Jump to content

Scotland to become independent in March 2016 if referendum passes


Recommended Posts

If Scotland was to become independent, then there is nothing stopping Scotland applying for membership.

But this will take time, first it would down to the new government to apply, it may not be even recognized until after separation from the Union, then it will have to negotiate with the EU.

Also remember while negotiating with the EU the rest of of the UK will have it's own referendum on staying in the EU, and I do not think "can we join if the UK stays in" will go down at all well.

During the transition period will we have to impose boarder controls? and if Scotland is not accepted or the UK opts out?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

If Scotland was to become independent, then there is nothing stopping Scotland applying for membership.

But this will take time, first it would down to the new government to apply, it may not be even recognized until after separation from the Union, then it will have to negotiate with the EU.

Also remember while negotiating with the EU the rest of of the UK will have it's own referendum on staying in the EU, and I do not think "can we join if the UK stays in" will go down at all well.

During the transition period will we have to impose boarder controls? and if Scotland is not accepted or the UK opts out?

And you know all this to be fact then???

If so can you please enlighten all of us and reveal where we can all see this info for ourselves?

Or are you just another speculator stating what you think will apply when Scotland becomes independent??

facepalm.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Scotland was to become independent, then there is nothing stopping Scotland applying for membership.

But this will take time, first it would down to the new government to apply, it may not be even recognized until after separation from the Union, then it will have to negotiate with the EU.

Also remember while negotiating with the EU the rest of of the UK will have it's own referendum on staying in the EU, and I do not think "can we join if the UK stays in" will go down at all well.

During the transition period will we have to impose boarder controls? and if Scotland is not accepted or the UK opts out?

And you know all this to be fact then???

If so can you please enlighten all of us and reveal where we can all see this info for ourselves?

Or are you just another speculator stating what you think will apply when Scotland becomes independent??

facepalm.gif

So, tell me, how are Scots folk going to be better off breaking away from the union. ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Scotland was to become independent, then there is nothing stopping Scotland applying for membership.

But this will take time, first it would down to the new government to apply, it may not be even recognized until after separation from the Union, then it will have to negotiate with the EU.

Also remember while negotiating with the EU the rest of of the UK will have it's own referendum on staying in the EU, and I do not think "can we join if the UK stays in" will go down at all well.

During the transition period will we have to impose boarder controls? and if Scotland is not accepted or the UK opts out?

And you know all this to be fact then???

If so can you please enlighten all of us and reveal where we can all see this info for ourselves?

Or are you just another speculator stating what you think will apply when Scotland becomes independent??

facepalm.gif

So, tell me, how are Scots folk going to be better off breaking away from the union. ?

I suggest you have a browse through this website to see just how much has been achieved since

the SNP took over the limited government of Scotland and imagine what could be achieved for

Scotland with independence. Scotland and the south of England are the only two places in UK that

are actually paying their own way in the UK. thumbsup.gif

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/#slide/2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a perfect scenario for a porridge pledging scheme, these schemes are a big hit in some Asian countries.

The currency of Scotland is this..............10 bowls of porridge to the haggis, ......20 haggis to a bottle of whisky..........a bottle of whisky is worth 10 pounds sterling + a picture of a salmon.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry 7by7 but your posts are becoming repetitive, have you nothing original to say? instead of

continual same old same old Salmond bashing, you are getting quite boring mate.

I'll do a deal with you; you stop repeating Salmond's <deleted> and I'll stop proving he's talking <deleted>.

I would also point out that the contigency plans and precautionary measures you refer to are not

about when Scotland gets independence but rather about whether Scotlands currency under

independence is the pound sterling or not. So as I see it when Scotland gains independence and

retains the pound as its' currency these contingency plans and measures will not be required.

Which is why I would venture to suggest they are only plans at this time, nothing decided.

One major flaw in the above.

Despite the pony Salmond is peddling, an independent Scotland will not be allowed to keep Sterling!

I'd explain why, but as you have asked me to stop repeating myself I shall simply refer you to the numerous posts and news reports on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, tell me, how are Scots folk going to be better off breaking away from the union. ?

I suggest you have a browse through this website to see just how much has been achieved since

the SNP took over the limited government of Scotland and imagine what could be achieved for

Scotland with independence. Scotland and the south of England are the only two places in UK that

are actually paying their own way in the UK. thumbsup.gif

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/#slide/2

Looking through that website it seems to me that around 90% of the services provided by the Scottish government are provided in England by county councils!

Scotland paying it's own way? Maybe; but will it still be able to when the subsidies from English taxpayers stop?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry 7by7 but your posts are becoming repetitive, have you nothing original to say? instead of

continual same old same old Salmond bashing, you are getting quite boring mate.

I'll do a deal with you; you stop repeating Salmond's <deleted> and I'll stop proving he's talking <deleted>.

I would also point out that the contigency plans and precautionary measures you refer to are not

about when Scotland gets independence but rather about whether Scotlands currency under

independence is the pound sterling or not. So as I see it when Scotland gains independence and

retains the pound as its' currency these contingency plans and measures will not be required.

Which is why I would venture to suggest they are only plans at this time, nothing decided.

One major flaw in the above.

Despite the pony Salmond is peddling, an independent Scotland will not be allowed to keep Sterling!

I'd explain why, but as you have asked me to stop repeating myself I shall simply refer you to the numerous posts and news reports on this.

I have already shown why Scotland will be entitled to keep the pound it is part owner of the

bank of England along with Wales,England and Northern Ireland, as seen in my previous post.

And BTW I have not quoted anything from Alex Salmond, YET.

English subsidies 5555555 Scotland is susidising England right now.

That will stop after independence, swiftly, the main reason why the UK government want to keep

Scotland in the UK.

Incidently you have spectacularly failed to prove anything you have said so far but you HAVE proved

how adept at speculating you are.

English susidies, cheesy.gifcheesy.gifcheesy.gif

Edited by phuketjock
Link to post
Share on other sites

You have posted lots of links to articles etc. written by Yes supporters repeating Salmond's pony about Scotland having a right to keeping Sterling; but no facts that I can see.

Maybe I've missed such facts hidden among the propaganda; so could you post a link to an independent source to prove Salmond's assertion that it is up to him, and only him, whether or not Scotland keeps Sterling?

Because the only facts on this point that I have seen is that whichever party forms the next British government, they have all said an independent Scotland wont be allowed to keep Sterling nor enter into a currency union with the remainder of the UK.

(0ops, repeating myself again; maybe you'll get it this time?)

Does Scotland get more out of the union than it puts in?

The basic facts are that Scotland accounts for 8.4% of the UK population, 8.3% of the UK's total output and 8.3% of the UK's non-oil tax revenues - but 9.2% of total UK public spending.

Scottish Executive figures for 2009-10 show that spending per capita in Scotland was £11,370, versus £10,320 for the UK. In other words, spending in Scotland was £1,030 - or 10% higher - per head of population than the UK average.

What about revenues? The same source shows Scottish total non-oil tax revenues coming in at £42.7bn in 2009-10, or £8,221 per head, which compares with total public expenditure attributable to Scotland of £59.2bn, or £11,370 per head.


"But what about the oil?" you cry. She deals with that.

But Alex Salmond and his supporters have a more basic objection (phew), which is that the revenue figures for Scotland make no mention of North Sea oil. These are falling, but were still more than £6bn in 2009-10.

If you add in a proportion of those revenues, in line with Scotland's share of the UK population, it makes very little difference to the overall story. But if you say that more than 90% of the oil revenues are Scottish, as Mr Salmond would consider geographically appropriate, then you get Scotland 'putting in' £48.1bn in tax revenues in 2009-10, not £42.7bn.

Put it another way: Scotland provided 9.4% of total UK revenues and got 'only' 9.2% of UK public spending in return.

What she doesn't mention, and Salmond either doesn't know, or more likely has conveniently forgotten, is where the bulk of the investment which made the extraction of North Sea oil possible came from; it wasn't the Scots!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is paying for the new trams in Edinburgh? Without the support of London it would not be happening.

If the Scots get independence the Lib Dems and the Labour party will never win an election again, there are not many Con seats over the border, they have the least to lose but give them their due they want the Scots to stay in the Union regardless, could be a power thing of course, ah well up to you AH HO!

Another whisky please jock!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have posted lots of links to articles etc. written by Yes supporters repeating Salmond's pony about Scotland having a right to keeping Sterling; but no facts that I can see.

Maybe I've missed such facts hidden among the propaganda; so could you post a link to an independent source to prove Salmond's assertion that it is up to him, and only him, whether or not Scotland keeps Sterling?

Because the only facts on this point that I have seen is that whichever party forms the next British government, they have all said an independent Scotland wont be allowed to keep Sterling nor enter into a currency union with the remainder of the UK.

(0ops, repeating myself again; maybe you'll get it this time?)

Does Scotland get more out of the union than it puts in?

The basic facts are that Scotland accounts for 8.4% of the UK population, 8.3% of the UK's total output and 8.3% of the UK's non-oil tax revenues - but 9.2% of total UK public spending.

Scottish Executive figures for 2009-10 show that spending per capita in Scotland was £11,370, versus £10,320 for the UK. In other words, spending in Scotland was £1,030 - or 10% higher - per head of population than the UK average.

What about revenues? The same source shows Scottish total non-oil tax revenues coming in at £42.7bn in 2009-10, or £8,221 per head, which compares with total public expenditure attributable to Scotland of £59.2bn, or £11,370 per head.

"But what about the oil?" you cry. She deals with that.

But Alex Salmond and his supporters have a more basic objection (phew), which is that the revenue figures for Scotland make no mention of North Sea oil. These are falling, but were still more than £6bn in 2009-10.

If you add in a proportion of those revenues, in line with Scotland's share of the UK population, it makes very little difference to the overall story. But if you say that more than 90% of the oil revenues are Scottish, as Mr Salmond would consider geographically appropriate, then you get Scotland 'putting in' £48.1bn in tax revenues in 2009-10, not £42.7bn.

Put it another way: Scotland provided 9.4% of total UK revenues and got 'only' 9.2% of UK public spending in return.

What she doesn't mention, and Salmond either doesn't know, or more likely has conveniently forgotten, is where the bulk of the investment which made the extraction of North Sea oil possible came from; it wasn't the Scots!

So you are disputing the fact that the bank of England is owned by Scotland, England, Northern Ireland and Wales are you?

"Put it another way: Scotland provided 9.4% of total UK revenues and got 'only' 9.2% of UK public spending in return."

From your own post does this not tell you that Scotland is subsidising UK and is perfectly capable of taking very good

finacial care of itself as an independent nation.

I find it fascinating that anyone could even consider the notion that the Scottish oil revenues should be shared out by UK

population when the majority of the oil is in internationally recognised Scottish waters. I can't help wondering if the English

would be so keen to share it if the oil was actually located in internationally recognised English waters????

Quoteing figures that do not include north sea oil revenues is a worthless and pointless exercise.

I think you will find like everywhere else in the world investment in oil exploration comes almost entirely from the large

international oil companies. biggrin.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...