CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

White Paper (THE #indyref thread)

(2915 posts)
  • Started 11 years ago by Morningsider
  • Latest reply from chdot
  • This topic is closed

  1. steveo
    Member

    Agree, but it certainly won't cost the £2.8 billion figure quoted made up by Danny "Chief Secretary" Alexander.

    Indeed. But these new boats aren't being paid for out of some sovereign wealth its just more debt.

    So whilst we'll borrow less, probably even proportionally less than rUK, "we'll just end up in the same place a few billion deeper in debt so why bother." Perhaps I overstated the debt yesterday, I'm in a more optimistic mood today. But given the dearth of actual information available my few billion is just as factually based as Secret Squirrel's or Wee eck.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  2. kaputnik
    Moderator

    I'm in a more optimistic mood today.

    That's what a few days good weather will do for one's mood!

    Of course, the sun will always shine / the rain will always fall on a post Yes/No Scotland, depending on which side of the tabloid nonsense you read ;)

    Posted 10 years ago #
  3. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    but I have it on good authority that the SNP commitment for Scotland to maintain a squadron of fast jets is equally daft from a military perspective.

    I was idly peering over the fence of the Pathos military air base in Cyprus the other day, wondering where the jets were. There were hardened hangars but no jets. Turns out they don't have any, only missile batteries, transport planes and helicopters. This in a small country off the coast of Syria and perpetually at loggerheads with Turkey.

    The idea of voting YES isn't to have a mini-UK with 8% of whatever junk they've got. The idea is to have a long hard look at what Scotland needs to be a good place to live and then to put that in place.

    Iceland is defended by its coast guards. They have no standing army at all.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  4. steveo
    Member

    Of course, the sun will always shine / the rain will always fall on a post Yes/No Scotland, depending on which side of the tabloid nonsense you read ;)

    My mood isn't that much better, I still fully expect it to continue raining virtually indefinitely regardless!

    Posted 10 years ago #
  5. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    So I was thinking about the argument that independence would change nothing - 'meet the new boss, same as the old boss'.

    This idea seems to be predicated on the notion that progressive political change is impossible. To refute that idea I started thinking back to the major changes that have taken place in this country over the last hundred years.

    One hundred years ago I would not have qualified to vote in a Westminster election because I would not have had enough money. Certain participants in this thread would not have qualified to vote because of their genitals. The Chartists, Suffragettes and trades unions amongst others, saw to this.

    One hundred years ago there were no paid holidays for the likes of me. The trade union movement saw to this.

    One hundred years ago there was no health service or social security. My grandparents' generation saw to this through the Labour Party when they came back from the war and reminded the elite of the time that they knew how to use guns.

    One hundred years ago I would have been imprisoned if I chose to have consensual sex with someone of the same gender. The Liberal Party sorted this after a press campaign.

    So I reject the notion that fundamental change is not possible. Indeed I note that fundamental change is almost always delivered by grass-roots movements outwith Westminster. That's not to say that independence will necessarily deliver anything worthwile, but it does give me some comfort that the argument that our society has reached some immutable juncture is false.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  6. kaputnik
    Moderator

    I'm trying to get my head around the latest buzzword from "You Decide" (the Westminster Civil Service disinformation campaign), which is that "together with England, Wales and Northern Ireland", [we] are the "greatest family of nations for 300 years".

    There's a few minor points here, like the fact Northern Ireland only came into existence in 1921 when the Irish Free State left the UK to become an Imperial Dominion. And that Ireland didn't join the UK proper until the Act of Union of 1801 (which is why Union flags prior to this have no offset St. Patrick's cross in them). Then there's the constitutional status of poor old Wales, which (correct me if I'm wrong) was made a principality of the Kingdom of England in 1537 and only in recent i.e. post-1997 referendum times has begun to be recognised as something more than a Principality, i.e. a country in its own right.

    Now what I don't get is what a "family of nations" actually is. I was pretty sure that the UK is a constitutional monarchy and a Unitary State, with devolution to some extent of another in three of the 4 "home nations", not some sort of quasi-federal family of equals. If you google it, you see the phrase used with regards to the nationhood complexities of Israeli and Korean politics, but it doesn't seem to appear in any media references for the UK until about February this year.

    So what we are left with is that we are the "greatest" (define great?*) recently invented, constitutionally meaningless group of nations (not countries) that haven't been together for 300 years. It just doesn't mean anything, yet this is one of the top 9 reasons given by the Civil Service to support maintaining of the Union!

    You can see how I'm confused and in need of a constitutional or political better to clear things up for me.

    * I don't think their short and turbulent spell in the United Kingdom really worked out all that great for Ireland to be honest.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  7. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    [we] are the "greatest family of nations for 300 years"

    I plan to submit a freedom of information request in order better to know the terms and scope of the comparison with the other "families of nations" that led our civil servants to come to this conclusion on my behalf.

    The FoI precedents are not good for indyref matters, but if you don't ask....

    Posted 10 years ago #
  8. Instography
    Member

    Isn't more of a marketing use of the terms, like when things are described as the most splendiferous, the giantest, the most funtabulous? Meaningless, non-specific terms that sound good and are intended to imply qualities that can neither be questioned nor proven.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  9. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Anyway, as we all know, the Time Capsule Monklands is the "biggest fun, in a Million Years", so easily trumps that claim.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  10. chdot
    Admin

  11. crowriver
    Member

    That article is a marvellous piece of mischief. One can imagine the Grauniad's Londinium readership choking on their quinoa reading it.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  12. chdot
    Admin

    "marvellous piece of mischief"

    Certainly 'impossible'.

    As would be making Scotland's faster growing city the capital of Scotland.

    Though the Queen could take the Court back to Dunfermline.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  13. chdot
    Admin

    New from Radio Scotland (now) a programme with a Yesser and a Noer.

    Called - Crossfire - mmm.

    Chaired by a Brompton owner.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  14. chdot
    Admin

  15. chdot
    Admin

    "

    “This survey shows that the public is increasingly disenchanted with the use of the NHS as a political football by all ­political parties in Scotland.”

    Dr Keighley said while the NHS remained high in public estimation, there was a significant majority of the population showing increasing impatience with decisions “made with ­reference to opinion polls and potential votes rather than on grounds of clinical need”.

    He added: “The public is not naive and is clearly suspicious of political interference in the NHS.

    "

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/health/scots-believe-health-policies-made-to-win-votes-1-3452914

    Posted 10 years ago #
  16. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    So, in case anyone is in any doubt that the reporting of the independence issue is...well...odd, to say the least we have this on the front page of Scotland on Sunday yesterday;

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/republican-plot-to-ditch-the-queen-after-yes-vote-1-3452710

    Scotland's finest journalists have exclusively revealed the presence in the Yes Scotland coalition of members of the Scottish Socialist Party and other republicans. How did they find this out? Did they use a powerful Google connected to a personal computer-enabled internet? The SSP have only been part of Yes Scotland from the outset after all, and it's only on their website that they declare themselves prominently to be in favour of an elected head of state.

    No mention anywhere of the irony of the United States of America's elected head of state telling us he thinks the UK 'works pretty well' while Scottish journalists uncover 'plots' by democrats to allow us to democratically elect a head for our new state. The United States of America was formed, if I remember correctly, with the express intention that no office of state should ever be hereditary.

    I am finding this coverage astonishing, and I am horrified at the thought of anyone taking this stuff seriously.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  17. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Also of note in the media today, the proposition by the Transport Minister of the London régime George Osborne (he is Transport Minister isn't he?) to build a high speed rail link between the 'northern' cities of Manchester and Leeds;

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27969885

    I invite 'No' voters to consider exactly what it is that these cities are north of, before they keenly pony up their 9% of the cost of construction. Neither city is north of the centroid of the United Kingdom with or without its odd semi-Scandinavian islands;

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_points_of_the_United_Kingdom

    Seriously, what is it that they are 'north' of? They look pretty central to me.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  18. crowriver
    Member

    If you can ignore the mischief making headline and the Bitter Togerther quote near the end, it's actually not a bad article. Folk need to know there's more to the Yes campaign than the SNP's "don't frighten the horses" approach.

    I have no problem with an independent Scotland becoming a republic in due course. I'm sure many Scots would like to see an elected head of state. This can all be debated and decided after a Yes vote: something to look forward to.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  19. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @crowriver

    Quite so, but there is a blatant contradiction in asserting that the Scottish people will be sovereign while retaining whoever may succeed to the English throne as our monarch.

    A monarch need not be sovereign, and it has long been held that the Scottish monarchs of old were replaceable magistrates chosen by a sovereign people. This cannot be the case in future unless we retain the right to dismiss a monarch who displeases us, thereby breaking with the succession to the English throne.

    And could an independent Scotland really forbid a Roman Catholic, or a person married to one, from becoming monarch?

    Posted 10 years ago #
  20. Morningsider
    Member

    IWRATS - I think Leeds and Manchester are north of the majority of the population of the UK. In which case, it would seem reasonable for them to be referred to as northern.

    The proposed high speed line (doubtful it will ever see the light of day) might seem questionable. No worse than spending £3bn on dualling the A96. I'm sure we could all point at projects/programmes we don't like from both Governments. While we are part of the UK all these projects are funded by UK taxpayers.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  21. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @Morningsider

    That's a reasonable proposition. The centre of population of the UK is at Appleby Parva (is there a place that sounds more like a pudding?) in Leicestershire;

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_population#Great_Britain

    Should we now expect to see Wolverhampton, Leicester and Peterborough refered to as 'central cities'? And why is Glasgow rarely refered to as 'northern'?

    Not one to get worked up about, but it's interesting dissecting the language, isn't it?

    Posted 10 years ago #
  22. chdot
    Admin

  23. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @chdot

    Professor Peat is a former 'Chief economist with the Royal Bank of Scotland' (therefore some kind of financial genius) and 'National Governor for Scotland' to the BBC (therefore quite neutral in the independence campaign).

    We can't know much about the future in this uncertain world, but the one absolute, undeniable fact is that if we vote Yes then we will continue to use the currency that we use right now. Absolutely nobody is proposing any other course of action and there is absolutely nothing that anyone can do to prevent it.

    The link is Unionist agitprop piffle.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  24. chdot
    Admin

    "therefore quite neutral in the independence campaign"

    Indeed...

    Posted 10 years ago #
  25. chdot
    Admin

    "Absolutely nobody is proposing any other course of action and there is absolutely nothing that anyone can do to prevent it."

    Not sure about that - and it's one 'unknown unknown' that is discouraging some people from voting Yes.

    Scotcoin??

    Posted 10 years ago #
  26. Instography
    Member

    @IWRATS
    But there is a difference between using a currency and being in a currency union. It's true that no one could stop an independent Scotland using the pound but it's unlikely to be the best outcome.

    I thought Common Weal was on record as proposing a separate Scottish currency.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  27. chdot
    Admin

    "I thought Common Weal was on record as proposing a separate Scottish currency."

    Think the Greens also.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  28. chdot
    Admin

    "

    Scotcoin Project Allocates 50 Million Scotcoins To ScotFund - A New Initiative aimed at increasing Scotcoin Adoption via Local Scottish Communities

    ScotFund has been established with one simple goal – To increase Scotcoin adoption via innovative ideas and concepts from the Scotcoin Community.

    "

    http://www.scotcoin.org

    Posted 10 years ago #
  29. Murun Buchstansangur
    Member

    "We can't know much about the future in this uncertain world, but the one absolute, undeniable fact is that if we vote Yes then we will continue to use the currency that we use right now. Absolutely nobody is proposing any other course of action and there is absolutely nothing that anyone can do to prevent it."

    Oh goodness, I think the EU would have more than a little to say about that.

    "The obligation to adopt the euro is outlined by the accession treaties, and the European Commission decided in 2004 not to allow for any more separate euro adoption referendums to take place, except for the three countries (UK, Denmark and Sweden) previously having negotiated such a process as a prerequisite for euro adoption."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_the_eurozone

    Hence the craze for the Yes campaign/SNP to portray the EU membership of an independent Scotland as a continuation rather than an application, despite all the evidence to the contrary, otherwise their whole currency house of cards comes tumbling down...

    Posted 10 years ago #
  30. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @Murun

    An independent Scotland wouldn't even qualify for the Euro. You have to run your own currency for two years first. And be in the EU.....

    @chdot

    Sterling is internationally tradeable. Any country could use it if they wished.

    @Instography

    Didn't know the Greens had proposed that - it's actually my favoured option. (But I don't think I count as a 'proposer'.)

    Posted 10 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin