Scotland to become independent in March 2016 if referendum passes

[Benmart]

Can we English people have a referendum to vote on if we want Scotland to remain in the United Kingdom? It seems to be all one way traffic. All these people getting referendums. English people never get referendums for anything.

Between 1973 and 1997, there were 4 referendums in Britain. Between 1997 and 2000, there have been 4 more. However, 7 of these were for local issues and only one was for a national question.

Two have been on Northern Ireland, 4 have been on devolution, one has been on the issue of the Lord Mayor of London. The national one was on whether Britain should join what was then the EEC (European Economic Community). This national one was held in 1975. Since then there has not been a national referendum.

It appears you may be right in that England is long overdue for a referendum. I'm a Yank, but I can call Whitehall and see if something be worked out.

[Benmart]

Can we English people have a referendum to vote on if we want Scotland to remain in the United Kingdom? It seems to be all one way traffic. All these people getting referendums. English people never get referendums for anything.

Between 1973 and 1997, there were 4 referendums in Britain. Between 1997 and 2000, there have been 4 more. However, 7 of these were for local issues and only one was for a national question.

Two have been on Northern Ireland, 4 have been on devolution, one has been on the issue of the Lord Mayor of London. The national one was on whether Britain should join what was then the EEC (European Economic Community). This national one was held in 1975. Since then there has not been a national referendum.

It appears you may be right in that England is long overdue for a referendum. I'm a Yank, but I can call Whitehall and see if something can be worked out.

[rgs2001uk]

Can we English people have a referendum to vote on if we want Scotland to remain in the United Kingdom? It seems to be all one way traffic. All these people getting referendums. English people never get referendums for anything.

Between 1973 and 1997, there were 4 referendums in Britain. Between 1997 and 2000, there have been 4 more. However, 7 of these were for local issues and only one was for a national question.

Two have been on Northern Ireland, 4 have been on devolution, one has been on the issue of the Lord Mayor of London. The national one was on whether Britain should join what was then the EEC (European Economic Community). This national one was held in 1975. Since then there has not been a national referendum.

It appears you may be right in that England is long overdue for a referendum. I'm a Yank, but I can call Whitehall and see if something can be worked out.

I'm a Yank, but I can call Whitehall and see if something can be worked out.

Please do, tell them to stick Brussels and their EU up their jacksie, tell them we want Boris for PM.

Thanks for your help.

Tell them they can have HRH Catherine Ashton in return.

[StreetCowboy]

Can we English people have a referendum to find out if we want Scotland in the United Kingdom?

No. Because your opinion on that topic is irrelevant. You could seek a referendum to choose to leave the United Kingdom if you thought that England could manage by themselves, though

SC

[Bagwan]

Any chance that the Scots can house Betty Windsor and her dysfunctional family? She is after all 50% Scottish. Since the other half is German, maybe you could share her with them ?

[super22k]

On a lighter note,there used to be a pub on the English/Scottish border near a town called Berwick where the the border actually went through the pub. They had a white line painted on the floor. The white border line also went through the gents toilet,so you could stand in England and Pee into Scotland. What I want to know is,if Scotland gets independence can we English still Pee into it.

[tw25rw]

Should give them Northern Ireland as a leaving present..

[MJP]

If Scotland becomes independent, what happens to Balmoral?

[NeverSure]

Here we go then, the facts as they stand on Scotlands ability to handle independence.

Source

http://www.yesscotland.net/answers/does-scotland-have-what-it-takes-be-independent

Given that your source is the Yes campaign, one has to ask whether your lengthy post consists of facts or propaganda! Despite quoting my previous post in full, interestingly your lengthy post didn't deal with a single point I raised.

For the alternative viewpoint, including counter arguments to the Yes campaign's 'facts' see Better together and No Scotland.

I am English and a Unionist; but I am also a democrat. If the Scottish people do vote for independence, then I will wave a fond farewell and wish good luck to them.

But it should be full independence.

1) No monetary union with the UK.

2) No more financial bail outs to Scottish institutions from Westminster.

3) All UK government institutions, factories, defence bases etc. to leave Scotland.

4) Scotland responsible for it's own security and defence. Including paying for it.

5) Scots to choose; British or Scottish. If they choose Scottish then they lose their British passports and all other rights and privileges that British citizenship bestows.

6) Scots who renounce their British citizenship to take up Scottish citizenship who are living in the remainder of the UK to come under the EEA freedom of movement rules in order to remain there pending Scotland's admission to the EU. Which means, among other requirements, that unemployed Scots in, for example, England would need to find work within three months or return to Scotland.

7) If Scotland fails within a reasonable time frame to gain admission to the EU, then Scottish citizens living in the Uk to make Leave to Remain applications under the UK's immigration rules should they wish to remain.

8) The increased unemployment in Scotland due to the UK government leaving will have a serious effect on the rosy economic picture painted by the Yes campaign!

Etc., etc.

All that may seem a bit harsh, vindictive even. But you can't say you want to be independent when it suits, but remain British when independence is inconvenient; despite the line Salmond and his cronies are trying to peddle.

I'm not European, so my opinion doesn't amount to squat. But I think it would be better if Scotland (assuming it leaves the UK) would encourage the industry that's there from Britain. Most countries benefit from jobs created by business from other countries. Think of Thailand, China, and even the US which has car manufacturers from Japan, Germany etc. providing a lot of jobs where they are. The US even manufactures a lot of Airbus parts and is happy to do it.

I wouldn't join the EU. Its immigration rules are going really hard on the budgets and social structures of the more prosperous countries.

It wouldn't take long to make a Scottish passport valuable. All civilized countries would make agreements with Scotland even if it took a little while.

OK, off my soap box. I don't have an opinion as to whether Scotland "should" become independent.

[MJP]

Here we go then, the facts as they stand on Scotlands ability to handle independence.

Source

http://www.yesscotland.net/answers/does-scotland-have-what-it-takes-be-independent

Given that your source is the Yes campaign, one has to ask whether your lengthy post consists of facts or propaganda! Despite quoting my previous post in full, interestingly your lengthy post didn't deal with a single point I raised.

For the alternative viewpoint, including counter arguments to the Yes campaign's 'facts' see Better together and No Scotland.

I am English and a Unionist; but I am also a democrat. If the Scottish people do vote for independence, then I will wave a fond farewell and wish good luck to them.

But it should be full independence.

1) No monetary union with the UK.

2) No more financial bail outs to Scottish institutions from Westminster.

3) All UK government institutions, factories, defence bases etc. to leave Scotland.

4) Scotland responsible for it's own security and defence. Including paying for it.

5) Scots to choose; British or Scottish. If they choose Scottish then they lose their British passports and all other rights and privileges that British citizenship bestows.

6) Scots who renounce their British citizenship to take up Scottish citizenship who are living in the remainder of the UK to come under the EEA freedom of movement rules in order to remain there pending Scotland's admission to the EU. Which means, among other requirements, that unemployed Scots in, for example, England would need to find work within three months or return to Scotland.

7) If Scotland fails within a reasonable time frame to gain admission to the EU, then Scottish citizens living in the Uk to make Leave to Remain applications under the UK's immigration rules should they wish to remain.

8) The increased unemployment in Scotland due to the UK government leaving will have a serious effect on the rosy economic picture painted by the Yes campaign!

Etc., etc.

All that may seem a bit harsh, vindictive even. But you can't say you want to be independent when it suits, but remain British when independence is inconvenient; despite the line Salmond and his cronies are trying to peddle.

I'm not European, so my opinion doesn't amount to squat. But I think it would be better if Scotland (assuming it leaves the UK) would encourage the industry that's there from Britain. Most countries benefit from jobs created by business from other countries. Think of Thailand, China, and even the US which has car manufacturers from Japan, Germany etc. providing a lot of jobs where they are. The US even manufactures a lot of Airbus parts and is happy to do it.

I wouldn't join the EU. Its immigration rules are going really hard on the budgets and social structures of the more prosperous countries.

It wouldn't take long to make a Scottish passport valuable. All civilized countries would make agreements with Scotland even if it took a little while.

OK, off my soap box. I don't have an opinion as to whether Scotland "should" become independent.

I think you're quite right. Scotland could do very well by being independent. So long as the likes of Alex Salmond are consigned to the dustbin of history and Scotland keeps well clear of Brussels.

[super22k]

StreetCowboy,as an Englishman,I find your remark that Scottish independance from the UK has nothing to do with me a bit sad This is a two way thing. My main point was that English citizens never get referendums for anything but if you read the previous posts,and very intelligent ones,too,you will learn that it has everything to do with England.

If you went through divorce proceedings with your wife would you tell her it was nothing to do with her?

[super22k]

Bye the way,who gets the Immigrants and Asylum seekers?

[NeverSure]

Who gets the Immigrants and Asylum seekers?

The EU. They are the ones that wanted them.

Scotland has one of the best GDPs per capita, and has a real opportunity for a do-over here if it has the wisdom to do it right.

I don't understand why any sovereign country would want to be dictated to by the EU. If Scotland becomes independent, does it really want to support Greece and Italy and Portugal, and countless immigrants and asylum seekers who really know how to work the system?

I would host a party if England broke away from the EU and tightened its immigration policies. I'm really pleased that it kept the GBP.

IMHO almost every Western country including Japan and the Americas need to take a step back and look hard at what they are doing and the long term affects.

The best to everyone across the pond.

[MJP]

NeverSure's right.

I think Scotland has the quality and the capability to become an absolutely world class country on its own. Like Switzerland good.

[jacko45k]

Pity it didn't happen before Gordon Brown!

[StreetCowboy]

StreetCowboy,as an Englishman,I find your remark that Scottish independance from the UK has nothing to do with me a bit sad This is a two way thing. My main point was that English citizens never get referendums for anything but if you read the previous posts,and very intelligent ones,too,you will learn that it has everything to do with England.

If you went through divorce proceedings with your wife would you tell her it was nothing to do with her?

The issue is self-determination. We can't force the English (or the Welsh or Northern Irish) to leave the UK. The only part we get a voice in is whether Scotland remains in the UK. And similarly, the English can push for a referendum to leave the UK, if that is what they wish.

SC

[NoshowJones]

Scotland should have been independent years ago, Scotland will not vote for independence next year. The Scottish mentality is " my father votes Labour, so I must vote Labour also" If I had my choice it would be UKIP.

What I'm saying is, as a Scot, if I had the choice of a united Britain with UKIP in control, or an independent Scotland, I would take the former. I detest every British government in my adult life time, particularly Labour.

No UK government has ever done anything for the working man, all they have given us is Lies, Lies and more Lies. In saying that, Margaret Thatcher did get some things right, only some things. ie allowing us to buy our homes as sitting tenants, without that, I would not be here in Thailand today.

And you honestly think a Scottish government wouldn't rip you off and treat you like <deleted>?

Of course they would rip you off, I would say where the UK is concerned, that about 95% of politicians will rip off the ordinary working man, they are only interested in themselves, the Labour party have more hypocrites and liars than all the other parties put together, and Scotland will be full of them if they remain part of the UK, which they will still be after next year.

[bangon04]

On a more serious note - if that is at all possible - what will happen to all those Scots who carry UK Passports, live in the UK, draw UK benefits, etc?

Yes - how will the British Trades Union system continue to function without all the Scots convenors, activists and spokesmen?

How will Match of the Day continue to function without all the Scots pundits and managers?

What will happen to all the empty seats in Westminster when the Scots born MPs go back to bonnie Scotland?

At least the great universities of Edinburgh and St Andrews will be filled with pure Scots (non-fee-paying) students. so they will be more successful until they close for lack of funds.

[IMA_FARANG]

I think the referendum is a slam dunk.

There was just an hour long program on that subject on Al Jazera last week.

Narrator was a Scot born woman who was married to an English man and lived in England.

She traveled back to Scotland and talked to many people there about their opinions on the referendum.

Her conclusion was that there was a lot of uncertainty even among the Scots she talked to in Scotland .... it's not a "slam dunk" by any means.

A lot of Scots want it with their 'heart", but in their "head" they are not sure it will work.

To be clear, I have no opinion either way, I'm just telling you what the documentary said.

[coma]

I think the referendum is a slam dunk.

There was just an hour long program on that subject on Al Jazera last week.

Narrator was a Scot born woman who was married to an English man and lived in England.

She traveled back to Scotland and talked to many people there about their opinions on the referendum.

Her conclusion was that there was a lot of uncertainty even among the Scots she talked to in Scotland .... it's not a "slam dunk" by any means.

A lot of Scots want it with their 'heart", but in their "head" they are not sure it will work.

To be clear, I have no opinion either way, I'm just telling you what the documentary said.

Intersting indeed. But if Andy Murray has anything to do with it ..........

[Scott]

A post with the comment inside another quote has been deleted.

[simple1]

An article in the Financial Times indicates that those calling for independence are underestimating the detrimental fiscal impact. You may like to discuss.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/51348232-51f8-11e3-adfa-00144feabdc0.html

[awayego]

If Scotland becomes independent, what happens to Balmoral?

Well, some suggestions:

1. Turn it into a national park and Centre for the Environment.

2. It could become Scotland's version of Chequers. On second thoughts the cost would be unjustifiable.

3. Make it totally secure and keep the entire Royal family and all their hangers on under permanent house arrest, provided of course that it was all funded by Westminster.

Any other suggestions?

[StreetCowboy]

Suradit69, by 'killing our bank' does your friend mean the £20 billion the UK government paid to bail out the Royal Bank of Scotland in 2008? Money which mainly came from English taxpayers.

By 'threatened our oil refinery' does he mean the dispute between the Swiss owners, Ineos, and the union, Unite, which nearly closed Grangemouth. A dispute settled after the British government promised £125 million in loan guarantees? (Yes, I am aware that the Scottish government promised £9 million, too. Where's that money coming from, I wonder? The grants they receive from English tax payers?)

Maybe you could also ask your friend to comment on this:

BAE closure of Portsmouth shipyard prompts political row

The coalition has been accused of sacrificing Portsmouth's 500-year-old shipbuilding tradition to save the industry in Glasgow before Scotland's independence referendum, as it unveiled plans for almost 1,800 job losses in the two cities.

Philip Hammond, the Conservative defence secretary, said it was "regrettable but inevitable" that BAE Systems' Portsmouth site would have to close, as there would no longer be enough orders to sustain two major military shipyards in the UK.

The closure in Portsmouth removes the immediate threat of closure from Glasgow's Scotstoun and Govan yards, although 835 jobs will be lost at those sites as well as at two other locations, in Fife and Bristol. These will be kept open to build three patrol boats while they wait to begin construction on millions of pounds' worth of type 26 warships in 2015.

However, ministers faced claims that they were playing politics with UK jobs as Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary, said it would be difficult to award the type 26 work to Scotland if the country voted to leave the UK in 2014.

Here we go then, the facts as they stand on Scotlands ability to handle independence.

Source

http://www.yesscotland.net/answers/does-scotland-have-what-it-takes-be-independent

Question:

Does Scotland have what it takes be independent?

Answer:

The question is not whether Scotland can afford to be independent. We have the people, resources and ingenuity to prosper. Instead we should be asking, why isn’t Scotland doing better, given all the natural and human wealth we enjoy?

Being an independent country is all about making Scotland a better place to live, with greater prosperity and higher standards of living. That is the purpose and the reason why so many Scots are passionate about an independent Scotland.

People ask, can we afford to be independent? Many have heard the claim that spending in Scotland is much higher than elsewhere in the UK. What is less well known is that tax revenues generated by Scotland are much higher too.

The 2011-2012 Government Expenditure and Revenue figures show that Scotland got 9.3% of UK spending, but generated 9.9% of UK taxes (due in part to high oil revenues in that year). When we take into account all parts of the financial equation, spending, revenue and borrowing, this means we contributed £4.4 billion more than 'our share'. This pattern has been repeated over the last 6 years: Scotland’s finances have been stronger than the UK. And looking over a period of 30 years, we have had a relative surplus of £19 billion.

The UK government has published figures on Scotland's finances since devolution began in 1999. They showed that Scotland's accounts matched the UK's to within £1 per person for each year. If the UK government were to rerun the same calculations in light of the 2011-12 figures, they would now show that Scotland's public finances have been stronger than the UK's looking at the whole period since devolution.

Taken together, these figures for the most recent years, the devolution years and over a 30 period tell us that Scotland has sufficiently strong financial foundations. These figures are not about forecasting the future, because one of the reasons for becoming independent is to grow our economy faster and improve our financial position. However they do confirm that Scotland is wealthy enough to be an independent nation, if we so choose.

Some people worry that an independent Scotland wouldn’t be able to deal with the high level of debt, but figures released in January 2012 by City firm M&G Investments showed that, at the time, Scotland’s debt as a percentage of national wealth was smaller than the UK’s. For Scotland it was 56%, for the UK 63% - as the report said, Scotland’s starting point looks better than the UK as a whole.

The Scottish Government's Fiscal Commission working group, which includes two Nobel Laureates, has provided updated estimates in February 2013. These look forward to a point after Scotland would be independent. They say that if Scotland assumed a population share of UK public sector net debt, in 2017-18 our debt would be equivalent to 72% of Scotland's national wealth. This would be lower than the equivalent UK figure of 77%.

Thanks to North Sea oil and gas, an asset worth well over £1 trillion, we have one of the best safety nets for the future. The wholesale value of this asset is as much as ten times our share of the national debt.

But oil and gas aren’t our only guarantees for the future. Scotland has 25% of the EU’s offshore tidal and wind energy potential, which will be worth billions every year. For our size, we have the strongest university research base in the world. We have key and growing industries including tourism, food & drink (including whisky), the financial sector, engineering and life sciences. These are firm foundations for success.

Thanks for identifying the source of the quote. In the interests of fair and balanced discussion, I think it would have been useful to have the opposition view as well, rather than just repeating the propaganda from the "Yes" campaign web site.

SC

[awayego]

Suradit69, by 'killing our bank' does your friend mean the £20 billion the UK government paid to bail out the Royal Bank of Scotland in 2008? Money which mainly came from English taxpayers.

By 'threatened our oil refinery' does he mean the dispute between the Swiss owners, Ineos, and the union, Unite, which nearly closed Grangemouth. A dispute settled after the British government promised £125 million in loan guarantees? (Yes, I am aware that the Scottish government promised £9 million, too. Where's that money coming from, I wonder? The grants they receive from English tax payers?)

Maybe you could also ask your friend to comment on this:

BAE closure of Portsmouth shipyard prompts political row

The coalition has been accused of sacrificing Portsmouth's 500-year-old shipbuilding tradition to save the industry in Glasgow before Scotland's independence referendum, as it unveiled plans for almost 1,800 job losses in the two cities.

Philip Hammond, the Conservative defence secretary, said it was "regrettable but inevitable" that BAE Systems' Portsmouth site would have to close, as there would no longer be enough orders to sustain two major military shipyards in the UK.

The closure in Portsmouth removes the immediate threat of closure from Glasgow's Scotstoun and Govan yards, although 835 jobs will be lost at those sites as well as at two other locations, in Fife and Bristol. These will be kept open to build three patrol boats while they wait to begin construction on millions of pounds' worth of type 26 warships in 2015.

However, ministers faced claims that they were playing politics with UK jobs as Alistair Carmichael, the Scottish secretary, said it would be difficult to award the type 26 work to Scotland if the country voted to leave the UK in 2014.

Here we go then, the facts as they stand on Scotlands ability to handle independence.

Source

http://www.yesscotland.net/answers/does-scotland-have-what-it-takes-be-independent

Question:

Does Scotland have what it takes be independent?

Answer:

The question is not whether Scotland can afford to be independent. We have the people, resources and ingenuity to prosper. Instead we should be asking, why isn’t Scotland doing better, given all the natural and human wealth we enjoy?

Being an independent country is all about making Scotland a better place to live, with greater prosperity and higher standards of living. That is the purpose and the reason why so many Scots are passionate about an independent Scotland.

People ask, can we afford to be independent? Many have heard the claim that spending in Scotland is much higher than elsewhere in the UK. What is less well known is that tax revenues generated by Scotland are much higher too.

The 2011-2012 Government Expenditure and Revenue figures show that Scotland got 9.3% of UK spending, but generated 9.9% of UK taxes (due in part to high oil revenues in that year). When we take into account all parts of the financial equation, spending, revenue and borrowing, this means we contributed £4.4 billion more than 'our share'. This pattern has been repeated over the last 6 years: Scotland’s finances have been stronger than the UK. And looking over a period of 30 years, we have had a relative surplus of £19 billion.

The UK government has published figures on Scotland's finances since devolution began in 1999. They showed that Scotland's accounts matched the UK's to within £1 per person for each year. If the UK government were to rerun the same calculations in light of the 2011-12 figures, they would now show that Scotland's public finances have been stronger than the UK's looking at the whole period since devolution.

Taken together, these figures for the most recent years, the devolution years and over a 30 period tell us that Scotland has sufficiently strong financial foundations. These figures are not about forecasting the future, because one of the reasons for becoming independent is to grow our economy faster and improve our financial position. However they do confirm that Scotland is wealthy enough to be an independent nation, if we so choose.

Some people worry that an independent Scotland wouldn’t be able to deal with the high level of debt, but figures released in January 2012 by City firm M&G Investments showed that, at the time, Scotland’s debt as a percentage of national wealth was smaller than the UK’s. For Scotland it was 56%, for the UK 63% - as the report said, Scotland’s starting point looks better than the UK as a whole.

The Scottish Government's Fiscal Commission working group, which includes two Nobel Laureates, has provided updated estimates in February 2013. These look forward to a point after Scotland would be independent. They say that if Scotland assumed a population share of UK public sector net debt, in 2017-18 our debt would be equivalent to 72% of Scotland's national wealth. This would be lower than the equivalent UK figure of 77%.

Thanks to North Sea oil and gas, an asset worth well over £1 trillion, we have one of the best safety nets for the future. The wholesale value of this asset is as much as ten times our share of the national debt.

But oil and gas aren’t our only guarantees for the future. Scotland has 25% of the EU’s offshore tidal and wind energy potential, which will be worth billions every year. For our size, we have the strongest university research base in the world. We have key and growing industries including tourism, food & drink (including whisky), the financial sector, engineering and life sciences. These are firm foundations for success.

Thanks for identifying the source of the quote. In the interests of fair and balanced discussion, I think it would have been useful to have the opposition view as well, rather than just repeating the propaganda from the "Yes" campaign web site.

SC

Be useful then. Give us a quote of similar length from the "NO Campaign" propaganda. In the interests of fair and balanced discussion of course (LOL).

[MJP]

If Scotland becomes independent, what happens to Balmoral?

Well, some suggestions:

1. Turn it into a national park and Centre for the Environment.

2. It could become Scotland's version of Chequers. On second thoughts the cost would be unjustifiable.

3. Make it totally secure and keep the entire Royal family and all their hangers on under permanent house arrest, provided of course that it was all funded by Westminster.

Any other suggestions?

It needs to be a cash cow, so high end holiday destination. It would be a big earner.

[Skint]

The paper won't sway my decision, independence is what's needed and now is the time to do it.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[sms747]

Scotland has been a financial drain on England for ever, I hope they vote yes to independence, the free loading whiners will regret it if they do. They could always have Gordon Brown as a leader!

Edited November 26, 2013 by sms747

[Chicog]

If Scotland becomes independent, what happens to Balmoral?

Well, some suggestions:

1. Turn it into a national park and Centre for the Environment.

2. It could become Scotland's version of Chequers. On second thoughts the cost would be unjustifiable.

3. Make it totally secure and keep the entire Royal family and all their hangers on under permanent house arrest, provided of course that it was all funded by Westminster.

Any other suggestions?

It needs to be a cash cow, so high end holiday destination. It would be a big earner.

American, Japanese and Chinese tourists would pay a small fortune for the opportunity to sit on the Queen's Gary Glitter.

[MJP]

If Scotland becomes independent, what happens to Balmoral?

Well, some suggestions:

1. Turn it into a national park and Centre for the Environment.

2. It could become Scotland's version of Chequers. On second thoughts the cost would be unjustifiable.

3. Make it totally secure and keep the entire Royal family and all their hangers on under permanent house arrest, provided of course that it was all funded by Westminster.

Any other suggestions?

It needs to be a cash cow, so high end holiday destination. It would be a big earner.

American, Japanese and Chinese tourists would pay a small fortune for the opportunity to sit on the Queen's Gary Glitter.

Absolutely!

Scotland has a real chance here. Casinos like Monaco, off-shore banking like Switzerland, high quality high end tourism, fishing, oil and gas, re-start real shipbuilding.

The only problem I see is Alex Salmond.

Edited November 26, 2013 by Scott