Seems some British Newspapers are trying to create civil strife between Scotland and England - and I mean Scotland and England this is not about Scotland and Wales or N.I This article in the Daily Mail published only in England - the Mail itself had to distance itself from by claiming it is 'what they fear many English think'. A paper publishing an article it claims to disagree with. Whatever next http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...ON-HEFFER-says-fear-English-people-think.html while the Scottish version of the paper comes from a different stance suggesting we are thought of as family. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rticle-Mail-warns-no-going-Yes-vote-wins.html Needless to say Simon Heffer is a Ukip supporter article-2637896/For-Essex-man-way-Ukip-says-SIMON-HEFFER-25-years-ago-coined-phrase-Essex-Man.html This is clearly an intent to incite hate and while I think the posters on this site who are trying to stir trouble in the debate are UKIP members and so to be expected, this is the kind of thinking which appears to be trying to move us out of the democratic process which we are currently in, into something which could be very unpleasant. This is not an isolated incidence http://wingsoverscotland.com/kicking-the-dog-until-it-bites/ There is clearly a hatred being spread about England which has nothing to do with what things are like in Scotland which is the exact opposite. There is even an English Scot's for Independence. This is a very dangerous thing to do especially along with all the last minute fear being presented every minute plus the bribe to Scotland which some people suggest would give Scotland more power than in most Federal States - though without the ability to have a say in foreign policy. Yesterday was interesting. John Prescott was clearly energised by his trip to Scotland although he suffered some strong booing and heckling. He said he didn't mind it at all because people were so passionate and he believed that the Scottish people had done something to really help England. Politics has become alive again in Scotland and that appeared to be what he liked. He felt Scotland had shifted the block that there had been on politics in the UK for quite some time and also believed that whether Scotland stayed in the UK or became Independent there would be big changes in England including considerable devolution. Now what he is talking about is what John Smith, at the time leader of the Opposition, deeply committed to democracy who saw during the Thatcher years democracy was being destroyed in the UK, envisaged. Unfortunately he died before he could take office and Tony Blair replaced him allowing this to take place in Scotland and Wales, he had promised before to implement Smith's wishes so could hardly refuse outright. However after that the opportunity was put to the North East in such a negative way - just adding more bureaucracy etc that they did what was wanted and refused and England has continued with precious little in the way of genuine democracy - something UKIP picked up on and exploited for their own ends. Many English progressives agree with Prescott that Scotland has opened up the political world in this country again - something which England can follow. It is not an England versus Scotland thing but very much a question of your politics - seems some want to hate and others see the possibility of a return to genuine democracy, taking power back from neo liberalism. Nick Clegg also was clearly energised and uplifted by his visit. Again he was saying how Scotland had achieved what the Liberals had been trying to achieve for a hundred years - home rule for them and it is true that before WW1 there was talk of devolution throughout the UK - not leaving England as just one voice. I believe that the leaders of the three main parties and Gordon Brown are honest in saying they are offering a time table for 'home rule' or devo max or whatnot to come into being. That is the carrot while all the sticks are regurgitated and even created - if an Independent Scotland does end up sharing the pound then her economy will have been hit by both the ever increasing crowd saying it will not happen and the EU member who declared that an Independent Scotland would not get into the EU if it had no currency union with rUK and not a high currency reserve. However even if the heads of the main parties are honest in their offers to Scotland, I doubt this will come about. First they all offer different things. Brown did not say which we would be getting. Secondly we are not an autocratic country. Three heads of Government cannot push something through Parliament and Westminster already has voices saying they do not approve. In addition a strong majority of English people have in a poll said rather that they would like Scotland to have her powers reduced or even removed rather than to get any more so for what it's worth I think Scotland would be safer to go for Independence. We hear the majority of the English are going to try and make Scotland's position hard whether she stays in the Union or not. In such a situation out is imo the better option. Very concerning seeing the inciters of hate working to create tension or worse between Scotland and England - of course being bigger does not always allow the bully to win though we have already seen on this site one poster wanting ethnic cleansing of Scottish people from England. English Nationalism has a very unpleasant past.
Oh, for goodness's sake. There's plenty of hatred being stirred up in Scotland for the "English". Just ignore it all and stick to the facts.
There is also lots of anti Scotland hate coming from England so lets not make England look Angelic. Both countries have their share of ignorant bigots and racists.
No they don't. Scots in England aren't bullied whereas the English are in Scotland I've known tons of Scots living here who have never once been harassed or had someone fight them just for having a different accent.
England, the country that has no racists or bigots. wow! I just saw a pig fly by my window. As I am a Scot who has indeed been verbally abused in England on 2 occasions I can say you are very wrong, but I don't judge the English by their few morons . I also know many English folks who have never suffered any abuse up here. In fact I married 2 of them( I was a young widow) and both love(d) living in Scotland, neither wishing to return to England. My neighbour is also English as is my best friend and they also are happy living here. ( My English friend is in fact canvassing for Independence because living here she knows why it has become necessary.) Mod edit,,flounder,,2
ProConsul. I have shown you exactly the same courtesy that you extended to me. If you would have respect, learn to give it and consider other people's opinions. The facts which I have presented are correct. That you cannot accept that is perfectly fine. No anti Scottishness in England!!! I nearly choked on my coffee when I read that.
Diamond Lil. I think she believes that Scotland could build a better country and that at least with independence Scotland would be run by the people Scotland put in power. Also, among other things, she likes the fact that we have free prescriptions and no road tolls. I have never gone into an indepth discussion with her but I might do yet. ( Lol. It certainly is'nt for the weather) My English, born and raised husband, feels that in general, Scotland could do better on it's own. For myself, I will gain nothing by independence as I am an old lady now but I hope I can leave my children's children a better, more balanced country than it has been for so many years. I hope I can see the removal of the WMD from our shores and I hope benefits and pensions might rise in line with much of Europe, Germany for example. My German daughter-in-law is amazed at the paltry pension in GB compared with in her country. I do not see anything as the fault of the English people, if that's what anyone thinks, in fact I think much of England is as hard done by as Scotland. I blame the successive Westminster governments for what is happening in Scotland today. The writing was on the wall but they could not heed it 60 years ago.
Really you insulted me and you haven't apologised for it. You've also written bigoted remarks which again you haven't apologised for. And you haven't an once of respect for other peoples view AT ALL. You told me about your bad eyesight at which point I said that I'd be as accommodating as possible. For someone amongst the senior generation you should know better. And yet everything you've said in this discussion leads me to conclude that you have to grown up. Name calling is nothing compared to the violence that has been applied to English people living Scotland something which is non-existent here. We have nothing further to discuss until you amend your ways
I think the independence of Scotland not only is a historical mistake but an economic disastrous for Scotland itself. How many centuries boht countries have been attached? Three, four centuries? Why break a historic union now? I'm not English not even British but I try to use intelligence. All nationalism is disgusting. Like It was said by an american was Swiss, a Swiss was German, and a German was Jew: Albert Einstein Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind
It isn't about Nationalism though Martin, it is about what has happened since the 1980's and realising that the only way we are going to change this is if we do it ourselves. Great article by Irvine Welsh of Trainspotting Fame puts it so well. http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/09/08/labour-pains-labour-of-love/ If you have time read that. It would be hard to put it better.
As a UKIP supporter (cue unrelated responses aimed at demeaning me) I personally would find it hypocritical to stand against Scotland voting for or against independence, being as I want the exact same right of vote to decide whether to leave the EU or not. If it truly is the "will of the people" to become an independent nation then so be it. I would hope that the Scottish people not only vote with their hearts but with their heads as well, for me there are to many if's and but's around the yes campaign, and for Alex Salmond to try and dismiss those things as "scaremongering" strikes me as nothing more than deflection.
Go away and try to grow up Proconsul. Disagreeing with you is not insulting you. Giving you some information which you don't want to hear is not insulting you. Come off your high horse You sound like you believe yourself to be someone of some great importance and would like everyone else to believe it. LoL No chance.
I already showed you where you did cast insults and other offensive remarks. You haven't substantiated you claims and no I did not take offence because we disagree; I take offence because of your juvenile behaviour. By rights I should have reported you to a moderator but I'm tolerant unlike yourself. I consider this dialogue with you to be at an end. I do not debate serious matters with children.
It will be interesting to see how the fear mongering affects things. Women in particular are very concerned about money and the yes vote started rising after people became more relaxed about the pound after the second Darling/Salmond debate. However, the No campaign have taken out their secret weapon - Gordon Brown who is strutting about stages with raw emotion scaring the hell out of people not to vote yes and offering the world to vote no. Gordon Brown may not be liked in England but he still has a good reputation here and whether it is true or not I have heard is the one person Salmond believes could beat him. Heck I am sure I heard Gordon Brown promising to stand for the Scottish Parliament if we would just stay in the Union. On Politics my guess is that 3/4 of the Scottish people would vote to leave but obviously that is not going to feed them. People have heard so much scaremongering on this campaign that in truth many have shut their ears to it.....and of course it is getting worse and worse. Prices may go up for transport costs we are told and we are told that they have not already though when I came up from Manchester five years ago and complained to my daughter about the high price of food, she said 'It's transport Mum, that's why our prices are higher'. Will people worry about that? Don't know but whether it will matter or not will in any case depend on how much money people have in their pockets and how much the prices rise and of course things that are too expensive will no longer be bought. We are fortunate in having a lot of home grown produce here. Banks are running off to England we are told and we will have thousands of people unemployed in this and lose money. Many of the banks are already in England and those that are thinking of moving have made it clear they are moving only on a 'door plate' level keeping the jobs here. There are also other financial services which may move some of their business to England and England may demand that they move more substantially to England. I think the report I read suggested that could result in about a loss of a third of the jobs so not so good. However there is a plus in this. Scotland will need a banking reserve. Now it has been reckoned that this must be at least a quarter of our GDP but could be as much as 100%. That clearly will be a lot of money £150b at 100% when we are only expecting to get £15b as our share from the BoE. If our banks go to England we will only need 25% of our GDP, so will have the benefit of an extra £114b roughly which will not be a bad thing to begin with. Then we have the Deutsch Bank coming out with it's warning's today but on questioning it admits that all it is saying is only maybes, wrongly comparing us to the Greece which has already been seen to be wrong comparison and on further investigation admits things are likely to be much easier if we have a currency union. Interestingly they had previously suggested we would do well pegging to the pound but this is scary times for financial institutions. I watched the Parliamentary programs on this and so was expecting a difficult transition period and then for us to do well. It is up to people to hold their nerve imo. Whether they do or do not will be whether the answer is yes or no.
I don't really have a problem with GB any more than I have with any other politician (inc NF), what I do find annoying is that the issues raised by the no campaign are valid issues to which AS hasn't really given valid answers and the answers he has given are fraught with other issues. Take the currency issue, when it was first said that rUK would not enter into a currency union with Scotland in the event of a yes vote AS basically said if you don't we won't pay our part of the debt .. one pales to think how that would be received by the rest of the world if it were to happen, what country would lend to Scotland with a track record of not paying their debts? I am a little wary of AS's assumptions on the economy of Scotland as it seems to be based on a heavy reliance on Oil revenue and on his insistence that the EU will accept Scotland without question, there has been no cast iron guarantee on that with even Juncker stating that "One does not become a member of the EU by sending a letter.", if the EU were to try and just accept Scotland "as is" then I can certainly see the likes of Spain, rUK and France voting against it and as it takes ALL member states to agree to a new entry into the union Scotland would fail. The Spanish are not going to give a yes vote while Catalan are fighting for independence. I really don't think the Scottish public have been given the full facts and most are going to vote with their hearts rather than their minds .. but .. I still think it will be a no vote, a very, very close vote but no just the same.
It isn't scaremongering to point out that Salmond is wrong when he claims rUK is bluffing when it says there will not be a currency union. It isn't scaremongering to point out that a deep recession for Scotland after a yes vote, is certain to happen. It isn't scaremongering to point out that Salmond's figures don't add up. Would you have preferred the rUK said nothing and allowed the people of Scotland to vote believing Salmond's wishful thinking was based on facts?
proConsul. Sigh......Do me no favours son, feel free to report me to the mods. You have turned this thread into a slanging match so this is my last post to you on here.
Lil, the people of Scotland would be well advised to listen to Salmond and not to the Bullington boys club which is Westminster at present, who were quite happy to treat the people of Scotland with contempt and used the oil money to benefit London. Not even England, just London and I don't understand why the English don't get riled at that. The Scots should not be fooled by all this last minute rash of promises because like all other past promises by Westminster, they won't be kept either. The lies and scaremongering tactics from the UK government have now degenerated into blackmail as they try to bully and bribe big businesses to vote no. Thankfully, not all businesses are so easily bought. It's almost like the Act of Union all over again as the UK government tries frantically to buy Scotlands votes.
Unfortunately neither side in the debate is exactly covering themselves with glory when it comes to presenting the people of Scotland with only open, honest and accurate information. There is scaremongering coming from both sides, too.
The SNP put it's desires in the white paper which tbh I did not read but heard a fair bit from from the news and my daughter who read a fair bit. In reality what happens will consist of many things, not least the aspirations of the Scottish people and finding decent people to implement them. Most things cannot be known. It has been possible however to get sufficient information from a variety of sources, Parliamentary special sessions where people were interrogated both in Scotland and in Westminster and a load of sites. However no one could say what is with certainty so you need to be prepared for a bit of risk in if you want change. I think that is the situation. This is what you may get but it is risky or this is what you may get without risk but it lacks a great deal of choice and possibilities. I think that is what people need to consider. Now to see the risks and possibilities people can either rely on what those they support say - often a very risky thing to do but obviously how unfortunately we most often do in politics or one can also become as informed by one's own study as possible. It was good to see the 16-18's at the beginning say that is what they were going to do. At some time people have more or less come to a point of saturation and become pretty closed off to any further information. However now we see fear flying at us from all angels and unless people are able and do inquire into what is said they will not be able to adequately access it's legitimacy and possible consequences. Well of course this is all part of the propaganda. Today I heard that Scotland would be seen as Zimbabwe or North Korea if she did this - big scare factor because now I suspect many Scottish people do believe they are bound to get a currency union due to playing this card and believing that Salmond would play it if necessary. First people need to think whether it would be necessary. Personally I doubt it. Even the apparently unbiased information given by bankers to the Parliamentary committee thought that Better Together were bluffing. Say they aren't bluffing. It would be great because it would save us taking on a lot of debt and certainly not impossible to present it as being justified in this particular situation. Iceland remember refused to pay her debt and did not suffer too much from it. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012...it-right-everyone-else-is-doing-it-wrong.html Nothing is set in stone but I would think that a Westminster which wasn't wanting to be spiteful to Scotland would offer the currency union. It would then be up to Scotland to build up money so that she had sufficient for her reserve. I don't know if that is Salmond or those criticising him. Oil is of course not the only way we make money. We also have wiskey, tourism etc. We can basically use the oil revenue we have initially to keep ourselves together and possibly have a bit left over for investment. In the future we hope to be able to make a fair income from green energy. We also hope to become a strong manufacturing nation. Now also there is oil. We do not for sure know how much there is. Some people believe there may be massive reserves but they have not yet been found so for the next 25 years we will make some money from oil but we will also be investing heavily in green energy and in manufacturing and other things. If more oil is found we can build a fund like Norway has and so have a strong nest egg. It is only possible for anyone to research something and go by what they have been told. I watched three different sessions with different EU experts in the Scottish Parliamentary committee sessions and every one of them expected there to be no serious doubt about Scotland getting in although it may take a little time, regardless of what some other people had allowed to slip out of their mouths. Even the rebate that rUK gets would apparently be ours. The EU would see no point in changing that now so it would be up to us to get our share during Westminster negotiations. They did also say it was unlikely it would be repeated when it was next reviewed. Now this is exactly what the SNP said though the timing could not be guaranteed. Other people are coming in saying it is not so because they do not want other areas of Europe to go for Independence. Can we say as an absolute definite probably no but the Scottish MP's were told that it was an absolute definite. The momentum is changing to No. One poll had them 8 votes ahead today. They are saying they think now women will decide it. They are the people who change to no if they believe it will hurt their purse too much. If it is a very close no, it will probably cause almost, not the same but almost the same amount of turmoil as a yes...or so they say
What utter nonsense. Let's see some actual evidence. There's no need to listen to Cameron, if you're that prejudiced, but there's no excuse for not listening to the experts. I'm flabbergasted. I've heard a lot of tosh from nationalists of all colours, but that beats the band.
There is no scaremongering coming from Westminster. It would be wrong to allow the people of Scotland to believe Salmond's fabrications.
Not exactly, Alexa. It's just Iceland didn't bail out its banks. Unlike other nations, including the U.S. and Ireland, which injected billions of dollars of capital into their financial institutions to keep them afloat, Iceland placed its biggest lenders in receivership. It chose not to protect creditors of the country’s banks, whose assets had ballooned to $209 billion, 11 times gross domestic product. “Iceland did the right thing … creditors, not the taxpayers, shouldered the losses of banks,” says Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, an economics professor at Columbia University in New York. “Ireland’s done all the wrong things, on the other hand. That’s probably the worst model.” Ireland guaranteed all the liabilities of its banks when they ran into trouble and has been injecting capital — 46 billion euros ($64 billion) so far — to prop them up. That brought the country to the brink of ruin, forcing it to accept a rescue package from the European Union in December. Wow...would have that worked for the UK, or is true they were too big to fail? Let's leave that for another discussion. The point is, the situation is not the same. Iceland did not renege on its debts. It's not being spiteful, but protecting the interests of rUK. I've a feeling they're right. Funnily enough when a BBC reporter asked Scottish towns people out shopping, whether they would vote yes if it meant they'd be £500 a year better off, the only one to answer no was a woman. She said she didn't believe a word any politician said.
