Independence Referendum

[DungBeetle]

Haha - what's Prescott thinking!?

Sometimes it's as if the guys they send to represent the "no" campaign actually want the other outcome!

 

[redarmi]

I think it is striking, on both sides of the argument, how much uncertainty there is about what the effects will be which is why normally sure footed politicians are getting massively tripped up when they are being asked unexpected questions but more so the 'no' supporters.  Some of the clangers like Millibands border guards and Prescotts comments on the football teams are stunning but they just go to show how much is going to need to be sorted out and hwo much hasnt been properly thought through yet.

[Kmac84]

From the Daily Record, One of the leading Unionist news outlets in Scotland.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-referendum-gordon-browns-12-point-4187106

Should be added that there are no new powers in this 12 point plan, we'd be better going with the Tory option whch gave more powers. 

But why vote for some power when you can have it all. 

[DungBeetle]

All this nonsense of politicians offering sweetners is very annoying, and undemocratic for the rest of us if you ask me.

It should be

A) Have independence - good luck guys hope it works out for you
B) Stay and get treated the same as everyone else in th UK

Bribing the Scots to stay sums up the woeful quality of our politicians in Westminster.

[Kmac84]

All this nonsense of politicians offering sweetners is very annoying, and undemocratic for the rest of us if you ask me.

It should be

A) Have independence - good luck guys hope it works out for you
B) Stay and get treated the same as everyone else in th UK

Bribing the Scots to stay sums up the woeful quality of our politicians in Westminster.

I agree.  If they wanted to offer devo max it should have been on the ballot paper. 

There is a survation poll released tonight at 10:30 pm. 

[DungBeetle]

What is a survation poll?

[horseplayer]

Looks like this 10.30pm poll is going to shake things up

They are doing a great job of ruining the No lead amazing "tactics" by the englishmen on tour

[Kmac84]

What is a survation poll?

Polling company.  I am hearing rumours that the yes campaign are very pleased with the findings.  Obvs nothing confirmed yet but apparentlt 53% in favour of yes, it still means nothing. 

[DMorgan]

All this nonsense of politicians offering sweetners is very annoying, and undemocratic for the rest of us if you ask me.

It should be

A) Have independence - good luck guys hope it works out for you
B) Stay and get treated the same as everyone else in the UK

Bribing the Scots to stay sums up the woeful quality of our politicians in Westminster.

Its just way more complex than that though

MPs representing the rest of the UK in Westminster and working for the Better Together campaign are doing so because their constituents want to keep the union together. I'm not going to find a direct source but if I recall correctly, the polls from rUK were 65-70% in favour of keeping the union. The rUK public wants Scotland to stay so our politicians can't just say 'meh, gl if you pull the trigger' when millions of people in their constituencies will feel the effects of a split in one way or another.

The idea that we're trying to 'bribe' Scotland to stay assumes that the scots were getting a 100% fair deal before and anything else would be unfair on the rest of the union. There are so many conflicting numbers I don't think anyone has a hope in hell of REALLY knowing whether independence is going to be of net benefit to them, but given the swirling maelstrom of numbers I think it would be very presumptuous to assume that Scotland was already getting a great deal and that anything extra is automatically a 'bribe'.

[arbboy]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2749971/Three-major-banks-warn-Scotland-faces-deep-recession-goes-Analysts-say-price-independence-wage-cuts-unemployment-mass-home-sell-off.html

The reality of voting Yes from the people at the coalface of business.

A couple more just for Woodsey to chuckle at!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2750071/Why-don-t-tell-Scots-shove-In-personal-view-Mail-disagrees-SIMON-HEFFER-says-fear-English-people-think.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2750517/No-one-weep-Labour-Scotland-votes-independence-Former-PM-John-Major-says-divisive-attacks-Tories-fuelled-nationalist-campaign.html

[DungBeetle]

All this nonsense of politicians offering sweetners is very annoying, and undemocratic for the rest of us if you ask me.

It should be

A) Have independence - good luck guys hope it works out for you
B) Stay and get treated the same as everyone else in the UK

Bribing the Scots to stay sums up the woeful quality of our politicians in Westminster.

Its just way more complex than that though

MPs representing the rest of the UK in Westminster and working for the Better Together campaign are doing so because their constituents want to keep the union together. I'm not going to find a direct source but if I recall correctly, the polls from rUK were 65-70% in favour of keeping the union. The rUK public wants Scotland to stay so our politicians can't just say 'meh, gl if you pull the trigger' when millions of people in their constituencies will feel the effects of a split in one way or another.

The idea that we're trying to 'bribe' Scotland to stay assumes that the scots were getting a 100% fair deal before and anything else would be unfair on the rest of the union. There are so many conflicting numbers I don't think anyone has a hope in hell of REALLY knowing whether independence is going to be of net benefit to them, but given the swirling maelstrom of numbers I think it would be very presumptuous to assume that Scotland was already getting a great deal and that anything extra is automatically a 'bribe'.

I think it is simple.  London runs a surplus and would be very wealthy if it were an independent country.  But we accept that the North needs to be funded as we are in it together so we contribute far higher tax than the rest of the country.  If Scotland wants to be in the Union then it should do the same.  They may be net contributors like London, but if you want to be part of the Union that is the price you pay. If they are offered anything else which the rest of the country is not, then it is indeed a bribe in my opinion.  We're either in it together, or we're not.

[arbboy]

The former premier - who warned 20 years ago that Scottish devolution would be ‘the high road to separation’ - was scathing about the SNP's inability to say what currency they would use if they did achieve independence.
‘It is one week away from the vote and people of Scotland do not know what currency they will have - I've never known such incompetence,’ he said.

John Major on the situation.  How can you seriously vote yes when such a serious issue is totally up in the air?

First direct financial impact i felt this morning when filling up the car as fuel prices have risen due to the currency movements against the dollar because of the uncertainty around the vote.  Everyone in the UK suffering because of this but only the lucky few north of the border get to vote whilst the rest of us just pay through our wallets with no say.

[DungBeetle]

It is indeed hard to believe that there is no credible plan ahead of the vote.

It should have been stated clearly what the plan was (with Westminster approval) both in terms of currency, assets and debt.   At that point the voters can decide.  I'm pretty sure this would have given some of the "no" voters the confidence to vote differently as well.

[kinboshi]

All this nonsense of politicians offering sweetners is very annoying, and undemocratic for the rest of us if you ask me.

It should be

A) Have independence - good luck guys hope it works out for you
B) Stay and get treated the same as everyone else in the UK

Bribing the Scots to stay sums up the woeful quality of our politicians in Westminster.

Its just way more complex than that though

MPs representing the rest of the UK in Westminster and working for the Better Together campaign are doing so because their constituents want to keep the union together. I'm not going to find a direct source but if I recall correctly, the polls from rUK were 65-70% in favour of keeping the union. The rUK public wants Scotland to stay so our politicians can't just say 'meh, gl if you pull the trigger' when millions of people in their constituencies will feel the effects of a split in one way or another.

The idea that we're trying to 'bribe' Scotland to stay assumes that the scots were getting a 100% fair deal before and anything else would be unfair on the rest of the union. There are so many conflicting numbers I don't think anyone has a hope in hell of REALLY knowing whether independence is going to be of net benefit to them, but given the swirling maelstrom of numbers I think it would be very presumptuous to assume that Scotland was already getting a great deal and that anything extra is automatically a 'bribe'.

I think it is simple.  London runs a surplus and would be very wealthy if it were an independent country.  But we accept that the North needs to be funded as we are in it together so we contribute far higher tax than the rest of the country.  If Scotland wants to be in the Union then it should do the same.  They may be net contributors like London, but if you want to be part of the Union that is the price you pay. If they are offered anything else which the rest of the country is not, then it is indeed a bribe in my opinion.  We're either in it together, or we're not.

Maybe London would have to pay more for it's water supply, it's electricity supply, it's gas supply, etc.?

[arbboy]

It is indeed hard to believe that there is no credible plan ahead of the vote.

It should have been stated clearly what the plan was (with Westminster approval) both in terms of currency, assets and debt.   At that point the voters can decide.  I'm pretty sure this would have given some of the "no" voters the confidence to vote differently as well.

What rational person would risk the value of their house/savings/pensions etc etc by voting yes with so little upside yet so much potential downside when such fundamental policies are not cast in stone before the vote?  Just makes no sense at all.  Maybe the value of Tennant's super is more important than these issues to the yes crew!