Brave heart salmond announces his vision for Scotland

[Viking Warrior]

Ok salmon and spurgeon are announcing their independence

 

They are keeping the pound . Trident and nuclear bases are first to go . They will have an independent military force of 15k with a small amount of reserves

 

670 pages worth of info

 

What are the forums views on here about salmons now published vision ?

[Hatch]

waiting for someone to summarise it for me.

 

Then and only then will I laugh

[badgerx16]

They are keeping the pound .

 

Only if the Treasury lets them.

[pap]

Opening shots in the battle for independence. I'm not sure it really matters. The Scots are just swapping one set of political masters for another. They'll still try for EU membership, they'll still be using our money and will still be part of the central banking system.

 

The timing is weird. Historically, Scots have every right to feel aggrieved about the indifference in Westminster. Recently though, New Labour gave them devolution, the Tories gave them a referendum and as things stand, the Scots have the best public services in the Union.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Personally think they have a pretty good deal out of devolution.

 

If anything, it gives them a disproportionate amount of power in Westminster. The "West Lothian Question" means Scottish MPs vote for things that don't affect their constituents. So they have a say in the running of the union, and then decide what they want on their own doorstep.

 

I find it baffling that we had a PM introducing laws and legislation, or changes to public services that had no impact on his own constituency. Something really needs doing about that.

 

On Scotland. Up to them really, if they want to go, so be it. Personally, I think it would be a shame. Labour must be bricking it, would make their chances of winning a majority very tricky.

[trousers]

Only if the Treasury lets them.

 

The treasury and/or the rest of the UK will have no choice according to Salmond..... "The pound is an asset of the UK. We're entitled to a share of the UK assets ergo we're entitled to carry on using what's already ours" (or words to that effect)

[pap]

Personally think they have a pretty good deal out of devolution.

 

If anything, it gives them a disproportionate amount of power in Westminster. The "West Lothian Question" means Scottish MPs vote for things that don't affect their constituents. So they have a say in the running of the union, and then decide what they want on their own doorstep.

 

I find it baffling that we had a PM introducing laws and legislation, or changes to public services that had no impact on his own constituency. Something really needs doing about that.

 

On Scotland. Up to them really, if they want to go, so be it. Personally, I think it would be a shame. Labour must be bricking it, would make their chances of winning a majority very tricky.

 

The benefits that Scots get are a consequence of devolution, not an inevitability. There's a school of thought that suggests that Salmond is deliberately lavishing his people with generous public spending to p!ss the rest of the country off. I wonder if that'll go away if and when Scotland leave the Union.

 

The thing you hear time and time again "Westminster doesn't care about us". That ain't unique to Scotland. Anyone outside the South East probably feels an element of that, and even there, attitudes are changing. Another attitude I find quite common is the depiction of the English as posh boys just looking after their own. Given the composition of the present government, you can see why that impression is formed. Speaking from my own experience, I've been all around this Union. Apart from accent and fascination with odd local pastimes, people from Britain and Ireland are broadly very similar in outlook.

 

If we want to keep the Scots (and I do), we need to show a major charm offensive and couple that with a lasting legacy. It's a shame that Cameron took devo plus off the menu, leaving people with a straight in/out choice. Given the experience with the AV referendum, I've every expectation that this will be a dirty political battle which will be used to the same ends. Largely, "you voted, you said no - now shut the f**k up".

 

I do quite like KRG's electoral imbalance theory too.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

The treasury and/or the rest of the UK will have no choice according to Salmond..... "The pound is an asset of the UK. We're entitled to a share of the UK assets ergo we're entitled to carry on using what's already ours" (or words to that effect)

 

He does this though, doesn't he?

 

I swear he proclaimed "we will already be part of the EU etc etc", only for the EU to say nah, you won't be - you will need to apply.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

The benefits that Scots get are a consequence of devolution, not an inevitability. There's a school of thought that suggests that Salmond is deliberately lavishing his people with generous public spending to p!ss the rest of the country off. I wonder if that'll go away if and when Scotland leave the Union.

 

The thing you hear time and time again "Westminster doesn't care about us". That ain't unique to Scotland. Anyone outside the South East probably feels an element of that, and even there, attitudes are changing. Another attitude I find quite common is the depiction of the English as posh boys just looking after their own. Given the composition of the present government, you can see why that impression is formed. Speaking from my own experience, I've been all around this Union. Apart from accent and fascination with odd local pastimes, people from Britain and Ireland are broadly very similar in outlook.

 

If we want to keep the Scots (and I do), we need to show a major charm offensive and couple that with a lasting legacy. It's a shame that Cameron took devo plus off the menu, leaving people with a straight in/out choice. Given the experience with the AV referendum, I've every expectation that this will be a dirty political battle which will be used to the same ends. Largely, "you voted, you said no - now shut the f**k up".

 

I do quite like KRG's electoral imbalance theory too.

 

I'll go along with most of that.

 

I wish I could take credit pap. It's well known - nothing to do with me.

 

Pretty sure I learned it at school in Politics? Either way, it's a well-established debate: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/jan/17/what-is-west-lothian-question

[badgerx16]

The treasury and/or the rest of the UK will have no choice according to Salmond..... "The pound is an asset of the UK. We're entitled to a share of the UK assets ergo we're entitled to carry on using what's already ours" (or words to that effect)

 

To be able to use the UK Pound, the Scots would have to devolve monetary policy to the Bank of England; in the same way as they would have to concede control to the Central European Bank should they find themselves bound by what is, in fact, an EU rule over new members joining the Euro.

 

Salmond is baiting too many bears on this one - The EU, the UK, and even NATO, which it seems requires it's members to permit nuclear weapons to be located on their soil.

Edited 26 November, 2013 by badgerx16

[badgerx16]

What happens if.......

 

The Scots vote 'YES' and Salmond starts building his empire based on his promise of unbridled wealth, only for the entire thing to be proven a web of deceit and at the next Scottish election Labour get in and come knocking on #10's door for re-unification.

[badgerx16]

"No10 repeats currency union is "highly unlikely""

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25088251

[holepuncture]

If the Scots leave the union whilst keeping strong social and commercial ties, along with sorting our Glasgows financial district, I think they could do very well out of this.

 

British citizens living in Scotland considered Scottish citizens, including those holding dual nationality.

 

If the Scots were to vote 'YES' next year, and were to leave in a year or so after, would those from other parts of the union be able to move there before the change takes place, if they wanted to join Scotland? Dual nationality?

[Tokyo-Saint]

Hope so or it will be another £90 for a new passport for me.

[Bearsy]

tokyos going on about his supposed scottish heredity again. Being ginger + tight fisted isn't the same thing yo

[Frank's cousin]

Opening shots in the battle for independence. I'm not sure it really matters. The Scots are just swapping one set of political masters for another. They'll still try for EU membership, they'll still be using our money and will still be part of the central banking system.

 

The timing is weird. Historically, Scots have every right to feel aggrieved about the indifference in Westminster. Recently though, New Labour gave them devolution, the Tories gave them a referendum and as things stand, the Scots have the best public services in the Union.

 

And that is the crux of the matter - Salmond us a Nationalist - principles built on IMHO all things anti English - yet seems willing to devolve additional power to Brussels.... hopefully and I think they will, the voters will see through it and the referendum will be a clear NO... which means Salmonds position becomes untenable as the whole rationale for the SNP is disolved.... hopefully...

 

Interestingly being English but living in Scotland, I get a vote... whereas my Scottish colleagues living in England dont... hahahahah. I did ask my local MP (who is another sad obnoxious SNP tw&t wherever I would qualify for all services such as health etc as I was English... he said of course.... I then said, but I work officialy in England and ONLY pay tax in England so does that efect this.... he could not answer and gave some BS about details still to be resolved.... he really is an ignorant fecker...

[moonraker]

Scotland will become the Nation equivilent of Pompey under the fiscally incompetent and conning fish siblings just like there skate cousins.

[CB Saint]

Let me guess

 

they keep the pound, the oil, eu membership, NATO membership, Andy Murray

 

we get to keep our nukes, rbs and hbos debts

 

get ready for twelve month of guff from both sides

[aintforever]

The treasury and/or the rest of the UK will have no choice according to Salmond..... "The pound is an asset of the UK. We're entitled to a share of the UK assets ergo we're entitled to carry on using what's already ours" (or words to that effect)

 

I guess that means the UK get a share of the North Sea oil assets as well then?

[Guided Missile]

 

[Window Cleaner]

 

 

the Krankies...sounds about right then.

[OldNick]

If there was no oil revenue coming in I doubt they'd get a vote in favour. If only we couldn't dig a pipeline into it and start pumping it into England. Are they 100%sure that all the oil is Scottish.?

Apparently independence will give each Scot £600 a year more. That is if their figures are correct. Of course politicians never gild the lily

[trousers]

I guess that means the UK get a share of the North Sea oil assets as well then?

 

They're copying Pompey's tactics.... Take all the good bits and forget about the bad

[Batman]

He is off his tits on this

[trousers]

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-scotland-hands-economic-future-england/16500

[trousers]

He is off his tits on this

 

That's Cameron's next speech in the bag

[Viking Warrior]

So in a couple of years if the krankies get there way . I will become a Scottish citizen . However if I refuse then I may well be classed as an illegal alien . Also if I will have to have a Scottish passport w gen my one runs out in 4 years . I hope somewhere in the 670 page document it allows me to have dual citizenship

[Viking Warrior]

The krankies first announcement was clearly geared at getting at the hearts and minds of families . A guaranteed 30 hous a week child care for all 3 and 4 year olds and vulnerable 2 year olds . This is worrying firstly what happened to traditional parent hood and secondly the average worker is on 35 hours a week . So are the krankies introducing some quasi type of institutionalisation for all kids between the ages of 2 -4 . Good parent hood should be introduced not shoving kids off to the local nursery .

[pap]

Well, the dismissive and condescending attitude shared by some of my fellow posters is at least giving me an inkling into why the Scots might fancy leaving!

 

After looking at the post-independence pledges, I reckon Salmond has played a blinder. I still think he'll have a hard time securing the vote, but he's deliberately pitched a different sort of country to the wider UK.

 

Of course, that doesn't mean all of those pledges will be honoured, but if they are, could give Scots a big advantage over their English neighbours.

 

Guess it all comes down to whether they have the cash.

[buctootim]

Promising jam and honey, all the good and none of the bad is easy. Its all too Pollyanna to be credible and personally I think support will gradually ebb away towards polling day as the difficult questions are posed. Its a pity because you can make an economic case for Scottish independence based on whisky, oil & gas, tourism, offshore wind and IT.

[Viking Warrior]

I believe he has already a massive black hole up here in free prescription charges . I would like to know how the SNP can afford to fund such initiatives . Maybe it's because he has cut beds and nurse numbers up here . He carefully hidden away the true costs of prescriptions

[Guided Missile]

I believe he has already a massive black hole up here in free prescription charges . I would like to know how the SNP can afford to fund such initiatives . Maybe it's because he has cut beds and nurse numbers up here . He carefully hidden away the true costs of prescriptions

Pie face's qualifications and experience for leading Scotland into a brave new economic world are a 2:2 in Economics and 7 years working at RBS .

 

Mind you Osborne's 2:1 in Modern History from Oxford don't provide much reassurance, either, but at least he has the backing of Danny Alexander, PPE from Oxford. They'll run rings round pie face if he thinks they'll let him retain sterling, without any input into their economic affairs from the rest of the UK.

 

TBH I hope he wins the referendum. It'll mean the end of Labour in the UK, for the foreseeable future, less of our tax money disappearing north of the border and a Tory majority at Westminster for a long time to come....

[Ken Tone]

Well, the dismissive and condescending attitude shared by some of my fellow posters is at least giving me an inkling into why the Scots might fancy leaving!

 

After looking at the post-independence pledges, I reckon Salmond has played a blinder. I still think he'll have a hard time securing the vote, but he's deliberately pitched a different sort of country to the wider UK.

 

Of course, that doesn't mean all of those pledges will be honoured, but if they are, could give Scots a big advantage over their English neighbours.

 

Guess it all comes down to whether they have the cash.

 

 

surely the point is that Salmond can't deliver what he claims. Keeping the pound is one example. Why on earth would the rest of the uk agree to let the value of its currency be affected by the economic policies of another country? The only way this could work would be if "independent" Scotland let its policy be dictated by the UK government and what would be the point of independence then?

 

Personally I'd be sorry to see Scotland go. I've been there on holiday ,any times and am fond of the place. Would be a shame to see its inevitable decline after independence.

 

 

sStill, look on the bright side, if they were independent, at least the rest if the uk's media could stop pretending that Scottish football actually matters!

 

PS ... btw what would happen to the union 'jack' flag ?

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Well, the dismissive and condescending attitude shared by some of my fellow posters is at least giving me an inkling into why the Scots might fancy leaving!

 

After looking at the post-independence pledges, I reckon Salmond has played a blinder. I still think he'll have a hard time securing the vote, but he's deliberately pitched a different sort of country to the wider UK.

 

Of course, that doesn't mean all of those pledges will be honoured, but if they are, could give Scots a big advantage over their English neighbours.

 

Guess it all comes down to whether they have the cash.

 

Surely anyone can see he can't deliver though?

 

So how is that playing a blinder? I could run for Westminster and promise everyone they will never have to work, or pay taxes again - and that everything will be free. Fact is it won't happen. It might fool a few dreamers, but it won't get you anywhere - and it isn't playing a blinder.

 

Clearly, above is a bit of hyperbole - but promising what you can't deliver will come back and bite you on the backside. People (like you with the tories) will remember.

 

Actually, does anyone really think he can deliver everything he promises?

[pap]

surely the point is that Salmond can't deliver what he claims. Keeping the pound is one example. Why on earth would the rest of the uk agree to let the value of its currency be affected by the economic policies of another country? The only way this could work would be if "independent" Scotland let its policy be dictated by the UK government and what would be the point of independence then?

 

Personally I'd be sorry to see Scotland go. I've been there on holiday ,any times and am fond of the place. Would be a shame to see its inevitable decline after independence.

 

 

sStill, look on the bright side, if they were independent, at least the rest if the uk's media could stop pretending that Scottish football actually matters!

 

PS ... btw what would happen to the union 'jack' flag ?

 

It remains to be seen. Let's not pretend Scotland doesn't have other options when it comes to currency, or that sterling will be as strong if Scotland aren't using it.

 

UK politicians denying the use of sterling to Scots could actually push more people into Salmond's camp.

[Ken Tone]

 

So how is that playing a blinder? I could run for Westminster and promise everyone they will never have to work, or pay taxes again - and that everything will be free.

 

 

Works for for me mate. What's the name of your party?

[pap]

Surely anyone can see he can't deliver though?

 

So how is that playing a blinder? I could run for Westminster and promise everyone they will never have to work, or pay taxes again - and that everything will be free. Fact is it won't happen. It might fool a few dreamers, but it won't get you anywhere - and it isn't playing a blinder.

 

Clearly, above is a bit of hyperbole - but promising what you can't deliver will come back and bite you on the backside. People (like you with the tories) will remember.

 

Actually, does anyone really think he can deliver everything he promises?

 

He's played a blinder because he is offering all the things that English politicians have said that UK citizens can't have. Free tuition, care for the elderly, no bedroom tax, etc. Pretty much the opposite of the "pay or go f**k yourselves" attitude of the UK.

 

He cannot deliver on anything bilateral without the assent of the other party, but the rest is fair game provided the Scots have enough money to finance it. 5.3 million is not a lot of people, so I think it feasible.

 

Whether they can pay for it all when all the left-wingers move North is another matter

 

Oh, and before you scoff at that suggestion, loads of people near retirement age, especially near the border, bugger off to Scotland to make the most of their retirement funds.

[Ken Tone]

It remains to be seen. Let's not pretend Scotland doesn't have other options when it comes to currency, or that sterling will be as strong if Scotland aren't using it.

 

UK politicians denying the use of sterling to Scots could actually push more people into Salmond's camp.

 

It's not a matter of strength as such though is it? No country will agree to have its currency used by another without control over that foreign country's economy. if Cameron agreed to that he'd be committing political suicide. I think some Scots need to realise that talk of independence is alienating the 'rump' of the UK. There is some feeling of "sod 'em then" about, in England especially. Why would we make the split easy for Scotland? Uk politicians won't necessarily care about pushing more people into salmond's camp. Playing hardball will get them votes down here.

 

But yes of course Salmond has currency options. He could apply to join the euro zone or he could go with a Scottish pound, but that Scot-pound would very soon be worth less ( or indeed more to be fair) than the pound sterling.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

He's played a blinder because he is offering all the things that English politicians have said that UK citizens can't have. Free tuition, care for the elderly, no bedroom tax, etc. Pretty much the opposite of the "pay or go f**k yourselves" attitude of the UK.

 

He cannot deliver on anything bilateral without the assent of the other party, but the rest is fair game provided the Scots have enough money to finance it. 5.3 million is not a lot of people, so I think it feasible.

 

Whether they can pay for it all when all the left-wingers move North is another matter

 

Oh, and before you scoff at that suggestion, loads of people near retirement age, especially near the border, bugger off to Scotland to make the most of their retirement funds.

 

Why do you think people have been told they can't have it though mate? Possibly because it isn't feasible?

 

The Scots, like many other Western countries face the problem of an ageing population.So care for the elderly, along with all the other stuff is going to cost an absolute packet.

 

Maybe I'm just not as cynical as you - but I don't believe politicians want to have to say you need to pay for this, you can't have this. "Tories this, Tories that" - worth remembering a lot of the things Salmond is wanting to change were also Labour policies - increased fees, prescription charges etc. But, part of being a politician is having to make difficult decisions - you are pretty much always going to p*ss someone off.

 

Yes, there is a smaller population, so it might not cost that much - but that also means there is a smaller number of people to pay for it.

 

Basically, to me it all just seems pretty fantastical - making lots of promises he will never be able to deliver. It's more of a manifesto than an actual proposal of how the country will look. It's silly really, he isn't answering real questions about how the country will be run at all. He is making claims he can't back up, I see he still stuck to his "we will automatically be in the EU" line, despite previously being told that wouldn't be the case, only for the EU to come out again yesterday and say this still isn't the case. He's also trivialising the whole thing - "oh don't worry, you can still watch Strictly" - get a grip ffs.

 

I have faith in people's intelligence to see through it. If people want an independent Scotland fair enough (again, I don't want our Scottish brothers and sisters to leave the union), but this really isn't a strong case for it.

 

I completely disagree with you Pap - this is far from a blinder in my opinion.

[solentstars]

A lot of froth about nothing it's up to the Scottish to chose it's own destiny.i hope they stay but if they choose independence it will not make much difference the only thing we notice is the london parliment will have no Scottish mps.

 

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[pap]

Why do you think people have been told they can't have it though mate? Possibly because it isn't feasible?

 

The Scots, like many other Western countries face the problem of an ageing population.So care for the elderly, along with all the other stuff is going to cost an absolute packet.

 

Maybe I'm just not as cynical as you - but I don't believe politicians want to have to say you need to pay for this, you can't have this. "Tories this, Tories that" - worth remembering a lot of the things Salmond is wanting to change were also Labour policies - increased fees, prescription charges etc. But, part of being a politician is having to make difficult decisions - you are pretty much always going to p*ss someone off.

 

Yes, there is a smaller population, so it might not cost that much - but that also means there is a smaller number of people to pay for it.

 

Basically, to me it all just seems pretty fantastical - making lots of promises he will never be able to deliver. It's more of a manifesto than an actual proposal of how the country will look. It's silly really, he isn't answering real questions about how the country will be run at all. He is making claims he can't back up, I see he still stuck to his "we will automatically be in the EU" line, despite previously being told that wouldn't be the case, only for the EU to come out again yesterday and say this still isn't the case. He's also trivialising the whole thing - "oh don't worry, you can still watch Strictly" - get a grip ffs.

 

I have faith in people's intelligence to see through it. If people want an independent Scotland fair enough (again, I don't want our Scottish brothers and sisters to leave the union), but this really isn't a strong case for it.

 

I completely disagree with you Pap - this is far from a blinder in my opinion.

 

Salmond won't have many of the commitments of UK PLC. For instance, he could decide not to get involved in imperialistic wars or pay for a nuclear weapons program. Scotland doesn't intend to be a big country operating on a small country's landmass.

 

Your assertion that Scotland's wealth is contingent on their population doesn't really have too much merit. Every country has to support itself using a combination of natural resources and taxation raised from its populace. If what you say is true, it'd basically be impossible for countries of less than 5.3 million to exist. Scale it up and your argument still looks dodgy. If Scotland can't support a population of 5.3 million with the tax-payers working there, then how are we managing to support a population of 70 million odd? With many more spending commitments associated with our status and defence? The volume argument is moot. Every country has to support itself using its population.

 

Time will tell as to whether Salmond is fantasising or has thought anything through. He'll be asked all the questions you've raised and if he's found wanting, that may be something that feeds into the result of the referendum. He may have to do a deal to retain a major currency. He may have to re-apply for EU membership. Can you see him being denied either?

 

"No, f**k off Scotland - you've upset our English friends".

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Salmond won't have many of the commitments of UK PLC. For instance, he could decide not to get involved in imperialistic wars or pay for a nuclear weapons program. Scotland doesn't intend to be a big country operating on a small country's landmass.

 

Your assertion that Scotland's wealth is contingent on their population doesn't really have too much merit. Every country has to support itself using a combination of natural resources and taxation raised from its populace. If what you say is true, it'd basically be impossible for countries of less than 5.3 million to exist. Scale it up and your argument still looks dodgy. If Scotland can't support a population of 5.3 million with the tax-payers working there, then how are we managing to support a population of 70 million odd? With many more spending commitments associated with our status and defence? The volume argument is moot. Every country has to support itself using its population.

 

Time will tell as to whether Salmond is fantasising or has thought anything through. He'll be asked all the questions you've raised and if he's found wanting, that may be something that feeds into the result of the referendum. He may have to do a deal to retain a major currency. He may have to re-apply for EU membership. Can you see him being denied either?

 

"No, f**k off Scotland - you've upset our English friends".

 

I don't think they would be denied EU membership - but it hardly smacks of credibility that he made this claim once, got told nah that isn't the case - and then did the exact same thing a couple of months later with the same outcome.

 

Also, you were the one that said "but the rest is fair game provided the Scots have enough money to finance it. 5.3 million is not a lot of people, so I think it feasible." The volume argument is moot, I'd agree, but it was your argument bud

[pap]

I don't think they would be denied EU membership - but it hardly smacks of credibility that he made this claim once, got told nah that isn't the case - and then did the exact same thing a couple of months later with the same outcome.

 

Also, you were the one that said "but the rest is fair game provided the Scots have enough money to finance it. 5.3 million is not a lot of people, so I think it feasible." The volume argument is moot, I'd agree, but it was your argument bud

 

You're forgetting the per capita amount of oil that those 5.3 million have.

[Whitey Grandad]

If there was no oil revenue coming in I doubt they'd get a vote in favour. If only we couldn't dig a pipeline into it and start pumping it into England. Are they 100%sure that all the oil is Scottish.?

Apparently independence will give each Scot £600 a year more. That is if their figures are correct. Of course politicians never gild the lily

 

The Shetlands may disagree. They could just as easily decide to stick with Westminster.

[Whitey Grandad]

You're forgetting the per capita amount of oil that those 5.3 million have.

 

Much of it owned by multinational companies.

[pap]

Much of it owned by multinational companies.

 

They're licensed to extract it. Not the same thing as ownership. I think you'll find that right now, the Crown owns it.

[aintforever]

They're licensed to extract it. Not the same thing as ownership. I think you'll find that right now, the Crown owns it.

 

If the UK own it then surely Scotland must only be entitled to their share, not the whole lot?

[pap]

If the UK own it then surely Scotland must only be entitled to their share, not the whole lot?

 

It's all rather murky. I do know that the Crown owns nearly every piece of land under your feet. If oil is discovered in the aintforever acres, it's the Crown's - not yours.

 

Legally, the Crown owns all of this country (apart from Cornwall) and many of the former colonies, including Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Scotland want to keep the Queen as head of state, yet presumably don't want the British Crown owning the land and sea. Otherwise their oil claim is a bit borked.

[badgerx16]

If the UK own it then surely Scotland must only be entitled to their share, not the whole lot?

 

Scotland, as an independent country, would have it's own territorial waters, defined in international law. As such, most of the oil and gas fields are likely to become Scottish. There is an argument about the investment that has been made so far in the industry on behalf of the UK as a whole, and therefore whether a degree of compensation should be paid to the Treasury in the event of 'ownership' being transferred.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

It's all rather murky. I do know that the Crown owns nearly every piece of land under your feet. If oil is discovered in the aintforever acres, it's the Crown's - not yours.

 

Legally, the Crown owns all of this country (apart from Cornwall) and many of the former colonies, including Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Scotland want to keep the Queen as head of state, yet presumably don't want the British Crown owning the land and sea. Otherwise their oil claim is a bit borked.

 

What was with the "shared assets" comments AS was making in relation to the £? If they have a share in GBP - surely the rest of the UK has a share of the oil?