Will you vote for independence?

[butchersapron]

It wasn't last year, it wasMarch/ April when the UK Government ruled out shared currency and Salmond raised the spectre of walking away from the debt. I said to look at the gilt markets, and the effect on the UK's ability to borrow. After all, Salmond was snearing that the markets would force the Treasury into accepting the Scottish position. UK has managed to borrow billions more having given this explicit promise to the markets that it won't cave in. No shortage of takers and at the same rates as before. Done deals. If it had gone the other way, Treasury would have blinked by now. As it is the Treasury knows part of its credibility depends on keeping a man prepared to threaten walking away from debt out of the MPC.


As to having a vote in a few decades. Game changes within ten.

You actually posted this in feb and said it would play out within one week. Either way, your prediction that it would simply be game over and the market would snap its fingers and decide has been shown to be a wee bit OTT.

 

[DairyQueen]

gosub

Salmond has never threatened to walk away from the debt. I doubt even an SNP MSP raised it. It would be impossible. In the event of the Yes, Westminster will probably find it has made a horrific mistake with regards to currency (that could cost Balls or Osbourne their job). If Scotland walks away from sterling, it will be England's fault. Nothing to do with debt obligations, everything to do with a poorly thought through policy that is not in the interests of England (but probably in the interests of Scotland).

 

[gosub]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...nd-as-scottish-campaign-pauses-for-games.html, he was even talking about in FMQ's when this first came out. Trying to spin tht walking away from debt obligations was 3k in the bank for everyone in Scotland. It isn't

 

[DairyQueen]

What did he actually say?

“People of Scotland know full well we’ll keep sterling because it’s in the best interests of Scotland and the best interests of the rest of the United Kingdom,” Salmond said in the interview. “We’re very happy to take a share of the liabilities but of course we’re equally entitled to a proper share of the assets.”

EDIT: What that means... Scotland is entitled to its share of the UK's asset base if it also mandated to take on its share of liabilities. Read between the lines.

 

[weepiper]

Not sure where else to put this as it's not exactly about independence as such but relevant-ish I think

http://www.petertatchellfoundation.org/commonwealth/commonwealth-games-alex-salmond-speaks-out-again

"Whatever people think about Alex Salmond and the push for Scottish independence, his statement and actions are the most forthright and supportive on LGBTI equality by any leader of any host nation during a major international sporting event.

"No other leader of a Commonwealth or Olympic Games host nation has ever said or done anything so positive. Neither David Cameron nor Boris Johnson did anything similar during the London 2012 Olympics. To fly the rainbow flag from government headquarters for the duration of the Games is unprecedented. It sends a message of solidarity to LGBTI people throughout the Commonwealth. This is a unique, unprecedented initiative for which Alex Salmond and the Scottish government deserve full credit and praise."

 

[weepiper]

On polls:

 

[74drew]

On polls:

This is how telephone polls work. I worked for MORI in Edinburgh for 3 years. You don't collect data, you produce it. We used to do surveys NHS trusts in England, elicit lots of negative attitudes towards existing services first before offering contracted out lollipops at the end. Present as the voice of the people, jobs a good 'un.

 

[Quartz]

This is how telephone polls work. I worked for MORI in Edinburgh for 3 years. You don't collect data, you produce it. We used to do surveys NHS trusts in England, elicit lots of negative attitudes towards existing services first before offering contracted out lollipops at the end. Present as the voice of the people, jobs a good 'un.

Anyone who's watched Yes, Minister knows this. (There's a scene where Sir Humphrey demonstrates this to Bernard.)

 

[danny la rouge]

What do those polls say? I'm in Ireland data roaming, and they don't show up on my phone.

Any interesting news?

 

[geminisnake]

Basically leading questions to get the answer they want danny.

 

[danny la rouge]

Cheers.

 

[Frankie Jack]

This basically. All they care about is their own careers.

 

[Poi E]

Ahh, it's a fight. Guess Labour know a bit about that.

 

[redsquirrel]

What do those polls say? I'm in Ireland data roaming, and they don't show up on my phone.

Any interesting news?

There's not been any results from any Mori poll that I know of. Panelbases latest (27th July) has Yes 41%, No 48% (excluding DKs Yes 46%).

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

It won't be 'once and for all' will it? A No vote won't destroy the Indy movement

The Quebec separatism referendum in 1980 returned a 'no' result... leading to another referendum in 1995: also a 'no', but by a narrower margin. I expect there will be another vote within my lifetime.

 

[weepiper]

People have been made to remove Yes badges at Glasgow Green and a woman was booted out of the swimming for waving a Yes saltire because the organisers don't want any political causes represented at the Games. The Red Arrows flying union jack colours over Celtic Park and God Save The Queen being sung at the opening ceremony is of course totally different.

 

[DotCommunist]

why are Slab going No? Do they fear complete party death should they be seperated from englandish labour?

 

[weepiper]

why are Slab going No? Do they fear complete party death should they be seperated from englandish labour?

It's largely only parliamentary SLab that is. A lot of traditional Labour supporters are saying they'll vote Yes. Some of the trade unionists are coming out for Yes. There's also Labour for Indy

 

[two sheds]

View attachment 58778

See, it's all just negative campaigning - no, no, no, no, no, no, NO.

No is an unconstructive, pessimistic and depressing word. Campaigning should be positive and use positive constructive and hopeful words like yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, YES.

 

[Frankie Jack]

why are Slab going No? Do they fear complete party death should they be seperated from englandish labour?

Probably. Possibly the thought of having Lamentable and her sad sacks as a potential government here too. *shudders*

 

[DairyQueen]

See, it's all just negative campaigning - no, no, no, no, no, no, NO.

No is an unconstructive, pessimistic and depressing word. Campaigning should be positive and use positive constructive and hopeful words like yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, YES.

The main problem is that the three establishment parties clearly have no vision for Britain apart from the status quo. Even the Liberal Democrats have totally failed to present some alternative vision of Scotland. Charmichael has come out and said Westminster should start having their own political programme in Scotland, Brown wants to scrap the Scottish education system.

All I get from Better Together is this idea that Britain is perfect, should not change and will never change. They view the problem as one of indoctrination.

 

[DairyQueen]

why are Slab going No? Do they fear complete party death should they be seperated from englandish labour?

Far from it. Scottish Labour don't exist as an independent political force. They have never really had a policy programme in Scotland (I don't think they even ran their own Scottish Parliament election campaigns), propose changes to the parliament that will keep it that way and have a patronage system in Westminster that keeps the grandee-types in plush London offices well past their political careers.

The same goes for Labour, Liberal Democrats and Tories. The Tories, in particular, would benefit hugely from completely detaching themselves from the Scottish Conservatives, and letting them do what they want in Scotland. There is a growing feeling in Westminster that they need to crush any kind of Scottish nationalism/identity no matter how benign.

 

[DotCommunist]

well we can see some of that in the tough talk about 'putting the scottish indy question to bed for a generation' etc.

 

[DairyQueen]

The main problem is the Scottish MPs/functionaries in Westminster. Some of them are literally crazy.

 

[two sheds]

One thing I've never quite understood is the West Lothian question. Correct me if I'm wrong but it's asked by English MPs as to why Scots MPs should be vote on matters that affect Scotland. But English MPs have always happily seemed to vote on matters that affect Scotland. Am I missing something here?


Polite answers on a postcard please.

 

[Quartz]

One thing I've never quite understood is the West Lothian question. Correct me if I'm wrong but it's asked by English MPs as to why Scots MPs should be vote on matters that affect Scotland. But English MPs have always happily seemed to vote on matters that affect Scotland. Am I missing something here?

That's not it at all; the current situation is actually the reverse in that Scottish MPs vote of English matters but English MPs don't vote on Scottish matters.

Here's Wiki's take on The West Lothian Question.

 

[DairyQueen]

Quartz is right. West Lothian Question is about the democratic deficit in England for devolved issues, and is primarily a Labour issue. A few votes have passed on the basis of Scottish MPs voting it through but there was not a majority of English and Welsh MPs voting on it. This affects health, education, policing, and a few other issues. It is a pretty serious problem, as it stands there is a bloc of Scottish MPs that only really represent party interests in these votes.

I think the SNP abstain on English-only issues.

 

[two sheds]

Sorry I meant to say "asked by English MPs as to why Scots MPs should vote on matters that affect England. But English MPs have always happily seemed to vote on matters that affect Scotland. "

Ok ta Quartz and DQ,so it's voting on purely English affairs? I was thinking that English MPs vote enough on matters that involve the whole of the UK, so involving Scotland.

But in the Wiki article Dalyell seems to be saying that Scots MPs can vote on English matters but not on Scottish matters - or if he's giving an example of the opposite situation that English MPs can vote on Scottish matters but not on English matters - which confuses me even more (last paragraph of quote below):

On 14 November 1977 Tam Dalyell, Labour MP for the Scottish constituency of West Lothian, asked during a British House of Commons debate over Scottish and Welsh devolution:

For how long will English constituencies and English Honourable members tolerate ... at least 119 Honourable Members from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland exercising an important, and probably often decisive, effect on English politics while they themselves have no say in the same matters in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?

He illustrated his point by pointing out the absurdity of a member of parliament for West Lothian being able to vote on matters affecting the English town of Blackburn, Lancashire, but not Blackburn, West Lothian, in his own constituency.

 

[DairyQueen]

Right, I get it. Yes, no MP technically votes on devolved issues. So in that example, you're right, the Scottish MP cannot vote on issues affecting his own constituency, because they are dealt with by the Scottish Parliament.

 

[DownwardDog]

What's the ccTLD going to be? Seychelles have .sc and Jordan have .jo.