Scottish Independence

[The Harp Awakes]

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

I'll be voting no - in fact I don't personally know anyone (out of the few people I've discussed it with) who intends to vote yes. These things tend to work like that, you tend to hang around with people with similar opinions to yourself which can lead to a bit of an echo chamber forming.

Its a purely heart over head thing for me. I'm British and Scottish and I can't imagine being anything else. I'm proud to be British and Scottish. I was born that way and I'll die that way, a referendum can't change it.

Having said that my head says stay with the Union too. I think we'll be better off economically, be more stable and have more influence as part of the UK.

I would like change though. My own preferred solution would be to move to a federal model with separate Scottish, Welsh, N Irish, English (probably more than one English, maybe North, Mid, South and London) parliaments handling all local issues and a British parliament to deal with foreign policy, defence and serious crime.

It's a definite YES for me. Wouldn't hesitate for one minute. It's a massive opportunity for us to take control of our country and sort out our social problems. A life expectancy of ~50 in parts of Scotland is simply not acceptable in a developed country in 2013. Westminster rule has failed us in that respect. Getting rid of nuclear submarines and weapons of mass destruction from our country is a clincher for me. Think of what we could spend Scotland's proportion of that massive budget on.

I guess my views are diametrically opposite to those expressed in the post above. I am Scottish and do not know what it means to be British. Never have. I do however, agree with the point about folk tending to be around others of similar views and opinions. Of the 11 members of my immediate family who are old enough to vote in the referendum, 10 will vote yes and 1 is undecided. The 10 includes my 87 year old mother who was born in Merseyside.

I believe that as we get closer to the referendum the 'YES' vote will increase. Whether it will increase enough to win the referendum I'm not sure.

[Hibrandenburg]

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

[Just Alf]

Interesting take on Alistair Carmichael's '20 reasons for voting against independence'

http://wingsoverscotland.com/taking-...ot/#more-47426

[Sylar]

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

Interesting take on Alistair Carmichael's '20 reasons for voting against independence'

http://wingsoverscotland.com/taking-...ot/#more-47426

“18. A strong university research base and infrastructure.”
Um, which we already have and which is already independent. Unless, of course, you’re suggesting that England might bomb our universities as well as our airports.

Erm, no, it 100% isn't. University research in Scotland is funded primarily through RCUK - although our Universities are more successful than most south of the borders (in terms of attracting research funding), we take out more than we put in.

£3 billion to be precise and the only mention of the loss of access to RCUK in the White Paper was 'we promise we'll discuss and negotiate' (single ' rather than " used as I'm paraphrasing). £3 billion and no plan B...

Plus, it was announced today that any efforts to charge RUK students tuition fees if the vote is 'Yes' would be illegal, that's another loss of funding income for research.

The ridiculous uncertainty and haphazard economics surrounding University and research funding are the exact reason most academics will vote 'no'.

[allmodcons]

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

Erm, no, it 100% isn't. University research in Scotland is funded primarily through RCUK - although our Universities are more successful than most south of the borders (in terms of attracting research funding), we take out more than we put in.

£3 billion to be precise and the only mention of the loss of access to RCUK in the White Paper was 'we promise we'll discuss and negotiate' (single ' rather than " used as I'm paraphrasing). £3 billion and no plan B...

Plus, it was announced today that any efforts to charge RUK students tuition fees if the vote is 'Yes' would be illegal, that's another loss of funding income for research.

The ridiculous uncertainty and haphazard economics surrounding University and research funding are the exact reason most academics will vote 'no'.

You should of course make it clear in your post that the £3 billion figure you quote is the total UK spend, 10.7% of which came to Scotland in 2012/13. On a population share of 8.4%, if we lose the funding and it's a big if, you're talking about £69 million. So much for your £3 billion and no plan B.

Can I ask who made the 'announcement' you reference?

How do you know that most academics will vote 'no'? This is just a bland statement based on your own voting intention.

[Sylar]

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

Who made this 'announcement' I wonder?

How do know that most academics will vote 'no'? This is just a bland statement based on your own voting intention.

I got it through Aberdeen University's staff news circular but here you go:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014...n_4587811.html

I know most academics are leaning towards 'no' because we do all speak. Through our Unions, through our institutions, through pooling initiatives, conferences, meetings etc...

Since well before the White Paper was published (and certainly since!), there's a real fear amongst academics that the 'plans' for funding higher education are utterly non-existent and the SNP are hoping that the status quo can be maintained. As a result, there have been several open forums, round table debates, touring presentations, Union polls, Q&A sessions where there's a genuine concensus of doubt and worry.

[allmodcons]

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

I got it through Aberdeen University's staff news circular but here you go:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014...n_4587811.html

I know most academics are leaning towards 'no' because we do all speak. Through our Unions, through our institutions, through pooling initiatives, conferences, meetings etc...

Since well before the White Paper was published (and certainly since!), there's a real fear amongst academics that the 'plans' for funding higher education are utterly non-existent and the SNP are hoping that the status quo can be maintained. As a result, there have been several open forums, round table debates, touring presentations, Union polls, Q&A sessions where there's a genuine concensus of doubt and worry.

Sorry having some trouble with laptop. Can you address the first point in my edited post?

[allmodcons]

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

I got it through Aberdeen University's staff news circular but here you go:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014...n_4587811.html

I know most academics are leaning towards 'no' because we do all speak. Through our Unions, through our institutions, through pooling initiatives, conferences, meetings etc...

Since well before the White Paper was published (and certainly since!), there's a real fear amongst academics that the 'plans' for funding higher education are utterly non-existent and the SNP are hoping that the status quo can be maintained. As a result, there have been several open forums, round table debates, touring presentations, Union polls, Q&A sessions where there's a genuine concensus of doubt and worry.

It's a report by Academics for Better Together!!!

[allmodcons]

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

I got it through Aberdeen University's staff news circular but here you go:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014...n_4587811.html

I know most academics are leaning towards 'no' because we do all speak. Through our Unions, through our institutions, through pooling initiatives, conferences, meetings etc...

Since well before the White Paper was published (and certainly since!), there's a real fear amongst academics that the 'plans' for funding higher education are utterly non-existent and the SNP are hoping that the status quo can be maintained. As a result, there have been several open forums, round table debates, touring presentations, Union polls, Q&A sessions where there's a genuine concensus of doubt and worry.

Real fear comes from individuals like you using headline figures of £3 billion when the worst case scenario is a 'potential' loss in funding of around £60 million - £70 million.

[Sylar]

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

You should of course make it clear in your post that the £3 billion figure you quote is the total UK spend, 10.7% of which came to Scotland in 2012/13. On a population share of 8.4%, if we lose the funding and it's a big if, you're talking about £69 million. So much for your £3 billion and no plan B.

Can I ask who made the 'announcement' you reference?

How do you know that most academics will vote 'no'? This is just a bland statement based on your own voting intention.

Sorry, you're quite correct of course! I thought I had bracketed our percentage secured in my last edit but haven't. Not quite sure where your figures come from but in 2013 we secured £257 million of funding, which is 13.1% of the total UK spend on research compared to our 8.4% proportion.

Regardless, that's still £93 million and it's not really a big 'if' at all - we leave the UK, we have no right to access UK based funding bodies, just like I'm not able to apply for funding from Irish, Spanish, Swedish or Dutch funding pools.

If the SNP (or post Independence parliament, as I'm aware this isn't party specific) cannot supplement that deficit (bearing in mind the likely loss of RUK tuition fees of £150 million added on to the aforementioned £93 million), researchers (and students) will leave Scotland if they can't get their research/courses funded accordingly.

That last point is obviously personal opinion but in our line of work, funding is key and if access to it becomes squeezed (unless you can suggest where the money might be sourced from otherwise, short of raising taxes?) it becomes unsustainable.

[Sylar]

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

It's a report by Academics for Better Together!!!

This discussion appears to have now drawn in 2 reports published on the same day...

I'm conscious of the important of source, without a doubt, but the facts and figures presented here are readily available to access regardless of your stance. It should be stressed that the report on RUK students being exempt from tuition fees come from a group of academic legal experts who aren't affiliated with Academics Together in any way. They're a research group based at Aberdeen (which is the report I'm referring to) and are world leading in their field.

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

Real fear comes from individuals like you using headline figures of £3 billion when the worst case scenario is a 'potential' loss in funding of around £60 million - £70 million.

It wasn't there to be deliberately misleading, it was a simple error of type. As I said, I thought i had included the % bracket and I'm willing to admit that. Also, you cite £60-70 (actually £93) million as if it's an insubstantial amount of money (compared to £3 billion, I suppose it is mind you ).

You might not believe it but I'm still open to being convinced that a 'Yes' vote is feasible - however, in order to do that, they're going to have to substantiate their claims and ideas with facts and figures. Whilst I'm aware many of the other discussions make a strong case, with evidence, for Independence, this for me personally, is a deal-breaker until it's less of a gamble.

[Sylar]

I'm aware it's hard to find balance and I've no intention here of 'scaremongering' but I've worked for the past 10 years to make my career in academia and the potential loss of major funding avenues, although a worst case scenario, is also a very real prospect, supported in evidence of the figures.

What we could be doing with is the RCUK or Westminster government coming out and providing a clear answer as to what is going to happen. Saying this will be done after the vote is utter stupidity.

Hand on heart, if the Scottish Government could confirm in advance of the vote that discussions had secured access to the funding post-Indy, I'd vote Yes. This, for me, is the only stumbling block but it's monumental from a personal (and professional) standpoint.

[allmodcons]

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

It wasn't there to be deliberately misleading, it was a simple error of type. As I said, I thought i had included the % bracket and I'm willing to admit that. Also, you cite £60-70 (actually £93) million as if it's an insubstantial amount of money (compared to £3 billion, I suppose it is mind you ).

What we could be doing with is the RCUK or Westminster government coming out and providing a clear answer as to what is going to happen. Saying this will be done after the vote is utter stupidity.

Hand on heart, if the Scottish Government could confirm in advance of the vote that discussions had secured access to the funding post-Indy, I'd vote Yes. This, for me, is the only stumbling block but it's monumental from a personal (and professional) standpoint.

Against my better judement, the figures I quoted come directly from a UK Government Paper published late last year - £60 million is the figure stated in the report - and headlined as 'fact' without any balanced comment by the pro Union propaganda machine that is the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-24892825

To balance matters, however, here is a link to the pro independence website Wings Over Scotland. This piece disputes the analysis coming from the UK Government and might help allay some of the fears the pro Union side have managed to plant in your academic head.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-soot-covered-cockerel/

[Sylar]

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

Against my better judement, the figures I quoted come directly from a UK Government Paper published late last year - £60 million is the figure stated in the report - and headlined as 'fact' without any balanced comment by the pro Union propaganda machine that is the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-24892825

To balance matters, however, here is a link to the pro independence website Wings Over Scotland. This piece disputes the analysis coming from the UK Government and might help allay some of the fears the pro Union side have managed to plant in your academic head.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-soot-covered-cockerel/

Cheers - it was nice to read some perspective from the other side actually.

I agree with Ian Diamond that it's in our interests to still be able to access RCUK funding and collaborate with UK Universities if the vote is a Yes but that's not enough. I agree with many of the statements in the White Paper about how various changes to the current system would be beneficial for our HE system but without an outline as to how this is funded, they too are not enough.

What we need are solid answers and supportive economic details from those who control the funding and regulate it and when the cabinet minister who controls the education purse strings is coming out and saying that Scotland would need to supplement the loss of RCUK funding, you can understand why academics north of the border are worried, bearing in mind that although the RCUKs control where money goes based on applicant quality, their funding is allocated by Parliament.

One thing I would say from the article:

Within the UK, funding for research is based on a “dual support” system, described below by Rick Rylance (the Chair of Research Councils UK) in his submission to the Royal Society of Edinburgh’s ‘Enlightening the Constitutional Debate – Science and Higher Education’ project.

“Research Councils UK (RCUK) is, as the name suggests, a UK-wide organisation. Its seven autonomous Councils distribute grants and awards to recognised Research Organisations (ROs). These comprise UK universities, but also research institutes (which are sometimes wholly or partially-owned by individual Research Councils), and some independent bodies, such as major museums, known as Independent Research Organisations or IROs. The grants are awarded on the basis of open competition and decided through peer review by appropriate expert researchers on a project-specific basis. They are thus not allocated on the basis of location, either geographic or political.

The distribution that arises does so naturally as a function of quality. By and large, ROs located in Scotland achieve success at a rate and to an extent that is above what one might notionally think of as an even distribution across the UK. This recognises the distinctive excellence of Scottish research.

Whilst it might be true that the awarding of grants is not geographical based across the UK, institutions in the Republic of Ireland, France, Italy, the USA, Swaziland or Papa New Guinea can't apply from funding from the UK Research Councils - if Scotland leave the UK, they are not automatically entitled to access a UK system, regardless of how much it's in ours and the UK's interests. What we need is someone to come out and categorically say 'Yes, this funding will be made available to Scotland' or 'no, sorry, this will be for UK based research institutions only'. If it turns out to be the latter, that then gives the Scottish Government enough time to put together some figures and work out how they would continue funding research to the currently high level.

[allmodcons]

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

Whilst it might be true that the awarding of grants is not geographical based across the UK, institutions in the Republic of Ireland, France, Italy, the USA, Swaziland or Papa New Guinea can't apply from funding from the UK Research Councils - if Scotland leave the UK, they are not automatically entitled to access a UK system, regardless of how much it's in ours and the UK's interests. What we need is someone to come out and categorically say 'Yes, this funding will be made available to Scotland' or 'no, sorry, this will be for UK based research institutions only'. If it turns out to be the latter, that then gives the Scottish Government enough time to put together some figures and work out how they would continue funding research to the currently high level.

You'll (presumably) know more about this than me, but does the RCUK not already commit serious funding overseas to it's foreign 'partners'
(e.g. - £150 million over 5 years in India)?

[Sylar]

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

You'll (presumably) know more about this than me, but does the RCUK not already commit serious funding overseas to it's foreign 'partners'
(e.g. - £150 million over 5 years in India)?

Not quite - funding is allocated to the following units/groups:

http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/noparentrcs.aspx

It is often the case that funding is set aside to fund research in foreign countries or that foreign partners become involved in RCUK funded projects through partnership with UK institutions but If I were an academic based in any country outwith the UK, I couldn't independently apply for funding with them without partnership with a UK University/Research Agency.

The scheme you're referring to enables Indian Universities to access RCUK funding so long as they submit a proposal in partnership with a UK institution as the lead, as India (and China) are deemed to be international research priorities.

[allmodcons]

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

Not quite - funding is allocated to the following units/groups:

http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/noparentrcs.aspx

It is often the case that funding is set aside to fund research in foreign countries or that foreign partners become involved in RCUK funded projects through partnership with UK institutions but If I were an academic based in any country outwith the UK, I couldn't independently apply for funding with them without partnership with a UK University/Research Agency.

The scheme you're referring to enables Indian Universities to access RCUK funding so long as they submit a proposal in partnership with a UK institution as the lead, as India (and China) are deemed to be international research priorities.

What's to stop you doing this in an Independent Scotland.

Without wishing to give you an overinflated ego, my understanding is that you guys in the Scottish Research sector are up there with the best in the world. You presumably already work hand in glove with other rUK institutions, so why would they not want you as one of their partners when Scotland becomes an Independent Nation State?

Maybe you need to have bit more belief in your own ability!!

[Sylar]

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

What's to stop you doing this in an Independent Scotland.

Without wishing to give you an overflated ego, my understanding is that you guys in the Scottish Research sector are up there with the best in the world. You presumably already work hand in glove with other rUK institutions, so why would they not want you as one of their partners when Scotland becomes an Independent Nation State?

Maybe you need to have bit more belief in your own ability!!

Nothing would stop us doing this but it's not the best way to go about it from personal or institutional points of view.

When we're assessed by various auditing agencies for University quality/rankings, or indeed when we apply for jobs or funding, evidence of funding acquired as a Principal Investigator is crucial.

To take the approach you're suggesting would mean that, although access would become available, it would always be as a co-funded/co-investigator as the UK institute is always the first named on any such application.

Whilst that becomes a different issue, the access to the funding is only part 1 of the problem. I guess when you start to scrape at the complexities, it doesn't come as much of a surprise that there's no blueprint for HE funding yet.

[heretoday]

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.

Surely, a dislike of the Tories is not sufficient reason to split and form a separate country?

It's how you feel in your heart about Scotland that's the key.....or should be.

[steakbake]

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

The ridiculous uncertainty and haphazard economics surrounding University and research funding are the exact reason most academics will vote 'no'.

For a clearly very intelligent fellow, that last remark is nonsense. Most - some - all? How do you know? Academics, I would image will vote pretty much in the same way that those outside of the ivory towers will vote and for the same or similar reasons.

There are many prominent academics who have put forward their academic opinions in the areas of law, international relations, economics, politics etc to support both sides of the debate.

Academics are not isolated from having political opinions shaped on experience, personal viewpoint and so on, just like other mere mortals.

[Sylar]

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

For a clearly very intelligent fellow, that last remark is nonsense. Most - some - all? How do you know? Academics, I would image will vote pretty much in the same way that those outside of the ivory towers will vote and for the same or similar reasons.

There are many prominent academics who have put forward their academic opinions in the areas of law, international relations, economics, politics etc to support both sides of the debate.

Academics are not isolated from having political opinions shaped on experience, personal viewpoint and so on, just like other mere mortals.

Apologies, I'm not claiming it as a known 'matter of fact' SB, it's simply my opinion based on the interactions, opinions and discussions I've shared with a wide range of colleagues and students on the matter.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, most Universities have hosted debates, Q&A sessions, public lectures and various information has been circulated by the Unions that govern lecturers, research and teaching staff. There have been opinion polls conducted amongst such staff and there's an overwhelming lean towards one outcome. Granted, this doesn't represent ALL academics but that, combined with the ones I've interacted with, all share the same concerns that are driving them towards a 'no'.

I'm not trying to put us in another echelon here either, somehow suggesting everyday politics, experiences etc don't factor in but you can't seriously believe that the possible loss of our primary revenue isn't going to impact the way we'll vote or weigh our options. It's horses for courses and people will vote on the aspects of the manifesto/promises (hopefully) which are important to them. HE funding isn't going to be a priority for anyone outwith academia but it is a huge factor on the direction we're going to vote as an industry.

[Just Alf]

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

Surely, a dislike of the Tories is not sufficient reason to split and form a separate country?

It's how you feel in your heart about Scotland that's the key.....or should be.

Agreed, I'm sure I've mentioned on this thread (months ago!) that my folks are split, One is a labour voter, the other is a tory.... Both have voted SNP in recent times and say they're voting "Yes", both also say they"ll revert to what they really want to vote for once the SNP have done their job (and it ain't the SNP).

[hibby rae]

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

Agreed, I'm sure I've mentioned on this thread (months ago!) that my folks are split, One is a labour voter, the other is a tory.... Both have voted SNP in recent times and say they're voting "Yes", both also say they"ll revert to what they really want to vote for once the SNP have done their job (and it ain't the SNP).

If the 'Yes' vote wins I wouldn't be surprised if the SNP splinter afterwards into a leftist party and a centreist one.

[allmodcons]

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

Surely, a dislike of the Tories is not sufficient reason to split and form a separate country?

It's how you feel in your heart about Scotland that's the key.....or should be.

I take your point about 'the heart' but one of the main reasons for voting 'Yes' is that Scotland will, thereafter, always get the Government the Scottish Electorate vote for. In the highly unlikley event of Scottish Conservative Government being elected, even their policies will no doubt be formulated in what they term to be Scotland's best interest. That is to say, we will not have the policies formulated on what is best for the SE of England and aimed, in the case of the current UK Conservative Party, at keeping their right wing rump and UKIP in check.

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

Agreed, I'm sure I've mentioned on this thread (months ago!) that my folks are split, One is a labour voter, the other is a tory.... Both have voted SNP in recent times and say they're voting "Yes", both also say they"ll revert to what they really want to vote for once the SNP have done their job (and it ain't the SNP).

This is how it should be. The Yes campaign is not about voting SNP.

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

If the 'Yes' vote wins I wouldn't be surprised if the SNP splinter afterwards into a leftist party and a centreist one.

I doubt this will happen. There is no doubt that voters on the left and right of politics vote SNP, however, the vast majority of SNP members are left of centre minded, which is why the SNP consider themselves to be a left of centre social democratic party. IMO this is how the party will stay in the event of Yes vote.

[One Day Soon]

Voters aren't idiots. In this case it is a straightforward agree or disagree question so there is no ambiguity.

I think when you have a government whose main objective is independence, conducting an independence Referendum whose timing and question they have framed then there can be little doubt that the ensuing result tells whether or not the people of Scotland agree with the proposition being put to them.

In this context the opposition parties and the Better Together campaign barely matter. This is going to be either a collision or a union between the most cherished policy of the SNP and the sovereign will of the Scottish people. If there is a substantial defeat of the independence proposal it will be fascinating to see how the SNP responds in the short and medium term to such a rejection from the people it so dearly wishes to represent. It can't blame them. It can't attack them.

As to a Scottish cringe, the only time that is manifest is when some McGlashanite forgets the party line on the English during this campaign and rails against 'them' as though there was some conspiracy to do Scotland down. It is truly a cringe to see Scots defining themselves by reference to what they are not (English) as opposed to what they are (Scottish).

I do wonder how these mid to late evening political programmes, the political commentators and the politicians themselves are going to manage to acclimatise themselves to addressing bread and butter issues again once this is over, whatever the result.

[Hibrandenburg]

"as though there was some conspiracy to do Scotland down"

You make it sound as if Westminster conspiring to do Scotland down was a nutty theory. It's real and factual and the attitude of Westminster towards Scotland can easily be interpreted by reading the McCrone report. We've been lied to and swindled for decades if not centuries and all without any chance to hold those responsible to account.

The independence vote is not about revenge or righting past wrong doings, it's about making sure it doesn't happen again or if it does then those responsible can be held to account, it's about determining our own fate and building governmental policy designed to serve the Scottish electorate and not Westminster's home base.

Those who fail to learn from the past will be damned to relive the past.

[Future17]

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

I think when you have a government whose main objective is independence, conducting an independence Referendum whose timing and question they have framed then there can be little doubt that the ensuing result tells whether or not the people of Scotland agree with the proposition being put to them.

I don't disagree with your general point but the Scottish Government didn't frame the question; the wording was recommended by the Electoral Commission after a question assessment consultation.

[jodjam]

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

"as though there was some conspiracy to do Scotland down"

You make it sound as if Westminster conspiring to do Scotland down was a nutty theory. It's real and factual and the attitude of Westminster towards Scotland can easily be interpreted by reading the McCrone report. We've been lied to and swindled for decades if not centuries and all without any chance to hold those responsible to account.

The independence vote is not about revenge or righting past wrong doings, it's about making sure it doesn't happen again or if it does then those responsible can be held to account, it's about determining our own fate and building governmental policy designed to serve the Scottish electorate and not Westminster's home base.

Those who fail to learn from the past will be damned to relive the past.

Excellent post

[allmodcons]

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

Voters aren't idiots. In this case it is a straightforward agree or disagree question so there is no ambiguity.

I think when you have a government whose main objective is independence, conducting an independence Referendum whose timing and question they have framed then there can be little doubt that the ensuing result tells whether or not the people of Scotland agree with the proposition being put to them.

As to a Scottish cringe, the only time that is manifest is when some McGlashanite forgets the party line on the English during this campaign and rails against 'them' as though there was some conspiracy to do Scotland down. It is truly a cringe to see Scots defining themselves by reference to what they are not (English) as opposed to what they are (Scottish).

Business as usual ODS?

If it's a straightforward agree or disgaree with no ambiguity, how on earth can the question have been framed by the SNP.

What is truly cringeworthy is watching Scottish Politicians talking down their own country in an effort to save to their beloved Union. Did you witness Johann Lamont at FMQ's last Thursday? Absolute embarrassment! Talking us down as subsidy junkies when Scotland's net fiscal balance is in a better position than that of the UK. By JL's reckoning it's ok for any country in the world to run a fiscal deficit except Scotland. God help us all if she becomes First Minister.

[One Day Soon]

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

"as though there was some conspiracy to do Scotland down"

You make it sound as if Westminster conspiring to do Scotland down was a nutty theory. It's real and factual and the attitude of Westminster towards Scotland can easily be interpreted by reading the McCrone report. We've been lied to and swindled for decades if not centuries and all without any chance to hold those responsible to account.

Let's see what the Scottish people think about that.

The independence vote is not about revenge or righting past wrong doings, it's about making sure it doesn't happen again or if it does then those responsible can be held to account, it's about determining our own fate and building governmental policy designed to serve the Scottish electorate and not Westminster's home base.

Let's see what the Scottish people think about that too.


Those who fail to learn from the past will be damned to relive the past.

Mmm, let's see what the SNP learn if they lose this vote