Why is David Cameron adamant that he wont debate with Alex Salmond about the future of Scotland and the United Kingdom. He is the prime minister yet keeps saying it should be the leader of the No campaign. Doesn’t he see it as important?

It’s a mater for Scotland. It’s too easy for Salmond to portray a debate as Scotland v England so why would Cameron agree to be part of that

right attitude in my opinion.. this is a matter for the eligble voters to debate. call me dave has a right to an opinion but the loon salmond just wants a fight on the telly he feels he can win on an england v scotland card. he s having more difficulty promoting a scotland vs scotland debate..

Because letting Salmond portray a vote for independence as an anti-tory vote would be a massive error.

As above, it’s those who have an actual say in the outcome who need to be involved in any debate.

No point in Cameron getting involved in it really.

As much as I can’t stick cameron, he has got it right on this one.
As others have said it would fall right into that little weasel’s plans for trying to twist it into an anti tory vote

Good to see Salmond hasn’t pulled the wool over every ones eyes.

There’s also the not insignificant point that if the Scottish MP’s leave Westminster, the rest of the U.K. Will be almost assured to elect majority Tory governments for the next generation, especially as the population ages.

Cameron may be having to publicly defend the union but the strategists at Tory HQ must be relishing the prospect of a whole pile of labour and SNP voters heading off into the horizon.

Basically, he wants to continue to comment on independence, without ever having to actually directly face those he’s commenting on. He says there are other people who should speak for Scotland yet he has no such scruples when it comes to leading Scotland, a country that has categorically rejected his party since the 50s.

I can’t fault him for evading a debate, it’d be a tactical error, and realistically why would you volunteer to enter a fight you can’t win? But I will fault him for refusing the challenge but expecting to still have a partisan voice.

People say this isn’t an England vs Scotland debate, and that’s correct- it’s a Scotland vs UK debate. A vote for change is implicitly a vote against the status quo, which is what Cameron as UK Prime Minister represents.

And the democratic and moral issues posed by rule from England by a party that could never dream of democratic support in Scotland are front and central to this debate. It’s not a case of “twisting” this to be an anti-Tory issue… It’s always been largely that. I’m not a huge Salmond fan but at least we voted for the ****.

My Yes vote is partly a vote for Scotland but it’s also partly a vote against Westminster in general and Tory rule in particular, I despair of British politics and since we can’t fix that, we have to take the only option we have, which is to turn our backs on it and do better here. As the national parliament lurches to the right it draws ever further from what our voters desire- this isn’t a gap that’s closing or shows any signs of.

So to characterise it as a simple scottish matter is, well, absurd tbh.

Because he’s feart of being humiliated by a superior debater and politician live on the telly.

He would much rather snipe from the sidelines like the coward he is.

There’s also the not insignificant point that if the Scottish MP’s leave Westminster, the rest of the U.K. Will be almost assured to elect majority Tory governments for the next generation, especially as the population ages.

“Without Scotland, Labour would still have won in 1997 (with a majority of 139, down from 179), in 2001 (129, down from 167) and in 2005 (43, down from 66). “

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2012/01/scotland-labour-majority-win

Good to see Salmond hasn’t pulled the wool over every ones eyes.

+1

On this one Cameron has made the right call.

It’s not as us vs them thing, it’s up to the Scots to make their own mind up.

He would much rather snipe from the sidelines like the coward he is.

He’s barely commented on it.

South of the border it’s not that big a deal, why would he want to make it a big deal at the risk of being accused of being overly bothered about the issues of 8% of the UK population as opposed to the other 92% who don’t live in Scotland, when it looks like the No’s will win anyway.

rene59 – Member
Because he’s feart of being humiliated by a superior…..politician live on the telly.

So superior that he launches a 167 page (if I remember correctly) of almost total gobbledygook and can’t answer basic questions?????

It’s not CMD role to debate….
He knows it would be bad for the better together campaign…
It would be tactically naive….

Was in Edinburgh on Thursday. Cabbie from the airport (no vote) was very agitated that Celtic were still not allowed to join the Premier/championship league. How can you have two Welsh clubs and not a Scottish one. “We are all part of Britain” was his basic line, and not a bad argument. I hadn’t realise that debate was still raging. All the folk I met were in the better together campaign (well they were all in the financial sector!!!!) but getting worried by the lack of momentum and the bigger uncertain voters. I would be nervous about the positive momentum from commonwealth games and the Ryder Cup as well. I reckon there will be a late surge for yes, but probably not enough. Too many savvy Scots. 😉

Northwind.
The fact your vote is partly for Scotland and partly a vote against westminster is entirely why cmd isn’t getting involved.
Your vote should be entirely for Scotland not against something else.
If you believe in Scotland then vote for it rather than some daft anti vote.
Let’s face it if you do get independence then being anti westminster isn’t going to matter a thing other than trying to find someone else to blame if it goes wrong.

Cameron doesn’t need to bother or worry about Scottish independence; it isn’t going to happen, with the vote being at worst 40% for – 60% against. He just needs to stand far away and watch Salmond and the SNP implode after the vote.

Cabbie from the airport (no vote) was very agitated that Celtic were still not allowed to join the Premier/championship league. How can you have two Welsh clubs and not a Scottish one. “We are all part of Britain” was his basic line, and not a bad argument.

What have football leagues got to do with the referendum on whether Scotland should be an independent country?

Just cause Salmond is a better debater than Cameron doesn’t mean that he’s right. No doubt Salmond would win a debate against Cameron – he’s got nothing else to occupy him or spend his time preparing for. Cameron has a tad more on his plate. If the Scots want independence then its unto them to decide, Cameron appointed a team to put the case for the UK forward to the Scottish people – its upto them to do that and not for Cameron to get involved and undermine them.

It was the cabbie’s idea. His line was we are British! we fight together….why do we not play football together. TBF he was also a shareholder in Celtic which may also explain his motivation. He was arguing that English clubs like Norwich etc were scared of the competition and were discriminating against Scottish team. Despite this sense of injustice (!!) he was still no voter.

I will admit that it is of only of lateral relevance to the OPs point 😉

Northwind.
The fact your vote is partly for Scotland and partly a vote against westminster is entirely why cmd isn’t getting involved.
Your vote should be entirely for Scotland not against something else.

Every vote for something is a vote against the alternatives. It’s just semantics to claim otherwise. I can rephrase my statement to something like “I believe Scotland’s politics are better for us than Westminster’s” if you like, but that’s exactly the same thing phrased differently.

You can’t vote for independence without voting against the UK. So clearly you can’t debate independence without considering the UK, and you can’t consider what we’ll do better and what independence will do for us, without considering what the UK does worse or what the UK will do for us. Obviously.

ohnohesback – Member

Cameron doesn’t need to bother or worry about Scottish independence

You might think so but he’s worried enough to try and buy No votes with defence contracts. Not that he’s involved in the debate, oh no.

No that’s fine, it just seems to fit in with most I have read.
a large part of the pro/yes campaign is to try and make it anti westminster rather than be just pro Scotland.
Entirely fair game but seems a bit daft to then criticise cmd for refusing to get drawn in.
It is up to Scotland to decide and totally sensible for the UK pm to stay out of it.

Because he knows Salmond will make the debate an argument about Cameron, Tories and cuts. And Salmond will always win that debate.

By not playing that version of the game, Camerom avoids looking a prat and can quite rightly point out that the debate is about Scotlands future with or without whichever bunch of incompetent privately educated morons is in charge at Westminster.

So on the one hand he wants to win the hearts of the Scots and on the other he doesn’t need to worry or bother with us. Well seeing how it’s not a big deal south of the border let’s just forget about him engaging in the debate properly. It’s not like he’s the Prime Minister of the UK now is it. I mean why bother when he can just chip in from the sidelines whenever he wants with his usual contempt.

He should make his mind up. Either he is part of the debate in which case he should engage in it properly, or he is out of it and he should shut up.

Personally, I don’t reckon its Cameron whose feart

Scottish Independence Referendum

Those surveys are great.
I love the fact the only one to give a lead by for the yes vote is sponsored by the snp

So elections come and go every 4-5 years ago, so that’s sort of define’s a politician’s time-frame.

A vote about independence really shouldn’t be debated by politicians working on such short political time-scales.

It was the cabbie’s idea. His line was we are British! we fight together….why do we not play football together.

You should have asked him how often he thought Celtic would be in the Champion’s League if they had to finish in the top 4 in the Premier League to qualify.

“We are all part of Britain” was his basic line, and not a bad argument.

We’re all part of Europe as well but we don’t want to be governed by them.

We’re all part of Europe as well but we don’t want to be governed by them.

Speak for yourself, some of us think it would be much better!

Union or not everyone in Europe/UK is in the deep poo poo with EU bureaucratic maggots governing all.

Yes, yes, the EU argument is we are a big family … yeah right … leave me alone. 🙄

It will take at least 3 generations to make sense of this idealistic bureaucratic zombie maggot and by the time everyone understand it, it will be out of fashion again in favour of smaller nation rather than US of EU.

Debate or not it is just career politicians looking out for themselves.

They are all full of zombie maggot ideologies.

CMD has said that it’s a matter for the people of Scotland to decide. An admirable stance – if only he’d stick to his principles and not try to influence the debate from the sidelines (e.g. his New Years speech).

He has also admitted that he won’t debate against Alex Salmond as he is too unpopular in Scotland.

As for making it an argument against “Tory” cuts, have we all forgotten that Ed Balls has committed to basically the levels of “austerity”?

Labour/LibDem/Tory – three cheeks of the same arse.

Salmond always says independence is about Scotland, not the SNP ie a yes or no vote. Therefore the debate should be between the leaders of the yes and no campaigns. Salmond is just trying to score cheap political points. Can’t stand the man.

Was in Edinburgh on Thursday. Cabbie from the airport (no vote) was very agitated that Celtic were still not allowed to join the Premier/championship league. How can you have two Welsh clubs and not a Scottish one. “We are all part of Britain” was his basic line, and not a bad argument

On well, if a cabbie said that it must be the thoughts of the country. What a load of shite, and don’t listen to football fans they only chase the money (ie the premiership) and bear in mind that your average Celtic fan would rather die in hell than be classed as ‘British’ this is a club that refuses the union flag at its ground. And before anyone says I’m biased, the other lot are just as bad. Choosing to ignore their proud Scottish roots to be some kind of bastion of Britain.

Both now give me the **** boak.

CMD has absolutely nothing to gain from a debate, as we all wouldn’t tote Tory up here, and Salmond would rip him a new arse, fine well he knows. I’m with Northwind, Salmond isn’t ideal by any stretch, but we voted for him, not the muppets in Westminster.

Bit what people have to realise, and what the slippy bastard himself has to point out – a vote for independence is NOT a vote for the SNP or indeed for wee eck.

Whatever peoples choices are, they have to vote on what is put forward, not fear of change or apathy, or false promises.

cant stand the man

And therein lies the problem. We now vote not on policy, but on an X factor style popularity vote. What a **** joke.

Druidh – 3 cheeks of the same arse – best one I’ve heard in awhile, chapeau!

And therein lies the problem. We now vote not on policy, but on an X factor style popularity vote. What a **** joke

Not true. I’m voting No because I firmly believe that’s what is best for myself, my family, my friends and my countries (both Scotland and Britain). Disliking Salmond has nothing to do with it. There are some pro-independence people I have loads of respect for although still disagreeing with them. Salmond however is nothing more than a publicity seeking egotist more interested in picking fights than doing what is best for Scotland.

As I said though, my decision to vote no is nothing to do with personalities therefore your X Factor comments don’t apply to me. That said, your point is, generally speaking, a quite valid one and I actually agree with you.

Celtic aren’t good enough for the Premiership and the Welsh clubs have played their way up through the lower leagues.

I must say Northwind has put my own thoughts into words
much better than I’ve been able to so far. Agree 100%.

I think the argument is that Celtic/Rangers would be good enough to compete at the top end of the Premiership is they had access to the same sort of funding other EPL teams have from Sky etc.

As for the Yes/No debate, I’d love to see Alistair Darling take on Dennis Canavan 🙂

I think the argument is that Celtic/Rangers would be good enough to compete at the top end of the Premiership is they had access to the same sort of funding other EPL teams have from Sky etc.

Which I agree with 100% Colin,but it’s a moot point, they want to remember that they are Scottish clubs, not English.

Kennyp – fair do’s.

Speak for yourself, some of us think it would be much better!

Really? Had a look at how well France, Spain, Greece, etc are doing currently? Especially France.