Independent Socialist Republic of Scotland?

[yeezus.]

Alex Salmond is watering down plans for an independent Scotland. Now saying we could still stay in the UK but have complete control over our economy. He also wants and independent Scotland to remain the Queen's country.

Anyone else want a Socialist republic? Don't think we'll get it with the SNP...

[Hibrandenburg]

Scary. I've just learnt today on another thread that mistakes in a socialist state could lead to death camps.

[bighairyfaeleith]

I don't favour a republic, I have no issue with the monarchy as they are just figureheads and tourism revenue for Edinburgh is greatly boosted by having a royal palace so I would keep the queen.

The thing to remember is the vote will be about independence, not who should run an independent Scotland. It's up to us to decide how we would want our country to then be run at the next general election based upon who we vote in to run our country.

[Kato]

Anyone else want a Socialist republic? Don't think we'll get it with the SNP...

How would a Socialist Republic work?

[Phil D. Rolls]

I think whether or not we keep the monarchy is a minor detail. Why risk the big prize over such a triviality?

[RyeSloan]

I think whether or not we keep the monarchy is a minor detail. Why risk the big prize over such a triviality?

And how much 'Scottish' land and sea does the crown estate own in Scotland? I'm not entirely sure this is a triviality...what can be more fundamental than who is your head of state?

[Hibs Class]

And how much 'Scottish' land and sea does the crown estate own in Scotland? I'm not entirely sure this is a triviality...what can be more fundamental than who is your head of state?

Maybe Salmond will use the "Mugabe Model" to deal with this issue :greengrin

[allmodcons]

And how much 'Scottish' land and sea does the crown estate own in Scotland? I'm not entirely sure this is a triviality...what can be more fundamental than who is your head of state?

2 things more fundamental than the head of state in Scotland.

1) The people of the country. In Scotland the principle has been established that sovereignty lies with the people of the country.
2) The Government. They get their mandate from the people.

The Queen has no mandate. Royal Assent is a complete formality these days.

[MountcastleHibs]

Alex Salmond is watering down plans for an independent Scotland. Now saying we could still stay in the UK but have complete control over our economy. He also wants and independent Scotland to remain the Queen's country.Anyone else want a Socialist republic? Don't think we'll get it with the SNP... Firstly, plans are not being watered down. There will still be a referendum, with the option of total independence, fiscal independence or no change at all. This has always been the case. And the SNP have always maintained that in any independent Scotland, the Queen would be the head of state. This is no more than a name nowadays, the Queen has no real power. Any of the parties with a real chance of election support the monarchy so we'll never get a republic here.

[yeezus.]

Firstly, plans are not being watered down. There will still be a referendum, with the option of total independence, fiscal independence or no change at all. This has always been the case. And the SNP have always maintained that in any independent Scotland, the Queen would be the head of state. This is no more than a name nowadays, the Queen has no real power. Any of the parties with a real chance of election support the monarchy so we'll never get a republic here.

I know, but it's not really a Republic if we are still the Queen's country.

Maybe the SSP will become mainstream and win a couple of seats in the Scottish Parliament next time round. I'll vote for total independence, in the hope that we'll stop having England elect our Governments.

Yes, 1 Tory MP in the whole of Scotland (soon to be none thanks to boundary changes). The future is bright.

[Dashing Bob S]

I'm all for a republic. Get rid of those parasitical in-bred muppets once and for all.

[RyeSloan]

2 things more fundamental than the head of state in Scotland.

1) The people of the country. In Scotland the principle has been established that sovereignty lies with the people of the country.
2) The Government. They get their mandate from the people.

The Queen has no mandate. Royal Assent is a complete formality these days.

Yeah I get your point, I was being slightly pedantic (not unknown!)

Still I must admit an Independent Scotland with the Queen as head of state seems a somewhat strange idea. Why claim 'independence' but then maintain allegiance to the crown? I think this would be a fudge.

To be honest I’m not bothered either way it’s just that I think if we are going to go down the independence route then we may as well go the whole hog, it would seem quite a strong message to send that Scotland was truly independent and had left it’s unionist ties behind.

In any case I’m much more intrigued by the practicalities of independence…the crown estate, it’s substantial land ownership and the revenues it generates are but one question that would need addressed…I’m very much looking forward to the ‘debate’ that will be held in the run up to this poll, it’s already kicked off with the £41bn deficit figure.

[One Day Soon]

Yeah I get your point, I was being slightly pedantic (not unknown!)

Still I must admit an Independent Scotland with the Queen as head of state seems a somewhat strange idea. Why claim 'independence' but then maintain allegiance to the crown? I think this would be a fudge.

To be honest I’m not bothered either way it’s just that I think if we are going to go down the independence route then we may as well go the whole hog, it would seem quite a strong message to send that Scotland was truly independent and had left it’s unionist ties behind.

In any case I’m much more intrigued by the practicalities of independence…the crown estate, it’s substantial land ownership and the revenues it generates are but one question that would need addressed…I’m very much looking forward to the ‘debate’ that will be held in the run up to this poll, it’s already kicked off with the £41bn deficit figure.

"£41bn deficit figure"? Where's that then?

[J-C]

Yeah I get your point, I was being slightly pedantic (not unknown!)

Still I must admit an Independent Scotland with the Queen as head of state seems a somewhat strange idea. Why claim 'independence' but then maintain allegiance to the crown? I think this would be a fudge.

To be honest I’m not bothered either way it’s just that I think if we are going to go down the independence route then we may as well go the whole hog, it would seem quite a strong message to send that Scotland was truly independent and had left it’s unionist ties behind.

In any case I’m much more intrigued by the practicalities of independence…the crown estate, it’s substantial land ownership and the revenues it generates are but one question that would need addressed…I’m very much looking forward to the ‘debate’ that will be held in the run up to this poll, it’s already kicked off with the £41bn deficit figure.

Is the Queen not half Scottish or have I missed the place where her mother was born and brought up, not a big royalist myself.

[Kato]

Still I must admit an Independent Scotland with the Queen as head of state seems a somewhat strange idea.


It didn't seem strange to the Aussies, or the Canadians or in fact the Majority of the Commonwealth.

Couldn't give a monkey's myself.

Queen Schmeen.

More interested in how a Socialist Republic would actually work. What good has socialism been to Scotland so far?

[RyeSloan]

It didn't seem strange to the Aussies, or the Canadians or in fact the Majority of the Commonwealth.

Couldn't give a monkey's myself.

Queen Schmeen.

More interested in how a Socialist Republic would actually work. What good has socialism been to Scotland so far?

Fair point but how much of Australia does the crown estate own and what revenue sharing agreements are in place like the one in the UK where the treasury takes the profit in return for a grant to the royals?

I also think that there has been a new agreement put in place where the Royals grant will be replaced with a set percentage of the income from the crown estate but I may be wrong...

Anyway as you say Quenn Schmeen so why bother retaining the Royal connection?

Ohh and I didn't even go near the fact that the OP had decided an independent scottish republic would automatically be a socialist one..:greengrin

[RyeSloan]

"£41bn deficit figure"? Where's that then?

From what I could see (I only read the reports quickly, most were filled with political jibes rather than a clear commentary as to what the figure was and what it actually meant) it was an attmempt to put a figure on what Scotland's national debt would be sitting at if we had been economically independent for the last 30 years....i.e Oil and Gas revenue even when fully allocated to Scotland on top of the Scottish tax take would not be enough to cover government expenditure over that period.

[allmodcons]

From what I could see (I only read the reports quickly, most were filled with political jibes rather than a clear commentary as to what the figure was and what it actually meant) it was an attmempt to put a figure on what Scotland's national debt would be sitting at if we had been economically independent for the last 30 years....i.e Oil and Gas revenue even when fully allocated to Scotland on top of the Scottish tax take would not be enough to cover government expenditure over that period.

It was a figure 'from the treasury' quoted by none other than Michael Moore.

What he forgot to tell everybody, however, is that the UK national debt for 2011 is forecast to peak at £1.1trillion (yes trillion) and interest on UK debt in 2010 was - wait for it - £42.9billion. In other words the UK paid more in debt interest payments in 2010 than the total value of the Scottish National Debt figure quoted by Michael Moore.

[Phil D. Rolls]

And how much 'Scottish' land and sea does the crown estate own in Scotland? I'm not entirely sure this is a triviality...what can be more fundamental than who is your head of state?

I am not in favour of the monarchy in its current form. It's just that I think that it, in a Scottish context, with so many people being fanatically loyal to the Crown, it would distract from the real issues around Independence.


Yeah I get your point, I was being slightly pedantic (not unknown!)

Still I must admit an Independent Scotland with the Queen as head of state seems a somewhat strange idea. Why claim 'independence' but then maintain allegiance to the crown? I think this would be a fudge.

To be honest I’m not bothered either way it’s just that I think if we are going to go down the independence route then we may as well go the whole hog, it would seem quite a strong message to send that Scotland was truly independent and had left it’s unionist ties behind.

In any case I’m much more intrigued by the practicalities of independence…the crown estate, it’s substantial land ownership and the revenues it generates are but one question that would need addressed…I’m very much looking forward to the ‘debate’ that will be held in the run up to this poll, it’s already kicked off with the £41bn deficit figure.

Canada and Australia do well, but are still nominally ruled by the Queen. The amount of money the aristocracy take out of the UK as a whole - let alone Scotland - is just not right, maybe further down the road we can sort that out.

[yeezus.]

If Scotland can afford to help fund illegal wars and tax breaks for the rich at Westminster we can surely afford to spend some of that money on our social problems.

Was just wondering if it's something people on here favoured?

Going in to a Septic thread with this question would provoke a predictably good response, just wondered how people on the East coast viewed it.

[RyeSloan]

If Scotland can afford to help fund illegal wars and tax breaks for the rich at Westminster we can surely afford to spend some of that money on our social problems.
Was just wondering if it's something people on here favoured?

Going in to a Septic thread with this question would provoke a predictably good response, just wondered how people on the East coast viewed it.

What you mean like a welfare state and a free point of use healthcare system?

Are you suggesting that spending on 'social problems' or trying to resolve them is purely the domain of socialists?

[Kato]

If Scotland can afford to help fund illegal wars and tax breaks for the rich at Westminster we can surely afford to spend some of that money on our social problems.

Was just wondering if it's something people on here favoured?

I would favour that.