Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

You don't get it, do you? There's nothing for the pro-union campaign to prove: they are campaigning for the status quo. They don't need a white paper because they have actual laws and policies and government agencies and ministries and diplomats and currency and an army and a navy and and and.... The burden of evidence is entirely on the part of the pro-independence campaign to demonstrate that things will be sufficiently "better" to justify the enormous cost and upheaval of separation.

The BoE have said they will work with both parties, sure. But all the major parties in Westminster have said that a formal currency union is not available as an option. That rips one great big hole in the White Paper, and has only exposed the rest to greater scrutiny and revelations of naive thinking.

I'm sure the SNP are very good at devolved local government. But forming a national government of an independent state is a whole different kettle of fish, and it's possible that there is not sufficient chewing capacity for all that has been bitten off ;)

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

BA boss to vote YES!
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/po...s-boss-3192281

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

erm... no.

What Walsh said was that the reduction and eventual abolition of air passenger duty would be marginally beneficial to the airline industry. But the Scottish government is proposing to abolish APD primarily because it knows it will otherwise find it difficult to persuade international carriers to fly to Scottish airports, if it is more difficult for passengers to make onward connections to rUK or European destinations. Of course, one also wonders how the revenue stream will be replaced.

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

What is the status quo? Food banks,child poverty on the increase,6 million people in UK on min. wage,20 billion pounds of cuts coming next year,more policies like the Bedroom Tax,more billions wasted on nuclear weapons,1 trillion pounds of debt,Scotlands resources being wasted for another 40yrs,a UK government that scots dont vote for,leaving the EU.Oh aye lets all vote for that!;)
The scottish gov. (btw it is a national gov. not a local gov.,thats why its called the scottish government!) has laws ,Scots law ,it has gov. agencies and ministries.Ok we we dont have a military that will be worked out after independence ,no-one is too concerned about this.
The Scottish Development Int. has offices around the world attracting business and investment to Scotland ,so cant see putting diplomats around the world much of a problem .
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...iness-21744979
As for the currency the SNP are sticking to their guns because they know its best for business on both sides of the border not to have added costs of currency exchange.Why would businesses in England want to throw away 500 mil a year and if the business sector wants it the politicians will follow.:)

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

First off - thanks to the posters that actually provide insight from both sides and actually attach the links. Nothing like a good debate.

As far as the comment above, I don't agree. If there was nothing to prove, you wouldn't have a bunch of Scots wanting to form their own country 'cus everyone is happy with the status quo.

I'll also be the first to admit that I'm not as read up as some posting on here but the pro-union campaign sure seems to do quite a lot of the fear mongering, "what if" mentality propaganda vs the independence "rose coloured glasses" crowd.

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

You genuinly think independence with a shared currency is independence? Currency exchange with the rest of the EU works fine for the UK at present and would be perfectly ok for RUK (not just England as you carelessly put it) with an independent Scotland. Obviously as Scotland would be so fantastically wealthy with all the oil revenue and economic growth a very short time after independence from RUK the RUK would struggle to share a currency with Scotland and it would therefore be in neither country's interests............ You like to pick the Norway example when it suits you - which country does Norway share it's currency with?

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

... and a stable welfare system, a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, membership of G8 and G20, a strong voice in the OECD, membership of NATO, membership of the EU, a strong and stable global currency... Oh aye, as you put it, why not vote to get rid of all that.
No, it's not. A national government has responsibility for international affairs, defence, finance, etc etc. Scotland's government is no more a national government than, say the Assemblee Nationale in Quebec. They call themselves national, but they are only responsible for regional decisions devolved from a central government. There's a big gap.
So you think that permanent trade missions, not even full consular offices, are broadly equivalent to the Chancery functions of embassies? Dream on.
Trade with rUK is a very much more significant proportion of Scotland's output than trade with Scotland is for rUK. UK businesses are perfectly well used to the costs of forex conversion when dealing with European or other overseas customers. It's simply not anything close to as significant a consideration for rUK as it is for Scotland. The potential disadvantages (to rUK) of a currency union with an independent country one tenth the size would far, far outweigh the convenience of being able to trade across the border with no currency costs.

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

We dont have a stable welfare system as it is, cue the Bedroom Tax and the ATOS fiasco where disabled people were being forced to work after being "assessed " fit to work ,some people died.The Scottish people dont have a voice at the UN,G8,G20,OECD or Nato because we didnt vote for the UK government which is in power!
You called it a local government ,which to me means the local council.It is the national government of Scotland ,its powers doesnt end at the Lothian border.Yes of course it doesnt have the powers international affairs and defence( finance yep) thats what the referendum is about!
As for the currency I would prefer a scottish currency mainly just to stop all the bitchin but if all the countries in the world can do trade in different currencies cant really see the big problem,its only money!
http://www.sdi.co.uk/locations/asia-and-pacific
As for consulates etc. Im sure we can afford an office or 2

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

Maybe we should have a currency union with Norway,I heard they are doing ok :)

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

Why would Norway want a currency union with anyone never mind Scotland?

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

Some people in Scotland did vote for the present government, not a majority this time but quite often the majority has voted for the UK government. Sometimes a majority in England votes for the UK government sometimes not. That's democracy.

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

Why not just have a Scottish currency? Not sure why it seems to have been ruled out by everyone in advance.

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

That would be real independence. If there was a real appetite for real independence a scottish currency would be the solution and a debate on it wouldn't be necessary. Pressumably Salmond knows he wouldn't win a vote on real independence so isn't offering it.

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

Lets put this into perspective and to bed.The last time the tories had a majority of seats in Scotland was 1918 and it was some kind of coalition.They have 1 MP in Scotland at present,they did win 16% of the overall vote.At the 1997 general election they lost all 11 scottish seats ,a big zero.They are "also rans" in Scotland.This is one of the major reasons people want independence ,to never have a tory gov. ever again!

Re: if the scots go, do you care?
 

The Tories weren't in government after the 1997 election, they lost masses of seats everywhere, in case you hadn't noticed. Plenty of Scottish seats were held by members of the government party between 1997 and 2010, including by the Prime Minister between June '07 and May '10. How much more representation do you want? Just because the "wrong" party formed a government four years ago seems a pretty staggeringly thin justification for so serious and irrevocable a step as secession from the Union.