politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Possibly not good news for the Scottish separatists: the fi
Comments
-
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.0 -
Mr. Jam, the defence plan proposed in the Scottish White Paper is about as big a work of fantasy and one of Mr. Dancer's novels. The difference is that Mr. Dancer doesn't try and pretend that his characters and stories are real.jam2809 said:
I vaguely recall the SNP's navel defence plan after independence was for 2 ships, at least initially. Presumably one for the East coast, another for the West.HurstLlama said:
How would the UK as it exists today? The RN is not actually over endowed with deployable assets and has a very limited anti-surface warfare capability and I think that the RAF no longer has any anti-ship capability at all.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
0 -
Thanks for the correction - I thought they were updated only on an annual basis.PClipp said:
Except that registers are updated on a monthly basis, and this applies to people dropping off, as well as those coming on.For it is I said:If one recalls that about 10% of the population moves each year, and so are consequently registered to vote at more than one address, than a 90% [real] turnout would be recorded as an 81% turnout, because of the excess people on the register.
A turnout of 85% on the official figures could be as high as 94% in reality.0 -
Now it's 6.0
-
NEW MARKET
Betfair - Voter Turnout 2
75.0 Percent or fewer 16
75.01 - 80.0 Percent 4.2
80.01 - 85.0 Percent 2.36
85.01 - 90.0 Percent 2.56
90.01 - 95.0 Percent 3.85
95.01 Percent or Greater 14.50 -
And whist we are at DEVO max powers for wales and NI and no voting on English matters.Socrates said:
It's a basic question of fairness. If England doesn't get a say on devolved matters in Scotland, your MPs shouldn't get a say on the same matters in England. Given the untrustworthiness of politicians, a gentleman's agreement is unacceptable. No more Scottish influence should be allowed on any issue covered by devomax. While we're at it, we can return to equal spending levels in Scotland and England.Carnyx said:
What I find bizarre is the concern about the WLQ. A true breach of the WLQ happens so rarely in reality, and although the cases of the student fees and NHS were important and pretty bad, there is a lot more activity in Parliament than that.Cyclefree said:
Unless they get the legislation on the statute book before May 2015, this is so much hot air. I don't trust either the Tories or the Lib Dems to deliver and Labour certainly won't.taffys said:A couple of news sources are hinting there's a bit of a tory/lib pact to shaft labour if we get a no - in the form of powers to freeze scots MPs out of English matters in return for devomax.
It should have been made part of the Vow. Instead, Cameron - who has all the strategic nous of a blancmange - got stitched up by Brown and Scottish Labour.
Surely it would be political suicide for Labour and the LDs to try it on again?
Any other solution than a gents agreement risks introducing new problems.
0 -
When the US film of the Scottish referendum comes out, whatever the actual result it will show a YES victory.0
-
Does anyone know if any other pollster, apart from Ipsos-Mori (it would seem), failed to ask the question as it actually appears on the ballot paper?
'Should Scotland be an independent country?'
Yes
No0 -
As far as I can see from the cross-tabs they asked the right question. Where is it coming from that they screwed up?audreyanne said:Does anyone know if any other pollster, apart from Ipsos-Mori (it would seem), failed to ask the question as it actually appears on the ballot paper?
'Should Scotland be an independent country?'
Yes
No0 -
The Union flag was the creation of the Union Act of 1801, not 1707. Given that part of both realms that merged in 1801 remain part of the UK, we should keep the flag. The Saltire doesn't even have the same blue on it.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
0 -
I asked that earlier.audreyanne said:Does anyone know if any other pollster, apart from Ipsos-Mori (it would seem), failed to ask the question as it actually appears on the ballot paper?
'Should Scotland be an independent country?'
Yes
No
TSE said Mori confirmed they did use the actual wording in the poll, but it appeared incorrectly on some infographics.0 -
Betfair now hits 6.2.
One way traffic - it's all over.0 -
Bookies odds on YES being cut...0
-
And out further. Wonder what is driving it.0
-
On their graphics but from what Hugh has posted that seems to be a typographical error. On their link the question appears 'Should Scotland become an independent country.' If the margins are tight that's a small but potentially significant difference.Alistair said:
As far as I can see from the cross-tabs they asked the right question. Where is it coming from that they screwed up?audreyanne said:Does anyone know if any other pollster, apart from Ipsos-Mori (it would seem), failed to ask the question as it actually appears on the ballot paper?
'Should Scotland be an independent country?'
Yes
No
I can't help thinking in the secrecy of the ballot station that question, and the way the ballot paper appears, favours YES. It just seems to me to be harder to put No to it ...0 -
Huge amounts of liquidity on BetFair now. 1.19 = 82k, 1.20 = 113k.
0 -
If you scroll down a short way on Ipsos-Mori's own twitter feed to their graphic the question is not the same as the one asked on the ballot:
https://twitter.com/IpsosMORI?original_referer=http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/09/18/possibly-not-good-news-for-the-scottish-separatists-the-final-two-poll-to-be-completed-had-no-with-the-largest-leads/&tw_i=512557294601912320&tw_p=tweetembed
0 -
Yes please! I want Miliband and Brown all over the telly in May. :-)BenM said:Talking of the Labour Party conference - if tonight's result is No, will Miliband push Gordon Brown front and centre next week as the former PM is now seen as something of a oratorial and tactical colossus?
0 -
A BBC team has been attacked in the southern Russian city of Astrakhan.
They had gone to investigate reports of Russian servicemen being killed near the border with Ukraine.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29249642?ocid=socialflow_twitter0 -
That might be accounted for by the very strong wealth - Tory - No correlation. Mind you, the causality is another matter.AndyJS said:There's been very little discussion in the media or elsewhere on a possible social divide between Yes and No supporters, which is a bit odd IMO. Most of the anecdotal evidence appears to be that the wealthier someone is the more likely they are to vote No.
0 -
The current version of the Union flag was created in 1801, yes, reinforcing the principle that it consists of a combination of the crosses of the patron saints of its constituent nations. If one of those constituent nations - Scotland - leaves it would be pathetically insecure to keep the cross of St Andrew on the Union Flag.Socrates said:
The Union flag was the creation of the Union Act of 1801, not 1707. Given that part of both realms that merged in 1801 remain part of the UK, we should keep the flag. The Saltire doesn't even have the same blue on it.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
While the shade of blue used on the Saltire today is lighter [and in my opinion less pleasant] than the shade used on the Union Flag, this is something of a recent innovation - Wikipedia records the current lighter shade being settled on in 2003!
The most sensible suggestion I have seen in a logical sense is to replace the cross of St Andrew with the Welsh cross of St David - although some people do raise entirely reasonable aesthetic objections to this solution.0 -
Do you think the Tories will have selected a new permanent leader by then, or will they go for a caretaker?Patrick said:
Yes please! I want Miliband and Brown all over the telly in May. :-)BenM said:Talking of the Labour Party conference - if tonight's result is No, will Miliband push Gordon Brown front and centre next week as the former PM is now seen as something of a oratorial and tactical colossus?
0 -
Having thought about it, I don't think the turnout can exceed 100%, even with postal voting fraud.
This is because the fraudulent votes will also be included in the total number of potential electors. For example dead people or non existant people will still be on the register.
0 -
A large number of bets were placed on Yes getting more than 55% IIRC. Those bets would seem like money down the drain now.0
-
Delete! Delete!0
-
Mr. Me, piffle. I'd prefer use to keep the flag as is. And why not? Australia and New Zealand aren't British and have our flag in theirs (I think Hawaii does as well).
If it must be changed, shifting blue to black would look alright and be a nice nod to the Welsh. It'd also be one of the few suggestions which wouldn't look bloody awful.0 -
The problem is the first result could be either Western Isles or Orkney. If it's Orkney with a big No vote the Yes position on Betfair may not improve much.0
-
Given that in such a scenario the Russians would first have to neutralize a NATO member - Norway - it is a frankly daft question. Mind you you are in good company. A few weeks ago a journalist from the Guardian contacted a Scots colleague of mine to ask if he knew anyone who could advise on the consequences of a Russian attack on an independent Scotland.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
It is worth pointing out that Russian military vessels regularly move up and down through the North Sea, happily ignoring any disruption they might cause to oil activity and have in the past shut down helicopter flights by launching fighter aircraft and helicopters from their carriers whilst in the oil fields.0 -
Socrates said:
The Union flag was the creation of the Union Act of 1801, not 1707. Given that part of both realms that merged in 1801 remain part of the UK, we should keep the flag. The Saltire doesn't even have the same blue on it.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
Any free country is at liberty to chose whatever colour it wants on its national flag.
Scotland does not have copyright on the colour blue.
So rUK can continue with the current 'Union' flag colours if it wishes.0 -
blue to black, hint of yellow/gold in there.OblitusSumMe said:something about flags ....
Bit like this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/UK_&_Wales_Flag_01a.png
lovely.0 -
There's absolutely no point in changing the Union Jack. I don't understand why it's even under discussion or speculation.David_Evershed said:Socrates said:
The Union flag was the creation of the Union Act of 1801, not 1707. Given that part of both realms that merged in 1801 remain part of the UK, we should keep the flag. The Saltire doesn't even have the same blue on it.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
Any free country is at liberty to chose whatever colour it wants on its national flag.
Scotland does not have copyright on the colour blue.
So rUK can continue with the current 'Union' flag colours if it wishes.0 -
Richard_Tyndall said:
Given that in such a scenario the Russians would first have to neutralize a NATO member - Norway - it is a frankly daft question. Mind you you are in good company. A few weeks ago a journalist from the Guardian contacted a Scots colleague of mine to ask if he knew anyone who could advise on the consequences of a Russian attack on an independent Scotland.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
It is worth pointing out that Russian military vessels regularly move up and down through the North Sea, happily ignoring any disruption they might cause to oil activity and have in the past shut down helicopter flights by launching fighter aircraft and helicopters from their carriers whilst in the oil fields.
Do we know that an independent Scotland would be a member of NATO given the SNP's rejection of nuclear weapons?0 -
In 2011 the Russians anchored up off the Moray Firth. We had to send a ship from Portsmouth to intercept them and the only reason we knew they had turned up there was because the Russians posted the fact on social media.HurstLlama said:
How would the UK as it exists today? The RN is not actually over endowed with deployable assets and has a very limited anti-surface warfare capability and I think that the RAF no longer has any anti-ship capability at all.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
0 -
How would the UK as it exists today? The RN is not actually over endowed with deployable assets and has a very limited anti-surface warfare capability and I think that the RAF no longer has any anti-ship capability at all.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
Really?
I don't think they are a credible threat. Putin only has a single aircraft carrier iirc.
UK does have anti-surface capability from surface and air according to Prof Wiki, never mind those hunter-killer subs.
Mr Salmond would shout at them through a toilet roll from a pedalo, and they would have no choice other than to obey because he would be Imperator Scotus Maximus, just as Germany, Spain, France, Italy and the rest of the EU will obe him, and the UK will give him CU because he says so.
Matt
0 -
In the event of a draw in the referendum, does the status quo prevail as at Westminster?0
-
It's a bit different for, say, Australia to have the Union Flag in the corner of their flag, because it's a nod to the creation of their country.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Me, piffle. I'd prefer use to keep the flag as is. And why not? Australia and New Zealand aren't British and have our flag in theirs (I think Hawaii does as well).
If it must be changed, shifting blue to black would look alright and be a nice nod to the Welsh. It'd also be one of the few suggestions which wouldn't look bloody awful.
Keeping the cross of St Andrew on the Union Flag would be akin to the centuries of English Kings retaining the Fleur-de-lis on the Royal Standard, laying claim to be the King of France. It would be a pathetic failure to acknowledge reality.0 -
Pah! Until the result is known this is all very dull.
Meanwhile in Australia they have apparently foiled an IS plot - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/11103346/Australia-foils-Islamic-State-terror-plot-to-commit-Lee-Rigby-style-murders.html0 -
It doesn't make any difference. Norway is currently debating a constitutional ban on nuclear weapons on its territory and no one has suggested it would in any way effect their NATO membership.David_Evershed said:Richard_Tyndall said:
Given that in such a scenario the Russians would first have to neutralize a NATO member - Norway - it is a frankly daft question. Mind you you are in good company. A few weeks ago a journalist from the Guardian contacted a Scots colleague of mine to ask if he knew anyone who could advise on the consequences of a Russian attack on an independent Scotland.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
It is worth pointing out that Russian military vessels regularly move up and down through the North Sea, happily ignoring any disruption they might cause to oil activity and have in the past shut down helicopter flights by launching fighter aircraft and helicopters from their carriers whilst in the oil fields.
Do we know that an independent Scotland would be a member of NATO given the SNP's rejection of nuclear weapons?0 -
If it's a YES I think Dave is indeed likely to be toast. Hague steps in as PM on acting basis while Tories elect new leader / PM (at least until May).Hugh said:
Do you think the Tories will have selected a new permanent leader by then, or will they go for a caretaker?Patrick said:
Yes please! I want Miliband and Brown all over the telly in May. :-)BenM said:Talking of the Labour Party conference - if tonight's result is No, will Miliband push Gordon Brown front and centre next week as the former PM is now seen as something of a oratorial and tactical colossus?
If it's a NO Dave survives - until the issue of Barnett / EVFEL / WLQ and Dave's reluctance to do the right thing causes some sort of rupture with his party and he's ejected. Then it's Hague etc as above.
If it's a NO and Dave drafts legislation to give Scotland Devomax / Barnett unchanged but also builds WLQ / EVFEL / FUK resolution into the legislation he puts himself back in the party's good books for shafting Labour and doing the right thing for the English -and survives altogether.
So...I think Dave's survival now depends wholly on what he does for England. Not what he does for Scotland.0 -
As a politico, I have always tended to over-estimate turnout during polling day itself and then been disappointed at the final percentage at the count.
If postal vote turnouts are being accurately reported at high 80 percents, I think polling day turnout will be in the 70 percents. There may be betting value in total turnout below 80%.0 -
Updated polling average from UKPR:
Lab 35%
Con 33%
UKIP 13%
LD 8%
Green 5%
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/uk-polling-report-average-20 -
What is the probability of a draw?David_Evershed said:In the event of a draw in the referendum, does the status quo prevail as at Westminster?
0 -
I have seen no serious suggestion from the Yes side that they are intending to end the Union of the Crowns. In which case by your own argument there is no need for a change in the flag.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.0 -
For me, aesthetics trumps logic when it comes to the flag. We would be mad to change it.OblitusSumMe said:
It's a bit different for, say, Australia to have the Union Flag in the corner of their flag, because it's a nod to the creation of their country.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Me, piffle. I'd prefer use to keep the flag as is. And why not? Australia and New Zealand aren't British and have our flag in theirs (I think Hawaii does as well).
If it must be changed, shifting blue to black would look alright and be a nice nod to the Welsh. It'd also be one of the few suggestions which wouldn't look bloody awful.
Keeping the cross of St Andrew on the Union Flag would be akin to the centuries of English Kings retaining the Fleur-de-lis on the Royal Standard, laying claim to be the King of France. It would be a pathetic failure to acknowledge reality.0 -
Power to the people! I tweeted Ipsos-Mori and they have just tweeted back to say they have corrected the graphic and the actual question asked was indeed as per the ballot paper. New graphic is here:
https://twitter.com/IMdatafizz/status/512618185607372801/photo/10 -
YouGov are doing an exit poll apparently.0
-
I wouldn't be too sure - when John Oliver did a segment on the Daily Show about Scottish Independence and featured a clip from Braveheart he got a huge cheer when he said 'who better to lead the Scots to freedom than a recovering alcoholic Australian multimillionaire anti-semite...'David_Evershed said:When the US film of the Scottish referendum comes out, whatever the actual result it will show a YES victory.
0 -
Most of my staff have yet to vote but plan to and will predominately vote No. The work rush is the last big unknown. For the Yes side, workers tend to be younger, for the No side, workers tend to be more scared about losing their job and more assets to fall in value if it all goes wrong. Workers are not predominately male. In the public sector 69% are female.
0 -
Surely the value bet on YES is the 50-55% band on Betfair, now? You can get on at 8.0AndyJS said:A large number of bets were placed on Yes getting more than 55% IIRC. Those bets would seem like money down the drain now.
If it's going to be YES, it will be by a whisker not a landslide , and the margin could go all the way up to almost a 10 point lead and you'd still collect. It's a very good value arb and overlooked by those fixated on the main market (which is still around 6.0) IMHO0 -
Send the bill for changing all the flags to Salmond, and see if he agrees.OblitusSumMe said:
The current version of the Union flag was created in 1801, yes, reinforcing the principle that it consists of a combination of the crosses of the patron saints of its constituent nations. If one of those constituent nations - Scotland - leaves it would be pathetically insecure to keep the cross of St Andrew on the Union Flag.Socrates said:
The Union flag was the creation of the Union Act of 1801, not 1707. Given that part of both realms that merged in 1801 remain part of the UK, we should keep the flag. The Saltire doesn't even have the same blue on it.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
While the shade of blue used on the Saltire today is lighter [and in my opinion less pleasant] than the shade used on the Union Flag, this is something of a recent innovation - Wikipedia records the current lighter shade being settled on in 2003!
The most sensible suggestion I have seen in a logical sense is to replace the cross of St Andrew with the Welsh cross of St David - although some people do raise entirely reasonable aesthetic objections to this solution.
0 -
I find it rather sad that Mike Smithson has chosen to use the pejorative term "separatists"0
-
Plus you have more to lose, self-evidently, if you are in a job and there are all these warnings about economic upheaval being bandied around.hamiltonace said:Most of my staff have yet to vote but plan to and will predominately vote No. The work rush is the last big unknown. For the Yes side, workers tend to be younger, for the No side, workers tend to be more scared about losing their job and more assets to fall in value if it all goes wrong. Workers are not predominately male. In the public sector 69% are female.
Option 1: vote Yes and see what happens with my job, could be interesting, a bumpy ride perhaps, what about the mortgage payments.
Option 2: vote No and know that not much will happen with my job; not interesting but safe.
Doesn't take the brains of an archbishop to work out which those who are risk-averse (most of us) is more appealing.0 -
Nah - it would be an acknowledgement of the peoples who make up rUK - which will continue to include many hundreds of thousands of Scots - in any case, the Royal College of Heralds has said there is no need to change it as its a Royal Standard.....OblitusSumMe said:
It would be a pathetic failure to acknowledge reality.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Me, piffle. I'd prefer use to keep the flag as is. And why not? Australia and New Zealand aren't British and have our flag in theirs (I think Hawaii does as well).
If it must be changed, shifting blue to black would look alright and be a nice nod to the Welsh. It'd also be one of the few suggestions which wouldn't look bloody awful.
I think we will have more pressing matters on our minds....and we'd be certifiable to tinker with an iconic global brand.....
0 -
The current version of the Union flag was created in 1801, yes, reinforcing the principle that it consists of a combination of the crosses of the patron saints of its constituent nations. If one of those constituent nations - Scotland - leaves it would be pathetically insecure to keep the cross of St Andrew on the Union Flag.dr_spyn said:
The Union flag was the creation of the Union Act of 1801, not 1707. Given that part of both realms that merged in 1801 remain part of the UK, we should keep the flag. The Saltire doesn't even have the same blue on it.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Socrates said:Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
While the shade of blue used on the Saltire today is lighter [and in my opinion less pleasant] than the shade used on the Union Flag, this is something of a recent innovation - Wikipedia records the current lighter shade being settled on in 2003!
The most sensible suggestion I have seen in a logical sense is to replace the cross of St Andrew with the Welsh cross of St David - although some people do raise entirely reasonable aesthetic objections to this solution.
A heraldist/vexillologist would have a fit. No gold bordering white, if you please!
0 -
SSN Salmond, SSN Sturgeon.jam2809 said:
I vaguely recall the SNP's navel defence plan after independence was for 2 ships, at least initially. Presumably one for the East coast, another for the West.HurstLlama said:
How would the UK as it exists today? The RN is not actually over endowed with deployable assets and has a very limited anti-surface warfare capability and I think that the RAF no longer has any anti-ship capability at all.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
0 -
Shy yes syndrome.hamiltonace said:Most of my staff have yet to vote but plan to and will predominately vote No.
0 -
Don't think the Danes have changed theirs for something like 1000 years. The Welsh dragon on a green and white background is certainly hundreds of years old, and I believe the dragon itself was a Roman army symbol (they used to have "fire breathing" dragons with hot coals in them with the army). As such I believe the Welsh flag is a touch of the "we are civilised Romans as opposed to you heathen Anglo- Saxons" sort of a meme.Unionist1707 said:
For me, aesthetics trumps logic when it comes to the flag. We would be mad to change it.OblitusSumMe said:
It's a bit different for, say, Australia to have the Union Flag in the corner of their flag, because it's a nod to the creation of their country.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Me, piffle. I'd prefer use to keep the flag as is. And why not? Australia and New Zealand aren't British and have our flag in theirs (I think Hawaii does as well).
If it must be changed, shifting blue to black would look alright and be a nice nod to the Welsh. It'd also be one of the few suggestions which wouldn't look bloody awful.
Keeping the cross of St Andrew on the Union Flag would be akin to the centuries of English Kings retaining the Fleur-de-lis on the Royal Standard, laying claim to be the King of France. It would be a pathetic failure to acknowledge reality.
Kind of appropriate if the Roman province of Britannia (Ok with added Irish bit) is effectively recreated by 5.00 tomorrow morning.0 -
You can't get a copyright on a colour. In very rare circumstances you may be able to register a trademark. These will not apply to Scotland.David_Evershed said:Socrates said:
The Union flag was the creation of the Union Act of 1801, not 1707. Given that part of both realms that merged in 1801 remain part of the UK, we should keep the flag. The Saltire doesn't even have the same blue on it.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
Any free country is at liberty to chose whatever colour it wants on its national flag.
Scotland does not have copyright on the colour blue.
So rUK can continue with the current 'Union' flag colours if it wishes.
In any case, the rUK is home to millions of people with Scottish heritage. Retaining the St Andrew's cross within the Union Jack will be completely appropriate.
0 -
The flag represents the political construct not the monarchical one. That is why it did not include St Patrick's cross before the Act of Union with Ireland in 1801, despite the fact that the Kings of Great Britain had long called themselves the King of Ireland.Richard_Tyndall said:
I have seen no serious suggestion from the Yes side that they are intending to end the Union of the Crowns. In which case by your own argument there is no need for a change in the flag.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
Her Majesty will continue to have a Scottish emblem on her Royal Standard to represent the Union of the Crowns but to have the cross of the patron saint of Scotland on the flag of a political Union that no longer included Scotland would be risible.0 -
Why is it pejorative? Do the nationalists not wish to be a separate country?JPJ2 said:I find it rather sad that Mike Smithson has chosen to use the pejorative term "separatists"
Merriam-Webster seem to think so:
sep·a·rat·ist noun \ˈse-p(ə-)rə-tist, ˈse-pə-ˌrā-\
: a member of a group of people who want to form a new country, religion, etc., that is separate from the one they are in now
Its only 'pejorative' to some because the SNP have been dishonest about what 'independence' entails.
0 -
Mr. Owl, point of order, I believe the Antonine Wall is significantly within Scottish territory.0
-
Shh, don't tell the Borders and Dumfries and Galloway - they'll get ideas.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owl, point of order, I believe the Antonine Wall is significantly within Scottish territory.
0 -
That's mild. One chap who came into the No campaign office in Galashiels referred to the SNP as the National Socialists.0
-
More to the point, how will the Scots keep European fishing boats out of their territorial waters?Richard_Tyndall said:
Given that in such a scenario the Russians would first have to neutralize a NATO member - Norway - it is a frankly daft question. Mind you you are in good company. A few weeks ago a journalist from the Guardian contacted a Scots colleague of mine to ask if he knew anyone who could advise on the consequences of a Russian attack on an independent Scotland.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
It is worth pointing out that Russian military vessels regularly move up and down through the North Sea, happily ignoring any disruption they might cause to oil activity and have in the past shut down helicopter flights by launching fighter aircraft and helicopters from their carriers whilst in the oil fields.
0 -
Carlotta
Do the Americans or anybody else celebrate "Separatism Day" and would they not be legitimately offended if you thus refered to it?
You KNOW it is pejorative, that is why it is used :-)0 -
World War 3 has started.
According to the Pope, anyway - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/11105986/Pope-tells-Jews-now-its-our-turn-to-suffer.html0 -
Very well put.SouthamObserver said:
In any case, the rUK is home to millions of people with Scottish heritage. Retaining the St Andrew's cross within the Union Jack will be completely appropriate.
0 -
LOL. That one really is a laugh given that we have singularly failed to do that ourselves for the last 40 years.SouthamObserver said:
More to the point, how will the Scots keep European fishing boats out of their territorial waters?Richard_Tyndall said:
Given that in such a scenario the Russians would first have to neutralize a NATO member - Norway - it is a frankly daft question. Mind you you are in good company. A few weeks ago a journalist from the Guardian contacted a Scots colleague of mine to ask if he knew anyone who could advise on the consequences of a Russian attack on an independent Scotland.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
It is worth pointing out that Russian military vessels regularly move up and down through the North Sea, happily ignoring any disruption they might cause to oil activity and have in the past shut down helicopter flights by launching fighter aircraft and helicopters from their carriers whilst in the oil fields.0 -
Afternoon all, any update on how turnout is looking?0
-
Tories seem to have spent two and half years yoyo-ing between 28 and 36, unable to break out. Labour lower than the day Ed was installed.AndyJS said:Updated polling average from UKPR:
Lab 35%
Con 33%
UKIP 13%
LD 8%
Green 5%
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/uk-polling-report-average-2
0 -
Uh-oh. Hope Socrates et.al. aren't around or we could be back to last night's theological seminar.TOPPING said:hamiltonace said:Most of my staff have yet to vote but plan to and will predominately vote No. The work rush is the last big unknown. For the Yes side, workers tend to be younger, for the No side, workers tend to be more scared about losing their job and more assets to fall in value if it all goes wrong. Workers are not predominately male. In the public sector 69% are female.
Doesn't take the brains of an archbishop to work out .0 -
America gained 'independence' from a colonial power.JPJ2 said:Carlotta
Do the Americans or anybody else celebrate "Separatism Day" and would they not be legitimately offended if you thus refered to it?
You KNOW it is pejorative, that is why it is used :-)
Scotland will separate from a Union.
Different cases entirely.
0 -
Just turn the blue bits black and leave it at that. Nod to Wales. Design unchanged. Looks fab. Red, white and black Union Jack. Maybe we should call it the Union Black. ;-)0
-
Mr. Tyndall, if the government had approved the deployment of enormo-haddock to deter foreign fishermen the situation would be quite different.0
-
We didn't change the flag when southern Ireland left. We didn't change the flag when Wales was given a legal personality distinct from England. We shouldn't change the flag if Scotland leaves.OblitusSumMe said:The current vesion of the Union flag was created in 1801, yes, reinforcing the principle that it consists of a combination of the crosses of the patron saints of its constituent nations. If one of those constituent nations - Scotland - leaves it would be pathetically insecure to keep the cross of St Andrew on the Union Flag.
While the shade of blue used on the Saltire today is lighter [and in my opinion less pleasant] than the shade used on the Union Flag, this is something of a recent innovation - Wikipedia records the current lighter shade being settled on in 2003!
The most sensible suggestion I have seen in a logical sense is to replace the cross of St Andrew with the Welsh cross of St David - although some people do raise entirely reasonable aesthetic objections to this solution.
What would be insecure is to allow the leaving of 8% of the population to cause us to completely rejig our identity and our symbols. No, we should do the British thing, which is to sail on as before, without making such a fuss over it. We will keep our state. We will keep our currency. We will keep our British identity. We will keep our flag.
0 -
They tend to separate independence days.JPJ2 said:Carlotta
Do the Americans or anybody else celebrate "Separatism Day" and would they not be legitimately offended if you thus refered to it?
You KNOW it is pejorative, that is why it is used :-)
But that's rather hard to convert, independents obviously means something else. Nationalists has strong party connotations.0 -
Yes supporters are saying if the turnout is 85% they should win. It'll be interesting to see whether that conditional proves correct.0
-
The Union flag included the St Andrews Cross from 1606. A century before the union of the Parliaments.OblitusSumMe said:
The flag represents the political construct not the monarchical one. That is why it did not include St Patrick's cross before the Act of Union with Ireland in 1801, despite the fact that the Kings of Great Britain had long called themselves the King of Ireland.Richard_Tyndall said:
I have seen no serious suggestion from the Yes side that they are intending to end the Union of the Crowns. In which case by your own argument there is no need for a change in the flag.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
Her Majesty will continue to have a Scottish emblem on her Royal Standard to represent the Union of the Crowns but to have the cross of the patron saint of Scotland on the flag of a political Union that no longer included Scotland would be risible.
0 -
Berwick is a historically Scottish town that will still be part of the UK. Therefore, in the same way that retaining Ulster lets us keep the Cross of St Patrick, Berwick will let us keep the Cross of St Andrew.OblitusSumMe said:
The flag represents the political construct not the monarchical one. That is why it did not include St Patrick's cross before the Act of Union with Ireland in 1801, despite the fact that the Kings of Great Britain had long called themselves the King of Ireland.Richard_Tyndall said:
I have seen no serious suggestion from the Yes side that they are intending to end the Union of the Crowns. In which case by your own argument there is no need for a change in the flag.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
Her Majesty will continue to have a Scottish emblem on her Royal Standard to represent the Union of the Crowns but to have the cross of the patron saint of Scotland on the flag of a political Union that no longer included Scotland would be risible.
That should satisfy you.0 -
I wondered when I saw my ballot paper last week whether the fact Yes appears above No would dissuade the doubters from going with status quo.0
-
Love it!Unionist1707 said:
Berwick is a historically Scottish town that will still be part of the UK. Therefore, in the same way that retaining Ulster lets us keep the Cross of St Patrick, Berwick will let us keep the Cross of St Andrew.OblitusSumMe said:
The flag represents the political construct not the monarchical one. That is why it did not include St Patrick's cross before the Act of Union with Ireland in 1801, despite the fact that the Kings of Great Britain had long called themselves the King of Ireland.Richard_Tyndall said:
I have seen no serious suggestion from the Yes side that they are intending to end the Union of the Crowns. In which case by your own argument there is no need for a change in the flag.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
Her Majesty will continue to have a Scottish emblem on her Royal Standard to represent the Union of the Crowns but to have the cross of the patron saint of Scotland on the flag of a political Union that no longer included Scotland would be risible.
That should satisfy you.0 -
Odds on a draw are vanishingly unlikely.David_Evershed said:In the event of a draw in the referendum, does the status quo prevail as at Westminster?
0 -
Moderatoraudreyanne said:
Uh-oh. Hope Socrates et.al. aren't around or we could be back to last night's theological seminar.TOPPING said:hamiltonace said:Most of my staff have yet to vote but plan to and will predominately vote No. The work rush is the last big unknown. For the Yes side, workers tend to be younger, for the No side, workers tend to be more scared about losing their job and more assets to fall in value if it all goes wrong. Workers are not predominately male. In the public sector 69% are female.
Doesn't take the brains of an archbishop to work out .
Even worse now the Nimrods have gone without any replacement on the horizon AFAIK.Richard_Tyndall said:
LOL. That one really is a laugh given that we have singularly failed to do that ourselves for the last 40 years.SouthamObserver said:
More to the point, how will the Scots keep European fishing boats out of their territorial waters?Richard_Tyndall said:
Given that in such a scenario the Russians would first have to neutralize a NATO member - Norway - it is a frankly daft question. Mind you you are in good company. A few weeks ago a journalist from the Guardian contacted a Scots colleague of mine to ask if he knew anyone who could advise on the consequences of a Russian attack on an independent Scotland.David_Evershed said:How will an independent Scotland defend itself if the Russians decide the North Sea oil platforms are in Russian territorial waters?
It is worth pointing out that Russian military vessels regularly move up and down through the North Sea, happily ignoring any disruption they might cause to oil activity and have in the past shut down helicopter flights by launching fighter aircraft and helicopters from their carriers whilst in the oil fields.
But see the SFPA and their FPVs and aircraft.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Fisheries_Protection_Agency
0 -
Exactly....though with our current crop of politicians I do worry that they will think about tinkering.....Socrates said:
No, we should do the British thing, which is to sail on as before, without making such a fuss over it. We will keep our state. We will keep our currency. We will keep our British identity. We will keep our flag.OblitusSumMe said:The current vesion of the Union flag was created in 1801, yes, reinforcing the principle that it consists of a combination of the crosses of the patron saints of its constituent nations. If one of those constituent nations - Scotland - leaves it would be pathetically insecure to keep the cross of St Andrew on the Union Flag.
While the shade of blue used on the Saltire today is lighter [and in my opinion less pleasant] than the shade used on the Union Flag, this is something of a recent innovation - Wikipedia records the current lighter shade being settled on in 2003!
The most sensible suggestion I have seen in a logical sense is to replace the cross of St Andrew with the Welsh cross of St David - although some people do raise entirely reasonable aesthetic objections to this solution.
0 -
Someone made a comment about Dundee having a thriving journalism industry that has now gone a day or two ago.
I know that historically the Beano and the Dandy were produced from Dundee, and presumably d.c. thompson published other more serious publications there. Has this all gone now or are they still going up there?0 -
Only agree to grant Scotland independence if they agree to change their flag. Job done.0
-
Thats not so daft. World war 2 actually started in the early '30s with more localised regional wars eg Japan invading Manchuria.Cyclefree said:World War 3 has started.
According to the Pope, anyway - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/11105986/Pope-tells-Jews-now-its-our-turn-to-suffer.html0 -
According to Rasmussen,
most Americans (51%) have no opinion about the referendum and only 33% think most of their fellow countrymen can even locate Scotland on a map.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/europe/september_2014/only_33_of_americans_can_find_scotland_on_a_map0 -
Nah.Socrates said:
Love it!Unionist1707 said:
Berwick is a historically Scottish town that will still be part of the UK. Therefore, in the same way that retaining Ulster lets us keep the Cross of St Patrick, Berwick will let us keep the Cross of St Andrew.OblitusSumMe said:
The flag represents the political construct not the monarchical one. That is why it did not include St Patrick's cross before the Act of Union with Ireland in 1801, despite the fact that the Kings of Great Britain had long called themselves the King of Ireland.Richard_Tyndall said:
I have seen no serious suggestion from the Yes side that they are intending to end the Union of the Crowns. In which case by your own argument there is no need for a change in the flag.OblitusSumMe said:
That's a bit disingenuous. The Union Flag was created as part of James VI/I campaign to create an Act of Union between England and Scotland.Philip_Thompson said:
Given the Union Flag pre-dates the Act of Union, there is no reason for it to change subsequent to independence.Flightpath said:
I agree. There is no need to change except for possibly an offiocial change to the blue colour and width of the white cross.Grandiose said:
Surely continuity is the best value. What are the rules?Stuart_Dickson said:William Hill - What Colours Will The Union Flag Be If Scotland Votes Yes To Independence?
Red And White EVS
Red White And Blue 11/4
Green Red And White 4/1
Black White And Red 6/1
Blue, Yellow And White 50/1
Orange, White And Red 50/1
Pink Green and Purple 500/1
Unless England is forever going to pine for recreating the Union with Scotland then we have to move on and change the flag.
Her Majesty will continue to have a Scottish emblem on her Royal Standard to represent the Union of the Crowns but to have the cross of the patron saint of Scotland on the flag of a political Union that no longer included Scotland would be risible.
That should satisfy you.
The whole referendum is a Welsh plot to try and get on the flag in some form.
0 -
Sporting Index suspended their turnout market at 83%/84.5%. Since the direction of travel from the start was upwards, it's safe to assume that a high turnout is bad for them. It's also likely that if they were not afraid of a very high turnout, they would have kept the market open to draw in some low-turnout punters.AndyJS said:Yes supporters are saying if the turnout is 85% they should win. It'll be interesting to see whether that conditional proves correct.
I'm beginning to suspect that our previous estimate of 83% may be on the light side.
Btw, who are these 'Yes Supporters' who infer a good result from high turnout? I know Stuart Dickson put this theory forward, but without any supporting evidence. The logic appears questionable to me and I suspect it was just Stuart being Stuart.
0 -
BBC has upset the Nats again. We're doomed, I tell you doomed!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11097615/Wur-doomed-BBC-angers-Scotlands-Yes-camp-with-ill-timed-Dads-Army-episode.html
0 -
At least we could send a ship up there to dislodge them. What would Indy-Scotland do? Play the "Complete Speeches of Chairman Alex" on loudspeakers until they left?Richard_Tyndall said:
In 2011 the Russians anchored up off the Moray Firth. We had to send a ship from Portsmouth to intercept them and the only reason we knew they had turned up there was because the Russians posted the fact on social media.0 -
Survation have been polling today by phone.0