An Independent Scotland?

simon ess said:
I'm very happy to wait and see Bob. I doubt it will have any impact on me whatsoever.

I'll ask again. Are you asking the Scottish people to wait and see, or are you offering them a clear and substantiated definition of an independent Scotland's role in global affairs?
Click to expand...

YES! :LOL:
 
simon ess said:
Err, with respect - no.
Click to expand...
Considering the fact that no one knows for certain re the EU, Nato etc how can anyone be more specific in what our role will be in future global affairs?
At least we'll have a bigger role on our own affairs.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
At least we'll have a bigger role on our own affairs.
Click to expand...

Well, if you, and the majority of Scottish voters, really believe that's the most important thing, and believe it's in your best interests, I can't argue against it.

I deeply and passionately believe you are disastrously wrong and will pay a heavy price. But so be it.

Europe will shaft you. The BOE will shaft you. The USA will shaft you.

I worry for you, but it's up to you. Good luck.
 
BillN_33 said:
I do know more than a few bloody minded "northerners" who would tell Scotland to p1ss off...
Click to expand...

I can think of a hell of a lot more who would tell Westminster to p1ss off! ;)
 
Last edited:
George Osbourne warned that Scotland will not keep the pound yesterday on the Andrew Mar show yesterday. "No ifs, no buts we will not share the pound if Scotland separates from the union" he went on to say that the latest poll of a gap of two points was within the margin of error at this stage. "This is a wake up call!"
 
Moadib said:
Not a troll, genuinely, but THIS system of government and shower of finance supporting charlatans are the really the government anyone wants? It's impossible to strive for better?

As I've said earlier in the thread, I have nothing against the English, Irish or Welsh whatsoever, and would like nothing more than a better system of government for the UK as a whole. But it is vanishingly unlikely that's going to happen, therefore to strive for a better system the next option is only for Scotland to do so alone. Hopefully successful, or at least not for lack of trying, and rUK may follow. I think the majority of English people are as badly served by Westminster as the Scots feel. As the saying goes there are 94,060 square miles in the UK, and the government fights tooth and nail to support one of them.....
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it can't be better but to exchange it for a left wing regime, with no likelihood of changing it for the forseeable future (certainly not before I die), isn't something that fills me with enthusiasm.
 
dod said:
I'm not saying it can't be better but to exchange it for a left wing regime, with no likelihood of changing it for the forseeable future (certainly not before I die), isn't something that fills me with enthusiasm.
Click to expand...

Death isn't something I'm looking forward to, or aspire to either.....
 
Head of State will unfortunately be Madge the Queen.

Neither Bob nor I are asking the people of Scotland to be anything, but to answer the question Scotland will take it's place alongside every other small nation. Neither pushing it's nose in where it's not wanted nor holding back where it's needed. I hate to bring it up again but we could do worse than emulate the Nordic countries in terms of global affairs.
 
Steep said:
Head of State will unfortunately be Madge the Queen.

Neither Bob nor I are asking the people of Scotland to be anything, but to answer the question Scotland will take it's place alongside every other small nation. Neither pushing it's nose in where it's not wanted nor holding back where it's needed. I hate to bring it up again but we could do worse than emulate the Nordic countries in terms of global affairs.
Click to expand...

I think that that is a highly offence comment to describe our Sovereign who has served our nation so well. However, your comments don't typically reflect that of many Scotsman.
 
dod said:
I'm not saying it can't be better but to exchange it for a left wing regime, with no likelihood of changing it for the forseeable future (certainly not before I die), isn't something that fills me with enthusiasm.
Click to expand...

I think you're being overly pessimistic, the SNP are in power now partly because of a protest vote and would almost certainly win the first election hands down on the Falklands principle. The next election after that will be a much more open affair and I'd expect a coalition again as the system is designed to make it and because while the SNP is a left of centre party it's held together by it's one main goal, independence. Once that's achieved I expect to see it's membership fall as people move away towards their true political leanings.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
I think that that is a highly offence comment to describe our Sovereign who has served our nation so well. However, your comments don't typically reflect that of many Scotsman.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Steep said:
The NHS is totally under the Scottish governments control but it's paid for out of the block grant and when a cut is made down south that cut affects what comes to Scotland via the Barnet formula.
Ignore what you want, the Tories are privatising the NHS in England right now bit by bit, down in England Labour! are marching to save the NHS from privatisation, yet up here we're told by Labour it's all rubbish. What happens to the NHS in England has a direct knock on effect on our NHS because when their funding is cut Scotland's funding is cut and there comes a point when you can no longer keep taking money away from other services to support it.
Click to expand...
@Steep could you do us a favour and ask why the Scottish executive actually has started NHS Privatisation by contracting out obesity treatments in Glasgow to a private for profit organisation? And can you ask them why they don't find that hypocritical considering the NHS is a big part of their campaign. Can you also ask them what else they are disingenuous about?
 
dejongj said:
@Steep could you do us a favour and ask why the Scottish executive actually has started NHS Privatisation by contracting out obesity treatments in Glasgow to a private for profit organisation? And can you ask them why they don't find that hypocritical considering the NHS is a big part of their campaign. Can you also ask them what else they are disingenuous about?
Click to expand...

No.
 
Steep said:
No.
Click to expand...
Is that because scotland hasn't decided to privatise the NHS despite there being overwhelming evidence the locally elected government is doing exactly that? Or aren't you allowed to question the yes campaign whilst still supporting it?

As I've always said, I'm up for yes. I admire people who want genuine change. However to get people to come along they should be informed of the truth and understand the whole picture. At the moment it just comes across as an emotional and emotive campaign where people aren't allowed to make a fully informed decision. To me that is not a good foundation for the future.
 
Highly embarrassing for the SNP when they have already stated they are against privatisation of the NHS and yet Weight Watches are going to be paid to tackle the obesity problem privately outside of the NHS.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Highly embarrassing for the SNP when they have already stated they are against privatisation of the NHS and yet Weight Watches are going to be paid to tackle the obesity problem privately outside of the NHS.
Click to expand...
What I don't understand is how the supporters don't seem be self critical about these kind of thing. Or perhaps it is all part of the expensive tax payers funded hush campaign.
 
dejongj said:
As I've always said, I'm up for yes. I admire people who want genuine change. However to get people to come along they should be informed of the truth and understand the whole picture. At the moment it just comes across as an emotional and emotive campaign where people aren't allowed to make a fully informed decision. To me that is not a good foundation for the future.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more but, terrifyingly, I keep hearing Yes voters interviewed who say they're protesting against a "Tory Scum" government they didn't vote for! They're going into a once ever and irreversable referendum with all the irresposibility of a byelection protest vote!!

I accept all electorates are thick, and only ever think about "what's in it for me right now", but this lot are coming across as absolute lemmings!

For what it's worth, I've voted in every General Election since 1979 and I've usually found the party in power wasn't the one I wanted. That's democracy, but at least I can try to change it next time.

The Scots seem to be voting for a Hollande model of French Socialism - and that has been working out very well, hasn't it, from a country with a far larger and established economic base - allied to Steep's assurance that there could be a unilateral future referendum to rejoin the rest of the UK if some Scottish governing party wanted it.
 
dejongj said:
Is that because scotland hasn't decided to privatise the NHS despite there being overwhelming evidence the locally elected government is doing exactly that?
Click to expand...
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has awarded a two-year contract to provide weight management services to Weight Watchers following a tendering process. The health board said the use of Weight Watchers does not replace its own weight management service while funding for the pilot has not been diverted from any existing services.​

Overwhelming....?

Personally I dislike it - I think weight watchers is entirely the wrong direction as regards obesity management - but it's a two year trial, augmenting existing services. It's extremely misleading to call it privatisation, and to say the Scottish Executive is doing it, when it's judged by NHS Greater Glasgow.
 
Yves Geza said:
I couldn't agree more but, terrifyingly, I keep hearing Yes voters interviewed who say they're protesting against a "Tory Scum" government they didn't vote for! They're going into a once ever and irreversable referendum with all the irresposibility of a byelection protest vote!!

I accept all electorates are thick, and only ever think about "what's in it for me right now", but this lot are coming across as absolute lemmings!

For what it's worth, I've voted in every General Election since 1979 and I've usually found the party in power wasn't the one I wanted. That's democracy, but at least I can try to change it next time.

The Scots seem to be voting for a Hollande model of French Socialism - and that has been working out very well, hasn't it, from a country with a far larger and established economic base - allied to Steep's assurance that there could be a unilateral future referendum to rejoin the rest of the UK if some Scottish governing party wanted it.
Click to expand...

You've seen yes supporters interviewed?? that's amazing, until this week you hardly saw a sign of yes supporter unless they were chucking eggs about.

Jonathan, you have every right to your views but I do think you're wrong.
 
dejongj said:
It is, but what if it isn't omfg ;) I mean the yes campaign is happy to hide other facts and their supporters seem to be happy to not question it ;)
Click to expand...

Is this petty sniping all you've got? really?
 
Moadib said:
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has awarded a two-year contract to provide weight management services to Weight Watchers following a tendering process. The health board said the use of Weight Watchers does not replace its own weight management service while funding for the pilot has not been diverted from any existing services.​

Overwhelming....?

Personally I dislike it - I think weight watchers is entirely the wrong direction as regards obesity management - but it's a two year trial, augmenting existing services. It's extremely misleading to call it privatisation, and to say the Scottish Executive is doing it, when it's judged by NHS Greater Glasgow.
Click to expand...

Never do to let fact get in the way of a good put down though.
 
Steep said:
I think you're being overly pessimistic, the SNP are in power now partly because of a protest vote and would almost certainly win the first election hands down on the Falklands principle. The next election after that will be a much more open affair and I'd expect a coalition again as the system is designed to make it and because while the SNP is a left of centre party it's held together by it's one main goal, independence. Once that's achieved I expect to see it's membership fall as people move away towards their true political leanings.
Click to expand...
I think it's realism.

More costs for the Scottish Government to bear
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...te-seen-risking-23-billion-in-power-work.html
 
Moadib said:
NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has awarded a two-year contract to provide weight management services to Weight Watchers following a tendering process. The health board said the use of Weight Watchers does not replace its own weight management service while funding for the pilot has not been diverted from any existing services.​

Overwhelming....?

Personally I dislike it - I think weight watchers is entirely the wrong direction as regards obesity management - but it's a two year trial, augmenting existing services. It's extremely misleading to call it privatisation, and to say the Scottish Executive is doing it, when it's judged by NHS Greater Glasgow.
Click to expand...
It is privatisation. And the trust is controlled by the Scottish executive. Despite funding coming from Westminster. Unfortunately I've been at the receiving end of it a while ago as a supplier to the DoH when trying to finalise the contractual implementation in Scotland. It was being thwarted at every single opportunity with local variations.
 
dejongj said:
At the moment it just comes across as an emotional and emotive campaign where people aren't allowed to make a fully informed decision. To me that is not a good foundation for the future.
Click to expand...

That's all 'Yes' was ever going to be though. Nothing more is really required to get over the line.

Why give people information - It's just something that can come back to bite you. If it's not needed it makes no sense to.
 
Steep said:
Is this petty sniping all you've got? really?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't be required if for once you actually answer some of the questions and be self critical.
 
dinners said:
Why give people information - It's just something that can come back to bite you. If it's not needed it makes no sense to.
Click to expand...


That applies to all politicians everywhere.
 
Steep said:
Fixed that for you, the article is no more definite than many of those you've complained about me posting.
Click to expand...
At least it has got the word risk in the title and acknowledges it as such opposed to presenting it as facts.
 
Steep said:
Fixed that for you, the article is no more definite than many of those you've complained about me posting.
Click to expand...
Not really. There will definitely be an additional cost incurred. Why would DECC continue to subsidise all investment in another country? Only the scale is unclear. As usual.

Those projects get funded through subsidies run by the government in London. Of the 2 billion pounds of support paid through the Renewables Obligation in the fiscal year ended in 2013, Scotland received 560 million pounds. That represents as much as 28 percent of the total U.K. funding. Scotland itself accounts for about 10 percent of electricity sales in the U.K., according to government estimates.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top