/ Independence ???
do you care?
I think it would be a shame to break up the UK, and also that it is not really financially viable in the sort of economic climate we have.
But if the Scottish people fully understand this and wish to take the risk nonetheless, it's up to them.
I think it would be a shame to break up the EU, and also that it is not really financially viable in the sort of economic climate we have.
But if the British people fully understand this and wish to take the risk nonetheless, it's up to them.
I would be very surprised if there wasn't a second vote on the settlement possibly including the whole UK.
For a lot of people, Scotland is lovely part of GB just like Cornwall, or the New Forest or Snowdonia. If you live in the north of England, Edinburgh is as much a city destination as Bristol might be for those in Devon/Cornwall.
It will be odd to think of it as a separate country, and worse if it either struggles economically or if there is any enmity over the break-up (eg income from oil, fishing rights, financial support).
How will Scotland take it's share of the deficit? On a %GDP or and %population basis? In nearly everything there is going to be a winner and a loser.
I think there will have to be, because the issue of what is England's and what is Scotland's is not clear cut.
From Muckle Flugga to the Mull of Galloway, from the Butt of Lewis to the River Tweed - it's about a third of the area of Britain and a lot more diverse than these people realise.
Yes, I care. I think it would be a great shame to break up a union that has been so successful. It's more emotional than based on economic considerations. My family has a strong Scottish side, a result of three sisters from Glasgow marrying three Londoners during and just after WW2 and I'm sure that such connections are not uncommon. A bit of variety in a country does no harm, the Lowlands need the Highlands and vice versa. Why break something that works?
You've lost me - maybe you could explain that post?
I've not decided which way to vote....but its hard to stick by a union run by people that want to tax every aspect of life.... I mean increasing tax on soft drinks...its getting ridiculous.
> You've lost me - maybe you could explain that post?
I think I understand it, Yorkshire is very different to Surrey, but it would be a disaster if the tykes split off from the UK, as it would if Surrey split off the UK, as it will be if Scotland split off from the UK
No, I wasn't contrasting Scotland's diversity with England's - you must have imagined that.
There was a good debate on BBC Scotland last night (Newsnight Scotland - you can find it on Iplayer) which I think was civil and balanced. Check it out for more info.
If, as Phillip claimed:
then they probably don't realise that there's a bit more to Scotland than that.
What's not to understand?
I think that this debate can be held on multiple levels. Unfortunately scaremongering appears to be the main tactic so far so that has set the tone.
Not sure yet....that's the kind of info im waiting on before making a decision....no point breaking up the union if nothing's going to change!
How do you expect to get this information? That would be for the Government to decide and this isn't an election. It's a referendum on what system of government you want, not which government.
I think if Scotland want to go their own way, then good luck to them. Scottish independence will have far more impact on Scotland than the rest of Britain, and if they believe that self-determination is important then go for it.
There are a few major issues to be resolved though -
Can it be a clean break, I can see constitutional lawyers and accountants (many of whom are probably friends of Salmond) walking off with billions from this process.
What happens to Northern Ireland? NI seems far more closely connected to Scotland than to England. Does NI have a future in a reduced UK?
What happens if Shetland and the oil rich regions don't want it. Do they have to go along with the Scottish decision?
You aren't voting for a president. You are voting to decide a system of government. If one man puts you off that then you need to look at the bigger picture. I don't like Gordon Brown but that has no bearing on what I think about the UK constitution.
But what is annoying me is the cake and eating it...
the Higher Education Funding Council For England give 400,000 a year to London Uni to fund a marine center in Scotland which is largely used by Scottish students. This center needs a massive overhaul and investment. HEFCE have pulled the funding, London want to pull out, there has been an uproar over it and protests to London University?
Why? HEFCE is for England, at this time English institutions should seriously monitor investment North of the Border. If it's Britain, fair enough, but I think this marine center may be one of the first victims of the fight for independence.
I actually brought these concerns up in an interview and was told the center was safe.. yet a week later they announced funding had been cut and it was closing..
I'm not actively against independence, I don't want it as I like the Union and am pro europe so want to see more unification with European countries anyway, but do think if Independence is to happen, it should happen as quickly as possible so as not to harm either country. Companies don't like insecurities and unknowns.
It amazes me that people still think this is about nationalism. As if the scottish electorate were always happy being British but something has appeared out of the ether in the last 10 years to suddenly change many people's minds.
Everyone with an interest in the debate will already have read this but it pretty much somes up my feelings
written by labour activist Kevin Mckenna. The idea this is about nationalism now is laughable. The kilt wearing, claymore wielding, stone of destiny stealing lunatic fringe of the independence movement are not who are driving the political agenda in Scotland today. It's about social democracy vs Blair-Brown-Cameron's free market free for all.
> Unfortunately scaremongering appears to be the main tactic so far so that has set the tone.
If Scotland gains its independence after the forthcoming referendum,
The remainder of the United Kingdom will be known as the Former United Kingdom
In a bid to discourage the Scots from voting 'Yes' in the referendum,
Unionists have now begun a campaign with the slogan:
“Please Vote No For FUK's Sake! “
I'd feel sad that we're all on the same piece of land but feel the need to be divided.
No need, I am not long back I will send you my Flickr link :)
I'd like to see Scotland go independant just because I'd like to see modern day remake of Braveheart. Mel Gibson playing Alex Salmond , stood outside Holyrood screaming "Forrrrr Freeeeeeedommmmmm!"
There you go.
From Lerwick , drive to Yell Ferry take the Yell Ferry to Unst, drive as far as you can to the NW park up , get take a Bothy Shelter with you, as going to the edge with waterproofs on apparently is fatal.
And you are there, easy. If you are lucky it will be just you and the birds and a few sheep.
I think Scottish independence would be a good thing. The more I think about things the more I think that having relatively small countries is better all round. The only advantage of being big is if you want to bully other countries.
However, if by "independence" one means joining Euro-land and "ever closer integration" then it's not really "independence" is it?
As far as I am aware, despite all the scare mongering, there needs to be at least 3 years of convergence before a state can join the Euro and even then it isn't certain. Therefore, whilst I understand you point, I think the idea that Scotland would be forced to join the Euro is not true.
The EU question is a good one thoough. I think Scotland would have to apply but that there would be no issue with gaining membership.
> It amazes me that people still think this is about nationalism. .......
The kilt wearing, claymore wielding, stone of destiny stealing lunatic fringe of the independence movement ..
Kilts were an English invention,(Thomas Rawlinson) worn latterly just to please the German Royalty who wanted to 'Play at being Scottish' but Sir Walter Scot passed off the kilt on them as he guessed they would not know better nor care too much about historical accuracy.
Not sure about the Claymore though.
I was reading something recently suggesting Scotland may have to adopt Sterling and Bank of England bank notes if it is to have a stable currency. It woudln't be able to issue licensed notes (backed by the B of E) as happens now (as with Northern Ireland) and it's own currency wouldn't be taken seriously globally. Seems a retrograde step and not exactly the sort of independence some are looking for. How true this is I don't know but the article included some official comment as I recall.
On top of which, I feel British and I think it would be such a shame to break up such a long standing relationship.
Also, where we would deploy/store nukes etc ? ;)
> What happens if Shetland and the oil rich regions don't want it. Do they have to go along with the Scottish decision?
Do you really see this as a major issue? If so, should the same principle apply to the coming referendum on E.U. membership? In other words, should Cornwall (for example) be able to remain in the E.U. were the rest of the U.K. to vote to leave?
The constitution of a country doesn't change how you feel. You dont have to do anything. Reinhold Messner has good thoughts on this.
Agree on currency. I say stay in Sterling and then either go Euro or Scottish currency. Michael Macintyre has a good sketch in this.
> then they probably don't realise that there's a bit more to Scotland than that.
> What's not to understand?
I understand, find me someone who doesn't realise there's more to Scotland than that and you might have a point. But as the vast majority of people know that Scotland has scummy bits as well as nice bits it was pointless.
No you're right, it probably shouldn't be a major issue, but we went for selective independence in Ireland. Oil rich regions have also tried for complete independence in a number of post-colonial independence movements.
> The EU question is a good one thoough. I think Scotland would have to apply but that there would be no issue with gaining membership.
Indeed, just what most people who have been widely quoted as saying the opposite, when you actually read what they say, they say is will be almost a forgone conclusion.
Why when the Germans unified, were East Germans brought in no problem, but suddenly people say that if Scotland was to be independant they would immediately be outside all the laws of Europe, and unable to trade because all the treaties will have been recinded. I don't think so, as The Scottish Government is Pro Europe, so they will be happy to hold on to Scotland, If Europe still want the rest of the UK within Europe, despite the emnity they show to them , then they are hardly going to give Scotland a hard time.
Exactly, the Irish EU ambassador said last week that Iceland joining has thrown up issue with EU law compliance and that Scotland would have the same issues. Em, no, our law is already EU compliant.
Could you expand as I don't actually follow this?
Well given that people on UKC and elsewhere routinely speak of 'Scotland' in comparison to the likes of Yorkshire, or the Lake District (or even Cornwall, or Snowdonia, or The New Forest), I'd say I have got a point.
But you believe whatever you like.
Well given that people on UKC and elsewhere routinely speak of 'Scotland' in comparison to the likes of Yorkshire
Well you have got about the same population. Do we need to pronounce Scotland in a funny way to make it clear that we aren't lumping you in with the common Northern counties?
Any truth in that or more scare mongering do you think?
I think I would feel much like I would if a long term girlfriend who I was much in love with told me it was all over. Begging her to stay in a relationship she'd decided not to be in would get me nowhere so I think I'd just have to put on my best stiff upper lip, wish her good luck in the future and watch her go with much sadness. I'd possibly get a bit bitter after the initial grief but would get on with my life as best I could. Bringing up the kids (Wales, NI and Kernow) without her would be challenging.
And you carry on misrepresenting my posts (the same way you do with everyone else's), if that makes you happy.
I think I would feel much like I would if a long term girlfriend who I was much in love with told me it was all over. Begging her to stay in a relationship she'd decided not to be in would get me nowhere so I think I'd just have to put on my best stiff upper lip, wish her good luck in the future and watch her go with much sadness.
Or you'd just get really drunk, wake up in bed with Iceland and an awful financial hangover ;-)
The idea this is about nationalism now is laughable. The kilt wearing, claymore wielding, stone of destiny stealing lunatic fringe of the independence movement are not who are driving the political agenda in Scotland today. It's about social democracy vs Blair-Brown-Cameron's free market free for all.
This - a million times this! The prospect that terrifies me is not independence, but a 'No' vote which at least temporarily robs the SNP of energy and focus, allowing the Labour drones to regain control of Holyrood and start to dismantle our social democracy for the benefit of their paymasters.
Which country gets to claim Hadrian's Wall?
We'll need the wall, as we aren't signatories of the Schengen agreement we will need to start policing our new land border.
I agree, of course they'll accept Scotland. The scaremongering is more about not wanting to encourage bits of Spain to secede. However, there is a real issue as to whether membership of the Euro is required; as it stands current rules are that any new member joining the EU has to join the Euro.
No longer being subject to the ideological whims of a disconnected home counties elite is the biggest prize to be gained from independence.
> Indeed, just what most people who have been widely quoted as saying the opposite, when you actually read what they say, they say is will be almost a forgone conclusion.
Seems like most of the posters on here are Scottish...hmmm
I think I should just butt in to correct you on a narrow point about Europe I think that statement is a bit contradictory.
The argument has been about whether Scotland would be granted automatic entry to the EU. The SNP said it would and they'd taken legal advice on the matter. It turned out that they were lying.
They now concede that it's most likely that Scotland would have to apply for membership as a new country. Although it's very unlikely that Scotland would be refused entry it would most likely be obliged to join the Euro, that is now a legal requirement for all states that wish to join. They would also most probably need to sign up to the Schengen agreement on border controls. Not such a big deal unless the rest of the UK decided to leave in which case Scotland would be obliged under Schengen to set up customs and border posts on the English border and for the Northern Irish Ferries. Vice versa if Scotland were left in limbo for a number of years while it's application was being considered (it wouldn't be like joining a snooker club and probably take over three years) the rest of the UK would be obliged to set up border controls on the Scottish border.
However with support for independence dropping into the high(ish) twenty percents and support for the EU growing in the UK I think that either scenario is unlikley to happen.
To the OP.
Before you decide which way to vote in 1 3/4 years time why don't you spend your time improving your knowledge of your country, the UK. Go and see Muckle Flugga and travel down to Land's End as well. The UK is a great country. Discovering as much as you can about it will enrich you as a person.
They would also most probably need to sign up to the Schengen agreement on border controls. Not such a big deal unless the rest of the UK decided to leave in which case Scotland would be obliged under Schengen to set up customs and border posts on the English border and for the Northern Irish Ferries.
We aren't currently Schengen signatories, so technically Scotland joining Europe as a separate entity would need to set up border points.
Yes. I have a British passport but dont call myself British. Others I know have British passports and dont call themselves Scottish. The point I am making is that whatever the constitutional arrangements you can still feel British or otherwise if you like. The geography wont change.
> Any truth in that or more scare mongering do you think?
This is widely available on the internet as far as I know. I dont have anything to hand but I am sure you will find it if you look.
I think it is scaremongering for the simple reason that I see no committment at all to these shipyards by the UK Government. Once the carriers are built do you think the workers will feel secure in the UK?
Ha ha you believe the Labour rhetoric too much. Read the actual results of the poll you cite. It was skewed. Most support the notion of independence, they don't support the word when asked.
And you could travel as much as you like after independence. Why couldn't you? Any real reasons?
No surely it would be the RUK setting up the border posts as is the current scenario?
No surely it would be the RUK setting up the border posts as is the current scenario?
While I'm sure we do subsidise it somehow at the moment it is the signatories duty to maintain their borders and the UK hasn't signed it. If Scotland has to sign it would be Scotland who had to implement border controls.
Sorry, "No" to independence or "No" to the United Kingdom, I don't follow you.
Which is why I believe Scotland voted for devolution. The opportunity being given to them by another UK Government which subsequently allowed a Scottish parliament to invest heavily in infrastructure and social services thus repairing some of the damage wreaked on the whole of the UK by one particular government. That said I think you overstate your point massively. Most have got on with their lives and don't wallow in a Thatcher hating maelstrom of loathing. It's not healthy. On the other hand if you're just a nationalist trying to dupe people into voting anti Thatcher when they should be thinking about the future of Scotland then shame on you.
> No longer being subject to the ideological whims of a disconnected home counties elite is the biggest prize to be gained from independence.
The last Prime minister was born in Kirkcaldy to a minister of the Church of Scotland, his chancellor was also the son of a minister and comes from Lewis. The one before that went to school (a posh one) in Embra, the one before that was English, admittedly from Surrey, but ran away from the circus to be an accountant. We currently have a posh PM and sidekick but that may well change by 2015 and anyway, we should be thinking a bit longer term than the next general election.
Really, surely the whole point of schengen is that the borders are open. Who pays for the current border posts?
It doesn't matter how many Scots are in the UK Government. It's their to serve the population, not the selected few such as Brown and Darling.
I don't care where people were born, I just want them to have more control over their lives.
Why do you support the Tories?
Schengen signatories have open internal borders, they have guarded external borders. So there are open borders within the area of the agreement, but the edges are policed. If Scotland signs the agreement they will be in and as we are out they will need to monitor the border.
With regard to Thatcher, Scotland was hit much harder, particularly in the west because of the complete collapse of capital spending on council housing, it had a far higher percentage of CHs than other areas of the UK with comparable employment structure. The legacy of this lives on with the poor health and unemployment which afflicts many in Glasgow.
Of course many people no longer suffer from the unemployment it wrought, but a society where this inequality and injustice can be reversed is a compelling dream even for those who won't benefit in a direct, economic sense.
As will the UK. I think you have misunderstood the point here. I haven't heard of a single pro-independence person saying lets have border controls with England and NI.
Meanwhile, all the antis keep saying they are required but completely unable to say if they will do this. In fact, even considering the notion of independence is beyond the antis. They can only think in terms of one scenario and nothing else.
It is precisely this type of politics I want to leave behind.
> Ha ha you believe the Labour rhetoric too much. Read the actual results of the poll you cite. It was skewed. Most support the notion of independence, they don't support the word when asked.
I was thinking of a number of polls actually. Support for independence has never been more than about 40% mas. It has generally been soemwhere between 30 and 40% for years but has been dropping lately. If you don't want to believe that fair enough, I can't make you believe what you don't want to.
> And you could travel as much as you like after independence. Why couldn't you? Any real reasons?
I can travel to France as well. Or China where I'm currently posting from. They aren't my country though. The UK is my country and I was suggesting to Count that he or she discover more of their own country before they vote on whether or not they decide to cut themselves off from most of it.
I actually dont believe much of the polling itself as it's based upon such a small survey size and has often, not rarely, been wrong. The last Scottish elections were a case in point.
So in fact you don't know.
No, and neither do you or anyone else so until the vote it is pointless to give definitive statements when the statements are only backed up by the more flimsy claims based on tiny surveys. I am relaxed about this.
As will the UK. I think you have misunderstood the point here.
Trust me, I haven't misunderstood. The UK won't have to sign Schengen because we already opted out of it! I couldn't give a rodents colon what Scotland does, but if an independent Scotland joins the EU it will have to adopt Schengen which means it will have to police the borders.
I haven't heard of a single pro-independence person saying lets have border controls with England and NI.
You don't have an option, they are a condition of new member states joining the EU. You'll be talking about opting out of the laws of thermodynamics next!
Because no one like talking about the negative side of their own position! The antis aren't exactly putting up posters saying that the differences in the balance of the Scottish economy means they'll be likely to better manage spending than can be done from London.
Meanwhile, all the antis keep saying they are required but completely unable to say if they will do this. In fact, even considering the notion of independence is beyond the antis. They can only think in terms of one scenario and nothing else.
Whereas the devolutionists can't hang onto a single train of thought and want to cherry pick the best bits without any consequences?
It is precisely this type of politics I want to leave behind.
The honest type where we don't kid ourselves that Scottish independence will fix anything overnight without causing any issues at all?
If you go to China or India, you will very quickly discover how insignificant Thatcher is. All she did was put her name to the inevitable.
You have misunderstood me! I know the UK wont sign up to Schengen but if Scotland is in it and rUK isn't then rUK will have to deal with the issues thrown up by that, as it does currently. So if rUK wants to have a border post with Scotland they should do that. Unfortunately they appear to be unable to say either way.
No the type where pointless scaremongering gets thrown around, reports are surpressed and the double standards abide for all. In short, where the government suppresses an opinion it doesn't agree with through a variety of mad claims and changing the goal posts.
Where is "Better Together" now on Scotland being assured EU membership by staying part of the UK? They appear to utterly silent suddenly. This is just one example of the problem. Opinions are presented as hard fact and when matters change, such as the UK EU referendum, they go silent and pretend they haven't even said it.
No one is saying that everything will be better after independence but the debate is worth having. I think there are many who cant have that debate though. Check out the Newsnight Debate last night on Iplayer.
Are you sure you want to join Europe?
(UK is not in much better position mind you)
> You have misunderstood me! I know the UK wont sign up to Schengen but if Scotland is in it and rUK isn't then rUK will have to deal with the issues thrown up by that, as it does currently. So if rUK wants to have a border post with Scotland they should do that.
I think mkean's point is Schengen countries are duty-bound to police their borders on the edge of the Schengen area. If Scotland ends up in Schengen and England out, Scotland would be need to police the border. Perhaps you could address, or at least acknowledge, this point.
You have misunderstood me!
I understand you, you don't understand the rules though!
I know the UK wont sign up to Schengen but if Scotland is in it and rUK isn't then rUK will have to deal with the issues thrown up by that, as it does currently.
Look at all the external Schengen borders, they are manned by the country that they are in! The external countries don't have to man them but choose to for internal security. The Schengen signatories are required under the terms of the agreement to man their external borders, this is not optional! So Scotland would have to man the border but the UK could choose not to.
I am already in Europe. So are you, you are a citizen of the European Union.
I think the UK isn't far behind. Isn't Iceland doing much better now?
I believe a Tory grandee (Tebbit??) came out recently saying they went too far with the attack on industry. And recently the Tories have been calling for more industry to be located in Britain, getting it making things again or something. Industry is not as footloose as economic thinking has made out of late, it was actively driven out of the UK by a ludicrous monetary policy and a complete vacuum of state encouragement which was instead laid on in a big way for more exploitative and ultimately lower growth business.
Ah yes, well that way round I agree. I know lots of people who have lived in the UK for years, may well have British passports, but feel Irish or Dutch or whereever they originally came from.
With this, nothing will change for me personally. I am and will remain British. I think it's a shame, however, that part of our country will no longer be a part of Britain and that certain things will change as a result. It's not about Britain wanting to 'own' Scotland; it's about a part of the country and its people that many of us go to regularly and enjoy the differences but feel a part of that union. Plus what many see as economic and political advantages for both.
You could be right and some Scottish people may well still look backwards but they won't actually be British and they will have divorced themselves from the union (if they vote for it). That's very different to someone who physically moves to another country - for whatever reason - but always looks back to the origins as home. Scotland will have chosen, spiritually as it were, that they don't want to be a part of Britain. Nothing will have changed geographically (other than borders being redrawn as it were).
Although in theory Britain could refuse to let them split away, it's accepting what the people of Scotland decide to do. So, at the end of the day it's their choice. Why would they want to look back, or the majority of them (who will have voted for it)?
In short, I think your comment (re where you feel to be your home being separate to your nationality) is pretty meaningless in the context of this debate.
And recently the Tories have been calling for more industry to be located in Britain, getting it making things again or something. Industry is not as footloose as economic thinking has made out of late, it was actively driven out of the UK by a ludicrous monetary policy and a complete vacuum of state encouragement which was instead laid on in a big way for more exploitative and ultimately lower growth business.
Please Google UK manufacturing output.
Actually I dont think the UK could refuse to let anyone split away. It could try of course but if a group of people decide they want to do that such is life. This notion that people do things with the permission of the UK Government is actually quite funny I think as it shows some kind of adherence the establishment. Sort of the same thing like when people get a warm feeling about "the big house" in Downton Abbey.
When will Scotland get HS2? The Union offers all this certainty so this should be an easy answer.
Scotland couldn't do that without complete anarchy.
Compare the current UK manufacturing output to that of the last 30 years.
Right, but if you need 10,000 unskilled labourers to turn bits of metal into widgets, you simply can't afford to employ them in the UK. The irony is that British industrial output has never been greater than at present. The difference is that it is umpteen times more efficient and generally high tech and high skilled output. When someone on the other side of the world can do the same work for a fraction of the cost in the UK you can bet it is going to move over there.
It is the same in my industry. My last job involved managing a team of 20 Chinese software developers. Why? Because you can employ four of them to one of me! When it comes to business, there is no such thing as Scotland, the UK or even Europe. It is a global market and you forget that at your peril.
Try looking at the numbers, go on. I'm sure you'll manage it if you try really hard. Maybe stop spouting propaganda and try actually learning?
Or you could look a couple of posts up the thread where someone summmarised it for you.
Your getting all this from one trend? Wow, that's a 'brave' (read: stupid) conclusion.
The rest of the UK is not in Schengen and is incredibly unlikely to join.
A new country joining the EU is required to join Schengen. It's been stated repeatedly that an independent Scotland would have to apply as a new country.
That being the case, there would need to be a strengthened land border between the UK and Schengen at the border England-Scotland, both from the point of view of the UK and that of the EU (because Schengen allows for freedom of internal movement but requires strong outside borders for the concept to work).
Sorry I'd assumed that as you are a bit dogmatic and slow I'd try you with a single trend. Of course you could also look at other countries economies that have transitioned from primary through secondary and into tertiary industry which display similar trends?
One handy tip; when using the word "Stupid" to describe someone, try proofreading your own posts.
Wow, you've either won hippocrite of the week or you are really hard of thinking.
Deindustrialisation was certainly inevitable and happened across europe around Eindhoven, Lyon, Nordrheinwestfalen. Up until the 1970s/80s the life outcomes of the people of west central Scotland were similar those of workers in other industrialised areas.
The difference being that on the continent their deindustrialisation was managed. The disgrace of thatcherism was the abandoning of communities across great britain to market forces and completely unmanaged collapse of the industries and state mechanisms in their communities.
The deterioration in health outcomes for males in west central scotland hauntingly mirror those of the industrial heartlands of the former USSR after the collapse of communism.
Hmmmmm.......I would estimate that around 30% of my colleagues cross the border twice a day just to get to and from work . . . .border posts will give them a Hell of a commute!
> The deterioration in health outcomes for males in west central scotland hauntingly mirror those of the industrial heartlands of the former USSR after the collapse of communism.
Couldn't agree more. There was a very interesting programme about the two contrasting towns of Thurscoe and Grimesthorpe. All rather sad.
Just a wild guess but I'd say you don't have a lot of experience of getting things made. Am I right?
Unfortunately EBG is right that lots of manufacturing jobs are never going to come back to Europe, not in the forseeable future anyway. The labour pool in China is so vast that it can grow for decades before wages rise to a point where it's competitiveness with Europe is put in jepordy.
Your tactic of trying to shame people into supporting independence by trying to make them think that a contrary view must be Thatcherite one is both deplorable and laughable. Unless of course you actually believe it in which case you're just a bit sad. Germany, for example, was able to maintain a lot more manufacturing industry in the 80's for a variety of reasons. A better government in the UK could have done so as well. That said Scotland did very well in attracting a number of electronics companies to Scotland to build wafer fabs. Sadly the realities of global business from the 90's onwards has meant these billion dollar businesses have now moved Eastwards. It's not a black and white choice.
When I was 18, my uncle said a very interesting thing to me. I will share it with you and allow you to ponder it over the next 10 years.
When I was 18, I thought I knew everything.
When I was 21, I knew I knew everything.
When I was 30, I knew I knew nothing.
Seem impossible? In what way? There are 200+ countries in the world and they all seem to be able to do these things to a greater or lesser extent.
> The rest of the UK is not in Schengen and is incredibly unlikely to join.
> A new country joining the EU is required to join Schengen. It's been stated repeatedly that an independent Scotland would have to apply as a new country.
> That being the case, there would need to be a strengthened land border between the UK and Schengen at the border England-Scotland, both from the point of view of the UK and that of the EU (because Schengen allows for freedom of internal movement but requires strong outside borders for the concept to work).
Is a new country required to join schengen?
I'm at a wise beyond by years 30 as I'm questioning your bien pensant rubbish and offering nothing concrete in return.
Why is it not inevitable? Sure, we can compete on value added, efficiency, expertise and the ability to design and manufacture high tech, high value stuff, but if the bottom line is cost and cost alone, how do we compete? I am genuinely interested.
Is a prime example of our economy the fact that we export expensive Land Rovers and Jaguars to China yet import cheap clothes? In your eyes you seem to be saying that we should be manufacturing our own clothes, but I can't see the masses being prepared to pay £100 for a pair of jeans when the current Primark price is £14.
Is a new country required to join schengen?
A couple of MEPs have been quoted as saying that Europe is basically an "in out" decision now and you either take the whole lot or none of it. So assuming they are right then Schengen is mandatory.
Easy or hard are not words I would apply to this. Complex might be one but it's all possible. Basically it's like many things - can you be be bothered with some admin to support a system which you think might be better.
Well on your basis the UK is out then. You should become a political advisor as it seems a pretty simple job.
Nah, as we all know, things in the EU can be fudged and changed to suit the circumstances. For some reason the UK loves to slavishly interpret rules to the nth degree.
We are already in with opt outs (unless the Cameron cocks it up), the EU have apparently stated that all new admissions are all or nothing. The core EU countries don't want more EU-lite countries as it creates a huge headache.
I'm of the opinion that it's up to the Scottish to decide their fate. However, I do worry that a lot of Labour support will be lost, leaving us more likely to be stuck with the pricks we're currently lumped with in future.
It can then become a puppet state ruled from Westminster. Mwah hah hah hah hah!
Considering they've got oil & gas, I'd be surprised if the yanks didn't invade.
It wasn't in France, whole areas of the N of France, for example, were reduced to unemployment as the mines and heavy industry closed. A lot of promises were made but many people never worked again. And it's still gong on, the last blast furnaces just closed, the car industry is preparing to reduce their work force by thousands as I type this. So Thatcher was certainly very brutal, especially in her apparent totally callous disregard for the people she was harming but to imagine that in the rest for Europe things went much better is a bit of a "the grass is always greener" sort of thing.
I think you are wrong that the EU has stated it's everything or nothing. Can you give a definitive source for this which says this in clear, unambiguous language?
I hear this often but unfortunately democracy throws up scenarios you don't like. Do you mean that voters need to be prevented for getting the government they want and need to be saved from themselves? ;-)
If you want to shortcut the process here is a link to a regularly updated article from Newsnet Scotland, a pro independence site, which tries to deal with the scare stories and other genuine questions which have been raised:
Some of the stories have been overtaken by events such as the question as to whether or not the referendum will be legal but it's still a useful source for those with a genuine interest in the debate.
Yes, soft diplomacy.
That's just pandering to their soft side.
Agreed. There is nothing wrong with being pro UK or in favour of the Union but I think they do little for themselves and the desperate measures employed suggest a really uncomfortable feeling they all seem to have.
> Agreed. There is nothing wrong with being pro UK or in favour of the Union but I think they do little for themselves and the desperate measures employed suggest a really uncomfortable feeling they all seem to have.
I've been banging on about this for a while now, but it's recently come to light that the Better Together campaign are preventing anyone from commenting on their facebook site if they support the Yes campaign (or even if they're unsure at the moment). Most of the people I know that have been banned have done nothing more than ask a few questions or engage in respectful debate. It would appear that they're not too keen on any contradictory opinions. I've also emailed the Better Together campaign team and tweeted at them and have had no response or clarification for this.
I would love to see a more positive campaign from the BT camp, but so far it seems to be primarily focussed on belittling the 'Nats' or peddling scare stories.
Better together, The rest of the UK would be weaker without Scotland.
What I'm really most sick of is foreigners thinking London = England, and that Tory = England. Get a grip on reality, a grip on the diversity we have down here, and get a grip on the transience of who holds power in Westminister, Westminister, Westminister, Westminister, Westminister, Westminister, Westminister. Sorry for repeating myself, I've obviously spent too long listening to Oil Banker Soapy.
And to assume that everyone in Londonland sees the northern tribe as 'a drain' and 'worthless to the uk' is about the most ignorant Daily Mail esque comment you can come out with, my dear Jockobite.
So sick of the constant moaning as well. Latest subject for moaning from the pro-union inlaws, HS2. You want a new trainset, borrow the money your self and pay for it yourself! Don't see why I should pay for your useless train set construction industry to make a fool of itself for year after year, f*cking things up. That isn't being slanderous, it's the reality of driving around that English student village you have up there called Edinburgh.
Going back in time 6 UKC independence threads, I was very pro union. Now I'm pro-independence. For little other reason than to annoy the people who spend their time moaning about England (or is it Londonland?) while being committed to voting against independence.
What do you mean "when" ? Scotland already IS Mad Max.
HAHAHAHAHA, I knew you did. Westminister, westminister, westminister. Westminister = England :)
Sorry if I offend you, I will apologise for the Jockobite comment.
But no, I will not drop the foreigner statements, that is what you are wanting to achieve, you want English and Scottish to be foreigners.
I would respectfully disagree, England is a far more diverse place than Scotland.
I was referring to my missus, and her family, who are Jockobites :-P
NO, NO, NO, technically they are not seperate countries. Technically they are the same country. Technically there is no 'English', there is no 'Scottish', there is only 'United Kingdom'.
You keep on kidding yourself mate. Having a good selection of pakora and Italian chippies serving brown piss on chips does not mean you are more diverse than England. Compare Londonland to Glasgow, walk a mile down Byers Road, and walk a mile down Camden High Street, then think about where is most diverse.
In fact you could probably walk a mile down a thoroughbred Tory racist heartland in Oxfordshire or Cheshire and it would be more diverse than the most hipster parts of the central belt.
I agree the discussion should be civialized. So the SNP should stop attaching 'if we are free from Westminster' as the get out clause to every negative news story about Scottish politics.
You may have a romantic notion of a Scottish nation, and for what it's worth I agree with you, but TECHNICALLY, it isnt a country amd hasnt been for a good while, much like England.
The US states and the German regions have different laws, Scotland(or England) is no more a country than Saxony, Bavaria, California or Alaska. (hint:that is what the independence vote is about)
Personally, I can't wait for England to appear on that list, because I'm a pathetic jingoistic nationalist with an inferiority complex.
> HAHAHAHAHA, I knew you did. Westminister, westminister, westminister. Westminister = England :)
> Sorry if I offend you, I will apologise for the Jockobite comment.
> I was referring to my missus, and her family, who are Jockobites :-P
Best to steer clear of religious matters in Scotland,and the Jacobite movement was aligned to the Catholic religion, but a lot of English people do not appreciate that, and can inadvertently stir up feelings that have been simmering for centuries.
Yeah, couldn't agree more. Don't involve England in your religious sectarian crap, we grew out of believing in fairy stories and persecuting our own nation based on who wears pointy hats and wears the rounded hats centuries ago.
Can't wait to see how proud independent Scotland handled the pathetic Saturday afternoon brutalism that England eradicated in the 80's.
'Best to steer clear from it'... well forgive me, but I couldnt give a shit if nonsense hokus pokus shit gets 50% of a nation angry. It isnt my problem and it isnt for me to be ashamed. That;s Scotlands problem.
I wasnt even thinking of that angle, but since you mentioned it, it's Scotland that has that problem, and I reserve the right to take the piss of people who think it's acceptable to discriminate based on which brand of fairy-story bullshit my football team supports.
God I'm jealous of your great society.
I think you have completely misunderstood what I said. I was referring to the London jocks like Darling, Brown, Alexander x2 etc. Not London itself.
Scotland can't borrow money for HS2 and pays for it even though it wont come here. You need to understand the scenario.
Good rant and keep dreaming.
Good bit of scaremongering from veteran scarer Ian Davidson: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=425608334183846&set=a.136650206412995.35100.1366401797473...
Re the Electoral Commission finding on the question itself. I bet there will be various utterances from the Tories and Labour about a "slap down" or something like that. They are so predictable.
think someone has been feeding you stories.
In my 29 years in Scotland I am yet to experience, witness or hear from a primary source of a single incident of religious bigotry, violence or discrimination. I suspect this must be a extremely localised phenomenon whose influence is much overplayed (the southern media is not the only one with a 'watford gap' nothing in Scotland exists west of Lanarkshire)
Regarding Saturday afternoon brutalism - Even the Old Firm stuff is massively overblown and no relation to the organised violence of the 80s. In fact even then Celtic and rangers wouldnt take each other on. You see no more trouble at Old Firm games then you would in any other situation with 60,000 loose at the drink before a game and probably another million or so around the country watching the game in the pubs.
Of course in the internet age many of the 'voiceless' have the opportunity to drape them selves in the tricolour or union flag and spout a load of shite they dont understand but the effect on Scottish society is absolutely negligible.
Re:Jacobitism - when people speak romantically of the jacobite cause it tends to be more about , for good or ill, the death of the clan system and the beginning of the end of gaelic culture. To suggest people are pining for a return of catholicism is an absolute nonsense. The people of scotland are as ignorant as anyone else around the 45 uprising and for many it is still seen as the last hurrah for the breaking of the union - even though the stewarts wanted the whole UK crown.
> It amazes me that people still think this is about nationalism. As if > Everyone with an interest in the debate will already have read this but The idea this is about nationalism now is laughable. The kilt wearing, claymore wielding, stone of destiny stealing lunatic fringe of the independence movement are not who are driving the political agenda in Scotland today. It's about social democracy vs Blair-Brown-Cameron's free market free for all.
But that is true of all the uk, we that feel like that should be sticking together and changing things not giving up and running away. Like I keep elucidating, what if Yorkshire or Lancashire or godforbid Surrey and Essex decided they too wanted out of the union? Scots that don't stay and make it work after all it's done for them are deserting people who have faught alongside them as British for the UK, not for some few selfish individuals to think 'ok, we might be a bit better on our own now, leave the neighbhours to get slaughtered by the tory hoards'
I don't see much mileage in trying to guilt Scots into not voting for independence.
You call that elucidating?
Maybe its time we looked beyond arbitrary borders defined centuries ago and invited Englands progressive counties to join us in our Social democratic utopia (i'm only half joking).
My quick answer to that would be the counties you mention have no history of being an independent nation, have none of the political, legal, educational and social strucutres and bodies that already exist in Scotand and do not reagrd themselves to be a nation.
However if the people of Lancashire decided they wished to be independent and set up an independence movement i would wish them all the best in their endeavours.
The stick around and make it work argument are the same ones you hear from old socialists in the labour party who are still trying to work it from the inside. they are pissing in the wind.
High speed rail a god send for the north of England? no,its just another mass investment paid for by the UK, which really just benefits the state of London.
as for the ship yards, sick to the teeth of this argument. It is the only non-competitive industry in scotland where you still find many people who have been in kooshy jobs since they left school in the 70s. lots of misplaced and unbalanced sympathy for a pretty small industry.
Funny, the standard view seems to be that London, or rather the financial, insurance and banking industry based there subsidises the rest of the country... The trade balance would certainly be very iffy without it. Has this situation changed of late or are you just making it up?
if anyone is interested the Scottish Government have just announced they have acceted all of the Electoral Commision's recommendations http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2013/01/electoral-commission-report30012013?utm_source=twit...
Funny, the standard view seems to be that London, or rather the financial, insurance and banking industry based there subsidises the rest of the country
According to Wikipedia (other sources differ slightly but are generally in the same area)
"London generates approximately 20 per cent of the UK's GDP (or $446 billion in 2005); while the economy of the London metropolitan area—the largest in Europe—generates approximately 30 per cent of the UK's GDP (or an estimated $669 billion in 2005)."
Which is actually lower than I was expecting when you look at the disproportionate quantity of financial services there and about 12% of the population.
Though it adds nothing to this discussion, I once accidently trod his foot while at ordering a pint at the Yucatan in Stoke Newington.
He was most apologetic
as was I.
as you were.....
what has always bugged me about the so called union is why London became the de-facto centre of control of the Union. This gave rise to a feeling that England was the dominant force and that in fact it has never been an equal partnership of nations..
one thing for sure is,there has been a culture in scotland of winjing about this and having a 'chip on shoulder' attitude of being downtrodden, yet many of these same people being too scared to go it alone. These spineless and winjing cretins will no doubt vote to remain on London's cowtails. Wish we could banish them across the border! :)
> one thing for sure is,there has been a culture in scotland of winjing about this and having a 'chip on shoulder' attitude of being downtrodden, yet many of these same people being too scared to go it alone. These spineless and winjing cretins will no doubt vote to remain on London's cowtails. Wish we could banish them across the border! :)
Well the pro unionists are doing your case no favours by then rabid scaremongering that is going on. That is for sure going to make some stick to the status quo, and most of that scaremongering is coming from the London end, so it does not look like they are so happy to get rid of Scotland as you are.
Have you asked yourself why (if what you say above is correct) that London want these "spineless and winjing cretins " to stay in the union ?
> > Re:Jacobitism - ......... To suggest people are pining for a return of catholicism is an absolute nonsense. ......-the stewarts wanted the whole UK crown.
Spot on,in my view, Bonnie Prince Charlie, was an Italian catholic born of a Polish Mother who was not in the least interested in Scotland other than as some ccannon fodder to help him gain the UK Crown.
for the same reason the Romans chose it for their province? Good links to continent. Plus it ended up with a large proportion of the population increasing its influence.
For the union though it was a pattern first set by James 1st and 6th.
> what has always bugged me about the so called union is why London became the de-facto centre of control of the Union.
I suppose we could have gone for a similar approach to Australia or Brazil and had a new town capital. Milton Keynes or Livingston perhaps. On second thoughts...
> Maybe its time we looked beyond arbitrary borders defined centuries ago and invited Englands progressive counties to join us in our Social democratic utopia (i'm only half joking).
> My quick answer to that would be the counties you mention have no history of being an independent nation, have none of the political, legal, educational and social strucutres and bodies that already exist in Scotand and do not reagrd themselves to be a nation.
Have you not heard of the War of the Roses?
yes - the war fought between the houses of lancaster and york for the english crown. An interfamilial rivalry between two duchies almost entirely unconnected to the cities attached to their title,far less the two counties?
Are you pulling my leg or are you suggesting it was a fight between the two nations of yorkshire and lancashire?
As I understand it The War of the Roses was not about Yorkshire/Lancashire independence. It was about which King they supported.
Apparently its was already done years ago:
After about 1 minute into the clip.
it was more North/South as well in terms of power bases.
Aw - think of the pigeons! You are right though - the best argument yet for the Union.
> If you want to shortcut the process here is a link to a regularly updated article from Newsnet Scotland, a pro independence site, which tries to deal with the scare stories and other genuine questions which have been raised:
> I travel with a socialist and a Tory, and I have heard all these stories before, as both are pro union and both swallow all scare stories hook line and sinker, with no effort to check if there is any truth in them or not.
When you offer them a chance to read a more measured option, they just don't want to read it, and at the same time , they are constantly arguing that the truth is being hidden from them!
The fact is that hard liners on both sides have made up their mind , so are irrelevant, in the numbers game.
Elsewhere on the site
F ounded in 1993, Mountain Hardwear are a pretty young mountaineering clothing and equipment manufacturer but are also one of... Read more
Perhaps the perfect Xmas gift for the climber in your life... Wild Country's Crack School has two of the worlds best crack... Read more
Tonight's Friday Night Video features the Norwegian town of Rjukan, once believed to be the home of the world's tallest... Read more
Rock shoes stink – let’s face it. Boot Bananas are the perfect way to fight the funk and keep them fresh. They help... Read more
The release of Peter Jackson's new film The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies on 12th December may not appear to link to... Read more