ReferendumNOW: EU petition now DOWNING STREET LIVE

[uselesseater]

[uselesseater]

[paul wright]

I'm not too keen on nationalism, but I also am aware of the fact that Blair is happily about to sign off Britain as a nation state, a major factor of his desired for 'legacy'. Now what do you do if you want to create a "full spectrum dominance" fascist one world government. First you have to destroy the notion of sovreignty in independent nations.
What I'm actually against is the continuing centralisation and globalisation, and don't regard being anti-EU as being in any way "right-wing" or "little Englander". That's just another game that's been pushed
I find that the zombiefication of the nation repulsive, and note how every neo labour minister politician councillor social involvement professional and corporate whore spouts meaningless Newspeak endlessly

[Rory Winter]

You say you refute the term "right-wing." But what do you think motivates characters like Farage & Co? Cui Bono? Don't you remember how Norris MacWhirter and his Freedom Association worked actively with Thatcher to break the unions in Britain? Maybe you approve of union-busting. I don't. It's the only protection workers have against the bosses.

So, despite UKIP's illustrious antecedents we must ignore their interests and backers?!? Get real! They are precisely the ones who've been stealing our freedoms for so long! Which country opted out of the EU's Social Contract giving unions more rights? Britain! And that's 'Europe' taking away our freedoms, of course.

I find it really ironic how so many people (mostly from south of the border) make such a fuss about their freedoms 'being taken away by the EU' and yet re-elect a Nu Labour government that has done more to erode our relative freedoms than any government before it.

While allowing the real fascists like Bush & Co and his British sidekicks to create havoc they vent their spleen on 'Europe' which to them is 'over there'. Notice how mostpeople, including the UK media, refer to Europe as if it were somewhere else! It's a repeat of "Fog in the Channel: world cut off from Britain"

Whereas it's really the other way around. It's Britain that is cut off both from the Continent and the world. It's even cut off from its own regions! For example, the English really have little or no understanding of what drives most of us north of the border to desire a final separation and ending of the infamous union.

The only way to finally bury British imperialism is to finish off the beast itself, ie the Union. Like many others, I fervently hope that the Scots will finally have the courage to do what should have been done a long time ago.

Sadly, most folk south of the border appear to have been so heavily indoctrinated by imperialist propaganda that they believe what their ruling classes tell them about "freedom". Scotland is no different except that, after the shock of Blair and Thatcher, a lot of folk hope they'll be better off with independence.

As for the Pound, does it matter what money is called? It's still the same illusion. From a capitalist point of view, however, I'd opt for the safer Euro.

I am fully aware of the capitalist nature of the EU. Given Hobson's Choice, however, I will still opt for a European capitalist institution over the total anarchy of a neocon future as a poor partner of the North American Free Trade Association which is what that rogue Conrad Black wanted Britain to join.

NB: In a capitalist world all such ideas as "Nation State" and "Sovereignty" are just decorative, romantic reminders of a feudal past. The new robber barons are into global gulag using the pretence of globalisation. It is they who abuse and devalue the concept of One World and Planetary Citizenship. It is they who are the usurpers of its true meaning.

[Leiff]

[uselesseater]

This is of interest.

There is much talk of the police state and some of the NWO in this meeting. If you look at about 1:10 in there is some discussion of false flag terrorism with reference to 7/7 and 9/11.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=3923831226400400435&q=Edward +Spalton+on+the+European+Union

[Rory Winter]

"Irrational hatred"!?!

My God, I haven't even BEGUN to describe my loathing for these two systems of misgovernance!

I don't know who you are or what your reason is for being on the 911 list here but you sound as if you're here for all the wrong reasons and nothing at all to do with the 911 Truth Campaign.

Moderators: is all this anti-EU Petition nonsense really relevant to this List?

[Leiff]

Moderators, please help venceremos he/she/it is losing this debate badly...

Here's a tidbit for you:

Angela Merkel relies on the advice of Jeffrey Gedmin, specially dispatched to Berlin to assist her by the Bush clan. This lobbyist first worked at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) [2] under Richard Perle and Mrs. Dick Cheney. He enthusiastically encouraged the creation of a Euro with Dollar parity exchange rate. Within the AEI, he led the New Atlantic Initiative (NAI), which brought together all the America-friendly generals and politicians in Europe. He was then involved in the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and wrote the chapter on Europe in the neocon programme. He argued that the European Union should remain under NATO authority and that this would only be possible by “discouraging European calls for emancipation.” [3] Finally he became the administrator of the Council of the Community of Democracies (CCD), which argues in favour of a two-speed UN, and became director of the Aspen Institute in Berlin [4]. Subsequently he turned down the offer from his friend John Bolton [5] of the post of deputy US ambassador to the UN so as to be able to devote himself exclusively to Angela Merkel.

http://www.voltairenet.org/article145409.html

Stop bleating and do some research!

[Rory Winter]

May I point out the following from the 911 site?:

"Purpose

The purpose of this forum is to provide a safe, respectful, positive space for the discussion and information sharing. The forum is intended for the use of people who accept the need for a reinvestigation of 9/11 and the war on terror.Those who believe no new investigation is required should only post in the critics corner."

How does your fanatical politicking fit in with this, mmm?

[Leiff]

If you examine my posts you will find that I most definitely do support the call for a new independent investigation into 9/11.

So stop calling for the moderators and refute my points if you can. The only fanatic around here is you - an EU fanatic!

[Rory Winter]

I don't dispute your 911 concerns but clearly you are what can be described as a Europhobe and by endorsing a UKIP style video you are, in effect, giving us all a party-political broadcast on behalf of UKIP.

My feelings about seceding from the Union, by the way, are not on behalf of the Scottish National Party. I am a card-carrying Green. However, as a Scots I feel highly offended that people like you choose to speak on behalf of Britain. You don't. Get that into your head, please.

And, in my opinion, you are abusing this Forum. Actually, the responsibility for that should be with the instigators of the two Petition threads, Reflecter and Steven Collins.

If you want to air your Europhobia I suggest you find an appropriate forum elsewhere and restrict yourself, here, to issues of 911 and the so-called War on Terror. I say that as a long-standing member of this group.

PS: I have, by the way, lots of comments I'd like to make about Merkel etc but shall refrain for the reasons I give above and not to "encourager les autres."

[Leiff]

This is part of the EU's 50th birthday celebrations!

Thanks for the debate, I enjoyed it.

[Rory Winter]

You're welcome, Leiff. I'm sure we have a lot more in common than our exchange here shows. I watched the entire Spalton video and agreed with a lot said there (in fact I downloaded it for future reference as an AVI file).

I just feel strongly however that when people like UKIP presume to speak for Britain they take a lot for granted, speaking as if we are all undergoing the blitz again. We're not and there are some huge rifts within the UK itself as I have tried to illustrate from a Scots point-of-view.

I don't think it's any accident that Europhobia runs very much higher in the UK than on the Continent (and even than in Scotland and Eire). Brits have never been enthusiastic Europeans and that, I suggest, has a lot to do with the sustained conditioning of decades of Empire during which Brits were made to feel superior to other humans.

There's still a lot of that conditioning lurking in the Anglo-Saxon subconscious. Witness the difference on the reporting of deaths of Brits and Americans in contrast to Irakis and Afghanis etc.

This weekend is also the 200th Anniversary of the Abolition of the Slave Trade and therefore a very appropriate time for us all to look at just how much racist conditioning we have been subject to over the centuries in regard to white supremacy.

Certainly, I can think of a lot of Asian Muslims who would agree with me wholeheartedly that ours is still a very racist society.

BTW, In no way do I identify with Merkel's plans for a privatized Europe. My vision for Europe is a much more radical one based on planetary bioregions, decentralization and proper representation at a European Parliament.

And are you familiar with the European Left?

http://www.european-left.org/press/pressreleases/pr/pressrelease.2005- 10-14.7592296840

[paul wright]

[Rory Winter]

And I wish you'd piss off with your "I'm speaking for Britain" attitude. You're not, just speaking for yourself (and perhaps UKIP or similar bunch of nutters). Yes, they were mostly fuddy-duddies but voiced a lot of genuine concerns: I would only qualify that by saying that an anti-European attitude is not only misguided and wide of the mark but an expression of resentment that the UK's days of Empire are over.

Most Continentals are quite aware of the false sense of superiority Brits (of the Al Murray kind) express. I saw it all too often while living in Spain amongst Brits. Then I'd feel sorry for their inability to speak Spanish and, more often than not, would go to their aid.

I have been Red-Green since the mid 'seventies (Scotland's first elected to regional government) so please don't include me in the younger suit-and-tie brigade. No new tricks for an old dog, thank you.

BTW, the Spalton meeting was nothing to do with Greens anyway. Or hadn't you noticed?

[ZUCO]

I don't think dh is alone here. I don't want to be ruled and dictated to by whatever Brussels says. I don't think Europe should have ANY say whatsoever in what happens on British soil. It seems like it's taking one more step towards a world Government which can't be a good thing and is a very important issue among truthseekers. 9/11, 7/7 etc are all a part of the long process of "revolutionary change" that PNAC asked for and each event like that serves as an excuse to bring in tighter controls on the population under the veil of "protecting" us.

[paul wright]

Listen up Venceremos
I don't claim to speak for anyone , least of all for adherents to the old empire, least of all for the new trans-Europe empire in creation
All centralisation is nonsense and the whole drift is centralisation
GB is at the centre of it all - I know that and have no pride in this nation
It's a scheissmeister uber alles
Still no wish to be Northern Region 9 as it pulls its little game

[Rory Winter]

Very glad to hear that. As long as folk insist on playing the capitalist game there are going to be region #9s. What do you think would happen if we left the EU tomorrow? We'd get swallowed up by the North American Free Trade Association (NAFTA) most likely.

There are many in the EU such as the European Left who are working for a different kind of Europe. But they're doing it as Europeans positively, recognizing the advantages of all Europeans working together. British Europhobia has racist and imperialist roots and is strongly rooted in a lingering resentment about the glories that never were of a lost Empire.

[Leiff]

[Rory Winter]

I don't despise the English at all. I'd have to be a self-hater to do that! What I loathe is the corruptness of their ruling classes at Westminster. The British are still suffering from a post-imperial hangover and this affects us all and is where much of the negative chauvinism comes from.

Some Brits recognize this. A lot remain blind to it. That's dangerous both to us and our victims abroad in Ireland, Iraq and Afghanistan. What General Dyer did at the Amritsar Massacre was repeated in Derry on Bloody Sunday and goes on in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is Britain's colonial masters who are primarily responsible but the rest of us have to accept our responsibility in not doing anything to replace them with a more civilised form of government. People get the governments they deserve. Or, as Neil Mackay, in his recent book, 'The War on Truth' says, "We are all terrorists now."

No doubt folk voted to join the Common Market for a host of reasons. But it was the overall feeling of post-imperial insecurity that affected the country as a whole. That insecurity still affects us.

PS: Region #9 most likely arose out of the regional administration of European Regional Development Funds (ERDF) from which many UK regions have benefited over the years, ie. regions were set up throughout the EU for administrative purposes including the doling-out of money. Hardly draconian!

PPS: You should read 'The Unraveling of another US Race War'

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=62644#62644

It's just as relevant to the Al Murray type of Anglo-Saxon Brit mentality as it is to US trailer-park white trash.

[karlos]

to my collegue who mentioned he is a card carrying green

The green party is the least green of all of the UK based parties. The current greens are in favour of nuclear power and air travel and are generally voting pro new labour everywhere where they have council seats such as the Greayer London Authority. I have never seen a green vote against Labour, so my dear colleague i would suggest you cancel your membership especially in light of the greens being against 911 truth and being the most PRO european integration superstate party.

I must confess i have voted UKIP several times.
Everything they say about europe and the EU is correct. We started off with a european free trade area EFTA, then the Common Market started and britain left EFTA and joined the common market. These terms seam like a joke now but at the time people were spinning the story like vote for the common market buy cheap Italian clothes and German Cars and take French wines and cheeses.
Little did we know that the common market would soon become the EEC the european economic community which is now calling itself the EU.
When did we as English, Scottish or Welsh or Northern Irish ever vote to become a region of someone elses country? Sows how democratic this country is. Even france and other countries got to vote on it.
Today EU law supercedes UK law.
EU collects net a huge amount of VAT and TAX from the UK.
Britain has lost millions of jobs to the EU you see they never buy british but we always buy their goods.
How many of you drive those crappy peugeots and citroens. The most unreliable and worst cars in the world. Shockingly i have even seen our metropolitan police driving them.
Go to france and tell me if any policeman would be seen dead driving a british car. I mean ever, because we dont really make anything in this country anymore. All of the new labour economy is service industry very little manufacturing.
This is a silly but accurate example. There is no quid pro quo. we have been shafted.

However since the war and 911 i have shifted my support to the RESPECT party. Not because i dont agree with UKIP regarding europe but because issues such as the lies the UK government is subjecting us to on a daily basis, the wars on the back of lies against civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran about to start, Somalia, Sudan, etc.
We have butchered people for no reason other than religion and greed.
Oil being the reason.

The respect party is the greenest of all the parties and very Euro Sceptic against euro intergration but in favour of a free trade area. Although in some ways they are too left wing for my tastes the big picture is they are in favour of Liberty, the rule of law, freedom, justice, truth, and are against war unless in self defence and against trident.

I have been trying to convine them to look again at the events of 911 and 7/7. Yvonne Ridley is on board but many others are blinkered and not interested.

I would suggest to all readers make a list of what is important to you. europe, war, 911, etc and see which party has voted or express views similar to your own. Dont think because the cover says green whats inside is green. The conservatives are more green than todays green party.

[karlos]

Oil
When have any major party come out and said " we dont even need oil do we"
Because oil is not needed.
The diesal engine was designed to run on peanut oil. By its inventor Rudolf Diesal a german. He was assasinated in 1914 approx.
So we can grow our own crops or import them from poor third world countries and make our own diesal like the do in germany where bio diesal is used by about 20% of cars. Germany has no oil industry hence no vested interests.
Brazil runs its cars on ethanol made from sugar cane turned into alcohol. If anyone thinks ethanol is bad look at american formula one cars all of which run on ethanol.

I have not heard the green party saying anything about stopping oil in our economy and switching to cleaner fuels which incidentally will mean more manufacturing jobs in the UK.

Britain used to have electric cars since way back when. Dont you remember milk floats, mail vans, Bank of england clearing vans and those little sky blue disabled cars?
So 50 years we have had electric vehicles loads of them but how comes they were never developed or improved and are not used today? Because the oil industry has quoshed their use.

Green Party wants more taxes more conjestion and more pollution. Creating a traffic jam does not cut pollution. Switching to clean fuels does.

[Rory Winter]

Hi Stelios, I don't know where you get the info that the current greens are pro-nuclear power. I would be more than a little interested to hear where you get this from.

If you check the UK Greens' website at the link below you'll find, in the section Clean Green Energy, they clearly say:

"Real Progress means stopping a nuclear industry that can't even stand on its own feet. Nuclear power gets nearly two million pounds of our money in subsidies every day - enough to employ fifteen thousand extra teachers."

"Real Progress means choosing clean, honest, reliable energy we can trust - not clinging to a failed nuclear dream."

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/issues/13

And on air-travel:

"Air travel is the fastest growing source of greenhouse emissions, predicted to contribute 15% to climate change by 2050. Any responsible plans for long term economic growth and stability would limit, and not encourage, air travel, by imbuing it with altruism... aviation should be made to pay its way; a first step would be ending its' tax exemptions, saving £10bn a year (at first) to be ploughed back into sustainable transport. This is not unfair, considering that 45% of EU plane journeys are under 500 KMs and could easily be made by high speed rail. Another step towards mitigating climate change, would introducing robust air traffic emissions reductions targets (we suggest 50% by 2050) to limit the growth of this industry."

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/comment/483

On Europe:

"We believe in Europe. But we don't believe in a European super-state. We want a Europe where decisions are made by elected parliamentarians and not behind closed doors. We want transparency and accountability. We want a Europe that believes local people know and understand their local communities and are best placed to make decisions that affect their daily lives. We believe in a Europe which is culturally, ethnically and economically diverse, where rights are protected for all, and discrimination, poverty and inequalities are consigned to history. We want a social Europe, which protects workers, public services and minorities. We want a commonsense Europe that works for the interests of all."

"We want a Constitution for Europe, to increase accountability, and one for the UK too. But Tony Blair has helped ruin the current EU proposals by removing some of the more positive aspects - such as workers' rights - and leaving some of the worst, such as support for increased arms spending, further globalisation, and no controls of big business."

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/issues/68

[Leiff]

Sounds fine on paper but reforming the EU is mission impossible.

This extract gives you some idea of what we're up against...

"We were being treated very unfairly and we were being asked to pay far too much given the state of the British economy at the time. There was a strong possibility that if we did not get the rebate we would have to pull out because the country simply could not afford it.

It was only when the other member states realised they would have to pay more if we pulled out that they agreed to do a deal. They were very selfish about it."
Lord Carrington the last surviving Tory grandee responsible for Britain's decision to join the EU.

This is how Thatcher got the famous EU rebate!

[Rory Winter]

Yes, it was all about paying the sub, wasn't it? Only to be expected from what Napoleon described as a nation of shop-keepers, I guess.

Of course, if the British hadn't been such late-comers to joining the EEC (they turned down the first invitation they were given) they could have played a part in setting the rules. Instead, their imperialist pride kept them out until, after having lost their traditional captive market in the Empire, they didn't know where to turn.

So they 'joined Europe' for financial security whilst maintaining a vicious imperialism in their foreign policy by hanging onto Uncle Sam's coat-tails. Result: we can now safely talk about the USUK, especially in the area of foreign policy.

Both Blair and Cameron have enthusiastically adopted the imperialist racism which is behind the so-called War on Terror. What we have now, essentially, is a reactionary Anglo-Saxon form of de facto colonialism which, while in its death throes, is fighting to survive and rule the world. Very, very dangerous for the planet.

Read 'The Ultimate Tragedy' which I helped to edit by the Canadian Muslim author, Abid Ullah Jan: http://urlsnip.com/405572

PS: While Britain "couldn't afford" to pay its EC contributions it could afford the huge, mainly subsidy of the US arms industry, in Thatcher's decision to buy the Trident missile system ... an imperialist decision now echoed by Blair and the Tories' decision to replace the ageing Trident with an even greater subsidy to the US Military-Industrial Complex! How the old toothless lion allows itself to be endlessly screwed by its American cousins!

[Leiff]

I think you might have missed my point, it was - the EU is unreformable.

[Rory Winter]

Why should the EU be unreformable? Enlightened capitalists have always chosen reform in place of the threat of revolution. Only when they no longer feel threatened by revolution will they drop reform and get really nasty. Perhaps that is what capitalists feel everywhere these days? But they can only feel safe to do their worst when we, the people, doped-up on consumer fascism, permit them. So it remains our responsibility whether in or out of the European Union!

As of now the EU is a capitalist enterprise, ruled by neocons like Merkel, supported by Blair, the Dutch Balkenende and the like. It is inevitable that any capitalist country (whether plain capitalist or state-capitalist) will opt for its own army.

Hence the establishing of a European currency, foreign policy and army was inevitable. Whether the Brits wish to remain out of all that is their business. But before groups like UKIP, which presume to speak for Britain when they don't, decide to make decisions for the present UK, they should take into account that countries like Scotland may well opt for independence, an ending of the Union to remain, as an independent country, within the EU.

Since my time as a Highland Regional Councillor I can vouch for the fact that both the Highlands and the rest of Scotland have chosen a direct relationship with Brussels because they felt they would be more fairly treated by avoiding having to go through Whitehall. Why? Because European Regional Development funds, meant to be shared amongst the UK's neediest regions, were being withheld by Whitehall's misers.

Despite the fact that we have been so conditioned by Westminster's imperialism for so long the Scots value their European connection, perhaps because of their 'Auld Alliance' with France against King George and his Hanoverians.

If Scotland does get its independence (it's only a case of time), it will want its own army and possible financial reparations from the break-up of the old company, UK Inc. For, clearly, Scotland played its own part in the British Empire in a junior capacity. So, as in the break-up of any marriage, there's likely to be a squabble about who gets what.

If England wishes to opt out of the EU and join its American cousins in NAFTA, good luck to it. Let the Scots decide their own future. Given the choice between US-style capitalism and European-style capitalism I would still opt for the latter.

It's not much of a choice but in the world as we find it what other options are there?

PS: Yes Bush is suddenly enthusiastic about the EU so he can base his missiles in a subservient "New Europe" in the East. Blair has always seen it in business terms. I support the European Left and the Greens' objective which I have quoted from in other places on these two threads.

[Rory Winter]

March 28, 2007
SNP ready to plant their banner in Labour’s heartland
How today’s poll is an omen of doom for Blair and Brown
http://urlsnip.com/852996
Magnus Linklater

The news from Scotland this morning must have hit Downing Street with the kind of shock that Macbeth experienced when he was told that Birnam Wood had begun to move in the general direction of Dunsinane. “Ring the alarum bell!” he cried, as he saw the fulfilment of the witches’ prophecies of doom. “At least we’ll die with harness on our back.”

Tony Blair may not have used quite those words, but the sentiment was much the same. If today’s Populus poll in The Times is to be believed — and it echoes a trend that is beginning to grow steadily harder — then Labour is about to lose political control of a country that, for more than 50 years, it has regarded as its heartland.

A 10 per cent lead by the Scottish National Party would give it a seven-seat majority in the Scottish Parliament, enabling its leader, Alex Salmond, to form a coalition with the Liberal Democrats, or to chance his arm and govern as a minority party. Either way it would be a savage blow for Labour, which has regarded itself as the natural party of government in Scotland for as long as most voters can remember. It would be a damning verdict on Mr Blair’s premiership, on Gordon Brown’s economic policies, and on the devolution experiment so far. The prediction once made by Lord Robertson of Port Ellen that devolution would “kill nationalism stone dead” has backfired spectacularly.

A few things need to be said right away. First, this is a poll, not the real thing — and the election campaign is yet to begin in earnest; secondly, it is very far from a clarion call for independence — only 27 per cent of those polled actually want Scotland to leave the United Kingdom; nor is it a rebuff for devolution itself — 52 per cent would like the Parliament to have more power, not less; and Mr Salmond, for all the high recognition he enjoys, wins no better ratings, at 27 per cent, than his rival, the First Minister, Jack McConnell.

This is, primarily, a stinging rebuff to Mr Blair, who has succeeded in winning for himself a level of unpopularity that has not been witnessed north of the Border since Margaret Thatcher introduced the poll tax; in this case it is Iraq that has been the aggravating factor. For Mr Brown, too, the poll is grim news, because it suggests that he may take over as Prime Minister just as his homeland is turning its back on a decade of steady if unspectacular economic growth under his chancellorship.

More than that, however, it means that he will be fighting a political war on two fronts, taking on Tories south of the Border and Nationalists north of it. Mr Salmond and the SNP, if they do command a majority, are pledged to pursue the issue of independence from Day 1, thus provoking a constitutional crisis as well as a political one.

Mr Salmond is well aware that independence does not rank high on the Scottish agenda. But he believes that, once in power, he can promote it as the best option for the future of the nation. Within 100 days of being elected, he has pledged to introduce a White Paper setting out the terms of a referendum. He has even devised the question: “The Scottish Parliament should negotiate a new settlement with the British Government, based on the proposals set out in the White Paper, so that Scotland becomes a sovereign and independent state. Do you agree or disagree?”

He has said that he would hold the referendum towards the end of his first four-year term of office, by which time, he argues, the SNP would have proved itself in government. As only Westminster has the power, to run a full-blown referendum with binding conclusions, the Salmond version would have to take the form of a “consultative” process; but if passed it would be hard to ignore.

What can Mr Brown and Labour do to claw back the ground? The first thing, of course, is to win, not lose the election — and in the next four weeks we will see some of the most ferocious campaigning that Scotland has witnessed. On my mobile phone yesterday came the latest in a series of messages from Labour, promising revelations about “Wee Alex’s” dubious proposals, and we will see much more of this kind of thing as the party sets out to expose the weaknesses of the SNP’s tax-and-spend policies, and to warn the country about the dangers of separation.

But if the SNP really does go on to win the election, there is another way that Mr Brown could turn the situation to his advantage. For all that Mr Salmond’s commitment to a referendum is portrayed as a strength, it is in reality a serious weakness. The Lib Dems — the only serious contenders as coalition partners — have stated that they would refuse to form a government with the SNP so long as the referendum is part of their manifesto.

The Nationalists, clinging perhaps to the slimmest of majorities, would hardly have tasted power before they faced defeat at the hands of their opponents on a key political issue. Even if they did go on to hold a referendum, it would, if held in the present climate of opinion, almost certainly be lost. A “no” vote would not only be a public humiliation for the Nationalists, it would deprive them of their flagship policy.

Mr Brown, meanwhile, could present himself to the Scots and the English as the champion of a united Britain, thus winning back useful ground with those of his critics who are wary of his Scottish background. And he could do something even sharper — he could shoot the Nationalist fox between the eyes. Instead of waiting for Mr Salmond to come up with his consultative exercise, he could announce his own referendum Bill, which would introduce the real thing — a proper nationwide and binding poll asking the Scots what kind of future arrangement they really wanted.

And he could devise his own question, perhaps something along the lines of: “The Scottish National Party proposes that Scotland should leave the United Kingdom and go it alone. Do you agree or disagree?” You don’t need a witch to prophesy the outcome of that one.