***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 2 *****
Well as voting day gets closer and closer I am still undecided what way I am going to vote.
But I have to say this is the only election in my memory that there has been so much focus, debating and discussion about it. In normal elections you never hear anyone discussing it but it is the mainstay in conversations now whether its at work , during break times, social evenings or news programmes.
Everyone is having their say, lots of questions and answers being banded around. Of course it would be disappointing if this monumentous decision was being made without much debate but I am pleasantly surprised by how much engagement there is in the debate.
Sadly there is a bit of a nasty, minority element on both sides, who are being disruptive , threatening etc and I do wonder how after the decision is made, that both sides continue to live hand in hand.
Of course in this current media age, social media is filled daily with captions, photos, videos from both sides and you really need to take the lot with a pinch of salt. But it is almost the subliminal effect of constantly putting these images about that you can see why some can get drawn into believing it all.
My son is 16 years old, has the vote, and him and the majority of his mates are voting Yes. They have bought all the "Scotland will be better" spin hook, line and sinker.
Interesting to hear what the other Scotland based contributors think? Not so much on which side to vote but just on the whole election campaign. And are the non Scots based folk interested in this debate? What is being said in England / Wales? Do the Welsh want to go down indie route as well?
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 9 Sep 14 at 10:21
|
And are the non Scots based folk interested in this debate?
Certainly interested - in the older, more serious sense - in the outcome. Losing Scotland's left-of-centre contribution to Westminster (more pandas in Scotland than Tories, remember) could condemn us to a permanent Tory majority in what remains of the UK. Then they really would get to privatize the NHS and anything else their friends might make money from. An appalling thought. Please vote No!
|
I heard the Yes campaign described in a TV debate today as "Someone asking me to jump out of an aircraft with a parcel which may or may not contain a parachute and if it did it may or may not work".
So far no one has told me how independence will be paid for or financially sustained.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 2 Sep 14 at 21:10
|
I am interested in the debate Bobby.It looks like the vote is going to be close.
If it is better or worse for the Scots to be independent I don't know.The Scots have to think about the currency if the vote is Yes.
You might end up with the Zloty.>:)
|
>>
>> You might end up with the Zloty.>:)
>>
More likely to be the Ruble. Scotland is so far left it is almost communist. There are lots of political promises to spend money but little about how to raise the funding.
|
As a disenfranchised Scot I haven't been asked for my vote.
|
>> >>
>> >> You might end up with the Zloty.>:)
>> >>
>>
>> More likely to be the Ruble. Scotland is so far left it is almost communist.
>> There are lots of political promises to spend money but little about how to raise
>> the funding.
Oil matey, apparently loads more oil is coming out that the english couldn't get, and for longer than any englishman thinks it could.
|
>> Oil matey, apparently loads more oil is coming out that the english couldn't get, and
>> for longer than any englishman thinks it could.
>>
Of course, I forgot the vast undiscovered reserves that only the politicians seem to know about. :)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 2 Sep 14 at 21:48
|
>> Of course, I forgot the vast undiscovered reserves that only the politicians seem to know about. :)
And don't forget Alex Salmond knows how to get the oil out and sold without the expenditure (and the companies) that is usually involved. So it's not just the taxation on the fuel when sold - he has a cost model where the value of the oil can 100% be realised. Clever chap.
|
>> You might end up with the Zloty.>:)
>>
The Scotty Zloty ?
|
>> >> You might end up with the Zloty.>:)
Och nae!
The Bawbee
Last edited by: neiltoo on Wed 3 Sep 14 at 14:28
|
Personally I hope the Scots decide to stay because I think together we are greater than the sum of our parts. However if they go I think there may be some resentment and hardening of attitudes on the English side and I cant see us being in the slightest bit generous in any settlement or distribution of resources.
It will certainly bring into very sharp focus the West Lothian question prior to separation.
|
Through many of the contacts I meet at work, the majority of them are in the No Camp. One stated very similar to Pezzer, that by voting for indie then it is showing a slight arrogance towards England of "we can do better without you". These people are all employed , well paid and senior jobs.
Those that are voting Yes, certainly amongst my friends, are probably more "shop floor" than senior management.
Although the yes side are painting a picture of prosperity etc, eventually and not overnight, the reality facing many Scots is that if we vote No, then we are basically going cap in hand to London and being happy to be ruled by Cameron, Boris or UKIP because there is no doubt that Labour and Lib Dems will not be near Power for a long while!
And Boris has not attempted to hide his disgust at Scotland with his famous quote comparing Croydon and Strathclyde.
The indie vote has forced us into a corner and in some ways it could be argued that either way, we cannot now win out of this.
|
>> The indie vote has forced us into a corner and in some ways it could be argued that either way,
>> we cannot now win out of this.
Someone voted Salmond in knowing what he was like and he was vocal about independence. Can't say I'm bothered with a yes or no vote. It might be different if I worked for my current employer and was based in Scotland though!
I personally think a no vote makes more sense but that's not my vote is it.
I only hope Labour is kept from power for a long while. An independent Scotland may help the rest of us in that respect :-)
|
So we had another TV debate tonight with a live audience.
One man stated he was undecided, didn't trust any of the parties and was only interested in what is happening at NHS.
Within 10 mins of the program finishing, there are full details of this guy all over twitter showing him at Labour Party conference, as a Labour party member and was previously a councillor.
That's how fast and intense this debate is up here!
|
Salmond is either a moron, or dishonest. I think I know which.
He says Scotland can walk away from its share of public debt because the UK has undertaken to stand behind it. Well of course it has - the UK's borrowing cost would be going up if it didn't.
That's not the same thing as saying Scotland is off the hook.
And of course, Scotland will have a proportionately higher spending deficit than the UK if it goes it alone. Unless of course an independent Scotland were to make considerable cuts in public spending.
Perhaps the 16 year-olds voting Yes aren't aware of their favourable treatment on universtity tuition fees which would be at risk if they get their wishes. Scotland may be forced to drop tuition fees for students from the rest of the UK, as it currently does for students from all other EU countries. The difference being that a vast number of UK students would apply to Scottish universities, swamping them to the disadvantage of Scots. Maybe Eck has come out with an answer to that - if so, I've missed it.
|
Oil will fund everything for ever. So many promises of a fantastic health service, pensions, care homes, houses etc. etc. A geriatric wonder land?
If a Yes vote then I would expect a lot of jobs will be repatriated to England. Wales/ NI.
I would expect many more young folk will leave to find jobs elsewhere much as happened in Ireland.
|
A friend of mine moved to a small community upon retirement a few years ago. He is into shooting, fishing etc and when we last spoke he told me that everyone in the small community, or at least those he comes into contact with , were of the Yes variety.
Otoh some of his ex colleagues, involved in the education system, are firmly in the No camp.
|
>> the UK's borrowing
>> cost would be going up if it didn't.
>>
>
So would Scotland's. Who's going to want to lend money to a new nation whose first step in laying down a track record is of debt default?
|
|
What happens if there is a narrow No vote - does this just rumble on ad infinitum until the Yes camp get their way also if there is a narrow Yes vote is that enough of a mandate? Clearly a significant majority either way is preferable but will it happen .... I doubt it.
|
>> The indie vote has forced us into a corner and in some ways it could
>> be argued that either way, we cannot now win out of this.
Not True. Scotland is now in Win /Loose situation. Win the vote and its a period of economic downturn and falling public standards as AS suddenly has to admit his spending plans don't add up.
Loose the vote and Scotland gets heavily devolved powers, probably with control over direct taxation.
Which is what AS wants. Shoot for the Stars and hit the moon.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 3 Sep 14 at 07:27
|
>>Loose the vote and Scotland gets heavily devolved powers, probably with control over direct taxation.
Is that written down in statute or whatever that it will definitely happen or is it just a promise along with everything else that either side can say?
I still think that Cameron is torn here - he doesn't want to lose Scotland "on his watch" but by the same token, without Scotland and all its Labour MPs in Parliament the Tories will surely have a monopoly for the forseeable future unless UKIP get bigger?
|
And today we have Milliband up in Glasgow trying to convey the message that the best way to get change is to vote No and then Labour will win the next General Election!!
|
>> >>Loose the vote and Scotland gets heavily devolved powers, probably with control over direct taxation.
>>
>> Is that written down in statute or whatever that it will definitely happen or is
>> it just a promise along with everything else that either side can say?
No its not written down in statute, but is a more or less promise by all parties, and it will be required, and everyone knows it will be required in the future, or we will get these drip drip referenda every 5 years, which is destabilising for England, Scotland and the UK in equal measure.
Not sure the Scots realise this, but the biggest fear for Scotland financial future was awakened when it was blithely announced they could threaten to default on share of National debt.
Such a cavalier attitude to debt by a government instantly scares the bejesus out of the global markets and Scotlands potential ability to borrow on global markets has been placed in high risk and hence high interest rates. HBOS and RBOS are now seriously putting plans in place to move HQ south of the border.
|
Personally, I would be very much in the 'No' camp as I believe the Union is much stronger than the sum of it's parts.
However, I don't get a vote on the break up of the Union purely because I'm English and, it would seem, am only allowed to stand by and watch as a minority group attempts to dismantle my country, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It rather galls that these people that don't want to allow me a voice in this decision then appear to want to dictate their own terms and conditions to the majority that they wish to be divorced from and pick and choose which tasty morsels they wish to pick from the carcase. Salmond wants fiscal independence but wants to keep the protection of Sterling, he wants to evict the nuclear submariners of the Royal Navy from the Clyde but still wants to build the Royal Navy's ships, to me, these are not the aspirations of an independent nation. The Scottish Nats have been deliberately provocative over things like tuition fees, free to all EU students except the English, for instance.
In spite of all the above I would really like to see Scotland stay in the Union, on the other hand if the decision is for the dissolution of the Union then that is what it should be, a return to the arrangements which existed before and a totally, truly, independent Scotland. No common currency, passports, tax system, Civil Service, defence forces, etc. Of course the Crown would remain as the Queen is, of course, Queen Elizabeth II of England, Queen Elizabeth of Scotland.
I really don't want to see the UK broken up but if the Scots wish to go then it should be a total break, for all our sakes; if not then I can see nothing but squabbling over minor points for years and years to come and the risk of increased tensions between the two nations, we fought wars before.......
Last edited by: Cockle on Tue 2 Sep 14 at 23:06
|
|
Another bit of hypocracy is that Salmond wants to be independent, yet is apparently happy for Scotland to be in the EU, and therefore by implication part of a United States of Europe.
|
Why would the Crown remain?
If the Scots vote for independence it is their choice who is head of state.
|
|
The Queen is retained as Head of State in the Scotland Bill due to be put to the Scottish Parliament should the result be a Yes vote, this will act as an interim Constitution until such time as a new Constitution is agreed. The Republicans are already circling ready for that discussion but that will be a matter for the Scots to decide as for it to even be on the table for discussion they will have become an independent state, possibly, depending on your definition of independent....
|
Won't there have to be a "Scotland Bill" in the UK parliament too?
Bits of the UK don't have the sole right to become independent just because a majority of their inhabitants want it. What would happen if Cornwall or Wiltshire voted to become independent?
Or perhaps London might want to opt out and become a tax-haven financial centre on its own? Would we all meekly say "This is a matter purely for the people of London" ?
|
>> Won't there have to be a "Scotland Bill" in the UK parliament too?
Of course their will.
Although elections are devolved 'the constitution' is not. Doubt was expressed by both Westminster and the Scottish Law Officers as to whether then current legislation permitted a referendum. After negotiations legislative action by way of an Order in Council under the Scotland Act 1998 followed so as to authorise the single question referendum.
In fact there will be a Scotland Act either way. If the outcome is yes the act, following negotiation on all the stuff now in controversy, including currency and nuclear bases as well as mundane admin, will provide for independence. If out come is No act will provide for so called 'Devo Max' where much of stuff still reserved to Westminster will pass to Holyrood.
>> Bits of the UK don't have the sole right to become independent just because a
>> majority of their inhabitants want it. What would happen if Cornwall or Wiltshire voted to
>> become independent?
>> Or perhaps London might want to opt out and become a tax-haven financial centre on
>> its own? Would we all meekly say "This is a matter purely for the people
>> of London" ?
No but it could theoretically happen over time starting with low level powers being devolved to, say a Cornish Assembly.
>>
|
I think I might have mentioned before that Yorkshire has as many inhabitants as Scotland, and has also never elected a Conservative government. And at least the rhubarb won't run out, unlike the oil.
The whole thing is ludicrous. We should all have a vote on splitting up the country.
|
>> I really don't want to see the UK broken up but if the Scots wish
>> to go then it should be a total break, for all our sakes; if not
>> then I can see nothing but squabbling over minor points for years and years to
>> come and the risk of increased tensions between the two nations, we fought wars before.......
>>
Czechoslovakia was broken up several years ago. A much smaller country and much less complicated structure. They are still arguing about so many different aspects of the settlement. There was a piece on the Beeb about it the other day.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_Czechoslovakia
|
As an exiled Scot I hope they vote YES.
Property prices in Scotland will be so much cheaper in 5 years time. And so will servants...
|
If there is a YES vote, the clamour for England to have its own parliament will be immense.
|
|
If there's a yes vote England will be well on way to own parliament.
|
>>If there is a YES vote, the clamour for England to have its own parliament will be immense.
If there is a YES vote then E&W will have their own parliament.
More interestingly, if there is a NO vote THEN the clamour for England to have its own parliament will be immense.
So you end up with England controlled by the Tories, Scotland by the Scot Nats, Wales by the National Party of Wales, and UK having a national government that is Labour.
At this point 'nobody is getting the government they voted for' (to quote the 'yes' campaign). Odd, or what?!
I have a personal hope that it is a YES, but a public view that NO is the better.
|
>> If there is a YES vote then E&W will have their own parliament.
>>
Surely Wales will have an Assembly, NI will have an Executive, UK will still have a parliament, but England will still be a collection of local councils?
|
"At this point 'nobody is getting the government they voted for' (to quote the 'yes' campaign). Odd, or what?!"
Sounds about like what's happening in the rest of the world ………… let's all join in!
|
Some MP's are suggesting the Constitutional implications of a Yes vote are such that 2015 General Election will need to be postponed until 2016 lest Scottish results swing UK wide vote from Tory to Labour.
www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/03/calls-to-postpone-uk-general-election-scots-independence
Looks like a call for a blatant gerrymander to me and I cannot see it getting required vote in Parliament.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 4 Sep 14 at 11:19
|
>>
>> Looks like a call for a blatant gerrymander to me
>>
But if we are hiving off a significant part of the electorate it can't be right to give them a vote in a country they will shortly not be part of?
It would produce a peculiar crop of dead-end MPs from constituencies that would in a year's time cease to exist in the UK parliament, but would in the meantime be free to vote on UK and English matters, indeed help determine the colour of the UK government they would be leaving behind.
|
If Scotland voted Yes, and still elected MPs to the UK Government, I can see thousands of claims under the Human Rights Act saying that they should not be allowed to vote.
I can also see legal cases.. which would tie the entire Westminster process in knots.
Someone will have to make a decision.. And if it's Ed Miliband that will take two years.. :-)
|
The Scottish press is reporting that some house purchase offers now have a clause inserted allowing it to be withdrawn in case of a yes vote.
www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/home-buyers-using-scottish-independence-clause-1-3531426
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 4 Sep 14 at 15:28
|
Don't they have a different system there, so that if your offer is accepted the contract is made, unlike in England where either can back out up to exchange?
So probably a wise precaution.
|
|
Correct, that's why the clause is required in case it all goes pear shaped. As I said earlier, "A yes vote is a leap into the dark".
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 4 Sep 14 at 15:37
|
>> Correct, that's why the clause is required in case it all goes pear shaped. As
>> I said earlier, "A yes vote is a leap into the dark".
>>
Missed the edit.
And not just for Scotland.
|
Interesting input from a senior Army Officer regarding Scotland's defence "Needs"
tinyurl.com/pmv2t3q
|
|
It seems to be assumed that regiments are "owned" by the region possessing the name in its title. But I don't see why a "Scottish" regiment should automatically be assigned in the spoils to Scotland. Some, like the Gurkhas, might perhaps prefer to remain in service of the UK?
|
They aren't owned by scotland, but broadly speaking regiments recruit by region, so will have a link to scotland. Although they struggle to find enough recruits from scotland and often end up going overseas.
Should they go independent, they best idea is that everyone would be allowed to transfer to scottish military or stay in the UK forces. The unit name will go but personal will change who knows how many.
|
|
It will be interesting to see (if a yes vote) how long the Royal Marine Commando unit stays in Arbroath, the Royal Marine Band remains based in Rosyth, and the RAF and Navy Fleet Air Arm squadrons stay in Scotland.There is much political attention given to getting rid of nuclear weapons in Scotland, but all of the military is integrated, and much of it (including the army regiments) have a support role for the nuclear deterrent. It is not just Faslane that would go.
|
A couple of years I would expect to move most of it down south. Just speaking of regular units, no plans made yet. But I would expect many to move south, I doubt the Gov north could afford or want them. They only want a minimal air defence capability and I would imagine the same for any other expensive kit.
What high end kit they do keep, they'll be tied to the UK for years afterwards anyway. There's no way they can keep the support and training lines going in the small numbers they would want.
|
For info, the Royal Marine bandsmen, (and girls), are trained as medics and have saved many lives when operationally deployed in Afghanistan.
They also do a superb series of band concerts over the winter each year in a local theatre. (We have season tickets). Many locals would be sad to see them go.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 4 Sep 14 at 19:57
|
|
I'm sure AS will make sure there is a reasonable amount of pomp and ceremony ;-)
|
|
Their defence policy and general attitude to defence is odd, some might say hypocritical. They don't want Nuclear weapons on Scottish soil, yet want to join NATO which has them in it's a***nal. Seems like it's a case of we want them to protect us but just not near us.
|
The same will also probably apply to wherever the nuclear deterrent (and the warhead store) are relocated to if the vote becomes a yes for independence.
The cost for Scotland to put in place central government departments seems endless. Cutting them out of the UK side of it will be a lot easier. Keeping it driver related, there will have to be a Scottish equivalent of the DVLA to issue road tax and driving licences.
And talking of driving licences, won't every driver in Scotland need a new licence issuing (at who's cost)? And what about passports - the passport is UK of GB and Northern Ireland and Scotland would not be in the UK.
And if Scotland reneged on it's share of the national debt (I can see why they might)... what happens to pensions? Would we as the rest of the UK have to hand over a pile of money because the pension system relies on today's tax payers to pay the pensions of the retired. There is no pension pot of money saved anywhere.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 4 Sep 14 at 20:09
|
>> The same will also probably apply to wherever the nuclear deterrent (and the warhead store)
>> are relocated to if the vote becomes a yes for independence.
God knows how much that would cost, billions for sure. Although whether it actually goes is another matter.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Thu 4 Sep 14 at 20:15
|
>> >> The same will also probably apply to wherever the nuclear deterrent (and the warhead
>> store)
>> >> are relocated to if the vote becomes a yes for independence.
>>
>> God knows how much that would cost, billions for sure. Although whether it actually goes
>> is another matter.
>>
I take it you mean warhead stores, I am sure you don't think they are all in the same place.
|
>> I take it you mean warhead stores, I am sure you don't think they are all in the same place.
Why not :-)
No I don't assume that. But they won't be too far away from the subs either. Or the separate missile stores (separate from the warheads of course).
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 4 Sep 14 at 20:27
|
|
The nuclar deterrent missiles are not stored in the UK. The nuclear deterrent are not the only nuclear warheads.
|
You mean the missiles themselves, yes noted they are in america or at least a portion. Yes aware that the nuclear deterent comes in different parts.
Just for clarity I meant 'the nuclear deterent, either in whole or part therin that are on scottish soil' ;-) If the SNP want rid and get their way, it will be expensive to move it (what is on scottish soil) south of the border. Fair point?
|
|
Yes fair enough, the point I was trying to make is that there is a LOT more to the nuclear deterrent than Faslane and Coulport. Also the jobs that go with it extend way beyond the Faslane area.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 4 Sep 14 at 20:44
|
|
Absolutely, yes far more than people imagine or indeed some governments imagine. There's a whole support network to high end equipment. I think they will be tied to the UK for years.
|
I think they must be ON. How else could they be serviced and taken on and off the submarines at Faslane? This Google image shows the base and, just to the North of it, a munitions storage area
goo.gl/maps/zNlmH. Another much larger one just to the West too which appears to be triple fenced, which is typical for a nuclear storage facility goo.gl/maps/uobZb
|
>> I think they must be ON. How else could they be serviced and taken on
>> and off the submarines at Faslane? This Google image shows the base and, just to
>> the North of it, a munitions storage area
>> goo.gl/maps/zNlmH. Another much larger one just to the West too which appears to be triple
>> fenced, which is typical for a nuclear storage facility goo.gl/maps/uobZb
>>
Polaris missiles and their warheads were regularly removed from the submarines for maintenance.
The current Trident missiles remain in the submarines. There is a facility to remove them but this is most unusual. The Trident warheads can also be seperately removed if required.
The sequence is usually the Trident submarine is built in the UK, goes to the USA and is loaded with missiles, returns to the UK and the warheads are fitted. The reverse happens if the submarine goes into a dockyard for extended repair, refurbishment, or scrap. Current submarines are also fuelled for life and continuously maintained so dockyard time is unusual.
I worked there for 20odd years I have rough idea what goes on.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 5 Sep 14 at 08:18
|
|
I recognise your in depth knowledge ON and I was thinking Polaris not Trident (mental lapse) but what, if anything is kept in the two storage areas, one nuclear capable, that I saw? At least we shan't have to move the factory in Derby where the nuclear reactors for our Trident submarines are constructed! tinyurl.com/pthzv4e
|
Another thing that may be of interest is the missiles (not the warheads) are leased from the USA so I assume they must be compensated when we test fire one.
Ref. What is stored where, I don't know, but there are many munitions stores around the UK, more than one nuclear weapon system, draw your own conclusions.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 5 Sep 14 at 11:51
|
As a little aside, my mate has a boat which is taken out the water during winter but during the season it is berthed just at the top of the bay at Faslane when he is not actually away sailing in it.
Me and the lad went down one Sat night and had a kip over on the boat there with my mate. Did a bit of fishing, maintenance, eating and drinking. Lovely night , very tranquil.
Mate had been giving me some boating lessons like how to tell if a boat is coming towards you or away in the dark due to the sequence of lights on display.
When it got dark, lad decided he would dig out the green laser pen that he bought in Bulgaria and see how far it could be seen for. He was shining it into the surrounding hillsides (where rumour has it there is storage within) and it was quite amazing to see how clear it was, even though we were probably more than a mile from the hill.
And then my mate came out from under the deck , looked down towards Faslane and uttered the words "remember I was telling you how to determine if a boat was coming towards you or not...."
|
>> And talking of driving licences, won't every driver in Scotland need a new licence issuing
>> (at who's cost)?
Whose cost? The licenceholders' of course.
>>
>> And if Scotland reneged on it's share of the national debt (I can see why
>> they might)... what happens to pensions?
As you said, pensions are paid out of the current account anyway.
The general principle of the proposed finances seems to be that having the oil taxes for themselves will substitute for the subsidies from (essentially) England with enough left over to cure all other ills. But I don't know whether there has been any agreement of which bits of the North Sea 'belong' to Scotland anyway; and of course the oil could run out - Eck is gambling (and coming out with "estimates") that there is much more oil left than anybody yet knows about.
The reneging on the debt thing is an extrapolation from UK's perfectly logical (and necessary) statement that UK will stand behind Scotland's share of the debt - it has to, because the bondholders bought UK debt, not Scottish debt, and not guaranteeing it would be seen as a potential default - UK's borrowing cost would shoot up. But that doesn't mean Scotland wouldn't owe UK the money. And Eck's cavalier attitude to debt won't have done an independent Scotland's borrowing prospects much good either.
I really hope they vote no. I have thought about moving to Scotland but independence will knacker it.
|
|
I suspect that Eck is getting a little worried that he might win when all he wanted was Devo Max.
|
>> I suspect that Eck is getting a little worried that he might win when all he wanted was Devo Max.
AS never wanted a simple yes/no vote though did he. He wanted at least a third option of Devo Max.
I didn't think a no vote would automatically mean Devo Max happens.
|
>> I didn't think a no vote would automatically mean Devo Max happens.
While little has been promised there seems to be a shared understanding between main Westminster parties and Holyrood that it will. Guardian news ticker reports that G Osborn has promised greater tax autonomy including tax raising powers.
I'd imagine today's polls have focussed attention.
Turn out in referendum forecast to be c80%. Would that UK wide politics got that degree of engagement.
|
>>
>> >> And talking of driving licences, won't every driver in Scotland need a new licence
>> issuing
>> >> (at who's cost)?
>>
>> Whose cost? The licenceholders' of course.
It needs to be remembered that choice is not status quo v independent. If result is No then alternative is 'Devo Max' with most powers excepting defence and foreign relations devolved to Holyrood. UK becomes Federal outfit like Canada or Commonwealth of Australia. Do they make song and dance over driver registration, or simply arrive at shared pragmatic solution?
>> >>
>> >> And if Scotland reneged on it's share of the national debt
Scotland's share by population is what, 10%?. While it might incommode Scots borrowing a bit it'd barely be worth a point's downgrade on creitwrthiness of residual UK.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 4 Sep 14 at 21:11
|
I expect a Yes vote.
And largescale emigration from Scotland with financial jobs.
|
>> I expect a Yes vote.
>>
>> And largescale emigration from Scotland with financial jobs.
>>
If so it will also include -
Shipbuilding jobs.
Armed forces.
MOD jobs.
And many companies relocating.
Followed by young job seekers.
It should do wonders for house values.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 5 Sep 14 at 12:36
|
>.It should do wonders for house values.
Yes, maybe a move to Jockland could still be on!
|
I still think England has a right to vote just as much as the Scots.
Its a bit like your right leg voting to detach itself from your body and you have no say in it whatsoever despite the obvious disadvantage.
|
|
I agree with Clint. There are actually very few cultural and language differences between Scotland and England, or no more than between say Yorkshire and London anyway. There re 800,000 Scots in the rest of the UK, and 400,000 non-Scottish UK citizens in Scotland. It's a farce. How can any country plan properly if bits of it can detach themselves unilaterally?
|
>> I agree with Clint.
Who he?
|
>>
>> >> I agree with Clint.
>>
>> Who he?
bit.ly/1AeqlcZ
|
>>
>> >> I agree with Clint.
>>
>> Who he?
>>
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_with_No_Name
|
Not a fan of the Leone oeuvre, then, AC? I'd explain, for a fee. A fistful of dollars ought to do it.
};---)
|
>> Not a fan of the Leone oeuvre, then, AC? I'd explain, for a fee. A fistful of dollars ought to do it.
Ooh, ah... duh.
|
My other concern is will it start a trend where Englands counties will want independence and special treatment because of their 'unique culture'. After all Cornwall has been given special minority status, whatever the Hells that means for them. I can understand trying to keep alive a unique language but surely pasties and cream teas are nothing special.
Can you imagine Essex being treated specially because of its orange perm-tanned residents and white shoes?
(ps the above is a stereotype unless you live in the south of the county, innit?)
|
|
I look forward to the congestion zone leaving the rUK. It will be a low-tax and wealthy place.
|
>> After all Cornwall has been given special
>> minority status, whatever the Hells that means for them.
It means they are inbred..
|
>> It should do wonders for house values.
>>
>>
That is my hope.
|
|
Looks like they've really turned things around. Less than a year ago the no vote would have walked it, I think they were 12 points clear. Now looks like a yes vote is a real prospect.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sun 7 Sep 14 at 14:27
|
I wonder whether there's an analogy between support for independence in Sotland and anti EU sentiment in England?
Both seem to rely on blaming various ills on domination by remote and (whether really or supposedly) unrepresentative and over powerful outsiders. Both propose a solution based on cutting loose from the outsiders but with a pretty nebulous view of what the future outside might really be like.
|
|
I will still be surprised if there's a yes vote, despite the efforts being made by the media to promote the idea that it's a cliffhanger. I see the Scots as shrewd, and only part-time kamikaze alcoholics.
|
Independence Vote - WillDeBeest
