Scottish independence and devolution superthread

[Gorgiewave]

Hey! You've finally said something that I think I could warm to!

 

The Tom Gallagher book though....

 

 

Even Massie, no Salmond fan he, says the author is a loon.

 

A Scotland-Norway Union because decisions affecting Scotland would be taken in Oslo? Or most in Edinburgh and some in Oslo? Or all in Edinburgh including some affecting Norway?

 

I infer it's because you see Scotland and Norway as fundamentally similar. If so, how are Scotland and anywhere in England north of Birmingham fundamentally different?

[Alba gu Brath]

A Scotland-Norway Union because decisions affecting Scotland would be taken in Oslo? Or most in Edinburgh and some in Oslo? Or all in Edinburgh including some affecting Norway?

 

I infer it's because you see Scotland and Norway as fundamentally similar. If so, how are Scotland and anywhere in England north of Birmingham fundamentally different?

 

Don't take it too seriously. However two nations of similar size are bound to be better balanced than a 'union' with a 'partner' ten times her size. I also like how Norway refuses to join the EU as it is 'too right-wing' and that even her Tories make Johann Lamont look like Farage.

[TheMaganator]

 

 

A Scotland-Norway Union because decisions affecting Scotland would be taken in Oslo? Or most in Edinburgh and some in Oslo? Or all in Edinburgh including some affecting Norway?

 

I infer it's because you see Scotland and Norway as fundamentally similar. If so, how are Scotland and anywhere in England north of Birmingham fundamentally different?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/3280030/Alex-Salmond-refuses-to-back-down-after-Norway-says-were-not-like-Scotland..html

 

I always like to remember this article when Nats talk of Norway...

[Ulysses]

If I was a worker at that business, I'd start consulting an employment lawyer.

 

And ask him/her to do what, exactly?

[Gorgiewave]

http://www.telegraph...-Scotland..html

 

I always like to remember this article when Nats talk of Norway...

 

A pleasing read.

[TheMaganator]

 

 

A pleasing read.

[JamboX2]

I note a sharp pro-Yes rise here [modedit]. If reflected nationwide i'd hazard a guess at a Yes win.

 

Personally I'm yet to be convinced.

 

Whatever occurs post vote the fact is Scotland is divided politically and socially and to me is politically immature. An immaturity shown by a focus in a PR system on 2 parties and an inability to look to the centre right. That needs rectified in Scotland. An inability to have debate of philosophies and base principle and to be divided in parliament on constitutional principle to me is not conducive to producing good policies.

 

Personally reckon these wounds will run deep for a long while. Either side of this honey and milk are looking unlikely. Bitterness, apathy and mudfling on do though.

[Gregory House M.D.]

I got to "prop up the economy like it would in a seperate Scotland" and stopped. Utter drivel.

[Ulysses]

Where are these vitriolic anti-UK posts though? Or these regurgitations of articles?

 

Littered throughout this thread. You probably don't notice because of your bias, just as the No supporters on the thread don't notice the more excessive comments on their side because of their biases.

 

 

...uneducated English beliefs....

 

Ah, the uneducated English and their uneducated beliefs. Where would we be without them?

 

 

I am voting yes as I want our country to start an Oil Investment fund rather than have oil from Scottish waters' revenue squandered by government after government that the Scottish people never voted for. I want to follow Norways lead in terms of oil. They have an oil fund worth about ?500bn and are one of the best countries in the world to live in because of this.

 

Why do you believe Scotland will end up with an "oil fund" one day? Or any time soon? I'm asking that in light of all the impediments to that happening in Scotland, which didn't exist in Norway.

 

 

Even if we wipe North Sea Oil off of our GDP we are more or less the same per head as the entire UK. With the oil we completely trounce it.

 

I wasn't aware that it was a competition, but then I'm not supporting either team.

 

By the way, has anyone worked out what actual difference it makes when you take oil into account? The simple approach seems to be to take the total contribution made by oil and gas to UK GDP, add that to Scottish GDP and say that's how much richer Scotland will be. But is that true? Or would an independent Scotland end up like Ireland, with apparently huge GDP figures that don't reflect what actually goes on in the economy? Google the term "net factor income from abroad" and it'll give you a sense of what I mean.

[Gorgiewave]

I note a sharp pro-Yes rise here [modedit]. If reflected nationwide i'd hazard a guess at a Yes win.

 

Personally I'm yet to be convinced.

 

Whatever occurs post vote the fact is Scotland is divided politically and socially and to me is politically immature. An immaturity shown by a focus in a PR system on 2 parties and an inability to look to the centre right. That needs rectified in Scotland. An inability to have debate of philosophies and base principle and to be divided in parliament on constitutional principle to me is not conducive to producing good policies.

 

Personally reckon these wounds will run deep for a long while. Either side of this honey and milk are looking unlikely. Bitterness, apathy and mudfling on do though.

 

http://www.gerryhass...-won/#more-3105

 

This article discusses much of what you've mentioned and indicates why, if it's a No, those who wish to retain the Union should not relax.

[Patrick Bateman]

I note a sharp pro-Yes rise here [modedit]. If reflected nationwide i'd hazard a guess at a Yes win.

 

Personally I'm yet to be convinced.

 

 

That's the calling card of the undecided, right enough. As I said before, the more informed a person is, the more likely they are to vote yes. The overwhelming majority of people that I've spoken to would vote no because they think Scotland just can't govern itself. Thankfully, I don't think even anyone on here would try to argue such a ridiculous case. However, that's why the no campaign is grounded in making people scared; they want people to see independence as unnatural, threatening, even racist, because it stops reasonable discussion. That's why they've refused to let the PM come to Scotland and explain why the parliament he leads is better at making decisions than people who live and work in Scotland. They shut down debate because it simply doesn't suit them. They won't debate Scotland's past or present relationship with Westminster, so they fixate on conjuring up some awful future that will spawn from independence. I'm not surprised, it's what most establishments do in the face of social change. It's just a shame that some lack the historical awareness to see this.

[Ulysses]

http://www.gerryhass...-won/#more-3105

 

This article discusses much of what you've mentioned and indicates why, if it's a No, those who wish to retain the Union should not relax.

 

I wouldn't have thought you were a fan of the author?

[JamboX2]

 

 

That's the calling card of the undecided, right enough. As I said before, the more informed a person is, the more likely they are to vote yes. The overwhelming majority of people that I've spoken to would vote no because they think Scotland just can't govern itself. Thankfully, I don't think even anyone on here would try to argue such a ridiculous case. However, that's why the no campaign is grounded in making people scared; they want people to see independence as unnatural, threatening, even racist, because it stops reasonable discussion. That's why they've refused to let the PM come to Scotland and explain why the parliament he leads is better at making decisions than people who live and work in Scotland. They shut down debate because it simply doesn't suit them. They won't debate Scotland's past or present relationship with Westminster, so they fixate on conjuring up some awful future that will spawn from independence. I'm not surprised, it's what most establishments do in the face of social change. It's just a shame that some lack the historical awareness to see this.

 

Used the term in a tougne in cheek manner. Sorry if it you felt inappropriate.

 

I do understand the relationship and history between Scottish MPs-Scottish people-Westminster governments. I just don't view it as negatively as you.

 

Personally I see a Holyrood establishment as out of touch and arrogant in all parties as many Yes voters see in Westminster. So what does that lead me to conclude? I don't quite know. A growing indifference to either outcome.

Edited February 10, 2014 by JamboX2

[Ulysses]

I note a sharp pro-Yes rise here [modedit]. If reflected nationwide i'd hazard a guess at a Yes win.

 

First of all, I don't like the highlighted expression. I think it's a means for anti-independence campaigners to put down those in favour of a Yes vote, and it's not on (IMO).

 

Also, the Yes side of the debate has always had a solid lead on JKB, so it's no surprise that more people will post in favour of Yes than in favour of No. Personally, I think it's good to see a wider group of people taking part - it freshens things up a bit, which is no harm. That said, there is a solid No constituency here as well, and if they have something to say I'm sure they're perfectly capable of doing so.

[Ulysses]

Used the term in a tougne in cheek manner. Sorry if it you felt inappropriate.

 

Does anyone mind if we edit it out?

[Patrick Bateman]

I don't know if this was posted earlier, but this is a fine speech from Tommy Sheridan.

 

 

I don't always agree with what he says, but he's clearly very passionate and is definitely a man of his convictions (if you excuse the pun).

Edited February 10, 2014 by Patrick Bateman

[JamboX2]

 

 

Does anyone mind if we edit it out?

 

Not at all. Sorry I used it if it offends. Meant it tougne in cheek. Can understand why but meant no harm.

[Gorgiewave]

I wouldn't have thought you were a fan of the author?

 

I do quite like him. I like the fact that he is not obviously partisan and explains many matters as if he were an interested but disinterested outsider (maybe like you?). He sees right through the Yes side's repeated claim that Scotland is essentially different from England, being naturally socially democratic and England naturally Tory, such that cohabitation is just impossible.

[JamboX2]

 

 

First of all, I don't like the highlighted exp<b></b>ression. I think it's a means for anti-independence campaigners to put down those in favour of a Yes vote, and it's not on (IMO).

 

Also, the Yes side of the debate has always had a solid lead on JKB, so it's no surprise that more people will post in favour of Yes than in favour of No. Personally, I think it's good to see a wider group of people taking part - it freshens things up a bit, which is no harm. That said, there is a solid No constituency here as well, and if they have something to say I'm sure they're perfectly capable of doing so.

 

Indeed, however I meant it jokingly. Albeit thats hard to show in writing!

 

What I was getting at was a breadth of more posters posting positives for Yes.

 

My phrasology is crap in all honesty and after a long day travelling i'm a tad drained. I think the breadth is excellent and is far better than other forums I've read. If anything disregard what I'd posted earlier if you view it negatively.

[Ulysses]

Not at all. Sorry I used it if it offends. Meant it tougne in cheek. Can understand why but meant no harm.

 

Sorted.

[Gregory House M.D.]

 

 

Littered throughout this thread. You probably don't notice because of your bias, just as the No supporters on the thread don't notice the more excessive comments on their side because of their biases.

 

 

 

 

Ah, the uneducated English and their uneducated beliefs. Where would we be without them?

 

 

 

 

Why do you believe Scotland will end up with an "oil fund" one day? Or any time soon? I'm asking that in light of all the impediments to that happening in Scotland, which didn't exist in Norway.

 

 

 

 

I wasn't aware that it was a competition, but then I'm not supporting either team.

 

By the way, has anyone worked out what actual difference it makes when you take oil into account? The simple approach seems to be to take the total contribution made by oil and gas to UK GDP, add that to Scottish GDP and say that's how much richer Scotland will be. But is that true? Or would an independent Scotland end up like Ireland, with apparently huge GDP figures that don't reflect what actually goes on in the economy? Google the term "net factor income from abroad" and it'll give you a sense of what I mean.

 

I believe an Oil fund is a quite achievable goal. I'm not saying that it'll be viable to set one up upon independence by any means but I do think we could do it in the future.

 

The last bit, the forecasts being banded about right now courtesy of NIESR are that Scotland could expect a Current Account surplus.

 

The report says that all of this suggests that "Scotland would have a very large current account surplus, which would in turn mean that its economic prospects would be much brighter than the rest of the UK's

 

I'm talking about the uneducated view that has been spouted in England and on national television (without argument) that Scotland is subsidised by the UK. 2 seconds on google prove it utter mince.

[Ulysses]

I believe an Oil fund is a quite achievable goal. I'm not saying that it'll be viable to set one up upon independence by any means but I do think we could do it in the future.

 

I think an independent Scotland could create one - but it would be worth a lot less than Norway's and would take a lot longer to mature. It would also be a doubtful proposition given a tendency in Scotland to what I saw described as "free mince" politics.

 

 

I'm talking about the uneducated view that has been spouted in England and on national television (without argument) that Scotland is subsidised by the UK. 2 seconds on google prove it utter mince.

 

Anyone I know in England doesn't think that Scotland is subsidised, but they may not be in the mainstream. Mind you, it's worth remembering that the opinion polls in England show a majority in favour of Scottish independence, so maybe they're smarter than you think.

[Ulysses]

I like the fact that he is not obviously partisan.....

 

Perhaps it's not obvious, but he is partisan.

[Gorgiewave]

a tendency in Scotland to what I saw described as "free mince" politics.

 

What is that?

[Gregory House M.D.]

 

 

I think an independent Scotland could create one - but it would be worth a lot less than Norway's and would take a lot longer to mature. It would also be a doubtful proposition given a tendency in Scotland to what I saw described as "free mince" politics.

 

 

 

 

Anyone I know in England doesn't think that Scotland is subsidised, but they may not be in the mainstream. Mind you, it's worth remembering that the opinion polls in England show a majority in favour of Scottish independence, so maybe they're smarter than you think.

 

You're taking the uneducated thing out of context here. I am talking about that viewpoint in particular. Not the English people.

[Ulysses]

You're taking the uneducated thing out of context here. I am talking about that viewpoint in particular. Not the English people.

 

Gotcha, thanks.

[Gorgiewave]

Perhaps it's not obvious, but he is partisan.

 

I agree he's pro-Yes, but in a much more nuanced and critical way than others, some even on kickback. That gives room for other viewpoints and non-partison appraisal.

[Ulysses]

What is that?

 

Offering things to the voters that are apparently free but in fact paid for with their money. In particular, it can be applied to enticements to the middle classes like free university tuition, council tax freeze and free childcare. I can't recall who used the expression, but it's a handy shorthand for the kind of auction politics that Fianna F?il made their trademark in Ireland.

[Gorgiewave]

Oh, thanks. A useful shorthand, yes.

[JamboInSouthsea]

I think an independent Scotland could create one - but it would be worth a lot less than Norway's and would take a lot longer to mature. It would also be a doubtful proposition given a tendency in Scotland to what I saw described as "free mince" politics.

 

 

 

 

Anyone I know in England doesn't think that Scotland is subsidised, but they may not be in the mainstream. Mind you, it's worth remembering that the opinion polls in England show a majority in favour of Scottish independence, so maybe they're smarter than you think.

 

Seems to be about 50/50 where I am, plenty of people think Scotland would be fecked without money from rUK and that it is subsidised and the other half said if the shoe was on the other foot they'd vote 'Yes'.

[Gizmo]

Used the term in a tougne in cheek manner. Sorry if it you felt inappropriate.

 

I do understand the relationship and history between Scottish MPs-Scottish people-Westminster governments. I just don't view it as negatively as you.

 

Personally I see a Holyrood establishment as out of touch and arrogant in all parties as many Yes voters see in Westminster. So what does that lead me to conclude? I don't quite know. A growing indifference to either outcome.

 

Out of touch, when it is implementing socially inclusive policies and attempting to resist the disgusting austerity being inflicted upon the worst off in society by the Westminster coalition.

 

I'm calling bullshit on that one, frankly you are just kidding yourself on to shore up your own position.

 

It would also be a doubtful proposition given a tendency in Scotland to what I saw described as "free mince" politics.

 

The cheek of it to think a government might actually strive to make things better for the people they represent!!! A very lamontable [sic] position to hold.

Edited February 11, 2014 by Gizmo

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

Out of touch, when it is implementing socially inclusive policies and attempting to resist the disgusting austerity being inflicted upon the worst off in society by the Westminster coalition.

 

I'm calling bullshit on that one, frankly you are just kidding yourself on to shore up your own position.

 

 

 

The cheek of it to think a government might actually strive to make things better for the people they represent!!! A very lamontable [sic] position to hold.

The same austerity that Scotland would have to follow in a currency union?

[Gizmo]

The same austerity that Scotland would have to follow in a currency union?

 

We would not need to follow this at all Geoff.

 

We can make savings in areas like defence (and ironically end up with a better defence force due to the inequitable spending by Westminster of what we shell out), we can chose to spend our budget in different areas, we can be more strident on corporate tax avoidance etc.

 

It's also been discussed that we can afford our share of the debt and pay it off a lot quicker than the UK, if we so wished.

 

I don't see the currency union as shackling Scotland to the tories austerity policies (incidentally of which about 60% are still to be implemented).

[Coco]

Offering things to the voters that are apparently free but in fact paid for with their money. In particular, it can be applied to enticements to the middle classes like free university tuition, council tax freeze and free childcare. I can't recall who used the expression, but it's a handy shorthand for the kind of auction politics that Fianna F?il made their trademark in Ireland.

 

My 'free mince' phrase coining is catching on at last!

 

http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/index.php?/topic/105046-if-scotland-becomes-independent/page__st__50#entry2648316

[JamboInSouthsea]

As someone has said business don't like uncertainty, it has huge impact on things. This independence debate has created that.

 

I don't think it's about whether it's a yes or no, as people/buisiness will get on with it. There view may move depending on the political climate, however, that the same independence or not.

 

The question itself creates that uncertainty and adds to potential risk. Personally, seen that effects decisions on investments being made. I think it's over played to some degree but it is there.

 

One of the major reasons why when the referendum has happened, irrespective of the outcome I'll be glad.

 

I agree with all of this although I do wonder if the promise of a referendum on the EU by Cameron might be upsetting to many businesses too.

 

As it is, the Scottish economy isn't half bad apparently...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-26110001

Edited February 11, 2014 by JamboInSouthsea

[Boris]

Barclay's not phased by potential Scottish independence.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26138893

[Coco]

Barclay's not phased by potential Scottish independence.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...litics-26138893

 

Of course that is because their situation wouldn't be much different to the Ukio Bankas position in Scotland (I know Ukio Bankas won't be coming back but was just relating this to VR's financial foray into Edinburgh). Barclays operate in a vast number of countries across the world - just as they would in Scotland.

 

It is a different question for the Scottish domiciled banks.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

 

 

Of course that is because their situation wouldn't be much different to the Ukio Bankas position in Scotland (I know Ukio Bankas won't be coming back but was just relating this to VR's financial foray into Edinburgh). Barclays operate in a vast number of countries across the world - just as they would in Scotland.

 

It is a different question for the Scottish domiciled banks.

 

RBS have already came out and said that it wouldn't effect them much at all. Claiming that they work in 38 countries currently, and 39 wouldn't make a huge amount of difference. This was after The Westminster government tried to claim they would be forced to relocate south of the border.

[Coco]

RBS have already came out and said that it wouldn't effect them much at all. Claiming that they work in 38 countries currently, and 39 wouldn't make a huge amount of difference. This was after The Westminster government tried to claim they would be forced to relocate south of the border.

 

We discussed this yesterday! This article should help.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/02/07/uk-scotland-independence-banks-analysis-idUKBREA161G020140207

[syndicalist]

RBS have already came out and said that it wouldn't effect them much at all. Claiming that they work in 38 countries currently, and 39 wouldn't make a huge amount of difference. This was after The Westminster government tried to claim they would be forced to relocate south of the border.

When did the Westminster government try and claim this. I'm not being funny, but how do you try to claim something. If they claimed something what was it, I didn't see it in the press.

 

In the case of Barclay's, is this the Barclay's who have just announced a further twelve thousand job cuts across the UK. Nothing worth celebrating I'd say. And how can any financial institution claim anything about a country when they don't know what the currency will be. I think that will determine what their involvement in an independent Scotland will be, and the pressure to make profit.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

 

 

We discussed this yesterday! This article should help.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/02/07/uk-scotland-independence-banks-analysis-idUKBREA161G020140207

 

I read that when it was written. Since then there has been an article in the FT in which RBS have denied Cable's claims.

 

I tried to post it earlier but as I'm not registered there, it doesn't let me. If you are a member, perhaps you could do so?

[Rudolf]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2533222/Scottish-independence-economic-disaster-finance-experts-warn-just-SNP-say-economy-key-battleground.html

 

So out of 31 high profile economists and business professors only 4 think the Scottish economy would improve with independence.

 

I'm sure wee Eck will talk his way out of it though!

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/01637ee4-8e88-11e3-98c6-00144feab7de,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F01637ee4-8e88-11e3-98c6-00144feab7de.html%3Fsiteedition%3Dintl&siteedition=intl&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fm.facebook.com%2Fl.php%3Fu%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fon.ft.com%252F1fWKXPp%26h%3D2AQHStg97%26s%3D1%26enc%3DAZMPyF3VOLnsZS4RXjl9An7aDhuWR9CGfBp9OZTvdI5A3CnsNKmc9XYYTyMuo5qxP7MwnUGL5EuOmpIAcRlWaOHJ#axzz2swaVhINd

 

Not sure if this will work...

 

Hope that's the right article, I'm doing it a wee bit blind. Sorry.

[syndicalist]

Found it. The Herald and Reuters quoted Vince Cable , the Liberal Democrat minister, as saying that RBS would move to London if there is a risk of economic collapse.

[Boris]

http://www.dailymail...ttleground.html

 

So out of 31 high profile economists and business professors only 4 think the Scottish economy would improve with independence.

 

I'm sure wee Eck will talk his way out of it though!

 

Again, mixing up independence with an SNP majority Govt at the first elections to an independent Scottish parliament.

 

Still, wouldn't really expect anything less from the Daily Heil.

 

A VOTE FOR INDEPENDENCE IS NOT A VOTE FOR THE SNP!!!!!!

[Coco]

Found it. The Herald and Reuters quoted Vince Cable , the Liberal Democrat minister, as saying that RBS would move to London if there is a risk of economic collapse.

 

 

If there is an economic collapse then RBS are likely to be at the centre of it!

[syndicalist]

 

If there is an economic collapse then RBS are likely to be at the centre of it!

HA HA

[Rand Paul's Ray Bans]

Good post. One other thing which regularly strikes me with regard to this debate is how short termist much of the commentary is, with reference to recent Governments in particular. Constitutional time is different.

 

Agreed.

 

http://www.dailymail...ttleground.html

 

So out of 31 high profile economists and business professors only 4 think the Scottish economy would improve with independence.

 

I'm sure wee Eck will talk his way out of it though!

 

Chimps with darts.

[Coco]

[deleted]

 

It is ridiculous that it was not unanimous that independence 'could' lead to a stronger Scottish economy. That is suggesting that it is axiomatic that the Scottish economy would be weaker. Take just one policy option - a responsive independent currency (if we were allowed a choice) could substantially boost the export potential of Scotland - or reduce the import bill if it ended up stronger than Sterling. Yet all these 'experts' have ignored any potential for a stronger Scottish economy?

[JamboX2]

It is ridiculous that it was not unanimous that independence 'could' lead to a stronger Scottish economy. That is suggesting that it is axiomatic that the Scottish economy would be weaker. Take just one policy option - a responsive independent currency (if we were allowed a choice) could substantially boost the export potential of Scotland - or reduce the import bill if it ended up stronger than Sterling. Yet all these 'experts' have ignored any potential for a stronger Scottish economy?

 

Surely then they are basing this on Scotland in a Currency Union. Something I agree would limit Scotland economically and most likely tie us to Westminster orthodoxies anyway.