What do you think of UK Government’s Scottish Referendum YouDecide tool? NOW CLOSED

[MichelleMumsnet]

Today, the UK Government is launching YouDecide; an online tool that helps you to see what remaining in the United Kingdom offers you and your family.

Here's what UK Government has to say:

"We have created YouDecide ahead of the Scottish independence referendum on 18 September, to help you explore what the United Kingdom provides and what this means for your home, your family and your work life. YouDecide has been designed so that you can drill down quickly and simply to get facts on the issues that matter to you.

"We all know that the independence referendum is the most important decision to face voters in Scotland in 300 years; it's a decision that affects everyone in Scotland and the rest of the UK. The information you find on the YouDecide tool is informed by the facts and figures published in HM Treasury's Scotland analysis programme and also reflects UK Government policy.

"There is a wealth of information on the referendum subject. We want you to be as fully informed as possible ahead of making such an historic and permanent decision.

"There are of course a number of things we cannot answer, because no one knows the full impact that independence would have on all areas. Splitting a 300 year-old union would be complicated and many new agreements would need to be negotiated. We can't speculate on unknowns but we can give you the facts about the existing UK policy.

"Together as England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland we have created one of the world's most successful unions. Our UK Government policy is that we want to see Scotland remain part of the UK because we believe that by staying together we have much more to share and much more to gain."

Have a look at YouDecide and let us know what you think of the tool and the issues surrounding it by posting your thoughts below. Do you feel you have the facts and information you need to make an informed choice about Scotland's future to remain in the United Kingdom or to leave and become a separate state, permanently, or not? You can also look at the UK Government's In the Know factsheets series and booklet: What Staying in the United Kingdom Means for Scotland.

Thanks,

MNHQ

[Keepcalmanddrinkwine]

I'm ashamed to say I don't really know much about the whole debate. Probably because I live in England and am not very informed. I had a look at the tool to see if it would sway me either way but it does appear very biased and I'm aware that there are two sides to the debate (or it wouldn't be a debate).

Everyone on the thread seems very knowledgeable and very informed, so I'm starting to wonder if we in England are being kind of kept in the dark about the whole thing. There seems to be a bit of an "It's out of our hands and doesn't effect us" attitude to the whole thing.

[OldLadyKnowsSomething]

Keepcalm, if you only look at Mainstream Media (esp the Beeb) you won't be very well informed. Of course, as you don't have a vote, there's no reason that you should be well informed - except, of course, that if we vote Yes you will be affected by our decision... If you're interested, have a look at websites like Wings over Scotland (yes, Stu is opinionated and abrasive at times, he also backs up the factual stories), Bellacaledonia, NewsnetScotland. Sorry can't give links but google is your friend.

MSM will give you the WM gvt's (No) pov. The sites I've named will give you the Yes pov, and an eyeopening experience of how gvt propaganda works.

[OldLadyKnowsSomething]

wingsoverscotland.com/the-non-political-games/ Here's Stu's post from today, just as an example. Have a read, and have a think...

(Yes, I know I said in my last post that I can't do links; I can do one at a time...)

[OOAOML]

KeepCalm I'm a No voter and I don't think much of the government tool! I try and read a range of sources, although there is a massive amount out there - people here have had a long time of this decision being discussed.

The UK Gov tool and leaflet are biased, which I'd expect. The Scottish Gov White paper (available online) is biased, which I'd also expect. Not had the leaflet they're sending out yet, obviously that will be biased. It has been an interesting time, and I certainly find myself paying much more attention to how people are reporting news, what stances are hidden within journalism etc. and what stances are blatantly obvious!

[OOAOML]

And I've just read the Wings link above. Some good points but I'd invite you to consider a few minor questions:

• quite a few Commonwealth countries incorporate the union flag into their own flag
  
• is he trying to suggest the opening ceremony was planned entirely by Better Together supporters? When the SNP has been running the country since 2007 (albeit as a minority govt until 2011)?
  
• just a coincidence that Salmond said he wouldn't talk about politics, then said Glasgow would vote yes and could be called "Freedom City" then miraculously the opening ceremony has a piece about Nelson Mandela and another "Freedom City" reference?
  

And surely the real issue with the opening ceremony is whether it was a yes or no person who thought those socks, that tartan and that bizarre blue/turquoise was a good combination

So yes, read wings and other yes sites, but have a look around for other views as well, because everyone has their own agenda.

There will be people insulting each other on Facebook right now about stuff like this. Meanwhile I should go and do some work.....

[OldLadyKnowsSomething]

The piece about Nelson Mandela was by Billy Connolly, who opposes independence for Scotland.

I quite like the tartan, but the blue dresses and shirts...

Yes, everyone should read around, see what's out there, and consider who wrote it, and with what agenda.

And then vote Yes

[OOAOML]

I saw the Billy Connolly piece, but I thought it was interesting Salmond had used those words earlier, and if I was a conspiracy theorist I might be wondering whether he knew what was planned for the ceremony and was trying to attach another meaning to the words.

I think the tartan would work ok without the bizarre shirts, dresses and socks. The socks looked worse under the stadium lights than in the photoshoot I thought. Wales looked good, although the matching dresses and handbags made me think of a hen night.

Press bias is bizarre - sometimes I read several versions of a story and it is hard to see they are talking about the same thing.

On a non-referendum press point, it was hilarious how quickly the editorial tone in our local paper changed after the council elections. Almost overnight council actions they had ripped to shreds were now wonderful . Although sometimes the council still stuffs up so much that they can't manage a positive spin

One thing that does bother me about the referendum chat is - is everyone else really good at speed-reading?? I'm struggling to keep up with all the stories, links and reports that are being passed about

[TheBogQueen]

Did you catch the song sung by the South African soprano at the commonwealth openjng ceremony? Perhaps a subversive choice. But a worthy one.

The Freedom Come All Ye it's in Scots which - even thigh I have read a lot of Scots I still found it difficult so here is the English translation

English translation here

[TheBogQueen]

And I saw billy Connolly today in glasgow - v excited

[tobiasfunke]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the UK government believe the Scottish population to be of low intelligence.

To be fair they believe all voters to be of low intelligence not just Scottish ones, judging by their cack-handed handling of any issue.

[MichelleMumsnet]

Thanks for your comments so far. The Cabinet Office would like to say, "Thanks for your contributions to the thread. We'd like to get back to you on a few of the themes that have come up so far."

"To start things off, we wanted to explain why the YouDecide website supports Scotland remaining part of the UK. Our policy as the UK Government is that we want to see Scotland remain part of the UK because we believe that as a united kingdom we are all stronger, so our aim with the website is to provide information about the benefits of being part of the UK."

"We don’t have all the answers, because nobody knows what the full impact of Scotland becoming a separate state would be. For example, no one can guarantee how long it would take to negotiate Scottish membership of the EU, or what the terms would be."

"Pensions: It was mentioned that pensions would be more affordable in an independent Scotland because there would be fewer pensioners. The answer is a clear no. State pensions are more sustainable as part of the UK because they are funded by 31 million tax payers and 5 million businesses. In a separate Scotland, the proportion of pensioners as a share of the population is expected to increase more rapidly than across the UK as a whole. This will increase pressures on age-related spending as well as decreasing future growth and tax revenues, because a greater proportion of people will be retired than working. The working age population in Scotland is expected to decline by over 6 per cent in the next 20 years, compared with a small increase in the UK as a whole.
You can read more here: www.gov.uk/government/publications/scottish-independence-referendum-jobs-and-pensions"

" Help to Buy: For those of you looking to buy a home, the good news is that both the LIFT and the Help to Buy: mortgage guarantee schemes are available in Scotland. Use of the mortgage guarantee scheme has been particularly concentrated in Scotland, with almost 1,000 households using the scheme."

"Read more on Help to Buy: www.gov.uk/affordable-home-ownership-schemes/help-to-buy-mortgage-guarantees
Find out more about the LIFT scheme (Low Cost Initiative for First Time Buyers): www.liftmortgage.co.uk/"

" EU membership: A contributor suggested that a separate Scotland might be able to become a member of the EU because Scotland is already a member as part of the UK. However, as a separate state Scotland would have to apply to join the EU and negotiate its own membership terms, in the same way as every other member state does. All 28 Member States would need to agree the terms of Scotland’s membership and the whole process would be complex and lengthy.
Read more here: www.gov.uk/government/publications/scottish-independence-referendum-our-place-in-the-world/scottish-independence-referendum-our-place-in-the-world"

"Thanks for all your comments. Please keep them coming."

[FannyFifer]

The fact that it's called "you decide" makes people think that there will be unbiased information from both sides, not the Westminster propaganda which it clearly is.
Disingenuous at best.

Clearly the answer to the pensions issue is yes pensions would of course be more affordable in an Independent Scotland.

Come day of Independence all the pensioners currently entitled to a UK pension will continue to receive it, they have paid into the pot.
It will just be the same as all the ex-pat pensioners living in Spain etc who get their UK pension.

So therefore pensions will only be paid out of Scotland's pot for those who reach pension age after independence.

Still, I would assume there would have to be some agreement reached regarding the future pensioners as they will have paid into UK for most of working life & only into Independent Scotland for short period of time.

So tell me how Pensions will be unaffordable in an Independent Scotland please as there won't be too many pensions to pay initially.

[FannyFifer]

The EU stuff is quite frankly nonsense.

We are EU citizens first & foremost and would not join the queue behind countries not currently in the EU.
We are compliant with all EU laws & regulations & the transition would be smooth.

We will not be removed from the EU following Independence, how many years did it take Greenland to be able to leave for example?

For a government with members who want to withdraw from the European convention of human rights, it's all rather pathetic scaremongering, the biggest threat to Scotland's citizens is remaining in the UK.
www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jul/15/dominic-grieve-warns-uk-withdrawal-human-rights-court-echr

[OOAOML]

It is biased FannyFifer but it is also quite obvious it is from the UK Government and I think most people know that they have a specific position. You could also say that the 'Scotland's Referendum' website hosted by the Scottish Government is biased (obviously, because they also have a specific position). I don't rate either site frankly.

Pension 'pot' is slightly disingenuous, as state pensions are a liability on the balance sheet, they are paid for out of current income. So yes, there would have to be an assessment of liabilities and responsibilities, hopefully handled by people a lot better at maths and projections than I am. Going forward I really don't know - Scotland has a small population that is also an ageing population. I've seen pro-independence arguments that pensions are a lesser liability because of low life-expectancy in some areas (densely populated) and completely bizarre claims that in an independent Scotland we will live healthier lives - presumably somewhat altering the pension liabilities if we all start living longer.

Longer term I know the birth rate has gone up in some areas (a fact our council chose to ignore when closing schools) but I'm not sure what the projected mix of taxpayers to the rest of the population is.

The EU debate - both sides are annoying me on that one, I do agree we would get in but don't necessarily think it would be seamless, nor guaranteed to be on the same terms. But it is clear that we're unlikely to get a definitive statement in advance and a guarantee from the EU so I wish the debate would move on from both sides slinging quotes at each other but nobody having absolute certainty.

I have noticed quite a bit of scaremongering from the Yes side recently, mainly on the NHS (yes, the UK govt employs private companies to provide some services, but it's still free at the point of use and still funded by public money - and if this is such a terrible model why is it one employed by the Scottish Government as well? And why is it not privatisation when they do it but it is when the UK government does?) - change of approach for some reason?

[OldLadyKnowsSomething]

70% of the NHS contracts south if the border have gone to private companies; that's quite a lot, with plans for more. Andy Burnham said yesterday the process should be "slowed" down, but I am cynical enough to suspect he means so that if Labour get in after the next GE (which I think is unlikely) they can sell off the rest of the NHS to their pals, instead of the Tories selling it all to theirs.

The problem with such privatisation is that if the whole healthcare budget is £XXX, a chunk of that will be creamed off in profits, shareholder dividends etc, instead of the whole £XXX going to patient care. The budget is unlikely to increase to £XXX + 10% (given it's all about cost-cutting) so patient care will inevitably suffer.

[OldLadyKnowsSomething]

The question of our EU membership could be answered in advance of the indyref if only WM would ask it. The fact that they refuse tells me they don't like the most probable answer; it'll be no bother maintaining our membership after we say yes. It'll be subject to renegotiation of course; maybe we'll get to keep the millions in farming subsidies currently creamed off and denied to our farmers?

[FannyFifer]

Interesting all the Shetland stuff, what was Cameron really doing up there then?
www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/987/worlds-largest-oil-field-not-found-the-mystery-surrounding-the-prime-ministers-shetland-visit/

[OldLadyKnowsSomething]

Yes, I've been following all that. Humungous new oil fields with decades of oil in them, certainly makes threatening to frack Loch Lomond look like petty mindedness (but not if it puts pennies in your family pockets, I suppose). So much for "too poor"... Are you following wee Buster with his shiney new drone, on the Yes Shetland FB page? That cat sure gets around!

[affafantoosh]

Well I have to say that the latest integration from Westminster has failed to convince me that I should vote no. It's failed to convince me of anything. Blah blah blah. Why don't you go and get some answers for us, UK Govt, since you're the only ones who can ask the questions needed? Just find out the facts and pass them on, then we can decide. Why won't you do that? Oh of course ... You know the same as we do that the answers would support the case for independence

The cracks are showing!

[OOAOML]

Well if Cameron was trying to keep it under wraps (in which case surely he should have slapped an injunction on the Investors Chronicle a few months back, because this was already in the public domain) why would he make a visit? Because nobody notices the PM and his entourage when they travel around the country?

Interesting take on it from someone in Shetland www.shetnews.co.uk/letters/9002-conspiracy-theories

affafantoosh I don't need the UK Government to convince me, nor do I have any expectations of the Scottish Government propaganda I can apparently expect through my door shortly. But do you actually expect the UK Government to negotiate the end of the union before Scotland votes?

FannyFifer totally offtopic but every time I see your username it reminds me of my old music teacher who was behind her back referred to as Granny Fyfe and I have to stop myself typing it.

[OldLadyKnowsSomething]

Hmm, saying that oil is a commodity and therefore the more of it the lower the price is a bit disingenuous; there may be (hugely) more of it than first thought, but as long as it's still underground it's not available, so don't expect the price of petrol to plummet at the pumps just yet.

Has there been any mention of this vast new wealth on the telly news yet? I just checked google News, not a word, even when I specified "Shetland oil".

[OOAOML]

I thought we weren't supposed to watch the news on telly in case we got indoctrinated?

of course the discovery could shed some light on the reluctance of the Scottish Government to give the islands their own referendum.

[OldLadyKnowsSomething]

You can watch what you like; it's quite interesting to see how they spin some stories. So there's been no mention of it, even while people are dying because "austerity" means their benefits are being cut, and millions of folk are depending on foodbanks? Surely this is fantastic news for the Chancellor and the people of the whole of the UK? There should be dancing in the streets!

Sometimes what's not reported is as important as what is.

There's no real appetite in Shetland for "a referendum". If you're suggesting that an independent Shetland would keep all the oil, you need to look up some maritime law. They'd get the 12 miles round their coastline, and no more.

[OOAOML]

Well, discovering the potential is one thing, but as you say whilst it is still to be extracted there isn't too much cause for dancing in the streets. And even if we do get extra revenue, I don't think it will do away with the need for foodbanks, whose use has increased dramatically across Europe.

I don't actually watch that much news on TV - I think the advent of 24 hour news has really diluted the impact, and you either get the same stories on a loop, or, if something is actually happening, news readers looking vacant because nobody has had time to process information yet, or they have no idea what is actually happening. I do like comparing news stories across newspapers though - and you're right, the spin is fascinating, in all political directions

Sadly no time to look up maritime law just now - have to take the children out (despite the claim by at least one Yes campaigner that as a No voter I am a bad parent . I did read that there was a drive for a referendum in the islands that was rejected. I wasn't actually suggesting they would keep all the oil - obviously the revenue from oil is important, but it isn't the main argument in this for me.

[FannyFifer]

uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKKBN0F10MQ20140626?irpc=932