Jump to content

The Big Scottish Independence Debate


Laurence

Recommended Posts

 

No I don't, because if there was, there would be a resounding and unstoppable shift of opinion in favour of independence, and that's not what the rest of the UK wants.

 

It would be too late because we would have voted to stay and wouldnt have another one so soon after so don't expect another for 25+ years unless something huge happens like the uk leaving europe and even that might not be enough!

 

I don't think it is as simplistic as that.  What is for certain is that there is no going back if there is a "YES" vote.  If we vote "YES" and then regret it we could only ever return to the UK if the rest of the UK wanted us back - and they won't.  If it is a "NO" vote then I think it all depends on the strength of feeling.  If polls showed a consistent majority in favour over 5 or 10 years or so  then I can't see how the UK Government could ignore that.  If a majority of Scots voters consistently demonstrate they want independence then we will have it.  Up to this point in time, the majority of Scottish voters have consistently indicated that they do not want independence and therefore now is not the time to take such an irrevocable step.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either way it's a fait accompli now. That vote is going ahead, regardless, in a few days time!

 

That's why, when you start a hare running  you had better be pretty certain that that hare will cross the finishing line ahead of the rabbits, foxes, racoons and cockroaches. No offence intended ..just hyperbole. :smile:

Well, I can agree with you on this one SP!   :smile:

 

I think it is going to be a very close call on Sep 18th and if the result is for independence it will be somewhat ironic that the 2 people most responsible for the break up of the Union will be 2 Conservative and Unionist PMs.  Firstly there was Thatcher.  Single handedly she destroyed the standing of the Tory party north of the Border and fuelled the fans of nationalism by her insensitive policies and arrogance.  Secondly there is David Cameron who naively agreed to a referendum, despite polls never having showed a majority in favour of independence, in the belief that we would say "No" and then the issue would go away and support for the SNP would wane.  I wonder, will Cameron resign if Scotland votes "Yes"?

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

It is well documented that many Tory MP's would like to do with the NHS what they done with BT and BG and all the other national institutes that were privatised.

 

In that case it'll be easy for you to provide a link to demonstrate this.

 

Remind me, which side is "project fear"?!

 

The English folk wouldn't stand for the things you talk about any more than the Scots would. Everybody wants the same thing from the NHS.

 

 

The "English folk" voted for the Tories--we didn't, and haven't done for decades, which suggests strongly that we do indeed want starkly different things from our governments and social services.

 

I don't think there is a huge difference.  The rest of the UK is generally pretty moderate politically as was illustrated by a pretty lengthy run of labour administrations before the current one ( which, let us not forget, is actually a coallition because the Tories dod not get an overall majority).  Fot those who keep to the view that Scots have no influence on a Tory dominated Westminster, let us not forget that the previous PM was a Scottish Labour MP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In May we have a General Election.  It is fascinating to think what might happen in the event of a "Yes" vote.

 

Whilst the current administration at Westminster would open negotiations with the Scottish Government, all could change in May.  There is the real prospect of Labour being elected with Ed Milliband becoming PM and he would then be responsible for the final agreements.  However, if that happens, it might be only because of the number of Scottish Labour MPs elected.  When Scotland actually becomes independent, Scottish MPs would then relinquish their seats and Labour might become a minority government which would not be tenable.  Labour would lose a vote of no confidence and another General Election for rUK would be held.

 

With that scenario in the offing, Milliband would be desperate to get certain key bits of legislation through before Independence and he would only be able to do so with the support of his numerous Scottish MPs.  Those MPs might be Labour MPs but they would also be Scottish MPs who will be looking for political careers in a Scottish Government.  They will be looking to gain favour with the Scottish electorate and they will do that by helping to secure a good deal for Scotland in the post referendum negotiations.  Regardless of whether they were in favour of Independence or not, in the reality of independence their loyalty will be with Scotland and not with UK Labour.  The price Milliband would have to pay to ensure their support for UK legislation would be in making concessions to Scotland.

 

If the Tories win the May election, they will have no such worries and will negotiate very hard indeed.  It will be backlash time.  If the best option for Scotland is a Labour Government propped up by Scots labour MPs, it will be interesting to see what the tactic of the SNP will be for the general election.  With independence won, would there actually be any point in them standing for the UK parliament for 10 months?  The SNP are certainly going to have no influence on the party in power in the UK and it would be in their interest to have as many labour MPs as possible.  So would they simply not stand and instead suggest to voters that they should vote for whoever the electorate feel can best further Scotland's cause in the negotiations?

 

It could be fascinating - not to mention highly disruptive for the government of rUK.   If the people in the rest of the UK think the Scottish referendum has little impact on them, they are about to discover that it does!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should perhaps be pointed out that the editorial above is actually from Wings over Scotland, not the Scotsman!

You're not wrong Yngwie though it should also be pointed out that it is a few paragraphs copied from the Scotsman article. Some of article is reproduced below and heres a link. http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-english-backlash-warning-1-3514735?fid=15991&isc=1&did=bookmark.7d626d9fdbe9e961305f1dd04b9d003a9ab45f4e&ctp=article

 

 

  • by SCOTT MACNAB
 

 

Updated on the 20 August

2014

12:55

Published 20/08/2014 00:00

 
 
 
 

comments Have your say!

 

 

AN ENGLISH backlash against Scotland’s demands for greater political power is looming, whatever the outcome of the independence referendum.

 

Alex Salmond’s proposals for a currency union are opposed by two-to-one among English voters, who say the UK should block an independent Scotland joining Nato and the European Union, according to new polling evidence today.

Even after a No vote, people south of the Border say public spending in Scotland should be reduced to bring it into line with the UK average, which the SNP has warned could see £4 billion removed from the Scottish budget.

 

Get the latest referendum news, opinion and analysis from across Scotland and beyond on our new Scottish Independence website

 

“The English appear in no mood to be particularly accommodating however Scots choose to vote in their independence referendum,” said researcher Professor Richard Wyn Jones, of Cardiff University. “There is strong English support for reducing levels of public spending in Scotland to the UK average – a development that would lead to savage cuts in public services north of the Border.

“There is also overwhelming English support for limiting the role of Scottish MPs at Westminster. The question for Scottish voters is whether they can rely on pledges about the consequences of a No vote, when such pledges do not seem to be supported in the largest and most important part of the Union.”

The YouGov poll of 3,695 English adults was carried out in April, but held back until now by the Economic and Social Research Council, which commissioned it.

Only 23 per cent agreed with the proposition that “an independent Scotland should be able to continue to use the pound”, while 53 per cent disagreed. Conservative Party supporters (69 per cent) are most opposed and 64 per cent of Ukip supporters are against sharing the pound. The figure for Labour supporters is 46 per cent and Liberal Democrats 49 per cent.

Even if Scots reject independence, the majority (62 per cent) of people south of the Border believe it is time to get tough. The poll says 56 per cent want public spending in Scotland – about £1,300 higher per head than in the rest of the UK – to be brought in line with the UK average. And 62 per cent want Scotland MPs barred from voting on English-only issues.

But support for greater Holyrood powers is strong in England, with 42 per cent agreeing that the Scottish Parliament should be given control of the majority of taxes raised in Scotland.

A spokesperson for Yes Scotland said: “It is a real concern for a growing number of Scots that Scotland’s budget is in Westminster’s crosshairs and waiting to be slashed in the event of a No vote.”

The pro-union Better Together campaign said English opposition to sharing the pound was to be expected. Labour MSP Jackie Baillie said: “It is not surprising that the majority of people in England do not support a currency union. For us in Scotland, it would mean handing over control of our economy to what would then be a foreign country.”

Professor Charlie Jeffery of the University of Edinburgh, another of the researchers, said: “It is striking how tough people in England are on Scotland whatever the referendum outcome. If anything, the message appears to be: ‘Vote Yes by all means, but if you do, you’re on your own.’

“But if Scots vote No, there’s something similar at play. Here the message is: ‘By all means have more devolution, but you can’t then have the role at Westminster you do now, and don’t expect any funding to flow northwards from England’.”

Edited by Alex MacLeod
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I detect a change in your viewpoint, DD, which is encouraging.

You are talking about "we" and "us" as if you are a true Scotsman now.

It had to happen; the longer you stay in a country or place then the more you grow to love it and identify with it. This is not about Scotland or England per se -- it's about FREEEEDOM!

All you need to do now to solidify your position is by voting yes and the loop is completed.

Welcome to the club, Doofers Dad. You're the man.

YES!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top marks for Yngwie for spotting that the sentiments expressed in Alex's post were not from the "Scotsman".  It is difficult to see how the actual "Scotsman" article can be seen as supporting independence but one gets quite a different sense when you read the bits which were attributed to it but were not in the article.   One relevant bit states - 

 

"Scottish voters are about to be faced with a stark choice. They can choose to take responsibility for their own affairs and manage the future with the security of a massive oil bonanza behind them, or they can choose to run away from responsibility and go crawling to a Westminster which will be under enormous pressure from voters to punish them viciously in the name of “more devolution”."

 

This sneaky add on is nonsense of course but is exactly the the sort of thing that persuades those emotionally attracted to the concept of Independence that Salmond's vision of a wealthy land of social harmony and justice (milk and honey too, no doubt) is there for the taking if only we have the "courage" to vote "YES".  Truth is there is no oil bonanza massive or otherwise.  Oil production has fallen every year since it peaked in 1999 and is now running at around 30% of those levels.  Exploration is down and the amount of oil being discovered is falling. 

 

Last year UK tax revenues from oil were £4.7bn and the office for budget responsibility forecasts these will drop to £3.5bn by 2018/19.  The Scottish Government's own predictions are for revenue for the Scottish sector of between £3.2 and £8bn by 2018/19.  The upper figure is unlikely to be realised and clearly it would be prudent to budget for the lower end figures.  Beyond that, nobody is seriously suggesting revenues will rise much beyond that, and whilst there may be periodic peaks of activity, the general consensus is that revenues will slowly drop off over the next 25 years.

 

Coming back to what was actually in the Scotsman article there is the suggestion that the UK Government might end the benefit Scotland receives in public funding in the event of a no vote.  That is speculation of course, because whilst the English voters may see that as fair, the politicians will want the Scots votes.  What is clear is that whilst an Independent Scotland would receive all the tax revenue from the Scottish Sector, these alone would not be sufficient in order to maintain public sector services at current levels.  As the Scotsman article points out, Salmond is warning that £4bn could be removed  from the Scottish budget and that (or should it be £7.2bn) will be what an independent Scotland would need to find.  Given the total UK oil revenue is less than that, it is clear that the freedom independence would give is the freedom for the Scottish Government to decide whether it raises taxes or cuts public spending first in order to address the budget deficit. 

 

Added to that are the costs of setting up the infrastructure of a new state and a requirement to pay £5.5bn annually as Scotland's share of the UK debt. You really have to ask where the money is going to come from to maintain peoples standards of living in Scotland at the level we currently have.  As for all the milk and honey stuff about a fairer and more equal society, you can forget it. No matter how appealing it sounds in principle, Scotland does not have the cash to boost the wages of the lower paid and if it tries to increase taxes of the rich they will simply b*gger of south of the border and not pay any tax into the Scottish exchequer.

 

If Salmond tries to go ahead with his social vision he will bankrupt us.  He's promised us oil but what we'll get is Greece.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I detect a change in your viewpoint, DD, which is encouraging.

You are talking about "we" and "us" as if you are a true Scotsman now.

It had to happen; the longer you stay in a country or place then the more you grow to love it and identify with it. This is not about Scotland or England per se -- it's about FREEEEDOM!

All you need to do now to solidify your position is by voting yes and the loop is completed.

Welcome to the club, Doofers Dad. You're the man.

YES!

Sorry SP, but as you will see from my post above my view has not changed!

 

I talk about "we" and "us" because I live in Scotland and pay my taxes in Scotland and have done for 40 years.  The decision we make on Sep 18 affects me personally as much as anyone born and bred in Scotland.  If we are talking about freedom, I think that independence may actually curtail the freedom of many.  Within the UK Scots get the best of both worlds, the security that being part of a larger economy brings plus the freedom to make decisions on a wide range of devolved issues.  The English don't get that.   We have levels of freedom as part of the UK that William Wallace could never have dreamed of!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What nonsense DD, proper freedom is having total control over all aspects of your own economy and society, and we are nowhere near that. It is commendable that you have Scotland's best interests at heart, but maybe you don't quite get the idea that many would and will choose to be independent no matter what, and that it is a question of honor, pride, and dignity as much as anything else. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just an honest simple question that I would be grateful if one of our "YES" supporting friends would be good enough to answer.

 

Today I got a mailing through the door from the "YES" campaign.  There is a page where it says "Scotland's got what it takes" where it lists a number of things and puts a value to them but with no supporting explanation.  For instance it has "Whisky Export £4,3bn" which I think is an accurate enough annual figure.  It also has "Oil and Gas £1,500 billion".  Can anyone tell me what that figure means?

 

The innocent reader would be excused for thinking these are the sums of money which will come into the Scottish Government to spend but yet total UK tax revenues from oil and gas last year were a mere £4.7bn.  £1,500bn is equivalent to £300,000 for every man woman and child in Scotland and is over 300 times the total annual UK revenue from oil and gas.  I am thinking this might be an estimate of the total value of all remaining recoverable reserves of which only a small proportion of the value will ever come back to the Government as oil tax revenues and even then, this will be spread over 30 to 40 years. 

 

This would appear to be just the latest bit of misleading information aimed at duping people to believe they will be better off in an Independent Scotland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What nonsense DD, proper freedom is having total control over all aspects of your own economy and society, and we are nowhere near that. It is commendable that you have Scotland's best interests at heart, but maybe you don't quite get the idea that many would and will choose to be independent no matter what, and that it is a question of honor, pride, and dignity as much as anything else. 

 

I very much do get the fact that some people's sense of Scottish identity is such that they will choose to be independent no matter what - and I very much respect that view point.  But there are very few who display that level of honesty.  Too many people have that view but are dishonest about what the consequences will be and imply that they want Independence because Scotland will be better off.  You may be happy in a poorer but independent Scotland but I suspect the majority who say they will vote "YES" will do so because they believe they will be better off.  They will not be happy when they realise they have been duped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DD there is misleading information coming from both sides, would you trust a politician?  I have always wanted an Independent Scotland but do not read into all the figures that are always banded about now or when there is an election.  There is also a lot of scare stories but those who are still don't know will have to make their mind up soon or not vote.

 

From today's P & J reporting on the debate in Inverness yesterday, Alan Savage (Ex ICT Chairman) suggested there was an anti-English sentiment underlying in the Independence movement.  "Patriotism is a good thing.  Nationalism is completely different.  History has had some very bad experiences with nationalistic movements.  I often wonder when does nationalism end and racism begin?  Do they overlap?" he asked. 

 

I think that is a terrible statement from a man who has already said he will move his business down south if there is a yes vote.  He obviously has no thoughts for the staff he employs in Inverness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DD there is misleading information coming from both sides, would you trust a politician?  I have always wanted an Independent Scotland but do not read into all the figures that are always banded about now or when there is an election.  There is also a lot of scare stories but those who are still don't know will have to make their mind up soon or not vote.

 

From today's P & J reporting on the debate in Inverness yesterday, Alan Savage (Ex ICT Chairman) suggested there was an anti-English sentiment underlying in the Independence movement.  "Patriotism is a good thing.  Nationalism is completely different.  History has had some very bad experiences with nationalistic movements.  I often wonder when does nationalism end and racism begin?  Do they overlap?" he asked. 

 

I think that is a terrible statement from a man who has already said he will move his business down south if there is a yes vote.  He obviously has no thoughts for the staff he employs in Inverness.

 

I agree that Savage's statement is not clever.  I am an Englishman who has lived in Scotland for 40 years and I can honestly say that I have never been on the receiving end of any animosity because of me being English.  That is one of the things I love about Scotland, there are plenty of things the Scots get very patriotic about but I have never experienced that being translated into anything remotely racist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What nonsense DD, proper freedom is having total control over all aspects of your own economy and society, and we are nowhere near that. It is commendable that you have Scotland's best interests at heart, but maybe you don't quite get the idea that many would and will choose to be independent no matter what, and that it is a question of honor, pride, and dignity as much as anything else. 

 

I very much do get the fact that some people's sense of Scottish identity is such that they will choose to be independent no matter what - and I very much respect that view point.  But there are very few who display that level of honesty.  Too many people have that view but are dishonest about what the consequences will be and imply that they want Independence because Scotland will be better off.  You may be happy in a poorer but independent Scotland but I suspect the majority who say they will vote "YES" will do so because they believe they will be better off.  They will not be happy when they realise they have been duped.

 

 

I don't think you really understand how people think at all; the only "duping" is the whole non-campaign to convince us that we are Better Together, and really once people are free, even those who were most susceptible to all the negativity will realize that yes it is better to have control over your own affairs, and that what we make of our country will be down to us.

 

You seem very sure that all the consequences will be negative, but they won't be, and to wake up every day knowing that you and your country are free will be to many a dream come true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DD there is misleading information coming from both sides, would you trust a politician?  I have always wanted an Independent Scotland but do not read into all the figures that are always banded about now or when there is an election.  There is also a lot of scare stories but those who are still don't know will have to make their mind up soon or not vote.

 

From today's P & J reporting on the debate in Inverness yesterday, Alan Savage (Ex ICT Chairman) suggested there was an anti-English sentiment underlying in the Independence movement.  "Patriotism is a good thing.  Nationalism is completely different.  History has had some very bad experiences with nationalistic movements.  I often wonder when does nationalism end and racism begin?  Do they overlap?" he asked. 

 

I think that is a terrible statement from a man who has already said he will move his business down south if there is a yes vote.  He obviously has no thoughts for the staff he employs in Inverness.

That was the kind of nonsense he was coming out with on QT; clearly he's not the sharpest and has a limited grasp of history and what the Yes campaign is about. In fact, it is insulting to all those who have worked to make this an inclusive, civilized and mature campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Savage's statement is not clever.  I am an Englishman who has lived in Scotland for 40 years and I can honestly say that I have never been on the receiving end of any animosity because of me being English.  That is one of the things I love about Scotland, there are plenty of things the Scots get very patriotic about but I have never experienced that being translated into anything remotely racist.

 

Very few Scots have a problem with English people as individuals, but there is perhaps a bit of anglophobia regarding England, as an institution, with all its....... Englishness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just an honest simple question that I would be grateful if one of our "YES" supporting friends would be good enough to answer.

 

Today I got a mailing through the door from the "YES" campaign.  There is a page where it says "Scotland's got what it takes" where it lists a number of things and puts a value to them but with no supporting explanation.  For instance it has "Whisky Export £4,3bn" which I think is an accurate enough annual figure.  It also has "Oil and Gas £1,500 billion".  Can anyone tell me what that figure means?

 

The innocent reader would be excused for thinking these are the sums of money which will come into the Scottish Government to spend but yet total UK tax revenues from oil and gas last year were a mere £4.7bn.  £1,500bn is equivalent to £300,000 for every man woman and child in Scotland and is over 300 times the total annual UK revenue from oil and gas.  I am thinking this might be an estimate of the total value of all remaining recoverable reserves of which only a small proportion of the value will ever come back to the Government as oil tax revenues and even then, this will be spread over 30 to 40 years. 

 

This would appear to be just the latest bit of misleading information aimed at duping people to believe they will be better off in an Independent Scotland.

The figures are the value of Scotlands exports in whisky, oil and gas. We export oil and gas as well as use it. We export refined products from oil and gas.These are nothing to do with revenue income but more to do with demonstrating that we are a thriving nation. Bear in mind that showing a healthy economy also shows that people are in employment and paying taxes. Its not just about the taxes from the profits of the companies its about the taxes from the people. There are around 42,000 employed directly and indirectly in the Scottish whisky industry and close on 200,000 in oil and gas in Scotland. Assuming an average wage of £30,000 and taxes at 20% thats 1.4 billion to the treasury. Add to that the taxes on spending (VAT, Insurance taxes etc) and it comes to a substantial amount from two industries. Yesterday or the day before the Financial Times ran an article stating that an independent Scotland would be in the top twenty of the worlds wealthiest countries. I'd provide a link but I've no intention of paying a subscription.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is just an honest simple question that I would be grateful if one of our "YES" supporting friends would be good enough to answer.

 

Today I got a mailing through the door from the "YES" campaign.  There is a page where it says "Scotland's got what it takes" where it lists a number of things and puts a value to them but with no supporting explanation.  For instance it has "Whisky Export £4,3bn" which I think is an accurate enough annual figure.  It also has "Oil and Gas £1,500 billion".  Can anyone tell me what that figure means?

 

The innocent reader would be excused for thinking these are the sums of money which will come into the Scottish Government to spend but yet total UK tax revenues from oil and gas last year were a mere £4.7bn.  £1,500bn is equivalent to £300,000 for every man woman and child in Scotland and is over 300 times the total annual UK revenue from oil and gas.  I am thinking this might be an estimate of the total value of all remaining recoverable reserves of which only a small proportion of the value will ever come back to the Government as oil tax revenues and even then, this will be spread over 30 to 40 years. 

 

This would appear to be just the latest bit of misleading information aimed at duping people to believe they will be better off in an Independent Scotland.

The figures are the value of Scotlands exports in whisky, oil and gas. We export oil and gas as well as use it. We export refined products from oil and gas.These are nothing to do with revenue income but more to do with demonstrating that we are a thriving nation. Bear in mind that showing a healthy economy also shows that people are in employment and paying taxes. Its not just about the taxes from the profits of the companies its about the taxes from the people. There are around 42,000 employed directly and indirectly in the Scottish whisky industry and close on 200,000 in oil and gas in Scotland. Assuming an average wage of £30,000 and taxes at 20% thats 1.4 billion to the treasury. Add to that the taxes on spending (VAT, Insurance taxes etc) and it comes to a substantial amount from two industries. Yesterday or the day before the Financial Times ran an article stating that an independent Scotland would be in the top twenty of the worlds wealthiest countries. I'd provide a link but I've no intention of paying a subscription.

 

Thanks for trying to clarify, but the figures for oil and gas cannot be annual export value.  The link here http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fff67a62-88fa-11e3-bb5f-00144feab7de.html#axzz3B7Z5SzkA is pretty factual I think and quotes a Scottish Government spokesman as saying the exports of of oil and gas in 2012 (including to the rest of the UK) to be £24.4bn. 

 

In terms of wider value to the Scottish economy, using your figures of 200,000 earning an average £30,000 gives us a wage bill of £6bn in oil and gas related activity.  The value of oil related exports and the wider benefit to the economy is therefore in the region of £30bn - that is just 2% of the £1,500bn quoted in the "YES" booklet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More good news for Yes :

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-28894313

More than a million people have signed a declaration that they are in favour of Scottish independence, campaigners have said.

Yes Scotland set itself the target of getting a million signatures to its Yes Declaration when it launched in 2012.

First Minister Alex Salmond said at the time that if the target was met, Scotland would become independent.

The pro-UK Better Together campaign has said it still speaks for the majority of Scots.

The Yes Declaration states: "I believe it is fundamentally better for us all, if decisions about Scotland's future are taken by the people who care most about Scotland, that is, by the people of Scotland. Being independent means Scotland's future will be in Scotland's hands."

The announcement of the millionth signature was made at an event attended by the Proclaimers at Dynamic Earth in Edinburgh.

The chief executive of Yes Scotland, Blair Jenkins, said breaking the one million barrier at this stage was a "clear indication" that the pro-independence campaign was on "a winning trajectory".

'Great confidence'

He said: "We are hugely grateful - not just to the one million plus people in Scotland who have now signed the Yes Declaration, but also to our many thousands of volunteers all around the country who have worked so hard to help us reach this target with just under a month still to go.

"More and more people are waking up to the fantastic opportunities created by a Yes vote. People realise that only with a Yes can we protect our NHS and other public services, grow our economy to create better jobs, and make Scotland a fairer society.

"Today's announcement is a clear indication of the level of support we're getting, and it gives us great confidence as we work towards securing a Yes majority on 18 September."

Yes Scotland said that the precise number of signatories was 1,001,186 at 16:00 on Thursday.

A spokesman for Better Together said: "Whilst the nationalists spend a lot of their time talking to nationalists, we are focused on convincing those who have yet to make up their mind that we can have the best of both worlds for Scotland within the UK.

"We can have what the majority of Scots want without taking on all the risks - more powers for Scotland guaranteed, backed up by the strength and security of being part of the larger UK.

"We should say No Thanks to putting that at risk on 18 September."

Just over four million people will be eligible to vote in the referendum on 18 September, when voters will be asked: "Should Scotland be an independent country?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got to say, well done to 'Yes' for reaching that landmark target. I remember thinking that 1,000,000 was asking a lot.

But, what's got to be remembered - and mentioned in the last sentence - is that over 4 million folk are registered. 4.02Million I think is the official figure (rounded up).

Assuming a turn out of 75% - it maybe higher!...then approx. 3 million folk will be voting next month. I would argue that 'Yes' need at least 1,500,000 votes to turn this dream into reality. As commendable as one-million is, they still need another 500,000. ie a city the size of Edinburgh.

Yes, the pro-independence campaign is putting up a good fight, but I reckon they've just got too big a gap to close.

My forecast is 42% YES...58% NO.

 

A side note. I have just read that we may not get the result of the ballot overnight. That would be disappointing. Seemingly, the 32 Council areas will have their own 'results' and the totals only revealed 'as one'.

Argyll and Bute - due to geographical reasons will likely take longer to declare. However, due to the relatively sparse population of that region, it's likely some exit poll results will have leaked and Salmond will have acknowledged defeat by 3am!

 

But joking aside, it'll be fascinating to see if any of the 32 regions have voted YES. In theory 31 regions could vote YES but the overall result could still be a NO!

I predict all 32 regions vote NO.

Edited by Sneckboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy