[Closed] 18/09/2014.

As a englishman I'd like the opportunity for a UK wide referendum as to whether we should continue to accomadate scotland within the union.

Simple answer: if Greece, Ireland and Portugal can get in, then allowing Scotland in is a no-brainer.

As a englishman I'd like the opportunity for a UK wide referendum as to whether we should continue to accomadate scotland within the union.

Accommodate? Scotland subsidises the rest of the UK.

Why would he do that if he thought it would provide ammunition for the No campaign?

No idea, but it's not like he's renowned for joined up thinking

This is the bit I don't get. What's in it for the Tories? Why on earth do they want to keep us Labour-voting Scots hanging around so much?

Simple answer: if Greece, Ireland and Portugal can get in, then allowing Scotland in is a no-brainer.

Greece, Ireland and Portugal were already separate entities and members before the GFC. Scotland isn't.

ohnohesback - Member

As a englishman I'd like the opportunity for a UK wide referendum as to whether we should continue to accomadate scotland within the union.

That's nice. But I don't think you quite understand the meaning of "self determination". Now if you want to leave the union, that's fine.

It's a bit like when you go to a party, and someone you don't like is there- you can leave but you can't demand they leave. Especially when, like in this case, they bought all the drinks 😉

This is the bit I don't get. What's in it for the Tories? Why on earth do they want to keep us Labour-voting Scots hanging around so much?

I'm not entirely convinced they do want the Union to survive. There are pros and cons for them.

There's a loss off influence and prestige on the world stage, but at 8.5% of the UK population it's not a catastrophic loss.

And that's the best part of 80 seats less to fight against in Westminster. I'd guess its more to do with pride and not wanting to upset the Tory heartlands that I'd wager want the Union to survive.

Why would Cameron/the Tories want to save the Union? Well it could be that they have an underlying principle that the Union is sacrosanct regardless of any issues - or that they know that Scotland actually contributes more than it gets back. I'll let you decide.

Interesting discussion some of you are having here, I shall restrain myself from posting my usual puerile drivel and just lurk about.

Just one thing, the Tory party's full name is The Consrvative and Unionist Party.

In contrast to others, if this is the one vote we get, I see a No as a no-brainer. That's simply because there's no detail to vote for.

Were this part 1 of 2 which started negotiations and then part 2 was a vote on a specific deal on debt, taxation, EU, Defence, etc then a yes to part 1 might make sense now.

But, given the low calibre of Scottish politicians there is no prospect of me giving them a mandate to negotiate my family's future without a chance to approve the final deal. I fear the desire to gain independence would see unfavourable terms accepted just to get the result.

Do the English get to vote on whether we should keep them or not?

The Conservative Party merged with the Liberal Unionist party in 1912. At that time the "unionist" part was to do with the Irish question.

Oldbloke - what would happen on the event of Yes/No vote in your scenario?

Do the English get to vote on whether we should keep them or not?

I can vote, you have to live here though.

The Conservative Party merged with the Liberal Unionist party in 1912. At that time the "unionist" part was to do with the Irish question.

I did not know that, you learn something every day.

Do the English get to vote on whether we should keep them or not?

Nothing to do with nationality, all to do with residency. Anyone can vote if they're registered to vote in Scotland.

scotroutes - Member
Oldbloke - what would happen on the event of Yes/No vote in your scenario?

It would have to be clear there were two steps at the start.

Part 1 - Yes vote = "go negotiate, come back to us with a detailed proposal". No vote = "don't bother, we're not interested"

Part 2 would be binding on both Westminster & Holyrood.

Part 1 was the people of Scotland electing the SNP as the majority government. Part 2 happens on 18/09/2014. In the next 18 months the two sides of the campaign will hopefully provide all the details necessary to make an informed decision.

In the next 18 months the two sides of the campaign will hopefully provide all the details necessary to make an informed decision.

I really hope so, I'm currently on the fence but leaning towards a no.

Bawbag:

Electing SNP was not Part 1. That was a national election, not a single issue vote.

Even it it were, part 2 does not happen 18/9/14. There cannot be the detail of a deal to vote on at that point. There isn't time. If there were, I'd be delighted, but there won't be. In my dealings with policitians, they couldn't decide on the detail of their own headline policy within 18 months (it actually took 4 years), let alone conclude negotiations with multiple parties who are not so committed to the final goal.

If you want them to dot every i and cross every t before you vote, it's not going to happen. However there's nothing stopping you researching the issues yourself - become an informed member of the electorate. Decide for yourself whether you think Scotland would be better off independent.

For me, it's not about whether Scotland would be better off*, it's about self determination. Even if it costs us, I think it's worth it to be able to decide things for ourselves, to be able to stand on our own feet and make our own mistakes, and to be able to kick the nukes out.

*A Better Together "analysis" recently announced that being independent would cost every Scot the grand sum of £1 per year. Don't know about you, but I'd happily pay £1 per year to never have to listen to a Tory politician ever again 😉

oldbloke - I hear what you say about the "independence at all costs" folk but let's say it's a Yes/Yes, based on amongst other things a settlement with the EU. What happens if in, say, 10 years time a different Scottish Government is elected that decides to pull out of the EU - or there's a re-negotiation of some other sort?

I think Ben, you may have just convinced me to vote.

All the sentimentality of the Union washed away at the mere thought of never having a Tory prime minister.

Oh, and I get sentimental about the Union too - I just bought an old book about the North British Locomotive Works, Henry V Act III ("Once more unto the breach, dear friends.."), Oates saying "I'm just going outside and may be some time", all that.

But we can celebrate our shared history without having to share our future.

scotroutes - Member
oldbloke - I hear what you say about the "independence at all costs" folk but let's say it's a Yes/Yes, based on amongst other things a settlement with the EU. What happens if in, say, 10 years time a different Scottish Government is elected that decides to pull out of the EU - or there's a re-negotiation of some other sort?

Then a future Scottish Government can try and convince the electorate to go down that route.

*A Better Together "analysis" recently announced that being independent would cost every Scot the grand sum of £1 per year. Don't know about you, but I'd happily pay £1 per year to never have to listen to a Tory politician ever again

If you want them to dot every i and cross every t before you vote, it's not going to happen.

It is exactly what I expect to happen. It is what I expect to happen when I buy a house, a car, when I resolve contracts at work, when I employ someone. Independence could be either wonderful or a total nightmare depending on its terms.

Maybe it is because I operate in a world where I have seen the impact of poorly vs well negotiated deals. But if I can't read the terms, there's no way I'm going to vote for it.

David Cameron, Alex Salmonds greatest ally.

Ben, Well put.

As a non-Scotsman who prefers the current Union, my only facile contribution would be to say;

"No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in..."

Better late than never:

1 - MoD Spending - are all the Scottish Regiments just being re-housed south of the border, is this where the increase in MoD spending comes from? I would guess not.

2 - Oldbloke - if you can actually dot the "i"'s etc everytime you employ someone then well done, I tend to find that a great deal of recruitment is still done on trust, a bit like voting for your government.

I am in no way decided on this issue but lately I feel I have more in common with Alex Salmond than David Cameron, Ed Milliband, Nick Clegg and George Osbourne. It would pain me to vote for CMD as I would feel like I would be doing the right thing with the wrong person. Actually looking forward to the next 18th months and the debate.

CMD does not want the international embarrasment of being the PM who over saw the final nail in the coffin of the Great British Empire (ironing finished) being hammered home.

CMD does not want the international embarrasment of being the PM who over saw the final nail in the coffin of the Great British Empire (ironing finished) being hammered home.

Nah, we've still got the Falklands!

2 - Oldbloke - if you can actually dot the "i"'s etc everytime you employ someone then well done, I tend to find that a great deal of recruitment is still done on trust, a bit like voting for your government.

We are going to vote on something which doesn't have the equivalent of those and are going to have to trust the politicians to negotiate pay & conditions as well as ability to perform.

You may well be happy to give them that authority. I'm not.

Ojn the question of the army, can they really afford to do without the significant number of Scots who comprise the various regiments?

For me it is a yes. Having lived through the Thatcher years as a late teen,the way she abandoned my country because we didn't vote for her makes me realise that Scotland will always be way behind in any UK corp. (I realise that the majority of the population live in England)Because of this I feel that we can never rely on a Westminster Government (esp a Tory one)So I have to take this opp to apologise for dooming England to a tory government for ever.

I also have to say that I think this will be an every-generation issue. A no vote now will not be the end of it.

So I have to take this opp to apologise for dooming England to a tory government for ever.

Thing is, this won't. The Scottish vote hasn't decided any national election since WWII.

This (pro-independence) video covers lots of the main arguments:

I also have to say that I think this will be an every-generation issue. A no vote now will not be the end of it.

I can't think of a bigger case for the rest of the UK deciding it wanted to self determine as a place that didn't include Scotland 😉

who wants the perpetual moaning, wailing and gnashing of teeth 🙄

Having lived through the Thatcher years as a late teen,the way she abandoned my country because we didn't vote for her makes me realise that Scotland will always be way behind in any UK corp

how come 13 years of Scottish Labour prime ministers didn't rebalance this ❓

[quote=oldbloke ]
I know what I'm going to pay them and I know what is written in their job description & employment contract. Their ability to perform is trust / judgement.
We are going to vote on something which doesn't have the equivalent of those and are going to have to trust the politicians to negotiate pay & conditions as well as ability to perform.
You may well be happy to give them that authority. I'm not.
Is that not like having an over-paid, under-performing employee and then being too scared to take the risk on replacing them? 🙂

Ojn the question of the army, can they really afford to do without the significant number of Scots who comprise the various regiments?

The greater irony being that unless they happen to be registered to vote in Scotland, then presumably they won't count as residents and may well end up on the wrong side in a hypothetical conflict.

Though that does raise an interesting question: When it comes to issuing Scottish passports, who's eligible? Those who live there, those who can prove in some way that they are Scottish, or will it just be a free for all on dual citizenship?

how come 13 years of Scottish Labour prime ministers didn't rebalance this

This does seem to be a question that's being quite well evaded. Why was the balance not redressed with Scots in power in Westminster for 13 years?

Good grief, that pro independence video has put my vote straight back on the fence.

A chirpy tune, a sarcastic narrator, and saying this that and be other, isn't enough to convince me of owt.

will it just be a free for all on dual citizenship?

Can't see them stopping anyone who wants one having one tbh. Probably similar to the situation in Ireland.

This does seem to be a question that's being quite well evaded. Why was the balance not redressed with Scots in power in Westminster for 13 years?

Prime Ministers don't have absolute power.

This does seem to be a question that's being quite well evaded. Why was the balance not redressed with Scots in power in Westminster for 13 years?

Because they may have been Scots, but they were members of political parties containing politicians from all over (mostly England, of course), living in London, and working in a first-past-the-post system that doesn't really allow for change. If they even wanted change.

scotroutes - Member

Is that not like having an over-paid, under-performing employee and then being too scared to take the risk on replacing them?

You're proposing firing someone and taking your luck in what you get as a replacement. I'm suggesting I want to see the range of alternative candidates presented so I know there's a better option before I consider firing the old one.

I'll be voting yes.

I've not seen a single [i]positive[/i] reason from the "better together" campaign as to why Scotland should remain in the union. Just scaremongering and some guff about our "shared heritage".

If Scotland becomes independent the various peoples of these islands will still have a shared heritage and a shared future just under different governments.