Cameron offering more powers to Scotland

#21
A stroke of genius. He probably knows full well that the scots will do the opposite to what he wants them to do, so he pretends he wants them to remain in the union. They vote YES for independence, and he'll remain PM for longer than Tony Blair did.
 
#22
Several thoughts on this.

If CMD is so set against a second question why did he offer more devolution if they voted no? I don't really get why having a referendum for Scotland to have a greater set of devolved powers is such a bad thing; in fact why don't we go the whole hog and let every country in the Union run their own internal affairs with Westminster dealing with only international issues. A bit like the USA perhaps. It would certainly resolve some of the political and representational imbalances we currently have.

Secondly, why is the argument not more about economics. As I understand it (and please correct me if I'm wrong) even if the SNP get their wish and the Oil revenues come to them, they would still be about £2000 a year per person worse off. Scotland like most of the UK is subsidised by London and the South East's tax revenues. Even then this doesn't as far I can see cover the extra costs that Scotland will incur by having to cover some of the functions of State that Westminster currently does for the UK, Defence, Foreign Office etc.. There should also be a representative portion of the UK nation debt and the interest payments that will incur. To my simple brain, unless I have my fact completely wrong, the economics of the problem either require a big drop in Scottish Government Spending or a steep rise in Scottish Taxes.

I also don't understand who would get to vote. I currently live in England, but have severed in the past all 4 nations of the UK. I have Scottish parents, but was born in London. I would be eligible to represent Scotland at sport, stand for the Scottish Parliament and probably to vote for any future independent Scottish Government but not to vote in a Referendum. How can that possibly be legal?

Finally, why do we need to wait until 2014? It seems both side have their arguments pretty well tied down by no and it took considerably less time than that to organise a referendum across the whole country. As someone said above - 2 more years of this shit; is this the SNP's plan that we all vote yes to stop the endless arguments, newspaper articles and radio interviews?
 
#23
Perhaps Mr Dave will offer Mr Salmon Scotland's own tax raising powers. So when the Scottish government starts taxing folks out of sight, the Scottish government will be going cap in hand to Brussels for a Euro bail out from President Van Rumpledstiltskins....

I've never worked out just what the actual political beliefs (if any) of the SNP.... are they socialistic or what??
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#24
Several thoughts on this.

If CMD is so set against a second question why did he offer more devolution if they voted no? I don't really get why having a referendum for Scotland to have a greater set of devolved powers is such a bad thing; in fact why don't we go the whole hog and let every country in the Union run their own internal affairs with Westminster dealing with only international issues. A bit like the USA perhaps. It would certainly resolve some of the political and representational imbalances we currently have.
It's illogical, Jim. Vote no and I'll give you more powers - vote yes and I won't? Why not allow a vote on Devo-max?


Secondly, why is the argument not more about economics. As I understand it (and please correct me if I'm wrong) even if the SNP get their wish and the Oil revenues come to them, they would still be about £2000 a year per person worse off. Scotland like most of the UK is subsidised by London and the South East's tax revenues. Even then this doesn't as far I can see cover the extra costs that Scotland will incur by having to cover some of the functions of State that Westminster currently does for the UK, Defence, Foreign Office etc.. There should also be a representative portion of the UK nation debt and the interest payments that will incur. To my simple brain, unless I have my fact completely wrong, the economics of the problem either require a big drop in Scottish Government Spending or a steep rise in Scottish Taxes.
I need to see the economic arguments too. I know that the SNP do not agree with your figures but I'd like to see more substance.

I also don't understand who would get to vote. I currently live in England, but have severed in the past all 4 nations of the UK. I have Scottish parents, but was born in London. I would be eligible to represent Scotland at sport, stand for the Scottish Parliament and probably to vote for any future independent Scottish Government but not to vote in a Referendum. How can that possibly be legal?
There is no practical way of achieving that. The referendum will be put to Scottish voters. Many of them will be English, Welsh or Irish as well as Scots. As it stands at the moment there is no way of including Scots abroad and excluding 'foreigners' registered to vote in Scotland. It's certainly legal, whether it's fair is a different matter. (I think it is but I assume you don't)

Finally, why do we need to wait until 2014? It seems both side have their arguments pretty well tied down by no and it took considerably less time than that to organise a referendum across the whole country. As someone said above - 2 more years of this shit; is this the SNP's plan that we all vote yes to stop the endless arguments, newspaper articles and radio interviews?
This is a massive and complicated issue. We don't have all the details yet. Given my current concerns and lack of information I would be inclined to vote 'no' tomorrow becasue it's the safe option. However if I felt that I was being stampeded into an early vote to achieve that result then I may just vote 'yes'.

People don't like being manipulated. There's a strong feeling that the unionists are trying to manipulate or rig the referendum rather than dealing with the issues.
 
#25
For once Cameron is right (and I don't like the slimy ****). He's making a more than reasonable suggestion.

What he is suggesting is pretty simple, a straight yes/no vote on independence.
If the vote is for independence then the matter is settled once and for all, if the vote is no then the UK government will concede too much greater devolution.
A three way vote is just Salmond's way of trying to create himself a kingdom.

Cameron is offering something akin to devomax in the event Scotland votes to stay in the United Kingdom. Isn't that the option everyone is asking for? If Scotland votes for independence (and I hope not) then there is no further need to debate devomax.

Salmond is a ****, we all know it, but he is pretty good at playing the "Scotland the victim" card. Scarily some supposedly intelligent people even believe him.

Cameron offers what is supposedly being asked for, a vote on independence or further devolution of the Union remains. Its pretty clear cut.

Lets just be honest, I straight yes/no vote is whats needed.
A yes/no/devomax vote is just a politicians way of trying to fudge the referendum.
 
#27
And they don't think Salmond and the SNP aren't doing exactly the same? Genuine question
Honest answer, no. Salmond articulates how many folks think about Scotland’s relationship with Westminster. The thinking Scot does not have a gripe with the English, they have a gripe against a system that they feel is imbalanced against Scotland.
 
#28
Honest answer, no. Salmond articulates how many folks think about Scotland’s relationship with Westminster. The thinking Scot does not have a gripe with the English, they have a gripe against a system that they feel is imbalanced against Scotland.

Gotta be honest, I grew up in the North of England in the 1970's and 80's.
The imbalance Scotland feels it suffers from is absolutely no different to any of the industrial areas of the rest of the UK.

Perhaps Scotland ought to take a long hard look at how the rest of the UK views Westminster? Not so different really.

All independence will achieve is that Scotland will be in the control of a different bunch of corrupt and self serving politicians. Even worse, Salmond will plunge Scotland into greater integration with the EU.
Do the Scots really want to trade being part of the Union to being a smaller part of the European Union?
 
#29
If Scotland did get Independence how much of the billions in Nation Debt would they take on?....

Would the currency they use be know as the 'Jock'?....

At the outset Scotland would have to apply to join the EU and until they joined they would be a non EU Nation.So where will the Border crossings be?..

Would the Scots need a passport to enter England?...

Would Scots have to pass through customs when entering the UK?..

What would happen if they reclaimed Berwick upon Tweed?..

Would Scottish MPs still be allowed to fill Labours back benches in the Commons?..

What would happen to the Scottish Bishops and Lords in the 'other place'?...

Would we UK citizens have to pay import duty on our fave Whisky?..

Just a few questions that have been bothering a bit.........

Also what would the Union Flag look like and the Royal Standard?......

I wonder if Alex has mulled on these few points?......
 
#30
If Scotland gets independence its only a matter of time before Orkney and Shetland declare independence from Scotland-Most Orcadians think themselves more Scandanavian than Scottish........
 
#33
Perhaps Scotland ought to take a long hard look at how the rest of the UK views Westminster? Not so different really.
There is one important difference: the rest of the UK did not enter into a union of equal nations while retaining the distinct legal systems and social organisations that make them a separate entity.

Being equally****ed over by Westminster does not make the situations equal and the failure to recognise this is a significant part of the problem.

We are not, and never have been, a province of England. That was not the deal.

If it's been sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk then I'm probably pissed.
 

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#34
If Scotland gets independence its only a matter of time before Orkney and Shetland declare independence from Scotland-Most Orcadians think themselves more Scandanavian than Scottish........
Bollox, most Orcadians think themselves Orcadian first, the Scots and perhaps as an afterthought British.
As part of being Orcadian they are aware of Viking heritage of the islands but there is very little Scandanvian about them about from a parade of the Pipe Band on Norwegian Constitution day. Which I believe is something to do with them getting independence from a larger neighbour!
 
#36
There is one important difference: the rest of the UK did not enter into a union of equal nations while retaining the distinct legal systems and social organisations that make them a separate entity.

Being equally****ed over by Westminster does not make the situations equal and the failure to recognise this is a significant part of the problem.

We are not, and never have been, a province of England. That was not the deal.

If it's been sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk then I'm probably pissed.
I thought you joined because you were skint due to an ill planned overseas venture. Scots bankrupting a Nation, funny how history repeats itself.
 
#37
There is one important difference: the rest of the UK did not enter into a union of equal nations while retaining the distinct legal systems and social organisations that make them a separate entity.

Being equally****ed over by Westminster does not make the situations equal and the failure to recognise this is a significant part of the problem.

We are not, and never have been, a province of England. That was not the deal.

If it's been sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk then I'm probably pissed.

I'm not arguing that Scotland doesn't have its own seperate legal system etc, I'm arguing that Scotland hasn't been singled out for victimisation by Westminster.
I son't believe I made any sort of suggestion that Scotland is a province of England either.

Scotland hasn't been treat any different to the rest of the UK

What genuionely astonishes me is that some Scots think Salmond is anything other than a self serving politician and has Scotlands interests at heart. He is no different to any Westminster politician.

Given that the population of Scotland is roughly five million and support for independence is around 30% that means around 1.5 million people support and are likely to vote for Scottish independence. In the 2010 general election the BNP got more voters than the SNP. Nobody takes them seriously yet the SNP with a smaller national vote share are demanding to split the UK up
Thats a pretty small mandate for breaking up the Union.
Thats why Salmond wants devomax on the referendum, its his best hope of splitting the no vote up. I suspect that most people are of the opinion that devomax is what Salmond really wants.

Cameron is right to make devomax a seperate issue.


Scottish independence is to important a decision to allow politicians to **** it all up, they only serve their own interests. The only real bright part about all this is that the Scot's themselves aren't looking like swallowing Salmond's tripe.
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#38
I thought you joined because you were skint due to an ill planned overseas venture. Scots bankrupting a Nation, funny how history repeats itself.

I'll planned? The Darien scheme was a thing of genius, just 200 years too early. Placing a colony on the Isthmus of Panama was a thoroughly sensible move.
 
#39
Scotland hasn't been treat any different to the rest of the UK
There’s been wide variety in how different parts of the UK have been treated. You can certainly find parts of England, Wales and NI that have received the same treatment and shoddy service at the hands of Westminster that Scotland has, but unlike them Scotland has the separate mechanisms to give it structure as an independent nation

What genuionely astonishes me is that some Scots think Salmond is anything other than a self serving politician and has Scotlands interests at heart. He is no different to any Westminster politician.
I certainly don’t think that he’s any different in type just that he’s better at being of his type than a majority of our other politicians.

I do think that Scotland stands little chance of being governed well within the UK as it currently stands. That other parts might be equally shoddily dealt with is no reason for us to remain shackled to a rotting corpse.
 
#40
I would be rather careful in quoting statistics for or against independence. Most figures are taken in the cities where it is easy to get to talk to folks. The rural populace is rarely if ever asked. As a slight aside, did you notice the map behind Salmond when he was yapping to Cameron? UK national news has not reflected the popularity the Nats have in Scotland. In some areas even labour are struggling; again, they are seen as the puppet of Westminster.

I also note that many folks in England fail to see the hypocrisy of their own actions when moaning about Europe controlling 'their' Parliament, yet see nothing wrong with an outside parliament controlling the Scots. Before anyone says that Westminster is not outside, I can tell you that for a very, very long time Westminster has been seen as being foreign. Might I also suggest that those who fail to appreciate the various sensibilities up here, to think about how they would feel if England had been invaded and conquered in 1940. Would you be so keen some years later to leave the conquerors and their stool puppets in control or would you wish to have your own free politicians control your destiny?

As for Salmond being a self serving politician, yes he is, as is all of that ilk; however, he is our self serving politician.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top