Scottish Independence discussion area

I think it will be a close call, but I do think Scotland will remain in the Union.

I do think Scotland will choose Independence someday and I do think Scotland could be economically viable. But there's too much doubt in the current economy and most people will vote safe.:)

darkpagandeath wrote: »

What's the EU said on their end I assume If they vote for independence they will not be automatically invited to the EU and many many targets and such like will be needed to be met if joining is even an option. Same with the currency has it not already been said the pound is not an option. Wont the EU be making it really difficult to join as they Don’t want EU countries splitting up.

When Ireland achieved Independence, we had arrangements made to use the British pound for an interim period until a new currency was established. Scotland could certainly make arrangements, but Westminster won't consider it until the vote is actually passed. Any doubt is a yes vote for the Union.

I think the yes vote is gaining a lot of ground,the pro union crowd can only promise more of the same, and a lot of scots are left leaning and hate the tories, the uk goverement has said that they can not continue to use the pound if they leave(currency union) but the snp says all this can be settled after independence.

After I moved to Scotland I was pleasantly surprised to see that Irish people get a vote.

I've tried to keep an open mind but I keep coming back to Yes. The Tory government has presided over an explosion of poverty, opening of food banks, and a widening wealth gap and are doing nothing to tackle it. Scots have always been far more socially minded than their southern neighbours (historically Labour have been very strong, and the SNP espouses similar principles to old Labour) and I think the opportunity to have a government that leans that way appeals to them.

I have tried to give Better Together the benefit of the doubt but they are clueless how to sell the union positively. As the three main parties are involved they all have differing views on how the union should be run and haven't offered any unified vision for a post indyref still-in-the-union Scotland. This has resulted in their policies being, at best, vague. Two of my close friends are unionists and when quizzed on "why are we Better Together?" their responses have boiled down to "Because we ARE Better Together!" without saying why.

Yes canvassers on the other hand tend to be quite persuasive (the idea that the Yes front is anti-English is ludicrous though as with all things some lunatics exist) and can give calm, rational explanations of why Scotland will be a stronger separate nation. Alex Salmond is also very charismatic and is playing shrewd tactics (reaching out to women voters - less likely to vote Yes - by promoting women into his cabinet, for example), something that will enhance its chances.

The whole thing about the EU - Barroso is trying to appease the Spanish who are sh1tting themselves that Catalonia will follow Scotland's example and leave; quite a few EU theorists and legal experts have come out and said things to the effect that Scotland would have an expedited rejoining process, if forced out at all before the 2016 independence day. Scots are currently EU citizens and to strip them of that right would cause a lot of legal heartache for the EU.

The Bank of England - which is meant to be independent from the British government - have quietly mentioned that a deal could be done for a currency union. This caused serious embarrassment for the Tories who a few weeks previous had screeched about how Scotland wouldn't keep the pound.

awec wrote: »

The Bank of England said Scotland would have to cede some national sovereignty for a currency deal to work.

That seems totally counter intuitive to the idea of independence. :pac:

Just one of those things I don't get. The SNP want independence, but not on currency. Or maybe partly on currency, they haven't really specified from what I can see.

Just as we did when we joined the euro, I agree. However at present what the Yes side are angling for is similar to the old Dominion status in the British empire, plus external relations powers.

Some have accused Yes Scotland of wanting to have their independence cake and eat it while retaining the pound and the Queen, but then that leaves aside the fact that they're planning to establish a Scottish Defence Force and remove the Trident missiles (which, all told, contribute 15,000 jobs directly and indirectly, so that's a big one), this would be a tremendous break from the UK.

discus wrote: »

Living in semi rural scotland here at the minute. The NO voters seem to be keeping their heads down at the minute, while the YES voters are all over social and local media. People here seem to be very irrationally emotive about it. Most people point to thr tories and Cameron as the reason to split. They don't realise that the financial nexus that is london city is what gives the currency (and the union) the power and status in international relations.

I expect they WILL get independance, and when the trident missiles, royal navy bases, royal marine bases, british army bases and shio building industries move down south, the scottish will realise where they now lie in the scheme of things. A population with growing public health problems, a huge social welfare bill and a currency that will either be stillborn or suffer hugely for the next few years.

They may even learn Irelands lesson, that the same people will still lead them.... someone has to collect the taxes and meet budget constraints. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss!

The most honest no voter I've met said "yes, we are unashamedly sponging off London, and I'm voting no because I want to continue basking in its reflected glory."

Better question perhaps is not should Scotland be independent, but should London decide to go it alone as Europe's Singapore?

Under glorious President for Life Boris Johnson, of course.