Scottish Independence? Yay or nay?

[lkc]

Let's talk politics for this weeks poll. Following the news that the Sunday Herald is going to back the YES campaign what is your opinion on the matter? do you think Scotland should be independent or would you prefer to stay as part of the union? And tell me why you think this

It'll be interesting to see how this changes as September approaches

 

[mrcinquecento]

I'm a yes, although i do think both campaigns have been appallingly run. No have been just scaremongering and turning into a vote against Alex Salmond and yes too focused on turning it into a vote against David Cameron.

It's not a vote for either.

No are too focused on negatives and not focused on what the country would be like should we vote no, (although they are perfectly happy to paint it like we'll be a North Korea insular state and invaded by everyone should we vote yes) yes, although providing the more eye catching statements, haven't really brought too many convincing things out to back much up. So the real answer for me lies in ignoring the vast majority of claim and counter claim and focused on facts of how similar sized countries have done compared to how we do now. We also have the right to claim to a percentage of all assets we currently fund and use as part of the uk.

I do think we should stay part of the EU (and btw, the whole in out thing of an independent Scotland is more clear cut than it seems as precedents have already been set, the only real doubt has been put on it by the Spanish PM fighting his own battle trying to ward off the a similar independence threat on his own turf).

As for Jobs, Companies will go wherever is cheapest and most convenient, be that in the UK, Independent Scotland, other EU, India etc etc. As long as rates etc stay similar, threats of pulling out etc is all scaremongering. Businesses like stability and are watching their own back for now until they see how it will play out.

 

[M21MFS]

Although officially undecided, I reckon I may vote yes.

The no campaign has been full of lies, spin and propoganda. Kinda feels the playground bully kicking and screaming til he gets his own way.

The yes campaign hasn't exactly been forthcoming with some of the information, but we have an opportunity to prove what we as a country can do. Interesting times, for sure...

 

[Seanantasy]

I'm neutral, but think if I had to choice I'd go NO.
As a collective, Scotland/Wales/England/Ireland we are stronger with a shared economy, shared army, shared support etc.
If Scotland becomes independent would we get a Scottish Pound? Will this pound be worth anything? The British Pound has strong firm standing and worth a lot, this has taken decades to establish, no chance a Scottish Pound is going to be worth anything or any European country is going to support/trade with Scotland then.
Would Europe keep us in the EU? Or would the majority vote of the European countries see Scotland unproven/new? Unestablished worth and currency? Perhaps even see Scotland as a threat! Scotland could encourage other European countries to become independent from their Parent (Italy, Spain, France etc.)

What's gonna happen to all the large Naval and military bases all over Scotland that belong to England and the many jobs the Scots have in these bases?
And what about the many English companies all over Scotland? Even collective companies as Tesco/ASDA/McDonalds/KFC/02/Orange/SKY/BT telecom/ etc. have many trade/business rights set up through the UK laws, but if Scotland becomes independent these laws may change or have to be re-applied for, meaning many contracts with Tesco/ASDA would have to be re-established and/or may be terminated.... with all results that may have. Many English work in these companies or travel to Scotland for meetings etc. but after independence what would happen, and the same for the Scots working or traveling to England for meetings etc would they loose their jobs? Would many companies be cautious and close branches in Scotland? or stop expansion into Scotland in the future because of independence?

Being a collective things are smoother and many laws are set for the collective. But once we go separate many of these laws would not apply, including things like University funds/bursaries, pensions, taxes, etc.

If Scotland goes independent then what is stopping Wales, or N. Ireland, and when they go the UK will fall apart....

Just a somewhat negative thought about it all

I'm still a YES man aswell though haha,.. I just dunno

 

[mrcinquecento]

People do realise that we don't lose bases etc if we went independent? We "own" a percentage of all services which are therefore rightfully ours come any yes vote.

 

[firstcar-Y10]

People do realise that we don't lose bases etc if we went independent? We "own" a percentage of all services which are therefore rightfully ours come any yes vote.

Now I realise I'm speaking from south of the border here but... I can think of one base at least which is dedicated to the support of Britains nuclear sub fleet. Now as a relatively small nation do you think Scotland will want to be paying for a nuclear deterrent, and if not will the rest of the UK want that base on 'foreign soil'?
TBH it may have been a stroke of genius for the UK government to force a referendum this soon as the 'yes' campaign seems to be based on a lot of promises and assumptions which really needed to be thought through and negotiated beforehand, instead of the Scottish side going 'ah that'll be fine we'll just keep using this and that from the British government' and Westminster going 'hang on a minute, you do know what 'independent' means do you?'
There may well be practical and fair solutions for both sides on issues like defence, currency, EU membership and so on but they needed sorting out first, then Scotland votes on that, rather than voting for an ideal, then working out what that means afterwards!

 

[Venters]

I typed a monster post and it got deleted when I changed tab to fact check.
Scotland wont pay for nukes in Scotland, part of the reason for the vote is to get rid of nukes here. Scotland part owns the bank of England and sterling so currency union isnt even a question. As for military, Scotland pays 3.5 billion to the mod a year, less than 2.5 billion is spent by the mod in scotland. So post yes vote defence budget could be cut without any cut being made to the Scottish mod.


Obviously this was all much better worded first time with much more information. But I will be damnedn f im typing it all again, for it to only be skimmed over anyway.

 

[mrcinquecento]

Now I realise I'm speaking from south of the border here but... I can think of one base at least which is dedicated to the support of Britains nuclear sub fleet. Now as a relatively small nation do you think Scotland will want to be paying for a nuclear deterrent, and if not will the rest of the UK want that base on 'foreign soil'?
TBH it may have been a stroke of genius for the UK government to force a referendum this soon as the 'yes' campaign seems to be based on a lot of promises and assumptions which really needed to be thought through and negotiated beforehand, instead of the Scottish side going 'ah that'll be fine we'll just keep using this and that from the British government' and Westminster going 'hang on a minute, you do know what 'independent' means do you?'
There may well be practical and fair solutions for both sides on issues like defence, currency, EU membership and so on but they needed sorting out first, then Scotland votes on that, rather than voting for an ideal, then working out what that means afterwards!

We don't want nukes. We don't need them any more than any other "small" country does. What the UK wants to do with their nukes is their own damn problem :laugh:

As for the "ideals", that's Westminster spin. we are (and this is the vital word here) ENTITLED to keep whatever we currently fund on our land, Hospitals, lifeline services, defence hardware (technically, if we wanted to be really difficult that also includes a percentage of current nukes as it is UK funded and Scotland, currently as part of the UK pays towards it...and it is on "our" land so..... )

All services (and that includes Pound Sterling) are just as much ours as England's at present. Army, Police, NHS etc, We aren't "using it from the British government", it's our currency and services too!, the only debate on that is whether post independence we continue with a currency union (which btw benefits the rest of the UK too, as well as Scotland), or whether (Westminster cuts it's nose off to spite it's face, not that there should be any doubt as we "own" part of the currency!) we self govern from Bank of Scotland. There may be complications in that but also perhaps longer term benefits. Neither situation is a disaster by any means.

Hell, if you want to be picky and claim we only "use" British services from the British government at present, And that we have no rights to things because of that and no right to use our own currency, then in that case we've also no reason to take on or pay part of the national debt... after all, the British government ran that up, not us...we just use their services as tenants

As for the EU membership, i agree that is potentially more sticky. As mentioned Spain in particular has a reason to veto any application, however there have already been rough precedents set abroad for new members, but yes, it's by no means set in stone either way.

 

[firstcar-Y10]

We don't want nukes. We don't need them any more than any other "small" country does. What the UK wants to do with their nukes is their own damn problem :laugh:

As for the "ideals", that's Westminster spin. we are (and this is the vital word here) ENTITLED to keep whatever we currently fund on our land, Hospitals, lifeline services, defence hardware (technically, if we wanted to be really difficult that also includes a percentage of current nukes as it is UK funded and Scotland, currently as part of the UK pays towards it...and it is on "our" land so..... )

All services (and that includes Pound Sterling) are just as much ours as England's at present. Army, Police, NHS etc, We aren't "using it from the British government", it's our currency and services too!, the only debate on that is whether post independence we continue with a currency union (which btw benefits the rest of the UK too, as well as Scotland), or whether (Westminster cuts it's nose off to spite it's face, not that there should be any doubt as we "own" part of the currency!) we self govern from Bank of Scotland. There may be complications in that but also perhaps longer term benefits. Neither situation is a disaster by any means.

Hell, if you want to be picky and claim we only "use" British services from the British government at present, And that we have no rights to things because of that and no right to use our own currency, then in that case we've also no reason to take on or pay part of the national debt... after all, the British government ran that up, not us...we just use their services as tenants

As for the EU membership, i agree that is potentially more sticky. As mentioned Spain in particular has a reason to veto any application, however there have already been rough precedents set abroad for new members, but yes, it's by no means set in stone either way.

Don't get so defensive! I never said Scotland were just 'using' British services at the moment, You are part of Britain at the moment, of course it's as much yours as anybody elses. Independence does change that though, of course what's in Scotland stays with Scotland (although using that argument what's in the rest of the UK stays with them too, you can't have it both ways). I'm not even arguing that monetary union would be wrong, although for Scotlands politicians to assume its going to happen without bothering to check with Westminster or the Bank of England was perhaps a tad rash, whatever they think they might be 'entitled' to we will be dealing with 2 separate countries both of whom have to agree.
The point I'm making is that these discussions should not be part of the campaigning, they should have been had before, argued out, and then whatever agreements could be thrashed out that is what should have been put to the Scottish people. If you were taking on say a builder and he's asking you to sign a contract that says he'll probably build you a house and he reckons he can persuade someone to connect it to the electric and he's pretty sure the neighbours will be OK to let you put a drive across their garden, and all the other houses have drains so there must be something nearby to put your waste into you'd be wanting something a bit more before you signed up. (although actually, that was more or less the deal for Holyrood wasn't it) That's what's being offered to the Scottish people right now, fortunately politicians are a lot more trustworthy than builders.........
I lived in Scotland a long time and I don't doubt you could go it alone and it really saddens me that this dogs dinner is what's being offered as a referendum. If Scotland votes yes then you have to stand by and wait to see what you've actually voted for and that's just not fair.
Glad I don't have to vote on it anyway. Good luck!

 

[M21MFS]

I think you have a few valid pointd there but setting out a stall implies a certain amount of telling the truth and we all know that politicians of every party are fairly shite at it.

Tbh I dont doubt for a second that we can govern ourselves. I even think we can do it well. See what September brings I guess!

 

[firstcar-Y10]

I think you have a few valid pointd there but setting out a stall implies a certain amount of telling the truth and we all know that politicians of every party are fairly shite at it.

Tbh I dont doubt for a second that we can govern ourselves. I even think we can do it well. See what September brings I guess!

Think you're right. Say it quietly in case they hear but Holyrood does seem to have its collective head screwed on when it comes to prioritising and decision making up to now (well, compared to England anyway). I just hate that Scotland's being forced to vote either for its hopes or its fears instead of making an informed decision, and I can't help feeling that whatever way it goes the referendum campaign will just leave scars and resentment on both sides. ('cause Scotland just doesn't have enough of that now!)
As long as I can still visit I'm happy either way. I promise to spend some of my funny English money while I'm there! Oooh and will your petrol be cheaper too?

 

[mrcinquecento]

Don't get so defensive!

I wasn't getting defensive at all! only pointing out that a lot of what is put on the table from "No" is fundamentally incorrect and used to feed fears. (i like the debate)

I actually agree with some of your points raised.

I never said Scotland were just 'using' British services at the moment, You are part of Britain at the moment, of course it's as much yours as anybody elses. Independence does change that though, of course what's in Scotland stays with Scotland (although using that argument what's in the rest of the UK stays with them too, you can't have it both ways).

We aren't looking for it "both ways", what is both ways? what would we be getting that we don't already fund on our own land? If we're talking solely about currency as an isolated issue, Sterling is our currency. It will be after referendum regardless. We're not looking to steal it off anybody! the only debate on it is whether it is tied into the world economy/exchange as a whole with one rate via one central bank (Bank of e, or separately with independent rates and values via 2, band of e and bank of s). A currency union suits both parties, especially if one "market" begins to outperform another post independence. For example, should the Scottish market begin to outperform the English market (or vice versa), it significantly affects foreign business interests as to where they may set up camp. If we get that right, then not having a currency union could well prove a massive advantage for us and a disadvantage for the Uk (or again vice versa should the opposite happen). A currency union would be more stable for both, not entering one is basically just cutting a nose off to spite a face.

Should this have been agreed beforehand? yes. I agree with you fully on that. But equally, i think as the debate has gone on there has been significant goalpost moving on both sides, so even if it had been agreed, frankly that agreement would have meant nothing anyway.

I'm not even arguing that monetary union would be wrong, although for Scotlands politicians to assume its going to happen without bothering to check with Westminster or the Bank of England was perhaps a tad rash, whatever they think they might be 'entitled' to we will be dealing with 2 separate countries both of whom have to agree.

See above.

The point I'm making is that these discussions should not be part of the campaigning, they should have been had before, argued out, and then whatever agreements could be thrashed out that is what should have been put to the Scottish people. If you were taking on say a builder and he's asking you to sign a contract that says he'll probably build you a house and he reckons he can persuade someone to connect it to the electric and he's pretty sure the neighbours will be OK to let you put a drive across their garden, and all the other houses have drains so there must be something nearby to put your waste into you'd be wanting something a bit more before you signed up. (although actually, that was more or less the deal for Holyrood wasn't it) That's what's being offered to the Scottish people right now, fortunately politicians are a lot more trustworthy than builders.........
I lived in Scotland a long time and I don't doubt you could go it alone and it really saddens me that this dogs dinner is what's being offered as a referendum. If Scotland votes yes then you have to stand by and wait to see what you've actually voted for and that's just not fair.
Glad I don't have to vote on it anyway. Good luck!

again, similar to above, i agree. A lot of goalpost moving has happened though on both sides, overall the whole debate is shambolic on both sides. Both are too focused on making it against an individual or party and feeding on fear. All that is creating is uncertainty amongst voters...which probably benefits no more than yes. Yes haven't done a good enough job of shooting down no fear (No, to this day have not even made one positive statement as to why it is best for all to vote No, it has all been project fear.... we'll all be bankrupt, we'll all be dead at 30, we'll be at war with Russia etc etc etc), Yes have not done anywhere near enough to back up most their claims though, the default position is "grrrr.... tories..... you don't like them, don't trust them" overall it's a mess.

 

[clock34]

ive got no vote being english but from my point of view its a yes...

would be interesting alone to see what happens to the medical services, which i know are funded by scotland but alot is shared with england and vice versa. universities also as i beleive at the min there all free for you guys however all funded by england? (not totally sure but the way scottish folk at my uni described it).

id like to see a strong/stronger scotland than what is now, you have your own parliment, law and people i dont see why you wouldnt want to be more indipendant from england and our choices. however i think you have alot of indipendance on politics over england anyways so im unsure much would change?

what about immigration? it would HAVE to be the same as england otherwise people would just come here and drive up or vice versa so who decides on that?

money wise the bank of england is subsidised by scotland but i beleive thats only as a right to use it? part of a ancient agreement.

(just re-read. dont want to come across as wanting to play with scotland to see the results. but seems its a incredibly complex situation and alot gets overlooked (far more than anyone can see))

 

[lkc]

Time for me to register my thoughts.

At the moment I'm undecided but heading towards the no vote. I'd love to vote yes and if anyone had told me back in the 80s and 90s I'd be seriously considering voting no to independence I would have laughed at them. But here we are and the entire situation has been so badly mismanaged I just can't see me taking the gamble (and it is a very big gamble for me) unless some of the pertinent questions such as currency, business, Europe etc,. are answered in an unambiguous way first.

We need to know what is happening before we can make an informed vote but as it is we're going to have to choose whether to jump ship and hope that everything is split fairly and Europe accepts us (and no that is not clear-cut) or stay with the status quo because it's safe and the worst that will happen is that we allow Westminster to continue doling out our money to us.

The problem with the former is that it is all completely unknown and should have been agreed before we got this far. There are mutterings in Europe that Scotland will only be welcome if we are not going to be a burden and although this is only anecdotal from European colleagues I find it interesting that this is not just coming from those who did the bailing out but those who were bailed out also.

Unfortunately we don't know if we're going to be a burden or not.

We're a small population spread out over a decent-sized country and therefore the costs to maintain our infrastructure are not insubstantial. If we get a fair share of the assets/debts then perhaps we can manage but it is not proven and there is a chance we'll end up on our own and with a lot less than we started it. Perhaps it is a small chance but it is there and I, and many others like me, run the risk of losing my job, pension, home and everything else I've worked hard for over the past 10 years just because we gambled to become self-governing and got it wrong. I'll no doubt be told I'm scaremongering but in reality I'm not. I'm weighing up the odds and deciding if it's worth the risk.

Norway has been mooted as a country we should look to when it comes to independence and I agree. They are a bigger country than ours, have a smaller population and yet have one of the highest living standards in the world. Back in 1905 they voted in the vast majority for independence from Sweden so they must have been doing something right. And oh yeah they did.

Prior to the vote they had most of the institutions and infrastructure in place to make it a safe bet thus reassuring the electorate that they weren't jumping off a wall in the hope they could fly. The transition was fairly smooth for them and if Scotland could promise the same then the vote would be an overwhelming yes. Unfortunately they can't because the UK government won't allow it. Something to fight for perhaps? Well if we had it particularly tough I'd be one of the first to give up my security but in my opinion we don't.

We're not fighting oppression (Ireland), communism (Czechoslovakia) or a disparate foreign policy (Norway). Ok we don't have complete control over what happens to us but we run the important things such as healthcare, education, emergency services etc. Yes it would be nice to have total say in how we spend our money but with increasing globalisation that isn't going to happen anytime soon. Whether we like it or not we have to belong to something be it the EU or UK or risk going it alone and look how well Iceland managed when they tried that. So yeah, for the moment I'm sticking with the UK because it's safe and even if we do leave the only way we'll do it successfully is to be part of Europe.

In which case we're still not in complete control of ourselves.

In answer to onee of Clock's points, our Universities are not funded by England. Scotland is allocated money out of what it sends down to Westminster and we then choose how we spend it. We choose to spend it on free tuition fees for our students whether they study in Scotland or elsewhere.

 

[mrcinquecento]

I'd just like to touch on the jobs aspect.

People say their job is at risk in an independent Scotland, and given the unknowns, i totally respect that. (again, i use this as another reason a currency union for me would be good for both sides, it provides a more stable base for both sides initially as well as for companies to come here or stay here konowing what is happening...providing of course we have similar taxation rates to the rest of the Uk which in a union, we should), but as pointed out, increased globalisation means that perhaps we aren't quite as safe jobs wise by sticking in the uk as the Uk would perhaps like us to believe. We aren't just talking Scotland v uk here, in the global market, is the uk as a whole really, really that good a place for companies and organisations to work from nowadays?

The world as a whole is a smaller place, companies won't take much thought of loyalty if they can get a similar service elsewhere in the world, cheaper. I'm not so sure Britain as a whole can even claim much in the way of having specialist skills that companies would be willing to make moves for. Other countries have caught up and indeed surpassed us.

I agree that thinks maybe are "safer" as the uk, but how much safer?, and what's to say that Westminster won't royally screw Scotland over in a no vote? (not saying they will, but it's also not beyond the realms of possibility to boost figures down south). There's a risk either way, it's more a case of what risks we as a country are willing to take.

I've got a mate that's part English btw, and he is 100% voting no purely on the basis that he hates Alex Salmond and has it in his head that we're going to have a military patrolled checkpoint border and are going to rename potatoes, "tatties" on shop shelves. So hearing sides with real reasons for folk to vote no is rather refreshing to me :laugh:

 

[Venters]

I've got a mate that's part English btw, and he is 100% voting no purely on the basis that he hates Alex Salmond and has it in his head that we're going to have a military patrolled checkpoint border and are going to rename potatoes, "tatties" on shop shelves. So hearing sides with real reasons for folk to vote no is rather refreshing to me :laugh:

Could be worse, he might be one of those who are only voting no because they support rangers. Ofcourse they try and invent reasons to the contrary, but the sad fact of the matter is yes or no, the most important vote in Scottish history is being decided by some because of football.

 

[M21MFS]

Nothing you can do to guard against brainwashing, sadly.

Everyone has the right to vote their own way, it goes without saying, but voting on the basis of following some football team or because you think Alex Salmond is a **** is just plain daft.

If indpendance goes ahead it'll outlive Salmond. Maybe..

 

[mrcinquecento]

Could be worse, he might be one of those who are only voting no because they support rangers. Ofcourse they try and invent reasons to the contrary, but the sad fact of the matter is yes or no, the most important vote in Scottish history is being decided by some because of football.

The Rangers, Rangers died

But agree, sadly all too many people are voting based on nothings like what we call potatoes, thinking Alex Salmond looks like a constipated chipmunk or whether their football teams fans sing rule Britannia.

If we're turning it into a vote against Alex Salmond, does that make it a vote for David Cameron? strangely in that logic of those just voting against Alex Salmond, it doesn't. A lot of these voters with phony non reasons are also the same people who vote Labour (or other) just because their parents did, so they always will etc etc, then claim not to give a **** about politics but will still happily complain about everything when the goons they vote in keep making stuff worse

then they vote for them again.

rinse and repeat.

 

[Stuart]

As for currency... we pretty much have our own anyway.... anyone tried spending Scottish notes anywhere in England or a lot of other places? ( granted its getting better in england) generally damn near impossible. ...

The actual argument for seperating is rather shocking tbh... within about 3 sentences.. it resorts to 'hes just a fat ****' or 'hes an eton boy thats never lived in the real world' we arent getting any answers at all tbh.

And notice the Westminster lot keep ducking a televised debate with salmond? Cos they know he would wipe the floor with them, imo he is an excellent speaker..

BUT at the moment I dont know which way to vote, heart says yes, head says dunno, im a bit scared of the unknown. If it all goes tits up I would just live in another country but theres millions of others who dont have the luxury of that option.

But I know one thing... on the run up to the vote, Mel Gibson will be earning a fortune from re-runs of Braveheart

 

[Venters]

Its the misinformation being spread too. Anyone see the comparison of the front pages in the Scottish express compared with the English express last week. The English version led with a pension crisis in the uk with a 1 billion pound blackhole. But the Scottish express led with pensions may be under threat in independant scotland.