Goldie03 Posted January 21, 2012 Report Posted January 21, 2012 Well if it's left to the banks then it's bound to turn out to be a fuck up! As long as they don't fuck up my bonus Quote
mizer Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 I see the Earl of Caithness is trying to remove Orkney and Shetland from being part of Scotland in the house of lords............ Quote
glasgow sheep Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 I see the Earl of Caithness is trying to remove Orkney and Shetland from being part of Scotland in the house of lords............ He's also after Rockall Quote
Harcus Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 I see the Earl of Caithness is trying to remove Orkney and Shetland from being part of Scotland in the house of lords............ Independence for Orkney! Quote
Harcus Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 FFS, apparently not. A former Conservative minister has said Orkney and Shetland should have the right to remain part of the UK if Scotland votes for independence. The Earl of Caithness has tabled amendments to the Scotland Bill, which gives further powers to Holyrood. He said a referendum vote favouring independence should not be binding on the Northern Isles, unless the majority of islanders voted "yes". The Scotland Bill is due to be discussed in the Lords later this week. The Tory peer's proposed changes to the bill are among a number of newly-published amendments. The earl said a "yes" vote in a Scottish referendum should be followed by a referendum held throughout the UK, a proposal he sets out in an insert to the bill that the peer has labelled subsection (2B). In his amendment, he said: "A vote in a referendum held under subsection (2B) of this section which results in Scotland leaving the United Kingdom shall not be binding on the residents of the Orkney Islands or the Shetland Islands unless a majority of the residents of the Orkney Islands and the Shetland Islands who voted in such a referendum voted that Scotland should leave the United Kingdom." On Wednesday, First Minister Alex Salmond will announce his consultation into the Scottish referendum which he said should be held in autumn 2014. The Westminster government has already announced its consultation into the historical vote. Quote
mizer Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 These lads must feel a bit awkward at games https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rangers-FC-SNP-Supporters/121113214586741 Quote
BrownyBrown Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 These lads must feel a bit awkward at games https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rangers-FC-SNP-Supporters/121113214586741 Talk about identity crisis! Quote
BobbyBiscuit Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 These lads must feel a bit awkward at games https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rangers-FC-SNP-Supporters/121113214586741 The majority of huns I know are SNP voters and very strong supporters of the party, it's far from uncommon. They're a mixed up bunch all right. Quote
glasgow sheep Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 Oh dear looks like Paxman is trying to compare Scotland to Zimbabwe and Salmond to Muggabe on Newsnight. Quote
mizer Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 Oh dear looks like Paxman is trying to compare Scotland to Zimbabwe and Salmond to Muggabe on Newsnight. Seriously or a 'joke'? Quote
glasgow sheep Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 Well what passes as a joke to paxo. Just watching the interview and he suggested that as Salmond suggested an independent Scotland would be a progressive country this implied a one party state and that Muggabe had made a similar claim in the past. Quote
dave_min Posted January 24, 2012 Report Posted January 24, 2012 That interview just made Paxman look like a knob. Quote
manc_don Posted January 25, 2012 Report Posted January 25, 2012 Well what passes as a joke to paxo. Just watching the interview and he suggested that as Salmond suggested an independent Scotland would be a progressive country this implied a one party state and that Muggabe had made a similar claim in the past. Now I don't trust salmond, but comparing him to Mugabe is one step too far Quote
glasgow sheep Posted January 25, 2012 Report Posted January 25, 2012 Interesting point by an Irish Journalist on Newsnight about India and Ireland not worrying about whether they would be richer or poorer if independent. It would seem to me any argument about the money will be nearly impossible to prove, surely Independence is about more than how much more or less cash you will have, and if it is about the cash the Status Quo will always win. As for Paxman, really if that is the level of debate and interogation then Salmond must be laughing, woeful. Finally some quotes from Salmond's speech last night, I suspect alot more bullshit stories like he (and Paxman) quotes will be published over the next two years: The argument currently being adopted by some people –people who have always opposed a referendum full stop - that because independence is such an important issue, a referendum should be rushed, simply does not stand up to scrutiny. It is precisely because independence is important that we intend all stages of the process leading up to a referendum - from the consultation on its enabling legislation to the referendum campaign itself - to take place over a timescale which allows the Scottish people to reach an informed decision. The further argument that Scotland’s economy is being damaged by a supposed delay does not resonate with voters in Scotland who in the last year have seen Amazon, Michelin, Dell, Gamesa, and Aveloq, among others, announce major investments. As the Financial Times said two weeks ago Westminster’s “pretext for accelerating the poll – that uncertainty is damaging the economy – looks disingenuous at best. As threats go, the risks posed by separatism are as a fleabite compared with the all-devouring Eurozone crisis.” This has been endorsed by the great arbiter of accuracy in current UK politics - the Channel 4 fact check - which pointed out that international inward investment is now more successful in Scotland than any other parts of these islands, including London. .......... But we still see regular assertions that Scotland would be weaker or more impoverished if it were independent. Many of these statements are straightforward scare stories. For example, sources close to the Chancellor of the Exchequer warned that an independent Scotland would not be allowed to use the pound. Of course the interesting thing about these suggestions is not just that they are economically illiterate – since sterling is a fully tradeable currency, the UK Government has absolutely no power to stop an independent Scotland from using it. But more importantly, why would any sensible person wish to stop England and Scotland sharing a currency. Sunday’s Scottish Daily Mail reported William Hague as threatening that if Scotland became independent, British embassies would no longer promote Scotch whisky. That I think was scraping the bottom of the cask. Incidentally, for the Foreign Secretary’s benefit, he should know that receptions to promote Scotch whisky or any other goods at British embassies are charged by the foreign office! But I rather suspect that the whisky industry would in any case get by without the promotional efforts of the British foreign service. If I could adapt an old Scots ditty – “how nice it would be if the whisky was free and the embassies full up to the brim.” And the Daily Mirror tried to argue that if Scotland voted for independence, the Edinburgh Zoo pandas might somehow be seized by the UK Government. I can tell you that I have decided to grant Tian Tian and Yang Guang political asylum, while reflecting of course that the UK government did not contribute a single RMB to the cost of the pandas’ arrival in our capital city. I hear occasionally from the Prime Minister how he is just about to make a positive case for the union. On the evidence of the last two weeks, I think it is still on the drawing board. Fearmongering about constitutional change is nothing new. But it is disappointing to see such an approach being adopted – therefore, as an antidote and a counterpoint, may I attempt to present independence for Scotland in a way which is positive about Scotland and positive about England. Quote
mizer Posted January 25, 2012 Report Posted January 25, 2012 Daily Mail have started their 1000 days to save the union campaign. Quote
Andrew Posted January 25, 2012 Report Posted January 25, 2012 What is wrong with Paxman? Does anyone like his rude, pompous and cuntish style? Quote
glasgow sheep Posted January 25, 2012 Report Posted January 25, 2012 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00386122.pdf Going to be a while till we get the full SNP view of an independent Scotland by the looks of it, but then will still have a good year of campaigning: A principle underpinning the referendum is that of informed choice. The Scottish Government will ensure that voters have the information they need to participate in the national debate and to make an informed decision. Following Royal Assent to the Referendum Bill (expected in November 2013) the Scottish Government will publish a comprehensive white paper setting out full details of the offer to the people of Scotland Timetable: Public consultation on draft Referendum Bill begins 25 January 2012 Local Government elections 3 May 2012 Close of consultation period 11 May 2012 Analysis of consultation responses Summer 2012 Practical preparations including testing of the ballot paper Autumn/Winter 2012 Scottish Government Legislative Programme Statement Autumn 2012 Finalisation of Referendum Bill and development of implementation plan Autumn/Winter 2012 Introduction of Referendum Bill to Scottish Parliament Early 2013 Parliamentary consideration of the Bill: Stages 1 and 2 (including committee consideration and public evidence sessions) Early to mid 2013 Summer Recess July to August 2013 Referendum Bill passed after Stage 3 October 2013 Royal Assent to the Referendum Bill November 2013 Publication of White Paper on Independence November 2013 European Elections June 2014 Commonwealth Games July 2014 Start of regulated period (see Chapter 3) Summer 2014 (16 weeks before referendum) Pre-referendum period (no Government publications etc) (28 days before referendum) Referendum Autumn 2014 Quote
Kowalski Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Posted January 25, 2012 What is wrong with Paxman? Does anyone like his rude, pompous and cuntish style? I think he's brilliant, but appears to have made a fool of himself in the Salmond interview (although I haven't seen it). Quote
glasgow sheep Posted January 25, 2012 Report Posted January 25, 2012 I think he's brilliant, but appears to have made a fool of himself in the Salmond interview (although I haven't seen it). My favourite line wasn't the Muggabe one but where he ranted on about how would we transfer our share of the UK's gold reserves from the Bank of England to Scotland ,"will you use a train???!!! Much like the folk ranting about needing passports to go to Gretna/Berwick, despite the fact that you clearly won't (currently no UK citizen needs a passport to go to Ireland) it's bizarre how fatuous or indeed vacuous many peoples questioning of the issues are. Maybe it is because it is only now that a lot of folk are thinking about it but nonsense like the above is just a waste of everyone's time and intelligence......I mean the bbc have as one of their 12 questions, What will happen to Scottish MPs?....do people really ask this?! So another 2.5 years of this chat with worthless questions and posturing from all sides. Is it that complicated? Surely the only good reason for the Union is that you feel British and want to be part of a British state, while the only good argument for Independence is you feel Scottish and want to be part of a Scottish State. All this debate about numbers, embassies and pandas is just flim-flam. Domestically thanks to Devolution (and increasing devolution whatever happens) we have control of most of the important things in life -Health, Education, Law and Order so independence won't make massive changes there. There will likely be little difference financially as an independent Scotland despite what both sides say. The main difference will be in our relationship with world, do you want to be part of a British State, one of the richest nations in the world with significant political, economic and military influence or do you want to be part of a Scottish State which knows it place on the World stage, works with it's Scandinavian and European neighbours collaboratively but has little significant influence, but therefore less obligations to get involved in Euro bail outs and foreign wars. But even then Independence, Self Governance and Self Determination is really something you want for Scotland or something you feel you already have in the shape of the UK. The already-haves seem to have the upper hand and I'm not sure 2yrs of chat about the minutia will change things that much. Quote
mizer Posted January 26, 2012 Report Posted January 26, 2012 Anyone see Jim Wallace on the BBC debate thing, what a shambles he was. Quote
mizer Posted January 27, 2012 Report Posted January 27, 2012 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9043092/Nuclear-subs-will-stay-in-Scotland-Royal-Navy-chiefs-decide.html#.TyJpzZHexSU.facebook Nuclear subs will stay in Scotland, Royal Navy chiefs decide Britain's nuclear deterrent would have to remain in Scotland even if the country voted for independence, Royal Navy chiefs have concluded. The Scottish naval base currently used to arm submarines with Trident nuclear missiles is the only site suitable for the task and building another could take up to a decade, ministers have been told. Alex Salmond, the Scottish First Minister, has set out a timetable that could see Scotland vote on independence by 2014. David Cameron wants the referendum held sooner and may challenge Mr Salmond’s proposed referendum question. The recent moves have caused alarm among defence chiefs, who are worried about the consequences for the Armed Forces. The Daily Telegraph understands that recent internal discussions at the Ministry of Defence have concluded that a Scottish declaration of independence would effectively leave the UK’s nuclear weapons based in a foreign country for several years. The prospect was described by a senior military source as “the nightmare scenario” for commanders overseeing the nuclear deterrent and for UK ministers negotiating with a new Scottish government. Britain’s deterrent, Trident missiles on Vanguard-class submarines, is based on the Clyde. The subs are based at Faslane on the Gare Loch , while their missiles and warheads are stored and loaded at a nearby base, Coulport, on Loch Long. The MoD believes Faslane’s facilities could be replicated at an existing English naval base. But the Royal Naval Armaments Depot at Coulport is unique in the UK. It is equipped with highly specialised and sensitive equipment for safely moving missiles and warheads and incorporates hardened concrete bunkers to store them. A source said: “Berths would not be a problem – there are docks on the south coast that could be used without too much fuss. But there simply isn’t anywhere else where we can do what we do at Coulport, and without that, there is no deterrent.” The SNP has promised an independent Scotland will be free of nuclear weapons and insisted Scots should not bear any of the cost of relocating Trident. MoD insiders believe that, after an independence vote, ministers in London would have no choice but to strike a deal with Scottish leaders allowing the Navy to go on using Coulport and Faslane until an alternative was ready. That would give Scotland’s new government bargaining power over other issues like their share of the UK national debt and other financial liabilities. “Maintaining the deterrent is the first priority for any UK government, so ministers in London would have to pay Salmond any price to ensure we kept access to [the Clyde bases],” said a source. “It would be an unbelievable nightmare.” Prof William Walker of St Andrews University, who has studied the nuclear deterrent, said it would be “very, very difficult and very, very costly” to move the entire system out of Scotland. The most likely legal model would be the Irish “treaty ports”. After Irish independence in 1922, Britain continued to use several Irish ports as naval bases, only handing them back shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War. The MoD declined to discuss details of the nuclear deterrent. A spokesman said: “The UK government position is clear and we are arguing the case for Scotland to remain within the Union. However, any decisions on Scotland’s future are for people in Scotland to decide.” Þ?Thousands more Ministry of Defence civilian staff are to be sacked. To balance the books for the next financial year, the MoD will be forced to let go another 3,000 civilian workers in addition to the 25,000 civilians and 30,000 service personnel already cut. Quote
glasgow sheep Posted January 27, 2012 Report Posted January 27, 2012 Well they are part our nuclear weapons too aren't they? Quote
mizer Posted January 27, 2012 Report Posted January 27, 2012 Well they are part our nuclear weapons too aren't they? well 8.7% of them, but that could be swapped for a squadron of Euro fighters, heap of tanks and a couple of destroyers. Then we invade England and take the nuclear weapons back and sell them to Iran and make loads of money Quote
rocket_scientist Posted January 27, 2012 Report Posted January 27, 2012 well 8.7% of them, but that could be swapped for a squadron of Euro fighters, heap of tanks and a couple of destroyers. Then we invade England and take the nuclear weapons back and sell them to Iran and make loads of money Salmond is already on the case. Our best advertising firm brains in Glasgow and Edinburgh are engaged in creating appropriate marketing strategies. The destruction of Israel is the common theme, looking at the first draft prototypes. It would be politically incorrect to reveal the straplines. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.