An Independent Scotland?

The two ladies on STV (Kezia Dugdale) esp are knocking spots of Salmond and Darling.
 
Last edited:
Steep said:
I know this will probably start another argument but...
Click to expand...

Serious question - Are you campaigning through TP to get people to vote yes - or just trying to justify to everybody why you are voting Yes ?
 
Last edited:
No debt legally? Steep QC has spoken.
If you have no debt then you by the same logic have no right to anything.
I am not sure that legal experts will agree, although clearly they are wrong or right wing propagandists, but either way, Scotland would start with nothing and need to borrow on the open markets, at very high rates of interest.
Hugh, you really do need to stop believing blindly what the SNP claim, they are not truthful or right on everything. You may be happy to buy lemons from them, and they may well have conned too many Scots, but I think you are all in for a very rude shock.
 
Steep said:
No my comments don't and I don't remember ever saying they do, they do however reflect my attitude to royalty. Some of them do good work, Harry for example with invictus but that's his mothers influence I reckon. Most of them are a waste of taxpayers money though imo.
Click to expand...
We've been through all this before. Have a search for exactly the net gains that Charles, the queen etc make payments into the treasury, rather than let your opinions blinker the truth.

The royalty is what makes the uk unique
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
Steep said:
I know this will probably start another argument but... Legally there is no debt for us to take, what a Scots negotiating team would want to do would be called something fancy but would amount to us paying our share of the debt on a moral basis.

There's a couple of reasons why there is no legal debt for us to take on. Firstly the loans were made to the UK treasury and cannot be reassigned even in part to anyone else without being renegotiated with the lenders, probably at higher interest rates for all parties. Secondly and I've mentioned it before the treasury has accepted responsibility for all loans and guaranteed them in the event of a break up.

What that means is that iScotland could simply walk away free and clear because you cannot default on a debt that is not yours. Nobody thinks that's the right thing to do though and some compromise will be worked out. DC or more likely his replacement cannot play hardball on the issue because the cost to rUK would be crippling and that is in nobody's best interests.
Click to expand...

Great, so does that mean we take our money out of RBS and leave them to it.
Are you hoping to find more oil with your head in the sand?
 
And that is exactly spot on Bernie. I've never seen such a display of selective hearing and fingers in the ears going lalalala as from the active yes camp.

I'm actually for Yes, but come on go into it with your eyes wide open. Be clear about the issues you are facing, and plan to overcome those challenges. Develop the vision to more than booh bad Tories and England never think about us. Dude that is the behaviour of a two year old when they have their tantrums.

Learn and challenge. Challenge your own leaders and stop looking at everyone else's leaders. Challenge them, make them work. Contribute to it. Shape it. But don't assume or accept anything. You've all got the opportunity of a life time and it comes across it is being wasted about emotive nonsense opposed to addressing the important points.
 
dejongj said:
Dude that is the behaviour of a two year old when they have their tantrums
Click to expand...

Its more like a spoilt child who's been given everything, then stamps their feet as they want more.

I'm starting to think, sod them, let them go. Break every link. Pull our navy out and back down to Portsmouth, it's not too late to reverse the decisions for Portsmouth yards and would be a great boost to the economy there.

They'll be some pain at first as the markets react to the uncertainties, but if we don't let them have the pound, it shouldn't take too long.

Then I think it'll be a couple of years until their current spending plans run them into becoming another Greece.
 
Byker28i said:
Its more like a spoilt child who's been given everything, then stamps their feet as they want more.

I'm starting to think, sod them, let them go. Break every link. Pull our navy out and back down to Portsmouth, it's not too late to reverse the decisions for Portsmouth yards and would be a great boost to the economy there.

They'll be some pain at first as the markets react to the uncertainties, but if we don't let them have the pound, it shouldn't take too long.

Then I think it'll be a couple of years until their current spending plans run them into becoming another Greece.
Click to expand...
Here, here. Common sense at last
 
My issue is that the spoilt child is completely ignoring the financial consequences to the rest of the union. Why is it that only one part of the union gets to vote? The financial consequences affect all of us, much like the Scottish RBS bailout did, so why don't we all get the right to vote?

Instead we seem to be constantly pandering to the spoilt child of the uk and it's probably time to say enough is enough. Can you imagine the constant moaning and bickering if there's a no vote, especially if it's close? It'll only be repeated and repeated.

They've no armed forces, we can always invade :D
 
Thank god for some reason Byker!

The Scots, mostly due to the SNP, and the blinkered people like Hugh who cannot distinguish between politicians lies and reality are walking into a mess. OK, it's their mess, but that's no reason for them to drag us down with them.

Currency Union wont work for the UK. It means we'd have liability for the debts Scotland racks up forming the Socialist Utopia. The breakup agreement has to work for both sides, not just Scotland.

As for the rest? Independence? Really? They think they are going to use the UK's infrastructure, eg. CAA, NATS. Going to pay for that are you Hugh? I hope you have the cash. Either way, that's not Independence.
They think they are going to run an armed force, with no trained personnel and without the logistics trail. Hope you have the cash to pay BAE. All those Typhoons will look good lined up at Lossie,, but that'll be the only place they'll go. 2 type 23's? Will be rusting in Falsaine, while the former workers, let down by the SNP scratch round looking for work, and local businesses go bust. Wont happen? Look at former garrison towns in England Hugh.Look at Pit Towns, if you remove a major employer in any town, it screws the whole lot.
They think they are going to be in the EU with no issues, except the EU seem to disagree.
Nato? You need to spend another 500 Million Hugh. That's Pounds cash, not credit.
NHS? The UK subsidise that for you Hugh,Oh and before you start on refund of oil revenue etc, we, the UK give you £14 Billion more than that brings in. Gosh aren't you hard done by!
You remind me of the Life of Brian "What have the Romans ever done for us" sketch!

I am also all for Scotland going, I am sick and tired of listening to a once proud nation complaining about how hard done by they are, when in reality they get far more than the rest of the UK.
But like most of the rest of the UK, we don't want to be dragged down by an ill thought out, ideal with no substance.
 
big soft moose said:
but why should we give a currency union - we don't want our currency tied to a small economically unstable country. He'll take your share of the debt anyway , as like it or not if he doesn't he'll find it very hard to run any kind of nation without assets.

Thing to remember is at the moment Westminster is trying to convince the scots to vote no so they are all fluffy bunnys and love hugs and a white paper full of promises - after a yes vote the gloves come off and those promises won't be worth the paper they are written on if Salmond doesn't play ball. For example rUK could block Scotland's entry into the EU if we were so inclined, we could also refuse to transfer any defence assets , and even the tax agreements on the oil could be hard to get transferred if rUK decided to be uncooperative.
Click to expand...

We know how you feel about a currency union, I was merely replying to your comment specifically stating that Alex Salmond didn't want to take on our share of the debt, which is not correct.
 
big soft moose said:
Thing to remember is at the moment Westminster is trying to convince the scots to vote no so they are all fluffy bunnys and love hugs and a white paper full of promises - after a yes vote the gloves come off and those promises won't be worth the paper they are written on if Salmond doesn't play ball. For example rUK could block Scotland's entry into the EU if we were so inclined, we could also refuse to transfer any defence assets , and even the tax agreements on the oil could be hard to get transferred if rUK decided to be uncooperative.
Click to expand...
Yes, but no.

Remember, whatever the outcome of the vote, there is no independence unless Westminster says so. So the UK government doesn't need to even bother talking about it; it can just say no. That's the hard ball line.

However, Cameron voluntarily signed up to the Edinburgh agreement which says that his government will (1) respect the outcome of the vote, and (2) negotiate the independence settlement in good faith, in the best interests of the people of both Scotland and the UK. He didn't have to do that. He could have told the Scots to have their referendum but it wouldn't achieve anything because it's not up to them.

I personally think Cameron is a man of principle and would not renege on the agreement. So vetoing Scotland's position (entry/continuation) in the EU won't happen, and not transferring defence assets won't happen. Of course there would be areas where the two sides disagree as to what is in the best interests of the UK, but whatever the outcome of wouldn't be things like this.
 
The current UK debt is around £1.6Trillion. If we divide that up by percentage of population that puts Scotlands share at arounf £132 Billion, or around 80% of Scotlands GDP. So you can see why Steep doesn't want his fair share of the debt.
Scotland is currently running a deficit, its spending exceeds it's tax revenue and it relies on central govt to make up the rest. If it loses that subsidy, then it will have to seek the rest on the commercial market increasing its payments and hence deficit further, or cut it's excessive spending.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
Something that's just occurred to me. If the referendum vote is Yes, there is a proposed timetable of something like 18 months to sort out the details before a target independence date in March 2016. But almost exactly half way through that period, there will be a UK general election. What happens if Labour get in? They might take a very different line on some of the substantive issues...
 
StewartR said:
Yes, but no.

Remember, whatever the outcome of the vote, there is no independence unless Westminster says so. So the UK government doesn't need to even bother talking about it; it can just say no. That's the hard ball line.

However, Cameron voluntarily signed up to the Edinburgh agreement which says that his government will (1) respect the outcome of the vote, and (2) negotiate the independence settlement in good faith, in the best interests of the people of both Scotland and the UK. He didn't have to do that. He could have told the Scots to have their referendum but it wouldn't achieve anything because it's not up to them.

I personally think Cameron is a man of principle and would not renege on the agreement. So vetoing Scotland's position (entry/continuation) in the EU won't happen, and not transferring defence assets won't happen. Of course there would be areas where the two sides disagree as to what is in the best interests of the UK, but whatever the outcome of wouldn't be things like this.
Click to expand...
I think you are correct. It will be much more subtle. And what does in the best interest for both mean. My children don't always agree or fully understand my decisions for them. They are still taken in their best interest.

Heck one could argue that David Cameron is the perfect saviour for Scotland. It might be taught in history lessons 400 years from now what could have happened if we didn't intervene :)
 
dinners said:
They've also now latched onto the sweeping anti Salmond feeling and are distancing themselves from him - no longer preaching to the converted.
Click to expand...
What sweeping anti Salmond feeling? Can't say I've noticed it, unless you're talking about on here:LOL:
 
Scotland is currently running a deficit, its spending exceeds it's tax revenue and it relies on central govt to make up the rest. If it loses that subsidy, then it will have to seek the rest on the commercial market increasing its payments and hence deficit further, or cut it's excessive spending.
Click to expand...

Which is why they avoid questions on the subject.
If the SNP was interested in a fair deal for Scotland, they would be telling the Scots exactly that. They aren't, like on many parts of Independence they are hiding things away. The SNP will no doubt be judged in years to come as the most treacherous of Scots, quite an accolade given the competition!
 
StewartR said:
Something that's just occurred to me. If the referendum vote is Yes, there is a proposed timetable of something like 18 months to sort out the details before a target independence date in March 2016. But almost exactly half way through that period, there will be a UK general election. What happens if Labour get in? They might take a very different line on some of the substantive issues...
Click to expand...
And I agree again. But God help us if that happens. There will be a melt down in the markets and a financial Armageddon. Heck look at how volatile it still is with regards to uncertainty.

Heck either a no vote or a yes vote will have very adverse effects on the next election. Queue the moment where sheep will say the Scottish electorate won't make any difference to Westminster regardless....
 
StewartR said:
Something that's just occurred to me. If the referendum vote is Yes, there is a proposed timetable of something like 18 months to sort out the details before a target independence date in March 2016. But almost exactly half way through that period, there will be a UK general election. What happens if Labour get in? They might take a very different line on some of the substantive issues...
Click to expand...
And I agree again. But God help us if that happens. There will be a melt down in the markets and a financial Armageddon. Heck look at how volatile it still is with regards to uncertainty.

Heck either a no vote or a yes vote will have very adverse effects on the next election. Queue the moment where sheep will say the Scottish electorate won't make any difference to Westminster regardless....
 
StewartR said:
Something that's just occurred to me. If the referendum vote is Yes, there is a proposed timetable of something like 18 months to sort out the details before a target independence date in March 2016. But almost exactly half way through that period, there will be a UK general election. What happens if Labour get in? They might take a very different line on some of the substantive issues...
Click to expand...
Unlikely though with Milliband at the helm?
 
The biggest hurdle for the yes vote I believe is Alex Salmond and his attitude everything is going to be fine we will get everything we want. Sorry to say it doesn't wash. If he had come out and pointed out where there might be issues and the way you would deal with them and been totally honest I believe the yes vote would be well in front because people would have deemed him a honest politician ( there's not many of them about) not trying to fudge the figures to suit his own ends which is how it comes across to me. It's the same with the better together campaign in my mind, would I employ either group not a chance.
The problem for the people of Scotland is just who is telling the truth of what will happen the reality is no one can tell you. Are more Jobs going to suddenly spring up is the NHS going to find a magic wallet are the old going to suddenly get younger because the fountain of youth is discovered in Glasgow the harsh reality is no the rich will carry on getting richer the politician's will still be warming their backsides on their chairs and like always the common man will pick up the pieces if you don't believe me look back at history and you will see for yourself there is no Utopia. look how many leaders over the years have promised this. The question I would ask myself is will me or my children end up worse off than I am now or not.
;) Vote No and you will never Know
:naughty:Vote Yes and you could spend the rest of your life wishing you could turn back time.
:thinking: The choice is yours not ours all I hope is you don't live to regret it just maybe you could be the first country in history to build a Utopia that lasts :whistle:
 
Steep said:
I know this will probably start another argument but... Legally there is no debt for us to take....

What that means is that iScotland could simply walk away free and clear because you cannot default on a debt that is not yours.
Click to expand...

but as I said before if Scotland were to follow that line , they would also find that legally none of the assets of the government are their's either, because they are all owned by HMG , and indeed even the oil agreements were signed between the oil companies and HMG (and most of the fields aren't in territorial waters) - so fine you can't default on a debt that isn't yours, but you can't also legally expect any assets that aren't "yours" either.

So Scotland could indeed walk away free and clear - to an impoverished future and swinging tax rises to pay for the basic assets necessary to run a state - if they want to take that route I suspect HMG would be delighted

of course in the real word once the political posturing is done Salmond wouldn't be so stupid, and a sensible break up plan would be agreed with both debt and assets being transferred in proportion
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
We know how you feel about a currency union, I was merely replying to your comment specifically stating that Alex Salmond didn't want to take on our share of the debt, which is not correct.
Click to expand...

from the FT

Alex Salmond, Scotland's first minister, has vowed the new country will not take its share of UK debt if it is not allowed to use the pound,
Click to expand...
 
StewartR said:
I personally think Cameron is a man of principle and would not renege on the agreement..
Click to expand...

wheres the rolling on the floor p***ing yourself laughing smiley - nothing he's done in this term of government supports that view , he's a politician and he'll do whatever he/his advisers thinks will help him get re-elected
 
StewartR said:
2) negotiate the independence settlement in good faith, in the best interests of the people of both Scotland and the UK. He didn't have to do that. He could have told the Scots to have their referendum but it wouldn't achieve anything because it's not up to them.
Click to expand...


Both sides need to do this though. If the pro independence position really is fixed at "CU or no dept" then i can't see how any fair agreement can be reached.
 
It is negotiation trade union style. Just look at what happened to the dinosaur.
 
Steep appears to have to be stumped. The SNP book of excuses and blame other for dummies probably doesn't cover the points raised.
I expect either these will all be ignored, a claim to be made that these have all been answered, or that they are some form of right wing propaganda.
 
I think this is a considered and balance missive.

Copied and pasted from FB

Alasdair Houston
Well it's nearly here! The Referendum that could lead to Scotland divorcing from the UK. I am not a politician. I am a born and bred Scot living and working here and typing this on his phone from his bath. Sorry about the last bit.

Let's cut through the b******t, the scaremongering (on both sides) and the dream selling. This is important. For our children's grandchildren and beyond.

All proud Scots want what is best for Scotland, so let's start by agreeing that on this we can agree.

Let's also agree that too many policies for too many years were 'made in London' and did not address Scotland's specific needs.
But we now have a Scottish Parliament and all parties agree that it will get more powers whatever the outcome. I believe that. Mr Salmond and SNP do deserve credit for getting Scotland's voice heard better than ever before in my lifetime. But the fact is that with our own parliament in place we can't keep blaming everything on Westminster. That's out of date. We already have many independent powers, with more to come. To move from a wish to secure these extra powers, to filing for full divorce, cannot be the right thing for Scotland.

We have a population about the size of Yorkshire's but over a much greater land mass to service with roads, small schools, hospitals etc. Our population is ageing faster than UK with a big pensions challenge ahead with a lot of gold plated public sector pensions in there. We have a relatively small tax base and we rely heavily on the public sector for employment and on one commodity.

Oil and gas is a valuable resource. The most optimistic forecast gives us 30 or 40 more years on the dipstick, the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. Yes, it may see today's politicians out, but they will not be around to deal with 'life after oil.' During that time the price may vary greatly. Up or down. We have no control.
Basing a 400 year decision on a 40 year resource of which we do not control the price does not make good sense. Short term-ism on a grand scale. It will take one hell of lot of wind and whisky to replace it.

The form of 'independence' that says 'We would like to share the pound in a formal union and the Bank of England can carry on setting the interest rates' defeats one of the main claimed benefits of independence..controlling one's own future. Interest rates would be set in a country made foreign by a yes vote, a country that no longer had any political or other motive for considering the interests of the 'independent' country north of the border no longer part of UK. This could really hurt us. This is the version of 'independence' that Mr Salmond claims to want for us. I just don't get it.

Talking of banks, if we were to divorce from UK, we would have no lender of last resort. We don't need long memories to sicken ourselves with the mess of the so called 'financial crisis'. I have another set of words for it: greed, lies, arrogance and more greed. But the fact is that our own Scottish institutions had their snouts in the trough along with the best of them and together they nearly brought the country to its knees. IF we had been independent at that time, Scotland Plc would have been bust. The Scottish taxpayer could not have underwritten the debt. We needed the financial strength of the Bank of England and the UK taxpayer to bail out RBS and others. It is a fool that believes that humans really learn from past mistakes... They go right out there and make all their own new ones. Would we like to go to Europe for our bail out if it were needed in the future. Greece is not having fun.

It strikes me as a peculiar form of 'independence' that wants to divorce from England, while at the same time get closer to Brussels. If one of the main complaints is feeling controlled by an unelected government, do we really want to swap London for Brussels? It seems to me that there is a hefty dose of 'anti English' being confused and dressed up as pro-independence. Pre- divorce proceedings are messy, and it saddens me that Scotland is going through its own version, whatever the outcome, with our three other partners in rest of UK.

I am a passionately proud Scot. Born here, schooled here. I've spent my life working here, investing in and promoting Scotland both in UK and abroad, and doing my best to provide good employment here. My children were born here and are schooling here. My point is, don't try and tell me that believing that being in a BETTER version of UK, which we can have, and staying part of the family with our Welsh, Irish and English friends somehow makes me un-patriotic or less Scottish. Please.

I know some, perhaps many will disagree with what I say. I respect your right to do so. But to those that do in turn I say respect my right and those that agree with me when I say with my heart and my head, let's stay together and work hard together to make Scotland an even greater part of Great Britain.

Over and out. Bath cold.
 
Good piece! bravo!
 
Byker28i said:
So you can see why Steep doesn't want his fair share of the debt.
Click to expand...

You went to a lot of time and trouble and spoiled it all with this lie.
 
Last edited:
7412-1410255268-9c23fe643b62093f21ad63e275e379ae.jpg
 
dinners said:
Serious question - Are you campaigning through TP to get people to vote yes - or just trying to justify to everybody why you are voting Yes ?
Click to expand...

Neither, I try to correct misconceptions where I see them, answer genuine questions where I can and do my best not to rise to the baiting of the three or four usual suspects playground sniping.
With 9 days to go anyone reading this thread who has a vote isn't going to be swayed by anything they read here, from me or anyone else.

It is my belief that if there is a yes vote there will be negotiations in good faith, of course both sides will try to get the best deal for them but in the end what we'll all get is the best deal for everyone.
 
Last edited:
Tigger.ufo said:
I think this is a considered and balance missive.

Copied and pasted from FB

Alasdair Houston
Well it's nearly here! The Referendum that could lead to Scotland divorcing from the UK. I am not a politician. I am a born and bred Scot living and working here and typing this on his phone from his bath. Sorry about the last bit.

Let's cut through the b******t, the scaremongering (on both sides) and the dream selling. This is important. For our children's grandchildren and beyond.

All proud Scots want what is best for Scotland, so let's start by agreeing that on this we can agree.

Let's also agree that too many policies for too many years were 'made in London' and did not address Scotland's specific needs.
But we now have a Scottish Parliament and all parties agree that it will get more powers whatever the outcome. I believe that. Mr Salmond and SNP do deserve credit for getting Scotland's voice heard better than ever before in my lifetime. But the fact is that with our own parliament in place we can't keep blaming everything on Westminster. That's out of date. We already have many independent powers, with more to come. To move from a wish to secure these extra powers, to filing for full divorce, cannot be the right thing for Scotland.

We have a population about the size of Yorkshire's but over a much greater land mass to service with roads, small schools, hospitals etc. Our population is ageing faster than UK with a big pensions challenge ahead with a lot of gold plated public sector pensions in there. We have a relatively small tax base and we rely heavily on the public sector for employment and on one commodity.

Oil and gas is a valuable resource. The most optimistic forecast gives us 30 or 40 more years on the dipstick, the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. Yes, it may see today's politicians out, but they will not be around to deal with 'life after oil.' During that time the price may vary greatly. Up or down. We have no control.
Basing a 400 year decision on a 40 year resource of which we do not control the price does not make good sense. Short term-ism on a grand scale. It will take one hell of lot of wind and whisky to replace it.

The form of 'independence' that says 'We would like to share the pound in a formal union and the Bank of England can carry on setting the interest rates' defeats one of the main claimed benefits of independence..controlling one's own future. Interest rates would be set in a country made foreign by a yes vote, a country that no longer had any political or other motive for considering the interests of the 'independent' country north of the border no longer part of UK. This could really hurt us. This is the version of 'independence' that Mr Salmond claims to want for us. I just don't get it.

Talking of banks, if we were to divorce from UK, we would have no lender of last resort. We don't need long memories to sicken ourselves with the mess of the so called 'financial crisis'. I have another set of words for it: greed, lies, arrogance and more greed. But the fact is that our own Scottish institutions had their snouts in the trough along with the best of them and together they nearly brought the country to its knees. IF we had been independent at that time, Scotland Plc would have been bust. The Scottish taxpayer could not have underwritten the debt. We needed the financial strength of the Bank of England and the UK taxpayer to bail out RBS and others. It is a fool that believes that humans really learn from past mistakes... They go right out there and make all their own new ones. Would we like to go to Europe for our bail out if it were needed in the future. Greece is not having fun.

It strikes me as a peculiar form of 'independence' that wants to divorce from England, while at the same time get closer to Brussels. If one of the main complaints is feeling controlled by an unelected government, do we really want to swap London for Brussels? It seems to me that there is a hefty dose of 'anti English' being confused and dressed up as pro-independence. Pre- divorce proceedings are messy, and it saddens me that Scotland is going through its own version, whatever the outcome, with our three other partners in rest of UK.

I am a passionately proud Scot. Born here, schooled here. I've spent my life working here, investing in and promoting Scotland both in UK and abroad, and doing my best to provide good employment here. My children were born here and are schooling here. My point is, don't try and tell me that believing that being in a BETTER version of UK, which we can have, and staying part of the family with our Welsh, Irish and English friends somehow makes me un-patriotic or less Scottish. Please.

I know some, perhaps many will disagree with what I say. I respect your right to do so. But to those that do in turn I say respect my right and those that agree with me when I say with my heart and my head, let's stay together and work hard together to make Scotland an even greater part of Great Britain.

Over and out. Bath cold.
Click to expand...

A good read.
 
Steep said:
Neither, I try to correct misconceptions where I see them, answer genuine questions where I can and do my best not to rise to the baiting of the three or four usual suspects playground sniping.
With 9 days to go anyone reading this thread who has a vote isn't going to be swayed by anything they read here, from me or anyone else.

It is my belief that if there is a yes vote there will be negotiations in good faith, of course both sides will try to get the best deal for them but in the end what we'll all get is the best deal for everyone.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

Unsure of your last sentence though. Whilst I do agree that both sides will work in good faith, I'm not sure we will all get the best deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top