And now they lose and the rUK will be impoverished without Scots subsidies. Especially the VAT and Corporation Tax which are classed as "London Region" but are based on Scottish economic activity.
Can you explain? Presumably you are talking about oil profits received by the majors?
Not just Oil profits. Diageo makes most of its money from Whisky and all the VAT and Corporation Tax is classed as London revenue because their HQ is there. Same with any chain store which is based in England which is pretty much all of them. Every penny of VAT and Corporation Tax counts as English revenue in the GERS figures. You're looking at between £15bn and £25bn which Scotland will get after Independence.
England is very, very, very fucked economically. Part of the reason they will be desperate for a Currency Union as it's the only way to avoid a Devaluation on Sterling.
Well, the VAT on whisky will be charged at the point of sale, so will be English not Scottish (in fact, independence might reduce Diageo's ability to offset input prices against VAT so increase the English tax take). In terms of the profits, I'd imagine (don't know but this is the way I'd set it up) that the Scottish companies are manufacturing units with a fixed mark-up, that then sells their product to a distribution company which also owns the brand. That international distribution company then onsells to each of the local affiliates. So I doubt many of the profits end up in the Scottish company.
With the retail companies, you'd get to keep the VAT, that's true, but again, I'd assume that the products are bought into an ex-Scottish central company which then would sell on to the Scottish subisidiary on a transfer price basis (or they might even use one of those low-risk distributor models, whereby the English parent underwrites the P&L in return for a fixed gross margin).
I guess it depends on what the iScot government does to corporation tax - if it goes up significantly then the taxes will flow south.
RobD/Surbiton Without Scotland UKIP rises to 16% in England and Wales, the same total the LDs got in 1997, on that total they are bound to pick up seats in England and Wales. If it is Yes UKIP's total will likely rise above 20% as Farage promises UKIP is the surest way to stop currency union. On those numbers Farage will hold the balance of power beyond doubt
Doubt it. Many of UKIP's seats will come from the Tories. Net change = very small. An LD 16% and a UKIP 16% is not the same 16%.
Well, maybe not just them, but the fragile alliance of No seems like it will fragment rather than refocus on the actual opponents in this fight. Such a massive swing at such a stage seems tough to reverse and much less likely to be a flash in the pan.
Though, what is it about Scots and polling that, perhaps, will once again lead to such a late charge. Are people really just suddenly shifting in droves to one side late in the game, or are the polls only picking them up really late, and either way, why?
BBC News- Gordon Brown has written an article for a newspaper blaming the Tories and their policies for the narrowing in the polls. Sounds like #fallingapart
59 Scottish seats. 58 left/centre left, 1 centre right.
If there is a yes vote and Cameron goes (as he certainly would have to) then we are into a Tory leadership contest. In which the candidates will have to appeal to the Tory grassroots. And how will they do that? Well, by slagging off the Lib dems and hinting (or even stating explicitly) that they favour withdrawal from the EU. The coalition could not survive such a contest - the Lib Dems would refuse to serve under a new PM and force a vote of confidence. A yes vote could well mean a UK-wide general election this Autumn.
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
For those who reckon the YES side will just sneak it, Ladbrokes' odds of 3.33/1 on a YES vote of between 50% -55% looks like the best value currently around, but hurry, this price can't last on the back of these latest polling numbers.. DYOR.
Things could change, but the 10/11 on Yes Over 46.5% at Ladbrokes is also looking pretty generous. Not as generous as the 11/4 on a Yes vote at Betfair Sportsbook though!
O/T Quincel - you'd have won our would-have-been bet which expired yesterday!
Has he actually updated his forecasts? I don't remember seeing anything on Twitter.
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
The over 60s as a group are likely to grow, not get less.
This is not about Salmond or the SNP its about Scotland's future. The Scottish People got that , the no campaign just cant grasp the concept at all.
The No campaign grasped it, it was the polls, after all, which told us that the Scots would go independent for 500 quid so faced with that nugget, No fought, wrongly IMO on pragmatic terms.
Yes for a while copied them; also a mistake.
This is always and ever was about passion and destiny. If the Scots want independence then so be it; I would rather otherwise, as a Tory, but if they want control of their future, fine.
What I rather suspect Yes has not done, however, is to explain how this generation and the next and the next will suffer, in well-documented terms of fiscal contraction, for the greater good. Now if this and immediate future generations get this, then so much the even better.
The tragedy would be for a Yes vote, for all the short term pain (of which there will be plenty) and for those who voted Yes to say: "but you never told us it would be this bad now".
BBC News- Gordon Brown has written an article for a newspaper blaming the Tories and their policies for the narrowing in the polls. Sounds like #fallingapart
Hardly surprising that the most malign, poisonous and probably insane politician in the UK should do this....
If the 59 Scottish seats are removed at the next election, how will the bookies interpret the seat bands? Will the bets be voided?
Voided
The Scottish seats will be contested in next May's GE so the question doesn't arise.
If I read this Sunday Times article correctly, Tories will either demand Dave's head, or Scottish MPs banned from the 2015 General election
I'd expect both and Tories (probably with a UKIP alliance) to play the RUK Nationalist card to get a mandate from RUK to be as tough as possible with Salmond in negotiations.
We could be about to go through one of our once to twice a century upheavals.
If the 59 Scottish seats are removed at the next election, how will the bookies interpret the seat bands? Will the bets be voided?
Voided
The Scottish seats will be contested in next May's GE so the question doesn't arise.
If I read this Sunday Times article correctly, Tories will either demand Dave's head, or Scottish MPs banned from the 2015 General election
Given Cameron's resignation will have little impact in such a situation - it's not as though there will be much government business from now until the GE, so I don't see why any new leader could not be PM for a few months, and even if it caused an early GE, well, it's not that much earlier so no real problems - and denying Scottish people Westminster representation until formal independence does have an impact, the former seems a lot more likely than the latter.
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
The over 60s as a group are likely to grow, not get less.
Well yes, that's true, but they *cough* die off too! (Sorry)
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
The over 60s as a group are likely to grow, not get less.
Yes, but the people joining that Group in the future are currently Yes, making the over 60 Group likely to switch to that in time as well. Some level of conservatism may come upon them, but social attitudes and so on do change with the generations nevertheless.
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
The over 60s as a group are likely to grow, not get less.
Well yes, that's true, but they *cough* die off too! (Sorry)
Not at all, but my point is that their inherent caution and conservatism does not (thank goodness) die with them, but is inherited by the newcomers to the cohort.
Surbiton Labour seats like Grimsby will go UKIP, highly marginal seats like Thurrock Labour held in 1992 will go UKIP. 16% is the base even before this poll, Farage is not stupid, he will now campaign on flat out opposition to currency union and the UKIP total will increase to 20%+ and beyond
And now they lose and the rUK will be impoverished without Scots subsidies. Especially the VAT and Corporation Tax which are classed as "London Region" but are based on Scottish economic activity.
Can you explain? Presumably you are talking about oil profits received by the majors?
Not just Oil profits. Diageo makes most of its money from Whisky and all the VAT and Corporation Tax is classed as London revenue because their HQ is there. Same with any chain store which is based in England which is pretty much all of them. Every penny of VAT and Corporation Tax counts as English revenue in the GERS figures. You're looking at between £15bn and £25bn which Scotland will get after Independence.
England is very, very, very fucked economically. Part of the reason they will be desperate for a Currency Union as it's the only way to avoid a Devaluation on Sterling.
Well, the VAT on whisky will be charged at the point of sale, so will be English not Scottish (in fact, independence might reduce Diageo's ability to offset input prices against VAT so increase the English tax take). In terms of the profits, I'd imagine (don't know but this is the way I'd set it up) that the Scottish companies are manufacturing units with a fixed mark-up, that then sells their product to a distribution company which also owns the brand. That international distribution company then onsells to each of the local affiliates. So I doubt many of the profits end up in the Scottish company.
With the retail companies, you'd get to keep the VAT, that's true, but again, I'd assume that the products are bought into an ex-Scottish central company which then would sell on to the Scottish subisidiary on a transfer price basis (or they might even use one of those low-risk distributor models, whereby the English parent underwrites the P&L in return for a fixed gross margin).
I guess it depends on what the iScot government does to corporation tax - if it goes up significantly then the taxes will flow south.
Scotland definitely will follow the Irish model of 12% Corporation Tax. They have more or less said it all along.
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
The over 60s as a group are likely to grow, not get less.
Yes, but the people joining that Group in the future are currently Yes, making the over 60 Group likely to switch to that in time as well.
Like acne and bad haircuts, I think people are likely to outgrow yes.
Adam Boulton has done his column in the Sunday Times
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
Maybe this will encourage the No campaign to take their collective finger out.
No can't take their finger out. They have no alternative to the fear, uncertainty and doubt which has failed so far. Without FUD they have nothing. Today they have no options, they can't even use the Quebec save because they don't have ANYONE to bus and fly into Scotland.
Dair London puts in more than it takes out compared to Scotland, but of course Scotland will have to get its own currency as England and Wales do not want currency union, or it could join the euro
Dr Matt Qvortrup @drqvortrup 20 mins #indyref Yes Scotland on 51 percent according to YouGov. This is the most sensational polling reversal I have seen since 1975...
BBC News- Gordon Brown has written an article for a newspaper blaming the Tories and their policies for the narrowing in the polls. Sounds like #fallingapart
Hardly surprising that the most malign, poisonous and probably insane politician in the UK should do this....
The turning point was when Salmond accused Darling for being a "Tory".
Adam Boulton has done his column in the Sunday Times
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
And that is indeed the core of the matter. He can deny he would feel like resigning in that situation, others can say it would be silly, that there is no requirement to do it, that even if he has not been of much help in preventing it it is not his fault - but at the end of the day, he will have overseen it, will have been publicly humiliated in such a spectacular fashion that has rarely ever have occurred. He can have no authority after this, should it happen.
Even were the Tories not descending into panic over Labour, despite their problems, walking back into office, whining about losing their base and constantly quivering in fear over the UKIP threat, how could Cameron stand up with any authority to lead such a group, or present himself to the public as a strong leader. Laughable.
Once again, even though long term he will have just as many if not more problems as a result of this, and whose party is more responsible here, Ed M will probably get off relatively lightly initially simply by virtue of not being the PM right now.
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
The over 60s as a group are likely to grow, not get less.
Yes, but the people joining that Group in the future are currently Yes, making the over 60 Group likely to switch to that in time as well. Some level of conservatism may come upon them, but social attitudes and so on do change with the generations nevertheless.
Some very good points from you three. Well worth remembering.
At the end of the day and whatever happens later this month, it just shows the achievement of Mr Salmond and his SNP colleagues - to make independence a mainstream political desire.
Surbiton Labour seats like Grimsby will go UKIP, highly marginal seats like Thurrock Labour held in 1992 will go UKIP. 16% is the base even before this poll, Farage is not stupid, he will now campaign on flat out opposition to currency union and the UKIP total will increase to 20%+ and beyond
'Amid signs of panic and recrimination among unionist ranks about the prospects of a yes vote on 18 September, the Observer has learned that a devolution announcement designed to halt the nationalist bandwagon is due to be made within days by the anti-independence camp.
The plan, in the event of a no vote, is that people from all parts of Scottish society – rather than just politicians – would be invited to take part in a Scottish conference or convention that would decide on further large-scale transfers of power from London to Holyrood.' http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/06/scots-radical-new-deal-save-the-union
Adam Boulton has done his column in the Sunday Times
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
Adam Boulton has done his column in the Sunday Times
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
Nevermind Christmas. It could all be over in a fortnight! :^O
But Ed must do the same after failing to deliver his own voters. And it's not the first time, look at the 2011 Scottish Election which started all this off.
For one reason or another Scots seem to hate Ed Milliband and what he was doing in Scotland this week I have no idea because he just looked like a joke quite frankly.
'Amid signs of panic and recrimination among unionist ranks about the prospects of a yes vote on 18 September, the Observer has learned that a devolution announcement designed to halt the nationalist bandwagon is due to be made within days by the anti-independence camp.
The plan, in the event of a no vote, is that people from all parts of Scottish society – rather than just politicians – would be invited to take part in a Scottish conference or convention that would decide on further large-scale transfers of power from London to Holyrood.' http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/06/scots-radical-new-deal-save-the-union
I don't see how that would work. If people are switching in droves to Yes despite any risks - and they cannot be ignorant of them by this point - and without details of the further powers that are to be transferred, they seem to be deciding en masse that Scotland can take that risk. Knowing which powers specifically will be transferred if they vote No is pointless in that scenario.
"Well, I'd decided Scotland should go its own way and assume all powers a week ago, but now I know we'll get X, now the risk is too great"
Plausible? When there were more DKs and Yes a long way behind, maybe, but not now.
Our six year old was firmly against independence because he thought it would mean we wouldn't be able to take the train to England any more (so I guess I see which part of the electorate Miliband is going for with his latest ridiculous pronouncement). I'm not sure if he thought this would be due to some draconian border patrol or because he perceived independence involving some sort of landmass movement. I suppose we played a part in disabusing him of this notion, and now he is firmly in favour of independence because he wants Scotland to be free of nuclear weapons which might "explode the world".
The wife came back from Glasgow today with a tale of her Subway carriage of young drunks and middle-aged yes enthusiasts joyously bonding over a determination to secede.
What does it all mean? Probably future disillusionment one way or another.
I must say I always feared a late charge and momentum from Yes, they seemed to have the more invigorating campaign and activists, the more appealing narrative, but to find I was correct those raucous SNPers were not simply being optimistic about the masses voting Yes not being picked up is still depressing.
'Amid signs of panic and recrimination among unionist ranks about the prospects of a yes vote on 18 September, the Observer has learned that a devolution announcement designed to halt the nationalist bandwagon is due to be made within days by the anti-independence camp.
The plan, in the event of a no vote, is that people from all parts of Scottish society – rather than just politicians – would be invited to take part in a Scottish conference or convention that would decide on further large-scale transfers of power from London to Holyrood.' http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/06/scots-radical-new-deal-save-the-union
I suggested this a few days ago. In fact, I said the only way to turn this around for NO was for all mainstream UK parties to get together *this* weekend and come up with a major comprehensive attractive Devomax offer for Scotland: they can then argue for the positives of this offer, rather than relentlessly drumming on about the negatives if Scotland leaves the UK, which clearly isn't working.
I'm glad someone was listening. I just hope it's not too late.
'Amid signs of panic and recrimination among unionist ranks about the prospects of a yes vote on 18 September, the Observer has learned that a devolution announcement designed to halt the nationalist bandwagon is due to be made within days by the anti-independence camp.
The plan, in the event of a no vote, is that people from all parts of Scottish society – rather than just politicians – would be invited to take part in a Scottish conference or convention that would decide on further large-scale transfers of power from London to Holyrood.' http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/06/scots-radical-new-deal-save-the-union
Well clearly the momentum now with Yes, but as Quebec showed in 1995 No could still eke out a win if it convinces undecideds of the case for No. In 1995 Yes led in the final Quebec polls, but No won through winning undecideds. In that campaign made a passionate TV appeal for Canadian unity and a huge unity rally was held in Montreal with people from across Canada, as Fraser Nelson sets out here, Cameron and No should listen and learn, a far more positive case for the union now needs to be made in the final fortnight, those wary for economic reasons will now all be No
The major difference is Quebec was never more than a province. Scotland has been a separate country for 1300 years.
I liked the analogy someone referred to here yesterday whereby away football supporters sometimes make the more noise, but ultimately lose the game. As a shy Tory yourself Easterross, what is your view about there being a significant number of shy NO voters - significant that is to possibly swing the result?
Peter I think that's the 1st time I've been called a "shy Tory". I rather thought I am a fairly up and at em Tory. I don't believe there is a shy no vote in Scotland. People who don't venture an opinion are almost certainly no voters. There are however fewer and fewer of them in my experience. Goodnight all as I must try and finish some work I started 2 hours ago.
Adam Boulton has done his column in the Sunday Times
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
And that is indeed the core of the matter. He can deny he would feel like resigning in that situation, others can say it would be silly, that there is no requirement to do it, that even if he has not been of much help in preventing it it is not his fault - but at the end of the day, he will have overseen it, will have been publicly humiliated in such a spectacular fashion that has rarely ever have occurred. He can have no authority after this, should it happen.
Even were the Tories not descending into panic over Labour, despite their problems, walking back into office, whining about losing their base and constantly quivering in fear over the UKIP threat, how could Cameron stand up with any authority to lead such a group, or present himself to the public as a strong leader. Laughable.
Once again, even though long term he will have just as many if not more problems as a result of this, and whose party is more responsible here, Ed M will probably get off relatively lightly initially simply by virtue of not being the PM right now.
One problem with the theory. Nobody would be mad enough to trust Ed Milliband and 50-60 Labour MP's (who are about to return North of the Border in 2016) to negotiate the divorce with Salmond and get the best deal for RUK.
The Tories will ditch Cameron, do a deal with UKIP and play the rUK Unionist card to the hilt.
If Scotland votes yes the world as we know it will change rapidly.
I should add that it'll take more than just a "convention" at this stage. They need to say what exactly will be on the table - and it needs to be a very attractive offer.
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
The over 60s as a group are likely to grow, not get less.
Yes, but the people joining that Group in the future are currently Yes, making the over 60 Group likely to switch to that in time as well. Some level of conservatism may come upon them, but social attitudes and so on do change with the generations nevertheless.
Not necessarily. In the 1990s most Australians under 30 were strongly in favour of the country becoming a republic, but now the pro-republic campaign has largely faded away.
@andrewpicken1: Yes Scotland Panelbase poll just released:
Yes: 44% No: 48% Undecided: 8%
Excluding undecideds Yes: 48% No: 52%
#indyref
Presumably, this is the one that YES sat on for a day or two? Now they've got their momentum from YouGov, they see no reason not to release it anymore.
Adam Boulton has done his column in the Sunday Times
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
The question is if Cammo falls on his sword could there be a snap GE in spite of the 5 year rule?
I suspect there won't be, mostly because I don't think anyone but UKIP would really want one right now - the Tories were already in chaos, after that they would be freefall, Labour will not be as bad on the surface, but losing Scotland will be putting a lot of their plans in jeopardy, the LDs don't want to be facing the voters for another five years if they could help it, so as late as can be managed will have to do.
Still, could Clegg be installed as interim PM while the Tories conduct a leadership campaign, the winner of which would take over until the GE? Probably not, but pretty hilarious.
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
The over 60s as a group are likely to grow, not get less.
Yes, but the people joining that Group in the future are currently Yes, making the over 60 Group likely to switch to that in time as well. Some level of conservatism may come upon them, but social attitudes and so on do change with the generations nevertheless.
Not necessarily. In the 1990s most Australians under 30 were strongly in favour of the country becoming a republic, but now the pro-republic campaign has largely faded away.
Granted. And Quebec voted No very narrowly and PQ are not doing so good right now I understand. But we cannot assume the incoming grey vote will become more skeptical of independence as a result of natural conservatism shining through as one ages.
'Amid signs of panic and recrimination among unionist ranks about the prospects of a yes vote on 18 September, the Observer has learned that a devolution announcement designed to halt the nationalist bandwagon is due to be made within days by the anti-independence camp.
The plan, in the event of a no vote, is that people from all parts of Scottish society – rather than just politicians – would be invited to take part in a Scottish conference or convention that would decide on further large-scale transfers of power from London to Holyrood.' http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/06/scots-radical-new-deal-save-the-union
I suggested this a few days ago. In fact, I said the only way to turn this around for NO was for all mainstream UK parties to get together *this* weekend and come up with a major comprehensive attractive Devomax offer for Scotland: they can then argue for the positives of this offer, rather than relentlessly drumming on about the negatives if Scotland leaves the UK, which clearly isn't working.
I'm glad someone was listening. I just hope it's not too late.
Here we go again,more powers and proberly more money for Scotland,where does that leave England ? Where's the English parliament ?
The campaign this reminds me most of is Obama/Clinton '08. Clinton / SLAB had the machine, the dirty tactics and were relentlessly negative - 4am phone call. Obama was hopey change, things can be different rhetoric matched with an unsurpassed ground campaign...
Its all airy fairy, the Clinton's said, and anyway the young dont turnout..
Obama had the moment, his 'arc of history', Clinton had 'keep safe dont rock the boat'. Obama won, as this Englishman hopes Salmond will.
And now they lose and the rUK will be impoverished without Scots subsidies. Especially the VAT and Corporation Tax which are classed as "London Region" but are based on Scottish economic activity.
Can you explain? Presumably you are talking about oil profits received by the majors?
Not just Oil profits. Diageo makes most of its money from Whisky and all the VAT and Corporation Tax is classed as London revenue because their HQ is there. Same with any chain store which is based in England which is pretty much all of them. Every penny of VAT and Corporation Tax counts as English revenue in the GERS figures. You're looking at between £15bn and £25bn which Scotland will get after Independence.
England is very, very, very fucked economically. Part of the reason they will be desperate for a Currency Union as it's the only way to avoid a Devaluation on Sterling.
Plus if England wishes to act as Uncle Sam's boy and throw a few toys here and there, Scotland will not be paying for those. Might even charge for Faslane until England finds another suitable place.
Er, what if they decide to move the businesses lock stock and barrel to England? All the offices, everything? Just do a bit of manufacturing up there?
This is far more likely. Expect businesses to relocate down south pronto. Quebec never recovered from NEARLY going indy. Businesses relocated to Toronto.
Our of interest, which English city would like Nuclear Weapons stored there and be the first target of a nuclear strike? This is a population that object to windmills ffs.
The Union's pretty much over right? IF only the over 60s are backing it, then even squeaking a No win will be pretty pointless.
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
The over 60s as a group are likely to grow, not get less.
Yes, but the people joining that Group in the future are currently Yes, making the over 60 Group likely to switch to that in time as well. Some level of conservatism may come upon them, but social attitudes and so on do change with the generations nevertheless.
Some very good points from you three. Well worth remembering.
At the end of the day and whatever happens later this month, it just shows the achievement of Mr Salmond and his SNP colleagues - to make independence a mainstream political desire.
Not so difficult when you realise it's an achievement made with zero opposition, and the active connivance of the political elite. Scottish Nationalists are very fond of accusing the 'London' press of bias, but they cannot deny that those who wish to break up the country have been given a voice and a platform. Contrast this with those who merely wish to leave a supranational organisation -who have been mocked, derided, smeared and attacked. Why? When the latter is a far less extreme and extraordinary aim. We only joined the EU in the 1970s. It costs an arm and a leg, and is currently in a crisis that makes the UK's travails look like a walk in the park.
Regional nationalisms have been encouraged and subsidised by the EU, because they are part of the greater plan of EU federalism. The only one that has not been is English nationalism -because the plan is for England to be divided into regions.
Adam Boulton has done his column in the Sunday Times
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
And that is indeed the core of the matter. He can deny he would feel like resigning in that situation, others can say it would be silly, that there is no requirement to do it, that even if he has not been of much help in preventing it it is not his fault - but at the end of the day, he will have overseen it, will have been publicly humiliated in such a spectacular fashion that has rarely ever have occurred. He can have no authority after this, should it happen.
Even were the Tories not descending into panic over Labour, despite their problems, walking back into office, whining about losing their base and constantly quivering in fear over the UKIP threat, how could Cameron stand up with any authority to lead such a group, or present himself to the public as a strong leader. Laughable.
Once again, even though long term he will have just as many if not more problems as a result of this, and whose party is more responsible here, Ed M will probably get off relatively lightly initially simply by virtue of not being the PM right now.
One problem with the theory. Nobody would be mad enough to trust Ed Milliband and 50-60 Labour MP's (who are about to return North of the Border in 2016) to negotiate the divorce with Salmond and get the best deal for RUK.
Why? A lot of people don't think anyone would be mad enough to trust Ed M to run the country from 2015 onwards, but millions of others do think that and the polls have steadily suggested it will happen, despite all his weaknesses and tightening polls.
I do think any new Tory leadership candidate would promise a referendum in 2015 should they win the GE, if they wanted to win. Even those who don't think that would be a good idea will likely change their position if they want to win.
'Amid signs of panic and recrimination among unionist ranks about the prospects of a yes vote on 18 September, the Observer has learned that a devolution announcement designed to halt the nationalist bandwagon is due to be made within days by the anti-independence camp.
The plan, in the event of a no vote, is that people from all parts of Scottish society – rather than just politicians – would be invited to take part in a Scottish conference or convention that would decide on further large-scale transfers of power from London to Holyrood.' http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/06/scots-radical-new-deal-save-the-union
I suggested this a few days ago. In fact, I said the only way to turn this around for NO was for all mainstream UK parties to get together *this* weekend and come up with a major comprehensive attractive Devomax offer for Scotland: they can then argue for the positives of this offer, rather than relentlessly drumming on about the negatives if Scotland leaves the UK, which clearly isn't working.
I'm glad someone was listening. I just hope it's not too late.
Here we go again,more powers and proberly more money for Scotland,where does that leave England ? Where's the English parliament ?
Enough is enough,let them go.
I think there should be an English parliament. Where have I said I think the West Lothian question should remain "unanswered" ?
Unlike you, I think the break-up of the UK would be a disaster for both our countries. It would leave us both irremediably weaker.
Adam Boulton has done his column in the Sunday Times
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
And that is indeed the core of the matter. He can deny he would feel like resigning in that situation, others can say it would be silly, that there is no requirement to do it, that even if he has not been of much help in preventing it it is not his fault - but at the end of the day, he will have overseen it, will have been publicly humiliated in such a spectacular fashion that has rarely ever have occurred. He can have no authority after this, should it happen.
Even were the Tories not descending into panic over Labour, despite their problems, walking back into office, whining about losing their base and constantly quivering in fear over the UKIP threat, how could Cameron stand up with any authority to lead such a group, or present himself to the public as a strong leader. Laughable.
Once again, even though long term he will have just as many if not more problems as a result of this, and whose party is more responsible here, Ed M will probably get off relatively lightly initially simply by virtue of not being the PM right now.
One problem with the theory. Nobody would be mad enough to trust Ed Milliband and 50-60 Labour MP's (who are about to return North of the Border in 2016) to negotiate the divorce with Salmond and get the best deal for RUK.
Why? A lot of people don't think anyone would be mad enough to trust Ed M to run the country from 2015 onwards, but millions of others do think that and the polls have steadily suggested it will happen, despite all his weaknesses and tightening polls.
I do think any new Tory leadership candidate would promise a referendum in 2015 should they win the GE, if they wanted to win. Even those who don't think that would be a good idea will likely change their position if they want to win.
We'll see.
I think your being very complacent about the danger a YES vote presents to Labour in 2015.
The whole election will basically become about who is best placed to deal with Salmond and Scotland in the negotiations, pretty much to the exclusion of everything else actually.
Ed Milliband or Con/UKIP who are already seen as English nationalists, lets be honest.
Oh and how many of those Scottish Labour MP's will be replaced by SNP MP's for one year in 2015 I ask myself?
And now they lose and the rUK will be impoverished without Scots subsidies. Especially the VAT and Corporation Tax which are classed as "London Region" but are based on Scottish economic activity.
Can you explain? Presumably you are talking about oil profits received by the majors?
Not just Oil profits. Diageo makes most of its money from Whisky and all the VAT and Corporation Tax is classed as London revenue because their HQ is there. Same with any chain store which is based in England which is pretty much all of them. Every penny of VAT and Corporation Tax counts as English revenue in the GERS figures. You're looking at between £15bn and £25bn which Scotland will get after Independence.
England is very, very, very fucked economically. Part of the reason they will be desperate for a Currency Union as it's the only way to avoid a Devaluation on Sterling.
Plus if England wishes to act as Uncle Sam's boy and throw a few toys here and there, Scotland will not be paying for those. Might even charge for Faslane until England finds another suitable place.
Er, what if they decide to move the businesses lock stock and barrel to England? All the offices, everything? Just do a bit of manufacturing up there?
This is far more likely. Expect businesses to relocate down south pronto. Quebec never recovered from NEARLY going indy. Businesses relocated to Toronto.
Our of interest, which English city would like Nuclear Weapons stored there and be the first target of a nuclear strike? This is a population that object to windmills ffs.
Milton Keynes please. They'd be doing us a favour.
@kle4 Will Boris be near enough to the back of the scrum if the ball comes loose?
In this analogy, I think the ref and the players in the scrum have already had to warn him from picking up the ball before it comes lose. But as someone said below, events will move quickly. Perhaps Cameron might even do a quick resignation in part to try to prevent Boris from getting the job - they may play it nice for the cameras, but surely he cannot have appreciated Boris's naked ambition all these years.
And now they lose and the rUK will be impoverished without Scots subsidies. Especially the VAT and Corporation Tax which are classed as "London Region" but are based on Scottish economic activity.
Can you explain? Presumably you are talking about oil profits received by the majors?
Not just Oil profits. Diageo makes most of its money from Whisky and all the VAT and Corporation Tax is classed as London revenue because their HQ is there. Same with any chain store which is based in England which is pretty much all of them. Every penny of VAT and Corporation Tax counts as English revenue in the GERS figures. You're looking at between £15bn and £25bn which Scotland will get after Independence.
England is very, very, very fucked economically. Part of the reason they will be desperate for a Currency Union as it's the only way to avoid a Devaluation on Sterling.
Plus if England wishes to act as Uncle Sam's boy and throw a few toys here and there, Scotland will not be paying for those. Might even charge for Faslane until England finds another suitable place.
Er, what if they decide to move the businesses lock stock and barrel to England? All the offices, everything? Just do a bit of manufacturing up there?
This is far more likely. Expect businesses to relocate down south pronto. Quebec never recovered from NEARLY going indy. Businesses relocated to Toronto.
Our of interest, which English city would like Nuclear Weapons stored there and be the first target of a nuclear strike? This is a population that object to windmills ffs.
Good point. Christ, solar panels are the hot NIMBY topic at the moment, and they're only a few metres off the ground if we're assessing impact (yes, they can be seen, but compared to a windmill...)
The problem is the paucity of the polls. Three polling companies have published post debate polls.
Panelbase - no change, NO 4 points ahead Survation - no change from their long-term average, reversion to the mean after previous poll, NO 6 points ahead Yougov - massive shift in 4 weeks with an 11 point swing, Yes lead by 2
Until the YouGov shift is confirmed it should be viewed skeptically. It may be right but we can't really know yet. Also - they have changed their methodology. OK this does not explain the dramatic shift but it is a reason to doubt it.
The other problem is there are lots of reasons to think the polling might be wrong either way (shy Nos, high turnout, weighting problems given 2010/2011 differences). The next 12 days could be a wild ride!
Adam Boulton has done his column in the Sunday Times
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
The question is if Cammo falls on his sword could there be a snap GE in spite of the 5 year rule?
I suspect there won't be, mostly because I don't think anyone but UKIP would really want one right now - the Tories were already in chaos, after that they would be freefall, Labour will not be as bad on the surface, but losing Scotland will be putting a lot of their plans in jeopardy, the LDs don't want to be facing the voters for another five years if they could help it, so as late as can be managed will have to do.
Still, could Clegg be installed as interim PM while the Tories conduct a leadership campaign, the winner of which would take over until the GE? Probably not, but pretty hilarious.
Even present day Tories would never stand for a PM from the junior partner in a coalition.
@kle4 Will Boris be near enough to the back of the scrum if the ball comes loose?
No Boris will be out on the wing waiting for the try scoring pass after everyone else has done the work.
I does seem astonishing, but who knows. JG Ballard wrote in the New Statesman in 2006 that the notion of Britishness had never been so devalued and that sport was the only thing that seemed to unite people. How right he was.
Our of interest, which English city would like Nuclear Weapons stored there and be the first target of a nuclear strike? This is a population that object to windmills ffs.
Plymouth. Already has nuclear subs there and is a total shithole. Being an Exeter City man myself means I have no bias in this..
Comments
With the retail companies, you'd get to keep the VAT, that's true, but again, I'd assume that the products are bought into an ex-Scottish central company which then would sell on to the Scottish subisidiary on a transfer price basis (or they might even use one of those low-risk distributor models, whereby the English parent underwrites the P&L in return for a fixed gross margin).
I guess it depends on what the iScot government does to corporation tax - if it goes up significantly then the taxes will flow south.
Well, maybe not just them, but the fragile alliance of No seems like it will fragment rather than refocus on the actual opponents in this fight. Such a massive swing at such a stage seems tough to reverse and much less likely to be a flash in the pan.
Though, what is it about Scots and polling that, perhaps, will once again lead to such a late charge. Are people really just suddenly shifting in droves to one side late in the game, or are the polls only picking them up really late, and either way, why?
The Screaming Eagles @TSEofPB now
Sunday Times graphic on the yougov #indyref poll
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bw4QxuZIIAAMmxF.jpg
I've thought Yes would win all along when it came down to it, though a couple of months ago I allowed myself some brief moments of optimism, but if has failed to inure me from the disappointment at the sudden swing toward Yes regardless.
At the end of the day, the Scots are optimists it seems.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/scotland/article1455988.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_09_06
says it all really...
twitter.com/SkyNews/status/508352769502502912/photo/1
Yes for a while copied them; also a mistake.
This is always and ever was about passion and destiny. If the Scots want independence then so be it; I would rather otherwise, as a Tory, but if they want control of their future, fine.
What I rather suspect Yes has not done, however, is to explain how this generation and the next and the next will suffer, in well-documented terms of fiscal contraction, for the greater good. Now if this and immediate future generations get this, then so much the even better.
The tragedy would be for a Yes vote, for all the short term pain (of which there will be plenty) and for those who voted Yes to say: "but you never told us it would be this bad now".
We could be about to go through one of our once to twice a century upheavals.
There was some value there whilst it lasted
it is headlined with
Cheer up, PM. At this rate you will all be over by Christmas
and signs off with
But this is Cameron’s watch and, as every Tory tells me, “we are the Conservative and Unionist party”. If Cameron loses Scotland, it won’t just be etched on his record: it will be his tombstone.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/columns/adamboulton/article1455494.ece
I can't believe it. Scotland on the brink.
Is the Mail's front page a spoof? - who in their right mind would suggest such a loopy plan!
#indyref Yes Scotland on 51 percent according to YouGov. This is the most sensational polling reversal I have seen since 1975...
It'll be interesting to see Prof Curtice's line.
Even were the Tories not descending into panic over Labour, despite their problems, walking back into office, whining about losing their base and constantly quivering in fear over the UKIP threat, how could Cameron stand up with any authority to lead such a group, or present himself to the public as a strong leader. Laughable.
Once again, even though long term he will have just as many if not more problems as a result of this, and whose party is more responsible here, Ed M will probably get off relatively lightly initially simply by virtue of not being the PM right now.
At the end of the day and whatever happens later this month, it just shows the achievement of Mr Salmond and his SNP colleagues - to make independence a mainstream political desire.
Labour ....... 4/11
UKIP ........... 3/1
'Amid signs of panic and recrimination among unionist ranks about the prospects of a yes vote on 18 September, the Observer has learned that a devolution announcement designed to halt the nationalist bandwagon is due to be made within days by the anti-independence camp.
The plan, in the event of a no vote, is that people from all parts of Scottish society – rather than just politicians – would be invited to take part in a Scottish conference or convention that would decide on further large-scale transfers of power from London to Holyrood.'
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/06/scots-radical-new-deal-save-the-union
But Ed must do the same after failing to deliver his own voters. And it's not the first time, look at the 2011 Scottish Election which started all this off.
For one reason or another Scots seem to hate Ed Milliband and what he was doing in Scotland this week I have no idea because he just looked like a joke quite frankly.
Yes: 44%
No: 48%
Undecided: 8%
Excluding undecideds
Yes: 48%
No: 52%
#indyref
Good night....
"Well, I'd decided Scotland should go its own way and assume all powers a week ago, but now I know we'll get X, now the risk is too great"
Plausible? When there were more DKs and Yes a long way behind, maybe, but not now.
Our six year old was firmly against independence because he thought it would mean we wouldn't be able to take the train to England any more (so I guess I see which part of the electorate Miliband is going for with his latest ridiculous pronouncement). I'm not sure if he thought this would be due to some draconian border patrol or because he perceived independence involving some sort of landmass movement. I suppose we played a part in disabusing him of this notion, and now he is firmly in favour of independence because he wants Scotland to be free of nuclear weapons which might "explode the world".
The wife came back from Glasgow today with a tale of her Subway carriage of young drunks and middle-aged yes enthusiasts joyously bonding over a determination to secede.
What does it all mean? Probably future disillusionment one way or another.
I'm glad someone was listening. I just hope it's not too late.
The Tories will ditch Cameron, do a deal with UKIP and play the rUK Unionist card to the hilt.
If Scotland votes yes the world as we know it will change rapidly.
Still, could Clegg be installed as interim PM while the Tories conduct a leadership campaign, the winner of which would take over until the GE? Probably not, but pretty hilarious.
Will Boris be near enough to the back of the scrum if the ball comes loose?
Enough is enough,let them go.
Ian Geldard @igeldard 4m
Viking 'ring fortress' discovered in #Denmark http://bit.ly/1och0g0
Its all airy fairy, the Clinton's said, and anyway the young dont turnout..
Obama had the moment, his 'arc of history', Clinton had 'keep safe dont rock the boat'. Obama won, as this Englishman hopes Salmond will.
Regional nationalisms have been encouraged and subsidised by the EU, because they are part of the greater plan of EU federalism. The only one that has not been is English nationalism -because the plan is for England to be divided into regions.
I do think any new Tory leadership candidate would promise a referendum in 2015 should they win the GE, if they wanted to win. Even those who don't think that would be a good idea will likely change their position if they want to win.
Unlike you, I think the break-up of the UK would be a disaster for both our countries. It would leave us both irremediably weaker.
Where is McArse when you want to take the Piss
I think your being very complacent about the danger a YES vote presents to Labour in 2015.
The whole election will basically become about who is best placed to deal with Salmond and Scotland in the negotiations, pretty much to the exclusion of everything else actually.
Ed Milliband or Con/UKIP who are already seen as English nationalists, lets be honest.
Oh and how many of those Scottish Labour MP's will be replaced by SNP MP's for one year in 2015 I ask myself?
Nadine Dorries MP @NadineDorriesMP 30 mins
Guards on borders, border controls, remove the £ - handling this really well aren't we.
That is absolutely right.
The problem is the paucity of the polls. Three polling companies have published post debate polls.
Panelbase - no change, NO 4 points ahead
Survation - no change from their long-term average, reversion to the mean after previous poll, NO 6 points ahead
Yougov - massive shift in 4 weeks with an 11 point swing, Yes lead by 2
Until the YouGov shift is confirmed it should be viewed skeptically. It may be right but we can't really know yet. Also - they have changed their methodology. OK this does not explain the dramatic shift but it is a reason to doubt it.
The other problem is there are lots of reasons to think the polling might be wrong either way (shy Nos, high turnout, weighting problems given 2010/2011 differences). The next 12 days could be a wild ride!
I does seem astonishing, but who knows. JG Ballard wrote in the New Statesman in 2006 that the notion of Britishness had never been so devalued and that sport was the only thing that seemed to unite people. How right he was.
Our of interest, which English city would like Nuclear Weapons stored there and be the first target of a nuclear strike? This is a population that object to windmills ffs.
Plymouth. Already has nuclear subs there and is a total shithole. Being an Exeter City man myself means I have no bias in this..