Scottish Independence

[Phil D. Rolls]

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

Every time I fly to London for work, I take my passport for ID for the airline/checking in.

Anytime I've crossed a land border on the mainland in the past few years - which I've done a decent number of times - I've never had to show my ID.

Funnily enough in the independence debate, the former is suddenly a massive problem and the latter would suddenly not apply.

Better Together like to invent problems that are simply not found elsewhere or are uniquely insurmountable in our apparently advanced part of the world.

USA and Canada have a system where frequent travellers sign up to an annual scheme. They have an express lane to drive through when they reach the border.

Wonder when Better Together are going to fess up and admit the people who will suffer most are those MPs that will no longer be able to claim a wage for sleeping at Westminster.

[ancienthibby]

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

I've been invited to a debate on the referendum on Friday in Dumfries. Can't wait!

SH,

I hope you enjoyed the debate.

I listened as I always do to this programme though always frustrated with the Moderator who hardly lets anyone get a dozen words in, before he buts in!

At the end of the programme which concentrated only on the IndyRef issue, he asked for a show of hands as to voters' intentions, saw the Yes hands, saw the No hands and then said 'oh my goodness' before the radio broadcast ceased!

Can you give your own impartial result?

[stoneyburn hibs]

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

Apologies if I was patronising. The SNP 'poll' is rubbish though and wouldn't stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny.

The fact that polling had Labour in the lead way before the election just reflects the fact that the electorate moved to the SNP as the election approached. It doesn't mean that the polling was wrong.



Fear and confusion are part and parcel of both sides' campaigns. It's one of the reasons why the entire saga hasn't been worthy of the issue. IMHO the quality of the debate hasn't moved on from the initial flurry of "Aye, it will" "No, it won't" mince we got in the early days.

Fear and confusion is the better togethers number 1 tool since day one and they are getting to use it to great effect by having a bias media on side.
The feart voters will decide the outcome in September.

[Booker5time]

Think this Video sums up the better together lot... wtf is this ****

[allmodcons]

Two good news stories for Yes campaign today. One confirming shocking tactics of UK Government and a very encouraging independent poll.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h...dence.23269484


http://www.scotsman.com/news/politic...poll-1-3281655

[allmodcons]

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

Think this Video sums up the better together lot... wtf is this ****

Sorry, that's 3 good news stories for the Yes campaign today!

[One Day Soon]

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

Two good news stories for Yes campaign today. One confirming shocking tactics of UK Government and a very encouraging independent poll.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h...dence.23269484


http://www.scotsman.com/news/politic...poll-1-3281655

AMC, in the interest of fostering a return to disagreement between us I thought I would post.

1. I will see your Barrowman and call it with a bunch of equivalent welts (I believe that is the .net phrase in vogue at the moment) on the Yes side

2. The Herald story is just space filling. Salmond has been up to almost exactly the same stuff wherever he can, soliciting support for his views on various questions from EU membership to the future of the pound.

3. The poll is a lark and makes it a wee bit more interesting except that the over 44 year olds aren't shifting to Yes at all and the shift in the teens is so enormous as to be clearly unreliable. That's mainly because the pollsters have difficulty getting significant numbers of them to put their pizza and playstations down for long enough to get them to think/speak to them.

There is still a 7 point gap. Imagine what would happen if the Better Together team started some actual campaigning? What could be interesting I suppose is if concern about polls forced the Devo Max parties to crystalise the detail of their post-referendum proposals for increasing powers of the Scottish Parliament.

Anyway how can there be good news stories for Yes in the 'MSM' when everything they write is supposedly a giant Unionist conspiracy?

[allmodcons]

[QUOTE=One Day Soon;3883883]AMC, in the interest of fostering a return to disagreement between us I thought I would post.

1. I will see your Barrowman and call it with a bunch of equivalent welts (I believe that is the .net phrase in vogue at the moment) on the Yes side

2. The Herald story is just space filling. Salmond has been up to almost exactly the same stuff wherever he can, soliciting support for his views on various questions from EU membership to the future of the pound.

3. The poll is a lark and makes it a wee bit more interesting except that the over 44 year olds aren't shifting to Yes at all and the shift in the teens is so enormous as to be clearly unreliable. That's mainly because the pollsters have difficulty getting significant numbers of them to put their pizza and playstations down for long enough to get them to think/speak to them.

There is still a 7 point gap. Imagine what would happen if the Better Together team started some actual campaigning? What could be interesting I suppose is if concern about polls forced the Devo Max parties to crystalise the detail of their post-referendum proposals for increasing powers of the Scottish Parliament.

Anyway how can there be good news stories for Yes in the 'MSM' when everything they write is supposedly a giant Unionist conspiracy? QUOTE]



Business as usual ODS?

1. Maybe so, but JB really is a top 'welt'. Can you trump him with someone on the Yes side, would be interested to know who you think 'matches up'?

2. No way is this story space filling. If any space filling is required by MSM it will be an anti Independence story . In all sincerity, for me, The Herald is the most balanced MSM outlet.

3. You're being extremely selective with the numbers here. The sample of those questioned aged 16 - 24 was only 74. If you ignore this 'pizza eating play station category' by balancing them out (i.e. - 28 yes, 28 no & 18 undecided) you still have an end result of 36.6% yes and 44.8% no. If you're looking to ignore anyone under 44 then you're just being ridiculous.

Better Together will always struggle to campaign well. With a UK election looming in 2015, the 2 main players Labour and the Conservatives will soon be at each other's throats whilst trying to maintain a 'mutual working relationship' up here in Scotland. Recipe for a disaster.

MSM is a Unionist conspiracy. Sticking with .net phraseology this is FACT.

[IndieHibby]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...rendum-divorce

Some interesting comments re the Czech-Slovak separation.

[stoneyburn hibs]

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

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...rendum-divorce

Some interesting comments re the Czech-Slovak separation.

This wee snippet has made me think that i might consider changing my vote.........

Much more likely is that the impact of a Yes on England's self-esteem, identity and politics would be profoundly negative.

[jodjam]

House of Lords are to debate the independence referendum today. Should be worth a point or two swing to the Yes camp

[Sylar]

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

House of Lords are to debate the independence referendum today. Should be worth a point or two swing to the Yes camp

They need it after the speech from Mark Carney yesterday.

[allmodcons]

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

House of Lords are to debate the independence referendum today. Should be worth a point or two swing to the Yes camp

Total embarrassment. The unelected and priviliged spending the day (at our expense) criticising the democratically elected Scottish Government and the taking every opportunity they can (without facing any opposition) to talk down the prospects of an iScotland. Makes me sick, nothing but a house full of blood sucking leeches.

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

They need it after the speech from Mark Carney yesterday.

You really need to stop listening to/believing Alistair Darling's take on everything.

Mark Carney simply listed some of the possible advantages and disadvantages of a currency agreement between the rest of the UK and an iScotland. He said that a currency union could work but that safeguards would have to be agreed between both sides which would mean the ceding of some power. He went to great lengths to stress he was neither arguing in favour of or against independence.

Both sides appear to have taken some positives from his speech, which would suggest it was fairly neutral in content.

[Sylar]

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

Total embarrassment. The unelected and priviliged spending the day (at our expense) criticising the democratically elected Scottish Government and the taking every opportunity they can (without facing any opposition) to talk down the prospects of an iScotland. Makes me sick, nothing but a house full of blood sucking leeches.

Our School of Politics hosted an evening with Lord Ashdown last night and although a self-confessed Unionist, he was fully advocating that full fiscal control should have been made available to devolved regional powers long before we got to this stage, acknowledging that for the most part, Westminster make decisions in their own interests and don't give much of a toss about provincial regions. He also highlighted that there are a growing number of people in the Conservative government who want Scotland to go Independent, so they won't need to worry about us any longer. A sad and eye-opening (though not necessarily surprising) indictment to the small handful of Scots who were present in the room.

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

You really need to stop listening to/believing Alistair Darling's take on everything.

Mark Carney simply listed some of the possible advantages and disadvantages of a currency agreement between the rest of the UK and an iScotland. He said that a currency union could work but that safeguards would have to be agreed between both sides which would mean the ceding of some power. He went to great lengths to stress he was neither arguing in favour of or against independence.

Both sides appear to have taken some positives from his speech, which would suggest it was fairly neutral in content.

I tend to avoid that unfortunate mouth-piece whenever I can AMC - although I do subscribe to a lot of the Better Together commentaries, that man is not one I give any time of day and I always go out of my way to listen to the Yes opinion once I've listened to his and deduce a middle-ground accordingly, disparate from all of the hyperbole, scaremongering- and rose-tinted language.

Of course it was a neutral speech - he was giving a technical overview, not a political standpoint on the issue - However, given the standpoint of 'ability to control fiscal policy' as one of the key motivators for Independence, doesn't ceding some degree of sovereignty and handing that power back to the BoE/Westminster, just to retain the pound not seem entirely counter-intuitive to you?

[allmodcons]

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

I tend to avoid that unfortunate mouth-piece whenever I can AMC - although I do subscribe to a lot of the Better Together commentaries, that man is not one I give any time of day and I always go out of my way to listen to the Yes opinion once I've listened to his and deduce a middle-ground accordingly, disparate from all of the hyperbole, scaremongering- and rose-tinted language.

Of course it was a neutral speech - he was giving a technical overview, not a political standpoint on the issue - However, given the standpoint of 'ability to control fiscal policy' as one of the key motivators for Independence, doesn't ceding some degree of sovereignty and handing that power back to the BoE/Westminster, just to retain the pound not seem entirely counter-intuitive to you?

No. We currently have no say whatsoever on how much we can borrow or spend, basically, we can’t borrow and can only spend what pocket money is given us by Westminster. Put bluntly, what is being ceded compared with today's state of affairs? With independence, we will control all our taxes, our welfare, how our money is spent, our laws and, hopefully, have a constitution that reflects the will of the Scottish people. Yes, there will have to be some pooling of sovereignty, but if anyone is seriously suggesting the SNP's vison of Independence will give us less of a say over our own affairs than we have now then they're just plain wrong.

FWIW, comparisons with the Euro zone are completely outrageous and, whilst I thought Mark Carney did well yesterday not to be influenced or coerced by either side of the debate, his reference to the Euro zone as something comparable to the perceived sterling zone wasn't too clever.

[One Day Soon]

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

No. We currently have no say whatsoever on how much we can borrow or spend, basically, we can’t borrow and can only spend what pocket money is given us by Westminster.

We are in exactly the same position currently as England, Wales and Northern Ireland. How much we can borrow or spend is determined on a pooled basis by all the representatives of the nations within the UK (their MPs) and, ultimately, the Chancellor. Though truthfully he doesn't even determine it - the markets do. And that would be true for an independent Scotland too.

Put bluntly, what is being ceded compared with today's state of affairs?

Control overt inflation, interest rates, money supply and the pound. At present we have pooled decision making on these in the UK. With independence these matters would be controlled for us by a separate country (the remainder of the UK - England, Northern Ireland and Wales) and/or its major institutions - the Bank of England. That's IF they felt it was in their interest to have us in the pound. They may decide that a high tax high public expenditure independent Scotland would weaken their pound rather than strengthen it.

With independence, we will control all our taxes, our welfare, how our money is spent, our laws and, hopefully, have a constitution that reflects the will of the Scottish people.

Not entirely - see the point on markets above. We already have a Parliament that reflects and expresses the will of the Scottish people. Personally I'd prefer the best of both worlds. A lot more of what we have but not baby out with bath water.

Yes, there will have to be some pooling of sovereignty, but if anyone is seriously suggesting the SNP's vison of Independence will give us less of a say over our own affairs than we have now then they're just plain wrong.

"some pooling of sovereignty" - it doesn't get more fundamental than a different country controlling the basic fabric of your economy like your currency. We get to decide tax rates, while someone else decides the cost of our mortgages. That raises a serious question as to what is meant by independence.

FWIW, comparisons with the Euro zone are completely outrageous and, whilst I thought Mark Carney did well yesterday not to be influenced or coerced by either side of the debate, his reference to the Euro zone as something comparable to the perceived sterling zone wasn't too clever.

Why wasn't it too clever? Picking and choosing the bits of his analysis that suit your position here, no? This isn't some punter or a Better Together fellow traveller we are talking about. This is the Governor of the Bank of England.

Posted in haste AMC, so forgive any errors or anything too abrasive. Gotta run for the moment.

[Phil D. Rolls]

An independent Scotland could lead to the rules of golf being suspended in England. it could also be disrespectful to Scotland's war dead. Good to see that the No campaign is full of mature intellectuals that have given the important issues lots of thought.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...er-claims.html

http://www.scotsman.com/news/andrew-...work-1-3290217

[Sylar]

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

An independent Scotland could lead to the rules of golf being suspended in England. it could also be disrespectful to Scotland's war dead. Good to see that the No campaign is full of mature intellectuals that have given the important issues lots of thought.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...er-claims.html

http://www.scotsman.com/news/andrew-...work-1-3290217

I think you'll find pretty much everyone has condemned 'Lord' Lang and his comments and he doesn't speak on behalf of anyone but himself.

[Glory Lurker]

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

I think you'll find pretty much everyone has condemned 'Lord' Lang and his comments and he doesn't speak on behalf of anyone but himself.

Not Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke. She condemned the condemners.

You've got to love the House of Lords. Thank goodness a "Yes" vote gets us away from that.

[One Day Soon]

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

An independent Scotland could lead to the rules of golf being suspended in England. it could also be disrespectful to Scotland's war dead. Good to see that the No campaign is full of mature intellectuals that have given the important issues lots of thought.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...er-claims.html

http://www.scotsman.com/news/andrew-...work-1-3290217

Yes FR, because relic Tory Lords are completely representative of people who want Scotland to stay in the UK and there are no similarly daft counterparts at all on the separatist side.

[Phil D. Rolls]

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

Yes FR, because relic Tory Lords are completely representative of people who want Scotland to stay in the UK and there are no similarly daft counterparts at all on the separatist side.

No doubt there are, and they should be highlighted when they come out with mad stuff as well.

[allmodcons]

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

Why wasn't it too clever? Picking and choosing the bits of his analysis that suit your position here, no? This isn't some punter or a Better Together fellow traveller we are talking about. This is the Governor of the Bank of England.

Posted in haste AMC, so forgive any errors or anything too abrasive. Gotta run for the moment.

We are in exactly the same position currently as England, Wales and Northern Ireland. How much we can borrow or spend is determined on a pooled basis by all the representatives of the nations within the UK (their MPs) and, ultimately, the Chancellor. Though truthfully he doesn't even determine it - the markets do. And that would be true for an independent Scotland too.

That's the problem. IMO the Mother of all Parliaments doesn't reflect the views of the vast majority of Scots. With regard to borrowing and spending, successive UK Governments have a proven track record handling these matters - £1.4 trillion of debt, leading to Tory austerity that hits the weakest and most vulnerable in society? Maybe, just maybe, an iScotland would take a different approach to the politics of greed that prevail at Westminister (witness Helen Liddell in the House of Lords last week - a Labour left winger?? what a ****ing joke). I'm not sure what your point is with regard to markets, it goes without saying they affect every ecomony. It's dealing with the impact they make on your country's economy that's important and, up until now, the UK Goverment doesn't appear to be doing that too well.

Control over inflation, interest rates, money supply and the pound. At present we have pooled decision making on these in the UK. With independence these matters would be controlled for us by a separate country (the remainder of the UK - England, Northern Ireland and Wales) and/or its major institutions - the Bank of England. That's IF they felt it was in their interest to have us in the pound. They may decide that a high tax high public expenditure independent Scotland would weaken their pound rather than strengthen it.

The Bank of England, is not an rUK institution. I think a quick look at the UK balance of payments will tell you that a 'sterling zone' is in the best interests of rUK.

Not entirely - see the point on markets above. We already have a Parliament that reflects and expresses the will of the Scottish people. Personally I'd prefer the best of both worlds. A lot more of what we have but not baby out with bath water.

Again, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make regarding world markets? Does our Scottish Parliament really reflect and express the will of the Scottish people. If it does, why are the 3 Unionist Parties at Holyrood currently reviewing the powers of the Parliament?

some pooling of sovereignty" - it doesn't get more fundamental than a different country controlling the basic fabric of your economy like your currency. We get to decide tax rates, while someone else decides the cost of our mortgages. That raises a serious question as to what is meant by independence.

As I've already said, the Bank of England does not belong to rUK. Yes, rUK would be the main player, but, after the political posturing is put to one side, I have no doubt both parties (rUK and iScotland) would look to find a common platform from which to progress their respective economies. You're obviously no fool, and know full well that Independence in the modern era is a lot different to what was mean't by Independence even 40 or 50 years ago. The bottom line, however, is that Scotalnd would be able to decide when, and with whom, to pool sovereignty.


With regard to Mark Carney, I thought his analysis was fairly balanced but happen to think that the economic dispartities between certain Eurozone member states make any comparsion with a 'Sterling Zone' somewhat shaky.

On a lighter note:-
1. You've still not trumped John Barrowman.
2. Did you enjoy the dance around your lounge with your son whilst watching 9 man ICT beat Hearts?
3. Are you Ian Gray?

[allmodcons]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/5b5ec2ca-8...de.html#slide1

http://wingsoverscotland.com/unleash...rm/#more-49089

The Financial Times, never a great supporter of Scottish Independence, seems to be making a decent economic case for an iScotland today!

[Phil D. Rolls]

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

Yes FR, because relic Tory Lords are completely representative of people who want Scotland to stay in the UK and there are no similarly daft counterparts at all on the separatist side.

Should have added that Lang was a canny politician, and he knows thar he can chip away at the mad fringes of society ( the Rangers vote) and not come to any real harm as he is out of the line of fire now.

The other guy is just a chinless wonder. I wouldn't see Ian Lang as a total renegade though.

[lucky]

Good to see the SNP vote accept Labours budget amendment on the bedroom tax. Devolution working, and the Scottish parliament delivering the wish of the Scottish people. Can only hope that the social democrats in parliament link up more in the future to use the devolved powers we already have.

[green glory]

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

Good to see the SNP vote accept Labours budget amendment on the bedroom tax. Devolution working, and the Scottish parliament delivering the wish of the Scottish people. Can only hope that the social democrats in parliament link up more in the future to use the devolved powers we already have.

It's a shame so many Labour MP's didn't turn up or abstained in the recent Westminster vote on the bedroom tax. If they had done the decent thing it would have been abolished UK wide.

[lucky]

[QUOTE=green glory;3898879]It's a shame so many Labour MP's didn't turn up or abstained in the recent Westminster vote on the bedroom tax. If they had done the decent thing it would have been abolished UK wide.[/QUOTE
Absolute rubbish. The collation have a majority. So if every Labour mp turned up they would still have lost. The Labour MPs missing were paired as such they were allowed to be absent. But not good politics as it allows people like you to spin it.

[Glory Lurker]

[QUOTE=lucky;3899282]

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

It's a shame so many Labour MP's didn't turn up or abstained in the recent Westminster vote on the bedroom tax. If they had done the decent thing it would have been abolished UK wide.[/QUOTE
Absolute rubbish. The collation have a majority. So if every Labour mp turned up they would still have lost. The Labour MPs missing were paired as such they were allowed to be absent. But not good politics as it allows people like you to spin it.

Just to check that I'm not just swallowing the spin - is it the case that pairing is only used for "unimportant" votes? I would have thought, regardless of the lobby arithmetic, this would have been an important matter? As I say, I might just have fallen for spin here - no doubt you'll let me know!

More generally, though, it's all very well Holyrood managing to fight a rearguard action, but personally I'd prefer that we didn't run the risk of nonsense Westminster legislation like the bedroom tax (and so much else) being foisted on us in the first place. I would have thought that would appeal to a social democrat like yourself?

[One Day Soon]

[QUOTE=Glory Lurker;3899324]

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

Just to check that I'm not just swallowing the spin - is it the case that pairing is only used for "unimportant" votes? I would have thought, regardless of the lobby arithmetic, this would have been an important matter? As I say, I might just have fallen for spin here - no doubt you'll let me know!

More generally, though, it's all very well Holyrood managing to fight a rearguard action, but personally I'd prefer that we didn't run the risk of nonsense Westminster legislation like the bedroom tax (and so much else) being foisted on us in the first place. I would have thought that would appeal to a social democrat like yourself?

Pairing is used in a variety of circumstances. If votes from either side are going to cancel each other out then there is often no reason why they can't be paired - paticularly if that allows those concerned to do other things. So if you have an ill MP, or someone with difficult family circumstances or some other important engagement it allows felxibility where otherwise every MP would always have to attend for all votes.

From time to time pairing just doesn't work - where there is a very contentious vote or where the parties want to demonstrate a particular point or even where relations between parties are at a bad enough point that they just want to make life difficult for the other side.

There is quite a lot of total crap talked about this sort of thing. "Labour didn't care enough to turn up and vote in numbers against X", The SNP were so unconcerned about policy Y that not all their MPs bothered to vote..." etc. The bottom line is that in almost all cases the vote is determined in advance by the government's majority of numbers and in those circumstances everything else is window dressing.

As a Social Democrat I take the view that reinstating borders at Berwick and Carlisle - and thereby condeming Cardiff, Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle and many other parts of England and Wales to legislation they don't want - isn't a very social or democratic way of behaving.

[Peevemor]

[QUOTE=One Day Soon;3899368]

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

Pairing is used in a variety of circumstances. If votes from either side are going to cancel each other out then there is often no reason why they can't be paired - paticularly if that allows those concerned to do other things. So if you have an ill MP, or someone with difficult family circumstances or some other important engagement it allows felxibility where otherwise every MP would always have to attend for all votes.

From time to time pairing just doesn't work - where there is a very contentious vote or where the parties want to demonstrate a particular point or even where relations between parties are at a bad enough point that they just want to make life difficult for the other side.

There is quite a lot of total crap talked about this sort of thing. "Labour didn't care enough to turn up and vote in numbers against X", The SNP were so unconcerned about policy Y that not all their MPs bothered to vote..." etc. The bottom line is that in almost all cases the vote is determined in advance by the government's majority of numbers and in those circumstances everything else is window dressing.

As a Social Democrat I take the view that reinstating borders at Berwick and Carlisle - and thereby condeming Cardiff, Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle and many other parts of England and Wales to legislation they don't want - isn't a very social or democratic way of behaving.

This is the job of the party "whips". It's their job to ensure that their members are there for the votes and to deal with their opposing number to "pair" those that can't attend. Even when relations are strained between parties, the whips normally maintain a good working relationship otherwise their jobs become impossible.