|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 27 May 19:33
Ipsos Mori poll suggesting more than 50% want a referendum within next 5 years with over a third wanting one sooner.
They're relating this back to COVID so expect those percentages may drop again but interesting to see the effect of the current situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Wed 27 May 19:51
Initially the coronavirus crisis had dampened my enthusiasm for independence but the Cummings affair had reignited it.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 27 May 22:46
It's an interesting result. I would argue it has - rightly or wrongly - been suggested beneficial to be in the union during this crisis, but then we've also seen utter ineptitude from our PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Thu 28 May 09:50
What are the benefits of being in a union during a crisis ?
Support for independence has been creeping up the last couple of years.
Most polls show that a majority are in favour of another referendum.
The “ No appetite “ for another Indy ref spouted by Unionists has been a busted flush for a while now.
That’s why they are looking at moving the goal posts and trying every dirty trick in the book to prevent one that they know they will probably lose.
Personally I don’t relish another one and would prefer to explore other avenues.
A good starting point would be for SNP and ISP, Greens to unequivocally state in their manifestos for the Holyrood elections next year that a vote for them is a vote for independence. There is no doubt the pro Indy Parties will win most seats but they need to get over the 50% mark also. If that did happen then Scotland will have de facto voted for independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 28 May 13:25
Note: "rightly or wrongly". I'm relating it to the arguments I've heard about "would Scotland be able to prolong a lockdown if not in the union?" and "how would Scotland survive?". Being clear - I'm not agreeing or disagreeing on Scotland's economy. However, what I would say is that we would benefit from seeing the financials for the future Scotland, even if it predicts a grim period at the start.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 28 May 13:40
I had certainly placed independence lower down my list of priorities after Covid happened.
It seems even more necessary now that we know that the UK government is willing to undermine public health in order to cling to their agenda.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Thu 28 May 21:19
It's all about how people perceive things.
Nicola Sturgeon, you could argue has played a blinder so far during this crisis by appearing non political to the public at large and while initially, it seemed the UK Government were along these same lines, this week has really exposed them big time.
It was a massive kick in the teeth for people who obeyed the rules, people who couldn't visit parents, couldn't go to family funerals and couldn't visit dying relatives to learn their chief advisor was flouting the rules all along and no single condemnation from anyone of note in the Government.
Sturgeon will have questions to answer of course in due time about care homes, the Nike conference etc but they really pale into insignificance, politically speaking with the unfolding mess in Westminster imo.
All this will only boost the indy vote and we may see signs where the demand becomes too great to ignore.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 28 May 22:10
Good post aaps Jen and Nan who live below my Lassie have never left their house for 9 weeks
The weasel Dominic flaunts all the laws to go to a birthday party
The misanthrope Boris the Brave backs him
If Alba was of no use or importance to Westminster why did they send in the big guns to frighten folk
Simples they cannot survive without us
jake89 we are a rich Country even without oil would we survive ?... No we would thrive
Courtesy of the Tory Government financial expert
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 29 May 07:57
As my maths teach used to say "show your working". I'm not suggesting Scotland is rich/poor/anything. What I'm saying is the independence parties, but mainly the SNP, need to show how the economy would thrive.
You can't simply say "it'll be fine" and expect a yes vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 29 May 08:51
The Unionist parties are never required to show how the economy will thrive. The status quo just seems to be accepted as the best we can expect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Fri 29 May 12:15
That argument results in nothing ever changing. Any financial estimate can have holes shot in it - whether it comes from the unionist Westminster party, an indy supporting Scottish party.
Also, why should it be to to the snp to build a financial case? The finances of Scotland will be determined by the direction and economic policies set by the government voted into run an independent Scotland - and like any other country, that direction may change depending on who we all vote into power.
Were not voting on making snp the sole party in some dictatorship.
We either accept that we are just as good as any other European country, who could manage our affairs and resources in same way they do... Or we believe we are financially and politically dependent on the good people of England as we, unlike every other European country are unable to manage ourselves
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Fri 29 May 13:33
There was a recent article that the electricity produced by windpower has to be paid for (£12m) to be put into national grid?
This is then sold on to Wales and Northern Ireland, by the national grid!
I understand that Longannet was subject to the same deal, and along with the green agenda led to it's demise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 29 May 14:20
DBP. You are right. Scotland will always have to justify every single thing ,particularly about the economy by those who oppose independence. They want it to be thus as it confuses and frightens some people. Heck economists can’t even agree on everything as it is not an exact science.
I can’t imagine there has been another country in the world that when push came to shove and they decided independence was the way forward they had to prove they would be financially viable in the short , medium, long term.
The U.K. Gov can’t predict how the economy will perform in years ahead, no country can really.
You either want independence or you don’t. You either want people who live and work in Scotland and who better understand Scotland to make the major decisions, or you want to let people in London do it and let’s be honest Scotland is way down their priority list.
When working overseas most people from other countries were gobsmacked that we turned down the opportunity of self governance. When I tried to explain that a lot of people were frightened by stories of economic hardship, I was met by a shrug of the shoulders and more disbelief.
As I said , you either want to run your own affairs or you are happy to let others do it for you. The economy, everything else will sort itself out if there is a will to do it and politicians know they will be held accountable, by voters whose votes will really matter.
The natural resources Scotland has will always be a plus and the fact that we are the only part of the U.K. that exports more than we import then going forward that is a good starting point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 29 May 16:40
Think of it like buying a car. You've got your current car. It's great. Drives well but it's a bit thirsty on the petrol and sometimes it's temperamental. If you go in the showroom and the fella says "this car is the bees knees" you don't blindly go forward. You'll want some information. What's the fuel economy (and then ask what the REAL economy is), will it have leccy windows and mirrors? All these kinds of things. You'll then compare with your current car. Okay, maybe it doesn't have a sunroof, but that sunroof was always a bit leaky anyway.
That's how you make a decision. So right now many are thinking "this is not what I want" but in order to move on you need clarity on the alternatives.
I know there was the whitepaper but what's needed is a simple breakdown covering things like:
How income will be generated
How pensions will work
What currency will be used
An economic plan for the next 5-10 years
Plan for joining the EU.
I want to be clear that I'm in favour of independence but we won't see it if people can't make compelling arguments. I also don't think it matters if we're honest and say the initial period would require more borrowing but that we have a plan to balance the books and grow out economy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 29 May 18:54
You keep putting off the decision until the current model breaks down and is beyond repair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 29 May 19:32
Quote:
wee eck, Fri 29 May 18:54
You keep putting off the decision until the current model breaks down and is beyond repair.
Which may be the best thing to do but normally someone would make clear the reasons to change car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 29 May 20:08
jake89 you are not in favour.... your feart ....just like many that were scared off because Westminster canny afford to lose us
You won't be able to use the pound woo woo
Do you honestly think that their fervour to keep us would have been as intense if we were a burden on them
We have been second class citizens, cannon fodder, for hundreds of years
They have lied and hidden the true wealth of this braw wee Country for their own benefit
Even yes even without OIL we are a Country rich in natural resource
We led the world we helped to shape the American constitution we invented nearly all modern day appliances and we are still in the top 4 financial and educational statistics list (I think)
Here's a wee scenario no one has written or spoken about ...Just imaging if we were an independent Country before the North sea oil ....we were oil rich.. water rich ..electricity rich ..export rich ..Do you think England would have invaded us declared war on us and raped and pillaged our Country .....For sure jake89
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 29 May 21:23
It's not me you need to worry about. I'll vote yes as I did last time.
But, mark my words on this, we will NEVER see independence whilst there's still an attitude of "it'll be fine, trust me.". To get something we need to convince the doubters and naysayers. Making statements like "You won't be able to use the pound woo woo" won't win votes. What we need is a statement like "In an independent Scotland we will use the pound, in-line with Bank of England rates whilst we seek to join the EU and the Euro. We recognise this will cause a fluctuation in our economy but research would indicate this will be short term and allow us to trade more easily".
Forget about the last 2 referendums, oil and all that nonsense. Focus on the here and now. What Scotland has to offer and how it would fund itself. Speak the uncomfortable truths about a reduction in spending to reduce our deficit if need be.
On the note of being second class - this appears to be true of the entire nation outside a small group of people in the City of London. This isn't unique to Scotland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Fri 29 May 21:31
I certainly wouldn't use a Great running car as an analogy for the current Union...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 29 May 21:41
LOL. Perhaps "comfortable" would've been a better analogy.
What I'm saying is you have the likes of Kevin Hague who, despite being a bit of a git (I've met him and he's not a very nice person), makes an excellent case for the Union. However, his arguments could be pulled apart if someone in the Scottish Government would bother.
For example, Scotland has a deficit of 12bn. How do we reduce that? The uncomfortable truth would be through a cut in public spending. So what do we cut? Spending cash on missiles etc? How much does that save us? Streamlining processes? How much does that save us?
We need something that at least estimates these things.
In my opinion, the BIGGEST question we should be seeking to answer is why, despite having a 12bn deficit, we're still the biggest economy in the UK outside the South-East of England. Why is the South-East so much more financially successful than the rest of the UK?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 29 May 21:49
Buspasspar,
There would be no need for England to invade since it already has armed forces scattered throughout Scotland. Those soldiers, airmen and members of the Royal Navy have all sworn allegiance to the Queen. Neither Sturgeon nor Swinney strike me as heroic revolutionaries so it would only need a symbolic gesture of military manoeuvres to quell any political opposition. (Refer back to the military ‘exercise’ at Heathrow Airport in 1974 when Harold Wilson had his card marked.)
Ah, but would the Scottish soldiers in Redford Barracks turn their weapons on their ain folk? That would depend on a context that no one could forecast. However the officers commanding Scottish regiments are largely educated at private schools in England, speak with English accents and their main connection to Scotland is the land that they own: and intend to keep out of the hands of stroppy jocks.
So no invasion needed since I doubt that Sturgeon and Swinney are serious about independence. Have they ever attempted to write political pamphlets aimed at Scottish soldiers? Have they ever pushed for a Scottish annexe of Sandhurst to train Scottish officers? The answer I am sure is no to both of these questions. Swinney’s interest in the military will be limited to the costs he works out on his calculator and Sturgeon seems more interested in gender issues in the barracks.
From a nationalist perspective we have been invaded since at least 1707.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 29 May 22:07
I think two of the points raised by Jake89 were significant influences in the referendum: the issues of pensions and the currency.
First of all, currency. Imagine if in the late 1990s the UK had adopted the Euro and the Bexiteers had then to argue for leaving the EU but retaining the Euro as a currency since it was partly ‘ours.’ It would have holed them below the waterline. Yet that apologetic argument was what was being offered in the referendum by Alex Salmond, a man with a banking background. Maybe the sums added up but it was a vote loser as a policy.
Pensions are a grey area. Young people understandably think little of them and that is probably to their credit. But I don’t think retired people are as nervous about pensions as the mainstream media suggest, with its ‘pensions tips’ and advice on ways to ‘eke out your pension.’ The age category that worries most about pensions seems to be the worker in his/her later years that is coming to terms with the reality of reduced income so maybe that is the group the SNP need to reassure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 29 May 23:49
The problem seems to be that many in the SNP consider these older people to be dying off. They're not. We have an aging population so the subject of pensions will INCREASE rather than decrease.
All these petty insults about being "feart", "a Tory" or "Unionist" are an unacceptable distraction. Rather than being defensive and insulting anyone who questions the approach to SNP, we should welcome their question and seek to understand their concerns. You won't convince someone by insulting them. If you can't answer their question why not work with them to find the answer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBA
Date: Sat 30 May 00:08
Quote:
jake89, Fri 29 May 23:49
The problem seems to be that many in the SNP consider these older people to be dying off. They're not. We have an aging population so the subject of pensions will INCREASE rather than decrease.
All these petty insults about being "feart", "a Tory" or "Unionist" are an unacceptable distraction. Rather than being defensive and insulting anyone who questions the approach to SNP, we should welcome their question and seek to understand their concerns. You won't convince someone by insulting them. If you can't answer their question why not work with them to find the answer?
Sounds like you're pretty feart. Tory Unionist I'm guessing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sat 30 May 08:23
jake89 sorry if I've insulted you swap feart for unsure
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sat 30 May 08:57
sammer we could launch a couple from Coulport and neuk them :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 30 May 09:11
Not all buspasspar. 🙂
My point is that independence will only come if people are convinced. Scotland wasn't convinced of putting a number on the side of a bus with regards to Brexit. It also won't be convinced of a "dinnae worry" from Nicola Sturgeon.
So if out canvassing, people need to be prepared with answers. If someone starts asking hard questions then it's fine to say "Sorry, I don't have the answer to that, but do you know what the UK answer is?" in a polite and friendly way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sat 30 May 10:27
At the referendum my elderly mother voted to remain in the union as she believed her state pension would stop.
She also didn't want the Scottish flag to disappear from the Union Jack, stating that it wouldn't look right!
That was more of a World War 2 reason!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sat 30 May 10:35
i don't think scotland voted so strongly to remain in the EU because we saw through the lies written on Boris' bus...
i genuinely believe we are politically diverging from England and have been for some time now. things like the EU referendum just highlighted that different political and social outlook (as well as the political deficit we experience because of the size difference)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Sat 30 May 18:29
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 30 May 18:43
Fair enough BigJPar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 30 May 19:07
Jake, don't be reasonable, just grab some poms poms and spell out snp while Caledonia plays in the background.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Mon 1 Jun 03:35
Have to admit, I'm whole-heartedly behind Independence but I have severe doubts about the SNP/Scottish Government's ability to deliver on it.
Westminster are saying that they won't allow another referendum, but the Scottish Government could easily hold a so-called advisory referendum on election day next year. To me it seems the obvious thing to do. If the Unionists boycott then they are potentially faced with a massive SNP majority in Holyrood, which they most definitely do not want. From the Nationalist side, it forces the Unionists out to vote and weakens any claims of illegitimacy. Also puts Westminster in a very awkward position if they are going to respect the election result (which they undoubtedly would), but not the result of a referendum held on the same day.
SNP/SG need to be prepared though and this means:
- Writing a (draft)Constitution for an Independent Scotland
- Marketing this as an opportunity to build a nation on consensus:
(i) Offer a vote within 90 days on EU Membership vs. Norway Model (personally I'm torn on this one)
(ii) Offer a vote within 90 days on Monarchy vs. Republic
- A proper plan for regional government with alignment of Social, Emergency and Judicial Services (possibly based on a mixture of the Danish and Swedish systems) and local taxation powers.
- A proper plan for the establishing of an exchequer and a Scottish Currency. Personally I would advocate a currency peg to Sterling or the Euro in the early days until such times as it is advantageous to freely float the currency (such as the Swiss did in recent years).
- A proper plan for the establishment of Government Institutions around the country. These can potentially be used as a boost to rural economies by establishing Government offices in places that struggle with job creation - the Norwegians, Swedes and Finns have all set precedents here.
Personally I would like to see us copy the Estonians and introduce National ID cards that can be used for voting and use this as a basis for "Direct Democracy" such as we see in Switzerland.
The longer the delay though, it will continually shift in the Independence camp's favour as the Baby-boomers die out.
I do reckon though that the next vote might be held with Joanna Cherrie at the helm and I would consider her as far more capable than Nicola Sturgeon.
As a side note, I've been doing some Economics courses purely out of interest and one thing I find fascinating is the absolutism of both sides. The Unionists basically say Scotland is a basket case and can't afford it, which is baseless. The Nationalists say that Scotland would definitely be better off but don't seem to acknowledge (at least to my mind) the requirement for strong management, which is shown by so many precedents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 1 Jun 08:11
I don't think we'd be any better or worse off. I think we'd be better led though. I've said it a few times that Westminster is an embarrassment.
Though what's also an embarrassment is the so-called nationalists on social media talking about turning around folk at the border if their car has an English number plate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Mon 1 Jun 10:04
Jake, precedents are normally the thing to go by and precedent shows that nations that are well-managed tend to perform better economically. Scotland has massive potential here, but the question is whether the SNP/SG have properly planned things - if I were in charge of the SNP I would be directing party funds to draw up proper plans for the points I've mentioned above. I would bet anything this or similar has not been done.
The UK/England has a pretty grim outlook going forward. Their economy has turned into a low-skilled service-based economy and they have not invested in skills to anywhere near an appropriate level. One of the key aspects of economic growth is factor accumulation and Scotland, conversely to England, boasts a population with a very high rate of education and graduates who generally leave university with little debt, which is a major driver of liquidity in the economy. Where we do need to improve is in skills development.
Smaller countries also find it much easier to create an economic niche - look at the advances Ireland has made in tech and pharmaceuticals in recent years or what Denmark has done with Maersk and international shipping and logistics. At the other side of the globe you have Taiwan and their electronics sector - why shouldn't we learn from this? Scotland already has a solid base with which it can use tech & R&D to create strong high-level growth.
As for claims of economic volatility decimating a small economy, a tech and R&D based economy tends to fare far better than a service based economy in times of hardship. What's for certain anyway is that getting into coding is the most secure career path at the moment.
As for the Covid comment, yes there are cyber raspers on both sides but I wouldn't necessarily scoff at that view - if there is a second wave in England then Police will need to be posted at the border and folk will need to be turned around. The Welsh have been doing this already.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 1 Jun 11:52
One thing worth looking at is that divergence of London and the rest of England and the UK. Outside London, how is the country REALLY performing. The North East of England seems to offer very little. Where are the economic opportunities for that area?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Mon 1 Jun 18:25
Exactly Jake, another example of p*ss poor British management. The English only have themselves to blame for that one though - they rejected a local government structure that would have empowered the regions and led to great accountability. The English populace also continually turn a blind eye to the corrupt Trust System they have running their public services that Labour initiated and the Tories emboldened. Well, either that or they are blissfully unaware of it - just like a number of the people in Scotland who give the SNP baseless flack for the sake of it but could not tell you one iota of how public services in England are run. There are some issues like this in Scotland surrounding PFI/PPP and much of that was down to the refusal of Westminster to devolve borrowing powers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 1 Jun 18:45
I'm not in favour of finger waggling at Westminster but it really has to be questioned what Westminster has done for the North. I'm also not in favour of marriage analogies but it's almost like a North/South wife/husband set up where the North is told what's good for it and what's good for it is always what the husband wants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 1 Jun 20:27
The UK model is based on London and SE England being the economic hub. That's why the GERS figures, which the Unionists usually cite as the starting point in proving Scotland benefits from the Union, are misleading as a template for independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 1 Jun 21:17
In fairness, a certain Mr Salmond was all for citing GERS a few years back.
The whole London thing is why I don't get why people in England aren't rising up and asking questions. They did a study a few years ago that suggested areas like North East England suffer a brain drain as the young are all drawn away to London or Edinburgh for jobs as there are few jobs in the area. People will play up to the thick Northerner stereotype in the same way folk here play up to the drunk Jock stereotype but to me it's about lack of opportunity. These areas developed on the basis of heavy industry and hard graft. That's gone and has been replaced with contact centres.
I'll add that Scotland is foolishly following the same model. We push all our economic development into Edinburgh and Glasgow. We need to move beyond this and push Scotland rather than 32 local authorities all competing against each other. A few years back Scotland pushed out a lot of public sector offices around the country. This seemed to stop under the SNP (feel free to correct me as I'm not sure).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Mon 1 Jun 22:12
Jake, I'd say the English populace and Westminster both have to take their fair share of the blame. The North East of England had the chance to have a regional government system in 2004. They voted against it. The whole of England had the chance to reform the voting system for Westminster. They voted against it.
My experience from living and working in England was that as a people they are completely different ideologically from Scots. They are far more individualistic and have an incredible passiveness and will moan about things for an eternity but take no affirmative action to get things changed. They also have a severe reliance on hierarchy and an extreme dislike of being challenged - generally they have no idea what to do when this happens and fall back on policy and conjecture.
In short, the English people ain't got the gumption to do anything.
Its not a case of fingering Westminster, but as the foremost legislative body of the land then they bare the ultimate responsibility for fiscal, monetary and economic policy whether you like it or not. And, frankly, their record is abysmal.
I do agree with your statement about Glasgow and Edinburgh though - this is why I advocate the points about local government I stated above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Tue 2 Jun 18:59
After the capers in Westminster today, with Rees Mogg conducting parliament, it is really time to leave.
Democracy is going down the tubes, with Brexit fastly approaching and minds concentrated on affairs across the pond, the Tories are getting away with murder!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Tue 2 Jun 19:42
If nothing else, this displays that Westminster is 100% not fit to host a modern day parliament. Forget spending billions on it and ship out parliament to a new building in somewhere like Newcastle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 2 Jun 20:35
It looks like the Scottish Parliament is going to have some remote sessions during what would usually be the Summer recess so MSPs can continue to scrutinise the government's response to the pandemic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bandy
Date: Wed 3 Jun 23:01
In short, the English people ain't got the gumption to do anything.
In the hotbed of .net, where sweeping generalisations of entirely populations are sadly no uncommon, that one is absolutely outstanding. Well played.
My kids were born in England, will probably identify as English. I'm gutted they'll have no gumption
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 3 Jun 23:14
Of say the opposite. The English have MORE "gumption". They wanted Brexit and voted for it without giving a toss about the impact. Scots on the other hand rejected independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Wed 3 Jun 23:33
Quote:
jake89, Wed 3 Jun 23:14
Of say the opposite. The English have MORE "gumption". They wanted Brexit and voted for it without giving a toss about the impact. Scots on the other hand rejected independence.
Statistical analysis of the votes in the 2014 referendum showed if only those born in Scotland had been allowed to vote Yes would have won.
So Scots did not lack the gumption.
Our friends who have chosen Scotland as their home were not persuaded in large enough numbers to back Independence.
It is absolutely right that they should be able to vote in any future referendum though as it is their future too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 4 Jun 08:08
Only half of foreign born Scots are English. There's almost 1/6 foreign born in the UK as a whole, most of whom live in England.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Thu 4 Jun 13:30
Bandy, cool story bro - My son is half Japanese so he's gonna be a Maths whizz. It just works that way, ken?
We know you have a habit of making passive aggressive comments rather than contributing constructively to debate - seems something that you've never grown out of in all the years on this forum. Very interesting how you stay silent and contribute hee haw to the debate until there is one comment from me you don't like.
Let me ask you directly, when did the UK actually try to make a constructive contribution to the UK and fully engage in building the EU organisation? You'll be struggling to find examples there because the majority of the time was spent whinging about the organisation and over-legislating guidelines back home and then moaning that these had supposedly been imposed from abroad.
SIF has it right there - Scots born voted in the majority for yes. Still amazes me that they didn't look at who would have been eligible for Scottish Citizenship (under the UK 5 year residency rule). What other situation has there been when foreigners could mote to and register to vote in a country 6 weeks before a Constitutional referendum? None.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 4 Jun 16:48
Surely those living in Scotland should have a say? I'd suggest my pal from Greater Manchester living here with his Scottish wife and child should have a greater say than an ex-pat Scot. He's living here, paying taxes here and raising a family here.
It's worth highlighting many English people in Scotland voted yes. The English born no's are no different to Scots no's. We need to convince heads as well as hearts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Thu 4 Jun 18:23
Jake, if your pal has lived in Scotland for the 5 years as stipulated by the UK as the requirement for British Citizenship, then absolutely he should have the right to vote. If he's not been here for 5 years, nope.
As it was in 2014, rUK and EU citizens (not sure about Commonwealth) could move to Scotland 6 weeks prior to the vote, register and then this was considered legal.
I live in Sweden now and have/had the right to vote in the General Election here as a European Citizen but I didn't because I am not a citizen but as a forieng national I am barred from any constitutional referenda. I become a permanent resident in September and then can apply for citizenship. When I'm granted it, then I'll vote.
The standard stipulation for voting in any nation is that you are a citizen of that nation and resident in said nation at the time of a poll.
For me, Scotland should be looking to introduce something along the lines of a 5 year time period for rUK residents to be entitled to the extra services we have in Scotland such as Tuition-free University (I think currently the limit is 3 years residency) and Elderly care, particularly now when the Conservatives are moving England in the direction of lower spending and privatisation which is likely to force the Scottish Government into further upping tax due to Barnett. Namely, rUK residents should have to live in Scotland for 5 years (perhaps with 3-4 tax-paying years) before they are entitled to elderly care or their children are entitled to tuition free university, although in the latter case there has to be special clauses for those with one Scottish Parent or where a child is born to at least one Scottish parent and they have served abroad with the Armed Forces.
This is actually very similar to the requirements that Sweden and Denmark both have to access their benefits systems. Scotland is special though, so of course in our case its Rampant Anglophobia! ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 4 Jun 18:31
Problem is were all British. Let's be honest, 85% of Scottish residents were born here. Only 8% are English. The referendum was lost for two reasons IMO:
Media pressure
Lack of clarity on key issues.
A marginal win on either side should be questioned. I for one wouldn't be happy to see independence happen on the basis of a 51/49 majority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Thu 4 Jun 18:53
Jake, I would never call myself British. For that reason I have not registered my son as a British citizen and have no intention to.
We can go down the whole cultural, historical, anthropological argument route, but Scotland (or the Kingdom of Scots if we're being picky) was an Independent Nation for just shy of 850 years and has been part of a Union for 313. "British" is a legal and geographical definition. If you read about the struggle of the "ethic" Russian people and Putin to create a distinctive "Russian Identity" since the fall of the Soviet Union and the various smaller republics such as Chechnya and Tatarstan etc you can draw many parallels between England and Scotland - actually quite fascinating to study. The different ethnic groups in Russia have very distinctive cultures and it has been extremely Turbulent in recent times - Gorbachev's decentralisation, Yeltsin's chaos and then Putin's re-centralisation or "Top Down" governmental style. Much of these issues the Tatars etc have in these instances date back to the days of the Tsars. Bottom line though, the nationality of "British" is essentially a legal and geographical definition in much the same way that "Citizen of the Soviet Union" was. Even today, you can argue that there is a distinct difference between a Russian and a Russian Citizen.
I agree with you though on your points about the referendum and would refer back to my points earlier about the SNP/SG failing to comprehensively plan. And of course Media's vested business interests inevitably played a role.
I would argue that if Scotland has to endure Brexit on a 50%+1 mandate then the same should stand for an Independence vote. I do honestly believe though that the SNP/SG can win with aplomb if they make the preparations I mentioned earlier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Thu 4 Jun 19:49
Has to be 50+1 (democratic majority vote). any artificial threshold would be simply undemocratic and unfair... and who gets to say where that hurdle is set?
Agree that a timetable should be set for subsequent votes, eg EU options, but disagree with the monarchy one. Don't get me wrong, I'd disband them tomorrow but don't think it's worth adding another dimension to the debate unnecessarily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 4 Jun 20:32
If we start going back in time we find the bottom half of what is now Scotland was part of the Kingdom of Northumbria and the rest was still divided as separate kingdoms. Scotland itself is a merger of 2 or 3 kingdoms.
I don't wish to sound rude, but if your son isn't British, what is he? I may be wrong, but those born here are British by default, aren't they?
Scotland is a mongrel nation the same as any other nowadays. We may be mainly white but you've got people descended from Scots, Irish, Norwegian, English and all other sort of stock.
To me being Scottish is a state of mind. It comes from living here. We're still a nation filled with absolute belters, but we feel kinder, more generous and more socialist than places like the South of England. I always feel quite an affinity with those in the North of England. Yorkshire is basically the Fife of England - towns next to countryside and tight fisted grumpy gits living there!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 4 Jun 20:34
Meant to say that parts of the former USSR like Ukraine used to be part of Poland. Boundaries move, as do people. It's fascinating seeing old maps and how things have changed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Thu 4 Jun 20:45
Jake, I suppose it depends what nationality/passport you hold and if you get dual citizenship (obviously if you're a child then it's what your parents decided)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 4 Jun 21:05
But surely if you're born here you are by default a British citizen? My understanding is you can only give up that citizenship when over 18 and by doing so you're effectively not supposed to be here.
Dual citizenship is different. I have a couple of friends who have this. One is British/Australian as he moved there and applied for Australian citizenship after being there a few years. The other was born in Australia with a Scottish parent. They now live here (purely coincidentally) and are Australian/British.
Both are still British citizens even though one was born in Australia and the other lives in Australia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bandy
Date: Thu 4 Jun 21:28
Bandy, cool story bro - My son is half Japanese so he's gonna be a Maths whizz. It just works that way, ken?
Not sure - looking at this chart suggests your son would stand a better chance of being a top level mathematician if his mother was American, French, Russian or British :)
We know you have a habit of making passive aggressive comments rather than contributing constructively to debate - seems something that you've never grown out of in all the years on this forum. Very interesting how you stay silent and contribute hee haw to the debate until there is one comment from me you don't like.
As a general rule I don't like sweeping generalisations, based on things as arbitrary as country of birth - I think they're incredibly dangerous. Many of the protests we're seeing right now are down to the sweeping generalisations make about others due to the colour of their skin. I call these things about pretty frequently - although admit I'm an infrequent poster - you know job, young children, that kind of thing. That goes for all the forums.
Let me ask you directly, when did the UK actually try to make a constructive contribution to the UK and fully engage in building the EU organisation? You'll be struggling to find examples there because the majority of the time was spent whinging about the organisation and over-legislating guidelines back home and then moaning that these had supposedly been imposed from abroad.
Not sure why your asking this - I've never argued, or tried to argue, that the UK have been constructive members of the EU. For what it's worth I think Brexit is an absolute shambles driven by greed, a certain amount of arrogance, an electorate that allowed itself to be misinformed, and some savvy use of social media. I'm massively pro Europe regardless of how the British have interacted with on the continent.
SIF has it right there - Scots born voted in the majority for yes. Still amazes me that they didn't look at who would have been eligible for Scottish Citizenship (under the UK 5 year residency rule). What other situation has there been when foreigners could mote to and register to vote in a country 6 weeks before a Constitutional referendum? None.
Bluntly because it would have been an administrative nightmare and expensive to implement. The method that was chosen was imperfect, but it was clear, understandable and easy to implement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Thu 4 Jun 23:21
Bandy - Interesting point I never though about the Fields Medal. Think you'll find though that the standard of Maths among the general population in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and China is higher than that of Europe by and large.
https://www.businessinsider.com/pisa-worldwide-ranking-of-math-science-reading-skills-2016-12?r=US&IR=T
Calling out generalisations is fine. I gave an account of my experience of living and working in England, so why not back it with your own experiences as counter examples?
The point I've made about the English Populace not having what I guess we could term "Socio-Political Gumption" (which I will stand by) is based on the fact that they have done hee haw to introduce a form of local government in the regions, bar some rather powerless mayors. They have done hee haw to address the corrupt trust system that is driving their public services into the ground. The passiveness and lassez faire attitude will be severely damaging to England. They are already lagging behind other developed economies in terms of high level economic growth because they haven't invested enough in their populace (and all signs show that investment will be further cut) and the government is showing a distinct lack of policy in terms of directing the economy. I'm open to being proven wrong, but I honestly don't see it.
You may hold the opinions you state about Brexit, but it is completely foolish to try and rubbish an argument with out both investigating and understanding its basis. The example that springs to mind currently is the political left who make no effort to understand why people voted Brexit, Trump etc - its just racist. Likewise now, you have the political right, such as those in America, who can't comprehend that social problems in the US are more prominent among the black population because they've been treated like sh*t from the get-go. Conjectural rebuttals are rather pointless.
I do agree with your point about the administration of the vote - doing this just for a poll would be a nightmare but creating something along the lines of a "Scottish Residency Status" is something that should have been done as soon as social policy began to diverge after devolution.
I too work full time, have a young child and also study a number of courses in University for the banter, so I know exactly where you're coming from in terms of time. If something is worth doing though, is it not worth doing it correctly and comprehensively as you did second time round?
-------
Jake, I agree with you on being Scottish being a state of mind. Nationality doesn't necessarily rely on national boundaries etc and I would say its more dependent on tradition and culture. Compared to other nations that have been in unions such as those still part of the Russian Federation, Scotland has retained a particularly strong culture despite similarities in language and I would surmise that this is due to the independence of the legal and education systems on top of the fact that the Kingdom of Scots exists for so long prior to the Union. If memory serves rightly, Poland and Lithuania are examples of nations who "disappeared" for 200 (?) years but still existed and returned later. Like you say, boundaries change and Lwow/Lviv in Western Ukraine is a strong example of this. A huge chunk of what is now Poland was mainly lived in by ethnic Germans, including Prussia where Germany was "born". I do share your love of looking at old maps as well!
As for my son's nationality, don't worry I know no malice is intended - my little guy was born in Osaka and so is a Japanese citizen and will also gain Swedish nationality when I do later in the year. UK want a far chunk of cash for British nationality and I'm not prepared to pay that for a passport that is worth less than the other two.
----
DBP, you make a fair point there. Curious as to why you reckon a post-Yes referendum on the Monarchy would confuse the primary issue though? I'd say that if the SNP/SG drew up comprehensive plans for both scenarios then it'd be fair game, no?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 5 Jun 08:21
Thanks HJ. That would make sense. The guy has got a good pick of nationalities there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Fri 5 Jun 10:01
I do agree that timetabling a monarchy referendum supports the primary issue, i.e. Scotland choosing its own path in the world and deciding what sort of country it wants to become.
I think there are questions that indy and brexit will force, so nothing wrong in timetabling votes on eu membership, currency, etc - but what I also think is that from an optics perspective, it will appear by even mentioning them, an indy Scotland has already decided it doesn't want the monarchy. For me that is potentially another divide that will be falsely, but nonetheless exploited.
Also, could you imagine the likes of Gordon Brown being wheeled out again, to promise stuff he can't deliver and talking not only of his love for gazza... but also how much he adores the windsors! 😂
One step at a time for me. The real prize is indy and the rest can go into Scottish parties manifestos and be voted on by the Scottish electorate as and when
Post Edited (Fri 05 Jun 10:40)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 5 Jun 10:52
I'd imagine many would want us to keep a monarchy as I'm always hearing about how great the Nordic nations are and with the exception of Finland they all have monarchs.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Fri 5 Jun 18:19
A new royal yacht to boost morale, on the week they stopped free school meals in England!
Let's get away, please!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Sun 7 Jun 12:20
Regarding any poll on independence it is always important to note that any swing during a referendum would be most likely in favour of Yes as was the case in 2014 when it rose by at least 15 points. A 5% swing would be more than achievable next time once the Yes movement coordinate and move into action so any poll around the 48% mark or higher would most probably result in a Yes win.
The U.K. Gov know this of course and that is why they are determined there won’t be another one. Aided and abetted by a complicit media which will continually spew out SNP Baddery.
I think the SNP need to remember what they are all about and make their manifesto for the Holyrood elections clear. A vote for them is a vote in favour of independence. Along with the Greens and the new party - ISP. Make it a de facto referendum on Independence and take the initiative away from Westminster.
Pro Indy party’s will win a majority of seats and if....a big if, pro Indy party’s win more than 50% of the votes cast then that’s it.
However I don’t think the SNP have the guts to do this.
They will declare another victory as another mandate- how many do they need? And we will go round in circles again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Mon 8 Jun 23:52
And now in the same James Kelly panelbase commissioned poll 63% excluding don’t knows are in favour of the above......
If Boris Johnson and the UK Government manage to block an independence referendum, do you think that pro-independence parties such as the SNP and the Greens should consider including an outright promise of independence in their manifestos for a future election, to give people an opportunity to vote for or against the idea?
Yes 49%
No 29%
With Don't Knows excluded, it's roughly...
Yes 63%
No 37%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 21 Jun 19:55
Latest poll is 54% in favour.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: dd23
Date: Sun 21 Jun 20:11
Bring it on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Sun 21 Jun 22:17
It could be 74% and SNP will still weekly ask WM for permission to have another referendum.
Time for Plan B.
The Scottish Covenant now have their Blockchain registration up and running after teething problems and ISP are gathering steam. Plenty folk in Scotland not prepared to just sit and wait for WM or SNP.
Good to see the polls holding up and creeping up though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: pacifist
Date: Mon 6 Jul 21:07
If one government should know you cannot keep a country against it's will it should be Westminster. The lies and hypocrisy are blatant. We are constantly told we are a financial mess but Westminster is prepared to do anything to keep us. Anyone conned by that any more? Many of our folk are suffering hugely from westminster policies and there is no doubt we can do so much better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Mon 6 Jul 21:14
Maybe the Tories are so generous they are prepared to subsidize us as they are such a caring and loving party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Tue 7 Jul 23:25
Of course they are . Happy to pay more to subside Scotland, Wales and NI than they were to subsidise those nasty Europeans.
What is it now they graciously “ pay “ us ? £14 billion......lol
If I remember correctly....without googling ...U.K. should pay the EU c€40 billion over twenty years....which equates to €2 billion pa.
YET they are happy to pay massively more to keep a hold of Scotland.....mmmm smells like s***e to me.
Thankfully English folk are starting to wake up to the “ fact “ that their taxes are keeping us in Irn Bru , haggis and universal credit payments, hence the recent poll which shows that a majority of Tory voters south of the border would happily jettison Scotland tomorrow. This will soon....hopefully.... manifest itself into most of the people in England.
The die hard Unionists in Scotland will then have to reconcile themselves with the fact that their loyalty has been shoved right down their faces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Mon 13 Jul 14:33
Can’t access that LA.
In the National NS “Warns BJ about a full scale attack on devolution”
Personally I am getting a bit fed up with NS and Ian Blackford and others warning WM about this and that, knowing full well they will be ignore.
“Scotland will not be dragged out of the EU against its will “ Blackford repeated this in WM multiple times yet here we are.
Time is running out for the SNP to make a stand. If they dont the U.K. will just ride roughshod over the Devolution agreement that 75% of voters voted in favour of in 1997.
Even those in Scotland who are not in favour of independence must stand up and be counted against an attack like that.
No doubt many will put their hatred of the SNP before their country shamefully.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 13 Jul 19:09
Needs to be clear that the SNP would not lead an independent Scotland. That would be like suggesting the Brexit party would run the UK after Brexit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Mon 13 Jul 21:38
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 13 Jul 19:09
Needs to be clear that the SNP would not lead an independent Scotland. That would be like suggesting the Brexit party would run the UK after Brexit.
If independence is achieved then I think it is reasonable that the current Scotgov would be negotiating the deal with the rUK. Once achieved then there would be no need for the SNP. However they would need to make sure that something was written into a Scottish Constitution protecting our new status before leaving the scene of the crime so to speak.
All SNP MP’s and MSP’s could stand for re-election with an existing party or a new party afterwards. Oh, the condition of existing party’s standing at election in a newly independent Scotland would be the requirement for them to detach themselves from their paymasters down south and become Scottish party’s...which they certainly are not just now despite their names.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Wed 12 Aug 18:08
New YouGov poll out has another lead, their first one it must be noted.
Yes 53%
No. 47%
That's 4 in a row now which clearly isn't a fluke so momentum is now well and truly with the yes camp and that's before any indyref campaign starts.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Wed 12 Aug 18:26
Interesting read L.A.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Wed 12 Aug 18:45
Quote:
Buspasspar, Wed 12 Aug 18:26
Interesting read L.A.
All in it together!🤔🏴🏴🏴
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Wed 12 Aug 19:48
Only wish it was my gran Irish instead of my grandad.New passport would be on its way
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Wed 19 Aug 11:58
Panel base poll now showing 55% Yes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 19 Aug 16:10
Expect the full Cabinet to arrange staycations in Scotland now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bandy
Date: Wed 19 Aug 16:14
The current Government strategy is to consider inconvenient matters 'closed'. There's no pressing need for Johnson & Co to engage on independence, so they won't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 19 Aug 16:23
They're going to need more of those "Funded by the UK Government" signs 🤣
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Wed 19 Aug 20:51
72% Yes in the under 35 group apparently. Have not seen the data breakdown yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Thu 20 Aug 00:23
It's pretty much inevitable now, the youth have got the appetite to live in an open, progressive, welcoming country. When you see the swing in the vote from when they last allowed a referendum where there was around 27% Yes, to now, you can see why they would be in no rush to grant another referendum. Its only going to end one way
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 20 Aug 03:05
The momentum is all one way. The issue is whether Scotland can secede from the Union or whether it will have to fight to do so along the lines of Eire.
The younger generation are understandably little interested in pensions, which was a significant fear for older Scots in the last referendum. It shouldn’t have been really: the average Scot pays into the UK pension fund the same as everyone else but dies around four years earlier so he is a net contributor. The failure of Salmond, a man with a background in banking, to convince the Scottish people on the issue of a Scottish currency was a telling point and so far as I can see under Sturgeon remains equally unclear. That is partly why her critics within the SNP do not believe she is committed to independence.
The fight for independence may have to be undertaken by the next generation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 21 Aug 10:02
Apparently Michael Gove's latest ploy to ward off the threat off independence is to consider extending the vote in a future referendum to include Scots living elsewhere in the UK. He's reported to be enlisting cross-party help to achieve this by consulting Lord (Jack) McConnell, Danny Alexander and George Galloway!
Does this indicate he concedes that another referendum is inevitable? Would this principle be extended to all elections in the UK so that ex-pats are included in General Elections, say? I've always considered suggestions like this to be anti-democratic and unmanageable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 21 Aug 10:17
I think UK ex pats can vote in UK general elections unless they've been abroad for 15 years or something like that.
Pretty sure some of my mates living abroad still vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 21 Aug 10:32
The Scottish government have already put in place a procedure for any forthcoming referendums whether it be independence or whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 21 Aug 10:32
Were they allowed to vote in the EU referendum?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 21 Aug 10:56
My worry about a section 30 order being agreed to by U.K. gov is there is guaranteed to be conditions attached and it is fair to say they won’t be favourable.
Martin Keatings case will go to court soon and if it wins we don’t need a section 30 order.
The Scottish government have already passed legislation to hold referendums.
As Cameron said at the time “it is for the Scottish people to decide their constitutional future“ or words to that effect.
We all know this was a load of baloney as the U.K. interfered in every way they could and even asked Obama and others to put their oar in.
The Scottish parliament will decide who gets to vote and it should be as it was last time. If you live and work in Scotland then you get a vote. Not perfect as I have argued on here before but probably the best and simplest way.
I would prefer a caveat added next time though that you must have been living in Scotland for a minimum of five years to qualify.
People who own holiday homes in Scotland and therefore have a registered address here were allowed to vote last time and that cannot be right.
50%+1 was agreed to last time and it was the same for the Brexit referendum which was only consultative. It is because of that vote that are we are where we are again so soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 21 Aug 12:58
Quote:
wee eck, Fri 21 Aug 10:32
Were they allowed to vote in the EU referendum?
I dont know actually the rules vary by referendum I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:19
Don’t think expats we’re allowed a vote in the EU referendum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:27
Interesting!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Thaipar
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:31
Quote:
wee eck, Fri 21 Aug 13:27
Interesting!
I can't be 100% certain but did Lux not get a vote as he still owns property in the UK?
Am sure he will clarify.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:43
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:46
Our imperial masters !!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:48
Just googled it. Ex pats were denied a vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:49
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:50
I don't suppose precedent will matter. It will depend on how they think the non-residents are likely to vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 21 Aug 17:36
Folk in rUK will not be voting in Indy ref 2.
Lol at that BigJPar. That had me in stitches at the time and still makes me laugh and at the same time sick to my stomach that Scottish Labour MP’s were involved.
Neither wonder they have been reduced to a rump up here and yet they still can’t see it and still keep on beating the same tired old drum...”No to Indy Ref 2. “
As if 54% and rising will be listening to what a party with..maybe 16% are saying.
The only way Labour have the slightest chance of resurrecting themselves in Scotland is when they agree to an other referendum on independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Fri 21 Aug 19:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 21 Aug 23:52
It'd be interesting to see the make up of Scottish Labour voters these days. I'd expect a lot would be in favour of retaining the union but that's based only on the nearest Labour MP being a Jambo!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 22 Aug 09:47
Quote:
desparado, Fri 21 Aug 13:19
Don’t think expats we’re allowed a vote in the EU referendum.
EU nationals could vote though,,191,000 of them then
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 22 Aug 10:18
EU nationals weren't allowed a vote in the EU referendum other than those from Ireland, Malta and Cyprus.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 22 Aug 16:09
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Sat 22 Aug 10:18
EU nationals weren't allowed a vote in the EU referendum other than those from Ireland, Malta and Cyprus.
Correct my error.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Wed 26 Aug 17:34
From Aunty ...I like this :-
Senior Tory Charles Walker - vice-chair of the influential backbench 1922 Committee - said an increasing number of Conservative MPs were "very worried" at the government's ever-extending record of chopping and changing policy without debate, often in the wake of decisions taken by Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 26 Aug 22:41
GERS figures though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Thu 27 Aug 05:16
Quote:
jake89, Wed 26 Aug 22:41
GERS figures though...
?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 27 Aug 08:22
This again shows why the SNP need to display how an independent Scotland would find itself. Hard to do given all the variables but they could start by being quite frank that we would likely reduce our defence spend considerably. I also suspect free university places would be replaced by burseries for those studying sciences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Thu 27 Aug 08:33
<reduce our defence spend considerably>
What, you mean like the long standing SNP desire to remove Trident?
< I also suspect free university places would be replaced by burseries for those studying sciences.>
I suspect that 'required' degrees would continue to be supported, but the peripheral Arts/Philosophy/Film/etc degrees would be subject to bursary or payment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 27 Aug 09:13
The budget deficit of the UK and the notional Scottish deficit is barely impacted by defence spending.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 27 Aug 13:22
Is it not a couple of billion? That's still 14% of the deficit.
Point still stands that a realistic indication of future budgeting is required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Thu 27 Aug 19:20
Gers figures are based on Scotland in the UK. They are not based on an independent Scotland.
You can say anything you like, fiddle stats anyway you like. You can never know the financial position of an independent Scotland. We're not independent so it's all speculation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Thu 27 Aug 19:25
Seen some Yoons on r/UKpolitics claiming an Indy Scotland will have to suffer through austerity to survive the first few years, almost like exactly that hasn't been forced onto us by the tories for 10 years already, to literally no benefit
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 27 Aug 20:32
GERS figures show Scotland contributes £3bn to the UK for defence and the SNP proposed to spend £2bn to £2.5bn a year in an Indy Scotland so they are planning on reducing expenditure on defence.
I think they were quoted at looking to spend 1.6% of GDP on defence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 27 Aug 20:59
For a few years now GERS figures have shown only London, SE England and E England as being 'in surplus'. It's the way the UK model is set up with most of the wealth concentrated in that corner. An independent Scotland would adopt a different model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Thu 27 Aug 22:03
Scotland is the only country in the U.K. that exports more than it imports. It is has been that way for many years. U.K. gov never mention this of course.
As far as defence goes Scotland gets charged slightly over 5% of GDP for the privilege of having nuclear submarines based here and for having a couple of frigates based in.....Portsmouth.
Scotland “pays” more than any other country on the planet for defence as a ratio of GDP..
So you can knock a couple of billion off their fanciful figures straight away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 27 Aug 22:36
Good Post ^^^
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 28 Aug 02:42
I don't think we do get charged as much as 5% of our GDP. We pay £3 billion for defence and our gdp was up at about £180bn a year or so ago which works out at about 1.6% from what i can see?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 28 Aug 10:56
Looks like I have compared it to Tax revenue as opposed to GDP.
Scotland generates around £60 billion in revenues and pays around £3 billion to the U.K. for its share of defence cost,so this is where the 5% figure came from.
Need to find out where I got the info originally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 28 Aug 11:28
Ah yeah I see where you are now - I think one of the more recent reports on how much revenue raised had Scotland at about £62 billion.
Removed a paragraph as im a dafty that couldn't read your post properly.
Post Edited (Fri 28 Aug 11:29)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 28 Aug 13:49
Just googled it. Ex pats were denied a vote.
I just googled it as well. Ex-pats who could vote in GEs were allowed to vote - basically UK Citizens who had been abroad less than 15 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 28 Aug 14:15
So have I ....again. Looks like I need to go to spec savers.....again.
I remember many expats complaining about being denied a vote....obviously those who had been away more than 15 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 28 Aug 14:18
Gers figures are based on Scotland in the UK. They are not based on an independent Scotland.
You can say anything you like, fiddle stats anyway you like. You can never know the financial position of an independent Scotland. We're not independent so it's all speculation.
We have a similar argument every year (although the debate does move on, slowly.) There seems more general acceptance that the GERS figures are professionally compiled and a fairly accurate estimation of what they claim to represent.
Now the debate seems to be over what the financial position of an independent Scotland would look like. It’s a fair question, yet most reasoned answers seem to be “a lot worse”. (I think most of the senior members of the SNP know this).
Don’t forget the SNP used GERS as the basis of their financial case in 2014 – essentially Oil and Gas revenues from the North Sea were to be used to maintain (or even improve) high levels of public spending. IMO it was criminally foolish to base your economic case on a single, volatile commodity. Now oil is trading at less than $50 per barrel and there is suddenly climate emergency. We dodged a large bullet there.
Andrew Wilson’s long awaited Growth Commission (again based on GERS) essentially recommends a decade of austerity (but people didn’t like this). It appears to have been quietly shelved.
People speculate about the future all the time. More so people make reasoned and informed estimates based on available information (and make major financial decisions on the back of it). So where’s the financial case? Currently we benefit from about £10bn pa due to a fiscal transfer. That’s a lot of money to make up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 28 Aug 14:45
A quick comment on defence spending.
The allocation in GERS for 19/20 seems to be £3,451 million, which is about 2% of GDP. It's based on a population share of the UK total.
I guess there might be an opportunity to reduce it to 1.6% say which might save £700m or so - but this must essentially be a consequence of Scotland's GDP per capita being slightly lower than the UK average.
SNP policy is to join NATO which notionally requires members to commit to a spend on defence of the order of 2% p.a. Trident (or rather a Trident replacement?) comes in at about £2bn pa for the UK (so approximately £200m pa for Scotland). If a NATO member it would seem irrelevant to the total whether you are spending the money on nuclear weapons or conventional weapons (or even Covid testing centres).
Of course, it could be argued that per capita is not entirely the appropriate way to allocate spending - land area or coastline may be factors as well.
Post Edited (Fri 28 Aug 16:17)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 28 Aug 15:07
Lastly for now…
For a few years now GERS figures have shown only London, SE England and E England as being 'in surplus'. It's the way the UK model is set up with most of the wealth concentrated in that corner. An independent Scotland would adopt a different model.
This is quite an interesting comment.
Firstly, and rather flippantly, it’s obvious that an Indy Scotland would adopt a different model as London wouldn’t be part of Scotland (which is kind of the point).
Secondly, a lot of that wealth is redistributed. I’ve often asked the question – “which would you rather – greater equality (but everyone being worse off) or more inequality (but everyone being better off)?”
However, I guess your point is really over concentration of (production of) wealth, and to what extent the government can do anything about it.
In general, I think Governments have little power in this area – market forces are too great. All over the world, I think there has been a population shift from the country to the towns and cities; history and geography are big factors. I guess a lot of reasons for London’s pre-eminence are geographical – on a large river with easy access to the trade routes. Nowadays Europe has a “time-zone” advantage, enabling it to trade electronically with the Far East in the morning, and the Americas in the afternoon.
Today I’ve seen figures to suggest that Edinburgh and the East of Scotland is becoming wealthier at the expense of everywhere else. I’m not therefore convinced that an Independent Scotland necessarily would (or even could) easily adopt a different model willingly.
Possibly the Covid-19 aftermath may afford different opportunities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 28 Aug 18:15
In the UK everything is focussed on London with Manchester getting the scraps. In Scotland it's Edinburgh and Glasgow. Anyone making out that things would necessarily be fairer in Scotland are being a touch naive. It'll still be the case that anyone outside Edinburgh/Glasgow will be largely ignored. This applies not only to politics but almost anything.
There was an interesting piece written recently (will try and find a link) about how disgraceful it is that more isn't made about Dunfermline's history and how it's effectively been tossed aside. May seem unrelated but the truth is that our Government have no interest in the economic development of Dunfermline. They don't care about promoting Dunfermline as a location for business and tourism. They just want towns like Dunfermline to exist as places for people working in Edinburgh and Glasgow to live. The local council is no better. Short-sighted at best, utterly inept at worst. SESplan and the City Region Deal are a farce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 28 Aug 19:13
Financial position of an independent Scotland would be “ a lot worse “ . Based on what ? That’s right the Gers figures.
This is the whole point about becoming independent. Within the U.K. we are a basket case apparently, a country that needs more public spending per head than most...not all parts of the U.K. well that’s the good old union for you. It has obviously failed Scotland.
Once independent Scotland can control its own resources and spending and not be reliant on an incompetent cabal who don’t care a jot for Scotland.
There is no reason why Scotland could not be as wealthy, and as successful as any of the Scandinavian countries is there? Is there ?
We simply have two choices. Go it alone . Or forever put our faith in politicians in London that don’t really give a fig about the many problems we have in our society currently.
Jake89 makes good points about centralisation.
The only way we can really make politicians accountable (more) in Scotland is by being independent. The current set up where most of the powers are held by politicians we don’t vote for is ludicrous.
We can complain all we want but it will never make one iota of difference.
This mob ( UK gov ) are trampling all over devolution , the Scotland act and are now attacking our laws. If they win this battle Scotland is finished as a proud nation and is destined to become a region of the U.K. aka England. That is their plan after all.
Not something I want and those who are quite happy or ambivalent to the threat we face from this U.K. gov cannot complain when in a few short years ,if we do not become independent will see Scotland as a regional backwater.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 28 Aug 19:36
Good posts jake89 and desparado
We are undoubtably a natural resource rich nation
Unfortunately being prostituted under English control
We have been cannon fodder since time and memoriam
So why oh why are they so desperate to keep us
I read a Tory government economist report many years ago which outlined how successful Scotland could be if Independent even without Oil
I was hoping to be Independent in my life time but running out of years :(
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 28 Aug 20:33
Quote:
McCaig`s Tower, Fri 28 Aug 14:18
Gers figures are based on Scotland in the UK. They are not based on an independent Scotland.
You can say anything you like, fiddle stats anyway you like. You can never know the financial position of an independent Scotland. We're not independent so it's all speculation.
We have a similar argument every year (although the debate does move on, slowly.) There seems more general acceptance that the GERS figures are professionally compiled and a fairly accurate estimation of what they claim to represent.
Now the debate seems to be over what the financial position of an independent Scotland would look like. It’s a fair question, yet most reasoned answers seem to be “a lot worse”. (I think most of the senior members of the SNP know this).
Don’t forget the SNP used GERS as the basis of their financial case in 2014 – essentially Oil and Gas revenues from the North Sea were to be used to maintain (or even improve) high levels of public spending. IMO it was criminally foolish to base your economic case on a single, volatile commodity. Now oil is trading at less than $50 per barrel and there is suddenly climate emergency. We dodged a large bullet there.
Andrew Wilson’s long awaited Growth Commission (again based on GERS) essentially recommends a decade of austerity (but people didn’t like this). It appears to have been quietly shelved.
People speculate about the future all the time. More so people make reasoned and informed estimates based on available information (and make major financial decisions on the back of it). So where’s the financial case? Currently we benefit from about £10bn pa due to a fiscal transfer. That’s a lot of money to make up.
Exactly as I said. We can't know what the position of an independent Scotland would be.
You can speculate all you like. People have made and lost millions on speculations.
Until or if we are independent no one can make proper judgements. I won't be speculating because I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 28 Aug 20:37
Quote:
jake89, Fri 28 Aug 18:15
In the UK everything is focussed on London with Manchester getting the scraps. In Scotland it's Edinburgh and Glasgow. Anyone making out that things would necessarily be fairer in Scotland are being a touch naive. It'll still be the case that anyone outside Edinburgh/Glasgow will be largely ignored. This applies not only to politics but almost anything.
There was an interesting piece written recently (will try and find a link) about how disgraceful it is that more isn't made about Dunfermline's history and how it's effectively been tossed aside. May seem unrelated but the truth is that our Government have no interest in the economic development of Dunfermline. They don't care about promoting Dunfermline as a location for business and tourism. They just want towns like Dunfermline to exist as places for people working in Edinburgh and Glasgow to live. The local council is no better. Short-sighted at best, utterly inept at worst. SESplan and the City Region Deal are a farce.
I have to say that Aberdeen has done rather well in recent years. We now have a very necessary by pass which has been in the offing for 20 years. It finally was pushed through despite objections locally. SG instrumental in getting it done.
The main concentration of population is in the central belt so I would expect most of the money to be spent on that area. However, as an Aberdeen resident I don't believe we just get the scraps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 28 Aug 20:38
Quote:
jake89, Fri 28 Aug 18:15
In the UK everything is focussed on London with Manchester getting the scraps. In Scotland it's Edinburgh and Glasgow. Anyone making out that things would necessarily be fairer in Scotland are being a touch naive. It'll still be the case that anyone outside Edinburgh/Glasgow will be largely ignored. This applies not only to politics but almost anything.
There was an interesting piece written recently (will try and find a link) about how disgraceful it is that more isn't made about Dunfermline's history and how it's effectively been tossed aside. May seem unrelated but the truth is that our Government have no interest in the economic development of Dunfermline. They don't care about promoting Dunfermline as a location for business and tourism. They just want towns like Dunfermline to exist as places for people working in Edinburgh and Glasgow to live. The local council is no better. Short-sighted at best, utterly inept at worst. SESplan and the City Region Deal are a farce.
I think the regional council should really be pushing the case for Dunfermline. If they don't bother why should the SG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 28 Aug 20:47
Do you know what Scotland's position will be if it continues to be part of the Union, moviescot? They didn't set out any kind of economic plan at the last referendum, they just made vague promises about more devolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Fri 28 Aug 22:14
The only question I ever have is that if Scotland costs so much why do Tories,who are hardly famed for their generosity,try so hard to keep the union.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Fri 28 Aug 22:23
Quote:
wee eck, Fri 28 Aug 20:47
Do you know what Scotland's position will be if it continues to be part of the Union, moviescot? They didn't set out any kind of economic plan at the last referendum, they just made vague promises about more devolution.
No I don't. That's speculation. Thought I'd made it clear I don't speculate.
Just so that we are clear, I would prefer not to be in this union.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 28 Aug 22:50
Gotcha now. I should have re-read your earlier post.
I wonder if economics will play such a significant part if there's a second referendum. I think more people are getting fed up with Scotland's subsidiary role in this union and how we've been treated since the last one. The only time we see Westminster Tories up here is when the polls go against them. When Brexit finally kicks in, that may be the final straw; so economics may in fact work against the union.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 28 Aug 23:14
As you say MT we do have this same conversation every year and it does become tiresome.
Lets look at what Scotland might have been and what it might become.
When Oil was discovered in vast quantities in Scottish waters many years ago how did we as a nation benefit from this new found wealth? Well the answer is we did not. What we did see was manufacturing being decimated and mass unemployment. Scotland’s wealth being squandered and the Mcrone report being hidden and marked as secret for thirty years. Wasted Windfall was a documentary that was aired a good few years ago now that summed it all up quite nicely...well sadly.
Looking across the North Sea at our near neighbours, we can see how a small independent nation in Europe has managed its resources for the benefit of its people and future generations.
The U.K. has basically mis managed all of it and still does. Major Oil and gas companies have made more money than the country has. We had the ridiculous situation a few years ago when the U.K. was apparently losing money from these resources instead of making money .....how on earth can that be?
We “dodged a bullet” .. you say....that old chestnut. I seem to remember the SNP at the time saying that Oil and Gas was a bonus and that basically is still true to this day as Scotland’s GDP is comparable with the UK’s without oil
and gas. $50 dollars..ish the price is just now and I think that will be about average over the last ten years or so.....without googling. The $120 price was a peak that I don’t think had been seen before or will be again.
Add Scotland’s abundance of renewable energy and we could and should be in a pretty good place with regards to energy and a very good place if we managed these resources like they do In Norway.
I have read and heard many economists discussing how an independent Scotland would fair and to be honest the only ones that I have come across that paint a terrible picture are obviously tied to the U.K. gov or a U.K. political party....agenda? Of course.
I hope you don’t mind me saying but I am convinced that this applies to you, I am reasonably confident that you are close to a unionist MSP or a member of a Unionist Party/SiU or a similar organisation.
So back on topic, Scotland has been shafted by successive WM governments , there is proof. Documents showing how much Scotland generated in tax revenues and the U.K. Gov spend in Scotland going back to the 19th century are available and it makes grim reading. So grim in fact that they (UK Gov) stopped producing them in 1922..I think.
Yip we can really trust the U.K. gov can’t we when it come to Scotland’s finances ?
Then along come the GERS figures in 1992 ? just in time for a certain referendum on devolution. You know what Ian Lang said about them at the time don’t you? Enough said.
Anyway I think that we look at these GERS figures the wrong way round. I will conceded that they are the most accurate figures available but the question that needs asked is not how will an independent Scotland fill the “Black Hole” ? But why does it exist at all? If the U.K. gov economy was performing properly and they were ensuring that all four corners of the U.K. were benefiting equally from being part of the fifth/sixth biggest economy in the world then surely there would not be a significant deficit? But there is...apparently, not only in Scotland but in Wales and NI too? Something is seriously wrong and if after 313 years of being in a union this is the best we can expect then it is time to bolt. We get charged c4.5 billion to service U.K. debt, a debt others accrue on our behalf, a debt we have no control over, c1.8 Billion on U.K. Service costs ? Another billion on International services? Basically the GERS figures are an argument for Independence not against it !
Yip we can really trust the U.K. gov can’t we when it comes to Scotland’s finances. Only recently Rishi Sunak stood up in parliament to make his summer statement and announced Scotland would be receiving £800 million+ in Barnet consequentials , much to the glee of the house. A wee lassie from Dingwall a certain Kate Forbes rubbished the claim and stated it was in fact £21 million. She was in turn ridiculed by serial loser Murdo ( Queens 11) Fraser......maybe he is your pal? And lo and behold she was proven right and wee Murdo had to issue an apology for probably the first time in his life. If they can get this so wrong then how can we possibly trust them? I mean it was only a trifling £800 million that ( a very good chancellor of the exchequer according to many commentators) he misplaced. If he is good then god forbid when we get a bad one eh? Lol
Look at the cronyism that has been prevalent of late, Cummings and Hancock lining the pockets of their friends with tax payers money, close on a £ Billion just given away..for nowt. They are so incompetent that there is no way on earth you or anyone else could possibly convince me that we could not make a better fist of things ourselves.
So rather than bat the proverbial ping pong ball back and forward I would like you to use your imagination and look into the future.
If Scotland was to become independent in the next few years , how do you envisage your country being, socially, economically, politically , the ability of/likelihood of an Independent Scotland to convert growth into well being, social inclusion , immigration etc? Let’s say in the short term 5-10 years, the medium term, 10-20 years and the long term 20+ years.
Just curious to see if you have faith in your fellow country men and women to build a better future for our country as I do, or if you are happy to just amble along putting your faith in the worst WM government in my lifetime hoping for the best whilst watching your country slowly but surely be brow beaten into complete subservience? All the while knowing that in almost every GE your vote is a wasted vote, does not matter, not one iota. You will get the government England votes for and be thankful. Not only that but they reneged on many promises made in 2014.
If they had been honest enough to admit to themselves that they have a problem convincing people in Scotland that we trust them , delivered the strongest devolved parliament in the world....as promised....stood by their assertion that Scotland is an equal partner in a family of nations ( Brexit kinda proved what most of us already know ) Then we would not be having another conversation about an independence referendum and the polls would not be showing 55% in favour.
I read recently about how quickly and easily the Baltic States set up their own Central Banks and Currencies.....nothing to fear there then either by the sounds of it unless the cringe is strong, or you are of a British Nationalist persuasion, then it is definitely Scotland alone in the world that is incapable.
Dodged a bullet...pfft. No other country in the world would describe a missed opportunity at taking back their independence in such terms. Every other country in the world would have been prepared to take a bullet ...or more,just for the chance we had.
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
Post Edited (Fri 28 Aug 23:17)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: MikeyLeonard
Date: Sat 29 Aug 00:19
Oooft, took a bit of reading but that's a great post Desperado.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 29 Aug 08:00
Post of the day/week/month/year/decade/century/millennium!
We'll still be too wee/poor/stupid in some eyes though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sat 29 Aug 08:20
Excellent post desparado
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: dd23
Date: Sat 29 Aug 09:14
It certainly was. That post should be made Sticky.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sat 29 Aug 11:38
Some post Desperado!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 29 Aug 14:31
A well constructed post but like Stephen Stills said, 'singing songs and carrying signs, mostly saying hooray for our side'.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sat 29 Aug 16:54
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 29 Aug 14:31
A well constructed post but like Stephen Stills said, 'singing songs and carrying signs, mostly saying hooray for our side'.
Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 29 Aug 17:17
That's a great riposte, Bpp. Keeping quiet won't achieve anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sun 30 Aug 00:09
Fine post desparado,
I enjoyed it as many have done. But the case for Scottish independence has largely been made and accepted by both the lower middle class and the skilled working class of Scotland. There remain middle class elements who possess property, and unskilled workers who possess nothing, to be persuaded. But by and large the argument has been won. You are right to highlight the statistics but they in themselves will not liberate Scotland.
The focus from now on should not be about if we should have independence but rather, how. Once that is absorbed in our thinking then we can move forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Sun 30 Aug 16:58
https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2020/08/28/dugcast-fae-the-dughoose-with-prof-richard-murphy/
An explanation of the GERS figures here in an interview by Paul Kavanagh with Professor Richard Murphy. Well worth a listen if you have a spare 42 minutes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Sun 30 Aug 17:58
LPS,
Thanks. I have read those. I find it more “ satisfying” to actually listen to him explain how ludicrous GERS is though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 30 Aug 18:11
I thought you might have actually but popped it up on the off chance others hadn't.
The biggest disappointment for me is that neither side has really expressed an interest in trying to get better data to allow more informed decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Tue 1 Sep 13:02
<<The biggest disappointment for me is that neither side has really expressed an interest in trying to get better data to allow more informed decisions.>>
'Better data' will still be based on assertions, assumptions, extrapolations etc and will immediately pulled to pieces and rubbished by the other side, regardless of who prepares it.
This report suits the Scottish Government fine, it shows enough of Scotland's potential upside, with much of the 'bad' numbers easily shown to be unrealistic at best with much of it being made-up nonsense.
Not to mention the 'accidental' acronym pandering to certain sevconians...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Sep 22:26
Yeah i think both sides are happy using them when it suits them but even taking the Indy debate out I think it would be beneficial to both sides to know the underlying numbers as accurately as possible and only to rely on predictions or estimates where they really have to.
ONS should have been a good thing and could have lead the drive for better numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Wed 2 Sep 21:05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Mon 7 Sep 18:59
U.K. gov polling has support for Scottish Independence at....56% 👍🏼.....excluding 16/17 year olds...
Not sure how this became public as they sure as heck would not happily allow this to be common knowledge.
Anyway good news.
Tick Tock
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
Post Edited (Mon 07 Sep 21:38)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Tue 8 Sep 08:10
And with 16/17 year olds?
Given that I would expect the Scottish Government to be advocating a quick return to EU membership, I suspect that this would increase...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 8 Sep 09:30
I'm not surprised by this as it explains why the unionist side have sprung into action recently and I don't think they would do that purely on the basis of polls they didn't commission themselves. I see The National has latched on to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Tue 8 Sep 16:00
Data released from the recent Panelbase Poll.55% Yes
Question if the current Tory leader made it more likely for you to vote for independence.
When don’t knows are removed. 83% Yes
57% Labour voters
37% Lib Dem’s
14% Tory
Those who voted No in 2014. 39% more likely to vote Yes now
Those who voted Yes in 2014. 7% more likely to vote No now.
Even with the non standard “likely” question these are utterly astounding figures.
I think the dam has been breached now and the scales have definitely tipped and I can’t see any going back.
Independence is normal.
Scotland will take it next time and kick these nasty Tories out...permenantly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Tue 8 Sep 16:29
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Tue 8 Sep 16:39
Well it was Labour who cost us last time.
Brown won’t make a difference he is an irrelevance now.
There is no GE on the horizon, no time for the “Starmer” effect.
First things first a big win at the Holyrood election.
If there is a ref next year and there better be. We will win it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Tue 8 Sep 21:28
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Tue 8 Sep 23:20
Baroness Untruth and Dross will be their dream team. Heavily backed by a compliant media of course.
Their angry faces and their violent language and threats of sectarianism in the streets of Scotland will backfire.
Dross who stated on tv yesterday four times ! that he believes he will be first minister next year, so confident he is that he is only standing on the list....
The Tories will get trashed again.
Nobody is listening to them. Well the hard core unionists are of course, but their numbers are dwindling by the day, the rest of us won’t be fooled again.
The only way Scotland can save itself from this utter car crash of a U.K. gov is by becoming independent.
All of the above being dependent on there even being a referendum of course.....
If there isn’t Scotland is finished. And all those who voted No last time should hang their collective heads in shame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 10 Sep 16:58
The new bill regarding the EU and the trading across the UK is pretty frightening, even the Welsh are kicking off about it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 10 Sep 18:28
Frightening how?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 10 Sep 18:49
Read it and find out!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 10 Sep 19:42
L.A. I'm sure I posted a year or two back that there was a Huge hidden agenda behind Brexit including removing Scotland of all devolved power and thereby stopping any future Independence as they cannot afford to lose us
It is now evident that they will stoop to any level to ensure this happens
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 10 Sep 20:04
And yet people still believe the Tories have our best interests at heart...they only care about themselves and their pals. Record debt but make sure you buy a coffee from Pret.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 10 Sep 20:44
Interesting that all the major parties are supporting Blackford's motion except two. One being the obvious one - the Tories. The other being Labour, the party in charge of the devolved government in Wales.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Fri 11 Sep 10:13
BBC now stopping broadcasting the daily briefing!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 11 Sep 10:47
The BBC are a shower though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: pacifist
Date: Mon 12 Oct 16:53
I have no idea why anyone thinks Scotland is better served in this union. The tories privatised NHS recruitment that created the massive ppe shortages as the "business people " they hired thought "just in time" was a good procurement tool. The English test and trace scheme is another failing privatised con, actually spread sheet based, where in Scotland it.s effective and Scottish NHS controlled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 12 Oct 22:44
I'd suggest the NHS in Scotland isn't much better. Too many chiefs...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 13 Oct 10:15
Quote - ..I have no idea why anyone thinks Scotland is better served in this union...
That.s a good question, pacifist, and not just in relation to the NHS. The unionist side never seem to spell out the case for the union other than generalities like .pooling and sharing. or .broad shoulders. or .precious union.. They.ve highlighted the financial support given by Westminster during this pandemic through borrowing without acknowledging that the devolved administrations are precluded from such borrowing by their very membership of the union!
Westminster isn.t judged on the same terms as Holyrood. No matter how incompetent or dysfunctional it is it will always be seen as superior by unionists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Tue 13 Oct 12:36
No one can say with absolute certainty whether an independent Scotland would be better or worse off than remaining in the UK, but a YES vote is the only sure fire way of ridding ourselves of Tory rule for evermore.
I rest my case m'lud......
Eta. I just read my way through this whole thread and have to say desparado's longish post on 28th August was one of the best blogs I've ever read on any subject.
Brilliant. 🙂
Not your average Sunday League player.
Post Edited (Tue 13 Oct 12:40)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Tue 13 Oct 18:34
Quote:
GG Riva, Tue 13 Oct 12:36
No one can say with absolute certainty whether an independent Scotland would be better or worse off than remaining in the UK, but a YES vote is the only sure fire way of ridding ourselves of Tory rule for evermore.
I rest my case m'lud......
Eta. I just read my way through this whole thread and have to say desparado's longish post on 28th August was one of the best blogs I've ever read on any subject.
Brilliant. 🙂
Possibly not for evermore. You never know they may get in her one day but we can vote them out. As it is we can't vote anyone out unless the people of England also feel the same.
In 120 years of the Labour Party they have been in power for only 36 of them and 16 of them were "new Labour" so Tory in all but name.
So only 20 years out of 120 have been under an ideology I would support.
That's why I want Independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Wed 14 Oct 12:47
New poll this morning from IPOS MORI
YES: 58%
NO: 42%
Wow!
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Wed 14 Oct 16:02
So Wales going to stop people entering the country from Covid hotspots!
Border checks going up?
That'll cause some stooshy!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BigJPar
Date: Wed 14 Oct 16:29
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Wed 14 Oct 18:48
Quote:
sadindiefreak, Tue 13 Oct 18:34
Quote:
GG Riva, Tue 13 Oct 12:36
No one can say with absolute certainty whether an independent Scotland would be better or worse off than remaining in the UK, but a YES vote is the only sure fire way of ridding ourselves of Tory rule for evermore.
I rest my case m'lud......
Eta. I just read my way through this whole thread and have to say desparado's longish post on 28th August was one of the best blogs I've ever read on any subject.
Brilliant. 🙂
Possibly not for evermore. You never know they may get in her one day but we can vote them out. As it is we can't vote anyone out unless the people of England also feel the same.
In 120 years of the Labour Party they have been in power for only 36 of them and 16 of them were "new Labour" so Tory in all but name.
So only 20 years out of 120 have been under an ideology I would support.
That's why I want Independence.
I may be guilty of using a bit of poetic licence with my claim, sif, but could you ever see the Tories ever becoming the biggest party in Scotland, under any circumstances?
Scots have a different DNA to the English, many of whom still appear to believe they are some kind of Master Race, currently being contaminated by these pesky foreign immigrants. The Tories tapped in to that mindset for Brexit and the most recent GE.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 14 Oct 21:16
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Wed 14 Oct 16:02
So Wales going to stop people entering the country from Covid hotspots!
Border checks going up?
That'll cause some stooshy!
Welsh are anti-English. Disgraceful. Drakeford is a racist and looks like Harold Bishop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Wed 14 Oct 23:23
GG Riva,
Poetic licence? Don.t adopt the Scottish cringe! If anything you were too kind on a Labour Party which has held true to its mission: to prevent the outbreak of socialism in the UK. This is has done magnificently, bar a few blips, for over a century. Keir Starmer will clearly prolong this great tradition. Long live the Queen.
Where I have doubts is with Nicola Sturgeon.s SNP. It is a petit bourgeois party devoted more to a concept than economic reform. Being bossed around by freemasons does not seem much better to me than being booted around by Oxbridge types like Johnson. Am I expected to go to the barricades for Sturgeon and her husband? I doubt few will do that.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Thu 15 Oct 06:21
Quote:
sammer, Wed 14 Oct 23:23
GG Riva,
Poetic licence? Don.t adopt the Scottish cringe! If anything you were too kind on a Labour Party which has held true to its mission: to prevent the outbreak of socialism in the UK. This is has done magnificently, bar a few blips, for over a century. Keir Starmer will clearly prolong this great tradition. Long live the Queen.
Where I have doubts is with Nicola Sturgeon.s SNP. It is a petit bourgeois party devoted more to a concept than economic reform. Being bossed around by freemasons does not seem much better to me than being booted around by Oxbridge types like Johnson. Am I expected to go to the barricades for Sturgeon and her husband? I doubt few will do that.
I don't know why I even used the term 'poetic licence', Sammer, when I really wanted to convey that I was taking liberties, so the more accurate term would have been hyperbole.
I'm happy enough with the rest of my previous post. I just can't see the Scottish electorate ever voting for a Tory Government. Yes, there was a time when almost every man and his dog voted Labour, but that's long gone now, not due in any way to a change in the Scottish mindset, but rather to the incompetence and complacency of the Labour party.
Putting up a monkey as the Labour candidate for Cowdenbeath wouldn't cut it now. 🙂
Not your average Sunday League player.
Post Edited (Thu 15 Oct 06:22)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 15 Oct 08:22
Labour in Scotland died when they got into bed with the tories in 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Fri 16 Oct 06:37
Quote:
sammer, Wed 14 Oct 23:23
GG Riva,
>Poetic licence? Don.t adopt the Scottish cringe! If anything you were too kind on a Labour Party which has held true to its mission: to prevent the outbreak of socialism in the UK. This is has done magnificently, bar a few blips, for over a century. Keir Starmer will clearly prolong this great tradition. Long live the Queen.
Where I have doubts is with Nicola Sturgeon.s SNP. It is a petit bourgeois party devoted more to a concept than economic reform. Being bossed around by freemasons does not seem much better to me than being booted around by Oxbridge types like Johnson. Am I expected to go to the barricades for Sturgeon and her husband? I doubt few will do that.<
There are many aspects of the SNP I am not happy with. Don’t think I would go to the barricades for the Murrells either, but as SNP are the only vehicle that are even remotely likely to win independence then they get my vote every time. The only way Scotland can shape its own future is with independence. I struggle to get my head round why there are still so many so called proud Scots against having their own people running their own country.
Sure there will be problems and issues and political shenanigans in an independent Scotland as there are in England and many other countries, but we will be able to do something about it at the ballot box, something that we can’t really do as part of the U.K.
An independent Scotland can be the kind of country the people of Scotland want it to be. As part of the U.K. Scotland will always be the kind of Country sic that WM wants it to be.
What kind of aspiration for your nation is the latter ?
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 16 Oct 08:20
Good post desparado
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 16 Oct 12:52
I'm not convinced by the SNP but that doesn't mean I'm not in favour of independence. One thing that needs made clear in any future campaign is that in a referendum you are voting for independence, not the SNP. They are simply an enabling party. After independence we could have whoever we like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Thaipar
Date: Fri 16 Oct 14:03
Quote:
jake89, Fri 16 Oct 12:52
I'm not convinced by the SNP but that doesn't mean I'm not in favour of independence. One thing that needs made clear in any future campaign is that in a referendum you are voting for independence, not the SNP. They are simply an enabling party. After independence we could have whoever we like.
I think in fairness the 1st elected party will be the SNP as there are no other party's in Scotland at the moment either big enough or capable of running the country. A few more party's will pop up am sure but as it is looking only a 1 horse race.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 16 Oct 14:17
The more I think about it the more I am convinced that, certainly for the Tories, the Union is a way for them to keep a toehold on power in a part of GB where they know they have no chance of being elected. It.s nothing to do with the Scottish people or what they want, it.s what is best for the Tory party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 16 Oct 16:57
I am in agreement with most of the recent points raised above. I voted for independence last time round and would do so again in future. Desperado and jake89 are right to remind me that independence is the start of a process, not its culmination.
It is this issue that raised my original concern. To maintain broad support the SNP has to find a balance between inspiring citizens with a vision of a new future while at the same time reassuring the electorate that things will keep ticking along much as before. But for me, the SNP is too intent on delivering the safety first message. Given that the other parties oppose independence there is a something of a vacuum in relation to how an independent Scotland would handle matters such as currency, pensions, land ownership, housing, energy, membership of NATO.
I’m sure many of us have our pipe dreams of what an independent Scotland would be like, whether that be a tartan Norway, a cold water Cuba or a saltire Singapore. These will all dissolve the minute an intransigent UK government refuses to countenance another referendum, or refuses to acknowledge one that takes place. In the event of such a constitutional crisis it is imperative that the people supporting independence have a clear, shared sense of a future well within their grasp the better to steel their resolve. However, if that future is seen as little different from what we have at present, then the cause of independence can be easily contained.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 17 Oct 09:43
If Westminster doesn.t grant a referendum then I reckon nothing much will happen. Like Sammer suggests the difference independence will make to people.s lives just isn.t great enough to prompt direct action. The risk reward ratio just doesn.t make it viable.
There is some talk of Holyrood just organising its own referendum but that just wouldn.t work. One it wouldn.t be recognised by international bodies, especially the EU. Secondly what would then stop any region of Scotland holding its own unofficial referendum, perhaps the Shetlands or the Borders. Maybe they.ll be persuaded to do so by the UK government and then they are annexed by the UK military.
No the only way independence can be secured is by a referendum agreed upon by all parties. All is not lost though. Peaceful protests that see 3.5. of the population engaged have never failed to bring about change. So if 200,000 take to the streets for a sustained period it wouldn.t take long for the call to be answered. Mind you if the footballs on that day and the latest series on Netflix needs to be binged then it might not be so easy.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Sat 17 Oct 10:06
If Westminster really reject any call for a referendum then I'm all for protests and civil discourse honestly. french connection the Tories and french connection Labour
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Sat 17 Oct 18:23
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 17 Oct 09:43
If Westminster doesn.t grant a referendum then I reckon nothing much will happen. Like Sammer suggests the difference independence will make to people.s lives just isn.t great enough to prompt direct action. The risk reward ratio just doesn.t make it viable.
There is some talk of Holyrood just organising its own referendum but that just wouldn.t work. One it wouldn.t be recognised by international bodies, especially the EU. Secondly what would then stop any region of Scotland holding its own unofficial referendum, perhaps the Shetlands or the Borders. Maybe they.ll be persuaded to do so by the UK government and then they are annexed by the UK military.
No the only way independence can be secured is by a referendum agreed upon by all parties. All is not lost though. Peaceful protests that see 3.5. of the population engaged have never failed to bring about change. So if 200,000 take to the streets for a sustained period it wouldn.t take long for the call to be answered. Mind you if the footballs on that day and the latest series on Netflix needs to be binged then it might not be so easy.
So what you are saying TOWK is that SNP can win every election , the polls can be consistently in favour of Independence and if WM keeps saying NO then there is nothing we can do ? Really ? Democracy ?
I am no constitutional expert but I have read loads these past few years and there are very few instances where a country achieved its independence with a referendum. If WM says NO after the Holyrood election, assuming an SNP majority, then Scotgov have no choice but to organise their own referendum. If it’s boycotted by Unionists so be it.
I think you will find that going down that route would be recognised by the UN, so no worries what the EU think. Although I have a feeling that they might sit on the fence rather than be opposed to it. Ultimately its the people of Scotlands right to decide their own future and if WM won’t play ball then we will have to go down the Plan B route.
The right to self determination is not dictated by domestic law ( and certainly not English Law)but by international law.
Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, enables a state to get out of its treaty obligations when circumstances change radically.
I would suggest that that is indeed the case in Scotland with Brexit and now with the Internal Market Bill.
If SNP win a majority next year they better be ready to start “ fighting dirty” because they will get nowhere by playing by Perfidious Albions rules.
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: pacifist
Date: Sat 17 Oct 19:44
What has changed is 10 opinion polls in a row putting the yes campaign in front. That has never happened before and changes everything.
The SNP winning in Holyroood is pretty hefty but an election which is about who runs Holyrood and involves electing candidates can.t be seen as a referendum because there are too many different reasons why people vote.
So, it requires a referendum. The notion the tories can deny this is laughable. Everyone knows this. They are spinning like mad and the lie about "once in a generation" is laughable. If that is to be treated as serious then so has the claim that "the only way to stay in the EU is to vote no. "
I reckon the HUGE question is why they are so determined to keep us in the first place. It is in direct conflict with what they say about Scotland. We are financially inept and every one of us gets £2k more spent on us than England.
Kinda doesn.t make sense or logic that the UK with over £2 trillion debt is twisting and fibbing at every turn desperately keen to keep the 5.4 million people (1/12th of the population) who they say are responsible for a lot of it.
So, the tories are in an absolute mess with every argument in terms of consistency or logic. And labour? They are even in a worse position because their demise was directly related to "better together" and they haven.t changed despite awful election results and opinion polls.
As far as I am concerned there has to be and will be a referendum and only an utter fool would try to deny it. Things have changed hugely since 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sat 17 Oct 20:35
superb pacifist
I have said many times on here why oh why are the Tory party so desperate to keep us ?
A Country they have treated as cannon fodder since time and memorial
Do they want to keep us because we are a drain on their natural resources ?
Maybe we are a drain on their economic stability ?
Its coming ...Its gathering momentum
It won.t be long until England are buying Electricity and water from Scotland instead of stealing it
Even without oil we are a rich Country
Just lets hope we can keep the pound :)
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Sat 17 Oct 21:13
Aye the big red bus amount during the Brexit vote leave campaign is actually less than they pay to subsidise the ungrateful jocks ....yet they fight to continue these payments to their North Britain colony......weird eh ?
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Sat 17 Oct 21:17
Keep the pound? I really hope not. Once Scotland leaves the UK the pound will tank
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sun 18 Oct 00:03
It would be safe to assume that on their past record in Northern Ireland, the UK state has many agents or sympathisers within influential positions of the SNP. So let us all be careful.
When we are offered some Good Friday compromise let us not be blind. And when others are encouraged to act without the law, and commit outrages, let them not be blind either.
That is why a clear sense of a future independent Scotland needs to be presented to the populace to avoid these problems .If Nicola Sturgeon leads a regime which cannot do this then she will face the wrath of the UK state and be pushed aside, to become no more influential than Bernadette Devlin.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 20 Oct 14:05
They.re getting worried!
From the Guardian -
According to a Bloomberg story by Alberto Nardelli and Tim Ross, senior Tories, including the Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove, have been considering a 21-page memo exploring what the government can do to counter the rise in support for Scottish independence. It will make grim reading for Tory unionists. Here is an extract covering the analysis in the memo.
“If the SNP builds on this momentum then the endpoint could be a full-blown constitutional crisis or a second independence referendum,” the report said. “Either of these outcomes would consume significant political capital for the government” ...
One way of trying to break the link between independence and remaining in the single market is by “co-opting the EU into demonstrating that there is no viable pathway to renewed membership,” the report said.
Brexit has changed the game and makes the conventional argument against a rerun of the 2014 referendum -- that it was a “once in a generation” vote -- no longer effective, it said. “Put simply, there are not enough Leave voters to convert to the ‘No’ side to make up for the movement of Remain voters into the ‘Yes’ camp,” the report said.
And this is what the story says about the recommendations in the memo.
The memo offers three steps the U.K. government could take to mitigate the pressure: “New accommodation, new constitutional settlement, and cooperation rather than confrontation.” It describes the first step as a “velvet no” that rejects a referendum in the short term and buys time.
The government should instead focus on a “Four Nations, One Country” policy by transferring further financial powers, differentiation on policies connected to the EU vote, such as immigration.
Commenting on the report, the SNP’s deputy leader at Westminster, Kirsten Oswald, said:
This leaked memo reveals that the Tories are in panic mode because people in Scotland know Boris Johnson’s government can’t be trusted to act in Scotland’s interests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 20 Oct 14:23
And this -
The leading psephologist Prof Sir John Curtice has written a blog about the latest polling on this topic which is invaluable for anyone following this issue closely.
Here are some of his main points.
Curtice says nine polls in a row have put Yes ahead which is “a wholly unprecedented picture” - even if it is too early yet to know whether the Ipsos MORI poll putting support for independence at 58. (a record high) was evidence of a trend and not just an outlier.
He says that whereas in 2014 men were much more likely to favour independence than women, that gender gap has disappeared, and now women are just as enthusiastic.
He says that polls now suggest people in their teens or 20s are strongly in favour of independence, in a way they weren’t six years ago. He says:
On average, polls conducted since June have put support for independence among those aged 16-24 as high as 79. – compared with 56. among those aged 35-44 and just 33. among the over 65s. Most of those in the pollsters’ youngest age group of under 25s were too young to vote six years ago – and if those who enter the electorate anew continue to support Yes so heavily in future years then, other things being equal, it will with every passing year become gradually more difficult for No to win any second referendum ballot.
He says people who do not have a firm view about independence - roughly a quarter of voters - are particularly likely to be pro-EU, and particularly likely to see how Brexit evolves before making up their minds on independence.
He says even among those who voted Yes in 2014 only 30. think an independent Scotland should keep the pound in the short term before launching a separate currency - despite this being the SNP’s policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Tue 20 Oct 14:49
Its coming
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Tue 20 Oct 18:22
We may be quicker giving England the vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: shrek par
Date: Tue 20 Oct 22:50
I'm very much of the opinion that people are more receptive now to the ability to self determine than ever before. Even if the cost to do so may be initially painful, financially. I started as a definite No in 2013 and swung over just before the 2014 indyref. The battle lies in the middle ground and will be fought over the financial implications of indy and the long term plans for growth and recovery. Post indy there I would like there to be an element of federalism to keep everyone happy otherwise we will be swapping the London centric outlook for a central belt centric one. In addition co-opting the correct people from regular employment into govt departments on a fixed term secondment to aid recovery and growth may also be something that pays dividends rather than getting nodding dogs into posts they know nothing about. Present the right argument in the right way with no brave heart singing shortbread tin may well be the winning formula to win over the moderates in the middle ground
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 21 Oct 11:47
Spot on about the central-belt, Shrekpar. We don't want to swap London for Edinburgh/Glasgow. That's why I'd want the SNP out as soon as we have independence. I want a party in that focuses on all of Scotland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Wed 21 Oct 13:41
It wasn't the SNP who chose Edinburgh for the parliament, and I believe they have moved some of the civil servants out of the central belt
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 21 Oct 17:03
I'd need to check, but I think it was Labour who moved civil and public sector jobs out of Edinburgh/Glasgow. I'm not aware of the SNP moving any jobs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 21 Oct 17:10
Just checked. Under the SNP, civil service jobs in the central belt have gone up, not down. In Fife there are single figure civil servants. Fife is the third largest population in Scotland. It's laughable. Dundee should be getting some social security jobs but it's the crumbs from the table.
This isn't unique to the SNP but it needs to stop. The public sector should be leading by example and locating outside Edinburgh and Glasgow. Both have issues with congestion caused by people commuting from outside, so why not put some of these jobs outside? 10,000 more homes in Dunfermline, another couple of thousand in Kirkcaldy. Where do they think these new home owners will work?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 22 Oct 07:23
Quote:
jake89, Wed 21 Oct 17:10
Just checked. Under the SNP, civil service jobs in the central belt have gone up, not down. In Fife there are single figure civil servants. Fife is the third largest population in Scotland. It's laughable. Dundee should be getting some social security jobs but it's the crumbs from the table.
This isn't unique to the SNP but it needs to stop. The public sector should be leading by example and locating outside Edinburgh and Glasgow. Both have issues with congestion caused by people commuting from outside, so why not put some of these jobs outside? 10,000 more homes in Dunfermline, another couple of thousand in Kirkcaldy. Where do they think these new home owners will work?
In their spare bedrooms?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 22 Oct 11:12
Touche 😂
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Tue 17 Nov 08:25
From Aunty :-
Boris Johnson has come under fire for reportedly telling a virtual meeting of Conservative MPs that devolution had been a "disaster" in Scotland.
Mr Johnson also reportedly described it as predecessor Tony Blair`s "biggest mistake".
A Downing Street source said: "The PM has always supported devolution, but Tony Blair failed to foresee the rise of separatists in Scotland.
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 17 Nov 09:34
The ubiquitous Douglas Ross was not available this morning when BBC Scotland asked for his take on his master`s comments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Tue 17 Nov 11:45
Is he away refereeing again, or hiding in a freezer with BOJO?🤔😷😷😷
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Tue 17 Nov 13:39
Funny how the unionist party's support devolution until a nationalist party democratically wins power.
Then it's "a disaster"
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Riquende
Date: Sun 22 Nov 00:44
So... I`m English. In 2014 I wondered why the referendum was even happening, and I was glad that Scotland stayed as part of the Union. But the nightmare developments since, with a horrific Tory Brexit leading the charge? I can understand now why anyone who can would separate themselves from the path ideologically deficient current Westminster is set on carving.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: dander par
Date: Mon 23 Nov 19:40
Quote:
jake89, Wed 27 May 19:33
Ipsos Mori poll suggesting more than 50% want a referendum within next 5 years with over a third wanting one sooner.
They're relating this back to COVID so expect those percentages may drop again but interesting to see the effect of the current situation.
Ipsos mori in Latin means They die . Crazy how that can get on a government peice of paper alongside nhs
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: dander par
Date: Mon 23 Nov 19:42
Quote:
Buspasspar, Tue 17 Nov 08:25
From Aunty :-
Boris Johnson has come under fire for reportedly telling a virtual meeting of Conservative MPs that devolution had been a "disaster" in Scotland.
Mr Johnson also reportedly described it as predecessor Tony Blair`s "biggest mistake".
A Downing Street source said: "The PM has always supported devolution, but Tony Blair failed to foresee the rise of separatists in Scotland.
How could anyone side with Hitler sturgeon nowadays. She is hellbent on seeing economy fail .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 23 Nov 20:23
``How could anyone side with Hitler sturgeon nowadays. She is hellbent on seeing economy fail .``
But so is Johnson and all the other world leaders apart from Trump according to you so why should we `side with` him? Don`t you realise how daft your theory of world domination is? I hope for your sake you`re trolling although that`s a pretty sad activity too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 23 Nov 21:44
Must be hidden meaning their, dander. Or it could be an outcome of a merger some years ago between Ipsos and MORI. I can't recall what it stands for but it's something like Marketing Orientated Research Institute.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 24 Nov 02:06
Facts are a bitch 🙃
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Tue 24 Nov 06:17
Quote:
dander par, Mon 23 Nov 19:42
Quote:
Buspasspar, Tue 17 Nov 08:25
From Aunty :-
Boris Johnson has come under fire for reportedly telling a virtual meeting of Conservative MPs that devolution had been a "disaster" in Scotland.
Mr Johnson also reportedly described it as predecessor Tony Blair`s "biggest mistake".
A Downing Street source said: "The PM has always supported devolution, but Tony Blair failed to foresee the rise of separatists in Scotland.
How could anyone side with Hitler sturgeon nowadays. She is hellbent on seeing economy fail .
Unlike you giving your 4 mates £100 each
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: back oh the net
Date: Wed 25 Nov 13:10
Quote:
dander par, Mon 23 Nov 19:42
Quote:
Buspasspar, Tue 17 Nov 08:25
From Aunty :-
Boris Johnson has come under fire for reportedly telling a virtual meeting of Conservative MPs that devolution had been a "disaster" in Scotland.
Mr Johnson also reportedly described it as predecessor Tony Blair`s "biggest mistake".
A Downing Street source said: "The PM has always supported devolution, but Tony Blair failed to foresee the rise of separatists in Scotland.
How could anyone side with Hitler sturgeon nowadays. She is hellbent on seeing economy fail .
You’ll be moving to England once we are independent then eh?........nah thought not
Come on ye pars ⚽️
|
|
|
|
|
|
