Brave heart salmond announces his vision for Scotland

[aintforever]

From what I saw on Question Time it looks like Scots want out of the UK because they don't want to be governed by Conservatives.

 

I can sort of sympathise with them, it's hard for most of England to feel any connection with Cameron and the other silver spoon millionaires handing out austerity. It must be near impossible for the ginger mountain-dwelling hobbits up there.

[moonraker]

From what I saw on Question Time it looks like Scots want out of the UK because they don't want to be governed by Conservatives.

 

I can sort of sympathise with them, it's hard for most of England to feel any connection with Cameron and the other silver spoon millionaires handing out austerity. It must be near impossible for the ginger mountain-dwelling hobbits up there.

 

I think you are right there may well be a swing to the SNP position because of the Torys unfortunately as pointed out above the UK is very regionalised when it comes to party following, try finding a Labour MP west of Bristol or indeed any MP from the main parties in NI. Oh the irony of the Conservative and Unionist party being in Government for the break up of the Union.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

I think you are right there may well be a swing to the SNP position because of the Torys unfortunately as pointed out above the UK is very regionalised when it comes to party following, try finding a Labour MP west of Bristol or indeed any MP from the main parties in NI. Oh the irony of the Conservative and Unionist party being in Government for the break up of the Union.

 

I do agree with you & aintforever - it's a fair point but on the flip side, imagine being a tory in England for 13 years and basically being kept out by Scottish & Welsh Labour MPs. As I mentioned above, the West Lothian Question means Labour governed basically due to support in Scotland, whilst the Scottish MPs are enacted laws and policies that don't affect their constituencies.

 

I have no problem with people like Cameron and his school buddies not being in govt, but there are two sides to every argument.

[JoeShmoe]

I'm in Scotland and nearly everyone i know thinks the whole thing is barmy. Its not even Independence they want, its devo-max. There's no way the rump UK will allow Scotland to keep the pound when they have control over their own tax and spend policies. What they've put out is the absolute best case scenario which there is no way they'll get. There would have to be a new currency, new request to join the EU, tax increases to fund more welfare etc. After 2 or 3 years where it all looked initialy rosy as they try and copy Ireland by putting corp. tax etc at stupidly low amounts to funnel Google and Amazons profits, the party would stop and we'd end up like Greece

 

So basically its not true independence, most of the big promises couldn't be met, most people dont want it and we all have to listen to it for the next 10 months. Just a shame Alistair Darlings such a complete wet fart as i'll give Salmond this, he's a darn good politician

[badgerx16]

I do agree with you & aintforever - it's a fair point but on the flip side, imagine being a tory in England for 13 years and basically being kept out by Scottish & Welsh Labour MPs. As I mentioned above, the West Lothian Question means Labour governed basically due to support in Scotland, whilst the Scottish MPs are enacted laws and policies that don't affect their constituencies.

 

I have no problem with people like Cameron and his school buddies not being in govt, but there are two sides to every argument.

 

There is nothing preventing Tories getting elected in Scotland - other than the Tory policies. They still have 1.

Also, Bliar's first 2 Governments had a majority in England, ( overall majorities of 179 and 167 ).

Edited 29 November, 2013 by badgerx16

[trousers]

I agree with Pap. The Scottish referendum is a 'win win' for the conservatives.

 

If Scotland votes 'no' then the Tories can be happy that the UK is preserved; if Scotland vote 'yes' then the conservatives are pretty much a shoe-in in rUK elections for the foreseeable future.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

There is nothing preventing Tories getting elected in Scotland - other than the Tory policies. They still have 1.

Also, Bliar's first 2 Governments had a majority in England, ( overall majorities of 179 and 167 ).

 

I was just trying to add some balance. It would be much harder for Labour to win a majority should Scotland go solo, which I have said multiple times I don't want.

 

Blair is far from a typical 'Labour' candidate in that he is about as left wing as Cameron.

[badgerx16]

 

Blair is far from a typical 'Labour' candidate in that he is about as left wing as Cameron.

 

Cameron is also almost certainly as 'Scottish' as Blair, as his father's family are from Aberdeenshire.

[badgerx16]

if Scotland vote 'yes' then the conservatives are pretty much a shoe-in in rUK elections for the foreseeable future.

Doesn't that depend on the level of right-wing defection to UKIP ?

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Cameron is also almost certainly as 'Scottish' as Blair, as his father's family are from Aberdeenshire.

 

Being a Tory will always turn the scots off you though, even if you were from Glasgow.

[Wes Tender]

I agree with Pap. The Scottish referendum is a 'win win' for the conservatives.

 

If Scotland votes 'no' then the Tories can be happy that the UK is preserved; if Scotland vote 'yes' then the conservatives are pretty much a shoe-in in rUK elections for the foreseeable future.

 

If the Scots vote "no", then it is long overdue that the West Lothian question is addressed and Scottish MPs be disallowed voting on purely English matters. If this rampant Nationalisation by the SNP has some benefit at all, it will be that issues like this are placed firmly under the spotlight. I'm fairly ambivalent about the outcome provided that if the Scots and Welsh have their own Parliament/Assembly, so do we English, whichever way the vote goes.

[Viking Warrior]

I have not done the maths but if the krankies get their way . how many scottish MP's on either side of the border will lose their seats?

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Some thoughts on the question of moving UK nuclear weapon facilities out of a newly independent Scotland.

 

It seems to me there are all sorts of potential security/health & safety/planning difficulties associated with relocating the Scottish based UK nuclear facilities. For instance, wherever we might choose to relocate these facilities (Devonport/Portland/Portsmouth?) you can rest assured that many locals will object vehemently to having nuclear weapons placed in their 'backyard' as it were - and who can blame them some might say.

Okay there are provisions for the MoD to 'short cut' the normal labyrinthine planning process in this country, but that itself raises ethical questions re the validity of riding roughshod over the democratic process in order to protect it. HMG can't just force this through in a matter of months - they will need to win the argument both in Parliament and with the people.

 

Those familiar with submarine operation may consider it tactically undesirable for our SSBN force to be operating in the highly congested (and hence acoustically noisy) waters of the English Channel/Western approaches. I'm not a believer in the case for a UK nuclear deterrent anyway, but those who are may be concerned about the operational security of these boats when departing/returning from patrol.

 

For that matter what about the seven old decommissioned nuclear submarines currently rusting away quietly at Roysth? Being true believers in a non nuclear Scotland I can't see the SNP being very interested in participating meaningfully in the disposal process (when we finally get round to deciding how we are going to proceed with that difficult problem that is) so all those old hulks might be heading south to Devonport sometime soon I can only presume. Is there even room for them there?

 

The only estimate for the cost of all this major disruption I have seen is the (suspiciously round) £20bn+ number published in the press a year or so ago. But surely the IRON LAW of defence procurement is that as soon as you attach the word 'Nuclear' to any project then the costs go through the roof and any delivery date slips into the distant future at a rate of knots. Ten years and £20bn might end up being wildly optimistic estimates. Those who doubt any of that would do well to take a quick look at the record of the 'Valiant' nuclear submarine jetty at Faslane and think again.

 

For what it's worth, I both hope and believe the Scottish people will ultimately decide to maintain the union in the coming referendum.. a happy outcome that would render this whole point moot of course. Should they vote otherwise however ... well we would have a big problem on our hands then wouldn't we?

[aintforever]

Some thoughts on the question of moving UK nuclear weapon facilities out of a newly independent Scotland.

 

It seems to me there are all sorts of potential security/health & safety/planning difficulties associated with relocating the Scottish based UK nuclear facilities. For instance, wherever we might choose to relocate these facilities (Devonport/Portland/Portsmouth?) you can rest assured that many locals will object vehemently to having nuclear weapons placed in their 'backyard' as it were - and who can blame them some might say.

Okay there are provisions for the MoD to 'short cut' the normal labyrinthine planning process in this country, but that itself raises ethical questions re the validity of riding roughshod over the democratic process in order to protect it. HMG can't just force this through in a matter of months - they will need to win the argument both in Parliament and with the people.

 

Those familiar with submarine operation may consider it tactically undesirable for our SSBN force to be operating in the highly congested (and hence acoustically noisy) waters of the English Channel/Western approaches. I'm not a believer in the case for a UK nuclear deterrent anyway, but those who are may be concerned about the operational security of these boats when departing/returning from patrol.

 

For that matter what about the seven old decommissioned nuclear submarines currently rusting away quietly at Roysth? Being true believers in a non nuclear Scotland I can't see the SNP being very interested in participating meaningfully in the disposal process (when we finally get round to deciding how we are going to proceed with that difficult problem that is) so all those old hulks might be heading south to Devonport sometime soon I can only presume. Is there even room for them there?

 

The only estimate for the cost of all this major disruption I have seen is the (suspiciously round) £20bn+ number published in the press a year or so ago. But surely the IRON LAW of defence procurement is that as soon as you attach the word 'Nuclear' to any project then the costs go through the roof and any delivery date slips into the distant future at a rate of knots. Ten years and £20bn might end up being wildly optimistic estimates. Those who doubt any of that would do well to take a quick look at the record of the 'Valiant' nuclear submarine jetty at Faslane and think again.

 

For what it's worth, I both hope and believe the Scottish people will ultimately decide to maintain the union in the coming referendum.. a happy outcome that would render this whole point moot of course. Should they vote otherwise however ... well we would have a big problem on our hands then wouldn't we?

 

Or the UK could just decide they don't want nukes after all and then it's Scotland's problem? They are after all, like the oil, located in Scotland.

[Batman]

Rhu narrows is even more at risk due to it being..... Err... Narrow. Than a deep water harbour like Plymouth

 

Why would being based in Plymouth or say, Falmouth mean you operate in the English channel?

[Lord Duckhunter]

This line that is somehow undemocratic to the jocks to have a Tory government in westminster is clearly nonsense and shows a degree of ignorance. The lib/dem on QT pointed out that Orkney had never ever returned an SNP member, yet they get an SNP government. I believe that 4 or 5 times England has voted for a Tory government and go it a labour one, including the Blair one after Iraq. That ginger fishwife singer who wouldn't shut up on QT should have had that pointed out to her ( bearing in mind one of her reasons for yes vote was the war)

 

The level of debate was depressing. Krankie saying France and Germany are independent yet share a currency, has she not heard of the ecb. EU rules also state that any new member must adopt the euro. The krankies used to accept this, until it blew up in their face. I watched the programme on catch up and its hardened my opinion that I hope they **** off and leave us alone. I know that's not a true representation of the whole country, but what a bunch of moaning twots. That singer, man I'm against domestic violence but if I was married to her would find it a real struggle not to give her a Glasgow kiss.

[trousers]

Or the UK could just decide they don't want nukes after all and then it's Scotland's problem? They are after all, like the oil, located in Scotland.

 

Might it even be cheaper for the rest of the uk to say to scotland: "ok, you get to keep all that nuclear stuff - do what you want with it coz we're gonna buy ourselves some new stuff"?

[CB Saint]

Might it even be cheaper for the rest of the uk to say to scotland: "ok, you get to keep all that nuclear stuff - do what you want with it coz we're gonna buy ourselves some new stuff"?

 

What other bollo cks can we shift up there before the vote. All of our nuclear waste, Portsmouth, the Bulgarians

[Viking Warrior]

Chapel interesting comment about Rosyth . Salmond has stated that Rosyth may be used as a 2nd navy base for his new navy . So he either keeps the rusting vessels or he will have to dispose of them . But I don't see this second base happening for ten years if he gets independence

[Ken Tone]

One solution not yet suggested is to let Scotland go independent, then simply invade and take it over again. What sort of defence force could a country with 5 million inhabitants have?

 

Then we could simply help ourselves to the oil etc, without sending hard-earned tax money up there from the economic powerhouse of the south of England.

[channonball]

The biggest benefit for the Scot's leaving will be that we won't have their ****ing football results shoved down our throats everytime we turn on the news. It sickens me that the Scottish league gets biger profile than the Championship & League 1 despite their **** attendances.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

One solution not yet suggested is to let Scotland go independent, then simply invade and take it over again. What sort of defence force could a country with 5 million inhabitants have?

 

Then we could simply help ourselves to the oil etc, without sending hard-earned tax money up there from the economic powerhouse of the south of England.

 

How delightfully medieval Ken ... the spirit of old 'Longshanks' lives on!