Will RoUK really give up some of its financial freedom to the independant Scots?

Graham_Devon

kabayiri wrote: »

If there is a substantial "No" majority, the galling thing is just how much political capital Westminster politicians might spin out of this. This might just be Cameron's Falkland moment...

I really do doubt it.

From all the responses on here and all the responses I see in the news from the rest of the UK population, there isn't much political spin to be had.

Rather than "winning a political argument", most of us, I believe, will just be relieved Scotland saw sense and we can stop paying for this nonsense. Though there would of course always be a nagging wish that we'd seen independence take place...just to see how it panned out.

I believe Scotland may well do well to go independent. There is something quite unique about Scotland and that comes through. The distaste for England is quite clear (and I don't mean in a racist way, just there is a clear difference of wants).

However, I think the way the SNP and some of the supporters are going about it, believing that everyone else will simply plead with Scotland to do deals with them is far fetched, to say the least.

zagubov

kabayiri wrote: »

I think you're right.

You seem to be arguing for 'evolution not revolution'.

We shouldn't be surprised. Politics often descends to lowest common denominator options.

If there is a substantial "No" majority, the galling thing is just how much political capital Westminster politicians might spin out of this. This might just be Cameron's Falkland moment...

It won't be like that. It'll be a very close No or Yes. Most of the people I know up there are in the no camp. But get them talking and you hear them doubting whether to trust the unionist parties to run a bath. They don't trust the Nats either but in a grudging way they respect them and they act surprised about how well they're running the place.

Westminster were too scared to allow for devo max as they knew they'd get their hand bitten off. In reality it could have been the way forwrd. No particular cost to the rUK. But there wasn't a particular unionist party to push for it. Result is the proper answer won't be offered and the UK may well split. Which I'd see as unnecessary and a shame.

Shakethedisease

I agree with that Zav.. my husband is English, and we've spent most of our married life down there until 5 years ago when we moved back up near my home town. He cannot stand Alex Salmond and the ( as he see's it ) whole flag waving Saltire stuff..

However, he's probably going to grit his teeth and vote yes. Simply because he's so disillusioned with the Westminster 'lot'.. if I can put it that way, and the fact that there's not much between any of them in terms of policies. He also does have a very grudging respect for the way the SNP have run things up here as well. There are many like him in my family and social circle. Die hard old school 'Labourites' ( like my dad and his pub buds ) , the not particularly politically minded but don't like the privatisation of the NHS ( my nursing friends ).. I could go on. But it does seem like there is a fair proportion of people who 'just want things to change' ! And are willing to put an X in the Yes box, just hoping that things will ( and for the better ). Fairytales or not, at least the white paper has offered a bit of that.

The currency thing ? I think personally it was a poisoned chalice for the SNP/Yes camp anyway. If they'd said ' Oh yes we'll have a new currency too'.. it would've caused MUCH more in the way of consternation and dire warnings of doom and 'what if's' than just simply saying 'we're keeping the pound by the way'. It's easier. They would've been hung out to dry whatever they said. May as well just be honest about that in terms of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't'.

And The EU, really ? I honestly fail to see why intelligent people waste so much time going on, and on, and on about this ( even in this thread ) about 'the uncertainty', ' have to join the euro', 'the Spanish Prime Minister says', 'They'll have to re-apply' blah blah....When David Cameron has commited to an 'in-out' referendum the year following ! With Labour a bit undecided on the whole thing. So, Scotland votes 'yes' and get's kicked out.. oh that's soooo terrible'.. or Scotland votes 'no' and a UK wide referendum may have us all out anyway. It's all 'uncertain' regarding the EU for the UK as a whole, never mind Scotland. So not sure why you guys keep making such a meal of it ? Give up with that one. It's a lottery either way as part of the UK or not.

vivatifosi

Shakethedisease wrote: »

And The EU, really ? I honestly fail to see why intelligent people waste so much time going on, and on, and on about this ( even in this thread ) about 'the uncertainty', ' have to join the euro', 'the Spanish Prime Minister says', 'They'll have to re-apply' blah blah....When David Cameron has commited to an 'in-out' referendum the year following ! With Labour a bit undecided on the whole thing. So, Scotland votes 'yes' and get's kicked out.. oh that's soooo terrible'.. or Scotland votes 'no' and a UK wide referendum may have us all out anyway. It's all 'uncertain' regarding the EU for the UK as a whole, never mind Scotland. So not sure why you guys keep making such a meal of it ? Give up with that one. It's a lottery either way as part of the UK or not.

Starting a "new" country is all about treaties, relationships, trade and the such like, whether you're Scotland, Slovakia, South Sudan or East Timor. If people vote against independence then these things don't matter, vote in favour and they do.

Rajoy is a nasty, vituperous piece of work who a) doesn't like Britain because he wants Gibraltar, b) is worried that an independent Scotland will lead to similar campaigns from Catalunya, the Basque Country, etc. He will do what he can to make things as uncomfortable as he can for an independent Scotland, whether in or out.

The crazy thing is, if you speak to Catalans, their position is very similar to that of the Scots... they would rather have a devo max type arrangement than independence for the most part and think Rajoy is a jerk, and not just over his handling of Gibraltar but the way he is handling all sorts of issues.

The timing of this is hardly accidental. Of course Cameron knew issues like currency would come out in Scotland, so Scots get to be the experiment in the petrie dish to warn rest of UK off going it alone.

My personal view is that devo max should have been an option, but there you go.

Generali

vivatifosi wrote: »

Starting a "new" country is all about treaties, relationships, trade and the such like, whether you're Scotland, Slovakia, South Sudan or East Timor. If people vote against independence then these things don't matter, vote in favour and they do.

The thing is, the SNP seem to be saying with this document, "it's ok, all sorted. We've got a currency in place and (effectively) a treaty in place with our major trading partners". The reality is that's rubbish and starting to unravel.

Loughton_Monkey

vivatifosi wrote: »

.....The crazy thing is, if you speak to Catalans, their position is very similar to that of the Scots.......

... "very similar" meaning 'exactly'. Both 'groups' are a bunch of crazed revolutionaries, who speak differently, eat differently, and wear funny hats...

These Basques are only upset about the great Bullring disaster of 800 AD when thousands of them burnt in a raging fire because [pre Health & Safety] there was only one small gate to get out...... proving that you shouldn't put all your Basques into one exit.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

It's one of many reasons why Scots will vote no. Most of them simply aren't stupid or naive enough to vote yes.

Quite strong words Generali and if I may say so, your usually balanced view does appear to be a bit one sided on this occasion (In my opinion).
Maybe this is based on your historical knowledge and your current location to be make an informed opinion

I will be voting yes, however I expect the no vote to prevail.

I'm sure if we did get independence, there would be a period of initial hardship, maybe even for the remainder of my life.
I simply believe in having the power to determine ones own future.

I have not heard anything positive from the no campaign, it's purely been based on negative campaigning rather than saying what the positives are for keeping the union.

Sure the SNP and the Greens are spinning the positives as per any political manifesto should be.
I see no problem with aspiring tough targets and goals that we wish to achieve.

In my profession, I articulated a realistic target for revenue expectation and was given a goal of stretching that by 20%.
My initial perception was that this was impossible and indeed I did fail to meet the stretch target.
What I achieved was 19.6% above and was an important lesson to me that setting tough stretch goals may not always be achievable, but focusing and trying to achieve said goals still can produce a positive result.

Scotland has a population and economy similar to other successful independent nations and I have yet to hear why an independent Scotland would not prevail.

Overall, I wish politicians would focus on what they want to achieve rather than negative campaigning.

For example, the SNP may not achieve their ambitious target of 100% energy provided by renewable energy in 2020, but if they achieve 90% or 95%, although failing to meet the stretch target and could be considered a failure, it still is a fantastic progression towards self sustainability.

kabayiri

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

...
I have not heard anything positive from the no campaign, it's purely been based on negative campaigning rather than saying what the positives are for keeping the union.
...

Hasn't every recent political campaign been predominantly negative in nature?

How can anyone forget slogans like "Labour isn't working".

Every insurance salesperson under the sun will tell you that fear is a very powerful emotion to tap into.

IveSeenTheLight

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

They did a poll on the street and one 16-19 year old girl said "I think we should give it a go and see what happens". Hmnn, and it if all goes terribly wrong, what then? No wonder the SNP wanted 16 year olds to be allowed to vote.

An arguable debate is why 16 and 17 year olds should not be allowed to vote.

If they can pay taxes and fight for ones country, I think they should be allowed the opportunity to vote for the party of their choice.

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

* There is a conspiracy theory that hard-core Conservatives actually want Scotland to break away because most of Labour's support will go with them. We'll have Conservative governments forever, and with the Labour's 'spend spend spend' benefit culture and immigration open doors policies, would that be such a bad thing?

You have to question why the Conservatives want to keep the union.
If your looking at conspiracy theories, you have to consider the consideration of independence of the 70's and the "fact's" that were portrayed then

zagubov

BobQ wrote: »

The enclosed is a fairly balanced explanation of the minefield into which Scottish independence would lead and the problems it could cause RoUK and the rest of the EU.


http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmfaff/643/64306.htm#a2

If you want to know if it's balanced, check whether it takes the rUK's side on every issue, as it's paid for by Westminster.

Strong on assertions, selective on precedents and choosy about sources. Much the same accusations have been made about the SG's white paper, so let's not be too quick to label this as impartial.