An Independent Scotland?

I stumbled across these historical minutes from 1706, from the debate when Scotland was judging whether to enter the union; ;)

1) What will happen to critical whale oil supplies?
Answer: No-one knows. This is a fundamental question for the future of Scotland, and an answer has not been provided.

2) Will the Scottish groat still be used, or must the newly created Bank of England become involved?
Answer: No-one knows! This question, critical for groat-hoarders, has not been answered.

3) What will happen to the sixteen Scottish mints located around the country? Can we continue to mint our own silver coins?
Answer: No-one knows!

4) What will become of our Darien scheme? This is the jewel in the crown of Scotland, and will be sold off to England?
Answer: No-one knows! This issue of key importance has not yet been defined.

I could go on. It's tongue in cheek of course, but today clearly whale oil, the groat, our mints, the Darien scheme, tobacco trading, etc are matters of historic curiosity. I'm sure they were seen as overriding at the time, and could easily have clouded the debate (indeed arguably did so), but with hindsight we can see how the waves of history put these into perspective.

Will we allow details to obscure our vision again? Things such as passports, the domicile of banks and whether we allow them to keep fleecing us, the immediate impact in terms of how we keep score in terms of "money tokens" - in the grand scheme of things those are secondary, even tertiary details. Necessary to be worked out, but AFTER a judgement has been taken in terms of the direction of self-determination, and not allowing these near-term issues to obscure long-term vision and benefit. Today RBS may seem of incredible importance, but it is perhaps only today's Darien scheme.

A country is just an idea. Money is an idea. The current banking dominated economy is just a collection of ideas. All of these can be changed - and unless we have run out of better ideas, all of these can be improved upon.

I personally have faith that we haven't run out of ideas, and that society can come up with better structures than those we currently have - this is not our peak, not by far. However to actually make those improvements we have to challenge and change the status quo. Self determination is merely a start to that, but a critical first step.
 
I don't actually think the SNP being elected to power in an independent Scotland is a done deal at all. Scotland is a traditionally Labour/left wing oriented country and it's more than possible we'd have a Labour government after the first elections.
 
Steep said:
it's more than possible we'd have a Labour government after the first elections.
Click to expand...
Given the current incumbents of that failing conglomerate, you have just highlighted my biggest single fear with independence. My hope is for a new style of pragmatism in Holyrood without party lines and whips.
 
gman said:
I think it's fairly obvious that the SNP (and worse Salmond) will be in control should Scotland go independent.

My comments aren't straight from the "Fear Campaign" although ironically I'm seeing an awful lot of comments here that are almost word for word that came from the panel at a "Pro Yes" meeting I attended a month ago in order to keep an open mind by hearing from both sides. For me there just seems to be far too much rhetoric and not enough figures. There were people standing up and shouting that "we need to get up off our knees and start fighting this properly". I rolled my eyes and wondered if I stood out for not have a painted saltire on my face.

I appreciate it can be difficult to provide accurate figures for something where there are so many unknowns, however, the currency would be a good starting point as the value of almost everything is directly linked to the value of your currency. I also don't seem to hear very much in the way of new contracts and investments (along with the relevant financial information) promised for an independent Scotland. Surely if this independence were such a good thing then there would be hordes of companies lining up to setup in Scotland? Things like this would help reassure people that Scotland is planning for the best and not just hoping for the best.



Anyway, here's some interesting reading:

Points 1 to 9 may, or not be, relevant.



10 Will any of this influence the referendum?
No. Despite the furore generated by Standard Life’s announcement, the Scottish independence referendum is not principally about finance, commerce or economics. It is about identity, passion and a sense of belonging.
All the country’s banks, asset managers, insurers and pension providers can do is remain sitting atop a very high fence, plan for the possibility of ending up on either side and treat anyone who claims to have answers to the above questions with a dose of healthy scepticism.
Click to expand...

"It is about identity, passion and a sense of belonging. .......... Is it ? - as a Scot I don't think so. I have spoken to many folk who agree with me. Perhaps the Wallace, Bonnie Prince Charlie tripe / heather and haggis brigade and the other historical types see it like that, but as a very hard headed Scot (like most of us are) we see things as very simple - as to what best puts money in our pockets and food on the table. It surely is not breaking up a successful union then handing control over to dodgepots in Europe as the likes of Salmond and Sturgeon propose .

Substantial NO vote is what will happen.

Doug
 
I think I'd prefer the SNP rather than Labour!

Anyway, to steer away from politics I do feel that those who want it for perhaps, should we say emotional reasons, sound rather anti English? It will of course be denied.

Everyone is entitled to their say, thoughts and opinions of course but no matter what, I do feel that it will be interesting which ever way the vote goes.
 
Cuddy said:
An interesting article in the Independant today, 67% of Scotlands oil and gas reserves are supposed to be in this area.
Click to expand...
Interesting perhaps, but mischief making all the same. The islands would only have a 12-mile territorial limit if they were 'independent' and none of the oil reserves are that close to them.
 
arclight said:
"It is about identity, passion and a sense of belonging. .......... Is it ? - as a Scot I don't think so. I have spoken to many folk who agree with me. Perhaps the Wallace, Bonnie Prince Charlie tripe / heather and haggis brigade and the other historical types see it like that, but as a very hard headed Scot (like most of us are) we see things as very simple - as to what best puts money in our pockets and food on the table. It surely is not breaking up a successful union then handing control over to dodgepots in Europe as the likes of Salmond and Sturgeon propose .

Substantial NO vote is what will happen.

Doug
Click to expand...

I'd sacrifice some of the forecasted wealth of independence for the union. Its worth it, infact I'd pay more to retain it than hand it to nationalists and Europe. I know the majority of our English, Welsh and Irish brothers and sisters are with us!
 
FourRingCircus said:
...I'd venture the fear campaign from Westminster has instilled many of the questions you have asked in many people whose heart says 'Yes', but you may not have asked yourself the simplest of questions....
Click to expand...

There is no 'project fear' campaign running from Westminster. There is however, a campaign being run by the SNP to label inconvenient real world issues (EU/Currency) or things they would rather not talk about as being fear-mongering though. Its quite obvious why they are doing this as it means they don't have to deal with real world issues/concerns. They can deal in projected fantasy instead. The so called SNP ASS strategy; Alec Says So.

Regards...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
Finste said:
There is no 'project fear' campaign running from Westminster.
Click to expand...
Just as there wasn't in the seventies.....until the files were declassified and we find that there was.

Surely we're all worldly wise enough to see that there MUST be a fear campaign from the state, which inevitably means there will be similar obfuscation from the Yes side. As I've said elsewhere, there'll be no "truth" spoken in the campaign, just whatever statement is calculated to chase enough voters into the desired flock - by both sides.
 
give it 30 years when the oil has run out and they won't GAF if Scotland remains in the union.
 
AndyB1976 said:
I'd sacrifice some of the forecasted wealth of independence for the union. Its worth it, infact I'd pay more to retain it than hand it to nationalists and Europe. I know the majority of our English, Welsh and Irish brothers and sisters are with us!
Click to expand...

As a Scot, I say that that you are 100% correct. The independendence types are living in cloud cuckoo land. The UK is already grossly over governed. We do not need an already bloated UK parliament plus Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly, Irish Assembly plus all the council govs added on. It is all a seriously expensive system that requires major pruning.
 
arclight said:
As a Scot, I say that that you are 100% correct. The independendence types are living in cloud cuckoo land. The UK is already grossly over governed. We do not need an already bloated UK parliament plus Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly, Irish Assembly plus all the council govs added on. It is all a seriously expensive system that requires major pruning.
Click to expand...

we do however want a government that cares about the rest of the uk not just London which we don't have and won't have.
 
arclight said:
As a Scot, I say that that you are 100% correct. The independendence types are living in cloud cuckoo land. The UK is already grossly over governed. We do not need an already bloated UK parliament plus Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly, Irish Assembly plus all the council govs added on. It is all a seriously expensive system that requires major pruning.
Click to expand...

An independent Scotland would be minus the entire Westminster strata of government, if you want pruned down government vote yes! And leave the UK to make it's own way.
 
Steep said:
An independent Scotland would be minus the entire Westminster strata of government, if you want pruned down government vote yes!
Click to expand...
Ahem. In the interests of factual accuracy:

650 MPs at Westminster = 1 per 97,000 people, or 10 MPs per million people

129 MSPs at Holyrood = 1 per 41,000 people, or 24 MSPs per million people
 
POAH said:
we do however want a government that cares about the rest of the uk not just London which we don't have and won't have.
Click to expand...
Thats a little hard for me to argue as i agree but London is only a relatively speaking small percentage of the whole coupled with the odds you will get greater powers even with a no vote the don't throw the baby out with the bath water comes to mind.
 
border_all said:
I thought your SNP mp,s worked in London some of the time don,t they count
Click to expand...

There are currently six SNP MPs, given a yes vote their jobs along with every other Scottish constituency MPs' job will cease to exist.
 
StewartR said:
Ahem. In the interests of factual accuracy:

650 MPs at Westminster = 1 per 97,000 people, or 10 MPs per million people

129 MSPs at Holyrood = 1 per 41,000 people, or 24 MSPs per million people
Click to expand...

So in the event of a yes vote, Scotland would have only those 129 MSPs, Westminster would no longer be a governing body in Scotland so the 650 MPs who currently have a say in Scottish affairs would not any more. As I said, a whole strata of government we would be saying goodbye to.
 
Steep said:
There are currently six SNP MPs, given a yes vote their jobs along with every other Scottish constituency MPs' job will cease to exist.
Click to expand...
So who would go to London and negotiate the separation of the union, keeping in mind that in the event of a yes vote the electorate of the remaining UK mp's would expect a fair outcome and I for one would expect a referendum upon the proposed settlement of the future countries working nature which I hope you agree I have a right too in the same way as the Scottish people have a right to reject us.
 
Maybe I should have been more specific. In the event of a yes vote (any negotiating would be done by the Scottish government and those others chosen) and 'after' independence those MPs currently holding Scottish seats in Westminster would be unemployed and we up here would have one less layer of government.

If you guys down South want a referendum on your governments relationship with an independent Scotland it would be for you to arrange and would be none of our concern.
 
FourRingCircus said:
Interesting perhaps, but mischief making all the same. The islands would only have a 12-mile territorial limit if they were 'independent' and none of the oil reserves are that close to them.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the same 12 mile limit equally apply to an independent mainland Scotland so what would give Scotland ownership of the oil reserves over the Shetlands for example?
 
This is the same scaremongering that was raked up in the seventies debate (look up Anthony Crosland, Bernhard Ingham on google) - "Scotland under attack from the North!!!". They called it the Shetland card. And people say there's no fear mongering from Westminster....

The 12 mile limit comes from a European ruling. Shetland and Orkney would be consider ed island enclaves of a foreign state (i.e. England (or Norway...?)), and as such permitted a claim to 12 mile territorial waters (plus perhaps an access corridor between). Scotland (as an independent nation) would have the rights to full territorial waters.

Against that is Blair's movement of the territorial waters between Scotland and England (no doubt in anticipation of this debate). That shifted "England's" waters far north, and would claim a lot the territory. Indeed if you stand on the beach at St. Andrews and look east, after a certain distance you are looking at English waters, not Scottish. But the Shetland thing is raked up from the seventies to again cast doubts, and drive a wedge between people (as politicians have been doing since time immemorial - divide and rule, recorded in Roman times, and goes back earlier than that).
 
I really can not understand how so many people in Scotland refer to anything that they perceive as negative in connection to their view is scaremongering

I have not heard anyone say you could not go it alone (In power)

I am not a party activist I do wonder if perhaps a few comments are following SNP official press

I really doubt my personal finances or freedoms will be adversely affected if you separate from the union

My posts in this thread are hugely influenced by my strong wish that the Scottish people remain part of the union perhaps the pluses and minuses are in close balance however it's not possible to predict the future for anyone

The vote is not like the Crimea the views of the majority will be respected my fear is a low turn out maybe 3 million votes 1.6 million say leave that for me means maybe 3.4 million perhaps did not have your strong view

I do respect your yes campaign my gut says you have as much that you may loose as gain if you go its with my best wishes

Please at least consider that many in the stronger together camp Really want you staying not because you can't go but because they would like you staying some do live in Scotland and will be leaving despite wishing to stay

I for one fail in understand why the SNP put the ballot so far away in the first place is it coincidence that elections would follow soon after and it may improve the chance of re election? The possibility of going for such a protracted time must have had some negative impact on the recovery of the whole union.

Hope this does not seem like a rant or scaremongering like your posts it's heart felt and I only ask you consider staying

For the moderators who are letting this thread run I would like to say thank you as an older person in England who uses little social media the opportunity to ask the Scottish to stay is really appreciated

Allan
 
arclight said:
The independendence types are living in cloud cuckoo land. The UK is already grossly over governed. We do not need an already bloated UK parliament plus Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly, Irish Assembly plus all the council govs added on. It is all a seriously expensive system that requires major pruning.
Click to expand...
I can't believe what I've just read. Independence will completely change this and yet, you either think that's cuckoo land or you want to change it from within which isn't going to happen.

Scotland pays £50 million a year towards the cost of running Westminster and the House of Lords. That's a hundred and thirty-seven thousand of yours and my pounds A DAY!!! With independence, we pay nothing towards the costs of Westminster and the House of Lords and it certainly doesn't cost £50m a year to keep Holyrood going. How many families relying on foodbanks in Scotland could be fed for £137,000.00 per day?:mad:
 
Allen, the reason the referendum date was set for September is because it's a huge thing. There has to be plenty of time for everyone to get to grips with the issues involved because this is not a vote for the next four years government, it's a vote for a lifetime!

Much of the stuff that comes out of the no camp, like for instance this latest guff about the Northern isles wanting their own referendum IS pure scaremongering, the islanders have said no such thing!
Osbornes statement about the use of the pound is guff, it's not his decision to make, it was agreed that all items dealing with separation would be dealt with in negotiation 'after' a yes vote.

If some of the comments and information posted in the thread comes from official (SNP or otherwise) statements there's nothing wrong with that as long as the poster feels that they are valid and accurate, or wants to refute them.
 
border_all said:
For the moderators who are letting this thread run I would like to say thank you as an older person in England who uses little social media the opportunity to ask the Scottish to stay is really appreciated
Click to expand...
Allan, this is for you and I hope it helps you to understand my position:

This may be difficult to explain, or difficult to understand, but gaining independence will be the single best thing in my life - even if I may become financially worse-off in the process!

It must be quite hard for people south of the border to fully understand this sentiment, probably because there is a general perception that England=UK, whether intentional or otherwise. You mainly see it as a nasty split or a break-up by a separatist movement of misguided people who are otherwise, the same as you. I see it as a re-determination of a people of a specific nationality or identity or culture, who have never necessarily been the same. I've always been Scottish, even though I was actually born in England as an accident of birth. People may look north and wonder what all the fuss is about, but that's because they only view it from their own perspective. Quite a natural thing to do you may say, but I disagree. I don't think this is something that the English people do as a matter of vindictiveness or in any meaningful way. They just do it as a matter of course - the idea that Scotlandshire is just north Britain. The Americans do it too - "Edinborrow - like in England" or talking about "you people in England" meaning the UK.

I have felt politically subjugated for as long as I've been able to think for myself. Perhaps it's got a lot to do with my upbringing and the social conditioning of the 70's/80's. As a child, most adults I came into contact with were very pro a notion of independence. We have "Flower of Scotland" and "Caledonia" for a very good reason. That's what makes us different. Some may suggest that there's three hundred years of resentment built-up in there, but I'm not one to look backward in such a way. I want to look forward with a positive vision of who I am, as well as what my nation stands for, not as someone who just pays for a boys-club to exist in Westminster to pursue policies I'm at odds with.

I've never once hated 'the English', but I do admit to making jokes about how somebody "must be English" according to how they speak or act. In the same way, I am happy to be termed an ignorant Jock or a haggis munching ginger.

My point here is that we are different, in as much as the French and the Belgians are different. It doesn't stop us being good friends and neighbours and neither it should.

Anyway, I reckon there will be winners across the whole UK if Scotland gains independence. Aside from those, like myself, who will endure the mother of all hangovers after a Yes vote, I sincerely believe that the UK political establishment will be rocked to the core and a new breed of regional politics will come about as a result in rUK. I think that when the dust settles and the people of the North East / North West see what can be achieved on their doorstep, there will no longer be a settled will about the course of mindless disregard for the people of rUK by an elite in Westminster. I see regional devolution and power being returned to the people across England. They may even begin to regain a sense of their own nationality and pride as they become empowered, as a result of Scotland showing what can be done. I sincerely look forward to enjoying a beer with my English friends and celebrating their success at the world cup - it's not something I've relished up to now. Genuinely, I feel we will be the best of friends and neighbours after a Yes.

The whole Westminster machine is corrupt, self-serving and hopelessly out of touch with the electorate. They are there to serve the people, not the other way around.

If Scotland doesn't achieve independence, then I really do fear for the future of the UK, because (like the McCrone Report), when the lies and deceit finally come out in the wash, which they will, the next avenue may well be civil disobedience. The debate has polarised the country in a way which will not just fizzle out on the 19th September. I even believe that there will be many in England who will feel shamed for being party to those lies, as they gobbled them up from Westminster without a thought. When the people see what their own government has done to twist the truth for its own ends, I think only the very hardened core of conservative England will be quiet, whilst the rest will be shamed about what Westminster is currently practising in the name of 'the union'.
 
The tide is still turning..........

mailcrisis.jpg


Those of you who fancy a flutter might be advised to take the chance of better odds while you can. :p

Given the 'apparent' polls, why do you think there is a crisis in the No camp? The answer is that the polls are as wrong on this as they were on the last Holyrood elections.

In 2011, the polls for the Scottish parliament elections gave Labour a clear lead with the SNP floundering some 14 points behind. Then came the landslide victory for the SNP. This was a landslide that was meant to be unachievable in the way the parliament was set-up. At the time, Ipsos MORI said:

The landslide victory by the SNP in last week’s Holyrood election has been variously described by commentators as ‘staggering’, ‘crushing’ and ‘a seismic shift.’ It is even more remarkable given the performance of Labour in Scotland at the 2010 general election and what the polls were reporting up until early 2011

The problem with the polls is their demographic base. Firstly, they are mainly telephone polls from a database at the poll centre. It may come as a surprise, but this database does not contain many C2DE demographics, since many of these people do not even have a home telephone. Furthermore, this social demographic is the least likely to vote in a General Election. However, given that the largest support for independence comes this group, and that they DO specifically turn-out for a referenda, perhaps you will begin to understand why there is a crisis in Westminster and the No campaign.
 
Tabloid hype pish. YES?? It'll never happen!!
 
BRASH said:
Tabloid hype pish. YES?? It'll never happen!!
Click to expand...

As you are well aware, it happened in 1979 and was stolen from us by Westminster. It happened in 1997 when the Scottish Parliament was set-up. It happened in 2011 when the SNP won their landslide and it's going to happen this year when we can finally regain our national identity. The path to independence is virtually guaranteed, only the time-frame is in question. There is nothing to fear except the terminal decline offered by a No vote. The tabloid hype may well be 'pish', but the story behind it is very true. We've had months of scare stories from Westminster and the last crap I heard on the BBC radio headlines was that Kermit the Frog says 'vote No'. You want to talk about 'pish'??? In a week which sees a very important Scottish Constitution being put forward, the BBC reports that an green American cloth puppet is telling us to vote No. THAT'S how desperate the No campaign has become.:rolleyes:
 
Never
FourRingCircus said:
As you are well aware, it happened in 1979 and was stolen from us by Westminster. It happened in 1997 when the Scottish Parliament was set-up. It happened in 2011 when the SNP won their landslide and it's going to happen this year when we can finally regain our national identity. The path to independence is virtually guaranteed, only the time-frame is in question. There is nothing to fear except the terminal decline offered by a No vote. The tabloid hype may well be 'pish', but the story behind it is very true. We've had months of scare stories from Westminster and the last crap I heard on the BBC radio headlines was that Kermit the Frog says 'vote No'. You want to talk about 'pish'??? In a week which sees a very important Scottish Constitution being put forward, the BBC reports that an green American cloth puppet is telling us to vote No. THAT'S how desperate the No campaign has become.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It'll never happen and you know it;). I'd vote for Kermit before the pie eater at Hollyrood.:D
 
Neither of them are on the ballot paper in September.(y)
 
Here's a link to a blog article that says a lot of what I feel is true about the No campaign.

thebabelfishblog.wordpress.com/2014/03/11/would-the-real-no-campaign-please-stand-up-2/
 
Moadib said:
The 12 mile limit comes from a European ruling. Shetland and Orkney would be consider ed island enclaves of a foreign state (i.e. England (or Norway...?)), and as such permitted a claim to 12 mile territorial waters (plus perhaps an access corridor between). Scotland (as an independent nation) would have the rights to full territorial waters.
Click to expand...

That doesn't equate to the story above (which refers to the islanders considering their own independence), nor does it compare with the Falkland Islands who have an internationally accepted (except by 1 neighbouring country) 200 mile limit.
 
The Westminster orchestrated cross party 'No' campaign may or may not be motivated by interests contrary to the well being of Scotland and the Scottish people. However, speaking as an Englishman who sympathises with the Scotts' desire for independence and who would like to see them achieve it, I have to say that much of what the 'No' campaign says seems to me to be realistic whereas some of the arguments of the 'Yes' campaign are divorced from reality and are tending toward fantasy.
Even if there is a Yes vote I suspect the Westminster Government would make the negotiations very protracted and would probably go on for years, right up to the point where the NS oil runs out!
 
Maybe we'll follow the russian/ukraine model - give them independence, wait til they pee us off then invade the bit of the country we want (ie the east coast oil ports) while claiming we are intervening to protect the ethnic english people living there - then we can stage a referendum and annexe that bit to become part of england :lol:
 
Dave1 said:
That doesn't equate to the story above (which refers to the islanders considering their own independence), nor does it compare with the Falkland Islands who have an internationally accepted (except by 1 neighbouring country) 200 mile limit.
Click to expand...
Whether it does or not, that was the ruling. Any debates can be taken up with the European Journal of International Law - they cited the ruling, coming after a long legal study. The theoretical map they cited is below

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bm6d9rfy19477s0/iPXZSOElxQ#lh:null-UK_Sea_Rights_EJIL.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top