the scottish question.

[jeff oakley]

Jeff, I would put money on Labour to win the next election as UKIP splits the Tory vote.

 

It was said at lunchtime that 8.3% of the Btitish embassies belong to the Scots. That'll be the shed in the garden then.

But if the Scots vote for independance then the split of seats in the South would mean Labour would not win.

 

Now as it is you may be right that a UKIP vote may allow Labour to win some marginal seats. I would hope that before we get to the next election there is some changes which will negate those votes.

 

It is things like ABU Hanser, that captures what people think is wrong, even though it was due the EHR decision. It took us for ever to get rid of him due to interferance. We pandered to him as a result. Today he was in court in the US demanding to be moved to another prison as his stump is not suited to the one he is in. The judge told him it was prison not a hotel and sent him back. If that was here we would have been forced to take action.

[s2rrr]

The beefeaters speech is excellent seen him in different clips before, brilliant. Worked in Scotland for 18years and put up with all sorts of banter about the English but all in good fun you understand. Been bleating on about Scotlands oil since the 70's and how it was wasted by Maggie. A different deal now as it looks like it will be all decided and soon and quite a few of my mates in Scotland although very proud to be Jocks do not want to leave the club. It all depends on how much politics is rammed down the necks of the folk who make the effort to vote.

 

I think its a shame to split away but we don't have a say in it.

 

Bob  

[Wile E. Coyote]

9) assuming they wish to stay in the eec the payments to Europe.

 

I thought it was already established that they would not automatically be EU members.  They'd need to apply and may or may not be successful.

 

As for keeping the Pound: no reason why they couldn't.  A number of countries use USD as their official/de facto currency (e.g Zimbabwe's recent decision to adopt USD) or "peg" their rates to another currency - East Caribbean Dollar (XCD) being the first that springs to mind (pegged to USD for over 30 years) - with absolutely no need to have tax harmonisation. 

[Norman Verona]

I'm aware it's not automatic but I can't see Europe saying no. The nonsense about having to join the Euro is just that, nonsense.

 

Big difference to a country shadowing another currency to Salmonds plan to stay with the pound. Why should we put ourselves in the position that Germany did with Greece? 

 

Please bear in mind that the European Court of Human Rights is nothing to do with the EEC. However I agree that we should have deported him without any fuss before his lawyers could build a defence. Our problem, in the UK, is that we always want to play by the rules. If we treated EU directives as everyone else in the EC does there wouldn't be an issue about leaving. In my view we can't leave. There is a war raging between the US block and the Chinese. It's a trade war. We need the protection of a very large trading block. On our own we would wither and die.

[Wile E. Coyote]

I'm aware it's not automatic but I can't see Europe saying no. The nonsense about having to join the Euro is just that, nonsense.

 

Why do you think that, Norman?

 

Personally I think there is no way that some key existing members will roll over and admit a new country - especially under Mr Salmond's assumed terms (opt outs etc to mirror those already enjoyed by Westminster).

 

There's also a huge gulf between retaining use of the pound (which could happen) vs. complete monetary union (which almost certainly won't, partly for the reason you suggest).

[Norman Verona]

Salmonds said he would retain the pound as it made sense for both parties. That implies he wants to retain the currency as it is but will raise money independently. The Government have already put out a statement to the effect "on your bike".

 

I get the feeling he (Salmond) want independence but, at the same time, keep all the benefits that Scotland gets from being in the union.

 

If the British government wants to keep Scotland in the union then all that's need is a list of all the benefits they will no longer enjoy and will, therefore, have to pay for themselves.

[M444TTB]

I think you're hit the nail on the head there. That's exactly what the first minister wants. That and more power for himself I suspect.

[Norman Verona]

My only fear is we will let him have it.

[M444TTB]

I'd rather someone elected had power than some of the unelected persons helping to call the shots in this country.

[iain m]

Seeing Alex Salmond  and Nicola Sturgeon together launching their new book a news pundit was drawing attention to their fish based names, to me they bring  back fond memories of the Krankies    

[Rab (bombero) Reid]

I do not wnat to start a debate about the Scottish independence vote, just what is likely to happen if the Scots vote for independence.

I guess a good example to follow would be Eire, once part of the UK, now independant.

So what will Scotland have to create and fund if they are no longer part of the UK?

1) the armed forces - Good question! However, I have to say that the current size of the Scottish Division has been substantially depleted by the Government over the years, so it'll probably only cost us 2' 6p to keep them going!

2) police and security services - Unsure what you mean by 'security services' (Armed Forces? see above), but you might not realise but the Police and Fire are now national organisations under the Scottish Government and not controlled/governed by local Boards. It's only been this way since 1st April 2013.

3) medical services - We'll continue to have a NHS and it's proposed to be funded by a re-jigged framework of taxation, which will include oil/gas revenues staying in Scotland as opposed to going straight into central Government coffers!

4) education services - The education system in Scotland has been seem as the model in the UK for some years now but funding its continuation in its current form has been a hot debate for some time. Salmond & Co will be hell-bent on making sure that this and welfare are top priorities in any new independent country.

5) currency - This one makes me laugh .. many are saying that Salmond won't be able to keep the Pound Sterling as it's not his decision to make! I believe that the intention is to keep the 'Pound' as the form of currency aligned to the Pound Sterling a la Isle of Man, Jersey, etc

6) radio and television services - A television licence will be required as is the current status.

7) diplomatic services including embassies - Not 100% sure but I think some foreign embassies for the UK are currently based in Scotland so there's definitely going to be a bit of shuffling about! Diplomatically speaking, I don't think the international vision is that there'll suddenly be border guards and need to completely 'separate' relationships between Scotland and the rest of the UK .. there'll still be joint approaches as stated by both Cameron and Salmond should the vote go for independence.

8) tax raising services - I think England/Wales/NI have more to worry about if Scotland takes back its oil/gas/whisky revenues!

9) assuming they wish to stay in the eec the payments to Europe - beats me!!

Any more?

My thoughts above!

 

What gets my goat about the whole debate is the stupidity of some comments (apologies if that is anyone here as I've not read through all the previous comments) such as, (i)will Scotland be putting up a border and will we now require our passports to travel to and from? (ii)Scotland needs England because we subsidise them for 'everything' (iii)Scotland can't use the Pound .. it's ours!

 

Norman, you raise some very relevant points about how Scotland will need to manage itself. It's not like any other country striving for independence though and as far as some other countries go, Scotland does have a fair chance of succeeding independently. Economically, Scotland has healthy tourism, can generate most of its electricity though wind and water generators, has a very healthy whisky export industry (as I found out recently £mils going to China and Japan!), already has single Police, Fire, Ambulance Services and a leading education system. Yes, there's MUCH work to be done but it's not all 'doomed to failure' as many are making out.

 

Scotland must have something to offer .. after all, why would Cameron be fighting so hard to keep us in the Union?! He (and others before him) have been willing to sent our troops to 'save' some countries .. but not others, and for who's benefit??

 

ps - you can all still come up and use our westy loving roads .. we'll just tax you silly for the pleasure!

[Norman Verona]

I'll try and add to my thoughts as we go.

 

By security services I mean intelligence services. Things like MI5, MI6 and GCHQ.

 

I can't be sure about oil revenues but I'm sure they don't all belong to Scotland.

 

If the Scottish education system is 100% funded by Scottish taxpayers then fine. However if it isn't can the YES lobby expect that "subsidy" to continue?

 

Keep the Scottish pound aligned to the English pound is fine. However, from what I say Salmond say he wants to keep it as it is and says it's as beneficial to us as it is the Scotland. The problem there is we will have no control on the way Scotland raises its money. This is the scenario that's gone wrong with the Euro. Some states have ignored the rules and nearly brought the Euro down with huge debt. Why would we want to take that risk. The others you cite are historical and are will hardly be able to need to borrow or find anyone willing to lend the sort of sums that would harm Sterling.

 

Radio and TV services explicitly for Scotland should be paid for by an independent Scotland. Why do you think that the Scottish authorities will collect a tV licence and pay it over to the BBC? They may do after negotiation but that's not taken place yet.

 

I accept there's no need for border controls between the UK and an independent Scotland. But how about controls from the rest of the world, Russia, China, North Korea?

 

It was stated that Scotland own 8.3% of all UK embassies. Wont pay for much, will it.

 

Of course they will keep the tax and duties raised on their home grown products. Will it pay for all the costs they will have?

 

Back soon, teas ready.....

[Norman Verona]

.... OK, watered and fed.

 

I've had a feeling that the numbers won't stack up for Scotland to raise its own taxes if all that the UK (by that I mean England, Wales and NI) do not pay for any of the services currently provided.

 

This feeling has now been reinforced by a 630 page book that has no costings in it whatsoever but lots of new benefits and services that will be provided. 

 

I have no feeling either way if Scotland pulls out of the Union. As long as we don't pay for their independence. 

 

It is irresponsible to base all the calculations on future negotiations. If the vote is YES and they come to negotiate with all the governments and bodies they need to I would think the terms will be very tough. On the basis that you've voted to go it alone so now we'll set our price.

 

As I said earlier, from personal experience I would think the vote will be a NO. But if it's a YES then that's fine by me.

[Nick Algar - Competition Secretary]

I think everyone should forget the politics and the financials. 

 

We are all on the same big island, so it makes sense to all be know as one state. Why do we suddenly want to becomes like North & South Korea or Vietnam ? Or any other islands that have been split.

[Scottish Bloke]

^^^^Give this man a biscuit, my thoughts exacerly!