An Independent Scotland?

Steep said:
Scots passports, yes though anyone already holding a UK one will be allowed to keep it along with UK citizenship if they wish.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this argument at all. Sorry Hugh. Surely if you vote to leave the union then all rights and privileges of being a member of the Union also go. It strikes me, that rightly or wrongly if you choose to leave the Union then you've left it.
 
I cannot see dual nationality, (if that does occur), as being possible - too many complications for two countries next to each other.

I hope that they become independant as the major and also all the minor consequences and changes will be be interesting, if expensive, to see

Going to be a "field" day for Accountants and lawyers and what going to happen to all those number plates on UK registered cars that are in Scotland ………. great for tax collections etc., as they re register and change over ……. I reckon that the one off income for Scotland from changing Stuff will keep Alex in great lunches for the rest of his life!!!
 
Hugh not everyone living in Scotland will want to become Scottish citizens and for those who want to go dual UK law permits it. The only folk who would have a problem would be U.S. citizens since they are not allowed to hold dual nationality.
 
Hugh

I'm sorry, but you really are in cloud cookoo land.
And so is the SNP. You want to base your navy at probably the furthest point from the very thing it's intended to defend? In a base with no dry dock?
I'm sorry Hugh, but I think you're making up answers.
I too lived with the RAF for the first 17 years of my life. I also live near the UK's biggest Naval base, and guess what, the area has sufferred every time the Navy has shrunk in size.
I know what got spent in 'Garrison towns' because I spent my money oin them. My parents, like everyone else shopped in the local shops, (NAAFI never had anything you wanted except Marmite and brown source!). My dad bought his cars in Local dealerships.

It's funny, the link you posted earlier, you know the one with the figures that make acceptable reading to Scots who don't want to think says the same as you, all the sailors go home for lunch, again, it's words written without research.

I've looked through this thread, and it's interesting, you, meaning the Yes camp answer everything with such confidence, and to order. I suspect, strongly most of those answers are invention. As the man said, on your own heads be it, but you are being sold a pile of something that came out the north end of a southbound camel. In any case, it's not you that needs to provide the answers, it's the SNP, but the problem is that they don't know. What's more they aren't going to know until you find your selves in deep poo or not. At that point, you may not, but I suspect a lot of your countrymen will be crying foul and want back in.
 
Steep said:
Hugh not everyone living in Scotland will want to become Scottish citizens and for those who want to go dual UK law permits it. The only folk who would have a problem would be U.S. citizens since they are not allowed to hold dual nationality.
Click to expand...


It sounds a lot like you would rather have 'devo max' then full blown independence. An awful lot of things do sounds as if they'd be rather hitched to the former UK's skirts. Citizenship being a case in point. I don't see how you can hang on to all the good bits (and there are some) while voting to move away from the bad bits (of which there are many). It does sound rather like having your cake and eating it.
 
Re your first paragraph Bernie, once again you have managed to completely miss the obvious, West Coast Scotland has extensive fisheries and will have extensive oilfields.

It beggars belief that Faslane has survived so long without a dry dock! But it's ok, there are dry docks on the Clyde that could be used should one ever be needed badly enougn and of course one thing about ships is that they do tend to sail. I think your arguments over this are becoming ever more silly, perhaps you need to sit back and think about it for a while unless your intention is just to troll.
 
boyfalldown said:
It sounds a lot like you would rather have 'devo max' then full blown independence. An awful lot of things do sounds as if they'd be rather hitched to the former UK's skirts. Citizenship being a case in point. I don't see how you can hang on to all the good bits (and there are some) while voting to move away from the bad bits (of which there are many). It does sound rather like having your cake and eating it.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'll be first in the queue for a Scottish passport but I recognise that not everyone will want to join me. On independence every Scot or anyone who has made their home in Scotland will be offered the chance to accept Scottish citizenship. Accepting the offer does not mean giving up your existing (unless you're a yank) nationality. This applies to French, German, Polish, Brazilian, Chinese, whoever not just English, Welsh, Irish and has nothing whatsoever to do with hanging on to anyones coat tails.
 
Steep said:
. On independence every Scot or anyone who has made their home in Scotland will be offered the chance to accept Scottish citizenship. Accepting the offer does not mean giving up your existing (unless you're a yank) nationality. This applies to French, German, Polish, Brazilian, Chinese, whoever not just English, Welsh, Irish and has nothing whatsoever to do with hanging on to anyones coat tails.
Click to expand...

Have they published the tax rates yet? ……… could be the next "tax haven" … even Sean may return then
 
Steep said:
Don't get me wrong, I'll be first in the queue for a Scottish passport but I recognise that not everyone will want to join me. On independence every Scot or anyone who has made their home in Scotland will be offered the chance to accept Scottish citizenship. Accepting the offer does not mean giving up your existing (unless you're a yank) nationality. This applies to French, German, Polish, Brazilian, Chinese, whoever not just English, Welsh, Irish and has nothing whatsoever to do with hanging on to anyones coat tails.
Click to expand...


See - I think this is where there is a big problem. Its a half hearted approach. Leaving other nationalities out of it for a moment, to me its like saying 'You can vote to leave the UK, but even if we get exactly what we want you to vote for, independence from the Union, you don't really have to leave it'. And I can't really see, given the current climate, the remaining UK countries giving carte blanche for the 10% who vote to leave access to everything dual nationality entitles them to
 
Surely, (I nearly said Shirley), we have been taking about this forever now …….. if the people of Scotland want to be independent and that's what they vote for it is OK ………. you could say that they are NOT voting to leave the UK ……… they are voting to be independent.

The politicians have their own vested interests for saying this and that ………. let the people decide and then it is "on their heads" if it is a good or a bad decision for them.

Bring the vote on as they say and let's get it over with …….. a change will be nice for all of us
 
Hugh

No, they are common sense questions. But ones you can only quote web sites that have a debious pedigree in answer too.

Oh, and from the SNP's white papoer on defence

Maritime forces

One naval squadron to secure Scotland's maritime interests and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and contribute to joint capability with partners in Scotland's geographical neighbourhood, consisting of:
two frigates from the Royal Navy's current fleet
a command platform for naval operations and development of specialist marine capabilities (from the Royal Navy's current fleet, following adaptation)
four mine counter measure vessels from the Royal Navy's current fleet
two offshore patrol vessels (OPVs) to provide security for the 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). However, as the Royal Navy only has four OPVs currently[262], a longer lead time for procurement might be necessary
four to six patrol boats from the Royal Navy's current fleet, capable of operating in coastal waters, providing fleet protection and also contributing to securing borders
auxiliary support ships (providing support to vessels on operations), which could be secured on a shared basis initially with the rest of the UK

These arrangements will require around 2,000 regular and at least 200 reserve personnel.
Click to expand...

2 Frigates. You'll be welcome to a couple of Type 23's. They will be out of service in 10 years time anyway, at least in the UK.
A command & Control platform - Oh? So a Bay class RFA.
4 MCV's I suspect that wont happen. No role for them in reality.
2 OPV's. A longer lead in time may be necessary. In other words isn't going to happen.
4-6 Parol vessels, they mean the glorified cabin cruisers by that, as they are the only such boats in the RN.
Auxillaries? Secured on a shared basis with the UK? Do they mean the ones being built in South Korea? That'll go down well with the Scottish Ship yards who suddenly find they have no work. So that wont happen either.

Looks like a straight lift from the RNZN order of battle to me. But anyway.

For a more expert opinion, and a look at SNP not answering questions about defence very well, have a read of this:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmdfence/198/19806.htm
 
This navy, army and airforce thing will have to be joint no matter what Alex says - IMHO, of couse

we are even sharing ships with the French - I think?
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
See - I think this is where there is a big problem. Its a half hearted approach. Leaving other nationalities out of it for a moment, to me its like saying 'You can vote to leave the UK, but even if we get exactly what we want you to vote for, independence from the Union, you don't really have to leave it'. And I can't really see, given the current climate, the remaining UK countries giving carte blanche for the 10% who vote to leave access to everything dual nationality entitles them to
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with the country, it's a personal thing. A person remains a citizen of the country of their birth regardless of what other citizenships they may take 'unless' they decide to give it up. I don't understand why you think this is going to be a problem since it's a fact of life for almost every nation on earth and there are many 'dual' citizens already living in the UK.

Here's a passage from a Zimbabwean web site.

"This ruling automatically creates a significant number of dual citizens. We need not be afraid of this. International law has long solved the principal problem of where dual citizens owe their loyalty. They owe it to the country where they live if they hold citizenship of that country, regardless of any other citizenship they might hold."

I should say that I think most British Scots who choose to take Scottish citizenship will not keep their British side. There are many hundreds of thousands (probably) of other nationalities here too who will have the same choice. This really is a non issue, over time I expect the 'other' nationalities will fade as children are born and folk die.
 
Bill in a way you're right and no one up here thinks in terms of some big iron curtain affair shutting off rUK from the rest of us, we're not doing this because we want to go hide in some dark corner by ourselves. Of course there will be cooperation, I'm sure we'll be members of Nato and I expect the usual big cooperative exercises will run in and around Scotland just they always have done..
 
Steep said:
Nothing to do with the country, it's a personal thing. A person remains a citizen of the country of their birth regardless of what other citizenships they may take 'unless' they decide to give it up. I don't understand why you think this is going to be a problem since it's a fact of life for almost every nation on earth and there are many 'dual' citizens already living in the UK.

Here's a passage from a Zimbabwean web site.

"This ruling automatically creates a significant number of dual citizens. We need not be afraid of this. International law has long solved the principal problem of where dual citizens owe their loyalty. They owe it to the country where they live if they hold citizenship of that country, regardless of any other citizenship they might hold."

I should say that I think most British Scots who choose to take Scottish citizenship will not keep their British side. There are many hundreds of thousands (probably) of other nationalities here too who will have the same choice. This really is a non issue, over time I expect the 'other' nationalities will fade as children are born and folk die.
Click to expand...

I would not quote Zimbabwe as a "good" example of anything ……………. apart from the wildlife and weather
 
Nothing to do with the country, it's a personal thing. A person remains a citizen of the country of their birth regardless of what other citizenships they may take 'unless' they decide to give it up. I don't understand why you think this is going to be a problem since it's a fact of life for almost every nation on earth and there are many 'dual' citizens already living in the UK.
Click to expand...

Not correct. You usually inherit your fathers nationality.
For example, I was born in Cyprus, post Independence, but I am not entitled to Cypriot Nationality at all.
Thats because my Fathers Nationality is British, although his father was born in Ireland pre Independence, and although he chose to be British, both my father and myself could (Ok, he can't he's dead!), if we so desired claim Irish nationality.

Nationality is an irrelevance really anyway, as you say, as European law makes gives right of abode and employment in any EU state. It only makes a difference if you go further than that.
 
Last edited:
Steep said:
Here's a passage from a Zimbabwean web site.

"This ruling automatically creates a significant number of dual citizens. We need not be afraid of this. International law has long solved the principal problem of where dual citizens owe their loyalty. They owe it to the country where they live if they hold citizenship of that country, regardless of any other citizenship they might hold."

.
Click to expand...
The peoples paradise of Zim is a far cry from the country that was Rhodesia. It is now one seriously f***ed up country, quoting anything to do with Zimbabwe is a serious own goal. God help Scotland if you end up anywhere near that s***hole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
Yay - I'm (officially) not allowed to have an opinion in this thread (or any social media) company rules :)
 
fracster said:
The peoples paradise of Zim is a far cry from the country that was Rhodesia. It is now one seriously f***ed up country, quoting anything to do with Zimbabwe is a serious own goal. God help Scotland if you end up anywhere near that s***hole.
Click to expand...

The quote was to show that dual citizenship is a non issue, the passage refers to some changes in their laws but could equally well have come from a.n. other country. In if I hadn't mentioned the originating country no one would have been any the wiser and accepted the text for what it says.
 
Steep said:
The quote was to show that dual citizenship is a non issue, the passage refers to some changes in their laws but could equally well have come from a.n. other country. In if I hadn't mentioned the originating country no one would have been any the wiser and accepted the text for what it says.
Click to expand...

The laws vary from country to country - in some you have to chose at the age of 21 years, some you are only allowed one, but the Zim example is only one illustration and it's not helped your argument, at least emotionally, by quoting it.

but anyway it is a non - issue - other than to confuse the logistics of any changes further ………. it is all these detail changes that will be needed that will be fascinating as laws, rules and regulations etc., have been built up over years.

Presumably you will keep "miles" on road signs, but maybe go the Southern Irish, (Eire), way for speedometers in cars, which are now mostly in kms?

There needs to be a few "differences" to make life interesting?

Good luck, it will be an interesting few years for you
 
Last edited:
viscountdriver said:
I hope Scotland gets independence because it would mean Labour loses 27MPs and keeps the two Eds out. Political, sorry.
Click to expand...
It's amazing how many times this has to be refuted, Blair would have won all his majorities regardless of the Scottish vote and I have no doubt should Scotland go independent it would not stop another Labour majority
 
Interesting point with regard to the SNP wanting a currency union and for those that see the UK as a marriage and going independent as a divorce: how many divorced couples continue to have a joint bank account? lol
 
gman said:
Interesting point with regard to the SNP wanting a currency union and for those that see the UK as a marriage and going independent as a divorce: how many divorced couples continue to have a joint bank account? lol
Click to expand...

maybe they just want to continue their overdraft
 
Just had a call from wee Eck, the referendum's off.
 
POAH said:
your company rules are illegal ;)
Click to expand...

Actually, having just read through all the company blurb - it's more about keeping political impartiality if speaking as an employee.
 
Last edited:
Well it's gone awfully quiet in this thread. Has Salmond been phoning you all? hehe
 
Bernie174 said:
Hugh

I read the link you included, which is I'm sorry to say one of those smoke and mirrors things.

The Naval base exists to support the Trident and Astute Submarines, and to store conventional explosives.
Once Scotland asks for them to go, then there is no reason for the base, so everyone goes. You mention, as does the article Trident, maybe it's correct that 520 are directly employed by Trident missile tasks, but that's not the point is it, the whole base is going to close. Of the 11000 there are a huge number that don't work directly on the trident system, but are only there because the submarines are.

So everyone not directly employed by the RN, and some of the MOD civil Servants is unemployed. The trouble is CND asked the wrong question, they asked how many were employed directly on Trident as a missile. The answer they got is undoubtedly true, but isn't the number that will go if the site is closed.

Moving on, the £270 million came from a local (to CNB) web site, but doesn't surprise me. Trouble is with people who've never had anything to do with the forces, is that you have no idea how everything works round the edges of it. So, not everyone that gets posted to CNB stays behind the wire, in fact like most Military stations, almost no one does. They get paid, and that money gets spent in the local area in the main. Families shop in the local area, people drink in the local pubs. Cars are bought, and sold. Provisions for ships are often sourced locally, as is food for on shore Messes. People live in their own, and rented accommodation in the area, and pay Council tax.
Submariners on Trident spend months at sea, with nothing to spend money on. When they get back a lot of that flows into the local area.
Businesses grow up around Military bases and are dependent upon them, thats all Military Bases, not just CNB. The base goes, they go, more loss to the local economy.

Anticipating your 'oh, well the Scottish Navy will be based there!' line, the SNP say that it will consist of a couple of Frigates. your navy is going to be less than 1000 people all in. Probably a lot less. That leaves a huge black hole in the economy, which is currently the biggest single site employer in Scotland.

Read what's written, and you'll see that what Cameron said was cross checked against the reality. For once for a Politician he's told the truth.

So thats just one example of what I have been trying to say to you. The SNP are selling you a dream, if they have misled once, how many more times have they done so? Ok, you are never going to accept that, but there are seemingly a number of Scots that will fall for it, and once this vote is over they have to live with that. Once they start to find out they have been led up the garden path it's too late, hence why I think you should have negotiated first and then voted.
Click to expand...

The base wouldn't close as Faslane would act as the main operating base for the Scottish Navy, and the headquarters for the Scottish defence forces as a whole after independence. RNAD Coulport would be under threat of closure due to its part in Trident.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Well as a Navy that won't work good luck with that one !
Click to expand...

The navy would expect to have two submarines, four frigates, four ocean patrol vessels, four coastal patrol vessels and eight inshore patrol craft and a defence budget similar to Denmark's £2.5 billion. Seems adequate enough given the size of Scotland. The Royal Navy isn't exactly ruling the waves anymore and according to the SNP Scotland doesn't have a maritime patrol aircraft and not a single major conventional naval vessel based in Scotland.
 
This hasn't been thought out at all. No top cover, minesweepers, amphibious capability. No capability to fuel, arm or provision ships whilst at sea. That's even if there is enough crew to crew them up in the first place.
 
prime time to invade then...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top