Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Scottish Independence Referendum


  • Please log in to reply
663 replies to this topic

Poll: Should Scotland be an independent country? (48 member(s) have cast votes)

Should Scotland be an independent country?

  1. Yes (22 votes [45.83%])

    Percentage of vote: 45.83%

  2. No (26 votes [54.17%])

    Percentage of vote: 54.17%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 ShotgunGold

ShotgunGold
  • Coach
  • 858 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 12:06 PM

If Scotland does become independent, then we will be competing economically.

I'd like to see a 'free trade zone' implemented in Newcastle. Most businesses would probably only want a presence in one part of either England or Scotland not both. Having that in Newcastle could drive huge amounts of business out of Edinburgh and Glasgow and England would be much stronger because of it.

#22 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,796 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 12:17 PM

If Scotland does become independent, then we will be competing economically.

I'd like to see a 'free trade zone' implemented in Newcastle. Most businesses would probably only want a presence in one part of either England or Scotland not both. Having that in Newcastle could drive huge amounts of business out of Edinburgh and Glasgow and England would be much stronger because of it.

International non-manufacturing firms tend to want access to London and the rest of the UK can go wither away as far as they're concerned.  For example, one London based firm I'm going to see tomorrow has a massive London office and that's it for the UK but they have 4 in Australia, 4 in Canada, 3 in the US and so on, they know their UK clients are either London based or they can be reached in a day trip quite easily.  Scotland, the North, Wales, Ireland, in fact anywhere outside the M25 is just make-believe land for many inside London.  I can't really see that changing in an independent Scotland as the EU free trade laws make services transparent across borders.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#23 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,019 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 01:04 PM

I've been following the news/press confs etc for the White Paper.  It seems to me  and others that is not really a white paper, but more of a referendum manifesto for the Yes /SNP campaign. They are promising to do things they can do already but haven't  or won't, and promising other things where they have absolutely no guarantee of success.  Scotland deserves better.


Edited by JohnM, 26 November 2013 - 01:05 PM.


#24 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,796 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 01:11 PM

I've been following the news/press confs etc for the White Paper.  It seems to me  and others that is not really a white paper, but more of a referendum manifesto for the Yes /SNP campaign. They are promising to do things they can do already but haven't  or won't, and promising other things where they have absolutely no guarantee of success.  Scotland deserves better.

Isn't that the "Yes" campaign slogan?


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#25 The Future is League

The Future is League
  • Coach
  • 6,005 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 01:20 PM

I'm all for Scottish Independence  and the sooner the better.  Yesterday would be good. My worry, though is that the UK will be swamped with  even more foreigners  from north of the border flocking here to take advantage.  Assuming an independent Scotland is at some point admitted to the EU, shouldn't there be accession-state immigration quotas imposed as has been argued in the case of Rumania?

Could be interesting if Scotland votes for independence and the UK votes to come out of the EU. That could leave them in no mans land. There wouldn't be any work for the Scots in the rest of the UK then. Interesting times ahead.



#26 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 4,779 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 04:18 PM

Just pulled this from the BBC website:

 

"International Relations and Defence

 

The paper says an independent Scotland would remove Trident from the Clyde by 2020. It would be a member of the United Nations, Nato, the Council of Europe, the Commonwealth, the OECD, and the OSCE.

  • it will also seek a closer relationship with the Nordic Council of Ministers
  • a network of overseas embassies will be established in locations including Beijing, Islamabad, Seoul and Washington.
  • an independent Scotland would legally commit to spending 0.7% of gross national income on international aid with an aspiration to spend 1% over time
  • A Scottish Defence Force would consist of 15,000 full time personnel and 5,000 reservists
  • Faslane to be retained as a conventional naval base and joint HQ of a Scottish defence force."

I'd love to know where they are going to get 15,000 full time personnel from? The vast majority of jocks I know serving in the military catergorically do not want to join any token Scottish Defence Force and will decide to stay serving in the British Army/military. Am I right in also suggesting that as a NATO member, the Scottish government wouldn't have a choice of not allowing nuclear missiles in their country? I am sure I have heard of a clause stating for its collective defence, NATO can station missiles in any member country...

 

As for Faslane, most RN and RM personnel will tell you that the Scottish can keep it... :)


Edited by GeordieSaint, 26 November 2013 - 04:19 PM.

Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#27 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,796 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 04:42 PM

Just pulled this from the BBC website:

 

"International Relations and Defence

 

The paper says an independent Scotland would remove Trident from the Clyde by 2020. It would be a member of the United Nations, Nato, the Council of Europe, the Commonwealth, the OECD, and the OSCE.

  • it will also seek a closer relationship with the Nordic Council of Ministers
  • a network of overseas embassies will be established in locations including Beijing, Islamabad, Seoul and Washington.
  • an independent Scotland would legally commit to spending 0.7% of gross national income on international aid with an aspiration to spend 1% over time
  • A Scottish Defence Force would consist of 15,000 full time personnel and 5,000 reservists
  • Faslane to be retained as a conventional naval base and joint HQ of a Scottish defence force."

I'd love to know where they are going to get 15,000 full time personnel from? The vast majority of jocks I know serving in the military catergorically do not want to join any token Scottish Defence Force and will decide to stay serving in the British Army/military. Am I right in also suggesting that as a NATO member, the Scottish government wouldn't have a choice of not allowing nuclear missiles in their country? I am sure I have heard of a clause stating for its collective defence, NATO can station missiles in any member country...

 

As for Faslane, most RN and RM personnel will tell you that the Scottish can keep it... :)

I've heard somewhat the opposite from my friends still serving.  Those in the Scottish Regiment units and fully badged Scottish other units, e.g. 19RA, are very strongly linked with Scotland and I'd be sure you'd get about 75%+ moving to the new Scottish Army.  The problem is... where to put them in Scotland!  You'd have to create almost a new town along the size of Catterick Garrison to house them all.

 

I'd assume that there would be a joint effort in existing places for at least 5-10 years under a single command until they could be unpicked.  The British Army as it is wouldn't be able to cope with the loss of 20,000 military personnel without stopping some fairly essential commitments and the Scottish wouldn't have anywhere to keep them.  5-10 years would be enough to unpick all that.

 

On Trident, there's a difference between owning your own nukes and being host to someone else's.  If the US wants to pay for their upkeep then that's a massively different scenario to Scotland having to pay for their own.

 

I've yet to read through the thing but the other big things I'd like to read will be around the planned and committed military procurement the government have already put in place for the next two decades


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#28 Futtocks

Futtocks
  • Coach
  • 20,353 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 04:47 PM

Milton Jones Tweets: For an independent Scotland just put an x in the box. Then you can cut it out and use it as a little flag.


A mind is like a parachute. It doesn’t work if it isn’t open. Frank Zappa (1940 - 1993)


#29 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 04:54 PM

International non-manufacturing firms tend to want access to London and the rest of the UK can go wither away as far as they're concerned.  For example, one London based firm I'm going to see tomorrow has a massive London office and that's it for the UK but they have 4 in Australia, 4 in Canada, 3 in the US and so on, they know their UK clients are either London based or they can be reached in a day trip quite easily.  Scotland, the North, Wales, Ireland, in fact anywhere outside the M25 is just make-believe land for many inside London.  I can't really see that changing in an independent Scotland as the EU free trade laws make services transparent across borders.

 I disagree with that. Dublin is also a major financial centre. I don't think that it would be more significant than Leeds or Newcastle if it wasn't a capital city.



#30 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 04:57 PM

Could be interesting if Scotland votes for independence and the UK votes to come out of the EU. That could leave them in no mans land. There wouldn't be any work for the Scots in the rest of the UK then. Interesting times ahead.

Not really. Irish men born before 1948 (the year that the ROI officially left the British sphere) are automatically entitled to British citizenship. It is likely that all people currently living in Scotland would be similarly entitled to British citizenship (especially since they already have it).


Edited by Northern Sol, 26 November 2013 - 04:57 PM.


#31 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,796 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 05:03 PM

After quickly scanning through the "Defence" section of the document, I'm actually quite impressed.  I was right to be suspicious of the media in this, the BBC figures there were the independence + 10 years point and the paper is quite realistic about the numbers who'll transfer over to the new Scottish military.

 

So far, what I've read is that the paper is of a far higher quality than I'd ever have thought they'd have produced.  It's still high level in many ways but it's got one hell of a lot of substance behind many of the policies stated. I'm just not used to political parties being that detailed, it'll make one hell of a knuckle-rapper for the next time a "No" campaign spokesman goes on about the SNP not knowing what they want.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#32 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 4,779 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 05:30 PM

I've heard somewhat the opposite from my friends still serving.  Those in the Scottish Regiment units and fully badged Scottish other units, e.g. 19RA, are very strongly linked with Scotland and I'd be sure you'd get about 75%+ moving to the new Scottish Army.  The problem is... where to put them in Scotland!  You'd have to create almost a new town along the size of Catterick Garrison to house them all.

 

I'd assume that there would be a joint effort in existing places for at least 5-10 years under a single command until they could be unpicked.  The British Army as it is wouldn't be able to cope with the loss of 20,000 military personnel without stopping some fairly essential commitments and the Scottish wouldn't have anywhere to keep them.  5-10 years would be enough to unpick all that.

 

Interesting... maybe the little sods are just lying to me! :) Plenty of infrastructure now coming online in Scotland with the move back from BFG starting to kick in. You are right about the impact on the Armed Forces whatever the figure moving across could potentially be but I be surprised if 20,000 personnel was the overall Scottish representation in the Armed Forces currently. There is a large proportion of Fijians/Commonwealth and Northern English serving in fully badged Scottish units like the Scots DG, 1 SCOTS, 3 SCOTS and the SG especially. It's why I am a bit sceptical that fully badged Scottish units would migrate across over whatever timescale set. They'd have huge manning gaps across the board and considering the current recruitment rates in Scotland presently, the SNP may be surprised at what they would be left with in 2020 onwards...

 

I'll have a read of the defence section...


Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#33 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,796 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 06:13 PM

I've been watching the news coverage on this this evening and I think the media are, yet again, underestimating the Scots.  Much like many of the northern parts of England, the Scots can be mightily awkward if they get a sniff that they're being patronised by one side of the argument.  A 670 page, fully referenced white paper that is being laughed at by the likes of Alastair Darling on something that's eminently negotiable rather than a black/white issue as Darling and Co are making out.

 

The coverage was enough that I'd be tempted to vote "yes" out of sheer spite at the patronising tone coming from the "no" campaign essentially saying "trust us, you're too thick to believe anything but our waffly soundbite-heavy news interviews"


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#34 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 06:46 PM

I've been watching the news coverage on this this evening and I think the media are, yet again, underestimating the Scots.  Much like many of the northern parts of England, the Scots can be mightily awkward if they get a sniff that they're being patronised by one side of the argument.  A 670 page, fully referenced white paper that is being laughed at by the likes of Alastair Darling on something that's eminently negotiable rather than a black/white issue as Darling and Co are making out.

 

The coverage was enough that I'd be tempted to vote "yes" out of sheer spite at the patronising tone coming from the "no" campaign essentially saying "trust us, you're too thick to believe anything but our waffly soundbite-heavy news interviews"

I'd run a mile from Salmond. You might be impressed by the document but he's spent years arguing that Scotland would stay inside the EU, he even went to court to protect the "legal advice" that he was given from becoming public. Then we found out that there never was any advice and the EU position is that Scotland would have to reapply.

 

It's a similar story with the pound. Alex says they'll keep it. The British government says that's not acceptable. Alex claims that they are bluffing.

 

It's hardly surprising that there is a lot of scepticism.



#35 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,019 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 07:06 PM

For me- and I am in favour of Independence - the White Paper is designed to persuade the good burghers of Scotland  to vote yes. It is stating policy that it has no possibility of enacting..which will be a shame for the Scots.



#36 bedlam breakout

bedlam breakout
  • Coach
  • 740 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 07:17 PM

scotlands biggest 3 exports seem to be whisky deep fried mars bars and drunks, would like to know how much this has cost already? must be running in to the millions, whos picking up the tab so far?


the inside of a 3star halex table tennis ball smells much like you'd expect it to.

#37 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,019 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 07:38 PM

 whos picking up the tab so far?

 

Guess!



#38 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,796 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 09:45 PM

The latest opinion poll, conducted before the white paper release, showed a 9% lead for the "no" campaign.  Not exactly a massive gap, a 5 point swing will do it.

 

Edit:  Link to the Scotsman's article on it, the Scotsman is quite heavily leaning to the "no" camp.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#39 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,151 posts

Posted 26 November 2013 - 10:25 PM

The latest opinion poll, conducted before the white paper release, showed a 9% lead for the "no" campaign.  Not exactly a massive gap, a 5 point swing will do it.

 

Edit:  Link to the Scotsman's article on it, the Scotsman is quite heavily leaning to the "no" camp.

Analysing the findings on the website What Scotland Thinks, John Curtice, professor of politics at Strathclyde University, said: “In what is likely to be the last poll before Tuesday’s independence white paper, Panelbase once again present a more optimistic picture for the Yes side than any other pollster. However like everyone else, they also find that the balance of public opinion remains resistant to all attempts to shift it - and that thus the Yes side continues to be behind.”



#40 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,591 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 09:56 AM

I've been watching the news coverage on this this evening and I think the media are, yet again, underestimating the Scots.  Much like many of the northern parts of England, the Scots can be mightily awkward if they get a sniff that they're being patronised by one side of the argument.  A 670 page, fully referenced white paper that is being laughed at by the likes of Alastair Darling on something that's eminently negotiable rather than a black/white issue as Darling and Co are making out.

 

The coverage was enough that I'd be tempted to vote "yes" out of sheer spite at the patronising tone coming from the "no" campaign essentially saying "trust us, you're too thick to believe anything but our waffly soundbite-heavy news interviews"

 

That was my impression too.

 

The no campaign should just concentrate on selling the positive benefits of the union, whatever they believe them to be, rather than trying to rubbish the very notion that Scotland could function as an independent state or claiming that the current Scottish government is somehow too stupid to understand the minutiae of how such a transition would work.

 

The current Scottish government has been sharp and successful enough to reach the point of offering a referendum on the matter. The real stupidity would be to underestimate them or patronise the Scottish people over the choice they have to make.


John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com





2 user(s) are reading this topic

2 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users