Scotland to become independent in March 2016 if referendum passes

[transam]

Another aspect I bet Alex has not considered is Scotland's representation abroad, consular services, embassies, ambassadors, representation at the UN.

I hope Britain cancels all passports of Scots who were entitled to vote in the referendum if Scotland does go independent.

You bet how much? I will take your money off you.

Basil, why such animosity? Can you not accept that a sizeable proportion of Scots simply feel that they want to be independent from the UK? Don't take it personally; it is not a reflection on you. Why not be happy for them and the confidence they have in themselves?

Does any mere mortal have any confidence in any government. ?

Most of us mortals know nothing about what is really happening behind political scenes. None of us. It all changes after the election. I have been around a while and have NEVER seen the promises delivered, from any political party/bloke..........

Transam, I fully agree - but what is the alternative, that we give up on democracy?

Weeeell for sure democracy for all must be maintained. We have fought for that. It is no secret that my thoughts of a Union split is a disaster. We have moved on from stuff 300 years ago to be a big contender in the world as a Union. We are all taxed the same and get looked after the same via stuff that as a Union of working folk we have fought for. If Scots folk think they will suddenly be better off in some way, weeell, up to them, but I don't believe it. To me it's a bit like a country bailing out of the EU because they think they are a rich country.

The UK is what it says, a United Kingdom, it is not the English Kingdom or Welsh Kingdom, it is an Island Union that has done very well, abroad and looking after all it's folk at home, where ever their life has lead them. Except us in LOS.......

[7by7]

Another aspect I bet Alex has not considered is Scotland's representation abroad, consular services, embassies, ambassadors, representation at the UN.

I hope Britain cancels all passports of Scots who were entitled to vote in the referendum if Scotland does go independent.

You bet how much? I will take your money off you.

Basil, why such animosity? Can you not accept that a sizeable proportion of Scots simply feel that they want to be independent from the UK? Don't take it personally; it is not a reflection on you. Why not be happy for them and the confidence they have in themselves?

If the Scottish people vote for independence then, as I have said many times, whilst I think they will have made a vast mistake, I will wish them luck.

But if they do vote for independence, it should be total independence. Which means, among other things:

• Losing all British nationality privileges, including British passports and British consular representation abroad.
• Losing the use of Sterling and the financial protection to Scottish institutions keeping Sterling would give.

In addition, the Scottish government should repay the majority of the £46 billion bail out of RBS by the taxpayer. Plus repaying the majority of other subsidies and bail outs to Scottish companies and institutions paid for by the taxpayer.

The 'Yes' campaign don't want this, of course. They want to be independent when it suits, but rely on the rest of the UK when that's beneficial to them; they simply don't want to pay their share for those benefits!

[7by7]

Scotland contributes an annual total of approximately £230 million in licence fees to the BBC. Yet BBC Scotland has an annual budget of £120 million, an amount which is being cut. Scotland has 8.6% of the UK population but only receives 3.7 % of the BBC's programme making expenditure. (See here.)

I didn't realise that BBC1, BBC2, BBC3 (while it still exists) and BBC4, plus all the BBC national radio stations were not available in Scotland!

Must be a pain only having BBC Alba; especially if you don't speak Scottish Gaelic!

BTW, the report you linked to is over 10 years old. Anyone who pays any attention to these things, or even watches the BBC regularly, will know that since then much of BBC production has been moved away from London. So much so that Television Centre has been closed.

Edited April 13, 2014 by 7by7

[transam]

Scotland contributes an annual total of approximately £230 million in licence fees to the BBC. Yet BBC Scotland has an annual budget of £120 million, an amount which is being cut. Scotland has 8.6% of the UK population but only receives 3.7 % of the BBC's programme making expenditure. (See here.)

I didn't realise that BBC1, BBC2, BBC3 (while it still exists) and BBC4, plus all the BBC national radio stations were not available in Scotland!

Must be a pain only having BBC Alba; especially if you don't speak Scottish Gaelic!

Perhaps Scots prefer English TV, perhaps Scottish programs are crap, I don't know, only viewer numbers will clarify eh....

[Basil B]

Scotland contributes an annual total of approximately £230 million in licence fees to the BBC. Yet BBC Scotland has an annual budget of £120 million, an amount which is being cut. Scotland has 8.6% of the UK population but only receives 3.7 % of the BBC's programme making expenditure. (See here.)

I didn't realise that BBC1, BBC2, BBC3 (while it still exists) and BBC4, plus all the BBC national radio stations were not available in Scotland!

Must be a pain only having BBC Alba; especially if you don't speak Scottish Gaelic!

BTW, the report you linked to is over 10 years old. Anyone who pays any attention to these things, or even watches the BBC regularly, will know that since then much of BBC production has been moved away from London. So much so that Television Centre has been closed.

As I see it we all have access to the same number of BBC TV channels with some regional current affairs and news variations but basically 95% off the stuff we all get, and we all pay the same licence fee, except Wales and Scotland who have extra channels in there own lingo at no extra cost, is that fair?

[wigantojapan]

Wigantojapan, as most of your latest posts obviously consist of cut and paste jobs, maybe you should familiarise yourself with Forum Rule 13 and at least post a link to your source.

I am shocked that someone who presents himself as a patriotic Scot spells whisky as whiskey!

Surely you must know that Scottish whisky doesn't have that 'e' in it!

7 by 7 why dont you read the whole post and comment on them if you desire..

Why would the link be of an interest to you ?

Even though you dont seem to understand basic English and links have been pasted

Its the content that matters

The content clearly has both sides of the yes and no

If you desire to add your bit please do..

Please take your time and read them slowly old chap as obviously you are having difficulty reading them as i have NEVER EVER put an E in the spelling of Whisky...So read them slowly and you might just learn something even if that is a slight might. and on more important issues of the spelling of whisky

Just to clarify also when i was called a bigot when i posted a link to a topic on that Scots are anti English....I have never ever said in any shape or form that i am Anti English

7 by 7

BTW, the report you linked to is over 10 years old. Anyone who pays any attention to these things, or even watches the BBC regularly, will know that since then much of BBC production has been moved away from London. So much so that Television Centre has been closed.

care to share your link with that statement and oh i have posted links as you have obviously said yourself

keep supporting weapons of war keep sending men and women to war but dont take any part in them yourselves.

Brave unionists on that point alone i am happy more than happy NEVER ever to support ANY WAR...or Any war weapons....But yes i am sure you will divert away from the question and the content related to them

Unionists have offered nothing and keep on offering nothing

The UK is strong enough as is clearly stated here to survive without Scotland Good luck to them

Scotland also is strong enough to survive and grow without Westminister based politics

[wigantojapan]

'Britishness' was invented as a marketing ploy by the Scottish king James VI, after he inherited the English throne in 1603. Jaimie decided that instead of being Jaimie the Saxt King o Scots and James I King of England, which didn't look nice on letterheadings, he'd be King of Great Britain, which was a whole lot shorter plus he got to design a new flag, thus creating endless opportunities for the manufacturers of commemorative tea-towels and ornamental bric-a-brac. All this was 104 years before anyone thought about a Union of Parliaments, that didn't happen until 1707.

The referendum debate is a debate about the 1707 Union. The Union of 1603 will remain intact. Scots who feel that Britishness is a part of their identity can continue to feel so after independence. Your personal feelings are not for politicians to decide.

Ed's assertion that British identity depends upon Westminster may also come as something of a surprise to the inhabitants of the Isle and Man and the Channel Islands. The islands are Crown Dependencies, and although British are entirely self-governing. The make their own laws, raise their own taxes, and have their own parliaments. The Channel Islands and the Isle of Man are not even a part of the EU. Despite this, the islanders maintain that Britishness is an important part of their identity.

Ed's remark that only Westminster can allow people to develop a particular personal identity is an example of that same arrogant presumption which allows Westminster politicians to solemnly inform us that our English and Welsh friends and relatives will become foreigners to us if Scotland votes for independence. It takes some gall for anyone to assert that they can decide for us how close we feel to our own families and friends.

[Ace of Pop]

If they enforce a Booze Ban like they do here for Voting, the Deals Off.

[7by7]

Wigantojapan:

Strong enough to survive without the £45 billion paid by Westminster to bail out RBS?

Strong enough to survive without the £125 million in loan guarantees provided by Westminster to keep Grangemouth open?

Just two examples from a very lengthy list of Westminster money paid to Scottish industry and business.

Where will the money come from if Scotland becomes independent and no longer receives such hand outs?

As you don't use quotes, it is difficult to differentiate between what you are saying and what you are quoting. If your misspelling of whisky came from a quote, maybe you should familiarise yourself with the quote function (see button in bottom right corner of a post) to avoid such confusion in the future.

[7by7]

Ed's assertion that British identity depends upon Westminster may also come as something of a surprise to the inhabitants of the Isle and Man and the Channel Islands. The islands are Crown Dependencies, and although British are entirely self-governing. The make their own laws, raise their own taxes, and have their own parliaments. The Channel Islands and the Isle of Man are not even a part of the EU. Despite this, the islanders maintain that Britishness is an important part of their identity.

Crown Dependencies are not sovereign nations, but possessions of the Crown.

They are self governing in domestic matters, but not in matters of defence and international ones.

Most UK Acts of Parliament do not apply to the Crown Dependencies, but an Order in Council can make them do so.

Is that what you want for Scotland?

[wigantojapan]

Embassies: It will cost a fortune to set up separate Scottish embassies everywhere.We already own just under 9% of existing UK embassies and contribute the same percentage to the wages of British diplomats. If the rump-UK wishes to act like a toddler who's never learned to share and retain them solely for itself, it will have to pay Scotland compensation. Alternatively we can all act like grown ups and share embassy facilities.

Embassy sharing between friendly nations is not new. Recently the Visegrad group of nations, Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Hungary, announced plans to share embassies in Africa, Asia and the Americas, and to share consulates in former Soviet states, in order to save costs and boost efficiency. This allows the four countries to maintain a diplomatic presence in more states than they otherwise might.

In either event none of this is going to cost us any more than it currently does. And Scotland will possess the immense advantage of having its own direct representation with foreign governments instead of having Conservatives like David Cameron telling other countries what Scottish people think.

[wigantojapan]

Royal Bank of Scotland: The cost of bailing out RBS would have bankrupted an independent Scotland.cottish GDP in 2008 was an estimated £145 billion. The cost to the UK of the RBS / HBOS bail out in 2008 was £88 billion. However the actual Scottish share on a per capita basis was £8.8 billion, and on the debt accrued by the Scottish registered banks which would have been an independent Scotland's liability is estimated at £2.4 billion. We'd only have had to cough up even that much assuming that Scotland implemented the same slash-and-burn approach to regulation of the financial sector as Westminster.

The Unionists would have us believe that we'd be bankrupted by the price of a £1 bus fare out of a London riot zone, even though we've got £75 in our pocket. And we can reasonably hope to get a refund on that bus ticket at some point in the future.

It wasn't Scotland that allowed bankers to run riot, it was Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. Brown and Darling and their ilk are effectively telling us we can't be independent because they're so bleedin' incompetent. But we already know that, which is why we're not so inclined to vote for them any more.

As Andrew Hughes Hallett. Professor of Economics at St Andrew’s University, put it, speaking on Radio Scotland.

"The real point here, and this is the real point, is by international convention, when banks which operate in more than one country get into these sorts of conditions, the bailout is shared in proportion to the area of activities of those banks, and therefore it’s shared between several countries. In the case of the RBS, I’m not sure of the exact numbers, but roughly speaking 90% of its operations are in England and 10% are in Scotland, the result being, by that convention, therefore, that the rest of the UK would have to carry 90% of the liabilities of the RBS and Scotland 10%. And the precedent for this, if you want to go into the details, are the Fortis Bank and the Dexia Bank, which are two banks which were shared between France, Belgium and the Netherlands, at the same time were bailed out in proportion by France, Belgium and the Netherlands."

[transam]

Embassies: It will cost a fortune to set up separate Scottish embassies everywhere.We already own just under 9% of existing UK embassies and contribute the same percentage to the wages of British diplomats. If the rump-UK wishes to act like a toddler who's never learned to share and retain them solely for itself, it will have to pay Scotland compensation. Alternatively we can all act like grown ups and share embassy facilities.

Embassy sharing between friendly nations is not new. Recently the Visegrad group of nations, Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Hungary, announced plans to share embassies in Africa, Asia and the Americas, and to share consulates in former Soviet states, in order to save costs and boost efficiency. This allows the four countries to maintain a diplomatic presence in more states than they otherwise might.

In either event none of this is going to cost us any more than it currently does. And Scotland will possess the immense advantage of having its own direct representation with foreign governments instead of having Conservatives like David Cameron telling other countries what Scottish people think.

What do Scottish, Welsh and Cornish folk think..?

[wigantojapan]

Subsidies: Scotland depends upon subsidies from the UK to run our economy

. A recent study by the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) think tank, based on official tax and spending figures, concludes that Scotland's North Sea oil and gas revenues, with other taxes, means it gets no net subsidy from the rest of the UK. And this is based upon shonky Westminster figures, which allocate a notional share of "UK national expenditure" to Scotland even though the money is actually spent in the South East of England. So we're paying for just under 10% of the bloody Olympics.

But if, like me, your eyes glaze over when you hear talk of balance sheets, budgets and the Barnett Formula, just consider that Westminster could very easily make it clear exactly how much Scotland puts into the Union, and exactly how much we get back in return. After all, it's Westminster which collects all the money and allocates where it goes. We can assume they know who pays what and who gets what.

If Scotland was indeed hopelessly dependent on UK handouts, Westminster would publish all the figures in glorious technicolour and upload videos to YouTube, and there would be a 10 part BBC documentary all about them. This would pretty much kill the independence debate stone dead, as Scots would be able to quantify those so-called Union benefits in precise detail. But instead finding out how much Scotland pays into the Union and how much we get back takes a crack squad of industrial strength accountants on amphetamines. So it's a safe bet that we're not dependent on subsidies from Westminster after all

[RuamRudy]

No animosity, simply, why should we be supporting free loaders who voted for independence but still want/need consular services when they are abroad.

All Alex thinks about is what Scotland will gain and not what Scotland will lose with independence.

Edit, in all fairness maybe should have written: All Alex talks about is what Scotland will gain and not what Scotland will lose with independence.

No animosity, you say? Then why use terms such as 'free loaders'? It is, I presume, intended as a slur, or do you actually think that it moves the debate forward?

Plenty of evidence has been produced which proves that Scotland is a net contributor to the UK finances so your use of the term suggests to me that you take a degree of umbrage at the concept of independence.

[wigantojapan]

No animosity, you say? Then why use terms such as 'free loaders'? It is, I presume, intended as a slur, or do you actually think that it moves the debate forward?

Plenty of evidence has been produced which proves that Scotland is a net contributor to the UK finances so your use of the term suggests to me that you take a degree of umbrage at the concept of independence

Also, as proven by this question on this forum alone, that there still is, a substantial thought pattern by those, who support the idea of the union that, the UK subsidizes Scotland even though i have presented evidence myself on this forum and as you quite rightly pointed out there is plenty evidence out there ,,but yet, still, some people just can not accept that fact, or are unwilling to accept that fact or are incapable of any thought movement in the slightest..

There has been a SNP party for 80 years and yet still people want to bring this important question and decision down to one man.....

.....

I don't know if there is an ENP if not why not?but that is a question for another posting not here ,though it is one one of the reasons Scots want independence,because they don't want any of the Westminister parties,though the Greens are welcome

[wigantojapan]

Just to remind people that the heading in bold is what the Union better together campaign has said at any one given time

Positive case for the Union: The anti-independence parties will make a positive case for Scotland remaining within the Union

If the anti-independence parties had spent a fraction of the time and energy finding a positive case for the Union as they have telling us scare stories about how Scots would all die of the plague the day after independence, we'd probably not be having this debate now. But in reality a positive case for the Union is the biggest myth of all. There's more evidence for the existence of monsters in lochs than there is for the existence of the positive case for the Union. Photies of nuclear submarines in the Firth of Clyde count as evidence for monsters, in case you were wondering.

All the anti-independence parties have promised that they will make a "positive case" for Scotland remaining under Westminster government. It's always that they're "going to" make a positive case for the Union, or that they're "about to", or "watch this space it's coming", or "those nats better watch out because we'll be doing it really really soon, honest". But they never seem to get round to it. They're too busy making up scare stories to find the time.

The closest we've come so far was when Davie Cameron attempted to give what he believed to be a positive case for the Union while on a trip to Embra in February 2012. But as is well known north of the Border, Davie struggles with the Scottish vernacular. When yer average Scottish punter says "positive case for the Union", what is meant is that Westminster politicians spell out in detail exactly how Scotland benefits from being ruled from the banks of the Thames by a Parliament dominated by Tory MPs.

But what Davie thought the phrase meant was spelling out how Westminster benefits from having control of all of Scotland's resources and economy. But we all know that already, and it's because we can see how Westminster benefits at our expense that we want to know what Scotland gets out the deal. Tory Prime Ministers are incapable of articulating that, because there is no positive spin that can be put on the situation.

What is occasionally presented as a positive case for the Union falls into one of three categories: 1. The irrelevant 2. The outright falsehood, and 3. The delusional.

1. Irrelevant: There are legions of examples, like waffle about fighting Hitler together. We didn't fight Hitler in order to keep George Foulkes and Michael Forsyth in well paid jobs where they can influence legislation despite no one voting for them. Also irrelevant are claims about family and cultural ties - we have those with Ireland too - Irish independence didn't break them. We don't need Westminster to tell us who our nearest and dearest are. And Irish people still speak English.

2. The outright falsehood: There are legions of these too. Subsidy junkie myths, alarmist scaremongering about defence, challenging those is what this A-Z is all about.

3. The delusional: Anything uttered by Michael Forsyth.

There's no sign of a substantive positive case for the Union coming along any time soon, nor indeed, ever coming along at all. Let's be honest here, if the positive case existed, we'd all know all about it by now. BBC Scotland, the Scotsman et al. would have been sure to mention it, repeatedly. It would in fact be given about as much publicity as the London Olympics.

The silence speaks volumes.

[wigantojapan]

This

Norman Ormal Part 4/5

is what the unionist want to give us

[wigantojapan]

Cameron: keeping the Union not as important as winning at Westminster

Tom Gordon

Scottish Political Editor

Sunday 6 April 2014

THE next General Election is a bigger political fight for the Tories than the independence referendum, David Cameron said yesterday.

The Prime Minister ranked defeating Labour in 2015 above maintaining the Union in a speech to the National Conservative Convention in London.

Despite previously saying he would fight with "every fibre of my being" to keep Scotland in the United Kingdom, Cameron said "the biggest fight of all" for the Tories was the election

[Basil B]

No animosity, you say? Then why use terms such as 'free loaders'? It is, I presume, intended as a slur, or do you actually think that it moves the debate forward?

Plenty of evidence has been produced which proves that Scotland is a net contributor to the UK finances so your use of the term suggests to me that you take a degree of umbrage at the concept of independence

Also, as proven by this question on this forum alone, that there still is, a substantial thought pattern by those, who support the idea of the union that, the UK subsidizes Scotland even though i have presented evidence myself on this forum and as you quite rightly pointed out there is plenty evidence out there ,,but yet, still, some people just can not accept that fact, or are unwilling to accept that fact or are incapable of any thought movement in the slightest..

There has been a SNP party for 80 years and yet still people want to bring this important question and decision down to one man.....

.....

I don't know if there is an ENP if not why not?but that is a question for another posting not here ,though it is one one of the reasons Scots want independence,because they don't want any of the Westminister parties,though the Greens are welcome

Excuse me, but if they are not contributing they are free loaders, once out of the union Scotland will not be contributing, every man and women who was entitled to vote in the referendum should be classed a Scottish, pay their taxes to Scotland and have their UK citizenship revoked if Scotland votes for independence.

Alex has 18 months to negotiate and has a big list of wants and very little to give in exchange, further more a lot of what he wants will require a lot of legislation to go through both houses at Westminster, I do not think it is right or proper that these should be considered while there are members within the houses who represent Scotland.

[wigantojapan]

Basil B

Excuse me, but if they are not contributing they are free loaders, once out of the union Scotland will not be contributing.

Scotland already owns just under 9% of existing UK embassies and contribute the same percentage to the wages of British diplomats.

If the rump-UK wishes to act like a toddler who's never learned to share and retain them solely for itself, it will have to pay Scotland compensation.

Alternatively we can all act like grown ups and share embassy facilities.

[Basil B]

Just who will make the UK pay?

As I see it there will be a lot of negotiations if Scotland votes for independence, but Scotland is only entitled to 9% of shared assets, it maybe possible to share, find a broom cupboard or two for the Scottish section to work from, but if Scotland were to be a republic we would not be tacking down the big pictures of Liz, and do not be surprised to see the Scotch replaced with Welsh Whisky.

[wigantojapan]

all brits together aye RIGH

Thttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQBZq4wZk4M

[wigantojapan]

an interesting wee read lassies and laddies

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-mushroom-farm/

[Commander Tamson]

I am Scots form both sides of my family going back as far as my village church began keeping records..

But if Scotland votes for independence I want to have right to retain my British passport.. Note that I will also make great effort to remove any Scots-accent from my speech. And I'll then deny I have or have ever had any affiliation with the nation of retards who voted for split of the Union..

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[wigantojapan]

http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/scotlands-exporters-let-down-by-uk-embassy-network

[Basil B]

I am Scots form both sides of my family going back as far as my village church began keeping records..

But if Scotland votes for independence I want to have right to retain my British passport.. Note that I will also make great effort to remove any Scots-accent from my speech. And I'll then deny I have or have ever had any affiliation with the nation of retards who voted for split of the Union..

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

My Grandfather was Scottish too.

I assume you are not living in Scotland and will not have the vote, then I assume you will remain to be British.

My concern is the Pied Piper of Linithgow will lead the people of Scotland with stories of great wealth down the road of no return to ruination.

[wigantojapan]

http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/where-does-scotlands-wealth-go/

[Basil B]

http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/scotlands-exporters-let-down-by-uk-embassy-network

Must be busy promoting Welsh Whisky

[wigantojapan]

BASIL B

My concern is the Pied Piper of Linithgow will lead the people of Scotland with stories of great wealth down the road of no return to ruination.

Lots of men women and children would already state that it is ruined,,read this http://www.businessf...ands-wealth-go/ and don't be so flippant to the people who are living in poverty and dying young because of geographical politics