Scottish Independence

[TinkyWinky]

It would be shockingly large if it was £40 billion, but it is nowhere near that figure.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Economy/Q/pno/3

Ahhh - yep your right Diablo - sorry - was getting figures mixed up and I didn't check.

£40bn is the amount the Oil & Gas sector is worth to the UK economy, of which the SNP say about 90% should be Scotland's under a "geographical share".

So yes a roughly £4bn shortfall annually on income when you compare to existing cost structure.

Put that in context, that's the entire budget for "Education and Lifelong Learning" and "Justice" shortfall every year - even without increased debt payments based on a pretty swift move to remove the AAA rating that Scotland enjoys as part of the UK.

But when you look up "deficits", "geograhpical share" vs "per capita share", "share of debt" there's no one set of figures available to ministers or the public where we can all make an informed judgement.

There are soooooooooo many variables it's ridiculous for anyone to really be able to compare like with like in order to make an informed decision.

This for me is exactly why there is no way Independence should happen now - as no one can make the a decision having been given all the facts.

Can you imagine no Pound and no Euro, no membership of the EU, no part in NATO, no defence force and then a rising deficit each year in the order of £4bn in the first few years and then rising quickly as debt mounts and the credit rating sinks?

I think most people just want to see some facts that the majority can agree on - so you can compare and listen to reasonable arguments for and against.

TW

 

[scooter]

i think most people just want to see some facts that the majority can agree on - so you can compare and listen to reasonable arguments for and against.

+1

 

[monaghan]

The bit I don't understand is why they would want the pound and other bits from the rest of the UK, surely independence is rejecting all these things and doing your own thing?

 

[scooter]

Do you think the push for independence is being driven by an anti English agenda?

Thats a very big NO where I live.


TinkyWinky is right. People vote for their pockets but that's not anything new, north or south of the border.

The SNP were in power before the recession and they were voted in again during the recession. Why? I think it is because they have shown they can manage and they seem to manage better than Labour.

free prescriptions
free university tuition feees
100% rate rebates for small shops
free eye tests




.

 

[TinkyWinky]

The bit I don't understand is why they would want the pound and other bits from the rest of the UK, surely independence is rejecting all these things and doing your own thing?

Cos Salmond knows the economics doesn't stack up.

Having your own money, army, EU membership et al. costs money and it removes the "safety net" of keeping links with the rest of the UK (read Bank of Scotland and RBS or defending yourself).

Unfortunately, the SNP's deluded leader wants to have his cake and eat it !

His and Sturgeon's continual whining about being bullied is becoming very boring - as he can't counter it with meaningful numbers and debate that stands up to any kind of scrutiny.

I wouldn't mind if he came out with some honesty that he is leveraging for more autonomy, but stay part of the UK, but he's not. He's hellbent on trying to bully his way to declaring Scotland an independent country, which I believe would leave Scotland with truly monumental problems.

Why? I think it is because they have shown they can manage and they seem to manage better than Labour.

Yep agree - I personally think it is purely the latter - the opposition parties up here are bloody feckless.

 

[Skinner]

Will these still be possible if Scotland goes independent, with the prior mentioned 4bn a year deficit.

How is this deficit going to increase with their own military (don't forget they need to equip said military and all that goes with it), the increased interest on its debts and eu rebates removed, and everything else or does 4bn become 6bn or 8bn ?

I haven't looked into it very deep, but with the spanish veto (due to their own separatist issues) on them fast track joining the eu, it seems the Scottish NEED the english lifelines so as to not end up sinking into a deep pit.

free prescriptions
free university tuition feees
100% rate rebates for small shops
free eye tests

 

[blether]

A question for you Scottish lads. Given that Scotland already has pretty comprehensive autonomy, certainly much more than the English counties. Do you think the push for independence is being driven by an anti English agenda?

Well....

No, Scotland doesn't have "pretty comprehensive autonomy". Reserved matters (which only Westminster can legislate on) include:

benefits and social security
immigration
defence
foreign policy
employment
broadcasting
trade and industry
nuclear energy, oil, coal, gas and electricity
consumer rights
data protection
the Constitution

In these matters Westminster represents all of the UK, balancing the effects of legislation on the 5 million residents of Scotland and the 60 million residents of the rest of the UK.

Also a comparison with English counties it utterly irrelevant. Scotland is a *country*, so you'd expect more autonomy than for a *county*.

It seems to me that too few North of border understand the politics of the SNP

What do you base that on? I've lived here for over 20 years and couldn't disagree more. There's far more clarity around the SNP's politics than Labour's or the Lib Dems.

In my lifetime the SNP hasn't moved much at all, while you can hardly get a fag paper between the policies of Labour and the Tories these days.

This is a nice visual aid based on the 2010 general election (http://www.politicalcompass.org/ukparties2010):

and view them as the anti English dominance party when what they actually are is ultra socialists who will tax heavily to pay for their spending.

"Ultra socialists"? I think "socialists" would about cover it, where do you get "ultra" from? In comparison to the main Westminster parties it may seem that way, but that just shows how far off-centre mainstream politics in England has drifted in the last 30 years.

 

[anthony]

If people in England and Wales were included in the vote (which you could argue should be taken into consideration given the adverse affects they'll supposedly suffer), then which way do we think it would go?

 

[blether]

Will these still be possible if Scotland goes independent, with the prior mentioned 4bn a year deficit.

How is this deficit going to increase with their own military (don't forget they need to equip said military and all that goes with it), the increased interest on its debts and eu rebates removed, and everything else or does 4bn become 6bn or 8bn ?

I haven't looked into it very deep, but with the spanish veto (due to their own separatist issues) on them fast track joining the eu, it seems the Scottish NEED the english lifelines so as to not end up sinking into a deep pit.

UK net borrowing for 2012/13 is forecast to be £120bn. A deficit isn't anything new.

In an independent Scotland it would be for the political parties to set out their approach to deficit management, taxation and other fiscal matters, and for the electorate to choose, just as happens in the UK at present.

Personally I'd be happy to pay a little more tax for better public services, a more socially just society and self-determination for Scottish voters.

I'm not sure what english lifelines you're referring to? Every independent financial measure shows that Scotland is perfectly capable of being a relatively wealthy, sustainable independent nation.

As for the EU, no current EU member state has indicated anything other than support for Scotland's future entry into the EU. Spain will not exercise a veto, it would be economic and political suicide for them to do so.

But the language being used by the Spanish government does not support these dire predictions (that Scotland would not be admitted to the EU). In a recent interview the Spanish foreign minister, José Manuel Garcia-Margallo, stated that a Scottish EU application should be considered in the event of a Yes victory in the referendum. He went on to insist: "If Britain's constitutional order allows – and it seems that it does – Scotland to choose independence, we have nothing to say about this."

More strikingly he went out of his way to distance himself from suggestions that the Scottish and Catalan cases were inseparable for Madrid. "The two issues are 'fundamentally different'," he declared.

EU membership will be negotiated, not least because the residents of Scotland are already EU citizens, businesses are trading within the EU framework, and there is no provision in law for removing either.

As ever the politicians (on all sides) predict the worst case scenarios, while the reality will be a steady, negotiated, outcome. Not necessarily pain-free, but worth it IMHO.

 

[Skinner]

As I said I haven't looked into deeply, but I assumed keeping the pound, and the other things they wish to keep was lifelines, to ease things and offer some protections ?

If things was equal with or without, why does scotland want them ?

I can't remember last time in a divorce where one partner said to the other, I still want to come to sunday lunch, visit your parents and go on holiday together. Assuming no kids, you cut the cord and go alone, unless you need those ties ?

 

[blether]

If things was equal with or without, why does scotland want them ?

Because there is mutual potential benefit to Scotland and rUK in a currency union. It's not a zero sum game, where what's good for Scotland is bad for the rest of the UK and vice versa.

I can't remember last time in a divorce where one partner said to the other, I still want to come to sunday lunch, visit your parents and go on holiday together. Assuming no kids, you cut the cord and go alone, unless you need those ties ?

If divorce was a good analogy for Scottish independence then I'd agree with you. As it is, Scotland and England are already happy border neighbours, have extensive social and trade connections, which would exist had the union never happened, and will exist and develop post-independence. Nothing changes in that regard.

There is massive *mutual* benefit in these connections, regardless of political union.

I think a better analogy is of siblings who live with their parents. The one who isn't 'favourite' wants to leave home to get away from the overbearing parents - it's not a reflection of the relationship with the people of the UK, it's a reflection of the relationship with the political system and the political direction of the UK, which the Scottish people have no influence over.

Independence is about self-determination. Is it right that the 5 million people in Scotland have no influence over who governs them in the list of matters I posted above? I don't think so, and will vote 'Yes' in September because of this - I'll accept that there is uncertainty in many areas, but know we have the wherewithal for them to be resolved, that the sky won't fall in and we won't wake up on independence day destitute and facing the doom predicted by many.

 

[tifosi]

but it's the kid who wants the 'independence' but still goes home at weekends for a free feed and with a bag-full of dirty washing!

 

[blether]

but it's the kid who wants the 'independence' but still goes home at weekends for a free feed and with a bag-full of dirty washing!

How exactly? Where's the 'free feed' or laundry in the independence white paper?

 

[tifosi]

How exactly? Where's the 'free feed' or laundry in the independence white paper?

It's in the subtext of every statement that Salmond & Sturgeon have made regarding their currency demands.

I'm all for Scottish independence but this has a long long way to go yet.

 

[blether]

It's in the subtext of every statement that Salmond & Sturgeon have made regarding their currency demands.

That's really not very illuminating and probably not true - *every* statement?! Can't you come up with *one* example?

You were very forceful about the 'free feed' and laundry a couple of posts ago, surely that was based on more than "subtext"?

I'm all for discussing and debating independence, but it's tricky when most anti-independence views on here appear to be founded on plain assertion and over-generalisation.

 

[tifosi]

You'll be accusing me of bullying next because you don't like my opinion!!

Danny Alexander stated it again this morning that "Currency union just isn't going to happen". It's the position of all the main UK parties.

Yet, S&S have stood firmly on their independence with currency platform without having any backup plan, or coherent plan at that. It's falling apart and even the European union finance chiefs have pretty much told them to go back to the drwing board, yet all Salmond could come up with was that it's going to hurt the economy! Well, doh!

 

[TinkyWinky]

blether :

Sorry I don't share your optimism - partly due to the idiot at the helm, partly due to the fact the SNP are only still in power because there is no one else to challenge them.

With regards to the fairly lightweight manifesto (I mean White Paper) last year :

Quite interesting when you read :

http://blogs.ft.com/off-message/2014/02/06/scottish-independence-the-30-charts-you-need-to-know/

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...scottish-governments-independence-white-paper

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...ding-gap-in-scottish-independence-white-paper

and

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-a...-need-to-know-about-the-scottish-independence

I know the .gov.uk ones are bias, but they do raise some pretty basic and vitally important questions that I have not heard the answers to yet.

In the latter, it is interesting they choose to see the headline as "Sterling" !! In addition, further down the docuiment, this line is of interest to a lot of people :

"The document is surprisingly lightweight given its length. The legal advice supporting the SNP's position on Europe, Nato and the like is not in there"

As we know that's what is now dominating the whole debate.

There's no defiinitive answers from the SNP to questions over any of the key points including :

EU membership
Currency
Oil Revenues (how much or how it is to be divided)
Defence

And just to underline the "waferthin" way the SNP is conducting the YES campaign, Salmond has been pilloried over misleading the campaign over "legal advice" he holds about the EU membership being a done deal.

If Salmond wanted to be taken seriously, to convince voters he is the man to take Scotland forward, then he needs to step up now - but he isn't.

Again both he and Sturgeon are very good at deflecting answers to critical questions that ordinary folk need to know in order to make an informed choice. They are also far to quick in pulling out the "we're being bullied card".

He is the best of a bad bunch in power and the SNP are the best of a bad bunch party-wise.

Is that really a sound footing to make one of the most monumental decisions in a countries future - I personally happen to think not.

If we could all get behind the rhetoric and lies and have a "like for like" debate over key factors, then chances are I might even say YES, but unless that happens even it's most basic form, I personally don't think it is worth the risk of what could go wrong by going it alone.

For me, there's just too many what if and maybe's and tricks like freezing council tax may work with some voters, but they are usually the fuirst to moan about 35 children in a class, potholes in the roads and council run facilities shutting due to lack of funding.

 

[diablo]

tricks like freezing council tax may work with some voters...

Have you been to England or Wales lately? It's Coalition Policy for council tax to be frozen and has been for years.

https://www.gov.uk/government/polic...for-money/supporting-pages/council-tax-freeze

I agree with Blether. So much on this thread is either complete nonsense or over-generalisation.

There is a serious debate to be had, but the fact of the matter is that Scotland does have the wherewithal to be independent. Even the No campaign admits that - it just believes that retaining the Union is a better option.

The Scottish people will decide on Thursday 18th September 2014. I'll be voting yes, but I am not interested in convincing others to do the same. Not even my immediate family will all be voting Yes. We will all make our own minds up.

 

[blether]

TinkyWinky, if you're looking for certainties about EU membership, currency, and oil revenues, then no-one can provide them, so long as the Westminster government maintains its position of no pre-negotiation.

All the white paper can do is set out the preferred negotiating position of the current Scottish Government, until those negotiations take place there are no certainties.

If you think the status quo is as good as it can get for Scotland, and provides the best possible future for Scotland, then you have to vote 'No' and accept Westminster government rule for the next generation. I'm not prepared to do that.

He is the best of a bad bunch in power and the SNP are the best of a bad bunch party-wise.

Is that really a sound footing to make one of the most monumental decisions in a countries future - I personally happen to think not.

Personally I'd prefer an independent Scottish government I could vote in or out than a Westminster government I had zero influence over.

I'm not a member of the SNP, or a huge fan of Alex Salmond, but I think calling him an "idiot" shows a lack of respect for what he (and his predecessors) have achieved with their limited devolved powers, not to say the electorate who voted for an SNP majority government.

And this isn't an election for Alex Salmond - chances are the way the SNP's by-election results have gone that there wouldn't be a clear majority in the first independent government and we'd have a coalition.

If we could all get behind the rhetoric and lies and have a "like for like" debate over key factors, then chances are I might even say YES.

We'd all love to see that - our UK prime minister should be willing to debate with our Scottish first minister, but only one of them is willing to do so. Makes you wonder when he'd be debating with an idiot.

And it is too hard to find independent views on the important factors - the .gov.uk links you posted show that, as do the Yes campaign's own websites. The sad thing is many people confuse a free press with an unbiased press, and every column inch dedicated to the independence debate has an agenda to push, and can't be trusted.

 

[diablo]

I disagree that my point about the English counties is irrelevant. The West Midlands for example has a similar size population to Scotland but has far less autonomy. Being ruled by the South East of England seems to be a major reason for independence so how is it any different for the West Midlands to be controlled by Westminster?

The West Midlands is a region of England. Scotland isn't. That's the difference.

1707 saw an Act of Union between nations. The United Kingdom is a union of countries. Scotland is part of today's United Kingdom on an equal footing to England, Wales, and Northern Ireland.