To wonder why England wants to keep Scotland?

[user1481215005]

Or am I being really thick? NS has been causing no end of grief the past few years always complaining about how bad Scotland has it (despite receiving more money for Scotland than Scotland gives back) also promising English votes for English laws and then changing that when something she didn't like can up. Her financial plan depends on the North Sea oil. If Scotland keeps rights to that it'll last fifty years tops before oil runs out. She just seems to be a constant pain and wants special treatment which wales and NI don't ever seem to get. I do love Scotland but right now I'm inclined to cheerily wave them off and wish the good luck.

So you get a yes answer and the have another referendum the week after? Because a proportion of the people want that? That's democracy right? And the week after that? How about two days later? Most reasonable people once you've asked, you accept the result. For a reasonable amount of time. A parliament lasts for five years or so. This is a much bigger decision, so the time should be longer. Otherwise you'd keep on having referendums weekly. Which would be silly.
It's undemocratic for the people who voted previously - it's like you don't want to hear their voices.

So you get a yes answer and the have another referendum the week after? Because a proportion of the people want that? That's democracy right? And the week after that? How about two days later? Most reasonable people once you've asked, you accept the result. For a reasonable amount of time. A parliament lasts for five years or so

I'd argue that if a government had a mandate to hold a referendum, and lost the referendum, it should not hold another referendum unless it had a mandate again, which would really be after another election. So no, not a weekly referendum. The same referendum once in every parliamentary term seems reasonable to me though, if people keep voting for it. I can't see how, democratically, you could stop that happening

It's undemocratic for the people who voted previously - it's like you don't want to hear their voices

But it's democratic for the people who voted in a majority of Indy supporting MSPs. And it means that people of both sides get their voices heard again. And of course this is not the same referendum anyway, the UK that people voted to remain in last time is going to cease to exist soon - that is a pretty material change in circumstances.

Dont know if anyone has said this, but doesn't logic dictate that a country with a sparse, widely dispersed population is bound to have to spend more per head than somewhere like south England?

Scotland gets more than Wales though, which has a similarly sparse population.

The original reason that Wales gets less goes back to the 19th Century when the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Goschen, set out rules for extra spending in Scotland and Ireland. Wales was included with England, so it didn't get the same bonus

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-35977052

Possibly a different thread but is independence now only a matter of time? If younger people favour it and older people are against is there realistically any chance of a union remaining in 20 years?

Should rUK not be preparing for that now?

Unless the Scots reignite some desire for the union beyond it being a mutual fund paying the pensions , I can't see any hope.

Possibly a different thread but is independence now only a matter of time? If younger people favour it and older people are against is there realistically any chance of a union remaining in 20 years?

Correct. The union is dead. NI will leave too. Wales may or may not eventually.

Should rUK not be preparing for that now?

Of course they should. But given their lack of any planning for Brexit ,the fact they aren't is not surprising.

By the way i think the practicalities will be extremely awkward and that Scotland will come off very badly indeed. It's not a future to relish. We will all be losers.

If Scotland wishes independence, so be it.

I have asked a few Scots the question of who would be the bank of last resort and it's not the Bank of England. So far, no one has any idea.

Also what would be their currency? Not the pound, Euro perhaps?

Scotland will come off very badly indeed

I can't see why. Small population. Lots of assets. We'll be just fine.

Also what would be their currency? Not the pound, Euro perhaps?

I'm not in anyway an expert. I think either an independent currency initially pegged to the £ or € or the euro are both absolutely fine scenarios.

Banks of last resort are.only one way of managing a financial crisis, regulating the bank's properly in the first case could be another option.

If you are interested in the answers from a pro indy viewpoint this is quite detailed www.commonspace.scot/articles/8911/new-report-scottish-currency-options-post-brexit (pdf download linked to from this page)

Again Scotland does not belong to England, so England cannot keep Scotland

The Scots haters will enjoys this video, it's hilarious (I am Scottish, btw)

twitter.com/AngrySalmond/status/842023902834524160

I apologise about the "Scots haters" bit, that was unfair. Everyone can enjoy the video

Can you imagine this the other way round? A video of a Scottish person talking that way about the English?

Most reasonable people once you've asked, you accept the result. For a reasonable amount of time

Quite

And it really does confuse me to see the endless remarks suggesting that oil and other natural resources belongs exclusively to Scotland ... do folk honestly believe that constant repetition will somehow make this true, or is there some wilful refusal to face the facts going on? In case it helps I'll post that BBC link again:

"Under the present arrangement the oil tax revenues are assigned to an economic region set up by the UK government, which is called the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS). This means that oil resources are not officially assigned to Scotland but instead to a region distinct from the British mainland" (My italics)

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20042070

Just watched that, it's hilarious! Why do people get so angry about politics🤓

And it really does confuse me to see the endless remarks suggesting that oil and other natural resources belongs exclusively to Scotland
--

The boundary between Scotland and the rest of the UKCS should be determined by negotiation between the two governments with the possibility of referral to the International Court in the absence of an agreement. There is a presumption that the median line extending from the boundary between Scotland and England just north of Berwick into the North Sea would form the basis of negotiations. The median has been employed in the past in negotiations between the UK government and other governments with continental shelves extending into the North Sea

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmenergy/writev/1912/sco16.htm

I don't accept voting for a parliament is the same as voting in a referendum. you can vote overall for one party, but vote on specific issues against the party line. It's allowed!

I do think that Scottish people should decide - and that includes those who currently don't live in Scotland. Or are you saying they aren't Scottish?

I doubt the English will be very keen to accept free travel between the two either. You can't particularly if Scotland accepts free travel within the EU.

Genuinely not sure how that clarifies anything, Itsall ... negotiations are exactly that, complex issues with the outcome as yet not fully clear. Do some Scots really want to risk their future on a falling oil price and uncertain results?

Got to go out now, but sometimes I can't help wondering if we should just leave them to try ...

Demographically, people change too. So don't think that as older people voted to stay and younger voted to leave that would mean "it's only a matter of time"
The same is seen in domestic politics. Historically younger people are less conservative...but as they age, they tend to swap sides as it were.

My children seem to adopt the same methods as NS. They ask, we say no, they wail and shout it's not fair....and ask again in the hope that we might have changed our mind...

Genuinely not sure how that clarifies anything

It clarifies that there is a clear and reasonably simple process for defining maritime borders.

And was in answer to this point

"Under the present arrangement the oil tax revenues are assigned to an economic region set up by the UK government, which is called the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS). This means that oil resources are not officially assigned to Scotland but instead to a region distinct from the British mainland"

And this point

"And it really does confuse me to see the endless remarks suggesting that oil and other natural resources belongs exclusively to Scotland"

The Scottish Herald said a few days ago thatlooking at the finances, Scotland would have to reduce spending by £1000 per person or raise taxes by the equivalent sum. Scotland spends that amount per person more than the rest of the UK. So how can they finance independence? www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/15152654.Economist_warns_independent_Scotland_would_have_to_raise_taxes_or_lower_spending/

I am all for Scottish devolved government in its entirety and Westminster having no say, provided the rest of the UK does not subsidise Scotland in any way. This would be independence in all but name and then NS can actually start to govern and shut up about independence. They would of course have another referendum to complete the independence push in time but I suspect NS would have finished wrecking scotlands economy by then. She is a one trick pony.

Scotland would have to reduce spending by £1000 per person or raise taxes by the equivalent sum.

But that is assuming that Scotland makes exactly the same spending and taxing decisions as rUK.

I'm not in anyway an expert. I think either an independent currency initially pegged to the £ or € or the euro are both absolutely fine scenarios

'Absolutely fine scenarios' for who?

Why would rUK agree to a currency being pegged to the £?

This isn't something Scotland can decides it wants and that's it.

Why would rUK agree to a currency being pegged to the £?

Eh? They don't have to agree. Nothing to do with them and has no impact on them.