Scottish Independence

LordSutch · 06-07-2011 9:41am

deise go deo wrote: »

Saor Alba.

I hope Scotland gets its Independance. The SNP have shown that scottish people have what it takes to Govern Scotland effectivly.

The one problem I see with it is that it may lead to a strenghtning of Scottish Unionism, and as a side effect, Ulster Unionism. However Scottish independance would cause such a crisis in Northern Unionism that it would be worth it in the long run IMO.

As a Unionist it might surprise you to learn that I don't care either way :eek: If Scotland votes to leave the Union then that's cool, and that's a lot more money in the kitty for everybody else in the UK, the English would be only too happy to finally get rid of those Scot's once and for all, and they could finally have a Parliament all to themselves in Westminster, without any Scottish influence, Yum yum

. . . .

Fratton Fred · 06-07-2011 11:06am

The UK is now in the ridiculous position where English students are being disadvantaged compared to Scottish one.

Scottish students can attend a Scottish university for around £1,300, whereas English universities charge up to £9,000.

The SNP have decided therefore that Scottish universities will charge English students the same, but can't charge students from other EU countries £9,000 because it contravenes EU law.

EU laws only cover discrimination against citizens of other EU states, not discrimination within the same state.

I have to hand it to Alec Salmond, he is certainly drumming up support for independence, albeit in England.

djpbarry · 06-07-2011 3:27pm

dlofnep wrote: »

The Scottish people by and large, vote for Labour because a single Scottish-based party does not have the political strength in Westminster to serve their interests. Therefore, they see it better to vote for whichever the lesser of the two evils are - in their case, usually Labour (as the Tories are held with contempt in Scotland).

Interesting. So presumably, by the same logic, if Labour ran candidates in Northern Ireland, they’d clean up among the nationalist community?

dlofnep wrote: »

The fact that the Scottish public have voted for the SNP in a majority leads me to believe that they are very comfortable with the SNP governing the country (which is what they are doing at the moment, with the exception of a few areas).

I think it’s far more likely that the SNP’s large return at the last assembly election was due in no small part to public discontent with Labour and the Lib Dems. If you think the majority of Scots are content to hand their futures over to Alex Salmond, you are seriously deluded. Besides, I have yet to meet a Scottish person who would not quite happily refer to themselves as both British and Scottish – this rather warped view of Scotland that Irish people seem to have never fails to amuse.

scotty_irish · 06-07-2011 3:35pm

i live in scotland, have a lot of hardcore SNP friends and even they aren't pushing for independence. back when there was lots of oil it would've made economic sense - scotland doesn't have a massive amount of industry - methinks a serious decline in living standards is what independence will translate to. also, not a chance of there being a referendum in the next few years, let alex salmond sprout all the BS he wants - i'll eat my socks if there is - you can hold me to this.

serfboard · 06-07-2011 3:54pm

Alec Salmond is canny enough to know he wouldn't win a referendum on Scottish Independence in the next few years - which is why he's not proposing to have one.

I can more likely see a process of creeping independence - where they get more and more powers until they can convince their own electorate that Scotland can go it alone.

Off-topic, but I find it interesting that the proposal in Northern Ireland to allow them to have a low corporation tax rate, would be coupled with a decrease in the block grant. Presumably companies would not be sending their remittances back to London to be re-doled out in grants, but would be collected and spent locally.

As someone said earlier, the UK is looking more and more like a federal state - even though they'd never actually put it like that.

Fr Tod Umptious · 06-07-2011 4:09pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Interesting. So presumably, by the same logic, if Labour ran candidates in Northern Ireland, they’d clean up among the nationalist community?
I think it’s far more likely that the SNP’s large return at the last assembly election was due in no small part to public discontent with Labour and the Lib Dems. If you think the majority of Scots are content to hand their futures over to Alex Salmond, you are seriously deluded. Besides, I have yet to meet a Scottish person who would not quite happily refer to themselves as both British and Scottish – this rather warped view of Scotland that Irish people seem to have never fails to amuse.

Well as I said before certain people view the possibility of an independent Scotland as some sort of proxy Irish nationalism.

Kind of 'we could not rid this country of the Brits but if the Scots get rid of them it will do fine for now'.

serfboard · 06-07-2011 4:17pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Well as I said before certain people view the possibility of an independent Scotland as some sort of proxy Irish nationalism.

Kind of 'we could not rid this country of the Brits but if the Scots get rid of them it will do fine for now'.

I think there's also a hope that Scottish Independence might convince a million unionists that union with Ireland mightn't be the worst thing in the world.

I not sure that it would, though.

deise go deo · 06-07-2011 9:36pm

dlofnep wrote: »

There is no maybe about it. I have no ill will towards the English public, and I challenge anyone on here to prove otherwise and neither does the broader Republican movement.

As a republican myself I certainly have to say this is true. Even during the worst excesses of the tan war there were plenty of English people speaking out against what their government was doing to Ireland in their name.
The British establishment has been the problem, Not the English people.

deise go deo · 06-07-2011 9:40pm

LordSutch wrote: »

As a Unionist it might surprise you to learn that I don't care either way :eek: If Scotland votes to leave the Union then that's cool, and that's a lot more money in the kitty for everybody else in the UK, the English would be only too happy to finally get rid of those Scot's once and for all, and they could finally have a Parliament all to themselves in Westminster, without any Scottish influence, Yum yum . . . .

Its not surprising in the least to see that there are some Unionists that are not all that interested in Scotland, but i'm sure you will admit that some are, It would put those who Identify as 'Ulster Scot' in a somewhat awkward position. Who would they want Union with? A rump UK or an Independant Scotland?

Also, Where did you find the figures that show Scotland is a drain on the UK economy overall? I tried to find them but could not, Yet it is repeated so often it must be true, Right?

irishh_bob · 06-07-2011 9:59pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Interesting. So presumably, by the same logic, if Labour ran candidates in Northern Ireland, they’d clean up among the nationalist community?
I think it’s far more likely that the SNP’s large return at the last assembly election was due in no small part to public discontent with Labour and the Lib Dems. If you think the majority of Scots are content to hand their futures over to Alex Salmond, you are seriously deluded. Besides, I have yet to meet a Scottish person who would not quite happily refer to themselves as both British and Scottish – this rather warped view of Scotland that Irish people seem to have never fails to amuse.

+1 , for the most part , the only scotts who are big on independance are those of irish ancestry , they will never be a majority

ReReginald · 06-07-2011 11:44pm

Well all i can say on scottish independence is that beside all the serious political stuff id LOL if id did happen

dont think it will and theres too many arguements against it but if it did id have to laugh in the face of loyalist types. it would be very sweet in some ways.

ardmacha · 07-07-2011 1:15am

I have yet to meet a Scottish person who would not quite happily refer to themselves as both British and Scottish

I would hope so, otherwise they would be ignorant of geography.

+1 , for the most part , the only scotts who are big on independance are those of irish ancestry , they will never be a majority

This is not true. Indeed, those of Irish ancestry were suspicious of the project and until recently were staunch Labour supporters.

Exile 1798 · 07-07-2011 9:14am

irishh_bob wrote: »

+1 , for the most part , the only scotts who are big on independance are those of irish ancestry , they will never be a majority

As someone else mentioned this is not true.

Many of the founders of Scottish National Party were virulently anti-Irish. Even though that was a long time ago the legacy lived on for much longer and until relatively recently Scottish people of Irish background had almost no involvement in Scottish Nationalist politics. Instead they have traditionally supported the Labour Party, in many parts in the West of the country they comprised its backbone.

That's where creatures such as George Galloway and John Ried emerged. Like the Labour Party and many Irish-Scots of their generation they are both nominally Unionists on the question of Scottish independence.

Another example of this stance is what happened in 2007 before the Scottish Parliamentary elections. As things were looking dire for Labour, four members of Celtic's 1967 Lisbon Lions agreed to put their names to an open letter printed in the Scottish press urging voters to reject the SNP and protect the Union. In the end the letter had no discernible impact as the SNP trounced Labour in many of their traditional heartlands.

So the younger generation of Irish-Scots are different, but their support for an independent Scotland seems to be in proportion to every other group of young Scots. There is no evidence that they're outliers in anyway.

Batsy · 07-07-2011 2:43pm

serfboard wrote: »

As someone said earlier, the UK is looking more and more like a federal state - even though they'd never actually put it like that.

The UK can only become a federal state if it gives England its long overdue Parliament.

Batsy · 07-07-2011 2:52pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Also, Where did you find the figures that show Scotland is a drain on the UK economy overall? I tried to find them but could not, Yet it is repeated so often it must be true, Right?

The Government Expenditure and Review Scotland (GERS) calculates how much money is raised through taxes in Scotland and the level of public spending in Scotland.

GERS figures for the financial year 2008/09 showed that the UK Treasury spent about £54 billion on Scotland and only received £43.5 billion in revenue.

Treasury figures on total government expenditure on public services show that over the last decade the British Government has shelled out about £1000 a year more on the average Scottish person than the average English person.

Fratton Fred · 07-07-2011 3:24pm

deise go deo wrote: »

As a republican myself I certainly have to say this is true. Even during the worst excesses of the tan war there were plenty of English people speaking out against what their government was doing to Ireland in their name.
The British establishment has been the problem, Not the English people.

Would you support English independence?

deise go deo · 07-07-2011 4:37pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Would you support English independence?

From an English dominated Westminster? Seams a little pedantic if you ask me, but sher sure why not if the English want it.

rounding tattenham Corner · 07-07-2011 5:02pm

deise go deo wrote: »

From an English dominated Westminster? Seams a little pedantic if you ask me, but sher sure why not if the English want it.

English dominated!
neil kinnock, gordon brown, john smith, tony blair and many more, do a little research and don't let your prejudice make you so incorrect.

deise go deo · 07-07-2011 5:38pm

rounding tattenham Corner wrote: »

English dominated!
neil kinnock, gordon brown, john smith, tony blair and many more, do a little research and don't let your prejudice make you so incorrect.

How many MP's in Westminster are Elected in England? Is it more or less than Everywhere else in the UK combined?

Fratton Fred · 07-07-2011 5:51pm

deise go deo wrote: »

How many MP's in Westminster are Elected in England? Is it more or less than Everywhere else in the UK combined?

They represent their constituents in more or less the same proportions as Scottish, Norn Irish or Welsh MPs.

Except of course those MPs can vote on laws that may not affect them, like maybe blocking a vote on free NHS prescriptions, then nip home and pick up their free drugs from their local Boots.

The IRgAy · 07-07-2011 6:11pm

I would say this has absolutely nothing to do with the honourable members for Ireland; this is a United Kingdom matter and, quite frankly, none of your business!

LondonIrish90 · 07-07-2011 11:16pm

deise go deo wrote: »

How many MP's in Westminster are Elected in England? Is it more or less than Everywhere else in the UK combined?

Why on earth would Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireladn have the same amount of MPs as England? Bearing in mind the population of England is now around 52 million, compared to the Scottish population of roughly 5 million, Wales 3 million and Northern Ireland around 1 and a half million, it is very evident as to why England is represented by so many members in the House of Commons. Surely this is fairly easy to comprehend, unless you believe the English deserve less of a say in the running of the United Kingdom than any of the other constituent nations?

Exile 1798 · 08-07-2011 5:26am

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

Why on earth would Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireladn have the same amount of MPs as England? Bearing in mind the population of England is now around 52 million, compared to the Scottish population of roughly 5 million, Wales 3 million and Northern Ireland around 1 and a half million, it is very evident as to why England is represented by so many members in the House of Commons. Surely this is fairly easy to comprehend, unless you believe the English deserve less of a say in the running of the United Kingdom than any of the other constituent nations?

Drop the attitude.

Deise's point was clearly the classic complaint about the UK: It's woefully imbalanced. One of it's countries is many times bigger then the other three combined. England dominates the UK and it's Parliament for this reason. Nice of you to illustrate this by giving the figures.

Fratton Fred · 08-07-2011 8:53am

Exile 1798 wrote: »

Drop the attitude.

Deise's point was clearly the classic complaint about the UK: It's woefully imbalanced. One of it's countries is many times bigger then the other three combined. England dominates the UK and it's Parliament for this reason. Nice of you to illustrate this by giving the figures.

Dublin has more TDs than Roscommon, are the people of Roscommon hard done by?

deise go deo · 08-07-2011 5:25pm

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

Why on earth would Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireladn have the same amount of MPs as England? Bearing in mind the population of England is now around 52 million, compared to the Scottish population of roughly 5 million, Wales 3 million and Northern Ireland around 1 and a half million, it is very evident as to why England is represented by so many members in the House of Commons. Surely this is fairly easy to comprehend, unless you believe the English deserve less of a say in the running of the United Kingdom than any of the other constituent nations?

Nice dodge on the question.

I understand why England has more MP's than the rest combined. I was not asking why, Just pointing out that England does, thus making Westminster, by any standard, English dominated.

I dont recall claiming here or anywhere else that the English deserve less of a say in the running of the United Kingdom than any of the other constituent nations, so don't be putting words in my mouth like a good chap.

Iwasfrozen · 08-07-2011 5:27pm

deise go deo wrote: »

Nice dodge on the question.

I understand why England has more MP's than the rest combined. I was not asking why, Just pointing out that England does, thus making Westminster, by any standard, English dominated.

I dont recall claiming here or anywhere else that the English deserve less of a say in the running of the United Kingdom than any of the other constituent nations, so don't be putting words in my mouth like a good chap.

You may as well say the Dáil is Dublin or Leinster dominated.

djpbarry · 08-07-2011 5:47pm

deise go deo wrote: »

From an English dominated Westminster? Seams a little pedantic if you ask me...

I fail to see how it could be considered pedantic. By virtue of devolution, English MP’s are prevented from voting on certain issues affecting Scottish residents, for example. However, MP’s representing said Scottish residents can effectively vote on how those same issues affect both Scottish and English residents. It may therefore be argued that the electorate in England is effectively under-represented.

Fr Tod Umptious · 08-07-2011 11:05pm

djpbarry wrote: »

I fail to see how it could be considered pedantic. By virtue of devolution, English MP’s are prevented from voting on certain issues affecting Scottish residents, for example. However, MP’s representing said Scottish residents can effectively vote on how those same issues affect both Scottish and English residents. It may therefore be argued that the electorate in England is effectively under-represented.

Exactly
Which brings us back to The West Lothian Question

I really fail to see how anyone can argue that Scots are at some power disadvantage in the UK with the way they have their own parliament and can vote on matter that pertain to England, Wales and NI also.

Yahew · 08-07-2011 11:08pm

Batsy wrote: »

The Government Expenditure and Review Scotland (GERS) calculates how much money is raised through taxes in Scotland and the level of public spending in Scotland.

GERS figures for the financial year 2008/09 showed that the UK Treasury spent about £54 billion on Scotland and only received £43.5 billion in revenue.

Treasury figures on total government expenditure on public services show that over the last decade the British Government has shelled out about £1000 a year more on the average Scottish person than the average English person.

Generally these figures do not include the oil revenues.

Exile 1798 · 09-07-2011 10:04am

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Dublin has more TDs than Roscommon, are the people of Roscommon hard done by?

Pretending to be obtuse Fred? Not very edifying, if you have to pretend to be thick to make a point then the point isn't worth making

Scottish Independence

Comments