Nicola Sturgeon: David Cameron 'living on borrowed time'

[RuamRudy]

What's the point; like your beloved Sturgeon and your blessed Salmond before her, any facts you don't like are ignored or disparaged.

The basic fact is that Scotland gets more public money back per capita than it contributes.

BTW, is there a reason why SNP leaders are named after fish?

Which facts have I ignored and which have I disparaged?

The government runs at a deficit. All get back more than they paid in, not only Scotland.

[MaeJoMTB]

As for visas, we plan to stay in the EU so I suppose that border formalities will depend upon the decision made south of the border.

Freedom of movement is an EEA treaty, nothing to do with the EU.

If Scotland were to become independent, it would need to be accepted by the EEA before it's residents gained freedom of movement in other EEA countries.

[gandalf12]

If Cameron had any backbone to talk about he would give this vile, hate filled woman full fiscal autonomy now. She can then tell those fools who voted for her and her " End Austerity " just why taxes have to go up and services have to be cut and she wont be able to blame it on Westminster as she does now as SHE is the one setting the spending

The only hate I see are from the people who trot out spittle flecked ad hominems every time she is mentioned in the news.

She may be setting the spending, but the purse strings are still being controlled by a party for which we Scots have repeatedly and comprehensively shown our disgust and loathing.

As for the 'fools' who seek to end austerity, The UK Centre for Macroeconomics surveyed leading economists and found that ony 15% of them believed that austerity had a positive effect on the UK economy, while two thirds said it had a detrimental effect.

I am not a Scot but they should have independance. Along with it no funding from England, no assistance whatsoever and the Oil companies that are British re-route pipelines to England. I am sure the people of Scotland would be then be very happy. I just cant see how though Scotland, as beautiful as it is, will generate sufficient income to support itself.

And to ensure Scotland is an independant country Scots should have to apply for visa's when entering England as should the English when entering Scotland.

To whom, do you propose, should the US, Canadian, Italian oil companies etc pay their royalties?

Scotland already contributes per head more to the UK exchequer than any of the other home nations so, if we remove the burden of Trident, I am not sure I see why we couldn't live within our means.

As for visas, we plan to stay in the EU so I suppose that border formalities will depend upon the decision made south of the border.

The Oil fiels are in Internatinal waters so I guess it ould be up to the individual companies to pay where ever tey bring the oil ashore. Maybe we get more per head but there isnt that many Scots in Scotland to be a truely serious problem

[nontabury]

Ruam Ruby.

What is your take on Sturgeons stance in the hopefully EU referendum? I believe she thinks that If a majority of the Scottish electorate vote to remain inside this undemocratic Union, yet the remaining UK votes to leave, she thinks this would automatically mean Scotland should separate from the UK, as they would not have voted to leave.

[RuamRudy]

Ruam Ruby.

What is your take on Sturgeons stance in the hopefully EU referendum? I believe she thinks that If a majority of the Scottish electorate vote to remain inside this undemocratic Union, yet the remaining UK votes to leave, she thinks this would automatically mean Scotland should separate from the UK, as they would not have voted to leave.

That is not strictly correct. My understanding is that she suggests that each home nation should have a veto on withdrawing if their vote was not reflective of the UK at large, but that is unlikely to be offered, so if Scotland was in favour of remaining within the EU but the rest of the UK wanted to leave, she would consider this to be a material change of circumstances, and could trigger another independence referendum.

As for my take on it, I am in favour of Scottish independence in the EU so, whilst I would have preferred a more amicable split from the UK, I would support such a move if it achieved both outcomes.

[RuamRudy]

The Oil fiels are in Internatinal waters so I guess it ould be up to the individual companies to pay where ever tey bring the oil ashore. Maybe we get more per head but there isnt that many Scots in Scotland to be a truely serious problem

That is not quite how royalty payments work now - why do you think the rules would be redrafted?

[7by7]

What's the point; like your beloved Sturgeon and your blessed Salmond before her, any facts you don't like are ignored or disparaged.

The basic fact is that Scotland gets more public money back per capita than it contributes.

BTW, is there a reason why SNP leaders are named after fish?

Which facts have I ignored and which have I disparaged?

All those which show Scotland gets more from being in the Union than it could ever gain by leaving it.

The government runs at a deficit. All get back more than they paid in, not only Scotland.

Maybe poor wording on my part; but spending per capita is higher in Scotland than in England and Wales. Only Northern Ireland gets more public money per capita, and that's not by much.

Another oft repeated fact which you and the SNP ignore and disparage.

[7by7]

Back to the OP.

Cameron has pledged legislation giving more power to the Scottish Parliament and further enshrining that Parliament's existence and it's powers in British law.

Sturgeon seems to be against this.

Why? What is she afraid of?

The SNP signed the Edinburgh agreement, in which they agreed that the referendum would be a 'once-in-a-generation' or a 'once-in-a-lifetime' event.

They lost that referendum, and now whenever they, for whatever reason, see an upsurge in their popularity they want to have another one in the vain hope that this time they'll win!

I, of course, have no firm evidence to back up the following, but it seems to me, based on anecdotal evidence, that many Scots voted SNP at the last election because they saw them as the only viable alternative to the Tories in Scotland; not because they wanted Scottish independence.

If they had, then they would have voted for it in 2014!

[RuamRudy]

What's the point; like your beloved Sturgeon and your blessed Salmond before her, any facts you don't like are ignored or disparaged.

The basic fact is that Scotland gets more public money back per capita than it contributes.

BTW, is there a reason why SNP leaders are named after fish?

Which facts have I ignored and which have I disparaged?

All those which show Scotland gets more from being in the Union than it could ever gain by leaving it.

The government runs at a deficit. All get back more than they paid in, not only Scotland.

Maybe poor wording on my part; but spending per capita is higher in Scotland than in England and Wales. Only Northern Ireland gets more public money per capita, and that's not by much.

Another oft repeated fact which you and the SNP ignore and disparage.

I wish I knew how to split your comments and reply inline, but I unfortunately don't. So in reply to your first comment - every choice has pros and cons. I don't think that anyone has suggested that every aspect of life in Scotland will improve immediately upon separation, but I believe that, on the balance of things, it would prove to be a positive move that benefited Scotland and the rest of the home nations. I only wish it could be done without acrimony and bitterness.

As for your second point, I am sure I did mention how the Barnett formula is devised to ensure that the quality of public services in a remote region are on parity with those is a built up region - hence the additional funding per capita in Scotland. This applies to Wales to an extent, and to Northern Ireland. But the SNP is campaigning for full fiscal autonomy for the Scottish parliament and the scrapping of the Barnett formula. It is the Tory government (and Labour pre-Corbyn) who is resistant to the move, so they are to blame.

[7by7]

"It's nae my fault; a big boy did it and ran away!"

[RuamRudy]

Back to the OP.

Cameron has pledged legislation giving more power to the Scottish Parliament and further enshrining that Parliament's existence and it's powers in British law.

Sturgeon seems to be against this.

Why? What is she afraid of?

The SNP signed the Edinburgh agreement, in which they agreed that the referendum would be a 'once-in-a-generation' or a 'once-in-a-lifetime' event.

They lost that referendum, and now whenever they, for whatever reason, see an upsurge in their popularity they want to have another one in the vain hope that this time they'll win!

I, of course, have no firm evidence to back up the following, but it seems to me, based on anecdotal evidence, that many Scots voted SNP at the last election because they saw them as the only viable alternative to the Tories in Scotland; not because they wanted Scottish independence.

If they had, then they would have voted for it in 2014!

It is not that the SNP is afraid of it, but that they feel it does not go far enough, and does not meet the pledges made on the ridiculously termed 'Vow'. They also claim that the recommendations of the Smith commission are not being fully implemented.

The Edinburgh Agreement did not include the terms you mentioned, and did not state any binding period should the vote be no. It did state that the referendum, amongst other things, should: "deliver a fair test and decisive expression of the views of people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect."

I think that the result was respected, but if the groundswell of opinion continues to move towards independence, then what would you advise?

[gandalf12]

The Oil fiels are in Internatinal waters so I guess it ould be up to the individual companies to pay where ever tey bring the oil ashore. Maybe we get more per head but there isnt that many Scots in Scotland to be a truely serious problem

That is not quite how royalty payments work now - why do you think the rules would be redrafted?

It would be a totlly new situation, something not seen before. As such it would be essential if the situation is not to be left in limbo for clear guidelines to be drawn up.

[RuamRudy]

That is not quite how royalty payments work now - why do you think the rules would be redrafted?

It would be a totlly new situation, something not seen before. As such it would be essential if the situation is not to be left in limbo for clear guidelines to be drawn up.

Clear guidelines are already drawn up and in use around the oil producing world. If you like, I can explain to you the concept of acreage allocation (albeit around 15 years since I was last involved in it) but this thread is not really about ridiculously abstract notions.

[nontabury]

Ruam Ruby.

What is your take on Sturgeons stance in the hopefully EU referendum? I believe she thinks that If a majority of the Scottish electorate vote to remain inside this undemocratic Union, yet the remaining UK votes to leave, she thinks this would automatically mean Scotland should separate from the UK, as they would not have voted to leave.

That is not strictly correct. My understanding is that she suggests that each home nation should have a veto on withdrawing if their vote was not reflective of the UK at large, but that is unlikely to be offered, so if Scotland was in favour of remaining within the EU but the rest of the UK wanted to leave, she would consider this to be a material change of circumstances, and could trigger another independence referendum.

As for my take on it, I am in favour of Scottish independence in the EU so, whilst I would have preferred a more amicable split from the UK, I would support such a move if it achieved both outcomes.

We will be voting as a nation,the U.K., which has a population of 64 million ( some would say even more ) of which Scotland only consists of 5 million. Democracy means that the will of majorities should prevail. So if 50.5% vote to leave the EU that should be it. Like wise if the people of England,Northern Ireland and Wales vote 50.5% to leave the EU and the Scottish electorate votes 100% to stay in, thus making it 50.1% to remain in,then again the majority should prevail and those like myself who hope we will leave will have to accept the wishes of the majority.

P.s I think you will find that there will be a sizable number of Scots who will vote to get out .As you well know, UKIP received more than 1/3 of the votes that the SNP received in the Scottish European elections, this was in spit of the actions of nationalist thugs. Add these to those of other parties and you may be surprised.

[RuamRudy]

Ruam Ruby.

What is your take on Sturgeons stance in the hopefully EU referendum? I believe she thinks that If a majority of the Scottish electorate vote to remain inside this undemocratic Union, yet the remaining UK votes to leave, she thinks this would automatically mean Scotland should separate from the UK, as they would not have voted to leave.

That is not strictly correct. My understanding is that she suggests that each home nation should have a veto on withdrawing if their vote was not reflective of the UK at large, but that is unlikely to be offered, so if Scotland was in favour of remaining within the EU but the rest of the UK wanted to leave, she would consider this to be a material change of circumstances, and could trigger another independence referendum.

As for my take on it, I am in favour of Scottish independence in the EU so, whilst I would have preferred a more amicable split from the UK, I would support such a move if it achieved both outcomes.

We will be voting as a nation,the U.K., which has a population of 64 million ( some would say even more ) of which Scotland only consists of 5 million. Democracy means that the will of majorities should prevail. So if 50.5% vote to leave the EU that should be it. Like wise if the people of England,Northern Ireland and Wales vote 50.5% to leave the EU and the Scottish electorate votes 100% to stay in, thus making it 50.1% to remain in,then again the majority should prevail and those like myself who hope we will leave will have to accept the wishes of the majority.

P.s I think you will find that there will be a sizable number of Scots who will vote to get out .As you well know, UKIP received more than 1/3 of the votes that the SNP received in the Scottish European elections, this was in spit of the actions of nationalist thugs. Add these to those of other parties and you may be surprised.

I agree that the situation is wholly unsatisfactory, but I think you will be surprised that a sizeable number of Scots see themselves as Scottish before British, and hence their contingent view carries equal weight in the union. Of course, no sane person could deny that this would cause strain in any relationship if our distinctly different neighbour forces us to take a path that we have explicitly chosen not to take - and I mean that from an English perspective as well as a Scottish one. That is why the SNP are suggesting that such a situation would be a material change in circumstance.

The only nationalist thugs I can recall were those weilding union jacks and rampaging across George Square.

[nontabury]

Ruam Ruby.

What is your take on Sturgeons stance in the hopefully EU referendum? I believe she thinks that If a majority of the Scottish electorate vote to remain inside this undemocratic Union, yet the remaining UK votes to leave, she thinks this would automatically mean Scotland should separate from the UK, as they would not have voted to leave.

That is not strictly correct. My understanding is that she suggests that each home nation should have a veto on withdrawing if their vote was not reflective of the UK at large, but that is unlikely to be offered, so if Scotland was in favour of remaining within the EU but the rest of the UK wanted to leave, she would consider this to be a material change of circumstances, and could trigger another independence referendum.

As for my take on it, I am in favour of Scottish independence in the EU so, whilst I would have preferred a more amicable split from the UK, I would support such a move if it achieved both outcomes.

We will be voting as a nation,the U.K., which has a population of 64 million ( some would say even more ) of which Scotland only consists of 5 million. Democracy means that the will of majorities should prevail. So if 50.5% vote to leave the EU that should be it. Like wise if the people of England,Northern Ireland and Wales vote 50.5% to leave the EU and the Scottish electorate votes 100% to stay in, thus making it 50.1% to remain in,then again the majority should prevail and those like myself who hope we will leave will have to accept the wishes of the majority.

P.s I think you will find that there will be a sizable number of Scots who will vote to get out .As you well know, UKIP received more than 1/3 of the votes that the SNP received in the Scottish European elections, this was in spit of the actions of nationalist thugs. Add these to those of other parties and you may be surprised.

I agree that the situation is wholly unsatisfactory, but I think you will be surprised that a sizeable number of Scots see themselves as Scottish before British, and hence their contingent view carries equal weight in the union. Of course, no sane person could deny that this would cause strain in any relationship if our distinctly different neighbour forces us to take a path that we have explicitly chosen not to take - and I mean that from an English perspective as well as a Scottish one. That is why the SNP are suggesting that such a situation would be a material change in circumstance.

The only nationalist thugs I can recall were those weilding union jacks and rampaging across George Square.

If it went the way of my second example, and the Scottish vote tipped it over, I think the people in the rest of the U.K would accept the democratic decision even though they might not like it. If on the other hand the majority of the whole UK were to vote out, and a majority of Scots voted to remain in this undemocratic Union, I'm sure the Scots would start complaining like little spoilt children.

Regarding the Nationalist thugs, you must have forgotten the disgraceful incidence when Nigel Farage tried to hold a public meeting in Edinburgh, that was disrupted by these fascist thugs. Also I recall reading about incidents last August/September were again nasty nationalist tried to intimidate those who wished to remain in the Union.

[RuamRudy]

I agree that the situation is wholly unsatisfactory, but I think you will be surprised that a sizeable number of Scots see themselves as Scottish before British, and hence their contingent view carries equal weight in the union. Of course, no sane person could deny that this would cause strain in any relationship if our distinctly different neighbour forces us to take a path that we have explicitly chosen not to take - and I mean that from an English perspective as well as a Scottish one. That is why the SNP are suggesting that such a situation would be a material change in circumstance.

The only nationalist thugs I can recall were those weilding union jacks and rampaging across George Square.If it went the way of my second example, and the Scottish vote tipped it over, I think the people in the rest of the U.K would accept the democratic decision even though they might not like it. If on the other hand the majority of the whole UK were to vote out, and a majority of Scots voted to remain in this undemocratic Union, I'm sure the Scots would start complaining like little spoilt children.

Regarding the Nationalist thugs, you must have forgotten the disgraceful incidence when Nigel Farage tried to hold a public meeting in Edinburgh, that was disrupted by these fascist thugs. Also I recall reading about incidents last August/September were again nasty nationalist tried to intimidate those who wished to remain in the Union.

I agree with the thrust of your first point, if not with the baiting at the end. It would be a deeply unsatisfactory situation if either scenario played out, however I think that if the wider UK voted to withdraw from the EU and Scotland clearly voted to remain in, then out we would come. How this was received in Scotland would remain to be seen - if it helps push the strength of feeling further towards independence then I don't doubt that the SNP would seek to capitalise on it and push for another referendum.

I seem to recall that Farage was chased out by left wing people of all hues, not specifically Yes voters. UKIP took a total of 1.6% of the Scottish vote at the general election so I think it is safe to say that Mr Farage has very few admirers north of the border.

As a Scot who was in Scotland at the time, I can say you that the worst of both sides were out in force, especially in the run-up to the referendum; it was a potentially massive proposition ahead of us, people were passionate on both sides of the debate. But the press drivel was mainly that - a press overwhelmingly in support of a No vote was only ever going to emphasise the Yes nutters while ignoring the racist unionists, the orange order bigots and the national front scum from Scotland, England and Northern Ireland who all pushed their UK agenda.