View Full Version : Yes or No to independance
what will you decide?
ON ANOTHER NOTE DID YOU KNOW
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (David Mundell) recently stated that " Scotland was part of England since the 1707 Treat of Union and do not exist"
This means in legal terms, if SCOTLAND becomes a "NEW STATE" by voting for Independence on Sept 18th 2014 they DO NOT inherit any debt incurred by the UK and start with a new bank account..
macadamia
21-May-13, 17:37
Yes, with nothing in it, because Scotland doesn't exist in the eyes of the Union so it can't be given the money. Next......
orkneycadian
21-May-13, 17:52
I guess that means they wont inherit of the oil that lies off the coast of the former "England" either then.
I am still waiting for Eck and Nic to publish the financial prospectus. But I think I'll be waiting a long time, and on that basis, my mind is pretty much already made up. Unless of course, they can come with a full and proper prospectus between now and then that will show us what we are being asked to vote for.
Duncansby
21-May-13, 18:39
what will you decide?
ON ANOTHER NOTE DID YOU KNOW
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (David Mundell) recently stated that " Scotland was part of England since the 1707 Treat of Union and do not exist"
This means in legal terms, if SCOTLAND becomes a "NEW STATE" by voting for Independence on Sept 18th 2014 they DO NOT inherit any debt incurred by the UK and start with a new bank account..
Gee Whiz -missed that quote at the time! So much for England and Scotland being partners in 'union'!
orkneycadian
21-May-13, 21:59
So if Scotland is still part of England, and as at this point in time, doesnt actually exist, what are we doing with a devolved government?
what will you decide?
ON ANOTHER NOTE DID YOU KNOW
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (David Mundell) recently stated that " Scotland was part of England since the 1707 Treat of Union and do not exist"
This means in legal terms, if SCOTLAND becomes a "NEW STATE" by voting for Independence on Sept 18th 2014 they DO NOT inherit any debt incurred by the UK and start with a new bank account..
And that is precisely why we are where we are now...there has never been a Union of two nations...that would have required a federal system.....and England wouldn't have been able to dictate as they have for the last 300+ years. I'm not even going to say that Westminster MPs are on the wrong side of brain dead and have spent their lives maintaining their income and perks at the expense of democracy.
The rUK is certainly pushing for the "we will replace the UK everywhere in foreign/International relations and Scotland has to start as if they were Eire or South Sudan". Wonder if it could be because if Scotland removes itself from the Union, the fishing waters go, the oil goes and the nuclear deterrent goes....and all the theoretically empty space up here used as NATO training areas goes.....and they are trying to pretend that nothing they used to get the UN veto, the EU membership etc has just removed itself from their control?
It will certainly be a real benefit if we don't have to accept our share of UK debt...as our share of UK assets aren't overly likely to negate them completely, given the current debt level....though we would end up with a lot less debt than the UK proportionate to population.....as we do now, if they included oil income in our figures.
So if Scotland is still part of England, and as at this point in time, doesnt actually exist, what are we doing with a devolved government?
Good question...that would be because what they are saying is the usual crock of Unionist crap...which is predicated only on the ability to throw manure in the hope that some sticks. We have devolution because Tony Blair thought it would kill off the SNP (and that worked well!).
If they really believed that Scotland was a part of England.....why would they be worrying about the SNP any more than they worried about the BNP? Even if Scotland elected SNP MPs in all constituencies that doesn't mean that the Union Parliament has to take any notice, given any MPs elected by Scotland are still outnumbered in Westminster by around 10 to 1.
What Unionist politicians say for public consumption and what they think are different things. Afer all, if they did not think Scotland was a separate nation...why did they bury the McCrone Report?
ywindythesecond
22-May-13, 00:09
what will you decide?
ON ANOTHER NOTE DID YOU KNOW
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (David Mundell) recently stated that " Scotland was part of England since the 1707 Treat of Union and do not exist"
This means in legal terms, if SCOTLAND becomes a "NEW STATE" by voting for Independence on Sept 18th 2014 they DO NOT inherit any debt incurred by the UK and start with a new bank account..
I haven't checked but I think that it is very unlikely that David Mundell actually stated that " Scotland was part of England since the 1707 Treat of Union and do not exist".
I also haven't checked, but I doubt if "legal terms" apply to "if SCOTLAND becomes a "NEW STATE" by voting for Independence on Sept 18th 2014 they DO NOT inherit any debt incurred by the UK and start with a new bank account".
Get a life Oddquine if England had n't bailed Scotland out on several occasions then it would have gone down the pan many years ago.
Get a life Oddquine if England had n't bailed Scotland out on several occasions then it would have gone down the pan many years ago.
It would be useful if you would specify the "several occasions".
My history studies failed to mention these.
Granted the Union of 1707 bailed out the Scottish aristocracy who had foolishly mortgaged their assets for the Darien Scheme. "Parcel of rogues" and "English gold" etc.
Whatever happened in the past is useful to know as it helps us think about what we would do differently. If Lizz believes that England has bailed Scotland out and that is a reason for not supporting the union then it is equally valid to say that Scotland has bailed out England through the oil revenues and that had Westminster not squandered the oil revenues then Scotland would not have needed any bailing out. We need to look forward. The referendum is about Scotland's future and the future of our children. It is about putting the power to run Scotland back into the hands of the people of Scotland. You and me. Its about having the opportunity to change things in a way we dont have now.
And before someone slags me off for mentioning oil as if that is all there is lets add some context to Scotland's economy.
Scotland having generated more tax per head than the UK for every one of the last 30 years
* Our world-class food and drink industry which is seeing rising exports and the most recent annual turnover of £12.4 billion
* Our thriving creative industries which are recognised throughout the world and have an annual turnover of £4.8 billion
* Our global reputation in life sciences and an annual turnover of £2.9 billion
* Our oil and gas industry, which is seeing record investment and which, in 2011, contributed £26bn to Scotland’s GDP and boosted the UK balance of payments by £40bn.
* Our green energy reserves, with an estimated 25 per cent of Europe’s tidal and offshore wind resources.
* Our tourism industry which employs almost 200,000 people
* Our manufacturing sector, which exported £14.7bn in 2011
Scotland can afford to be independent.
orkneycadian
22-May-13, 08:57
From an Orkney context then;
Scotland having generated more tax per head than the UK for every one of the last 30 years
* Our world-class food and drink industry which is seeing rising exports and the most recent annual turnover of £12.4 billion
Orkney Meat, producer of the World Class "Orkney Gold" brand - No more
* Our thriving creative industries which are recognised throughout the world and have an annual turnover of £4.8 billion
Ortak - One of the biggest jewellery manufacturer - In administartion - a number of shops in the UK now closed
* Our global reputation in life sciences and an annual turnover of £2.9 billion
Not something that happens in this neck of the woods, as far as I am aware
* Our oil and gas industry, which is seeing record investment and which, in 2011, contributed £26bn to Scotland’s GDP and boosted the UK balance of payments by £40bn.
Flotta Oil Terminal - A quiet backwater compared to the 70's and 80's. Tankers in Scapa flow are something of a rareity these days
* Our green energy reserves, with an estimated 25 per cent of Europe’s tidal and offshore wind resources.
With many Scottish residents sending out a message that they do not want this in Scotland
* Our tourism industry which employs almost 200,000 people
With downturns due to visitors saying they cannot afford to come to the extremities of the UK due to the higher cost compared to going to low cost destinations
* Our manufacturing sector, which exported £14.7bn in 2011
Not sure what we manufacturer in these parts anymore, thats not covered above.
Scotland can afford to be independent.
So either these cash cows are not relevant to the North of Scotland, or they have been milked dry and are on the way to the knackery. In either case, we might become as dependant on Central Scotland as we presently are on England.
Whatever happened in the past is useful to know as it helps us think about what we would do differently. If Lizz believes that England has bailed Scotland out and that is a reason for not supporting the union then it is equally valid to say that Scotland has bailed out England through the oil revenues and that had Westminster not squandered the oil revenues then Scotland would not have needed any bailing out. We need to look forward. The referendum is about Scotland's future and the future of our children. It is about putting the power to run Scotland back into the hands of the people of Scotland. You and me. Its about having the opportunity to change things in a way we dont have now.
Squidge, the voice of reason, logic and conciliation! I am serious not sarcastic.
I have to disagree with your view that we should move on from the contention by LIZZ that England is continually bailing out Scotland.
An ongoing tactic by the Better Together cabal is to make bald assertions and repeat them ad nauseam in the hope that they will be accepted as fact.
In the interest of the truth these assertions must be challenged. Assertions about the future will only be confirmed or proved false when the time comes. Neither side of the argument do the electorate any favours by making unfounded or currently nonprovable assertions.
Again I ask LIZZ to back up her assertions of bailout with facts to support it.
Squidge, have a good day.
rich62_uk
22-May-13, 10:24
I think I love you Squidge ! Totally agree ONCE AGAIN on all you say.
Get a life Oddquine if England had n't bailed Scotland out on several occasions then it would have gone down the pan many years ago.
But if they bailed Scotland out on any occasions....wouldn't that have been because of the effects of the actions of the English Government (since the Union of the Crowns) and a predominantly South of England oriented Parliament (since the Union of Parliaments) producing policies which were not designed to help our economy at all?
Can you come up with any time Scotland was "bailed out" as you put it, for any reason which was not as a direct result of policies made in London for London........or for buying votes in England? The deregulation of the banking system is one classic example which immediately springs to my mind.
So either these cash cows are not relevant to the North of Scotland, or they have been milked dry and are on the way to the knackery. In either case, we might become as dependant on Central Scotland as we presently are on England.
Far be it for me to question someone who lives on orkney but I think you may be being a wee bit pessimisitic,
A couple of examples -
Food and Drink
http://www.orkney.com/b/Orkney+Quality+Food+and+Drink+Ltd
Creative Industries - Crafts
http://www.orkneydesignercrafts.com/CraftTrail_Brochure.pdf
Renewables
Hatston (Orkney) – a five hectare marine site identified in the National Renewables Infrastructure Plan (N-RIP). Construction of six workshop units is underway and there are potential agglomeration benefits when considered together with Lyness and Scrabster. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2012/01/Employment17012012
http://www.orkneymarinerenewables.com/new-developments.asp
Oil
Whilst definitely quieter than its heyday, Flotta is still seeing nearly 3 million barrels of oil through its terminal.
Here is the OrkneyCouncils Economic review for 2011. http://www.orkney.gov.uk/Service-Directory/E/Economic-Information.htm
It shows that there are a greater percentage of the working population who are economically active in Orkney than in Scotland and the UK. About five per cent more. It shows that there were the following active enterprises in Orkney in the sectors shown.
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
710
Mining & Quarrying
5
Manufacturing
55
Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply
10
Water supply, sewerage, waste management & remediation activities
5
Construction
130
Wholesale & Retail Trade and Repair of Motor Vehicles
175
Transportation and storage
45
Accommodation and food services
80
Information and communication
15
Financial and insurance services
10
Real estate activities
10
Professional, scientific and technical activities
75
Administrative and support services
70
Education
10
Human health & social work
35
Arts, entertainment, recreation
25
Other service activities
35
There is an economic strategy too http://www.orkneycommunities.co.uk/COMMUNITYPLANNING/documents/MINUTES/Task%20force/Orkney%20Economic%20Strategy%202012-16%20_no%20action%20plan_.pdf
Tourism alone is worth 32 million to Orkney and whilst Orkney, like the rest of us, has had casualties of this economic downturn, with a 1.5% unemployment rates - the lowest in the highlands - it seems to be holding its own.
I am sure that it can seem depressing when you compare it to the heyday of the oil industry and 8,9, million barrels of oil heading through Flotta but you must see that Orkney is not "on its way to the knackery".
Just as an aside in case anyone missed it. The Scottish Governments paper Scotland's Economy; the case for Independence was published yesterday. I urge everyone to read it whatever their view on Independence. I am not suggesting that it will change your mind - I have no expectations of that - indeed I dont care which way you vote or even if you choose to vote at all - that is YOUR choice. I do care that you have the information you need to make a decision. I rather think that many committed No supporters will curl their lip and not get past Alex Salmond's Introduction but they should. The report is easy to read and understand. It is not couched in the economic language that turns many people off the subject - including me. I found it very straightforward and it is a paper that all voters should really try to read. There are tables and supporting evidence for the mathematically inclined and plenty of referenced quotes for those who prefer words.Even if you have never read anything like this before you should give it a go.
Here it is
http://scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0042/00422987.pdf
Just as an aside in case anyone missed it. The Scottish Governments paper Scotland's Economy; the case for Independence was published yesterday. I urge everyone to read it whatever their view on Independence. I am not suggesting that it will change your mind - I have no expectations of that - indeed I dont care which way you vote or even if you choose to vote at all - that is YOUR choice. I do care that you have the information you need to make a decision. I rather think that many committed No supporters will curl their lip and not get past Alex Salmond's Introduction but they should. The report is easy to read and understand. It is not couched in the economic language that turns many people off the subject - including me. I found it very straightforward and it is a paper that all voters should really try to read. There are tables and supporting evidence for the mathematically inclined and plenty of referenced quotes for those who prefer words.Even if you have never read anything like this before you should give it a go.
Here it is
http://scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0042/00422987.pdf
Tried to rep you but wasn't allowed to...so just posting to say that the PDF file is interesting. I have spent a long time reading it....and while there are parts with which I, personally, am inclined to disagree (mainly EU and the green/windmill oriented stuff...not the figures but the real need for either), there are enough figures given for a decent discussion...though on here. I won't be holding my breath in anticipation of that.
As an effort to be even-handed I link you all to http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22580074 and to
http://thinkandtalkwithtods.com/2013/05/21/uk-treasury-paper-fails-to-appreciate-nature-of-existing-regulatory-environment/
No disrespect to you Squidge, but I choose not to believe anything that comes from Eck and his cronies, I will still vote NO no matter what.
Eenie meenie mynie mo, cross a yes or a no?
secrets in symmetry
22-May-13, 23:16
I choose not to believe anything that comes from Eck and his cronies, I will still vote NO no matter what.Lol!
Have you read the storybook that Ugly Fat Eck published yesterday? One section of the economic analysis hasn't changed since I pointed out a glaring error to its authors in a beer soaked discussion many months ago. The whole thing is an entirely predictable wishlist, and indeed a work of fiction intended for intellectually-bankrupt gullible economic illiterates.
It's barely worth reading. Most of it is the usually fluffy wishful sessionist crap. The economic sections (if you can call them that) are ludicrously naive - and mostly wrong for two crucial reasons that the authors evidently don't understand - but they do at least give some insight into what may pass for thought processes in the imbeciles that wrote it.You'd have to be truly thick or truly gullible to be taken in by this nonsense.
I can't decide whether the authors are merely economic illiterates or liars (or both).
macadamia
22-May-13, 23:20
I thought Mr Salmonds book was a very nice couler, and has some very nice pictures in it which helped me to understand wat he was tryeing to say but he didn't have any proper sums in the book and I was very frigtened because he kept talking about Westmister which is a dynersoar and eats everybody up especially widows and orfans becos the Westmisters are TORRIES wich means there not even human beans. Anyway, my Dad sed it was going to be a book of sums, and I'm so glad it wasent, just a nice fairy story with a funy ending, and Dad sed the only thing missing was the perferations so he could hang it in the cludgie and use it to wipe his bottom!
Explain it then Secrets - tell us why it is as you say it is. We are a bright lot here you know we can understand the arguments and if you explain it to us we will see that you are right. Oh thats not the case is it - you think we are stupid and have said so on many occasions. Thing is you NEVER do actually back up your point of view with evidence or supporting information. You mutter smugly and throw your nonsense around but you dont actually DO the maths.
And macademia - that goes for you too - ridicule ridicule ridicule and yet no debate.... I expected better.
Folks
Read it for yourself.
None taken Golach
It would, however be useful if all of those like golach, who will vote NO no matter the arguments, admitted it rather than waste everybody's time and this forum's bandwidth arguing just for the sake of it.The average undecided punter is not going to be convinced either way by either side reiterating we are right and the other side is wrong...but do need facts and figures to consider.....and the undecided voter is who all posters on forums and elsewhere are addressing. No argument however lucid or compelling will change a settled mind.
Surely we are past the "Yah Boo sucks to you" element which passes so much for discussion on this forum.....aren't we? Oops.having just read squidges response to sis...edited to say that it appears the "Yah Boo sucks to you" mentality is alive and well in Caithness.
Surely we are past the "Yah Boo sucks to you" element which passes so much for discussion on this forum.....aren't we? Oops.having just read squidges response to sis...edited to say that it appears the "Yah Boo sucks to you" mentality is alive and well in Caithness.
Have taken you off ignore Oddquine , momentarily to reply Yah Boo sucks back, and IMHO I do have a settled mind, your back on Ignore now
macadamia
23-May-13, 00:04
I am not in the business of debating whether a power-mad blusterer and his collection of second-rate politicians should be rupturing and trying to secede from a Union which has stood him and his cronies well in the past, and, in these troubled times, is even more likely to do so: as well as in the future, when the oil runs out.
I see what he is doing as a mischief, and one of the most powerful weapons to be deployed against the self-important and Ozymandian figures in this world is ridicule: the method - used widely by British squaddies in WW2 against the Axis leaders, was to mock them. It improved morale, upset the opposition, and displaced any chance of a sympathetic hearing.
But in a kind of way, you're right. When your Leader says he will tie himself to the pound he said only a few years ago was going down the toilet, you know you're dealing with a winner. How DARE I point at him and laugh?!
And before you run away with a righteous fit of the vapours, I am NOT comparing Mr. Salmond to the Axis leaders: merely comparing the methodology to be used. After all, the "Yes" faction are pretty handy with the bon mots like "Scaremongering" and "Wastemonster", so I figure the odd piece of ridicule is within the rules of engagement. Especially with a troop of humourless secessionists.
RBS and the banking crisis comes to mind. Sorry but I know I am an incomer and have no right to express any opinion on the matter of independence apart from the fact that I live here, I chose to move here and I too come from an area that has expressed it's outrage at Westminster, I'm not English but am British. I'm a Kernewomse and proud to be so but that does n't make me want to leave a united kingdom despite all it's flaws.
My leader lol. Aye ok then. I was mistaken macademia, I assumed that you had answers or meaninful points which would help inform and enlighten the discussion and were simply CHOOSING ridicule as your preferred option. Now I see that ridicule must be all you have. You know that is disappointing in a way... Although probably not surprising.
Once again, for anyone that thinks a yes vote is a vote for some illustrious leader a YES vote will mean that decisions about Scotland will be made in Scotland by a government elected by the Scottish Electorate. The decisions about who runs the country and how they will do that will not be made by Alex Salmond, nor by a bunch of out of touch blinkered nonentities in London. The decisions will be made by US.... You and me at the ballot box voting for politicians to represent Scottish priorities and work to grow a society which is the one we choose.
I hope its fairer and more socially responsible, you may hope for richer or greener but without Independence its exactly what we have now. No change. If thats ok for you then that is fine. Its not for me.
RBS and the banking crisis comes to mind. Sorry but I know I am an incomer and have no right to express any opinion on the matter of independence apart from the fact that I live here, I chose to move here and I too come from an area that has expressed it's outrage at Westminster, I'm not English but am British. I'm a Kernewomse and proud to be so but that does n't make me want to leave a united kingdom despite all it's flaws.Lizz of course you have a right to express an opinion, wherever you come from. Who says you havent .. Put em up put em up. Disagreeing with you does not mean I want you to be silenced. At least you have an opinion which is more than blowing raspberries from the sidelines or wittering about dinosaurs.
secrets in symmetry
23-May-13, 01:03
Have taken you off ignore Oddquine , momentarily to replyI made that mistake last week lol - it was soon corrected! The oddquine bloke still can't count, but this doesn't make him worth sniggering at. That would be unnecessarily cruel....
macadamia
23-May-13, 01:19
Squidge! Oh dear, you DO take yourself so seriously, don't you? I have no objections to you believing the arrant tosh spouted by the good gentleman and indeed his cohort of acolytes. It is very plausible, except for those those passages where he contradicts himself. You have every right to believe that his protestations are honest, transparent, upright and honorable. Indeed I further see your point that it isn't the man himself, or his party - he is merely the carrier wave which will lead the people to a freedom when they can vote for a proper leader of stature. Would that there were such a person who isn't at this moment engaged in realpolitik with the grown-up parties.
Sadly, the Utopia you seek is unlikely to be brought about by the kind of change to be seen at the ballot box: if the "yes" brigade are successful, by the time they have negotiated their way with a country they have been busy ripping apart with insults and blame for past grievances, with a European Community which does not approve of fragmentation or secessionism, and with a world order which demands certain fiscal imperatives are obeyed ( which does not include the threat to withhold outstanding debt), the resulting "Independence" will be in name alone. There will be so many strings attached that the puppet will dance a very jerky dance indeed.
But what do I know? I am merely a person who lives in Scotland, has a massive celtic pedigree (no, I don't mean the fitba team!) and has a sincere interest in not letting goal-post movers and snake-oil merchants disrupt the peace any more than they have to. I bow graciously to your right to consider me a mere blower of raspberries, and shall content myself with considering you to be a misplaced but sincere idealist.
Awwww seeee macademia .... You CAN do better.
Still a bit strong on the too stupid ( westminster has grown up parties, Scotlands are not) and Too wee ( puppet, fragmentation).
You dismiss the desire for change as some sort of drive for utopia ... It isnt and it wont be. It is however an opportunity to change things. The only place that we can give ourselves an opportunity to do things differently IS at the ballot box in September 2014. There is also a vague inference that somehow your "celtic pedigree" gives you added gravitas although to me it makes you sound like a westie.
But its better.
Interestingly you dont deny that If we had an Independent Scotland we would have a government elected by and answering to the Scottish electorate in a way we dont have now. Its also worth saying again that the only truth in the Economics issue is that in an Independent Scotland revenue raised in Scotland would be spent by a scottish government on scotland's priorites decided upon by the electorate. That doesnt happen now either. You might also notice that in your rush to dismiss my views as well intentioned but stupid you assumed that I believed every word of the document. I simply asked people to read it. It is a good place to start to look at the Economics of Independence for people who have struggled with the subject.
Take myself too seriously, well maybe I do Macademia. This is the most important decision we have to make, it is an opportunity to change things that we havent had for ages. People deserve more from the debate than the name calling and Superior dismissal that seems to be the only thing that many No supporters do on this board.
macadamia
23-May-13, 09:39
I feel the beginnings of a structured truce. I have perhaps the natural worry about "freedom from" and "freedom to", and I feel that, as yet, I'm hearing a lot of the former, and little of the latter. What worries me is that the present level of benefits and sweeteners attending this movement towards the desired goal is likely to be unsustainable after a honeymoon period: my reason for thinking along these lines resides in the fact that the Scottish government has for a time now had the capability of raising a local income tax, which it has steadfastly refused to do. Anything that puts the blame for what is clearly a European and global recession is roundly and regularly blamed on the familiar monster of the Westminster government. Given the prediliction of Scotland to embrace emollients within the economy - benefits, grants, laissez-passer fees, charges and taxes, it is no wonder that a society which is by nature rather more left wing than the rest of the UK would seek to retain in perpetuity that which no other developed country pretends to be able to afford.
My second worry is how Scotland is being governed between the announcement of the Referendum and the day itself. The present ruling party, the SNP, is spending far too much of its time on electioneering, and engineering the desired "Yes" vote, than engaging in the business of governance over all of its own peoples and infrastructure.
Above all, what really worries me is that a noble and so clearly characterisable and identifiable country such as Scotland, with its history, legends, iconic scenery, produce, and customs, feels that it is not properly recognised as a stand-alone country in its own right, with all the benefits of HM Queen, Sterling, the Bank of England, the NHS, and the economies of scale predicated on the punching weight of the UK as a whole to assist its infrastructure. What cost the replication of much of that structure in a stand-alone Scotland?
Finally, there is the whole business of secession. Rather like an acrimonious divorce, sadly I see the situation, if separation were to happen, of two countries being very brave about the split, each diminished in material terms, wondering in their embittered loneliness whether they did the right thing. In such situations, it does seem to be the case that the less well off of the separating parties tends not to do so well, which in itself causes further acrimony.
There is no doubt that Scotland has the fire in its belly to be Independent - whatever version of Independence means at any given time - but no man is an island, and Scotland will always be beholden in some ways to its nearest neighbour, to Europe, and to the rest of the world. Given what I just said, "Independence" will never be Scotland standing alone of any financial, ethical or family ties with others. That's why I am an eternal supporter of Scotland the Brave, and would not wish to see such a wonderful country dash itself to pieces on the rocks of its leaders' hubris.
What worries me is that the present level of benefits and sweeteners attending this movement towards the desired goal is likely to be unsustainable after a honeymoon period: my reason for thinking along these lines resides in the fact that the Scottish government has for a time now had the capability of raising a local income tax, which it has steadfastly refused to do. Anything that puts the blame for what is clearly a European and global recession is roundly and regularly blamed on the familiar monster of the Westminster government. Given the prediliction of Scotland to embrace emollients within the economy - benefits, grants, laissez-passer fees, charges and taxes, it is no wonder that a society which is by nature rather more left wing than the rest of the UK would seek to retain in perpetuity that which no other developed country pretends to be able to afford.
Overheard in the pub last night where the landlord (Scottish) and some regulars (English) were discussing Scots independence:
"I'm all for it, it'll be five million less mouths to feed…"
Overheard in the pub last night where the landlord (Scottish) and some regulars (English) were discussing Scots independence:
"I'm all for it, it'll be five million less mouths to feed…"
I believe the English are all pretty happy for us to do one.
Im not sure they would be so happy if we could manage to secure all of the North sea oil income though (doubt if that will materialise).
Anyway IMHO we are better as a unit.
I believe the English are all pretty happy for us to do one.
Im not sure they would be so happy if we could manage to secure all of the North sea oil income though (doubt if that will materialise).
Anyway IMHO we are better as a unit.
It was the landlord who said it.
Thats a great post Macademia and thank you for a serious and considered response. I will give you a serious and considered reply but im going out for lunch with my darling hubby and he gets cross if I Caithness.org it on my mobile :(
Mystical Potato Head
23-May-13, 17:26
Have taken you off ignore Oddquine , momentarily to reply Yah Boo sucks back, and IMHO I do have a settled mind, your back on Ignore now
Don't get too cocky and smarmy about it Golach..Remember the last time you even started a thread to say you had put someone on ignore.
Whatever happened to that thread?
I won't vote for independence because I am a citizen of the UK. Why would I want to change?
I won't vote for independence because I am a citizen of the UK. Why would I want to change?
In a previous thread, there seemed to be an overwhelming support for Caithnessians to divorce themselves from the Highland regional council and setup a local Caithness council because it was deemed that localism was the way forward. In other words, it is felt that Caithnessians are only the ones trusted to take the big decisions in the best interests of Caithness, made all the more acute by the issues surrounding bilingual signage etc.
If we scale that concept up, then there may be some merit to support the idea that perhaps it is Scots that are the only ones who should be trusted to take the big decisions in the best interests of Scotland.
In a previous thread, there seemed to be an overwhelming support for Caithnessians to divorce themselves from the Highland regional council and setup a local Caithness council because it was deemed that localism was the way forward. In other words, it is felt that Caithnessians are only the ones trusted to take the big decisions in the best interests of Caithness, made all the more acute by the issues surrounding bilingual signage etc.
If we scale that concept up, then there may be some merit to support the idea that perhaps it is Scots that are the only ones who should be trusted to take the big decisions in the best interests of Scotland.
If that was in response to me, sorry, haven't changed my mind.
RBS and the banking crisis comes to mind. Sorry but I know I am an incomer and have no right to express any opinion on the matter of independence apart from the fact that I live here, I chose to move here and I too come from an area that has expressed it's outrage at Westminster, I'm not English but am British. I'm a Kernewomse and proud to be so but that does n't make me want to leave a united kingdom despite all it's flaws.
But isn't/wasn't RBS and the banking crisis a direct result of Westminster deregulation policies. And if we had had independence before then, would Scotland have had a banking crisis? Are you so certain Scotland would have left the banks to gamble with our money in order to make big profits and pay themselves big bonuses?
Incomers who live here have as much right to an opinion as any other person who lives here. It's good to get an opinion on here which doesn't include words like wee fat Eck, and power-mad blusterer and various other epithets which seem to allude that Salmond is the driver and not the vehicle. That is a mindset which is frankly insulting to pro-independence Scots whatever their original nationality.
golach..just to let you know, you don't have to take me off ignore to read my posts.......there is a link on the ignored post which lets you read that single post. That's how I occasionally read yours (and some others) if nobody has quoted you.
But isn't/wasn't RBS and the banking crisis a direct result of Westminster deregulation policies.
No, it was a direct result of the management's incompetence. That holds even more truly for HBOS. The effect without the bail-out would have been the loss of depositors money. I.E. wages that went in, would never come out. The knock-on effect would be unimaginable.
But isn't/wasn't RBS and the banking crisis a direct result of Westminster deregulation policies. And if we had had independence before then, would Scotland have had a banking crisis? Are you so certain Scotland would have left the banks to gamble with our money in order to make big profits and pay themselves big bonuses?
Incomers who live here have as much right to an opinion as any other person who lives here. It's good to get an opinion on here which doesn't include words like wee fat Eck, and power-mad blusterer and various other epithets which seem to allude that Salmond is the driver and not the vehicle. That is a mindset which is frankly insulting to pro-independence Scots whatever their original nationality.
golach..just to let you know, you don't have to take me off ignore to read my posts.......there is a link on the ignored post which lets you read that single post. That's how I occasionally read yours (and some others) if nobody has quoted you.
I don't recall Alex Salmond and his buddies screaming for more bank regulation when deregulation happened.
I don't recall Alex Salmond and his buddies screaming for more bank regulation when deregulation happened.
And when Gordon Brown had cross party talks over the strategy to bail out the banks, I didn't see any of the opposition party leaders disagree with Gordon's policy, regrettable but necessary seemed to be the collective mood.
I don't recall Alex Salmond and his buddies screaming for more bank regulation when deregulation happened.
And the point in the current political system in which Scotland was not subservient to the system set up for the UK as a whole (and for that read the the Banks paying their taxes to the UK) would have been what, exactly? Bear in mind that at the time of deregulation, we didn't even have a devolved Parliament.......and care to explain just what difference that would have made to any decision by a UK Westminster Parliament...... even if we had one which did object? Really?
orkneycadian
25-May-13, 00:56
Far be it for me to question someone who lives on orkney but I think you may be being a wee bit pessimisitic,
A couple of examples -
Food and Drink
http://www.orkney.com/b/Orkney+Quality+Food+and+Drink+Ltd
Creative Industries - Crafts
http://www.orkneydesignercrafts.com/CraftTrail_Brochure.pdf
Renewables
Hatston (Orkney) – a five hectare marine site identified in the National Renewables Infrastructure Plan (N-RIP). Construction of six workshop units is underway and there are potential agglomeration benefits when considered together with Lyness and Scrabster. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2012/01/Employment17012012
http://www.orkneymarinerenewables.com/new-developments.asp
Oil
Whilst definitely quieter than its heyday, Flotta is still seeing nearly 3 million barrels of oil through its terminal.
Here is the OrkneyCouncils Economic review for 2011. http://www.orkney.gov.uk/Service-Directory/E/Economic-Information.htm
It shows that there are a greater percentage of the working population who are economically active in Orkney than in Scotland and the UK. About five per cent more. It shows that there were the following active enterprises in Orkney in the sectors shown.
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
710
Mining & Quarrying
5
Manufacturing
55
Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply
10
Water supply, sewerage, waste management & remediation activities
5
Construction
130
Wholesale & Retail Trade and Repair of Motor Vehicles
175
Transportation and storage
45
Accommodation and food services
80
Information and communication
15
Financial and insurance services
10
Real estate activities
10
Professional, scientific and technical activities
75
Administrative and support services
70
Education
10
Human health & social work
35
Arts, entertainment, recreation
25
Other service activities
35
There is an economic strategy too http://www.orkneycommunities.co.uk/COMMUNITYPLANNING/documents/MINUTES/Task%20force/Orkney%20Economic%20Strategy%202012-16%20_no%20action%20plan_.pdf
Tourism alone is worth 32 million to Orkney and whilst Orkney, like the rest of us, has had casualties of this economic downturn, with a 1.5% unemployment rates - the lowest in the highlands - it seems to be holding its own.
I am sure that it can seem depressing when you compare it to the heyday of the oil industry and 8,9, million barrels of oil heading through Flotta but you must see that Orkney is not "on its way to the knackery".
With respect, most of the publications linked to above are either promotional, or a few years old. The OIC Economic Review document was last updated in 2011, and scrolling though it, the very latest data in it is from the period up to May 2011. Much of the most up to date data is for the 2010 year. At best then, the data is 2 years out of date, and in the meantime, there have been distinct downturns across a number of areas.
More up to date links include
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-20147679
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-20147679)
Ok macademia - I promised you a response and here it is. Its really long though and Im sorry about that but after you gave me a sensible post I wanted to do it justice .
I have said before that only economic truth I can find is that in an Independent Scotland money raised in Scotland would be spent by a Scottish Government which is elected by and accountable to the people of Scotland and so will be spent on Scottish priorities in a way that doesn’t happen now.
Our government does not currently have the power to decide what to spend all the money we raise on. Whether to contribute to UK wide projects which often are not UK wide - like the london sewer system - or not. It cannot ask “How does this benefit the People of Scotland” and then choose on that basis whether to spend money on it or not. We currently contribute to Trident, the London sewage system and the high speed rail link. This would change. Scotland contributed to the Olympics and yet there is no Westminster money coming to the Commonwealth games for example.
Scotland currently spend less as a proportion of GDP on welfare and pensions than the rest of the UK and several countries in Europe and, as the rest of the UK and many other countries in Europe re examine how they will afford the rising costs of pensions, so will an Independent Scotland. Many say that as we are rich in natural resources and with a highly innovative business sector we will weather that particular storm better than many other countries. However – only with Independence will we get the freedom to decide for ourselves how to manage that, and manage the welfare system and the health system for the benefit of Scottish society. If we are Independent we do not have to have the same system that the UK has for any of it. There is a plan to have a more simple taxation system and welfare is being looked at just now but there are many options and many different systems operating throughout Europe which we can examine and choose from as we wish according to the needs of our own society. Without Independence we have to have what Westminster decides.
You are right to say that the Scottish Government has not used its ability to raise taxes. It is important to note however, that the ability to vary taxes by 3p is a limited power. We can only vary the standard rate of Income tax. We cannot raise taxes for the highest earners by 3pence and the leave the lowest earners untouched. We cannot reduce taxes by 3p for the lower earners and yet leave the highest earners untouched. We would have to increase taxes across the board for everyone. We have no way of managing taxation policy as a whole so that we could mitigate the burden on the lowest earners - who are already paying a high price for this government's Austerity programme – and we could not ensure that the highest earners and corporations are paying their fair share. In addition the Scottish government would have to pay for the Inland Revenue to collect the tax. I have seen a figure of £15 million quoted. They are probably better using this money for mitigating the effects of the welfare reforms imposed by Westminster. The Local Income Tax is not a sensible tool for a country wishing to grow their economy. It just doesn’t do the job we would want it to do.
You also seem to assume that personal taxes would need to rise. There is no evidence of this. We are actually contributing more to the pot than we get back. No one seems to be doubting that. Remove the need to contribute to some of the things I have mentioned - including Trident - and we have a pretty good foundation. The revenue from all the resources we have – and I listed many of the businesses in a post above shows that we have a good base upon which to build which isnt just oil. Whilst there is plenty of argument about Oil there are many economists who think Scotland could be prosperous WITHOUT oil. Indeed, it seems only in the anti- independence camp that people think having oil is a bad thing for Scotland.
As for the intervening period and the quality of the government of the country, whilst I accept your concerns, I cannot see any evidence that the country is going to rack and ruin. The roads are still being maintained, hospitals are still treating people and we haven’t had many of the issues with AandE and catastrophic care quality which they are having in England. Education is performing well, the curriculum for Excellence has been introduced and seems to be doing what it should be doing. On newsnight the other night there was an examination of education and many complimentary things were said about Scottish Education. Exams are still being sat and marked and young people are getting places at universities. Modern apprenticeships are on the rise and unemployment is not skyrocketing. Not everything in the garden is rosy, housing shortages exist despite extra investment and waiting list and drug affordability continues to be an issue for the NHS. The removal of the Gatwick link for Inverness has to be a concern and we await the Student loans process to see if the problems of last year will appear again. Social Care, particularly for looked after children is not working and a massive area of concern for me is how we care for the most vulnerable in our society, but Scotland is not marking time, not starting to look frayed at the edges and the government is not firefighting in the same way that The UK government seems to be doing.
In the paper that you ridiculed in your earlier post there were several places where the infrastructure was discussed. There was no desire to simply replicate what we will inherit, the systems that Westminster have grown, fiddled with, chopped and changed over the years. With Independence we have the freedom to do something different. We have the freedom to choose different systems, different methods, different departments. When talking about Industry and competition the report says “Rather than simply replicating the full suite of UK economic regulatory bodies, an independent Scotland could bring these functions together and simplify the regulatory landscape to one that is more appropriate for a country of Scotland's size.” There is a paper on this subject already published.
We are a smaller country we need an infrastructure to support our smaller country and its particular society with its rural areas and its cities, its agriculture and its fishing, its financial institutions and its IT companies. What works for London may not work in Edinburgh and it definitely wont work in Caithness! We currently do not have the freedom to choose a different way. Independence gives us that freedom.
I absolutely agree that it is a worry that Scotland feels it is not properly recognised but maybe that is because its interests have been overlooked or given less priority in the UK than they should have been. This ties in to your final point about divorce and being beholden to our neighbours. Of course we are beholden to our neighbours just as they are beholden to us – but we don’t have to be governed by them
As an Independent country operating on an equal footing with all the other independent countries we will support them and they will support us - as it should be. Embittered loneliness is where the UK is heading with its growing desire to leave Europe. An Outward looking Independent Scotland, will have many friends. With the plan to participate in NATO and to be represented in the EU we will grow and develop our influence and we will draw on the expertise and knowledge of our neighbours. There is no real opposition to Scotland being part of these organisations. There is much research to show that small countries within the EU find much to benefit them. Independence is not ever someone standing alone avoiding ties and responsibilities - that is isolation and is not something that the current Scottish government or the other pro independence parties (with the exception of the SDA) advocate.
You are absolutely right that Scotland has fire in its belly for Independence. But instead of being bashed on the rocks of a leader’s hubris Independence gives the people of Scotland the opportunity to rise with a renewed sense of our own abilities and potential. The Government that offers the best chance of Scotland doing exactly that will be voted for in 2016. There is an ambition to be more and ambition is the first step to success. We have a desire to see change. There is no opportunity for change within the UK political system we have now. We have seen change stifled and twisted to benefit the rich and the greedy. Scotland can take that desire for change and make it fit the priorities of the people of Scotland expressed at the ballot box. Not overnight, not in the next year, two years or even five or ten but for our children and our grandchildren. That is why I will be voting for Independence. Not because of the past, not because of the present but because of the future.
Looks like another poll is tipping the balance to the NO camp.
thank goodness
And the point in the current political system in which Scotland was not subservient to the system set up for the UK as a whole (and for that read the the Banks paying their taxes to the UK) would have been what, exactly? Bear in mind that at the time of deregulation, we didn't even have a devolved Parliament.......and care to explain just what difference that would have made to any decision by a UK Westminster Parliament...... even if we had one which did object? Really?
You weren't talking about the current devolved system. As usual you were ranting against Westminster. My point stands, how many SNP politicians opposed deregulation?
Can't rep you for that post, squidge..so very good post. It's one worth repeating on National Collective if you haven't already done so.
PeteSeeker
31-May-13, 23:06
Ok macademia - I promised you a response and here it is. Its really long though and Im sorry about that but after you gave me a sensible post I wanted to do it justice .
I have said before that only economic truth I can find is that in an Independent Scotland money raised in Scotland would be spent by a Scottish Government which is elected by and accountable to the people of Scotland and so will be spent on Scottish priorities in a way that doesn’t happen now.
Our government does not currently have the power to decide what to spend all the money we raise on. Whether to contribute to UK wide projects which often are not UK wide - like the london sewer system - or not. It cannot ask “How does this benefit the People of Scotland” and then choose on that basis whether to spend money on it or not. We currently contribute to Trident, the London sewage system and the high speed rail link. This would change. Scotland contributed to the Olympics and yet there is no Westminster money coming to the Commonwealth games for example.
Scotland currently spend less as a proportion of GDP on welfare and pensions than the rest of the UK and several countries in Europe and, as the rest of the UK and many other countries in Europe re examine how they will afford the rising costs of pensions, so will an Independent Scotland. Many say that as we are rich in natural resources and with a highly innovative business sector we will weather that particular storm better than many other countries. However – only with Independence will we get the freedom to decide for ourselves how to manage that, and manage the welfare system and the health system for the benefit of Scottish society. If we are Independent we do not have to have the same system that the UK has for any of it. There is a plan to have a more simple taxation system and welfare is being looked at just now but there are many options and many different systems operating throughout Europe which we can examine and choose from as we wish according to the needs of our own society. Without Independence we have to have what Westminster decides.
You are right to say that the Scottish Government has not used its ability to raise taxes. It is important to note however, that the ability to vary taxes by 3p is a limited power. We can only vary the standard rate of Income tax. We cannot raise taxes for the highest earners by 3pence and the leave the lowest earners untouched. We cannot reduce taxes by 3p for the lower earners and yet leave the highest earners untouched. We would have to increase taxes across the board for everyone. We have no way of managing taxation policy as a whole so that we could mitigate the burden on the lowest earners - who are already paying a high price for this government's Austerity programme – and we could not ensure that the highest earners and corporations are paying their fair share. In addition the Scottish government would have to pay for the Inland Revenue to collect the tax. I have seen a figure of £15 million quoted. They are probably better using this money for mitigating the effects of the welfare reforms imposed by Westminster. The Local Income Tax is not a sensible tool for a country wishing to grow their economy. It just doesn’t do the job we would want it to do.
You also seem to assume that personal taxes would need to rise. There is no evidence of this. We are actually contributing more to the pot than we get back. No one seems to be doubting that. Remove the need to contribute to some of the things I have mentioned - including Trident - and we have a pretty good foundation. The revenue from all the resources we have – and I listed many of the businesses in a post above shows that we have a good base upon which to build which isnt just oil. Whilst there is plenty of argument about Oil there are many economists who think Scotland could be prosperous WITHOUT oil. Indeed, it seems only in the anti- independence camp that people think having oil is a bad thing for Scotland.
As for the intervening period and the quality of the government of the country, whilst I accept your concerns, I cannot see any evidence that the country is going to rack and ruin. The roads are still being maintained, hospitals are still treating people and we haven’t had many of the issues with AandE and catastrophic care quality which they are having in England. Education is performing well, the curriculum for Excellence has been introduced and seems to be doing what it should be doing. On newsnight the other night there was an examination of education and many complimentary things were said about Scottish Education. Exams are still being sat and marked and young people are getting places at universities. Modern apprenticeships are on the rise and unemployment is not skyrocketing. Not everything in the garden is rosy, housing shortages exist despite extra investment and waiting list and drug affordability continues to be an issue for the NHS. The removal of the Gatwick link for Inverness has to be a concern and we await the Student loans process to see if the problems of last year will appear again. Social Care, particularly for looked after children is not working and a massive area of concern for me is how we care for the most vulnerable in our society, but Scotland is not marking time, not starting to look frayed at the edges and the government is not firefighting in the same way that The UK government seems to be doing.
In the paper that you ridiculed in your earlier post there were several places where the infrastructure was discussed. There was no desire to simply replicate what we will inherit, the systems that Westminster have grown, fiddled with, chopped and changed over the years. With Independence we have the freedom to do something different. We have the freedom to choose different systems, different methods, different departments. When talking about Industry and competition the report says “Rather than simply replicating the full suite of UK economic regulatory bodies, an independent Scotland could bring these functions together and simplify the regulatory landscape to one that is more appropriate for a country of Scotland's size.” There is a paper on this subject already published.
We are a smaller country we need an infrastructure to support our smaller country and its particular society with its rural areas and its cities, its agriculture and its fishing, its financial institutions and its IT companies. What works for London may not work in Edinburgh and it definitely wont work in Caithness! We currently do not have the freedom to choose a different way. Independence gives us that freedom.
I absolutely agree that it is a worry that Scotland feels it is not properly recognised but maybe that is because its interests have been overlooked or given less priority in the UK than they should have been. This ties in to your final point about divorce and being beholden to our neighbours. Of course we are beholden to our neighbours just as they are beholden to us – but we don’t have to be governed by them
As an Independent country operating on an equal footing with all the other independent countries we will support them and they will support us - as it should be. Embittered loneliness is where the UK is heading with its growing desire to leave Europe. An Outward looking Independent Scotland, will have many friends. With the plan to participate in NATO and to be represented in the EU we will grow and develop our influence and we will draw on the expertise and knowledge of our neighbours. There is no real opposition to Scotland being part of these organisations. There is much research to show that small countries within the EU find much to benefit them. Independence is not ever someone standing alone avoiding ties and responsibilities - that is isolation and is not something that the current Scottish government or the other pro independence parties (with the exception of the SDA) advocate.
You are absolutely right that Scotland has fire in its belly for Independence. But instead of being bashed on the rocks of a leader’s hubris Independence gives the people of Scotland the opportunity to rise with a renewed sense of our own abilities and potential. The Government that offers the best chance of Scotland doing exactly that will be voted for in 2016. There is an ambition to be more and ambition is the first step to success. We have a desire to see change. There is no opportunity for change within the UK political system we have now. We have seen change stifled and twisted to benefit the rich and the greedy. Scotland can take that desire for change and make it fit the priorities of the people of Scotland expressed at the ballot box. Not overnight, not in the next year, two years or even five or ten but for our children and our grandchildren. That is why I will be voting for Independence. Not because of the past, not because of the present but because of the future.
Brilliant!
secrets in symmetry
31-May-13, 23:11
Secessionists will encounter the fate they deserve after their vote is lost.
secrets in symmetry
31-May-13, 23:31
The vote is 50-50 within statistical errors. All this proves is that there are more idiot secessionists in Caithness than within the country as a whole. This is not something for us to be proud of.
Secessionists will encounter the fate they deserve after their vote is lost.
Actually, what will they do? They presumably won't go away. Particularly the noisier, nastier ones.
secrets in symmetry
01-Jun-13, 21:07
Actually, what will they do? They presumably won't go away. Particularly the noisier, nastier ones.They will become even more irrelevant to the success of Scotland than they are now.
Actually, what will they do? They presumably won't go away. Particularly the noisier, nastier ones.
When the majority of the population of Scotland vote to stay with the UK the would be secessionists will dig up any and every excuse for the vote going against them. They'll argue the vote was unfair because Tom, Dick or Harriet was or was not able to vote. Then we'll go into another cycle of wishful thinking and argue for another referendum in another 50 years.
When the majority of the population of Scotland vote to stay with the UK the would be secessionists will dig up any and every excuse for the vote going against them. They'll argue the vote was unfair because Tom, Dick or Harriet was or was not able to vote. Then we'll go into another cycle of wishful thinking and argue for another referendum in another 50 years.
That will suit. I'll be quite old by then. [lol]
the polls are quite close it seems if you minus the people who do not live in Scotland
orkneycadian
14-Jun-13, 14:33
Well bumped. I heard on Radio Scotland today that now there are doubts that a seceded Scotland might not be able to bid on defence contracts for the rest of the UK, where the confidentiality of the contract means that it cannot be awarded to foreign countries. Scotland, then being a foreign country, will be excluded from bidding for the work. Hope there will be plenty other jobs for the former defence workers to do....
Well bumped. I heard on Radio Scotland today that now there are doubts that a seceded Scotland might not be able to bid on defence contracts for the rest of the UK, where the confidentiality of the contract means that it cannot be awarded to foreign countries. Scotland, then being a foreign country, will be excluded from bidding for the work. Hope there will be plenty other jobs for the former defence workers to do....
Is the rUK going to be the only country in the World looking for companies to tender for Defence Contracts if we vote for Independence anyway? To hear the UK Government, you'd think that if we vote for independence, the whole world, at the rUK's behest will declare us pariahs.
That is just the sound of the UK Government stamping its feet and pouting..yet again...via the medium of BBC Scotland, (which would more accurately be called either BBC North Britain or BBC Scottish Region). Want a list of the UK Government's huffy pronouncements to date?
The Royal Navy has never had a fighting ship built anywhere other than in the UK. If Scotland becomes independent and no longer part of the UK we can kiss goodbye to future Royal Navy contracts. If Scotland is to retain its shipyards it's going to have to compete with the many European shipbuilders who seem to be able to undercut us at every turn. As for our world class Defence electronics/avionics industries they will in all probably slowly 'bleed' south where the markets are managed.
We have to get use to the idea that Scotland, on its own, is a small nation
When people look why don't you vote on top of page ?????????????????????????
a fantastic reason to vote NO on Sept 18 2014 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEJedgRvQDQ
When people look why don't you vote on top of page ?????????????????????????
I haven't voted at the top of the page because I've yet to hear all the arguements and make my mind up, *simples*. It's called democracy.
I haven't voted at the top of the page because I've yet to hear all the arguements and make my mind up, *simples*. It's called democracy.This isn't the real vote you realise?
This isn't the real vote you realise?
Of course - so all the more reason to listen to all the arguements, do a bit of research and join the debate. Despite having plenty of time until the referendum the SNP have still to provide credible answers to some fairly fundamental questions.
We can all get fed up with Westminster or even Brussels so I'm listening to every word from Salmond and Sturgeon in the hope that they might provide the charismatic leadership we sorely need,;)
orkneycadian
15-Jun-13, 10:15
Following news of his knighthood, Sir Tony Robinson of Baldrick fame, has said he is willing to slay any unruly dragons if asked.
So thats her sorted - All we need to deal with now is Eck! ;)
Following news of his knighthood, Sir Tony Robinson of Baldrick fame, has said he is willing to slay any unruly dragons if asked.
So thats her sorted - All we need to deal with now is Eck! ;)
Mmmmmm I wonder if Sir Baldrick would like to step up and lead the independence debate, I'm sure he would have a cunning plan!
Only a fortnight ago a defence contract worth £600m was awarded to a French company. Last year (and I linked to it on this board Im sure) Philip Hammond said there was no obstruction to contracts being awarded to Foreign firms. The key to securing work is skilled workforce and competitive pricing not location. In this issue the Government is allowed to restrict tenders to UK companies but is not required to restrict tendering to UK companies. That is how come the french firm got the recent contract.
macadamia
15-Jun-13, 14:20
There is no obstruction to HMG awarding Defence Contracts to foreign countries, as long as there are no security implications. Which are determined in advance by HMG, not the contractor, and there is no appeal.
If a new foreign country, which has spent the last eighteen months slagging off its former partner, with some vehemence, and a lot of jibing about "Wastemonster", "Tory Boys lining their own pockets" and "The South East gobbling up all of the profits", then I have the sneakiest of feelings that nearly all Defence Contracts after a putatutive successful secession will contain quite a few security implications making it impossible for Scotland to tender.
By and large, you tend not to treat people who insult you very kindly.
Only a fortnight ago a defence contract worth £600m was awarded to a French company. Last year (and I linked to it on this board Im sure) Philip Hammond said there was no obstruction to contracts being awarded to Foreign firms. The key to securing work is skilled workforce and competitive pricing not location. In this issue the Government is allowed to restrict tenders to UK companies but is not required to restrict tendering to UK companies. That is how come the french firm got the recent contract.
The contract of which you speak is not for new equipment or a new build. It is for the maintenance and repair of less than twenty sensor systems used by HM Ships and Submarines over a ten year period. Thales (French owned) has a UK workforce. In any event you can bet there will be quite stringent conditions attached to this contract.
Defence contracts will go out to tender to the wider European community but fighting ships from scratch have always been kept 'in house'. Of course that might change but it doesn't mean an independent Scotland's shipyards will get any special consideration.
orkneycadian
15-Jun-13, 14:40
Mmmmmm I wonder if Sir Baldrick would like to step up and lead the independence debate, I'm sure he would have a cunning plan!
Which seems to be more than Little and Large have....
And you would expect a government who would take money off the disabled and the poor to save a few quid to ignore the cheapest tender. Especially when to have security issues which remove Scotland from the process will remove all other countries from the process. its like the passport carry on. Theresa Mays inference that Scots would not be allowed dual nationality would mean changing the law for many thousands of British People all over the world. The UK government will be watched by the whole world to see how the British deal with Scottish Independence. We know that it important to the Westminster Government to be respected and hold the high ground. They will do nothing to damage the reputation of Britain for fair dealing.
Of course that might change but it doesn't mean an independent Scotland's shipyards will get any special consideration.Of course not but it has already been pointed out there arr other countries and other contracts.
orkneycadian
15-Jun-13, 14:51
Its the fact there are all these doubts and unanswered questions that concerns me. Eck and Nic just seem to shrug them off with a "Hopefully, things will be OK - We don't see a problem, but we can worry about it after the event"
Until such time as all the questions can get cast iron guaranteed answers, its in the same league, for me, as turkeys voting for Christmas.
First of all i do not do nicknames nor converse with people who use them as it shows disrespect as i do not know any members of the coalition personally , also pretty soon the ones you mock could be running our country, Scotland is renowned Worldwide for its friendly atmosphere,hospitality (happy people etc) part of the reason i will be voting yes is because i do not support war of any kind. The Bedroom Tax was the final nail in the coffin, David Cameron talks about cuts here and there..his weight don't cut down his shopping for foods at m&s doesn't either, in any other country the government is trying to end poverty in ours its trying to increase it
orkneycadian
15-Jun-13, 16:28
Is Cesare you first name or surname?
the polls are quite close it seems if you minus the people who do not live in Scotland
It seems to heading in the right direction now. :D
If the UK is to be broken up, then surely all UK residents should have a say.
If the UK is to be broken up, then surely all UK residents should have a say.
Not being broken up, just a bit trimmed of the top, the UK will still exist.
Not being broken up, just a bit trimmed of the top, the UK will still exist.
So how can it be still be described as united?
So how can it be still be described as united?
It'll still be a Union of England, Wales & Northern Ireland (at least for the time being anyway)
Cesare... is my first name, i do not understand what my name has to do with Scotland's independence
Is Cesare you first name or surname?
(at least for the time being anyway)
Exactly. So why should the decision be left to just 5 million of the population?
Exactly. So why should the decision be left to just 5 million of the population?
Because the UK is not a country? It is a Union of countries....there is not "a population of a country called Britain, Great or otherwise" there are four populations in four countries under the same Government (which is the Government chosen by the voters in England). The decision is being left to those of the country which is having the referendum..as it would be if it was taking place in England, Wales or Northern Ireland.
Allowing the whole population of the UK a vote on our future would be the equivalent of letting all populations within the EU vote in any referendum the UK Government had to decide on whether or not to leave the European Union...wouldn't it? Would you be in favour of that scenario, I wonder?
Because the UK is not a country? It is a Union of countries....there is not "a population of a country called Britain, Great or otherwise" there are four populations in four countries under the same Government (which is the Government chosen by the voters in England). The decision is being left to those of the country which is having the referendum..as it would be if it was taking place in England, Wales or Northern Ireland.
Allowing the whole population of the UK a vote on our future would be the equivalent of letting all populations within the EU vote in any referendum the UK Government had to decide on whether or not to leave the European Union...wouldn't it? Would you be in favour of that scenario, I wonder?
Well equated... Sums it up nicely, maybe now those people in England (or any other country) will finally stop moaning about not getting a vote, though probably not.
equusdriving
17-Jun-13, 16:41
Well equated... Sums it up nicely, maybe now those people in England (or any other country) will finally stop moaning about not getting a vote, though probably not.
I think you may be shooting yourself in the foot, as I believe that the majority of the people in England would vote for Scotland's Independence, so they wouldn't have to carry on subsidizing us.
But looking at the results of all the recent polls, I don't think it will matter either way, as it seems the good people of Scotland are mostly seeing sense :)
I think you may be shooting yourself in the foot, as I believe that the majority of the people in England would vote for Scotland's Independence, so they wouldn't have to carry on subsidizing us.
But looking at the results of all the recent polls, I don't think it will matter either way, as it seems the good people of Scotland are mostly seeing sense :)
Not shot myself in the foot at all. I don't care how the people in England would vote, it's not their decision to make, full stop. I'll live with whatever decision the people of Scotland make about their own Country.
equusdriving
17-Jun-13, 18:55
Not shot myself in the foot at all. I don't care how the people in England would vote, it's not their decision to make, full stop. I'll live with whatever decision the people of Scotland make about their own Country.
well that is refreshing to hear, because most of the pro-independence supporters I have spoken to want Independence at any cost, regardless of the methods or sacrifices made to get it.
Not shot myself in the foot at all. I don't care how the people in England would vote, it's not their decision to make, full stop. I'll live with whatever decision the people of Scotland make about their own Country.
The people of England reside within the UK. Any decision to break up the UK MUST involve their say, just as it must include the say of Wales and Northern Ireland.
The people of England reside within the UK. Any decision to break up the UK MUST involve their say, just as it must include the say of Wales and Northern Ireland.
The people of the UK are part of and reside in the European Union...under a Union treaty........just as the people of Scotland are a part of and reside in the UK as part of a Union Treaty. So I ask again........Allowing the whole population of the UK a vote on our future would be the equivalent of letting all populations within the EU vote in any referendum the UK Government had to decide on whether or not to leave the European Union...wouldn't it? Would you be in favour of that scenario, I wonder?
equusdriving
19-Jun-13, 00:05
The people of the UK are part of and reside in the European Union...under a Union treaty........just as the people of Scotland are a part of and reside in the UK as part of a Union Treaty. So I ask again........Allowing the whole population of the UK a vote on our future would be the equivalent of letting all populations within the EU vote in any referendum the UK Government had to decide on whether or not to leave the European Union...wouldn't it? Would you be in favour of that scenario, I wonder?
slightly different scenario, there is a chance that the UK would vote to leave the European Union, :lol:
The people of the UK are part of and reside in the European Union...under a Union treaty........just as the people of Scotland are a part of and reside in the UK as part of a Union Treaty. So I ask again........Allowing the whole population of the UK a vote on our future would be the equivalent of letting all populations within the EU vote in any referendum the UK Government had to decide on whether or not to leave the European Union...wouldn't it? Would you be in favour of that scenario, I wonder?
The EU is not a single country, Great Britain is.
The EU is not a single country, Great Britain is.
No it is not....it is a Union of England and Scotland decided for/imposed on the population by treaty in 1707 at the behest o f(greedy) politicians. Kindly explain the difference between the EU and the England/Scotland Union treaties to me. Thank you! .
I can see both parts there, glad Englishmen are not allowed to vote or we would be independent for sure.
equusdriving
19-Jun-13, 09:29
I can see both parts there, glad Englishmen are not allowed to vote or we would be independent for sure.
definitely! Its a good job that they are willing to cut off their nose to spite their faces and as usual and would rather stop the auld enemy from voting even if it would actually help their cause, :lol::lol::lol:
No it is not....it is a Union of England and Scotland decided for/imposed on the population by treaty in 1707 at the behest o f(greedy) politicians. Kindly explain the difference between the EU and the England/Scotland Union treaties to me. Thank you! .
Do you have a British or Scottish passport?
Do you have a British or Scottish passport?
I don't have a passport......because there is not yet a Scottish one. However, what that has to do with what is right for one Union of countries being correct for all Unions of countries I fail to understand. A Union is nothing more than a contract, after all.
So I'll try again..........Allowing the whole population of the UK a vote on our future would be the equivalent of letting all populations within the EU vote in any referendum the UK Government had to decide on whether or not to leave the European Union...wouldn't it? Would you be in favour of that scenario, I wonder?
I don't have a passport......because there is not yet a Scottish one. However, what that has to do with what is right for one Union of countries being correct for all Unions of countries I fail to understand. A Union is nothing more than a contract, after all.
So I'll try again..........Allowing the whole population of the UK a vote on our future would be the equivalent of letting all populations within the EU vote in any referendum the UK Government had to decide on whether or not to leave the European Union...wouldn't it? Would you be in favour of that scenario, I wonder?
I already told you Great Britain is a single country, the EU is not.
cptdodger
19-Jun-13, 20:15
If the UK is to be broken up, then surely all UK residents should have a say.
The most I have ever said about the independence is that I will vote against it. However, just to be clear, Scotland is a country in it's own right, part of Great Britain, UK and so on, but, a country in it's own right. I am Scottish and live in Scotland. If independence is gained, or not, it is us that will have to live with the consequences.
Correct me if I am wrong Flynn, but you live in England (now) and have only been here a couple of times on holiday ? So why the concern whether we gain independence or not?
The most I have ever said about the independence is that I will vote against it. However, just to be clear, Scotland is a country in it's own right, part of Great Britain, UK and so on, but, a country in it's own right. I am Scottish and live in Scotland. If independence is gained, or not, it is us that will have to live with the consequences.
Correct me if I am wrong Flynn, but you live in England (now) and have only been here a couple of times on holiday ? So why the concern whether we gain independence or not?
Because I'm British, and I don't see why only a tiny fraction of the British people should have sole say on the breaking up of Britain.
Interesting that Dundee is in the final round of UK City of Culture in 2017. Do you think the commitee know something we don't? :eek:
secrets in symmetry
19-Jun-13, 23:25
I already told you Great Britain is a single country, the EU is not.Surely you knew the oddquine bloke doesn't have a passport? He's never been abroad, so he's never needed one! I think he may have made one brief visit to the North of England....
orkneycadian
27-Jun-13, 00:08
bump to top
What for? :confused
The people of Scotland did not have a vote for the 1707 Treaty of Union.
This time we, The people of Scotland do and we must use it wisely.
None of us have yet got the full facts of what would happen afterwards if a yes vote was obtained. Independence will not happen overnight, it could take years to sort all the details out.
As far as I can see their has only been agreement on a referendum and not on independence
In my opinion Alex Salmond is not for independence, he wants to hand us over to Europe and the Scottish Government will be no more effective than a Local Council. Does any-one really think that we will have any real influence in the E.U.
My good friend Oddquine does put up a great case for independence, but I am sorry to say it will not happen as we the people of Scotland are too gutless to go it alone because we believe all the scare stories.
If we are such a lame duck, why does England want us stay in the U.K.?
Latest BS scaremongering cobblers: Mobile phone charges will go up due to roaming charges, especially for those near the border as they will 'inadvertently' connect to Ingerlish masts.
secrets in symmetry
30-Jun-13, 13:20
Latest BS scaremongering cobblers: Mobile phone charges will go up due to roaming charges, especially for those near the border as they will 'inadvertently' connect to Ingerlish masts.Lol, that's a good one! :cool:
Having said that, it could be an issue in both directions if the refugee camps are close to the border fence.
orkneycadian
30-Jun-13, 14:06
Sounds feasible. If you live in the Isle of Man and have a Manx Telecom mobile, you pay roaming charges when you come to the "UK".
orkneycadian
30-Jun-13, 14:17
Maybe the vote would go a lot more favourably for the SNP if, beside the Yes box on the ballot paper, there were to be a statement to the effect of "The SNP indemnify the Scottish public against any losses they may incur as a result of independence"
Humerous Vegetable
30-Jun-13, 16:18
Scotland has been an independent and seperate nation since the mid 800s AD. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/four_nations_01.shtml
We are not voting for the SNP next year, we are voting for the return of our country to independent status. The only current reason for the existence of the SNP is to provide a means whereby the Scottish electorate gets a political channel to register their vote on this issue. No other party, including the Labour party and the Liberal party when they purported to be advocating Home Rule, gave us this opportunity, so, we go with what we've got.
Unfortunately, the political consensus of the current electorate appears to be influenced by whatever they last read on Facebook or Twitter, so the outlook for our country is looking increasingly dim. A bit like some of the uninformed comments on this thread.
Unfortunately, the political consensus of the current electorate appears to be influenced by whatever they last read on Facebook or Twitter, so the outlook for our country is looking increasingly dim. A bit like some of the uninformed comments on this thread.
I have not taken my decisions from Facebook or Twitter, I read history books. Scotland was a ever a divided nation them teuchters living by a feudal clan system in the north, and the Lowlanders in the central belt, they always fought against each other. Scotland lurched from crisis to crisis, just look at the Darian Scheme, that made Scotland bankrupt, and in my opinion if we vote yes, that will happen again, and this time our neighbours will not pull us out of the mire.
MerlinScot
03-Jul-13, 12:09
I have not taken my decisions from Facebook or Twitter, I read history books. Scotland was a ever a divided nation them teuchters living by a feudal clan system in the north, and the Lowlanders in the central belt, they always fought against each other. Scotland lurched from crisis to crisis, just look at the Darian Scheme, that made Scotland bankrupt, and in my opinion if we vote yes, that will happen again, and this time our neighbours will not pull us out of the mire.
That is the most historically correct post I ever read on this forum, I posted only to say 'well done Golach'!
But you know that... Peoples, all over the world, have a short memory when it comes to history. Plus, they also like to re-write history. Eck is one of them, given that he is using the anniversary of a battle to inspire Scots to vote yes to independence...but alas, in my history books it says that 'that' battle achieved nothing because war was far from being won at that point. Poor Robert the Bruce.
@Sis, refugee camps? Oh God, that is why they were putting up fences beyond the Hadrian's Wall a few days ago
:D
@Flynn, with all due respect, I have no say in the referendum and wish to have none either. It is a Scottish matter and the decision is up to them, it is their future. We can't assume what it will be for the rest of UK but as a English resident I find it right not to be involved in it ;)
Surely you knew the oddquine bloke doesn't have a passport? He's never been abroad, so he's never needed one! I think he may have made one brief visit to the North of England....
Like the Oddquine bloke [lol] I too don't have a passport (it expired years ago). Apart from a brief altercation at Gatwck Airport, I've not had any problem travelling the UK since. I've seen the rest of the world, it mostly smells funny.
I certainly don't intend to get another one, so I will have to wetback, back and to accross the border.:eek:
Because I'm British, and I don't see why only a tiny fraction of the British people should have sole say on the breaking up of Britain.
Have to agree with you there Flynn but i think if the rest of the UK population were given a chance to vote then there would be a major upset with the other nations being given the chance to get rid of us jocks and be done with us totally. Thats my thoughts and they are based on a me, a Scot, living for 15 years in England with an English partner and her kids and having to face the constant daily barrage of abuse, discrimination and racist derogatory remarks. I was so glad when i moved back to Scotland and will never live down south again under any circumstances
cptdodger
08-Jul-13, 12:27
having to face the constant daily barrage of abuse, discrimination and racist derogatory remarks. I was so glad when i moved back to Scotland and will never live down south again under any circumstances
I have to say I lived and worked in England (London, Kent and Lincolnshire) for a number of years, and never, ever found that. My partner is English, my children although born in Scotland, consider themselves English because they have lived there the majority of their lives. and the majority of my friends are English. Of course there was playful banter when Scotland was playing (football) but that is all it was. Everything you describe, is what I have read on here, directed at the English. And as on the Wimbledon thread, taking offence at Andy Murray being called "British" is just a waste of energy, until and if Scotland gains independence, like it or lump it - that is what we are - British.
There are a variety of sessions being held over the weekend of the 23rd to the 25th August as part of the Festival of Politics. These events cover topics ranging from Immigration,Defense and Welfare to Culture, Art and Social Media. These are discussions and presentations and if you are around the capital on that weekend then it might be worth a visit.
Its also The Bruce Festival at Dunfermline that weekend so I will be busy being a medieval cooking wifie. ITs great fun if you would rather go there! Maybe make a special trip and do both!!!!
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-23225473 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-23225473)
http://www.festivalofpolitics.org.uk/
http://www.scotland.com/events/festivals/fife/dunfermline/the-bruce-festival-2013-3220.html
(http://www.festivalofpolitics.org.uk/)
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.