SNP Referendum Nonsense

[JaWalks]

Isn't a no vote a foregone conclusion? The bookies seeem to think so.

 

[grumpysculler]

Why is independance less likely to receive majority support in Edinburgh than Glasgow?

Because support for independence decreases as you move up the socioeconomic spectrum.

Nearly one-third of households in Glasgow are workless. In Edinburgh, it is in single digits.

They say Edinburgh is run by lawyers, and I guess it would be the financial and insurance sector that primarily keep them on their toes.

Tosh. Who says? It is clear to anyone that every saw a tram that Edinburgh is run by Kermit, Miss Piggy and friends.

Edinburgh has a large financial sector, but it hardly dominates local politics. Glasgow is (or was) an industrial city. Edinburgh is post-industrial. It is no surprise that in a post-industrial age Edinburgh is more successful (and that goes much further than financial companies).

 

[=XDC=FluphyBunny]

If a no vote goes through (very much doubt it) won't the rich successful financial sector just move offices to London? See no reason why they would operate from a country who's EU membership isn't guaranteed.

 

[Biohazard]

Tosh. Who says? It is clear to anyone that every saw a tram that Edinburgh is run by Kermit, Miss Piggy and friends.

Edinburgh has a large financial sector, but it hardly dominates local politics. Glasgow is (or was) an industrial city. Edinburgh is post-industrial. It is no surprise that in a post-industrial age Edinburgh is more successful (and that goes much further than financial companies).

The saying has been around since the 19th possibly even 18th century iirc.

The wealth provided by Edinburgh's service sectors goes some way towards explaining it, it's merely the other end of the spectrum you yourself just alluded too.

 

[Lord-Jaffa]

Uk has been so long since 1707 so it time for scotland go free from uk also when i was stay i england for few daysand the went to shop but refused scottish money which is same as english.. i think it time for future for scotland and i would go for yes..

Look no further than here for why this will probably end up happening.

 

[Sheff]

Much in the same way that the SNP's white paper is purely the SNP's take on independance, surely the onus would be on each party to produce their own white papers with their vision of Scotland's future within the union rather than a blanket release from the no campaign?

How are the no campaign supposed to create a coherent and substantial paper when the parties struggle to agree with anything on a day to day basis?

 

[Angilion]

As an Englishman who has never even visited Scotland, I really hope the No vote wins this one. Unlike some of my fellow countrymen, I think Scotland is a real asset to the UK, and I think we're stronger together. It would be a real shame to cut the country in half like that.

I think so too. The union was formed under dodgy circumstances at best and cost England a lot, but it's worked out well and strengthened both countries.

I also think that a split would be completely pointless, especially the half-arsed semi-independence that's being proposed by Scottish nationalists. As far as I can see, the only people who would gain anything are a few politicians.

I have visited Scotland. Up the west coast, round the north a while and over to Shetland. I've good memories of the place and the people I met.

 

[Angilion]

And we'll keep asking until we get one.

Cobblers. You'll keep asking regardless because you'll never accept any answers.

Hiding behind the status quo is pathetic. Scots want change, they want answers.

Lots of people do. I do. That doesn't mean that I want my local area to secede from the union, nor does it mean that doing so would bring positive change or meaningful answers.

It's about time the coalition of Unionist parties started coming up with them.

How about they do the same as the seperatists and make lots of promises of all sorts of jam tomorrow and no answers at all to the question of how the people of Scotland are going to pay for it?

 

[Angilion]

A car full of passengers drives onto a ferry. Are the passengers on the ferry or just in the car?

Yes, Scotland is currently in the EU. That is because Scotland is part of the UK and the UK is in the EU. if Scotland leaves the UK, then Scotland is not part of the UK.

If your workplace has a staffroom for its employees, would you still be entitled to use the staffroom if you left the company?

 

[Castiel]

After Scotland and England united in 1707, Scots took advantage of free trade with England and access to the British empire. Scotland was transformed from a poor peripheral state to one of the world’s richest regions. Steam technology made it a global leader in building ships and locomotives. In the mid-19th century it was common to talk about North Britain.

But Scotland’s performance was less impressive in the 20th century. The manufacturers of west central Scotland failed. Nationalism revived and, in the 1970s, its adherents adopted the unsentimental slogan “it’s Scotland’s oil!” – most of the UK’s North Sea wealth was within what would be the territorial waters of an independent Scotland.

In the 1980s, the strident tones of Margaret Thatcher, then prime minister, grated on Scottish nerves. She swept to electoral victory in the UK as a whole, but eroded Conservative support in Scotland. When Labour won power in 1997, not a single Tory MP was elected north of the border. Labour quickly implemented an election pledge to establish a Scottish assembly.

In 2007, when Labour’s popularity was at a low ebb, the Scottish National party became the largest party in the Edinburgh parliament. Alex Salmond, its charismatic leader, led an SNP administration more competent than the coalitions that had preceded it. So he was re-elected in 2011 with a mandate to hold a referendum in Scotland on independence – a poll that will be held in September 2014.

The speed with which independence for Scotland moved from a vague aspiration to a live issue wrongfooted politicians on all sides. The SNP had few specific ideas of what independence would imply. Mr Salmond and the SNP are consistently more popular than their signature policy, and have struggled to win over moderate voters to it. They have attempted to make the case that nothing would really change while everything would be better. The problematic nature of this position is seen in the 667-page blueprint for independence published this week.

It seeks to reassure that an independent Scotland would have the same queen, the same relationship with the EU and the same currency. Her Majesty would no doubt be amenable to remaining Queen of Scotland. Spain and Belgium – each contending with their own separatist movements – might be unhelpful, but Scottish accession to the EU could certainly be negotiated.

Where the document does promise change, it is long on pledges and short on how they would be paid for. Its headline-grabbing proposal – the extensive provision of free childcare – is one Scotland already has the power, if not the financial resources, to implement.

The biggest outstanding question is over which currency an independent Scotland would use. Monetary union with the rest of the UK is the most sensible course – and the one the Scottish government proposes. But in the context of the troubles of the eurozone, the Treasury and Bank of England might be expected to seek extensive control of both Scottish fiscal policy and banking supervision. Yet with Scotland representing only 8.5 per cent of the monetary union, it is hard to imagine them conceding many such rights back to Scotland. While Mr Salmond insists that there is no currency plan B, Scotland would have no negotiating power without one and the rational plan B – a Scottish pound pegged to sterling – is also the likely outcome.

Scotland has income per head broadly in line with the UK average, making it the richest part of the UK outside London and the southeast. Its industrial and employment structure differs little from that of the UK. Unlike Wales and Northern Ireland, Scotland is plainly viable as an independent country.

Scottish government revenue is currently principally derived from a block grant from the UK Treasury, which supports public expenditure per capita in Scotland at a level 10-12 per cent higher than the UK. An independent Scotland would lose this subsidy, but gain most UK oil income. These revenues are uncertain, enabling both sides of the debate to find support for conflicting claims about the fiscal consequences of independence. But a more important question is whether Scottish business would perform better in an independent country.

Scotland has suffered from a drain of corporate headquarters activity. The pull of London would remain, but an independent Scotland would have better opportunities to compete. Devolution since 1999 has been associated with a revival of self-confidence that might gain strength in an independent country. Even small growth effects would have economic consequences far larger than fiscal balances.

But the centre of political mavity in Scotland is far to the left of that of the UK and that is at the centre of the concerns – widely held but little expressed – of Scottish business over independence. It is possible to imagine a future for an independent Scotland characterised by reactionary municipal socialism – and the crony capitalism that brought Ireland and Iceland close to economic collapse.

The polls suggest independence will be defeated. A narrow margin leaves the issue alive – Quebec has done well by being always on the point of leaving Canada. A heavy loss would raise questions over the future of the SNP and its leadership. Yet arguments over independence that have caused strife elsewhere – from Ireland to Kosovo – have not been about small economic benefits. That this issue dominates discussion in Scotland demonstrates that this debate is not deeply serious. For the degree of economic independence a small European country can enjoy in a global marketplace is inevitably limited. Nothing that happens in Scotland in September 2014 will change that reality.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/83d6b9d2-5796-11e3-86d1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2m5xw0pXl

 

[Angilion]

is the point in the vote not to allow Scotland to act on the will of the nation?

Obviously not, or else the vote would be for the entire nation, i.e. the UK.

If you want local areas to vote to leave the union, why do you want to forbid local areas from voting to leave the union?

 

[Angilion]

The UK is a unitary state. Of course Scotland is in the EU just as England Wales and NI is.

As long as it remains part of the UK.

You're not just moving the goalposts. You're pretending that the goalposts are in different places at the same time.

 

[Angilion]

Yes, it's all just a mirage. There have been no outrageous claims in this, it's all just my 30 year old over active imagination.

I would ask why should I take your word on it not being there, but I don't really give a ****.

It's all in the other thread.

As I expected, you have no evidence at all to support your claim. Which is no surprise, since you made it up.

 

[Angilion]

That's a different question entirely, the point you made was that Scotland wouldn't be inside the EU when negotiating.

It would.

But I'm sure you're going to tell me how everybody is going to block Scottish ascension.

The point I made was simple enough - if Scotland leaves the UK, Scotland would not be part of the UK. It's not a complex point. When Scotland leaves or what Scottish politicians say in the meantime is irrelevant to that point.

I'm sure you're not going to tell me why every country in the EU would allow Scotland to join the EU on its own special terms despite the fact that the other countries would be going against their own interests if they did that. You're not going to tell me because you don't have an answer and you don't have an answer because it's a ridiculous claim to make.

I'm in the UK. The government of the UK is in the UK. I could ask them to make me exempt from all taxes while retaining the benefit of having the various things that are paid for from taxes. That would be "negotiation from within the UK". It does not mean that they would have to go along with it.

 

[Dr House]

Sorry a little OT but if the scots get independence will the Labour party ever be able to get back into power in the uk?

 

[Biohazard]

Cobblers. You'll keep asking regardless because you'll never accept any answers.

Lots of people do. I do. That doesn't mean that I want my local area to secede from the union, nor does it mean that doing so would bring positive change or meaningful answers.

How about they do the same as the seperatists and make lots of promises of all sorts of jam tomorrow and no answers at all to the question of how the people of Scotland are going to pay for it?

I didn't write the article you know.

The white paper has put the ball in the unionists court. It's time for their proposals.

 

[Biohazard]

As long as it remains part of the UK.

You're not just moving the goalposts. You're pretending that the goalposts are in different places at the same time.

And it would remain apart of the UK until independence day.

Thus would be negotiating within the EU as a part of the UK.

It has nothing to do with goal posts.

 

[Biohazard]

As I expected, you have no evidence at all to support your claim. Which is no surprise, since you made it up.

It's all out there, as I said before it isn't my place to hold your hand through this or evidence an entire two year campaign.

Scottish independence: Ditch No campaign - McLeish

LABOUR should abandon the cross-party Better Together campaign, former first minister Henry McLeish has said as he accused the unionist group of using “fear and scare tactics” to defeat the SNP.

Mr McLeish said the anti-independence campaign was “treating Scots like idiots” as he claimed Better Together was working alongside Westminster in attempting to frighten voters about independence.

The comments from the former Scottish Labour leader came after the UK government made a series of claims about the consequences of independence such as the end of Scottish banknotes and more expensive mobile phone calls for Scots visiting the rest of the UK.

Mr McLeish said there was “too much venom and hatred aimed at the SNP” in Better Together, which is an alliance of Labour, Tories and the Lib Dems.

He called on the Labour leadership in Scotland to leave the group and “forge a new campaign” with Lib Dem supporters of greater devolution.

The Better Together campaign is led by former Labour chancellor Alistair Darling, but the leadership of the group includes senior Scottish Tories such as David McLetchie, who is a director of the campaign.

Mr McLeish said that the anti-independence campaign was “tied to the utterings of David Cameron and the Scottish Tories” as he called for a new Unionist Labour-Lib Dem campaign.

He also said that Better Together was involved in a “constant haranguing of Scots” in a campaign he claimed is dominated by Westminster and London-based politicians.

Mr McLeish said: “There are fear and scare stories such as that we’ll have passport controls at the Border and won’t have access to blood transfusion supplies. Next they’ll be saying there will be seven years of famine in an independent Scotland and that aliens will land here.

“By leaving Better Together, Labour can start to reinforce its identity.”

The former first minister’s attack on his party’s decision to support Better Together came as it emerged that senior figures within Scottish Labour had refused to join the cross-party campaign because of Tory involvement.

Party figures staying away from Better Together include MP Katy Clark, MSP Elaine Smith and senior trade union officials – Richard Leonard, Scotland organiser for the GMB union, and Dave Watson, head of campaigns at Unison.

Mr McLeish warned: “Scots don’t like to be talked to like idiots and there has been a constant haranguing of Scots by Westminster in terms of the type of campaign being run.

“This could creates a backlash as Scots want to know what vision of Scotland within the Union the Unionists are campaigning for. If there’s another year of this people will start to rebel.”

United With Labour – the party’s campaign against independence – was launched by Gordon Brown this spring.

Mr McLeish insisted that a bigger cross-party group, but without any Tory involvement, was needed to deliver a No vote in the referendum on 18 September 2014.

He said: “The Tories bring nothing to the table, so Labour and progressive Lib Dems have to put forward their own campaign.

“It’s not just the referendum, we have a general election in 2015 and then a Holyrood election in 2016.”

A Better Together spokesman said: “We are running a strong, positive campaign highlighting the benefits to Scotland of continuing to pool our resources across the whole of the UK.”

SNP MSP John Wilson said: “While Henry McLeish calls on Labour to withdraw from the Better Together campaign, he would also be well advised to argue for a constructive debate on the issues surrounding independence and the referendum.

”The Labour Party will only gain credibility among its supporters if they can give a clear direction as to the future of Scotland within the Union.”

A Scottish Labour spokesman said: “We are fully committed to campaigning with others who agree with us that Scotland should stay strong within the United Kingdom as part of Better Together while setting out a distinct vision for the future of Scotland through United With Labour.”

etc

 

[Amp34]

Which is better? The sweets and candies* or the fear and scare** campaign?

Only one way to find out..!

!!FIGHT!!

*SNP - Vote for independence and we will give you loads of extra money/benefits, we could give it to you now as we have the power but that would mean we can't bribe you...!

**No Campaign - We could tell you what you want to hear, instead we will pick holes in the speeches of Salmond, well there are so many holes.

 

[Biohazard]

I think given past records in Holyrood elections that politics of fear doesn't have the desired effect.

It's not about picking holes through what Salmond says but ridiculing or belittling Scotland round every corner, Salmond is here for a lifetime Scotland will remain long after.

The end effect of Better Together campaigning is to give the impression that Scotland alone in the world is incapable of governing itself and it's a sad reflection on the state of the Union when that's the only positive campaign they can offer.