The Scottish Independence referendum

[mcjwills]

Interesting that many in England' date=' have not picked up on the fact that should Westminster no longer contain the 50 odd Scottish MPs, it's unlikely there would ever be any other Government in England other than a Right wing one... Great if that's your bent, but disastrous for Labour in England... In some respects it's interesting the Tories are not completely behind it![/quote']

Not strictly true only a 3% swing would still see Labour in power, when Tony Blair was first elected you could discount all the Scottish labour MP's and he still would have been in government.

[Batman]

His blathering on the £ proved beyond doubt he is making it up as he goes along.

 

If in the highly unlikely event of a yes vote I think there would be an immediate campaign in the rest of the UK for us to have a say on whether/how we share our currency with a foreign country.

I agree.

The pressure, mostly by the English on the govt to be very harsh on any negotiation will be immense.

 

listening to those who vote yes going on about 'english rule' are complete clowns

[mcjwills]

I agree.

The pressure, mostly by the English on the govt to be very harsh on any negotiation will be immense.

 

listening to those who vote yes going on about 'english rule' are complete clowns

As there is a General Election between the time the Vote and Scotland leaving the Union will the Scottish MP'S not vote on any policies that will affect the rest of the union as how can a foreign country vote on things that will affect our country. Can we start making laws and tax raising for our benefit in Scotland?

[aintforever]

I think the Jocks will vote no. The hairy, sweaty braveheart types shout he loudest, and it's cool to hate the English, but I think deep down when it comes to ticking the box most will do the sensible thing and vote no. Breaking up the UK will be alot of pointless hassle and potential instability.

[CB Fry]

I think the Jocks will vote no. The hairy, sweaty braveheart types shout he loudest, and it's cool to hate the English, but I think deep down when it comes to ticking the box most will do the sensible thing and vote no. Breaking up the UK will be alot of pointless hassle and potential instability.

They will vote no. Far too many sensible people who, when faced with it in the ballot box will just think - "what's the point, really?". Voting Yes is not going to magically turn Scotland into Sweden like the Nats will have people believe. Just a heck of a lot of ball-ache for things to be not much different.

[whelk]

Bookies are never wrong on this sort of thing. 1/10 to vote No. Forgone conclusion.

 

Mind u remember Will Young upsetting the odds against Gareth Gates.

[Viking Warrior]

One of the most profound things salmond has said, was that he would re-nationalise Royal Mail as soon as he got independence .

Strange comment when it is British .

 

I hope he doesn't think that it will only be the scots who will only get all the tax payers money back when the RBS eventually cough that up .

 

It was the Bank of England and British gov who bailed them out

 

Alpine sorry mate your way of the mark re the krankies and the scots deserving each other . Bad bad call

[revolution saint]

His blathering on the £ proved beyond doubt he is making it up as he goes along.

 

If in the highly unlikely event of a yes vote I think there would be an immediate campaign in the rest of the UK for us to have a say on whether/how we share our currency with a foreign country.

 

Hmmm, maybe I'm missing the point but does Salmon want a shared currency, or just a separate currency called the pound? I honestly don't really care what they would call it but surely from their point of view a shared currency would mean they really wouldn't be independant? They certainly wouldn't have control over interest rates anyway and practically I can't see it working. I'd also take issue with him when he says it's as much Scotlands currency as it is Englands - I thought it was the United Kingdom currency which is the very thing they want to leave.

 

At any rate I fully expect a vote to stay in the Union because apart from a patriotic tug-at-the heartstrings / braveheart style appeal the SNP don't seem to have many convincing arguments. Hopefully it'll be the end of Salmon and devolution talk for at least a while as well.

 

If they do split I hope they take the monarchy with them though - they can have that part of the union free of charge......

[Whitey Grandad]

If they do split I hope they take the monarchy with them though - they can have that part of the union free of charge......

 

What would you have instead? Whatever you choose would cost us a hell of a lot more.

[moonraker]

The delicious irony of a Yes vote would be that the SNP no longer have a reason to exist. There would have to be a quick General Election which would result in either a Labour victory or a hung parliament with Labour as the biggest party.

I do not believe the Scots will vote yes, the risks are to great on currency, EU membership, oil price volatility and pension affordability. The pools are very difficult to judge, it has been widely reported that the unknowns are the key and I am sure when faced with the choice between the status quo, even if means the occasional Tory Government, and the unknown the vast majority will vote no.

[revolution saint]

What would you have instead? Whatever you choose would cost us a hell of a lot more.

 

Ah well that's a different topic entirely and to be fair I chucked that comment in at the end as a joke. With my username it's hardly surprising which side of that debate I'd fall into. However to answer your question it's not really about money for me and never has been. I notice most republicans always bring up money as a counter argument to something that is inherently undemocratic. So, personally I don't really see the need to replace them with anything. I don't think we need them or a replacement for them. If one was proposed then I'd judge it on it's merits but if it was democratic and accountable then that's far better than the current situation.

 

I find the idea of a heriditary head of state to be frankly ridiculous but that's just my opinion - been round the block on this debate and realise opinions are unlikely to be changed. Thanks for asking though and apologies for going off topic.

[Whitey Grandad]

Ah well that's a different topic entirely and to be fair I chucked that comment in at the end as a joke. With my username it's hardly surprising which side of that debate I'd fall into. However to answer your question it's not really about money for me and never has been. I notice most republicans always bring up money as a counter argument to something that is inherently undemocratic. So, personally I don't really see the need to replace them with anything. I don't think we need them or a replacement for them. If one was proposed then I'd judge it on it's merits but if it was democratic and accountable then that's far better than the current situation.

 

I find the idea of a heriditary head of state to be frankly ridiculous but that's just my opinion - been round the block on this debate and realise opinions are unlikely to be changed. Thanks for asking though and apologies for going off topic.

 

At last, a man of principle! You should be stuffed and mounted, but not necessarily in that order

[pap]

I see that Peter Capaldi is going to be doing the Doctor with his Glaswegian brogue. Devolution, free Uni and a fkn Time Lord! What more do these people want?

[toofarnorth]

The Trident issue will be an interesting one

 

AS big thing is that it will be gone in 5 years. That simply is completely unworkable

 

Surely though it's only an issue if post independence SNP remain in power at the Scottish Parliament. As far as I'm aware the Scottish Labour and conservatives aren't proposing to get rid of it?

 

That's what irks me about so much of the debate. Alex Salmond surely has no mandate to say what will be done post independence as he only has power to do it if he is voted back in. However, Labour has for decades been the dominant party in Scotland so will more than likely return to power either solely or in a coalition in the near future.

[KingdomCome]

I get a vote in this, and it's a fervent no from me.

Strange that the yes campaign are making a fuss about how the no campaign is trying to scare the voters while they themselves are saying only a yes vote will guarantee the continuation of the NHS.

Ridiculous claim based on nothing but scare tactics. The Scottish government have total control over the NHS in Scotland and additional tax raising powers should they need to increase funding. Even if the rest of the UK reduces the NHS budget, the Scottish Government already has sufficient powers to compensate this. I wonder if their next "guarantee" will be to promise that there will never be wild tigers roaming the streets of Glasgow.

The pound issue is also bizarre. If you want to keep the pound, surely recent history has proven you need a conjoined fiscal policy...doesn't sound like independence to me.

[Guy]

It seems to me the two best ways for an independant Scotland to succeed long term would be a) become a tax haven and encourage London based companies and High-Net-Worth individuals to base themselves in Edinburgh on paper (sort of like a more rainy Switzerland) but this goes against the traditional Left Wing stance of the SNP, or b) dive headlong into the EU and take on the Euro and style itself as an English speaking centre for European business (sort of like a more rainy Belgium) but that seems to defeat the idea of 'independence'.

[pap]

Salmond crushed Darling in latest debate, according to some commentators.

 

Highlights here.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/aug/26/salmond-darling-second-debate-scottish-independence-video

[OldNick]

Salmond crushed Darling in latest debate, according to some commentators.

 

Highlights here.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/aug/26/salmond-darling-second-debate-scottish-independence-video

yep, I watched some, but it was cringeworthy how salmond walked to the front and was using his trained body language. he looked so awkward,but he did fluster Darling. Darling made the mistake af saying that Scotland could keep the pound.

If they didnt have the oil, there would be no contest. i dont know how it would effect England if they become independant. Personally the Scots have been an asset to the UK as great allies.

If they leave i hope they sink.

[Jimmy_D]

Part of me wants to see Scotland vote yes, and Salmond turn out to be wrong with his constant claims that the rest of the UK is bluffing about the possibility of a currency union, just to see how big the fallout would be.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Salmond crushed Darling in latest debate, according to some commentators.

 

Highlights here.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/aug/26/salmond-darling-second-debate-scottish-independence-video

 

Interesting.

 

I watched most of it last night and thought he was utterly pathetic. His debate style was childish. Refused to answer questions, then refused to let Darling speak. He just kept repeating himself.

[pap]

Interesting.

 

I watched most of it last night and thought he was utterly pathetic. His debate style was childish. Refused to answer questions, then refused to let Darling speak. He just kept repeating himself.

 

Scored 71% in Salmond's favour.

 

I'm wondering whether the Scots are starting to get a bit weary with the Better Together messages. Broadly, one campaign is based on fear, the other is based on hope.

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Scored 71% in Salmond's favour.

 

I'm wondering whether the Scots are starting to get a bit weary with the Better Together messages. Broadly, one campaign is based on fear, the other is based on hope.

 

Hmmm. It's hard to tell with these debates. I remember Cleggy winning them.

[Batman]

Scored 71% in Salmond's favour.

 

I'm wondering whether the Scots are starting to get a bit weary with the Better Together messages. Broadly, one campaign is based on fear, the other is based on hope.

 

means little

 

will you now be swayed to UKIP after nigel crushed cleggy in the TV debates?

what if cameron does it to milliband next year?

[pap]

Hmmm. It's hard to tell with these debates. I remember Cleggy winning them.

 

means little

 

will you now be swayed to UKIP after nigel crushed cleggy in the TV debates?

what if cameron does it to milliband next year?

 

Clegg did well in General Election debate. Lib Dems do well in general election, especially on the popular vote.

Clegg did badly in European Election debate. Lib Dems get eviscerated at the polls.

 

Very different political winds whirling around at the time, I'll grant you.

[Batman]

Clegg did well in General Election debate. Lib Dems do well in general election, especially on the popular vote.

Clegg did badly in European Election debate. Lib Dems get eviscerated at the polls.

 

Very different political winds whirling around at the time, I'll grant you.

I will be amazed if salmond wins.

he went all out attack yesterday and we still dont know any more. He just shouts a lot.

[Badger]

I will be amazed if salmond wins.

he went all out attack yesterday and we still dont know any more. He just shouts a lot.

 

Which may of course appeal to some of the electorate there.

[saintbletch]

Salmond crushed Darling in latest debate, according to some commentators.

 

Highlights here.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/aug/26/salmond-darling-second-debate-scottish-independence-video

 

He did indeed papster.

 

If I'm honest I found myself slightly envious that in Scotland it's not considered off limits to put forward left-of-centre policies. Unaffordable pie in the sky they may be, but at least the political climate allows those things to be discussed. I found it refreshing, and I imagine the SNP's growth in support has been as a place for disgruntled voters to run to from the yellowy-purple amalgam of the centre-ground-grabbing 'traditional' parties. Much like UKIP in The South.

 

Re the 'debate', I was actually left thinking that it was an odd decision to put an anxious and overly beige 'droid like Darling up against a 'slick' politician like Salmond.

 

I don't understand the process that selected Darling as the No representative, but if I were as given to seeing conspiracy and not cockup as you, I might think that the great puppet master actually wants an independent Scotland.

 

I mean, if I had been managing Salmond's campaign I'd have been rubbing my hands - it was like shooting fish in a barrel. Take your pick.

 

Put Darling in a position where he is forced to defend the current policies of the coalition. At this point Darling is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Political DNA means that he can't make excuses for the current Westminster power brokers, yet if he reverts to type and claims that it will be better under the next labour government, then Salmond simply attacks on the line that he can't guarantee a Labour government.

 

Put Darling in a position where he describes the current hardship as a transient problem caused by economic downturn. At this point Salmond simply points out that it was the Labour party that governed the country during that period, and in fact Darling's hands, as chancellor, were on the recessionary rudder during that time.

 

Put Darling in a position where he is forced to dream up policies that specifically help Scotland, and he's stymied instantly. Because a) he doesn't talk for the coalition, and b) any post-election Labour policies he might mention are reliant on the Scottish people taking a leap of faith to believe that their combined Xen can suddenly turn the home counties into a vision of post-Tsarist Russia.

 

Throw in a bit of 'my oil expert is better than your oil expert', add a bit of jingoistic nationalism, pluck the 'Westminster doesn't care about us' heartstrings, add in the lament that the devolved Scottish parliament doesn't have enough power, set the whole shebang against a backdrop of The Edinburgh Festival and the successful Commonwealth Games and you're there.

 

Darling was forced to either paint a picture of the current Better-Together world in which he politically doesn't believe in, or paint a vision of a future Better-Together world that he can't guarantee he can deliver.

 

Darling's only weapon was 'fear'. He had to resort to spreading doubt, and in a debate setting like that passion trumps doubt every time.

 

It was a no-win situation. He was cannon fodder.

 

So papster who's the puppetmaster?

[KingdomCome]

Interesting.

 

I watched most of it last night and thought he was utterly pathetic. His debate style was childish. Refused to answer questions, then refused to let Darling speak. He just kept repeating himself.

 

You forget how easily impressed the public are.

 

"ooh he's got a nice tie and he speaks very confidently...he must be right"

[KelvinsRightGlove]

You forget how easily impressed the public are.

 

"ooh he's got a nice tie and he speaks very confidently...he must be right"

 

True. Nigel Farage case in point.

[KingdomCome]

Scored 71% in Salmond's favour.

 

I'm wondering whether the Scots are starting to get a bit weary with the Better Together messages. Broadly, one campaign is based on fear, the other is based on hope.

 

Salmond is straying into the fear approach with the NHS though.

[badgerx16]

The interesting thing, for me, about the whole process is that with all 3 Westminster parties in the NO camp, what happens in the first Scottish General Election should the referendum produce a YES vote ? How do Scottish Labour, for example, as the probable leading political party, reconcile themselves to a legislature they didn't want ?

[pap]

He did indeed papster.

 

If I'm honest I found myself slightly envious that in Scotland it's not considered off limits to put forward left-of-centre policies. Unaffordable pie in the sky they may be, but at least the political climate allows those things to be discussed. I found it refreshing, and I imagine the SNP's growth in support has been as a place for disgruntled voters to run to from the yellowy-purple amalgam of the centre-ground-grabbing 'traditional' parties. Much like UKIP in The South.

 

Re the 'debate', I was actually left thinking that it was an odd decision to put an anxious and overly beige 'droid like Darling up against a 'slick' politician like Salmond.

 

I don't understand the process that selected Darling as the No representative, but if I were as given to seeing conspiracy and not cockup as you, I might think that the great puppet master actually wants an independent Scotland.

 

I mean, if I had been managing Salmond's campaign I'd have been rubbing my hands - it was like shooting fish in a barrel. Take your pick.

 

Put Darling in a position where he is forced to defend the current policies of the coalition. At this point Darling is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Political DNA means that he can't make excuses for the current Westminster power brokers, yet if he reverts to type and claims that it will be better under the next labour government, then Salmond simply attacks on the line that he can't guarantee a Labour government.

 

Put Darling in a position where he describes the current hardship as a transient problem caused by economic downturn. At this point Salmond simply points out that it was the Labour party that governed the country during that period, and in fact Darling's hands, as chancellor, were on the recessionary rudder during that time.

 

Put Darling in a position where he is forced to dream up policies that specifically help Scotland, and he's stymied instantly. Because a) he doesn't talk for the coalition, and b) any post-election Labour policies he might mention are reliant on the Scottish people taking a leap of faith to believe that their combined Xen can suddenly turn the home counties into a vision of post-Tsarist Russia.

 

Throw in a bit of 'my oil expert is better than your oil expert', add a bit of jingoistic nationalism, pluck the 'Westminster doesn't care about us' heartstrings, add in the lament that the devolved Scottish parliament doesn't have enough power, set the whole shebang against a backdrop of The Edinburgh Festival and the successful Commonwealth Games and you're there.

 

Darling was forced to either paint a picture of the current Better-Together world in which he politically doesn't believe in, or paint a vision of a future Better-Together world that he can't guarantee he can deliver.

 

Darling's only weapon was 'fear'. He had to resort to spreading doubt, and in a debate setting like that passion trumps doubt every time.

 

It was a no-win situation. He was cannon fodder.

 

So papster who's the puppetmaster?

 

Some interesting analysis there, bletch - and I'm inclined to agree with you. Darling isn't really in a position to deliver anything but fear, which I think will ultimately be counter-productive. If he overdoes it (and I reckon he already has), he runs the risk of activating the strong "fúck yis" instinct within the Scots.

 

Puppetmasters? Cui bono, bletch, cui bono?

 

1) Tories (win-win, regardless - but would find it easier to win rUK elections)

2) Scottish Nationalists (the "in bed with Darling" theory!)

3) IMF (large loans if Scotland picks its own currency and defaults)

4) EU (esp if rUK treats Scotland like shíte afterwards)

5) Anyone that knows what would actually happen post settlement (insider deals, etc)

[pap]

Salmond is straying into the fear approach with the NHS though.

 

With some justification though. Cameron and the Tories lied about their plans from the outset.

[Gemmel]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28943041

 

Interesting twist regarding currency.

 

All starting to get a bit nastier.....I'm sure there are still some cards from both parties to play.

 

I have to confess to being an interested (Result only) spectator by this, simply because I have no idea which way it will go and neither do I care.

 

I am sure there are ramifications for all of us, but haven't really spent anytime trying to understand either argument.

[Jimmy_D]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28943041

 

Interesting twist regarding currency.

 

All starting to get a bit nastier.....I'm sure there are still some cards from both parties to play.

 

I have to confess to being an interested (Result only) spectator by this, simply because I have no idea which way it will go and neither do I care.

 

I am sure there are ramifications for all of us, but haven't really spent anytime trying to understand either argument.

 

 

They go that route, no country in the world will touch them financially with a bargepole, let alone London.

[Clapham Saint]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28943041

 

Interesting twist regarding currency.

 

All starting to get a bit nastier.....I'm sure there are still some cards from both parties to play.

 

I have to confess to being an interested (Result only) spectator by this, simply because I have no idea which way it will go and neither do I care.

 

I am sure there are ramifications for all of us, but haven't really spent anytime trying to understand either argument.

 

This is a stupid argument (the article, not you) which I find it amazing that nobody from the No camp has shut down.

 

The "Assets" of Scotland and the UK are not just the £.

 

The debt has been incurred to build roads, hospitals schools etc. These are also assets of the UK.

 

If Salmond doesn't intend for an independent Scotland to use any of the existing infrastructure in the country, or alternatively if he wants to lease these assets from the rest of the UK then fine he can avoid the debt, if not then claiming that none of the debt will be Scotland's to pay is just silly.

[Tokyo-Saint]

You are missing the point Jimmy D. They are saying that they have as much right to the pound as anyone else does, it is Scotland's currency as much as it is Wales' or England's. If they leave the UK and are told they cannot use the pound they are saying, well why should we pay the debt on the pound? The pound has some value of course. It is an established currency and respected around the world. However, like all currencies, the assets are in fact debts. If they cannot not use the bloody thing, why should they pay the debt on it? It is a bit tongue in cheek but a fair point.

[trousers]

With some justification though. Cameron and the Tories lied about their plans from the outset.

What plans did they lie about pap? (Not fishing, genuine question as I can't remember)

[trousers]

The interesting thing, for me, about the whole process is that with all 3 Westminster parties in the NO camp, what happens in the first Scottish General Election should the referendum produce a YES vote ? How do Scottish Labour, for example, as the probable leading political party, reconcile themselves to a legislature they didn't want ?

I've mulled over that conundrum too (without coming to any conclusions)

 

Another thing to ponder on is how does the 2015 UK general election work if the Scots vote for separation? Surely Scots couldn't be involved in a general election for a country that they'll leave part way through a parliament? Or would there be another rUK general election on 'Scottish independence day'?

 

And what if we vote in a UK government in 2015 who have a different stance on the separation negotiations that will have started by then? Do the negotiations get scrapped and start again from square one, thus derailing Salmond's target of Spring 2016?

 

Lots of "what ifs" for sure

[Jimmy_D]

You are missing the point Jimmy D. They are saying that they have as much right to the pound as anyone else does, it is Scotland's currency as much as it is Wales' or England's. If they leave the UK and are told they cannot use the pound they are saying, well why should we pay the debt on the pound? The pound has some value of course. It is an established currency and respected around the world. However, like all currencies, the assets are in fact debts. If they cannot not use the bloody thing, why should they pay the debt on it? It is a bit tongue in cheek but a fair point.

 

That wasn't the point I was making. It's not a case of whether they should or not, it's a case of how they would be perceived should they refuse to pay any debt, regardless of claims over whether it would be valid or not.

 

As for using the Pound, Salmond seems to be pinning some of his hopes on a Plan B that hopes no-one notices the difference between Currency Union and Sterlingisation.

[pap]

What plans did they lie about pap? (Not fishing, genuine question as I can't remember)

 

Not surprised, trousers. The Conservatives have tried to remove many of them from the Internet

 

Here's a list. Main one is "no top down reorganisation".

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-camerons-top-ten-lies-692469

[Tokyo-Saint]

That wasn't the point I was making. It's not a case of whether they should or not, it's a case of how they would be perceived should they refuse to pay any debt, regardless of claims over whether it would be valid or not.

 

As for using the Pound, Salmond seems to be pinning some of his hopes on a Plan B that hopes no-one notices the difference between Currency Union and Sterlingisation.

 

Sorry it is hard to tell when you are just laughing. Maybe that is why may Scots fancy going it alone. Also, I think they would survive long term, even if the boys in the city sulked for a bit.

[Viking Warrior]

Oh don't forget the huge NHS black hole salmond has created by giving free prescriptions for everyone up here

 

One of the biggest debtors in banking is the Royal bank of Scotland.

 

If Finney is saying they will not pay any debt re the pound . Then we should ask salmond and the SNP to pay back all the UK bail out money we gave to The RBS to save them from going under

[Viking Warrior]

Any serious financial bods on here ? Should I close my RBS accounts and investments etc and move to an English bank ?

[Sydenhampton]

Pfft, they'll vote no. TV debates mean nothing. If they do vote yes though can they take the north with them? In fact, feck it. The sooner the M4 becomes a shark infested trench the better!

[KingdomCome]

With some justification though. Cameron and the Tories lied about their plans from the outset.

 

No justification at all. NHS in Scotland is completely devolved and the Scottish Government as is already has tax raising powers to compensate any reduction in funding caused by Westminster reductions.

 

I'm not saying the NHS in England and Wales is completely safe, but the NHS in Scotland is under no threat whatsoever...unless the Scottish Government chooses not to use the power it already has to protect it.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

It took centuries of relentless bloodshed and acrimony before we managed to learn how to live together harmoniously on these islands. That unhappy history now belongs to the distant past of course but history can still teach us much. So to my way of thinking those seeking to break the UK asunder better have some powerful case in their locker as to why that should happen - or leave well alone.

 

I've yet to see anything like that overwhelming case emerge from the 'yes' camp, while the practicable problems that separation would bring after all this time are obvious and formidable. Centuries of cross border trade and social interaction have led to a situation where many hundreds of thousands of Scots now live and/or make their living in England, and equally a great number of English (and Welsh/Irish) do likewise in Scotland. For all intents and purposes we are one nation, a nation that could not be easily divided without a undesirable degree of complication and disruption. This divorce is likely to be of the 'messy' variety.

 

Those familiar with the story of Queen Elizabeth I and her unhappy Stuart cousin will know that there is precedent for England and Scotland sharing the same monarchy. However if a newly independent Scotland wants to continue to use the UK£ too - with control of this currency still vested in London - well then you have to ask yourself just how 'independent' Alex Salmond's new/old country would be anyway? Indeed it is hard to resist the suspicion that the aggrandisement of a generation of Scottish politicians is in fact one of the prime (but unspoken) drivers behind this sense of Scots discontent with the union.

 

We've made (and then lost) a great empire together. We've forged a industrial revolution together the like of which no other nation on earth could equal. We've fought wars together that have played a crucial role in forming the modern world as we know it today. It seems to me that we have done here on these small islands is create a nation that is more than the sum of its parts - a thing worth keeping.

[Viking Warrior]

One aspect that appears to be a common theme up here is anyone but Cameron , they want Cameron out of Westminster .

Hence salmond constantly saying labour are in bed with Cameron

[pap]

No justification at all. NHS in Scotland is completely devolved and the Scottish Government as is already has tax raising powers to compensate any reduction in funding caused by Westminster reductions.

 

I'm not saying the NHS in England and Wales is completely safe, but the NHS in Scotland is under no threat whatsoever...unless the Scottish Government chooses not to use the power it already has to protect it.

 

Nothing in Scotland is completely devolved. They may have greater autonomy over how they spend their budget. They don't get to set it.

[KingdomCome]

Nothing in Scotland is completely devolved. They may have greater autonomy over how they spend their budget. They don't get to set it.

 

"Completely" as in the whole of the NHS, rather than Westminster being unable to change that.

The Scottish Government have tax raising powers. The Scottish Government set their NHS budget. How much of that funding comes from Westminster may reduce according to reductions made UK wide, but make no mistake, the Scottish Government has total control of the NHS Scotland budget,

 

In theory Westminster could amend the Scotland Bill to withdraw powers, but the possibility of that is minute to say the least. As I say, using fear to further his campaign.