Should Scotland be an independent country

[PullMyFinger]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/prime-minister-david-cameron-backs-1794754

Cameron wants OF straight into premiership.

Getting desperate. I wonder what other treats are in store from jam Tomorrow?

 

Is this only if we vote NO?

 

Almost worth voting NO if it will get rid of the OF from Scottish fitba forever! (only joking!)

 

I want to point out there is no connection between the outcome of the referendum and their admission to EPL. Just Cameron's sudden interest is a bit suspicious, does he really think that's all we want?

[Oddquine]

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/prime-minister-david-cameron-backs-1794754

Cameron wants OF straight into premiership.

Getting desperate. I wonder what other treats are in store from jam Tomorrow?

 

Is this only if we vote NO?

 

Almost worth voting NO if it will get rid of the OF from Scottish fitba forever! (only joking!)

 

I want to point out there is no connection between the outcome of the referendum and their admission to EPL. Just Cameron's sudden interest is a bit suspicious, does he really think that's all we want?

Just another Union sound-bite...if anyone cares to consider the Mirror reliable in the first place?

 

Tbh.not quite sure what influence on the vote that Rangers and Celtic shifting to England would have, unless every supporter is going to shift south with the teams and not vote at all...in which case it would more likely help the YES campaign than the NO one. Can't see any logic in Downing Street interference....but then, what logic is there ever in ideas the UK Government as a whole entity comes up with.so why expect Cameron to be any more sensible than his cohorts.

 

How many in Scotland who like football support English teams as well as their Scottish /local ones....Spurs was mine in my teenage years, though I'm not that bothered about English football now,....but I never considered attending a Spurs game..so where they played was never a problem, I was happy enough to go "YEEEEEEEESSSSSSSS! at the radio or on reading the Sunday papers.....though that was before the plethora of footie on telly.  If punters do footie in general....,and not one specific team only....., then they will find a local team to support on Saturdays....the Wee Rangers may do well out of the busloads who head south to Glasgow regularly to support Rangers  from Caithness.though not sure they would appreciate the vocals.  And maybe Wick Academy could change their name to Wick Celtic and pick up some from the other travelling lot! .

 

Kinda wonder if we are going to get the border controls/passports crap, already mentioned in the media, pushed even harder...so we think we would need a passport to see a Rangers/Celtic  game in future.  That would mean that Westminster (including some of our own representatives) think we are even nastier than Ireland......and deserve much more penalising because we haven't done bombing and shooting to get our way. 

 

Ireland fought their way to Independence.and got, in exchange.....,no borders within the UK, so no border controls or passports; votes in the UK even before they joined the EU,  and re currency, they were able to use sterling/Irish punts on a 1 for 1 basis until Ireland decided to change it....which was when they joined  the ERM in 1978....so they were allowed to do what Westminster Unionists say Scotland can't do and still be considered independent, for fifty or so years after the became an independent country in the eyes of the world.

 

And that is what is the problem with the NO campaign.....there has been to date, no cogent reasons offered for staying in the Union which are any less pie in the sky than they claim the YES campaign produces...no crystal ball on either side ...but the main difference is that the NO Campaign reasons are all extremely negative..while the YES campaign ones are positive, because the YES Campaign thinks we are all capable people in Scotland..and the NO campaign thinks we are not without someone in charge telling us what to do.. 

 

Edited to remove rogue apostrophe! 

Edited April 5, 2013 by Oddquine

[Yngwie]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/prime-minister-david-cameron-backs-1794754

Cameron wants OF straight into premiership.

Getting desperate. I wonder what other treats are in store from jam Tomorrow?

 

The "story" is utter garbage.

 

1. I don't think the PM gives a sh*t about Rangers or Scottish football.

2. Even if it were true I don't see any possible way he could benefit politically.

3. Even if he could, what could he actually do? Nothing.  Its a matter for various independent institutions like the FA, SFA, UEFA and no doubt the courts.

3. Note the complete absence of any facts or sources in the story. An unnamed source says this has gone all the way to the top, FFS!

Edited March 31, 2013 by Yngwie

[Oddquine]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/prime-minister-david-cameron-backs-1794754

Cameron wants OF straight into premiership.

Getting desperate. I wonder what other treats are in store from jam Tomorrow?

 

The "story" is utter garbage.

 

1. I don't think the PM gives a sh*t about Rangers or Scottish football.

2. Even if it were true I don't see any possible way he could benefit politically.

3. Even if he could, what could he actually do? Nothing.  Its a matter for various independent institutions like the FA, SFA, UEFA and no doubt the courts.

3. Note the complete absence of any facts or sources in the story. An unnamed source says this has gone all the way to the top, FFS!

 

To be fair...when was the last time Cameron engaged brain before opening mouth?

[Sneckboy]

The Scottish Sun has not ruled out backing the Yes campaign nearer the time. It would be a major fillip for the independence drive as the power of the media is widely accepted as having considerable influence when it comes to voting intentions. It was the Sun wot won it!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-22014293

[PullMyFinger]

The Scottish Sun has not ruled out backing the Yes campaign nearer the time. It would be a major fillip for the independence drive as the power of the media is widely accepted as having considerable influence when it comes to voting intentions. It was the Sun wot won it!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-22014293

 

The Sun will back independence if the polls show the yes vote is in the lead. They sell newspapers not principles.

[Sneckboy]

^^^ Very good point. I'd, naively, not thought of that!

[PullMyFinger]

They have declared themselves as neutral though which is good. Hopefully all other media will also report events from a neutral point of view but I think hell will freeze over first.

[PullMyFinger]

The No camp are forever coming out with scaremonguering stories, none can come close to this in my opinion and it's from a Yes supporter.

 

http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-warning-in-the-mail/

 

That's terrifying.

[PullMyFinger]

Got to love the headline.

 

From midnight, Scotland becomes a police state!

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/388183/From-midnight-Scotland-becomes-a-police-state

[Sneckboy]

To Oddquine: off topic. Your post (#77) had a 'rogue' apostrophy sitting in a blank area after your dialogue had finished...I thought it was a bit of dirt on my screen and wasted a minute trying to remove it before realising!!!

[Oddquine]

Equally off-topic...edited it out.  When both screen and specs aren't as clean as they might be, I tend to assume all marks are just dirt.     (I think this is tirst forum I've ever been on in which you can edit your post so long after it was first made).

[PullMyFinger]

Just read this and found it to be quite motivating.

 

Independent Scotland and NATO

 

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2013/04/Brookings-Institution090413?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

An independent Scotland’s defence policy would be based on pursuing active global partnerships including NATO membership, Alex Salmond confirmed today in a speech to one of the world’s most influential and trusted think-tanks.

Addressing the Brookings Institution in Washington DC, the First Minister said the Scottish Government’s policy for a newly-independent Scotland was to secure membership of the strategic alliance while remaining free of nuclear weapons.

In his address – entitled Scotland as a good global citizen – the First Minister pointed to Scotland’s existing friendships with the USA and other nations, including her “closest friends” and neighbours across the UK and Ireland, and crucial allies across the European Union.

 

The full text of the First Minister’s speech is as follows:

 

 

 

Before I start this morning, I want to acknowledge the fact that Baroness
Thatcher died yesterday. She visited this institution as opposition leader in
September 1977. She was a truly formidable prime minister and one who was a
staunch ally of the United States.

 

It is an honour to speak here this morning at the Brookings Institution - one
of the most respected think tanks in the world.

 

I'm in Washington to strengthen economic links with America, to discuss
Scotland’s constitutional future, but most of all to mark the lasting friendship
between Scotland and the USA.

 

That friendship is commemorated every 6 April, on Tartan Day – although we
have now turned that into a whole Scotland Week of events. The 6 April – the
anniversary of the sealing of our Declaration of Arbroath – was declared to be
Tartan Day by a Congressional resolution in 1998 and by a presidential decree in
2008.

 

That presidential decree said “Scotland and the United States have long
shared ties of family and friendship... The Declaration of Arbroath, the
Scottish Declaration of Independence signed in 1320, embodied the Scots' strong
dedication to liberty, and the Scots brought that tradition of freedom with them
to the New World.”

 

In Princeton on Tartan Day, I paid tribute to James Witherspoon – a former
president of the University - who exemplified that shared dedication to liberty,
as one of two Scottish-born signatories to the US Declaration of
Independence.

 

I also noted that another former president of Princeton, Woodrow Wilson, once
remarked that “every line of strength in American history is a line coloured
with Scottish blood.”

 

I am due to speak later this evening at a reception at the US Capitol. The
Capitol is yet another example of the links between Scotland and the US - it was
designed by William Thornton, a graduate from Edinburgh and Aberdeen
Universities.

 

The foundation stone for the Capitol was laid by George Washington on 18
September 1793.

 

18 September is also due to become a significant date in Scotland’s history.
I announced three weeks ago that on 18 September 2014, people in Scotland will
vote on a straightforward question, the most important that we have had to
decide in more than 300 years – should Scotland be an independent country?

 

That choice is one for the people of Scotland to make – and we will do so
after a clear, vigorous, democratic debate.

 

However I am aware that our decision, and its consequences, are of interest
to many other nations – especially those, like the USA, with whom we share such
close ties of culture and history; trade and commerce; friendship and
family.

 

And so today I want to set out what independence would mean for Scotland in
an international context – how we would engage with the wider world. In doing
so, I want to talk in particular about our continued membership of the European
Union and NATO, and more broadly about how Scotland would participate as a good
global citizen.

 

Before the 1707 Act of Union, Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun, a member of the
auld Scots Parliament, said that “all nations are dependent, the one on the
many, this we know.”

 

He went on to warn that “If the greater must always swallow the lesser” it
would be to the detriment of all.

 

Saltoun was emphasising a truth which is especially relevant in the modern
world. All nations are interdependent. And an independent Scotland will achieve
its goals through partnership.

 

But as an independent nation, we would be able to choose our aims, our
partnerships and our priorities. That is the fundamental case for independence.
Because the best people to take decisions about Scotland’s future – about
international relations or any other issue – are the people who choose to live
and work in Scotland.

 

Since the Scottish Parliament reconvened in 1999 - after 300 years - we have
already strengthened our links with allies old and new – with advanced economies
and fast-emerging ones. Our Scotland Week celebrations provide just one example
of how links between Scotland and the USA have been promoted in recent
years.

 

I accompanied a Scottish trade delegation to New York last week, and I have
been able to announce significant investments from Daktari Diagnostics, the life
sciences company, and SAS, the business software services firm.

 

This type of success illustrates exactly why Ernst and Young has named
Scotland, for the second year running, as the top destination for foreign direct
investment out of all the areas of the UK, including London.

 

Indeed, for the foreseeable future, and regardless of what happens in
September 2014, the USA will remain Scotland’s biggest trading partner, biggest
foreign investor and biggest tourism market outside of the United Kingdom.

 

However we have different approaches for different countries. Our friendship
with Pakistan is based on the large diaspora which makes such a major
contribution to modern Scotland. Our ties to China and India have developed
through shared economic interests, as well as the links between our people.

 

Our overseas enterprise agency, Scottish Development International, has 30
commercial embassies around the world – the most recent one of which has been
established in Brazil.

 

This is a policy of targeted engagement, guided by enlightened self interest.
Independence would increase our autonomy and profile in pursuing such an
approach. However, it’s also worth stressing that as an independent nation,
Scotland’s most important friends and partners would remain unchanged.

 

Our friendships with the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are based on
a deep shared history, but also on modern ties of trade, people and values.

 

Closer to home, the remaining nations of the United Kingdom, and Ireland,
will remain our closest friends as well as our closest neighbours.

 

And the other nations of the European Union and northern Europe, as a result
of shared geography and shared democratic values, will continue to be crucial
allies.

 

I want to say more about the European Union – partly because it is an issue
that has been discussed a lot in Scotland, and partly because I recognise that
it is important here in the USA.

 

Any real consideration of the history of Europe would recognise that in
recent decades the EU has been a force for good – a force for peace, prosperity
and security.

 

As the world’s largest single market, EU membership brings massive benefits
and opportunities for Scotland.

 

Despite all of the current difficulties in the Eurozone, we saw a reminder of
that just two months ago - with the announcement of the planned Transatlantic
Trade and Investment Partnership between the EU and the USA. Estimates show that
once this is established, the European economy will get a stimulus of half a per
cent of its GDP.

 

For Scotland, given that the USA is our largest individual trading partner
outside the UK – our trade with the EU as a bloc is greater - the agreement will
be especially good news.

 

There is a fundamental shortcoming with Scotland’s current position in the
EU, however. On a range of issues - from fisheries and agriculture, to
employment and economic development - the Scottish Government currently has
responsibility for policy-making in Scotland; but we have no formal or direct
representation when it comes to the many decisions made in Brussels.

 

One advantage of independence is that it would enable us to gain full and
equal membership of the European Union – allowing us to co-operate on an equal
basis with 27 other member states, more than half of which have a population of
less than 10 million people.

 

Following a vote for independence in 2014, the Scottish Government would
immediately make a notification of intent, confirming that as an independent
nation, we want to continue within the European Union.

 

Our planned independence date is March 2016. The UK Government’s own chosen
legal expert, Professor James Crawford of Cambridge University, has given his
view that it would be “realistic” to expect negotiations to have been concluded
by that date.

 

After all, Scotland would begin negotiations as a country which would be a
net contributor to the EU budget, and whose people are already EU citizens.

 

We would begin them as a country which already applies the body of EU law and
policy. And we would begin them as a country keen to be an equal and
constructive partner in the EU.

 

Angus Roxburgh is a highly-respected broadcaster and journalist who was the
BBC’s foremost Europe Correspondent in Brussels. He summed up the position well
in an article last month. “What would any country gain by making Scotland leave
(the EU), wait a while, and then rejoin? Out of sheer self-interest every
country would want to avoid such pointless disruption.” His conclusion was
clear. “Scotland's accession would almost certainly be the smoothest and
quickest in EU history.”

 

An independent Scotland would also be an active member of other multilateral
organisations, ranging from the United Nations to NATO. Of course, membership of
NATO is an issue of particular interest here in Washington.

 

Last year the governing party of Scotland, the Scottish National Party,
changed its position to supporting membership of NATO, following a principled,
open and very thoughtful debate.

 

It could be argued that membership of Partnership for Peace would enable us
to fulfil many of our defence requirements as does Ireland and Finland.

 

But we understand why, in the international community, countries such as
Iceland, Denmark, Norway, and indeed the USA - would prefer it if we signalled
our intention to be part of the NATO Alliance as an independent country.

 

Such a step would demonstrate clearly our commitment to working closely with
those friends and allies.

 

We should acknowledge that NATO is a cornerstone of defence policy for these
nations and therefore membership is a responsible decision for Scotland to
seek.

 

It’s worth reflecting here on Scotland’s geographical position. Scotland is
located in key strategic position in northern Europe. To our east is the North
Sea, to our west the Atlantic, to our north the Icelandic gap.

 

Environmental warming in the High North and Arctic is occurring faster than
anywhere else on the planet, and the average temperature in the region has
surpassed all previous measurements in the first decade of the 21st century.
During last summer the Northern Sea Route was free of ice and this trend is set
to continue and become the norm.

 

There are therefore significant opportunities including renewable energy as
well as oil, gas and mineral extraction and new international shipping routes.
Up to 30 per cent of the world’s undiscovered gas reserves and 10 per cent of
oil resources are believed to be located in the Arctic.

 

The waters around Scotland will become even more important for fisheries, for
energy and for transportation. And as things stand, all air and naval policing
in northern Europe is co-ordinated through NATO. It makes sense for Scotland to
work within NATO on such important issues.

 

As a member of NATO, an independent Scotland would also fulfil the Article 5
commitment to collective self-defence, recognising its obligations to the
international community.

 

Scotland’s participation in the future either in peace-keeping or military
operations would be on the basis of legitimacy.

 

I have recently argued that an independent Scotland should have a written
constitution. In my view that constitution should include safeguards on the
circumstances under which we commit our armed forces to theatres of conflict–
such as a requirement that military action is in accordance with the United
Nations Charter.

 

At a time when - as President Obama made clear in his State of the Union
address - the world’s focus must be to seek further reductions in our nuclear
arsenals, for an independent Scotland to host nuclear weapons would be absurd.
No-one seriously holds the view that an independent Scotland – a nation of five
and a quarter million people – should be a nuclear power.

 

Only three of NATO’s 28 members are actually nuclear-weapons states. The
majority, including Canada, Norway and Denmark, are fully committed members of
the alliance without hosting nuclear weapons.

 

We recognise that the safe removal of the UK’s Trident system would require
careful discussion with the UK government and our NATO allies. But our aim would
be clear – we would require the speediest but safest removal of Trident from our
shores.

 

An independent Scotland would not be a global superpower. But we would be a
good global citizen.

 

Scotland already has a wide-ranging co-operation agreement with Malawi. That
reflects our historic links to that country, and our determination to target our
present, limited development budget in a way which allows us to make a real
difference.

 

Other countries demonstrate, on a day to day basis, how much can be achieved
by targeting resources, or by focussing on areas of particular expertise. It is
one of the advantages that smaller countries have, both in economic development,
and in international engagement - they can be more agile in developing clear
strategies, and exploiting their comparative advantages.

 

For example Denmark and Sweden are global leaders in international
development; Ireland plays a significant role in peacekeeping; Norway has
developed expertise in conflict resolution.

 

Scotland is in an excellent position to assist peace and reconciliation
efforts. In recent years we have already hosted important discussions such as
those that led to the 2006 St Andrews Agreement, which helped progress devolved
government in Northern Ireland.

 

Scotland also hosted the first dialogue outside the former Soviet Union
between parliamentarians from the South Caucasus. In 2003, delegations from
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan discussed the frozen conflicts of their
region.

 

There is much more that we can do as a sovereign state to host and support
these initiatives. Not only is Scotland a good location for these kinds of
meetings and discussions, but our current democratic journey, based on civic,
non-ethnic and peaceful principles are a useful backdrop. Scotland can
contribute much directly to the rest of the world as an active global citizen.
This is something I look forward to immensely.

 

For Scotland, the global effort to tackle climate change is a good example of
an international issue where we can have a significant influence.

 

In 2009 the Scottish Parliament unanimously voted for the toughest climate
change targets in the world – committing ourselves to reducing our greenhouse
gas emissions by 42 per cent by 2020, and by 80 per cent by 2050.

 

We have established the fifteen million dollars Saltire Prize for marine
energy - one of the largest commercial challenge funds in the world - which we
run in partnership with National Geographic here in Washington.

 

There’s enlightened self interest at work here. Renewable energy is one of
Scotland’s best economic growth prospects in generations, given our research
base, our engineering heritage, and our immense natural resources – we have 10
per cent of the European Union’s wave power potential, and a quarter of its
offshore wind and tidal power potential.

 

But we also recognise the environmental imperative for action. As President
Obama said in his inauguration speech earlier this year, failure to act on
climate change “would betray our children and future generations.”

 

That’s why last year we became the first government anywhere to establish a
climate justice fund. Climate justice is the concept that nations which have
benefited from industrialisation have the obligation to help less developed
countries to adapt to the consequences of climate change.

 

Scotland’s stance has received support from Mary Robinson, the former United
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Al Gore, among others. It’s a
message that I took to the Communist Party Central School in Beijing in 2011. I
made the case again in Princeton on Saturday.

 

The first projects in Scotland’s climate justice fund are helping communities
affected by climate change in Malawi and Zambia. The fund is currently small –
tiny - in terms of the scale of the global challenge, but it will make a real
difference to people’s lives, and it sends a strong message to the wider
world.

 

To adapt an expression of President Clinton – although Scotland cannot use
the example of our power, we can use the power of our example.

 

And of course, all of our work on this issue raises a final, hugely
interesting and relevant question.

 

If Scotland can succeed, in showing global leadership on one of the most
significant environmental, economic and moral issues facing the planet – namely
that of climate change - why on earth shouldn’t we have control over our own
defence, international development and foreign policy, let alone our own tax
rates and welfare system?

 

Ladies and gentlemen, earlier in my speech I quoted President Bush’s Tartan
Day proclamation of 2008, and President Obama’s inauguration speech and state of
the union address. I want to end by quoting a speech given by President Kennedy
50 years ago this year,

 

President Kennedy was addressing the Dail Eireann – the Irish Parliament - on
a return to his own ancestral homeland. He therefore spoke in some detail about
the contribution small nations can make to world affairs.

 

He praised Ireland’s participation in UN peacekeeping missions, and pointed
out that “the achievement of nationhood is not an end but a beginning…;
self-determination can no longer mean isolation; and the achievement of national
independence today means withdrawal from the old status only to return to the
world scene with a new one.”

 

Since President Kennedy spoke, many more nations have attained independence.
As recently as 1990, Europe had 35 countries – now it has 50. Of the 27
countries which currently make up the EU, six of them did not exist as
independent states before 1990. When the United Nations was founded, it had 51
member countries. Now there are almost 200.

 

In 2014, I believe that Scotland will choose to join those nations.

 

We will do so knowing – as President Kennedy knew - that self-determination
cannot mean isolation. States are interdependent as well as independent, and
nationalism must embrace internationalism.

 

That’s why an independent Scotland will be a staunch friend of our neighbours
and allies. We will participate actively in international organisations such as
the EU and NATO.

 

We will use the powers of independence to strengthen Scotland’s voice in the
world. And we will use that voice – together with our allies – to promote
democracy, international law, climate justice, and human rights.

 

So as the Presidential decree of 2008 recognised, it is fitting that we
celebrate the “long shared ties of family and friendship” between Scotland and
the USA this week. We can look forward to those ties being renewed and
strengthened in the years to come – as a newly independent Scottish nation
embraces enduring alliances, values and friendships.

[PullMyFinger]

I see Alan Savage has made a donation to BitterTogether of £100,000.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-22058475

 

Would have been better spent on ICT imo but it's his money to waste.

 

I wonder how he feels about sharing story with Ian Taylor?

 

http://nationalcollective.com/2013/04/07/dirty-money-the-tory-millionaire-bankrolling-better-together/

 

At least Alan stays in Scotland and I assume he pays tax unlike Taylor with his EBT.

[ictchris]

£100,000 is about the same as he spent on Marius Niculae, will he be as successful?

[Alex MacLeod]

The No camp are forever coming out with scaremonguering stories, none can come close to this in my opinion and it's from a Yes supporter.

 

http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-warning-in-the-mail/

 

That's terrifying.

One fatal mistake in that story. There is no such entity as the UK NHS.

[Laurence]

You would have to be a complete and utter idiot to vote yes

[PaderbornCaley]

You would have to be a complete and utter idiot to vote yes

Obvious troll is obvious.

[PullMyFinger]

You would have to be a complete and utter idiot to vote yes

 

Why? Please make a positive case for voting no preferably without reference to wee dogs and sausage rolls. I will then make my case for voting yes limitted to covering the 3 areas of democracy, the economy and socially.

[Alex MacLeod]

Ten facts about an independant Scotland:

 

1. Being independent means that the people of Scotland will be in charge of Scotland’s future. Together, we care most about our nation, so nobody else is going to do as good a job of making Scotland a success. 
2. If Scotland votes yes, the first independent parliament will be elected in 2016 – we will get the government we vote for, unlike today, with a government in London the majority of voters in Scotland did not support. 
3. Scotland more than pays her way in the UK. We get 9.3% of UK spending, but contribute 9.6% of UK taxes. We are in a stronger financial position than the rest of the UK, to the tune of £500 per person last year - that's over £1000 for each Scottish household. As an independent country, this money would stay in Scotland.
4. Scotland already pays for all the government services we need as an independent country - we don't have to start from scratch. However, the money will be spent in Scotland, rather than London, creating thousands of Scottish jobs.
5. With independence we'll save on some UK spending - so the initial start up costs will be met by the £250 million annual saving from the UK's existing nuclear weapons and the £50 million annual saving by no longer paying for politicians at Westminster.
6. Scotland would remain part of the EU. EU law doesn't allow for Scotland to be unilaterally kicked out on independence. And, EU law also makes clear that Scotland can't be forced to join the euro. We will continue to use the pound, just as we do today.
7. Scotland has 25% of the EU's offshore wind and tidal energy potential. By 2020 our renewable energy could be generating £2 billion a year of exports and by 2050 the value of electricity from offshore renewables could be £14 billion.
8. Scotland doesn't need oil to become independent, but our oil and gas resource is worth over £1 trillion and gives us a safety net for the future. Last year saw record investment in the North Sea and in October, BP said they expected North Sea oil and gas to flow for at least another 40 years.
9. The UK government doesn't include oil and gas when it talks about Scotland's finances. But, if you do include oil and gas in our national accounts, we would be the 6th wealthiest nation per capita in developed world.
10. Scotland has a wealth of talent - for our size we have more world-class universities than any other nation and our research tops world league tables.

Source: YesScotland website

Edited May 1, 2013 by Alex MacLeod

[dougiedanger]

You would have to be a complete and utter idiot to vote yes

 

One more for the yes camp then.  

[Heilandee]

You would have to be a complete and utter idiot to vote yes

 

You related to Boris Johnson Laurence?  

[+DoofersDad]

You would have to be a complete and utter idiot to vote yes

 

That would be true if you don't want an independent Scotland, but it would seem to be a sensible thing to do if you do.

[starchief]

Everything you say Alex presumes that Scotland away from the UK is the same as Scotland in the UK.  That might not be the case, and there's economists on both sides.

 

I'm more in favour of federalism and localism.  Then you really get a representative government.  The Highlands is ruled from the Highlands, Yorkshire from Yorkshire etc.  None of this central belt or central London.  Government at the most appropriate level.  Does that not sound better as regards democracy?  Pity the EU has now given this up for anti-democratic centralism.

[PullMyFinger]

Ten facts about an independant Scotland:

 

1. Being independent means that the people of Scotland will be in charge of Scotland’s future. Together, we care most about our nation, so nobody else is going to do as good a job of making Scotland a success. 
2. If Scotland votes yes, the first independent parliament will be elected in 2016 – we will get the government we vote for, unlike today, with a government in London the majority of voters in Scotland did not support. 
3. Scotland more than pays her way in the UK. We get 9.3% of UK spending, but contribute 9.6% of UK taxes. We are in a stronger financial position than the rest of the UK, to the tune of £500 per person last year - that's over £1000 for each Scottish household. As an independent country, this money would stay in Scotland.
4. Scotland already pays for all the government services we need as an independent country - we don't have to start from scratch. However, the money will be spent in Scotland, rather than London, creating thousands of Scottish jobs.
5. With independence we'll save on some UK spending - so the initial start up costs will be met by the £250 million annual saving from the UK's existing nuclear weapons and the £50 million annual saving by no longer paying for politicians at Westminster.
6. Scotland would remain part of the EU. EU law doesn't allow for Scotland to be unilaterally kicked out on independence. And, EU law also makes clear that Scotland can't be forced to join the euro. We will continue to use the pound, just as we do today.
7. Scotland has 25% of the EU's offshore wind and tidal energy potential. By 2020 our renewable energy could be generating £2 billion a year of exports and by 2050 the value of electricity from offshore renewables could be £14 billion.
8. Scotland doesn't need oil to become independent, but our oil and gas resource is worth over £1 trillion and gives us a safety net for the future. Last year saw record investment in the North Sea and in October, BP said they expected North Sea oil and gas to flow for at least another 40 years.
9. The UK government doesn't include oil and gas when it talks about Scotland's finances. But, if you do include oil and gas in our national accounts, we would be the 6th wealthiest nation per capita in developed world.
10. Scotland has a wealth of talent - for our size we have more world-class universities than any other nation and our research tops world league tables.

Source: YesScotland website

 

3. Latest GERS figures show us contributing 9.9% of revenue whilst receiving 9.3% of expenditure but let's not kid ourselves, we still spend more than we are contributing. Currently the UK has borrowed £245 billion more than expected since "austerity" measures were introduced.

 

As with everything else, things change and sometimes they don't get updated where they are published in a timely manner. Just like the Better Together leaflets advising we could lose the UKs AAA credit rating leading to our mortgage rates increasing and it costing us £ billions.

 

Two of the three agencies have now downgraded us and the leaflet still goes out and our interest rates haven't changed yet. When the interest rate does go up and it will, the UK will collapse further and faster than Greece.

 

We are currently (as the UK nation) in debt to the tune of 500% GDP when you add in personal debts this rises to circa 800% and rising.

 

Rates have been contolled by the Bank of England by quantative easing (borrowing more to pay off loans). The £ in your pocket in 2008 is now worth 80p. 

 

This was never going to end well. There comes a time when rates must rise and we'll be the ones to pay. Westminster are set on shafting all those on benefits and low incomes all the while they feather their own nests by selling off the NHS, ambulance service, police service and post office amongst other things to companies they and their cronies have interests in.

 

Rant over