If the Yes vote wins, then what happens with the 2015 GE, are all persons who voted or were registered to vote, disbarred from voting in the GE and are the Scottish Westminster constituencies still valid?
We have debated this before. According to the Scottish Government white paper (the same one that says we will be in the EU, have the £, have a currency union with LOLR, be able to charge English students etc etc) they will be elected as normal. Whether that will be the case or, if so, what voting rights they will have is not something the rUK has commented on yet.
What I cannot see is Miliband as PM based on the votes of MPs from what is soon going to be an independent country. That really would be absurd.
David - what happens to the Scottish-nationality MPs who are in English constituencies? Will they become "foreign" and if so what would their position be?
thanks
Resolving passports and nationality issues after a YES will be a nightmare. Right now a 'Scot' is anyone with a UK passport who lives in Scotland - those are the ones who will get to vote. What becomes of those with Scottish ancestry or birth but who live elsewhere is a bit murky. Maybe all 63 million of us will end up as dual nationals!
Where are the positive visions for the Union? Where are the No footsoldiers?
Good question - where is Scottish Labour and why are they too divided to campaign effectively?
I have no idea. It's depressing.
Heard of "Falkirk"?
Oh yes, it's a story of no importance.....
Oh God. Words fail me.
They certainly do on constructive suggestions for what Scottish Labour should do! Or what's your analysis of why Scottish Labour is so divided?
Don't be silly we will vote as normal given the UK will still be intact at that point. Will give some troughers a year to fill their boots, but unlikely that over 40 of them will be pig swilling Labour ones.
Let's take one example: given the tendency for tax changes to be announced up to a year in advance, why is it right that MPs for Scottish seats should vote on changes that will not come into force until after I-day?
Seems to me that the fairest solution is that Westminster passes a quick Act immediately after a Yes vote:
- acknowledging the referendum result - authorising ministers to enter into practical negotiations - replacing the Barnett formula witha fixed block grant for the next couple of years - immediately devolving (to extent practical) all Scottish-only matters to Holyrood and authorising UK ministers to use Crown Prerogative where necessary to give Holyrood decisions force of law - confirming the SMPs constituency and representative roles - suspending the right of SMPs to vote on non-devolved matters.
Even something like foreign affairs - given we are talking about 12months of overlap, there is no reason why SMPs should get to set the foreign policy of rUK. In practice, even if rUK went to war, I am sure that (a) plans could be developed that minimised the use of future Scottish assets and (b) Salmond would be unlikely to object during the separation negotiations if such assets (eg air bases) were necessary. No doubt, though, - and reasonably - he would want something in return
Why so complicated? Why not pass a bill before the end of September 2014 removing MPs from Scottish constituencies from the House of Commons?
The Scottish people will have voted to end the Westminster Union. They will have chosen to be represented by their MPs in Holyrood. The Holyrood Parliament will be the de facto ruling body of Scotland, even if the details take a year or so to be completed.
Everything is a lot simpler if the Scottish MPs are simply removed the day after a YES vote in the referendum.
Because otherwise (a) Westminster would still be writing Scottish law and (b) while Scotland remains part of the UK its voters have the right to be represented (eg access to ministers). In practice, power would shift to Holyrood. I do like Easterross's idea though of using the list MSPs as delegates though as that removes any doubt [may be they should be non-voting observers]
At independence would every current UK passport become an invalid travel document? I expect the passport office will need a practical plan on replacement of the entire nation's stock of passports. And the new Scotland will need a similar plan.
"People wishing to stand as an MP must be over 18 years of age, be a British citizen or citizen of a Commonwealth country or the Republic of Ireland"
From parliament.uk.
I suppose they would bolt on "Or Scotland."
Scotland is part of Britain and will remain so, it is the UK that will cease to exist, British Isles will still remain.
No quite so.
You are confusing the nation that is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland that presently by various Acts of Union includes Scotland and the geographic Britain and British Isles that also includes the Republic of Ireland.
An independent Scotland would no longer be a member of the first but would be of the second and third.
The remaining elements of the UK may still wish to be called UK as the nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland or The United Kingdom of England Wales and Northern Ireland. The former is more likely as Great Britain is a political construct rather than a geographic one.
Jack , I may be losing my mind but I thought I said that th eonly thing that changed was the UK, so all you have done is elaborate more fully on my answer. Or am I confused.
According to the PDF and the image the fieldwork was carried out between 28th January and 6th February, which would be before David Cameron's "love bombing" speech, George Osborne's ruling out of a currency union and Alex Salmond's "rebuttal" of it.
Unless I am missing something?
Sorry I didn't read your article properly. Two polls.
HERE is what I predicted, in reaction to theOsborne intervention. I made this prediction three days ago.
Which, given your hilarious and unstable track record on predictions, is about the usual time it takes you to completely change your mind. Shall we dig down and find out what you were saying at the time of your OsborneGasm a week ago? That could prove most illuminating. Almost as revealing as what that funny little poster Gildas was saying when he too suddenly found himself obsessed with scottish matters for some strange reason.
Stuart_Dickson You are quite right. RD's statement is bad news for Unionists. I despair of the failure of the Scottish Conservatives to follow the German-Bavarian CSU example and come out from under London control: without a revival of Scottish Conservatism even if "No" carry it this autumn, the Union will remain at risk and must ultimately be lost.
Ruth Davidson's election as "Leader" (ahem) of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party was one of the biggest Unionist foot-shooting exercises in the last ten years. And it was all the work of David Cameron. God bless his rosy wee cheeks.
Davidson, Rennie and Lamont are the invisible trio of the IndyRef campaign. And there is a reason their minders have kept them out of the spotlights.
Are there any Scottish Conservatives that are pro-independence? I would have thought there would be.
If the Yes vote wins, then what happens with the 2015 GE, are all persons who voted or were registered to vote, disbarred from voting in the GE and are the Scottish Westminster constituencies still valid?
We have debated this before. According to the Scottish Government white paper (the same one that says we will be in the EU, have the £, have a currency union with LOLR, be able to charge English students etc etc) they will be elected as normal. Whether that will be the case or, if so, what voting rights they will have is not something the rUK has commented on yet.
What I cannot see is Miliband as PM based on the votes of MPs from what is soon going to be an independent country. That really would be absurd.
David - what happens to the Scottish-nationality MPs who are in English constituencies? Will they become "foreign" and if so what would their position be?
thanks
Resolving passports and nationality issues after a YES will be a nightmare. Right now a 'Scot' is anyone with a UK passport who lives in Scotland - those are the ones who will get to vote. What becomes of those with Scottish ancestry or birth but who live elsewhere is a bit murky. Maybe all 63 million of us will end up as dual nationals!
Where are the positive visions for the Union? Where are the No footsoldiers?
Good question - where is Scottish Labour and why are they too divided to campaign effectively?
It's sad when your opponents start playing the blame game 7 months before the event.
Who am I kidding, it's BRILLIANT!
Surely the low point was when Michael HowardJim Sillars former leader of the Conservative Party SNP denounced George Osborne'sAlex Salmond's currency plan as "stupidity on stilts"?
Hey, I won a bet with myself on what precisely your response would be!
Congratulations! It will make up for your bet with SeanT!
Now, I've got to run away to teacher to complain about being bullied......
Mr. Eagles, Scotland knew what they were getting with Robinson after his less than glorious reign at Twickenham. Bloody odd decision to hire him.
From the BBC F1 livefeed: "After doing just eight laps on the first day of public testing of the new E22, the Franco-Swiss admitted the team would not even try to find the best handling balance before the first race. 'I don't really care about set-up work,' Grosjean said. 'That's going to be when we are in free practice (in Melbourne). It's just about fixing all the issues and making sure the car is in one piece when we do long runs.'""
Yes it was odd, it would have been like the Romans appointed a Carthiginian as head of their army after the second Punic War.
Why would anyone want a serial loser in charge.
I'm sure the Glazers may be able to provide an answer..
I keep on having nightmares, as a Liverpool fan, we finish fourth this season, and Moyes leads Man U to the Champs League, and thus we end up in the Europa league.
I keep on having nightmares, as a Scottish rugby fan, that we finish sixth this season and with the wooden spoon in the Six Nations and San Marino replace us !!
Have faith Jack , we will beat Italy.
Hhhhmmmm
In my heart it's a fifty point away win in the Stadio Flaminio but ....
From a betting point 4/6 on Italy looks the option to take and in the final analysis I'm very hard nosed about my wagers.
Don't be silly we will vote as normal given the UK will still be intact at that point. Will give some troughers a year to fill their boots, but unlikely that over 40 of them will be pig swilling Labour ones.
Let's take one example: given the tendency for tax changes to be announced up to a year in advance, why is it right that MPs for Scottish seats should vote on changes that will not come into force until after I-day?
Seems to me that the fairest solution is that Westminster passes a quick Act immediately after a Yes vote:
- acknowledging the referendum result - authorising ministers to enter into practical negotiations - replacing the Barnett formula witha fixed block grant for the next couple of years - immediately devolving (to extent practical) all Scottish-only matters to Holyrood and authorising UK ministers to use Crown Prerogative where necessary to give Holyrood decisions force of law - confirming the SMPs constituency and representative roles - suspending the right of SMPs to vote on non-devolved matters.
Even something like foreign affairs - given we are talking about 12months of overlap, there is no reason why SMPs should get to set the foreign policy of rUK. In practice, even if rUK went to war, I am sure that (a) plans could be developed that minimised the use of future Scottish assets and (b) Salmond would be unlikely to object during the separation negotiations if such assets (eg air bases) were necessary. No doubt, though, - and reasonably - he would want something in return
Why so complicated? Why not pass a bill before the end of September 2014 removing MPs from Scottish constituencies from the House of Commons?
The Scottish people will have voted to end the Westminster Union. They will have chosen to be represented by their MPs in Holyrood. The Holyrood Parliament will be the de facto ruling body of Scotland, even if the details take a year or so to be completed.
Everything is a lot simpler if the Scottish MPs are simply removed the day after a YES vote in the referendum.
Because otherwise (a) Westminster would still be writing Scottish law and (b) while Scotland remains part of the UK its voters have the right to be represented (eg access to ministers). In practice, power would shift to Holyrood. I do like Easterross's idea though of using the list MSPs as delegates though as that removes any doubt [may be they should be non-voting observers]
Another alternative would be to advance Independence Day to coincide with the GE. Since some things (like EU membership) are going to take years to sort out, the SNP's 18 months is neither here nor there - and it's something not solely (technically at all) within their gift.....
Stuart_Dickson You are quite right. RD's statement is bad news for Unionists. I despair of the failure of the Scottish Conservatives to follow the German-Bavarian CSU example and come out from under London control: without a revival of Scottish Conservatism even if "No" carry it this autumn, the Union will remain at risk and must ultimately be lost.
Ruth Davidson's election as "Leader" (ahem) of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party was one of the biggest Unionist foot-shooting exercises in the last ten years. And it was all the work of David Cameron. God bless his rosy wee cheeks.
Davidson, Rennie and Lamont are the invisible trio of the IndyRef campaign. And there is a reason their minders have kept them out of the spotlights.
Are there any Scottish Conservatives that are pro-independence? I would have thought there would be.
PB Tories like to cling to the idea that it's they who are keeping the pure, bright flame of the Union alight while pesky Labour are screwing up the No campaign, but the picture is much more complicated than that.
Stuart_Dickson You are quite right. RD's statement is bad news for Unionists. I despair of the failure of the Scottish Conservatives to follow the German-Bavarian CSU example and come out from under London control: without a revival of Scottish Conservatism even if "No" carry it this autumn, the Union will remain at risk and must ultimately be lost.
Ruth Davidson's election as "Leader" (ahem) of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party was one of the biggest Unionist foot-shooting exercises in the last ten years. And it was all the work of David Cameron. God bless his rosy wee cheeks.
Davidson, Rennie and Lamont are the invisible trio of the IndyRef campaign. And there is a reason their minders have kept them out of the spotlights.
Are there any Scottish Conservatives that are pro-independence? I would have thought there would be.
Yes. Although most would deserve a small "c" rather than a large "C".
* "Wealthy Nation has been founded by a group of right of centre business people, academics, creatives and entrepreneurs who wish to break the tired old politico-economic consensus and point out that people with what are often referred to as conservative views don’t need to be unionists, and that they should in fact support independence for Scotland."
I'd be interested in a thread on the campaign funding situation. My sense is that Yes is better funded and better staffed. I wonder whether funds are coming from across the Atlantic from rich Scots-Americans? Be keen to read up on this.
How does a probable £7 million warchest for the Yes campaign sound?
I'm so tempted to link the details but I'm afraid it's only right to let Carlotta suffer that bit longer till the estimated £2.5 million marketing blitz kicks in likely sometime next month.
She thought it was all Yes propaganda from one fashion student.
At independence would every current UK passport become an invalid travel document? I expect the passport office will need a practical plan on replacement of the entire nation's stock of passports. And the new Scotland will need a similar plan.
"People wishing to stand as an MP must be over 18 years of age, be a British citizen or citizen of a Commonwealth country or the Republic of Ireland"
From parliament.uk.
I suppose they would bolt on "Or Scotland."
Scotland is part of Britain and will remain so, it is the UK that will cease to exist, British Isles will still remain.
No quite so.
You are confusing the nation that is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland that presently by various Acts of Union includes Scotland and the geographic Britain and British Isles that also includes the Republic of Ireland.
An independent Scotland would no longer be a member of the first but would be of the second and third.
The remaining elements of the UK may still wish to be called UK as the nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland or The United Kingdom of England Wales and Northern Ireland. The former is more likely as Great Britain is a political construct rather than a geographic one.
Jack , I may be losing my mind but I thought I said that th eonly thing that changed was the UK, so all you have done is elaborate more fully on my answer. Or am I confused.
Yes you are losing your mind .... but you'll get in back after the NO on 18 Sep .... Chortle ....
You indicated that the UK would cease to exist. In its present form yes but in the amended form as I illustrated no.
Stuart_Dickson You are quite right. RD's statement is bad news for Unionists. I despair of the failure of the Scottish Conservatives to follow the German-Bavarian CSU example and come out from under London control: without a revival of Scottish Conservatism even if "No" carry it this autumn, the Union will remain at risk and must ultimately be lost.
Ruth Davidson's election as "Leader" (ahem) of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party was one of the biggest Unionist foot-shooting exercises in the last ten years. And it was all the work of David Cameron. God bless his rosy wee cheeks.
Davidson, Rennie and Lamont are the invisible trio of the IndyRef campaign. And there is a reason their minders have kept them out of the spotlights.
Are there any Scottish Conservatives that are pro-independence? I would have thought there would be.
So you see, it really is Scottish Labour that need to persuade their supporters (highest yes and highest don't knows of the three unionist parties)- the Tories work is done with their supporters.
How effectively do you think Miliband is doing that?
Well, my assessment is that the Better Together side have played an absolute blinder, which will be decisive. What is impressive is the coordination: we've had a clearly well-organised response on the currency issue (although of course some of that was to reassure the financial markets about UK government debt), Gordon Brown was clearly working in tandem with them on the pensions side, and maybe even the Eurocrats were asked to put their oar in a coordinated fashion as well, although that might just be coincidence. We can expect more of these, for example on the questions of citizenship, private pension funds and annuities, university fees, etc.
Oh, you say - but the polling is positive. Yes, which is why the Better Together side have exploded these simultaneous detonations now, not closer to the vote. Nonetheless they have cracked the SNP case to its foundations.
At independence would every current UK passport become an invalid travel document? I expect the passport office will need a practical plan on replacement of the entire nation's stock of passports. And the new Scotland will need a similar plan.
"People wishing to stand as an MP must be over 18 years of age, be a British citizen or citizen of a Commonwealth country or the Republic of Ireland"
From parliament.uk.
I suppose they would bolt on "Or Scotland."
Scotland is part of Britain and will remain so, it is the UK that will cease to exist, British Isles will still remain.
No quite so.
You are confusing the nation that is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland that presently by various Acts of Union includes Scotland and the geographic Britain and British Isles that also includes the Republic of Ireland.
An independent Scotland would no longer be a member of the first but would be of the second and third.
The remaining elements of the UK may still wish to be called UK as the nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland or The United Kingdom of England Wales and Northern Ireland. The former is more likely as Great Britain is a political construct rather than a geographic one.
Jack , I may be losing my mind but I thought I said that th eonly thing that changed was the UK, so all you have done is elaborate more fully on my answer. Or am I confused.
Yes you are losing your mind .... but you'll get in back after the NO on 18 Sep .... Chortle ....
You indicated that the UK would cease to exist. In its present form yes but in the amended form as I illustrated no.
Is your ARSE feeling slightly uncomfortable, or can it accomodate an akward poll? Of course there may be several more to come..
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
If any Tory "strategists" (ahem) need me to explain why, I'll be happy to oblige. I have a very reasonable fee rate.
If there was a 'Cross Party Plan' it would be denounced as 'Diktats' from 'Westminster Bullies' anyway......by the way, how's the Currency Plan B coming along - your supporters are waiting!
Ho ho. You clearly haven't got the faintest clue about either Yes supporters or the key group of DevoMax swing voters who are going to decide the outcome of the election. The only audience you (sometimes) understand are the small core of StatusQuoers.
Hint: the Scottish Labour Party and the Scottish Liberal Democrats are your allies, not your enemies. Have fun while you are in bed with that lot. It could get kinky.
Better Together do not have an office in Dundee. They are in Glasgow, Aberdeen and Edinburgh. But you are right. I have volunteered to do what I can in my own area.
Looking at their website they are having some events but these seem to be mainly in Glasgow where SLAB are strongest.
Well this is disappointing if not completely surprising.
I don't think that's quite the case DL.
Coverage SOTB has been pretty minimal largely because the campaign has been ridiculously long ( and tedious to date ). I'd expect the tempo to pick up as we get closer to the vote much the same as any other election.
PB isn't really the place to get a good feel for where things are in Scotland since our contributors consist of hardline nats and hardline unionists. There are very few middle of the road Scots on the board and we've suffered in the debate from having no SLAB bloggers to even out the picture or give an alternative view.
As to how campaigning is going I suspect last week was the first serious shots of the campaign and the intensity will increase from here on in with a break of sorts for the Euros in May.
Alan, the Yes campaign have been organising and having meetings for months. They have literature going to every house, at least in my area, regularly. They are in the city centres with loud speakers, petitions and leaflets. They have the organisation of the SNP to support them whole heartedly.
No so far has none of this. You might be right that it is too early and the effort will start now but I fear that SLAB are (a) incompetent and (b) too conflicted internally to campaign effectively.
Yes and their meetings are behind locked doors and you need to sign up to being a supporter etc , they do not like public debate or any open questions. In general their meetings are sparsely attended, they spout the usual scare stories and do not answer any questions that are not sychophantic.
Stuart_Dickson You are quite right. RD's statement is bad news for Unionists. I despair of the failure of the Scottish Conservatives to follow the German-Bavarian CSU example and come out from under London control: without a revival of Scottish Conservatism even if "No" carry it this autumn, the Union will remain at risk and must ultimately be lost.
Ruth Davidson's election as "Leader" (ahem) of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party was one of the biggest Unionist foot-shooting exercises in the last ten years. And it was all the work of David Cameron. God bless his rosy wee cheeks.
Davidson, Rennie and Lamont are the invisible trio of the IndyRef campaign. And there is a reason their minders have kept them out of the spotlights.
Are there any Scottish Conservatives that are pro-independence? I would have thought there would be.
PB Tories like to cling to the idea that it's they who are keeping the pure, bright flame of the Union alight while pesky Labour are screwing up the No campaign, but the picture is much more complicated than that.
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
Great Britain is an island so I guess Scotland will still be part of it (assuming the lack of gigantic circular saw I mentioned down thread)
Not so .... In geographic terms Britain is the island comprising England, Wales and Scotland that Scotland will remain in. Great Britain is the nation construct that Scotland will leave.
I'd be interested in a thread on the campaign funding situation. My sense is that Yes is better funded and better staffed. I wonder whether funds are coming from across the Atlantic from rich Scots-Americans? Be keen to read up on this.
How does a probable £7 million warchest for the Yes campaign sound?
I'm so tempted to link the details but I'm afraid it's only right to let Carlotta suffer that bit longer till the estimated £2.5 million marketing blitz kicks in likely sometime next month.
She thought it was all Yes propaganda from one fashion student.
I'd be keen to have a look. I may google it. Do you have any concerns re: the 'American paradox'? The fact that many/most Scots-Americans already consider Scotland to be a nation-state and therefore aren't as motivated/engaged with the idea of administrative independence?
(I'm reminded of a conversation I had with an American friend when playing a pub quiz: "Which British city is home to a district called the Merchant City?" "Glasgow," I said. "No, no," she said, "it said which *British* city. Glasgow is in Scotland.")
Unusually I agree with Richard Nabavi again. I think there was always going to be an emotional reaction to the perceived bullying from the "London parties", but this will be a short term effect, and worry about uncertainty will take over with time from this intervention. While Scotland would probably be fine both with another currency and being outside the EU, Salmond has doubled down on the importance of both of these so much, and there will be a feeling of being adrift without a plan B if these things don't happen, which there is now a big chance of them happening.
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
'Lloyds Banking Group has opted to domicile TSB in England rather than Scotland ahead of the new bank’s £1.5bn stock market float.
In a move which will be taken by some as another sign that big business is increasingly concerned about the prospect of an independent Scotland, the bank is to place its 631-branch subsidiary into a new holding company registered in London.'
Great Britain is an island so I guess Scotland will still be part of it (assuming the lack of gigantic circular saw I mentioned down thread)
Not so .... In geographic terms Britain is the island comprising England, Wales and Scotland that Scotland will remain in. Great Britain is the nation construct that Scotland will leave.
"Great Britain, also known as Britain, is an island in the Atlantic Ocean off the north-western coast of continental Europe. "
If any Tory "strategists" (ahem) need me to explain why, I'll be happy to oblige. I have a very reasonable fee rate.
If there was a 'Cross Party Plan' it would be denounced as 'Diktats' from 'Westminster Bullies' anyway......by the way, how's the Currency Plan B coming along - your supporters are waiting!
Carlotta, if you read the whitepaper you will see plans a,b,c,d,and e. Any fool knows what the options are, if you cared to listen the YES campaign state "our preferred solution" not the only solution. They will save their powder for the negotiations knowing that squeaky will be holding a pair of deuces and not to hard to beat.
Curtice right now stating the bleeding obvious- "In short, however one looks at this poll, one has, at minimum, to conclude that it offers no evidence that the currency intervention has delivered the No side any immediate boost."
You missed a bit (and a link):
While you've missed the glaringly obvious fact that Curtice is very far from the last word on polling and is only one psephologist. He kept parroting the line that there had been no change in the Independence polling even when it was blatantly obvious there had been and was someone who most certainly did not cover himself in glory for the 2011 scottish elections.
Yet even HE knows that there is no way on earth to read this polling as anything other than bad for the idiots who were cheering on Osbrowne cluelessly.
You and so many other amusing right-wingers have just spent a week almost 24/7 on PB shrieking at the top of your lungs, crapping out every witless westminster bubble commentary from the press and pouring scorn all over the Yes campaign, Salmond and the SNP. And all for nothing.
It was pointless. You completely wasted your time. Something that those of us who are familiar with the scottish tory and PB tory track record on understanding scottish public opinion knew all too well. It's why we were laughing at you then and are laughing at you now.
By all means keep the shrieking going for another week. It will take your mind of so much else that seems to have passed you by politically elsewhere as well.
Rubbish, Pork. The discussion was all about, not will Eck get a Yes, but if he gets a Yes will he get a currency union. Not a question affected by this poll.
The problem for no is that if all you are allowed to say is no, negativity sort of goes with the territory. The question is whether their nerve will crack and they start to offer goodies and treats (devomax lite) in the run up to September. The problem there of course is who is to make the offer given the probabilities for May 2015 - hard to see a tripartite effort like the no currency union one.
I still don't fully believe that Cameron is desperate for a no though, given the electoral advantage of yes for the tories.
Probably a foolish question (asking cybernats to back up their smears usually is), but do you have any cites for that (the "PB Tories" bit)? As a relatively neutral observer, (Welsh, pro-independence but thinking cybernats are a very poor advert for the cause) it's always seemed to me that it's the cybernats who are desperate to portray the Conservatives as monolithically pro-union, not the Conservatives. Doubtless the tactic is to portray a pro-independence vote as an anti-Tory vote, but as we've seen on so many other issues just because the SNP wishes something to be true doesn't make it so.
I lost the will to live after 'their smears'.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
I'd be interested in a thread on the campaign funding situation. My sense is that Yes is better funded and better staffed. I wonder whether funds are coming from across the Atlantic from rich Scots-Americans? Be keen to read up on this.
Don't be silly we will vote as normal given the UK will still be intact at that point. Will give some troughers a year to fill their boots, but unlikely that over 40 of them will be pig swilling Labour ones.
Let's take one example: given the tendency for tax changes to be announced up to a year in advance, why is it right that MPs for Scottish seats should vote on changes that will not come into force until after I-day?
Seems to me that the fairest solution is that Westminster passes a quick Act immediately after a Yes vote:
- acknowledging the referendum result - authorising ministers to enter into practical negotiations - replacing the Barnett formula witha fixed block grant for the next couple of years - immediately devolving (to extent practical) all Scottish-only matters to Holyrood and authorising UK ministers to use Crown Prerogative where necessary to give Holyrood decisions force of law - confirming the SMPs constituency and representative roles - suspending the right of SMPs to vote on non-devolved matters.
Even something like foreign affairs - given we are talking about 12months of overlap, there is no reason why SMPs should get to set the foreign policy of rUK. In practice, even if rUK went to war, I am sure that (a) plans could be developed that minimised the use of future Scottish assets and (b) Salmond would be unlikely to object during the separation negotiations if such assets (eg air bases) were necessary. No doubt, though, - and reasonably - he would want something in return
'Lloyds Banking Group has opted to domicile TSB in England rather than Scotland ahead of the new bank’s £1.5bn stock market float.
In a move which will be taken by some as another sign that big business is increasingly concerned about the prospect of an independent Scotland, the bank is to place its 631-branch subsidiary into a new holding company registered in London.'
Good news. The referendum really is a win win. "No" wis the union stays together, "Yes" wins then there is a boost for rUk business as the corpse is drained and no prospect of a Miliband PM.
Mr. Divvie, polling now is almost irrelevant. What matters is how people will vote. Salmond has to decide whether he's going to outline plan B for currency, or just keep schtum.
MD, you do not seem to listen, he has outlined his 5 options in the White paper. He has stated what his preferred option of those 5 options is but I doubt he will rank them 1 through 5 to help Squeaky in the negotiations. Any fool can read those options.
For the avoidance of doubt, and to save Mick Pork soiling himself in excitement once more, HERE is what I predicted, in reaction to theOsborne intervention. I made this prediction three days ago.
*****
SeanT Posts: 3,081 February 17 DavidL said:
"One of my friends was telling me today that his brother in law had been around. Having been undecided he was now voting yes because he hates Osborne and disagrees with pretty much everything he says on principle. There will be some like that, how many is hard to tell. We could really do with some Scottish polling on this.
As I mentioned yesterday my wife was telephone polled by Ipsos Mori on Saturday. It would move things forward somewhat if such polling was released."
[And then I replied:]
I reckon there will be an initial boost for YES - for the reasons you state - but it will subside as logic and doubt sinks in. In the end what we might get is a surge in support for both sides, as Don't Knows are finally polarised - those who hate the Tories more than anything will go YES, those who are worried about risk will now go NO. Flag Quote · Off Topic
*****
So far I have been entirely correct. And now having spent three jet lagged hours working on my new thriller, I am going back to sleep with Goodwife Xanax. Anon.
Fieldwork is BEFORE the big Osborne-Salmond hoo har though Sean.
Curtice right now stating the bleeding obvious- "In short, however one looks at this poll, one has, at minimum, to conclude that it offers no evidence that the currency intervention has delivered the No side any immediate boost."
You missed a bit (and a link):
While you've missed the glaringly obvious fact that Curtice is very far from the last word on polling and is only one psephologist. He kept parroting the line that there had been no change in the Independence polling even when it was blatantly obvious there had been and was someone who most certainly did not cover himself in glory for the 2011 scottish elections.
Yet even HE knows that there is no way on earth to read this polling as anything other than bad for the idiots who were cheering on Osbrowne cluelessly.
You and so many other amusing right-wingers have just spent a week almost 24/7 on PB shrieking at the top of your lungs, crapping out every witless westminster bubble commentary from the press and pouring scorn all over the Yes campaign, Salmond and the SNP. And all for nothing.
It was pointless. You completely wasted your time. Something that those of us who are familiar with the scottish tory and PB tory track record on understanding scottish public opinion knew all too well. It's why we were laughing at you then and are laughing at you now.
By all means keep the shrieking going for another week. It will take your mind of so much else that seems to have passed you by politically elsewhere as well.
Rubbish, Pork. The discussion was all about, not will Eck get a Yes, but if he gets a Yes will he get a currency union. Not a question affected by this poll.
The problem for no is that if all you are allowed to say is no, negativity sort of goes with the territory. The question is whether their nerve will crack and they start to offer goodies and treats (devomax lite) in the run up to September. The problem there of course is who is to make the offer given the probabilities for May 2015 - hard to see a tripartite effort like the no currency union one.
I still don't fully believe that Cameron is desperate for a no though, given the electoral advantage of yes for the tories.
He could hardly be seen to support a 'Yes' vote. Still, if it goes that way in September, he can say he tried.
Meanwhile, lets all sit back and watch the ScotLab disaster unfold.
At independence would every current UK passport become an invalid travel document? I expect the passport office will need a practical plan on replacement of the entire nation's stock of passports. And the new Scotland will need a similar plan.
"People wishing to stand as an MP must be over 18 years of age, be a British citizen or citizen of a Commonwealth country or the Republic of Ireland"
From parliament.uk.
I suppose they would bolt on "Or Scotland."
Scotland is part of Britain and will remain so, it is the UK that will cease to exist, British Isles will still remain.
No quite so.
You are confusing the nation that is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland that presently by various Acts of Union includes Scotland and the geographic Britain and British Isles that also includes the Republic of Ireland.
An independent Scotland would no longer be a member of the first but would be of the second and third.
The remaining elements of the UK may still wish to be called UK as the nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland or The United Kingdom of England Wales and Northern Ireland. The former is more likely as Great Britain is a political construct rather than a geographic one.
Jack , I may be losing my mind but I thought I said that th eonly thing that changed was the UK, so all you have done is elaborate more fully on my answer. Or am I confused.
Yes you are losing your mind .... but you'll get in back after the NO on 18 Sep .... Chortle ....
You indicated that the UK would cease to exist. In its present form yes but in the amended form as I illustrated no.
Is your ARSE feeling slightly uncomfortable, or can it accomodate an akward poll? Of course there may be several more to come..
My ARSE sits beautifully and pertly as the font of sagacity knowing that its projection is for 18 Sep and is not an "akward" or even awkward single poll seven months before the vote.
Great Britain is an island so I guess Scotland will still be part of it (assuming the lack of gigantic circular saw I mentioned down thread)
Not so .... In geographic terms Britain is the island comprising England, Wales and Scotland that Scotland will remain in. Great Britain is the nation construct that Scotland will leave.
"Great Britain, also known as Britain, is an island in the Atlantic Ocean off the north-western coast of continental Europe. "
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
If any Tory "strategists" (ahem) need me to explain why, I'll be happy to oblige. I have a very reasonable fee rate.
If there was a 'Cross Party Plan' it would be denounced as 'Diktats' from 'Westminster Bullies' anyway......by the way, how's the Currency Plan B coming along - your supporters are waiting!
Carlotta, if you read the whitepaper you will see plans a,b,c,d,and e. Any fool knows what the options are, if you cared to listen the YES campaign state "our preferred solution" not the only solution. They will save their powder for the negotiations knowing that squeaky will be holding a pair of deuces and not to hard to beat.
Malcolm - then why is Salmond saying "there is no plan B" and why do the polls show majorities of both Yes and No supporters wanting one (and the yes supporters wanting different things)?
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
Especially since all Labour can do is carp from the sidelines.....
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
Where's the 'unpleasantness'? Why would you object to the English having a view on Independence too?
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
Sentiments of that nature are extremely common on social media.
Could the IndyRef be the breakthrough election where Facebook, Twitter, Blogger etc are more decisive than the BBC and the papers?
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
Rolls eyes
You think the whole of Scotland reads PB ?
No, of course not. But they are on FB, Twitter etc, where those types of comments are all too common.
Great Britain is an island so I guess Scotland will still be part of it (assuming the lack of gigantic circular saw I mentioned down thread)
Not so .... In geographic terms Britain is the island comprising England, Wales and Scotland that Scotland will remain in. Great Britain is the nation construct that Scotland will leave.
"Great Britain, also known as Britain, is an island in the Atlantic Ocean off the north-western coast of continental Europe. "
I love Wikipedia, but it isn't perfect. Great Britain was a name coined by James I (or VI) to encourage his Kingdoms of Scotland and England to merge their Parliaments. It was something along the lines of the M&S ad: "This is not just Britain, this is Great Britain".
That said, if Scotland leaves the Union then the political construct of Great Britain also ceases to exist. The UK then becomes the United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland (Wales existing as a Principality of the Kingdom of England).
Why is that an unpleasant post? Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism? For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
Mr. Divvie, polling now is almost irrelevant. What matters is how people will vote. Salmond has to decide whether he's going to outline plan B for currency, or just keep schtum.
Polling almost irrelevant 7 months before an event? I think you're on the wrong site!
Still, it makes a change from the constant chorus of 'the polls have been static for months, Yes will never win'.
What he meant was that polling now is almost irrelevant... if it shows the No lead dropping.
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
Sentiments of that nature are extremely common on social media.
Could the IndyRef be the breakthrough election where Facebook, Twitter, Blogger etc are more decisive than the BBC and the papers?
I'd be keen to have a look. I may google it. Do you have any concerns re: the 'American paradox'? The fact that many/most Scots-Americans already consider Scotland to be a nation-state and therefore aren't as motivated/engaged with the idea of administrative independence?
I honestly don't think that's where the lion's share of the funding comes from. Discounting the out of touch shrieking from the PB tories on Yes not being prepared, this has been long in the preparation and it's telling that quite a few of the smaller fundraisers for various aspects of the Yes campaign exceeded expectations very quickly indeed. Not all of course, but enough to indicate that those who have worked all their political lives to see such a vote are more than willing to put their money where their mouth is as well as their time.
You want yet another good reason for the No campaign to be worried? The Independence vote's close proximity to the GE and a Holyrood election not that long after.
Resources are finite for all three of the unionist parties nor are the relations between the three scottish subordinate parties and their westminster high command particularly harmonious, to say the least. So what we are going to have is a balancing act with SLAB and SCON MSPs and their scottish leadership not overly keen to leave themselves completely vulnerable for the next Holyrood elections since so many jobs could be on the line while their importance could suddenly become overwhelming with a Yes vote. SCON will want to take advantage of the lib dem meltdown while SLAB will be infuriated if it look likes they will have to do all the heavy lifting for the ground campaigning for the referendum. Their base are not exactly enthused as it is. You then have the spectacle of labour and the tories basically at each others throats for the GE by september with not a great deal of goodwill to be found. Little Ed and Cammie will also be acutely aware that any blame game will be front and centre to start off that election campaign with both of them trying to fend off that blame while trying to pin it on the other party should things keep going as they are.
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
Sentiments of that nature are extremely common on social media.
Could the IndyRef be the breakthrough election where Facebook, Twitter, Blogger etc are more decisive than the BBC and the papers?
And the Cybernats are models of good humour and compassion......
A recent poll had TV radio and newspapers orders of magnitude ahead of the Internet blogs and posters where people look for information. I suspect the internet is very much an echo chamber with like minded folk talking to each other - which might explain the incomprehension when confronted with views different from their own....
The Union Jack is an iconic and deeply cool piece of graphic design. You see it on handbags, T-shirts, wallets, etc the world over. The Chinese call it the 'Mi Zi Qi' - literally the Rice Character Flag (as the chinese character for rice is a cross overlaid with a diagonal cross).
If Scotland goes we should keep the basic design. But..we could play with the colours a bit. The underlying white background / red cross for England should remain. As should the diagonal red cross, thus retaining the 'divided into 8' core of the design. MAybe the dark blue background should become dark green to reflect the red/white/green colours of the welsh flag and some sort of muted tribute to NI / Irish elemnts of our history.
Actually that's it. Just turn dark blue bits to dark green and otherwise leave alone.
Why is that an unpleasant post? Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism? For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
England are 35/1 (YouWin) to win the World Cup. If that shortens, I will be a happy man. The Yes team needs to see the English lads getting into at least the last eight.
I think that the Scottish response to being reminded of some completely non-controversial facts on the EU and the currency is interesting from another point of view: what happens to the SNP after Scots vote No. Since there is clearly a conflict between the head and the heart, those who think the SNP would fall back into irrelevance after a No might be completely wrong: I can see an emotional reaction which works the other way, causing people to vote No for practical reasons, and then compensate subsequently by increased support for the SNP on emotional grounds.
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
Rolls eyes
You think the whole of Scotland reads PB ?
No, of course not. But they are on FB, Twitter etc, where those types of comments are all too common.
Sheesh what planet are you on Stuart ? Are you telling me there aren't similar Nat posts slagging off unionists, you could start on PB with some of your own. If anything the Nats now need to get a bit of nationalism on the boil since they've been called out on most of the major arguments. It's all you have left.
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
It's lefty handwringers like you that have indulged the separatists with Labour's stupid asymmetric devolution settlement that puts the noose around the Uk's neck.
Labour need to start worrying - 53 anti Con MPs could be about to leave Westminster forever.
Instead of sniping about GO etc what is Ed Miliband doing ? Ferk all it appears.
Captain nothing doing nothing achieving nothing and saying nothing.
Stuart_Dickson You are quite right. RD's statement is bad news for Unionists. I despair of the failure of the Scottish Conservatives to follow the German-Bavarian CSU example and come out from under London control: without a revival of Scottish Conservatism even if "No" carry it this autumn, the Union will remain at risk and must ultimately be lost.
Ruth Davidson's election as "Leader" (ahem) of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party was one of the biggest Unionist foot-shooting exercises in the last ten years. And it was all the work of David Cameron. God bless his rosy wee cheeks.
Davidson, Rennie and Lamont are the invisible trio of the IndyRef campaign. And there is a reason their minders have kept them out of the spotlights.
Are there any Scottish Conservatives that are pro-independence? I would have thought there would be.
They will all be in the SNP nowadays, what poses as Scottish Tory party is just the regional admin department of London Tory party. They will have been advised by phone that they support NO.
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
Where's the 'unpleasantness'? Why would you object to the English having a view on Independence too?
Sentiments promoting the benefits to Scotland are 'Good', but make a similar statement about any positives for England, and one is 'Unpleasant'.
I have changed my mind on this issue and now back independence. Partly this is because The Scottish people have every right to go it alone if that is what they want and partly because with demographic changes I can't see the Tories getting a majority again without ditching the MPs north of the border. Although such a move certainly doesn't guarantee a right of centre majority in the rest of the UK, anything that will hamper the Labour party south of the border can only be a good thing. Finally it may even be with their independence granted I actually think the Scots will come to like the rest of us more (and we them). Give them the Pound and it probably won't even feel that much has changed given the amount of devolution they already have. My only regret - the loss to the World of the distinctive Union flag, the shared history will remain.
'South of the border' can only benefit from full independence. No DevoMax.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.
It's lefty handwringers like you that have indulged the separatists with Labour's stupid asymmetric devolution settlement that puts the noose around the Uk's neck.
Labour need to start worrying - 53 anti Con MPs could be about to leave Westminster forever.
Instead of sniping about GO etc what is Ed Miliband doing ? Ferk all it appears.
Captain nothing doing nothing achieving nothing and saying nothing.
The Labour leader too scared to join the battle..
You have such a nice way with words. Presumably you are just smarting because you most recent prediction was proved laughably wrong, hence why you are now being rude.
Why is that an unpleasant post? Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism? For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
England are 35/1 (YouWin) to win the World Cup. If that shortens, I will be a happy man. The Yes team needs to see the English lads getting into at least the last eight.
Great Britain is an island so I guess Scotland will still be part of it (assuming the lack of gigantic circular saw I mentioned down thread)
Not so .... In geographic terms Britain is the island comprising England, Wales and Scotland that Scotland will remain in. Great Britain is the nation construct that Scotland will leave.
"Great Britain, also known as Britain, is an island in the Atlantic Ocean off the north-western coast of continental Europe. "
I was trying to make the distinction politically and geographically between the two remembering that only mainland Scotland is part of the island of Britain.
So to avoid confusion Scotland or parts of it will remain in and out of Great Britain and er .... Britain too !!
On the passports thing, if all the Scots except the newly born or highly nationalistic ones are going to have rUK passports (which makes sense), presumably they'll be able to vote as overseas voters in rUK elections? People who liked the West Lothian Question are going to love this one...
Why is that an unpleasant post? Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism? For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
That begins to sound as though independence for Scotland from the UK could well lead to Wales, England and NI going their separate ways.
The English have rather buried their nationalism as the price to be paid for keeping the Scots and Welsh happy to stay aboard the good ship Britannia. If that changes then the UK ends.
At independence would every current UK passport become an invalid travel document? I expect the passport office will need a practical plan on replacement of the entire nation's stock of passports. And the new Scotland will need a similar plan.
"People wishing to stand as an MP must be over 18 years of age, be a British citizen or citizen of a Commonwealth country or the Republic of Ireland"
From parliament.uk.
I suppose they would bolt on "Or Scotland."
Scotland is part of Britain and will remain so, it is the UK that will cease to exist, British Isles will still remain.
No quite so.
You are confusing the nation that is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland that presently by various Acts of Union includes Scotland and the geographic Britain and British Isles that also includes the Republic of Ireland.
An independent Scotland would no longer be a member of the first but would be of the second and third.
The remaining elements of the UK may still wish to be called UK as the nation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland or The United Kingdom of England Wales and Northern Ireland. The former is more likely as Great Britain is a political construct rather than a geographic one.
Jack , I may be losing my mind but I thought I said that th eonly thing that changed was the UK, so all you have done is elaborate more fully on my answer. Or am I confused.
Yes you are losing your mind .... but you'll get in back after the NO on 18 Sep .... Chortle ....
You indicated that the UK would cease to exist. In its present form yes but in the amended form as I illustrated no.
Jack, so technically we are both correct. I leave for Catalonia on the 19th of September ( well Malaga actually but close enough ) so will be giving them tips on how to get a YES..
Great Britain is an island so I guess Scotland will still be part of it (assuming the lack of gigantic circular saw I mentioned down thread)
Not so .... In geographic terms Britain is the island comprising England, Wales and Scotland that Scotland will remain in. Great Britain is the nation construct that Scotland will leave.
"Great Britain, also known as Britain, is an island in the Atlantic Ocean off the north-western coast of continental Europe. "
I was trying to make the distinction politically and geographically between the two remembering that only mainland Scotland is part of the island of Britain.
So to avoid confusion Scotland or parts of it will remain in and out of Great Britain and er .... Britain too !!
Titters ....
Ha. Indeed. And they say British geopolitics is confusing
Mr. G, that's not an answer. Salmond has indeed said there are about 5 options and his preferred one is a currency union with the UK, but all major parties have said no to that. Pretending that negotiation involves Scotland saying "I want this" and England, Wales and Northern Ireland saying "OK" is bullshit by Salmond. Given a formal currency union is off the table he ought to come forward with a plan that has some hope of success.
Actually, if he acknowledged that Scotland would have to apply for membership that would also solve his currency problem as new members must join the euro.
Why is that an unpleasant post? Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism? For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
England are 35/1 (YouWin) to win the World Cup. If that shortens, I will be a happy man. The Yes team needs to see the English lads getting into at least the last eight.
This is a fascinating point I hadn't heard before. There's nothing Scots going chippier about than England doing well in sports, and English fans boasting about it. If the Welsh did the same thing, they don't have an issue with it, but it really gets under their skin if it's the English. I could really see this moving votes.
I'd be interested in a thread on the campaign funding situation. My sense is that Yes is better funded and better staffed. I wonder whether funds are coming from across the Atlantic from rich Scots-Americans? Be keen to read up on this.
How does a probable £7 million warchest for the Yes campaign sound?
I'm so tempted to link the details but I'm afraid it's only right to let Carlotta suffer that bit longer till the estimated £2.5 million marketing blitz kicks in likely sometime next month.
She thought it was all Yes propaganda from one fashion student.
I'd be keen to have a look. I may google it. Do you have any concerns re: the 'American paradox'? The fact that many/most Scots-Americans already consider Scotland to be a nation-state and therefore aren't as motivated/engaged with the idea of administrative independence?
(I'm reminded of a conversation I had with an American friend when playing a pub quiz: "Which British city is home to a district called the Merchant City?" "Glasgow," I said. "No, no," she said, "it said which *British* city. Glasgow is in Scotland.")
Given NO are getting all their money from foreign or London business owners why should we care. At least the Scots-Americans have a link to Scotland even if tenuous.
Thirteen of the protesters killed in Independence Square on Thursday morning died from single gunshot wounds fired by a sniper, a medic in Independence Square tells Interfax-Ukraine news agency.
Trains with "40 carriages of military servicemen" are moving towards Kiev from Kremenchuk, the Ukrayinska Pravda website reports.
This can go a few ways, and none of them are good.
I'd be interested in a thread on the campaign funding situation. My sense is that Yes is better funded and better staffed. I wonder whether funds are coming from across the Atlantic from rich Scots-Americans? Be keen to read up on this.
She thought it was all Yes propaganda from one fashion student.
That was your source.....
.....my source was the Telegraph:
*tears of laughter etc.*
Bless.
She finally found it. So much for it being Yes propaganda from a fashion student when it was blatantly obvious he had sourced it from your favourite unionist paper the Telegraph. I gave you so many hints at the time and even burst out laughing when you linked another telegraph piece immediately before you poured scorn on the very notion of a £7 million warchest or advertising blitz. You completely failed to catch on.
You just can't help yourself, can you dear?
Enjoy another week of pointless shrieking safe in the knowledge that we will be laughing even harder this week at the hilarious notion of scottish tories or PB tories being in touch with scottish public opinion.
Why is that an unpleasant post? Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism? For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
England are 35/1 (YouWin) to win the World Cup. If that shortens, I will be a happy man. The Yes team needs to see the English lads getting into at least the last eight.
This is a fascinating point I hadn't heard before. There's nothing Scots going chippier about than England doing well in sports, and English fans boasting about it. If the Welsh did the same thing, they don't have an issue with it, but it really gets under their skin if it's the English. I could really see this moving votes.
With that prospect, plus the spectre of a propaganda free hit for Salmond in the Commonwealth Games (in which Scotland competes independently, unlike the Olympics), it could be a double whammy from the sporting world this summer @Socrates
"At least 17 protesters have been killed in renewed clashes with police in central Kiev after a truce agreed on Wednesday broke down, eyewitnesses say."
Comments
LOL
Yes 4/1 (Betfair)
No 1/4 (Hills)
Now, I've got to run away to teacher to complain about being bullied......
41% and over 5/6
Under 41% 5/6
66% and over 4/6
Under 66% 11/10
In my heart it's a fifty point away win in the Stadio Flaminio but ....
From a betting point 4/6 on Italy looks the option to take and in the final analysis I'm very hard nosed about my wagers.
SNP 4/6
Lab 11/10
Any other 150/1
Great Britain is an island so I guess Scotland will still be part of it (assuming the lack of gigantic circular saw I mentioned down thread)
http://www.wealthynation.org/
PB Tories like to cling to the idea that it's they who are keeping the pure, bright flame of the Union alight while pesky Labour are screwing up the No campaign, but the picture is much more complicated than that.
* "Wealthy Nation has been founded by a group of right of centre business people, academics, creatives and entrepreneurs who wish to break the tired old politico-economic consensus and point out that people with what are often referred to as conservative views don’t need to be unionists, and that they should in fact support independence for Scotland."
http://www.wealthynation.org/our-goal/
MfE?
I'm so tempted to link the details but I'm afraid it's only right to let Carlotta suffer that bit longer till the estimated £2.5 million marketing blitz kicks in likely sometime next month.
She thought it was all Yes propaganda from one fashion student.
Thanks – I'll take a look.
You indicated that the UK would cease to exist. In its present form yes but in the amended form as I illustrated no.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/12/15/the-2011-holyrood-election-when-scottish-labour-moved-from-a-14pc-yougov-lead-to-being-18pc-behind-in-just-11-weeks/
Holyrood 2011 vote (y/n/dk)
Con: 3/91/5
Lab: 23/64/13
LibD: 18/73/9
SNP: 62/27/10
So you see, it really is Scottish Labour that need to persuade their supporters (highest yes and highest don't knows of the three unionist parties)- the Tories work is done with their supporters.
How effectively do you think Miliband is doing that?
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/tybxis6ofg/YG-Archive-140106 - The Sun - Scotland.pdf
Oh, you say - but the polling is positive. Yes, which is why the Better Together side have exploded these simultaneous detonations now, not closer to the vote. Nonetheless they have cracked the SNP case to its foundations.
Hint: the Scottish Labour Party and the Scottish Liberal Democrats are your allies, not your enemies. Have fun while you are in bed with that lot. It could get kinky.
(I'm reminded of a conversation I had with an American friend when playing a pub quiz: "Which British city is home to a district called the Merchant City?"
"Glasgow," I said.
"No, no," she said, "it said which *British* city. Glasgow is in Scotland.")
Ah spot the buzz word - can't they mention what the going rate might be for a graduate job.
http://www.populus.co.uk/item/Internships-with-Populus/
Someone here might know someone who might benefit from it.
It's a shame we're not allowed to vote too - I wouldn't be surprised to find that the English are more 'Pro' than the Scots.
'Lloyds Banking Group has opted to domicile TSB in England rather than Scotland ahead of the new bank’s £1.5bn stock market float.
In a move which will be taken by some as another sign that big business is increasingly concerned about the prospect of an independent Scotland, the bank is to place its 631-branch subsidiary into a new holding company registered in London.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain
Will the British team win, or will the Scottish team lose. Nail biting.
Where on earth does PB find these out of touch comedians?
The problem for no is that if all you are allowed to say is no, negativity sort of goes with the territory. The question is whether their nerve will crack and they start to offer goodies and treats (devomax lite) in the run up to September. The problem there of course is who is to make the offer given the probabilities for May 2015 - hard to see a tripartite effort like the no currency union one.
I still don't fully believe that Cameron is desperate for a no though, given the electoral advantage of yes for the tories.
Whoever did it, the creation of the PB Tory meme was a work of staggering genius. You actually get Tories coming on to PB whining that they're being smeared by being called PB Tories!
.....my source was the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/10632305/Scottish-independence-Yes-campaign-readies-million-pound-marketing-blitz.html
And I note your (uncharacteristically) careful use of "probable" and "estimated".
You do know that "optioning" is not quite the same as "buying" don't you?
When are Yes going to publish their much delayed finances?
Meanwhile, lets all sit back and watch the ScotLab disaster unfold.
You think the whole of Scotland reads PB ?
Could the IndyRef be the breakthrough election where Facebook, Twitter, Blogger etc are more decisive than the BBC and the papers?
That said, if Scotland leaves the Union then the political construct of Great Britain also ceases to exist. The UK then becomes the United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland (Wales existing as a Principality of the Kingdom of England).
Is it just the Scots who are allowed to show a bit of patriotism?
For what its worth, I'm hoping for the Scots to vote YES, as I fancy being able to call myself English, without being called a little Englander.
You want yet another good reason for the No campaign to be worried? The Independence vote's close proximity to the GE and a Holyrood election not that long after.
Resources are finite for all three of the unionist parties nor are the relations between the three scottish subordinate parties and their westminster high command particularly harmonious, to say the least. So what we are going to have is a balancing act with SLAB and SCON MSPs and their scottish leadership not overly keen to leave themselves completely vulnerable for the next Holyrood elections since so many jobs could be on the line while their importance could suddenly become overwhelming with a Yes vote. SCON will want to take advantage of the lib dem meltdown while SLAB will be infuriated if it look likes they will have to do all the heavy lifting for the ground campaigning for the referendum. Their base are not exactly enthused as it is. You then have the spectacle of labour and the tories basically at each others throats for the GE by september with not a great deal of goodwill to be found. Little Ed and Cammie will also be acutely aware that any blame game will be front and centre to start off that election campaign with both of them trying to fend off that blame while trying to pin it on the other party should things keep going as they are.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26269221
A recent poll had TV radio and newspapers orders of magnitude ahead of the Internet blogs and posters where people look for information. I suspect the internet is very much an echo chamber with like minded folk talking to each other - which might explain the incomprehension when confronted with views different from their own....
If Scotland goes we should keep the basic design. But..we could play with the colours a bit. The underlying white background / red cross for England should remain. As should the diagonal red cross, thus retaining the 'divided into 8' core of the design. MAybe the dark blue background should become dark green to reflect the red/white/green colours of the welsh flag and some sort of muted tribute to NI / Irish elemnts of our history.
Actually that's it. Just turn dark blue bits to dark green and otherwise leave alone.
'No wonder Yes has the momentum when Scots read unpleasant sentiments of this nature.'
aww...poor didums
Labour need to start worrying - 53 anti Con MPs could be about to leave Westminster forever.
Instead of sniping about GO etc what is Ed Miliband doing ? Ferk all it appears.
Captain nothing doing nothing achieving nothing and saying nothing.
The Labour leader too scared to join the battle..
Brazil
Argentina
Germany
Spain
Belgium
France
Colombia
Italy
... but England are not too far behind, in joint 11th spot (with Portugal).
Sentiments promoting the benefits to Scotland are 'Good', but make a similar statement about any positives for England, and one is 'Unpleasant'.
Don't be so ridiculous.
I was trying to make the distinction politically and geographically between the two remembering that only mainland Scotland is part of the island of Britain.
So to avoid confusion Scotland or parts of it will remain in and out of Great Britain and er .... Britain too !!
Titters ....
The English have rather buried their nationalism as the price to be paid for keeping the Scots and Welsh happy to stay aboard the good ship Britannia. If that changes then the UK ends.
Bernie wins in the High Court:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26273031
As I understand it, his victory in this case might have more widespread effects for the sport.
Ecclestone appears to have won his case.
Mr. G, that's not an answer. Salmond has indeed said there are about 5 options and his preferred one is a currency union with the UK, but all major parties have said no to that. Pretending that negotiation involves Scotland saying "I want this" and England, Wales and Northern Ireland saying "OK" is bullshit by Salmond. Given a formal currency union is off the table he ought to come forward with a plan that has some hope of success.
Actually, if he acknowledged that Scotland would have to apply for membership that would also solve his currency problem as new members must join the euro.
Thirteen of the protesters killed in Independence Square on Thursday morning died from single gunshot wounds fired by a sniper, a medic in Independence Square tells Interfax-Ukraine news agency.
Trains with "40 carriages of military servicemen" are moving towards Kiev from Kremenchuk, the Ukrayinska Pravda website reports.
This can go a few ways, and none of them are good.
"The F1 chief executive has ruled the sport for almost four decades."
I wonder if any other individual has had such a singular power or prolonged tenure as Ecclestone has over F1.
Bless.
She finally found it. So much for it being Yes propaganda from a fashion student when it was blatantly obvious he had sourced it from your favourite unionist paper the Telegraph. I gave you so many hints at the time and even burst out laughing when you linked another telegraph piece immediately before you poured scorn on the very notion of a £7 million warchest or advertising blitz. You completely failed to catch on.
You just can't help yourself, can you dear?
Enjoy another week of pointless shrieking safe in the knowledge that we will be laughing even harder this week at the hilarious notion of scottish tories or PB tories being in touch with scottish public opinion.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26268620#"