Alex Salmond and Independence

Team Brian GB

Baby Cameron loves X-Factor
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
16,249
Supports
Chelsea
I saw excerpts of his conference speech this morning, the SNP are coming up with ideas like "independence light" and "devolution max" whatever they mean.

What I do find laughable is that on achieving independence they will want to maintain Sterling whilst it is convenient for them and then switch to the Euro. This is stupid on many levels - they will not be independent of us if they maintain our currency which would be entirely on our terms, if we let them do so at all.

They also do not let on that a treaty is required for new countries to join the EU, and due to the criteria they would have to be independent before they join.

I just find this man ridiculous, he goes on and on about independence and the "Westminster Parliament" yet he wants to go running into the warm embrace of the EU, maybe he is not watching but the Eurozone is collapsing and is in no mood for new members.
 
I don't know enough of the facts to really debate much on this, but I do think that all the home nations are much better off as a unit rather than on their own, including England.

I can understand some of the frustration over England seemingly getting the priority, the same way much of England feels frustrated at how London-centric certain things can be. But is the small satisfaction of sticking two fingers up to England really worth the loss of financial and political benefits that can be reaped through the Union?
 
About 30-35% are in support as far as I am aware. The SNP wants to lower the voting age to 16 in order to make a win more likely, they also want to add a financial autonomy option as well which I don't see as being constitutional or in the interests of the rest of the UK.
 
On the face of it, if he called for a referendum and lost, he'd look like a joke and its on record that a primary principal of his party isn't even supported by the majority and would have to take it out of their platform, making them Labour B.
 
Scottish government has a lot of good points that you don't see in England. Keeping the pound and moving to the Euro later is 100% the right way to go. More and more Scottish people are unhappy with British Democracy, heck so am I.

Scotland also could not function without London. It would take 20 years for them to be able to function as a separate nation. As stupid as it sounds, it is not currently the right economic climate for it to happen.
 
rcoobc said:
Scottish government has a lot of good points that you don't see in England. Keeping the pound and moving to the Euro later is 100% the right way to go. More and more Scottish people are unhappy with British Democracy, heck so am I.

Scotland also could not function without London. It would take 20 years for them to be able to function as a separate nation. As stupid as it sounds, it is not currently the right economic climate for it to happen.
Click to expand...

So are you pro or against? Personally I am a fan of the Union, and always prefer to describe myself as British rather than English. If the majority of Scots were in favour of independence then I obviously feel they should be granted it, but if it would require the changing of laws such as the voting age to be pushed through, then I don't think it would be in Scotland's best interests to do so.

I can understand the desire for independence and pride that Scots might feel, but the Union does bring significant benefits for both and I think it would be a shame if it broke apart.
 
The Scots are fecking daft if they think being independent would be beneficial. Maybe during the peak of the North Sea oil production they might have been fractionally better off but these days they would be considerably worse off without London's assistance.
 
The Scots can jog on for all i care. I would be interested to see a breakdown of the Net tax receipts and spending in Scotland. Perhaps they can take RBS with them and support its balance sheet?
 
rcoobc said:
Scottish government has a lot of good points that you don't see in England. Keeping the pound and moving to the Euro later is 100% the right way to go. More and more Scottish people are unhappy with British Democracy, heck so am I.
Click to expand...

Keeping the pound is not their decision, if they want independence then the BoE should not be shoring up their economy which would not be in British interests.

Scotland's fate has been tied to an economic superpower for three hundred years, if Salmond believes they are held back then he should see what happens when they are in open competition with Britain, when we have to enforce a border with them.
 
GloryHunter07 said:
The Scots can jog on for all i care. I would be interested to see a breakdown of the Net tax receipts and spending in Scotland. Perhaps they can take RBS with them and support its balance sheet?
Click to expand...


Public spending in England per capita: £8,588
Public spending in Scotland per capita: £10,212
 
Agent Red said:
So are you pro or against? Personally I am a fan of the Union, and always prefer to describe myself as British rather than English. If the majority of Scots were in favour of independence then I obviously feel they should be granted it, but if it would require the changing of laws such as the voting age to be pushed through, then I don't think it would be in Scotland's best interests to do so.

I can understand the desire for independence and pride that Scots might feel, but the Union does bring significant benefits for both and I think it would be a shame if it broke apart.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure. I like the union, but can understand the want to get away from London Politics.
 
On a regional basis:
South East: £7,533
The East: £7,691
East Midlands: £7,949
South West: £8,020
Yorks and Humber: £8,450
England: £8,588
West Midlands: £8,618
North West: £9,349
North East: £9,503
Wales: £9,829
Scotland: £10,212
London: £10,256
Northern Ireland: £10,706
 
rcoobc said:
I'm not sure. I like the union, but can understand the want to get away from London Politics.
Click to expand...

Yes, I have long felt that things are too London centric so I would agree with you there. I do think though that we're stronger as a unit, if Scotland leave the Union it will be to the detriment of both Scotland and England (and Wales/N.I.).
 
Agent Red said:
Yes, I have long felt that things are too London centric so I would agree with you there. I do think though that we're stronger as a unit, if Scotland leave the Union it will be to the detriment of both Scotland and England (and Wales/N.I.).
Click to expand...

I agree. There is no reason that Scotland could not break away, and exist as a separate nation. It does not have the same Industries to support it like Norway and Sweden, yet it could exist on its own.

But the UK as a whole would suffer greatly in the short term, especially right now. Economically Scotland getting independence would cost a lot of money that isn't there. They also would either have to continue accepting money from us, or create a new economy which would quickly inflate. Politically the U.K. holds more weight than just England.

Personally I'd like the balance of power to shift so that all 4 countries have their own Government and the overall Union is just that, a union of the 4 countries but does not have as much involvement in the day to day running.
 
mjs020294 said:
The Scots are fecking daft if they think being independent would be beneficial. Maybe during the peak of the North Sea oil production they might have been fractionally better off but these days they would be considerably worse off without London's assistance.
Click to expand...

The Scots by and large don't think independence will be beneficial. Hence why Salmond is holding off on a referendum. The vote for SNP wasn't a vote for independence, but more an endorsement of some of the good work they'd done since 2007 and a reaction to Labour's mess and the coalition.
 
Indeed, they have looked to be very good at governing, especially when running a minority administration.
 
If Scotland did have independence surely it would be the death of Labour in ever securing a majority vote.

On the other hand, would Cameron want to be the PM that broke up the union.
 
The Tories are constitutionally committed to the protection the union.
 
Team Brian GB said:
On a regional basis:
South East: £7,533
The East: £7,691
East Midlands: £7,949
South West: £8,020
Yorks and Humber: £8,450
England: £8,588
West Midlands: £8,618
North West: £9,349
North East: £9,503
Wales: £9,829
Scotland: £10,212
London: £10,256
Northern Ireland: £10,706
Click to expand...

Which areas on this list have second tier elected representatives? Then look at which areas get most spending.
 
Support for independence has risen from pre-election levels, according to a new poll.
A YouGov survey puts support for the move at 34%, while opposition stands at 52%. The remainder of people said they were undecided or would not vote.
The poll, carried out for the Scotland on Sunday newspaper, questioned 1,075 adults in Scotland last week.
The last YouGov poll, taken before the May elections in April, showed 'yes' voters at 28%, 'no' at 57%, with 'don't know' at 15%.
The SNP, which said it would hold a referendum on independence in the second half of the current Scottish Parliament, won an unprecedented majority in the election.
The party launched its 'yes' campaign for the referendum at its Autumn conference in Inverness last weekend.
Referendum campaign director Angus Robertson MP said: "These are excellent figures, showing a growing number of people aspire to a better future for Scotland by taking responsibility for our own affairs.
"We are only at the start of the referendum campaign, yet support for independence has already increased by six points since May's election - that is significant progress as voters realise the positive benefits independence can bring to their future and to Scotland's future.
"As the campaign steps up, support for independence will continue to rise.
"This is the fourth poll since May's election to show an increase in the number of people backing an independent Scottish Parliament. Coming in the week after SNP conference where we launched our referendum campaign it's clear that the SNP and our vision for independence is one shared with people across the country."
Click to expand...

God that is interesting, the drop from no votes from 57 to 52 is the thing I'm most shocked about.
 
You cannot put that much stock in two isolated polls conducted six months apart, if there had been intervening polls showing a correlation then fine.

The SNP are using their position to effectively argue their case whereas the opposition is not organised and has no institutional backing to support them, when a campaign officially begins then it will be more of a level playing field, the SNP will come under fierce scrutiny etc.

Polls will become more valuable also as the independence question currently asked is hypothetical.
 
So this has kicked off as an issue and commentators are saying everything I said would happen - Scotland would have no right to Sterling, it would have to leave to the EU and go through the accession process in which it is mandatory to sign yourselves up to the Euro. Not to mention they would get a share of the national debt and as they would no longer be on Sterling it would cause them enormous problems no doubt.

Salmond really is a lunatic - you'd think someone who works for the Royal Bank of Scotland would understand that the reason Edinburgh has a vibrant financial services sector is because it is in the same country as London with the same currency. If that is no longer the case then watch them leave very quickly.

I am tirely of listening to Scottish people who know nothing about nothing complaining about the influence of England and how they're downtrodden whilst neglecting the fact that 53 million of 63 million people in this country are English. The scottish economy is wealthy for the same reason as their financial services are, they are tied to the English - throughout history prior to 1707 they were always generations behind in England, salaries in Scotland were something in the order of 2-3% of English equivalents when the UK was formed. The financial services are an extension of the City of London, their ship building is normally for vessels registered in England or for the navy and their manufacturing for domestic production invariably goes to England.

Salmond's procrastination should not be allowed to continue, if he wants a referendum then fine but it has to be a clear and definitive question and it has to be soon and not on a timetable that is designed around his agenda.
 
Team Brian GB said:
Scotland's fate has been tied to an economic superpower for three hundred years.
Click to expand...

Hehe, yes we did do quite well out of market capitalism once the Scots got round to inventing it

As for the currency, if we didn't want to let them keep sterling for a while, what would be to stop them just creating their own currency called the pound and pegging it to the pound?
 
Plechazunga said:
Hehe, yes we did do quite well out of market capitalism once the Scots got round to inventing it

As for the currency, if we didn't want to let them keep sterling for a while, what would be to stop them just creating their own currency called the pound and pegging it to the pound?
Click to expand...

Because it would not be issued by the Bank of England and would not be convertible with Sterling and we wouldn't accept it as ours, it in fact would benefit England as Scotland would have a currency that would be dramatically overvalued. If you want to see a country that ties itself inappropriately to a wealthier currency look at Argentina's financial crisis ten years ago.

Scotland would have a very bad time on the bond markets as it would have a newly floated currency and a national debt in a foreign currency which they have no control over - it would be a very dangerous fiscal situation for them.
 
Tied to which their banking sector's balance sheets and reserves are naturally all in Sterling, are they going to drop that for a new and untested currency? I think not.

And with regards to capitalism, the Bank of England and the London Stock Exchange (well it's predecessor) were well established by 1707 - not that it makes any difference really.
 
But I thought the EU was a bad thing :rolleyes:

In all seriousness, there is nothing to stop them starting again TGM. You say they would have to carry a share of the debt, which is bollocks if they don't get a share of our financial market, which would mean them keeping the pound.

They could, tomorrow, say to us "We declare independence". We would have a kinda of faux-war, and then maybe a mini war, and then let them have their independence. They would start again with nothing but their land, and they would survive. Countries split and countries merge. They take decades to deal with it, but it is only 1 or 2.
 
Team Brian GB said:
Scotland would have no right to Sterling
Click to expand...
Probably not.

Team Brian GB said:
It would have to leave to the EU and go through the accession process in which it is mandatory to sign yourselves up to the Euro.
Click to expand...
Undoubtedly

Team Brian GB said:
Not to mention they would get a share of the national debt and as they would no longer be on Sterling it would cause them enormous problems no doubt.
Click to expand...
Written in pounds? Why should they.

Team Brian GB said:
As they would no longer be on Sterling it would cause them enormous problems no doubt.
Click to expand...
Bar Humbug, without the pound they are nothing I tell you! Nothing! They need us, we don't need them! Jettison the lot of them, I never want to see them again! Make them walk the plank, then cut off their heads! No! Cot off their heads, then make them walk the plank!
 
Team Brian GB said:
Because it would not be issued by the Bank of England and would not be convertible with Sterling and we wouldn't accept it as ours, it in fact would benefit England as Scotland would have a currency that would be dramatically overvalued. If you want to see a country that ties itself inappropriately to a wealthier currency look at Argentina's financial crisis ten years ago.

Scotland would have a very bad time on the bond markets as it would have a newly floated currency and a national debt in a foreign currency which they have no control over - it would be a very dangerous fiscal situation for them.
Click to expand...

Yes but I mean they could just declare their currency the pound, not convert it - on the basis that it's their currency as much as ours. I don't see what we could do about it as there's no border and tons of Scots in England and vice versa.
 
We live in a much different world now, Scotland's economy would implode if they did anything unilateral like that. They would become a pariah to British and global institutions, they would have no relations with anybody, the WTO wouldn't recognise them, the IMF wouldn't recognise them and likely the UN wouldn't recognise them either whilst no international investors would touch them with a barge pole in such a circumstance.

Though it would be in great difficultly anyway - I am not saying I like the EU, it is what they would do and would have to but they would have to go through the accession process as an independent country which takes years to do so. In the meantime there would be an enforced border with customs regulations on Scottish goods entering England as it would be a non-EU state. As such Scottish manufacturers and engineers would swarm to England before hand to escape getting caught behind such a mess. As I have said before if there are some idiots north of the border who believe Scotland gets a rough deal when they are in union with England what do they think the consequences would be if they entered into open competition with it?

With regard to their currency they could only keep Sterling if their fiscal policy remained tied to Westminster otherwise we wouldn't accept it and wouldn't allow the free convertibility with Sterling and the last thing any country needs is to be paying debts in a currency over which they have no control for money supply. They would be beholden to us as they would need to buy Sterling in massive amounts to service their debts - when you talk about matters like hard power and soft power that would be a massive one for England in both areas.
 
Plechazunga said:
Yes but I mean they could just declare their currency the pound, not convert it - on the basis that it's their currency as much as ours. I don't see what we could do about it as there's no border and tons of Scots in England and vice versa.
Click to expand...

But it still wouldn't be sterling. It would just be an imitation, albeit a legal one. They wouldn't be able to use it to pay down debt, so they would be forced to buy actual sterling.
 
I don't see why it would be such a big deal, it could be done amicably. Just a common currency. Then, when they wanted to move to the Euro, they convert their pounds.

If they want to go their separate way, we should facilitate it as smoothly as possible, why get all prickly and jingoistic?
 
Plechazunga said:
Yes but I mean they could just declare their currency the pound, not convert it - on the basis that it's their currency as much as ours. I don't see what we could do about it as there's no border and tons of Scots in England and vice versa.
Click to expand...

Because pound sterling is issued and managed by the Bank of England - we are in full control of it and run it in the interests of the British economy. Scotland trying to hold onto it would be absolutely insane as it would not be seen to be credible and they would be charged exorbitant amounts on the bond markets to borrow as they would have no means whatsoever to print it or have it printed for them.

In international economics the last thing investors like is countries that don't have their own economies - I don't mean the likes of Eurozone countries as they formally share one but countries that randomly adopt somebody else's.
 
TGB why would there be an enforced border because it is a non-EU state? This referendum has been coming for a long time, everyone knows it. What needs to happen for the unionists is that the referendum is heavily lost and the Scottish people feel values. What needs to happen for the separatists is that they win.
 
Team Brian GB said:
Because pound sterling is issued and managed by the Bank of England - we are in full control of it and run it in the interests of the British economy. Scotland trying to hold onto it would be absolutely insane as it would not be seen to be credible and they would be charged exorbitant amounts on the bond markets to borrow as they would have no means whatsoever to print it or have it printed for them.

In international economics the last thing investors like is countries that don't have their own economies - I don't mean the likes of Eurozone countries as they formally share one but countries that randomly adopt somebody else's.
Click to expand...

But we're only talking for a transitional period of a few years. Nothing would really have changed, yes the English would control the money supply I suppose, but I don't really see why they couldn't negotiate sensibly to ensure the Scottish government was adequately funded as it is now.
 
Plechazunga said:
I don't see why it would be such a big deal, it could be done amicably. Just a common currency. Then, when they wanted to move to the Euro, they convert their pounds.

If they want to go their separate way, we should facilitate it as smoothly as possible, why get all prickly and jingoistic?
Click to expand...

How am I getting jingoistic? I am pointing out the consequences of what they are saying?

We have all seen what the structure of the Eurozone has led to, but all Eurozone countries have a mandate as part of the Euro and have a role in its management - Scotland on the otherhand would have all the same problems such as lack of political union etc. but it wouldn't have any authority over it whatsoever.

If Scotland for instance wanted a decrease in the money supply to slow inflation but we wanted to increase it what happens? The money supply increases because it would be our currency and ours alone - they would be putting their economy at the mercy of English monetary policy which flies in the face of everything they are saying about wanting independence.

Look at quantitative easing for example, we have pumped hundreds of billions into the economy in recent years to keep it going which means the inflation rate is double what it otherwise would be. In an independent Scotland using Sterling that would be mirrored in their inflation rate - so you see what I mean? They couldn't design a credible fiscal policy because the circumstances of that are controlled by currency, which they would have no control of.
 
Fair enough, a dumb idea I guess. Well, they'd just have to issue their own currency then.

I didn't mean you personally were getting jingoistic (though you are somewhat), I meant the English generally
 
Plechazunga said:
I don't see why it would be such a big deal, it could be done amicably. Just a common currency. Then, when they wanted to move to the Euro, they convert their pounds.

If they want to go their separate way, we should facilitate it as smoothly as possible, why get all prickly and jingoistic?
Click to expand...

They would be required to pay their debt down in actual pound sterling, so their ability to pay debt would rely on buying up sterling with their new currency at rates that would be subject to extremely volatile market forces on account of it being a brand new currency dealt with by a brand new country. Salmond isn't stupid enough to try anything like that, it would be like sailing from a gentle stream into white water rapids. If the market decides the new currency's value should drop, they might be forced to try to print like crazy causing massive inflation, or in the likely event that that doesn't work they would have to bleed their economy dry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.