Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Quote of the day

And what of the referendum question? Why not have it in 2010? The arguments for settling - for a while at least - the national question are compelling. It won't happen, of course, largely because it's all terribly risky and a leap into that most terrifying of places - the unknown. Nor, for that matter, is it Annabel Goldie's style. Aunt Annabel would much rather promise every voter a pair of sensible shoes than take such a bold, daring leap.

Alex Massie in The Spectator.
Nothing wrong with sensible shoes per se (obviously), but they alone won't save the Union. When the integrity of her nation (and probably her "department" of the party) is at stake...yes, she should be really widening her horizons.

The rest of the article is worth a read. I think I have to agree with him that Cameron's piece in Scotland on Sunday, which I covered a couple of days ago, was more nuanced on the subject of the Union than first appearances suggested.

(Little Man in a Toque has another interpretation of Massie's piece).


tony said...

""If we win the election and if, by some miracle, we don't have 25 seats in Scotland and have slightly fewer"

Cameron as quoted above is obviously on the same happy tabs as your good self Oneil. I can only imagine he is mixing Holyrood elections up with Westminster, if not I am looking for a bet, got his number handy?

As I have said previously the Tories are just being pragmatic, good sensible politics ensures we all go our own way with a smile and friendly hand shake.

O'Neill said...

I also suspect the Tories won't win 25 seats in Scotland in the General Election...but I think we haven't seen the full plan of Cameron revealed yet, so I'd hold fire on your last paragraph for the minute.