If Scotland ever becomes independent, I shall demand for citizenship, as I am entitled to do so thanks to the Auld Alliance, which has never been voided... :)
The Labour Party sums actually do still allow Labour majorities. They would lose some seats but actually it is in the hands of the electorate. In her speech two days ago, Ruth Davidson leader of Tories in Scotland said that Scotland should have the right to raise and control its own taxes, however the idea of devo-max was ruled out. Their report that she was presenting had Westminster approval and contributions. It has given the yes vote a further 1.5% swing yesterday.
I believe devo-max will now be included, but this will only irritate the english voters and make the Midlothain question even worse.
The real losers will be the Labour Party as they will not have a chance of becoming the majority party in an English/Welsh only parliament.
All this uncertainty does no one any favours and the sooner it is over one way or the other the better.
Salmond is declining in popularity rapidly. He is likely not to stand at the first general election because he knows it. His bluster is getting irritating and nobody is especially interested any longer.
The pound is a red herring. Scotland already has its own money but the Treasury is joint, thus the pund could become the Scots currency. It could be like Ireland's punt being fixed to Sterling until adopting the Euro or like the US$ being the real currency behind many local pesos in Central America, it is called currency shadowing, happens all over the world and cannot be stopped. The population are demanding their own currency, so Salmond should drop that. In the same poll, over 80% said the English monarchy should be disestablished and Scotland become a republic, so a lot of SNP propaganda is not what people who want real independence want. Oh yes, there is about 40 years worth of oil and gas which will decline gradually but nobody needs reminding any longer.
Spain. The prime minister Mariano Rajoy, Joaquín Almunia, the EU Commissioner for Economic & Financial Affairs/Competition and one other big 'animal' have said that there is no reason why Scotland should not join the EU. Spain, they said, is very different to the UK because Catalunya is included in Spain within a binding constitution that does not allow secessions. Scotland is part of a union of nations that has no constitution binding it. In fact, the Spanish pointed out that the legal validity of the Act of Union in 1707 could be challenged legally whereas their constitution cannot. The group of men who signed away Scotland in 1707 were all aristocrats and landowners who had lost most of the country's collateral in the Darien scheme. They basically signed the Act to get themselves out of the financial mess they were in although they had made Scotland bankrupt and not the population at large who not informed about either their investments or the Act of Union. The point about legality is that they represented less than 0.02% of the population of Scotland and also almost half of them were not actually Scots. The SNP has always chosen to go the more pleasant route of political rather than legal action. If independence is achieved with this referendum, then all is done and dusted come March 2016, leaving Scotland to make its own mess or success. If not, then because Cameron refused to include the 'devo-max' option in the referendum because he was convinced that he could not lose, the negotiations begin for more autonomy. If the UK government refuses, a new referendum will be called for roughly 2019. All indicators seem to hint that a second referendum would certainly achieve independence if the Tories are returned next year and high likelihood if a Labour government does not grant devo-max. Their present spokespersons have said that Labour will not do deals...
Yes Brian, but just what part of no cannot Alex Salmond not understand?
No to using the pound and Spain will never agree to membership of the EU because of its own problems and you cannot just wave a magic wand and make all these things go away.
So, Jane, are a number of other smaller parties, a large part of the Labour Party and a very large number of people who have no party allegiance in particular. The SNP was founded in 1934 with the aim of independence and remained a small and little noticed party until 20 years ago when it steadily gained support. Of course it is synonymous with independence. However, if you are looking at it from a pro-UK union perspective...
Yes, but the SNP is totally for independence, they are one and the same animal.
I would not pas judgement on whether it is objective but it reveals a lot. The entire UK parliamentary system is moribund. Lords are appointed to pack a house in which hereditaries with no interest in governance treat it like a club (I was told by a very political hereditary lord I know), many appointees have no political experience anyway and the few working peers are a small minority but really do not need the rest. They are also the forgotten delay, block and rejection of legislation that the elected house should be entirely responsible for. Along with the atrocious FPTP electoral system, the political system is moribund.
Scotland would have an elected parliament and no peers. Anything wrong with that? As for the rest, votes at 16 and PR. Sounds more democratic already.
Ooooooh! However, I must agree given that looking at the UK from outside since the 2010 election I am not even convinced they had a plan A!
Actually Jane, the referendum is for independence not SNP. After that, before independence in March 2016 there would be a general election. The chances are very high Labour would win that given the mood right now. Have you read the manifesto for independence: http://www.scotreferendum.com/reports/scotlands-future-your-guide-t...
Several versions, ebook, pdf, all very long but the same content of course. There are plans B and C. Media have painted the picture otherwise. Better Together have been doom mongers who can only say don't do it because we say it's not a good idea, but the way they do it looks at everything but the feelings of people who are fed up of Westminster misrule. Salmond is not winning friends by making stubborn statements and himself forgetting that every rebuttal to Better Together misrepresentations is driving more people toward yes and himself toward getting rid of him. He will not be the first Prime Minister because he does not have popular support. Independence does.
How can you vote for a party which has no plan B and totally relies on everyone else falling into line with what it wants?
I am entitled and both my children too and shall have it toute suite. I am hoping for the 'Yes' in September and shall be celebrating with a good bottle of malt and a few Scots and French friends (plus my Swiss wife using her 'observer' status).