Scottish Independence

[lucky]

Question for my separatist Hibbies, why is Salmond willing to give the Scottish people a referendum on Scotland's constitutional future but is not willing to let the people of iScotland have a vote EU membership?

[ronaldo7]

QUOTE=ronaldo7;3926383]Thank god the NHS is devolved. We would be on the road to privatisation along with Englandshire if we'd not got Devolution.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/paul-evans/race-to-privatise-englands-nhs

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/privatisation-agenda-drives-tory-policy-on-nhs-says-andy-burnham-9052640.html

Imagine what we could do with all the levers of power in our own hands.

You defeat your own argument by implying the NHS is safe in Scotland under a devolved Government[/QUOTE]

My argument is that it would be safer still if we have independence. I take it you're happy for rUK to go down the privatisation route??

[ronaldo7]

He is also a SCOT. But I thought the separatists were wanting to have debate with cameron and wee Eck. Surely your not going against wee Ecks wishes by not listening to MPs outside Scotland.

I'm perfectly happy for Wee dode to get involved in the debate, I just wonder which house he was living in at the time of his intervention.

I can't understand why the PM of UK would not want to debate with any part of the Union leaving, whilst he trots out lines on the Ukraine, and Crimea.

[One Day Soon]

I'm perfectly happy for Wee dode to get involved in the debate, I just wonder which house he was living in at the time of his intervention.

I can't understand why the PM of UK would not want to debate with any part of the Union leaving, whilst he trots out lines on the Ukraine, and Crimea.


Comparing the crisis in Ukraine and Crimea on one hand with Scotland and the UK on the other is way, way over the line.

[One Day Soon]

I'm perfectly happy for Wee dode to get involved in the debate, I just wonder which house he was living in at the time of his intervention.

I can't understand why the PM of UK would not want to debate with any part of the Union leaving, whilst he trots out lines on the Ukraine, and Crimea.

But its ok for Sean Connery to get involved from one of his houses?

[yeezus.]

Nice to hear from wee dode the MP for Bradford West:rolleyes:

Like usual he went off on one with my question. I wasn't trying to make a comparison between Scottish and Irish independence - the question I was trying to ask was does he think Scottish independence will lead to the rest of the UK going their own way.

I wish he would stop calling the possibility of Scottish independence partition!

[ronaldo7]

Comparing the crisis in Ukraine and Crimea on one hand with Scotland and the UK on the other is way, way over the line.

Just a tad. I wonder what it will take for him to come and debate the situation with the first minister.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Question for my separatist Hibbies, why is Salmond willing to give the Scottish people a referendum on Scotland's constitutional future but is not willing to let the people of iScotland have a vote EU membership?


Ok, why?

[Future17]

Question for my separatist Hibbies, why is Salmond willing to give the Scottish people a referendum on Scotland's constitutional future but is not willing to let the people of iScotland have a vote EU membership?

Surely a referendum on independence in its current proposed format is also a referendum on current EU membership? The clearly stated intention is to remain part of the EU so that is part of what is being voted on at this time?

If independence was to be achieved following the vote in September, a referendum on EU membership would perhaps take place in the future in the event of large, popular support for leaving the EU. As far as I'm aware, there is no evidence of a large amount of Scottish people wishing to leave the EU.

Why would you waste money on a referendum on a subject which there is no mandate to have a referendum on? :confused:

[One Day Soon]

Just a tad. I wonder what it will take for him to come and debate the situation with the first minister.

Why then are you comparing Ukraine/Crimea with UK/Scotland?

[ronaldo7]

Why then are you comparing Ukraine/Crimea with UK/Scotland?

It was a bit tongue in cheek. Maybe of we love bomb him from thurso, he might appear.

[Just Alf]

It is very clear, why has Swinney being saying that unless we can use the pound then iScoland won't take its share of the debt?. Clearly he is also the view that iScotland will walk away from its responsibilities. As a nation Scotland help run up these debts with the necessary spending on services and bailing out RBS and BoS. For any new independent country to try and stay/ apply for EU, NATO membership whilst reneging on its responsibilities is laughable

This appears to have gone off at a tangent.

The UK Government (also Bank of England and if I remember correctly one of the European lawyers) have stated that legally the ownership of the debt lies with the remaining UK entity.

The Yes starting position is that despite not being legally required to take on/service any of the debt they would take this on as part of the package that includes taking on the assets that the debt helped to finance.

If I divorced my wife and she kept the car the it's only right she takes on all the future payments? If on the other hand I was allowed to use it 10% of the time then of course id pay 10% of the costs.

Is it any more complicated than that?

[allmodcons]

It is very clear, why has Swinney being saying that unless we can use the pound then iScoland won't take its share of the debt?. Clearly he is also the view that iScotland will walk away from its responsibilities. As a nation Scotland help run up these debts with the necessary spending on services and bailing out RBS and BoS. For any new independent country to try and stay/ apply for EU, NATO membership whilst reneging on its responsibilities is laughable

Can you answer the question? Who holds the debt obligation?

[allmodcons]

Question for my separatist Hibbies, why is Salmond willing to give the Scottish people a referendum on Scotland's constitutional future but is not willing to let the people of iScotland have a vote EU membership?

Maybe because the referendum on an iScotland was a manifesto pledge.
If you want an EU referendum vote Conservative. It's called political choice.

[500miles]

This appears to have gone off at a tangent.

The UK Government (also Bank of England and if I remember correctly one of the European lawyers) have stated that legally the ownership of the debt lies with the remaining UK entity.

The Yes starting position is that despite not being legally required to take on/service any of the debt they would take this on as part of the package that includes taking on the assets that the debt helped to finance.

If I divorced my wife and she kept the car the it's only right she takes on all the future payments? If on the other hand I was allowed to use it 10% of the time then of course id pay 10% of the costs.

Is it any more complicated than that?

This use of Marriage related rhetoric only plays into the hands of unionists who wish to make this a heart over head matter. This is not a divorce where mummy is trying to screw money out of daddy after leaving him and the kids.

The union of the parliaments is no marriage - it is a business deal. ScotCO and UKCo (or EngCo if you like) merged, and one of the joint ventures is the Pound Sterling. ScotCo now wishes to split off again, but is offering to keep it's 10% stake in Sterling. UKCo do not want iScotland to keep the stake in Sterling, so it why should ScotCo continue to pay the debts of a venture it no longer has any stake in? It's common sense that if we are not allowed to keep our stake in Stirling, we should no longer pay it's debt or running costs.

If Scotland does become independent, it would be foolish for rUK to take on an increased share of the debt, and a political disaster for the ruling party to be seen increasing the debt, so the common sense and politically popular option would be to have a currency union.

[allmodcons]

Why then are you comparing Ukraine/Crimea with UK/Scotland?

"Tax, public spending and currency are absolutely central to what kind of a country we would live in. That Scotland could be a separate country is not debatable. What kind of a separate country is another matter altogether. Germany, Italy and Taiwan are countries in their own right, but so too are El Salvador, Syria and Ukraine".

Your quote ODS. Some fairly extreme examples in there, including Ukraine!

[Hibrandenburg]

Question for my separatist Hibbies, why is Salmond willing to give the Scottish people a referendum on Scotland's constitutional future but is not willing to let the people of iScotland have a vote EU membership?


Please post a link where he's said this!

[One Day Soon]

This appears to have gone off at a tangent.

The UK Government (also Bank of England and if I remember correctly one of the European lawyers) have stated that legally the ownership of the debt lies with the remaining UK entity.

The Yes starting position is that despite not being legally required to take on/service any of the debt they would take this on as part of the package that includes taking on the assets that the debt helped to finance.

If I divorced my wife and she kept the car the it's only right she takes on all the future payments? If on the other hand I was allowed to use it 10% of the time then of course id pay 10% of the costs.

Is it any more complicated than that?


Considerably more complicated than that. For a start, which of the assets do you propose we just take no part of as a result of taking on no debt liability?

The UK Government has, pretty responsibly, made clear to the international money markets it will guarantee all UK national debt in the event of a vote to separate. The reason for doing this is that any uncertainty now on honouring that debt would lead to higher borrowing costs and money being harder to borrow. If you think that Scotland - ie Salmond and Swinney - deciding to pick up none of the debt tab would just be discounted or ignored by international lenders then you must be pretty naive.

However as an aside - if Scotland's share of UK debt is so substantial as to matter to the UK (and presumably the cost of servicing that debt and interest charges are pretty high) why do Salmond/Swinney want to take on that share of debt in the first place? How much is Scotland's share and what are the costs of servicing that share? To put it another way, you have to be really gagging to get something else if you are so keen to take on huge debt and interest payments. That something is the pound currency union which we know know we aren't going to get.

[One Day Soon]

Can you answer the question? Who holds the debt obligation?

In real terms both the UK and a separate Scotland. The question is answered by looking at who would pay what price for not honouring the debt. The UK has already said it will back the debt so it minimises its own future debt premium risk. Salmond/Swinney however are playing high stakes poker on refusing to take on a share of debt thereby positioning themselves to potential international lenders as a higher risk because they are willing to play politics with credibility on borrowing.

I don't think S/S really care about the consequences however because I think they have already factored in that they aren't likely to win the vote and therefore won't face the consequences. If they do win the vote they will be happy enough for Scotland and its people to face the consequences because their view will be that any price is worth paying in order to separate.

Who decides the risk premium on lending to a separate Scotland? The potential lenders. They will be listening to all this very attentively.

[One Day Soon]

This use of Marriage related rhetoric only plays into the hands of unionists who wish to make this a heart over head matter. This is not a divorce where mummy is trying to screw money out of daddy after leaving him and the kids.

The union of the parliaments is no marriage - it is a business deal. ScotCO and UKCo (or EngCo if you like) merged, and one of the joint ventures is the Pound Sterling. ScotCo now wishes to split off again, but is offering to keep it's 10% stake in Sterling. UKCo do not want iScotland to keep the stake in Sterling, so it why should ScotCo continue to pay the debts of a venture it no longer has any stake in? It's common sense that if we are not allowed to keep our stake in Stirling, we should no longer pay it's debt or running costs.

If Scotland does become independent, it would be foolish for rUK to take on an increased share of the debt, and a political disaster for the ruling party to be seen increasing the debt, so the common sense and politically popular option would be to have a currency union.


The notion that it would be better for the UK to sign up to currency union with Scotland than to take on all UK debt is a separatist fantasy. The denial of reality around the closure of the pound currency union option for Salmond is just mind boggling.

Having the strength of the pound at the mercy of a Scotland which has; a much higher proportion of its economy in the public sector, a shortfall between revenues and public expenditure and a dependency on volatile oil revenue to meet that funding gap is a price that the UK simply won't pay. Why on earth would they agree to have the strength of the pound at the mercy of the fiscal responsibility of a foreign nation? To avoid the increased transaction fees of UK companies doing business in Scotland? Hardly, the cost of that is a few hundred million and most of those transactional costs will simply be passed on to the Scottish consumer.

This is why we have seen the political parties and the senior civil servant at the Treasury ruling out pound currency union. And politically it would be electoral suicide to go to electors in the UK saying that the pound should be shared with the country that has just walked out of the union.

Still, #alliscurrencybarry

[One Day Soon]

"Tax, public spending and currency are absolutely central to what kind of a country we would live in. That Scotland could be a separate country is not debatable. What kind of a separate country is another matter altogether. Germany, Italy and Taiwan are countries in their own right, but so too are El Salvador, Syria and Ukraine".

Your quote ODS. Some fairly extreme examples in there, including Ukraine!


You have misinterpreted me, accidentally or otherwise.

There is a gigantic difference between discussing the framework of tax, public sending and currency to a nation's future (and giving a wide range of possible examples) as I did on the one hand and on the other suggesting that somehow there is a comparison in constitutional, political or public debate terms between Ukraine/Crimea and UK/Scotland.

One is a discussion about how robust an economy and public services can or cannot be. The other is as you know about deliberately muddying the waters in relation to Cameron's participation or non-participation in the Scottish constitutional debate - by rather tastelessly comparing our open, transparent and democratic Referendum choice with the despotic external intervention in Ukraine.

[marinello59]

In real terms both the UK and a separate Scotland. The question is answered by looking at who would pay what price for not honouring the debt. The UK has already said it will back the debt so it minimises its own future debt premium risk. Salmond/Swinney however are playing high stakes poker on refusing to take on a share of debt thereby positioning themselves to potential international lenders as a higher risk because they are willing to play politics with credibility on borrowing.

I don't think S/S really care about the consequences however because I think they have already factored in that they aren't likely to win the vote and therefore won't face the consequences. If they do win the vote they will be happy enough for Scotland and its people to face the consequences because their view will be that any price is worth paying in order to separate.

Who decides the risk premium on lending to a separate Scotland? The potential lenders. They will be listening to all this very attentively.

When (:greengrin) the vote is won the currency issue may be taken out of our hands anyway. I would be surprised if joining the Euro was not part of the deal to remain within the EU.

[One Day Soon]

Are you suggesting that the thread does not meet your own high standard of what constitutes a high level online debate?
There are numerous excellent posts (from both sides) in this thread.


It is quite an achievement to have penned an entire article in 'playing the man' style and not to have addressed a single argument that has been raised.

The suggestion is that questions asked by the Better Together side are debasing the debate. It is a sort of 'if you join in the debate, then you are dragging the debate down just by having the temerity to participate in it' argument.

I would suggest journalism which substitutes assertion, rhetoric and personal attacks instead of fact based analysis is the sign of a pretty weak position.

[One Day Soon]

When (:greengrin) the vote is won the currency issue may be taken out of our hands anyway. I would be surprised if joining the Euro was not part of the deal to remain within the EU.


You do have a sense of humour. That's another Referendum required surely......

Wouldn't joining the Euro create a whole bunch of expensive transactional costs with our main market that must be avoided? :wink:

Hey, why don't we apply for joint currency status? We could call it the Pouro....

[Beefster]

This use of Marriage related rhetoric only plays into the hands of unionists who wish to make this a heart over head matter.

You definitely cannot accuse the SNP of trying to make it a heart over head matter. Especially if you ignore the fact that the referendum has been carefully timed to come during the Year of Homecoming and soon after the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn and the Glasgow Commonwealth games.

[green glory]

It is very clear, why has Swinney being saying that unless we can use the pound then iScoland won't take its share of the debt?. Clearly he is also the view that iScotland will walk away from its responsibilities. As a nation Scotland help run up these debts with the necessary spending on services and bailing out RBS and BoS. For any new independent country to try and stay/ apply for EU, NATO membership whilst reneging on its responsibilities is laughable

Not laughable at all. If we take on a share of the debt which is exactly what the Scottish Government is intending doing, but NOT without getting the assets which were paid for by that debt.

The treasury has already confirmed it's legally liable for all UK debt anyway.

[lucky]

Citigroup on SNP default threat: sovereigns who have defaulted have subsequently been locked out of capital markets for average of 5.6 years

[Just Alf]

Citigroup on SNP default threat: sovereigns who have defaulted have subsequently been locked out of capital markets for average of 5.6 years

Reality is though that an independent Scotland will not have defaulted.

On one hand the UK government have already committed to picking up the tab regardless if what happens ( this is the legal position if rUK wants to continue uninterrupted by a split) so there would be no default.

On the other hand the YES/SNP position is that a newly independent Scotland wants to pay its way but this is on the assumption that Scotland gets something for that ongoing financial input.

[lucky]

They will get a share of the assets just not a currency union. BoE will not be the lender of last resort

[allmodcons]

In real terms both the UK and a separate Scotland. The question is answered by looking at who would pay what price for not honouring the debt. The UK has already said it will back the debt so it minimises its own future debt premium risk. Salmond/Swinney however are playing high stakes poker on refusing to take on a share of debt thereby positioning themselves to potential international lenders as a higher risk because they are willing to play politics with credibility on borrowing.

I don't think S/S really care about the consequences however because I think they have already factored in that they aren't likely to win the vote and therefore won't face the consequences. If they do win the vote they will be happy enough for Scotland and its people to face the consequences because their view will be that any price is worth paying in order to separate.

Who decides the risk premium on lending to a separate Scotland? The potential lenders. They will be listening to all this very attentively.

This is simply not true. A separate Scotland would have no debt obligation. You are the first person I've heard argue otherwise.

Of course, there is talk of 'default' by an iScotland every time we hear Better Together speak. Just as they claim, out of hand, that if we don't vote to stay in the Union we can't use the pound. We know this too is a blatant lie. We might not get a currency union, but to suggest we will be unable to use the pound is a complete lie.

With regard to your comments concerning potential lenders, as I've said many times on here, international money markets will lend where the think they can make profit. They're not going to concern themselves with a spat between iScotland and rUK over assets and liabilities. If there's money to be made they'll be happy to lend.



The notion that it would be better for the UK to sign up to currency union with Scotland than to take on all UK debt is a separatist fantasy. The denial of reality around the closure of the pound currency union option for Salmond is just mind boggling.

Having the strength of the pound at the mercy of a Scotland which has; a much higher proportion of its economy in the public sector, a shortfall between revenues and public expenditure and a dependency on volatile oil revenue to meet that funding gap is a price that the UK simply won't pay. Why on earth would they agree to have the strength of the pound at the mercy of the fiscal responsibility of a foreign nation? To avoid the increased transaction fees of UK companies doing business in Scotland? Hardly, the cost of that is a few hundred million and most of those transactional costs will simply be passed on to the Scottish consumer.

This is why we have seen the political parties and the senior civil servant at the Treasury ruling out pound currency union. And politically it would be electoral suicide to go to electors in the UK saying that the pound should be shared with the country that has just walked out of the union.

Still, #alliscurrencybarry

Why is it mind boggling not to trust Osborne and his 'totally neutral senior civil servant'? You're happy to believe Osborne, Ed Balls and Danny Alexander whereas I prefer to believe Alex Salmond and the Fiscal Commission Working Group. We know, that by coming together, these 3 arch Unionists were hoping to close the debate around a shared currency but, it seems to have escaped their notice that there are 2 sides to the debate.

Of course, rUK doesn't have a shortfall between revenue and public expenditure!!! and rUK wouldn't want access to oil revenues to boost the balance of payments. As to the Better Together the line about 'volatile oil revenues', you know as well as I do that revenue streams can be smoothed over a period of time to counter volatility, it's just a pity that successive Westminister Government never thought it would make sense.

[JeMeSouviens]

But its ok for Sean Connery to get involved from one of his houses?

I think Connery is an arshehole and Galloway is an indefatigable ********. We're not genetically programmed to be free of ********s you know. :wink:

[JeMeSouviens]

Question for my separatist Hibbies, why is Salmond willing to give the Scottish people a referendum on Scotland's constitutional future but is not willing to let the people of iScotland have a vote EU membership?

Because there's little demand for that vote?

[Future17]

Citigroup on SNP default threat: sovereigns who have defaulted have subsequently been locked out of capital markets for average of 5.6 years

Is there a reason that you've started using this thread like twitter? :confused:

You make statements and ask questions, yet when people call you on it or seek to engage in debate, you ignore it completely. It's like you're happy to trot out the lines and sentiments of others as if they were established facts, but as soon as original thought is required to advance the discussion, you become incapable.

[lucky]

Is there a reason that you've started using this thread like twitter? :confused:

You make statements and ask questions, yet when people call you on it or seek to engage in debate, you ignore it completely. It's like you're happy to trot out the lines and sentiments of others as if they were established facts, but as soon as original thought is required to advance the discussion, you become incapable.

Have only used one quote from twitter and generally engage and debate with all. But if you dislike my posts add me to your ignore list. Now tell where I've not answered any direct questions to your satisfaction? I post on here when I get the chance but if the debate has moved on I don't respond.

[ronaldo7]

Have only used one quote from twitter and generally engage and debate with all. But if you dislike my posts add me to your ignore list. Now tell where I've not answered any direct questions to your satisfaction? I post on here when I get the chance but if the debate has moved on I don't respond.

Try going to page 34 mate, that should keep you going for a while.:aok:

[ronaldo7]

Some Hibs interest on a pro independence site:greengrin

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-kingdom-of-the-blind/

[lucky]

Try going to page 34 mate, that should keep you going for a while.:aok:

Just checked back everything answered either by me or others except on EU referendum. The point I was making is why aren't we the Scottish people being asked if we want to remain within the EU. None of us know what settlement an iScotland will get from the UK never mind the EU. Questions around the euro or rebate should be given and the people get to decide. There are many on the left and right who wish to have a vote.

[ronaldo7]

Just checked back everything answered either by me or others except on EU referendum. The point I was making is why aren't we the Scottish people being asked if we want to remain within the EU. None of us know what settlement an iScotland will get from the UK never mind the EU. Questions around the euro or rebate should be given and the people get to decide. There are many on the left and right who wish to have a vote.

We have one referendum coming up. Nothing on the horizon about an EU one unless you listen to DAVE.

On the subject of everything being answered, I thought that people were asking your opinion, not others...Might be wrong though.

[allmodcons]

Question for my separatist Hibbies, why is Salmond willing to give the Scottish people a referendum on Scotland's constitutional future but is not willing to let the people of iScotland have a vote EU membership?


Maybe because the referendum on an iScotland was a manifesto pledge.
If you want an EU referendum vote Conservative. It's called political choice.


Just checked back everything answered either by me or others except on EU referendum. The point I was making is why aren't we the Scottish people being asked if we want to remain within the EU. None of us know what settlement an iScotland will get from the UK never mind the EU. Questions around the euro or rebate should be given and the people get to decide. There are many on the left and right who wish to have a vote.

You asked a question and I gave you an answer.
If you are desperate for an EU referendum, vote for a party who is offering a referendum on EU membership.
Couldn't be simpler.

[Future17]

Have only used one quote from twitter and generally engage and debate with all. But if you dislike my posts add me to your ignore list. Now tell where I've not answered any direct questions to your satisfaction? I post on here when I get the chance but if the debate has moved on I don't respond.

I don't mean you had been quoting from Twitter, I mean that some of your recent posts read like you were publicising purportedly factual statements form elsewhere on here rather than continuing lines of debate in which you had specifically asked people to respond. However, I accept that some times the debate moves on and I don't want my outburst to distract from the debate now that we seem to be (kind of) back on track, so I'll shut up about that now. :greengrin

On the issue of an EU referendum, what makes membership of the EU different from any of the other decisions Scotland will be taking in event of a "Yes" vote in your mind? Would you want a referendum on any proposed currency union/alternative? A referendum on whether to have passport controls at the border with England? A referendum on what time the SBC shows Eastenders?

Everybody now knows the proposition they are being asked to vote on in September. If leaving the EU is more important to a voter than Scotland being independent, I would imagine they would vote "No" in the hope that a future UK government/parliament delivers an EU membership referendum.

[Jones28]

The more I hear about the opinion of the southern English majority the more I want to break away.

I was always pro independence, but more from a historic, romanticised perspective. Now I hear a lot of comments saying the we couldn't survive, we are subsidised and we would be lost without them. Their ignorance is astounding and makes me think **** you then, lets go our own way. And we will take the pound with us, and enter into a currency union. Or not bother, cos I would frankly love to hear an Englishman try to convince an Edinburgh shop-keeper that their pink tenner is legal tender

[lucky]

I don't mean you had been quoting from Twitter, I mean that some of your recent posts read like you were publicising purportedly factual statements form elsewhere on here rather than continuing lines of debate in which you had specifically asked people to respond. However, I accept that some times the debate moves on and I don't want my outburst to distract from the debate now that we seem to be (kind of) back on track, so I'll shut up about that now. :greengrin

On the issue of an EU referendum, what makes membership of the EU different from any of the other decisions Scotland will be taking in event of a "Yes" vote in your mind? Would you want a referendum on any proposed currency union/alternative? A referendum on whether to have passport controls at the border with England? A referendum on what time the SBC shows Eastenders?

Everybody now knows the proposition they are being asked to vote on in September. If leaving the EU is more important to a voter than Scotland being independent, I would imagine they would vote "No" in the hope that a future UK government/parliament delivers an EU membership referendum.

I'm not in favour of leaving the EU but the SNP want to be in the EU, which has a great say over our laws and life's , but wants to leave the UK and that they are seeking a mandate to do this through a referendum so surely there is an argument that a iScotland should ask the people of Scotland if we wish to be in the EU post independence.

In the unlikely event of independence, most observer's say that iScotland will be in the EU but it's likely to have to apply and that there will be a 18/24 month gap between being independent and joining. In these circumstances it's only correct that we hold a referendum on membership.

[lucky]

The more I hear about the opinion of the southern English majority the more I want to break away.

I was always pro independence, but more from a historic, romanticised perspective. Now I hear a lot of comments saying the we couldn't survive, we are subsidised and we would be lost without them. Their ignorance is astounding and makes me think **** you then, lets go our own way. And we will take the pound with us, and enter into a currency union. Or not bother, cos I would frankly love to hear an Englishman try to convince an Edinburgh shop-keeper that their pink, poofy tenner is legal tender

You at the wind up? Cringeworthy post. This debate is not Scotland V England. Also is there any need for homophobic comment?

[Beefster]

The more I hear about the opinion of the southern English majority the more I want to break away.

I was always pro independence, but more from a historic, romanticised perspective. Now I hear a lot of comments saying the we couldn't survive, we are subsidised and we would be lost without them. Their ignorance is astounding and makes me think **** you then, lets go our own way. And we will take the pound with us, and enter into a currency union. Or not bother, cos I would frankly love to hear an Englishman try to convince an Edinburgh shop-keeper that their pink, poofy tenner is legal tender

Brilliant.

[southfieldhibby]

You at the wind up? Cringeworthy post. This debate is not Scotland V England. Also is there any need for homophobic comment?


Brilliant.

Call him and bully and a cybernat and be done with it.Or ignore this type of nonsense and don't give it oxygen.

[allmodcons]

The notion that it would be better for the UK to sign up to currency union with Scotland than to take on all UK debt is a separatist fantasy. The denial of reality around the closure of the pound currency union option for Salmond is just mind boggling.

Having the strength of the pound at the mercy of a Scotland which has; a much higher proportion of its economy in the public sector, a shortfall between revenues and public expenditure and a dependency on volatile oil revenue to meet that funding gap is a price that the UK simply won't pay. Why on earth would they agree to have the strength of the pound at the mercy of the fiscal responsibility of a foreign nation? To avoid the increased transaction fees of UK companies doing business in Scotland? Hardly, the cost of that is a few hundred million and most of those transactional costs will simply be passed on to the Scottish consumer.

This is why we have seen the political parties and the senior civil servant at the Treasury ruling out pound currency union. And politically it would be electoral suicide to go to electors in the UK saying that the pound should be shared with the country that has just walked out of the union.

Still, #alliscurrencybarry

It would appear that it's not just me who disagrees with you ODS. I think this guy is supposed to be on your side but, as an Economist rather than a Politician, seems to think a currency union would suit both countries post a Yes vote.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/pro-union-economist-backs-sterling-for-independent-scotland.23653680
(http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/pro-union-economist-backs-sterling-for-independent-scotland.23653680)
So much for "separatist fantasy".

[Future17]

I'm not in favour of leaving the EU but the SNP want to be in the EU, which has a great say over our laws and life's , but wants to leave the UK and that they are seeking a mandate to do this through a referendum so surely there is an argument that a iScotland should ask the people of Scotland if we wish to be in the EU post independence.

In the unlikely event of independence, most observer's say that iScotland will be in the EU but it's likely to have to apply and that there will be a 18/24 month gap between being independent and joining. In these circumstances it's only correct that we hold a referendum on membership.

But the SNP sought and won a mandate to hold a referendum on independence for Scotland. There is presently no mandate for a referendum on membership of the EU. Would you have governments holding referenda on every decision they have to make?


The more I hear about the opinion of the southern English majority the more I want to break away.

I was always pro independence, but more from a historic, romanticised perspective. Now I hear a lot of comments saying the we couldn't survive, we are subsidised and we would be lost without them. Their ignorance is astounding and makes me think **** you then, lets go our own way. And we will take the pound with us, and enter into a currency union. Or not bother, cos I would frankly love to hear an Englishman try to convince an Edinburgh shop-keeper that their pink, poofy tenner is legal tender

Oh dear. :rolleyes:

[Jones28]

You at the wind up? Cringeworthy post. This debate is not Scotland V England. Also is there any need for homophobic comment?

Everyone has an opinion, mines is as stated in my post. Cringe all you like but it makes my blood boil when I hear people say Scotland is dependant on Westminster/England

Homophobic comment removed.

[Jones28]

Would like to point out that my "poofy tenner" comment was not meant to offend anyone, and apologise to anyone who was offended by it. I am not homophobic and have no ill feelings with regards to homosexuality.

It was meant as a piece of light hearted banter in what has been a very serious and heavy debate. This was obviously very misguided.

[allmodcons]

Would like to point out that my "poofy tenner" comment was not meant to offend anyone, and apologise to anyone who was offended by it. I am not homophobic and have no ill feelings with regards to homosexuality.

It was meant as a piece of light hearted banter in what has been a very serious and heavy debate. This was obviously very misguided.

Don't let the political correctness on here put you off posting. I wish I could say I never made any mistakes at age 20 :greengrin.

You're entitled to your view the same as the rest of us.

[lucky]

Would like to point out that my "poofy tenner" comment was not meant to offend anyone, and apologise to anyone who was offended by it. I am not homophobic and have no ill feelings with regards to homosexuality.

It was meant as a piece of light hearted banter in what has been a very serious and heavy debate. This was obviously very misguided.

Good response mate. I'm not overly PC but no need for stuff like that.
Still don't accept that pro UK supporters think that Scotland is a subsidy junkie.

[steakbake]

Aberdeen city council to include an appeal for voters to vote no in with the council tax bills this month. A new low in the campaign. Imagine the hoots of outrage and media guff if an SNP council decided to do the same...

[steakbake]

Good response mate. I'm not overly PC but no end for stuff like that. Still don't accept that pro UK supporters don't think that Scotland is a subsidy junkie.

Freudian slip in the double negative. Can you confirm whether you mean they do or they don't?

I think part of the no campaign sees it like that.

[marinello59]

Aberdeen city council to include an appeal for voters to vote no in with the council tax bills this month. A new low in the campaign. Imagine the hoots of outrage and media guff if an SNP council decided to do the same...

Your last line should read 'imagine the hoots of outrage and media guff if a council in the Central belt had decided to do the same.'
It's been well reported in the press up North and the tone is pretty negative towards the Council administration. The Labour group in Aberdeen are an embarrassment who have embarked on a course of petty politics since the last election. What other council in the land would cancel a city centre development voted for by the people of the city in a referundum and basically tell a local businessman willing to pay most of the costs to stick his money?
If Aberdeen City Council are telling people to vote No I suspect plenty will see it as a reason to vote YES.

[lucky]

Freudian slip in the double negative. Can you confirm whether you mean they do or they don't?

I think part of the no campaign sees it like that.

Very poor use of the English language from myself in original post, I have now amended .

[JeMeSouviens]

New Survation poll out for the Record today. Ex don't-knows it stands at 55-45 for No.

The polls seem to have split into 2 clumps: ICM, Survation, Panelbase have about a 10% lead for No, MORI and YouGov about 20%. Both clumps have been pretty steady for the past few weeks suggesting not much movement caused by the currency stramash.

Even on the optimistic clump, Yes has a big old gap to try and bridge but if that clump is correct it's at least possible which I must admit I never thought it would be with only 6 months to go.

[JimBHibees]

Aberdeen city council to include an appeal for voters to vote no in with the council tax bills this month. A new low in the campaign. Imagine the hoots of outrage and media guff if an SNP council decided to do the same...

Thats disgusting.

[heretoday]

Aberdeen council are particularly mental. If people don't get out and vote in local elections - and they generally don't - they can end up with a bunch of nutcases in charge. Hopefully next time sense will prevail.

[steakbake]

Very poor use of the English language from myself in original post, I have now amended .

I was just messing ;-)

[lucky]

I was just messing ;-)

I guessed that but still well deserved dig lol

[One Day Soon]

Been a bit ill so just starting to catch up on thread again today. Will reply more fully later (that means you AMC) but in brief: separatists still wrong on currency and numbers, let's keep the P word out of it (that's not being PC, that's being normal), how about that GERS deficit?, you must be imagining the Herald piece because the MSM is all a Unionist conspiracy remember and some posters on here have a real cheek complaining about questions not being answered - I'm talking about the throwing stones and running away brigade. Away for more virus pills now...

[Hibercelona]

The SNP don't even need to say anything anymore. David Cameron and his cronies at Westminster are causing their own down fall everytime they open their mouths.

[Just Alf]

Been a bit ill so just starting to catch up on thread again today. Will reply more fully later (that means you AMC) but in brief: separatists still wrong on currency and numbers, let's keep the P word out of it (that's not being PC, that's being normal), how about that GERS deficit?, you must be imagining the Herald piece because the MSM is all a Unionist conspiracy remember and some posters on here have a real cheek complaining about questions not being answered - I'm talking about the throwing stones and running away brigade. Away for more virus pills now...

Good thing about the GERS bit is that it's blown the claim that rUK subsidises Scotland out the water.

[hibsbollah]

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-yes-support-at-6-month-high-1-3339111

The gap narrows. Yea 39% Nay 47% Floaters 13%. David Cameron doing his best to turn it around.

[marinello59]

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-yes-support-at-6-month-high-1-3339111

The gap narrows. Yea 39% Nay 47% Floaters 13%. David Cameron doing his best to turn it around.

I'm worried that Salmond and co are not doing nowhere near enough to close the gap. They should be actively targeting women voters (most likely to vote No) and reaching out more to the poorer sections of our society. (Least likely to vote but most likely to vote Yes.) They are doing neither satisfactorily. Instead they concentrate on dismissing every counter argument as scare mongering and busting made up myths. Frustrating to say the least. There's still everything to play for here.

[Beefster]

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-yes-support-at-6-month-high-1-3339111

The gap narrows. Yea 39% Nay 47% Floaters 13%. David Cameron doing his best to turn it around.

I love this line of reasoning.

Cameron refuses to get involved - "He's running scared. Why won't he take on Salmond?".

Cameron gets involved and promises more powers to the Scottish Government, if the No vote comes to pass (and busting a long-running argument about how we won't get more powers) - "He's doing his best to make the Yes vote happen".

[Glory Lurker]

I love this line of reasoning.

Cameron refuses to get involved - "He's running scared. Why won't he take on Salmond?".

Cameron gets involved and promises more powers to the Scottish Government, if the No vote comes to pass (and busting a long-running argument about how we won't get more powers) - "He's doing his best to make the Yes vote happen".


But he didn't though, did he? And, as things stand (with next to no chance of things changing), it's not an "argument", it's a stone-cold fact (of the non-.net variety). It's 1979 misdirection all over again.

[hibsbollah]

I love this line of reasoning.

Cameron refuses to get involved - "He's running scared. Why won't he take on Salmond?".

Cameron gets involved and promises more powers to the Scottish Government, if the No vote comes to pass (and busting a long-running argument about how we won't get more powers) - "He's doing his best to make the Yes vote happen".

I often make the mistake of assuming hibs.net folk know when my tongue is firmly in my cheek. Apparently not :greengrin For the sake of clarity, It seems fantastical that DC is deliberately scuppering the No vote (for Tory party electoral reasons) by getting involved, and you'd need to have a highly developed conspiracy theory to assume this is his strategy.

But its fairly obvious that the bumps in the Yes numbers during polling are happening when the mainstream Westminster parties get involved in the debate, or when scots based financial institutions issue press releases critical of a Yes vote. If I was a tory strategist with an interest in keeping the union id advise him to keep it zipped.

[allmodcons]

I'm worried that Salmond and co are not doing nowhere near enough to close the gap. They should be actively targeting women voters (most likely to vote No) and reaching out more to the poorer sections of our society. (Least likely to vote but most likely to vote Yes.) They are doing neither satisfactorily. Instead they concentrate on dismissing every counter argument as scare mongering and busting made up myths. Frustrating to say the least. There's still everything to play for here.

You need to read behind the headlines M59 and maybe get out more often. :0)

I can assure you that these 2 groups (i.e. - women and the poor) are being heavily targeted by the Yes campaign.

[Future17]

I'm worried that Salmond and co are not doing nowhere near enough to close the gap. They should be actively targeting women voters (most likely to vote No) and reaching out more to the poorer sections of our society. (Least likely to vote but most likely to vote Yes.) They are doing neither satisfactorily. Instead they concentrate on dismissing every counter argument as scare mongering and busting made up myths. Frustrating to say the least. There's still everything to play for here.

Still 185 days of campaigning to go. Both sides' campaign strategies will intensify the nearer we get to 18 September.


I love this line of reasoning.

Cameron refuses to get involved - "He's running scared. Why won't he take on Salmond?".

Cameron gets involved and promises more powers to the Scottish Government, if the No vote comes to pass (and busting a long-running argument about how we won't get more powers) - "He's doing his best to make the Yes vote happen".

You're right of course, but the fact is Cameron and what he represents to most of the electorate in the referendum makes him one of "Yes" campaign's biggest weapons regardless of what he does.

[marinello59]

You need to read behind the headlines M59 and maybe get out more often. :0)

I can assure you that these 2 groups (i.e. - women and the poor) are being heavily targeted by the Yes campaign.

Thanks. :rolleyes:
Rewind to the Sturgeon/Lamont debate. The very first question Sturgeon was asked was how women would benefit from an Independent Scotland. I thought, great, this is a real chance for her to shine. She totally failed to answer it and threw out a few general phrases.
As for targeting the poor, I hope it involves something more than canvassing poorer areas and chasing out the vote on referendum day.

[lucky]

Labour will launch their report into further devolved powers on Tuesday. It will contain significant additional powers for the Scottish Parliament. Basically it's "Devo Max" that majority of Scots have said they want. It will then be voted on by the Scottish Labour conference on Friday morning and will be part of Labours 2015 UK manifesto.

[allmodcons]

Thanks. :rolleyes:
Rewind to the Sturgeon/Lamont debate. The very first question Sturgeon was asked was how women would benefit from an Independent Scotland. I thought, great, this is a real chance for her to shine. She totally failed to answer it and threw out a few general phrases.
As for targeting the poor, I hope it involves something more than canvassing poorer areas and chasing out the vote on referendum day.

Apologies if I offended you M59. My opening line was said tongue in cheek.
The wider Yes campaign is very active and, as I said, well aware of the potential vote to be had from these 2 groups.
What would you have them do that they aren't already doing?

[Hibrandenburg]

Labour will launch their report into further devolved powers on Tuesday. It will contain significant additional powers for the Scottish Parliament. Basically it's "Devo Max" that majority of Scots have said they want. It will then be voted on by the Scottish Labour conference on Friday morning and will be part of Labours 2015 UK manifesto.

And what if the rest of the Labour Party say no or the Tories get in again?

Full blown independence is the only way to guarantee that Scotland do what's best for Scotland.

[marinello59]

Labour will launch their report into further devolved powers on Tuesday. It will contain significant additional powers for the Scottish Parliament. Basically it's "Devo Max" that majority of Scots have said they want. It will then be voted on by the Scottish Labour conference on Friday morning and will be part of Labours 2015 UK manifesto.

It's Devo Plus rather than Devo Max .

[marinello59]

Apologies if I offended you M59. My opening line was said tongue in cheek.
The wider Yes campaign is very active and, as I said, well aware of the potential vote to be had from these 2 groups.
What would you have them do that they aren't already doing?

I wasn't offended. I do need to get out more. :greengrin
I'll answer your question later.

[lucky]

And what if the rest of the Labour Party say no or the Tories get in again?

Full blown independence is the only way to guarantee that Scotland do what's best for Scotland.

All parties at Westminster are committed to additional powers. The demand for what powers is being answered by the Scottish Labour party

[lucky]

It's Devo Plus rather than Devo Max .

Once it's released you will see the term Devo max is used but the reality it's the powers not the name that's the issue.

[#FromTheCapital]

I'll be voting no. Mainly because of my work having to shift a lot of work to England if the yes vote wins. 90% of our custom is south of the border which would be disasterous if the vote went through. I imagine there'll be a few Scottish companies thinking along the same lines.
Also, I can't see how independence is going to make things any better. We live in a stable country as it is and should be thankful for that, no need for a major shake up. Alex Salmond just doesn't have the answers on some key issues so why take a risk when there is no huge long term benefit to be had?

[CropleyWasGod]

I'll be voting no. Mainly because of my work having to shift a lot of work to England if the yes vote wins. 90% of our custom is south of the border which would be disasterous if the vote went through. I imagine there'll be a few Scottish companies thinking along the same lines.
Also, I can't see how independence is going to make things any better. We live in a stable country as it is and should be thankful for that, no need for a major shake up. Alex Salmond just doesn't have the answers on some key issues so why take a risk when there is no huge long term benefit to be had?

Why "would" your employer have to shift its work?

Surely, as at present, it would make a decision on its base on commercial grounds.

[JeMeSouviens]

It's Devo Plus rather than Devo Max .

More like Devo and a wee bit if the majority of Labour MPs have anything to do with it.

[JeMeSouviens]

I'll be voting no. Mainly because of my work having to shift a lot of work to England if the yes vote wins. 90% of our custom is south of the border which would be disasterous if the vote went through. I imagine there'll be a few Scottish companies thinking along the same lines.
Also, I can't see how independence is going to make things any better. We live in a stable country as it is and should be thankful for that, no need for a major shake up. Alex Salmond just doesn't have the answers on some key issues so why take a risk when there is no huge long term benefit to be had?

Personally, I think you've got that the wrong way round. I don't see much in the way of a short term benefit but in the long term I don't see how having our brightest and best concentrated and focused on our own problems rather than having to hightail it to Westminster to fulfil their ambition of actually doing something can be anything other than a good thing. The UK suffers from a ridiculous London-centric over-centralisation. We live in a faraway backwater, the predominant attitude to me seems to be pay them off and hope they'll shut up. Scotland needs fixed not bribed to keep quiet.

[JimBHibees]

Anyone watch the Andrew Marr show yesterday when Marr was trying to give a personal opinion about EU membership after the recent Barrosso comments and Salmond ripped into him about him giving his personal opinion. Thought Marr was awful especially IMO when he had previously not queried anything Barroso had said yet he felt it appropriate to try and give a personal opinion when interviewing Salmond.

BBC may as well be honest and just say they dont want a yes vote rather than this charade of neutrality. They are the media equivalent of Craig Thompson.

[JeMeSouviens]

Johann Lamont as per the Sunday Mail.


“Many people had been calling for us to bring forward a concept called devo max.
“Well, we believe this is the maximum devolution Scotland would want before the union itself starts to get picked apart and Scotland loses out.

What do you want? We'll damn well tell you what you want!

Devo plus not very much at all is my bet.

[CropleyWasGod]

Johann Lamont as per the Sunday Mail.



What do you want? We'll damn well tell you what you want!

Devo plus not very much at all is my bet.

Can I be the first person of a certain age to raise the question "Are we not men?".

[Stonewall]

Can I be the first person of a certain age to raise the question "Are we not men?".

We are Devo.

[CropleyWasGod]

We are Devo.

:aok:

[JeMeSouviens]

Interesting commentary on NO scaremongering from pugilistic ex-Labour MP Eric Joyce.

http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2014/02/why-independent-scots-would-remain-eu-citizens/
http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2014/03/scotland-foolish-no-campaign-is-morphing-into-the-nasty-campaign/

[#FromTheCapital]

Why "would" your employer have to shift its work?

Surely, as at present, it would make a decision on its base on commercial grounds.

We are a small business based in Edinburgh, shipping goods across the uk, mainly England. If the yes vote wins then 90% of our business becomes export, making it harder for the customer to buy from us and probably more expensive for us to ship. We're in a competitive market and our customers could simply switch to an English based competitor to make life easier for themselves. We're growing and the plan was to move to a bigger premise in Edinburgh but that's been put on hold until after the vote. If it's a yes vote we're buying a place down South and moving the goods and dispatch there.

[lucky]

Eric Joyce is a fool and embarrassment of an MP. But he does make a case on border controls. But I can't accept that the No campaign is any less negative than the Yes campaign. As for Labours Devo commission I think many will be surprised by its content. It sets out why certain powers should devolved and explains the argument for retain powers at Westminster.

[CropleyWasGod]

We are a small business based in Edinburgh, shipping goods across the uk, mainly England. If the yes vote wins then 90% of our business becomes export, making it harder for the customer to buy from us and probably more expensive for us to ship. We're in a competitive market and our customers could simply switch to an English based competitor to make life easier for themselves. We're growing and the plan was to move to a bigger premise in Edinburgh but that's been put on hold until after the vote. If it's a yes vote we're buying a place down South and moving the goods and dispatch there.

That makes sense if there are the so-called transaction charges to deal with.

I had a similar conversation with a client today. The point was made that, if a Scottish Government reduces tax rates, there's an incentive to stay.

[snooky]

Let's turn things on their heads.
Imagine Cameron is in Salmond's position. Scotland voters are say 80% Conservative and England are 80% Labour.
The UK is ruled by a Socialist government.
Do you think DC's views on Independence would be any different?
I just wonder :hmmm:

[Beefster]

Let's turn things on their heads.
Imagine Cameron is in Salmond's position. Scotland voters are say 80% Conservative and England are 80% Labour.
The UK is ruled by a Socialist government.
Do you think DC's views on Independence would be any different?
I just wonder :hmmm:

Sorry, what real-life scenario are you turning on its head?

Either way, your scenario assumes everyone is as cynical as you seem to be. If that was the case, Labour would be pro-independence every time they were out of power.

[JimBHibees]

Eric Joyce is a fool and embarrassment of an MP. But he does make case on border controls. But I can't accept that the No campaign is any less negative than the Yes campaign. As for Labours Devo commission I think many will be surprised by its content. It sets out why certain powers should devolved and explains the argument for retain powers at Westminster.

Really even respected Scottish Unionist politicians are now lining up to say that very thing.

[lucky]

http://s.bsd.net/scotlab/default/page/file/26e0eb4bdf4c775d14_ram6b81bk.pdf

Labours proposed enhanced powers for Holyrood

[JeMeSouviens]

Eric Joyce is a fool and embarrassment of an MP. But he does make case on border controls. But I can't accept that the No campaign is any less negative than the Yes campaign. As for Labours Devo commission I think many will be surprised by its content. It sets out why certain powers should devolved and explains the argument for retain powers at Westminster.

I must say I am surprised. I thought even the Labour party would come up with something more than that. So much for acting boldly. :rolleyes:

[lucky]

The full report is over 300 pages and gives an explanation of what powers labours supports devolving. It's a comprehensive response to the White paper

[ronaldo7]

We concluded that, for a variety of good reasons, VAT, national insurance contributions, corporation tax, alcohol,
tobacco and fuel duties, climate change levy, insurance premium tax, vehicle excise duty, inheritance tax, capital
gains tax and tax on oil receipts should remain reserved. However we do support, in principle, a derogation to
allow a lower rate of fuel duty to be charged in remote rural areas of the Highlands and Islands.

They need our cash.

Air passenger duty pumped into the long grass too.

Our interim report considered whether there was scope for devolution of air passenger duty, subject
particularly to EU rules. We received a number of considered representations, and continue to note that
departures from Highlands and Islands airports are already exempt from this tax. Given the pressure
to reduce this tax from airlines and others and the risk of tax competition which would be created, we
are not now convinced that devolution should be progressed until further consideration is given to the
environmental impact and how else this tax might be reformedAir passenger Dut


Here's what they said earlier
Air passenger Duty

Calman Commission final report, June 2009:

RECOMMENDATION 3.2: Stamp Duty Land Tax, Aggregates Levy, Landfill Tax and Air Passenger Duty should be devolved to the Scottish Parliament, again with a corresponding reduction in the block grant.

Scottish Labour Devolution Commission – interim report, April 2013

Providing that the application of different rates of air passenger duty in Scotland to the rest of the UK did not contravene EU law, and it could be shown that any associated administrative and economic issues could be overcome, we believe that there is a strong case that air passenger duty should be devolved. (p 9)


Labours previous "Commitments" on tax powers in their interim report. Looks like the Big party boys in Westminster have put Johanne in her place.

Previous commitments on tax powers

Income tax

Scottish Labour Devolution Commission – interim report, April 2013

“Income tax is clearly the best candidate for further devolution. It raises enough revenue to make a significant increase in the proportion of the Scottish Budget accounted for by the Parliament’s own resources (closing some of the “fiscal gap”). In our view, a strong case exists for devolving income tax in full, and we are minded to do so. We do, however, wish to consult widely on this issue. The advantage of devolving income tax – a revenue stream that provides a substantial, stable tax yield – is that it would provide a broader range of fiscal choices, enhancing accountability and responsibility for decisions made by the Scottish Parliament on taxation and public expenditure. It would also enable the Scottish Government to make the tax system more progressive. However, we would not want to devolve income tax in a way which would increase the administrative burden on employers, and indeed on individuals”

[JimBHibees]

http://s.bsd.net/scotlab/default/page/file/26e0eb4bdf4c775d14_ram6b81bk.pdf

Labours proposed enhanced powers for Holyrood

Did they mention any of this at the last Holyrood elections?

[marinello59]

Did they mention any of this at the last Holyrood elections?

We wanted the No side tell us what would happen if we voted No. Looks like they have done that. Shouldn't they have.:confused:
It will take me a while to digest that. Initial impressions aren't too good though.

[lucky]

Did they mention any of this at the last Holyrood elections?

None of it was part of the manifesto. This is Labours proposals for further devolved powers. Come 2016 the SLP will produce a full manifesto for the Holyrood elections.

[JimBHibees]

We wanted the No side tell us what would happen if we voted No. Looks like they have done that. Shouldn't they have.:confused:
It will take me a while to digest that. Initial impressions aren't too good though.

This isnt the No side though this is the Labour party who arent in a position to decide otherwise and it appears until recently that they hadnt considered any of these increased devolved powers they now say they are keen on. Was it Blair that called the Scottish Parliament a 'Parish council'?

[ronaldo7]

None of it was part of the manifesto. This is Labours proposals for further devolved powers. Come 2016 the SLP will produce a full manifesto for the Holyrood elections.

And if the 2015 General Election is won by the Tories, can you tell me how many of the proposals will come to fruition?

[marinello59]

This isnt the No side though this is the Labour party who arent in a position to decide otherwise and it appears until recently that they hadnt considered any of these increased devolved powers they now say they are keen on. Was it Blair that called the Scottish Parliament a 'Parish council'?

Would you also argue that much of the White Paper isn't the Yes side but is SNP policy? I don't really care what Blair said in a sound bite, his Government actually delivered devolution. Just a pity that they didn't really understand the reality of it once they had.
What do you think of the actual proposals? I assume you have had time to go them in detail, it will take me a while to consider them but at least it's something worthy of considering. It will be interesting to see what the Tories come out with because I suspect they may go even further.

[Glory Lurker]

Possibly another huge boost for the Yes campaign? - is the font used on today's "6 months" signage the same as the one used on the "Rangers FC" sign on the Govan stand roof at Ibrox? :greengrin:stirrer:

[lucky]

And if the 2015 General Election is won by the Tories, can you tell me how many of the proposals will come to fruition?

None but as you've belittled them you won't be bothered. The Tories are going to publish their proposals in the next couple of months but god knows what they will come up with.

[JeMeSouviens]

Would you also argue that much of the White Paper isn't the Yes side but is SNP policy? I don't really care what Blair said in a sound bite, his Government actually delivered devolution. Just a pity that they didn't really understand the reality of it once they had.
What do you think of the actual proposals? I assume you have had time to go them in detail, it will take me a while to consider them but at least it's something worthy of considering. It will be interesting to see what the Tories come out with because I suspect they may go even further.

It strikes me as over-complicated tinkering around the margins. Very Gordon Brown, wonder how much of a hand he had in this?

The Lib Dem proposals from old Ming the not especially Merciless seem much more coherent but unfortunately their Tory dalliance has left them looking like electoral snowballs in hell.

[Beefster]

And if the 2015 General Election is won by the Tories, can you tell me how many of the proposals will come to fruition?

How many of the SNP promises will come to fruition if Labour win the first post-independence election?

[lucky]

Another blow to the SNPs plans to cut corporation tax
http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-corporation-tax-plan-warning-1-3345629?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

[JimBHibees]

Would you also argue that much of the White Paper isn't the Yes side but is SNP policy? I don't really care what Blair said in a sound bite, his Government actually delivered devolution. Just a pity that they didn't really understand the reality of it once they had.
What do you think of the actual proposals? I assume you have had time to go them in detail, it will take me a while to consider them but at least it's something worthy of considering. It will be interesting to see what the Tories come out with because I suspect they may go even further.

No I havent just very cynical of these new plans being raised which appear to be on the hoof.

[ronaldo7]

How many of the SNP promises will come to fruition if Labour win the first post-independence election?

I would think none. I'd still be delighted though as we would have won the yes vote to a new beginning. I'm voting yes for an independent scotland, not for the snp.

[Beefster]

I would think none. I'd still be delighted though as we would have won the yes vote to a new beginning. I'm voting yes for an independent scotland, not for the snp.

That wasn't really the point you were making when you were attempting to dismiss Labour's proposals though. I don't recall you dismissing the SNP White Paper quite so readily, despite it being arguably more unlikely to have a chance of implementation than the Labour stuff.

[allmodcons]

Labour will launch their report into further devolved powers on Tuesday. It will contain significant additional powers for the Scottish Parliament. Basically it's "Devo Max" that majority of Scots have said they want. It will then be voted on by the Scottish Labour conference on Friday morning and will be part of Labours 2015 UK manifesto.

Having had some time to digest what's on offer from 'Scottish Labour' would it be safe to say that you got this wrong?
You can call it a lot of things but one thing's for sure it certainly is not Devo Max.
One other thing, as they will be responsible for implementing this 'half baked' proposal, can I ask if the recommendations will be included in the UK Labour Party's 2015 General Election manifesto?

[JeMeSouviens]

Nailed:


Ben Thomson, chairman of the Devo Plus thinktank, which has Labour, Lib Dem and Tory membership, said he was deeply disappointed by the new proposals and said it remained unclear how Labour believed the limited tax devolution was equal to 40% of Holyrood's spending.

It would not make Scottish politicians accountable enough for the money they spend, he said. "It's just tinkering with the current system," Thomson said. "It's just lip service towards real devolved powers. The SNP will benefit from this; they will just say that the unionist parties aren't interested in real devolution."

Strange days when you're awaiting the Tory proposals with more interest. :rolleyes:

[lucky]

Having had some time to digest what's on offer from 'Scottish Labour' would it be safe to say that you got this wrong?
You can call it a lot of things but one thing's for sure it certainly is not Devo Max.
One other thing, as they will be responsible for implementing this 'half baked' proposal, can I ask if the recommendations will be included in the UK Labour Party's 2015 General Election manifesto?
It will be part of the UK labour manifesto if accepted by this weekend Scottish conference

[lucky]

Nailed:



Strange days when you're awaiting the Tory proposals with more interest. :rolleyes:

Labour went with these proposals as we would still receive funding from Westminster through the Barnett formula. There has been much debate within the party over tax and how much should be devolved. Personally I believe it's a fudge and I would have gone further but others were against this. We shall have a full debate on this on Friday

[allmodcons]

Labour will launch their report into further devolved powers on Tuesday. It will contain significant additional powers for the Scottish Parliament. Basically it's "Devo Max" that majority of Scots have said they want. It will then be voted on by the Scottish Labour conference on Friday morning and will be part of Labours 2015 UK manifesto.


Having had some time to digest what's on offer from 'Scottish Labour' would it be safe to say that you got this wrong?
You can call it a lot of things but one thing's for sure it certainly is not Devo Max.
One other thing, as they will be responsible for implementing this 'half baked' proposal, can I ask if the recommendations will be included in the UK Labour Party's 2015 General Election manifesto?


It will be part of the UK labour manifesto if accepted by this weekend Scottish conference

So you 'jumped the gun' with the Devo Max line?

Provided we vote No, are you sure this will form part of the 2015 UK Labour Party GE manifesto?
I could be wrong but my understanding is that this is a proposal for the 2016 Scottish Election.

Whatever way you look at it, it's a complete dog's breakfast and only goes as far as tinkering around the edges. If you want confirmation of this you should take a look at Gordon Brewer interviewing Johann Lamont on Newsnight last night. This from a woman who aspires to be Scotland's FM!!!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03yq7hy/Newsnight_Scotland_18_03_2014/

My favourite bit:-

BREWER: What if Ed Balls should become Chancellor of the Exchequer and he says “Right, I’m going to put the top rate up to 50p”, can the Scottish Parliament say no, we’re not going to do that, we’ll just keep it at 45p?
LAMONT: I wouldn’t have thought so.

[lucky]

So you 'jumped the gun' with the Devo Max line?

Provided we vote No, are you sure this will form part of the 2015 UK Labour Party GE manifesto?
I could be wrong but my understanding is that this is a proposal for the 2016 Scottish Election.

Whatever way you look at it, it's a complete dog's breakfast and only goes as far as tinkering around the edges. If you want confirmation of this you should take a look at Gordon Brewer interviewing Johann Lamont on Newsnight last night. This from a woman who aspires to be Scotland's FM!!!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03yq7hy/Newsnight_Scotland_18_03_2014/

My favourite bit:-

BREWER: What if Ed Balls should become Chancellor of the Exchequer and he says “Right, I’m going to put the top rate up to 50p”, can the Scottish Parliament say no, we’re not going to do that, we’ll just keep it at 45p?
LAMONT: I wouldn’t have thought so.

Did not jump the gun on the Devo max, it is actually described as such in the document. If the SLP conference votes to accept the SEC recommendation then it will be part of the UK manifesto in 2015.

On a side note, unite the union have decided to stay neutral. I would say that's more disappointing for the NO campaign as Unite are a Labour affiliated union.

[allmodcons]

Did not jump the gun on the Devo max, it is actually described as such in the document. If the SLP conference votes to accept the SEC recommendation then it will be part of the UK manifesto in 2015.

On a side note, unite the union have decided to stay neutral. I would say that's more disappointing for the NO campaign as Unite are a Labour affiliated union.


You sound a smidgen pissed off with the lack of commitment shown by the Labour Party?

Maybe you should drop the Better Together link, seize the opportunity and vote Yes :greengrin.

[lucky]

You sound a smidgen pissed off with the lack of commitment shown by the Labour Party?

Maybe you should drop the Better Together link, seize the opportunity and vote Yes :greengrin.

I'm a democrat and accept collective responsibility. When we engage in these processes you seldom get everything you want.

Joking aside Labour have done a decent job on this considering there are many within the party that did not want further devolution. I took the decision to vote no based on my head not my heart. As I have said previously there are too many questions unanswered to take a risk with a yes vote. Some of that is my pathological hatred of the Nats. Been involved in too many campaigns over decades to change that.

[ronaldo7]

That wasn't really the point you were making when you were attempting to dismiss Labour's proposals though. I don't recall you dismissing the SNP White Paper quite so readily, despite it being arguably more unlikely to have a chance of implementation than the Labour stuff.

The point on the SLP devo nano document was to show how they have back tracked from their interim reports, maybe someone from Westminster told them to pipe down. On the white paper, still digesting it thanks.

[ronaldo7]

None but as you've belittled them you won't be bothered. The Tories are going to publish their proposals in the next couple of months but god knows what they will come up with.

So when I point out the changes from the interim report to the final document its belittling it. I would say back tracking would be more appropriate. Westminster labour have had their day.

[lucky]

So when I point out the changes from the interim report to the final document its belittling it. I would say back tracking would be more appropriate. Westminster labour have had their day.

It's an internal labour document so changes were always going to happen. But your wrong if you think Westminster is finished. The bookies the polls and commentators are saying a No vote is likely to win. The trouble with being a separatist is that you and your kind can't / won't see the benefits of devolution

[ronaldo7]

It's an internal labour document so changes were always going to happen. But your wrong if you think Westminster is finished. The bookies the polls and commentators are saying a No vote is likely to win. The trouble with being a separatist is that you and your kind can't / won't see the benefits of devolution

Care to elaborate.

I am not a member of any political party and have looked at how the country has been run in both Scotland since Devolution, and the UK. I prefer to be given a shot at doing it for ourselves.

On the subject of Devolution, I've seen benefits and can see no harm in pushing it further. If you want to take your pocket money from Gideon and Co, that's your prerogative. I wouldn't hold out much hope of getting into power in any parliament any time soon.

[Glory Lurker]

It's an internal labour document so changes were always going to happen. But your wrong if you think Westminster is finished. The bookies the polls and commentators are saying a No vote is likely to win. The trouble with being a separatist is that you and your kind can't / won't see the benefits of devolution

Quite the opposite. We've always seen it as a means of Scotland gaining confidence on the road to independence. It's done a grand job. Labour is very late to the devolution party. If it hadn't have been for Sillars winning Govan in '88 I do wonder when you would have got round to it at all.

P.S. love the "you and your kind" comment - are we still a virus?:greengrin

[marinello59]

Quite the opposite. We've always seen it as a means of Scotland gaining confidence on the road to independence. It's done a grand job. Labour is very late to the devolution party. If it hadn't have been for Sillars winning Govan in '88 I do wonder when you would have got round to it at all.

P.S. love the "you and your kind" comment - are we still a virus?:greengrin

You maybe want to rethink the Labour late to devolution line. A wee bit silly given that Labour were ever presents in the Scottish Constituonal Convention which lead directly to the creation of the devolved Scottish government.

[ronaldo7]

I'm a democrat and accept collective responsibility. When we engage in these processes you seldom get everything you want.

Joking aside Labour have done a decent job on this considering there are many within the party that did not want further devolution. I took the decision to vote no based on my head not my heart. As I have said previously there are too many questions unanswered to take a risk with a yes vote. Some of that is my pathological hatred of the Nats. Been involved in too many campaigns over decades to change that.

You really need the channel that Hatred bud.

[Glory Lurker]

You maybe want to rethink the Labour late to devolution line. A wee bit silly given that Labour were ever presents in the Scottish Constituonal Convention which lead directly to the creation of the devolved Scottish government.

No, I'll stick by it. The Scottish Constitutional Convention kicked up in the wake of Sillars winning Govan.

[BroxburnHibee]

People really need to forget about hating the SNP and vote on whether they think Independence is good for Scotland.

Salmond's an erse and I expect him to be voted out of a job at the earliest opportunity (only if Labour get a more credible leader mind you) that interview the other day along with her stupid performance against Sturgeon a few weeks back have done Lamont irreparable damage IMO.

[marinello59]

No, I'll stick by it. The Scottish Constitutional Convention kicked up in the wake of Sillars winning Govan.

Nope, it evolved from the ashes of the failed '79 referundum. And Sillars had little to do with it. Like it or not Labour delivered devolution. Saying they are late to the Devo party is simply not true.

[snooky]

People really need to forget about hating the SNP and vote on whether they think Independence is good for Scotland.

Salmond's an erse and I expect him to be voted out of a job at the earliest opportunity (only if Labour get a more credible leader mind you) that interview the other day along with her stupid performance against Sturgeon a few weeks back have done Lamont irreparable damage IMO.

:agree:

The only thing she's missing is a half dozen clothes pegs in her mouth.
If that's the best Labour leader Scotland can come up with then God help us in Westminster or Holyrood, where'er the future lies.

[marinello59]

People really need to forget about hating the SNP and vote on whether they think Independence is good for Scotland.

Salmond's an erse and I expect him to be voted out of a job at the earliest opportunity (only if Labour get a more credible leader mind you) that interview the other day along with her stupid performance against Sturgeon a few weeks back have done Lamont irreparable damage IMO.
Sturgeon was just as bad as Lamont when they went head to head. In some ways she was worse as she was always going to look slicker in a TV setting yet she failed to add any meaningful arguments to the Yes side. Very disappointing, I admire both of them.
Anyway... I can't stand the SNP but will be voting YES. I really hope they disappear for good after Independence.

[Glory Lurker]

Nope, it evolved from the ashes of the failed '79 referundum. And Sillars had little to do with it. Like it or not Labour delivered devolution. Saying they are late to the Devo party is simply not true.


Sorry, I don't agree. Labour's lack of commitment to devolution led to the failure of the 79 referendum that you mention. The party was hopelessly split on the issue then and in the years after. The Campaign for a Scottish Assembly did not have full support from the party, and there were many in Labour strenuously anti. The CSA was barely a movement, either. The first march I ever went on was with them and I was almost embarrassed at how few of us were there.

Devolution was a fringe topic for Labour in the '80s. Sillars won Govan and all hell broke lose. The Constitutional Convention was formed the next again year, so it's not right to say it evolved from the 79 referendum.

My take on all of this is from growing up through the 80s, despairing of Labour's lack of interest in pressing the Scottish agenda. I might be doing you a dis-service assuming that you are old enough to remember it too (:greengrin). Perhaps we just took different impressions of what was going on?

As for delivery, Labour delivered the vote - it was the Scottish people that delivered the result.

[snooky]

Sturgeon was just as bad as Lamont when they went head to head. In some ways she was worse as she was always going to look slicker in a TV setting yet she failed to add any meaningful arguments to the Yes side. Very disappointing, I admire both of them.
Anyway... I can't stand the SNP but will be voting YES. I really hope they disappear for good after Independence.

I agree with you entirely. Sturgeon came over as smug and over confident.
I was very disappointed with the performance of all three of the women on that programme.
Catfight.

[Glory Lurker]

Sturgeon was just as bad as Lamont when they went head to head. In some ways she was worse as she was always going to look slicker in a TV setting yet she failed to add any meaningful arguments to the Yes side. Very disappointing, I admire both of them.
Anyway... I can't stand the SNP but will be voting YES. I really hope they disappear for good after Independence.

A good opportunity to put my cards on the table while we debate Labour's 1980s devolution policy (we really do need to get out more!). I have always supported the SNP because I support independence. I am a member for that reason. I am really enjoying the Yes campaign because I don't need to be party political. If you get your wish after independence I'll not greet my eyes out.

[BroxburnHibee]

Sturgeon was just as bad as Lamont when they went head to head. In some ways she was worse as she was always going to look slicker in a TV setting yet she failed to add any meaningful arguments to the Yes side. Very disappointing, I admire both of them.
Anyway... I can't stand the SNP but will be voting YES. I really hope they disappear for good after Independence.

Neither of them got any credit from that performance but for me Sturgeon at least gave some answers when called on but it was hard to hear it with all the cackling going on. Lamont's whole tactic was clearly to disrupt the whole thing as often as she could (and as a Labour voter my whole life I found it pathetic). This is the woman that won 'Debater of the year' last year!!!!

That Newsnight interview was frankly ridiculous and I'm afraid it will be used again and again to beat her up. Gordon Brewer could hardly believe his ears.

I can't stand Salmond but I don't think the SNP will wilt away after Independence. Sturgeon will get the leadership soon enough once the referendum is over and will be a force to reckon with in Scottish politics for many years.

[marinello59]

Voting yes, I really dont see any reason not to.


Sorry, I don't agree. Labour's lack of commitment to devolution led to the failure of the 79 referendum that you mention. The party was hopelessly split on the issue then and in the years after. The Campaign for a Scottish Assembly did not have full support from the party, and there were many in Labour strenuously anti. The CSA was barely a movement, either. The first march I ever went on was with them and I was almost embarrassed at how few of us were there.

Devolution was a fringe topic for Labour in the '80s. Sillars won Govan and all hell broke lose. The Constitutional Convention was formed the next again year, so it's not right to say it evolved from the 79 referendum.

My take on all of this is from growing up through the 80s, despairing of Labour's lack of interest in pressing the Scottish agenda. I might be doing you a dis-service assuming that you are old enough to remember it too (:greengrin). Perhaps we just took different impressions of what was going on?

As for delivery, Labour delivered the vote - it was the Scottish people that delivered the result.

Fair comments. We have a different perception of what went on . At least we agree on the right way to vote in September.

[Hibrandenburg]

Sturgeon was just as bad as Lamont when they went head to head. In some ways she was worse as she was always going to look slicker in a TV setting yet she failed to add any meaningful arguments to the Yes side. Very disappointing, I admire both of them.
Anyway... I can't stand the SNP but will be voting YES. I really hope they disappear for good after Independence.

The SNP are like the Tories during the war years. They've been voted in to get a job done and will be launched on completion.

[Saorsa]

It's an internal labour document so changes were always going to happen. But your wrong if you think Westminster is finished. The bookies the polls and commentators are saying a No vote is likely to win. The trouble with being a separatist is that you and your kind can't / won't see the benefits of devolutionNever paid much attention tae these things, canvass returns on the other hand.....:agree:



:tee hee:

[JeMeSouviens]

Latest Panelbase (conducted 7-14 March, ex don't knows and changes versus prior Panelbase poll):

Yes 47 (+3)
No 53 (-3)


Interesting. :wink:

[JeMeSouviens]

Anyway... I can't stand the SNP but will be voting YES. I really hope they disappear for good after Independence.

I more or less agree. Especially Salmond.

Pretty tragic that short term considerations like Fat Eck's smug pus being around a few more years or the campaign tribalism of Labour's Nat bashers might deprive of us of a once in a lifetime chance to be a proper country that gets on with sorting itself out. Sigh.

[allmodcons]

I more or less agree. Especially Salmond.

Pretty tragic that short term considerations like Fat Eck's smug pus being around a few more years or the campaign tribalism of Labour's Nat bashers might deprive of us of a once in a lifetime chance to be a proper country that gets on with sorting itself out. Sigh.

Who do you think was, in the main, responsible for delivering this 'once in a lifetime chance'?

Answer - the SNP led by Alex Salmond.

Never before have Scots had the oppourtunity to vote on their own sovereignty and the best you can do is refer to Salmond as Fat Eck.

[allmodcons]

I'm a democrat and accept collective responsibility. When we engage in these processes you seldom get everything you want.

Joking aside Labour have done a decent job on this considering there are many within the party that did not want further devolution. I took the decision to vote no based on my head not my heart. As I have said previously there are too many questions unanswered to take a risk with a yes vote. Some of that is my pathological hatred of the Nats. Been involved in too many campaigns over decades to change that.


It's an internal labour document so changes were always going to happen. But your wrong if you think Westminster is finished. The bookies the polls and commentators are saying a No vote is likely to win. The trouble with being a separatist is that you and your kind can't / won't see the benefits of devolution

The rhetoric you're using suggests to me you're losing the agrument.
Why would you hate 'Nats'. I'm a Nationalist. You've never met me, but yet you have pathological hatred towards me???

[stoneyburn hibs]

It's an internal labour document so changes were always going to happen. But your wrong if you think Westminster is finished. The bookies the polls and commentators are saying a No vote is likely to win. The trouble with being a separatist is that you and your kind can't / won't see the benefits of devolution

Can't see any benefits in getting a few more crumbs of power handed to the Scottish parliament every four years from whoever is in charge at Westminster.

This is our chance to get what we vote for, who we vote for and total control of our finances.

[JimBHibees]

So you 'jumped the gun' with the Devo Max line?

Provided we vote No, are you sure this will form part of the 2015 UK Labour Party GE manifesto?
I could be wrong but my understanding is that this is a proposal for the 2016 Scottish Election.

Whatever way you look at it, it's a complete dog's breakfast and only goes as far as tinkering around the edges. If you want confirmation of this you should take a look at Gordon Brewer interviewing Johann Lamont on Newsnight last night. This from a woman who aspires to be Scotland's FM!!!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03yq7hy/Newsnight_Scotland_18_03_2014/

My favourite bit:-

BREWER: What if Ed Balls should become Chancellor of the Exchequer and he says “Right, I’m going to put the top rate up to 50p”, can the Scottish Parliament say no, we’re not going to do that, we’ll just keep it at 45p?
LAMONT: I wouldn’t have thought so.

Just listened to that. She is truly awful didnt have a clue. Scotland can raise the top rate of tax but not lower the rates. Dear oh dear.

[JimBHibees]

I'm a democrat and accept collective responsibility. When we engage in these processes you seldom get everything you want.

Joking aside Labour have done a decent job on this considering there are many within the party that did not want further devolution. I took the decision to vote no based on my head not my heart. As I have said previously there are too many questions unanswered to take a risk with a yes vote. Some of that is my pathological hatred of the Nats. Been involved in too many campaigns over decades to change that.

Really, dear oh dear. So if independence would benefit Scotland and its communities you wouldnt vote for it because of a pathological hatred of the SNP.

[lucky]

The rhetoric you're using suggests to me you're losing the agrument.
Why would you hate 'Nats'. I'm a Nationalist. You've never met me, but yet you have pathological hatred towards me???

Not lost any arguments on here about the separatist agenda but I've use over the top rhetoric similar to what is used by Hibs fans about Hearts in describing the SNP.

[JeMeSouviens]

Who do you think was, in the main, responsible for delivering this 'once in a lifetime chance'?

Answer - the SNP led by Alex Salmond.

Never before have Scots had the oppourtunity to vote on their own sovereignty and the best you can do is refer to Salmond as Fat Eck.

Jeezo - it's only the interweb! :wink:

I personally don't buy the super-astute Salmond myth (see unpardonable folly, penny-for-Scotland) and let's face it he doesn't have much to compete against in Holyrood. I also find him hard to like due to the aforementioned smugness factor. I have submitted myself to rigorous self appraisal just to check I'm not letting anti-Hearts bias creep in.

[Future17]

I'm a democrat and accept collective responsibility. When we engage in these processes you seldom get everything you want.

Joking aside Labour have done a decent job on this considering there are many within the party that did not want further devolution. I took the decision to vote no based on my head not my heart. As I have said previously there are too many questions unanswered to take a risk with a yes vote. Some of that is my pathological hatred of the Nats. Been involved in too many campaigns over decades to change that.

I'm not sure you can attribute a "no" vote stance to your head having made the decision if it's partly based on a pathological hatred of something.

[RyeSloan]

Jeezo - it's only the interweb! :wink: I personally don't buy the super-astute Salmond myth (see unpardonable folly, penny-for-Scotland) and let's face it he doesn't have much to compete against in Holyrood. I also find him hard to like due to the aforementioned smugness factor. I have submitted myself to rigorous self appraisal just to check I'm not letting anti-Hearts bias creep in.

I trust that self appraisal did indeed find that the fact he's a fat Jambo does indeed have a weighting in ones consideration :-)

[ronaldo7]

It's an internal labour document so changes were always going to happen. But your wrong if you think Westminster is finished. The bookies the polls and commentators are saying a No vote is likely to win. The trouble with being a separatist is that you and your kind can't / won't see the benefits of devolution


Care to elaborate.

I am not a member of any political party and have looked at how the country has been run in both Scotland since Devolution, and the UK. I prefer to be given a shot at doing it for ourselves.

On the subject of Devolution, I've seen benefits and can see no harm in pushing it further. If you want to take your pocket money from Gideon and Co, that's your prerogative. I wouldn't hold out much hope of getting into power in any parliament any time soon.


Not lost any arguments on here about the separatist agenda but I've use over the top rhetoric similar to what is used by Hibs fans about Hearts in describing the SNP.

Lucky, I was hoping you would respond to my request for you to elaborate on "Me and my Kind". Any thoughts now you've had a night to think about it?

[ronaldo7]

Meanwhile back on track. Johann might want to go back to skool.

http://reformscotland.com/index.php/publications/details/2010

[Saorsa]

Meanwhile back on track. Johann might want to go back to skool.

http://reformscotland.com/index.php/publications/details/2010


Nail, hammer, heid

"The report is clearly motivated more by short-term referendum politics than a real desire for significant further devolution.”http://i58.tinypic.com/w8xmop.gif

[Purple & Green]

IMHO the sooner we get the referendum over and done with, the better

Sorry to pick up an old post, but I'm inclined to think that a very likely (and worst case scenario IMHO) is that we have a 48/49% yes vote which doesn't resolve the issue and we're debating for another five years before going to the polls again (and voting yes - which I think is inevitable now at some point)

[steakbake]

Better Together parties all now falling over themselves to come up with further devo plans - most of them just smoke and mirrors. Is the No poll lead softer than they'd like to tell us it is?

[lucky]

Lucky, I was hoping you would respond to my request for you to elaborate on "Me and my Kind". Any thoughts now you've had a night to think about it?

Don't know what sort of answer you want or expect. Certainly not even thought about it and was not aware that you were waiting overnight for a response. But it's fairly simple You and your kind--- separatists/ nationalists. Hope thus helps you sleep😄 won't be responding for a few days as I'm away to Perth for the weekend. Mixture of party conference and Hibs

[Beefster]

Sorry to pick up an old post, but I'm inclined to think that a very likely (and worst case scenario IMHO) is that we have a 48/49% yes vote which doesn't resolve the issue and we're debating for another five years before going to the polls again (and voting yes - which I think is inevitable now at some point)

No chance. As a nation, we can't have a damaging debate and the associated uncertainty of this kind every five years. Presumably if it's 51/49 in favour of indpendence, you wouldn't expect a poll on rejoining the union in five years?

If there's a 'no', there may well be a future referendum but it won't be for a long long time. Whatever the result, it should be final in the medium term. Folk on the losing side are just going to have to suck it up and get on with making the best of whatever we decide.

[jodjam]

Sorry to pick up an old post, but I'm inclined to think that a very likely (and worst case scenario IMHO) is that we have a 48/49% yes vote which doesn't resolve the issue and we're debating for another five years before going to the polls again (and voting yes - which I think is inevitable now at some point)

I think this is a one off vote, or at best , a once in a generation vote. The convoluted voting system we were given will see that. Barring a huge scandal hitting 3 of the parties in Scottish politics , we will have coalition governments for some time to come. Even as the votes were being counted at the last election the political analysts were still predicting a coalition.

Hopefully no need though and the YES campaign wins.

[Hibrandenburg]

A bit of fun but it's only funny because like most good gags there's an element of truth in there.

http://longtermplan.org.uk/

Shamelessly stolen from Atomheartfather on Facebook :greengrin

[Peevemor]

A bit of fun but it's only funny because like most good gags there's an element of truth in there.

http://longtermplan.org.uk/

:aok: Used!

[ronaldo7]

Don't know what sort of answer you want or expect. Certainly not even thought about it and was not aware that you were waiting overnight for a response. But it's fairly simple You and your kind--- separatists/ nationalists. Hope thus helps you sleep won't be responding for a few days as I'm away to Perth for the weekend. Mixture of party conference and Hibs

:tee hee: Thanks for your reply.

I was just wanting to see how the labour party activists were going to get me back onboard having voted labour for many years, only to find that we are now hated for deciding to vote for someone else.

I look forward to when the local labour party knock on my door in East Lothian:aok:

I wish I could have caught you before you left for perth as I had a wee calculator for Johann you could have dropped off.

Next time maybe with a 40% discount:aok:

[ronaldo7]

A bit of fun but it's only funny because like most good gags there's an element of truth in there.

http://longtermplan.org.uk/

Shamelessly stolen from Atomheartfather on Facebook :greengrin

Brilliant...Stolen:aok:

[ronaldo7]

Henry kens whit the score is...Stop all the Hating:greengrin

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/mcleish-labour-must-stop-hating-salmond-and-snp-1-3350246

[Hibrandenburg]

Henry kens whit the score is...Stop all the Hating:greengrin

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/mcleish-labour-must-stop-hating-salmond-and-snp-1-3350246

He does raise an interesting question there. We pretty much know what direction we will move in if Scotland votes yes but where do we go if it votes no? So many permutations depending on who wins the next UK election.

[Phil D. Rolls]

No chance. As a nation, we can't have a damaging debate and the associated uncertainty of this kind every five years. Presumably if it's 51/49 in favour of indpendence, you wouldn't expect a poll on rejoining the union in five years?

If there's a 'no', there may well be a future referendum but it won't be for a long long time. Whatever the result, it should be final in the medium term. Folk on the losing side are just going to have to suck it up and get on with making the best of whatever we decide.

I agree, I think it's put up or shut up time. I'd go further and suggest that if people continue to see us as a nation, rather than a region, after a no vote, they are out of order.

If we vote no, we vote for the UK. We should take our place, in the queue with the English regions.

[HiBremian]

A bit of fun but it's only funny because like most good gags there's an element of truth in there.

http://longtermplan.org.uk/

Shamelessly stolen from Atomheartfather on Facebook :greengrin

Ah, you reckon I don't pop in to this thread anymore, Paul? :greengrin

PS:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/osbornes-case-against-currency-union-ripped-apart-by-top-economist.23757346

[Beefster]

I agree, I think it's put up or shut up time. I'd go further and suggest that if people continue to see us as a nation, rather than a region, after a no vote, they are out of order.

If we vote no, we vote for the UK. We should take our place, in the queue with the English regions.

If I vote no, it'll be for Scotland to remain within the UK. Everyone's entitled to their own reasoning behind their decision though.

[HiBremian]

I agree, I think it's put up or shut up time. I'd go further and suggest that if people continue to see us as a nation, rather than a region, after a no vote, they are out of order.

If we vote no, we vote for the UK. We should take our place, in the queue with the English regions.

Interesting that you try to play off "nation" against "region" as if they were black and white. What of the Europe of the Regions debate? Or that related issue subsidiarity? In reality, the referendum has got little to do with economic viability - where on the scale of economic competence do you put Westminster governance, I wonder - and everything to do with power struggles. Of the three centres of power that affect our lives most - Brussels, London and Edinburgh - there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the most damaging is London, and the over-arching power of the City. Anything that reduces their influence has to be welcomed.

[Hibrandenburg]

Ah, you reckon I don't pop in to this thread anymore, Paul? :greengrin

PS:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/osbornes-case-against-currency-union-ripped-apart-by-top-economist.23757346

Knew you'd be sniffing around at some point Richard, that's why I gave you credit. :greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

If I vote no, it'll be for Scotland to remain within the UK. Everyone's entitled to their own reasoning behind their decision though.


Interesting that you try to play off "nation" against "region" as if they were black and white. What of the Europe of the Regions debate? Or that related issue subsidiarity? In reality, the referendum has got little to do with economic viability - where on the scale of economic competence do you put Westminster governance, I wonder - and everything to do with power struggles. Of the three centres of power that affect our lives most - Brussels, London and Edinburgh - there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the most damaging is London, and the over-arching power of the City. Anything that reduces their influence has to be welcomed.

Good points, thanks for the responses.:aok:

[green glory]

Last night the following Scottish Labour MP's voted hand in hand with the Tories for the benefits cap. Along with their failure to vote against the bedroom tax when they had the opportunity recently.

Shame on them.

Margaret Curran – Glasgow East
Tom Greatrex – Rutherglen and Hamilton West
Ian Murray – Edinburgh South
Willie Bain – Glasgow North East
Gordon Banks – Ochil and South Perthshire
Tom Clarke – Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill
Dame Anne Begg – Aberdeen South
Alistair Darling – Edinburgh South West
Ian Davidson – Glasgow South West
Thomas Docherty – Dunfermline and west Fife
Frank Doran – Aberdeen North
Gemma Doyle – West Dunbartonshire
Sheila Gilmore – Edinburgh East
David Hamilton – Midlothian
Tom Harris – Glasgow South
Jimmy Hood – Lanark and Hamilton East
Cathy Jamieson – Kilmarnock and Loudon
Mark Lazarowicz – Edinburgh North and Leith
Gregg McClymont – Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East
Anne McGuire – Stirling
Anne McKechin – Glasgow North
Iain McKenzie – Greeenock and Inverclyde
Grahame Morris – Livingston
Jim Murphy – East Renfrewshire
Pamela Nash – Airdrie and Shotts
Sandra Osborne – Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock
John Robertson – Glasgow North West
Frank Roy – Motherwell and Wishaw
Lindsay Roy – Glenrothes
Anas Sarwar – Glasgow Central

[hibsbollah]

Last night the following Scottish Labour MP's voted hand in hand with the Tories for the benefits cap. Along with their failure to vote against the bedroom tax when they had the opportunity recently.

Shame on them.

Margaret Curran – Glasgow East
Tom Greatrex – Rutherglen and Hamilton West
Ian Murray – Edinburgh South
Willie Bain – Glasgow North East
Gordon Banks – Ochil and South Perthshire
Tom Clarke – Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill
Dame Anne Begg – Aberdeen South
Alistair Darling – Edinburgh South West
Ian Davidson – Glasgow South West
Thomas Docherty – Dunfermline and west Fife
Frank Doran – Aberdeen North
Gemma Doyle – West Dunbartonshire
Sheila Gilmore – Edinburgh East
David Hamilton – Midlothian
Tom Harris – Glasgow South
Jimmy Hood – Lanark and Hamilton East
Cathy Jamieson – Kilmarnock and Loudon
Mark Lazarowicz – Edinburgh North and Leith
Gregg McClymont – Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East
Anne McGuire – Stirling
Anne McKechin – Glasgow North
Iain McKenzie – Greeenock and Inverclyde
Grahame Morris – Livingston
Jim Murphy – East Renfrewshire
Pamela Nash – Airdrie and Shotts
Sandra Osborne – Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock
John Robertson – Glasgow North West
Frank Roy – Motherwell and Wishaw
Lindsay Roy – Glenrothes
Anas Sarwar – Glasgow Central

Sarwar, Lazarovic, Murphy and Alistair Darling conspicuous by their inclusion. I get deluged with emails from my MP Ian Murray anyway; im going to reply to him this morning and asked him what his rationalefor supporting the benefits cap was.

[green glory]

Sarwar, Lazarovic, Murphy and Alistair Darling conspicuous by their inclusion. I get deluged with emails from my MP Ian Murray anyway; im going to reply to him this morning and asked him what his rationalefor supporting the benefits cap was.

It's estimated this'll push around 345,000 people in the UK into poverty. Food bank use has increased to around 500,000.

Better Together = shrugging your shoulders and accepting the above, accepting nothing can be done, or hoping under the current system somehow it'll work out. There's no way the people we entrust with power at Westminster are fit for purpose anymore.

Every one of us and our families are all only one injury or illness away from needing benefits. Something we should all remember when we stand in that ballot box in September.

[JeMeSouviens]

Puts the "Tartan Tories" jibe into a bit of a different light. :rolleyes:

Latest Westminster polling shows Milliband has blown his lead and they are now neck and neck with the Tories in intentions for the 2015 GE.

Vote No at your peril! :shocked:


Last night the following Scottish Labour MP's voted hand in hand with the Tories for the benefits cap. Along with their failure to vote against the bedroom tax when they had the opportunity recently.

Shame on them.

Margaret Curran – Glasgow East
Tom Greatrex – Rutherglen and Hamilton West
Ian Murray – Edinburgh South
Willie Bain – Glasgow North East
Gordon Banks – Ochil and South Perthshire
Tom Clarke – Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill
Dame Anne Begg – Aberdeen South
Alistair Darling – Edinburgh South West
Ian Davidson – Glasgow South West
Thomas Docherty – Dunfermline and west Fife
Frank Doran – Aberdeen North
Gemma Doyle – West Dunbartonshire
Sheila Gilmore – Edinburgh East
David Hamilton – Midlothian
Tom Harris – Glasgow South
Jimmy Hood – Lanark and Hamilton East
Cathy Jamieson – Kilmarnock and Loudon
Mark Lazarowicz – Edinburgh North and Leith
Gregg McClymont – Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East
Anne McGuire – Stirling
Anne McKechin – Glasgow North
Iain McKenzie – Greeenock and Inverclyde
Grahame Morris – Livingston
Jim Murphy – East Renfrewshire
Pamela Nash – Airdrie and Shotts
Sandra Osborne – Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock
John Robertson – Glasgow North West
Frank Roy – Motherwell and Wishaw
Lindsay Roy – Glenrothes
Anas Sarwar – Glasgow Central

[JimBHibees]

Last night the following Scottish Labour MP's voted hand in hand with the Tories for the benefits cap. Along with their failure to vote against the bedroom tax when they had the opportunity recently.

Shame on them.

Margaret Curran – Glasgow East
Tom Greatrex – Rutherglen and Hamilton West
Ian Murray – Edinburgh South
Willie Bain – Glasgow North East
Gordon Banks – Ochil and South Perthshire
Tom Clarke – Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill
Dame Anne Begg – Aberdeen South
Alistair Darling – Edinburgh South West
Ian Davidson – Glasgow South West
Thomas Docherty – Dunfermline and west Fife
Frank Doran – Aberdeen North
Gemma Doyle – West Dunbartonshire
Sheila Gilmore – Edinburgh East
David Hamilton – Midlothian
Tom Harris – Glasgow South
Jimmy Hood – Lanark and Hamilton East
Cathy Jamieson – Kilmarnock and Loudon
Mark Lazarowicz – Edinburgh North and Leith
Gregg McClymont – Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East
Anne McGuire – Stirling
Anne McKechin – Glasgow North
Iain McKenzie – Greeenock and Inverclyde
Grahame Morris – Livingston
Jim Murphy – East Renfrewshire
Pamela Nash – Airdrie and Shotts
Sandra Osborne – Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock
John Robertson – Glasgow North West
Frank Roy – Motherwell and Wishaw
Lindsay Roy – Glenrothes
Anas Sarwar – Glasgow Central

Why would they vote for this?

[green glory]

Why would they vote for this?

Probably to pay for the 11% increase for themselves which was voted through without any problems.

[allmodcons]

Why would they vote for this?

Simply because they think the electorate like to see a hard line taken on benefit spending. It's not for them to try and understand why so many people are on benefits in the first place.

It's an absolute tradegy that the UK is the most unequal country in the Western World.

Whether you support Scottish Independence or not, I think it's fair to say that successive Westminster Governments have failed the poor in our society.

Meanwhile, if the Goverment actually tried collecting the taxes it should, benefit payments wouldn't be such a big issue :grr:

http://www.oxfam.org.uk/blogs/2013/05/tax-haven-cash-enough-to-end-extreme-poverty

[hibsbollah]

It's estimated this'll push around 345,000 people in the UK into poverty. Food bank use has increased to around 500,000.

Better Together = shrugging your shoulders and accepting the above, accepting nothing can be done, or hoping under the current system somehow it'll work out. There's no way the people we entrust with power at Westminster are fit for purpose anymore.

Every one of us and our families are all only one injury or illness away from needing benefits. Something we should all remember when we stand in that ballot box in September.

I agree. Unfortunately, polling shows that the argument has been lost, and a majority of Britons believe that we are being bled dry by a lazy underclass. Which is hardly surprising when you consider the diet of popular tv and newspapers over recent years. The point of the left shoupd be to make a case for what you believe in regardless of short term polling. Tom Watson and Dianne Abbott were two of the measly 11 Labour MPs not to support the Tories. Sad.

[Northernhibee]

It's estimated this'll push around 345,000 people in the UK into poverty. Food bank use has increased to around 500,000.

Better Together = shrugging your shoulders and accepting the above, accepting nothing can be done, or hoping under the current system somehow it'll work out. There's no way the people we entrust with power at Westminster are fit for purpose anymore.

Every one of us and our families are all only one injury or illness away from needing benefits. Something we should all remember when we stand in that ballot box in September.

Utter garbage. The Yes campaign have been consistently outwitted on all the questions that the voter is asking so they're making up their own ones.

[marinello59]

Simply because they think the electorate like to see a hard line taken on benefit spending. It's not for them to try and understand why so many people are on benefits in the first place.

It's an absolute tradegy that the UK is the most unequal country in the Western World.

Whether you support Scottish Independence or not, I think it's fair to say that successive Westminster Governments have failed the poor in our society.

Meanwhile, if the Goverment actually tried collecting the taxes it should, benefit payments wouldn't be such a big issue :grr:

http://www.oxfam.org.uk/blogs/2013/05/tax-haven-cash-enough-to-end-extreme-poverty

I agree. And the devolved Governments in Scotland have been just as negligent.

[lucky]

Can someone tell what benefits will be able in an independent Scotland and how much any will we be able to claim and how are we going to pay for it?

[lucky]

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26743802 Labour plan to freeze the benefit at the present levels for 3 years. But don't let the truth get in the way of your story. Parliament voted 520 to 22 to cap benefits.

[green glory]

Can someone tell what benefits will be able in an independent Scotland and how much any will we be able to claim and how are we going to pay for it?

Some homework. :-)


http://www.yesscotland.net/news/financial-times-analysis-underlines-independent-scotlands-got-what-it-takes


http://newsnetscotland.com Click on the fact sheet on the left for an overview.


Hope this helps, but there's lots more info on the Bella Caledonia and Wings over Scotland sites.

[ronaldo7]

Last night the following Scottish Labour MP's voted hand in hand with the Tories for the benefits cap. Along with their failure to vote against the bedroom tax when they had the opportunity recently.

Shame on them.

Margaret Curran – Glasgow East
Tom Greatrex – Rutherglen and Hamilton West
Ian Murray – Edinburgh South
Willie Bain – Glasgow North East
Gordon Banks – Ochil and South Perthshire
Tom Clarke – Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill
Dame Anne Begg – Aberdeen South
Alistair Darling – Edinburgh South West
Ian Davidson – Glasgow South West
Thomas Docherty – Dunfermline and west Fife
Frank Doran – Aberdeen North
Gemma Doyle – West Dunbartonshire
Sheila Gilmore – Edinburgh East
David Hamilton – Midlothian
Tom Harris – Glasgow South
Jimmy Hood – Lanark and Hamilton East
Cathy Jamieson – Kilmarnock and Loudon
Mark Lazarowicz – Edinburgh North and Leith
Gregg McClymont – Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East
Anne McGuire – Stirling
Anne McKechin – Glasgow North
Iain McKenzie – Greeenock and Inverclyde
Grahame Morris – Livingston
Jim Murphy – East Renfrewshire
Pamela Nash – Airdrie and Shotts
Sandra Osborne – Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock
John Robertson – Glasgow North West
Frank Roy – Motherwell and Wishaw
Lindsay Roy – Glenrothes
Anas Sarwar – Glasgow Central


We should add this lot in for good measure.


http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/11/15/exposed-the-169-mps-who-voted-yes-to-the-bedroom-tax-after-claiming-up-to-25k-in-accommodation-expenses/

[Northernhibee]

Can someone tell what benefits will be able in an independent Scotland and how much any will we be able to claim and how are we going to pay for it?

The answer is that we don't know how we'd pay for what Salmond is promising and neither does he. We are looking at a multi-billion pound deficit between what Salmond proposes to raise and what he proposes to spend so we have literally no clue how we'd pay for it or even what his plan B is in terms of currency!

We're less than six months away from the referendum and the SNP can't even answer the most basic questions about the promises they've put in their glorified Argos catalogue wish list of a white paper.

[green glory]

The answer is that we don't know how we'd pay for what Salmond is promising and neither does he. We are looking at a multi-billion pound deficit between what Salmond proposes to raise and what he proposes to spend so we have literally no clue how we'd pay for it or even what his plan B is in terms of currency! We're less than six months away from the referendum and the SNP can't even answer the most basic questions about the promises they've put in their glorified Argos catalogue wish list of a white paper.

Or maybe it's just that you don't understand how. Have you read the white paper.? And incidentally there is a plan B, but it's still too early to play that card, but it concerns national debt v assets.

[Northernhibee]

Or maybe it's just that you don't understand how. Have you read the white paper.? And incidentally there is a plan B, but it's still too early to play that card, but it concerns national debt v assets.

I have read the white paper from start to finish.

It's nothing more than a glorified wish list.

[green glory]

I have read the white paper from start to finish. It's nothing more than a glorified wish list.

What are you going to do if there's a Yes vote? Genuinely interested.

[lucky]

Some homework. :-)


http://www.yesscotland.net/news/financial-times-analysis-underlines-independent-scotlands-got-what-it-takes


http://newsnetscotland.com Click on the fact sheet on the left for an overview.


Hope this helps, but there's lots more info on the Bella Caledonia and Wings over Scotland sites.

Great answer, NOT. Why do separatists continue to use separatists websites to back up their arguments. The White paper is the SNP's manifesto. It actually mentions Strictly come Dancing more times than it references the Scottish whiskey industry. It's a waste of Scottish tax payers money

[Hibrandenburg]

If I'd been lied to and cheated in any other relationship then that relationship would be terminated on those grounds alone. The Union is no different.

[allmodcons]

Utter garbage. The Yes campaign have been consistently outwitted on all the questions that the voter is asking so they're making up their own ones.

This made me laugh. I suppose this explains why there is swing to Yes in the polls, because voters are not getting answers to the questions asked of the Yes campaign they're moving across to Yes ???


The answer is that we don't know how we'd pay for what Salmond is promising and neither does he. We are looking at a multi-billion pound deficit between what Salmond proposes to raise and what he proposes to spend so we have literally no clue how we'd pay for it or even what his plan B is in terms of currency!

We're less than six months away from the referendum and the SNP can't even answer the most basic questions about the promises they've put in their glorified Argos catalogue wish list of a white paper.

As to debt and spending, can you take the time to post some stats on how well this has been managed by successive UK Governments. I guess we must be in black are we? I guess we raise more than we spend do we? You're the Unionist, lets have some figures from you for a change. Would be genuinely interested to see your take on the state of UK finances.

[green glory]

Great answer, NOT. Why do separatists continue to use separatists websites to back up their arguments. The White paper is the SNP's manifesto. It actually mentions Strictly come Dancing more times than it references the Scottish whiskey industry. It's a waste of Scottish tax payers money

At least it spells whisky correctly.

[green glory]

Apologies for the Daily Racist front page below, but panic seems to be setting in.



12265

[ronaldo7]

Can someone tell what benefits will be able in an independent Scotland and how much any will we be able to claim and how are we going to pay for it?

Did you find out what cuts Johann is going ahead with from her cuts commission? Free tuition fees? Prescription charges? free bus passes? Raising taxes?

Which is it going to be?

http://news.stv.tv/politics/191807-labour-leader-johann-lamont-demands-end-to-something-for-nothing-culture/

[ronaldo7]

Apologies for the Daily Racist front page below, but panic seems to be setting in.



12265

No panic here. Yes has the momentum

[RyeSloan]

Interesting article this...I wonder what the polls would be saying if we had taken this approach?

http://moneyweek.com/merryns-blog/scotland-placing-blind-trust-in-a-meaningless-question/

[ronaldo7]

It's estimated this'll push around 345,000 people in the UK into poverty. Food bank use has increased to around 500,000.

Better Together = shrugging your shoulders and accepting the above, accepting nothing can be done, or hoping under the current system somehow it'll work out. There's no way the people we entrust with power at Westminster are fit for purpose anymore.

Every one of us and our families are all only one injury or illness away from needing benefits. Something we should all remember when we stand in that ballot box in September.

:agree:Children.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/welfare-cap-will-push-345000-children-into-poverty-in-just-four-years-warns-save-the-children-9217442.html

[RyeSloan]

:agree:Children. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/welfare-cap-will-push-345000-children-into-poverty-in-just-four-years-warns-save-the-children-9217442.html

Surely the point of the cap is to highlight the fact that poverty cannot be eradicated by forever increasing the cost of benefits to the nation?

Child poverty should of course be taken very seriously but to suggest it can and should be removed by using benefits as the main tool is a mistaken one I would say.

I've not seen the analysis completed to come up with the 345,000 number but not sure how an alleged 2.5% savings requirement on the benefits bill would mean a 10-15% (depending in what measure you take) increase in child poverty....not saying its wrong just not always desperate to immediately believe projected figures that have used an unknown model calc to be arrived at.

Poverty measures and the reason for poverty are a complex field yet within days of an announcement we seem to have these figures banded about as a truth. I'm left wondering what inflation figures they have used, what wage inflation figures were applied, what GDP Growth assumptions were used, what the employment and unemployment rates assumptions were etc etc to get to their answers....and even if we knew all of that would we have any idea of how likely the prediction is to come true?

The same works in reverse of course so a healthy scepticism of government assurances etc should always be maintained as well...

[Just Alf]

Interesting article this...I wonder what the polls would be saying if we had taken this approach?

http://moneyweek.com/merryns-blog/scotland-placing-blind-trust-in-a-meaningless-question/

its a fair point actually

[lucky]

At least it spells whisky correctly.

Disappointed I only got 1 bite with that but hey ho :greengrin

[lucky]

Did you find out what cuts Johann is going ahead with from her cuts commission? Free tuition fees? Prescription charges? free bus passes? Raising taxes?

Which is it going to be?

http://news.stv.tv/politics/191807-labour-leader-johann-lamont-demands-end-to-something-for-nothing-culture/

No such commission but can you tell me how we continue to pay for everything? I certainly would look at raising taxes. FE and HE will need to be examined in the future.

[ronaldo7]

No such commission but can you tell me how we continue to pay for everything? I certainly would look at raising taxes. FE and HE will need to be examined in the future.

I believe green glory gave you some homework on how we could fund everything in the white paper. I'm sure you'll get there in the end. I take it you never spoke with Big Jo at perth then. Good luck in your proposals to raise taxes, I'm sure the welsh will have something to say about it.

[Beefster]

I believe green glory gave you some homework on how we could fund everything in the white paper. I'm sure you'll get there in the end. I take it you never spoke with Big Jo at perth then. Good luck in your proposals to raise taxes, I'm sure the welsh will have something to say about it.

Did Lucky's post deserve such a patronising response?

[ronaldo7]

Did Lucky's post deserve such a patronising response?

On reflection no, so my apologies to you lucky. On the subject of how we are to pay for everything, their is an abundance of information on this thread alone. It's just who you want to believe I suppose.

[green glory]

"Of course there would be a currency union" the minister told the Guardian.

The start of the backtracking in tomorrow's Guardian.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/28/independent-scotland-may-keep-pound?CMP=twt_gu

[lucky]

The key part of the article for is the following

The UK government dismissed the private comments by the minister. Alistair Carmichael, the Scotland secretary, said: "An anonymous, off-the-record quote does not change the stark reality on the currency. The UK government has listened to the views of the governor of the Bank of England and the independent advice of the permanent secretary to the Treasury that a currency union would be damaging for all the United Kingdom.

"That's why a currency union simply will not happen. The Scottish government should remove the uncertainty on the currency by coming forward with a plan B."

In the unlikely event of a yes vote I will be wanting iScotland to get the best deal it can for its citizens. But don't believe a long term currency union is the way forward. You only have to look at the Euro zone for proof that currency unions only help the larger economies especially during tough economic times.

[lucky]

On reflection no, so my apologies to you lucky. On the subject of how we are to pay for everything, their is an abundance of information on this thread alone. It's just who you want to believe I suppose.

No offence taken. But we do finally agree on one thing, it's who we choose to believe. Scotland unfortunately is not voting to become a socialist utopia, where everything will be paid for by the state and that poverty and unemployment will be eradicated. We are being offered a *******ised offer on independence, one which gives up control of our economy, with no MPs to influence it, and promises cutting corporation tax.

[Future17]

No offence taken. But we do finally agree on one thing, it's who we choose to believe. Scotland unfortunately is not voting to become a socialist utopia, where everything will be paid for by the state and that poverty and unemployment will be eradicated. We are being offered a *******ised offer on independence, one which gives up control of our economy, with no MPs to influence it, and promises cutting corporation tax.

You've said similar to this before on this thread; understandably as it's obviously your opinion. What I don't understand is why you believe the principles you seem to believe in are more likely to be delivered in a union which can often be dominated by Conservative MPs, rather in an independent Scotland in which that is never the case?

I understand what you have said previously about wishing to "fight" for these principles for people across the UK, rather than just in Scotland. However, does that not make your position more about identity than politics?

[gackohibs]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2215151/

watched this last night, absolutely fascinating. Recommend it if you havent seen it. Its identical to what is happening here, and what makes this yes vote even more important.
The Scottish gov, kens the score, and what we need to do to change it.

With no were stuck with austerity and the same old heid in the sand hope forever. We need radical change, and YES is the only way to secure that. The labour party are a joke and are nothing more than red tories. They cant be trusted to turn things around if they get back to power as theyve already admitted to pushing ahead with cuts.
If scotland cant afford to be independent, the UK cant afford it!

[marinello59]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2215151/

watched this last night, absolutely fascinating. Recommend it if you havent seen it. Its identical to what is happening here, and what makes this yes vote even more important.
The Scottish gov, kens the score, and what we need to do to change it.

With no were stuck with austerity and the same old heid in the sand hope forever. We need radical change, and YES is the only way to secure that. The labour party are a joke and are nothing more than red tories. They cant be trusted to turn things around if they get back to power as theyve already admitted to pushing ahead with cuts.
If scotland cant afford to be independent, the UK cant afford it!

Purely a party political question for you then? Vote Yes and get a caring, sharing SNP administration?

[gackohibs]

Purely a party political question for you then? Vote Yes and get a caring, sharing SNP administration?

its not about the SNP.

But, realistically, at the moment, are the only party, who were democratically elected to power in this country, by a majority, who are saying the right things, and planning the right things to turn this economy around.

There will be an election immediately after independence, so we can vote for whoever we feel will take this country forward. It wont be quick or easy, but we need to start somewhere. I know for a fact the UK gov arent doing a damn thing about it. Whoever gets elected and fails, can then be held directly responsible and can be voted out at the next election.
That doesnt happen at the moment. All we can do is shake our fist in the air and be powerless to change anything. A yes vote gives us that power.

[marinello59]

its not about the SNP.

But, realistically, at the moment, are the only party, who were democratically elected to power in this country, by a majority, who are saying the right things, and planning the right things to turn this economy around.

.

So it is all about the SNP for you.

[gackohibs]

So it is all about the SNP for you.

no, its not.

its been repeated again and again and again. this vote is NOT for a political party, its about scotlands future.

[Hibrandenburg]

no, its not.

its been repeated again and again and again. this vote is NOT for a political party, its about scotlands future.

Save your breath mate, the no campaign want to make Salmond the main argument against independence and don't want to admit/understand that he's only the means to an end.

[gackohibs]

Save your breath mate, the no campaign want to make Salmond the main argument against independence and don't want to admit/understand that he's only the means to an end.

your right mate, its pathetic.

12280

yes campaign and no campaign in a quote

[Beefster]

Save your breath mate, the no campaign want to make Salmond the main argument against independence and don't want to admit/understand that he's only the means to an end.

As far as I am aware, M59 is planning on voting for independence.

[Beefster]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2215151/

watched this last night, absolutely fascinating. Recommend it if you havent seen it. Its identical to what is happening here, and what makes this yes vote even more important.
The Scottish gov, kens the score, and what we need to do to change it.

With no were stuck with austerity and the same old heid in the sand hope forever. We need radical change, and YES is the only way to secure that. The labour party are a joke and are nothing more than red tories. They cant be trusted to turn things around if they get back to power as theyve already admitted to pushing ahead with cuts.
If scotland cant afford to be independent, the UK cant afford it!

Who do you think will be in power most of the time in an independent Scotland?

[gackohibs]

As far as I am aware, M59 is planning on voting for independence.

thats fine, im just sick of people going on and on about the snp! :agree:

[gackohibs]

Who do you think will be in power most of the time in an independent Scotland?

i can only hope in an iScotland, the Labour party go back to their roots. A party that looks out for the average working man and woman. They are so far right these days you can see the tory strings attached worse than thunderbirds!

[Hibrandenburg]

Who do you think will be in power most of the time in an independent Scotland?

That's just it though Beefster, the Labour party in their current form are designed to appeal to the electorate in England because that's where the elections in the UK are won and lost. Labour in an independent Scotland would have to adjust their policies to what appeals to the Scottish electorate.

[lucky]

You've said similar to this before on this thread; understandably as it's obviously your opinion. What I don't understand is why you believe the principles you seem to believe in are more likely to be delivered in a union which can often be dominated by Conservative MPs, rather in an independent Scotland in which that is never the case?

I understand what you have said previously about wishing to "fight" for these principles for people across the UK, rather than just in Scotland. However, does that not make your position more about identity than politics?

No sure what your asking. The problems people are facing are the same regardless of where they live on these islands. Yes we have suffered at the hands of the Tories but surely the fight must be to ensure that the UK has a left of centre political agenda. The Tories are as irrelevant in this referendum as Salmond. Both will not be in power forever and it's for us to decide the future of Scotland and the UK

[Hibrandenburg]

As far as I am aware, M59 is planning on voting for independence.

Ok, got my wires crossed but the point stands.

[Beefster]

That's just it though Beefster, the Labour party in their current form are designed to appeal to the electorate in England because that's where the elections in the UK are won and lost. Labour in an independent Scotland would have to adjust their policies to what appeals to the Scottish electorate.

There seems to be this belief that an independent Scotland is going to move massively to the left. I don't believe that. If that was the case, the likes of the SSP would do much better now.

IMHO, in an independent Scotland, a centre-right party with no ties to the UK Tories will mean more folk moving that way.

[Hibrandenburg]

There seems to be this belief that an independent Scotland is going to move massively to the left. I don't believe that. If that was the case, the likes of the SSP would do much better now.

IMHO, in an independent Scotland, a centre-right party with no ties to the UK Tories will mean more folk moving that way.

I've no idea if an independent Scotland will move left or right, all I know is that it will move in the direction that the Scottish electorate send it and will be held accountable if it doesn't.

[RyeSloan]

No offence taken. But we do finally agree on one thing, it's who we choose to believe. Scotland unfortunately is not voting to become a socialist utopia, where everything will be paid for by the state and that poverty and unemployment will be eradicated. We are being offered a *******ised offer on independence, one which gives up control of our economy, with no MPs to influence it, and promises cutting corporation tax.

"A socialist utopia where everything will be paid for by the state and that poverty and unemployment will be eradicated"

Man I've read some things in .net but this probably takes the biscuit. Do you honestly believe a centrally controlled country where the state is omni present could every deliver anything remotely close to what you have said?

Finally how does a state manage to "pay for everything" where does that money come from?

[Beefster]

Ok, got my wires crossed but the point stands.

It probably does but there's no point in pretending that it's one-sided thing. The Nats are trying to use the anti-Tory sentiment up here (e.g., frequent references to 'Dave' and 'Gideon'). The No side try to capitalise on the dislike of Salmond. Six and two threes.

[marinello59]

As far as I am aware, M59 is planning on voting for independence.

Correct.

[steakbake]

This Socialist Utopia sounds little more than a one-party centralised state. Terrifying proposition, regardless of whether it's a UK or an iScotland one.

[marinello59]

thats fine, im just sick of people going on and on about the snp! :agree:

If you are sick of people going on and on about the SNP stop doing it then.

[ronaldo7]

No offence taken. But we do finally agree on one thing, it's who we choose to believe. Scotland unfortunately is not voting to become a socialist utopia, where everything will be paid for by the state and that poverty and unemployment will be eradicated. We are being offered a *******ised offer on independence, one which gives up control of our economy, with no MPs to influence it, and promises cutting corporation tax.

Herein lies our problem... our MP's can't or don't seem to want to influence things. They either don't turn up for votes (bedroom tax), or they turn up and support the tories to suppress the poor.

We have an opportunity to break away from MP's in London matching up with each other to enable them to have a lovely meal with their loved ones instead of doing what is best for Scotland.

Time to change, time to vote yes for a positive, and different Scotland.

[green glory]

Some dreadful headlines for the No campaign in tomorrow's broadsheets.



12289



12290

[green glory]

Deary me... 12291

[Hibrandenburg]

Deary me... 12291

Bluff! Surely they mean lie!

I've said it twice already on this thread and I''ll ask again. Why would anyone continue a relationship where they're cheated and lied to?

[ronaldo7]

Some dreadful headlines for the No campaign in tomorrow's broadsheets.



12289



12290

Look at the positive yes lads and lassies in the Scotsman copy...Brilliant.

A couple of other pieces lending support to the debate.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/30/more-power-glasgow-online-journalists-wings-over-scotland-bella-caledonia

http://nationalcollective.com/2014/03/29/editorial-fear-no-more/

[Saorsa]

Bluff! Surely they mean lie!

I've said it twice already on this thread and I''ll ask again. Why would anyone continue a relationship where they're cheated and lied to?Just another lie in decades of deceit & lies by westminster governments of & tae the Scottish people. :agree:

[steakbake]

Just another lie in decades of deceit & lies by westminster governments of & tae the Scottish people. :agree:

Sometimes wonder whether some Better Together folks are just in it for a rabid and pathological dislike for "Nats" silently start doubting their position when stuff like this comes out.

Fact is, this vote is not just once in a lifetime but it's a once in 300year chance to all contribute to the building of a fair, just and sustainable society.

Yet still some just want the scraps chucked from the table by those in power, who lie, deceive and obfuscate to protect their own narrow interests.

There's only one side of this debate which has the lives of ordinary people at heart. The other side is there to protect a political, economic and social establishment that looks out only for itself.

[ronaldo7]

Former adviser to Thatcher is new Scotland adviser to Cameron.

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-politics/4573-man-behind-poll-tax-is-camerons-adviser-on-scotland

[Bristolhibby]

There seems to be this belief that an independent Scotland is going to move massively to the left. I don't believe that. If that was the case, the likes of the SSP would do much better now.

IMHO, in an independent Scotland, a centre-right party with no ties to the UK Tories will mean more folk moving that way.

Well it will definitely be more to the left than the SE of England.

May European elections will be interesting a future with UKIPs hand on the helm. No thank you!

Yes is the only option.

J

[green glory]

Barrhead Travel trying to bully staff into voting no.



12309

[lucky]

Good blog by Ian Smart looking at the state of the campaigns with a football slant
http://ianssmart.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/there-is-no-room-for-complacency.html?m=1

[lucky]

Barrhead Travel trying to bully staff into voting no.



12309

Don't see any bullying just laying out the facts as he sees it for his business. The bullying claims against everyone who challenges the separatist argument is getting tiresome. It's actually bullying in its self. The threats against Scottish businesses must stop it brings nothing to the debate

[green glory]

Don't see any bullying just laying out the facts as he sees it for his business. The bullying claims against everyone who challenges the separatist argument is getting tiresome. It's actually bullying in its self. The threats against Scottish businesses must stop it brings nothing to the debate

Many of the assertions in the memo have already been debunked.

[lucky]

Many of the assertions in the memo have already been debunked.

But it his views to his staff. So where's the bullying?

[allmodcons]

Don't see any bullying just laying out the facts as he sees it for his business. The bullying claims against everyone who challenges the separatist argument is getting tiresome. It's actually bullying in its self. The threats against Scottish businesses must stop it brings nothing to the debate

What is 'tiresome' is left leaning Labour people like you trying to justify pressure by business owners on their employees.

I take it you are happy for your 'comrades' to be subjected to this biased pish (for that's what it is) from those who employ them?

[allmodcons]

But it his views to his staff. So where's the bullying?

This is getting really tedious. I run a small busines (10 employees) but never in a million years would I subject them to my own political views.

He's saying, "I think you should think twice about voting No because you might not have a job if you don't". Absolutely disgraceful way to treat staff.

Anyone who thinks this is acceptable from a business owner is just plain and simply wrong.

[RyeSloan]

This is getting really tedious. I run a small busines (10 employees) but never in a million years would I subject them to my own political views. He's saying, "I think you should think twice about voting No because you might not have a job if you don't". Absolutely disgraceful way to treat staff. Anyone who thinks this is acceptable from a business owner is just plain and simply wrong.

Is he not just saying that in his opinion his business may suffer significant issues that have the potential to severely impact turnover?

Not sure he had to mention SNP lies..that did him no favour but it's clearly a response to questions from his own staff and his opinion on what a Yes vote may mean to his business.

Not entirely sure it's a disgraceful way to treat staff even if it's not a particularly well written piece.

[lucky]

This is getting really tedious. I run a small busines (10 employees) but never in a million years would I subject them to my own political views.

He's saying, "I think you should think twice about voting No because you might not have a job if you don't". Absolutely disgraceful way to treat staff.

Anyone who thinks this is acceptable from a business owner is just plain and simply wrong.

You are entitled to take the decision not share your views or concerns with your staff just like the owner of Barrhead travel is with his staff. The reaction on social media from cyberNats is scandalous. Some the comments of wanting the firm to go under, organising boycotts and threats to the owner and it's shops is not acceptable and is bullying at worst. I believe that the usual over the top reaction is co ordinated and encouraged by the Yes campaign to intimidate business leaders having their say

[allmodcons]

Is he not just saying that in his opinion his business may suffer significant issues that have the potential to severely impact turnover?

Not sure he had to mention SNP lies..that did him no favour but it's clearly a response to questions from his own staff and his opinion on what a Yes vote may mean to his business.

Not entirely sure it's a disgraceful way to treat staff even if it's not a particularly well written piece.

Put it another way. Do you think it would be fair of me to outline all of the benefits I think we'd derive from Scottish Independence (i.e. - my politics) whilst telling my staff that a No vote would be bad news for the business and bad news for their job prospects?

[allmodcons]

You are entitled to take the decision not share your views or concerns with your staff just like the owner of Barrhead travel is with his staff. The reaction on social media from cyberNats is scandalous. Some the comments of wanting the firm to go under, organising boycotts and threats to the owner and it's shops is not acceptable and is bullying at worst. I believe that the usual over the top reaction is co ordinated and encouraged by the Yes campaign to intimidate business leaders having their say

We know you think that anything and everything these terrible cybernats do is scandalous.

You gave the game away a while back with your 'pathological hatred of Nationalists' quote.

This should be an individual decision for all of us. I say again, to see a business owner put this sort of pressure on his, presumably, hard working staff is nothing short of disgraceful.

To see a left leaning individual like you support it, is just laughable.

What would you be saying if this guy told his staff joining a Trade Union would be bad for their employment prospects?

[lucky]

https://twitter.com/davidjhgardiner/status/450595486311780352 evidence of real bullying.