View Poll Results: How will or would you vote in a referendum for Scottish

Voters
644. You may not vote on this poll
  • I am Scottish - Yes

    24 3.73%
  • I am Scottish - No

    17 2.64%
  • I am from another part of the UK - Yes

    32 4.97%
  • I am from another part of the UK - No

    115 17.86%
  • I am from outside the UK - Yes

    260 40.37%
  • I am from outside the UK - No

    196 30.43%

Thread: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

  1. #4481
    Copperknickers II's Avatar quaeri, si sapis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    12,647

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrets54 View Post
    Who is claiming that?
    You, along with everyone else who says things like 'why Scotland, why not let Skye go independent. Why not let Portree go independent. Why not let 14 Wentworth Street become independent? Why can't we all just set up tents and throw rocks at each other whenever someone comes too close?'

    argumentum ad absurdum aside, the point is, we have not decided arbitrarily to draw the line at Scotland, instead of a lesser political division: the Union was a product of its time period, it was bitterly opposed by many, and most importantly, it was always just a political union between two kingdoms, for the sake of expediency, it wasn't ever supposed to be the creation of a new nation. That idea came later. (notwithstanding the huge dominance of English culture in Upper Class Scotland which is as old as England itself, though younger than Scotland).

    What we are proposing is, simply, restoring Scotland to the way it was before 1707. There were people living in the newly independent USA who could still remember when Scotland was an independent country. That is why its Scotland, not Skye, that we want to be independent: its partly because we think Scotland would be doing better if not for London-centricity, mainly because we think the Union has served its purpose, and so we want to go back to the way it was, making our own decisions that affect only our own country. Any self-respecting British politician would favour propositions such as the high speed rail in the South, and pumping millions of pounds into things like Crossrail and Trident, because those are (arguably) beneficial for Britain as a whole, regardless of whether the MP is Scottish or English. The point is, when there are no longer any Scottish policitians in Westminster, they will all be here, and they will all be focussing attention onto Scotland, instead of on England.

    This all eventually boils down to whether you think the Union is worth keeping, or whether you think that a temporary expenditure/investment is worth the dignity of being our own country with our own sovereign power. I think the latter. And I wouldn't be arguing the case if I thought that such dignity would come with the price of significantly reducing Scottish living standards and prospects: I think on the contrary, it will increase them, in the long term. But tbh that's secondary to breaking the unnecessary, inadequate, obsolete Union.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dante Von Hespburg View Post
    Scotland is actually also a very divided place internally (like most countries), you have culturally the traditionally Gaelic highlands, with the Scots Lowlands. You then have The East and West coasts, as well as various regional identities as you've said.
    Not so much any more. There are no highlanders left npw, they all moved down to the lowlands during the clearances. I and others from the central belt am the direct descendent of highland clansmen as well as lowlanders, there is literally noone left in mainland Scotland who preserves the way of life or culture of the highlands any more. There are the Gaelic speakers in the Western isles admittedly, but firstly, an independent Scotland would put a huge focus on Gaelic culture, so it will be quids in for the Gaels if we become independent (take a look at the Gaeltachd community in Ireland to see the model for this), and secondly, they are fast dying out.

    Thus to brush of so the Orkney's right to Independence doesn't work in the slightest. It's already been sourced that the Isles feel neglected by the Scottish government, thus they technically have every right for a referendum as We ourselves do.
    Indeed, Orkney and Shetland are not entirely convinced, but I don't think anyone is suggesting they become independent. They want to remain as part of the rUK iirc (and I'm sure we can talk them out of that).

    And the idea of the Scottish Parliament... its interesting here. As think about it, Poach has raised some very good points, if local councils were given great powers, a far more decentralized UK policy taken into account (theoretically), then the said local shire would be in a far better position to look after the issues of its inhabitants in a more relevant and direct way. This surely has much more to recommend than over any centralized national system?
    Certainly, the super-localisation of government has a lot going for it, its worked in Finland for example and its working in London. But tbh I don't see why Scotland can't do that as an independent nation, and it still doesn't solve the main problems for us which are representation in Westminster not being appropriate while England does not have a parliament, and the problems with defence and other non-devolved policies.

  2. #4482

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Thank god I have you to tell me what I claim, copper.

    Naw, you're spouting the worst sort of hypocrisy. You know you can't argue at the same time that Scotland can vote for it's independence but nowhere within Scotland can. You tried and failed to use historical reasons, without apparently knowing anything about Scottish history, and now you're reduced to demonising the rest of us by making strawmen of our points.

  3. #4483

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    We did insist that Bosnia remain together, despite some differing visions on it's future makeup by various communities.
    Last edited by Condottiere 40K; December 02, 2013 at 03:06 AM.
    Eats, shoots, and leaves.

  4. #4484
    Dante Von Hespburg's Avatar Sloth's Inferno
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,996

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperknickers II View Post
    Not so much any more. There are no highlanders left npw, they all moved down to the lowlands during the clearances. I and others from the central belt am the direct descendent of highland clansmen as well as lowlanders, there is literally noone left in mainland Scotland who preserves the way of life or culture of the highlands any more. There are the Gaelic speakers in the Western isles admittedly, but firstly, an independent Scotland would put a huge focus on Gaelic culture, so it will be quids in for the Gaels if we become independent (take a look at the Gaeltachd community in Ireland to see the model for this), and secondly, they are fast dying out.
    Indeed while your mostly right about the Highlander issue, i would point out my friend, not everyone was moved in the clearances, but also i rather meant more that, that tradition of Highland vs Lowland, built on a far reaching tradition of various rivalry and differences between the two areas is still present today. The most recent divide of course is economical. But you still have the old stereotypes- Lowlanders not being as Scottish as the Highlanders due to their proximity to the border . The Western isles again as you said has a large number of traditional Gaelic speakers.

    Also:

    As the first minister, Alex Salmond, looks south and campaigns for an independent Scotland, leaders in Orkney, Shetland and the Western Isles to his north have quietly begun talks among themselves about their own "home rule".The three leaders, who run the three largest island groups in the British isles, will meet in Shetland on Monday 25 March to discuss a joint project on whether they should demand a split from the Scottish and UK governments after the Scottish independence referendum in 2014 – the date of which is expected to be announced in Holyrood on Thursday.
    Malcolm Bell, the convenor of Shetland Islands council, said the independence referendum offered an opportunity for the islands to carve out a new political settlement. "There's no point in Westminster devolving powers to Edinburgh if they are going to stop in Edinburgh. When you're 300 miles from Edinburgh, or 700 from London, at those kind of distances, Edinburgh feels as remote as London," he said.

    The three island groups are poised for a huge growth in investment by global energy companies: major tidal and wave energy parks are planned around their shorelines, while Shetland and Orkney are already seeing hundreds of millions of pounds spent on extra oil and gas terminals to service new fields being opened up in the Atlantic and North Sea.
    Their alliance conjures up parallels with a campaign by rebellious Shetland islanders in the 1970s, when the Shetland Movement was formed to demand much greater autonomy for the islands as oil companies set up bases for the first wave of North Sea oil rigs.
    Tavish Scott, the MSP for Shetland and former Scottish Liberal Democrat leader, told party activists on Saturday that the constitutional debate was the islands' chance to fight for their own "home rule", and a case study for the Lib Dems' localism agenda before the next general election.

    Scott, who first raised this argument in a paper last year, fears that whichever side wins the independence referendum, more powers will be centralised by the Scottish government in Edinburgh, 300 miles south of the islands' main town, Lerwick.
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ands-home-rule

    "Centralisation in Edinburgh has to stop and be reversed. I look forward to working with our councils on a very positive and exciting approach to delivering services for local people."
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-22934024

    The emerging exploration of independence from the UK and Scotland by the Northern Isles of Orkney and Shetland, now joined in a trinity by the Western Isles, leaves the SNP in a serious bind.
    A movement founded on the right to self-determination and the political philosophy of keeping power close to home is staring blankly at a cluster of islands becoming assertive of their own rights and interests in just such a position.
    http://forargyll.com/2013/03/snp-box...pendence-move/

    “We are not going to be told what to do by the SNP. Nor by any other government,” said Scott. “We don’t want more centralising, know-it-all, top-down nationalism. This SNP government couldn’t care less about the outer extremities of the country.”
    http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottis...-bid-1-2841537

    As you can see my friend, i doubt the SNP could talk them away from the various issues they have and what they want, without really conceding to them, their own greater devolutionary powers. Which to be honest, no matter who wins the referendum should happen. As they raise a very valid point. Edinburgh or London, both are equally far away, and equally too centralised. It does need to change. Though your right in saying they seem to favour a sticking with the UK path.

    Certainly, the super-localisation of government has a lot going for it, its worked in Finland for example and its working in London. But tbh I don't see why Scotland can't do that as an independent nation, and it still doesn't solve the main problems for us which are representation in Westminster not being appropriate while England does not have a parliament, and the problems with defence and other non-devolved policies.
    The trouble is my friend, the Scottish Parliament too is going down the centralisation route. And as i've sourced, people aren't too happy with that model of government. It's the UK who's currently experimenting and finding ways to provided more autonomy to local and devolutionary governments, the case of wales receiving control over a larger proportion of their taxes, or the increased powers of local councils for instance. It's an especially powerful movement, when you have 'The City' on board as well.

    For instance their are many worries that the Scottish Governments policy of centralisation would increase after Independence:

    The “ruthless party machine” of the SNP could rid Scotland of its regional and cultural variety, a senior Lib Dem MP has claimed.In his speech to members of the party of the final morning session of the Scottish Lib Dem conference Sir Malcolm Bruce issued a warning that the increased centralisation that was currently being seen in Scotland could be damaging.
    http://www.holyrood.com/2013/03/snp-...b-dems-warned/

    The MSP will rail against what he calls Labour's centralisation of banks and the SNP's centralisation of government, warning of the danger of creating state monoliths like a national police board and massive superbanks.Scott, due to address the second day of the Liberal Democrat conference in Bournemouth, will call on government to "give people their lives back".
    He will say: "This week's Budget demonstrates that centralisation is the core approach of the SNP.
    http://www.kirkintilloch-herald.co.u...tion-1-1362100

    During a debate in Holyrood, Tory MSP Jackson Carlaw highlighted the planning system as the area where centralisation was most "consuming in its suffocation of local determination".
    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/po...-power-1120204

    While this source is indeed the Tories complaining, it does have a valid point (You can tell i dislike the Conservatives ) In that actually the SNP are centralising wind farm control and other local industries to their call. It highlights their vision of Scotland, based upon the former UK model of an All powerful capital, where most decisions are taken for the regions for them.

    Political and economic power in Scotland are becoming increasingly centralised. Local authorities are being asked to freeze the only source of finance they have any control over. The debate (in as much as there is one) is about reducing the number of local authorities and making them more “efficient”. The SNP manifesto had 41 sections. Not one talked about local government (to be fair, none of the other parties said very much about the topic either).

    Today, proponents of the Scotland Bill, fiscal autonomy and independence all argue for greater revenue raising powers for the Scottish Parliament. Curiously, however, none of these arguments says anything about local government. Recently, Rob Gibson MSP launched a consultation in his Caithness, Sutherland and Ross constituency on how to decentralise services in local government. It is one of a very few signs that some new thinking is emerging about local governance.
    http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2011/09/29/beyond-centralised-power/


    Very interesting points raised in the article. Where is the SNP's talk about greater devolution and local autonomy, it seems its not the model they wish for.

    Thus while i agree, Scotland could do that (So could the UK), it seems their is no inclination to. I think actually too the UK can be quite easily fixed by giving England it's own parliament, then having Westminster as a place where equal numbers of English, Welsh, Irish and Scots politicians meet to vote. It would need some work, but it's quite a simple suggestion and premise to begin with.
    Last edited by Dante Von Hespburg; December 02, 2013 at 03:20 AM.

  5. #4485

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Condottiere 40K View Post
    We did insist that Bosnia remain together, despite some differing visions on it's future makeup by various communities.
    Yeah but it wouldn't have been politically possible to essentially reward Serbia for the worst European conflict since the Second World War by granting them the Serbian populated areas of the neighbouring Yugoslav states. This is a democratic referendum, not a war.

  6. #4486
    OevetS's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Toulouse, France
    Posts
    120

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Anyway all of this is very academic, this time next year we will be looking forward to another 300 years of Union
    Last edited by OevetS; December 02, 2013 at 04:51 AM.

  7. #4487
    The Great Montrose's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Paisley, Scotland
    Posts
    1,317

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Pielstick View Post
    Some of your compatriots in this very thread have expressed real concern that it will be more difficult to support themselves in an independent Scotland because just about anyone with an even partly functioning brain capable of critical analysis can see that an independent Scotland will either have to raise taxes or cut public spending.

    As a minor you have not yet had to support yourself or dependents, or indeed make your own way in the world. I can tell you from my own experience that once I grew up and had to support myself my political beliefs and views changed a great deal when they met reality.

    That you believe so fervently - blindly some might say - that an independent Scotland will be a land of milk and honey is really quite telling. Do you seriously want to vote yes on the strength of a document which is nothing more than a wish list that is predicated on optimistic conjecture that Scotland will get everything it wants? A word to the wise - in the event of a yes vote rUK will not be sending the Chuckle Brothers to independence negotiations. The so called "White Paper" has been literally torn to pieces by critics and neither the SNP or the wider Yes campaign has any meaningful reply. These guys are taking you for a ride. Either the SNP are rank amateurs or they are telling the Scottish electorate bare faced lies. Wake up.

    Time and again you have been presented with some pretty well thought out arguments and quite compelling facts and evidence, yet you reject these out of hand and move onto the next puerile line of argument. It's really very difficult for me not to come to the conclusion that your beliefs are built on nothing more than anti-union (and therefore by extension anti-English) bigotry. It's quite sad, but perhaps not entirely surprising that someone so young can have their head filled with so much bollocks. I sincerely hope you grow out of it.

    Be very careful what you wish for. Remember you'll be reaching the age of majority around the time an independent Scotland would come into being, and you'll be the one that has to live in it.
    Yes some have expressed concern, some have also given the opposite view, why should that affect my decision? Both sides have arguments and facts that they peddle, it's very hard to really know how better or worse off we will be after independence. If you come to the conclusion that my beliefs are anti English that's fine by me, I don't need to convince you of my beliefs. I guess all the other yes voters that have been presented with facts and figures, arguments and tales and not changed their mind, there beliefs are anti union and based on bigotry? I guess you would tell the English members of the SNP that they are anti-English? Afterall have they not been presented with the same arguments I have?

    Quote Originally Posted by Poach View Post
    The Scottish Parliament was made as a vote winner and was extremely poorly thought out. 5 million people don't need their own Parliament, nor do the Welsh. The only area with a legitimate reason to need significant local powers is Northern Ireland due to the tensions there. It's also very unfair on the English who get nothing similar.

    Scotland and Wales should lose their Parliaments and legislation should come from Westminster alone. Greater devolution to local councils would be both cheaper and more effective from a "local government for local people" point of view.
    Well its up to the English to campaign for a parliament, it's not for us to give them one. Have we not had to campaign for decades to get one, if they want one they should do something about it. Are you seriously suggesting we and the welsh lose our parliaments? I'm sorry I'm asking you again it's just I cant believe you would argue that.


    Quote Originally Posted by OevetS View Post
    Anyway all of this is very academic, this time next year we will be looking forward to another 300 years of Union
    Don't get your hopes up.


    Dante on the islands devolution I have posted on that before, I believe the SNP have agreed to work towards devolution for the 3 island councils either way, yes or no
    the dream will never die


    Robert Wishart, Bishop of Glasgow, 'the kingdom of Scotland is not held in tribute or homage to anyone save God alone.' - 1290.

  8. #4488
    sabaku_no_gaara's Avatar Indefinitely Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    9,274

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    What would be the downside for England if the Scots secede? Because I keep hearing how awful it will be for the Scots etc..

    but what interests me most is how a secession would impact England, are there any analyses about this?

  9. #4489
    OevetS's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Toulouse, France
    Posts
    120

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great Montrose View Post

    Don't get your hopes up.
    I do not need hope as I have the luxury of drooling over opinion polls that do not give me hope but a certain expectation of a big fat NO. On the other hand, hope is all you have got and a forlorn one at that.
    Last edited by OevetS; December 02, 2013 at 06:44 AM.

  10. #4490

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by sabaku_no_gaara View Post
    What would be the downside for England if the Scots secede? Because I keep hearing how awful it will be for the Scots etc..

    but what interests me most is how a secession would impact England, are there any analyses about this?
    Hm, no not so much because it would be a pretty academic exercise - we're not voting so there's no reason for anybody to convince us either way. But of course it was reduce the UK's population and economy, reduce our numbers of members of the European Parliament, generally decrease our clout in foreign policy. Lots of jobs would be created in England to take over defence and state functions currently carried out in Scotland. I have no idea whether we would have to increase taxation or decrease spend.

  11. #4491
    Copperknickers II's Avatar quaeri, si sapis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    12,647

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrets54 View Post
    Naw, you're spouting the worst sort of hypocrisy. You know you can't argue at the same time that Scotland can vote for it's independence but nowhere within Scotland can.
    You're still the only one making bogus hypocritical claims. When have I ever said that different parts of Scotland could not vote for independence? I just said that supporting localised independence campaigns is in no way the logical conclusion of supporting Scottish secession, because the buck stops with Scotland for a Scottish nationalist, so to speak. That is what you're trying to argue isn't it? That all of the benefits of Scottish independence I have been arguing could be applied on a more local level with greater benefit? Well I have already told you why that is not the case. I'm all for Skye and Orkney and the Western Isles declaring independence, but

    1. They don't have the history that Scotland does, they would effectively be new states rather than revived ones. They wouldn't be seceding from the Union, because there never was a union in the first place, they were conquered or ceded to us (in most cases, at least, and certainly any of the remotely viable ones).

    2. There is no real support for localised independent states in Scotland, so supporting Scotland is not supporting the oppression of outlying regions.

    3. Even if it was, I am at liberty to support Scottish independence if I want to, its my decision. Just because I would abide by the results of future localised independence referendums, doesn't mean I have to agree with their reasoning or support them.

    4. I can support decentralisation and Scottish independence at the same time. Who says I have to support the SNP's policies? There will be several parties in an independent Scotland, they won't all be in favour of ubercentralisation.

  12. #4492
    Pielstick's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    2,063

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great Montrose View Post
    Yes some have expressed concern, some have also given the opposite view, why should that affect my decision?
    Because they are very legitimate concerns that are extremely foolish to dismiss out of hand as you have repeatedly done. When pressed on these concerns you heave repeatedly done the internet forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing Scotland the Brave at the top of your voice.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great Montrose View Post
    it's very hard to really know how better or worse off we will be after independence.
    No it's not really. You'll certainly be worse off in the short to medium term. Long term is far from certain. That has been pointed out time and again to you, but you choose to ignore it or dismiss it in the most flippant manner and then continue to pursue puerile lines of argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great Montrose View Post
    If you come to the conclusion that my beliefs are anti English that's fine by me, I don't need to convince you of my beliefs.
    I remember last year you made a very interesting post, I think it was in another thread - I really wish I had the time to go back and find it. In this one thread the mask slipped and you pointed the finger at the English for all your woes. Exactly the kind of flawed and bigoted thinking that the SNP have tapped into.... play on old prejudices and blame all Scotland's problems on the English.... who by the way only a few pages back you yourself said you regard as "foreigners".

    Indeed take a look at the signature you append to your posts:

    Pope Martin V -"the Scots are well-known as an antidote to the English."
    It doesn't take a genius to work out you've had your head filled with all sorts of anti-English crap.

    You're right you don't have to convince me about anything. However, I would say that you would get a lot more respect if you had the backbone to admit you just don't like the English and that is probably the single largest motivation for your pro-independence stance - rather than performing all sorts of ridiculous mental gymnastics and posting polls from ing schools to support your position.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great Montrose View Post
    I guess you would tell the English members of the SNP that they are anti-English?
    No more than you regard Scottish unionists as anti-Scottish.

    BTW, How many English members are in the SNP? What percentage of the membership do they make up? Do I have to tell you that the BNP has non-white Asian members? This doesn't quite make them beacons of racial equality and ethnic diversity.

    Andy, this isn't a ing football match. Apply some critical thinking and analysis to the piss poor "white paper" the SNP have published because the implications for you and your future are very serious indeed.

    Quote Originally Posted by sabaku_no_gaara View Post
    What would be the downside for England if the Scots secede? Because I keep hearing how awful it will be for the Scots etc..

    but what interests me most is how a secession would impact England, are there any analyses about this?
    rUK would lose out on Scotland's contribution to its economy, particularly in terms of oil revenue generated in fields that would be ceded to an independent Scotland, and any future benefits from the potentially big renewable energy sector in Scotland.

    The UK Armed Forces have a large presence in Scotland, with major air and naval bases, as well as a centre of construction for warships. These facilities would all have to be relocated to England, which would be expensive. Realistically an independent Scotland would be unable to defend its airspace and exclusive economic area, and as such rUK will have to pick up the slack.

    The SNP have said they would remove Trident (the UK's nuclear deterrant) from Scotland within the first independent parliament. This would potentially be quite serious for the UK if an independent Scotland insisted in removing Trident before facilities elsewhere could be made ready.

    There's still a question mark over exactly what UK assets and portion of national debt an independent Scotland would inherit.

    However, all of the above are mitigated to one extent or another. rUK's economy and influence is already large enough to absorb any losses (although they would be a headache). The crux of the matter is an independent Scotland's economy and influence wouldn't be large enough to cope with problems should things not go to the SNP's plans - which they almost certainly won't.
    Last edited by Pielstick; December 02, 2013 at 08:14 AM.


  13. #4493
    Lazzeer's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    New Zion, Edinburgh, North Britland
    Posts
    633

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Pielstick View Post
    The SNP have said they would remove Trident (the UK's nuclear deterrant) from Scotland within the first independent parliament. This would potentially be quite serious for the UK if an independent Scotland insisted in removing Trident before facilities elsewhere could be made ready..
    Yeah, I really don't think this would happen, at least not within the first parliament. It would be pretty difficult for Scotland to be simultaneously kicking out nuclear weapons (that have nowhere to go), whilst asking to join an alliance (with the very same states) that's at its heart a nuclear based alliance.

    I think it's clear that Scotland couldn't be fully nuclear free if we're in NATO. Even the SNP have admitted they'll allow nuclear armed submarines and warships into Scotland under what would essentially be a "Don't Ask Don't Tell" situation. I don't therefore understand the need to get rid of Faslane - if there'll be nuclear weapons here anyways, couldn't we just keep Faslane given its contribution to the local economy? And then if Salmond really wants, he can just cover his eyes every time he passes it.
    As far as I can tell, your entire enterprise is little more than a solitary man with a messy apartment which may or may not contain a chicken.

    It's all fun and games until people start getting eaten

  14. #4494
    Adar's Avatar Just doing it
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    6,741

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Pielstick View Post
    rUK would lose out on Scotland's contribution to its economy, particularly in terms of oil revenue generated in fields that would be ceded to an independent Scotland, and any future benefits from the potentially big renewable energy sector in Scotland.

    The UK Armed Forces have a large presence in Scotland, with major air and naval bases, as well as a centre of construction for warships. These facilities would all have to be relocated to England, which would be expensive. Realistically an independent Scotland would be unable to defend its airspace and exclusive economic area, and as such rUK will have to pick up the slack.
    Something I am very curious about is the mutual losses in case of a Scottish secession. For example the movement of military bases would be a cost for the UK but it would not generate any additional income for Scotland. So the Scots loose a de facto export industry (UK tax money spent in Scotland which benefits the local economy) while the UK got to pay through the nose to rebuild the infrastructure in an area where it is more costly to operate.

    Likewise the renewable energy sector got much more potential in the sparsely populated parts of Scotland than in the UK. But the creation of such energy parks is reliant on both back up power and energy consumers currently located in the UK.

    Scotland would achieve greater control over these resources if they became independent. But at the same time it become unfeasible for them to invest in the sector as the return on investment is reduced when they no longer have full access to the UK market.

  15. #4495
    OevetS's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Toulouse, France
    Posts
    120

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    I do not think this whole trident business is the trump card the indy Scots think it is. They seem to take great stock in the fact that we will struggle to re base these weapons as quite possibly there is no suitable place in rUK to base them, so therefore they have a big trump card to play. I believe if need be the rUK government could quite possibly negotiate basing rights in a US east coast Sub port and to borrow a phrase from the SNP "it is in their best interests to do so"
    Last edited by OevetS; December 02, 2013 at 08:38 AM.

  16. #4496

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperknickers II View Post
    When have I ever said that different parts of Scotland could not vote for independence?
    If that's not your view then you are very confused because you are arguing against it.

    They don't have the history that Scotland does
    Absolute nonsense. By definition everywhere has as much history as everywhere else.

    There is no real support for localised independent states in Scotland
    More nonsense.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/j...-vote-scotland

  17. #4497
    Copperknickers II's Avatar quaeri, si sapis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    12,647

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrets54 View Post
    If that's not your view then you are very confused because you are arguing against it.
    I'm arguing that whether or not I support Shetland's independence is totally irrelevant to my supporting Scottish independence.

    I am in exactly the same position as you: you support the right of the Scottish people to vote for independence if they so choose, but you don't support independence. I am the same with Shetland: if they want to become independent, fair enough, but I don't support them in doing so.

    Absolute nonsense. By definition everywhere has as much history as everywhere else.
    For the sake of my sanity, please actually read what I write and stop making strawmen. I did not say they didn't have as much history, I said they didn't have the history of being a long-standing independent nation, except in very specific cases such as some of the Pictish kingdoms. Shetland certainly does not have a history as an independent nation.

  18. #4498

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Copperknickers II View Post
    I'm arguing that whether or not I support Shetland's independence is totally irrelevant to my supporting Scottish independence.
    Only because your views make your stance on Scottish independence look hypocritical. I think it's relevant.


    For the sake of my sanity, please actually read what I write and stop making strawmen. I did not say they didn't have as much history, I said they didn't have the history of being a long-standing independent nation, except in very specific cases such as some of the Pictish kingdoms. Shetland certainly does not have a history as an independent nation.
    So they don't have the history you arbitrarily require them to except for the ones that do?

    As I said, this is just awkward garden variety hypocrisy.

  19. #4499
    Dante Von Hespburg's Avatar Sloth's Inferno
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,996

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by The Great Montrose View Post
    Dante on the islands devolution I have posted on that before, I believe the SNP have agreed to work towards devolution for the 3 island councils either way, yes or no
    Indeed my friend i remember you did. One of the sources i provided also say's this , don't worry. the context i was arguing was against Copperknickers point, and also highlighting the centralized nature of the Scottish Governments policies.

    Indeed i believe this is true, in either case, the Island Councils have pretty much got it secured- i think when looking at it, their actually the REAL winners of this referendum... jammy sods...

  20. #4500
    Pielstick's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    2,063

    Default Re: Scottish Independence Referendum is agreed: vote in 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by Lazzeer View Post
    Yeah, I really don't think this would happen, at least not within the first parliament. It would be pretty difficult for Scotland to be simultaneously kicking out nuclear weapons (that have nowhere to go), whilst asking to join an alliance (with the very same states) that's at its heart a nuclear based alliance.
    Quote Originally Posted by OevetS View Post
    I do not think this whole trident business is the trump card the indy Scots think it is. They seem to take great stock in the fact that we will struggle to re base these weapons as quite possibly there is no suitable place in rUK to base them, so therefore they have a big trump card to play. I believe if need be the rUK government could quite possibly negotiate basing rights in a US east coast Sub port and to borrow a phrase from the SNP "it is in their best interests to do so"
    The thing about Trident is it's essentially the cornerstone not only of UK defence but also foreign policy. The whole reason Churchill pushed for us to get nuclear weapons back in the 1950's was because he knew we could no longer afford to compete with the Americans and Russians in terms of sheer military force levels, and that our continued influence and presence on the world stage would only be achieved by the UK having an independent strategic nuclear capability. It's one of the things that people fail to grasp when they say we don't need the weapon because we'd never use it. That's just the point, the value of strategic nukes is not in using them, it's in everybody else knowing you've got them.

    If an independent Scotland were to pursue the stated goal of removing Trident from Faslane before an alternative base elsewhere in rUK could be found then it doesn't take a genius to work out the implications for the new Scottish state. A policy which might possibly be a vote winner for an onstensibly socialist party might end up souring relations between Scotland and rUK, and all that means for wider independence negotiations.

    And all that's even before an independent Scotland would ask to join NATO just after it's caused a massive strategic headache to one of its most important members.

    Quote Originally Posted by Adar View Post
    Something I am very curious about is the mutual losses in case of a Scottish secession. For example the movement of military bases would be a cost for the UK but it would not generate any additional income for Scotland. So the Scots loose a de facto export industry (UK tax money spent in Scotland which benefits the local economy) while the UK got to pay through the nose to rebuild the infrastructure in an area where it is more costly to operate.

    Likewise the renewable energy sector got much more potential in the sparsely populated parts of Scotland than in the UK. But the creation of such energy parks is reliant on both back up power and energy consumers currently located in the UK.

    Scotland would achieve greater control over these resources if they became independent. But at the same time it become unfeasible for them to invest in the sector as the return on investment is reduced when they no longer have full access to the UK market.
    The SNP believe they can keep the likes of RAF Lossiemouth and HMNB Faslane open as bases used by a new Scottish Defence Force. That may very well be true, but I don't know if the activity level that would continue at these bases would support the same level of economic activity in the local areas. Given the nature of the SNP's defence plans I wouldn't put much faith in them holding up when reality bites. Moving bases to England or Wales would be a pretty large expense for the MOD, one it could most certainly do without. However, the economic benefits to the local communities in the areas where the bases would go to would be very welcome.

    As for the renewables, I believe the question has been asked whether or not an independent Scotland would have sufficient financial slack to pay for the public investment required for the renewables sector to grow into a serious component of a Scottish economy. An independent Scotland would need to prioritise the diversification of its economy yet I fail to see any real plan of how this is going to be achieved. The intended market for Scottish renewable energy would of course be rUK, yet we are pursuing the objective of growing our own renewable and nuclear power industries as well as shale gas extraction. Long term, would there even be a market for Scottish renewable energy?
    Last edited by Pielstick; December 02, 2013 at 10:20 AM.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •