Scotland Indyref 2

You were badly let down weren't you.

We were. We were told that steel and HMRC jobs were safe if we voted No. We were told that our EU membership was guaranteed if we voted No. We were told that there would be a whole new load of devolved powers if we voted No, the words "near federal" were used. We were told that Clyde shipbuilding contracts would be secure if we voted No. We were told that the UK's broad shoulders would support oil workers in a downturn. We were told we were a valued and respected part of the UK, we were asked to help lead a new resurgent Union. We were told "we love you Scotland, please don't leave".

We were badly let down, you're absolutely right.

We were told that our EU membership was guaranteed if we voted No.

Really? I don't recall that claim. Hard to make that one with the EU referendum still to come. One of the reasons I voted no was precisely because there was a chance of escaping the EU that way.

Perhaps Ben is working off different texts? His list is quite specific. IIRC correctly the promises made were much vaguer with the detail being provided by the Smith Commission which the SNP supported (albeit before playing Oliver and demanding "MORE!")

Yeah, because having the decisions made in Holyrood rather than Westminster makes a real difference to people's lives, whilst having a job doesn't.

There's no causal connecction between decisions being made in holyrood and unemployment aracer Nor Westminster come to that

Why does this point always seem to get strawmanned? Is my sarcasm not obvious? No, I don't think the location of the government inherently makes any difference to the economy. Other sacrifices you need to make to get that might make a difference. Yet epi thinks job losses are unimportant because it's all about the ideology of self determination even if that is detrimental to things which make a real difference to people's lives.

Other interpretations of the work of the Smith commission and claims made by Better Together are available,including accurate ones that don't involve bare faced lying to suit your agenda, as "forgetful" THM does...
Any reply to any of the points he raises? Strange how you are unable to counter any of those awkward posts with anything other than suggesting he is reading from "other texts"

[quote=irc ]

We were told that our EU membership was guaranteed if we voted No.

You're wasting your time on here and I could do with the lottery numbers for tonight. Ta.

Well duckie, you could make a good example and make some points yourself, otherwise you are guilty of what you accuse others of.

There are lots of lies about what was promised pre the vote when Dave and his mates panicked at the rogue vote. But in the end it was left to the Smith Comm to put details on it. Do you agree so far? And at the start the SNP were happy? Ditto, still happ? But they later complained that they wanted more. Agreed? So far, so good.

Having read the report, I think Ben's list and the recommendations diffe. But be that as it may. Lets take one of Ben's points - the idea of a federal state. I am not aware of that being promised - but happy to be corrected if you want to play the ball - but I have already posted the conclusion of independent analysts which concludes that they is pretty much what has been achieved. They used that specific term. So much for not addressing the posts!!

Feel free to dispute any of the facts. Alternatively, carry on....

We were told that our EU membership was guaranteed if we voted No

Eh?

Care to point to any evidence of this claim Ben?

I recall Alex Salmond very specifically warning that a No vote could result in Scotland being "dragged out" of the EU

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28980041

[i]"The debate in Scotland is that we should not place ourselves in the position, given that we are only 8% of the UK population, of potentially being dragged out of the European Union against our wishes, against our will, which might be the position if we are foolish enough to have a 'No' vote in this referendum."[/i]

We were told that our EU membership was guaranteed if we voted No.

No you weren't. Absolutely not. I explained a few pages ago what the scenarios where Yes/No & Leave/Remain

What you wjere tood was a lie by Salmond that he had sought legal advice on EU status - when he had none

Ah Jamba - how could we forget:

[img] [/img]

If Indyref2 was tomorrow, I'd vote for Scotland to become an independent country, in spite of not really liking the SNP/Nicola Sturgeon, voting to Remain in the EU, voting No in Indyref1 and being born and raised in England. (now living in Scotland and married to Scot)

I wouldn't necessarily be in favour of an independent Scotland rejoining the EU. That should be decided on it's merits and what becomes of the EU post-Brexit.

My main reasoning is that independence would remove of a layer of Government and leave iScot and rUK to sort themselves out and take the paths best for each. There are going to be hard times ahead. These will be much more worthwhile if the end result(s) work better for each country.
In an Indyref2 debate the economic arguments are not going to be that strong on either side, hard times either way. I think arguments about control and self-governance will be much higher up the agenda. Even if an iScotland ceded governance to the EU by rejoining, it would still be one less layer of government compared to the current situation.

I believe Scotland will become independent at some point regardless so why not sooner rather than later? I'm basing that just how dominant the SNP are in Scotland (54 out of 59 constituencies) and the results of the EU vote in Scotland.

dmorts "In an Indyref2 debate the economic arguments are not going to be that strong on either side, hard times either way."

Super .. sign me up.
Oh wait;
Heres a picture of scotlands spending on stuff in billions.
[img] [/img]

Can any of you tell me which 14.8 billion of that we will not fund in year 1 of independence? What about year 2, 3 or 4?

Even assuming massive growth in the Scottish economy, how many years before we get back to where we are now?

Answers including "we can borrow to cover the difference" will win the "Make Edinburgh the Athens of the North" award, and incidentally, also disqualify Scotland from joining the EU.

Believe in independence if you want to but at least look at the Scottish Governments own figures on the economy before assuming that calling something "project fear" means its just make believe (see Brexit).

Ah Jamba on an indy thread, makes me all nostalgic for his tireless defence of the fine man that is Alistair Carmichael.

On the other hand - can any of you tell me which of that 14.8 billion we'll [i]still[/i] be able to fund once post-brexit austerity really bites on the back of a widely predicted (further) slump in the the pound?

Lets be honest there isn't going to be a indy ref in the short term and even a positive vote would take a while for the details to go through, so the level of pound now is irrelevant as it could be anything in the next 2-4 years. But a weak pound now doesn't necessarily hurt all Scotland, manufacturers should be taking advantage.

[quote=mcj78 ]On the other hand - can any of you tell me which of that 14.8 billion we'll still be able to fund once post-brexit austerity really bites on the back of a widely predicted (further) slump in the the pound?

More than you will when you're independent from the country which controls the levers for the currency you use (I'm assuming the plan is still to use the pound, any other option appears significantly worse), you're dealing with post-brexit austerity, you don't have the oil revenues the economic case was based on last time, you don't have money heading north to make up for the lack of oil money* AND you have trade barriers between you and by far your biggest trading partner. I suppose the latter wouldn't necessarily be the case if iS didn't rejoin the EU (or manage to be the continuing state), but keeping Scotland in the EU appears to be the whole justification for a second referendum (if you assume it's not just political posturing).

* I'm fully expecting TJ to rightly point out that Scotland has been sending money south for most of the past 40 years, but that's kind of irrelevant to the deficit you have right now and for the foreseeable future.

I note that I'm very grateful for the oil money Scotland has sent us, and totally happy to send money north now - it's well worth it because we both benefit from being together.

I'm assuming the plan is still to use the pound,

In which case it falls over at the start - some plan?!? McBaldrick to the rescue

But latest dream idea is even worse - possibly (to stop someone wetting himself) the euro 😯 Does wee nippy really think that Scots are that stupid!?!

Ducks, given that its been three days since Jambas was on here, what was the point of the shin-grazer?

But latest dream idea is even worse - possibly (to stop someone wetting himself) the euro Does wee nippy really think that Scots are that stupid!?!

[quote=teamhurtmore ]But latest dream idea is even worse

Quite - which is why I'm assuming the pound even with all the obvious pitfalls -which nobody will care about because FREEDOM. The only other obvious options are either a totally independent currency which seems to have all sorts of other very difficult hurdles or a currency tied to something else (the US dollar?) Not really surprising that it's a question nobody wants to answer.

You have to wear tartan-tinded specs to still argue for the £. Ruled out for good reasons last time by BoE, and all main parties. Its a non-starter.

There is only one option - an independent currency with all that implies. The reason no one mentions it (although Stilglitz is now converted to the obvious) is that it would be worse than the current situation. Blindingly obvious to all but the narcissist and her merry band.

She has to keep it under wraps as her case for independence falls flat from the outset

A currency union was ruled out - I can't see any way to stop them using the pound if they want to, though with no control over the levers.

well thats just daft - its meant to be about "independence" and faking control, sorry taking control.

I'm fully expecting TJ to rightly point out that Scotland has been sending money south for most of the past 40 years, but that's kind of irrelevant to the deficit you have right now and for the foreseeable future.
I note that I'm very grateful for the oil money Scotland has sent us, and totally happy to send money north now - it's well worth it because we both benefit from being together.

Given we were told during all the years of excess that independence wasn't financially feasible and knowing what we now know, it's hard not to come to the conclusion that Scots have been serially lied to. Has something happened to change that?

I'm just being pragmatic - it appears in the short term to be the best option despite all the drawbacks. Well I suppose the best option would be a currency union, along with some sort of political union, but with control over most things retained in Scotland...

In much that same way that the best option for Brexit is to negotiate membership of the single market in a similar way to Norway.

Pragmatism/common sense = status quo (remember close to a federal state already), it does not mean stupidity and desperation. Unless you are simply in it for yourself....

Well I suppose the best option would be a currency union, along with some sort of political union, but with control over most things retained in Scotland...

aracer
More than you will when you're independent from the country which controls the levers for the currency you use...

I thought we were equals in all of this, at least until any proposed split - it in together & all that jazz, or is that just the austerity bit? So, to confirm - is it the ENGLISH pound we currently use & do we not have the right to use it, post any theoretical split if we see fit? If we did, would RUK deliberately scupper the currency (haven't they already though?) just to devalue assets held in Sterling by those uppity Jocks?

you don't have the oil revenues the economic case was based on last time

Well, we'd still have 100% of the revenue to worry about, instead of the 30% we currently receive.

you don't have money heading north to make up for the lack of oil money...

True, but...

Scotland has been sending money south for most of the past 40 years

That^

AND you have trade barriers between you and by far your biggest trading partner.

Ok, you got me - we'll continue to send the whisky*, irn-bru, deep fried chocolate bars, shortbread & Broons annuals down south & you guys keep sending up the good old English tea & scones, vats of coronation chicken, bunting, morris dancers and the juicy Westminster scandals we all love reading about & we'll all carry on with a stiff upper lip and forget that the EU will be doing the exact same thing to the UK post article 50 triggerment (we'll make up our own language as well)...

It's a toughie...

*the revenue from which has always been listed under UK exports, as opposed to featuring on the tartan tax return, hasn't it?

You can use chocolate buttons if you like.

They key is to chose something that is compatible with the independence that some claim they need/want.

[quote=mcj78 ]I thought we were equals in all of this, at least until any proposed split

We are, and at the moment Scottish interests have some influence on control of the pound.

So, to confirm - is it the ENGLISH pound we currently use & do we not have the right to use it, post any theoretical split if we see fit? If we did, would RUK deliberately scupper the currency (haven't they already though?) just to devalue assets held in Sterling by those uppity Jocks?

It's the pound controlled by the Bank of England who hold the reserves (as we all know, Scottish pounds aren't legal tender 😉 ). As I've suggested Scotland is free to continue using the pound after independence, but with no control over the levers - what is ruled out is a currency union. Of course rUK wouldn't deliberately scupper the pound, but they might do things which aren't in Scotland's interests, and more importantly Scotland wouldn't actually have proper independent control of its economy.

Well, we'd still have 100% of the revenue to worry about, instead of the 30% we currently receive.

You currently get 100% of the revenue and then some extra money.

True, but...
Scotland has been sending money south for most of the past 40 years
That^

Which is completely irrelevant when considering the current effect of the deficit - that's been and gone.

Ok, you got me - we'll continue to send the whisky*, irn-bru, deep fried chocolate bars, shortbread & Broons annuals down south...

You can take the piss if you like, but rUK is still not only Scotland's biggest export market, it's the majority of Scotland's export market.

You can take the piss if you like, but rUK is still not only Scotland's biggest export market, it's the majority of Scotland's export market.

Cheers, so where will rUK get all these things from post split instead - US & Australia?

Let them have their "Freeeeeeddddooommmmmmmmmmm.......!!!"

Then maybe we can drop the archaic concept of changing the bloody clocks in a few days time & plunging the country into darkness for the next 6 months!!!!...

👿

mrlebowski - Member
Let them have their "Freeeeeeddddooommmmmmmmmmm.......!!!"

Then maybe we can drop the archaic concept of changing the bloody clocks in a few days time & plunging the country into darkness for the next 6 months!!!!...

Yep, how dare we - those uppity Jocks again...

Yep, how dare we - those uppity Jocks again...

5 million holding more than 55 million to ransom sound fair to you?

I know it's highly unlikely that the UK will ever stop this outdated practice of changing the clocks to make everybody more miserable......but it still boils my p1ss!

Ducks, given that its been three days since Jambas was on here, what was the point of the shin-grazer?

mrlebowski
5 million holding more than 55 million to ransom sound fair to you?

I know it's highly unlikely that the UK will ever stop this outdated practice of changing the clocks to make everybody more miserable......but it still boils my p1ss!

Seems fair from deepest darkest Glasgow - that's the trade off we get in return for all the money* & shortbread we send down to Westminster innit 😉

*Scottish £1 notes, just to annoy everyone - every time a Scottish person heads south, Nicola Sturgeon personally gives them a dozen just to piss English shopkeepers off & tells 'em to shout loudly about "legal tender" if questioned about their authenticity... 😆

NO doubt the economic argument for independence is not strong right now. As for that 15 billion - its less than that 'cos of accounting nonsense but no doubt a Scotland independent now would have some tough times ahead with horrible deficits. Most folk who back independence understand that. Long term an independent Scotland looks a much better prospect economically and don't forget - because Scotland economy is so small it would not take a huge number of companies expanding or relocating to Scotland to make a serious difference.

One thing that would make a difference potentially is the outcome of the negotiations. things like the £ and the reserve functions of the bank of england - Scotland owns 9% of that. rUK plays hardball then iScotland takes non of the debt. Without the debt the deficit looks much more manageable.

The whole thing is a bloody stupid mess. The obvious answer is a properly federal UK with a functioning democracy within the EU.

*bangs head on wall*

It would be ironic for wee nippy to have to implement the required anti-austerity measures required to put an iS on a stable footing. It might be worth just to watch that except that unlike her, I base my analysis on what is best for the Scottish people. 😉

[quote=mcj78 ]Cheers, so where will rUK get all these things from post split instead - US & Australia?

Who knows? Maybe we'll get less of them, maybe production of some will move a few miles south, but to imagine independence would have no effect on trade is naive.

Margins would be nailed for starters

Scottish £1 notes, just to annoy everyone - every time a Scottish person heads south, Nicola Sturgeon personally gives them a dozen just to piss English shopkeepers off & tells 'em to shout loudly about "legal tender" if questioned about their authenticity...

They aren't

Are Scottish & Northern Ireland banknotes "legal tender"?
In short ‘No’ these banknotes are not "legal tender"; furthermore, Bank of England banknotes are only legal tender in England and Wales.

[url= https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/132687 ]A petition to call for a referendum to vote Scotland out of the UK.[/url]

I've signed 😀

Don't tempt me...

no doubt a Scotland independent now would have some tough times ahead with horrible deficits. Most folk who back independence understand that

Really? Because the SNP were telling everyone they would be £1100 per person better off before the last referendum.

Long term an independent Scotland looks a much better prospect economically

Why?

and don't forget - because Scotland economy is so small it would not take a huge number of companies expanding or relocating to Scotland to make a serious difference.

Or leaving and your deeper in the red.

[i]Really[/i] -Yes.

[i]Why[/i] - control on the levers of the economy, oil ( they are not making any more) and a well educated workforce with plentiful green energy. If Denmark and Holland can be prosperous countries then why not Scotland?

[i]Or leaving[/i] indeed