Jump to content

The Big Scottish Independence Debate


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My voting form arrived on the doorstep this morning. After, months and months (and years for some, and 'centuries' for others!) of debate, it's now become very, very real! There will be an actual vot

I have to be honest I have not looked at this post for six months maybe, just got so peeed off with the lies coming from both sides.   Oddquine by the way is a real person, of the more senior genera

Well. of course it does and they have never made any secret of the fact.which is why the Scottish Parliament voting system was deliberately set up by Westminster to ensure there would never be majorit

Posted Images

Not a problem, Wanderer. Glad to oblige form "just an observer". :ohmy:

 

As for the completed referendum, watch this space--you can take the dog out of the fight but you cant take the fight out of the dog.

 

I assume that Boris the bore (and here we in Canada were thinking that our Toronto Rob Ford was the top world hottie controversial Mayor)  and some Prominent others are Putting a lot of Pressure on the P.M.  to dilute the Powers that he has Promised to devolve to Scotland. Pity for him if it works because the eventual outcome will be a very angry Scottish Public who will demand reparations--another referendum ---which will annihilate the current outcome and obliterate the P.M's career once and for all.

 

Mr Cameron is sure between a rock and a hard place now. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

And now he has the added pressure of deciding how many warplanes, or whatever, to send to Iraq together with the added financial burden that that will cause the exchequer.
If he moans to the Scots that he hasn't got the money right now,  this argument will be rejected with cynicism and bitter remarks and I would therefore assume that his promised devolving of powers must be implemented within say, 6 months? And this cost will be added to the National debt as well as the aforementioned costs of the Iraq involvement, which is already huge?

How could this man and his associates have allowed the overall finances to get in such a  a state? Maybe a conjoined Britain (i.e the U K.) is already too big a job for him to govern successfully? And Mr. Salmond might have done him and his Westminster cohorts a favor had they won? i.e handed him a ladder to allow him to climb out of the abyss.

 

I said before that there is trouble ahead as a result of this referendum. Truly, I hope that  you can escape from a tragedy in the short term rather than the long term.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of decent articles from the Grauniad, by the same person............the first written in January 2012, and the second on the day of the result.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jan/13/deborah-orr-scotland-independence-no-vote

 

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/commentisfree/2014/sep/19/scotland-voted-no-next-step-must-not-be-return-to-business-as-usual

 

From the first article........

Unlike the recent succession of British prime ministers, Salmond never wavers from putting the domestic agenda first and foremost. The fact that Salmond can do this, while British prime ministers find such a focus so wearying, is in itself a lesson in why devolved government, with Westminster concentrating on the international matters that its PMs always seem to want to concentrate on anyway, would be good for Scotland, Wales, the English regions, and for all of Britain.

 

And from the second......

We still don’t quite know what Scotland said, in its historic referendum. I’m glad the turnout was large. I’m glad the outcome was decisive. But in an important respect, it wasn’t decisive at all. How many no voters were happy with the status quo? How many would have opted for independence had devo max not been so grudgingly offered at such a late stage? Some of the people of the UK got to speak on Thursday. The truth is, that even on that day, Westminster’s machinations muddied, confused and diluted their message. Business as usual. That does not feel good.

 

Intelligent woman.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the SNP would just rather have the money spent on social services than faster trains around London and faster missiles to fire at nobody. 

 

 

Interestingly enough Robert Peston has just filed a report about the Barnett Formula on the BBC (cue the usual suspects shouting "bias") which shows that per capita spending on railways is actually 72% higher in Scotland than in England. So, it seems, yet another unsubstantiated Nationalist assertion, made to try to provoke dissent and grievance, bites the dust.

On the subject of the Barnett Formula, this referendum has of course now drawn Scotland's considerably higher level of public funding within the Union to the attention of the entire UK and many outwith Scotland will now, understandably, begin to question this.

But I am quite sure that the SNP would be delighted if the Barnett Formula were to be questioned and even more delighted if it a were to be scrapped, leading to lower levels of public spending for the Scottish people. Because this would give them yet another opportunity to sow grievance, division and ill feeling (*) among the Scottish people who in reality count for damn all to the SNP compared with their sole obsession of separation to which everybody and everything else is subsidiary.

 

(*) - remember the good old days when Scotland was actually quite a happy place to live in? I mean the days before the Nats set about their mission to create as much misery and discontent as they possibly could in order to sway the disaffected over to their cause.

Now, after seven years of Nationalist control of Holyrood, Scottish society distinctly oozes with grievance and resentment as the SNP misery machine proceeds on its distinctly unmerry way. You just have to take one look at them to see what a uniformly humourless bunch they are - which is probably why so many of them end up getting married to each other.

Given that the spreading of misery and discontent is such a cornerstone of SNP strategy, That Ghastly Woman must indeed be the overwhelming candidate to become the next SNP leader since she is the possessor of by far the most miserable and discontented looking gob in Scotttish politics. (Mind you, the recent performance of Councillor Liz MacDonald of Nairn may mean that Nippy Sweetie Nicola has competition ere long!)

Edited by Charles Bannerman
Link to post
Share on other sites

We are about to be fracked...isn't the Union wonderful, always pooling and sharing.  After a consultation which included 40,000+ people, 99% of them were opposed to fracking......but as is Westminster's wont.....they have decided to listen to the 1% who didn't object, and the businesses who want to frack for profit.......like Sir Ian Wood, who denied the conclusions of his own oil report in his effort to sook up to Westminster...for fracking licences in Scotland.....or an ermine collared robe ?  Makes one wonder why they aren't listening to the 45% of us who voted for independence rather than the 55% who didn't if numbers against don't count, doesn't it. 

 

Westminster said Whilst a wide range of arguments were raised and points covered, we did not identify any issues that persuaded us to change the basic form of the proposals..which, the cynic in me says, means that it isn't going to affect any of them and will keep their party donors and future employers very happy. I do cynically also observe that 1% is precisely the percentage of people in the UK who have pots of money and houses with gardens big enough that it is unlikely they will be getting fracked under the foundations of their house.

 

Gee, thanks, NO voters!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Charles, one day you may look in a mirror and see the most miserable and discontented looking gob outwith Scottish politics.

 

Oddquine, why is fracking such a big thing when it happens on land yet nobody cares when its been happening under the sea ever since oil and gas were discovered?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So they told us the oil is running out---------http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-29342142

We can't really decide the fate of a nation on hyopthetical conjecture of how some theoretical / early experimetal technique might increase the level of extraction.  Technology is moving forward all the time and work is also taking place about underground gasification of coal and carbon capture and storage.  That potentially may make coal a major factor in our economy again and if truth be told, the English and Welsh coalfields are very much greater than Scottish oil and coal reserves.  They will be important in the long term but were never mentioned in any of the debate I heard or read.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/commentisfree/2014/sep/19/scotland-voted-no-next-step-must-not-be-return-to-business-as-usual

 

 

 

We still don’t quite know what Scotland said, in its historic referendum. I’m glad the turnout was large. I’m glad the outcome was decisive. But in an important respect, it wasn’t decisive at all. How many no voters were happy with the status quo? How many would have opted for independence had devo max not been so grudgingly offered at such a late stage? Some of the people of the UK got to speak on Thursday. The truth is, that even on that day, Westminster’s machinations muddied, confused and diluted their message. Business as usual. That does not feel good.

 

Intelligent woman.

 

How many no voters were happy with the status quo?  We don't know.  It might be an idea to find out.  If the Scottish Government were actually committed to doing what is best for the Scottish people they would be urging the UK Government to take their time with plans for further devolution so that we can get it right.  The macho threats of holding the UK Government to account in keeping to some absurdly short time table smacks of bitterness.  One senses they want the arrangements to fail so that they can justify a 2nd referendum.

 

How many would have opted for independence had devo max not been so grudgingly offered at such a late stage?

Very few actually.  If Devo max is your preferred option and its not on offer, then you vote NO. Simple.  A no vote retains the opportunity for moving to devo max within the union at a later stage.  A YES vote removes any prospect of devo max in the union for ever.  Why on earth would anyone vote for an option which removes for ever the chance of getting what they actually want?

 

Some of the people of the UK got to speak on Thursday.  Quite.  Over 90% of the electorate within the UK got absolutely no say in a vote which nearly split their country in two.  Now that the small minority of us who did have the luxury of a vote have voted decisively that we do not wish to split our country in two, I think it would be reasonable to finally allow time to allow the vast majority of people in the UK to consider and debate the constitutional issues affecting our country.

 

It is of note that the article does not question how many of those who voted YES actually wanted independence.  Clearly many voted YES as a result of the pledges in the White Paper which was as much an SNP election manifesto as it was a Government White Paper.

 

Finally, it should be noted that the SNP have a mandate to govern Scotland in a devolved parliament and they had a mandate to hold a referendum on Independence - which they have now held.  Given that they lost the referendum, I would question whether this SNP Government actually has a mandate to lead on the negotiation about the terms of continuation within the Union.  Should it not be the majority who voted for the Union who take the lead?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/commentisfree/2014/sep/19/scotland-voted-no-next-step-must-not-be-return-to-business-as-usual

 

 

 

We still don’t quite know what Scotland said, in its historic referendum. I’m glad the turnout was large. I’m glad the outcome was decisive. But in an important respect, it wasn’t decisive at all. How many no voters were happy with the status quo? How many would have opted for independence had devo max not been so grudgingly offered at such a late stage? Some of the people of the UK got to speak on Thursday. The truth is, that even on that day, Westminster’s machinations muddied, confused and diluted their message. Business as usual. That does not feel good.

 

Intelligent woman.

 

How many no voters were happy with the status quo?  We don't know.  It might be an idea to find out.  If the Scottish Government were actually committed to doing what is best for the Scottish people they would be urging the UK Government to take their time with plans for further devolution so that we can get it right.  The macho threats of holding the UK Government to account in keeping to some absurdly short time table smacks of bitterness.  One senses they want the arrangements to fail so that they can justify a 2nd referendum.

 

How many would have opted for independence had devo max not been so grudgingly offered at such a late stage?

Very few actually.  If Devo max is your preferred option and its not on offer, then you vote NO. Simple.  A no vote retains the opportunity for moving to devo max within the union at a later stage.  A YES vote removes any prospect of devo max in the union for ever.  Why on earth would anyone vote for an option which removes for ever the chance of getting what they actually want?

 

Some of the people of the UK got to speak on Thursday.  Quite.  Over 90% of the electorate within the UK got absolutely no say in a vote which nearly split their country in two.  Now that the small minority of us who did have the luxury of a vote have voted decisively that we do not wish to split our country in two, I think it would be reasonable to finally allow time to allow the vast majority of people in the UK to consider and debate the constitutional issues affecting our country.

 

It is of note that the article does not question how many of those who voted YES actually wanted independence.  Clearly many voted YES as a result of the pledges in the White Paper which was as much an SNP election manifesto as it was a Government White Paper.

 

Finally, it should be noted that the SNP have a mandate to govern Scotland in a devolved parliament and they had a mandate to hold a referendum on Independence - which they have now held.  Given that they lost the referendum, I would question whether this SNP Government actually has a mandate to lead on the negotiation about the terms of continuation within the Union.  Should it not be the majority who voted for the Union who take the lead?

 

Dont think they will be leading the negotiations. Hasn't Lord Smith of Kelvin been appointed by Cameron to lead a cross party committee

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about new powers ?

The powers they already have , have not been used wisely at times

Take for instance the power to support local authorities and the freezing of council tax

The Highland region needs extra  finance from time to time, The maintenance of clear roadways in winter can put a massive burden on a remote area council such as ours. The miles of old roadways and weak  bridges need constant and expensive attention.  Coupled with the financing and maintenance of small parish and town councils , dotted all over the area.

Small villages often have small schools  with limited  children which are expensive to run,  Tourist information offices have to be provided  in quite remote areas.

If you freeze  Council tax , you are saying to council workers, no pay rises  or there will be cuts to council services.

 

 I could go on and on about the difference in running a council such as ours compared with the much smaller ( in size not population )  of councils to the south of us.

Freezing Council tax is a burden that is significantly harder for the highlands then other places in Scotland.

I would prefer the United Kingdom to give extra funds to the Councils direct, and not through the Scottish government.

 

That would really put local people in charge, and stop the power house in Edinburgh thinking only of their own needs 

 

I myself would ring fence some of the Barnet cash for use by local authorities to protect the services in remote district's  I have already mentioned above. 

 

We have heard a lot recently  about the poor people of Glasgow. If Council tax had not been frozen for Glasgow maybe fund could have been allocated to help them out/

 

Also playing  the Commonwealth games in Glasgow did the poor no favours .  Don't get me wrong on this I am in favour of International events , but I don't see why local Citiy Councils should be out of pocket.

 

End of rant

 

Laurence

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

the SNP would just rather have the money spent on social services than faster trains around London and faster missiles to fire at nobody. 

 

 

Interestingly enough Robert Peston has just filed a report about the Barnett Formula on the BBC (cue the usual suspects shouting "bias") which shows that per capita spending on railways is actually 72% higher in Scotland than in England. So, it seems, yet another unsubstantiated Nationalist assertion, made to try to provoke dissent and grievance, bites the dust.

On the subject of the Barnett Formula, this referendum has of course now drawn Scotland's considerably higher level of public funding within the Union to the attention of the entire UK and many outwith Scotland will now, understandably, begin to question this.

But I am quite sure that the SNP would be delighted if the Barnett Formula were to be questioned and even more delighted if it a were to be scrapped, leading to lower levels of public spending for the Scottish people. Because this would give them yet another opportunity to sow grievance, division and ill feeling (*) among the Scottish people who in reality count for damn all to the SNP compared with their sole obsession of separation to which everybody and everything else is subsidiary.

 

(*) - remember the good old days when Scotland was actually quite a happy place to live in? I mean the days before the Nats set about their mission to create as much misery and discontent as they possibly could in order to sway the disaffected over to their cause.

Now, after seven years of Nationalist control of Holyrood, Scottish society distinctly oozes with grievance and resentment as the SNP misery machine proceeds on its distinctly unmerry way. You just have to take one look at them to see what a uniformly humourless bunch they are - which is probably why so many of them end up getting married to each other.

Given that the spreading of misery and discontent is such a cornerstone of SNP strategy, That Ghastly Woman must indeed be the overwhelming candidate to become the next SNP leader since she is the possessor of by far the most miserable and discontented looking gob in Scotttish politics. (Mind you, the recent performance of Councillor Liz MacDonald of Nairn may mean that Nippy Sweetie Nicola has competition ere long!)

 

 

Didnt you read my message about your bitter and twisted slant on all things politics, created entirely from your parochial outlook that has no basis in reality, renders you irrelevant in any sort of political debate?

 

Leaving your consistent teeth grinding at the SNP aside for once, how do you proopose the UK government sets about improving the economy and lives of the 65 million, rather than the 5 million, as was the leading message of the No campaign?  At the moment we spend £52billion a year on national debt interest payments, which currently sits at 89% of GDP, as a comparison we spend £39billion on defence and £110billion on the NHS.

 

For all the bluster about the SNP's proposed borrwing plans, at the UK level we have borrowed a further £57billion to cover budget gaps this year, rising up to £127billion by 2017.

 

Under these conditions, what would you do to help everyone in the UK?  Or are you just thinking politics as an excuse to sneer at those flag waving lefty sorts cluttering up the high street?

Edited by clacher_holiday2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about new powers ?

The powers they already have , have not been used wisely at times

Take for instance the power to support local authorities and the freezing of council tax

The Highland region needs extra  finance from time to time, The maintenance of clear roadways in winter can put a massive burden on a remote area council such as ours. The miles of old roadways and weak  bridges need constant and expensive attention.  Coupled with the financing and maintenance of small parish and town councils , dotted all over the area.

Small villages often have small schools  with limited  children which are expensive to run,  Tourist information offices have to be provided  in quite remote areas.

If you freeze  Council tax , you are saying to council workers, no pay rises  or there will be cuts to council services.

 

 I could go on and on about the difference in running a council such as ours compared with the much smaller ( in size not population )  of councils to the south of us.

Freezing Council tax is a burden that is significantly harder for the highlands then other places in Scotland.

I would prefer the United Kingdom to give extra funds to the Councils direct, and not through the Scottish government.

 

That would really put local people in charge, and stop the power house in Edinburgh thinking only of their own needs 

 

I myself would ring fence some of the Barnet cash for use by local authorities to protect the services in remote district's  I have already mentioned above. 

 

We have heard a lot recently  about the poor people of Glasgow. If Council tax had not been frozen for Glasgow maybe fund could have been allocated to help them out/

 

Also playing  the Commonwealth games in Glasgow did the poor no favours .  Don't get me wrong on this I am in favour of International events , but I don't see why local Citiy Councils should be out of pocket.

 

End of rant

 

Laurence

Laurence I note your emphasis on roads. Road maintenance was taken out of local council control a few years ago. Indeed I may be wrong but I think it was a Labour administration that done this. Scottish roads are now the responsibility of Transport Scotland and works carried out by BEAR and Scotland Transerve.

Secondly I dont think Glasgow are out of pocket as a result of the commonwealth games. Indeed I believe that those games done a lot to regenerate the east end of the city. Slum tenements were demolished and new housing built which is now available for tenancy and assisted sale. Glasgow's biggest problem nowadays is lack of employment. This once vibrant shipbuilding capital of the world has been decimated. No steel industry since the closure of Gartcosh. No Lanarkshire coalmines. No Linwood car plant. No longer any heavy engineering works. Everything has gone except the population.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alex

I bow to your knowledge on this subject

I  feel the Transport dept just handle the trunk roads and the back roads fall under the jurisdiction of the local council. May be wrong on that ?

I was speaking some time ago to the Provost of Inverness , he was quite concerned over the number of old weak bridges he   ( his authority that is) was expected to maintain 

With regard to games I remember whilst living in London there was an awful stink that the rates  or  City Of London council would be out of pocket with the Olympics.

Anyway I agree that there are many spin off created by these events the public don't always notice. The Exchequer do very well through VAT and Income tax as well.

My main point is the very deprived of the",  population don't get a slice of the cake sort to speak. As the song says " The rich get richer and the poor get poorer". a bit flippant -  but some of it  is right. With my capitalist head on " I think great, with my Marxist cap on I think " Not so good"., I do hope more funds are granted to local areas as I suggested earlier.

Still the world has bigger problems at the moment on and beyond the Kurdish border with Iraq. Fingers crossed on that one.

 

Laurence.    

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Didnt you read my message about your bitter and twisted slant on all things politics, created entirely from your parochial outlook that has no basis in reality, renders you irrelevant in any sort of political debate?

 

 

What a wonderful expression of the "you don't agree with me which makes you so unworthy that you don't deserve an opinion" brand of politics which has been prevalent among the Yes side of the recent debate. Interesting too that a viewpoint which embraces the bigger picture of the United Kingdom and rejects the kailyard pseudo-politics of the Little Scotlanders should be described as "parochial".

That's a New/Doublespeak of which even George Orwell would be proud :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You just have to take one look at them to see what a uniformly humourless bunch they are - which is probably why so many of them end up getting married to each other.

Given that the spreading of misery and discontent is such a cornerstone of SNP strategy, That Ghastly Woman must indeed be the overwhelming candidate to become the next SNP leader since she is the possessor of by far the most miserable and discontented looking gob in Scotttish politics.

Wow. Right up there with 'Willie Bell shouting at English tourists' and 'the Nats don't know anything about Culloden but I do', this takes the debate, or as Charles would have it, "debate", to a new level. We are truly not worthy as Charles pursues his lifelong cause, death by anecdote.

Avoiding web forums after retirement really wasn't a challenge for me, you could have sought some advice and done likewise.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So come on Charles, any ideas on using the political process to affect change for the 65million of us?

No doubt a star of you intellect has the vision to save us all, you can peer deep into the future of an independent Scotland, so what awaits us in an independent UK?

So far all I've seen is you creating an anglophobic/xenophobe enemy to rally against, then bizarrely following through with attacking the SNP/YES people that only exist in your head, heres your chance to shut me up with some constructive ideas for us to unite behind to improve the entire island...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak about Scottish trunk roads but our own charming P.M., Stephen Harper , has just announced that we are sending  some fighter jets to Iraq--at President Obama's request to us and many other countries as well. There's a good chance that our pilots will be doing the devastation thing by at least tomorrow.

 

So, David Cameron--how many are you going to send? Will your  wow "Vow" to the Scots still be met even if the cost is staggering?

 

Just asking?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and before I  forget, the former deputy Nato Air Force commander was on the news today telling us that  "this is going to be a long war."

Seems like a very smart guy even if he is retired.  Glad we have finally managed to balance our Budget-- just in time for the 2015 Election, eh, Stephen?

Link to post
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