Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Scottish Independence Referendum


  • Please log in to reply
335 replies to this topic

Poll: Should Scotland be an independent country? (38 member(s) have cast votes)

Should Scotland be an independent country?

  1. Yes (20 votes [52.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 52.63%

  2. No (18 votes [47.37%])

    Percentage of vote: 47.37%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,929 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 10:53 AM

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.

The yes vote are struggling to get 30% in the polls.You should see how skewed the poll that the SNP carried out was, it was full of leading questions and blatant trolling and even then they couldn't get more than 45%.



#42 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,557 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 11:35 AM

The yes vote are struggling to get 30% in the polls.You should see how skewed the poll that the SNP carried out was, it was full of leading questions and blatant trolling and even then they couldn't get more than 45%.

I still think "no" will win but it'll be far closer than you or the "no" media are predicting.  The thing that'll swing it is the utter arrogance of the "no" campaign, some of the drivel and dross is just truly arrogant.  For example, yesterday's TV media were talking about Salmond's confused message, his inconsistent message, his barely worked ideas, his silly promises and so on.  They clearly have failed to learn the lessons that Westminster style politicking has failed repeatedly in Scotland where voters have gone over to the SNP in quite startling numbers over the last decade, often just to get away from the cynicism and arrogance of the mainstream Westminster driven parties.

 

My wife, who really couldn't care either way about the result, asked how all these people criticising the document had a chance to read it so quickly if it were just publicly released yesterday morning and released on embargo the day before.  Alistair Darling's interviews were especially canned and written out by a speech writer long before the paper's contents could ever have been known.

 

Anyway, who chose Darling to be the public face of the "no" campaign?  Do the people who chose him not really recognise that the only way they could get a worse person to run it is if they had Gordon Brown promising to dance a naked jig in Edinburgh's Princes Street if the public vote "no">


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


#43 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,629 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 12:11 PM

Not that I want the "no" campaign to win, but if they want to avoid driving up the yes vote, they need to focus on the positives of Scotland remaining in the union.  We all know how tetchy the Scots are when you point out the home truths of secession to them, or when we start to express opinions about this topic so the "no" bodies need to tread very carefully.


Edited by JohnM, 27 November 2013 - 12:12 PM.

  • ckn likes this

#44 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,678 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 12:26 PM

I can't understand why they want monetry union with the UK, once they become independant. All that will happen is that the UK wil benefit from the oil revenue and make policy that benefits London, Enlgand, Wales and NI. the Scots will have very little influence on these policies. Whereas now they have monetry union and send MPs to westminster that can influence the fiscal policies of the goverment. Remove the Scottish MP's and the is very little opposition to right wing central looking policies.

 

Or they could join the Euro and become like Ireland.

 

Salmond keeps using Norway as an example as how an indenpendant Scotland would work, but that country has a very high level of taxation, albeit the revenue is spent to secure the social benefits for the population, it will be a hard sell for him to persude the population that is the way to go.



#45 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,929 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 01:00 PM

I still think "no" will win but it'll be far closer than you or the "no" media are predicting.  The thing that'll swing it is the utter arrogance of the "no" campaign, some of the drivel and dross is just truly arrogant.  For example, yesterday's TV media were talking about Salmond's confused message, his inconsistent message, his barely worked ideas, his silly promises and so on.  They clearly have failed to learn the lessons that Westminster style politicking has failed repeatedly in Scotland where voters have gone over to the SNP in quite startling numbers over the last decade, often just to get away from the cynicism and arrogance of the mainstream Westminster driven parties.

 

My wife, who really couldn't care either way about the result, asked how all these people criticising the document had a chance to read it so quickly if it were just publicly released yesterday morning and released on embargo the day before.  Alistair Darling's interviews were especially canned and written out by a speech writer long before the paper's contents could ever have been known.

 

Anyway, who chose Darling to be the public face of the "no" campaign?  Do the people who chose him not really recognise that the only way they could get a worse person to run it is if they had Gordon Brown promising to dance a naked jig in Edinburgh's Princes Street if the public vote "no">

I think you have to distinguish between the SNP who run the Scottish parliament and by all accounts have done a decent job and the SNP who want independence who seem to have only half thought it through.

 

An example of which is the currency. The SNP's panel of experts has decided that continued currency union with the rest of the UK is best for Scotland and the rest of the UK and therefore this is their policy and there is no need for a Plan B. This is quite breathtaking arrogance especially since the Tories have been quite clear that it is not acceptable.

 

In addition, the EU requires all new member states to work towards Euro membership. The only states allowed to run their own currecy are those with a prenegotiated opt-out. The SNP don't think this to be worthy of discussion.

 

Another one is that all oil revenues have been assumed to switch to Scotland from HMRC. However, if you go by nearest landmass then between 10% and 20% (depending how the border is drawn) would actually be in English waters. Half thought through but even worse the SNP hasn't discussed the Shetland and Orkney question. The Northern Isles have been quite loud on the subject that if Scotland becomes independent then they would like to become a Jersey style crown dependency and keep their oil.



#46 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,929 posts

Posted 27 November 2013 - 01:02 PM

I can't understand why they want monetry union with the UK, once they become independant. All that will happen is that the UK wil benefit from the oil revenue and make policy that benefits London, Enlgand, Wales and NI. the Scots will have very little influence on these policies. Whereas now they have monetry union and send MPs to westminster that can influence the fiscal policies of the goverment. Remove the Scottish MP's and the is very little opposition to right wing central looking policies.

 

Or they could join the Euro and become like Ireland.

 

Salmond keeps using Norway as an example as how an indenpendant Scotland would work, but that country has a very high level of taxation, albeit the revenue is spent to secure the social benefits for the population, it will be a hard sell for him to persude the population that is the way to go.

They want currency union not monetary union. In essence they keep their tax money and we keep ours but we share the pound sterling through a currency board that is neither responsible to the British parliament nor to the Scottish one (as per the Euro). Unsurprisingly it is unacceptable to almost everybody south of the border.



#47 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,629 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 11:00 AM

Spanish practices to scupper chances? Wonder what the locals think?



#48 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,557 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 11:08 AM

Spanish practices to scupper chances? Wonder what the locals think?

I saw that this morning and it's fairly obvious that Spain will attempt to veto Scotland getting into the EU in order to make it clear to the Catalans that there's absolutely no scope for them getting set free.  I can see the situation where the EU will happily accept any eastern European nation barely able to pay their own way but a relatively prosperous Scotland would be vetoed by at least one or two major countries and left free.

 

It amuses me to think of the UKIP people in Scotland just now, on one hand they're probably instinctively pro-union, on the other they'd do anything to be out of the EU.  So, which way do they vote now?


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


#49 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 40,092 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 11:40 AM

Not being funny or owt

And maybe it's my age

But which is yes and which is no?

 

Is it yes for staying in uk or yes to independence?


WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#50 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,557 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 11:43 AM

Not being funny or owt

And maybe it's my age

But which is yes and which is no?

 

Is it yes for staying in uk or yes to independence?

The latter.  This is the question:  "Should Scotland be an independent country?"


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


#51 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 40,092 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:07 PM

The latter. This is the question: "Should Scotland be an independent country?"

Thanks craig
So who's winning?
I might have asked before so please be tolerant
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#52 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,557 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:19 PM

Thanks craig
So who's winning?
I might have asked before so please be tolerant

The "no" campaign.  Based entirely on a bitterly negative campaign that can be summarised as "a horde of evil trolls will kill you and eat your souls if you vote yes!"  The "no" campaign have about a 9-15% lead depending on the polls you use but then the "yes" campaign have really not started in earnest yet.  The "yes" campaign have the hard job of convincing people to want to change and I'm not convinced they'll be able to do so, that said the "no" campaign is just not making any friends in Scotland with their negativity.

 

There are repercussions for England as well, for example the recent shipyard review essentially shut down Portsmouth as a naval ship building facility while keeping the Scottish ones going, albeit at a reduced capacity.  That's about as bluntly political as you can get, a genuine bribe to the Scottish people to stay in the UK at the cost of English jobs while doing the damnedest to not give the SNP a PR "win" of Scottish jobs losses.  I've little doubt that the Scottish jobs would have gone but for the independence debate.


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


#53 MikeW

MikeW
  • Coach
  • 800 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:26 PM

Has there been much talk about the Scottish Navy?  As most of  Scotland's assets are out in the North Sea I'd imagine they'd need quite a robust force.



#54 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,557 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:34 PM

Has there been much talk about the Scottish Navy?  As most of  Scotland's assets are out in the North Sea I'd imagine they'd need quite a robust force.

Yes.  The independence white paper does cover the navy split.  It shows a few bits where they'll need to spend money, e.g. on a couple of new patrol craft, but Scotland is fairly well set in terms of naval infrastructure with the Clyde bases and also Rosyth.


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


#55 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 40,092 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:42 PM

The "no" campaign. Based entirely on a bitterly negative campaign that can be summarised as "a horde of evil trolls will kill you and eat your souls if you vote yes!" The "no" campaign have about a 9-15% lead depending on the polls you use but then the "yes" campaign have really not started in earnest yet. The "yes" campaign have the hard job of convincing people to want to change and I'm not convinced they'll be able to do so, that said the "no" campaign is just not making any friends in Scotland with their negativity.

There are repercussions for England as well, for example the recent shipyard review essentially shut down Portsmouth as a naval ship building facility while keeping the Scottish ones going, albeit at a reduced capacity. That's about as bluntly political as you can get, a genuine bribe to the Scottish people to stay in the UK at the cost of English jobs while doing the damnedest to not give the SNP a PR "win" of Scottish jobs losses. I've little doubt that the Scottish jobs would have gone but for the independence debate.

Thanks for that fine analysis craig
  • ckn likes this
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#56 Futtocks

Futtocks
  • Coach
  • 19,765 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:44 PM

Yes.  The independence white paper does cover the navy split.  It shows a few bits where they'll need to spend money, e.g. on a couple of new patrol craft, but Scotland is fairly well set in terms of naval infrastructure with the Clyde bases and also Rosyth.

England gets the boats, Scotland gets the oars.


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


#57 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 40,092 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:48 PM

Yes. The independence white paper does cover the navy split. It shows a few bits where they'll need to spend money, e.g. on a couple of new patrol craft, but Scotland is fairly well set in terms of naval infrastructure with the Clyde bases and also Rosyth.

Scotland already has a 'navy' which it uses for fishery protection it uses a version if the isles class ocean patrol vessel
It would be easy and cheap to adapt oil rig support vessels for this role in the same way that the Royal Navy did for interim Falklands patrol vessels
Most surveillance of oil fields is done from the air
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#58 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,557 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:53 PM

Scotland already has a 'navy' which it uses for fishery protection it uses a version if the isles class ocean patrol vessel
It would be easy and cheap to adapt oil rig support vessels for this role in the same way that the Royal Navy did for interim Falklands patrol vessels
Most surveillance of oil fields is done from the air

To be fair to the SNP, they've not assumed they'll get to keep those vessels, they've divvied up the Navy assets proportionally and have worked out that they'll have to either buy or build more patrol vessels to cover those they don't get as part of the split.  I suppose it'll come down to negotiation though, e.g. we'll give you the patrol vessels if you sign over your share of the nuclear missile sub fleet.


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


#59 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,629 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 12:56 PM

do  the Clyde bases belong to them, though?  are they claiming everything in Scotland as theirs?



#60 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,557 posts

Posted 28 November 2013 - 01:00 PM

do  the Clyde bases belong to them, though?  are they claiming everything in Scotland as theirs?

Why not?  It's Scottish soil, after all.  The actual ownership is BAE Systems but it's Scottish jobs that are the important factor.


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





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users