Indyref Part 4

[SantanaLopez]

Evening all :)

Phaedra: initially there is to be sharing of embassies and.consulates, which after all are joint assets of the UK state. If we decide to set up our own then I see that as a good thing - Scotland has a fantastic worldwide brand and plenty of talented folk we could pay to staff them. Why.not? I'd rather pay money out for that than some of the things I and others have stated we'd rather not have.

Signing in. Struggling to find time to keep up though.

Stopped I saw something that said the sharing of embassies was debatable -will try to find it but once again looks like the snp unilateral decisions to share might not be realistic. They do seem rather good at that

DH has (at my request) started unplugging the internet at night so I don't spend all my time on this thread, stressing out. But I see I actually missed out on be-kilted men, darnit.

Brain drain - in terms of attracting the top scholars I'd be more worried about the increasing restrictions on visas, especially student visas, as part of the UK. Without international students universities lose a big chunk of their income, which is obviously vital to paying for and equipping all those yop researchers!

Official line r.e. funding is that they'd seek to make a sort of research councils cooperative, so the current research councils would continue to fund (and be funded by) both rUK and Scotland. This is actually a lot more likely than a currency union I think as the aim of the research councils is to ensure the best research gets done, and I think they'd be more worried about that than any national borders. Citizenship of the UK certainly isn't a requirement of academics putting in big grant applications to RCUK, after all. People I've spoken to fairly high up in academia seem fairly relaxed about post-indepndence prospects. (Though, in the interests of fairness, some other profs I know are getting very antsy).

*top researchers.

Stopped I saw something that said the sharing of embassies was debatable

So Eck wants Westminster to share the pound, the Guardian article I linked also has him assuming there will shared research councils and he'd like to use the UK's embassies as well. 0h and of course the BBC will offer its programmes free in exchange for home made output. Yeah right.

Try not to let it stress you ncforaye. Admitted I find it less stressful on here as most people aren't quite as propaganda quoting but...

An independent Scottish state would not be entitled by right to any UK diplomatic premises, equipment or staff. As set out in Scotland analysis: Devolution and the implications of Scottish independence, the legal position is clear: the bodies that support the UK now, for example the Bank of England, would continue to operate on behalf of the remainder of the UK on the same basis as before Scottish independence.12 If an independent Scottish state wanted to continue to receive services from UK institutions or utilise them to carry out functions in relation to Scotland, that would be a matter for negotiation and would have to be agreed with the continuing UK.

here (opens PDF)

Agreed with here

As for I'd rather pay money out for that than some of the things I and others have stated we'd rather not have.

Well, why go to all that blinking bother? We've already got a fantastic system of embassies through the UK, and the White Paper only proposes to replicate that partially, and at a cost of £90 million to £120 million here.

Not better spent on the children in poverty?!

Better spending the Trident and HS2 money on children in poverty. For a start there's much more in those pots.

Swinney I like (and i fear you are right oNE nIGT)

But the trident money is going on armed forces. Scotland has different spending already -it's not like there is suddenly going to be a wee pot labeled hs2 which is immediately available for redistributing -we already have higher spending in other areas.

Yes, whatever happens to the money, it won't be pissed up the wall as it will with the current plans, in the event of a yes vote.

Somebody asked on the previous thread why Scotland wasn't using its tax vetting powers.

I think I asked this on one of the much earlier threads but don't think I got a response. If Scotland used its powers to raise tax, would Westminster then reduce the block grant?

So is it conceivable that Scots could have been more highly taxed but the Scottish Government not actually have much more money to spend?

Don't know where "vetting" came from - should've been "varying"

StatisticallyChallenged

Thanks! I'm not really a political creature and find a lot of it quite nerve-wracking. I keep repeating to myself "it'll be over soon!"

Came across an interesting quote this morning. There's been some discussion both on Mumsnet and in the press of fears of escalating acts of aggression (in the thread about BT posters someone said she'd heard No people were scared of having bricks through their windows if they put posters up). Alistair Darling has apparently called (or is planning to call) for the police to make plans for potential polling day disruption. In response the Scottish Police Federation made this statement:

^"The independence debate has been robust but overwhelmingly good-natured and it would prove a disservice to those who have participated in it thus far to suggest that with 17 days to go, Scotland is about to disintegrate into absolute carnage on the back of making the most important decision in the country’s history.

"Politicians and supporters of whichever point of view need to be mindful of the potential impact of intemperate, inflammatory and exaggerated language, lest they be seen to seek to create a self fulfilling prophecy."^

This article talks about it although the headline slightly misrepresents the statement - "Scotland referendum sides told to keep campaigns civil and peaceful" - when the police statement is saying that things thus far have been civil and peaceful!

The self-fulfilling prophecy thing is very apt and something I have worried about, and one of the reasons I've been so pleased to see civility and humour here on Mumsnet. Lovely bunch of people, y'all.

DH works in HE. The general scuttlebut is that many top level researchers will look for positions outwith Scotland, and there is also a concern that overseas student numbers will fall because although some Scottish universities are among the best in the world, attending university in the UK is the draw factor, not attending in Scotland. Achieving a degree from a UK university is perceived to have more clout than a degree from a Scottish university alone.

I raised a point in Indyref 2 or 3 (can't remember which) that Scotland already has many powers which it does not appear to have executed. Apart from the ability to raise 3p in £ more in tax which has not been utilised, even against the highest earners, there has been no move towards desperately needed land reform (anyone read Gentle Otter's blog?). Eck could have been progressing this for years but has chosen not to. Why?

The general perception of 'Yes' voters is that an independent Scotland would be a fairer place, more socialist. Why is being more socialist a good thing? Check out Wikipedia's list of socialist countries - not one functioning state among them. We've seen so called socialists in action at G8 protests and the like. There are the protesters with kagoules, beany hats and witty placards, then there are the socialists who invariably seem to prefer violent methods of protest to peaceful methods.

Our local councilors (and many MPs start their political lives in local government) with possibly two exceptions are an absolute shower. Many are only in it for their own glory - puffed up little men full of their own importance, or completely ineffectual - couldn't make a decision if their life depended on it.

An independent Scottish government will have to offer sweeteners to big business to come to/remain in Scotland - it's just the way the world works. They have not proved successful in this kind of deal previously, Hyundai/Motorola plant in Dunfermline ring any bells? And while the Edinburgh tram debacle was not a national govt initiative, it is still an example of a Scots run program being a complete and utter mess.

I also wish it was over! I lean more and more towards yes. If we are really economic basket cases who won't be able to fend for ourselves then why wouldn't the rUK be glad to see the back of us?
Doesn't add up.

But grandtheft, if your second paras are true..this is already the case. Under the union. This is the sort of thing people want to see get 'better'. For me this comes from us functioning as a region not a country and the brain drain we already suffer from. For that to change we need a new start.

It's not as simple as us being economic basket cases -it's what would happen as a result of independence, what would change, what would it look like in five years. Those of us who say the economics don't stack up aren't saying that Scotland is a giant leech -we're saying that post independence the picture, to us, looks grim.

Prettybird I can't link but I looked that up and any extra tax raised comes here.

R.e. university funding and the "brain drain", a discussion from the VC of Robert Gordon University:

www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/sep/02/independent-scotland-scare-mongering-attract-top-university-researchers

Just marking my place. Lost you last night when MN went boom.

I'd be interested to see that link Statistically as with all the implications that the Barnett formula will be revised, I am highly suspicious that Scots would end up being taxed more highly, be contributing even more to the overall pot and actually not see any benefit for it

Don't get me wrong, I've always been happy as a Higher Rate tax payer to pay taxes - I was pissed off when Margaret Thatcher reduced taxation even though I personally would benefit - as I believe that if we want good public services we need to pay for them - I just want to be sure that we would actually see the benefit

I haven't read darling's comments but I don't think suggesting the police have plans in place is exactly unreasonable. Descending into utter carnage on a large scale is unlikely but we are seeing an increase in violence/intimidation on both sides. It would be naive not to plan -plan for the worst, hope for the best and all that jazz.

I'll try to find it later but it was an official source -the money basically goes to a Scotland fund. On the flip side if we reduced tax then the block grant would be reduced to reflect that. What happens to Barnett outwith that is slightly separate but money raised directly through the Scottish tax raising power is for Scotland