An Independent Scotland?

Water? are you having a giraffe....come to Manchester.
 
I'm in Lincolnshire, high risk of drought in 2012. Perhaps we need a pre emptive strike???
 
I'm half Irish, half English - so not sure if my opinion counts ;), but for what it's worth I feel strongly that the UK should stay united. We have a long shared history (good and bad), and we count for more in the world together than apart.

The financial arguments put forward by the SNP are pretty spurious. For example, the Scots' share of the National Debt is about £90 billion - similar per head of population to Spain and Portugal. Portugal pays a much, much higher rate on it's debt than the UK. Would Scotland be able to get the same low interest rates as the UK or would it be paying 6-8 times as much like Portugal? Those increased interest payments would wipe out revenues from North Sea oil/gas even if Scotland took the whole of the oil/gas reserves (which is presumably a matter for negotation.)
 
The oil is not going to last forever! Last time I was in Aberdeen an executive in the oil industry (age 35) told me that he was looking to get additional qualifications to enable him to work in another industry as the oil was very unlikely to last much beyond his 50th birthday.
 
tiler65 said:
Water? are you having a giraffe....come to Manchester.
Click to expand...

lol, I know what you mean. I don't really know the facts on the drinking/fresh water it was just some dribs and drabs of information I picked up on somewhere. I can only guess that it's the large fresh reserves which is so necessary and I would assume that the majority of those are in Scotland.

I read somewhere that it takes 30 years for a new reservoir to go from concept to the stage of being in full operation, but I don't really know.

Ironically..... oh oh
 
gman said:
lol, I know what you mean. I don't really know the facts on the drinking/fresh water it was just some dribs and drabs of information I picked up on somewhere. I can only guess that it's the large fresh reserves which is so necessary and I would assume that the majority of those are in Scotland.

I read somewhere that it takes 30 years for a new reservoir to go from concept to the stage of being in full operation, but I don't really know.

Ironically..... oh oh
Click to expand...

At least the north east of England is ok ;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kielder_Water
 
Last edited:
So gald to find some sort of sensible(?) debate here. Hugh, I'm 47 and I've worked towards (and hoped for) an independent Scotland since I can remember tying my shoelases, so YES!! It's also worth pointing out that I'm a 'tartan tory' running a successful business trading across many borders, so not your stereotypical dole-scrounging, haggis munching, left-wing socialist radical.

Please don't think I'm anti-English. I believe that much of my mindset could be found in Lancashire, Sunderland, Swansea, Truro or Norwich. The difference is that Scotland has always been a nation in the eyes of it's people. We are culturally different and our priorities are different.
 
FourRingCircus said:
So gald to find some sort of sensible(?) debate here. Hugh, I'm 47 and I've worked towards (and hoped for) an independent Scotland since I can remember tying my shoelases, so YES!! It's also worth pointing out that I'm a 'tartan tory' running a successful business trading across many borders, so not your stereotypical dole-scrounging, haggis munching, left-wing socialist radical.

Please don't think I'm anti-English. I believe that much of my mindset could be found in Lancashire, Sunderland, Swansea, Truro or Norwich. The difference is that Scotland has always been a nation in the eyes of it's people. We are culturally different and our priorities are different.
Click to expand...

Holy thread revival, Batman! :D

....another 3 days and it would have been a full year since the last post here!

....I suppose it is at least topical though! :p


.
 
So it is.....!!!:oops: :$ I read all the comments but saw only February as the posting dates. Perhaps it's time to revive it after all - especially as it's a lot more pertinant now.
 
For me its a big NOPE.
My line of work would see a small spike in work if they went off to do there own thing but long term I don't see how long term it wouild work out.
EG getting rid of the nukes, ok totally understand why, but it would kill off a lot of the local area from hotels to buttie vans... Faslane contributes a lot to the local aera.
Ship yards, ok would see a small about of work building some scottish ships but what to do after that? The RN don't buy forign ships as a rule (some exceptions, yes but all the big stuff is made in UK yards...)
 
dinners said:
Big No here.
Click to expand...

And another big No from me.

I find the thought of seeking independence then handing over control to Brussels most odd.
UK is a tiny country that is already over-governed. We need less government not more.
 
Too many permutations to make a proper case for independence!
The whole argument is full of "IF" "AND" "BUTS"
What happens to the Queen? Does she give up her property in Scotland
Do all Scottish nationals require a different passport?
Who will pay for new passports?
If they go in dependant and do not become part of the EU will they come under the same rules for non EU migrants?
Will there be a physical border and controls?
What happens to the UNION JACK?
Armed Forces?
If they get independence and it goes wrong will they cry spilt milk and want to come back?
The list goes on and on and on!

My take is if they leave all be it, BUT will the last one close the door on the way out!
 
Obviously the issue of Scottish independence has been around for centuries.

I am proud to be English, and fully understand and respect that people from Scotland are proud with good reason to be Scottish. Same for folks from Wales and Ireland. That in itself is not grounds for independence IMHO. Feeling that the UK revolves around London is not restricted Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Many areas in the rest of England get cheesed off with London.

What I would like to see are some objective arguments for and against independence. Right now I see a lot of political posturing from all sides and not much by way of discussion. Alex Salmond seems bent on making his personal place in history (fancies himself as a modern day Robert the Bruce perhaps) and I very much doubt that he actually has Scotland's best interests at heart. Beyond the notional political freedom (which is then immediately given up to Brussels (WTF)) and the chance to shake off the English after centuries of tyranny, it would be interesting to see what the actual benefits to Scotland and Scottish people are. This weighed against the disbenefits.

I also think that if there is an independent Scotland, it should be just that, independent. Not some sort of cherry picked halfway house. If the arguments stack up and the Scottish people i.e. those resident in Scotland, vote for independence, then fair enough. But that means voting to apply for getting into the EU as an independent member (an oxymoron if ever there was one), have it's own currency or join the Euro if the criteria are met, etc..

My personal view is that the Untied Kingdom is better off united than the individual countries would be on their own. The old adage 'United we stand, divided we fall...' will hold true IMHO.

If history shows that the Scottish people were conned into voting for independence..... My goodness, what a mess that would be..
 
It is not just Scottish people who get to vote.

Anyone resident in Scotland and eligible to vote will have a vote, this will include EU immigrants as well as English people

And the SNP have also changed legislation on voting so that those aged 16-17 will be able to vote as well
 
Keith W said:
It is not just Scottish people who get to vote.

Anyone resident in Scotland and eligible to vote will have a vote, this will include EU immigrants as well as English people

And the SNP have also changed legislation on voting so that those aged 16-17 will be able to vote as well
Click to expand...

I did mention 'those resident in Scotland'. Didn't mean to imply only Scottish people resident in Scotland.
 
GeeJay57 said:
I did mention 'those resident in Scotland'. Didn't mean to imply only Scottish people resident in Scotland.
Click to expand...

Sorry Glenn, I did note that & apologise if you feel my post was "poke" at what you said

My post was meant as just general comment
 
I still say (as i did two years ago) that the whole of the uk should get a vote - its possible the majority in England don't actually want to be in a union with Scotland anyway - shouldn't their voice be heard too ?
 
Happy for the Scottish people to decide their own Independence, however you will have to give us back all of Northumbria, in fact that will go for the Southern bit as well Edinburgh to Sheffield will again belong to gods chosen :)
 
big soft moose said:
I still say (as i did two years ago) that the whole of the uk should get a vote - its possible the majority in England don't actually want to be in a union with Scotland anyway - shouldn't their voice be heard too ?
Click to expand...

I - sort of - agree with you but this could open a whole new can of worms. I don't know how many voters there are in each country but the estimated populations are about 52m (England) 5m (Scotland), 3m (Wales) and 1.8m (Northern Ireland) so I suppose the electorates are roughly proportional to those figures. This would effectively mean that the English vote would be decisive, and could lead to a situation where the independence campaign fails in Scotland, if the majority vote in favour of retaining the status quo, but succeeds on the strength of the English ballot. Conversely, it could succeed in Scotland, but fail overall for the same reason. Both would be undesirable, leaving the Scottish majority feeling betrayed. The referendum, as planned, is probably the least unsatisfactory way forward.

As far as I'm concerned, the independence campaign is being driven more by the personal ambitions of the SNP leadership and their desire to go down in history than anything else. The emergence of Scotland and England as separate entities, and their eventual union, is largely the result of fortuitous events and there's no real reason for their people to feel any natural antipathy towards each other. If anything, their common history should strengthen their relationship.
 
Last edited:
I suspect Scottish Independence could work - but not with Alex Salmond anywhere near it. Talk about naive!

He's offering his fellow countrymen one thing whilst wishing for another himself. Offering Independence - yet he's aiming for several more layers of bureaucracy. Salmond is wishing for some sort of Super-Autonomy, not true independence, with him sitting on the throne. You cannot achieve political independence whilst retaining monetary union.

So he's planning on joining the EU - yet intending to retain the £. He's ignoring the fact that the EU insist on all new member states joining the Euro. He's also conveniently forgetting that Spain have already denied a newly formed state access to the EU - on the grounds that it would encourage the Catalans. There's no way Spain will agree to Scotland joining the EU. So he's stuffed whichever way you turn. Besides, it doesn't seem that many months ago he was slagging off the £ and wishing for a Scottish future with the €.

Maybe it's time for some to remember why the Acts of Union came about in the first place. Scotland was potless and the noblemen were bankrupt.
 
Politician in selfserving and illogical argument shock :LOL:
 
2blue4u said:
Maybe it's time for some to remember why the Acts of Union came about in the first place. Scotland was potless and the noblemen were bankrupt.
Click to expand...

Correct. Scotland wasn't bankrupt, but many of the ruling class/establishment had lost heavily in the Darien venture and faced ruin. The Commissioners were drawn from this class, and the people weren't consulted. There was nothing unusual about that, and the English people weren't either.

Bribery and corruption played a role too, hence "What A Parcel Of Rogues In The Nation" (Burns). He understood human nature very well and was prescient.......
 
2blue4u said:
I suspect Scottish Independence could work - but not with Alex Salmond anywhere near it. Talk about naive!

He's offering his fellow countrymen one thing whilst wishing for another himself. Offering Independence - yet he's aiming for several more layers of bureaucracy. Salmond is wishing for some sort of Super-Autonomy, not true independence, with him sitting on the throne. You cannot achieve political independence whilst retaining monetary union.

So he's planning on joining the EU - yet intending to retain the £. He's ignoring the fact that the EU insist on all new member states joining the Euro. He's also conveniently forgetting that Spain have already denied a newly formed state access to the EU - on the grounds that it would encourage the Catalans. There's no way Spain will agree to Scotland joining the EU. So he's stuffed whichever way you turn. Besides, it doesn't seem that many months ago he was slagging off the £ and wishing for a Scottish future with the €.

Maybe it's time for some to remember why the Acts of Union came about in the first place. Scotland was potless and the noblemen were bankrupt.
Click to expand...
Everyone looses sight of a very simple FACT in this debate surrounding a potential Yes vote:

A 'Yes' vote on 18th September, in itself changes nothing. We shall all remain UK and EU citizens, pay our taxes to that nice Mr Osborne

On a subsequent Independence day, if the EU member states (including the UK government, but not of course the not-yet-existent Scottish Government) have not put in place transition arrangements, then chaos will reign - the legal framework for all commercial agreements and contracts between parties in Scotland and in other parts of the EU (including rUK) having been vaporized as midnight struck.

The EU member states will, of course, understand their duty to put in place arrangements that will make this transition smooth, and not a transition to chaos but to stability. The present framework for Scottish membership of the EU is working well enough, and efforts to change it in any substantial way would produce lengthy (all sides at least agree about this) negotiations, of uncertain outcome. Until an EU member state says that it would want to change the basis of Scotland's membership of the EU, it is entirely safe to assume that none of them do. EU membership is open to any recognized European democracy that meets the Copenhagen criteria and adopts the acquis communautaire. Scotland has been within the EU/ EC for over forty years and does meet these criteria. It is in nobody’s interest to throw Scotland out of the single market – not Scotland, the rest of the UK, the other member states, business or anyone would gain from this. This is exactly the same rationalle for keeping Stering, as it is in nobody's interests for the alternative (except to scare people). There is also no ‘queue’ to get into the EU. Applicants are admitted as and when they are ready.

On the 1st February 1993, formal negotiations began for Finland, Sweden, Norway and Austria to join the EU. By the summer of 1994 everything was signed and sealed. Scotland, already being fully compliant with EU law etc, would find it even easier than Norway.
 
LC2 said:
Good Point, Well Made...

Oh.

So, why shouldn't the rest of the population be consulted. I'm genuinely interested to understand why not.
Click to expand...

Because this is a referendum on 'Scottish' independence by 'the population of Scotland', it concerns only the Scots and those people resident here who would be directly affected by it. Things happen every day all over the world that affect all of us in some way but we don't expect to have a say in them.
 
Last edited:
2blue4u said:
I suspect Scottish Independence could work - but not with Alex Salmond anywhere near it. Talk about naive!

He's offering his fellow countrymen one thing whilst wishing for another himself. Offering Independence - yet he's aiming for several more layers of bureaucracy. Salmond is wishing for some sort of Super-Autonomy, not true independence, with him sitting on the throne. You cannot achieve political independence whilst retaining monetary union.

So he's planning on joining the EU - yet intending to retain the £. He's ignoring the fact that the EU insist on all new member states joining the Euro. He's also conveniently forgetting that Spain have already denied a newly formed state access to the EU - on the grounds that it would encourage the Catalans. There's no way Spain will agree to Scotland joining the EU. So he's stuffed whichever way you turn. Besides, it doesn't seem that many months ago he was slagging off the £ and wishing for a Scottish future with the €.

Maybe it's time for some to remember why the Acts of Union came about in the first place. Scotland was potless and the noblemen were bankrupt.
Click to expand...

Yip, and the EU also insists that new members join the ERM.

John Swinney said at the weekend that Scotland would not adopt the Eu or join the ERM. Funny how they are not offering a vote on whether to join the Eu. I reckon that would be another No.

I think that John #149 is correct. Salmond knows it will be a No vote and hopes to stampede Westminster into granting more powers to the Scottish Parliament, e.g. tax raising (they call it tax varying) powers.

By the time September comes lots of folk are going to be sick about hearing of independence. I am already sick of it.
 
I don't get this 'we want independence' but in reality they want to retain sterling and retain 'existing' EU membership (gained as being part of the UK) ... seems a bit hypocritical to me, though I confess I'm not interested enough to have delved into all the arguments :thinking:
 
Steep said:
Because this is a referendum on 'Scottish' independence by 'the population of Scotland', it concerns only the Scots and those people resident here who would be directly affected by it. Things happen every day all over the world that affect all of us in some way but we don't expect to have a say in them.
Click to expand...

Not so - the population south of the border will also be affected by it - particularly if the vote in scotland is against independence. There could be a sizeable proportion ogf the english tax payers who don't want their tax money spent on subsidising scotland.

I'd say let scotland have their refferendum but lets also have one on english independence - if the English choose to leave the union and the scots don't the scots can feel welcome to remain in a union with wales and NI.

also on a related subject scotland has a parliment that looks after their interests , so does wales, so does NI - but england doesnt, we have only the westminster party which has to consider the wishes of all of the uk - maybe we should have an english parliment composed only of english consituency MPs , then all four countries can be independent
 
That's fine Pete, if you want it then lobby your MP to get it started, it's entirely your concern and only you can do it. Also please get the idea that Scotland is subsidised out of your head, it's been proven countless times that Scotland contributes more to the Union than it gets back financially.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top