An Independent Scotland?

The % turnout will be very interesting versus a General Election
 
One day to go and I still feel there is a lack of solid facts and a lot of one side saying this will happen or we'll do this, and the other side saying no it won't or no you can't.


I would have had more respect for the 'Yes' campaign if they had said, “We are going for full independence” - Queen no longer Head of State, our own currency (or, if Scotland becomes part of the EU, the Euro).


How much true independence is there as part of a currency union where you represent 5 million people and the other members of that union represent 50+ million?


Perhaps the No campaign should have said, “We don't want a currency union with an independent Scotland, but this is such an important step that, should the vote be Yes, then we will put it the electorate of the rest of the UK.

Dave
 
Tringa said:
How much true independence is there as part of a currency union where you represent 5 million people and the other members of that union represent 50+ million?

Dave
Click to expand...

As you indicate, that is the problem with the Euro that was/is a dangerous experiment that will have fluctuating negative effects as long as the currency union exists, (and I can only see it expanding), you cannot beat "the market" and if you try to control "the market" nasty things happen and it can even destroy a national economy ……… IMHO

this will be the major consideration for iScotland and they must get it "right"
 
Last edited:
Bobsyeruncle said:
Guys, I don't condone violence of any kind, but we need to keep it in perspective. I'm not happy about any disrespectful behaviour either. I'm assuming that we are seeing the same news reports up here, and what we are seeing is a lot of shouting and heckling, I have not seen any actual violence.
I would also point out that in June, Alex Salmond also received death threats.
Not what we want to see at all, however, the vast majority of the people that I have witnessed, at work, in the streets, etc are all behaving sensibly.
Compared to things that have happened in other countries that want change, this referendum has been, in the main, a civil referendum. Comments about doomsday etc are not helpful, and only dramatise the situation further.
In my opinion, it should be expected that the campaigners for change will be out in larger numbers, will be more vocal etc, but unfortunately not all do this peacefully, and do shout, heckle, call folks traitors and liars etc.
I attended a small rally in my hometown on Saturday, where Alex Salmond turned up and was heckled by no supporters, called a traitor, a cheating liar etc.(albeit there were only a few) so it does happen on both sides. Any events that I've been to where there are supporters of both camps present, the no's have been massively outnumbered, so obviously the shouting and chanting from the yes campaigners does appear to be a lot worse.
Alex Salmond did condemn the poor behaviour from both sides on the news last night.
Click to expand...

He did. By and large I think that's a fair comment. There have been documented cases of people being charged with common assault and ABH. If someone kicks off then that's the outcome. Who knows what alcohol fuelled bitterness will result in. We all know what happens at the end of some football matches. Violence can ensue. I remember the poll tax riot in Trafalgar Square, I was there as a bystander passing through. Who knows ? I hope there is no civil unrest, I sincerely hope that the events over the next few hours are going to peaceful from both sides. The majority of people are sensible, but it's all ways the minority who spoil it.
 
Tringa said:
One day to go and I still feel there is a lack of solid facts and a lot of one side saying this will happen or we'll do this, and the other side saying no it won't or no you can't.


I would have had more respect for the 'Yes' campaign if they had said, “We are going for full independence” - Queen no longer Head of State, our own currency (or, if Scotland becomes part of the EU, the Euro).


How much true independence is there as part of a currency union where you represent 5 million people and the other members of that union represent 50+ million?


Perhaps the No campaign should have said, “We don't want a currency union with an independent Scotland, but this is such an important step that, should the vote be Yes, then we will put it the electorate of the rest of the UK.

Dave
Click to expand...


How i agree with you the Government must ask for the rUK to decide on the changes being negotiated if Scotland sadly does vote yes

Each person will have different views on

Currency
Border
Trident retention

Not exhaustive but highly in need of peoples support even more so from Wales and Ireland if that sad day arrives on Friday that Scotland goes Indy
 
presumably the UN monitors will soon be taking up their positions
 
I would be all for full independence from day one, with our own currency etc, but don't think that is the most sensible option in the short/med term.
I think a currency union would help smooth the way for all countries in the short/med term, but that we will at some point in the longer term future have our own currency. How the Euro/EU fits into things, I'm not sure, as we don't know what may be able to be negotiated (if anything) regarding our continued membership of the EU.
Don't see the issue with us having the Queen as Head of State though.
 
Last edited:
Just my personal opinion

iScotland should stay with the £ - I am sure a deal can be worked out

they should not join the Euro as that would be a step too far combined with Independence …….. but we will see as I think full Euro membership will be attractive to Alex and his followers as that would be another "separation" from the rest of the UK
 
At the moment, there's no chance of Northern Ireland going Independent, a minority (at the moment) want reunion with Eire, the rest are apparently loyal citizens of the UK. So I don't think the horror stories about one out, all out are likely to come to pass.
The Welsh have already said no thanks, so again, not a concern.
The Regions, Cornwall, Wessex and any others really don't have a case nor a chance, they are now, and have been for centuries part of one Country, they don't have the same case as Scotland has to make for Independence.
 
BillN_33 said:
Just my personal opinion

iScotland should stay with the £ - I am sure a deal can be worked out

they should not join the Euro as that would be a step too far combined with Independence …….. but we will see as I think full Euro membership will be attractive to Alex and his followers as that would be another "separation" from the rest of the UK
Click to expand...

Alex Salmond has said he doesn't want to use the Euro, but intends being in the EU. Not sure how that will work, but we don't know what could possibly be negotiated for continued membership.
I don't feel that he sees EU membership as attractive for the reason that you've stated though.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Alex Salmond has said he doesn't want to use the Euro, but intends being in the EU. Not sure how that will work, but we don't know what could possibly be negotiated for continued membership.
I don't feel that he sees EU membership as attractive for the reason that you've stated though.
Click to expand...

It could be a condition of EU membership, i.e. using the Euro, especially if the UK leave the EU
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
I would be all for full independence from day one, with our own currency etc, but don't think that is the most sensible option in the short/med term.
I think a currency union would help smooth the way for all countries in the short/med term, but that we will at some point in the longer term future have our own currency. How the Euro/EU fits into things, I'm not sure, as we don't know what may be able to be negotiated (if anything) regarding our continued membership of the EU.
Don't see the issue with us having the Queen as Head of State though.
Click to expand...
I think an informal currency union with the pound is the only realistic option. And too be fair it won't be that bad for Scotland either as I can't see the economies to become vastly different anytime soon. But it won't help you create that socialistic nirvana without control over your own currency. At some stage you'd be forced to make decisions that will be incompatible with your own policy and such law will be that those will come at the wrong time.

I can't see rUK agree to a formal currency union though. If they do then it will be riots on the street I can guarantee.
 
I would think that if the UK do not allow iScotland to be in a sterling union, at least for the next few years, it will really be seen in bad light ……… not matter what they decide …. Scotland will always be part of the United Kingdom even as iScotland …….. it's not just about money
 
Bernie174 said:
Bob

A few years ago he was championing the Euro, and saying Sterling was going down the pan.
Isn't he just playing a different tune depending on the wind direction?
Click to expand...
I can see why you would think that, but he obviously feels that the Euro is not the best option, and Sterling is.
Better that he has the balls to change his mind, than plough on regardless. Although some would say he does plough on regardless:p
 
Alex Salmon will not necessary be there forever ….. iScotland voters could return to the Labour Party, especially if the SNP perform badly after Independence
 
I would think that if the UK do not allow iScotland to be in a sterling union, at least for the next few years, it will really be seen in bad light
Click to expand...

I don't think it matters what light it's seen in, it's if it's good for the UK, Scotland's interests in that are very much second place if they have voted for Independence.

The Socialist utopia put forward by Hugh as the way Scotland will be is not compatible with CU.

Is it really in Scotland's interests? I doubt it, no matter what it's seen as, the UK isn't going to let 8% rule the rest. The majority is going to carry the day. If Scotland goes down the road of socialism, then it isn't something the UK are going to bankroll. Eventually if that's the chosen route it will go wrong. Once that happens it leaves the UK exposed, badly.

The economic models of the UK and that put forward by the SNP are just too different for it to work. The UK Government must put the interests of it's own people first, Scotland if they want to be independent should not have a voice in that at all. That's what Independence means, no more ties.
 
Bernie174 said:
I don't think it matters what light it's seen in, it's if it's good for the UK, Scotland's interests in that are very much second place if they have voted for Independence.

The Socialist utopia put forward by Hugh as the way Scotland will be is not compatible with CU.

Is it really in Scotland's interests? I doubt it, no matter what it's seen as, the UK isn't going to let 8% rule the rest. The majority is going to carry the day. If Scotland goes down the road of socialism, then it isn't something the UK are going to bankroll. Eventually if that's the chosen route it will go wrong. Once that happens it leaves the UK exposed, badly.

The economic models of the UK and that put forward by the SNP are just too different for it to work. The UK Government must put the interests of it's own people first, Scotland if they want to be independent should not have a voice in that at all. That's what Independence means, no more ties.
Click to expand...

Maybe I could agree

BUT

Politicians make mistakes, that's what they do …… they specialise in doing that
 
I don't think anyone would disagree with Politicians making mistakes.

But I don't see that as meaning the Uk would go into CU with a Country that has an economy based on something the opposite of ours.
If Scotland was to go down the same route as us then I could see it happening, but then they'd be no point in Independence.
 
Bernie174 said:
I don't think anyone would disagree with Politicians making mistakes.

But I don't see that as meaning the Uk would go into CU with a Country that has an economy based on something the opposite of ours.
If Scotland was to go down the same route as us then I could see it happening, but then they'd be no point in Independence.
Click to expand...

IMHO - The UK should not try to "penalise" iScotland in any way, + or - 50% of the Scots are going to vote to stay with the UK. ….. if they gain independence, the rest of the UK should work with them as much as possible.
There is no point in getting annoyed or trying to "fight" them ….. they may be Scottish but they are also British
 
BillN_33 said:
I would think that if the UK do not allow iScotland to be in a sterling union, at least for the next few years, it will really be seen in bad light ……… not matter what they decide …. Scotland will always be part of the United Kingdom even as iScotland …….. it's not just about money
Click to expand...

How's that? Scotland will always be a part of Britain (short of a huge natural disaster) but it very much will NOT be a part of the UK if they vote yes. That's the whole point.

I really don't see why the UK would get a bad reputation for not wanting a CU either. Just the fact that the referendum is being allowed to happen at all shows how much better this country is than most of the world. The whole point of independence is to be able to take the country in a different direction (if they want to do all the same things there's no need for it) & that is not compatible with a CU.

Salmond keeps going on about how he'll get what he wants because everyone will be obliged to negotiate in the best interests of the people of both countries... but that's a flawed argument because in regards to a CU at least i don't see the best interests of the rUK as being the same as those of his iScotland.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
There are also more minor issues.

What will happen to television if there is a Yes vote? Will the BBC continue to have a presence in Scotland? Why would it maintain staff, studios and and transmitters for a population of about 5 million who no longer contribute to a licence fee? I know there are parts of the channel coast of France and Belgium that receive and watch BBC TV but that is accidental. In Scotland there are many transmitters that broadcast exclusively to Scotland.

Would an independent Scotland take on producing definitive maps? I assume the Ordnance Survey would not update and otherwise revise maps of a foreign country.

Will Scotland have the ability to run an efficient Scottish Met Office. The staff who provide data will still be here but I'm fairly sure the number crunching gets done in England, and an accurate weather forecast is pretty important here.

Dave
 
H2O said:
How's that? Scotland will always be a part of Britain (short of a huge natural disaster) but it very much will NOT be a part of the UK if they vote yes. That's the whole point.

I really don't see why the UK would get a bad reputation for not wanting a CU either. Just the fact that the referendum is being allowed to happen at all shows how much better this country is than most of the world. The whole point of independence is to be able to take the country in a different direction (if they want to do all the same things there's no need for it) & that is not compatible with a CU.

Salmond keeps going on about how he'll get what he wants because everyone will be obliged to negotiate in the best interests of the people of both countries... but that's a flawed argument because in regards to a CU at least i don't see the best interests of the rUK as being the same as those of his iScotland.
Click to expand...


my view has changed in the last two months

I just wish they would get on with it and vote Yes as if it does not happen now it will happen one day soon

Then rUK and iScotland can then "get on with it" and try to make both as successful as possible, hopefully by working together

we have to accept what may be inevitable today and make the best of it
 
H2O said:
How's that? Scotland will always be a part of Britain (short of a huge natural disaster) but it very much will NOT be a part of the UK if they vote yes. That's the whole point.

I really don't see why the UK would get a bad reputation for not wanting a CU either. Just the fact that the referendum is being allowed to happen at all shows how much better this country is than most of the world. The whole point of independence is to be able to take the country in a different direction (if they want to do all the same things there's no need for it) & that is not compatible with a CU.

Salmond keeps going on about how he'll get what he wants because everyone will be obliged to negotiate in the best interests of the people of both countries... but that's a flawed argument because in regards to a CU at least i don't see the best interests of the rUK as being the same as those of his iScotland.
Click to expand...
For me, independence is not about doing the opposite of the uk, it's about more control over our own affairs etc, not about doing it differently, but better. (Hopefully)
 
I just see that iScotland will drift towards Labour and that rUK will move in the other, opposite direction

which is ironic as the "independence" wish by a slim majority, iScotland from the UK and the UK from the EU, is moving two countries in different directions politically

interesting
 
Last edited:
Steve Smith said:
I must be missing something. What's the relevence of the i and r ?


Steve.
Click to expand...

Steve

isn't that what is being used on here if Scotland become independent

iScotland = an independent Scotland

and

rUK = the UK without Scotland
 
BillN_33 said:
IMHO - The UK should not try to "penalise" iScotland in any way, + or - 50% of the Scots are going to vote to stay with the UK. ….. if they gain independence, the rest of the UK should work with them as much as possible.
There is no point in getting annoyed or trying to "fight" them ….. they may be Scottish but they are also British
Click to expand...

I doubt the UK lets drop the r and i shall we as that's a load of crap...is going to try and penalise Scotland...however at the same time there is not reason why we should do anything that will affect adversely the UK as it moves forwards without Scotland...less face it we need to make some extra savings to account for the tiny bit of lost income that we will loose apparently if Scotland goes its own way...something in the region of 1% of GDP if the yes campaigns figures are to be believed
 
BillN_33 said:
Then rUK and iScotland can then "get on with it" and try to make both as successful as possible, hopefully by working together

we have to accept what may be inevitable today and make the best of it
Click to expand...


Sounds nice, but that doesn't answer the question of what happens if the best for an independent Scotland is different to the best for the rest of the UK.

The only currency union i can see with even a slight chance is a fixed term one used as a transition to whatever Scotland wants as its new currency. But no one is asking for that.


Bobsyeruncle said:
For me, independence is not about doing the opposite of the uk, it's about more control over our own affairs etc, not about doing it differently, but better. (Hopefully)
Click to expand...

Ahhh, so you just see the rest of the Uk as incompetent?
 
Last edited:
H2O said:
.Ahhh, so you just see the rest of the Uk as incompetent?
Click to expand...
A bit twisted, but no. I see the rest of the UK as great, but us as having the potential to be greater than we are at present. Some may see that as being wreckless, I see it as being ambitious.
 
Last edited:
has anyone asked the rest of the uk, whether they want to work together, there is a general election next year,, maybe it will all change again if its a yes vote, after all it will become whats important to the rUK voter,,,,,,,,,, just a thought,
 
MWHCVT said:
I doubt the UK lets drop the r and i shall we as that's a load of crap...is going to try and penalise Scotland...however at the same time there is not reason why we should do anything that will affect adversely the UK as it moves forwards without Scotland...less face it we need to make some extra savings to account for the tiny bit of lost income that we will loose apparently if Scotland goes its own way...something in the region of 1% of GDP if the yes campaigns figures are to be believed
Click to expand...

Hum, but on the plus side we get back the £12bn that the rest of the UK are subsidising scottish overspending.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Bobsyeruncle said:
A bit twisted, but no. I see the rest of the UK as great, but us as having the potential to be greater than we are at present. Some may see that as being wreckless, I see it as being ambitious.
Click to expand...

You don't get better just by gaining control though, you have to use that control to make changes and those changes may not be compatible with extremely close links to the UK.
 
Military is very interesting if the Iscotland is 8% of the budget for the forces but 30% land mass why will rUK still spend 92% seems doubtful our land mass would be far less as indeed our coastal waters

This in my view leaves the islands far less protected unless iScotland significantly increases its forces budget for its land mass and coastal waters in which event iScotland does have a far larger bill almost a factor of 4 times more

I think the rUK Government should move further north and out of London if yes gets it reduce the costs
 
Bill
You keep saying we shouldn't 'penalize' Scotland.
It's not penalizing them, it's simply that the UK should not give them something which harms out economic recovery.
If they don't have a compatible economic policy, then harsh as it sounds it's tough.

Military is very interesting if the Iscotland is 8% of the budget for the forces but 30% land mass why will rUK still spend 92% seems doubtful our land mass would be far less as indeed our coastal waters
Click to expand...

Its not spending as a ratio to landmass, its ratio to commitments. We would loose a great deal of the North Sea Protection, which is part of the responsibility of the SBS and RN Patrol Squadron, but that's all, all other commitments remain the same.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Bernie174 said:
Bill
You keep saying we shouldn't 'penalize' Scotland.
It's not penalizing them, it's simply that the UK should not give them something which harms out economic recovery.
If they don't have a compatible economic policy, then harsh as it sounds it's tough.
Click to expand...

Hi Bernie

I am not in any way suggesting that anything that is done should "harm" the UK economy, rUK should certainly not do that.

What I am saying is that we are better "working together" if Independence becomes a reality

No harm to the UK ……… but let not "cut off anyones noises" to spite their face if it can be helped

You never know if we work together mutually it may work better than a lot forecast

If the Scots vote for Independence it is a reality that has to be accepted and we have to use the cards that have been dealt

But as you know I live in France so it can look difference from over here, but there is enough market speculation going on that could effect both countries especially in the short term

Quite simply if the financial markets see short term vulnerability they will exploit it
 
Last edited:
Byker28i said:
Hum, but on the plus side we get back the £12bn that the rest of the UK are subsidising scottish overspending.
Click to expand...

Possibly so...I'm being pragmatic and just for the purpose of my comment assuming the figures the yes campaign are giving...suggesting that the contribute 9.something to GDP and get back 8.something suggests that I real terms the loss of Scotland as part of the UK means a loss of 1% GDP...not ideal however equally I suspect something that isn't going to critically wound the recovery of the UK economy that is just starting to get back on its feet
 
H2O said:
Sounds nice, but that doesn't answer the question of what happens if the best for an independent Scotland is different to the best for the rest of the UK.

The only currency union i can see with even a slight chance is a fixed term one used as a transition to whatever Scotland wants as its new currency. But no one is asking for that.




Ahhh, so you just see the rest of the Uk as incompetent?
Click to expand...
Actually, and it seems like I'm talking to the stars as everyone keeps on ignoring the distinction.

Scotland using the pound will still be a currency union. It is technically called an informal union. We cannot stop it, there is no reason to stop it. And it is likely the only sensible option a to possible iScotland for the foreseeing future. To all intend and purposes this can be labelled as a currency union.

Scotland sharing the pound will also be a currency union. It is technical called a formal union with common policy. Scotland will require agreement from the UK for that type of a currency union. And I cannot see the UK agree to that at all since there is no benefit to is at all and will give away control over our own currency. We may as well join the euro. However to all intend and purposes this can be labelled as a credit union.

So in typical AS clever way he could win either way and say that he has established a currency union. Both types are good for Scotland in the short term. One is bad for UK in the short term and long term. And one is bad for Scotland in the long term. It is political brilliance in my opinion and I can appreciate it. Doesn't help informing the voters though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Long term rUK will benefit without Scotland and the politics it contributes to the UK. No doubt Scotland would get EU membership and it should adopt the Euro rather than share the currency it divorced itself from (in the event of a yes vote). That makes sense of sorts and opens up trade for Scotland.

Why would scotland want to use a currency it has no input into?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top