Forum menu
little Rob
The oilfeilds are already split between scottish and english so that is no issue
Faslane - subject to negotiations - the obvious deal is a leaseback to rUK for a limited time but if Westminster wants to play hardball its get your subs out now
The army - again we have scottish regiments, assets are split on a population basis. No great issue. Longer term we need a conversation about what sort of army iScotland would need
The NHS - already totally separate.
Can you imagine the billboards... Salmond, not with his hand in your pocket, but up the Queen's knickers!!
tjagain You make it all sound so simple. The cynic in me was concerned that it would be a total cluster-do-dah. Silly me.
Oh there will be huge difficulties - but those particular issues are not that difficult. difficult issues are currency, disentangling UK wide institutions that sort of thing
And also replacing incompetence with incompetence........
– Sort out the financial argument/situation, ie put scotland in the black, that way the argument becomes indisputable, there is no argument against it
– Sort out the EU position and get guarantees scotland would be accepted.
I agree with most of what you say for once! It would have to paint independence for positive reasons, not the epicyclo type reasons of still being bitter about things that happened hundreds of years ago. I think brexit has scuppered it in terms of more upheaval and chaos though.
The oilfeilds are already split between scottish and english so that is no issue
in what way?
In that some are subject to scottish law and some english law due to the different legal systems. Thats my understanding although there was a redrawing of the boundary a few years ago - or a oil grab in snp language
It would be another total shambles.
The difference is that the SNP has been considering this and planning for it for decades. They have a reasonable idea of what they want to do. Of course, there are going to be some or many cock ups, but at least they have a plan for most of it.
EDIT: all AIUI of course but I've only got my impression from the iref to go on. Many of you will be able to correct me I'm sure.
The difference is that the SNP has been considering this and planning for it for decades. They have a reasonable idea of what they want to do.
It would be nice if they could share that with us then! There is no plan, no helpful vision of how things would be set up after independence. Their white paper was nothing more than an unworkable pipe dream which made throwaway statements about some really complex stuff.
It could be done, but it would be more complex than Brexit (and require a more collaborative approach). The current mob appear to have no idea about how to actually do it.
The political case for Independence I see - Brexit has changed a lot of people's minds I am sure and Westminster hasn't inspired additional devotion to a Union that isn't United...
But the big issue for me is financial - the 2014 independence fiscal proposal based on Oil revenues and taxation has sailed. Oil money is not the answer to our prayers. We're an unattractive enough place to do business with higher personal tax already and a Government who openly say they want to increase it. Also - why on earth would companies want to come to Scotland and not London - the financial heart of Europe. That's not going to sell independence for me. HSBC contingency for Scottish Independence for example was to ship out of Scotland entirely (6000? jobs gone in a snap) and move to Birmingham. RBS are already a London bank in all but name so it doesn't require a lot of imaginative extrapolation to foresee a financial catastrophe in an Independent Future Scotland.
Oh and the Pound. That's a major hurdle right there.
I am a very proud Scot. I voted No in 2014. I've been called all sorts of horrible things for it but I would still vote No. One of the interesting things about the 2014 Referendum was it made me more proud to be British - something I thought I'd never say. Some of the tub thumping from Nationalists was cringeworthy and the whole Anti-English thing in my Borders homeland was awful - and from people who should know much better.
I completely understand and am tempted by the sentiment behind the political case for independence now after seeing Brexit unfold but I don't buy into it. The Tories are a Government not a nation and if people aren't happy they need to vote out the Tories. Whether people will is a really interesting question.
I think the idea that the Brexit process has caused unease for people because it's such a disaster is interesting and worth some pondering...
The issue is the nation keeps voting Tory again and again.
Grumpy - did you read it? Or are yoou relying on the unionist press? There was a lot of detail on how things would work but the unionist narrative was the only one that got into the UK wide press.
On the £ for example. the bank of england belongs to the UK. So 9% of it belongs to scotland. 9% of the debt and 9% of the reserves and 9% of the value of the bank of England. How much is that worth? Thats why iScotland would have the right to continue using the £ - its a part owner of it.
The unionist press only reported on 9% odf the debts - not 9% of the assets.
sas - how about the new oilfields? IIRC the latest is larger than Brent. Also oil prices have increased again significantly.
Independence is far from inevitable at this point. I think the Brexit chaos and more importantly the shape of the UK in future has caused many people to reconsider independence. The current govt appear to be heading down an authoritarian route and further cuts to benefits and services are in the pipeline. I cant see this UK government agreeing to another indy ref no matter how high support for independence in Scotland. That gives me major cause for concern.
tbh I should put a disclaimer on the arguments I made above they aren't really stipulations I need but what I think will be required for it to be successful.
The financial argument isn't really one I need satisfied for myself, it'll possibly take a hit in the short to medium term. I personal can live with that. But it needs a more definite answer if it's going to sway others. (I personally think scotland needs a 10/15 year programme to put it's self in the black or somewhere approaching it).
Same with the EU question, I think it's a stick on we'll get in, but the uncertainty will put alot of people off. So that needs worked on.
Biggest problem for me is the division, I just don't see how it'll work at the negotiating phase nor in the long term with 2 equal groups at each others throats.
Sort out the financial argument/situation, ie put scotland in the black, that way the argument becomes indisputable, there is no argument against it
It's unlikely this will be possible. In order to remove the issue of the subsidy Scotland currently gets, the ability to set policies required to grow the economy do not all sit with the Scottish Government. There is no appetite in Westminster nor has there been for decades to make investment more even across the whole of the UK. Little sign of this improving either. So how can the Scottish Government put Scotland in the black with one hand tied behind it's back without drastically cutting public spending just to prove a point? They can't. It's not possible currently. There is always going to be a leap of faith in that regards. Once independent then measures can be put in place to grow the economy to make up for the shortfall in losing the subsidy. That's why no matter what they come up with there will always be an argument against it.
The argument for me is if we don't go independent then are we going to be increasingly reliant on that subsidy year on year? Who wants to live in a country like that? Happy with handouts decided by people who can barely hide their contempt for you? Not for me thanks. Does anyone honestly see remaining part of the UK any different to that for the foreseeable future?
Not saying it'll easy, and there possibly is a chicken and egg scenario going on. But I just don't see people agreeing to IS, if the financial argument isn't sorted... so they'll need to get creative on that point.
In that some are subject to scottish law and some english law due to the different legal systems. Thats my understanding although there was a redrawing of the boundary a few years ago – or a oil grab in snp language
I think you've been suckered in by independence campaign material or what would nowadays be called fake news, the vast majority of oil resources are in Scottish waters, with a smaller number of mostly gas fields in English waters. Any so called dispute in the maritime boundary would only affect a small proportion of licence areas but along with the Cameron flying in to secret drilling rigs west of Shetland nonsense it got the punters riled up nice and easily during the referendum.
https://www.ogauthority.co.uk/offshoremap
Some of the tub thumping from Nationalists was cringeworthy and the whole Anti-English thing in my Borders homeland was awful
Perhaps it depends where you lived. I never encountered any anti English sentiment during the campaign. There was lots of very heated argument about the pros and cons of independence, but ethnicity wasn't an issue that I encountered.
WARNING - BITTER IRISH MAN RANT
The biggest problem a indy Scotland or united ireland would have is the english.
The sheer scale of group insanity and lunatic politicial class shows me that separation would be messy, dark, bloody and in no way certain if a ref voted for it.
Genuine LOL at the characterisation of England's politics against the shining light that is NI and Scotland
big_n_daft - there's a difference. NI admits it's a basketcase.
Bigjim - I am not and I think we actually agree on this hence my use of " in snp language"
The major flaw with Scottish independence as a means to stay in the EU is that there's no way the Spanish don't veto it and make an independent Scotland go through the standard application process. I'd imagine they'd get there in the end but the intervening years could be tough and I don't see how Scottish membership gets approved without an agreement on the border with England.
The spanish have said that with brexit they have no objection - as it does not set precedent for catalonia. Brexit makes scotland remaining in the eu / rejoining actually much easier.
'ere we go again.
If Brexit is bad, Scottish independence would be brexit on stilts.
The idea that Scotland can pay its own bills in a situation where there would be am immediate 10% drop in cash available across the board is not even denied by the SNP and was written into their "book of dreams 2" financial paper (the name escapes me).
For reference, the horrible effects of "Austerity" (suicides among the poor and removal of services for those in need etc. etc.) was a result of a 1.5% ish cut in budget, worsened by the larger cuts passed onto councils by the SNP. Independence would be 5 times that and even the SNP had to envisage something like 3% growth over 25 to 50 years to make up the difference.
N.B. Saying "no it wouldn't" is not a counterargument unless you can explain where the money will come from.
N.B. II Not having Trident would save scotland 300M a year (from memory) NOT 13Bn, so look elsewhere.
N.B. III Theres no such thing as Whisky Export Duty.
N.B. IV No we don't pay for Crossrail (or any U.K. project that does not benefit Scotland.)
To give you an idea of the scale, getting rid of NHS Scotland would save the right amount of cash. Or not paying for any pensions and for any social services (don't make me put up the graph!)
So, we've had these arguments before, and on planet reality (barring the zoomers of independence swallowing the same kool aid as the zoomers of brexit) theres not much to be said.
It is as hard to put the argument for "things staying the same" for Scotland in the UK as it was for the UK in Europe.
The "Change" side always has the advantage because they can claim things would be better for _everyone_ and promise _anything_.
All things to all people, with no evidence, until the die is cast.
Zoomers the lot of them.
N.B. Don't mistake my opposition to Scottish independence for a love of tories, brexit or anything else. Its its own subject with its own issues.
The only fun bit is watching the SNP argue that leaving a successful single market, customs and monetary union with whom you do 60% of your business is the best way forward.
And even that is wearing thin after watching the liars of brexit do so with no shame and no consequences.
edit:
P.S. For those who say "its not about money". If thats the case then you can't claim that it IS about social services and NHS and looking after people better than in the UK. Because thats the sort of decision that only money allows you to make.
Guess who's got a set of pre-prepared bits to cut and paste, who exactly are you arguing with here? Didn't you read the thread? 😆
Cut and paste .. I wish :O)
I did read the thread, (and I obviously disagree about inevitability). Not particularly arguing with anyone, I'm just trying to get ahead of the main subject in these threads.
To summarise:
Sooner or later it comes down to economics.
There is no viable economic argument.
The End (for those who aren't flag merchants)
Good for you, you are predicting doom, we kinda get it.
It is interesting how the uk can work itself down from a 10% deficit, to 2.4%. but Scotland is stuck forever with and 8.3% deficit, that will be impossible to shift forever. 😆
It's not an insurmountable challenge.
We’re an unattractive enough place to do business with higher personal tax already and a Government who openly say they want to increase it.
This too is utter bobbins. The higher personal tax is only on those earning more than the natioal averge - those earning less than the national average are taxed less.
doom or fact ? Hard to tell right up until it starts to happen.
Main fact was stated early on "If EU membership was on the cards I would strongly consider supporting independence". Yeah well it's sort of not as it isn't as easy as that. Not to say it's not the right answer but you have to consider the path to get there and the simple fact as a country we are economically unsustainable no matter what any hyperbole says.
And what is the "scottish deficit" looking like now that oil price has recovered from the temporary low? How about the two new fields discovered since the referendum? Fields we were told did not exist?
Seosamh
At least you're not saying it doesn't matter 🙂
Also the SNP say it would take 25 years (of unrealistic made up growth figures) to get back to where we are now.
So no I'm not saying it would last forever. Just a few decades.
But until then ... how does that make things better for the people of Scotland?
Hard to tell right up until it starts to happen.
It's hard to tell until 10/20 years after the fact. The decisions an independent Scotland makes will determine it's viability, not what has historically happened under the banner of the uk.
But yes I still agree the argument needs to basically show Scotland in surplus. It's just what will influence people the most.
tj.. the only recent years we didn't have a defecit (due to the oil price) were (I think ..) 2014 and 2014. Its going to take more than a return to "normal" more like an ongoing "exceptional".
eat_the_pudding
Member
Seosamh
At least you’re not saying it doesn’t matter 🙂
Also the SNP say it would take 25 years (of unrealistic made up growth figures) to get back to where we are now.
So no I’m not saying it would last forever. Just a few decades.
But until then … how does that make things better for the people of Scotland?
So are we imagining that the uk got from 10% to 2.4% in 8/9 years, was that hyper un-realistic growth? 😆
seosamh
Read the SNP report.
why would I bother, I've no intention of voting SNP post independence. Or pre, except at westminster.
Like I said, the decisions scotland makes in the future will determine it's viability, not all this bluster before hand.
I think that referendum fatigue and negotiation fatigue would make a successful independence vote in the near future unlikely. A second unsuccessful vote would probably also wind up a lot of people for a variety of reasons and result in even more polarised politics.
If Scotland were to vote for independence, given the moode apparently prevailing in England just now I worry that there would be a lot of public pressure on the Westminster government to "punish" Scotland as much as possible, as if doing so was some sort of revenge for the perceived unfairness inflicted on the UK by the EU during the Brexit negotiations.
seosamh
"why would I bother"
Because if you think that economics are important, then you might find it beneficial to read the _SNP_ figures that say indyscot would be an economic basket case (not a direct quote) and therefore be unable to e.g. rejoin the EU for 25 years.
I don't enjoy these threads and (despite appearances) I don't have a desperate need to keep repeating myself. But the facts are what they are and if the success of your political aims rest on deceiving "the people" you are allegedly trying to help then its not a good start.
See Brexit: "easiest deal ever!" and "no jobs lost!" to "there will be adequate food!" in 2 years.
If you want to drop the economic argument and make it all about flags, feel free.
If you want to have flags AND better conditions for your citizens, then that needs a little more application.
I understand people have to pretend they have a crystal ball, you and the SNP. lets not kid on any of you can predict the future.
Re brexit, tbh I doubt it'll be all that bad either tbh. few percent up or down don't mean a great deal to the majority. And before you say aye but you'll not be able to pay this and that, nonsense. Public expenditure largely has bugger all to do with how much is there and is more ideology than anything else.
But you crack on like you are the authority on the future. I'm sure someone will listen.
as for the EU:
The EU operates comprehensive approval procedures that ensure new members are admitted only when they can demonstrate they will be able to play their part fully as members, namely by:
1. complying with all the EU's standards and rules
2. having the consent of the EU institutions and EU member states
3. having the consent of their citizens – as expressed through approval in their national parliament or by referendum.
1. check
2. spain is the only obsticle there, and even they wouldn't be after the fact
3. easy to implement and get approval
If sure you'll throw the 3% thing in my face, but that's not a criteria for joining the EU, it's a criteria for joining the Euro.
Can someone explain why anyone in Scotland would want to replace the stability, maturity and wisdom of Westminster with the unproven and untried capabilities of Holyrood?
seosamh,
Carry on independencing.
The cognitive dissonance i get from listening to Brexiters and Indyrefers saying the same things with the same assumptions on the subjects of Brexit and Indyref, and yet hating on eachother for being idiots makes my head explode.
They deny any downside to their position, or that no-one knows the future (when they don't like the economic forecasts). Then when harm becomes obvious they claim "we'll survive" (like we did in the war/braveheart or some other other bloody historical reference that they didn't actually suffer through themselves).
How you can look at the real problems that a "few percent" austerity caused for the poor and the ill and the old. And then say;
few percent up or down don’t mean a great deal to the majority
Talk about "I'm all right Jack/Jock".
A plague on both your houses.