Scottish independence and devolution superthread

[FWJ]

I'm sure this has been discussed on here but I've not heard it discussed elsewhere. In the event of a 'no' win and 2 years down the line the UK votes to leave the EU because of a majority English vote - would we be justified in having another independence referendum - and how would current 'noes' vote that time round?

 

(And before people say it'll never happen - who would have believed a year ago the polls would be neck-and-neck with a week to go?)

[DETTY29]

I'm sure this has been discussed on here but I've not heard it discussed elsewhere. In the event of a 'no' win and 2 years down the line the UK votes to leave the EU because of a majority English vote - would we be justified in having another independence referendum - and how would current 'noes' vote that time round?

 

(And before people say it'll never happen - who would have believed a year ago the polls would be neck-and-neck with a week to go?)

I think the vote will be so close, if No, there will be another referndum vote at least once in my lifetime (mid 40's).

 

As I posted above, the YES/NO roadmap as predicted by BBC heavily suggests there will be another vote in 2020 if UK heads out of Europe.

 

I watched an extract of Cameron's interview to Scottish Widows staff. He didn't really do anything to turn the vote back to what he needs, which is a resounding win, to keep Independence off the table.

 

I don't give 2 monkeys about the strength of the union based on being on the UN Security Council; G8; having nuclear weapons; sticking our noses in to everyone elses business (as an agressor) and so on.

Edited September 10, 2014 by DETTY29

[BoJack Horseman]

Why is it every piece of news in favour of No is treated as scaremongering?

 

Personally I've yet to see any positive news come from the No campaign. No reasons why it's good to stay in the Union and stick with the status quo. Usually it's reasons why becoming independent might be a bad idea.

 

I'm saying this as a passive news reader, someone who hasn't dug deep to see the true issues, so this is top level information. I've no doubt there are plenty arguments as to what Scotland has to benefit from a continued Union.

[TheMaganator]

What he did say is that, in the opinion of BP, the best option for North Sea Oil is to remain in the UK.

 

Why would anyone base their vote on what is good for BP? He doesn't say that it would be good for the Scots people or the economy, just that in that company's opinion it would be better.

 

The only people who allow that sort of statement to influence their vote are those that feel that BP being unhappy may be a negative for Scotland (which I might add, he doesn't say, he says their will be continued spending in Scotland). As such, when used as a feather in the cap of BT, it is nothing more than scaremongering.

 

BP has large operations in the North Sea. Standard Life have big operations in Edinburgh.

 

These guys are huge employers - if they are concerned the public should be too.

[The People's Chimp]

Personally I've yet to see any positive news come from the No campaign. No reasons why it's good to stay in the Union and stick with the status quo. Usually it's reasons why becoming independent might be a bad idea.

 

Surely that is the point. The absence of those "bad things" being why the Union is good.

[Walter Bishop]

Personally I've yet to see any positive news come from the No campaign. No reasons why it's good to stay in the Union and stick with the status quo. Usually it's reasons why becoming independent might be a bad idea.

 

I'm saying this as a passive news reader, someone who hasn't dug deep to see the true issues, so this is top level information. I've no doubt there are plenty arguments as to what Scotland has to benefit from a continued Union.

 

Why should there be reasons to stay and stick with status quo? Its up to the Yes campaigners to entice you away by showing you there is something better out there, which they have so far failed to do in my opinion.

 

Voting Yes is a vote for someone with nothing to lose as so far they have failed to show that there is anything to be gained, in my opinion.

Edited September 10, 2014 by Walter Bishop

[jambo1185]

Independent saying Labour need the Scottish vote to win the next Westminster election.

 

Also puts UKIP national share of the vote at 13%

 

I know everyone likes to pretend UKIP are an English problem but we did return a UKIP MEP sadly. Im on my phone and wonder if anyone knew their Scottish vote share at the Europeans?

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Why should there be reasons to stay and stick with status quo? Its up to the Yes campaigners to entice you away by showing you there is something better out there, which they have so far failed to do in my opinion.

 

Voting Yes is a vote for someone with nothing to lose as so far they have failed to show that there is anything to be gained, in my opinion.

 

I've been trying to make this point from the outset. If you want change, it's your job to argue for it.

[wright1989]

The thing that swung my decision was the Salmond and Darling debate, the no camp spent 3 hours asking Salmond what his plan B for the currency was, knowing fine well that a CU will be agreed should we go independent. He was saying once we leave there is no coming back. We already know this.

I also find it funny there trying to offer un new powers, it's like there running for election in Scotland. How much of these promises would we actually see?

 

Scotland can be a strong independent country. We're just being shown that from the BT camp now as it looks increasingly likely we will be.

 

If they gave as much effort at the start of the campaign rather than just the last 10 minutes and had a better case for defence I would probably be a No voter right now.

[BoJack Horseman]

Surely that is the point. The absence of those "bad things" being why the Union is good.

 

I guess you could look at it like that. Or you could it see it like there aren't many positives. Take away the referendum and folk are whinging about the UK government all the time. But now, compared to an independent Scotland, the UK is great?

 

Why should there be reasons to stay and stick with status quo? Its up to the Yes campaigners to entice you away by showing you there is something better out there, which they have so far failed to do in my opinion.

 

Voting Yes is a vote for someone with nothing to lose as so far they have failed to show that there is anything to be gained, in my opinion.

 

To keep the debate positive, no? You asked why are all No points classed as scaremongering. I'm just pointing out that a lot of what they're saying is "you'll regret it, I swear", which is a negative angle.

[Maple Leaf]

Quite. So why would the UK accept Alex Salmond's desire to share sterling?

 

You're comparing two opposite suggestions, don't you think? The American and Canadian currencies have always been separate, whereas Scotland and England have shared a currency for 300 years. We can't compare a merger with a split.

 

The closest we can come to a comparison, using the Canadian model, would be the possibility of a separate Quebec using the Canadian dollar. Although Quebec never came remotely close to separating, the shared dollar suggestion was discussed in the mid-1990s, and it was generally agreed by both parties that it would be the most sensible approach.

 

Scotland and the rUK would be each other's biggest trading partners (I believe), so maintaining a shared currency would seem to be the best approach for both sides. imo.

[Prince Buaben]

Question...

 

Does a YES vote guarentee indpendance?

 

Is there a chance that a YES vote happens and we dont get Independance? I know Salmond as set a date in March 2016 as 'independace day' as there is neogoations to take place.

[Ivan Drago]

The thing that swung my decision was the Salmond and Darling debate, the no camp spent 3 hours asking Salmond what his plan B for the currency was, knowing fine well that a CU will be agreed should we go independent. He was saying once we leave there is no coming back. We already know this.

I also find it funny there trying to offer un new powers, it's like there running for election in Scotland. How much of these promises would we actually see?

 

Scotland can be a strong independent country. We're just being shown that from the BT camp now as it looks increasingly likely we will be.

 

If they gave as much effort at the start of the campaign rather than just the last 10 minutes and had a better case for defence I would probably be a No voter right now.

 

So why would salmond not discuss it at the debate and why does he continually refuse to do so? And why are the snp happy to push independance while at the same time wanting a foreign country to control interest rates?

A

[Ivan Drago]

 

 

You're comparing two opposite suggestions, don't you think? The American and Canadian currencies have always been separate, whereas Scotland and England have shared a currency for 300 years. We can't compare a merger with a split.

 

The closest we can come to a comparison, using the Canadian model, would be the possibility of a separate Quebec using the Canadian dollar. Although Quebec never came remotely close to separating, the shared dollar suggestion was discussed in the mid-1990s, and it was generally agreed by both parties that it would be the most sensible approach.

 

Scotland and the rUK would be each other's biggest trading partners (I believe), so maintaining a shared currency would seem to be the best approach for both sides. imo.

 

With England having control over the shared currency

[Stuart Lyon]

Why is pointing out that yes voters will regret it a negative. It's a positive warning about the utter folly of voting yes.

[LeftBack]

Have gone from no to yes to - today - no again. Im afraid the fear factor has got to me - I just dont have enough faith that things will be better for me - and in the short-term I feel it will be incredibly worse.

 

I think the NO campaign has been terrible with no cohesive planning and thought but is obviously much harder to be positive about a negative and I cant gamble on my children's future with the stakes so high.

 

But hoepfully this will revolutionise our political landscape and actually things will change for the better with a no vote.

 

Of course in the worst case scenario ie we vote no but Boris Johnston becomes PM in coalition with Farage then I think we are looking at the whole fabric of society across the UK unravelling.

 

Sorry for rambling - feeling very confused and apprehensive today!

[DETTY29]

Question...

 

Does a YES vote guarentee indpendance?

 

Is there a chance that a YES vote happens and we dont get Independance? I know Salmond as set a date in March 2016 as 'independace day' as there is neogoations to take place.

Not completely because under the White Paper a Currency Union is being proposed.

 

IF and it's huge IF, a Currency Union is approved then initially the Bank of England will still retain interest rates and budgetary veto.

 

However, if the Scottish people at a future date don't agree it's working and there is a party out there willing to break up the Currency Union and going it alone, it will be up to the will of the people to vote in that party and give it a mandate to do so.

[BoJack Horseman]

Why is pointing out that yes voters will regret it a negative. It's a positive warning about the utter folly of voting yes.

 

I wouldn't say the point is negative, but the message is negative in its nature. They are conveying a positive point with a negative message, if that makes sense.

[DETTY29]

Have gone from no to yes to - today - no again. Im afraid the fear factor has got to me - I just dont have enough faith that things will be better for me - and in the short-term I feel it will be incredibly worse.

 

I think the NO campaign has been terrible with no cohesive planning and thought but is obviously much harder to be positive about a negative and I cant gamble on my children's future with the stakes so high.

 

But hoepfully this will revolutionise our political landscape and actually things will change for the better with a no vote.

 

Of course in the worst case scenario ie we vote no but Boris Johnston becomes PM in coalition with Farage then I think we are looking at the whole fabric of society across the UK unravelling.

 

Sorry for rambling - feeling very confused and apprehensive today!

I have complete sympathy with you and at times my head goes back and forward too.

 

While they talk about wealth, prosperity, democracy and social conscience, politicians know that society is gripped with a combination of fear and greed.

 

And they take advantage of us all.

Edited September 10, 2014 by DETTY29

[TheMaganator]

The thing that swung my decision was the Salmond and Darling debate, the no camp spent 3 hours asking Salmond what his plan B for the currency was, knowing fine well that a CU will be agreed should we go independent. He was saying once we leave there is no coming back. We already know this.

I also find it funny there trying to offer un new powers, it's like there running for election in Scotland. How much of these promises would we actually see?

 

Scotland can be a strong independent country. We're just being shown that from the BT camp now as it looks increasingly likely we will be.

 

If they gave as much effort at the start of the campaign rather than just the last 10 minutes and had a better case for defence I would probably be a No voter right now.

 

That's the thing. The CU will likely not be agreed. You think it will because the Yes camp say it will as it 'is in the best interests of both parties'. It is not in the interest of rUK to be the lender of last resort for us - is it?

 

Especially as we're now to believe that should a CU not be agreed then we'll use the ? anyway.

 

The main reason Salmond tells us a CU will be agreed is to avoid transaction costs within the UK. Well, if we use the ? anyway there will be no transaction costs - so where is the benefit in rUK agreeing a CU?

[wright1989]

 

 

 

So why would salmond not discuss it at the debate and why does he continually refuse to do so? And why are the snp happy to push independance while at the same time wanting a foreign country to control interest rates?

A

 

Why should he? A currency union will happen, there's no point in debating that fact? A currency union is the best for both countries at this point in time.

[DETTY29]

Independent saying Labour need the Scottish vote to win the next Westminster election.

 

Also puts UKIP national share of the vote at 13%

 

I know everyone likes to pretend UKIP are an English problem but we did return a UKIP MEP sadly. Im on my phone and wonder if anyone knew their Scottish vote share at the Europeans?

I think UKIP was 10.5% in Scotland and 28% UK overall with a 34% turnout.

 

I suppose the question is what will happen at a general election with a greater turn out but always with a democracy, if you don't turn up and vote, that's your own fault.

 

While the Scottish labour vote will help Labour overall at the next election, the Scottish labour vote has swayed very few general elections since 1900.

[TheMaganator]

[deleted]

Tell me why you think it will, in light of what I have posted plz

 

[Ivan Drago]

 

 

 

 

Why should he? A currency union will happen, there's no point in debating that fact? A currency union is the best for both countries at this point in time.

 

I don't believe it will for sure and I even under a currency union we still won't control interest rates. Are you going to address that point?

 

 

[Mysterion]

Why should he? A currency union will happen, there's no point in debating that fact? A currency union is the best for both countries at this point in time.

 

You can't state a currency union will happen and claim it as fact. The 2nd part of your post is a view which could be true.

 

With Carney saying it wasn't compatible I think it is moving towards Sterlingisation with a possible switch to Euro.

[EIEIO]

Why is pointing out that yes voters will regret it a negative. It's a positive warning about the utter folly of voting yes.

Based on nothing tangible though just an opinion based on self interest or fear of change.

[TheMaganator]

Why should he? A currency union will happen, there's no point in debating that fact? A currency union is the best for both countries at this point in time.

 

Perhaps you can answer this then...

 

That's the thing. The CU will likely not be agreed. You think it will because the Yes camp say it will as it 'is in the best interests of both parties'. It is not in the interest of rUK to be the lender of last resort for us - is it?

 

Especially as we're now to believe that should a CU not be agreed then we'll use the ? anyway.

 

The main reason Salmond tells us a CU will be agreed is to avoid transaction costs within the UK. Well, if we use the ? anyway there will be no transaction costs - so where is the benefit in rUK agreeing a CU?

[wright1989]

One thing scarier than independence is the UK's national debt. If we fall off that mountain then we'll see how safe staying in the union really is. It's time to take our share and work on reducing it. I see the French put Scotland as the 18th richest country in the world post-independence. Also worth noting that all the UK news papers are all pro-union looking after there own interests.

[The People's Chimp]

One thing scarier than independence is the UK's national debt. If we fall off that mountain then we'll see how safe staying in the union really is. It's time to take our share and work on reducing it. I see the French put Scotland as the 18th richest country in the world post-independence. Also worth noting that all the UK news papers are all pro-union looking after there own interests.

 

[modedit]

 

[Yoda]

A currency union will not be in the best interests of rUK. Scotland and rUK will be competitors, so why would they want to do anything to help us out, to their detriment?

 

If Salmond wants to reduce corporation tax by 3% to stop businesses leaving or attrach new ones (some from rUK), the rUK is hardly going to help them. Doesn't make sense. rUK will reduce it's corporation tax by at least 3% also. It's a battle Scotland will lose.

 

Don't you think the bosses of all the big employers that have come out as NO, haven't thought about that. They have a duty to their shareholders to work in the best interest of their businesses. Clearly a YES vote isn't.

[Prince Buaben]

So Southern England are taking it well.

 

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/proclaimers-no-more-as-radio-goes-scot-free-1-3537396

 

http://www.bobfm.co.uk/

[Gabriel]

Surely nobody really knows what will transpire in the negotiations if there should be a 'Yes' vote. One sure thing, though, would be that any such negotiations would be protracted and difficult, with considerable give and take on both sides. The same was true when both nations entered the Union, so it would be understandable if there were similar bargaining at its dissolution.

[GBJambo]

So Southern England are taking it well.

 

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/proclaimers-no-more-as-radio-goes-scot-free-1-3537396

 

http://www.bobfm.co.uk/

 

Don't blame them tbh

[westbow]

Don't blame them tbh

So that's them and tynecastle that the proclaimers are banned from. It's a start I suppose..

[The People's Chimp]

Even if your dream comes true and you get a CU, what sort of independence is that? The worst of both worlds that's what.

 

I've not heard an answer on this point yet - what is the benefit of CU with an outside nation's central bank setting interest rates and wanting a say on our tax affairs?

[GBJambo]

 

 

I've not heard an answer on this point yet - what is the benefit of CU with an outside nation's central bank setting interest rates and wanting a say on our tax affairs?

 

Very much this. If you want independence you must have complete independence.

 

You can't pick and chose what suits you.

[Guest GhostHunter]

I've not heard an answer on this point yet - what is the benefit of CU with an outside nation's central bank setting interest rates and wanting a say on our tax affairs?

 

Interesting point.

 

What's to stop them hiking Interest rates up but then to offset the rise to the English, they increase things like welfare payments & NHS salaries (for instance) ?

 

Not quite so smart then....

[Gabriel]

Very much this. If you want independence you must have complete independence.

 

You can't pick and chose what suits you.

 

In that case, would you vote to leave the European Union? Genuine question.

[TheMaganator]

I don't need to state a reason why do I? Good so bet is on then. A mod want to pick this up and get in touch with us on messenger to get our details?

 

Poor form? WTF you on about? People make bets every day and don't have to give it to charity. Bizarre statement...

Of course you don't need to state why you think it will. But you 'd at the suggestion that it wouldn't. So you must have a reason? I gave you mine.

 

I have asked you why it would. You've given nothing in response. I have to assume that the only reason you think it will happen is because Salmond has told you it will. You are, like many voting Yes, voting without really having considered things. That's fine. That's democracy.

 

The bet stands - even if you provide a wonderfully thought out response that makes me change my mind.

[Ivan Drago]

 

 

I've not heard an answer on this point yet - what is the benefit of CU with an outside nation's central bank setting interest rates and wanting a say on our tax affairs?

 

I think you'll be waiting a while as I've raised the issue a couple of times on this thread and never got a response.

[hmfc_liam06]

Over the last few months I've gradually warmed to yes however as a home owner, there are just far too many question marks over currency/interest rates.

 

I've asked many a yes campaigner as well as reading the last few pages of this thread and it seems no one can give any concrete answers to currency/interest rates so I have to vote no.

 

It's not something I'm comfortable putting my future on the balance for.

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

 

 

This threads been pretty good, hopefully it won't descend into a farce as we get closer to the big day

 

Despite the thread title, it seems like every second post is a campaign post now. Everybody trying to change everybody else's mind even though nobody will. We've even got some admin openly arguing from one side.

[westbow]

In the event of Yes winning is Salmond still going to spend ?1 billion to re-nationalise the Royal Mail? Not heard much about this recently. Ian Murray voiced his concerns a year or so ago, but got no response. Can't see Amazon keeping their UK distribution center open in Fife either. The majority of items bought on the internet will have an international shipping tag too.

[TheMaganator]

Despite the thread title, it seems like every second post is a campaign post now. Everybody trying to change everybody else's mind even though nobody will. We've even got some admin openly arguing from one side.

 

The campaign posts will be removed refers to campaign pictures, or links to BT or Yes sites. You can still debate matters. It'd be a non-existent thread otherwise

[Brandt]

In the event of Yes winning is Salmond still going to spend ?1 billion to re-nationalise the Royal Mail? Not heard much about this recently. Ian Murray voiced his concerns a year or so ago, but got no response. Can't see Amazon keeping their UK distribution center open in Fife either. The majority of items bought on the internet will have an international shipping tag too.

 

Being a business owner and posting over 500-1000 items a day, it was a concern to me but for the life of me i cant find the article which reassured me a bit regarding the renationalisation of RM.

 

Also, Amazon dont pay tax on the distribution centers as they are just 'storage centers'.

 

Still though he is to put in new constitution the keeping of the NHS free.

Edited September 10, 2014 by Brandt

[Ulysses]

 

Despite the thread title, it seems like every second post is a campaign post now. Everybody trying to change everybody else's mind even though nobody will. We've even got some admin openly arguing from one side.

 

It would be a poor and somewhat pointless debate if people weren't trying to persuade others to change their views - even if they're unlikely to succeed.

 

The point is that anyone who posts directly from the campaigns is likely to see their posts removed.

 

And admins are as entitled to express their personal views as anyone else.

[Brandt]

 

OK pal. We don't need Dex involved. Just PM me the day after the CU has been agreed and I can wire you the cash or meet you at Tynecastle.

 

I suppose we should put an end date on it though - independence day, whenever that may be.

 

Just meet behind the Wheatfield stand

[ToadKiller Dog]

A bit on mortgages here , the fear is stronger than reality in my view .

Stricter rules to lending is a good thing .

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/10/scottish-independence-create-mortgage-drought

[Thunderstruck]

In the event of Yes winning is Salmond still going to spend ?1 billion to re-nationalise the Royal Mail? Not heard much about this recently. Ian Murray voiced his concerns a year or so ago, but got no response. Can't see Amazon keeping their UK distribution center open in Fife either. The majority of items bought on the internet will have an international shipping tag too.

 

I doubt Amazon in Gourock would last very long either.

[The Comedian]

 

 

Very much this. If you want independence you must have complete independence.

 

You can't pick and chose what suits you.

 

But we can have the best of both worlds?