Scottish Referendum debate: Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond, Wednesday September 10th, 1.45-2.45pm

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi all,

We're delighted to announce that Alex Salmond and Alistair Darling will both be joining us on Mumsnet this Wednesday at 1.45pm, to take part in a live debate in the lead-up to the Scottish Referendum on September 18th.

The decision with which Scottish voters are faced this month constitutes a significant moment in the history - and future - of Scotland and the UK. And with polls currently predicting a result that's too close to call, this final showdown between the two leaders could potentially prove decisive.

The debate will be conducted along typical Mumsnet webchat lines, but with each guest free to question and respond to the answers of the other. We know the referendum has been a topic of serious discussion on the site (we're currently on IndyRef thread number seven - and counting ...) so in order to ensure that the leaders answer your questions, we're restricting the ability to post to Mumsnetters who'd been members of the site for more than 24 hours before the launch of this thread. Otherwise, the usual guidelines apply.

Please join us on Wednesday at 1.45pm - and if you can't make it then, as ever, do post up any comments or questions in advance.

Green as I said to you earlier, these threads have been running for a long time. We are informed. We have read and researched widely. We may not have read every piece of propaganda you are linking to, but we are informed. We have made our decisions - for yes or for no.

I don't want Scotland being duped by empty promises either. That's why I'm voting No. I'm not convinced by the White Paper, or by the arguments of the various voices on the yes side. THere is not enough of a majority for independence. The time is not now. I don't say not ever, but not now, and not this. No Thanks.

Do you understand, and therefore accept, that the only way Alex Salmond can deliver true independence is to create a new currency?

No camp's 'political agenda' on currency laid bare
Wed, 05/03/2014 - 18:52
The SNP has welcomed the latest expert evidence making clear the benefits of a currency union after a Yes vote – and highlighting the transparent political agenda of the No campaign on the issue.

The Scottish Parliament’s Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee today heard from the former Chief Economic Adviser to Standard Life, Professor David Simpson, who praised the proposals put forward by the Fiscal Commission as being beneficial to business in Scotland and the rest of the UK – and described the posturing of the Westminster establishment on the issue as “very obviously” being part of a political agenda.

The UK Government’s political agenda was also highlighted by Crawford Beveridge, Chair of the Fiscal Commission Working Group, who pointed out that the Treasury has refused to even discuss the currency union, and confirmed his belief that “economics will trump the politics” after a Yes vote.

Commenting, Highlands and Islands MSP Mike MacKenzie said:

“Today’s evidence confirms what we already knew – that a currency union is in the best interests of people and businesses both north and south of the border. It has also lifted the lid on how economic experts view the Westminster establishment’s bluffing on the pound.

“Businesses and economists can see through the so-called Dambuster’s Strategy employed by Project Fear – designed to sow uncertainty and bully people in Scotland into voting No.

“As Crawford Beveridge made clear, after a Yes vote the bluff and bluster will be put to one side and the Scottish and UK Governments will negotiate a currency union in the mutual interests of both countries – ensuring certainty for business and in the best interests of the people.”

In short, no, i dont accept it.

Whereas today we have threats to nationalise BP and a 'day of reckoning' for business that have spoken out. What's your take on that?

Basic history cum economics lesson:-

Currency union with full political union = good idea.

Currency union by itself = very bad idea. (e.g. Euro).

Who cares what a SNP think tank says about how its a good idea. Its just not ever a good idea without political union and has never worked in all of history.

Aren't we all so full of ourselves - given this discussion is more about choosing to be selective about not only what we hear and read, its also about one simple argument

If Scotland is so poor and worthless why is it that Westminster is so desperate to hold onto it at any cost?

No, that's the argument it's about for you. It's not for me.

Statistically

when Westminster are prepared to breach their own rules in front of a global audience and witnessed for all the world to see - you need to remove the blinkers before all you value is taken from you Nick Robinson is a national disgrace a liar and the puppet of Westminster. I'm all for contrary opinion but when that opinion is a blatant distortion of reality and the truth and those spouting it are to scared to accept it then you are all humped.

dalzeil I guess you are meaning the example of when the larger Czech Republic and the smaller Slovakia split and their currency union without political union lasted 38 days?

For those that still have a mind of their own and want to at least source some conflicting opinion to that of the BBC and mainstream papers have a look at the following from inside the BBC

www.thedrum.com/news/2014/09/12/balance-failure-bbc-scottish-independence-referendum-coverage-wrong-and-not?desktop=1

did you see the BBC report this on national news

www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/1039/scottish-west-coast-untapped-oil-and-gas-reserves-worth-trillions/

so we are clear this is once again about oil

Falklands = oil
Iraq = oil
indy ref = oil

They cannot be trusted they are lying to you all

You have no idea what I value. I am not wearing blinkers, far from it. I have done an absolute mountain of research and analysis = and I rarely pay much attention to what the papers or news say. I don't give a damn about Nick Robinson. I have never mentioned Nick Robinson.

My decision is based on what I believe is the best outcome for Scotland. I do not believe that is independence.

Oh, the highly balanced Drum article which implies that BP said they're moving to London when that's not what their actual statement says...

don't become confused and assume I am someone who doesn't care about alternative views but you need to question authority (all authority - politcal, religious, educational, financial) and then make up your mind.

If you switch on to the mainstream media and lap it up you, then whether you like it or not you are supporting the stereotype "Eat Your Cereal" clone as portrayed by the Westminster boys club

No, I am not. Your comment and assumption is downright offensive.

Actually, your entire "I am so wise and everyone who doesn't agree is brainwashed" dialogue is utterly grim and exceptionally patronising. Infinitely worse, in fact, than BT woman.

Why do the no campaigners all think money is the only issue people think matter? It really puzzles me. There are lots of reasons countries want to be independent. Whether that makes you richer or not does not have to be the main issue.

i was thinking to challenge the pro currency union posters to

name a single example when it has worked without political union? Any occasion in the last 200 years???

set up the scottish pound. it wont be easy but its the only way if you want independence.
(Good luck!)

There's a difference between making you richer, and making the country considerably worse off.

green you seem very angry about something. The Indy discussion threads are approaching 10000 posts and they have been full of information, links, arguments for and against, as well as a whole lot of shit too. the Drum
Statistically is one of the calmest, balanced and well read No voters on the threads, I really think you're trying to patronise someone who clearly knows a lot more than you do.
You referenced Crawford Beveridge in your post above, he is Salmonds chief advisor on the economy so he would say that

StatisticallyChallenged
"No, I am not. Your comment and assumption is downright offensive"

That is your opinion which of course you are entitled to, but mine differs from you.
I don't think that "I am so wise... yada yada yada" I am merely offering alternative opinion and I am most definitely not BT woman.

Spent last night talking to a very senior military Officer, 27 years service in the UK armed forces. English born, but living and working in Scotland. I asked him what would happen to him, his unit, his regiment if it was a yes vote. His response? "That has still to be negotiated" stunned me! I would have thought the issue of defence might have been discussed already! He did say, that should a foreign force "show an interest" in an independent Scotland, it was unlikely a UK force would be involved. It would be up to Scotland to deploy its own defences. Which it doesn't have.

should a foreign force "show an interest" in an independent Scotland, it was unlikely a UK force would be involved. It would be up to Scotland to deploy its own defences

Exactly dementedma. These are issues that deserve a LOT more air time.

WildThong yes I am angry, but moreover I am disgusted at the so called democratic engagement that most certainly is not being portrayed by Westminster's puppets. Yes both sides will engage in political gamesmanship but ffs "tell the truth" so that the people who matter can make an informed decision whatever the result and it will be accepted. We teach our children to tell the truth and steer them on a path we wish for betterment of society, this campaign is the polar opposite of that premise. Lie, deceive, cover up and don't ever question authority. As for others knowing more than me I dare say some will and some won't that doesn't mean they are right. I will be voting yes because I have believed it is in Scotland's best interests to be elf governing for over 35 years, long before AS took over the reigns. If he is so wrong why has he managed to upset the whole of the UK with one simple question and why has his question gained massive support from all sections of society (not just in Scotland). If a No vote is registered we will be back here in a couple of years purely down to the fact that half of the voting public believe they are being lied to.

I don't agree that being financially worse off is a problem. It does not correlate to happiness. Take a talk in the Highlands or go skiing near Aberdeen and you are going to generate happiness much more than a £5k rise in salary would.

Crawford Beveridge was VP Sun Micrysystems before becoming Chief Exec of Scottish Enterprise from 1991-99 (so under both Tory and Labour regimes) so he has a wealth of business experience - not just as an advisor to the ScotGov.

Does becoming an advisor to the SG immediately disqualify someone from having an opinion - or is it evidence of seeking expertise from the business sector?

I don't agree that being financially worse off is a problem. It does not correlate to happiness. Take a talk in the Highlands or go skiing near Aberdeen and you are going to generate happiness much more than a £5k rise in salary would.

In the real world it isn't if you struggle every day to put food on your table or pay your rent/mortgage!