Britain, Scotland Sign Deal For Independence Referendum

[phuketjock]

So the whole SNP econoimic stratergy is to replace subsidy from Westminster with subsidy from Brussels

]To say that a 'no' vote would spell the end of the SNP as a political party is wishful thinking on your part.

Then why, according to BBC Scotlandfor one, does Salmond admit that a 'No' vote means the end of the independence debate for at least a generation?

Alex Salmond has described the independence referendum as a once-in-a-generation event

.........

Read my post again and you will see a question mark; "So the whole SNP economic stratergy is to replace subsidy from Westminster with subsidy from Brussels?"

I was asking a question, not putting words into your mouth!

A question that needs to be asked as Salmond and his mouthpiece here have yet to say where the money for an independent Scotland is coming from!

As you seem to have an inordinate interest in the future financial viability of an independant

Scotland let me direct you to www,oilofscotland_future.html

And in anticipation of your bunking of the information in the above source I can catagorically

state with confidence that an independant Scotland can and will survive and survive very well

under our own steam when the revenue generated in our country is used for the benefit of our

country and the people living there.

[Rob8891]

I don't think the can, Smokie. The unionists have had ample opportunity to put forward their arguments, but so far nothing has really held up. It becomes more and more apparent that they have scant understanding of the issue.

Ah yes, theblether method of debate; I have no answer to your points or questions, so I'm going to ignore what you've said.

At least, Rob, you haven't yet used the words 'bigot' and 'hypocrite' to describe those with whom you disagree and whose questions you can't answer..

I object to the tone of your post, 7x7 ... "haven't yet used"..... There is no "yet" about it. I have no intention of calling you a bigot... If I cannot answer a question, I will do as I did above and admit it (maybe you should do the same, eh?) I decide that you display hypocrisy, then I will tell you in very plain and simple terms.

Nor is there any need for you to lace your post with more snide references to theblether. If that is the best you can do in debating the issue of the the referendum (which is very important to Scots here or abroad), then maybe it would be best to totally ignore you. There have been several warnings from the mods, and it would be a shame to lose the thread due to someone's inability to hold themselves in check. Please be a good chap and exert some self-control, eh?

[nontabury]

So....leading on from the many failures in '79 what will be different this time around?

That the SNP may be successful in obtaining separation on a 33% vote of the Scottish people.

[GentlemanJim]

The Scottish Government has admitted that no specific legal advice has been taken on entry to the European Union in the event of a vote for independence.

The announcement by Deputy First minister Nicola Sturgeon follows concerted criticism from opposition parties about the SNP's attempts to keep the information under wraps.

Alex Salmon branded a bare faced liar over EU legal advice.

http://news.stv.tv/politics/196346-government-took-no-specific-legal-advice-on-scotland-joining-eu/

He is off to a good start then. If they don't win independence there will definitly be a place for him in the PTP Government.

Edited November 12, 2012 by GentlemanJim

[7by7]

Even theblether admits that those who didn't vote would probably have voted 'No' anyway, so the result would have been the same!

It has been pointed out to me that this could be read as my saying the result of the vote was 'No.' It wasn't, of course, the majority of those who voted said 'Yes.'

What I meant was that the motion, as it were, was not carried as the target of a 40% 'Yes' vote was not reached, so as those who did not vote would probably have voted 'No' then the motion would still have been defeated had they voted.

Hope that is clear.

I object to the tone of your post, 7x7 ... "haven't yet used"..... There is no "yet" about it.

You are quite correct; my use of the word 'yet' was uncalled for and out of order. I apologise.

As to your other comments, and comments from some other posters, I would like to point out that for the most part I have tried to treat this as an adult debate. Though I accept that one post in particular provoked such anger in me that I posted a response without thought, and that post was, rightly, deleted.

I have tried to put arguments for maintaining the Union, I have tried to deal rationally with points raised by those on the other side of the debate.

If asked a direct question I have answered it, even if the answer has been "I don't know."

In return I have been called a bigot, a hypocrite and an instant Google expert.

It seems that those members in favour of Scottish independence do not want a proper debate.

So be it, I will take no further part.

Edited November 12, 2012 by 7by7

[smokie36]

So....leading on from the many failures in '79 what will be different this time around?

That the SNP may be successful in obtaining separation on a 33% vote of the Scottish people.

I believe there will be a concerted effort from all sides on this occasion to get as many people to vote as possible.

The democratic process is taken far more seriously now....and must be much more transparent....hence no ridiculous 40% rule.

This vote will be clear, free and fair.

What more could we wish for?

[smokie36]

We could wish for information.

A vision of Scotland as an independent nation. Economically, politically and socially.

The SNP will have to make these things clear in the run up to the referendum.....to those who think they will not at least attempt to....you must be nuts!

You fail to give the electorate much respect....people will only say yes if they see economic sense in it in particular.

We're a prudent bunch as you like to remind us!!

Edited November 12, 2012 by smokie36

[smokie36]

The Scottish Government has admitted that no specific legal advice has been taken on entry to the European Union in the event of a vote for independence.

The announcement by Deputy First minister Nicola Sturgeon follows concerted criticism from opposition parties about the SNP's attempts to keep the information under wraps.

Alex Salmon branded a bare faced liar over EU legal advice.

http://news.stv.tv/politics/196346-government-took-no-specific-legal-advice-on-scotland-joining-eu/

He is off to a good start then. If they don't win independence there will definitly be a place for him in the PTP Government.

Its amusing to see the unionists focusing on the big picture....issues which are of real importance to the electorate.

I believe the figure quoted in your link to be less than £4000.

Laughable waste of parliamentary time.

[nontabury]

Even theblether admits that those who didn't vote would probably have voted 'No' anyway, so the result would have been the same!

It has been pointed out to me that this could be read as my saying the result of the vote was 'No.' It wasn't, of course, the majority of those who voted said 'Yes.'

What I meant was that the motion, as it were, was not carried as the target of a 40% 'Yes' vote was not reached, so as those who did not vote would probably have voted 'No' then the motion would still have been defeated had they voted.

Hope that is clear.

I object to the tone of your post, 7x7 ... "haven't yet used"..... There is no "yet" about it.

You are quite correct; my use of the word 'yet' was uncalled for and out of order. I apologise.

As to your other comments, and comments from some other posters, I would like to point out that for the most part I have tried to treat this as an adult debate. Though I accept that one post in particular provoked such anger in me that I posted a response without thought, and that post was, rightly, deleted.

I have tried to put arguments for maintaining the Union, I have tried to deal rationally with points raised by those on the other side of the debate.

If asked a direct question I have answered it, even if the answer has been "I don't know."

In return I have been called a bigot, a hypocrite and an instant Google expert.

It seems that those members in favour of Scottish independence do not want a proper debate.

So be it, I will take no further part.

Sorry to see you go 7x7, I understand why you and folium decided to leave this debate, you have asked on Many occasions, relevant and very intelligent questions,which unfortunately certain people on this forum have continuously side stepped.They are so blinkered and prejudiced it seems pointless,it's like trying to take part in a discussion with Muslim fanatics,you can never win.I myself am becoming very bored with this subject,but then again I've been bored with these narrow minded Scots for a very long time, that is why,I as a Englishman am so very supportive of Scottish separation.

If you still support the Union,can I suggest that you go back in this tread (post 122)and read the input of Gentleman Jim a Scotsman who is certainly not a bigot,or blinkered in his thoughts,a person who has an open mind and lives in the year 2012.

Maybe there are a majority of Scots like him,which would give you hope,but don't rely on it.

Edited November 12, 2012 by nontabury

[endure]

Can you please stop focusing on the perceived faults of other posters and stick to the topic. Thank you.

[smokie36]

I'm still seeking intelligent debate on this issue, having tried several times to ignite a dialogue between posters.

SC.....you are in favour of the status quo.....let's hear a reasoned reply or view please.

[smokie36]

The Scottish Government has admitted that no specific legal advice has been taken on entry to the European Union in the event of a vote for independence.

The announcement by Deputy First minister Nicola Sturgeon follows concerted criticism from opposition parties about the SNP's attempts to keep the information under wraps.

Alex Salmon branded a bare faced liar over EU legal advice.

http://news.stv.tv/politics/196346-government-took-no-specific-legal-advice-on-scotland-joining-eu/

He is off to a good start then. If they don't win independence there will definitly be a place for him in the PTP Government.

Its amusing to see the unionists focusing on the big picture....issues which are of real importance to the electorate.

I believe the figure quoted in your link to be less than £4000.

Laughable waste of parliamentary time.

On reflection, lamentable would have been a better choice.

[cowslip]

Scotland leaves, then Wales and then England that'd leave just Norther Ireland. well it's a roundabout way of getting a solution - ______

[StreetCowboy]

I'm still seeking intelligent debate on this issue, having tried several times to ignite a dialogue between posters.

SC.....you are in favour of the status quo.....let's hear a reasoned reply or view please.

I think the opportunities for us are greater in a United Kingdom than on an island riven by parochial balkanisation.

I'd like to see fewer parliaments, not more.

I think that our best politicians and administrators, like our best football managers, will continue to migrate to where the bigger opportunities are, and we will find ourselves being governed by second-rate, incompetent and corrupt bureaucrats, villains and megalomaniacs, while at the moment, while London will continue to attract the best in the land.

I think that we have so much in common with our neighbours that I really think it foolish to try and draw a separation.

SC

[GentlemanJim]

I'm still seeking intelligent debate on this issue, having tried several times to ignite a dialogue between posters.

SC.....you are in favour of the status quo.....let's hear a reasoned reply or view please.

Well if you are seeking intelligent debate, then debate intelligently.

The Scottish Government has admitted that no specific legal advice has been taken on entry to the European Union in the event of a vote for independence.

The announcement by Deputy First minister Nicola Sturgeon follows concerted criticism from opposition parties about the SNP's attempts to keep the information under wraps.

Alex Salmon branded a bare faced liar over EU legal advice.

http://news.stv.tv/politics/196346-government-took-no-specific-legal-advice-on-scotland-joining-eu/

He is off to a good start then. If they don't win independence there will definitly be a place for him in the PTP Government.

Its amusing to see the unionists focusing on the big picture....issues which are of real importance to the electorate.

I believe the figure quoted in your link to be less than £4000.

Laughable waste of parliamentary time.

On reflection, lamentable would have been a better choice.

I think it is you that is missing the 'big picture'. the article is nothing to do with '4000' pounds of expenses so far, it is commenting on the intentional deceit exhibited by the First Minister, which was admitted by the Deputy First Minister. The monetary value you quote is of no importance whatsoever.

[smokie36]

I think it is you that is missing the 'big picture'. the article is nothing to do with '4000' pounds of expenses so far, it is commenting on the intentional deceit exhibited by the First Minister, which was admitted by the Deputy First Minister. The monetary value you quote is of no importance whatsoever.

That in itself is open to interpretation.

In any case the issue you refer to is of absolutely no interest whatsoever to 99.99% or the Scottish electorate. It is an example of a Labour opposition with no better idea than to nit pick on small and pointless issues.

PS. Kindly leave out the personal insults Jim, the next one I shall simply report to the mods.

[GentlemanJim]

I think it is you that is missing the 'big picture'. the article is nothing to do with '4000' pounds of expenses so far, it is commenting on the intentional deceit exhibited by the First Minister, which was admitted by the Deputy First Minister. The monetary value you quote is of no importance whatsoever.

That in itself is open to interpretation.

In any case the issue you refer to is of absolutely no interest whatsoever to 99.99% or the Scottish electorate. It is an example of a Labour opposition with no better idea than to nit pick on small and pointless issues.

PS. Kindly leave out the personal insults Jim, the next one I shall simply report to the mods.

Where on earth was there a personal insult? You are asking for intelligent debate, implying that nobody is giving any, I am saying to you exactly the same thing. If you consider that a personal insult then you are clearly insulting everybody else.

How can you be requesting intelligent debate and then come out with the following statement

In any case the issue you refer to is of absolutely no interest whatsoever to 99.99% or the Scottish electorate.

So in your opinion only 1 person in every 10 000 of the electorate has any interest in the story, is that what intelligent debating consists of?

[ScotsExpat]

As has been pointed out already, a Yes vote is not necessarily a vote for Alex Salmond to be the First Minister of an independent Scotland.

A Yes vote is to give the people of Scotland the right to determine what is best for Scotland.

I firmly believe that this has given the other parties a large problem, If they are seen to dismiss the possibility that Scotland could stand on it's own 2 feet, how can they they ask the Scottish electorate to give them the control of the first wholly Independent Scottish government?

[smokie36]

I'm still seeking intelligent debate on this issue, having tried several times to ignite a dialogue between posters.

SC.....you are in favour of the status quo.....let's hear a reasoned reply or view please.

I think the opportunities for us are greater in a United Kingdom than on an island riven by parochial balkanisation.

I'd like to see fewer parliaments, not more.

I think that our best politicians and administrators, like our best football managers, will continue to migrate to where the bigger opportunities are, and we will find ourselves being governed by second-rate, incompetent and corrupt bureaucrats, villains and megalomaniacs, while at the moment, while London will continue to attract the best in the land.

I think that we have so much in common with our neighbours that I really think it foolish to try and draw a separation.

SC

I agree SC...we shall strip away the unnecessary layer of government at Westminster.

[smokie36]

I think it is you that is missing the 'big picture'. the article is nothing to do with '4000' pounds of expenses so far, it is commenting on the intentional deceit exhibited by the First Minister, which was admitted by the Deputy First Minister. The monetary value you quote is of no importance whatsoever.

That in itself is open to interpretation.

In any case the issue you refer to is of absolutely no interest whatsoever to 99.99% or the Scottish electorate. It is an example of a Labour opposition with no better idea than to nit pick on small and pointless issues.

PS. Kindly leave out the personal insults Jim, the next one I shall simply report to the mods.

Where on earth was there a personal insult? You are asking for intelligent debate, implying that nobody is giving any, I am saying to you exactly the same thing. If you consider that a personal insult then you are clearly insulting everybody else.

How can you be requesting intelligent debate and then come out with the following statement

In any case the issue you refer to is of absolutely no interest whatsoever to 99.99% or the Scottish electorate.

So in your opinion only 1 person in every 10 000 of the electorate has any interest in the story, is that what intelligent debating consists of?

Has David Cameron yet requested talks on this issue with the EU?

There is the real issue as it is his duty to do so.

Should the SNP be seeking legal advice on this issue? Well it rather depends upon whether it is paid for with SNP funding or off the back of the Scottish Parliament doesn't it?

Its a moot point, certainly nothing serious to Alex Salmond, simply a case of Labour looking to score a point.

I would much prefer to stick to the wider issues relating to the independence debate. This thread is not about the day to day running of the Scottish parliament.

[smokie36]

I'm still seeking intelligent debate on this issue, having tried several times to ignite a dialogue between posters.

SC.....you are in favour of the status quo.....let's hear a reasoned reply or view please.

I think the opportunities for us are greater in a United Kingdom than on an island riven by parochial balkanisation.

I'd like to see fewer parliaments, not more.

I think that our best politicians and administrators, like our best football managers, will continue to migrate to where the bigger opportunities are, and we will find ourselves being governed by second-rate, incompetent and corrupt bureaucrats, villains and megalomaniacs, while at the moment, while London will continue to attract the best in the land.

I think that we have so much in common with our neighbours that I really think it foolish to try and draw a separation.

SC

You could suppose that, following independence, the cream might wish to go to Brussels rather than remain in the Scottish parliament.

Better that than heading to another regional parliament....at least we would have excellent representation at the centre of Europe.

[cowslip]

If Scotland wants to be in the EU, it will be - no problems (traditionally Scotland's always had stronger ties with Europe - France in particular. ....England however is another matter -they may vote themselves out .........som nam naa!

Edited November 13, 2012 by cowslip

[phuketjock]

Even theblether admits that those who didn't vote would probably have voted 'No' anyway, so the result would have been the same!

It has been pointed out to me that this could be read as my saying the result of the vote was 'No.' It wasn't, of course, the majority of those who voted said 'Yes.'

What I meant was that the motion, as it were, was not carried as the target of a 40% 'Yes' vote was not reached, so as those who did not vote would probably have voted 'No' then the motion would still have been defeated had they voted.

Hope that is clear.

I object to the tone of your post, 7x7 ... "haven't yet used"..... There is no "yet" about it.

You are quite correct; my use of the word 'yet' was uncalled for and out of order. I apologise.

As to your other comments, and comments from some other posters, I would like to point out that for the most part I have tried to treat this as an adult debate. Though I accept that one post in particular provoked such anger in me that I posted a response without thought, and that post was, rightly, deleted.

I have tried to put arguments for maintaining the Union, I have tried to deal rationally with points raised by those on the other side of the debate.

If asked a direct question I have answered it, even if the answer has been "I don't know."

In return I have been called a bigot, a hypocrite and an instant Google expert.

It seems that those members in favour of Scottish independence do not want a proper debate.

So be it, I will take no further part.

Unfortunately you have chosen to ignore ( exactly what you accuse the blether of regarding your questions ) any answers

that have been given to your questions if they in any way disagree with your view of things!! As per my last post.

However I doubt if you will be in any way missed by many here

So thank you and goodbye

[geriatrickid]

Scotland is a country of limited economic means and of limited natural resources incapable of supporting a fully independent country. I expect that Scotland assumes it will be welcomed into the EU and have access to funding. I can't see the EU willing to take on additional support obligations, particularly now as it is trying to keep Spain and Greece from financial collapse. The Scots may be surprised when the UK embraces the eventual independence of Scotland as it will remove financial obligations during a time of fiscal hardship. The allocation of national debt will come as a wake up call to the Scottish population when they see their debt service payments jump when they cannot avail themselves of the borrowing rate extended to their mates of the realm.

I will not argue against Scottish people's inherent desire for nationhood as there is no doubt that Scotland has always had a unique and distinct national character. However, given the extent of existing autonomy, as an outsider, I do wonder as to what the real benefits to accrue to the Scottish population will be. For all intents and purposes Scotland isalready independent, and could most likely obtain additional powers within the existing relationship structure. Scottish people will get to call themselves a nation and celebrate all the rights that go along with it. However, England would not be under any obligation to render asistance and support. I can't wait for the complaints to start when Scottish nationals need help abroad and the nearest Scottish embassy is 12 hours away.

[phuketjock]

Scotland is a country of limited economic means and of limited natural resources incapable of supporting a fully independent country. I expect that Scotland assumes it will be welcomed into the EU and have access to funding. I can't see the EU willing to take on additional support obligations, particularly now as it is trying to keep Spain and Greece from financial collapse. The Scots may be surprised when the UK embraces the eventual independence of Scotland as it will remove financial obligations during a time of fiscal hardship. The allocation of national debt will come as a wake up call to the Scottish population when they see their debt service payments jump when they cannot avail themselves of the borrowing rate extended to their mates of the realm.

I will not argue against Scottish people's inherent desire for nationhood as there is no doubt that Scotland has always had a unique and distinct national character. However, given the extent of existing autonomy, as an outsider, I do wonder as to what the real benefits to accrue to the Scottish population will be. For all intents and purposes Scotland isalready independent, and could most likely obtain additional powers within the existing relationship structure. Scottish people will get to call themselves a nation and celebrate all the rights that go along with it. However, England would not be under any obligation to render asistance and support. I can't wait for the complaints to start when Scottish nationals need help abroad and the nearest Scottish embassy is 12 hours away.

Unfortunately geriatrickid it is obvious that you have not taken the time to actually read this thread

or you would realise your first sentence has no validity whatsoever and you would be aware that

any and every British Embassy/consulate is not the exclusive property of England but in fact is equally

owned by N.Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England ( Britain ) so in the event of Scottish independance help, if

needed, will be right where it is now!! I would urge you to read the whole thread before making rash and

unsubstantiated staements/comments.

Edited November 13, 2012 by phuketjock

[StreetCowboy]

Scotland is a country of limited economic means and of limited natural resources incapable of supporting a fully independent country. I expect that Scotland assumes it will be welcomed into the EU and have access to funding. I can't see the EU willing to take on additional support obligations, particularly now as it is trying to keep Spain and Greece from financial collapse. The Scots may be surprised when the UK embraces the eventual independence of Scotland as it will remove financial obligations during a time of fiscal hardship. The allocation of national debt will come as a wake up call to the Scottish population when they see their debt service payments jump when they cannot avail themselves of the borrowing rate extended to their mates of the realm.

I will not argue against Scottish people's inherent desire for nationhood as there is no doubt that Scotland has always had a unique and distinct national character. However, given the extent of existing autonomy, as an outsider, I do wonder as to what the real benefits to accrue to the Scottish population will be. For all intents and purposes Scotland isalready independent, and could most likely obtain additional powers within the existing relationship structure. Scottish people will get to call themselves a nation and celebrate all the rights that go along with it. However, England would not be under any obligation to render asistance and support. I can't wait for the complaints to start when Scottish nationals need help abroad and the nearest Scottish embassy is 12 hours away.

Unfortunately geriatrickid it is obvious that you have not taken the time to actually read this thread

or you would realise your first sentence has no validity whatsoever and you would be aware that

any and every British Embassy/consulate is not the exclusive property of England but in fact is equally

owned by N.Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England ( Britain ) so in the event of Scottish independance help, if

needed, will be right where it is now!! I would urge you to read the whole thread before making rash and

unsubstantiated staements/comments.

I thought the embassies represented the United Kingdom, and that the proposal was that Scotland was going to leave the United Kingdom. I'll be a little surprised if we can maintain as broad a network of embassies as the UK - even after it has been decimated by our departure. As you say, probably subletting a little unit of some of the UK embassies is probably the best way forward, if we can prevail upon Westminster to quote us a good rate.

In the countries where we don't have a presence, do you think we will rely on our own offices in neighbouring countries, or will we sub-contract to the UK embassies in those countries?

Anyway, I'm sure it will all be fine. What could possibly go wrong?

SC

[MAJIC]

Scotland is a country of limited economic means and of limited natural resources incapable of supporting a fully independent country. I expect that Scotland assumes it will be welcomed into the EU and have access to funding. I can't see the EU willing to take on additional support obligations, particularly now as it is trying to keep Spain and Greece from financial collapse. The Scots may be surprised when the UK embraces the eventual independence of Scotland as it will remove financial obligations during a time of fiscal hardship. The allocation of national debt will come as a wake up call to the Scottish population when they see their debt service payments jump when they cannot avail themselves of the borrowing rate extended to their mates of the realm.

I will not argue against Scottish people's inherent desire for nationhood as there is no doubt that Scotland has always had a unique and distinct national character. However, given the extent of existing autonomy, as an outsider, I do wonder as to what the real benefits to accrue to the Scottish population will be. For all intents and purposes Scotland isalready independent, and could most likely obtain additional powers within the existing relationship structure. Scottish people will get to call themselves a nation and celebrate all the rights that go along with it. However, England would not be under any obligation to render asistance and support. I can't wait for the complaints to start when Scottish nationals need help abroad and the nearest Scottish embassy is 12 hours away.

Should there be a Yes Vote,no doubt a settlement will be made,suitable for both parties. Much like a Divorce. A clean break would be the best option,and no maintenance necessary,or indeed a second marriage! so no second portion of the marital cake.

[MAJIC]

If Scotland wants to be in the EU, it will be - no problems (traditionally Scotland's always had stronger ties with Europe - France in particular. ....England however is another matter -they may vote themselves out .........som nam naa!

One thing that needs to be remembered,some member States are already in extreme financial difficulties i.e Bankrupt,such as Ireland,Greece,Italy,and Spain,several others are heading in that direction,it would be well to realise the EU owes support to their present members,before taking on yet more financially stretched new members,with expectations of funding and expecting a EU welcome with arms outstretched would be somewhat unrealistic.

IMO I wouldn't expect the Bankrupt nations to be voting for a large monetary welcome pack for Scotland either.

[cowslip]

If Scotland wants to be in the EU, it will be - no problems (traditionally Scotland's always had stronger ties with Europe - France in particular. ....England however is another matter -they may vote themselves out .........som nam naa!

One thing that needs to be remembered,some member States are already in extreme financial difficulties i.e Bankrupt,such as Ireland,Greece,Italy,and Spain,several others are heading in that direction,it would be well to realise the EU owes support to their present members,before taking on yet more financially stretched new members,with expectations of funding and expecting a EU welcome with arms outstretched would be somewhat unrealistic.

IMO I wouldn't expect the Bankrupt nations to be voting for a large monetary welcome pack for Scotland either.

it may have escaped your notice but Scotland is already in the EU and if they (Scotland) are financially strapped.........who's supporting them?

[Crushdepth]

My home state got 'self government' some time ago. All we got out of it was an extra bunch of second-rate politicians and higher taxes to pay for them.