Scottish Independence

[HibeeEmma]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm a lifelong Labour voter, but, having heard the crap coming out of the Tories this week, I am seriously considering voting 'Yes' in the referendum if that is going to be the future.
I'd be interested to hear other's thoughts.

I am firmly in the NO/ Better Together approach

Please remember it's not Scottish independence versus eternally Tory and no longer being Scottish.

I agree that Scotland should make certain decisions about communities where national agenda does not fit. Drawing away from Britain entirely is not the answer as powers can be devolved whilst still benefitting from being part of Westminster (financially and being in a competitive political arena). I've always found it ironic that the Scots want independence so badly when it's the Scots using a large proportion of English tax payers money for free healthcare and free University.

I dislike the the SNP because they are too idillic. They have failed so many of their bigger pre-election campaign headlines such as dropping student debt. Now they are sacrificing a whole country based on forecasts of tourism and oil, of which neither are sustainable.
Only a few days ago SNP was caught out saying to the public that taxes wouldn't go up when at the same time he had published papers saying they WOULD.

A few people have spoken about the idea why should we be governed by a different country. If we look on it as Britain, we can fight it as one. It's about putting heads together have having more innovation and ideas. Personally I'd rather be imminent on the international stage than fighting a small cause for Scotland. As much as we hate to think of ourselves as "british", Britain have done wonders in the world, building up an image (some better than others- everyone has their view). I would rather put a £44 million programme towards strengthening healthcare in South Africa than a Scottish £3 million programme.

Looking at the Republic of Ireland, I don't think they have benefitted from independence. Prices have hiked up (perhaps due to the Euro, but not out of the question to cover all the proposed ideas the SNP have). Ireland have also become a hub for immigration, seen as an easy option for students and workers, as UK regulations are so tight. I fully agree with fluid immigrant but for adding skills value (and that works both ways).

Our memberships as an independent Scotland would also not remain. For example the G8, the BBC, guaranteed EU membership and being in the UK gives a greater voice to the UN and beyond.

If none of the above influences you, what about Nicola Sturgeons voice? That alone would put me in the NO/Better Together camp.

[yeezus.]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I am firmly in the NO/ Better Together approach

Please remember it's not Scottish independence versus eternally Tory and no longer being Scottish.

I agree that Scotland should make certain decisions about communities where national agenda does not fit. Drawing away from Britain entirely is not the answer as powers can be devolved whilst still benefitting from being part of Westminster (financially and being in a competitive political arena). I've always found it ironic that the Scots want independence so badly when it's the Scots using a large proportion of English tax payers money for free healthcare and free University.

I dislike the the SNP because they are too idillic. They have failed so many of their bigger pre-election campaign headlines such as dropping student debt. Now they are sacrificing a whole country based on forecasts of tourism and oil, of which neither are sustainable.
Only a few days ago SNP was caught out saying to the public that taxes wouldn't go up when at the same time he had published papers saying they WOULD.

A few people have spoken about the idea why should we be governed by a different country. If we look on it as Britain, we can fight it as one. It's about putting heads together have having more innovation and ideas. Personally I'd rather be imminent on the international stage than fighting a small cause for Scotland. As much as we hate to think of ourselves as "british", Britain have done wonders in the world, building up an image (some better than others- everyone has their view). I would rather put a £44 million programme towards strengthening healthcare in South Africa than a Scottish £3 million programme.

Looking at the Republic of Ireland, I don't think they have benefitted from independence. Prices have hiked up (perhaps due to the Euro, but not out of the question to cover all the proposed ideas the SNP have). Ireland have also become a hub for immigration, seen as an easy option for students and workers, as UK regulations are so tight. I fully agree with fluid immigrant but for adding skills value (and that works both ways).

Our memberships as an independent Scotland would also not remain. For example the G8, the BBC, guaranteed EU membership and being in the UK gives a greater voice to the UN and beyond.

If none of the above influences you, what about Nicola Sturgeons voice? That alone would put me in the NO/Better Together camp.

The Yes are desperate to make this a referendum on the Tory/Liberal coalition at Westminster and I'm sick fed up of hearing it. Salmond and co. should be answering some of the basic questions on an independent Scotland's membership of the EU and the bizarre scenario where a foreign country (BoE) would set out interest rate!

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I am firmly in the NO/ Better Together approach

Please remember it's not Scottish independence versus eternally Tory and no longer being Scottish.

I agree that Scotland should make certain decisions about communities where national agenda does not fit. Drawing away from Britain entirely is not the answer as powers can be devolved whilst still benefitting from being part of Westminster (financially and being in a competitive political arena). I've always found it ironic that the Scots want independence so badly when it's the Scots using a large proportion of English tax payers money for free healthcare and free University.

I dislike the the SNP because they are too idillic. They have failed so many of their bigger pre-election campaign headlines such as dropping student debt. Now they are sacrificing a whole country based on forecasts of tourism and oil, of which neither are sustainable.
Only a few days ago SNP was caught out saying to the public that taxes wouldn't go up when at the same time he had published papers saying they WOULD.

A few people have spoken about the idea why should we be governed by a different country. If we look on it as Britain, we can fight it as one. It's about putting heads together have having more innovation and ideas. Personally I'd rather be imminent on the international stage than fighting a small cause for Scotland. As much as we hate to think of ourselves as "british", Britain have done wonders in the world, building up an image (some better than others- everyone has their view). I would rather put a £44 million programme towards strengthening healthcare in South Africa than a Scottish £3 million programme.

Looking at the Republic of Ireland, I don't think they have benefitted from independence. Prices have hiked up (perhaps due to the Euro, but not out of the question to cover all the proposed ideas the SNP have). Ireland have also become a hub for immigration, seen as an easy option for students and workers, as UK regulations are so tight. I fully agree with fluid immigrant but for adding skills value (and that works both ways).

Our memberships as an independent Scotland would also not remain. For example the G8, the BBC, guaranteed EU membership and being in the UK gives a greater voice to the UN and beyond.

If none of the above influences you, what about Nicola Sturgeons voice? That alone would put me in the NO/Better Together camp.

I've always found it ironic that the Scots
want independence so badly when it's the Scots using a
large proportion of English tax payers money for free
healthcare and free University.

The Scottish Government gets a block grant from the UK government that is proportionately the same as English government departments spend on the same stuff. The Scottish Government just spends it differently.

It should also be noted that the money raised in Scotland is greater than is spent in Scotland so its quite wrong to ever suggest Scotland uses any proportion of English (Welsh and NI) money raised through taxation or any other government levies.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I am firmly in the NO/ Better Together approach

Please remember it's not Scottish independence versus eternally Tory and no longer being Scottish.

I agree that Scotland should make certain decisions about communities where national agenda does not fit. Drawing away from Britain entirely is not the answer as powers can be devolved whilst still benefitting from being part of Westminster (financially and being in a competitive political arena). I've always found it ironic that the Scots want independence so badly when it's the Scots using a large proportion of English tax payers money for free healthcare and free University.

.

Do you have figures for this?

It is noticeable that the Better Together campaign are shying away from the economic argument. They seem to accept that, financially, Scotland is self-sustainable.

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The Yes are desperate to make this a referendum on the Tory/Liberal coalition at Westminster and I'm sick fed up of hearing it. Salmond and co. should be answering some of the basic questions on an independent Scotland's membership of the EU and the bizarre scenario where a foreign country (BoE) would set out interest rate!

I think its naive to suggest a wealthy, stable country like Scotland wouldn't be welcome as a member of any international `club`and perhaps not so bizarre on interest rates when the EU sets international interest rates for its members and that the UK interest rates are set within parameters set by the likes of the IMF etc..

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think its naive to suggest a wealthy, stable country like Scotland wouldn't be welcome as a member of any international `club`and perhaps not so bizarre on interest rates when the EU sets international interest rates for its members and that the UK interest rates are set within parameters set by the likes of the IMF etc..

"Vote for independence, except for the important stuff that will still be controlled by foreign countries or institutions like monetary policy where we'll have even less say than we do now", no?

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

"Vote for independence, except for the important stuff that will still be controlled by foreign countries or institutions like monetary policy where we'll have even less say than we do now", no?

We have a say now in that the Bank of England is The UK bank although that say is controlled by Westminster and Scotland is part of that.

If Scotland was to become independent and as part of the divorce settlement it was agreed Scotland kept the pound then as part of that agreement I suspect Scotland would have a direct input to fiscal policies affecting the pound.

As negotiations haven't even started only high level assumptions can be guessed at. At the end of the day Scotland might revert to the Groat!

No one can say anything definitive at this time, be it doom and gloom from the No campaign or all jelly and ice cream by the Yes team - and be right.

The only thing we can be sure of is that in the event of a Yes vote, the Edinburgh Agreement says the negotiations will be conducted in a grown up manner. Which would make a welcome change from some of the crap, front both sides, being flung about just now :-)

[HibeeEmma]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you have figures for this?

It is noticeable that the Better Together campaign are shying away from the economic argument. They seem to accept that, financially, Scotland is self-sustainable.

I fully appreciate what you are saying about figures, yet at the same time, I think it's difficult to forecast how an economy will sustain itself. For example would independence increase tourism or would visitors shy away from gaining another visa etc? We cannot predict that. Scotland would also have to take on some of the British debt and pay off while trying to spend on establishing an independent Scotland taking on millions for diplomats, passports. I suspect interest rates would increase due to new contractual payback agreements. The level of risk is unpredictable, whereas devolving certain powers allow Scotland to hold onto an extremely wealthy base (Britian).

Meanwhile, would the average working man/woman's taxes be increased for this, "better independent Scotland", or else where is this money coming from?

Im not for a minute saying I have all the answers against independence but independent Scotland is far more complex than it's laid out. For example if we kept the pound, we wouldn't be able to set interest rate And the policy would remain at Westminster. Another point, if oil was sold at a high rate, domestic demand would potentially also suffer.

If anyone can convince me why my life would be better in an independent Scotland, I'm all ears.

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I fully appreciate what you are saying about figures, yet at the same time, I think it's difficult to forecast how an economy will sustain itself. For example would independence increase tourism or would visitors shy away from gaining another visa etc? We cannot predict that. Scotland would also have to take on some of the British debt and pay off while trying to spend on establishing an independent Scotland taking on millions for diplomats, passports. I suspect interest rates would increase due to new contractual payback agreements. The level of risk is unpredictable, whereas devolving certain powers allow Scotland to hold onto an extremely wealthy base (Britian).

Meanwhile, would the average working man/woman's taxes be increased for this, "better independent Scotland", or else where is this money coming from?

Im not for a minute saying I have all the answers against independence but independent Scotland is far more complex than it's laid out. For example if we kept the pound, we wouldn't be able to set interest rate And the policy would remain at Westminster. Another point, if oil was sold at a high rate, domestic demand would potentially also suffer.

If anyone can convince me why my life would be better in an independent Scotland, I'm all ears.

Emma. Scotland already has a 10%* stake in the passport offices, Embassies, Consulates and everything else that is currently owned by the UK Government so the cost to an independent Scotland when taking control of these will not be a new cost - its already covered. This would also be the case for all the other government departments.

And its not uncommon for countries to share Embassies so there would be no great rush to acquire buildings all over the world, 10% are Scottish anyway ;-) Its not inconceivable to think that many of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office employees are Scots who could move to service a Scottish Embassy.

* Rough and ready estimate taken from the Barnett Formula for ease of conversation.

[HibeeEmma]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Emma. Scotland already has a 10%* stake in the passport offices, Embassies, Consulates and everything else that is currently owned by the UK Government so the cost to an independent Scotland when taking control of these will not be a new cost - its already covered. This would also be the case for all the other government departments.

And its not uncommon for countries to share Embassies so there would be no great rush to acquire buildings all over the world, 10% are Scottish anyway ;-) Its not inconceivable to think that many of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office employees are Scots who could move to service a Scottish Embassy.

* Rough and ready estimate taken from the Barnett Formula for ease of conversation.

I don't understand this state of mind. It's as if people want to break away but will clutch onto UK aspects such as having the same office.

I would understand if Scotland's economy was streets ahead and our contributions to Westminster was holding us back but that isn't the case.

image.jpg

[Sumner]

100% "no"

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't understand this state of mind. It's as if people want to break away but will clutch onto UK aspects such as having the same office.

I would understand if Scotland's economy was streets ahead and our contributions to Westminster was holding us back but that isn't the case.

image.jpg

Sorry. My point is that in a grown up style divorce the separation needn't be the big bang, there's nothing there and nothing to replace it scenario. There are so many international 'projects' including in defence (thinking of the UK being able to borrow French aircraft carriers over the next few years as an example) where there are already close working relationships. To think Scotland won't still be a close pal of the remaining UK is, IMO, a bit silly - in the nicest way. Some would have you think Hadrians Wall will be rebuilt and electrified!!!

No surprises about the chart either where Scottish economic policies are led by Westminster. The Scottish Government is really only responsible for 'domestic' spending as allocated by Westminster so the freedom to set policies that would affect the GDP are somewhat restricted.

[yeezus.]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think its naive to suggest a wealthy, stable country like Scotland wouldn't be welcome as a member of any international `club`and perhaps not so bizarre on interest rates when the EU sets international interest rates for its members and that the UK interest rates are set within parameters set by the likes of the IMF etc..

Do you agree with me that the Yes campaign are trying to make this a referendum on the Conservative party?

[Glory Lurker]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you agree with me that the Yes campaign are trying to make this a referendum on the Conservative party?

I know you didn't ask me, but as Jack seems to be otherwise engaged, I can't resist it - sorry, Jack!

The fact that we will be saddled with a Conservative government more that half the time whether we vote for them or not is a very relevant point to be highlighted, but there is no way you can say that this is the Yes campaign's main issue. It is just one of many good arguments for looking after our own affairs.

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you agree with me that the Yes campaign are trying to make this a referendum on the Conservative party?

Personally speaking I don't think it would matter who was in power at Westminster at the moment although with it being the Tories the SNP are going to take full advantage and I'd expect nothing less. Again, personally, I don't pay much heid ;-) to the petty sniping between the sides.

The question of Scottish independence is not, IMO, about current politicians, petty party politics and other 'trivia'. Its way more important than that. Its about the future of the 'country' I live in and the future of this country for generations to come. Its the most important vote any of us have ever taken part in.

[steakbake]

If Labour were in power in Holyrood right now with the Tories in Westminster, they'd be milking it for all it is worth.

As it is, they're in opposition in both places and in an uneasy collaboration with the ConDems in the no campaign.

[Purple & Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Looking at the Republic of Ireland, I don't think they have benefitted from independence.

And yet there's not a clamour for reunification, bizarre.

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We have a say now in that the Bank of England is The UK bank although that say is controlled by Westminster and Scotland is part of that.

If Scotland was to become independent and as part of the divorce settlement it was agreed Scotland kept the pound then as part of that agreement I suspect Scotland would have a direct input to fiscal policies affecting the pound.

Why do folk in favour of independence keep talking about Westminster as if it is a completely Scot-free zone? Institutions may be based in London but there are Scots all over the place and there is no bar to Scots being in positions of power. Just like there's nothing stopping someone from Shetland running things in Edinburgh.

What would be the motivations for the UK to give an independent Scotland a say in their fiscal policies? What would be the point of having a 10% say in a foreign country's fiscal policies anyway? It's not as if they're going to take the effects of decisions on us into account (which they have to do now).

[Purple & Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If Labour were in power in Holyrood right now with the Tories in Westminster, they'd be milking it for all it is worth.

As it is, they're in opposition in both places and in an uneasy collaboration with the ConDems in the no campaign.

Anything that unites the Tories, labour and liberal democrats screams BAD IDEA to me.

[Just Alf]

On another note, if we voted yes would we get back the £450,000,000 of Scottish taxpayers money that's going on London Crossrail? (Their figures)

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Why do folk in favour of independence keep talking about Westminster as if it is a completely Scot-free zone? Institutions may be based in London but there are Scots all over the place and there is no bar to Scots being in positions of power. Just like there's nothing stopping someone from Shetland running things in Edinburgh.

I think the part you quoted by me and I have replicated below to save you scrolling, fully acknowledges Scots are part of the current process. It doesn't mean though the decisions made are in the best interests of Scotland.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We have a say now in that the Bank of England is The UK bank although that say is controlled by Westminster and Scotland is part of that.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What would be the motivations for the UK to give an independent Scotland a say in their fiscal policies? What would be the point of having a 10% say in a foreign country's fiscal policies anyway? It's not as if they're going to take the effects of decisions on us into account (which they have to do now).

Again and as quoted by you the motivation (reason) would be as a result of the negotiations that brought about the agreement in the first place.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If Scotland was to become independent and as part of the divorce settlement it was agreed Scotland kept the pound then as part of that agreement I suspect Scotland would have a direct input to fiscal policies affecting the pound.

[Beefster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think the part you quoted by me and I have replicated below to save you scrolling, fully acknowledges Scots are part of the current process. It doesn't mean though the decisions made are in the best interests of Scotland.

Again and as quoted by you the motivation (reason) would be as a result of the negotiations that brought about the agreement in the first place.

You think that decisions are not currently made in the best interests of Scotland while we're a part of the UK. Yet, we'll be better off as a foreign country with absolutely no say over fiscal policy (which is what getting a 10% seat at the Bank of England will mean)?

You seem to be saying that the UK will give us a say in their fiscal policies because we'll offer to do something that we want to anyway. The SNP have already said that they want to keep the pound. The alternative is the Euro (which would be crazy) or a new currency (which probably wouldn't be in our interests right now). It's not much of a negotiating position.

IMHO independence is one of these things that sounds magic as an abstract idea. Who could disagree with "Let's guide our own destiny"? However, the detail is either completely missing ("ach, we'll sort it out after we've decided") or falls to bits under a bit of scrutiny.

[yeezus.]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And yet there's not a clamour for reunification, bizarre.

Yep, no appetite for unification north or south of the border.

Anyway, anything that unites the SNP with nutters like Sheridan and the SSP seems like a bad idea to me

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You think that decisions are not currently made in the best interests of Scotland while we're a part of the UK. Yet, we'll be better off as a foreign country with absolutely no say over fiscal policy (which is what getting a 10% seat at the Bank of England will mean)?

You seem to be saying that the UK will give us a say in their fiscal policies because we'll offer to do something that we want to anyway. The SNP have already said that they want to keep the pound. The alternative is the Euro (which would be crazy) or a new currency (which probably wouldn't be in our interests right now). It's not much of a negotiating position.

IMHO independence is one of these things that sounds magic as an abstract idea. Who could disagree with "Let's guide our own destiny"? However, the detail is either completely missing ("ach, we'll sort it out after we've decided") or falls to bits under a bit of scrutiny.

How negotiations around fiscal policy and how much say Scotland would have at that table is an unknown but I'd suggest having someone there whose sole objective is Scotland is better than than no specific voice among the competing UK regions and government departments.

[IndieHibby]

If I were eligible to vote I would vote 'no'.

I am Scottish and British and always have been. Lots of families in the UK are made up of mixed 'nationality' and live in different parts of the UK from where they, or their parents were born. This has always been the case and for Scotland to suddenly sever ties with the rest of the UK (but then turn to another family - the EU) strikes me as strange.

Scotland is a modern and prosperous country and has become so while being part of the UK. As HibeeEmma said above -I have yet to hear an argument from Independence supporters which has actually convinced me that the benefits outweigh the risks. I also prefer the federal model (which I think we are on the path to at present and it should be left to run it's course).

I live in England, am Married to an Irish woman, and I want our children to feel part of Britain, in addition to their Scottish and Irish heritage. This is what many people who are Scottish who live down here think, and equally, all of the English people who consider Scotland to be somewhere worth living (despite being made to feel totally unwelcome by a bone-headed minority - I am ashamed when I witness or hear about it).

If Scotland leaves the UK then the UK is dead and that would be a terrible loss to us all.

The ties that bind us are far stronger than the gripes that seperate us.

[Glory Lurker]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Scotland is a modern and prosperous country and has become so while being part of the UK. As HibeeEmma said above -I have yet to hear an argument from Independence supporters which has actually convinced me that the benefits outweigh the risks. I also prefer the federal model (which I think we are on the path to at present and it should be left to run it's course).

Okay, Scotland benefited by being in the UK while the empire was being built up, but that's literally history. Even then, though, it's not as if Scotland would have remained an 18th century country if it hadn't joined the Union! How did Denmark do it? Belgium? Norway?

Then take the recent past. We have been horribly under-served by the Union. Over the last forty years we have seen our wealth squandered big style. It is breath-taking just how wealthy a country we could have been. There's no point getting misty eyed about the distant past, or dreaming up all sorts of phantom dangers for the future. The only reliable reference point is what we have actually experienced in our life times - and we have lost out badly through being in the Union. Based on this, the risks of staying in it far outweigh the supposed benefits.

A federal system can only work with the agreement of the whole UK. There is no tangible support for it outwith Scotland. The only party supporting it is the Lib Dems. It is never going to happen.

[superbam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Looking at the Republic of Ireland, I don't think they have benefitted from independence. Prices have hiked up (perhaps due to the Euro, but not out of the question to cover all the proposed ideas the SNP have). Ireland have also become a hub for immigration, seen as an easy option for students and workers, as UK regulations are so tight. I fully agree with fluid immigrant but for adding skills value (and that works both ways).

Aye because everything was just dandy here under the Brits. But you are right, prices have indeed seen a modest increase since the 1920s.

What is the issue with attracting foreign students exactly? They have to prove they are financially solvent before getting a visa, and contribute a ****load to the economy.

[superbam]

This a great little analysis of mainstream media coverage of the independence debate

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If I were eligible to vote I would vote 'no'.

I am Scottish and British and always have been. Lots of families in the UK are made up of mixed 'nationality' and live in different parts of the UK from where they, or their parents were born. This has always been the case and for Scotland to suddenly sever ties with the rest of the UK (but then turn to another family - the EU) strikes me as strange.

Scotland is a modern and prosperous country and has become so while being part of the UK. As HibeeEmma said above -I have yet to hear an argument from Independence supporters which has actually convinced me that the benefits outweigh the risks. I also prefer the federal model (which I think we are on the path to at present and it should be left to run it's course).

I live in England, am Married to an Irish woman, and I want our children to feel part of Britain, in addition to their Scottish and Irish heritage. This is what many people who are Scottish who live down here think, and equally, all of the English people who consider Scotland to be somewhere worth living (despite being made to feel totally unwelcome by a bone-headed minority - I am ashamed when I witness or hear about it).

If Scotland leaves the UK then the UK is dead and that would be a terrible loss to us all.

The ties that bind us are far stronger than the gripes that seperate us.

I would respectfully suggest you would appreciate, through Mrs Indie, that a break from the UK isn't the end of civilisation as we know it. OK the South has had its problems, its GDP the last time I looked, fairly recently, was still higher than the UK.

How a grown up relationship can work is beautifully illustrated by the South, the only bit of the world outwith the UK where a passport isn't required by either side of the UK when traveling abroad. And that wasn't the most amicable of separations to start with!

If Scotland leaves the UK it will be no more dead than when Republic bid farewell.

[Miguel]

Salmond boobed. He had a unique opportunity in that, unlike his predecessors, he knew exactly when the next General Election would be held. Imagine the scenario: The Tories win outright in May, 2015. The Referendum is held as near to Bannockburn Day the following month. There are lots of despairing left of centre voters who would think, 'sod it, I'm not putting up with five more years of those clowns.' They make the best of a bad situation and vote 'Yes'.
Not wanting to live under the Tories is a perfectly good reason to vote 'Yes'. It was 18 years of them that essentially gave us devolution after all, achieved, by the way by Labour and not the SNP.