Two referendums now

[ducati]

I was watching Newsnight Scotland and the discussion was about how many referendums we need.

The thoughts being put forward were one for "do you want independence?"

And another after it has been negotiated "do you still want independence now you know what it entails?"

Could make it shorter: "Would you like to be ignored by the rest of the world and live in abject poverty for the rest of your life.....or not?":lol:

[pmcd]

No, I really, really believe that the Laird of Brigadoon was going to pop the question, get a resounding "Och Aye!" for Independence, walk away with all the assets, and none of the liabilities.

In your dreams, pal!

I suggest the rest of the Union might want to have a say in this affair......

[golach]

, and none of the liabilities.......

Wee Eck has never mentioned this before. :eek: Oh my goodness, would there be liabilities?[disgust]

[Rheghead]

I say bring the referendum on, just one question is required then if there is independence then a second referendum required for continued membership of the EU.

[weezer 316]

lol @ golach!

The SNP has NEVER mentioned what we would be liable for. Here is my uneducated stab at the costs and what we would take with us:

£2bn to set up independent forces, although it wouldnt surprise me if the nationalists decide not to set this up and let England do the fighting just to save money. They probably wouldnt see the irony in this.

Around £90bn as a proportion of our national debt, slightly less than 10% of the total debt - in the face of our £150bn GDP

Further £1bn at least in decoupling the NHS/Schools from westminster.

£500m transfering all uk govt jobs over to scottish govt employees, although this would likely present a chance for some efficiency savings

£1bn to take control of taxes away from the Inland revenue, possibly more.

God knows how much we are liable for the HBOS and RBS bailouts. Id take a guess that of the £500bn paid out by the govt around 3/4 of it was aimed in their general direction. If Alex can strike a good deal, then we might get away with £200bn, to give us a national debt of £290bn. We would then be straight in at number 2 snugly behind japan as the worlds most indebted country, worse than the well know fiscal heaven that is Zimbabwe and even Iceland who showed what can happen when a small country's banks go bang.

And then once we are "free" we have to start paying back that £290bn, all starting from a position of a year on year deficit, combined with a likely doubling of govt borrowing costs.


Still, vote yes. It will mean your voting scottish. Other stuff like jobs/economy/EU/UN and the fact small countries like us are at the mercy of our big neighbours anyway is irrelevant.

[ducati]

I say bring the referendum on, just one question is required then if there is independence then a second referendum required for continued membership of the EU.

I'm not sure 'continued' membership of the EU would be an option. Would we not have to join the queue behind all the other 'third europe' contries clamouring to get in?

[pmcd]

Now if Cameron wanted to play it clever, HE would hold the referendum on Scottish Independence, arguing that Scotland's independence is inevitably intertwined with the rest of the Union, and thus each member of the Union should cast a vote. (This is called "consequences".) Once the vote has been carried with the inevitable "Go bile yer hied!", then any referendum the Laird of Brigadoon puts before the Scottish people will be seen as petulant, and willy-waving. Not that he would, because we all know what the answer would be.

As I said somewhere else, with Independence, travelling hopefully is much better than arriving. Yes, by all means bring on the William Wallace Roadshow, but it'll be the tinkle o' siller which decides in the end........

[charlie]

Once the vote has been carried with the inevitable "Go bile yer hied!"

Methinks you underestimate the public feeling,certainly in England, where the majority of the electorate for your proposed referendum would be.

You might find the result would be "No afore time - yer costing us a fortune - sling yer hook and the sooner the better"

Now that would play right into wee Sanny's hands!

I have never thought Cameron clever...but he is no that daft.

[Bazeye]

The referendum I want is to wether we stay in or get out of the EU. It wont happen though because they know what the result will be.

[weezer 316]

Of course it wont happen! Why on earth would any rational person want us to leave the EU?

[RecQuery]

*Yawn* I had really hoped we saw the last of this thing when the other threads died, it's really not a discussion if you're just preaching, so what's the point. That two referendums thing was a suggestion made by a butthurt unionist BTW.

Also and I can not stress this point enough [citations needed]

[Green_not_greed]

Is anyone savvy enough to calculate just how much it would cost Wee Eck if UK Government stopped paying the obscene Renewable Obligation Certificate subsidies to all the windfarm owners in Scotland whom Wee Eck keeps encouraging, leaving him to fund it ? I'll bet that would change his tune a bit !

[bekisman]

Might be going a bit off track, but g-n-g got a point?

"Millions of families face being hit with higher fuel bills to pay for a new 'green energy revolution' as unveiled by Labour recently. The levies on the price of gas and electricity - dubbed 'green stealth taxes' by critics - will help pay for renewable energy to tackle climate change, including building 7,000 wind turbines over the next 11 years.
Industry experts warn the cost of subsidising renewables will increase household energy bills. At present the renewables element of the typical bill is an average £55 a year, but this could increase to as much as £120 by 2014. The respected UK Energy Research Centre has predicted that by 2050 the subsidy will cost the economy at least £17billion a year, the equivalent of an extra £700 a year per household."

http://www.knot.org.uk/Why%20we%20Object/Economics/

[theone]

Now if Cameron wanted to play it clever, HE would hold the referendum on Scottish Independence..........

If he were clever he would offer a referendum NOW.

The SNP have said it's inevitable, but they're doing it on their own terms, towards the end of this term of government.

Let's have it now, to save us from the negative campaigning and anti-union propeganda that will be coming from Alex and co for the next 3 years.

[FTOF.]

Good god, where is your ambition people? Scotland can and will be independant. Despite the cringing pessimism shown by most of the above posters.

[ducati]

Good god, where is your ambition people? Scotland can and will be independant. Despite the cringing pessimism shown by most of the above posters.

Aye, it's a brave(Heart) new world. :roll:

[pmcd]

The big downside to independence is the loss of the external "They" to blame. Followed by internal wrangles, leading to no-account splinter parties with the usual impossible names "Popular Workers Democratic Front": "Populist Democratic Socialist Workers' Party": "Monarchist Revivalist Party": "Peoples' Popular Democratic First National Workers Socialist and Republican Party": "National Socialist Party" - all of whom are determined to waste energy persuading the newly independent population that THEY are the way, the truth, and the life.

One of them inevitably will win.

Any they will become the "They".

All of this is no more than red-arsed baboon bum-baring by opportunistic politicians.

It has naff all to do with genuine national identity.

A community KNOWS when it is a cohesive entity.

It doesn't need any snake-oil merchant in a sharp suit to remind it, let alone take money for doing so.

People of Scotland! Stay the way you are! THAT is your national identity and your pride! And you have a huge amount of which to be proud!

[theone]

People of Scotland! Stay the way you are! THAT is your national identity and your pride! And you have a huge amount of which to be proud!

Hear hear.