Will you vote for independence?

[geminisnake]

WTF are George and Nigel doing there? Neither have MSPs. Nigel doesn't even have MPs. The Greens have been ignored yet again despite having MSPs. No interest in watching it at all.

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

Innit. Judging from twitter, the Greens and the Electoral Reform folks are putting in formal complaints to the BBC. Apparently Farage has been on 14 times and the Greens only once in the past ten years.

 

[DexterTCN]

Missed it...was watching Continuum

 

[DexterTCN]

A relative posted on facebook a pic of Gavin Hastings supporting the Empire Union.

I pointed out he'd forgotten to put the O.B.E in his name. I asked her what O.B.E meant. No reply as yet.

 

[ChocolateTeapot]

Well, apparently BBC Scotland correspondent James Cook thought the inclusion of Farage was "fun".

If we are lucky, we might get Jeremy Clarkson on the next time around - just about as appropriate and always guaranteed to say something a bit out there and "fun".

 

[gosub]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2013/jun/14/bbc-question-time

 

[Quartz]

Guido Fawkes is noting that there have been precious few scientists on QT.

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

Guido Fawkes is noting that there have been precious few scientists on QT.

Guido is just linking to the same piece as the post immediately before yours

 

[Quartz]

Guido is just linking to the same piece as the post immediately before yours

Then clearly it's a good point that bears repeating.

 

[ska invita]

Don't think this has been posted - GG making the case against independence. Any thoughts?

 

[Quartz]

I love listening to GG. Not sure if he's correct about the splitting up of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, mind.

 

[ska invita]

I love listening to GG. Not sure if he's correct about the splitting up of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, mind.

i found that interesting too. Without getting into it too much on Sunday morning my way of squashing together anarchist and socialist politics leads to a conclusion that the greatest possibility of achieving direct democracy is through more devolution and self determination, and that a practical way of defusing much of the negative power of a state is to make it into as small a unit as possible...it's been a while since ive heard someone make the case for a big state for its ability to unite people across ethnic identities and so on. I'm sticking with my small state thing though.

GGs case is
-its not really independent as the queen remains head of state <annoying but hopefully we'll all be rid of the royals before too long. that day will come
- its not independent as Scotland remains tied to the english pound and the decisions made by the Bank of England, and if it had courage it would go for the euro, which would be disastrous. <To me thats just teething problems. Independence is part of a process, and Scotland is tied to Sterling now so whats the difference. If UK economy collapses it could jump ship to the euro which might recover better. An independent future has many options.
-The bit about Scotland forced into a race to the bottom with a perpetual-Tory government in England is far from certain, though not impossible.

He is being pragmatic though I think, and is defending Scotlands best interests - I think he is saying that Scotland is getting quite a good deal out of the current set-up, and able to enjoy a better welfare state than England (uni fees, prescriptions, etc), and this would be threatened, or at least put at risk. He might be right there, there are a lot of unknowns involved.

For me Scottish independence is a dose of bad medicine for what is now the UK, and is one of the few ways we (I say we, its you, i cant vote in the referendum) can break up the old hierarchies and systems. breaking eggs to make an omelet. And in the long term it will be for the best.

 

[Quartz]

I forgot that bit: Queen as HoS is irrelevant - q.v. Canada, New Zealand, etc. He's right about the Pound and the Euro, but ignores that Scotland could have its own currency. We could go back to Groats.

I agree that he's being pragmatic but think he's defending Scotland's best interests as he sees them. This is all part of the debate and all to the good, and as someone who has yet to make up his mind, I very much want to hear all views.

 

[ska invita]

Also, like you i like to hear George talking (not at all keen on hearing Max Keiser talk though)

 

[Quartz]

BBC Scotland recently held another debate in Glasgow on independence. I applied and my question would have been along the lines of, "My family have returned to Scotland after nearly a century. I am concerned that politicians on both sides are only looking to the short term and not to the long term of 50 and 100 years ahead. Would the panel comment on this aspect of the debate?"

The first sentence is necessary as I have a very English accent and do not want the question dismissed lightly because of the questioner.

I'm hoping they have a debate in Aberdeen sometime soon.

 

[ska invita]

I think long-term its definitely the right thing to do (for some of the reasons i mentioned), but in the short-term it might be a rocky road. Or maybe it wont be so rocky <i dont know enough about the economic plans and situation to comment. There must be a strong vision of how to make the transition work economically - though GGs point that the SNP don't really want independence was an interesting one (though again im not convinced by it).

 

[danny la rouge]

GG said: “There would be a race to the bottom for working people, because without 71 anti-Conservative MPs coming from Scotland there would be perpetually right-wing Conservative government in England”.

He’s wrong about that for a number of reasons, all of them already aired several times on this thread.

1. There are not 71 anti-Conservative MPs returned by Scotland; 11 of that number are Lib Dems, who are in Coalition with the Conservatives. Those 11 seats are helping keep Cameron in number 10.
2. In ’97, the Labour government had a majority of 179. Had there been no Scottish MPs, that would still have been a majority of 139. The 2001 Labour government had a majority of 167. Without Scottish MPs, that would still have been a majority of 129. The 2005 Labour government had a majority of 66. Without Scottish MPs, there would still have been a majority of 43. England would not have been deprived of any of the Blair or Brown Labour governments by the absence of Scottish MPs.
3. Nor would they have been deprived of the 1945 Labour Government, the 1950 Labour Government, the 1964 Labour Government, nor the first Wilson victory in 74.
4. There would have been a hung parliament in the second 74 election, but that was a marginal victory anyway, and resulted in the Lib-Lab pact.
5. The idea of a perpetual Tory government without Scottish votes is a myth.
6. I’d argue the Labour governments have been “right wing” anyway. Callaghan was the first monetarist PM the UK had, and arguably the only one it had.
7. In the next Westminster election, there will only be 52 Scottish constituencies. Not 72, as at present. So GG’s (inaccurate) 71 "anti-Conservatives" are irrelevant to the future situation.

 

[weepiper]

He’s wrong

fixed that for you

 

[geminisnake]

Sorry, as much as I think Keiser is ace I think GG is such a prick I'm not prepared to even look at that video.
The man is a fecking loon who doesn't even fecking live here anymore afaik. He's just a self obsessed attention whore. WHO IS FULL OF SHITE!!!!

As danny says there have been links to the same info over and over again in this thread.
Do we have to paint it in BIG CAPITALS so people can understand it??

 

[geminisnake]

danny la rouge, have you seen this yet? And anyone else who might be interested.
http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/where-does-scotlands-wealth-go/

 

[danny la rouge]

danny la rouge, have you seen this yet? And anyone else who might be interested.
http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/where-does-scotlands-wealth-go/

No, hadn't seen that. I'm not surprised - of course the rest of the UK subsidises London; that's what provinces are for.

 

[danny la rouge]

I love listening to GG. Not sure if he's correct about the splitting up of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, mind.

There's no useful comparison to be had there.

In 1992, when the Czech Republich and Slovakia split, both countries were emerging from 47 years of Soviet Communism. Prior to that, Czechoslovakia had been part of the Third Reich for nearly 6 years, and prior to that had only existed as a country since 1918, some 21 years earlier. It had therefore had very little experience of democracy in its short existence.

Neither the Czech Republic nor Slovakia sought recognition as the successor state to Czechoslovakia. The question remains whether Scotland or England will seek recognition as the successor state (in the unlikely event of a Yes vote).

There were, at the time of dissolution, 10.3 million people in the Czech Republic, whereas Slovakia had 5.2 million. Roughly 2:1. Here, the population of England is 53.5 million while Scotland has 5,313,600. Roughly 10:1.

Neither Slovakia nor the Czech Republic was a member of the EU prior to dissolution. Slovakia qualified for euro currency membership before the Czech Republic. (In 2013, the Economist Intelligence Unit forecasts that Slovakia's GDP will grow by 2.1% - three and a half times faster than the Czech republic).

Slovakia upon dissolution was far more ethnically diverse than the Czech Republic; 10% of Slovakia's population were Hungarian, and there were up to 1/2 million Roma.

Nor does the economy or industry of the former Czechoslovakia or the two successor states compare with the UK, or England and Scotland.

I fail to see what lessons could be learned, other than very broad ones. George says he doesn't like countries to split up, in his heart of hearts. He and I differ on that. He is entitled to his heartfelt Unionism, but his choice of comparisons is not in the least bit apposite.

 

[TheHoodedClaw]

7. In the next Westminster election, there will only be 52 Scottish constituencies. Not 72, as at present. So GG’s (inaccurate) 71 "anti-Conservatives" are irrelevant to the future situation.

Just a nitpick, but it's 59 at present.

 

[danny la rouge]

Just a nitpick, but it's 59 at present.

You are of course right. There are 59, and have been since the 2005 elections. The last time there were 72 was 2001.

In my haste I just took George at his word: the figure 71 + 1 Tory comes from George in the above video clip. It turns out that none of his facts is correct.

 

[geminisnake]

Another interesting article on business for Scotland
http://www.businessforscotland.co.u...or-backs-yes-vote-to-boost-scotlands-economy/


This is my favourite paragraph
The Tory No Campaign response also carried the usual scare-stories and the completely wrong statement that Scottish Business supports the Union – In fact, according to the latest independent survey, the majority of business is in favour of a YES vote and want a new partnership across the British Isles.

 

[gosub]

the only sights I can find that refer to that survey are SNP Yes releated, all 4 of them, can't even find on AXA's site. g̶o̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶b̶a̶c̶k̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶b̶e̶g̶i̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶l̶a̶s̶t̶ ̶m̶o̶n̶t̶h̶.̶ ̶I̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶m̶e̶a̶n̶t̶i̶m̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶S̶c̶o̶t̶t̶i̶s̶h̶ ̶C̶h̶a̶m̶b̶e̶r̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶C̶o̶m̶m̶e̶r̶c̶e̶ ̶h̶a̶s̶ ̶p̶u̶b̶l̶i̶s̶h̶e̶d̶ ̶a̶ ̶s̶u̶r̶v̶e̶y̶ ̶s̶o̶ ̶i̶t̶s̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶l̶a̶t̶e̶s̶t̶ ̶i̶n̶d̶e̶p̶e̶n̶d̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶s̶u̶r̶v̶e̶y̶ which has 60% of businesses reckon they haven't got enough info. That strikes me as more credible what with the Yes side not having published any detailed outlines yet.

edit that SCC is 25/6/13 so benefitof doubt though still cant find the AXA anywhere

 

[geminisnake]

Afaik people donated money so that a proper independent survey could be carried out, many of the people may also be yes supporters but the survey was done by an independent source.
At the end of the day afaic we can debate and speculate it all we like but the only accurate indicator is going to be the vote tally in September next year.

Just for the record the guy who actually commissioned the survey and runs Wings Over Scotland is a life long Lib Dem supporter

 

[gosub]

no it was definitely the AXA one :http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/sme-survey-on-scottish-independence-written-off-1.109265

 

[ska invita]

The future's so bright...

 

[danny la rouge]

Isobel Lindsay (she of the Constitutional Convention) has a letter in the Herald today:

ANDREW Marr has spent too long in the metropolitan bubble to understand what is actually happening in Scotland ("Marr warns of Anglophobia risks in referendum run-up", The Herald, August 17).

Supporters of independence in Scotland aren't hostile to English people but they do want to escape from a jingoistic, aggressive British state which acts for the privileged.

Scotland has shown in the areas already devolved that it makes significantly different choices from Westminster and that includes the Blair/Brown governments. On the ideological spectrum, our decisions have been solidly social democratic and socially liberal. The gulf keeps increasing to the extent that we are now different political societies. What drives independence supporters is certainly not anti-Englishness but the desire to extend Scotland's political values to the other areas of state power.

To try to compare the xenophobic, right-wing, racist Ukip to the outward-looking, egalitarian, civic independence movement supported by SNP, Greens, Socialists and many not involved in parties was a disgrace. Andrew Marr should apologise for equating them. He referred critically to the young people who demonstrated against Nigel Farage. I know some of them. It is ridiculous to suggest that they are anti-English; they are the same young leftists who organise anti-racist demonstrations. To tell Mr Farage to go home is fortunately a sentiment with which the great majority of people in Scotland agree.

There is nastiness in the referendum debate, but if Andrew Marr cares to do some homework and compares the material that has come over the past year from Better Together with that from Yes Scotland, he will see where the balance of nastiness has come from.

Isobel Lindsay

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comme...endence-is-certainly-not-anglophobia.21900985