An Independent Scotland?

To me ...there's no hard facts telling me that we'd benefit by becoming independent,plenty of empty promises(standard procedure where governments and their members are involved) ,if anything we'd lose out so why mess with idea......:shrug:
 
given that we are talking about fragmenting the union perhaps the whole Uk should vote on it, wales might want to go too, and there might be plenty of english who think it would be great idea to shed the other two (lets not mention NI)

Come to that maybe England should leave the union and wales and scotland could remain united
 
Last edited:
frank said:
I thought that happened years ago, ;)
Click to expand...

:lol:

We are definately better of with our own parliament, next step control our own taxes. The central belt bias needs fixed though!
 
But the thing is, if AS gets his way, Scotland won't be independent at all, it will still be dependent on the EU or other Governing bodies.

The whole thing is a waste of money and I thought the sweaties were supposed to be frugal.


The amount of money & time spent trying to resolve all the individual changes would be astronomical and I wondered if they have actually thought about what this would cost.

Would all the 'Scots' living in England & Wales get a vote on devolution?
 
big soft moose said:
given that we are talking about fragmenting the union perhaps the whole Uk should vote on it, wales might want to go too, and there might be plenty of english who think it would be great idea to shed the other two (lets not mention NI)

Come to that maybe England should leave the union and wales and scotland could remain united
Click to expand...

As I mentioned earlier, the main issue that the current government have with it is that it may lead to England fragmenting into lots of devolved regions along the Scots/Welsh lines, each with their own local parliament.
 
My favourite quote on this subject so far :lol:

And then there's Jeremy Clarkson, who's a whole argument for independence all by himself.
Click to expand...
 
srichards said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/20/can-scotland-pay-its-way

It can't really pay its way. Also as oil is becoming less lucrative as alternative fuels are found Scotland's future is more uncertain. North Sea Oil and gas aren't anywhere near as plentiful as they used to be.
Click to expand...

It could be argued (and indeed is) that the oil revenue, during the boom times, should have been ours. Had that been the case then Thatcher's determination to turn the UK into a financial services hub, at the expense of the traditional heavy industry, wouldn't have had the catastrophic effect north of the border that it did.

One only has to look at Norway to catch a glimpse of the sort of prosperity Scotland could have enjoyed had the monies not been syphoned off int the UK coffers....
 
it could also be argued (and often is) that the vast ammount of english taxpayers cash spent north of the border exceeds the ammount gained from taxation on the oil

it could also be argued that an independent scotland wouldnt have had the same clout in facing down iceland over the more northerly feilds so the oil revenue vmight have been much rediced anyway.

Those not withstanding we have to deal with things as they are now - theres no way that past payments in either direction are going to be refunded
 
big soft moose said:
it could also be argued (and often is) that the vast ammount of english taxpayers cash spent north of the border exceeds the ammount gained from taxation on the oil
Click to expand...

It could be, but according to the article that Suz linked to....

The last set of figures from Holyrood statisticians show that for 2008-9, Scotland provided £1.3bn more in revenue than was spent north of the border.
Click to expand...

that isn't the case.
 
those arent exactly unbiased figures though, and even if they are accurate (and personally I wouldnt trust any figures from politicians in either westminster or holyrood - lies, damn lies and statistics and all that) just because scotland was a net contributor in 08/09 doesnt necessarily imply a net contribution since the north sea oil was discovered.

the real issue arround the north sea oil though was the startlingly crap negotiation with the oil companies who exploited it - the govt could have had a lot more out of them rather than getting bent over the nearest derrick and roggered senseless , tho theres no saying the AS would have done any better in that regard
 
What will all the Scottish politicians with seats south of the border do? Surely they would have to leave their seats?

More unemployed SMP's and that will leave us with more Dianne Abbots and Hazel Blears of this world. For the sake of neighbourly friendship, that alone should stop you wanting independence.
 
tiler65 said:
What will all the Scottish politicians with seats south of the border do? Surely they would have to leave their seats?
Click to expand...

Why? Following that logic any English people with jobs up here would have to leave too.
 
foreign nationals arent eligible to be MPs (they can however hold other jobs so long as they are from an Eu country)
 
And Scotland gaining independence does not make them automatically part of the EU, they will have to apply just like all other member states. (Unless Adolf Alex Salmond has other ideas)
 
big soft moose said:
foreign nationals arent eligible to be MPs (they can however hold other jobs so long as they are from an Eu country)
Click to expand...

Given that these people have already chosen to make England their home I'm sure they would simply adopt English citizenship
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Given that these people have already chosen to make England their home I'm sure they would simply adopt English citizenship
Click to expand...
Which home is that?....it is only their seat not necessarily their main home...as pointed out in the expenses scandal.
 
mxfun said:
To me ...there's no hard facts telling me that we'd benefit by becoming independent,plenty of empty promises(standard procedure where governments and their members are involved) ,if anything we'd lose out so why mess with idea......:shrug:
Click to expand...

Mystery to me why anyone would vote for it without irrefutable evidence that they would be financially better off. And that never be given because it does not exist. Megalomaniacs at work.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Can you name any?
Click to expand...

But maybe they have moved their main homes so that they are living in their constituencies for expenses purposes and they only moved because they were members of the UK Parliament. There would be no need to move if they were members of the Scottish Parliament. How many Scottish MP's did exactly this?

Some good party politicians were asked to move so that they could be in a 'safe' party seat in England.
 
tiler65 said:
And Scotland gaining independence does not make them automatically part of the EU, they will have to apply just like all other member states. (Unless Adolf Alex Salmond has other ideas)
Click to expand...

You missed my post earlier, both Scotland and the remaining UK would keep their EU membership as "Successor States".
 
The north of England feels ostracised by Westminster, so God alone knows how the Scottish people felt for years. However, did your own parliament not resolve some of the issues?

I believe that if independence for the Scottish people would work, then by all means go for it. But, at this moment in time, I feel it is not the right thing to do. My thoughts behind this are the current,global, economic climate and the fact that Mr Salmond, at times, seems to have an unhealthy obsession with this particular subject.

The discussion about NSO, past or present is largely irrelevant. Scotland would not be compensated for oil collected over the years, so would only benefit from oil collected after independence.

The comparison with Norway is also slightly misleading, comparing the two countries is a bit of a red herring in my opinion.
 
Steep said:
You missed my post earlier, both Scotland and the remaining UK would keep their EU membership as "Successor States".
Click to expand...

oops sorry if I missed that.

But why should they? They are now totally different than being part of a union (for England too). I understand why the Scots want to be part of the EU but surely that is going against the principles of being part of any union and wanting independence. Seems to me you want your cake and eat it and not share.
 
Last edited:
tiler65 said:
But maybe they have moved their main homes so that they are living in their constituencies for expenses purposes and they only moved because they were members of the UK Parliament. There would be no need to move if they were members of the Scottish Parliament. How many Scottish MP's did exactly this?

Some good party politicians were asked to move so that they could be in a 'safe' party seat in England.
Click to expand...

So that's a "no" then?
 
Far too early to ask this question as we all need a lot more information.

Hopefully an informed choice can be made in a couple of years time.
 
What a eejit ....my own MP is Scottish..... there's one for a start.
 
tiler65 said:
Seems to me you want your cake and eat it and not share.
Click to expand...

Let me say that I'm not at all sure staying part of the EU is a good idea, there are other options, all of which I hope will be explored fully beforehand.

I'm not sure what you mean by not sharing the cake, but I see no point having cake and not eating it, that goes against the principles of cake!
 
Steep said:
Let me say that I'm not at all sure staying part of the EU is a good idea, there are other options, all of which I hope will be explored fully beforehand.

I'm not sure what you mean by not sharing the cake, but I see no point having cake and not eating it, that goes against the principles of cake!
Click to expand...

:jaffa:
 
Tom, if your MP is Scots and represents an English seat then they would stay as long as he/she and the voters wanted. (since he/she represents them and not a Scots seat). A Westminster MP in a Scots seat would naturally no longer have a seat after Independence.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
and does he maintain a house north of the border?
Click to expand...
They don't have too but they may well have sold up and moved south because they were to become an MP in England. Not all MP's can afford two houses even if one is for 'expenses'.
 
Steep said:
Tom, if your MP is Scots and represents an English seat then he would stay as long as he/she and the voters wanted. (since he/she represents them and not a Scots seat). A Westminster MP in a Scots seat would naturally no longer have a seat after Independence.
Click to expand...

But wouldn't an MP have to come from the newly reformed UK (or whatever it will be called) to become an MP.

Again, it appears you have rules for your independence but any that involve the running of our nation you still get to keep what is in place now......go get your cake.

And if all those Westminster MP's lose their seats in Scotland....how far behind will Labour be in trying to win an election?
 
Last edited:
Steep said:
Tom, if your MP is Scots and represents an English seat then they would stay as long as he/she and the voters wanted. (since he/she represents them and not a Scots seat). A Westminster MP in a Scots seat would naturally no longer have a seat after Independence.
Click to expand...

only if he chose to adopt english nationality - at which point he'd no longer be scots

A french national can't be an mp however much he likes living in england, so if scotland became independent scots nationals would not be eligible to be English MPs either.

Come to than an independent england might choose to leave the EU - at which point scots ex pats living south of the border wouldnt have an automatic right of residency
 
I seem to remember it was a scottish king that united the UK in the first place.... Did the english complain about having a scottish king..? Prime minister.. ? No, and we elected him too. Sure, I'd like more even more autonomy for Scotland! What we have got just now is proving pretty successful. I just cant imagine its a good idea to be fully independent. The health service alone is one reason. Defence is another. We were the strongest nation in the history of the world when we were united now it seems we are rushing towards being a tiny unimportant principality. We would also be the most highly taxed nation on earth per capita. Look to Norway for comparisons.... Ultra high taxes. Expensive luxury goods and misery ensues. No thanks, I do not want to live in a third world country
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top