IMac Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) We were told today 300 jobs were at risk in a the event of a yes vote. that is just one facility. thousands more at risk across the country. So much for Scotland punching above its weight. was told recently that life sciences will help drive new industry in Scotland. going to be difficult when the brain drain begins. Edited September 10, 2014 by IMac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambogaza Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Interesting - Patrick Harvie questioning survation's methodology. Apparently they surveyed people via landline only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 3 Scottish banks confirmed to BBC enough money will remain in Scotland to support economy in event of Yes. RBS to announce tomorrow HQ to move to London. No, they are moving their HQ address to London not the whole shooting match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Patrick Harvie talks a lot of sense imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMac Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Patrick Harvie talks a lot of sense imo. except he is supporting increasing our economic reliance on oil and gas. get the nukes out then drill baby drill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Interesting - Patrick Harvie questioning survation's methodology. Apparently they surveyed people via landline only. As they did last time... There's no fail safe way to do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabienleclerq Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Well no, because the UK has one shared economy. I know, I'm maybe not asking my question the right way. Say Scotland is mainly an exporter and England an importer(I've no idea!), my local economy benefits from the pound being weaker yes? And London's benefits from it being stronger? What does the BoE do? Do they try to help the majority? Whys this different from a CU? What difference does that make if they are setting the rate to help the majority my local economy is the same under a CU or as part of the union. I'm completely aware I could be talking utter shite, I genuinely don't understand it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambogaza Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 As they did last time... There's no fail safe way to do it. I take his point though. Large groups potentially missed - students, deprived households etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Patrick Harvie talks a lot of sense imo. On some stuff - absolutely. He's articulate and credible when he talks of the constitution. Even when he talks of energy I agree with a lot he says. When you hear him talk on the economy though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderstruck Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Does Scotland not have a different economy at the moment? For example people said that the pound falling helped exports, surely Scotland is an exporter mostly? If the BoE sets the rate atm that might not be in Scotland's best interest now. So what's the differance? We import most of what we eat and virtually all of our consumer goods. Lower pound = higher prices and, in the case of food, the poorest would be hit hardest. It would also hit the cost of the Whisky we make as a lot of the barley is sourced from a East Anglia. On the other side of the equation tourists would get more bang for their $, $ or ?. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I take his point though. Large groups potentially missed - students, deprived households etc. Indeed. I don't have one either. My parents i think have one but don't use it. I've maybe got 10 landline numbers in my phone but they're mostly taxis & takeaways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambo1185 Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I take his point though. Large groups potentially missed - students, deprived households etc. No different to polls conducted solely online I ssuppose. Odd that he's only now complaining about methods given this company has historically been yes favourable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Drago Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I know, I'm maybe not asking my question the right way. Say Scotland is mainly an exporter and England an importer(I've no idea!), my local economy benefits from the pound being weaker yes? And London's benefits from it being stronger? What does the BoE do? Do they try to help the majority? Whys this different from a CU? What difference does that make if they are setting the rate to help the majority my local economy is the same under a CU or as part of the union. I'm completely aware I could be talking utter shite, I genuinely don't understand it! It's pretty complicated to be fair! The way I see it - with the current Economy, the BoE sets an interest rate that suits it as best it can. Two different economies - it sets one that probably won't suit either, or one that is preferable to the UK or Scotland. I don't believe it will favour Scotland if that's the case.... The interest rate can also be used to encourage or discourage growth, if the Scottish Government can't control it can't control growth, which i'd say is pretty important in a new economy. That's aboutas best as I can explain my interpretation of it, probably about as clear as mud..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboGraham Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Interesting - Patrick Harvie questioning survation's methodology. Apparently they surveyed people via landline only. That's the joys of opinion polls I am afraid. You really have to consider them as a general guide, not an exact science. YouGov for example collect data online. That instantly excludes 1 in 5 voters across Scotland. You also have to opt in to be considered for the survey group so really only people who are interested in being surveyed are included. Survation make random calls directly from the BT directory, so you must have a landline, not be ex-directory and actually answer your phone to be included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House M.D. Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Sadly, it's becoming very obvious that the scare-mongering and media bias are going to swing this in No's favour. There are going to be far more people going to the polling station thinking "yes" and then ending up voting no the vice versa as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabienleclerq Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 It's pretty complicated to be fair! The way I see it - with the current Economy, the BoE sets an interest rate that suits it as best it can. Two different economies - it sets one that probably won't suit either, or one that is preferable to the UK or Scotland. I don't believe it will favour Scotland if that's the case.... The interest rate can also be used to encourage or discourage growth, if the Scottish Government can't control it can't control growth, which i'd say is pretty important in a new economy. That's aboutas best as I can explain my interpretation of it, probably about as clear as mud..... I appreciate your efforts, I'm still of the opinion that staying in the union and being Independant with a CU won't make a huge differance to me. I could be massively wrong mind! The other things about big companies losing dosh doesn't bother me much as I won't ever see any of it anyway. I guess I'm even prepared to be a little poorer if it means the Scottish people getting a proper say in how our country is run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderstruck Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Sadly, it's becoming very obvious that the scare-mongering and media bias are going to swing this in No's favour. There are going to be far more people going to the polling station thinking "yes" and then ending up voting no the vice versa as well. If it is "scaremongering" to state that we are being asked to sign up for a future where the main proponents do not have a clue, not a single idea of what to do next or, if they do, they refuse to share their plans with they very people they ask for support? If it is, I am and will continue to be a scaremonger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldar Hadzimehmedovic Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I think it's a shame so many people are going to be frightened by statements from companies like BP and RBS. Companies whose profits might take a temporary hit. Not their survival mind, just their profits. I really hope the people of Scotland hold their nerve and show these companies they won't be held to ransom just so that 35 years of rampant free-market Thatcherism can continue unabated. It'll be a sad, sad day when the desires of multinationals trump the needs and rights of the people. Come at me with the teary smiley bros... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 The banks have been stock piling cash to survive any run thatsy happen after the vote. But they do that before any election - I am told. We are 8 days before the referendum and this has just come out. Again while not saying so, BT have been happy to let people worry all cash reserves would go to London. This can be a vote winner or loser tactic. Where I worry is the reasons why YES have been unable to put some of these simple scaremongering stories to bed. Is there an underlying reason? No, they are moving their HQ address to London not the whole shooting match. Under EU legislation they probably had to anyway. However since the banking crash and 2 London based CEOs it was natural more key decision makers and their teams move to London. Independence not quite the perfect storm, far from it, but a convenience in certain ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambo1185 Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) Apparently SNP refused to debate Galloway so George has been pulled from question time tomorrow by the BBC. George is an arse but even so that's poor, particularly given Nicola was quite happy to share a stage with a renowned homophobe. Edited September 10, 2014 by jambo1185 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House M.D. Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) If it is "scaremongering" to state that we are being asked to sign up for a future where the main proponents do not have a clue, not a single idea of what to do next or, if they do, they refuse to share their plans with they very people they ask for support? If it is, I am and will continue to be a scaremonger No, I'm talking about Better Together passing out leaflets saying Tesco will put up shopping prices in line with RoI. Which Tesco has confirmed as bullshit. I'm talking about Sky News regurgitating the already proven bullshit "roaming fees". I'm talking about BT allegedly telling foreign workers they'll be deported after a yes vote. I'm talking about people suggesting dual-nationality will be forced upon the foreign worker in indy Scotland. I'm talking about Ian Wood giving "expert analysis" as a "neutral" when he is in fact a BT supporter. I'm talking about people's "6th to 14th" argument as if it is actually that black and white. There's been many other scare tactics produced since westminster collectively shat it's self on the strength of one poll. I appreciate that questions need answered on the yes side. Better Together have done nothing other than pray on fear for the last year and more. I'm a yes supporter that is more than willing to accept a No vote but not when it has been manipulated by the UK media and scaremongering. It grates on me that people are being blatantly lied to by BT time and again about petty stuff like the Tesco fiasco but their scaremongering still maintains credibility purely because of fear. I can take losing. It's the being blackmailed that irks me. I also think it's shameful that big companies like BP, who couldn't actually leave an Independent Scotland without leaving the oil and have their HQ in England already, are pressuring the vote because their profits might take a hit for a while. It's depressing to watch knowing all this shite is swallowed by a lot of people. Also, the Governor of BoE's words being twisted by BT supporters to mean we can't have a currency union is utterly embarrassing. Even AD realises that is NOT what the man said. Edited September 10, 2014 by Gregory House M.D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboGraham Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I think it's a shame so many people are going to be frightened by statements from companies like BP and RBS. Companies whose profits might take a temporary hit. Not their survival mind, just their profits. I really hope the people of Scotland hold their nerve and show these companies they won't be held to ransom just so that 35 years of rampant free-market Thatcherism can continue unabated. It'll be a sad, sad day when the desires of multinationals trump the needs and rights of the people. Come at me with the teary smiley bros... I think you are being unfair on many of your fellow Scots. This decision isn't just about being 'frightened' this decision is about reality. Companies like RBS and BP employ thousands of Scots and directly pay for their homes, food and lifestyle. You should be aware that almost 50% of home owning families are only one pay packet away from serious financial difficulty. When the company that you work for (or do business with) suggests that they may not continue to operate in your country it asks a question of you so much bigger than should your government be in London or Edinburgh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandt Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 That's the joys of opinion polls I am afraid. You really have to consider them as a general guide, not an exact science. YouGov for example collect data online. That instantly excludes 1 in 5 voters across Scotland. You also have to opt in to be considered for the survey group so really only people who are interested in being surveyed are included. Survation make random calls directly from the BT directory, so you must have a landline, not be ex-directory and actually answer your phone to be included. At least 20 people i know have never done any kind of poll and are voting yes and i asked some what about their friends and they were apparently of the same opinion. The opinion polls and political analysts didnt stop the map of Scotland yellow at the 2011 elections. The people just turned up on the day to vote. Why they voted for Salmond if they didnt want the risk of independence says a lot about their idea of Scotlands future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House M.D. Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I think you are being unfair on many of your fellow Scots. This decision isn't just about being 'frightened' this decision is about reality. Companies like RBS and BP employ thousands of Scots and directly pay for their homes, food and lifestyle. You should be aware that almost 50% of home owning families are only one pay packet away from serious financial difficulty. When the company that you work for (or do business with) suggests that they may not continue to operate in your country it asks a question of you so much bigger than should your government be in London or Edinburgh. Let's not start trying to sneak in the rubbish that BP, who've invested megabucks into research and new technology for the Clair Oil Field in Scottish Waters are even contemplating leaving an indyScotland. It's a blatant, transparent lie. Given that their HQ is also already in England. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Marsh Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 No, I'm talking about Better Together passing out leaflets saying Tesco will put up shopping prices in line with RoI. Which Tesco has confirmed as bullshit. I'm talking about Sky News regurgitating the already proven bullshit "roaming fees". I'm talking about BT allegedly telling foreign workers they'll be deported after a yes vote. I'm talking about people suggesting dual-nationality will be forced upon the foreign worker in indy Scotland. I'm talking about Ian Wood giving "expert analysis" as a "neutral" when he is in fact a BT supporter. I'm talking about people's "6th to 14th" argument as if it is actually that black and white. There's been many other scare tactics produced since westminster collectively shat it's self on the strength of one poll. I appreciate that questions need answered on the yes side. Better Together have done nothing other than pray on fear for the last year and more. I'm a yes supporter that is more than willing to accept a No vote but not when it has been manipulated by the UK media and scaremongering. It grates on me that people are being blatantly lied to by BT time and again about petty stuff like the Tesco fiasco but their scaremongering still maintains credibility purely because of fear. I can take losing. It's the being blackmailed that irks me. I also think it's shameful that big companies like BP, who couldn't actually leave an Independent Scotland without leaving the oil and have their HQ in England already, are pressuring the vote because their profits might take a hit for a while. It's depressing to watch knowing all this shite is swallowed by a lot of people. Also, the Governor of BoE's words being twisted by BT supporters to mean we can't have a currency union is utterly embarrassing. Even AD realises that is NOT what the man said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Have RBS or BP (or any other business for that matter) said they would not continue to operate in Scotland? If so I missed that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimus Prime Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Do people not understand the difference between moving an HQ and moving an entire operation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Apparently SNP refused to debate Galloway so George has been pulled from question time tomorrow by the BBC. George is an arse but even so that's poor, particularly given Nicola was quite happy to share a stage with a renowned homophobe. Agreed, nearly as bad as Cameron refusing to debate with Salmond Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldar Hadzimehmedovic Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) I think you are being unfair on many of your fellow Scots. This decision isn't just about being 'frightened' this decision is about reality. Companies like RBS and BP employ thousands of Scots and directly pay for their homes, food and lifestyle. You should be aware that almost 50% of home owning families are only one pay packet away from serious financial difficulty. When the company that you work for (or do business with) suggests that they may not continue to operate in your country it asks a question of you so much bigger than should your government be in London or Edinburgh. There is no reason why these companies and others would need to leave an independent Scotland. The country would still require their services, they would be welcome with open arms. These companies are not saying they would be unable to carry on, they're saying their billions of pounds of profit might face an uncertain little period. If that isn't the very definition of scaremongering I don't know what is. Edited September 10, 2014 by Eldar Hadzimehmedovic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboGraham Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Do people not understand the difference between moving an HQ and moving an entire operation? Thin end of the wedge... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldar Hadzimehmedovic Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Have RBS or BP (or any other business for that matter) said they would not continue to operate in Scotland? If so I missed that. It almost doesn't matter. The fate that awaits these poor corporations in the event of a yes vote has been a huge part of the debate for what seems like forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboGraham Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 There is no reason why these companies and others would need to leave an independent Scotland. The country would still require their services, they would be welcome with open arms. These companies are not saying they would be unable to carry on, they're saying their billions of pounds of profit might face an uncertain little period. If that isn't the very definition of scaremongering I don't know what is. Uncertain profits mean down sizing and job losses in the real world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderstruck Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 No, I'm talking about Better Together passing out leaflets saying Tesco will put up shopping prices in line with RoI. Which Tesco has confirmed as bullshit. I'm talking about Sky News regurgitating the already proven bullshit "roaming fees". I'm talking about BT allegedly telling foreign workers they'll be deported after a yes vote. I'm talking about people suggesting dual-nationality will be forced upon the foreign worker in indy Scotland. I'm talking about Ian Wood giving "expert analysis" as a "neutral" when he is in fact a BT supporter. I'm talking about people's "6th to 14th" argument as if it is actually that black and white. There's been many other scare tactics produced since westminster collectively shat it's self on the strength of one poll. I appreciate that questions need answered on the yes side. Better Together have done nothing other than pray on fear for the last year and more. I'm a yes supporter that is more than willing to accept a No vote but not when it has been manipulated by the UK media and scaremongering. It grates on me that people are being blatantly lied to by BT time and again about petty stuff like the Tesco fiasco but their scaremongering still maintains credibility purely because of fear. I can take losing. It's the being blackmailed that irks me. I also think it's shameful that big companies like BP, who couldn't actually leave an Independent Scotland without leaving the oil and have their HQ in England already, are pressuring the vote because their profits might take a hit for a while. It's depressing to watch knowing all this shite is swallowed by a lot of people. You are quite right about the unfounded stuff that is being spouted by both sides. The SNP scare on NHS or the removal of Barnett as a punishment for even thinking about independence are examples for the other side. Most right thinking individuals see them for what are, bluff. The problem is that the chaff is masking the real unknowns: Currency - still don't have a clue. Oil - the consensus among the experts in the field is there is oil but not any significant extra recoverable resource. Energy - this is an enormous and poorly planned issue. The list goes on with a Defence, Telecoms, Transport... I would hope that someone selling something to me would have a business plan, a funding model and an assessment of risks. Instead, a shopping list is what I see. Equally, BT should have been clearer much earlier on what is their view of the way ahead given that the status quo cannot continue without another referendum in 10 years. I simply cannot see that the case has been made for independence and, as things stand, I foresee considerable turmoil for up to 10 years if we get a Yes vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadKiller Dog Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/09/standard-life-far-right-board/#comments A look at the Standard life Board , rather obvious which side they would back . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Do people not understand the difference between moving an HQ and moving an entire operation? This. I work at Lloyds and knew this announcement was coming a few days ago. Its a legal issue about where the parent company is registered, not about closing offices down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 And the suggestion that its news that partly government owned businesses would state government policy is mental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBJambo Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Why would the banks keep huge operations in a foreign country especially since they are reducing their overseas footprint not increasing it Not saying all operations will move but I'm sure a large portion will be shifted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hasselhoff Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Clydesdale bank also join Lloyds and rbs with the address change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Let's not start trying to sneak in the rubbish that BP, who've invested megabucks into research and new technology for the Clair Oil Field in Scottish Waters are even contemplating leaving an indyScotland. It's a blatant, transparent lie. Given that their HQ is also already in England. BP haven't said they'd leave. They've said that they believe that the future of the North Sea is best served with Scotland staying in the union. It is a Yes tag line 'what would you say to living in one of the wealthiest nations in the world' - and Sturgeon bangs on about us being 14th richest - when we're already 6th richest in the UK. The Yes camp attempted to make it black & White. BT has had failings - no doubt. But your camp would have done better if it was prepared to answer hard questions honestly. Salmond would never have (without saying so) admitted we'd be using the Panama Pound if he hadn't been pressed and pressed. You're voting on hope - that's fine. Most people may flirt with the idea of independence but they'll want to know exactly how it'll affect them. Hope isn't enough for most people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Dear Mr Salmond, why on earth would Standard Life be bluffing? Why did they bluff in '97? They're quite happy making money just now, and, like most of the other big business interventions, want to keep things just the way they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scallywag Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Why would they want to debate with George Galloway. The leaders of the the big three at Westminster should be laying down the gauntlet. Why is that not happening ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I am interested to know how, out of all of the revenues that flow in and out of Scotland, someone can say we only get 70% back to spend. If our public spending is 105%* of revenues raised in Scotland, somebody elsewhere must be "shortchanged". That is how tax works - redistribution of wealth to where it is needed most. * Net of spending not considered "public" like Network Rail where Scotland gets well over a per capita or GDP share or the subsidy of wind farms all over our "wee bit hill and glen" by English energy consumers. No it's not - just about every country in the world runs at a deficit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 This, for me, is a square that can never be circled - why do you only want to use Scotland's money to benefit Scots? Funny type of social justice. Should we spend the UK's money making France a better place? I believe, and I think many others do, that we can spend our money in a much better way than Westminster currently do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimus Prime Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Thin end of the wedge... Was it the thin end of the wedge when Clydesdale Bank were bought by the Australian National Bank or when RBS were bought by the UK government? Or is the reality that national banking headquarters mean very little in a global financial market? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Should we spend the UK's money making France a better place? I believe, and I think many others do, that we can spend our money in a much better way than Westminster currently do. We give money to the EU who gives subsidies to others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMaganator Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Was it the thin end of the wedge when Clydesdale Bank were bought by the Australian National Bank or when RBS were bought by the UK government? Or is the reality that national banking headquarters mean very little in a global financial market? Tell that to the people working at RBS Gogarburn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorgiestars Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Scotsman today...John C knows...for me the vote is all down to age and risk...me, I have a young family and work in one of the main finance employers in Scotland...can i take the risk of things going wrong...No.... Are things really that bad..? For me, not really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboGraham Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 At least 20 people i know have never done any kind of poll and are voting yes and i asked some what about their friends and they were apparently of the same opinion. The opinion polls and political analysts didnt stop the map of Scotland yellow at the 2011 elections. The people just turned up on the day to vote. Why they voted for Salmond if they didnt want the risk of independence says a lot about their idea of Scotlands future. Don't see the relevance in your last sentence but with regard to polls, in 2011 the final month polls were pretty much accurate on the constituency section (within the margin of error), they were off in the list vote. I did say they were a guide and not an exact science. For what it is worth I am not actually a fan of published polls (and certainly not close to a vote) as the poll result itself can often become more important than the debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimus Prime Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Tell that to the people working at RBS Gogarburn What those same people who've remained working in Gogarburn since the ownership of their employer changed hands in 2008? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBJambo Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 What those same people who've remained working in Gogarburn since the ownership of their employer changed hands in 2008? Thousands of people lost their jobs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.