Jump to content

Scottish independence and devolution superthread


Happy Hearts

Recommended Posts

 

 

Agree on your first point. I was responding to a question about money being spent on the nhs in Scotland instead of Trident. Point being Holyrood doesn't, I don't think, pay toward Trident so money isn't being diverted from health under the budget.

 

Why health spending is increasing down south is another debate. If spending increases the Barmett formula takes account of it. If Holyrood doesn't want to use that increase on the nhs here that's its choice.

 

Second point. Was merely a turn of phrase. Didn't mean what you inferred So aapologies if it offended.

 

Agree the NHS needs a shakeup.

 

I might be wrong but the Barnett formula varies with the amount of taxes we pay directly. So money we spent on the NHS isn't taken in account when WM decides what our budget is.

 

Again, I strongly disagree with how both sides have used and talked about the NHS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 27.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • TheMaganator

    2323

  • JamboX2

    2165

  • Geoff Kilpatrick

    1717

  • Boris

    1199

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Exactly this!   I was thinking about the naysayers and then thought about WHY a movement would want to lead a nation into independence which would ultimately lead to financial ruin, expulsion from c

Posted Images

ToadKiller Dog

 

 

Is that them getting their day of reckoning? What will we do to punish Belgium if they veto us? Or rUK who are likely to be feeling slightly scorned. Bit of a gamble just to hand over fiscal control to rUK (and that is presuming we get a CU which I doubt) without any representation in rUK. If we don't get the CU, we don't take our share of the debt (I didn't say default alex) and so England quite rightly veto us. Either way, bad idea.

 

The point is the Spanish minister is just blowing off for air . The EU will not kick out 5m citizens it goes against it's founding principals .

A pragmatic agreement would be made we would have to accept some token losses and the EU will let us some gains that how things work .

 

The same will happen over any negotiations between a Scotland and RUk . There will be lots of hot air but in the end pragmatism would result in an agreement .

Link to post
Share on other sites

One paper, Times I think, is reporting that the Conservatives now hold a commanding lead over Labour on the economy. Sure the 'Yes' campaign will milk that tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BoJack Horseman

Does anyone genuinely believe that if Cameron thought it was in any way beneficial for Scotland to secede from the UK, that he'd openly admit that? He's bound by his duty as prime minister to campaign for the union. Facts and opinion don't come into it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The point is the Spanish minister is just blowing off for air . The EU will not kick out 5m citizens it goes against it's founding principals .

A pragmatic agreement would be made we would have to accept some token losses and the EU will let us some gains that how things work .

 

The same will happen over any negotiations between a Scotland and RUk . There will be lots of hot air but in the end pragmatism would result in an agreement .

 

This, it's all about power & money. What is best for business is what will happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So Better Together punters then? Damning indeed.

 

Personally I find it more shameful that it took a narrow Yes lead in an opinion poll for the leaders of the UK parties to show an interest in the referendum, never mind waiting til the week before the vote before pushing forward alleged new powers into the mix.

You're ignoring the fact that UK Ministers were told repeatedly that this was for the people of Scotland.

 

When the campaigns started there were numerous comments made by both Salmond & Sturgeon about English MPs coming up here to argue against Scotland.

 

So, the Yes camp complained when they did come up and then complained when they didn't.

 

Rightly or wrongly I think (I don't know for certain) that BT told them to stay away.

 

You may not agree with how they went about it but you can't re-write history (not you, btw, but I've seen this line coming from plenty of Yes men)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're ignoring the fact that UK Ministers were told repeatedly that this was for the people of Scotland.

 

When the campaigns started there were numerous comments made by both Salmond & Sturgeon about English MPs coming up here to argue against Scotland.

 

So, the Yes camp complained when they did come up and then complained when they didn't.

 

Rightly or wrongly I think (I don't know for certain) that BT told them to stay away.

 

You may not agree with how they went about it but you can't re-write history (not you, btw, but I've seen this line coming from plenty of Yes men)

 

You are being naive to the max now, WM never expected for a second that yes would win. They kept they distance and are now panicking. How you can blame yes campaign is amazing. It's Yes that told them not to put any planning into the outcomes of a Yes vote.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The point is the Spanish minister is just blowing off for air . The EU will not kick out 5m citizens it goes against it's founding principals .

A pragmatic agreement would be made we would have to accept some token losses and the EU will let us some gains that how things work .

 

The same will happen over any negotiations between a Scotland and RUk . There will be lots of hot air but in the end pragmatism would result in an agreement .

 

He's not said there will be a veto or Scotland won't be admitted. All he said was that he expects tge accession process to take longer than has been suggested and inferred Scotland cannot expect to receive the same terms of membership the UK enjoys.

 

Not sure how any of that is hot air?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Albert Tatlock

Question to the NO voters, do you think David Cameron should have gone head to head in a debate with Salmond. If he had, it probably would have worked in his favour. Whereas now, he is coming over as pretty desperate. It is either his business or it it not. You do not come into the debate in the last few weeks, because you may well lose your job. Says it all really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll happen. You can be sure of that.

 

If it doesn't we'll be independent within a matter of a few years. No point winning the battle just to lose the war

No we can't plans could easily be defeated at Palace of Westminster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Albert Tatlock

This is quite an intimidating thread. It seems if you are not an economist, then you are disregarded. I did economics in my first year at uni.....still don't really understand it all. However, as a parent, this vote is not about how better or worse off I will be. If it is a YES, I won't die of starvation. Yes, the next five or ten years may be hard, but I will survive. I would rather go without now, so that my son has a future where he is accepted as a person, not by how much money he earns or what social bracket he is in.

 

This is about future generations.....we won't be here forever. Look at the bigger picture....it is not about us, it is for those that come after us...and to deny that to future generations is just selfish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Question to the NO voters, do you think David Cameron should have gone head to head in a debate with Salmond. If he had, it probably would have worked in his favour. Whereas now, he is coming over as pretty desperate. It is either his business or it it not. You do not come into the debate in the last few weeks, because you may well lose your job. Says it all really.

 

No, not really. It has always been a matter for the Scottish electorate, however defined, to decide. It is not simply negotiated independence. Since David Cameron is not one of the "Scottish people" (despite his surname), he should not have had such a starring role.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is quite an intimidating thread. It seems if you are not an economist, then you are disregarded. I did economics in my first year at uni.....still don't really understand it all. However, as a parent, this vote is not about how better or worse off I will be. If it is a YES, I won't die of starvation. Yes, the next five or ten years may be hard, but I will survive. I would rather go without now, so that my son has a future where he is accepted as a person, not by how much money he earns or what social bracket he is in.

 

This is about future generations.....we won't be here forever. Look at the bigger picture....it is not about us, it is for those that come after us...and to deny that to future generations is just selfish.

 

I'd be interested to know if anyone has changed the way they will vote as a result of this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a "debate" on Australian TV last night about this, with someone called Cochrane (seemed like an old alky) for the NO side and a northern irish lady for the YES side.

 

The YES lady won every argument so easily it was actually embarrassing. It is amazing how a dreadful arrogant public speaker can lose an audience quickly.

 

I haven't watched any debate about independence from the UK, but I hope to goodness that the quality of participants has been higher than what I saw last night.

 

Only a couple of days to go. I am actually very, very excited.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is quite an intimidating thread. It seems if you are not an economist, then you are disregarded. I did economics in my first year at uni.....still don't really understand it all. However, as a parent, this vote is not about how better or worse off I will be. If it is a YES, I won't die of starvation. Yes, the next five or ten years may be hard, but I will survive. I would rather go without now, so that my son has a future where he is accepted as a person, not by how much money he earns or what social bracket he is in.

 

This is about future generations.....we won't be here forever. Look at the bigger picture....it is not about us, it is for those that come after us...and to deny that to future generations is just selfish.

 

What do you think you are denying to future generations? Many people in Scotland already live very well and comfortably (compare 25% unemployment in Spain) in a basically free country with health care, education (did you pay for your year at university?), peace, access to information, relative equality for women, protection for ethnic, national and religious minorities, etc., etc. Scotland is not perfect - I have been to Celtic Park and seen the awful poverty there, I went to primary school in Boghall, etc. - and could be improved in a million ways but it is basically as good as human life has ever been, anywhere. Scotland does very well being in the Union and will continue to do so.

 

If I could say one thing to Yes supporters it would be: "You can't hide from the world; you'd be better embracing it".

Edited by Gorgiewave
Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a "debate" on Australian TV last night about this, with someone called Cochrane (seemed like an old alky) for the NO side and a northern irish lady for the YES side.

 

The YES lady won every argument so easily it was actually embarrassing. It is amazing how a dreadful arrogant public speaker can lose an audience quickly.

 

I haven't watched any debate about independence from the UK, but I hope to goodness that the quality of participants has been higher than what I saw last night.

 

Only a couple of days to go. I am actually very, very excited.

 

Lesley Riddoch and Alan Cochrane?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

He's not said there will be a veto or Scotland won't be admitted. All he said was that he expects tge accession process to take longer than has been suggested and inferred Scotland cannot expect to receive the same terms of membership the UK enjoys.

 

Not sure how any of that is hot air?

 

Pretty constructive for a nation which normally says "NO WAY JOSE!" to it's own national entities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bannockburn was 700 years ago, the Union was 300 years ago, Thatcher was 30 years ago and yet they are still cast up as reasons for independence today. Why not look to the future and give us a plan, a roadmap, a reason, something other than "trust us". Dominic Littlwood has forged a nice career in TV exposing charlatans who ask the gullible to "trust us".

 

They all happened and they all shaped what we have now. It is a fact that Westminster has lied, in the recent past, about oil and gas reserves and tyour points on trust can just as easily apply to staying in the UK

http://en.wikipedia..../McCrone_report

 

I do look to the future. i look past the current smokescreen of lies and subterfuge from Unionists and see a future where Scotland takes responsibity for it's own direction.

I've said before it's very simple question for me....do you want to run your own affairs or do you want them run for you buy those who have a track record in lying to you?

All the bile and fury about currency, EU, NATO, banks, deficits, prices etc. etc. etc. are details and details which will be worked out on a pragmatic basis by all those with an interest

 

"Resource rich". Do you know the value of these resources - not to the companies that will exploit them but to the Exchequer?

 

I am not an oil expert but I do know that under independence all oil resources will stay in Scotland rather than be siphoned off into the Westminster black hole and then if we're good and toe the line we may get some back

 

Oil, I'm sorry to say, is not the panacea it is claimed. ?6bn per annum is a generous estimate. Do not be seduced by the ?1.5tn quoted frequently by the Salmond and Sturgeon - that is the total wholesale value over 35 years (all being well).

 

I know the difference between wholesale values and tax revenues. I also know that statistics can be used to tell any story you like. I reiterate my first two points.

I don't trust those who have previously lied to me and whether the oil take is x billion or y billion it will be billions staying in Scotland which currently goes south.

Why do you think the prospect of a yes vote has suddenly galvanised the whole British establishment into the knee-jerking, foaming at the mouth farce which we are currently witnessing?

 

Renewables - the sources we have occupy three of the top four in the list of sources in energy in terms of cost per megawatt and can only exist with huge subsidy by consumers - English consumers.

 

Renewables has massive potential for Scotland I think I read somewhere one of the biggest offshore wind supplies in Europe.

I fear that leaving this resource in UK hands will mean it will go the same way as the oil for the last 30 years - sqandered in the pursuit of short term gains to shore up a failing UK economy

 

Whisky - ?1bn a year on a good year.

 

i don't think anyone is arguing that the whisky industry is going to finance the whole economy

 

People - the brightest and best will continue to leave, to adventure - its the Scottish way.

 

Especially if there is nothing here to attract them

 

"Scots lacking in self-confidence." Really? Scots are disproportionately represented in key roles in all walks of life throughout the UK. How many PMs have been Scots? How many key Cabinet Posts have been filled by Scots? How many leaders in boardrooms, in finance and the military are Scots? We might be many things but we do not lack confidence.

 

Voting No is not a lack of confidence. Quite the opposite, it shows we are confident in our abilities in our skills, in our cultural identity (or, more likely, identities) and our place in the world. We do not need the false promises of an ersatz independence.

 

I think it shows a remarkable lack of collective self-confidence, I'm not talking about individuals

To pass up the opportunity to shape a modern prosperous indepenent country for the 21st century and beyond because you fear dealing with the world without having your hand held by your big neighbour who has been systematically bullying and lying to you for as long as you've known them doesn't strike me as confident. Sounds more like an abusive type of relationship where we have become so used to the victimistaion that we no longer realise it when it happens.

We do not need any false promises but that is what we are currently being offered by the No campaign

Edited by AyrJambo
Link to post
Share on other sites
This is quite an intimidating thread. It seems if you are not an economist, then you are disregarded. I did economics in my first year at uni.....still don't really understand it all. However, as a parent, this vote is not about how better or worse off I will be. If it is a YES, I won't die of starvation. Yes, the next five or ten years may be hard, but I will survive. I would rather go without now, so that my son has a future where he is accepted as a person, not by how much money he earns or what social bracket he is in.

 

This is about future generations.....we won't be here forever. Look at the bigger picture....it is not about us, it is for those that come after us...and to deny that to future generations is just selfish.

 

I've argued both sides over the last couple of weeks. I'm not eligible to vote and part of me is relieved.

 

Another take on it might be what if 5-10 years down the line the country is bankrupt and England held out an olive branch?

 

Perhaps some are actually thinking of their children and their children's children. I know it's hypothetical but for the above to happen it would be on worse terms than what we have currently.

 

I can understand people's fear for not wanting to take a leap of faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites
nanananananana-angus

More powers & Barnet being preserved - guaranteed

 

46567EC0-1D41-4EC3-8CF0-49D6A257CE70_zpsscw4bcbo.jpg

 

Surely the bit at the top should read 'Westminsters three party leaders-one of whom might be the next Pm.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could say one thing to Yes supporters it would be: "You can't hide from the world; you'd be better embracing it".

 

The UK is a fine country, and many many Scots have done well from being part of it.

 

However, quality of life in three of the countries that have peacefully separated from the UK, but remained within the Commonwealth (NZ, Australia and Canada) are all higher than they are in the UK. As is life expectancy. http://www.oecdbette...eindex.org/??(I know, selective stats)

 

You're right, people should embrace the world - and the opportunities that the world has for societal improvement.

 

If NZ, Australia and Canada had all remained as colonies I don't believe they wouldn't be the progressive vibrant places they are today.

Edited by Sydney
Link to post
Share on other sites
Albert Tatlock

If I could say one thing to Yes supporters it would be: "You can't hide from the world; you'd be better embracing it".

 

And that is my point exactly. Why hang onto the coat tails of Westminster, when we are more than capable of governing ourselves. It's a global market out there. We are more than capable of running our own affairs successfully.

 

You also say that many Scot's are doing well, yes they are....but many are not. the same goes for those in England, some people are doing very well, others are toiling. Whether it is a YES or a NO , times are changing, and ordinary people now have a voice and will demand change. No one is better than anyone. To me it is about social justice and equality. You probably won't understand that because you are in the, "I'm alright Jack camp". Your financial status does not make you better than me.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it shows a remarkable lack of collective self-confidence, I'm not talking about individuals

To pass up the opportunity to shape a modern prosperous indepenent country for the 21st century and beyond because you fear dealing with the world without having your hand held by your big neighbour who has been systematically bullying and lying to you for as long as you've known them doesn't strike me as confident. Sounds more like an abusive type of relationship where we have become so used to the victimistaion that we no longer realise it when it happens.

We do not need any false promises but that is what we are currently being offered by the No campaign

 

England has not been "systematically bullying and lying to" Scotland all this time. Do you think No voters are just blind and can't see what you see? Or do they just come to a different conclusion?

 

There have been Scottish Prime Ministers, innumerable Scottish ministers at Westminster, innumerable Scottish MPs representing Welsh seats, Scots in senior positions in Whitehall, business, academia, journalism, the British Empire, etc. Scottish MPs currently vote on matters that affect only England but English MPs vote on far fewer matters affecting Scotland and none affecting only Scotland. Scotland has larger per-head public spending than England. It has, and has always had, its own established church, its own education system and its own legal system. It now has its own Parliament. Devolution was established on the initiative of a Scottish Prime Minister.

 

What on earth are you complaining about?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could say one thing to Yes supporters it would be: "You can't hide from the world; you'd be better embracing it".

 

And that is my point exactly. Why hang onto the coat tails of Westminster, when we are more than capable of governing ourselves. It's a global market out there. We are more than capable of running our own affairs successfully.

 

You also say that many Scot's are doing well, yes they are....but many are not. the same goes for those in England, some people are doing very well, others are toiling. Whether it is a YES or a NO , times are changing, and ordinary people now have a voice and will demand change. No one is better than anyone. To me it is about social justice and equality. You probably won't understand that because you are in the, "I'm alright Jack camp". Your financial status does not make you better than me.

 

I'd be surprised if my financial status is much better than yours and quite likely not.

 

Voting No is not selfish and does not express an "I'm alright Jack" attitude. But wanting to help people doesn't imply wanting them to be without the protection of a larger country.

 

Think of anything good that has happened in Scotland in the last 307 years. All of that happened within the Union.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Think of anything good that has happened in Scotland in the last 307 years. All of that happened within the Union.

 

And everything bad that has happened, and everything mediocre that has happened too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
nanananananana-angus

England has not been "systematically bullying and lying to" Scotland all this time. Do you think No voters are just blind and can't see what you see? Or do they just come to a different conclusion?

 

There have been Scottish Prime Ministers, innumerable Scottish ministers at Westminster, innumerable Scottish MPs representing Welsh seats, Scots in senior positions in Whitehall, business, academia, journalism, the British Empire, etc. Scottish MPs currently vote on matters that affect only England but English MPs vote on far fewer matters affecting Scotland and none affecting only Scotland. Scotland has larger per-head public spending than England. It has, and has always had, its own established church, its own education system and its own legal system. It now has its own Parliament. Devolution was established on the initiative of a Scottish Prime Minister.

 

What on earth are you complaining about?

 

These Scottish PMs and Scottish ministers,they would have been complicit in keeping the McCrone report buried?

Link to post
Share on other sites

England has not been "systematically bullying and lying to" Scotland all this time. Do you think No voters are just blind and can't see what you see? Or do they just come to a different conclusion?

 

There have been Scottish Prime Ministers, innumerable Scottish ministers at Westminster, innumerable Scottish MPs representing Welsh seats, Scots in senior positions in Whitehall, business, academia, journalism, the British Empire, etc. Scottish MPs currently vote on matters that affect only England but English MPs vote on far fewer matters affecting Scotland and none affecting only Scotland. Scotland has larger per-head public spending than England. It has, and has always had, its own established church, its own education system and its own legal system. It now has its own Parliament. Devolution was established on the initiative of a Scottish Prime Minister.

 

What on earth are you complaining about?

 

Devolution was established only because of the steady rise in popularity of the idea of Scottish independence and was seen by Unionists as a way to counter that.

I think it was George Robertson who came out with something along the lines of "....devolution will kill scottish independence..."

 

Of course there have been Scottish PMs, ministers, MPs at UK level but they act for the UK not Scotland

 

What are we seeing right now from the UK establishment if not bullying, lying and bluster?

Not a peep for the last 2 years of this debate but as soon as it looks like the Scots might just vote to grasp their own destiny the whole of the UK state apparatus rumbles into action spreading fear, lies and threats

 

If we're such an economic basket case and such a drain on the UK economy why are they all running around now pleading for us not to go?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You shouldn't believe everything you read in the papers :laugh4:

 

mails.jpg

 

The page on the right was a personal view of a columnist which the English edition of the paper disagreed with. Nice positioning work to make it look like the view of the PM, though. I wonder who created that?

 

That said, I know a few English people whose view is "carry on if that's what you want." They don't think Scotland being independent will do anything negative for Scotland or England. But they do get a bit mystified when they read all this faux-independence malarkey from the Yes campaign. Their view is that if Scotland is going to leave it should leave - not say it's going and then hang around looking for a currency union and all that goes with it. In fairness, I can see their point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The page on the right was a personal view of a columnist which the English edition of the paper disagreed with. Nice positioning work to make it look like the view of the PM, though. I wonder who created that?

 

That said, I know a few English people whose view is "carry on if that's what you want." They don't think Scotland being independent will do anything negative for Scotland or England. But they do get a bit mystified when they read all this faux-independence malarkey from the Yes campaign. Their view is that if Scotland is going to leave it should leave - not say it's going and then hang around looking for a currency union and all that goes with it. In fairness, I can see their point.

 

I didn't think it was representative of Cameron himself. Even I would give him credit for a bit more political nous than that! Not much though!!

I was just pointing up that newspaper front pages are used for all sorts

Link to post
Share on other sites

The page on the right was a personal view of a columnist which the English edition of the paper disagreed with. Nice positioning work to make it look like the view of the PM, though. I wonder who created that?

 

That said, I know a few English people whose view is "carry on if that's what you want." They don't think Scotland being independent will do anything negative for Scotland or England. But they do get a bit mystified when they read all this faux-independence malarkey from the Yes campaign. Their view is that if Scotland is going to leave it should leave - not say it's going and then hang around looking for a currency union and all that goes with it. In fairness, I can see their point.

 

Think the Yes ( Salmond ) strategy was one of gradualism to try and carry along the man in the street who hasn't really been thinking much about the details of the whole issue.

It's a big change we are asking people to vote for so the more constants we can leave in place the more the reassurance factor kicks in. I genuinely believe YES is the way to go but we have to take people with us and most people are really only concerned with the day to day.

 

Anyway, I'm still here because i have a horrendous cold and can't sleep. what's your excuse? Is it a MOD shift thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Francis Albert

Interestingly the Mail "Why don't we tell them to Shove Off" headline is probably the most common reaction I have experienced when the topic of the referendum comes up in conversation with people in my now home city of London. I suspect MPs postbags will reflect that when it comes after a No

win to voting on (in English eyes) giving Scotland even more privileges than it is perceived it already enjoys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think it was representative of Cameron himself. Even I would give him credit for a bit more political nous than that! Not much though!!

I was just pointing up that newspaper front pages are used for all sorts

 

Sorry not MOD Admin!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

MOD, aye, Ulysses is on kickback while on a nightshift guarding Trident.

 

(Only joshing...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

MOD, aye, Ulysses is on kickback while on a nightshift guarding Trident.

 

(Only joshing...)

 

LOL I hope he's getting paid the billions he's obviously worth

Link to post
Share on other sites
Geoff Kilpatrick

Hi FA

 

So you don't think the "VOW" will be worth the paper it is written in?

I think FA is highlighting the disconnect between Westminster and the electorate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is long, but it's thoughtful, rational and worth a read:

 

http://lallandspeatw...-old-music.html

 

A good read.

 

I myself have had to re-examine my died in the wool "nationalism" over the course of this debate.

I have family who are vehement NOs I have in-laws in the NO camp although my partner has come to the same conclusions as me independently. Which is nice!!

 

It's obviously a massive decision but I hope that we Scots ( and everyone else here who has a vote ) can grasp the THISTLE

i have many English friends some here in Scotland some in England. It is strange to me that most of the English based ones are saying if it was them they would vote Yes but the ones based here are NOs. I can't begin to know what that means, Whatever the result on Thursday they will still be friends though

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think FA is highlighting the disconnect between Westminster and the electorate.

 

My experience in London has been that most people I have had the pleasure of talking to think " go for it we would you're better off on your own maybe it will help us"

That's what they've said anyway.!

I don't think this is about differences between people rather political systems. I hope an independent Scotland will reach out to the other parts of the rUK and offer support

Link to post
Share on other sites
Geoff Kilpatrick

 

 

My experience in London has been that most people I have had the pleasure of talking to think " go for it we would you're better off on your own maybe it will help us"

That's what they've said anyway.!

I don't think this is about differences between people rather political systems. I hope an independent Scotland will reach out to the other parts of the rUK and offer support

Why would the politics of the UK be any of your business?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would the politics of the UK be any of your business?

 

Not sure what you're getting at?

 

Right now because I live in the UK.

If I lived in an independent Scotland I would want us to be in dialogue with the rest of rUK

Link to post
Share on other sites
Geoff Kilpatrick

 

 

Not sure what you're getting at?

 

Right now because I live in the UK.

If I lived in an independent Scotland I would want us to be in dialogue with the rest of rUK

I'm getting at this idea that Scotland will be some sort of "enlightenment" to the rest of the UK in their political outlook. If you go, you go. There will probably be a backlash as a result. Then life will go on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...