Scottish Independence

[DaveF]

I was always a strong No but I was dismayed by the so called 'campaign' of BT and felt it was so negative that I moved into the Yes camp the more I read about it. However your probably right I just needed a gentle nudge to bring me back to No and that what this has done.

Fair enough. I've got an offer which will make you rich, but you need to PM me your full name and bank details first if you don't mind :wink:

If you just watched Alistair Darling on BBC Scotland just now, you'd be back to a YES.

I've never seen such a bumbling, stuttering, panicky interview. He managed to say that the No campaign has been 'unrelentingly positive' and followed it up by saying a million jobs were at risk due to the uncertainty caused by the referendum. The rate he speaks at, I'm beginning to wonder about his heart rate!

[NAE NOOKIE]

They are raising the Saltire over Downing Street now, FFS give me strength.

J

I don't feel patronised in the slightest :fibber:

If we are talking about flags now all I can say is I'll believe their sincerity when I see the Saltire flying over Edinburgh Castle .... pisses me off that they fly the union flag over it. IMO the castle is the most iconic place in Scotland and flying that flag over the castle only says one thing. 'Of course you can have a watered down kiddy on wee parliament and all that' ............ but dinnae furget whaes in charge right!

[johnbc70]

Fair enough. I've got an offer which will make you rich, but you need to PM me your full name and bank details first if you don't mind :wink:

If you just watched Alistair Darling on BBC Scotland just now, you'd be back to a YES.

I've never seen such a bumbling, stuttering, panicky interview. He managed to say that the No campaign has been 'unrelentingly positive' and followed it up by saying a million jobs were at risk due to the uncertainty caused by the referendum. The rate he speaks at, I'm beginning to wonder about his heart rate!

And watching Kenny MaCAskill turn you to no! His answer on the currency union, which again today the governor of the BoE has ruled out, said let's wait and see and everything will be fine. Sorry but I don't want to wait and see I want answers.

Yes Germany and France share a currency but both share a central bank, that will not be the case in an iScotland.

[johnbc70]

I don't get it, you are pretty much saying you are being hood-winked. You can see you are getting lied to, yet you will still vote no.

It's jam tomorrow mate. If these "powers" had any merit, why announce them (sort of) with 10 days to go? Why not have a Devo Max option on the ballot, all those years ago that Cameron vetoed?

This is too big an opportunity to believe the same old lies from a creaking bunch of Westminster career politicians.

J

Where did I say I know I am being lied to?

[BroxburnHibee]

If people for for these last ditch lies then hell mend them. There's only one way to guarantee more powers :greengrin

[DaveF]

And watching Kenny MaCAskill turn you to no! His answer on the currency union, which again today the governor of the BoE has ruled out, said let's wait and see and everything will be fine. Sorry but I don't want to wait and see I want answers.

Yes Germany and France share a currency but both share a central bank, that will not be the case in an iScotland.

Did he actually say that word for word? Is the interview online anywhere?

My vote isn't up for grabs so I'm not particularly relevant here. Yours apparently was and I think a few people were surprised you turned back to No following a vague timetable as promised by those same people who oversaw the banking collapse a few years ago. Were you demanding answers then?

Anyway, you didn't have to, but you gave your reason for going back to No. I don't agree but it's your vote and you can do what you like with it :greengrin

[Pretty Boy]

And watching Kenny MaCAskill turn you to no! His answer on the currency union, which again today the governor of the BoE has ruled out, said let's wait and see and everything will be fine. Sorry but I don't want to wait and see I want answers.

Yes Germany and France share a currency but both share a central bank, that will not be the case in an iScotland.

A currency union, at least in the short to medium term, is desirable for both sides. If rUK decide not to negotiate one then it will be cutting of their nose to spite their face.

[johnbc70]

Did he actually say that word for word? Is the interview online anywhere?

My vote isn't up for grabs so I'm not particularly relevant here. Yours apparently was and I think a few people were surprised you turned back to No following a vague timetable as promised by those same people who oversaw the banking collapse a few years ago. Were you demanding answers then?

Anyway, you didn't have to, but you gave your reason for going back to No. I don't agree but it's your vote and you can do what you like with it :greengrin

He said 'we will see what happens after the referendum' and then avoided the question. Sky News about 7pm.

Sorry but if the money in my pocket, the interest rates I pay on my mortgage, the value of my home etc is at risk then I need more than let's see what happens.

[CropleyWasGod]

He said 'we will see what happens after the referendum' and then avoided the question. Sky News about 7pm.

Sorry but if the money in my pocket, the interest rates I pay on my mortgage, the value of my home etc is at risk then I need more than let's see what happens.

How are they at risk?

Nothing causes panic more than panic itself.

[johnbc70]

A currency union, at least in the short to medium term, is desirable for both sides. If rUK decide not to negotiate one then it will be cutting of their nose to spite their face.

Not according to the governor of the Bank of England who again stated it just won't work.

[DaveF]

He said 'we will see what happens after the referendum' and then avoided the question. Sky News about 7pm.

Sorry but if the money in my pocket, the interest rates I pay on my mortgage, the value of my home etc is at risk then I need more than let's see what happens.

Those BT folks never do that do they :greengrin

Interest rates are going to go up - whether we stay or go.

Sounds like you have been done by the fear factor and that's your call.

Me, I'm up for the leap. See you on the other side.

[DaveF]

Not according to the governor of the Bank of England who again stated it just won't work.

I didn't hear it all but Robert Peston was dissecting the language used by Mark Carney, where he said he used the word sovereignty rather than Independence when talking about Scotland and made some reference to Germany and a CU.

Not much point in posting that as the kids were shouting so I never understood it but someone else might have!

[JimBHibees]

Not according to the governor of the Bank of England who again stated it just won't work.

He said incompatible with sovereignty what ever that means. Of course as ex Chancellor Darling admitted at the last debate Scotland can use sterling. Sounds again like scaremongering.

[CropleyWasGod]

Not according to the governor of the Bank of England who again stated it just won't work.

According to the report I am reading "The Governor noted the Westminster view of Scottish independence would make creating the conditions for a formal currency union impossible. "

I interpret that as meaning that it is the parties' refusal to have a union that makes it impossible. That suggests that, if they changed that view, a union would be possible.

[Leith Green]

Anybody who cannot see through all this smarm offensive are bonkers, promises of supposed more powers in devolution that would come to next to nothing.. Saltires flying over english buildings, cameron coming north??

Ask yourself why oh why this is all happening now? Its no coincidence its timing is in line with polls showing them being in trouble, anybody voting No on any of this basis quite frankly needs their head examined

Patronising bull**** that I have never seen in my lifetime

[stoneyburn hibs]

Anybody who cannot see through all this smarm offensive are bonkers, promises of supposed more powers in devolution that would come to next to nothing.. Saltires flying over english buildings, cameron coming north??

Ask yourself why oh why this is all happening now? Its no coincidence its timing is in line with polls showing them being in trouble, anybody voting No on any of this basis quite frankly needs their head examined

Patronising bull**** that I have never seen in my lifetime

It's that bad it almost seems deliberate.

[Leith Green]

To reiterate the point, these westminster politicians do not give a **** about Scotland , its people, their feelings , or on bettering Scottish lives.. They are only interested in how all this affects themselves and england, this just proves that fact.

[snooky]

Is that 4 universes then ;-)

Aye, St Andrews, Glasgow, Heriot Watt & Invertay

Jings, can ye no' read laddie :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

He said incompatible with sovereignty what ever that means. Of course as ex Chancellor Darling admitted at the last debate Scotland can use sterling. Sounds again like scaremongering.

I interpret that as neither country having sovereignty over the currency.

[Leith Green]

It's that bad it almost seems deliberate.

The one thing I am not getting is why Salmond etc arent jumping all over this? Especially regarding postal voters having already voted. Im wondering wether they think that No will be seen right through??

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

If these "powers" had any merit, why announce them (sort of) with 10 days to go?

Is it even legal? How can they announce new measures after some people have already cast their vote via post?

[stoneyburn hibs]

The one thing I am not getting is why Salmond etc arent jumping all over this? Especially regarding postal voters having already voted. Im wondering wether they think that No will be seen right through??


I'm sure someone from Yes will be all over it. I'm looking forward to seeing our prime minister up here in Scotland tomorrow , decent odds on him wearing a kilt ? :greengrin

[snooky]

I'm sure someone from Yes will be all over it. I'm looking forward to seeing our prime minister up here in Scotland tomorrow , decent odds on him wearing a kilt ? :greengrin

Here ye go, Davie, och aye, it's a braw bricht moonlicht nicht ye ken the noo, laddie.
You've probably never seen it before ...

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=cameron+tartan&rlz=1T4SUNC_enGB361GB361&tbm=isch&imgil=-tU4bRo_QxaakM%253A%253BZ3pBR4AbjBgrPM%253Bhttp%252 53A%25252F%25252Fen.wikipedia.org%25252Fwiki%25252 FClan_Cameron&source=iu&fir=-tU4bRo_QxaakM%253A%252CZ3pBR4AbjBgrPM%252C_&usg=__dtoJIFr9GgXcCkOAh0mnXi96bmg%3D&sa=X&ei=AVMPVJmKBqry7AaNhIDwDg&ved=0CE8Q9QEwAA&biw=1440&bih=645#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=-tU4bRo_QxaakM%253A%3BZ3pBR4AbjBgrPM%3Bhttp%253A%25 2F%252Fupload.wikimedia.org%252Fwikipedia%252Fcomm ons%252Fb%252Fbd%252FCameron_tartan_(Vestiarium_Sc oticum).png%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fen.wikipedia.org% 252Fwiki%252FClan_Cameron%3B504%3B504

[steakbake]

I interpret that as neither country having sovereignty over the currency.

Agreed - the Bank of England would be the one that was independent.

[Future17]

The one thing I am not getting is why Salmond etc arent jumping all over this? Especially regarding postal voters having already voted. Im wondering wether they think that No will be seen right through??

I think the "Yes" campaign can see the "No" campaign effectively self-destructing, so why bother giving extra publicity to something which is essentially being universally acknowledged as having no real value or substance? The "Yes" campaign's attitude will essentially be to stand back and watch "No" lose it for themselves.

Also, regards postal voters, in theory the only postal voters who may be affected are those who have already voted "Yes", so why would the "Yes" campaign want to claim those people have been hard-done-by by the timing of the announcement?


Is it even legal? How can they announce new measures after some people have already cast their vote via post?

It's perfectly legal, it's just a bit silly and amateurish. "Purdah" doesn't exist for the UK Government as it does for the Scottish Government to the legislative restrictions of the Scottish Parliament, which passed the Referendum Act.

When the UK Government gave the Scottish Parliament the powers to make the Referendum Act, they agreed to abide by the same restrictions as applied to the Scottish Government in the 28-day period prior to polling day. They have essentially used a back door to break that agreement and, although it should have implications for them both now and in the future, there isn't the political will to make that happen.

Of course, one of the reasons purdah exists is to prevent exactly the scenario which has arisen with regards to postal voters and there are a lot of very angry electors out there. Given that it's about to be announced that electoral registration is at it's highest ever level in Scotland and that there are more postal voters than ever before, I suppose we have to hope that people don't have short memories.

[Hibrandenburg]

A currency union, at least in the short to medium term, is desirable for both sides. If rUK decide not to negotiate one then it will be cutting of their nose to spite their face.

I'd love for Salmond to now call his bluff and say "Ok, if the deal's off the table then we'll move on with option 2". They'd ***** themselves.

[Canongatehibs]

Wonderful watching the likes of Brown, Darling, Cameron, Clegg, Milliband and even the BBC and it's reporters squirm over the Yes campaigers ongoing polling achievements.
Itchy bum time :-)

[DaveF]

I caught a wee bit of BBC News 24 earlier on where they interviewed two ex pats living in London. The location was a scottish themed establishment called Boisdale of Belgravia (not yer bang average greasy spoon) and the interviewees were a lady who was very agitated at not getting a vote and clearly on the No side and a retired ex regimental piper who, if they didn't take him off air sharpish, was about to explode into an anti YES rant.

Impartial? I think not.

[CapitalGreen]

I caught a wee bit of BBC News 24 earlier on where they interviewed two ex pats living in London. The location was a scottish themed establishment called Boisdale of Belgravia (not yer bang average greasy spoon) and the interviewees were a lady who was very agitated at not getting a vote and clearly on the No side and a retired ex regimental piper who, if they didn't take him off air sharpish, was about to explode into an anti YES rant.

Impartial? I think not.

I saw that earlier, filled with people quaffing champagne at lunchtime. The old guy got cut off while ranting about all the Poles and Germans getting a vote.

[The Harp Awakes]

I caught a wee bit of BBC News 24 earlier on where they interviewed two ex pats living in London. The location was a scottish themed establishment called Boisdale of Belgravia (not yer bang average greasy spoon) and the interviewees were a lady who was very agitated at not getting a vote and clearly on the No side and a retired ex regimental piper who, if they didn't take him off air sharpish, was about to explode into an anti YES rant.

Impartial? I think not.

Watched it myself. An elitist London establishment is hardly a gauge of what Scottish people think of independence.

I've watched the BBC a lot through this campaign. Initially their coverage was very pro-unionist but following widespread criticism, I feel they became more balanced for a period, up until last weekend that is. Since the poll putting Yes in front, they have gone into overdrive in terms of giving premium coverage to Better Together. If you want any evidence of that watch every news bulletin on BBC since the weekend; the first mention ALWAYS refers to the no/better together/unionist agenda followed by the Yes agenda. It won't work:cb

[Mon Dieu4]

I caught a wee bit of BBC News 24 earlier on where they interviewed two ex pats living in London. The location was a scottish themed establishment called Boisdale of Belgravia (not yer bang average greasy spoon) and the interviewees were a lady who was very agitated at not getting a vote and clearly on the No side and a retired ex regimental piper who, if they didn't take him off air sharpish, was about to explode into an anti YES rant.

Impartial? I think not.

All the papers seem to have ramped up their scare tactics over the last couple of days, hope people are silly enough to fall for the propaganda

[Albion Hibs]

I don't know how many more people need to say it won't work, or finance markets and share values tumble, but surely sooner or later folk need to take their head out of wee eck's version of a Harry potter novel and realise this is a pipe dream.

Yesterday my pension was worth less, today less again and taking a guess it will be down again tomorrow. The longer this goes on the closer I think we head to being back in another sodding recession...and the last one was bad enough.

[The Harp Awakes]

I don't know how many more people need to say it won't work, or finance markets and share values tumble, but surely sooner or later folk need to take their head out of wee eck's version of a Harry potter novel and realise this is a pipe dream.

Yesterday my pension was worth less, today less again and taking a guess it will be down again tomorrow. The longer this goes on the closer I think we head to being back in another sodding recession...and the last joke was bad enough.

The reason for the uneasiness in the markets over the last few days is purely down unionist parties flapping around like a flock of geese after the the narrowing of the opinion polls. Incidentally, the share prices of 2 of Scotland's most successful companies increased today, of course not mentioned by the BBC in their unbalanced coverage of the referendum.

The No campaign is disintegrating because they have lost the argument. Folk are fed up with their scare tactics. Their feeble attempt to bribe the Scottish electorate will be seen for what it is.

Hope over fear will always win the day.

[Albion Hibs]

The reason for the uneasiness in the markets over the last few days is purely down unionist parties flapping around like a flock of geese after the the narrowing of the opinion polls. Incidentally, the share prices of 2 of Scotland's most successful companies increased today, of course not mentioned by the BBC in their unbalanced coverage of the referendum.

The No campaign is disintegrating because they have lost the argument. Folk are fed up with their scare tactics. Their feeble attempt to bribe the Scottish electorate will be seen for what it is.

Hope over fear will always win the day.

nonsense. The market dropped first thing on Monday, direct from the city and investors across the globe we have heard this is attributed to the possibility of the uk breaking up and as a result funds being pulled out. Furthermore people moving banking and savings out of the scotland says everything and more. Those are the facts.

Funny how how scotland being offered more powers is a "bribe" but wee eck going to negotiate (could not think of a worse person in a worse situation) is some form of achievement which has more certainty - there is no certainty in any negotiation, again that is a fact.

We are clearly from opposite sides on this so won't agree. I think the campaign has now descended into cringeworthy headlines, moving away from facts, great news of course for the yes supporters.

[CapitalGreen]

nonsense. The market dropped first thing on Monday, direct from the city and investors across the globe we have heard this is attributed to the possibility of the uk breaking up and as a result funds being pulled out. Furthermore people moving banking and savings out of the scotland says everything and more. Those are the facts.

Funny how how scotland being offered more powers is a "bribe" but wee eck going to negotiate (could not think of a worse person in a worse situation) is some form of achievement which has more certainty - there is no certainty in any negotiation, again that is a fact.

We are clearly from opposite sides on this so won't agree. I think the campaign has now descended into cringeworthy headlines, moving away from facts, great news of course for the yes supporters.

But you're happy to stay with the Darling, Brown et al? Their time in office was considerably more damaging to your pension than the minor market jitters experienced by the markets on Monday.

FYI, If your pension was that badly affected by that news, then you are probably not diversified enough. You should seriously look into spreading your investment into other markets/asset types to lower your risk exposure to British companies.

[NAE NOOKIE]

Not according to the governor of the Bank of England who again stated it just won't work.

The bank of England has autonomy to set interest rates, but that is all, and only then because the government gave them that autonomy.

As a Civil Servant ( and that's exactly what he is ) Mark Carney is answerable to the Government of the day. As a Civil Servant he is duty bound within the term of the Civil Service code to 'support and promote' the policies of the government he works for. That includes supporting the governments assertion that currency union is neither advisable nor desirable, whether he agrees with that or not. If he did disagree he would have to resign his post to state that opinion.

I have alluded to this in a previous post:

I E Mailed Robert Devereux ( permanent secretary of the DWP ) about 4 months ago when I still worked for the Civil Service to state my anger that the internal DWP website was packed with anti independence propaganda and that they had no business trying to influence the vote of their employees.

The reply I got from him personally, not a minion, was that as the Civil Service they ......... and me ........ had a duty under the terms of the Civil Service code to support and promote the policies of H.M. government which included keeping Scotland in the UK, irrespective of any personal opinions on the matter. It is stated in the Civil Service code .... which governs the behaviour and conduct of ALL Civil Servants .... that if you are unable or unwilling to abide by this you should resign.

As a Civil Servant Carney is bound by that very same code and by implication the stuff he is spouting is not to be trusted as being his personal opinion as a man .... or an economist.

[Sergey]

I should come clean and declare that if I had a vote, I would vote for independence in a heartbeat, and if Scots take what is theirs, I'll be the first in the queue for a passport. But like all expats I do not have a vote. I do know that making a nation is more than just your pension and water rates, your fear about a currency and whether or not you'll be able to get the BBC. A country isn't just for life, it's for all the lives to come and a lesson is just across the sea.

Ireland had a far more fraught and aggressive struggle for independence. They did not have the oil and they don't even have a fishing fleet, they've got second-rate whiskey and tweed and, finally, they gained a grudging and penurious independence without the EU, with a currency that was tied to the pound, and they immediately fell into a vicious civil war and then a depression. The new Eire had precious little goodwill from London or the continent. The Republic will be 100 years old in eight years, and if they had a referendum and were asked "Look, you've had a century of this, wouldn't you rather come back and be part of the UK again?" do you imagine there would be a single vote for yes?

If you have a vote, how will you be able to turn to your grandchildren in years to come and say: "Well, I did have the chance to right an old wrong, but actually I couldn't be bothered. I was a bit scared."

[NAE NOOKIE]

I should come clean and declare that if I had a vote, I would vote for independence in a heartbeat, and if Scots take what is theirs, I'll be the first in the queue for a passport. But like all expats I do not have a vote. I do know that making a nation is more than just your pension and water rates, your fear about a currency and whether or not you'll be able to get the BBC. A country isn't just for life, it's for all the lives to come and a lesson is just across the sea.

Ireland had a far more fraught and aggressive struggle for independence. They did not have the oil and they don't even have a fishing fleet, they've got second-rate whiskey and tweed and, finally, they gained a grudging and penurious independence without the EU, with a currency that was tied to the pound, and they immediately fell into a vicious civil war and then a depression. The new Eire had precious little goodwill from London or the continent. The Republic will be 100 years old in eight years, and if they had a referendum and were asked "Look, you've had a century of this, wouldn't you rather come back and be part of the UK again?" do you imagine there would be a single vote for yes?

If you have a vote, how will you be able to turn to your grandchildren in years to come and say: "Well, I did have the chance to right an old wrong, but actually I couldn't be bothered. I was a bit scared."

http://www.hibs.net/images/smilies/top%20marks.gif

[joebakerforever]

Just heard Salmond on News 24 state Cameron is the most unpopular Conservative Prime Minister in the history of Scotland.


Does he really think we are all suffering from amnesia ?


Two words for you Slippery Eck :- Margaret Thatcher

[#FromTheCapital]

I should come clean and declare that if I had a vote, I would vote for independence in a heartbeat, and if Scots take what is theirs, I'll be the first in the queue for a passport. But like all expats I do not have a vote. I do know that making a nation is more than just your pension and water rates, your fear about a currency and whether or not you'll be able to get the BBC. A country isn't just for life, it's for all the lives to come and a lesson is just across the sea.

Ireland had a far more fraught and aggressive struggle for independence. They did not have the oil and they don't even have a fishing fleet, they've got second-rate whiskey and tweed and, finally, they gained a grudging and penurious independence without the EU, with a currency that was tied to the pound, and they immediately fell into a vicious civil war and then a depression. The new Eire had precious little goodwill from London or the continent. The Republic will be 100 years old in eight years, and if they had a referendum and were asked "Look, you've had a century of this, wouldn't you rather come back and be part of the UK again?" do you imagine there would be a single vote for yes?

If you have a vote, how will you be able to turn to your grandchildren in years to come and say: "Well, I did have the chance to right an old wrong, but actually I couldn't be bothered. I was a bit scared."

Nonsense.

Your last paragraph in particular; 'I was a bit scared'. It's got **** all to do with being scared. There are legitimate reasons for people being against this pipe dream of a vote. The lack of clear answers coming from the yes camp with just over a week to go before the biggest vote in this nations history is scandalous, and you're trying to poke fun at no voters for being scared.

[The Baldmans Comb]

I should come clean and declare that if I had a vote, I would vote for independence in a heartbeat, and if Scots take what is theirs, I'll be the first in the queue for a passport. But like all expats I do not have a vote. I do know that making a nation is more than just your pension and water rates, your fear about a currency and whether or not you'll be able to get the BBC. A country isn't just for life, it's for all the lives to come and a lesson is just across the sea.

Ireland had a far more fraught and aggressive struggle for independence. They did not have the oil and they don't even have a fishing fleet, they've got second-rate whiskey and tweed and, finally, they gained a grudging and penurious independence without the EU, with a currency that was tied to the pound, and they immediately fell into a vicious civil war and then a depression. The new Eire had precious little goodwill from London or the continent. The Republic will be 100 years old in eight years, and if they had a referendum and were asked "Look, you've had a century of this, wouldn't you rather come back and be part of the UK again?" do you imagine there would be a single vote for yes?

If you have a vote, how will you be able to turn to your grandchildren in years to come and say: "Well, I did have the chance to right an old wrong, but actually I couldn't be bothered. I was a bit scared."

I would agree with that almost entirely though would say it is self confidence that is lacking rather than scared.

Scotland would be a far better and happier place if it was run by the people who live and work here just like every other country in the world.

That is just so normal rather than ask people from another country to run your life for you.

[marinello59]

I would agree with that almost entirely though would say it is self confidence that is lacking rather than scared.

Scotland would be a far better and happier place if it was run by the people who live and work here just like every other country in the world.

That is just so normal rather than ask people from another country to run your life for you.

I'd disagree. To dismiss what will be around 50% of our population as lacking in self confidence simply because they are voting differently just doesn't make sense. Their reasons for voting No will be just as valid to them as mine are for voting Yes.

[JimBHibees]

Nonsense.

Your last paragraph in particular; 'I was a bit scared'. It's got **** all to do with being scared. There are legitimate reasons for people being against this pipe dream of a vote. The lack of clear answers coming from the yes camp with just over a week to go before the biggest vote in this nations history is scandalous, and you're trying to poke fun at no voters for being scared.

Afraid it isn't nonsense. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity and Scotland will do ok as an independent country. The reason there isn't more surety is that the union parties have refused to discuss or negotiate prior to the ballot. We will use the pound, we will be able to pay for pensions, life will go on if Yes. It won't be milk and honey and skipping through the tulips but Scotland will be able to make their own decisions and have resources to pay for it. Take the leap.

[JimBHibees]

Watched it myself. An elitist London establishment is hardly a gauge of what Scottish people think of independence.

I've watched the BBC a lot through this campaign. Initially their coverage was very pro-unionist but following widespread criticism, I feel they became more balanced for a period, up until last weekend that is. Since the poll putting Yes in front, they have gone into overdrive in terms of giving premium coverage to Better Together. If you want any evidence of that watch every news bulletin on BBC since the weekend; the first mention ALWAYS refers to the no/better together/unionist agenda followed by the Yes agenda. It won't work:cb

Yes agree there are now hugely biased in terms of the amount of coverage. Please tell me Broons pitch at Loanhead wasn't covered for 50 mins on BBC news 24. Darling was awful but Bird gave him IMO an easy ride no mention of postal votes.

[JeMeSouviens]

nonsense. The market dropped first thing on Monday, direct from the city and investors across the globe we have heard this is attributed to the possibility of the uk breaking up and as a result funds being pulled out. Furthermore people moving banking and savings out of the scotland says everything and more. Those are the facts.

Funny how how scotland being offered more powers is a "bribe" but wee eck going to negotiate (could not think of a worse person in a worse situation) is some form of achievement which has more certainty - there is no certainty in any negotiation, again that is a fact.

We are clearly from opposite sides on this so won't agree. I think the campaign has now descended into cringeworthy headlines, moving away from facts, great news of course for the yes supporters.

The campaign has descended into deluded romantic pish and flag waving ... and all from the unionist side. Who'd have thought it? :wink:

[marinello59]

The campaign has descended into deluded romantic pish and flag waving ... and all from the unionist side. Who'd have thought it? :wink:

:greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

I'd disagree. To dismiss what will be around 50% of our population as lacking in self confidence simply because they are voting differently just doesn't make sense. Their reasons for voting No will be just as valid to them as mine are for voting Yes.

There are myriad reasons to vote in either direction. A big chunk of the No vote is just too British and doesn't want to give up its allegiance to the British state. They would never be persuaded. Others are economically driven and convinced they'll be better off in Britain. But there are some that would like independence but are wary of the risk. It's a big change, so being a bit nervous about it is hardly surprising.

Up to us on the Yes side to convince them the prize is worth it.

[RyeSloan]

There are myriad reasons to vote in either direction. A big chunk of the No vote is just too British and doesn't want to give up its allegiance to the British state. They would never be persuaded. Others are economically driven and convinced they'll be better off in Britain. But there are some that would like independence but are wary of the risk. It's a big change, so being a bit nervous about it is hardly surprising. Up to us on the Yes side to convince them the prize is worth it.

A rather sensible post this one.

Sadly this was always going to descend into something like a comedy farce as polling day approached.

The level of the public debate has been awful...there has been better discussions on this thread than there has been from both campaigns.

Considering what is at stake that is extremely disappointing.

[JeMeSouviens]

Damian Lyons Lowe ‏@DamianSurvation

Well that was a long day..results of our new #indyref poll Sept 5-9 are just in and they are quite something!

This will come out tonight for publication in tomorrow's record. Guess you could take that either way.

I'm going to be a nervous wreck waiting for the real result!

[Bristolhibby]

I caught a wee bit of BBC News 24 earlier on where they interviewed two ex pats living in London. The location was a scottish themed establishment called Boisdale of Belgravia (not yer bang average greasy spoon) and the interviewees were a lady who was very agitated at not getting a vote and clearly on the No side and a retired ex regimental piper who, if they didn't take him off air sharpish, was about to explode into an anti YES rant.

Impartial? I think not.

Saw that, one guy (the first old boy quaffing champagne) said, "yes, we'd like to keep THEM"!

Almost chocked on my bacon sandwich.

Keep us? WTF?

J

[JeMeSouviens]

A rather sensible post this one.

Sadly this was always going to descend into something like a comedy farce as polling day approached.

The level of the public debate has been awful...there has been better discussions on this thread than there has been from both campaigns.

Considering what is at stake that is extremely disappointing.

It's true that the media war has been just like everyone predicted but I'm enormously heartened by the amount of well intentioned, rigorous and thought provoking debate that's going on all around us. If Scotland votes No at least it won't be because it drifted by and nobody cared.

[calumhibee1]

The bank of England has autonomy to set interest rates, but that is all, and only then because the government gave them that autonomy.

As a Civil Servant ( and that's exactly what he is ) Mark Carney is answerable to the Government of the day. As a Civil Servant he is duty bound within the term of the Civil Service code to 'support and promote' the policies of the government he works for. That includes supporting the governments assertion that currency union is neither advisable nor desirable, whether he agrees with that or not. If he did disagree he would have to resign his post to state that opinion.

I have alluded to this in a previous post:

I E Mailed Robert Devereux ( permanent secretary of the DWP ) about 4 months ago when I still worked for the Civil Service to state my anger that the internal DWP website was packed with anti independence propaganda and that they had no business trying to influence the vote of their employees.

The reply I got from him personally, not a minion, was that as the Civil Service they ......... and me ........ had a duty under the terms of the Civil Service code to support and promote the policies of H.M. government which included keeping Scotland in the UK, irrespective of any personal opinions on the matter. It is stated in the Civil Service code .... which governs the behaviour and conduct of ALL Civil Servants .... that if you are unable or unwilling to abide by this you should resign.
As a Civil Servant Carney is bound by that very same code and by implication the stuff he is spouting is not to be trusted as being his personal opinion as a man .... or an economist.

So under the Civil Service code, any Civil Servant planning on voting yes (myself and the majority of my office) or canvassing for yes votes should resign from there post?

[Phil D. Rolls]

Yes agree there are now hugely biased in terms of the amount of coverage. Please tell me Broons pitch at Loanhead wasn't covered for 50 mins on BBC news 24. Darling was awful but Bird gave him IMO an easy ride no mention of postal votes.

She let him go on too long, and didn't ask the question "why now, when you turned down Devo Max in the first place".

I wish they would let Johann Lament do an extended interview, I really do. The only party leader that has to get somebody else to speak for her.

[Leith Green]

This will come out tonight for publication in tomorrow's record. Guess you could take that either way.

I'm going to be a nervous wreck waiting for the real result!



Can surely only mean one thing, every other poll shows a large swing to yes, I'm guessing it'll show 52 to 48 yes, i cannot see how it'll be any worse to Yes from Survations previous poll of yes 47 and No 53.. If it was then it would make this poll so far out from the other 3 released recently, ud have to question it.. I think its gonna be similar to You Govs but maybe larger Yes lead

[Moulin Yarns]

This will come out tonight for publication in tomorrow's record. Guess you could take that either way.

I'm going to be a nervous wreck waiting for the real result!


Can surely only mean one thing, every other poll shows a large swing to yes, I'm guessing it'll show 52 to 48 yes, i cannot see how it'll be any worse to Yes from Survations previous poll of yes 47 and No 53.. If it was then it would make this poll so far out from the other 3 released recently, ud have to question it.. I think its gonna be similar to You Govs but maybe larger Yes lead


Oh the teasers on the Internet, it is out at 10:30 tonight so Reporting Scotland might report it, if not Newsnight might be interesting. Certainly sounds like it at least reflects the YouGov and TMS polls

[marinello59]

There are myriad reasons to vote in either direction. A big chunk of the No vote is just too British and doesn't want to give up its allegiance to the British state. They would never be persuaded. Others are economically driven and convinced they'll be better off in Britain. But there are some that would like independence but are wary of the risk. It's a big change, so being a bit nervous about it is hardly surprising.

Up to us on the Yes side to convince them the prize is worth it.

I'd agree with all of that.

[JeMeSouviens]

Can surely only mean one thing, every other poll shows a large swing to yes, I'm guessing it'll show 52 to 48 yes, i cannot see how it'll be any worse to Yes from Survations previous poll of yes 47 and No 53.. If it was then it would make this poll so far out from the other 3 released recently, ud have to question it.. I think its gonna be similar to You Govs but maybe larger Yes lead

You would think so. If Survation picked up a similar swing to YouGov and TNS/BMRB, they will show Yes at around 55. Panelbase didn't have the swing at all though. I think at this stage any poll can be spun as "quite something".

[JimBHibees]

She let him go on too long, and didn't ask the question "why now, when you turned down Devo Max in the first place".

I wish they would let Johann Lament do an extended interview, I really do. The only party leader that has to get somebody else to speak for her.

Agree about Lamont she struggled massively to deliver the set piece pitch with the 2 other Scottish parties yesterday. Saying that it must be demoralising for both her and Darling to have guys like the 3 stooges from Westminster and the Iron chancellor :faf: moved in to save their skin.

[KdyHby]

Just passed Piershill Sq East, large media presence and the Margo Mobile.

[lord bunberry]

Just passed Piershill Sq East, large media presence and the Margo Mobile.

Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon and Jim Sillars were there.

[JeMeSouviens]

Apparently John Prescott's just suggested amalgamating the Scotland and England football teams to beat the Germans.

WTF? :confused:

I'm not sure if Yes actually needs to do anything at all for the next week now. :wink:

[JimBHibees]

More oil predicted. What a nightmare.

The Press and Journal
'Oil bonanza'

Posted at 09:48
Scottish independence: Expert Alex Kemp predicts 'North Sea oil bonanza'.
Leading oil economist Alex Kemp has predicted a potential North Sea bonanza of 99 new discoveries in the next 30 years.
Prof Kemp, from the University of Aberdeen, has used detailed financial modelling to set out "commercially viable" projects for the industry following the Wood Review.
The sector has been one of the key battlegrounds in the independence debate, with varying projections on just how many recoverable barrels remain.
In the new academic paper, Prof Kemp argues the 99 finds could be made by 2045, and also outlines an additional 58 which he says will be "uneconomic" by 2050 but could become viable as a result of technological improvements.

[JeMeSouviens]

More oil predicted. What a nightmare.

The Press and Journal
'Oil bonanza'

Posted at 09:48
Scottish independence: Expert Alex Kemp predicts 'North Sea oil bonanza'.
Leading oil economist Alex Kemp has predicted a potential North Sea bonanza of 99 new discoveries in the next 30 years.
Prof Kemp, from the University of Aberdeen, has used detailed financial modelling to set out "commercially viable" projects for the industry following the Wood Review.
The sector has been one of the key battlegrounds in the independence debate, with varying projections on just how many recoverable barrels remain.
In the new academic paper, Prof Kemp argues the 99 finds could be made by 2045, and also outlines an additional 58 which he says will be "uneconomic" by 2050 but could become viable as a result of technological improvements.

Big blow to Salmond there! Even more volatile oil to cope with. :rolleyes:

[Mon Dieu4]

Call me Dave was in my work this morning, as if there wasn't enough reasons to dislike him, I've had to find something else to do for lunch, prick

[DaveF]

Yes agree there are now hugely biased in terms of the amount of coverage. Please tell me Broons pitch at Loanhead wasn't covered for 50 mins on BBC news 24. Darling was awful but Bird gave him IMO an easy ride no mention of postal votes.

She can interview me if that's on offer :greengrin

[Betty Boop]

I'd disagree. To dismiss what will be around 50% of our population as lacking in self confidence simply because they are voting differently just doesn't make sense. Their reasons for voting No will be just as valid to them as mine are for voting Yes.


Exactly different strokes for different folks. :agree:

[RyeSloan]

Standard Life the first to jump then....potential significant transfer of business to England in the event of a Yes.

Just a small taster of what may come to pass as companies seek to ensure they remain within the current UK regulations.

[Beefster]

If you have a vote, how will you be able to turn to your grandchildren in years to come and say: "Well, I did have the chance to right an old wrong, but actually I couldn't be bothered. I was a bit scared."

This was pish the first time you posted it too. I love the irony of the English Mrs Beefster getting more say than you in whether you get to have a Scottish passport or not though!

[Beefster]

Standard Life the first to jump then....potential significant transfer of business to England in the event of a Yes.

Just a small taster of what may come to pass as companies seek to ensure they remain within the current UK regulations.

*Lots of posts saying that it's all a bluff/acceptable collateral damage/who are they to lecture us.../we don't need them anyway...*

[DaveF]

Standard Life the first to jump then....potential significant transfer of business to England in the event of a Yes.

Just a small taster of what may come to pass as companies seek to ensure they remain within the current UK regulations.

Is that a definite or a potential?

I've got the potential to be a lot of things but never quite got there :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Is that a definite or a potential?

I've got the potential to be a lot of things but never quite got there :greengrin

He says that it could transfer pensions, investments and other long-term savings held by UK customers to new regulated companies set up in England.

The aim would be to ensure that all transactions with customers outside of Scotland could continue to be in sterling, that the Westminster tax regime would apply to them, and that they would be subject to regulation and protection by City regulators and the Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

[Bristolhibby]

Standard Life the first to jump then....potential significant transfer of business to England in the event of a Yes.

Just a small taster of what may come to pass as companies seek to ensure they remain within the current UK regulations.

Pretty sure they said that in 1999 regarding devolution.

Where are their offices again at this moment?

J

[7 Hills]

Standard Life the first to jump then....potential significant transfer of business to England in the event of a Yes.

Just a small taster of what may come to pass as companies seek to ensure they remain within the current UK regulations.

They said the same prior to Devolution.

[NAE NOOKIE]

So under the Civil Service code, any Civil Servant planning on voting yes (myself and the majority of my office) or canvassing for yes votes should resign from there post?

I don't think so mate :greengrin

The CC code as far as I can interpret it relates to activities directly connected to your activities in work. FWIW here is the part relating to political activity:

POLITICAL IMPARTIALITY:

You must:

Serve the Government, whatever its political persuasion, to the best of your ability in a way which maintains political impartiality and is in line with the requirements of this code, no matter what your own political beliefs are:

Act in a way which deserves and retains the confidence of ministers, while at the same time ensuring you will be able to establish the same relationship with those whom you may be required to serve in some future Government; and

Comply with any restrictions that have been laid down on your political activities.

You must not:

Act in a way which is determined by party political considerations, or use official resources for party political purposes; or

Allow your personal political views to determine any advice you give or your actions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I said though the referendum isnt party political as far as I can see ... and what you are doing is outwith work time.


SCOTLAND REFERENDUM ... GUIDANCE TO DEPARTMENTS ON CONDUCT:

"The UK Governments policy is to maintain the United Kingdom. It is therefore both legitimate and necessary for Civil servants to support ministers as fully as possible in pursuit of those objectives"

Mark Carney is a Civil Servant so his statements on the subject of currency union must be viewed in the light of the above.

[JimBHibees]

She can interview me if that's on offer :greengrin

Yep prime time tv as well. Dear oh dear. :greengrin

[JimBHibees]

*Lots of posts saying that it's all a bluff/acceptable collateral damage/who are they to lecture us.../we don't need them anyway...*

Given the same company has previous for this sort of thing and then reneging on their threat, is it any wonder people are sceptical. In saying that personally think it is despicable that they are trying to influence a democratic vote in this way.

[JimBHibees]

Thought this tweet was funny.

CHRIS BROOKMYRE 'I see McCoist supports BT. From the way they've blown a 15-point lead, you'd think he was actually managing them.' #indyref :greengrin

[RyeSloan]

Given the same company has previous for this sort of thing and then reneging on their threat, is it any wonder people are sceptical. In saying that personally think it is despicable that they are trying to influence a democratic vote in this way.

They are not trying to influence anyone.

They are simply trying to reassure their customers and shareholders.


I'm pretty sure David Nish was not CEO in 1999.

For people just to write a statement like this off as bluster and bluff is a touch worrying...they have clearly stated their reasons why they perceive risk to their business and the possible actions they would need to take to prevent it.

Such actions would be taken, absolutely no doubt about that. If they felt their business was being harmed by the total uncertainty a Yes vote will bring.

I said a few days ago there is nothing more damaging than uncertainty and that a Yes will create a ton of that. I had little belief the politicians would be able to contain the fall out and this is just one example of a huge business that could move not because Scotland was voting for independence but because of the uncertainty of what that entails.

[JimBHibees]

They are not trying to influence anyone.

They are simply trying to reassure their customers and shareholders.


I'm pretty sure David Nish was not CEO in 1999.

For people just to write a statement like this off as bluster and bluff is a touch worrying...they have clearly stated their reasons why they perceive risk to their business and the possible actions they would need to take to prevent it.

Such actions would be taken, absolutely no doubt about that. If they felt their business was being harmed by the total uncertainty a Yes vote will bring.

I said a few days ago there is nothing more damaging than uncertainty and that a Yes will create a ton of that. I had little belief the politicians would be able to contain the fall out and this is just one example of a huge business that could move not because Scotland was voting for independence but because of the uncertainty of what that entails.

You seriously believe that. The institution has previous for this sort of thing given their previous pronouncements. If you look at their Board they are very right wing. Standard life work well in loads of other countries this pronouncement is nothing more than a threat intending to influence as their previous threat was.

[NAE NOOKIE]

They are not trying to influence anyone.

They are simply trying to reassure their customers and shareholders.


I'm pretty sure David Nish was not CEO in 1999.

For people just to write a statement like this off as bluster and bluff is a touch worrying...they have clearly stated their reasons why they perceive risk to their business and the possible actions they would need to take to prevent it.

Such actions would be taken, absolutely no doubt about that. If they felt their business was being harmed by the total uncertainty a Yes vote will bring.

I said a few days ago there is nothing more damaging than uncertainty and that a Yes will create a ton of that. I had little belief the politicians would be able to contain the fall out and this is just one example of a huge business that could move not because Scotland was voting for independence but because of the uncertainty of what that entails.

If the UK votes to bin the EU in a few years time and the share price drops, will they move everything to France?

If Standard Life move all of their jobs out of Scotland without a second thought for their employees or damage to the Scottish economy, what incentive would I have as a Scot to keep any investments I had with that company?

Standard life may justify their actions as purely a business decision for the benefit of their investors .... that is their right.

But that works both ways ......... I for one would move any investment I had in Standard Life either to another Scottish firm or any firm who have not followed their example.

[CapitalGreen]

So the electorate bows down to big businesses and their fat cat owners.

What if those same businesses oppose the further devolved tax raising powers in Scotland? Are they then taken off the table?

[johnbc70]

Standard Life are simply letting people know what their plans are if there is a Yes vote and that is they will move some parts of the business to England.

If I am living in say Manchester and my pension and life savings are in SL then I would be worried what happens in the event of a Yes vote. Is the BoE still the lender of the last resort? What if the pound cannot be used in Scotland what currency is my pension and savings going to be in? Will I need to convert it back to pounds and will it be worth the same? Is SL still regulated by the FCA and the protection that offers?

There may be answers to them all but actually Mr Smith in Manchester who has all his life's savings with SL does not care and wants his funds where he knows what the rules and regulations are, he wants certainty and not confusion. That's all SL have done.

[DaveF]

Standard Life are simply letting people know what their plans are if there is a Yes vote and that is they will move some parts of the business to England.

If I am living in say Manchester and my pension and life savings are in SL then I would be worried what happens in the event of a Yes vote. Is the BoE still the lender of the last resort? What if the pound cannot be used in Scotland what currency is my pension and savings going to be in? Will I need to convert it back to pounds and will it be worth the same? Is SL still regulated by the FCA and the protection that offers?

There may be answers to them all but actually Mr Smith in Manchester who has all his life's savings with SL does not care and wants his funds where he knows what the rules and regulations are, he wants certainty and not confusion. That's all SL have done.

For someone who was a YES last week that's some shift :greengrin

(just kidding!)

[johnbc70]

If the UK votes to bin the EU in a few years time and the share price drops, will they move everything to France?

If Standard Life move all of their jobs out of Scotland without a second thought for their employees or damage to the Scottish economy, what incentive would I have as a Scot to keep any investments I had with that company?

Standard life may justify their actions as purely a business decision for the benefit of their investors .... that is their right.

But that works both ways ......... I for one would move any investment I had in Standard Life either to another Scottish firm or any firm who have not followed their example.

And what protection would your money have if Scotland has no central bank or lender of the last resort?

[NAE NOOKIE]

And what protection would your money have if Scotland has no central bank or lender of the last resort?

I'll take the bloody risk.

For me this is not all about money and never has been. The more I see the Better Together campaign encourage the climate of fear which encourages firms like Standard Life to leave the more I ask myself this:

If they care so much about Scotland, why is it that they seem so determined to promote a scenario where Scotland's task if there is a Yes vote will be made as hard as possible? Even if that is not their intention that is what they are doing.

What a way to go about things ....... to keep Scotland in the union lets try and make her look as unattractive a prospect and as lost a cause as possible. But at the same time hoist their stupid wee flag over Downing street to show how much we love them.

[Moulin Yarns]

They said the same prior to Devolution.

And they have said the same about the threat of coming out of Europe.

[#FromTheCapital]

Afraid it isn't nonsense. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity and Scotland will do ok as an independent country. The reason there isn't more surety is that the union parties have refused to discuss or negotiate prior to the ballot. We will use the pound, we will be able to pay for pensions, life will go on if Yes. It won't be milk and honey and skipping through the tulips but Scotland will be able to make their own decisions and have resources to pay for it. Take the leap.

It was complete nonsense and I take exception to an ex-pat poking fun at no voters when he will be relatively unaffected no matter what way the vote goes.
The yes/no vote is like a football rivalry. Let people have their views without taking the piss, try to understand where people are coming from (not a dig at you btw). I can see the argument for both sides although for my personal circumstances the no vote makes much more sense and it's very little to do with being scared.

[RyeSloan]

You seriously believe that. The institution has previous for this sort of thing given their previous pronouncements. If you look at their Board they are very right wing. Standard life work well in loads of other countries this pronouncement is nothing more than a threat intending to influence as their previous threat was.

The work in loads of other countries because they can point to the regulations they operate under...if they can't do that with any certainty then their business will be at risk.

[RyeSloan]

I'll take the bloody risk. For me this is not all about money and never has been. The more I see the Better Together campaign encourage the climate of fear which encourages firms like Standard Life to leave the more I ask myself this: If they care so much about Scotland, why is it that they seem so determined to promote a scenario where Scotland's task if there is a Yes vote will be made as hard as possible? Even if that is not their intention that is what they are doing. What a way to go about things ....... to keep Scotland in the union lets try and make her look as unattractive a prospect and as lost a cause as possible. But at the same time hoist their stupid wee flag over Downing street to show how much we love them.

You've got that the wrong way around.

It is the Yes campaigns clear inability to evidence how those risks and uncertainties will be mitigated that has prompted SL to say what they have.

Do you honestly think they are spending time and money on contingency plans for purely political motives?

And you may be happy to take the risk...billions of pounds probably won't and that's why they have to be seen to operate in a clearly defined jurisdiction with clear and unambiguous regulations.

Finally they did nothing to talk Scotland or Independence down...they simply laid out the unanswered questions that could result in significant harm to their business, customers and shareholders. You can claim it is scare mothering if you want but let's not ignore the fact that there is a large section of Scotland's economy based on financial services and a Yes vote will create a huge amount of uncertainty for them...SL are only articulating what many of them are thinking.

[Moulin Yarns]

Standard Life are simply letting people know what their plans are if there is a Yes vote and that is they will move some parts of the business to England.

If I am living in say Manchester and my pension and life savings are in SL then I would be worried what happens in the event of a Yes vote. Is the BoE still the lender of the last resort? What if the pound cannot be used in Scotland what currency is my pension and savings going to be in? Will I need to convert it back to pounds and will it be worth the same? Is SL still regulated by the FCA and the protection that offers?

There may be answers to them all but actually Mr Smith in Manchester who has all his life's savings with SL does not care and wants his funds where he knows what the rules and regulations are, he wants certainty and not confusion. That's all SL have done.

Similarly, Standard Life have publicy announced it is making plans for when the UK, in whatever form, votes to leave the EU.

It is in the business of assurance after all. Vote Yes, next week and you lose some part of Standard Life. rUK votes no to the EU, Scotland gets those jobs back again. :cb

[johnbc70]

Similarly, Standard Life have publicy announced it is making plans for when the UK, in whatever form, votes to leave the EU.

It is in the business of assurance after all. Vote Yes, next week and you lose some part of Standard Life. rUK votes no to the EU, Scotland gets those jobs back again. :cb

Assuming an iScotland is part of the EU? I have not seen anything that says that's a cast iron given. Again who knows, some say it won't be possible and others say it will. So it's a risk and as CEO of a company your job is to manage that risk.

[JeMeSouviens]

Assuming an iScotland is part of the EU? I have not seen anything that says that's a cast iron given. Again who knows, some say it won't be possible and others say it will. So it's a risk and as CEO of a company your job is to manage that risk.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9NcuGVtGfY

[Bristolhibby]

Single biggest threat to UK business is this in/out EU referendum that Tories/UKIP will lead us to.

If you want that vote No.

Exports struggling, multinationals pulling out as we no longer have an English speaking access to EU markets.

J

[JeMeSouviens]

And what protection would your money have if Scotland has no central bank or lender of the last resort?

The EU FSCS as long as you keep the money in any 1 account to < €100K. Should do for most?

Also, see ...

http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/money-banking/an-independent-scotland-should-use-the-pound-without-permission-from-ruk/


... and also also, Carney (it seems to me) left deliberate wiggle room by saying CU was "incompatible with sovereignty". It's not hard to imagine rUK will u-turn post-Yes while proclaiming that fiscal oversight and common banking regulation means that iScotland has ceded sovereignty (which is true to an extent, but it's about a million times more sovereign than Scotland is atm).

[Beefster]

Similarly, Standard Life have publicy announced it is making plans for when the UK, in whatever form, votes to leave the EU.

It is in the business of assurance after all. Vote Yes, next week and you lose some part of Standard Life. rUK votes no to the EU, Scotland gets those jobs back again. :cb

You're confusing Standard Life and Standard Life Investments. Standard Life have no plans to leave the UK.

I'm sure it's an honest mistake though.

[JeMeSouviens]

You've got that the wrong way around.

It is the Yes campaigns clear inability to evidence how those risks and uncertainties will be mitigated that has prompted SL to say what they have.

Do you honestly think they are spending time and money on contingency plans for purely political motives?

And you may be happy to take the risk...billions of pounds probably won't and that's why they have to be seen to operate in a clearly defined jurisdiction with clear and unambiguous regulations.

Finally they did nothing to talk Scotland or Independence down...they simply laid out the unanswered questions that could result in significant harm to their business, customers and shareholders. You can claim it is scare mothering if you want but let's not ignore the fact that there is a large section of Scotland's economy based on financial services and a Yes vote will create a huge amount of uncertainty for them...SL are only articulating what many of them are thinking.

They should definitely be doing contingency planning for various outcomes. If you think this announcement hasn't been timed and worded in such a way so as to ladle on large dollops of extra fear then you're either very naive or disingenuous.

SL are looking at shifting business to England registered companies. That doesn't mean they're about to jettison the thousands of jobs (and experience and skills) they currently have located in Edinburgh. But you can bet your last [insert tradeable currency of choice] that's how this is being spun even as we speak.

[johnbc70]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9NcuGVtGfY

So because this one person 'thinks' it will be fine then its true and will happen? What about Barosa who is President of the European Commission and has stated Scotland would not be part of the EU?

For every person that says yes Scotland will join the EU you have another that's say no it won't be possible.

And that's it, we just don't know.

[JimBHibees]

They should definitely be doing contingency planning for various outcomes. If you think this announcement hasn't been timed and worded in such a way so as to ladle on large dollops of extra fear then you're either very naive or disingenuous.

SL are looking at shifting business to England registered companies. That doesn't mean they're about to jettison the thousands of jobs (and experience and skills) they currently have located in Edinburgh. But you can bet your last [insert tradeable currency of choice] that's how this is being spun even as we speak.

Absolutely spot on.

[NAE NOOKIE]

You've got that the wrong way around.

It is the Yes campaigns clear inability to evidence how those risks and uncertainties will be mitigated that has prompted SL to say what they have.

Do you honestly think they are spending time and money on contingency plans for purely political motives?

And you may be happy to take the risk...billions of pounds probably won't and that's why they have to be seen to operate in a clearly defined jurisdiction with clear and unambiguous regulations.

Finally they did nothing to talk Scotland or Independence down...they simply laid out the unanswered questions that could result in significant harm to their business, customers and shareholders. You can claim it is scare mothering if you want but let's not ignore the fact that there is a large section of Scotland's economy based on financial services and a Yes vote will create a huge amount of uncertainty for them...SL are only articulating what many of them are thinking.

I was referring to the BT campaign as a whole rather than Standard Life. The economic arguments go round and round and are never going to meet in the middle. Which is probably where they lie.

I don't pretend to be an economics expert, which is why by and large I have avoided getting involved in the technicalities of some of the discussions on here and why I didn't say that Standard Life were doing what they seem to intend for political reasons. But rather pointed out that in my view companies are being far from discouraged from taking this view by BT ...... Its hardly in their interest to do otherwise.

One thing has become clear to me:

Lets just say for a minute that BTs arguments regarding the inability of Scotland to flourish as an independent country are entirely accurate. Lets just say for a minute that the vast majority of companies based in Scotland will decide to move to London post independence.
Lets just say for a minute that Scotland is only a viable entity within the UK and that we are so tied into it that extraction is, and never will be possible, at least not without a disastrous outcome.

What does that make Scotland?

An equal partner in a partnership of countries?

A member of the UK?

Or a region of a lager entity which has drawn us into it so completely that we might as well start calling the place Scotlandshire and be done with it.

[JimBHibees]

So because this one person 'thinks' it will be fine then its true and will happen? What about Barosa who is President of the European Commission and has stated Scotland would not be part of the EU?

For every person that says yes Scotland will join the EU you have another that's say no it won't be possible.

And that's it, we just don't know.

Do you seriously think that an independent Scotland with its wealth and vast natural resources would not get into EU? Not a chance it would be knocked back.

[JeMeSouviens]

So because this one person 'thinks' it will be fine then its true and will happen? What about Barosa who is President of the European Commission and has stated Scotland would not be part of the EU?

For every person that says yes Scotland will join the EU you have another that's say no it won't be possible.

And that's it, we just don't know.

When Barrosso made his comments he was angling for UK support for his (failed) bid to become NATO secretary general.

How about Graham Avery (read the Bio at the bottom first if you think there's any way he'd have any kind of Nat-friendly leanings):

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmfaff/writev/643/m05.htm

To save you time, here's the summary:


In the debate on Scottish independence it is natural that opponents tend to exaggerate the difficulties of EU membership, while proponents tend to minimise them. This note tries to address the subject as objectively as possible. In summary it argues that:

· Arrangements for Scotland’s EU membership would need to be in place simultaneously with independence

· Scotland’s 5 million people, having been members of the EU for 40 years; have acquired rights as European citizens

· For practical and political reasons they could not be asked to leave the EU and apply for readmission

· Negotiations on the terms of membership would take place in the period between the referendum and the planned date of independence

· The EU would adopt a simplified procedure for the negotiations, not the traditional procedure followed for the accession of non-member countries

Lastly, a member state (the UK) could have formally requested a pre-referendum ruling from the EU. Wonder why they haven't?

[Gus]

Standard Life have slowly been pulling alot of it's business and downsizing in Edinburgh/Scotland since 1999, that's a fact, so they may have not left when devolution but plans have been put in place.

Yes voters would be very niave imo to believe that companies won't go in the event of Scotland going independent.

I am sure that the country with the vast wealth from oil will be able to cope with job losses though. :******:

[johnbc70]

Do you seriously think that an independent Scotland with its wealth and vast natural resources would not get into EU? Not a chance it would be knocked back.

That may be the case but can you point me in the direction where this is confirmed? Or is this an assumption?

[CropleyWasGod]

Standard Life have slowly been pulling alot of it's business and downsizing in Edinburgh/Scotland since 1999, that's a fact, so they may have not left when devolution but plans have been put in place.

Yes voters would be very niave imo to beleive that companies won't go in the event of Scotland going independent.

I am sure that the country with the vast wealth from oil will be able to cope with job losses though. :******:

Other than for regulatory reasons, why would they?

[johnbc70]

As I say for everyone that states its a given you will find another that states its not. Nobody knows.

[NAE NOOKIE]

So because this one person 'thinks' it will be fine then its true and will happen? What about Barosa who is President of the European Commission and has stated Scotland would not be part of the EU?

For every person that says yes Scotland will join the EU you have another that's say no it won't be possible.

And that's it, we just don't know.

That statement has been debunked by a number of sources and given his vested interest he is hardly objective. I'm also lead to believe its the case that he wont be in post come 2016. Even if Spain was against Scottish membership, surely they would have to come up with a better reason than possible encouragement of Catalan separatism.

The EU is a body committed to expansion. As a sovereign country ( not for example a breakaway region of Spain ) which will meet all of the requirements, on what basis would the EU deny us membership? It wouldn't make any sense and would be a direct contradiction of its previous history.

Even Turkey is bombed out for membership only due to its political instability, dodgy human rights record and retention of the death penalty. None of which could be applied to an independent Scotland.

There are also thousands of Scots living in EU counties as a result of freedom of movement and thousands of EU citizens living here under the same rule. What happens to them if we don't get in?

Yes the UK is currently in the EU ....... But for how long? If I was a betting man I would rather put my money on an independent Scotland being in the EU in 5 years time than I would the UK, with or without Scotland, still being in it 5 years from now.

[johnbc70]

That statement has been debunked by a number of sources and given his vested interest he is hardly objective. I'm also lead to believe its the case that he wont be in post come 2016. Even if Spain was against Scottish membership, surely they would have to come up with a better reason than possible encouragement of Catalan separatism.

The EU is a body committed to expansion. As a sovereign country ( not for example a breakaway region of Spain ) which will meet all of the requirements, on what basis would the EU deny us membership? It wouldn't make any sense and would be a direct contradiction of its previous history.

Even Turkey is bombed out for membership only due to its political instability, dodgy human rights record and retention of the death penalty. None of which could be applied to an independent Scotland.

So again can you show me where it's guaranteed Scotland will be part of the EU or is this an assumption?

Will say it again, nobody knows.

[CropleyWasGod]

So again can you show me where it's guaranteed Scotland will be part of the EU or is this an assumption?

Will say it again, nobody knows.

It's a gamble, sure.

But I'd rather gamble on being a citizen of a country that is kicking the door to get in, rather than one that may be kicking it to get out.

[JimBHibees]

That may be the case but can you point me in the direction where this is confirmed? Or is this an assumption?

Why do you think it wouldn't be the case? See the link above indicating Scottish people have EU citizenship and that cant be taken away.

As we know the Better together parties refused to negotiate prior to the referendum to enable this sort of fear and uncertainty to arise no doubt as a deliberate tactic. We do need to make up our own mind based on what is there and to me common sense would suggest there is no way the EU would not allow access to Scotland. We have something like the highest renewable energy industry in Europe.

[marinello59]

So again can you show me where it's guaranteed Scotland will be part of the EU or is this an assumption?

Will say it again, nobody knows.

I'm waiting for somebody from the No side to answer that one given that the Tories are intent on having a referendum on our continued membership.

[johnbc70]

Why do you think it wouldn't be the case?.

I don't know, that's the problem. Scotland could sail into the EU with no problems, or not. Nobody knows.

[JeMeSouviens]

I don't know, that's the problem. Scotland could sail into the EU with no problems, or not. Nobody knows.

Right, so we can either look for credible, independent sources (I've given you 2) or we can throw up our hands in horror about how hard it all is and go back to eating our cereal. :rolleyes:

[NAE NOOKIE]

So again can you show me where it's guaranteed Scotland will be part of the EU or is this an assumption?

Will say it again, nobody knows.

Nothing in life is guaranteed mate.

But you can make a reasonably accurate prediction based on previous circumstances and current evidence.

As things stand my guess is the chances of Scotland joining are about the same as Celtic winning the league and the chances of it not happening about the same as Celtic not winning it.

At the moment Celtic are 5th ..... I cant 'guarantee' that one of ICT, Hamilton or Dundee Utd wont win their remaining games and win the league. But I can predict given previous history and what I know about the clubs involved that such an outcome is highly unlikely.

[RyeSloan]

They should definitely be doing contingency planning for various outcomes. If you think this announcement hasn't been timed and worded in such a way so as to ladle on large dollops of extra fear then you're either very naive or disingenuous. SL are looking at shifting business to England registered companies. That doesn't mean they're about to jettison the thousands of jobs (and experience and skills) they currently have located in Edinburgh. But you can bet your last [insert tradeable currency of choice] that's how this is being spun even as we speak.

I think as SL are one of the biggest listed Scottish companies they probably feel they have a need to make a public announcement on their position.

Business by their nature tend to be anti change so maybe it was a politically motivated statement but maybe more likely a statement to protect their business rather than being directly politically motivated (I accept there may be some considerable cross over there!)

I get your point re the fact their registered businesses may move and their staff stay but business tend to follow their clients and if their business ends up needing to be registered out of rUK rather than Scotland I could easily see a move of SLI at the very least and ultimately SL following in due course.

[JeMeSouviens]

I think as SL are one of the biggest listed Scottish companies they probably feel they have a need to make a public announcement on their position.

Business by their nature tend to be anti change so maybe it was a politically motivated statement but maybe more likely a statement to protect their business rather than being directly politically motivated (I accept there may be some considerable cross over there!)

I get your point re the fact their registered businesses may move and their staff stay but business tend to follow their clients and if their business ends up needing to be registered out of rUK rather than Scotland I could easily see a move of SLI at the very least and ultimately SL following in due course.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/09/standard-life-far-right-board/

[xyz23jc]

Standard Life are simply letting people know what their plans are if there is a Yes vote and that is they will move some parts of the business to England.

If I am living in say Manchester and my pension and life savings are in SL then I would be worried what happens in the event of a Yes vote. Is the BoE still the lender of the last resort? What if the pound cannot be used in Scotland what currency is my pension and savings going to be in? Will I need to convert it back to pounds and will it be worth the same? Is SL still regulated by the FCA and the protection that offers?

There may be answers to them all but actually Mr Smith in Manchester who has all his life's savings with SL does not care and wants his funds where he knows what the rules and regulations are, he wants certainty and not confusion. That's all SL have done.

Why not ask your chums in BT, it's them who are against a currency union, partnership of equals my a***!

[7 Hills]

So again can you show me where it's guaranteed Scotland will be part of the EU or is this an assumption?

Will say it again, nobody knows.

There didn't seem to be a problem in absorbing several million East German citizens into the EU when German reunification happened. And what's the precedent for kicking just over 5 million current EU citizens out of the EU?

[xyz23jc]

That statement has been debunked by a number of sources and given his vested interest he is hardly objective. I'm also lead to believe its the case that he wont be in post come 2016. Even if Spain was against Scottish membership, surely they would have to come up with a better reason than possible encouragement of Catalan separatism.

The EU is a body committed to expansion. As a sovereign country ( not for example a breakaway region of Spain ) which will meet all of the requirements, on what basis would the EU deny us membership? It wouldn't make any sense and would be a direct contradiction of its previous history.

Even Turkey is bombed out for membership only due to its political instability, dodgy human rights record and retention of the death penalty. None of which could be applied to an independent Scotland.

There are also thousands of Scots living in EU counties as a result of freedom of movement and thousands of EU citizens living here under the same rule. What happens to them if we don't get in?

Yes the UK is currently in the EU ....... But for how long? If I was a betting man I would rather put my money on an independent Scotland being in the EU in 5 years time than I would the UK, with or without Scotland, still being in it 5 years from now.

Basques, Galicia and Andalucía looking on with interest too!

[JeMeSouviens]

Survation (Daily Record) has no Y swing at all!

Y 47 (n/c)
N 53 (n/c)

Polling was done 5-9 September so it will only partially have been impacted by the Yougov 51-49 poll and "new" powers timetable.

[NAE NOOKIE]

Basques, Galicia and Andalucía looking on with interest too!

Possibly, but their situations are entirely different from that of Scotland.

[Leith Green]

I think this is just too close to call.. Polls all in high 40s or low 50s, different polls saying different things.. This is gonna be close

[Bronson]

So the referendum is a week tomorrow, just wondering what the general consensus is amongst the hibs support.

I'm a yes voter myself:aok:

[silverhibee]

Footie only. :thumbsup:

[Hibbyradge]

YES, it's football only.

If you ask nicely, given the historic nature of the vote, the admins might make an exception on polling day. :dunno:

[Bronson]

Ah, I wasn't aware. It's a pretty huge deal though, surely they can let one wee poll slide?

[Scouse Hibee]

I have a rule about football, religion and politics, never shall they be discussed on the same platform. For me there is no connection between the three so I will just say I am voting for more footie :greengrin

[Billie Jo]

So the referendum is a week tomorrow, just wondering what the general consensus is amongst the hibs support.

I'm a yes voter myself:aok:

Me too :saltireflag

[Bristolhibby]

Possibly, but their situations are entirely different from that of Scotland.

They aren't countries for a start.

J

[Pretty Boy]

It's a big, fat yes from me.

[marinello59]

Yes.

[RyeSloan]

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2014/09/standard-life-far-right-board/

Hardly a revelation that a member of SL board has worked with JP Morgan or has ties to the City or indeed might be a member of a non profit organisation promoting London...nor indeed that they might be 'far right' or god forbid Tories!

I would hazard a guess that not too many boards of financial institutions are stuffed full of 'far left' socialist types campaigning for central government to control all.

[Stranraer]

Yes from me.

"Scotland must leave the United King-dumb" ​Morrissey

[JeMeSouviens]

Hardly a revelation that a member of SL board has worked with JP Morgan or has ties to the City or indeed might be a member of a non profit organisation promoting London...nor indeed that they might be 'far right' or god forbid Tories!

I would hazard a guess that not too many boards of financial institutions are stuffed full of 'far left' socialist types campaigning for central government to control all.

No, I have to admit, that would be mildly surprising!

[JohnStephens91]

I'm voting no. My mind has been made up since the beginning.

[xyz23jc]

Possibly, but their situations are entirely different from that of Scotland.

Nae really amigo, jist ither folk tryin tae get anither millstone fae aroon thir neck, autonomia y tal, me entiendes?
;)

[xyz23jc]

They aren't countries for a start.

J

Nae yit! Different cultures and set o values fae Espana tho! ;)

[xyz23jc]

Yes from me.

"Scotland must leave the United King-dumb" ​Morrissey

Kwality!

[SteveHFC]

Yes.

[Onceinawhile]

Voting yes as I want rid of trident. Voted lib dem at the last GE on the same reasoning.

[John_the_angus_hibby]

No from me. But I have never witnessed such an active debate. Sure not everyone (on either side) has a large grip on all facts, but I think the awakening again of politics is healthy.

But not on here please! I am getting enough of this on twitter FB etc!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

Voting yes as I want rid of trident. Voted lib dem at the last GE on the same reasoning.

I honestly think that Trident will stay regardless....an early casualty of the negotiations.

Part of the reason I'm still inclined to be a no...I want to vote yes but finding it hard to vote positively for such an ill defined concept.

If I was giving authority for negotiations then a vote on the final outcome I would vote Yes no problems at all.

[johnbc70]

Right, so we can either look for credible, independent sources (I've given you 2) or we can throw up our hands in horror about how hard it all is and go back to eating our cereal. :rolleyes:

Or you listen to the people that are or were actually in these positions to make these decisions who say its highly unlikely to happen. How silly of me to listen to the actual President of the EU or someone who used to be the European Commissioner for Monetary Union, what do they know about it. But I guess the have their own agenda, and you think everyone else who makes these decisions does not?

I sure someone will correct me but any new EU member must have 1) A Central Bank (we would not have one) 2) Agree to join the Euro (something Salmond has ruled out)

[HibeeLR]

It's a massive Yes from me! :)

[DaveF]

Voting yes as I want rid of trident. Voted lib dem at the last GE on the same reasoning.

I honestly think that Trident will stay regardless....an early casualty of the negotiations.

Part of the reason I'm still inclined to be a no...I want to vote yes but finding it hard to vote positively for such an ill defined concept.

If I was giving authority for negotiations then a vote on the final outcome I would vote Yes no problems at all.

Yet (I presume) you think that any currency agreement would not be a similar casualty in negotiations?

[BOB MARLEYS DUG]

Yes from me. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FJbmB9k2Y88#

[SteveHFC]

Yes from me. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FJbmB9k2Y88#

Great clip mate :thumbsup:

[MyJo]

Or you listen to the people that are or were actually in these positions to make these decisions who say its highly unlikely to happen. How silly of me to listen to the actual President of the EU or someone who used to be the European Commissioner for Monetary Union, what do they know about it. But I guess the have their own agenda, and you think everyone else who makes these decisions does not?

I sure someone will correct me but any new EU member must have 1) A Central Bank (we would not have one) 2) Agree to join the Euro (something Salmond has ruled out)

the argument is that we are not a "new" EU member as we have 5 million EU citizens living in our country who cannot have thier rights as EU citizens removed if we go independent so we would a different type of arrangement than a country outwith the Eurozone applying to join for the first time.

[johnbc70]

the argument is that we are not a "new" EU member as we have 5 million EU citizens living in our country who cannot have thier rights as EU citizens removed if we go independent so we would a different type of arrangement than a country outwith the Eurozone applying to join for the first time.

I get that, but I am just pointing out the people that actually decide these things say something completely different.

[Stranraer]

So every ITV newspaper headline was basically No propaganda.

[BOB MARLEYS DUG]

Great clip mate :thumbsup:

:greengrin

[7 Hills]

It's a big, fat yes from me.

Me ANAW!

[Sir David Gray]

It's been a while since I posted on this thread, almost a year to be exact.

With one week to go until polling day, I haven't really changed my mind over the last 12 months. I'll be voting "no" next week, not because I'm completely against the idea of Scotland being an independent country but because there's too many issues which, in my opinion, haven't been ironed out by those who are campaigning for independence.

I've no doubt that we would survive as a separate nation, given time we would probably even prosper as a separate nation. However I believe there's not been enough thought put into what life immediately after independence would look like and that scares me.

I also fail to see how leaving the UK and applying to join the EU, and all that would bring with it, fits into the idea of being an independent nation.

[worcesterhibby]

All the scaremongering about an Independent Scotland not being allowed the pound, or us losing all the defence jobs etc etc is nonsense. If Scotland votes yes, then all the negotiating power will be with Scotland for one big reason…Trident.

All parties in Westminster want to keep Trident because it makes them feel big and powerful and they get to rub up to the USA like a cat at feeding time, because they have nukes too. The rest of the UK have NO WHERE to base Nuclear submarines and the official westminster report in to how long it would take them to find a site, and build a nuclear submarine base estimated at least 10 years. That's if they can find anywhere else willing to have them (South Wales most likely). Much more likely is that it would rumble on for 15 or even 20 years before everything was agreed and built and ready and by then they will be looking at Trident 2. If Scotland don't agree to lease Faslane to the UK on a minimum 10 year lease while they get themselves sorted then the UK will effectively lose it's nuclear deterrent. Cameron is not going to like his big red button taken away, so it's going to be pretty easy for Scotland to negotiate pretty much anything it likes with a UK government after it votes for Independence.

It does mean we will be stuck with nukes for at least 10 years though.

[Mon Dieu4]

It's been a while since I posted on this thread, almost a year to be exact.

With one week to go until polling day, I haven't really changed my mind over the last 12 months. I'll be voting "no" next week, not because I'm completely against the idea of Scotland being an independent country but because there's too many issues which, in my opinion, haven't been ironed out by those who are campaigning for independence.

I've no doubt that we would survive as a separate nation, given time we would probably even prosper as a separate nation. However I believe there's not been enough thought put into what life immediately after independence would look like and that scares me.

I also fail to see how leaving the UK and applying to join the EU, and all that would bring with it, fits into the idea of being an independent nation.

So in your theory no country who is in the EU is an independent nation?

[Albion Hibs]

But you're happy to stay with the Darling, Brown et al? Their time in office was considerably more damaging to your pension than the minor market jitters experienced by the markets on Monday.

FYI, If your pension was that badly affected by that news, then you are probably not diversified enough. You should seriously look into spreading your investment into other markets/asset types to lower your risk exposure to British companies.

the bit in bold. :top marks Did make me laugh and thanks for the advice.

Re darling brown etc, yes is the answer. Salmond was also in charge of scotland during this time, do you blame him? Fact if the matter is regardless who was in government and what policies were in place avoiding a global meltdown like that would have been impossible, unless of course the country in which you live take no part in the sector, or has no indirect links.

[johnbc70]

It's been a while since I posted on this thread, almost a year to be exact.

With one week to go until polling day, I haven't really changed my mind over the last 12 months. I'll be voting "no" next week, not because I'm completely against the idea of Scotland being an independent country but because there's too many issues which, in my opinion, haven't been ironed out by those who are campaigning for independence.

I've no doubt that we would survive as a separate nation, given time we would probably even prosper as a separate nation. However I believe there's not been enough thought put into what life immediately after independence would look like and that scares me.

I also fail to see how leaving the UK and applying to join the EU, and all that would bring with it, fits into the idea of being an independent nation.

Good post, kind of sums up my feelings as well. How can a nation be independent with a central bank in a foreign country..? Please nobody reply look at Germany, France etc as they SHARE a central bank that considers all members when making decisions. Why would the BoE consider Scotland, a foreign country, when making decisions about policy.

[Stantons Angel]

I like this sort of debating and its been good to read both YES and NO posters views without silly childish remarks taking over the posting.

Im voting YES with my heart and my head, I was born into a country that has been controlled by governments we didnt vote for. Our time is now and we must use this time for our futures. If not our own our sons and daughters and even our grandchildren.

Its their futures we are voting for. We have all lived under UK governments and i personally feel we have always come off second best in everything that happens.

The three musketeers on their shining steeds have come over the border when the polls predicted they had fallen behind. If they are offering powers AFTER the vote is decided why couldnt they have given them before this all came about?

Why are they flying the Scottish Saltire above 10 Downing Street when it was unacceptable to wave when a Scot won at Wimbeldon? Why are they going around English towns asking them to fly our flag to persuade us to stay? Even the English football supporters where singing Scotland Scotland get to F--K in Switzerland?

Its all so patronising and the best thing yet to push people to a YES vote!

At the end of the day it will all hinge on one question on a ballot paper "should Scotland become an Independent country" this is what your voting about. Your not voting because you have to like the wee fat jambo who leads the YES campaign. You are not voting for the SNP either you are voting for your country's future.

Please use your vote wisely and vote YES. GGTTH!!!

[MyJo]

It's been a while since I posted on this thread, almost a year to be exact.

With one week to go until polling day, I haven't really changed my mind over the last 12 months. I'll be voting "no" next week, not because I'm completely against the idea of Scotland being an independent country but because there's too many issues which, in my opinion, haven't been ironed out by those who are campaigning for independence.

I've no doubt that we would survive as a separate nation, given time we would probably even prosper as a separate nation. However I believe there's not been enough thought put into what life immediately after independence would look like and that scares me.

I also fail to see how leaving the UK and applying to join the EU, and all that would bring with it, fits into the idea of being an independent nation.

The fact that nobody knows what will happen post independence is a deliberate tactic by the UK government who flat out refused any form of pre-negotiation with the SNP to deliver answers to a lot of the questions people want answered to help them with their decision.

Westminster, better together and David Cameron have done their absolute best to ensure that the only answers people are getting are the ones they provide to scare and intimidate voters and push people towards a no vote.

A yes vote is taking a risk that we can control our own destiny and we have the ability to do it in Scotland, it's also putting our trust in our Scottish politicians to negotiate the best deal in breaking away from the UK because we are not allowed those answers until we make that decision blind to the consequences.

[The Harp Awakes]

It's been a while since I posted on this thread, almost a year to be exact.

With one week to go until polling day, I haven't really changed my mind over the last 12 months. I'll be voting "no" next week, not because I'm completely against the idea of Scotland being an independent country but because there's too many issues which, in my opinion, haven't been ironed out by those who are campaigning for independence.

I've no doubt that we would survive as a separate nation, given time we would probably even prosper as a separate nation. However I believe there's not been enough thought put into what life immediately after independence would look like and that scares me.

I also fail to see how leaving the UK and applying to join the EU, and all that would bring with it, fits into the idea of being an independent nation.

I think you are looking for certainty where there is none and that includes what life would be like in Scotland in both scenarios; a no or a yes vote next week. Nobody has a crystal ball.

For example, what would life be like in Scotland if we vote no and the UK ends up being governed by a Tory/UKIP coalition after next years general election? A realistic proposition.

Life is full of uncertainties but the bottom for me is that Holyrood with 100% control over Scottish affairs will always do the right thing for Scotland whereas a right wing Westminster Government will do what is right for the South East of England.

[Mibbes Aye]

I think you are looking for certainty where there is none and that includes what life would be like in Scotland in both scenarios; a no or a yes vote next week. Nobody has a crystal ball.

For example, what would life be like in Scotland if we vote no and the UK ends up being governed by a Tory/UKIP coalition after next years general election? A realistic proposition.

Life is full of uncertainties but the bottom for me is that Holyrood with 100% control over Scottish affairs will always do the right thing for Scotland whereas a right wing Westminster Government will do what is right for the South East of England.

I like your posts but I have to take issue with the last sentence.

The polls seem to show that around half of Scotland don't want an independent Holyrood.

Even if they did, you can't say an independent Holyrood would always do the right thing for Scotland - a party or a coalition will be in power, implementing policy that most likely a majority of Scots didn't vote for. It's not plausible to say they would be doing the 'right thing' by a Scottish voter's standard.

Incidentally, we've only had a majority Conservative government for three years in the last two decades at Westminster. I'm not seeing much evidence that they will form a majority any time soon either.

[NAE NOOKIE]

YES

Its simple for me ....... For all of my adult life I have wanted to see my country take its place in the international family of nations.

At this moment in time Scotland is of absolutely no consequence as a country. The truth is that our opinion only has any relevance at the UN, EU or anywhere else if it is in line with what England thinks. That is not anti English sentiment, with a population difference of over 6 to 1 how could it be any other way. As a constituent part of the UK we have no more influence than the north west of England on international affairs.

At home we suffer governments we did not vote for and are obliged to be grateful for the few crumbs thrown to us by way of the Barnett formula or devolution, all the while increasingly being labelled spongers and subsidy junkies.

In my opinion that is not a proper country ....... I don't care if folk from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe know where Scotland is and they just love Whisky and Bagpipes. They also know where California is and probably love the Beach boys and Baywatch .... none of that makes Scotland a proper country any more than California.

For me the choice is, do you want to live in Scotland or North Britain ...... If its North Britain that's your choice, but don't tell me you belong to a proper country like Slovenia or Denmark.

[The Harp Awakes]

I like your posts but I have to take issue with the last sentence.

The polls seem to show that around half of Scotland don't want an independent Holyrood.

Even if they did, you can't say an independent Holyrood would always do the right thing for Scotland - a party or a coalition will be in power, implementing policy that most likely a majority of Scots didn't vote for. It's not plausible to say they would be doing the 'right thing' by a Scottish voter's standard.

Incidentally, we've only had a majority Conservative government for three years in the last two decades at Westminster. I'm not seeing much evidence that they will form a majority any time soon either.

Fair enough, on reflection I was probably generalising too much in my last sentence.

However, in an independent Scotland, it is surely realistic to say that the Scottish Government would follow a populist, centre left agenda regardless of whether it was a coalition or majority Government, i.e., will implement policies which would be centre left in tune with the majority view. By contrast, Westminster, regardless of whether Scotland was independent or not would follow a centre/right agenda or possibly a right wing agenda if UKIP in coalition, i.e., completely out of tune with the will of the Scottish people.

[Amit]

I'm not against independence but think there should be some form of progression towards it or at least more preparation before becoming independent otherwise there is too much uncertainty.

I'm NO but not because I've been convinced by the pro-union people, it is because I'm not confident in the case Salmond has presented.

I can understand why some people choose to vote with their hearts and they are entitled to do so. Unfortunately, my head wins this time but I'm still proud to be Scottish and love this country.

[The Baldmans Comb]

YES

Its simple for me ....... For all of my adult life I have wanted to see my country take its place in the international family of nations.

At this moment in time Scotland is of absolutely no consequence as a country. The truth is that our opinion only has any relevance at the UN, EU or anywhere else if it is in line with what England thinks. That is not anti English sentiment, with a population difference of over 6 to 1 how could it be any other way. As a constituent part of the UK we have no more influence than the north west of England on international affairs.

At home we suffer governments we did not vote for and are obliged to be grateful for the few crumbs thrown to us by way of the Barnett formula or devolution, all the while increasingly being labelled spongers and subsidy junkies.

In my opinion that is not a proper country ....... I don't care if folk from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe know where Scotland is and they just love Whisky and Bagpipes. They also know where California is and probably love the Beach boys and Baywatch .... none of that makes Scotland a proper country any more than California.

For me the choice is, do you want to live in Scotland or North Britain ...... If its North Britain that's your choice, but don't tell me you belong to a proper country like Slovenia or Denmark.

I would completely agree with that and add that I see England's political future as one of the Tories/UKIP coalition or a Labour/UKIP coalition. Not that it really matters as there is so little to differentiate between any of them.

I see nothing in the mainstream English parties that I remotely want to be a part of especially illegal wars, a privatised NHS and the continuing attacks on the more vulnerable members of society summarised by a "flipping" food bank in my local Sainsbury.

Scotland would be a far better and happier place if it was run by Scottish people in the same way as any normal country.

[John_the_angus_hibby]

the argument is that we are not a "new" EU member as we have 5 million EU citizens living in our country who cannot have thier rights as EU citizens removed if we go independent so we would a different type of arrangement than a country outwith the Eurozone applying to join for the first time.

Rubbish. We will have split from an EU country. Out citizens will be of a newly Independent Scotland and not EU citizens. Whilst there may be issues around duel nationality (this is unclear) the State itself is the entity that will have to apply. On what basis and evidence from the EU do you have that they would consider us a "different type of arrangement"? Boroso et al have been actually quite clear on this. Also - as we all know - Spain and some other countries with similar issues will not want an easy application as it sets precedence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[John_the_angus_hibby]

YES

Its simple for me ....... For all of my adult life I have wanted to see my country take its place in the international family of nations.

At this moment in time Scotland is of absolutely no consequence as a country. The truth is that our opinion only has any relevance at the UN, EU or anywhere else if it is in line with what England thinks. That is not anti English sentiment, with a population difference of over 6 to 1 how could it be any other way. As a constituent part of the UK we have no more influence than the north west of England on international affairs.

At home we suffer governments we did not vote for and are obliged to be grateful for the few crumbs thrown to us by way of the Barnett formula or devolution, all the while increasingly being labelled spongers and subsidy junkies.

In my opinion that is not a proper country ....... I don't care if folk from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe know where Scotland is and they just love Whisky and Bagpipes. They also know where California is and probably love the Beach boys and Baywatch .... none of that makes Scotland a proper country any more than California.

For me the choice is, do you want to live in Scotland or North Britain ...... If its North Britain that's your choice, but don't tell me you belong to a proper country like Slovenia or Denmark.

It's not a full state as Denmark etc. it's a Nation and part of a political Union with another couple of Nations. I am on the East Coast and don't fall into general Scottish west coast politics/views either. But that's life, we are all minorities from some view point. I am 100% OK with being a Scot within Great Britain. I don't get the Gov I vote for a lot of the time either, but that is a lesser known side effect of democracy. It's a hard No from me as I don't want to belong to a minnow in the UN (as if we would get more say as an indep Country, yes right). The UK is hardly listened too, so I don't see why you would get more of a voice off the security council.

And there is no such thing as North Britain, it's Great Britain and the is a Northern part. So yes proud to be a Scot from the North of Great Britain.

But as a couple of the posters have stated, the debate has been interesting and in the main healthy (street yobs and cyber prats aside). I do believe we need more determination, indeed the Union is not 100% fit for purpose and needs change. A more federal approach would suit me.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[John_the_angus_hibby]

I would completely agree with that and add that I see England's political future as one of the Tories/UKIP coalition or a Labour/UKIP coalition. Not that it really matters as there is so little to differentiate between any of them.

I see nothing in the mainstream English parties that I remotely want to be a part of especially illegal wars, a privatised NHS and the continuing attacks on the more vulnerable members of society summarised by a "flipping" food bank in my local Sainsbury.

Scotland would be a far better and happier place if it was run by Scottish people in the same way as any normal country.

I am also v worried about the drift to the right in national politics (Tory/UKIP). I actually believe the Tories may split actually as they have never won full power from their base. Which has become localised and more right wing over the last 3 decades. In fact I believe a lab Gov at the next election is a stick on.

My main issue I feel and have a massive affinity with my British identity. However if I put that aside, my main issue is not knowing what I am saying yes to. I actually believe that if a yes comes to pass then the UK Gov will legislate (as it's within their gift to) to have a final determination post negotiated settlement under the guise of "now you know what the settlement is, The Scottish people can decide if this is the Indy they want." If they announced it now, then it just would increase the yes vote as their would be a safety net.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[7 Hills]

Rubbish. We will have split from an EU country. Out citizens will be of a newly Independent Scotland and not EU citizens. Whilst there may be issues around duel nationality (this is unclear) the State itself is the entity that will have to apply. On what basis and evidence from the EU do you have that they would consider us a "different type of arrangement"? Boroso et al have been actually quite clear on this. Also - as we all know - Spain and some other countries with similar issues will not want an easy application as it sets precedence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So how were several million East German citizens absorbed into the EU upon German reunification? And what is the precedent for kicking out just over 5 million EU citizens from the EU? I have already asked these questions earlier in this thread, and haven't been offered a reply as yet.

[Gus]

Standard Life, BP, Lloyds and RBS all coming out with their contingency plans now if Scotland votes yes.....

[johnbc70]

So how were several million East German citizens absorbed into the EU upon German reunification? And what is the precedent for kicking out just over 5 million EU citizens from the EU? I have already asked these questions earlier in this thread, and haven't been offered a reply as yet.

Completely different circumstances. The East Germans were joining a state already in the EU not separating from one. Yes there were no formal discussions but the West Germans made many financial guarantees and they were accepted. There is no precedent for 'kicking out' 5M EU citizens just as there is no precedent for a brand new state to be accepted without any issues or problems. Look at what the people who make these decisions are saying.

[JimBHibees]

It's been a while since I posted on this thread, almost a year to be exact.

With one week to go until polling day, I haven't really changed my mind over the last 12 months. I'll be voting "no" next week, not because I'm completely against the idea of Scotland being an independent country but because there's too many issues which, in my opinion, haven't been ironed out by those who are campaigning for independence.

I've no doubt that we would survive as a separate nation, given time we would probably even prosper as a separate nation. However I believe there's not been enough thought put into what life immediately after independence would look like and that scares me.

I also fail to see how leaving the UK and applying to join the EU, and all that would bring with it, fits into the idea of being an independent nation.

The unionist parties didn't allow pre negotiation of some of the main issues deliberately. We are a rich country and there is no doubt we could be successful. There was a debate on French TV which listed Scotland as the 14th richest country in the world above both France and Germany. We can be successful and self determined.

[marinello59]

The unionist parties didn't allow pre negotiation of some of the main issues deliberately. We are a rich country and there is no doubt we could be successful. There was a debate on French TV which listed Scotland as the 14th richest country in the world above both France and Germany. We can be successful and self determined.

And why should they? I don't think either side would want to play their hand before the decision was made. Would Salmond want us going in to the vote knowing that he had already made concessions on some of the stuff in the White Paper in order to get a currency deal done for example? The talking can start for real after we vote Yes.

[Mon Dieu4]

Standard Life, BP, Lloyds and RBS all coming out with their contingency plans now if Scotland votes yes.....

Which entails moving their registered offices from Edinburgh to London, hardly the end of western civilisation in Scotland,the headlines state banks to leave Scotland then if you actually read the articles they say they will move their registered offices, since Lloyds HQ is already in London there will be no change

[Jack]

Rubbish. We will have split from an EU country. Out citizens will be of a newly Independent Scotland and not EU citizens. Whilst there may be issues around duel nationality (this is unclear) the State itself is the entity that will have to apply. On what basis and evidence from the EU do you have that they would consider us a "different type of arrangement"? Boroso et al have been actually quite clear on this. Also - as we all know - Spain and some other countries with similar issues will not want an easy application as it sets precedence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The EU would only officially answer the question about what would happen in the event of Scotland becoming an independent country if it was asked by Westminster.

Why don't you think Westminster asked the question so that we could all be clear?

[7 Hills]

Completely different circumstances. The East Germans were joining a state already in the EU not separating from one. Yes there were no formal discussions but the West Germans made many financial guarantees and they were accepted. There is no precedent for 'kicking out' 5M EU citizens just as there is no precedent for a brand new state to be accepted without any issues or problems. Look at what the people who make these decisions are saying.

Wow! As someone who was on the brink of voting "Yes", last week, you really got "On Message" with the NOSE, quite quickly!

[Jack]

And why should they? I don't think either side would want to play their hand before the decision was made. Would Salmond want us going in to the vote knowing that he had already made concessions on some of the stuff in the White Paper in order to get a currency deal done for example? The talking can start for real after we vote Yes.

As an observation I found it a bit hypocritical that Better Together campaign have made a huge thing around the contingency plans of companies like Standard Life but are not willing to discuss their own contingency plans.

Do they not have a plan B?

[marinello59]

As an observation I found it a bit hypocritical that Better Together campaign have made a huge thing around the contingency plans of companies like Standard Life but are not willing to discuss their own contingency plans.

Do they not have a plan B?

I don't think they do. The assumption for so long was that they would win so no plan B was needed. When we vote Yes next week Westminster is going to be totally unprepared for what lies ahead.

[RyeSloan]

And why should they? I don't think either side would want to play their hand before the decision was made. Would Salmond want us going in to the vote knowing that he had already made concessions on some of the stuff in the White Paper in order to get a currency deal done for example? The talking can start for real after we vote Yes.

Exactly. And exactly why I'm struggling to be a Yes. We are being asked to vote on something that no one has any idea of what it means!

The Canadian question was much better and if I was offered that question in the ballot paper I would be voting Yes.

Sadly we are being offered to vote on a concept that will be formalised afterwards. I find people's total acceptance of that quite baffling.

[RyeSloan]

So more companies moving registrations and potentially jobs south today...I suppose all of them have far right boards and are politically motivated in their statements?

On the flip side it's a shame we have not heard more from Angus Grossart....now there's a proper Scottish money man!!

[RyeSloan]

Yet (I presume) you think that any currency agreement would not be a similar casualty in negotiations?

Its a good question...I'm not sure...that will be the biggest ticket item so it will depend how much whoever is doing the negotiations for Scotland (do we know who they are yet?) will be prepared to give to get it. I would guess Trident alone won't be enough but honestly god only knows and exactly why I would like a vote on whether to accept the negotiated agreement.

[DaveF]

Standard Life, BP, Lloyds and RBS all coming out with their contingency plans now if Scotland votes yes.....

Lloyds have stated that there is no impact to employees, they expect to remain a significant employer (whatever the result) and that any re-location is a legal procedure with no immediate change. In the event of a YES, discussions would be had with both govt's to manage the way forward.

Seems like reasonable and grown up thinking to me and not the panic stricken race to leave the country, No would have you believe.

[Jack]

I don't think they do. The assumption for so long was that they would win so no plan B was needed. When we vote Yes next week Westminster is going to be totally unprepared for what lies ahead.

I put that down to their arrogance around all things Scottish and their general disdain for the Scottish people.

At the start of the campaign the Scots weren't bright enough to run their own country, the reasons too complicated to explain to them.

A proper No campaign would have have the leaders of the UK parties coming up here to court us in a strategic, organised way. They certainly wouldn't be cancelling PMQs at 24 hours notice! Incidentally can anyone remember the last time that happened?

Cameron saw Queen Liz on Sunday and while outwardly she is neutral its not difficult to imagine privately she'll not be sitting on the fence. I reckon Cameron met the angriest Queen there's ever been and told him in no uncertain terms Scotland must remain in the UK or he'll be tried for Treason. His knighthood is on the line, his head is in the noose!

[ACLeith]

...... A more federal approach would suit me.
I agree with this, but Westminster vetoed anything on the ballot paper other than a polarisation. And we know the reason - they assumed NO would win and they could forget about us again for a long time.

That is why I am voting YES, the only chance to begin the process of moving towards my preferred solution.

[Just Alf]

I agree with this, but Westminster vetoed anything on the ballot paper other than a polarisation. And we know the reason - they assumed NO would win and they could forget about us again for a long time.

That is why I am voting YES, the only chance to begin the process of moving towards my preferred solution.

Spot on :thumbsup:

I hear so many people say similar, I tell you what, if it is a yes then the veto of other options in the paper will be seen as a massive error.

[Beefster]

Standard Life, BP, Lloyds and RBS all coming out with their contingency plans now if Scotland votes yes.....

John Lewis Partnership chairman has said that we'll probably get higher prices in their shops too.

Bloody right-wing fat cats only looking out for the interests of their shareholders. To be honest, I've never been a fan of that shareholder who works behind the till in the kitchen department.

[DaveF]

John Lewis Partnership chairman has said that we'll probably get higher prices in their shops too.

Bloody right-wing fat cats only looking out for the interests of their shareholders. To be honest, I've never been a fan of that shareholder who works behind the till in the kitchen department.

If that's the 5live interview he did, then I'm not sure he did say that Beefster. He said there would be a concern (or words to that effect) but he never said prices would probably go up IIRC.

[johnbc70]

If that's the 5live interview he did, then I'm not sure he did say that Beefster. He said there would be a concern (or words to that effect) but he never said prices would probably go up IIRC.

He was quoted as saying 'And it is the case that it does cost more money to trade in parts of Scotland and therefore those hard costs, in the event of a Yes vote, are more likely to be passed on'.

[DaveF]

He was quoted as saying 'And it is the case that it does cost more money to trade in parts of Scotland and therefore those hard costs, in the event of a Yes vote, are more likely to be passed on'.

Not sure I understand that? Is he saying it already costs more for the remote area's but JL are meeting those costs just now and only in an iS wil they pass it on? Is that right?

[Hibs7]

Would all you yes voters care to tell me where Scotland ( Salmond) will get the money to provide for all the free child care. ( promised) the reduced retrial age and increased pensions .. You are all in la la land if you believe we as an independent country can afford Salmonds dreams, plus the increased Immigration ( we have more than enough on our streets already ) he has promised and membership of the EU ( I want out of that gravy train )

[johnbc70]

Not sure I understand that? Is he saying it already costs more for the remote area's but JL are meeting those costs just now and only in an iS wil they pass it on? Is that right?

I think so yes, they can share the costs across the whole network in the UK now.

[Moulin Yarns]

Standard Life, BP, Lloyds and RBS all coming out with their contingency plans now if Scotland votes yes.....

Official statement is a bit different from the doom and gloom as reported in the media


http://www.rbs.com/news/2014/09/statement-in-response-to-press-speculation-on-re-domicile.html

[DaveF]

I think so yes, they can share the costs across the whole network in the UK now.

But food and petrol costs more in remote area's just now. Why don't these kind, caring companies level that out just now?

Not an iS discussion - more a general point really.

[johnbc70]

But food and petrol costs more in remote area's just now. Why don't these kind, caring companies level that out just now?

Not an iS discussion - more a general point really.

Market forces I suspect. You can buy that Sony TV from John Lewis, Curry's or order it online if you want. They need to keep the price competitive or customers go elsewhere.

If your buying food or petrol then where else do you go? Not as much consumer choice so they can charge more.

[CropleyWasGod]

Would all you yes voters care to tell me where Scotland ( Salmond) will get the money to provide for all the free child care. ( promised) the reduced retrial age and increased pensions .. You are all in la la land if you believe we as an independent country can afford Salmonds dreams, plus the increased Immigration ( we have more than enough on our streets already ) he has promised and membership of the EU ( I want out of that gravy train )
Is that you, Nigel? :)

We (Scotland that is, whoever we elect) would get the money from the same place we've had it for the last 15 years ie the Scottish tax payer. The difference is....we'd get all of it, and not have anything hacked off it for wars and Trident.

[Moulin Yarns]

Is that you, Nigel? :)

We'd probably get the money from the same place we've had it for the last 15 years ie the Scottish tax payer. The difference is....we'd get all of it, and not have anything hacked off it for wars and Trident.

Not forgetting the increase of tax accrued from a higher working population including immigrant workers.

[Beefster]

If that's the 5live interview he did, then I'm not sure he did say that Beefster. He said there would be a concern (or words to that effect) but he never said prices would probably go up IIRC.

I heard the Five Live interview and you're right, I don't think he said it during that. It's being reported that he said it during a R4 interview IIRC.

[YehButNoBut]

John Lewis Partnership chairman has said that we'll probably get higher prices in their shops too.

Bloody right-wing fat cats only looking out for the interests of their shareholders. To be honest, I've never been a fan of that shareholder who works behind the till in the kitchen department.

If that is the case then we stop shopping at his store there are many other options.

[CropleyWasGod]

If that is the case then we stop shopping at his store there are many other options.

..in which case they pay off staff.

Not a smart move IMO.

[JimBHibees]

And why should they? I don't think either side would want to play their hand before the decision was made. Would Salmond want us going in to the vote knowing that he had already made concessions on some of the stuff in the White Paper in order to get a currency deal done for example? The talking can start for real after we vote Yes.

It is up to them however please then dont base your whole campaign on the risks based on uncertainty.

[JimBHibees]

Wow! As someone who was on the brink of voting "Yes", last week, you really got "On Message" with the NOSE, quite quickly!

Yep a transformation Lazarus would be proud of. :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

Would all you yes voters care to tell me where Scotland ( Salmond) will get the money to provide for all the free child care. ( promised) the reduced retrial age and increased pensions .. You are all in la la land if you believe we as an independent country can afford Salmonds dreams, plus the increased Immigration ( we have more than enough on our streets already ) he has promised and membership of the EU ( I want out of that gravy train )

If free child care gets more parents working then they'll pay more tax and it pays for itself. That's why there's no point doing it in a devolved setup as we pay the costs of provision but don't get the benefit of increased tax revenue. Of course, if it doesn't increase working numbers it won't work and will be scrapped.

There is no plan to lower retiral age, just a promise to review whether we still need to raise it post-independence. My expectation (fwiw) is that we will still need to raise it.

Increased immigration increases the working age population, and increases the total tax take. The myth of "immigrant scroungers" is Daily Mail/UKIP pish. Scotland needs population growth, so we need to attract migrants or get making babies!

[JeMeSouviens]

So more companies moving registrations and potentially jobs south today...I suppose all of them have far right boards and are politically motivated in their statements?

On the flip side it's a shame we have not heard more from Angus Grossart....now there's a proper Scottish money man!!

As if by magic ...

Angus Grossart, chairman of merchant bank Noble Grossart and one of the most influential figures in the Scottish financial establishment, said some commentary on the referendum’s market impact had been “severely overstated” and people should “stay cool and not panic”.

“I think it is getting out of hand, a severe overreaction,” he said. “The FTSE seems perfectly stable today, but to hear some of the comments you almost expect people to be predicting a plague of locusts or mice next.”

[JeMeSouviens]

Support from a FTSE-100 company! He'll be blackballed. :wink:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/sep/11/aberdeen-asset-management-boss-backs-independent-scotland

[Beefster]

If that is the case then we stop shopping at his store there are many other options.

Yup, we should definitely be pushing one of the best [retailer] employers out of Scotland and losing hundreds/thousands of jobs.

Someone else recommended forcing RBS to leave an independent Scotland with the loss of tens of thousands of jobs.

They're only people, right?

[Leith Green]

How very interesting, the post from pretty boy yesterday referring to a leak in the No campaigns private polls suggested they were losing....

Seems the leak from an unknown No m.p , was made to Faisal Islam, sky's political editor.. Its on twitter, Yes people seem to respect him and don't seem to doubt his version of events

If that were to be believed, then it coincides with Rupert Murdoch saying Yes campaigns private polls had them 54 to 46 on Sunday.. It would also go along way to help explain the completely shocking panic reaction from Westminster

It would also call into doubt the integrity and timing of these polls by you gov and survation, who are pulling their strings??

[Beefster]

Support from a FTSE-100 company! He'll be blackballed. :wink:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/sep/11/aberdeen-asset-management-boss-backs-independent-scotland

Not exactly. His opinion is that Scotland will be successful, irrespective of the result. Slightly different to advocating a yes vote.

Anyway, why has Gilbert not been attacked for wading into the debate?

[Leith Green]

Oh and forgot to add, the leak also suggested that the polls were narrowing well before the 2nd debate

[JeMeSouviens]

Not exactly. His opinion is that Scotland will be successful, irrespective of the result. Slightly different to advocating a yes vote.

Anyway, why has Gilbert not been attacked for wading into the debate?

Because he's on my side (wasn't that the bleeding obvious?) :wink: ... and he's fairly balanced and he's not trying to create the impression that a shift of business between group companies registered in different places in response to an as yet unquantifiable risk automatically means thousands of jobs will go which, whether you admit it or not, is the current BTNT strategy du jour.

[Beefster]

How very interesting, the post from pretty boy yesterday referring to a leak in the No campaigns private polls suggested they were losing....

Seems the leak from an unknown No m.p , was made to Faisal Islam, sky's political editor.. Its on twitter, Yes people seem to respect him and don't seem to doubt his version of events

If that were to be believed, then it coincides with Rupert Murdoch saying Yes campaigns private polls had them 54 to 46 on Sunday.. It would also go along way to help explain the completely shocking panic reaction from Westminster

It would also call into doubt the integrity and timing of these polls by you gov and survation, who are pulling their strings??

I'm dubious that the 'leak' is actually true. It's not on Islam's Twitter feed AFAIK and it doesn't appear to be on the Sky News site. Without confirmation, it's no more reliable than me posting on Twitter than Olivia Munn has proposed (which I'd have to turn down as I'm married).

Do the Yes people trust Islam?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11058007/Alex-Salmond-criticises-leading-political-journalist-during-heated-interview.html

It's more likely that the loons on Twitter trust whoever it takes to justify their opinions or give them optimism.

Incidentally, IIRC, Survation were held up on here as the paragon of polling methods when their results were closer than everyone else.

[NAE NOOKIE]

If free child care gets more parents working then they'll pay more tax and it pays for itself. That's why there's no point doing it in a devolved setup as we pay the costs of provision but don't get the benefit of increased tax revenue. Of course, if it doesn't increase working numbers it won't work and will be scrapped.

There is no plan to lower retiral age, just a promise to review whether we still need to raise it post-independence. My expectation (fwiw) is that we will still need to raise it.

Increased immigration increases the working age population, and increases the total tax take. The myth of "immigrant scroungers" is Daily Mail/UKIP pish. Scotland needs population growth, so we need to attract migrants or get making babies!

Totally agree ......... I spent over a year interviewing people coming into Scotland, in that time the ones who asked about benefits were a handful out of thousands. The overwhelming majority were here to work and send money home ... by and large they were doing jobs that employers were finding hard to fill ..... digging up vegetables, that sort of thing.

The Hungarians were the cheeriest and funny to say the Australians were mostly a miserable bunch .... probably the weather.

[JeMeSouviens]

I'm dubious that the 'leak' is actually true. It's not on Islam's Twitter feed AFAIK and it doesn't appear to be on the Sky News site. Without confirmation, it's no more reliable than me posting on Twitter than Olivia Munn has proposed (which I'd have to turn down as I'm married).

Do the Yes people trust Islam?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11058007/Alex-Salmond-criticises-leading-political-journalist-during-heated-interview.html

It's more likely that the loons on Twitter trust whoever it takes to justify their opinions or give them optimism.

Incidentally, IIRC, Survation were held up on here as the paragon of polling methods when their results were closer than everyone else.

Still there on his twitter feed ...


Faisal Islam @faisalislam · 15h

@OMalleyAndrew @FitzyFan1 Dundee lost, and Glasgow looking likely too... Difficult reception amongst labour voters on the doorstep.

Faisal Islam @faisalislam · 15h

@OMalleyAndrew @FitzyFan1 important No campaigner was "bereft" at internal polling, said it was already getting tighter before 2nd debate..

[Leith Green]

I'm dubious that the 'leak' is actually true. It's not on Islam's Twitter feed AFAIK and it doesn't appear to be on the Sky News site. Without confirmation, it's no more reliable than me posting on Twitter than Olivia Munn has proposed (which I'd have to turn down as I'm married).

Do the Yes people trust Islam?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11058007/Alex-Salmond-criticises-leading-political-journalist-during-heated-interview.html

It's more likely that the loons on Twitter trust whoever it takes to justify their opinions or give them optimism.

Incidentally, IIRC, Survation were held up on here as the paragon of polling methods when their results were closer than everyone else.


It is on his twitter, i read it there myself..

[JeMeSouviens]

Economist (and disclaimer: former SNP politician) George Kerevan answers Paul Krugman and also provides a useful 101 on monetary policy:

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-opinion/9725-paul-krugman-what-the-heck

[allmodcons]

Not exactly. His opinion is that Scotland will be successful, irrespective of the result. Slightly different to advocating a yes vote.

Anyway, why has Gilbert not been attacked for wading into the debate?

Probably because he's been fairly neutral.
Bascially saying that either way, Yes or No, the financial sector can be successful.
Those who are being attacked are completely entrenched Unionists who continually talk down the prospects of an iScotland.

[JeMeSouviens]

Is it just me or has it occurred to anyone else that the apocalyptic vision we're currently getting bombarded with is remarkably similar to Doncaster/Regan and their post-Hun armageddon?

How did that turn out? :wink:

[Beefster]

Still there on his twitter feed ...


It is on his twitter, i read it there myself..

I'm obviously being a dum-dum because I still can't find it on his actual feed. No matter. I trust you guys!


Probably because he's been fairly neutral.
Bascially saying that either way, Yes or No, the financial sector can be successful.
Those who are being attacked are completely entrenched Unionists who continually talk down the prospects of an iScotland.

So businesses and business leaders are allowed to participate only when they sit on the fence? Shouldn't anyone/organisation be allowed an opinion irrespective of whether we agree with it or not?

[Leith Green]

I'm obviously being a dum-dum because I still can't find it on his actual feed. No matter. I trust you guys!



So businesses and business leaders are allowed to participate only when they sit on the fence? Shouldn't anyone/organisation be allowed an opinion irrespective of whether we agree with it or not?


Suppose it depends on their agenda

[Leith Green]

The funniest one is RBS having a say, correct me if im wrong but arent their biggest shareholder the Treasury??

And same goes with standard life, ex tories etc at board level

[allmodcons]

I'm obviously being a dum-dum because I still can't find it on his actual feed. No matter. I trust you guys!



So businesses and business leaders are allowed to participate only when they sit on the fence? Shouldn't anyone/organisation be allowed an opinion irrespective of whether we agree with it or not?

Opinion is fine when it is balanced and fair.

Different story when the 'opinion' is a blatant attempt to scare ordinary people towards a 'No' vote.

Read Martin Gilberts comments and contrast them with the one sided contributions of those entrenched establishment figures who would have believe the financial sector in an iScotland would be a complete disaster (not mediocre, not poor, but disastrous). Do you really believe this extreme pish!

Anyway, who gives, despite their best efforts to make our country sound like a complete basket case economy it isn't working.

[JeMeSouviens]

What RBS is saying on the inside:


Letter from Ross McEwan, RBS Chief Executive to staff

Dear colleagues

We have today made a statement to the market (see below), providing information on our contingency planning in the event of a Yes vote in next week’s referendum on Scottish independence. As you will have seen over the last twenty four hours, other Scottish headquartered financial institutions have made public statements about their intentions. This served to fuel media speculation about our own plans, and in those circumstances, it became necessary for us to update the market on aspects of our contingency planning.

It is my view as Chief Executive that any decision to move our registered headquarters should have no impact on everyday banking services used by our customers in Scotland and the rest of the British Isles. This is a technical procedure regarding the location of our registered head office. It is not an intention to move operations or jobs.

Our current business in Scotland, including the personal and business bank, IT and operations, human resources and many other functions, are here because of the skills and knowledge of our people, and the sound business environment. So far, I see no reason why this would change should we implement our contingency plans.

It is always my aim to ensure we inform our staff about such issues at the earliest opportunity. I know many of you will have already heard about this first in the media. My apologies for that, on this occasion this was unavoidable.

Over the next week, and beyond, we will continue to update you whenever appropriate.

Ross McEwan

Chief Executive

[Beefster]

Suppose it depends on their agenda

Why? You've got an agenda, I've got an agenda, the Herald has an agenda, the Scotsman has an agenda and so on. Why should a business leader or a business' opinion be treated any differently?

[Beefster]

Opinion is fine when it is balanced and fair.

I must have a completely different notion of free speech than some of you on here.

[JeMeSouviens]

From the Lancet:



The Lancet, Early Online Publication, 10 September 2014
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved.

Privatisation of the Scottish NHS: TTIP and independence

Mike Lean aEmail Address, Graham Watt a, Hugh Bishop b, Anne Mullin c, Kenneth Barker d, on behalf of 51 signatories

Neil Bennet (Sept 6, p 843)1 has given stark warnings about irrevocable future privatisation of the National Health Service (NHS) as a result of the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). This is an even more serious issue for Scotland, as people decide how to vote on its independence on Sept 18, 2014. The Scottish NHS would inevitably be drawn into TTIP and privatisation, because the TTIP agreement is with the UK Government in Westminster. There is no opt-out possible for the currently devolved Scottish NHS.
The planning behind UK involvement in TTIP appears to go back to Margaret Thatcher's Centre for Policy Studies in the 1980s, designing reforms to open up public services for privatisation.2 Throughout, either Westminster has not thought about implications for NHS Scotland and the devolved health administrations in Wales and Northern Ireland, or has considered TTIP a covert vehicle for forcing the privatisation agenda. Either way, Scotland has no voice in matters of great importance to its people. For the same reason, Plaid Cymru (Welsh party) has urged the UK Government to make the Welsh NHS exempt from TTIP.3
The NHS in Scotland is now very different from that in the rest of the UK. It is increasingly under threat because of funding cuts from Westminster. The plan for the UK to enter TTIP, without an opt-out clause for NHS Scotland, is symptomatic of the way Scotland has been treated in general, and an even more potent reason for Scottish people to be able to elect governments with full economic and bargaining powers through independence.
We declare no competing interests.

[JimBHibees]

From the Lancet:

Incredible that this story has been given no coverage at all. That is massive IMO.

[allmodcons]

What RBS is saying on the inside:

I saw this earlier today.

I have to say (at the risk of falling foul of Marinello59) the BBC's coverage of this story first thing this morning was disgraceful.

They altered their online story after they'd interviewed Alex Salmond because they realised they'd completely misrepresented what RBS had been saying.

I guess that is what happens when your source is the Treasury!

[allmodcons]

I must have a completely different notion of free speech than some of you on here.

I wouldn't disgaree with you on that one!

[allmodcons]

Would all you yes voters care to tell me where Scotland ( Salmond) will get the money to provide for all the free child care. ( promised) the reduced retrial age and increased pensions .. You are all in la la land if you believe we as an independent country can afford Salmonds dreams, plus the increased Immigration ( we have more than enough on our streets already ) he has promised and membership of the EU ( I want out of that gravy train )

Top post Mr Farage.

[Moulin Yarns]

From the Lancet:


Incredible that this story has been given no coverage at all. That is massive IMO.

I saw that this morning, posted it on FB and to a young mother who is expecting her second and is voting no with my own plea for sense as I didn't want to sell my house to get the treatment I will need in my dotage. Hopefully do the trick. :greengrin

[allmodcons]

From the Lancet:


Incredible that this story has been given no coverage at all. That is massive IMO.


I saw that this morning, posted it on FB and to a young mother who is expecting her second and is voting no with my own plea for sense as I didn't want to sell my house to get the treatment I will need in my dotage. Hopefully do the trick. :greengrin

Is this not what Jeane Freeman battered Andrew Neil about last week.

http://www.scoop.it/t/referendum-2014/p/4027453485/2014/09/04/jeane-freeman-wipes-the-floor-with-andrew-neil-on-nhs-and-indy-youtube

[Gus]

The funniest one is RBS having a say, correct me if im wrong but arent their biggest shareholder the Treasury??

And same goes with standard life, ex tories etc at board level

So it's funny them having a say because they were bailed out by the UK taxpayer then they would of gone bust with the loss of thousands of jobs. Do you think an independent Scotland would have been able to of save them alone? Genuine question btw

And it's funny for Standard Life to have a say because.........bearing in mind 95% of their custom is outside Scotland, they remain in Scotland however employing thousands of people so I think they have every right to have a say whether they are Tory, Labour, UKIP, SNP

[allmodcons]

So it's funny them having a say because they were bailed out by the UK taxpayer then they would of gone bust with the loss of thousands of jobs. Do you think an independent Scotland would have been able to of save them alone? Genuine question btw

And it's funny for Standard Life to have a say because.........bearing in mind 95% of their custom is outside Scotland, they remain in Scotland however employing thousands of people so I think they have every right to have a say whether they are Tory, Labour, UKIP, SNP

Who knows how it would have 'panned out' in an iScotland.
I certainly don't and for that matter neither do you!
All I know for sure is that the banking crisis happened on Westminster's watch.

[xyz23jc]

So it's funny them having a say because they were bailed out by the UK taxpayer then they would of gone bust with the loss of thousands of jobs. Do you think an independent Scotland would have been able to of save them alone? Genuine question btw

And it's funny for Standard Life to have a say because.........bearing in mind 95% of their custom is outside Scotland, they remain in Scotland however employing thousands of people so I think they have every right to have a say whether they are Tory, Labour, UKIP, SNP

Impeccable timing tho, eh?

[CropleyWasGod]

Salmond vs Robinson.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHmLb-RIbrM&sns=tw

[CropleyWasGod]

So it's funny them having a say because they were bailed out by the UK taxpayer then they would of gone bust with the loss of thousands of jobs. Do you think an independent Scotland would have been able to of save them alone? Genuine question btw

And it's funny for Standard Life to have a say because.........bearing in mind 95% of their custom is outside Scotland, they remain in Scotland however employing thousands of people so I think they have every right to have a say whether they are Tory, Labour, UKIP, SNP

RBS' "say" consists mainly of their moving a brass plaque to London, and a note to Companies House. That is all.

[Peevemor]

RBS' "say" consists mainly of their moving a brass plaque to London, and a note to Companies House. That is all.

Not even that

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/traders-and-brokers/membership/member-firm-directory/member-firm-directory-detail.html?castMemberId=ALSE1A0003T5

[CropleyWasGod]

Not even that

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/traders-and-brokers/membership/member-firm-directory/member-firm-directory-detail.html?castMemberId=ALSE1A0003T5

Good spot.

See my YouTube of the Salmond vs Robinson spat, where he tells him about Lloyds Head office.

However, the "Registered Office" of RBS is still shown at Companies House as St Andrew Square.

[RyeSloan]

As if by magic ... Angus Grossart, chairman of merchant bank Noble Grossart and one of the most influential figures in the Scottish financial establishment, said some commentary on the referendum’s market impact had been “severely overstated” and people should “stay cool and not panic”. “I think it is getting out of hand, a severe overreaction,” he said. “The FTSE seems perfectly stable today, but to hear some of the comments you almost expect people to be predicting a plague of locusts or mice next.”

Aye read that...his views are to respected...shame he has not been canvassed on his opinions more often.

[JimBHibees]

Who knows how it would have 'panned out' in an iScotland.
I certainly don't and for that matter neither do you!
All I know for sure is that the banking crisis happened on Westminster's watch.

Specifically on the same watch of Darling and Brown who are predicting economic meltdown in an iScotland, you couldnt make it up. :rolleyes:

I think it is safe to say the banking regulation in Scotland may have been a little more stringent than the 'light touch' that was the case down south.

[JimBHibees]

I saw this earlier today.

I have to say (at the risk of falling foul of Marinello59) the BBC's coverage of this story first thing this morning was disgraceful.

They altered their online story after they'd interviewed Alex Salmond because they realised they'd completely misrepresented what RBS had been saying.

I guess that is what happens when your source is the Treasury!

or Douglas Alexander or Darling. :rolleyes:

[ACLeith]

Is it just me or has it occurred to anyone else that the apocalyptic vision we're currently getting bombarded with is remarkably similar to Doncaster/Regan and their post-Hun armageddon?

How did that turn out? :wink:

Thanks JMS for reminding us that this is actually overall a fitba MB and that there's always a connection if you look hard enough :wink:

A "Yes/Yes" vote in 1997 was also going to be Armageddon according to some of the same organisations. It was the Tories vs The "Rest of the World" back then, with the final score in the 7-0, 6-2 category :aok:

Probably going to be a "win on the away goals rule" this time round, whoever wins?

[One Day Soon]

If that is the case then we stop shopping at his store there are many other options.


Hello all. I see the debate is pretty much where it last was.

It isn't 'his store' it is a partnership or co-operative. Given the number of declarations we are seeing I think your fuel bills in travelling between different types of retail suppliers are going to be quite high.

The holiday destination is an easy one though - get the sombreros and sun tan lotion out for North Korea.

[7 Hills]

This is an amazing era to be living in, as a Scot! IMHO, whatever happens next week, we WILL be independent within my lifetime. I have heard anecdotal evidence of workers being threatened by their employers that jobs will be lost if next week's Referendum's outcome is Yes. In my view, these companies are horrible, lying b******s, but I can't, and won't blame people for voting no under such pressure. Such a shame that Democracy can be thrown aside in the name of profit.

[One Day Soon]

This is an amazing era to be living in, as a Scot! IMHO, whatever happens next week, we WILL be independent within my lifetime. I have heard anecdotal evidence of workers being threatened by their employers that jobs will be lost if next week's Referendum's outcome is Yes. In my view, these companies are horrible, lying b******s, but I can't, and won't blame people for voting no under such pressure. Such a shame that Democracy can be thrown aside in the name of profit.

File that under made-up cobblers I think.

[PeeJay]

Who knows how it would have 'panned out' in an iScotland.
I certainly don't and for that matter neither do you!
All I know for sure is that the banking crisis happened on Westminster's watch.

You inferring it was Westminster's fault, then? Are you suggesting it would have been any different in an iScotland? Seriously? What influence would iScotland have had on regulating banks in the City or elsewhere? NONE - Westminster, Washington, Frankfurt, Madrid and so on - none of them were able to prevent what happened, just as they are all unable to control what is now happening again. You are seriously overestimating any willingness or ability on the part of anyone in an iScotland government to exert any influence on the banking and financial world - fairness isn't on the table. Breaking up the UK doesn't make it any easier to tackle the real problem ... anybody with any knowledge of the situation knows where the problem is and how to tackle it ... simply saying it happened on Westminster's watch as if that really means anything demonstrates just how much you've lost sight of the ball ...

[Peevemor]

You inferring it was Westminster's fault, then? Are you suggesting it would have been any different in an iScotland? Seriously? What influence would iScotland have had on regulating banks in the City or elsewhere? NONE - Westminster, Washington, Frankfurt, Madrid and so on - none of them were able to prevent what happened, just as they are all unable to control what is now happening again. You are seriously overestimating any willingness or ability on the part of anyone in an iScotland government to exert any influence on the banking and financial world - fairness isn't on the table. Breaking up the UK doesn't make it any easier to tackle the real problem ... anybody with any knowledge of the situation knows where the problem is and how to tackle it ... simply saying it happened on Westminster's watch as if that really means anything demonstrates just how much you've lost sight of the ball ...

The banks could have been more strictly controlled. French banks for example weren't anywhere near as badly affected as those in the UK - they had greater restrictions on the amount they were permitted to loan/speculate.

[allmodcons]

You inferring it was Westminster's fault, then? Are you suggesting it would have been any different in an iScotland? Seriously? What influence would iScotland have had on regulating banks in the City or elsewhere? NONE - Westminster, Washington, Frankfurt, Madrid and so on - none of them were able to prevent what happened, just as they are all unable to control what is now happening again. You are seriously overestimating any willingness or ability on the part of anyone in an iScotland government to exert any influence on the banking and financial world - fairness isn't on the table. Breaking up the UK doesn't make it any easier to tackle the real problem ... anybody with any knowledge of the situation knows where the problem is and how to tackle it ... simply saying it happened on Westminster's watch as if that really means anything demonstrates just how much you've lost sight of the ball ...

Read my earlier post.

Clearly said I didn't know but, presumably, you 'oh wise one' can tell me exactly how something that didn't happen would have panned out.

Always a good idea to read before you reply.

[PeeJay]

The banks could have been more strictly controlled. French banks for example weren't anywhere near as badly affected as those in the UK - they had greater restrictions on the amount they were permitted to loan/speculate.

You sure about that? French banks were one of the prime enablers in extending credit to Spain and Greece ... exposure was anything but light as you seem to be suggesting ...

[CropleyWasGod]

You sure about that? French banks were one of the prime enablers in extending credit to Spain and Greece ... exposure was anything but light as you seem to be suggesting ...

Aren't you both talking about different things?

You seem to be talking about the Euro issues, whilst he's talking about the 2008 crash.

[PeeJay]

Read my earlier post.

Clearly said I didn't know but, presumably, you 'oh wise one' can tell me exactly how something that didn't happen would have panned out.

Always a good idea to read before you reply.

Oh, I understood the bit about you not knowing, I was mainly replying to your pointless "...on Westminster's watch" statement ...

"Oh wise one" doesn't do anything for me, by the way ... just my opinion on a board debating something of importance ...

[Stranraer]

Just watched Salmond lay the smackdown on Nick Robinson on YouTube which was great.

On another note, I'm out campaigning again tonight - knocked some doors this morning and the response was very positive.