Derrygal

Editha

Seriously? Or are you being ironic?

formula

I was listneing to an older Scottish lady and she said it is all very well Salmond promising us all this better NHS, free elderly care and lower taxes, but where is he going to get the money from? No sharing the pound; no EU; no Barnett formula; all these companies leaving Scotland; no UK passports for the out of work Scots to seek work in the UK or other EU countries and Scotland funding it's own welfare state.

He is talking about nationalising BP now! Start attacking the oil firms profits to try to raise money and he will drive them out too.

I'm not even sure how trade will work as Scotland exports a lot to England, but the UK has trade agreements for EU countries and as we now know, an independant Scotland won't be in the EU.

As for their planing retribution on all the companies that will be move out of Scotland. How? It might take a year or two to move all the jobs they provide, but move them they will, unless Salmond is planning to pay them to stay.



They can use the pound if they want to, but the UK will no longer base the pound on what is good for Scotland too as it will be better for the UK if they just base it on what is good for the UK. A bit like Germany with the Euro, where they based it on what was good for themselves and it drove other euro countries economies down.

At least those countries were memebrs of the EU and received financial help to bail them out. Salmonds planned early default for Scotland from the ratings agencies, won't attract a good rate of interest when Scotland needs to borrow from other countries.

izzi81

The 'no' campaign are also promising everything... devo max by January, when it's something that has to be approved by Westminster and the House of Lords? No guarantees there..

Even offering devo max 11 days before the vote was illegal - The Edinburgh Agreement (2012) which sets down the rules regarding the referendum says:

29. It is customary for there to be a period before elections in the UK, during which Ministers and other public bodies refrain from publishing material that would have a bearing on the election. Section 125 of PPERA sets out the restrictions that apply to Ministers and public bodies in the 28 days preceding referendums held under that Act. Both governments recognise the importance of respecting the 28-day period prior to a referendum, in the same way that both governments already respect each other’s pre-election period for Parliamentary elections. The Scottish Government will set out details of restricted behaviour for Scottish Ministers and devolved public bodies in the Referendum Bill to be introduced into the Scottish Parliament. These details will be based on the restrictions set out in PPERA. The UK Government has committed to act according to the same PPERA-based rules during the 28 day period.

Of course no news outlet is reporting this because they are all biased! Oh wait hang on... also from the Edinburgh Agreement:

21. The governments agree that it will be important to ensure that broadcast coverage of the Referendum is impartial. Broadcasters, Ofcom and the Electoral Commission will discuss the best way to achieve this.
Free-of-charge mail-shot

I'm for 'yes' (can you tell) but if the country votes 'no' that's fair enough. However if the country votes 'no' because it has been misled by a biased media that is disappointing.

Editha

If I were living in Scotland, the economic blackmail from big business and UK government would make me more likely to vote Yes. Most of it is blatantly exaggerated. The business over the Pound, for example: Ireland used the pound for five years after independence, before getting its own currency without experiencing disaster.

Of course an independent Scotland would experience initial economic upheaval. That's the price emerging nations have to pay. Mostly they think it is worth it.

formula

I don't care either way. With a yes vote, the UK will get short term pain for long term gain. With a no vote, we all stay together. Although I know a few Welsh who want a Scots yes vote as they want those relocated jobs to move to Wales.

I voted yes in this poll as I would be fasinated to watch Salmond try to run a truely independant Scotland, a far cry from the 'indelendant but not independant' he hoped to lead. A good leader would be up against it, trying to run a new, truely independant small country, but Salmond is a worse leader than those other Scot PMs Blair and Brown were and they needed to improve to be bad. But my vote on this board doesn't mean that I won't feel sorry for the Scots who voted no and the Scots who weren't allowed to vote, if they have to abide by a yes vote.

Editha

formula, I'm interested in why you think Salmond is a bad leader. I don't like him, but I do admire him as a politician. He is one of the most experienced politicians currently active in the UK. He has been spectacularly successful in pursuit of his goals and that will still be true even if he loses the referendum.

mikemike

I am a Scot denied a postal ballot

I am presently in the Philippines and a year ago I saw what I thought was just the local currency trader having a funny day. He posted exchange rate for British pound and at the bottom of his board The rate for the Scottish pound, 20% worse on the rate. At the time I just laughed, now I am not smiling anymore!!

formula

You don't seem to understand that Ireland was and still is, treated as a special case. Sterling was still based on the Irish economy too, to help Ireland establish independence and during those years, they had financial protection from the Bank of England to allow them to establish themselves. Even before they joined the EU, Ireland was still treated as a special case and the Irish could move freely to the UK and be treated as a Brit when they arrived to have immediate full access to work or benefits and visa versa.

When Ireland recently got into serious trouble with the Euro as some other EU countries did too, the UK gave Ireland extra loans to help them, in addition to the loans the UK loaned them (and other Euro countries) through the EU. The UK did not give these extra loans to the other troubled eurozone countries. The UK will always back Ireland. Something like 1 in 9 Londoners have Irish ancestors.

I haven't seen anything that makes the Scots think they will be a special case too as Ireland was and still is and the vote is soon isn't it? If they had been told that, I'm sure Salmond would be shouting about it.

It therefore seems that Scotland is voting for independance to leave the UK, just as other countries like Australia, Canada, India etc have done, to exit the UK and be a truly independant country. No pound based on their economy too, no financial protection from the UK, the end of their UK citizenship (and passport) and no EU (trade or free movement).

formula

Perhaps you would like to explain how Salmond plans to finance all his promises? Or how he plans to provide jobs for all the Scots? Or what plans he has to trade when Scotland is out of the EU and UK? Or his plans for a currency? It's not like all these things have happend overnight as he knew his plans for "independant but not independant" were over ages ago and that Scotland will truly have to be independant, so he must have plans? Doesn't he?

When countries have left the UK before (as many have) they already have at least these basic requirements sorted, years before.

If he is such a good leader, they why did he refuse to let all Scots have a vote on their own country?

What does he think he will achieve by threatening BP?

How will he borrow money for Scotland in the future, when his plans means that he will ignore his financial advisors and let the ratings agencies record a default against the newly independant Scotland?

I can't see anything to admire. I see a man who has poor negotiating skills and who has lost the plot.

Editha

I'm not sure what formula means by Ireland being a 'special case'. At the time of independence, Ireland wasn't a 'special case', it was the only one of its kind. It wasn't as if there were any other parts of Great Britain becoming independent at that time or previously. Something can only be a 'special case' if there are other cases that are not special.

I don't see the relevance over sterling. Ireland used the GB£ for several years after independence before adopting its own currency. There is nothing to stop Scotland doing the same thing, regardless of all the huffing and puffing by the British establishment. Scotland does have some cards in negotiation, including how much share of the national debt it takes on, and Faslane, but it doesn't actually need the UK's consent to use the £.

The point about being subject to the Bank of England interest rate changes, which may not be good for the Scottish economy would be a problem in the long term (though I don't see any evidence that the Governor of the BofE gives special consideration to Scotland's economic problems now -- to the extent of prioritizing them over the City of London's). But, we are talking about a temporary situation until Scotland joins the Euro, which it would have to do as a condition of joining the EU.

If one in nine Londoners have Irish ancestors, how many have Scottish? Utterly irrelevant. But the fact is that the interconnectedness of the two economies means inevitably that Scotland will also be treated as a 'special case', regardless of what is said as part of the Yes campaign.

I am puzzled by forumula's suggestion that 'many' countries have left the UK before. I only know of one -- Ireland. Which is why it is relevant to look at what happened. Ireland did not have all questions to do with its independence sorted out years before it achieved it, unsurprisingly given that Eire's independence was achieved after a guerrilla war against Britain and was followed by a civil war.

Editha

Continuing my comment on formula's post:

The people who can vote in the referendum are the same people who can vote for the Scottish Parliament plus 16 and 17 year olds. That seems fair to me. I understand that many ex-pat Scots feel aggrieved (including my OH who is of Scottish descent and would vote No), but disenfranchisement has been a price of emigrating for a long time. I don't see how that could be turned into a criticism of Salmond's leadership.

I think it was Jim Sillars not Salmond who threatened to nationalize BP, so irrelevant.

Your last point is not entirely clear to me but I concede that Salmond probably is probably making financial promises he can't keep which puts him up there with David Cameron, Nick Clegg, Ed Balls, George Osborne, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

Editha

)

Well I suppose, apart from Ireland, which strictly speaking left GB not UK, there is the 1949 secession of Pimlico.

trottytrue

My Dad was Scottish but I am not sure how he would be voiting. On the news today it said that Scotland had becore part of the UK over 200 years ago. Well thats not along time ago. I thiink many who are voting yes we be voting with their hearts. After all what Scot if he's looking back at the History of the country wouldnt want to be Scotland the brave again. I think it will be very hard for the truly Scottish people not to vote yes, those who will be voitng No will be people who moved to Scotland and those who are letting their head rule their heart but a true Scot will let his heart rule his head and vote yes and bugger the consequences....... Scotland Forever and letsget rid of those Sassenachs.

Novocastrian

Far too simplistic. And it was over 300 years ago.