To want to keep my UK passport if Scotland votes YES in the 2014 referendum?

[SittingBull1]

If the majority of people actually voting votes YES in the 2014 referendum, Scotland will leave the UK. As Scots living in Scotland, will my family and I lose our UK passports? Along with a very large number of NO voters, my family and I will want to retain our UK passports, and I'm sure that a huge percentage of the non-voters will also want to keep theirs. I think that the UK government should offer to allow Scots living in Scotland to retain their UK passports. Is that unreasonable?

[fully appreciate that my MP may have a different view and that I'm being a bit mean calling it moaning]

Yes, anyone registered to vote in the UK within the last 15 years can vote from abroad if British citizen.

So I guess you could look at if you have been on the electoral roll in Scotland in the last 15 years?

Pairing is an arrangement where an MP of one party agrees with an MP of an opposing party not to vote in a particular division. This gives both MPs the opportunity not to attend. Pairing is an informal arrangement and is not recognised by the House of Commons' rules. Such arrangements have to be registered with the whips who check that the agreement is stuck to. Pairing is not allowed in divisions of great political importance but pairings can last for months or years.

I guess neither side viewed the bedroom tax as a matter of great political importance

I don't care much whether immigrants can vote in the referendum or not.

My apologies for expressing myself poorly there. I'm happy for immigrants to be able to vote in the 2014 referendum. I was just trying to point out that my concern was the huge number of Scots who will not be able to vote because they live outwith Scotland (for now). Scotland's biggest export is its people and the wealth of experience that is being ignored in this very important decision is astounding. We can be so caught up in the debate we're having that we don't realise that someone else operates within a different paradigm and that it might be useful to borrow it in order to get a new perspective. With a new perspective mountains can become molehills, problems can disappear entirely and simple solutions can suddenly appear. Okay, I'm not saying that ex-pats have all the answers but they have useful information and understanding that is otherwise in short supply.

People get hung up on whether or not Sean Connery should have a vote. Now that I don't care about. He has one vote; it won't be decisive. If most of the Scots who have moved abroad no longer have an interest in Scotland they won't bother voting, but why shouldn't the ones who do still genuinely have an interest be able to express their views? Some of them are just in the army and they go where they're sent; same for large companies. A couple of years ago the Scottish government was promoting a 'Homecoming' which was aimed at descendants of Scots, but when it comes to actual Scots working abroad they don't want to know.

Goodness, such a long thread! I have to say, I've read it all and I don't think there's much in the yes argument, on other threads you've all been much better!

Did everyone see this? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24986670

Sorry I can't do a fuller response here - will try later! But no, spirited, you're entitled to be annoyed with your MP. He asked to represent constituents at WM and should therefore represent them there. Unless, of course, it was a specific issue that would require further devolution - but I got the impression that you meant it was a stock reponse :)

I think I actually agree with you on about 90% of this but we will be voting differently and I find that fascinating. For me independence is about a chance to build something new and egalitarian, but then I don't see the parity that you currently see in the UK system. To me the UK is a bit of a historical hangover, even though the constituent countries have much in common.

Part of my issue is that I'm very pro-European and my interest in socialism doesn't stop at Dover - I think I'd be keen to see a Scottish left without the WM issue getting in the road.

Also, I'd be fascinated to see what happens to the SNP post-Indy. It's actually amazing they've (mostly) held together their 'broad tent' of social conservatives, liberals, left/right, all religions and ideologies, behind a single issue. If that issue is resolved by a yes vote we could see some really interesting new small parties, perhaps hooking up with disenfranchised elements of other existing parties... Genuinely exciting.

Annunziata this is the only thread that hasn't descended into madness! :)

I know, I'm trying to work out what on earth that means!

I think it means there are more political geeks of all persuasions on this thread than the anti-English/anti-Scottish folk that usually come on for a bunfight. It also means I think we aren't trying to change each others' minds maybe? Just discussing! :)

Thanks, It'sAllGoing. However, I wasn't talking about me, or anyone I know; I'm one of the ones who has never lived anywhere other than Scotland.

Apparently the 15 year rule applies to Westminster but not Holyrood elections. The wording in the 2013 bill looks similar to that for local government elections rather than matters of national importance.

It also means I think we aren't trying to change each others' minds maybe? Just discussing!

I don't count myself as a political geek. The only label of that sort that I would apply to myself is 'feminist', although other people have applied their own on occasion.

Aren't we seeking truth and the best solution? I am. And if we find truth and the best solution then I want to change the minds of those who don't have it!

I usually don't either sitting but have been enjoying the debate on both sides FAR too much... :)

I don't think there is one 'truth' here. I'm happy to debate issues out and have my opinion changed if need be - but I'm not here to evangelise about Yes, even though I believe in it I'm happy to just chat it out.

Here's one. The white paper will come out and I'd imagine Scottish government will say something like 'we propose that we will keep the pound'. For example. That isn't good enough, especially for those who deal in guarantees. But it's only a UK government that could guarantee this as a certainty and they obviously won't discuss it before a yes vote as it might give the other side an upper hand. But there's no way, absolutely none, that they wouldn't be able to reach an accord of some kind on it - they are all pragmatists at the end of the day. You can bet your life though both sides will play politics, the ScotGovt saying 'they're not playing ball and telling us what will happen' (true) and the UK Govt saying 'they're not playing ball and telling us what will happen' (also true). But short of having the negotiations in public, prior to the vote, we won't get the answers. Will both sides be brave enough to do this and let us all go into a vote with all the information? I highly doubt it.

Until then, we get to chew the fat...

Someone said up thread the white paper isn't going to mention currency at all, forgetmenots.

I think most people have made up their minds by now, really.

Don't think that's a true assertion (was reported by the herald but rebutted by Salmond) Annunziata - but we'll wait and see. It's just one example, I was meaning more the back and forth rather than transparency.

I agree that many have made their minds up, particularly those posting on threads like this, but there are a huge number of fence sitters out there. It's nowhere near decided.

Agreed forgetmenots about it being fascinating that people with similar political opinions can be on both sides of this. I certainly know some socialists who support indepence or are considering it for the same reason you are. For my part, I hope that if the result is "yes" that you are right that we can create a more equal society, setting up the systems to be fairer from the off. I'm sceptical that it will happen but I'd certainly work towards it.

Of course I think loads more can be achieved than at present in the current devolved set up too. In terms of modernising WM, I'd definately favour an elected replacement to the house of lords, PR and I think the LD idea of a federal UK has merit, though Labour might also have ideas about the future of devolution, (there's been some things said about strengthening it) I'd like to hear them.

doubt whether Scots will be allowed dual nationality following vote for independence

Ubik - I honestly think its far worse to comment adversely on a Scot for daring to have views different from your own, than to say the SNP are characterised by groupthink. Do you really think they are so special as to somehow be exempt from comment?

I'm not sure im all that convinced Scotland is all that more socialist than the UK. They have different voting patterns, but in practice I'm suspicious that Scottish Labour fill the role of the Conservatives, and the SNP the Lib Dems.

TRUE, they can talk the socialist talk, because its a sop to the conscience to win votes, but there's a difference between socialism and high personal taxation and standard European redistributive tax regimes. The parts of Scotland I've lived in seem to me just as middle class as here in Belgium, and many of the Scots live in bigger houses. In fact, it feels more redistributive here, because the public sector is more efficient, roads and pavements are far better, bin collections better, etc.

The Scots to me seem very conformist, and there seems some lack of tolerance for alternative views, but again I dont think thats equivalent to socialism (although its often a result).

Don't surveys which concentrate on very basic issues tend to produce much the same results in Scotland and England ie that like most of Europe they are quite middle class or aspirant to be, materialistic and slightly consrvative?

Why Scotland MUST keep the pound. Written by an economist, sounds solid to me, anyone see things differently?

I'm not convinced of that either LessMiss - just my own opinion, wasn't suggesting it would necessarily be replicated. Although of course as queen of the independent Scotland that would have to change. Ahem. :)

Think Ubik was just disagreeing, whereas I think saying voting yes is groupthink is odd. I'll say it once and say it again, I'm not an SNP supporter on a lot of issues so I find the conflation odd.

Will take a read of that OldLady, interested to know more as I've been ok with either pound or euro thus far.

But there are truths, untruths and obfuscations. That's why I'd like a panel of academics (rather than politicians) to discuss the issues with us asking them the questions.

Recently the UK govt got extra money from the EU to provide extra subsidies to farmers, according to the Scottish govt to provide extra subsidies to the farmers who got the least subsidies. The Scottish farmers generally get a lower rate per hectare than other UK farmers. The man from DEFRA says that is because a Scottish hectare is generally less productive. He also says that Scottish farms get more per farm on some sort of count, which was something to do with there being some very big landowners in Scotland. (I didn't follow his point.) Anyway, the EU gives the UK more money which the Scottish Govt claims is for distribution to those farmers who get low subsidies, but instead the UK allocates the money to the different countries on another basis and leaves each country to determine how to allocate cash internally and the Scottish Govt receives much less than it would on a simple how-much-subsidy-do-they-get-now basis I've no idea whether the man from DEFRA was being disingenuous and trotting out the party line and whether the Scottish Govt has a genuine grievance here or not and I need an independent academic to explain.

Similarly, earlier I heard a man on Radio 4 complaining that 'the Scots are getting all the cherries these days'. I hadn't really been listening, to be honest, but I think he was referring to the fact that his Scottish counterparts in the food business had received more help from their government than he had from his (whether financial or other, I don't know). He seemed to be talking about the internal allocation of resources within Scotland but complaining as if about the internal allocation of resources within the UK.
(Apologies to the man on Radio 4 if I've picked that up wrong; just using it as an example of the sort of thing that we hear of fairly often.)

This is worrying and some effort needs to be made to explain to people in England (and probably to a lesser extent in Wales and Northern Ireland) that the whole purpose of devolution (which they can have if they want to) is precisely to allow the various countries to allocate their resources internally as they see fit, and that people in England are not paying extra tax for free tuition or prescriptions or whatever in Scotland. In allowing this sort of misunderstanding to continue the UK govt is fomenting bad relations between the constituent parts of the UK and possibly with a new (albeit ancient) country on its border.

Like your idea of a panel sittingbull. I take your point but I guess I'm just cynical about getting some of these answers, and I'm open to hearing different points of view rather than one truth (in some cases two opposing things can still be true if you see what I mean). That was all I meant - your example is an interesting one.

What I will say though is I think a varied panel would be good - academics are people with bias just like you and I, and like politicians. Get a farmer on, get all sorts of people on who can tell us what it means for them and try to represent a fair picture.

(I'm willing to bet it will prove very hard indeed but worth a go).

Still discussing it. Some interesting points, although nothing that makes me change my mind.

I suppose fundamentally I simply don't understand why the Nats get so worked up about it.

I don't feel oppressed nor any desire to claim my freedom. An awful lot of nationalism comes across as a bizarre mix of having a chip on both shoulders combined a certain smugness about being more lefty and socialist.