Will Scotland Ever Become an Independent Country and if so When?

[The Harp Awakes]

The latest post-September 2014 opinion poll published on 2 September 2015 puts Yes at 53%.

Do you think Scotland will ever become an independent country, and if so, when?

[Hibbyradge]

2011 will see a Yes vote.

[danhibees1875]

Yes, 20 years plus.

I've always thought independence was an inevitability, it was just a question of timing. I genuinely don't think the question will be asked again anytime soon.

[lord bunberry]

I think there will be another referendum within 5 years and it will be a yes vote this time. With support for the SNP and independence is at an all time high it would be madness not to try again.

[Moulin Yarns]

2011 will see a Yes vote.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing :greengrin

[degenerated]

The latest post-September 2014 opinion poll published on 2 September 2015 puts Yes at 53%.

Do you think Scotland will ever become an independent country, and if so, when?
I reckon their will be another referendum around 2020 with independence being the outcome. The only thing that may speed the process up would be the outcome of the EU referendum.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

[steakbake]

I reckon their will be another referendum around 2020 with independence being the outcome. The only thing that may speed the process up would be the outcome of the EU referendum.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

I think I'll see it in my lifetime. 2020 seems a reasonable timescale.

[marinello59]

It's impossible to tell when' the next referundum will be right now. There is no real debate going on in Scotland about the issue, its mainly Yes voters talking to themselves. That won't do anything to win the majority who voted No last year to change their minds.
Support for the SNP will inevitably start to drop after they hit a peak at next years Holyrood elections. Timing will be everything on this one.

[#FromTheCapital]

Although I don't want it to happen, the question do I think it will happen is unfortunately yes. However I don't think it'll be in 5 years as some are saying. The UK government will be in no rush to grant another referendum anytime soon, so 20 years or thereabouts is a safer bet imo.

[Hibs Class]

If the views of Salmond, Sturgeon etc. last time around were to be trusted then 2014 was a once in a generation/once in a lifetime opportunity. The issue should have been regarded as settled last year. But duplicity and dishonesty are endemic in politics and the SNP are certainly no noble exception, and so we will probably see another referendum within a decade.

[Hibbyradge]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing :greengrin

Oops. I meant to type 2021.

[Moulin Yarns]

Oops. I meant to type 2021.

I realised that, but it was too good an opportunity to miss. :greengrin

[RyeSloan]

It's impossible to tell when' the next referundum will be right now. There is no real debate going on in Scotland about the issue, its mainly Yes voters talking to themselves. That won't do anything to win the majority who voted No last year to change their minds. Support for the SNP will inevitably start to drop after they hit a peak at next years Holyrood elections. Timing will be everything on this one.

I tend to agree and you are right all things move in cycles...will be interesting to see what happens in the Holyrood elections. The SNP have had a bit of a free ride really considering they have had power for almost 8 years, I wonder if they will start to come under some pressure on their record and blaming Westminster for a lack of powers can only go so far.

To be honest I've not really heard anyone mention independence as being a talking point for them any more...largely it seems the world has moved on (with nothing much changing) and most folk seem OK with that. Prob just the circles I keep but that's the feeling I get.

[Mikey09]

2011 will see a Yes vote.


You ou should be a politician!!! :greengrin

[Mikey09]

I realised that, but it was too good an opportunity to miss. :greengrin


:faf:

[HiBremian]

You ou should be a politician!!! :greengrin

Didn't Dr Who say that 2011 will be a "once in a space-time opportunity"? :confused:

[Hibbyradge]

I realised that, but it was too good an opportunity to miss. :greengrin

:na na:

[Steve20]

It will happen in the next ten years, IMO.

I hope not, though.

[JeMeSouviens]

I think (and hope) it's inevitable. Immediately after the referendum I thought it would take 15-20 years but now I could see it being in 10 or less. The Smith commission is generally perceived as half-arsed and with the seeming disintegration of Labour north and south of the border, we're staring down the barrel of potentially decades of Tory government.

I think the key number in this poll is people who want another referendum within 10 years: 58% in favour, 37% against. I believe this shows the 2014 Yesses plus Not Yets versus the hard Noes. The topline figure shows some of the Not Yets are shifting over to Yes. Why would you want another referendum within 10 years if you thought you might vote for the status quo in it?

[BroxburnHibee]

It's inevitable IMO. There was 25 years between the last 2 - think it will be at least another 10-15 before we see the next one.

[CropleyWasGod]

It's inevitable IMO. There was 25 years between the last 2 - think it will be at least another 10-15 before we see the next one.

That's my take on it.

The 79 referendum planted the seed of devolution in people's minds. As a species, we're often resistant to wholesale change, and that seed took (18?) years to flower. By that time, the thought of devolution had been normalised, hence the large majority in favour.

2014 planted the seed of independence. By the time that thought has been processed, particularly by the younger voter..... unless there is a world event which changes the environment fundamentally, I can't see it being anything other than a vote for independence.

[Sir David Gray]

Hopefully not but I've no doubt that, like with all debates of this nature, the people going for it will go on and on about it until they wear everybody else down and they just eventually accept it.

It's even happening just now, I've seen so many people from the "Yes" side recently, saying things along the lines of, "No" voters have been duped and don't really understand things etc. It's all very patronising.

I can see it happening within the next 10-15 years.

[Canon Hannan]

It will happen in the next ten years, IMO.

I hope not, though.

The referendum opened my eyes to the world. I would rather share a drink with a yes hearts or rangers supporter than a no hibs supporter. Our country is divided now and I am happy not to support arms dealers, bankers, corruption, royalty and the empire. Hope over fear. Scotland will be a bastion of peace and a blueprint for a socialist caring society.

[marinello59]

The referendum opened my eyes to the world. I would rather share a drink with a yes hearts or rangers supporter than a no hibs supporter. Our country is divided now and I am happy not to support arms dealers, bankers, corruption, royalty and the empire. Hope over fear. Scotland will be a bastion of peace and a blueprint for a socialist caring society.

Really? I support independence but there really is no great difference between the values of your average Scot and the rest of the UK. Check out the refugee thread if you don't believe me.

[twiceinathens]

Can you see Westminster allowing another official referendum?

[liamh2202]

Can you see Westminster allowing another official referendum?

20 years I reckon 15 at least before they even consider it. The bit people forget is even some no voters would have voted SNP. But the yes camp seem to take those figures as people who have changed their minds. I think one day the time will be right. IMO that day is not yet here

[weecounty hibby]

If the views of Salmond, Sturgeon etc. last time around were to be trusted then 2014 was a once in a generation/once in a lifetime opportunity. The issue should have been regarded as settled last year. But duplicity and dishonesty are endemic in politics and the SNP are certainly no noble exception, and so we will probably see another referendum within a decade.
You are 100% correct that duplicity and dishonesty are endemic in politics. I give you the unionist parties "the vow" promised, signed, sealed and.... Well that's it really no delivery. I hope to God that one day soon we will be an independent country and that I am around to see it. It's not inevitable but I really hope we will get there

[RyeSloan]

20 years I reckon 15 at least before they even consider it. The bit people forget is even some no voters would have voted SNP. But the yes camp seem to take those figures as people who have changed their minds. I think one day the time will be right. IMO that day is not yet here

It's a bit like the pre referendum Yes hype...those that shout loudest think they are in the majority.

The UK parliament will be in no hurry to grant another referendum and to be honest I would tend to agree to that, do we really need another independence vote any time soon? If so why? What's changed from the last time around?

I'm sure the SNP will be doing their utmost to get a re-run but despite Cannon's assertions above I see no evidence of a split country seething over an injustice. Add in the SNP's own assertions that last time around was a once in a generation opportunity and the reasons for another neverendum seem pretty thin on the ground.

In other news it will be interesting to see how the SNP deal with the fact that they have tax varying powers...so far they have cried wolf at seemingly every turn that they don't have the powers they need to make a difference. So now that they can vary income tax in Scotland I wonder if they will be brave enough to actually do so. No one likes a party that puts up taxes (esp such an obvious one as income tax) no matter how much they may support the broad concepts that are used to justify the rise.

[Northernhibee]

No, never. The SNP bubble will burst sooner rather than later and their blame shifting won't be enough to cover up their appalling record in government.

[SteveHFC]

In the next 20 years.

[Canon Hannan]

Really? I support independence but there really is no great difference between the values of your average Scot and the rest of the UK. Check out the refugee thread if you don't believe me.

Marinello I agree 100% with your comment. My friends are English and in the Yes movement. But Scotland will need to lead the way alone as a small ethical Country. The rest of the UK is too intertwined financially and militarily with the USA. Peace.

[CropleyWasGod]

Marinello I agree 100% with your comment. My friends are English and in the Yes movement. But Scotland will need to lead the way alone as a small ethical Country. The rest of the UK is too intertwined financially and militarily with the USA. Peace.
We led the way in the banking crash, that's for sure [emoji48]

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

That's my take on it.

The 79 referendum planted the seed of devolution in people's minds. As a species, we're often resistant to wholesale change, and that seed took (18?) years to flower. By that time, the thought of devolution had been normalised, hence the large majority in favour.

2014 planted the seed of independence. By the time that thought has been processed, particularly by the younger voter..... unless there is a world event which changes the environment fundamentally, I can't see it being anything other than a vote for independence.

I agree with your point but would quibble with the timescale. Scotland would certainly have voted for devolution had the Tories not won in 92 and probably a good few years earlier than that. I'd say it was already the norm by the time the constitutional convention got together in 89, so I reckon 10 years is a better estimate of flowering time.

This time, we won't have to wait. It would be politically impossible to stop a second referendum, whatever the legalities.

[Rasta_Hibs]

I agree with your point but would quibble with the timescale. Scotland would certainly have voted for devolution had the Tories not won in 92 and probably a good few years earlier than that. I'd say it was already the norm by the time the constitutional convention got together in 89, so I reckon 10 years is a better estimate of flowering time.

This time, we won't have to wait. It would be politically impossible to stop a second referendum, whatever the legalities.

There will be civil war if Scotland ever votes for independence IMO.

[Moulin Yarns]

There will be civil war if Scotland ever votes for independence IMO.


:rolleyes:

What do you think we are? A banana republic?

I attended 4 'political' events at the fringe, and it was all very civilised, apart from the former Labour party member in the audience that had a rant at what the party had become.

[JeMeSouviens]

There will be civil war if Scotland ever votes for independence IMO.

I couldn't agree with that less.

[Moulin Yarns]

After 308 years of struggle, if there was to be a civil war, would it not have happened a year ago?

http://bright-green.org/2014/09/18/the-spoils-of-308-years-of-struggle/

There were riots on the streets in 1707, but not in 2014.

[Future17]

There will be civil war if Scotland ever votes for independence IMO.

Total tangent but I once asked a bookie to give me odds on there being Civil War in the USA in the next 20 years. I was in the shop about 30 mins before someone on the end of a phone line said no. If I asked for the same these days, I'd probably be arrested.

[CropleyWasGod]

There will be civil war if Scotland ever votes for independence IMO.
Why?

And between whom?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[majorhibs]

The referendum opened my eyes to the world. I would rather share a drink with a yes hearts or rangers supporter than a no hibs supporter. Our country is divided now and I am happy not to support arms dealers, bankers, corruption, royalty and the empire. Hope over fear. Scotland will be a bastion of peace and a blueprint for a socialist caring society.

What. Utter, Drivel. You ever been in the real world, mate, or always been out there wi the butterflies & the bees?

[over the line]

some of you may remember I was a definite No leading up to the referendum (although I didn't get a vote as I was living in England at the time). Well I am not so sure anymore and I am not sure how I would vote if there were another referendum and I was eligable to vote. Even with the huge swell in SNP support since the referendum, I am still not convinced that would definitely convert to a Yes majority if there were another referendum in a few years from now (can't see there being one much sooner than that). I think there are still a huge section of "shy No voters", who appear to be in favour of independence when they are in public, but when it comes down to placing their X, they would bottle it and take the well trodden path and stick with what they know. Not a criticism of them BTW, a lot of people don't like/fear change, that is natural. I think Scotland will be independent at some time in the future, but I am not sure it will be within the next 20, or even 50 years.

[Hibrandenburg]

I don't think there will be independence in my lifetime. Even if there was another referendum in 10 years people will already have forgotten all that's gone on since the last one.

[PeeJay]

The referendum opened my eyes to the world. I would rather share a drink with a yes hearts or rangers supporter than a no hibs supporter. Our country is divided now and I am happy not to support arms dealers, bankers, corruption, royalty and the empire. Hope over fear. Scotland will be a bastion of peace and a blueprint for a socialist caring society.

You praise the ideal of a "socialist, caring society" while at the same time proclaiming you would ostracise anyone who didn't agree with you: can't you see the obvious problem here? :confused: Anyway, if I recall correctly most so-called "socialist.caring societies" have been based on fear over hope? Maybe you need to open you eyes a bit wider ?

[Keith_M]

I voted 'never', as I don't believe there's a strong enough desire for Independence.

Also, one of the major factors in people being unconvinced last year was related to the Currency issue. The Yes side failed to come up with a convincing enough proposal.


For what it's worth, I consider myself a Scot first and foremost and have no feelings of 'Britishness' whatsoever. I just don't think it'll happen in my lifetime.

[Moulin Yarns]

I know it is only an opinion poll, but...


http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/majority-of-uk-voters-want-to-leave-eu-poll-1-3879429

If it works out that way, who knows.

[fulshie]

I saw an interview on BBC Alba a few years ago, Cathy MacDonald was interviewing Irvine Welsh. In that interview Irvine was asked If Scotland would ever become an Independent country. Irvine replied yes! then added, "It would come without the people voting for it because powers would keep coming up to the Scottish government until there were no more to come up and would just be a natural progression to independence". I have to say that there is a bit of logic to that because this interview took place long before the referendum campaigning was taking place.

[NYHibby]

If the views of Salmond, Sturgeon etc. last time around were to be trusted then 2014 was a once in a generation/once in a lifetime opportunity. The issue should have been regarded as settled last year. But duplicity and dishonesty are endemic in politics and the SNP are certainly no noble exception, and so we will probably see another referendum within a decade.

I realise this will fit into your last point, but I think one could argue that a generation in political terms is two elections or 10 years. If you compare Labour in 1997 with them in 2007, other than a couple of exceptions, there was a pretty large turnover in senior ministers. After two more elections, we are seeing another turnover.

Although we haven’t hit my two elections or 10 years yet, we are starting to see a generational turnover in the Scottish Government if you compare the 2007 government to the current post-Salmond government. While senior ministers remain familiar faces, a lot of the junior ministers weren’t in post in 2007.

[lucky]

If there is to be another referendum then it would need to happen in the next 2 years. The SNP will never be in a stronger position but I will still be campaigning for a no vote based on the economy. Remember the white paper said Scotland's oil was valued in excess of $100 a barrel and how it would make all the promises affordable. Now swinney says the oil is a bonus as its down to around $65 a barrel. The reality is we would struggle but accept that many people are willing to take that gamble

[johnbc70]

The referendum opened my eyes to the world. I would rather share a drink with a yes hearts or rangers supporter than a no hibs supporter. Our country is divided now and I am happy not to support arms dealers, bankers, corruption, royalty and the empire. Hope over fear. Scotland will be a bastion of peace and a blueprint for a socialist caring society.
I will have some of what your on.

[hibbymick]

If there is to be another referendum then it would need to happen in the next 2 years. The SNP will never be in a stronger position but I will still be campaigning for a no vote based on the economy. Remember the white paper said Scotland's oil was valued in excess of $100 a barrel and how it would make all the promises affordable. Now swinney says the oil is a bonus as its down to around $65 a barrel. The reality is we would struggle but accept that many people are willing to take that gamble

maybe englandshire will have their own referendum when the oil runs out.

[Moulin Yarns]

If there is to be another referendum then it would need to happen in the next 2 years. The SNP will never be in a stronger position but I will still be campaigning for a no vote based on the economy. Remember the white paper said Scotland's oil was valued in excess of $100 a barrel and how it would make all the promises affordable. Now swinney says the oil is a bonus as its down to around $65 a barrel. The reality is we would struggle but accept that many people are willing to take that gamble

Go back a year and a bit and you will find that the oil was always a bonus and was not needed in the SNP independence budgeting. The oil would always have eased the burden on an independent Scotland, a pity more emphasis wasn't put on renewables instead.

[liamh2202]

Go back a year and a bit and you will find that the oil was always a bonus and was not needed in the SNP independence budgeting. The oil would always have eased the burden on an independent Scotland, a pity more emphasis wasn't put on renewables instead.

Renewables are another argument completely as the picture doesn't seem so rosy there either. I personally would like to see a decent nuclear program put in place alongside wave and especially tidal.

[Moulin Yarns]

Renewables are another argument completely as the picture doesn't seem so rosy there either. I personally would like to see a decent nuclear program put in place alongside wave and especially tidal.

There needs to be a lot of R&D to get wave and tidal energy up to a feasible stage.

Nuclear? So dirty it is not worth considering as a long term solution. What do you do with the waste products?

A very simple renewable solution that I can't believe the Scottish Government have not implimented it yet, make it policy that every new building must have solar PV panels. It would add no more that £1500 to a building and would be less as production cost would be lower as demand soared. Added bonus of increased employment, lower Carbon emmissions, lower electricity bills.

Compared to the cost of building new nuclear facilities, it is a no brainer for me.

[liamh2202]

There needs to be a lot of R&D to get wave and tidal energy up to a feasible stage.

Nuclear? So dirty it is not worth considering as a long term solution. What do you do with the waste products?

A very simple renewable solution that I can't believe the Scottish Government have not implimented it yet, make it policy that every new building must have solar PV panels. It would add no more that £1500 to a building and would be less as production cost would be lower as demand soared. Added bonus of increased employment, lower Carbon emmissions, lower electricity bills.

Compared to the cost of building new nuclear facilities, it is a no brainer for me.

We have differing opinions which is fine. Nuclear is the most cost effective energy available according to a report I read last week. And the waste can be safely contained as it is being done at the moment in rosyth among many other sites in the UK. The technology around reactors now is unbelievable and can now be fuelled for an unprecedented amount of time ( which also means they are generating no waste for this amount of time)

Im not sold on the solar idea tbh . the government are already backtracking with the amount of power they could actually provide. Although I haven't seen any reliable figures on this

[Moulin Yarns]

We have differing opinions which is fine. Nuclear is the most cost effective energy available according to a report I read last week. And the waste can be safely contained as it is being done at the moment in rosyth among many other sites in the UK. The technology around reactors now is unbelievable and can now be fuelled for an unprecedented amount of time ( which also means they are generating no waste for this amount of time)

Im not sold on the solar idea tbh . the government are already backtracking with the amount of power they could actually provide. Although I haven't seen any reliable figures on this

At a guess, the report was produced by the Nuclear industry but if you can find an independent source fire away.

some comparisons from neutral sources.

http://burnanenergyjournal.com/major-sources-of-energytheir-advantages-and-disadvantages-ii/

http://energy4me.org/all-about-energy/what-is-energy/energy-sources/

[PatHead]

Interesting that 75% of the poll believe Scotland will be independent at some stage.

[liamh2202]

At a guess, the report was produced by the Nuclear industry but if you can find an independent source fire away.

some comparisons from neutral sources.

http://burnanenergyjournal.com/major-sources-of-energytheir-advantages-and-disadvantages-ii/

http://energy4me.org/all-about-energy/what-is-energy/energy-sources/

It may well have been as I don't have it to hand. What I do know is the links you have posted are not accurate. One of them even says plant need refueled weekly . (listed as a pro) 50-70 years is the latest projection for refueling intervals) even our old reactors just now that I work with have lasted 25 years without refueling.

[Stranraer]

A lot depends on Labour leadership election. If Corbyn wins he is bound to win back some votes from the SNP but not from middle England. Therefore I see independence as inevitable. The more Tory Governments elected down south the more the chance that a second referendum will happen IMO.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

The referendum opened my eyes to the world. I would rather share a drink with a yes hearts or rangers supporter than a no hibs supporter. Our country is divided now and I am happy not to support arms dealers, bankers, corruption, royalty and the empire. Hope over fear. Scotland will be a bastion of peace and a blueprint for a socialist caring society.

Has such a thing ever existed?

My history may be a bit shady, but i seem to remember socialist countries (before they all failed) being very far from caring.

[Berwickhibby]

Has such a thing ever existed?

My history may be a bit shady, but i seem to remember socialist countries (before they all failed) being very far from caring.

Exactly ..... I could not have put it better

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

[RyeSloan]

There needs to be a lot of R&D to get wave and tidal energy up to a feasible stage. Nuclear? So dirty it is not worth considering as a long term solution. What do you do with the waste products? A very simple renewable solution that I can't believe the Scottish Government have not implimented it yet, make it policy that every new building must have solar PV panels. It would add no more that £1500 to a building and would be less as production cost would be lower as demand soared. Added bonus of increased employment, lower Carbon emmissions, lower electricity bills. Compared to the cost of building new nuclear facilities, it is a no brainer for me.

It's a half decent idea but without local storage infrastructure it would be useless at peak demand times (winter when it's dark)...there is also plenty of load balancing implications etc etc.

This is a interesting web page that shows just how demand is met and, to me at least, why nuclear would be your 1st choice if you were responsible for meeting energy demands

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

OK off topic for sure but none the less it's interesting to see how little of current energy demands is being met by wind just now for example (3%) and how much is still being produced by coal.

Renewables have their place but the reality is that we are a very very very long way from being able to rely on them with the exclusion of any fossil or nuclear power.

[Beefster]

Interesting that 75% of the poll believe Scotland will be independent at some stage.

I disagree. Independence polls on here were running at 80+% prior to the referendum IIRC.

[JeMeSouviens]

TNS have just released their latest Scottish poll.

Indy: 53Y 47N

Holyrood Const: SNP 58 Lab 23 Con 12 Lib 5
Holyrood List: SNP 51 Lab 24 Con 11 Lib 6 Grn 6

So the 2 most recent polls show healthy Yes leads and the SNP on course for another Holyrood majority. Only 2 polls but trends have to start somewhere ...

[JeMeSouviens]

No, never. The SNP bubble will burst sooner rather than later and their blame shifting won't be enough to cover up their appalling record in government.

:faf:

Is that the bubble that was going to burst when the SNP got into government, the one that was going to burst when they had a clear majority or the one that was going to burst when No won the indyref? Or maybe the one that was going to burst when Big Beast Murphy arrived and Lamont got the knife in the back? Oh, or the one that was going to burst when everyone's minds turned to westminster?

Peskily tough bubble, eh? :wink:

[JeMeSouviens]

A lot depends on Labour leadership election. If Corbyn wins he is bound to win back some votes from the SNP but not from middle England. Therefore I see independence as inevitable. The more Tory Governments elected down south the more the chance that a second referendum will happen IMO.

:agree:

A Labour revival would need Corbyn to get in, hold his party together and look like standing an earthly of winning an election. I think the UK is staring down the barrel of at least another 2 Tory majority govts.

[marinello59]

:faf:

Is that the bubble that was going to burst when the SNP got into government, the one that was going to burst when they had a clear majority or the one that was going to burst when No won the indyref? Or maybe the one that was going to burst when Big Beast Murphy arrived and Lamont got the knife in the back? Oh, or the one that was going to burst when everyone's minds turned to westminster?

Peskily tough bubble, eh? :wink:

Support for the SNP will drop, it's inevitable. They'll win a landslide in the Holyrood election but support will start to slip. At the moment they can say or do what they like. Imagine the furore on here if a Scottish Labour politician had said they preferred people of faith, they would have been slaughtered.

[TrinityHibs]

Go back a year and a bit and you will find that the oil was always a bonus and was not needed in the SNP independence budgeting. The oil would always have eased the burden on an independent Scotland, a pity more emphasis wasn't put on renewables instead.

The impact of Brent crude at sub $49/barrel is tangible. It will come back and de-commissioning is important to the north east but we cannot ignore the loss of tax revenue, direct and indirect job losses, significant hold on investment (oil and non oil) and the almost shut down of the Aberdeen housing market due to the oil and lack of government support for Help to Buy. Oil is not a bonus for those that rely on it and any government Scottish or UK would be naïve to ignore its importance to the economy. I find it difficult to believe that the benefits of the oil industry are not needed at this time.

[marinello59]

The impact of Brent crude at sub $49/barrel is tangible. It will come back and de-commissioning is important to the north east but we cannot ignore the loss of tax revenue, direct and indirect job losses, significant hold on investment (oil and non oil) and the almost shut down of the Aberdeen housing market due to the oil and lack of government support for Help to Buy. Oil is not a bonus for those that rely on it and any government Scottish or UK would be naïve to ignore its importance to the economy. I find it difficult to believe that the benefits of the oil industry are not needed at this time.

65000 jobs gone already. I don't think any of those who are now unemployed saw oil as just a bonus either. The SNP dismissed all warnings that this might happen as scaremongering though.

[JeMeSouviens]

Support for the SNP will drop, it's inevitable. They'll win a landslide in the Holyrood election but support will start to slip. At the moment they can say or do what they like. Imagine the furore on here if a Scottish Labour politician had said they preferred people of faith, they would have been slaughtered.

There have been plenty of furores surrounding Salmond and he has been regularly slaughtered for years. Having the good sense to stand aside and let Sturgeon take over was a masterstroke. I agree that support is bound to drop at some point but I don't see any imminent bubble bursting, especially with such a pathetic bunch in opposition.

[marinello59]

There have been plenty of furores surrounding Salmond and he has been regularly slaughtered for years. Having the good sense to stand aside and let Sturgeon take over was a masterstroke. I agree that support is bound to drop at some point but I don't see any imminent bubble bursting, especially with such a pathetic bunch in opposition.

Masterstroke? If he had left before the referendum and let Sturgeon take charge we would be preparing for Independence now. That's not hindsight, I said it on here a couple of times.... It didn't go down well though. :greengrin

[lord bunberry]

Masterstroke? If he had left before the referendum and let Sturgeon take charge we would be preparing for Independence now. That's not hindsight, I said it on here a couple of times.... It didn't go down well though. :greengrin
I think you may be right on that. I was probably one of the people telling you that you were talking rubbish :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

Masterstroke? If he had left before the referendum and let Sturgeon take charge we would be preparing for Independence now. That's not hindsight, I said it on here a couple of times.... It didn't go down well though. :greengrin

Yeah, a fair point. Unfortunately egomaniac politician stands down to avoid loss is even less likely than egomaniac politician stands aside after loss. :rolleyes:

[HiBremian]

65000 jobs gone already. I don't think any of those who are now unemployed saw oil as just a bonus either. The SNP dismissed all warnings that this might happen as scaremongering though.

And they'll reappear when the oil price goes back up. Welcome to free market capitalism. UNLESS someone in power decides to take a grip of energy policy and plan for an orderly rundown of fossil fuels to less ecologically destructive levels.

[Canon Hannan]

You praise the ideal of a "socialist, caring society" while at the same time proclaiming you would ostracise anyone who didn't agree with you: can't you see the obvious problem here? :confused: Anyway, if I recall correctly most so-called "socialist.caring societies" have been based on fear over hope? Maybe you need to open you eyes a bit wider ?

Mondragon corporation Spain. My eyes are wide.

[PeeJay]

Mondragon corporation Spain mate. My eyes are wide mate.

I don't actually agree with you, so "mate" won't sit well with your policy of ostracism for dissenters :greengrin .. your reference to Mondragon was an interesting one, must admit it was new to me ... but again: it seems it is not all it's being made out to be ... as usual in projects of this nature we end up with "some people being more equal than others" and the much-lauded principle of solidarity seems to be on a slippery slope ... no surprises there then

[Moulin Yarns]

65000 jobs gone already. I don't think any of those who are now unemployed saw oil as just a bonus either. The SNP dismissed all warnings that this might happen as scaremongering though.

Less negative news hidden amongs the bad

http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/140362/GoAhead_Given_for_Biggest_UK_Field_Found_in_a_Deca de

http://www.yournorthseaoilnews.com/field+development+plan+approved+for+culzean+in+uk+ north+sea_120600.html

it has resources estimated at 250-300 million barrels of oil equivalent. It is both the largest field discovered in the UK North Sea in the last decade and is the largest gas field sanctioned since 1990.

Aw ****, the oil isnae runnin' oot efter aw!!

[marinello59]

Less negative news hidden amongs the bad

http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/140362/GoAhead_Given_for_Biggest_UK_Field_Found_in_a_Deca de

http://www.yournorthseaoilnews.com/field+development+plan+approved+for+culzean+in+uk+ north+sea_120600.html

it has resources estimated at 250-300 million barrels of oil equivalent. It is both the largest field discovered in the UK North Sea in the last decade and is the largest gas field sanctioned since 1990.

Aw ****, the oil isnae runnin' oot efter aw!!

Hidden away? Maybe you just haven't been paying attention. Culzean was discovered in 2008 and is common knowledge up in Aberdeen, has been for years. It doesn't change the fact that currently the industry is in turmoil just now and the City of Aberdeen is facing more challenging times.
Maybe you could comfort the thousands who have lost their jobs already with your closing comment.

[RyeSloan]

Less negative news hidden amongs the bad http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/140362/GoAhead_Given_for_Biggest_UK_Field_Found_in_a_Deca de http://www.yournorthseaoilnews.com/field+development+plan+approved+for+culzean+in+uk+ north+sea_120600.html it has resources estimated at 250-300 million barrels of oil equivalent. It is both the largest field discovered in the UK North Sea in the last decade and is the largest gas field sanctioned since 1990. Aw ****, the oil isnae runnin' oot efter aw!!

Yet exploration for new oil has plummeted as fast as the oil price.

No one is saying the oil is about to run out but with reduced exploration and significant costs associated with offshore drilling and production (not to mention decommissioning) even a blind man can see revenues are likely to fall significantly. As Scotland spending on public services is significantly higher that the UK as a whole that difference I assume was intended to be made up with oil revenue. Therefore steep declines in that potential revenue would surely mean either significant public spending cuts or significantly higher deficits.

Not saying none of that is not solvable but on the other hand you can't just ignore the fact that oil is worth a lot less (and may remain suppressed for some time) and the implications that would have for an Independent Scotland.

[JeMeSouviens]

Yet exploration for new oil has plummeted as fast as the oil price.

No one is saying the oil is about to run out but with reduced exploration and significant costs associated with offshore drilling and production (not to mention decommissioning) even a blind man can see revenues are likely to fall significantly. As Scotland spending on public services is significantly higher that the UK as a whole that difference I assume was intended to be made up with oil revenue. Therefore steep declines in that potential revenue would surely mean either significant public spending cuts or significantly higher deficits.

Not saying none of that is not solvable but on the other hand you can't just ignore the fact that oil is worth a lot less (and may remain suppressed for some time) and the implications that would have for an Independent Scotland.

Otoh, if we stay in the union, would you bank on Scotland continuing to be funded at higher than the UK average? There was considerable pressure to reform Barnett about 10 years ago but it was buried by the indyref. We are effectively being bribed to stay. At some point, a UK gov is going to either decide that we're crying wolf and won't leave or that they don't give a f whether we leave or not, and cut the block grant to the UK average. So we are going to have to face up to that problem anyway. At least an independent Scotland would have some chance of pursuing a growth strategy. A dependent Scotland is a sitting duck.

That's the practical side. The moral side is why should Scotland be disproportionately funded anyway? Since UK public spending allocation is a zero sum game, how do Scottish unionists justify effectively stealing from their fellow countrymen?

[Beefster]

Less negative news hidden amongs the bad

http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/140362/GoAhead_Given_for_Biggest_UK_Field_Found_in_a_Deca de

http://www.yournorthseaoilnews.com/field+development+plan+approved+for+culzean+in+uk+ north+sea_120600.html

it has resources estimated at 250-300 million barrels of oil equivalent. It is both the largest field discovered in the UK North Sea in the last decade and is the largest gas field sanctioned since 1990.

Aw ****, the oil isnae runnin' oot efter aw!!

I thought that, as a Green, you'd be desperate for the oil to run out or be left alone?

[Moulin Yarns]

I thought that, as a Green, you'd be desperate for the oil to run out or be left alone?

I am, I had a wonderful conversation at the weekend with a guy who works at Knockhill, and they are putting in charging points for electric cars, they run TESLAs and electric motor bikes/scooters, are investing in solar PV. Not bad for a place known as petrolhead heaven
:greengrin


I just had to answer the post about job losses, the oil industry has always had big fluctuations in employment, and a single new field will employ between 6,000 and 7,000. Or they could get jobs in the renewable energy industries.

[RyeSloan]

Otoh, if we stay in the union, would you bank on Scotland continuing to be funded at higher than the UK average? There was considerable pressure to reform Barnett about 10 years ago but it was buried by the indyref. We are effectively being bribed to stay. At some point, a UK gov is going to either decide that we're crying wolf and won't leave or that they don't give a f whether we leave or not, and cut the block grant to the UK average. So we are going to have to face up to that problem anyway. At least an independent Scotland would have some chance of pursuing a growth strategy. A dependent Scotland is a sitting duck. That's the practical side. The moral side is why should Scotland be disproportionately funded anyway? Since UK public spending allocation is a zero sum game, how do Scottish unionists justify effectively stealing from their fellow countrymen?

Fair points which I have no real answer to ;-)

I've no idea why Scotland deems it necessary to spend more on public services than the UK as a whole...one for the SNP to answer I suppose. My point was merely to highlight that airbrushing the drop in oil revenues as 'Ach it was only a bonus anyway' is disingenuous.

In principle I get the fact an Indy Scotland would have more leeway to mitigate the impacts, however such mitigation doesn't happen over night and therefore I would have expected a much stronger response from the Indy camp as to how and when the shortfall of revenue would be met. As ever I'm slightly deflated at the quality of response from the powers that be that are allegedly responsible for plotting Scotland's future as an independent nation.

If any lesson should have been learned from the failed referendum is that people need clear and honest answers on such things not the avoidance of the tough questions and the potentially difficult decisions that would result.

[Canon Hannan]

I don't actually agree with you, so "mate" won't sit well with your policy of ostracism for dissenters :greengrin .. your reference to Mondragon was an interesting one, must admit it was new to me ... but again: it seems it is not all it's being made out to be ... as usual in projects of this nature we end up with "some people being more equal than others" and the much-lauded principle of solidarity seems to be on a slippery slope ... no surprises there then

Mondragon is an excellent concept and the plan has lasted for many years. The gulf in income from top to bottom is 100s of times smaller than CEOs in the Capitalist World we know. The surprise is that it has worked within a European Capitalist business model for over 50 years. Scotland is socialist because we care for each other. Personally that is why I am proud to be Scottish - Mondragon model in a progressive, nuclear free Scotland is there or us. As for the UK,USA and Isreal is this what you accept? Many people have large bank balance's with their head in the sand. Mate...:-)

[Moulin Yarns]

I've no idea why Scotland deems it necessary to spend more on public services than the UK as a whole

The population is more dispersed in Scotland, with the added difficulty of providing the same services over large distances in rural areas compared to cities.

[JeMeSouviens]

The population is more dispersed in Scotland, with the added difficulty of providing the same services over large distances in rural areas compared to cities.

This is an answer to the hypothetical "why might Scotland require a higher per-capita spend than the UK average?"

The answer to the actual question, "why does Scotland have a higher per-capita spend than the UK average?" is just much slower population growth than the rest of the UK. When Barnett was devised it was supposed to allocate bang on average spend to Scotland. Since then, Scotland's population has barely moved while rUK's has grown by about 20%.

[PeeJay]

Mondragon is an excellent concept and the plan has lasted for many years. The gulf in income from top to bottom is 100s of times smaller than CEOs in the Capitalist World we know. The surprise is that it has worked within a European Capitalist business model for over 50 years. Scotland is socialist because we care for each other. Personally that is why I am proud to be Scottish - Mondragon model in a progressive, nuclear free Scotland is there or us. As for the UK,USA and Isreal is this what you accept? Many people have large bank balance's with their head in the sand. Mate...:-)

Mondragon may well be an excellent concept, but don't you think it exists as a minor anomaly in a capitalist environment? Is it a blueprint for society? Seems to me that capitalism has lasted for a long time too, but then communism was around for a few decades as well, so longevity alone is maybe a poor indicator of value. Excessively overpaid CEOs is a regulatory issue that has to be dealt with, agree with you on that point.

Your claim that Scotland is socialist because it is a "caring" society surprises me, particularly in view of the recent election results? Mind you, maybe round your way it is ... I seem to recall a different Scotland when I lived there and my family don't live in a "socialist" area of Scotland. Here in Germany, I believe we too have a caring society in general: it's not a "socialist" society, although social democratic principles are held in esteem here. (Well, perhaps not in Bavaria .:greengrin.)

I'd rather live in the UK/USA or even Israel than any socialist state, believe me, although I'm perfectly happy where I am ....

[JeMeSouviens]

Mondragon may well be an excellent concept, but don't you think it exists as a minor anomaly in a capitalist environment? Is it a blueprint for society? Seems to me that capitalism has lasted for a long time too, but then communism was around for a few decades as well, so longevity alone is maybe a poor indicator of value. Excessively overpaid CEOs is a regulatory issue that has to be dealt with, agree with you on that point.

Your claim that Scotland is socialist because it is a "caring" society surprises me, particularly in view of the recent election results? Mind you, maybe round your way it is ... I seem to recall a different Scotland when I lived there and my family don't live in a "socialist" area of Scotland. Here in Germany, I believe we too have a caring society in general: it's not a "socialist" society, although social democratic principles are held in esteem here. (Well, perhaps not in Bavaria .:greengrin.)

I'd rather live in the UK/USA or even Israel than any socialist state, believe me, although I'm perfectly happy where I am ....

We have Edinburgh Bike co-op! :na na:

And http://www.social-bite.co.uk/ (whose pieces are pretty good). Be nice to give European type social democracy a try.

[johnbc70]

Politicians and trust? Sturgeon says its once in a generation opportunity and then stars talking about the next referendum 12 months later, but I guess that's OK with the SNP supporters?

How is this different to the so called 'vow' that people say we cannot trust to be delivered. Double standards?

[Just Alf]

Politicians and trust? Sturgeon says its once in a generation opportunity and then stars talking about the next referendum 12 months later, but I guess that's OK with the SNP supporters?

How is this different to the so called 'vow' that people say we cannot trust to be delivered. Double standards?

Reading the papers etc it does sound like double standards, thing is, if you read what she's actually said its a slightly different story, IMHO anyways.....

She's mentioned the in/out EU referendum, after all the heavy hitters saying only a NO in the referendum last year would guarantee us staying in the EU if Scotland (again) voted to stay in the EU and the rest of the UK decided otherwise what then (big "if's" of course!)

The other bit is the VOW.... Essentially "vote NO and you'll get this stuff"....... Again, IF (another "if" :greengrin ) that's not delivered what should happen?

I'd imagine that if the above did come to pass then I'd be thinking we should all have the chance to have an independence vote on the reality rather than the make believe issues we'd previously voted on.

She also said it could be 5, 10 years or maybe even longer and even then, it would only ever happen if there was a genuine appetite by the people of Scotland for another one.

Of course, I'm a Yesser so I think all that seems fair and sensible? :dunno:



Edit: oh, and just be clear, right now I do Not think we should be having another referendum, nothing's materially changed from last year at the moment

[JeMeSouviens]

Politicians and trust? Sturgeon says its once in a generation opportunity and then stars talking about the next referendum 12 months later, but I guess that's OK with the SNP supporters?

How is this different to the so called 'vow' that people say we cannot trust to be delivered. Double standards?

Fine by me. ;-) All that needs to change is that we look like winning.

[Moulin Yarns]

Politicians and trust? Sturgeon says its once in a generation opportunity and then stars talking about the next referendum 12 months later, but I guess that's OK with the SNP supporters?

How is this different to the so called 'vow' that people say we cannot trust to be delivered. Double standards?

Not an SNP voter but for the opposition to mention indyref2 continually for the last year you wwould think it's their own aim

[Just Alf]

Not an SNP voter but for the opposition to mention indyref2 continually for the last year you wwould think it's their own aim

Indeed, the only time I'm ever involved in a discussion about it is when it's raised by No voters..... I just don't get it...

[johnbc70]

Not an SNP voter but for the opposition to mention indyref2 continually for the last year you wwould think it's their own aim

I guess most thought after the vote it would have been done and dusted and like Sturgeon said forget about it for another 20 or 30 years. Yet 12 months later she is laying out her timetable for the next one.

[RyeSloan]

Indeed, the only time I'm ever involved in a discussion about it is when it's raised by No voters..... I just don't get it...

Apart from the fact Sturgeon has raised it today...with the fact that it will be SNP policy to work towards another neverendum. Only when the people want it of course ( conveniently forgetting that such a huge decision was only voted on 12 months ago).

[marinello59]

Indeed, the only time I'm ever involved in a discussion about it is when it's raised by No voters..... I just don't get it...

Do you not discuss SNP policy then? Sturgeon and co mention it frequently.

[marinello59]

I guess most thought after the vote it would have been done and dusted and like Sturgeon said forget about it for another 20 or 30 years. Yet 12 months later she is laying out her timetable for the next one.

The SNP has thousands of new members who have joined in the last twelve months and many want a re-run as soon as possible. Ruling that out completely isn't possible for her, she has to keep her party on side.

[ronaldo7]

Politicians and trust? Sturgeon says its once in a generation opportunity and then stars talking about the next referendum 12 months later, but I guess that's OK with the SNP supporters?

How is this different to the so called 'vow' that people say we cannot trust to be delivered. Double standards?


I guess most thought after the vote it would have been done and dusted and like Sturgeon said forget about it for another 20 or 30 years. Yet 12 months later she is laying out her timetable for the next one.

I thought she said once in a generation, meaning the political type of generation:greengrin

Two of the amigos are now away to the back benches of the HOC, and we have the Prime Minister trying to get EVEL though the back door at WM.

The political landscape has indeed changed.

The material change to trigger another ref might be on Trident, as Scotland have voted overwhelmingly for a party that doesn't want it. The will of the people must be heard right?

I'd also like to see where Sturgeon mentioned forgetting about another referendum for 20 to 30 years.:confused:

[Glory Lurker]

If the public feels suitably aggrieved by a perceived indyfib by Sturgeon, it can punish her for that next May. Simples.

[marinello59]

I thought she said once in a generation, meaning the political type of generation:greengrin

Two of the amigos are now away to the back benches of the HOC, and we have the Prime Minister trying to get EVEL though the back door at WM.

The political landscape has indeed changed.

The material change to trigger another ref might be on Trident, as Scotland have voted overwhelmingly for a party that doesn't want it. The will of the people must be heard right?

I'd also like to see where Sturgeon mentioned forgetting about another referendum for 20 to 30 years.:confused:

Is the political type of generation the one where politicians decide themselves rather than going with the commonly accepted meaning of the term? It's a definition that seems to have only recently emerged from the SNP faithful.
I'm not aware of Sturgeon saying at any point that it would be 20-30 years before another referendum, she was very careful about making statements on timing. The whole 'not for a generation' thing really doesn't matter, if there is a general readiness for another vote then we should get one no matter if it is within five years or fifty. My money is on closer to five years though. :greengrin

[HiBremian]

If the public feels suitably aggrieved by a perceived indyfib by Sturgeon, it can punish her for that next May. Simples.


Is the political type of generation the one where politicians decide themselves rather than going with the commonly accepted meaning of the term? It's a definition that seems to have only recently emerged from the SNP faithful.
I'm not aware of Sturgeon saying at any point that it would be 20-30 years before another referendum, she was very careful about making statements on timing. The whole 'not for a generation' thing really doesn't matter, if there is a general readiness for another vote then we should get one no matter if it is within five years or fifty. My money is on closer to five years though. :greengrin

:agree: The wingeings about neverendums are frankly irrelevant when a party, whose primary reason for existence is independence, is getting over 50% of the vote in a PR system of election. The only way to stop another referendum is to vote out the SNP. If Scots vote for independence, and 10 years down the line an avowedly unionist party wins a similar majority in an independent Scotland, well they can call a referendum for re-union. It's called democracy, and if people get tired of it they can always emigrate to Bavaria where things are a bit more predictable :greengrin.

[ronaldo7]

Is the political type of generation the one where politicians decide themselves rather than going with the commonly accepted meaning of the term? It's a definition that seems to have only recently emerged from the SNP faithful.
I'm not aware of Sturgeon saying at any point that it would be 20-30 years before another referendum, she was very careful about making statements on timing. The whole 'not for a generation' thing really doesn't matter, if there is a general readiness for another vote then we should get one no matter if it is within five years or fifty. My money is on closer to five years though. :greengrin

:agree: The generation argument is made by those who think they need to put a figure on it. The definition of Generation for me, is of people born and living at the same time.

If our generation have the kahoonas to go for another Referendum, that's up to them. The people will decide.

[RyeSloan]

:agree: The wingeings about neverendums are frankly irrelevant when a party, whose primary reason for existence is independence, is getting over 50% of the vote in a PR system of election. The only way to stop another referendum is to vote out the SNP. If Scots vote for independence, and 10 years down the line an avowedly unionist party wins a similar majority in an independent Scotland, well they can call a referendum for re-union. It's called democracy, and if people get tired of it they can always emigrate to Bavaria where things are a bit more predictable :greengrin.

Hmm...democracy was served with a referendum just 12 months ago. This strikes me as a Europe style referendum, if you get the wrong answer the first time try try and try again.

If the SNP wanted to listen to the people they should be coming out and saying they hear what they said. The majority didn't want independence but they will work for Scotland within the Union and ensure the powers that they do have, and have just been given, are used as effectively as possible.

Of course their whole raison d'etre is independence so that's impossible so they will ignore what was clearly spelled out to them very recently and continue making the case regardless. My cynical head says this suits them perfectly and helps to take the attention away from what is becoming a rather uninspiring period of power in Scotland and who cares about the consequences.

I'll leave it up to others to decide the virtues or otherwise of such a path

[marinello59]

:agree: The generation argument is made by those who think they need to put a figure on it. The definition of Generation for me, is of people born and living at the same time.

If our generation have the kahoonas to go for another Referendum, that's up to them. The people will decide.

We agree then? :greengrin

[Hibrandenburg]

Why are pro unionists obsessed with the SNP keeping a promise about another independence referendum when their own side still needs to deliver their vow? It's easy, deliver the powers promised and you'll take the momentum out of the SNP surge.

[ronaldo7]

We agree then? :greengrin

It's taken a while:greengrin

[Just Alf]

Why are pro unionists obsessed with the SNP keeping a promise about another independence referendum when their own side still needs to deliver their vow? It's easy, deliver the powers promised and you'll take the momentum out of the SNP surge.

Totally this..... That's why as far as I'm concerned I don't want/need another referendum, they still have time to deliver on their promises.

[Just Alf]

Apart from the fact Sturgeon has raised it today...with the fact that it will be SNP policy to work towards another neverendum. Only when the people want it of course ( conveniently forgetting that such a huge decision was only voted on 12 months ago).

In response to questioning though? ...... And surely "if the people want it" has to be the key underpinning reason?


Do you not discuss SNP policy then? Sturgeon and co mention it frequently.

I do, not often :greengrin , but I do... What I don't really do is raise it with others.... The "non-believers' :wink: ..... Generally that only happens when we're in the pub and its either mentioned in the news or some one brings it up.... Norma.ly starts with "that Salmond is an a*** and he's still pulling her strings" .... Then it goes from there! Lol

[JeMeSouviens]

Interestingly, 3 more polls out since the thread started, all of which use an online panel (ie. a random sample of ~1000 but drawn from their registered database) and all showing a narrow N lead:

Yougov: Y48 N52
Panelbase: Y47 N53
Survation: Y49 N51

compared to the 2 that use random sampling of the population at large (MORI by telephone, TNS by chapping doors):

MORI: Y55 N45
TNS: Y53 N47

The other potential difference is that I think the first 3 all weight by recalled referendum vote (ie. the sample is weighted to 45% say-they-voted-Y voters, 55% say-they-voted-N voters). TNS weighted by 2015 election result whereas MORI is just by demographics.

So, it looks like at least some shift to Y over the year but probably not a decisive one yet.

[The Harp Awakes]

Interestingly, 3 more polls out since the thread started, all of which use an online panel (ie. a random sample of ~1000 but drawn from their registered database) and all showing a narrow N lead:

Yougov: Y48 N52
Panelbase: Y47 N53
Survation: Y49 N51

compared to the 2 that use random sampling of the population at large (MORI by telephone, TNS by chapping doors):

MORI: Y55 N45
TNS: Y53 N47

The other potential difference is that I think the first 3 all weight by recalled referendum vote (ie. the sample is weighted to 45% say-they-voted-Y voters, 55% say-they-voted-N voters). TNS weighted by 2015 election result whereas MORI is just by demographics.

So, it looks like at least some shift to Y over the year but probably not a decisive one yet.

And the unknown factor is what effect, if at all, will a Corbyn led Labour Party have on the slow but steady shift to yes as suggested by these polls.

It could really go 2 ways I suppose. The SNP and Yes camp could be eroded by a more left wing Labour Party under Corbyn, seen as viable alternative to the SNP in Scotland. Alternatively, if Corbyn's Labour Party is seen as being unelectable, the anti Tory electorate in Scotland may increasingly see independence as the only option to avoid another Tory, right wing, Westminster Government in 5 years' time.

[TrinityHibs]

I tend not to read the comments section in Scotsman articles as it tends to be populated by wind up merchants but the one in todays paper following the article about the SNP threatening to block the Scotland Bill seems to produce really concerning statistics. Taking control of our property tax seems to have made us worse off. They are quoting £1 Billion which will be high but the 10% of something as opposed to 100% of nothing argument seems logical. Taking control of welfare has made us worse off. The reduction in the Barnett formula will make us worse off. Oil revenue reduction if we were independent would be the equivalent of the whole state pension budget.

In the poll I had voted that we would become independent at some point. I now doubt that will happen. It looks like in driving for Independence the SNP have taken their eye of the ball and in granting additional powers to Scotland Osborne has not only retained money for the rUK, making his job a bit easier, but also passed the responsibility for additional austerity in Scotland on to the Scottish Government. Normally in the comments section counter arguments are made to show that the unionist figures are not accurate however the lack of response today is concerning. Can anyone on here cast any light on this?

[JeMeSouviens]

I tend not to read the comments section in Scotsman articles as it tends to be populated by wind up merchants but the one in todays paper following the article about the SNP threatening to block the Scotland Bill seems to produce really concerning statistics. Taking control of our property tax seems to have made us worse off. They are quoting £1 Billion which will be high but the 10% of something as opposed to 100% of nothing argument seems logical. Taking control of welfare has made us worse off. The reduction in the Barnett formula will make us worse off. Oil revenue reduction if we were independent would be the equivalent of the whole state pension budget.

In the poll I had voted that we would become independent at some point. I now doubt that will happen. It looks like in driving for Independence the SNP have taken their eye of the ball and in granting additional powers to Scotland Osborne has not only retained money for the rUK, making his job a bit easier, but also passed the responsibility for additional austerity in Scotland on to the Scottish Government. Normally in the comments section counter arguments are made to show that the unionist figures are not accurate however the lack of response today is concerning. Can anyone on here cast any light on this?

A quick google reveals the following:

- the new LBTT only raised £7M in April 2015 compared to more than double that in April 2014
- BUT this was mostly due to a load of high value transactions being put through before the change - “We saw an enormous push pre-LBTT, with a phenomenal high in sales in March followed by a very subdued April,” said Edward Douglas-Home, head of Edinburgh city sales at agent Knight Frank.

So, a headline grabbing but explicable shortfall for 1 month that if replicated over the year would be £120M short rather than your £1Bn. Can't find anything googlable to suggest the shortfall is continuing since then.

Perhaps you should have followed your own advice, "tend not to read the comments section in Scotsman articles as it tends to be populated by wind up merchants". :wink:

[TrinityHibs]

A quick google reveals the following:

- the new LBTT only raised £7M in April 2015 compared to more than double that in April 2014
- BUT this was mostly due to a load of high value transactions being put through before the change - “We saw an enormous push pre-LBTT, with a phenomenal high in sales in March followed by a very subdued April,” said Edward Douglas-Home, head of Edinburgh city sales at agent Knight Frank.

So, a headline grabbing but explicable shortfall for 1 month that if replicated over the year would be £120M short rather than your £1Bn. Can't find anything googlable to suggest the shortfall is continuing since then.

Perhaps you should have followed your own advice, "tend not to read the comments section in Scotsman articles as it tends to be populated by wind up merchants". :wink:

You're right but I did caveat the figures quoted.:agree: The £1B was a snapshot from Q1which, setting aside the fact that powers had not been handed over, showed Scotland would have been £240M better off which was then projected on a similar basis over the year. As you say this was a skewed figure due to the number of higher end transactions taking place prior to the introduction of the LBTT.

I think the point that was being made was that 10% of income from UK would generate more money through Barnett than 100% from Scotland. This is due to higher average house prices and higher transaction rates in England due to stamp duty tax thresholds being higher down south.

I'll just stick to the articles and not the comments in the future:greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

You're right but I did caveat the figures quoted.:agree: The £1B was a snapshot from Q1which, setting aside the fact that powers had not been handed over, showed Scotland would have been £240M better off which was then projected on a similar basis over the year. As you say this was a skewed figure due to the number of higher end transactions taking place prior to the introduction of the LBTT.

I think the point that was being made was that 10% of income from UK would generate more money through Barnett than 100% from Scotland. This is due to higher average house prices and higher transaction rates in England due to stamp duty tax thresholds being higher down south.

I'll just stick to the articles and not the comments in the future:greengrin

That bit is just bollocks. Barnett works solely on spending, it takes no account of how or where revenue is raised. England decides to spend money on something (identifiable as a devolved matter), Scotland automatically gets a Barnett multiple of that included in the block grant.

[HappyHanlon]

Independence within the next 10 years :agree:

Then we can put this bed to nonsense :thumbsup:

[Gatecrasher]

I think it will happen, I was waiting to be convinced during the last referendum and I think the SNP need to come back with more answers as to what an independent Scotland will look like. I hope there is at least another 8 to 10 years before the next one though I think the referendum divided a lot of people and I would like some time for everything to calm down for a while.

[johnbc70]

They need to get a more credible story for the currency - no point debating it again but if they stick to the same story then the same arguments will come up again. They need to kill it dead so there is no debate, so still waiting.

[xyz23jc]

Hopefully this will have a great impact on the ongoing national debate...http://www.hibs.net/images/smilies/thumbs%20up.gif

http://www.cataloniavotes.eu/message-to-the-world-in-english-at-catalan-independence-demonstration-we-want-our-own-independent-state/?utm_source=Catalonia+Votes&utm_campaign=63096ae5b3-Catalonia_Votes_Newsletter_65_18_September_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d7687e41a5-63096ae5b3-214842245

P.S. Just cut and paste into your browser.

[Baldy Foghorn]

How much money was wasted on last year's referendum, and potential future one's, that could be much better utilised on more pressing issues, like NHS, homelessness etc etc?

[HiBremian]

They need to get a more credible story for the currency - no point debating it again but if they stick to the same story then the same arguments will come up again. They need to kill it dead so there is no debate, so still waiting.

One reason among many (including the oil debate) why I'm a member of the Greens. For reasons of genuine economic control the Greens favour a Scottish currency. And are now crowdfunding more research into what an indy currency could look like.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[liamh2202]

The people who are going to use the EU referendum as the trigger for another Indy ref, are you happy to accept the euro as a currency in Scotland?