Indyref8

[grovel]

ItsAllGoingToBeFine, but who will be Prime Minister? Pretty unsatisfactory changing halfway through. My suggestion was that maybe Cameron, Clegg, Miliband et al agree on a team and step back themselves. It would make the end result a joint enterprise and could prevent years of feuding in rUK.

The austerity of living in a Banana Republic frightens me a LOT more.

Interest rates, mortgages and taxes will go sky high. Public services will be slashed.

It is the only solution to the problem of not wanting a Tory or labour or UKIP coalition government ruling me for another 5 years.

One thing that must not be allowed to happen is for the independence day to slide. The uncertainty affects UK as well as Scotland.
If you must do this crazy thing you must go on the due date, ready or not.

IssyDee It's already been established that an independent Scotland would be a successor state, so your first scenario doesn't apply.

On your second points, I can assure you that the financial markets would not take the rose-tinted view you outline, as they've already indicated than an independent Scotland would pay c.10% more for borrowing, with implications for mortgages, etc (that's before any 'statesmanlike' threats to renege on debt)

Scotland would still have a moral responsibility to pay her share and rUK would retain 100% of the assets until agreement had been reached.

It is evidence enough that the mn survey put yes in front but that these threads are dominated by no.

People have already said they didn't know the vote on MN was happening.

Lots of yes voters have complained about feeling bullied on these threads

So have no voters and in RL.

AS is not the one accused of lying.

Alistair Darling's government put together the biggest lie ever in the dodgy dossier. Darling flipped his big Morningside pad and London apartment 4 times.

AS is not the one accused of lying.

Doesn't mean he hasn't though

Sallying it will be up to the UK government to get on with negotiations then won't it.

The best way to get independence as quickly as march 2016 will be for DC et all to admit they were bluffing with the currency union and to get on with arranging it.

I imagine that is how they will sell it to their voters.

Weatherall - surely the problem is you have no idea who will be governing an independent Scotland in 5 years time?

I have a feeling one of the unintended consequences of a yes vote will be the rise of a far right, and a far left, along with a powerful union movement (not in itself a bad thing, but I see a rise in militant unions who will drag the country to it's knees rather than unions who fight hard for a fair and safe workplace for their members).

I hate no idea about the Mumsnet survey until I saw it mentioned on here about half an hour ago.

Issy that is incorrect concerning Denmark.
The Danish have their own currency, krone, introduced in 1875, backed by a strong Danish central bank, which regularly intervenes to maintain the exchange peg to the euro.
That is totally different to sterlingisation.

There should have been an only in there - he is not the only one accused. If people want to focus on this, things are likely to get very murky

Sallying it will be up to the UK government to get on with negotiations then won't it.

It will be up to both sides surely

You don't know that there will be a monetary union unless you have that crystal ball out again.

weatherall
Wild thong- lady c did lie. She refused to apologise when I called her up on it
As the thread moved on it was proven that she didn't. Calling someone a liar isn't on.

Lots of yes voters have complained about feeling bullied on these threads
Lots of no voters have complained as well. But no-one at all has been "hounded off" as you claimed.

The no side gang up on yes supporters like vultures and cal them stupid until they disappear
There is no gang. It isn't a playground. People are trying to argue their points. Again, NOONE HAS BEEN FORCIBLY DISAPPEARED SO PLEASE STOP REPEATING IT

It is evidence enough that the mn survey put yes in front but that these threads are dominated by no
Can't say I agree that the thread is dominated one way or another. I don't think the MN survey was a valid barometer of anything at all.

Our local electoral office is reporting that out of 4000 odd postal votes issued out over 2000 have been returned already. I think that indicates a high turnout .

People are voting! That's a positive no matter what you are voting!

Issy you say that WM is now telling the people that Devo Max is on offer if they vote no. It isn't, it isn't on the ballot and it isn't on the cards.

I think this is a really important point. No, it's not on the ballot paper, but here's where the whole political campaign has completely shifted over the last month/weeks of tightening polls. I think now it really is on the cards. They could not go back on their word.

A No vote now is not for the status quo.

There's been a lot of talk on these threads about how supposedly interest rates will 'skyrocket'in an independent Scotland.

So for the first time I went over to the better together website to see what the official campaign has to say on this issue.

What’s more the National Institute of Economic and Social Research estimate that an independent Scotland would “face additional interest rate costs of between 0.72% to 1.65% above the UK borrowing costs”

Quoted from:
bettertogether.net/blog/entry/fact-checked-13-of-the-snps-craziest-currency-claims

So on an average mortgage of £100,000 the increase would be c. £58pcm. Still lower than pre-2008 rates.

And this is BT's 'doomsday' scenario. From their own website.

I don't know about anyone else but westminster's austerity policies have cost me and everyone I know a lot more than £60 per month.

Phaedra "you do realise it wasn't that long ago the Tory Party were the majority party in Scotland"

Yeh and look what's happened!!! Quite apart from your patronising tone all I have to say about that is why on earth do you think a lot of Scots want rid of them, they destroyed parts of Scotland and at the moment have 1 solitary MP here.

you will be at the back of the queue and at the mercy of Spain, Belgium, France and Italy - with nascent seperatist movements who they wish to discourage

I live in Lombardia. Surrounded by Lega Nord enthusiasts. On matters such as immigration (including the "immigration" of S. Italians to the North of the country) they make UKIP look like a bunch of bleeding heart liberals and Deep Thinkers. The union of regions as the nation of Italy is significantly younger than the union between Ennland and Scotland. People still think in terms of their regional identity as being some way before their national identity in terms of importance. As unions go it has a degree fragility at certain stress points.

I have nothing against Scotland being indpedendent. Not my business, nor my problem. But an overegged, over excited Lega Nord is both my business and my problem. iScotland probably does have to be left out of the EU in order not to create an even larger issue than already exists. Italy can't be expected to place a greater priority on Scotland than on the security of the continued existence of its own unified nation.

Letting an iScotland into the EU could end up being like pouring petrol on the cinders of the Lega Nord campfire. Unsurprisingly quite a lot of people, who would be hard pushed to trace the Scottish boarder on a (not political) map ....don't fancy getting burnt.

I wouldn't expect Italy to go first in terms of a veeto. They'd vote yes as long as they were sure another country was coming in with a respunding no. But if push came to shove, I'd bet my house on a "no" from Italy in the name of not slowing down the economy even further by allowing Lega to have new life breathed into it.

If iScotland were allowed into the EU, I'd had have to move. The Lega Nord fuckers are dangerous, stupid and prone to violence. Pumped up and using iScotland as "proof" that an independent Padania Plain could still be in the EU ... I personally would not risk keeping my family in that kind of tinder keg enviroment. It was bad enough with things like the "White Christmas" vigilantism. But it could so very easily get so much worse and bloodier given the rage (and immigrant blaming) at the depths of the economic downturn of today. Not helped by the fact that while things are turning the corner elsewhere in the EU, they aren't here.

Claiming as many yes voters do, that the UK is doomed by the current government or any of its likely successors is scaremongering IMO.

As there have been far more WM governments than Scottish governments and we all know that governments sometimes behave badly, it goes without saying that there are far more examples of Westminster 'bad behaviour' - I'm not trying to diminish it, by the way - than Scottish government examples of bad behaviour.

What's at stake now is the future of Scotland and the UK. Lies by the yes campaign about what can be expected in the event of independence are much more important than historical examples of dishonesty.

It's all very well saying 'this is not about AS/SNP/NS' but they are the reason for many voters voting yes. If they are voting yes on the basis of inaccurate claims then those claims should be challenged.

issydee

Thank you for answering - a useful, erudite and ultimately wrong answer

1. asset division would be dependent on debt allocation and today Salmond has been reported as rejecting taking any UK debt
2. see above - the head of the yes campaign and first minister for scotland is refusing to have any debt.
3. The Uk is a member of the EU - the new state would have to apply - this was the basis of the non existent legal advice. The UK would not need to negotiate remaining in the EU.
4. nato has said Scotland will have to apply

1. There will be no currency union and sterlingisation will be a mess and is not consistent with Eu membership

2) if you dont take the debt - successor/new or what ever state - you will be perceived as reneging on your liabilities. This is bad from a credibility point of view 3) you may be right about EU membership - but it will be 5 years at least 4) nukes is not a condition of entry but demanding another nato country remove theirs doesnt play well in the negotiation stakes

AS also said today that Scottish people have "contempt" for Westminster politicians. That's unprofessional. How can anyone expect the Westminster politicians to gladly treat him with respect during negotiations when he talks like this.

They could not go back on their word.

Why on earth not? Seriously, if a credible reason is given to suggest Scotland would get devo Max after a no vote, then I might vite No.

All of the three major WM parties are promising this. It has attracted a huge amount of attention.

DevoMax is not on offer. It is not clear what is on offer - all three parties have differing proposals, and none of them are in any way, guaranteed to pass into law. I believe it is highly unlikely that Scotland would be offered anything significant. rUK, understandably would be peed off at what seems to be appeasement of the Scots. Just look at the delightful Simon Heffer article in the DM today.

Once we vote No, there will be a backlash and we will be put firmly in our place forevermore. I can also see the electoral system for the Scottish Parliament changed to ensure that the SNP never receives another majority, just like it was originally designed to do.