SNP Referendum Nonsense

[Destination]

you clearly know some real stupid people

You've never met half the population of Northern Ireland then have you
The thick half, both sides. The divisive parties win the election now, as building a shared future might means someone on the other side gets more than you do.

 

[covenantuk]

However independence would give us one less tier of government

But would mean setting up multiple tiers of bureaucracy from scratch.

Personally, anything that means Scotland can't blame "it" on the English any more is a good thing.

 

[the_r_sole]

You know what the advantages of staying in the union are. You've been part of it for the whole of your life!

Being governed by a political party I have never voted for that facilitates exploitation by large corporations, that tries things like the poll tax on the scots, that puts their nuclear weapons close to our biggest city (and miles away from the English capital)

still waiting for the advantages to be outlined...

 

[Schlong&Stable]

But would mean setting up multiple tiers of bureaucracy from scratch.

Personally, anything that means Scotland can't blame "it" on the English any more is a good thing.

Only an immature and trivial number of Scots blame England for Scottish problems. Probably the same proportion as that of immature English persons who whine about Scotland.

And you're right, Scotland will need to establish lots of new government departments and therefore bureaucracy.

Being governed by a political party I have never voted for that facilitates exploitation by large corporations, that tries things like the poll tax on the scots, that puts their nuclear weapons close to our biggest city (and miles away from the English capital)

still waiting for the advantages to be outlined...

That is the most asinine comment I've read on the independence question. In any democracy, a significant proportion of the populace will be governed by a party they didn't vote for.

Here's a few advantages -

1. Membership of EU guaranteed (excepting referendum)
2. Sterling guaranteed (if you want to join EU, you must take Euro).
3. Representation in Security Council guaranteed
4. Barnett formula safeguarding minimum Scottish budget, guaranteed.
5. Scottish finance industry safeguarded by British taxpayers
6. "British" businesses likely to remain in Scotland.
7. Membership of NATO guaranteed.
8. Massive amounts of Scottish money not wasted establish bureaucracy that already exists as part of the UK.
9. Etc.

You can argue that these are "negatives" and you're right, they are negatives in the sense that they are what you lose by leaving the union. Do you honestly feel Salmond has produced any real material benefits to the Scots that cannot be achieved inside the unions?

You're keeping the Queen
You're attempting to keep Stirling
You're attempting to keep the BBC
The finances are based upon declining oil reserve
Nothing Salmond promises is guaranteed

 

[grumpysculler]

the vote is not for the snp, the vote is for the people to be able to chose who runs the country.

Except that the White Paper that is meant to inform voters about the future is effectively an SNP party political manifesto. Virtually everything in it is either up to a future government or relies on negotiations with other countries/bodies.

The bits I have read so far are empty on details and full of nice, warm, fluffy assertions.

The only solid reason for independence seems to be because then we rid ourselves of Westminster. Sadly, there seems to be some rosy view that any problems we have are down to geography of our parliament. Even if Scotland votes for independence, we will still be governed by politicians who are likely to be just as accountable as the various mobs we have had in recent years. The only difference is that Scots politicians won't be able to blame anything on big bad Westminster any more.

 

[leaskovski]

If they did introduce a separate passport, do you get to keep your current one?

Multi Passport!!! Multi Pass! MULTI PASS!!!!

 

[daver]

Although I think its up to the Scottish to decide whether they want independence, I think it would be quite an interesting time period to live through if they did vote yes.

The impact of independence whether good or bad will be felt by both sides, but due to the size difference will obviously have a much larger impression on Scotland. In a lot of cases I can see Scotland 'winning' arguments on separations of assets/liabilities just because even if the rUK 'loses' the deal, it might be better to avoid a ****fight dragging on and on and the impacts of settlements will be much more material on Scotland and rUk might be more concerned over the uncertaincy/markets will prefer a quick settlement.

 

[leaskovski]

Im hoping that when the No vote goes through that this is the end of any more independence nonsense.

It seems destined to fail, thankfully.

Would that mean that SNP can finally go forth with and bugger off? Surely they would have no reason to exist after it fails?

 

[grumpysculler]

Being governed by a political party I have never voted for

That happens in any representative democracy. Not everyone votes for the party in power, but they represent a majority (definition of majority depends on the voting method used).

You do know that the Conservatives got 16.7% of the Scottish vote in 2010, against 18.9% for the Lib Dems and 19.9% for the SNP? Why should all those Conservative supporters have to put up with the SNP when they are almost as numerous?

 

[alx]

Simple proof of id, address and birth.

I can vote for the UK general election but can't vote on the Scottish referendum despite being Scottish.

Fair enough, if you can vote in the UK general election then there's no real admin barrier. Maybe there's certain rules regarding voting in referendums? If not maybe it was the SNPs call.

 

[Cosimo]

Looks like we're in a parallel universe.....

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18544099

 

[alx]

Although I think its up to the Scottish to decide whether they want independence, I think it would be quite an interesting time period to live through if they did vote yes.

The impact of independence whether good or bad will be felt by both sides, but due to the size difference will obviously have a much larger impression on Scotland. In a lot of cases I can see Scotland 'winning' arguments on separations of assets/liabilities just because even if the rUK 'loses' the deal, it might be better to avoid a ****fight dragging on and on and the impacts of settlements will be much more material on Scotland and rUk might be more concerned over the uncertaincy/markets will prefer a quick settlement.

If anything I'd of thought it would harm Scotland more to drag everything out and argue every last point if they voted Yes than rUK. Scotland would be the ones trying to remove themselves from the unknown of independence and establish themselves as a stable, economically sound country. Markets, companies etc probably aren't going to risk investment until the majority of issues have been resolved/decided.

 

[platypus]

The bits I have read so far are empty on details and full of nice, warm, fluffy assertions.

Which sums up Salmond in a nice, succinct sentence.

Now, we just need Biohazard to wade in, quote every single post and reply in a seperate new post, ignore anything that doesn't suit his agenda, or rubbish it as not being legitimate, and we have a genuine OcUK Scottish independence thread™.

 

[the_r_sole]

Only an immature and trivial number of Scots blame England for Scottish problems. Probably the same proportion as that of immature English persons who whine about Scotland.

And you're right, Scotland will need to establish lots of new government departments and therefore bureaucracy.



That is the most asinine comment I've read on the independence question. In any democracy, a significant proportion of the populace will be governed by a party they didn't vote for.

Here's a few advantages -

1. Membership of EU guaranteed (excepting referendum)
2. Sterling guaranteed (if you want to join EU, you must take Euro).
3. Representation in Security Council guaranteed
4. Barnett formula safeguarding minimum Scottish budget, guaranteed.
5. Scottish finance industry safeguarded by British taxpayers
6. "British" businesses likely to remain in Scotland.
7. Membership of NATO guaranteed.
8. Massive amounts of Scottish money not wasted establish bureaucracy that already exists as part of the UK.
9. Etc.

You can argue that these are "negatives" and you're right, they are negatives in the sense that they are what you lose by leaving the union. Do you honestly feel Salmond has produced any real material benefits to the Scots that cannot be achieved inside the unions?

You're keeping the Queen
You're attempting to keep Stirling
You're attempting to keep the BBC
The finances are based upon declining oil reserve
Nothing Salmond promises is guaranteed

at no point did I "blame" any one for any problems
from your list of advantages there is a lot of the same things that I have been hearing today - almost none of which are actual facts, just possibilities, we understand that nothing is guaranteed so why use that as the basis for the argument?

here is that list again
1. Membership of EU guaranteed (excepting referendum) - but up for discussion if independent, not guaranteed either way
2. Sterling guaranteed (if you want to join EU, you must take Euro). - that is not the case, otherwise the rest of the uk couldn't be members of the EU, there are clearly exceptions to membership criteria on each case - so again not a definite issue
3. Representation in Security Council guaranteed - but not definitely excluded
4. Barnett formula safeguarding minimum Scottish budget, guaranteed. - and that's an advantage?!
5. Scottish finance industry safeguarded by British taxpayers - because the finance industry is working so well?
6. "British" businesses likely to remain in Scotland. - and why would it leave?
7. Membership of NATO guaranteed. - ?
8. Massive amounts of Scottish money not wasted establish bureaucracy that already exists as part of the UK - please quantify and specify what isn't present at holyrood
9. Etc. - good point

Scotland has traditionally voted for centre left parties/policies, that indicates a distinct difference from what the rest of the uk vote for - obviously not everyone can be happy in a democracy but why can't we choose the make up of the people that govern us?

 

[the_r_sole]

That happens in any representative democracy. Not everyone votes for the party in power, but they represent a majority (definition of majority depends on the voting method used).

You do know that the Conservatives got 16.7% of the Scottish vote in 2010, against 18.9% for the Lib Dems and 19.9% for the SNP? Why should all those Conservative supporters have to put up with the SNP when they are almost as numerous?

so why can't Scotland be ruled by a parliament made up of those people rather than being dictated to by a party which got 16.7% of the vote?

 

[Schlong&Stable]

from your list of advantages there is a lot of the same things that I have been hearing today - almost none of which are actual facts, just possibilities, we understand that nothing is guaranteed so why use that as the basis for the argument?

here is that list again
1. Membership of EU guaranteed (excepting referendum) - but up for discussion if independent, not guaranteed either way

Membership is up for discussion, indeed. But membership of the EU is what the SNP argue Scotland will pursue, yet they cannot guarantee it.

2. Sterling guaranteed (if you want to join EU, you must take Euro). - that is not the case, otherwise the rest of the uk couldn't be members of the EU, there are clearly exceptions to membership criteria on each case - so again not a definite issue

That is because the UK's membership predates the law. The EU commission confirmed TODAY that Scotland would have to take the EU

3. Representation in Security Council guaranteed - but not definitely excluded

There are only five permanent seats. A non-nuclear power with no military speak of will not hold a sixth seat.

4. Barnett formula safeguarding minimum Scottish budget, guaranteed. - and that's an advantage?!

Uh yes, a major advantage. It means even if Scotlands economy slackens with declining oil revenues, the rest of the UK will pick up the slack

5. Scottish finance industry safeguarded by British taxpayers - because the finance industry is working so well?

It accounts for a major part of Scottish GDP. By all means sacrifice that particular lamb, but you'd also need to cutback on welfare, education etc

6. "British" businesses likely to remain in Scotland. - and why would it leave?

You will not immediately be part of the EU, so exports from Scotland may be impacted.

7. Membership of NATO guaranteed. - ? What?

8. Massive amounts of Scottish money not wasted establish bureaucracy that already exists as part of the UK - please quantify and specify what isn't present at holyrood

Listing specific departments is an exercise in tedium. Do you think that the Scottish parliament has enough bureaucrats to function as an independent state currently? If so, then it sounds like they're wasting a lot of money.

9. Etc. - good point It's not a point, it's pointing out that I don't have time to list every positive.

Scotland has traditionally voted for centre left parties/policies, that indicates a distinct difference from what the rest of the uk vote for - obviously not everyone can be happy in a democracy but why can't we choose the make up of the people that govern us?

This is factually false. Scotland has variously been a Conservative bastion in the last hundred years and you cannot qualify how many existing SNP voters are left/right-wing. It may be many independence voters will go to the right once Scotland is independent.

 

[Schlong&Stable]

so why can't Scotland be ruled by a parliament made up of those people rather than being dictated to by a party which got 16.7% of the vote?

Why can't Newcastle be ruled by a parliament made up of Labour given that they voted Labour at the national elections?

You're going to be ruled by the EU in the end anyway, so you'll end up having your leader chosen by Germany, France etc.

 

[platypus]

so why can't Scotland be ruled by a parliament made up of those people rather than being dictated to by a party which got 16.7% of the vote?

Should the vote go 'Yes', how long before people start whinging about being ruled by the EU?

 

[eddiemcgarrigle]

1. Membership of EU guaranteed (excepting referendum). Why not?
2. Sterling guaranteed (if you want to join EU, you must take Euro). Would England cut off it's nose to spite it's face?
3. Representation in Security Council guaranteed. Couldn't care less.
4. Barnett formula safeguarding minimum Scottish budget, guaranteed. Not according to your Unionist chums.
5. Scottish finance industry safeguarded by British taxpayers. Safeguarded by Scots.
6. "British" businesses likely to remain in Scotland. Why not?
7. Membership of NATO guaranteed. Again, why not?
8. Massive amounts of Scottish money not wasted establish bureaucracy that already exists as part of the UK. Money saved by not keeping trident, etc.
9. Etc. Exactly

You're keeping the Queen. For a while, anyways.
You're attempting to keep Stirling. Why wouldn't we, it's a Scottish town.
You're attempting to keep the BBC. As do 80 other nations.
The finances are based upon declining oil reserve New reserves found all the time, enough for the next 50 years.
Nothing Salmond promises is guaranteed. And you believe Darling, Sarwar and Lamont? Dearie me.

 

[the_r_sole]

This is factually false. Scotland has variously been a Conservative bastion in the last hundred years and you cannot qualify how many existing SNP voters are left/right-wing. It may be many independence voters will go to the right once Scotland is independent.

and if that's the case, then fine at least we will have decided on who runs our political system... you can't compare Scotland to Newcastle
some points like Scottish exports, what about English exports to Scotland given we are the biggest importer of English goods)?
do you think the uk government would deliberately try to make that trading awkward or do you think that it might be in their interests to maintain a good trading relationship?
never saw anything about Scotland being told they would have to take the euro, can you please post me a link, had a google but no new articles, surprising really
but yet again, all the points are based on opinion and crystal balls, what you have done is listed the points that are potential negatives of Scotland leaving the uk, but none are set in stone and no one can say that they wouldn't happen in an independent Scotland - and none are definite positives in retaining the union