[Closed] Salmond on Newsnight

I am sure there will be unrealistic expectations on both sides. England will want the oil, Scotland will want the carriers....

I didn't, but about this independence mullarkey…. I’m Scottish, I qualify directly to play for Scotland, etc etc, not through residence, but through my father and his father and his back as far as you can go. Due to no fault of my own I live south of the border. In the meantime Terry Butcher, as Suffolk as you like and an Ex England Captain can.

Whatever way you spin it this decision has a profound effect on me and mine, either as a Scot, or as a citizen of the Union, either way it does. So how come I have no say?

That’s not democracy!

Overall, I probably favour less centalisation, and if I had my way the system would work in layers from the lowest level up, so say Parish councils reporting to and being represented at local boroughs, reporting to and being represented at Regional authorities reporting to and being represented at National government reporting toand being represented at Europe. So for my money if we are going down this route that’s the way foreard with Northumbria, Wessex and East Anglia getting the same deal stylee.

What in particular Capt John?

Due to no fault of my own I live south of the border

You don't have any say in the matter?

So for my money if we are going down this route that’s the way foreard with Northumbria, Wessex and East Anglia getting the same deal stylee.

Except the regions decided it was a ridiculous idea a couple of years ago and quite rightly threw a bag over it.

Oh and I'm a former lancastrian holed up in Scotland FWIW

Scotland will want the carriers....

Interesting - I'd not considered of this before - would Salmond's intention to be to have separate armed forces as well, autonomous and funded entirely from the Scottish budget?

The SNP policy on armed forces is to have a small national defense force and some troops available for UN peacekeeping. No carriers required.

Of course an independent Scotland would want independent armed forces. However Scotland would be neutral and not in NATO thus not be involved in imperialistic adventurism overseas and would not have any colonies to defend so would need armed forces of a very different make up to the current UK forces

Just throwing this out there...

Surely going into any negotiation you say you want x,y,z, with the expectation that in reality you'll come away with only x and y.

Isn't this just standard negotiating procedure?

I felt like posting on here immediately afterwards!! It was spectacularly awful. Perhaps the vote should be put back even further because Salmond was painfully exposed by Paxman. It was embarrassing. After all this time, he is still so ill-prepared on simple (if awkard) questions.

Paxman's decision to go the "expose by ribbing" approach worked in spades. And it was clear who came out looking a clown!

Capot John - I didn't see the interview so I am interested to know what areas were

Salmond's arrogrance about what an independent Scotland would definitely get, not what they might negotiate for independence

If we had a vote south of the border I'd just vote for whatever Salmond didn't want. He's a proper chubby little cock of a man.

And it was clear who came out looking a clown!

and

He's a proper chubby little cock of a man.

The really sad thing is that he is the best there is from any political party in Scotland.

....although are there any decent political party leaders in the UK?

So Eck says Engerlund will be better off with an independent Scotland.

Now does Dave say he's talking ****e and infer Scotland costs the UK tax payer money or agree with him and defeat his own arguement about unionism?

Salmond once again shows how to get the English voter to come down on his side and back Dave into a corner.

deadlydarcy - Member
If we had a vote south of the border I'd just vote for whatever Salmond didn't want. He's a proper chubby little cock of a man.

Posted 3 minutes ago # Report-Post

Obviously being a Southern Irish ex-pat living in Bristol, Scottish indy is a burning issue to you MacDarcy

TJ it will be on BBC iplayer.

Salmond is a horrendously arrogant little toad of a man! But then who can blame him. Look at the so-called opposition he's got. Woeful, the lot of them! In the kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man is king - never better illustrated!

He's been running rings around everyone. CmD is playing right into his hands for a start. And Ed Milliband and the Scottish labour party.... sweet jesus!

I think that may be about to change though. His policies will now be given some closer scrutiny, for the media for a start. I hope so. Because his economic policy - such as it is - is frankly laughable

Just watched a it. Clearly not the same programme as teamhurtmore did. Good performance by Salmond in the face of extremely hostile and biased questioning focussing on trivia. How will the gold reserves be transported - in an armoured train. thats really a core issue, (Paxman has previous history as a very strong unionist) Comparing Scotland to Zimbabwe FFS.

Scottish indy is a burning issue to you MacDarcy

In the words of Rhett Butler, frankly my dear... Hence, my lack of involvement in the weekly Scottish independence debates on STW.

Yeah, I know personality shouldn't get in the way, so I most likely wouldn't vote anyway. But I'm sick of the sound of Salmond. He's an arse. And he was exposed on newsnight last night. That is all. 🙂

Slightly off topic, but from the same programme, Dr.Hans Rosling was brilliant on last night's Newsnight.
If anyone does decide to go back and watch this on iplayer, his presentation was well worth watching. It was the last article on the programme so worth waiting/skipping forward to.
Great use of visual statistics showing different global development rates, focussing on income and health, comparing UK, China and all.
His enthusiasm, optimism, and "bigger picture" really made Paxman appear quite small minded.

Can't believe I'm saying this...
But I agree with TJ - I know nothing of the political issues but Paxman came across as very hostile and did himself no favours.
(EDIT) - I saw that loam and yes he was very good.

I've been trying to understand myself why Salmond and the idea of Scottish independence makes me so angry. I confess that it might still be an unfounded emotion.

The answer I keep coming up with though is that Salmond and the idea of Scottish independence is both hugely selfish and arrogant. If I believed it were possible for Scotland to cede from the union with zero impact on everyone else, then I would feel fine about it.

But I don't feel that this would be the case. I think it would have a huge impact on those left in the Union and to our detriment. You just can't unpick everything fairly.

You also run the risk of having a basket case country on your doorstep, which has big implications for the rest of us having to pick up the pieces in the event it goes spectacularly wrong.

Let's say that Scotland has become independent in 2005, had adopted the Euro and then in 2007 everything goes belly up. RBS needs a massive bail out, Scotland ends up like Greece in bankruptcy and you have mass unemployment. Then you have a massive influx into the rest of the UK because suddenly our benefit system is in far better shape.

It's just a possibility; I'm not saying it would happen, but it could.

Sure there are plenty of arguments to counter this but that's not the point.

Playing to the little englanders and unionists - successfully as can be seen from the above responses

Is the issue of Scottish independence all a bit moot anyway?
By definition devolution is a one way process.

Oh seriously TeeJ. Change the record will you. FFS. Little Englanders. 🙄

DD - its what he was doing. Paxman is not neutral on this issue.

Have you ever watched Newsnight before Uncle Jezza?

While you're on iplayer, could you have a trawl through the archives and find an example where Paxman has had a nice leisurely, non-agressive little chat with ANY politician?

We live in a democracy. Its the job of the media to hold politicians to account. Salmond has had an unbelievably easy ride so far. Due to the afore-mentioned feebleness of his political opposition.

Thats about to change. And what a surpise: he doesn't like it

Mainly - as I've pointed out on literally countless occassions to you - If Salmond had had the power to impliment his often-stated economic policies, Scotland would presently be making Greece look like Switzerland (Oil or no oil!). And we would ALL be dealing with the resulting shit-storm. Not just the Scottish!

It's comin' yet fer a' that

Cowardly SNP would indeed withdraw from NATO. Just like they opposed NATO action to stop Milosovic in Kosovo which they still wring their hands about.

Young Scots will do what we always did.....leave Scotland to serve in the British Army.

Playing to the little englanders

Erm yeah! That'll be the Big Scotlanders up there then? 🙄

Let's just remember whose little country wants independence because it can't see past the end of its own nose.

Paxman ended up asking silly questions but that was an old interviewers ploy to prevent the interviewee hiding behind prepared responses. And Salmond looked very uncomfortable when he was forced to apply himself to important questions phrased in an unusual manner. He is normally better than that. Pretty crap interview all round though.

Them the round table with the two economists and Horlick where the latter seemed to make a bit of a name for herself or should I say of herself?

So let me get this straight - you don't care about Scottish independence, yet opt to start, and participate in, endless threads ploughing repetitively through the same lame attempts to score meaningless 'points'.

Let me give you an example - RBS (it doesn't use the Royal Bank of Scotland moniker anymore, much like BP isn't British Petroleum) is a British company, which happens to be headquartered in Edinburgh. It's not Scotland's 'national bank'; that function is performed by the Bank of England, same as for the rest of the UK. It was bailed out, after some spectacularly bad management decision making put it in serious trouble - and before anyone crows about Alex Salmond congratulating Fred Goodwin, please bear in mind that it was the Westminster government who made him Sir Fred, for services to banking!

Please feel free to discuss the issues of substance, but could you do yourselves a favour and stop repeating the same inane drivel twice a week, and before you ask, your existing tyres will still work north of the border if Scotland does become independent.

your existing tyres will still work north of the border if Scotland does become independent.

But will be taxed...(not for any worthwhile reason you understand,just to annoy you.)

The answer I keep coming up with though is that Salmond and the idea of Scottish independence is both hugely selfish and arrogant. If I believed it were possible for Scotland to cede from the union with zero impact on everyone else, then I would feel fine about it.

Hmmmm..... just watched the introduction piece and the interview. Thought the 'interview' was bobbins all ends up - no-one came out of it looking good. The intro piece raised some interesting points though - EU membership (or not) retaining the pound (or not). It appears that a lot of these detailed issues will remain unresolved prior to the referendum/until such time that a solution needs to be found..... regardless of what Teej says 😉

It appears that a lot of these detailed issues will remain unresolved prior to the referendum/until such time that a soultion needs to be found..... regardless of what Teej says

One reason for not having the referendum for a couple of years is to allow these things to be decided and debated

Paxman came across as very hostile and did himself no favours.

Let me give you an example - RBS (it doesn't use the Royal Bank of Scotland moniker anymore, much like BP isn't British Petroleum) is a British company, which happens to be headquartered in Edinburgh. It's not Scotland's 'national bank'; that function is performed by the Bank of England, same as for the rest of the UK. It was bailed out, after some spectacularly bad management decision making put it in serious trouble - and before anyone crows about Alex Salmond congratulating Fred Goodwin, please bear in mind that it was the Westminster government who made him Sir Fred, for services to banking!

Sure, we all get this.

But (and it's a big BUT), had Salmond had his day earlier, vaunting the economic policies of Iceland and Ireland, and all that Celtic tiger tosh, it would very much have been a Scottish bank, as would HBOS. If Scotland had been independent when they both went bust, it would be the 5m north of the border working out what the hell to do.

Whilst the UK economy as a whole isn't great, Scotland's would have made it look like childs' play after that.

The interesting question is however, what happens to that debt should Scotland become independent? As you say, they are companies based in Scotland - surely therefore the Scottish taxpayer should be picking up that tab. I can guarantee that if they ever rake in the profits again that Scotland would take much more interest in the banks' financial interests. Cake and eat it, I believe.

If it's everyone for themselves; how do we go about kicking off a campaign for english independence?

One reason for not having the referendum for a couple of years is to allow these things to be decided and debated

Great, and just how much public money would be wasted sorting all this out, if after all that, the Scots didn't vote for independence. And if they did, I assume they would reimburse Westminster?

What Zokes said

One reason for not having the referendum for a couple of years is to allow these things to be decided and debated

But things like EU membership - it appears there is no clear precedent to do EXACTLY what the SNP would prefer. All EU members would have to agree to allow and independant Scotland to join. This puts CmD in an awkward position now, but he may not be in charge when the time comes to vote on it and Christ knows what the next swivel-eyed-loon in No 10 will decide.... unless an agreement can be put into law...... the ifs, buts and maybes go on, and on, and on.....

By all means, rightly, have the debate but I don't see how many of the factors that extend beyond our land mass can be taken as a given. The referendum will ultimately be about the idea of separation - I don't think you can honestly say the details of even some pretty major factors will be set in stone, or all the consequences forseen.

If it's everyone for themselves; how do we go about kicking off a campaign for english independence?

Where do I sign up....?

TandemJeremy - Member
One reason for not having the referendum for a couple of years is to allow these things to be decided and debated

TandemJeremy - Member
YOu don't even understand why a referendum is not going to happen for the foreseeable future.

Its to do with eh unionist parties refusing to have one - and the unionists are the majority. Its nothing to do with the Economic situation - and anyway that makes the case for independence stronger not weaker

the SNP would have one tomorrow but they can't get support thru the parliament

Which is it?

it would very much have been a Scottish bank, as would HBOS. If Scotland had been independent when they both went bust,

apart from it would either have been a multinational and thus the failure would have needed multinational solutions as happened with other banks across europe. Or it would have been remodelled into a central scottish bank without the casino part run from London where the losses were made.

you cannot have it both ways

In the kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man is king -

[img] [/img]All hail king Gordon.

The interesting question is however, what happens to that debt should Scotland become independent? As you say, they are companies based in Scotland - surely therefore the Scottish taxpayer should be picking up that tab. I can guarantee that if they ever rake in the profits again that Scotland would take much more interest in the banks' financial interests. Cake and eat it, I believe.

The desirability of it is an entirely different question.

Jota - that was a previous administration when the situation was different.

You don't have any say in the matter?

Yep thats right, in much the same way as the Scottish ex pat community in Corby/London/Bristol/Birmingham/every flipping town in the country don't.

apart from it would either have been a multinational and thus the failure would have needed multinational solutions as happened with other banks across europe. Or it would have been remodelled into a central scottish bank without the casino part run from London where the losses were made.

I don't even know where to begin with this piffle. and finishes with a pearl

you cannot have it both ways

you cannot have it both ways

Genius! Truly brilliant! Someone want to tell Alex that. I can see him hearing that phrase an awful lot from this point in.

Jota - that was a previous administration when the situation was different.

That'll been when the unionists were preventing a referendum would it?
and now they're not, so why aren't they having the referendum tomorrow?
Have they discovered something that they never realised 18 months ago?

or were you just swallowing the SNP guff hook, line and sinker?

you really don't know your arse from your elbow do you?

DJ why the sensitivity all of a sudden? CJ asks a perfectly acceptable question about the performance of one of our leading politicians discussing a matter that is of national importance to everyone in the UK.

And it wasn't a good performance nor a good interview as several have stated above. But just as Scotland justifiably delights in pricking the often arrogant English rugby team's bubble at Murrayfield and may well do so again soon, so will other nationalities delight in exposing a so-called Scottish big-hitter when and if appropriate. As Private Eye demonstrates mild ribbing can be particularly effective.

mcboo - its the truth tho.

Just because it does not fit your agenda does not change that. European banks that had operations spread over several countries had multinational solutions. why would Scotland have been liable for loss making parts of he bank based in England?

I assume they would reimburse Westminster?

You can deduct it from what you owe us in stolen oil revenues. 😆

How long have the SNP been in existance? As with UKIP you'd think that they'd have given at least some thought as to how they'd achieve their goals. Why isn't there a big black book of a draft plan for independance?

why would Scotland have been liable for loss making parts of he bank based in England?

Well, for example, if until recently (pre-crash) they'd been laying claim to said banks profits. What was the phrase you just used again? Oh yes.....

you cannot have it both ways

Anyone know who ran RBS' casino during the period?

I don't even know where to begin with this piffle

If you're going to keep asking people to speculate answers to alternate reality questions - the question was piffle to begin with...

To be honest, you come across as someone looking for reasons to be pissed off about this issue.

This really makes me laugh - all you guys who claim not to give a stuff about Scottish independence using desperate arguments to show its a bad idea economically when the key thing is its about he right to self determination of a people.

Once again actually being openminded and listening might allow you to understand a bit more.

You're brilliant TJ 🙂

Unlike many of you here I want to be rid of the scots.

Unlike many of you here I want to be rid of the scots.

you wont be getting "rid" of anyone. its about devolution, not ethnic cleansing.

and thanks so much for carrying us all these years, i really dont know what we'd have done without you.

I don't think many people south of the border would be remotely bothered about Scottish independence, but for the nagging suspicion that we're going to be left picking up the tab when (not 'if) it all goes pear shaped.

the key thing is its about he right to self determination of a people.

I have no particular opinion either way - I find the mechanics of what would need to be done for the separation WAAAAAYYYYYY more interesting than the philosophy and the politics of it.

I completely agree with the setniment of self determination, but surely there should be a clear, detailed and costed proposal on the table so that the separation is at least initially clearly 'neutral' to both parties (past performance is no guide to the future etc) and not obviously self destructive for the sake of the ideal.

Yes, there is still time to make that case, but as a casual observer it hasn't been made yet and I still don't see how it can be made such that anyone will know EXACTLY what they are voting for/getting in to. The tag line will read 'Independance - we've talked about for ages, shall we roll the dice or not then?'

right to self determination of a people.

Like the Falklands, then?

TandemJeremy - Member
La malvinas son argentinas

Oh.... 🙄

VERY relevant point zokes.

DJ why the sensitivity all of a sudden?

Because I'm getting weary of people posting inane drivel trying to score points and distracting from what should be a serious conversation. I can appreciate people are worried about the possible consequences on both sides of the border - this would be a far easier process to undertake in a time of economic prosperity, but we are where we are, and to be fair, it's not the SNP who are trying to hurry the pace on this.

This is exactly the same tactic that was used in 1979 - rush the debate, tailor the referendum criteria to make a "yes" vote almost impossible to obtain, deliberately hide information about the economic prospects for Scotland (McCrone Report). After the "no" vote in 1979, the SNP got hammered at the ensuing election, and it's taken nearly 30 years to get to where we should have been in the 80s. That's why this constant sniping is irritating.

Zokes, TJ will be along soon to tell you why that is [b]not[/b] a good point and that you are very misguided.

RBS was and is headquartered St Andrew's Square, Edinburgh. The mad dash for growth was dreamed up and driven by Sir George Mathewson, Sir Tom McKillop and Sir Fred Goodwin, with the investment bank run by Johnny Cameron. The clues are in the names.

TJ and Salmond want to waltz off with 92% of the oil but only 8% of the UK national debt and 8% of the liabilities of RBS. Most of us south of the border are pretty indifferent to Scottish independence but you can think again if you think England is going to be stuffed in the process.

And a vote for devo max means you are staying in the Union on our terms, England will have a say, and a vote.

This is exactly the same tactic that was used in 1979 - rush the debate, tailor the referendum criteria to make a "yes" vote almost impossible to obtain, deliberately hide information about the economic prospects for Scotland (McCrone Report). After the "no" vote in 1979, the SNP got hammered at the ensuing election, and it's taken nearly 30 years to get to where we should have been in the 80s. That's why this constant sniping is irritating.

Well, from my understanding, Camoron (Sic) wants a referendum quickly as the SNP seem so dead set on it, as they have been going on about it for quite a while now. He also wants a very simple referendum: It's a question with only two answers, so he favours the options of [b]yes[/b] or [b]no[/b].

For some inexplicable reason, the SNP want to wait a few years, temporarily let 16 year olds have a say in democratic process, and have three answers to a very simple question.

zokes / wrecker - apart from that point was widely debated on that thread and I said then as I do now I accept the principles of a peoples right to self determination.

so actually completely irrelevant

mcboo

TJ and Salmond want to waltz off with 92% of the oil but only 8% of the UK national debt and 8% of the liabilities of RBS. Most of us south of the border are pretty indifferent to Scottish independence but you can think again if you think England is going to be stuffed in the process.

Teh oil is in Scottish territorial waters. Clear in international law. and already delineated.

8% of the population, 8% of gdp, 8% of the jointly owned assets and 8% of the liabilities seems fair.

I can appreciate people are worried about the possible consequences on both sides of the border

exactly, which is why all this posturing about "wanting rid" of either side is pointless and not constructive. From what I've read of the interview last night it served no real purpose either.

surely there should be a clear, detailed and costed proposal on the table

yeah i'm sure their will be, which is why CmD attempting to rush the referendum is ludicrous. I think it would be foolish to suggest a referendum without all the facts unless you are asking people to vote purely on an idea.

zokes - Member
For some inexplicable reason, the SNP want to wait a few years, temporarily let 16 year olds have a say in democratic process

And as regards HBOS, the heid bummer was Andy Hornby, an Englishman and despite the fancy office on the Mound in Edinburgh it was controlled from Halifax, West Yorkshire.

so actually completely irrelevant

No, not really. Call it a record of your character, if you will...

Reducing the voting age - for all elections - has been LibDem and SNP policy for years.

And this bit???

and have three answers to a very simple question.

Seeing as that's the important part.

Teh oil is in Scottish territorial waters

Again, a genuine question - proved (currently) commercial off-shore reserves are limited to a generation or two. What happens then? Is there a massive shale gas reserve waiting to be found under Aviemore? If the GDP of a newly independant Scotland is almost entirely based on the off-shore oil sector, is basing the numbers on this not a touch short-sighted?

Scotland may be 8% of the population, but its institutions have made a hugely disproportionate impact on the national debt

So... we bail out Scottish banks, then Scotland walks away. No doubt to then lay claim to the profits if they ever recover? Get a grip Uncle Jezza. Nobody in Westminster is ever going to agree to that. As well as 90% of the other demands/assumptions Salmond is making

Teh oil is in Scottish territorial waters. Clear in international law. and already delineated.

And RBS is Scottish. So, there's going to be some negotiating, but there's no chance Scotland takes all the oil without taking a big chunk of RBS too.

What kind of independence would be sitting in isolation with your economy dependant on the international oil price? You want to leave Sterling and join your beloved Euro right? Now you say you want to stay in Sterling, where the Bank of England will set interest rates for the benefit of England, Wales and NI with no reference to the state of Scotland's economy? That is EXACTLY the thing that has destroyed the economies of Southern Europe, where rates are set for the benefit of Berlin and Paris, not Athens or Madrid.

What independence?