Scottish Independence

[bilbobaggins]

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.

 

I think they'll blitzkrieg it.

[glasgow sheep]

Couple of interesting polls:

 

Latest voting intention poll for Holyrood (those certain to vote):

SNP 49% Lab 23% Con 13% LD 10%

Presuming this is for constituency vote apparently it would give Lab 1, LD 2 Tories 2 and SNP the rest of the constituencies.

 

On the independence vote, using the preferred SNP option:

“Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?”

Yes: 37% No 50%

If just those certain to vote Yes: 39% No 50%

[tlg1903]

That is interesting, an 11% swing is not impossible by any means over 2 and half years

[BigAl]

Can anyone tell me what rate income tax I'd pay in an independent Scotland 

 

No, thought as much, then why the fuck should I behave like a turkey voting for Xmas

 

There is just SO much unknown just now, making it impossible to fully weigh up the implications of full independence

 

We're going to have a full two and half years of this 

[dave_min]

Can anyone tell me what rate income tax I'd pay in an independent Scotland 

 

No, but can anybody tell you the rate of income tax you'll be paying in 3 years if Scotland is still in the UK?

 

There is just SO much unknown just now, making it impossible to fully weigh up the implications of full independence

 

We're going to have a full two and half years of this 

 

Are you saying 2.5 years is too long or short to weigh up the options here?

[BigAl]

No, but can anybody tell you the rate of income tax you'll be paying in 3 years if Scotland is still in the UK?

 

Are you saying 2.5 years is too long or short to weigh up the options here?

 

Probably could hazard a better guess from a position of current knowledge than taking a stab in the dark, and to be honest I don't trust the fat bag o' wind and his pig ugly side kick.

 

Regarding your second point, I'm actually saying neither..... I firmly believe if fat boy thought he could win it tomorrow he would be at the polls. He knows he has no fucking chance and the longer he can drag this out he patently believes the better chance he has to bore folk into voting yes just to get the fucker to shut his mouth.

 

 

[mizer]

Probably could hazard a better guess from a position of current knowledge than taking a stab in the dark, and to be honest I don't trust the fat bag o' wind and his pig ugly side kick.

 

Regarding your second point, I'm actually saying neither..... I firmly believe if fat boy thought he could win it tomorrow he would be at the polls. He knows he has no fucking chance and the longer he can drag this out he patently believes the better chance he has to bore folk into voting yes just to get the fucker to shut his mouth.

 

Patriotic YES, nationalist NO

 

Bore people into voting yes??

 

:lolabove:

 

 

[BigAl]

Bore people into voting yes??

 

:lolabove:

 

Is it really that laughable though Dave 

You surely can't deny that Salmond just loves the sound of his own voice.

I honestly believe the 2014 is nothing but a scheme to work and work and work on the good people of Scotland until they reach a point where they think, right might as well if only to shut the fat cunt up

[TENEMENTFUNSTER]

No, but can anybody tell you the rate of income tax you'll be paying in 3 years if Scotland is still in the UK?

 

Are you saying 2.5 years is too long or short to weigh up the options here?

 

On the first, presumable given all the available figures would be there for the SNP to put a number on it, as it stands. They won't though.

 

On the second, what's to weigh up? 2.5 years? Really?

[BigAl]

On the first, presumable given all the available figures would be there for the SNP to put a number on it, as it stands. They won't though.

 

 

Exactly my point 

[Kowalski]

Another 2 and a half years of this thread 

[BigAl]

Another 2 and a half years of this thread 

 

[TENEMENTFUNSTER]

Is it really that laughable though Dave 

You surely can't deny that Salmond just loves the sound of his own voice.

I honestly believe the 2014 is nothing but a scheme to work and work and work on the good people of Scotland until they reach a point where they think, right might as well if only to shut the fat cunt up

 

2 issues Al, firstly, the SNP know fine they'd get whipped right now but equally know that the opposition are pretty much useless so they have time to "work" on the Scottish public.

 

There's still a lot of mistaking a vote for the SNP as a vote for independence which clearly appears not to be the case. There's a great deal of dissatisfaction amongst voters for the unionist parties and politics in general for a great many reasons, not least of which the lack of genuine leadership amongst the opposition here and the more general distaste for dodgy politicians that the SNP has largely avoided.

 

I just don't give 2 fucks about independence BUT am very glad that a lot of things are devolved and see no reason why we can't have a wee bit more of that.

[TENEMENTFUNSTER]

Another 2 and a half years of this thread 

 

I fully concur.

[BigAl]

2 issues Al, firstly, the SNP know fine they'd get whipped right now but equally know that the opposition are pretty much useless so they have time to "work" on the Scottish public.

 

There's still a lot of mistaking a vote for the SNP as a vote for independence which clearly appears not to be the case. There's a great deal of dissatisfaction amongst voters for the unionist parties and politics in general for a great many reasons, not least of which the lack of genuine leadership amongst the opposition here and the more general distaste for dodgy politicians that the SNP has largely avoided.

 

I just don't give 2 fucks about independence BUT am very glad that a lot of things are devolved and see no reason why we can't have a wee bit more of that.

 

+1

 

Excellent post, you obviously have a more eloquent way of putting things in writing than I do

[El Padre™]

Out of curiosity what will the rabid nationalists rage against if/when we do get independence? They'll need something to thump tables about. 

[tlg1903]

I agree with everything you said there TF bar not giving a fuck.  I do, i would love to see it but i'm realistic.  I will say this though, i do think the vote will be a close thing when it comes. Its also 2 + 1/2 years of Cameron which i think will change peoples votes waaaaaaaaaaay more than being bored of Salmond ever will.

 

Whatever way of looking at its unarguable that these are interesting times we are living in.  I guarantee that every single one of us will look back in 20 years knowing exactly where you were, who you were with and how you voted on the day that Scotland chose it fate. 

 

One thing that i have wondered is what will be the criteria that you must meet to be able to vote.  It doesn't seem right that someone could move from N/I, Wales or England three months before the vote and be eligible to take part.  In contrast it doesn't seem right to deny a non scot the right to vote when they are long term residents and aim to continue to do so

[glasgow sheep]

Re income tax I would imagine in the short term the tax rates would be much the same and in any case would be dependent on which party was in government, which probably won't be a post-independence snp. 

So many of the "questions" are really imponderables, but then they are in a future UK state too.  I guess the snp will have to set out numbers and projections and given their entire existence has been for this moment I'll be staggered  if they don't do that.  The question will be then whether you believe their numbers or the unionist numbers. 

 

For me none of that really matters anyway as I have no doubt we will not be massively better or worse off under independence.

 

Interesting point from TF that you'd be happy with more devolution, a very widespread opinion.

My thinking is what's the point in more devolution, why not independence, surely it would be better, not a position I've always had.

 

I've gone from "devolution will be good but what's the point in more", to,

"well we're doing a decent job here, I disagree with stuff but over all much prefer the way we are doing things in Holyrood compared to Westminster so perhaps we should have more fiscal responsibility and be a grown up parliament and country (and shut up those who say we leech off the rest of the uk)"

 

That would be it for me but then firstly even "devo-max" will probably still mean a grant of some sort coming from London for our share of oil and some other centralised incomes as well as centralised social security etc and thus the same limitation on Holyrood policy. 

Secondly why get all those powers for Scotland but then still share a defence and foreign policy?  A lot of people will prefer the idea of a shared defence force, seat on the UN etc, not for me.  If we can trust, and want, the Scottish Parliament to have powers over the majority of our daily lives (as we almost do now) why not trust they will do a decent (or better) job with the other stuff too?

 

I suspect further devolution will be coming and at some point independence, whether that will be in 2014 or 2044 I'm not sure, but it seems an inevitable path for what is a ultimately a country and state in it's own right (unless you disagree with that central premise in which case all the numbers in the world presumably won't change your vote).

 

[mizer]

Is it really that laughable though Dave 

You surely can't deny that Salmond just loves the sound of his own voice.

I honestly believe the 2014 is nothing but a scheme to work and work and work on the good people of Scotland until they reach a point where they think, right might as well if only to shut the fat cunt up

 

To be honest yes, if boring was a good factor  Ross Finnie would be the emperor of the universe by now!

 

For me the SNP have been dancing the tune of the Westminster parties for too many years by trying to combat the stories that Scotland could not afford to stand on its own feet. Now it is accepted that the world would not end and hopefully somebody can dredge some figures up over the next years from the treasury. But for me its not about being financially £1 or £1000 better off its about being ourselves and determining the future of our country. Somewhere in the past something has made us politically different than our larger neighbours to the South which manifests in them liking politics more to the right than the people of Scotland.

With the reduction of Scottish MPs the only future is for the UK to be ran by tories for the foreseeable future and any labour goverment would have to pander to 'middle-England'. And for me how can we be part of the UK when a person representing a constituency in Scotland cannot be the leader of the country? Yes Gordon Brown was prime minister but he was undermined (and rightly so) as he voted on issues of which did not affect his constituents only those living in England. The clear political consensus at Westminster is that is wrong for a Scottish person to be PM in the current constitutional settlement. It also brings up a very important question about the so called potential devo-max option. If only a few powers such as defence are held by Westminster will there be Scottish MPs? What is the point in having them there for only a few votes per year and then the Prime Mister certainly could not represent a Scottish constituency. As GS says, this option may be a nice stepping stone but what is the point of it we may as well take the step rather than two half steps.

 

Finally, for me and a lot of my friends, we find Labour as detestable and the tories but in different ways. For years and year I as a supporter of Independence listened to political speeches and comments by labour politicians who were derogatory in many ways about my political views& then talking down Scotland saying it could not cope on its own. I could never vote for them or support them, and they are the ONLY other option in the UK other than the tories. For me there can only be one option.

[Penfold]

Re income tax I would imagine in the short term the tax rates would be much the same and in any case would be dependent on which party was in government, which probably won't be a post-independence snp. 

So many of the "questions" are really imponderables, but then they are in a future UK state too.  I guess the snp will have to set out numbers and projections and given their entire existence has been for this moment I'll be staggered  if they don't do that.  The question will be then whether you believe their numbers or the unionist numbers. 

 

For me none of that really matters anyway as I have no doubt we will not be massively better or worse off under independence.

 

Interesting point from TF that you'd be happy with more devolution, a very widespread opinion.

My thinking is what's the point in more devolution, why not independence, surely it would be better, not a position I've always had.

 

I've gone from "devolution will be good but what's the point in more", to,

"well we're doing a decent job here, I disagree with stuff but over all much prefer the way we are doing things in Holyrood compared to Westminster so perhaps we should have more fiscal responsibility and be a grown up parliament and country (and shut up those who say we leech off the rest of the uk)"

 

That would be it for me but then firstly even "devo-max" will probably still mean a grant of some sort coming from London for our share of oil and some other centralised incomes as well as centralised social security etc and thus the same limitation on Holyrood policy. 

Secondly why get all those powers for Scotland but then still share a defence and foreign policy?  A lot of people will prefer the idea of a shared defence force, seat on the UN etc, not for me.  If we can trust, and want, the Scottish Parliament to have powers over the majority of our daily lives (as we almost do now) why not trust they will do a decent (or better) job with the other stuff too?

 

I suspect further devolution will be coming and at some point independence, whether that will be in 2014 or 2044 I'm not sure, but it seems an inevitable path for what is a ultimately a country and state in it's own right (unless you disagree with that central premise in which case all the numbers in the world presumably won't change your vote).

 

This.

 

There's going to be no way to know the financial ins and outs because much of the important negotiations will have to be held after the referendum takes place. Independence shouldn't be about being a few pounds better or worse off.

 

What we would have is a government who's focus is on the issues important to Scotland and the people who live here. This is what I will be voting for unless I hear a convincing argument against it - which is unlikely seeing as about the best Union supporters have come up with is we'll lose the Pandas or have to pay for embassies abroad (guess what, we're already doing this!)

[glasgow sheep]

With the reduction of Scottish MPs the only future is for the UK to be ran by tories for the foreseeable future and any labour goverment would have to pander to 'middle-England'. And for me how can we be part of the UK when a person representing a constituency in Scotland cannot be the leader of the country? Yes Gordon Brown was prime minister but he was undermined (and rightly so) as he voted on issues of which did not affect his constituents only those living in England. The clear political consensus at Westminster is that is wrong for a Scottish person to be PM in the current constitutional settlement. It also brings up a very important question about the so called potential devo-max option. If only a few powers such as defence are held by Westminster will there be Scottish MPs? What is the point in having them there for only a few votes per year and then the Prime Mister certainly could not represent a Scottish constituency.

 

Of course there is a perfectly sensible way round this, and a policy the LibDem were meant to support at one time, federalism.  Even without going that far there needs to be massive political change at Westminster, proportional representation, an elected second chamber, written constitution, English or regional parliaments, all of which could solve alot of the above.  Unfortunately for the Unionist position nobody is suggesting anything like that and won't be for some time.

 

Actually that raises a couple of questions re an independent Scotland, will we have a unicameral legislature or will we have a second revising chamber? Will we have a formal written constitution and bill of rights and what will they be? How will we elect the new Parliament?

[mizer]

Of course there is a perfectly sensible way round this, and a policy the LibDem were meant to support at one time, federalism.  Even without going that far there needs to be massive political change at Westminster, proportional representation, an elected second chamber, written constitution, English or regional parliaments, all of which could solve alot of the above.  Unfortunately for the Unionist position nobody is suggesting anything like that and won't be for some time.

 

Actually that raises a couple of questions re an independent Scotland, will we have a unicameral legislature or will we have a second revising chamber? Will we have a formal written constitution and bill of rights and what will they be? How will we elect the new Parliament?

 

Hence why I think 2 years may be too quick for the vote as arguments will be all over the shop.

[Kowalski]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9149481/TV-viewers-in-separate-Scotland-to-pay-extra-for-BBC.html

 

"Television viewers in an independent Scotland would be forced to pay an extra subscription fee to access the full range of BBC programmes, under the SNP’s plans to break up the corporation.

 

Pete Wishart, the party’s broadcasting spokesman, said the replacement Scottish Broadcasting Corporation (SBC) would spend up to £75 million a year importing popular UK programmes like EastEnders, which viewers could watch for free.

 

But he said that households would have to pay a “commercial” charge on top of the licence fee, by installing satellite or cable TV, if they wanted to watch other BBC shows that “have got very little to do with the experience of living in Scotland”.

 

The limited budget for buying in BBC content suggests a relatively small proportion of its programmes would be purchased for free-to-air viewing. Mr Wishart said the SBC would instead spend an extra £100 million on Scottish programming.

 

The Perth and North Perthshire MP also used the speech, at a media conference in Salford, Greater Manchester, to suggest the BBC is an “institutional enemy” of the party’s drive for separation.

 

However, a senior BBC Scotland executive said internal research shows Scottish viewers get more from the corporation than they pay in licence fees, while opposition parties warned viewers would miss out on their best-loved shows.

 

Alex Salmond has insisted people in a separate Scotland could continue watching their supposed “favourite” programmes like EastEnders and the X Factor, but have not made clear what would happen to less mainstream shows.

 

Mr Wishart began his speech by stating the SNP would not publish its final plans next year but started divulging details under close questioning from delegates.

 

Asked which BBC programmes would continue to be broadcast after independence, he said: “We would just buy the programmes that we’d want.

 

“Do we want some of the programmes that we see in Scotland which have got very little to do with the experience of living in Scotland, got very little to do with our national debate? We’d want popular programmes.”

 

He estimated between £50 million and £75 million would be spent annually buying in BBC shows for “what would become SBC ONE and SBC TWO”.

 

These would be free to view for households paying the Scottish licence fee, but the BBC currently spends around £2.5 billion a year on output including specialist shows on channels such as BBC TWO and BBC FOUR.

 

Asked how viewers would access less mainstream content, he said: “If you have a cable or satellite network, you would get the full range of services.”

 

The MP confirmed this would require households to pay an addition “commercial” charge on top of their SBC licence fee."

[tlg1903]

I would be more concerned about the bbc radio than bbc television if i'm honest. 

[maverick sheep]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9149481/TV-viewers-in-separate-Scotland-to-pay-extra-for-BBC.html

 

As scaremongering goes that's pretty desperate from the wellygraph. Instead of paying a BBC license fee, at worst the full channels/select programmes will be part of a subscription package that you'd pay for other channels anyway, while new or enhanced Scottish free-to-air channels would emerge.

 

(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Northern_Ireland)

 

    BBC One Northern Ireland and BBC Two Northern Ireland are widely available across the border in the Republic of Ireland. These channels are carried on all digital platforms in the Republic including Sky Ireland, UPC Ireland, Magnet Networks, SCTV and Crossan Cable. BBC One NI and BBC Two NI are also available terrestrially in the Republic in counties near the Northern Ireland border. Saorview, the free-to-air Irish digital television service is yet to carry the BBC channels soon.

 

    Additional BBC channels such as BBC Three, BBC Four, BBC News, and BBC World News, are also available within the Republic of Ireland as part of a subscription with leading digital television providers.

 

    On 1 February 2010 the Republic of Ireland's Minister for Communications Eamon Ryan signed an agreement with the UK's Ben Bradshaw. This agreement will enable viewers within Northern Ireland to watch RTÉ One, RTÉ Two and TG4 on a free-to-air basis as of 2012. The agreement between both jurisdictions will also guarantee that viewers within the Republic of Ireland will be able to view BBC One Northern Ireland and BBC Two Northern Ireland on the Republic of Ireland's free-to-air service which is to debut in late 2010. A cross-border initiative has always been on the agenda for the Green Party in the Republic of Ireland. However it was later confirmed that BBC Northern Ireland services are now to be offered in the Republic of Ireland on a 'paid-for' basis and not the original free-to-air basis.