Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Scottish Politics 2011-2017


Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Paris suburbs
  • Location: Paris suburbs

    The Michael Kelly? That must have been something.

     

    Anyway, saw this posted elsewhere in reference to Labour's Lamont calling Scots who are interested in indy - and presumably indy lite / devo max - a 'virus'.

     

    From 1989.

     

    http://www.nytimes.com/1989/08/27/world/moscow-condemns-nationalist-virus-in-3-baltic-lands.html

     

    MOSCOW CONDEMNS NATIONALIST 'VIRUS' IN 3 BALTIC LANDS

     

    In its strongest response yet to the growing calls for independence in the Baltic republics, the Communist Party today condemned nationalist movements in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and declared that the agitation had caused alarm and hysteria and raised the prospect of ''civil conflict.''

     

    Sounds eerily familiar huh. Posted Image

    Let's not make hysterical comparisons now. The Baltic states all went through wars of independence in the early 20th century only to be forcibly annexed by the USSR in World War II. There were no democratic referendums and comparisons like these are as bad as UKIP's 'new greater Germany dictatorship' rhetoric, euromyths or indeed some of the ridiculous rumours about how independence would plunge Scotland into the dark ages.
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
    • Replies 30.9k
    • Created
    • Last Reply

    Top Posters In This Topic

    • Scottish-Irish Skier

      8874

    • mountain shadow

      1528

    • skifreak

      1435

    • frogesque

      1306

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Popular Posts

    And that ignorant, offensive, rant sums up exactly why the YES campaign failed  

    Good god. What a load of boarish spiteful bile from bad losers has been posted during the night. I actually dread to think how Scotland would be run if this is representative of how the yes vote behav

    I'm disappointed in the lack of grace shown by some across the net in accepting this No vote. A complete lack of any empathy and understanding as to why fellow Scots didn't vote Yes.   I personally

    Posted Images

    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    There's a strong correlation between supporting independence and identifying as Scottish rather than British, but that doesn't mean that all or even a majority of them would vote for independence if there wasn't a strong case for it (there is). Likewise, you can't exclude those that feel British from voting Yes.I think turning independence vs. unionism into a question of national identity is needlessly divisive. I see it as a desire to 'do things differently' and that independence would help this be achieved.

     

    I'm just advocating weighting to it because it is a major factor, as e.g. noted in SSAS surveys etc. It is solid, accurate census data so perfect.

     

    In the end, people are being forced to pick a flag. If they haven't made up their minds with the head, they'll go with the heart. That's why indy refs almost invariably do in the result in indy.

     

    It is a simplification yes, but one which seems to balance out. 28% 'British' to varying extents is bang on status quoers. The 'Scottish' are the ones wanting indy/devo max etc. Of course there is cross-over, but as noted, it balances out.

     

    ------

     

    Anyway,

     

    On the subject of Labour wanting to end Devolution...

     

    “That is why I am talking quite passionately about getting English Labour MPs back up the road and for me, sitting down with Neil [Findlay] and Richard [simpson] and Rhoda [Grant] and others and saying, let’s get health policies that can be consistent across England, Scotland and Wales.
     
    Wouldn’t that be a good thing, pulling in the same direction as opposed to pulling our separate ways?
     
    Devolution, in its early days, was about doing something different and it needs to enter a different phase where we start talking again more about a UK-wide policy because in the end, that helps everybody.â€
     
    Strange the MSM aren't reporting this; Labour looking to e.g. hand Scotland's NHS over to ATOS, KPMG and Virgin Healthcare?
     
    It's from Holyrood magazine.
     

     

    Thanks to WoS for noting it.

     

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/quoted-for-proof/

    Let's not make hysterical comparisons now. The Baltic states all went through wars of independence in the early 20th century only to be forcibly annexed by the USSR in World War II. There were no democratic referendums and comparisons like these are as bad as UKIP's 'new greater Germany dictatorship' rhetoric, euromyths or indeed some of the ridiculous rumours about how independence would plunge Scotland into the dark ages.

     

    Note the smiley face. It was a joke and aimed at Johann Lamont with her 'virus' comments. 

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    I’m going to blow my own trumpet a bit. Well sort of…

     

    I read this today and was pleased at the news; some sunshine on the horizon.

     

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-24279995

     

    Bank of Scotland business monitor shows surge in Scottish economic activity

     

    (obviously the referendum really bad for business as predicted the pro-union camp).

     

     

    But what made me particularly pleased is the feeling I’m doing my wee bit too. I'm having a bit of a 'warm glow' moment for the moment...

     

    As mentioned in the past, my colleagues and I started a university spin-out company back in 2006. It’s grown slowly but organically now to 20 staff, working mainly on specialist consultancy services and technical laboratory studies for oil and gas majors.

     

    We’ve also been developing something that’s finally hit the big time.

     

    After various small trials, it’s now being applied for the first time in the field in its full capacity. It has been crucial in extending the life of a fair sized gas field (Nuggets) by 3 years already, allowing the production of an additional 2.8 million BoE (barrels of oil equivalent with a value of ~300 million USD) so far (spot the Times journalist mistake, but then in the industry they’ll know a ‘million’ is missing as 2.8 barrels isn’t much for 3 years!). Also reduced methanol dosing from 28% to 0%, saving the client a lot in terms of OPEX. They (TOTAL E&P) have recently published a paper on the success of the project, much to our pleasure.

     

    Was reported in the Times Scotland business supplement a couple of days ago (below link and attached) as part of an issue on uni start-ups etc.

     

    http://www.times-scotland.co.uk/

     

    (the lady on the front page is on our board).

     

    SPE paper by TOTAL:

    http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/app/Preview.do?paperNumber=SPE-166596-MS&societyCode=SPE

     

     

    What I am most proud of is not so much being involved in development etc (for it wouldn't have happened without all our staff), but in the fact we’ve created jobs and with this technology taking off, should create many more. Decently paid jobs too in a company that values its staff highly (we are something of a co-operative with staff getting shares and bonuses based on profits). Watching the staff celebrating this breakthrough really ended up being quite emotional for me.

     

    We have a highly educated, innovative workforce here in Scotland.

     

    Come on Scotland; no need to be feart. We can do 'being a real country' just as well as any other can.

    post-9421-0-05224300-1380222093_thumb.pn

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 4
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Burghead, Moray.
  • Location: Burghead, Moray.

    I’m going to blow my own trumpet a bit. Well sort of…

     

    I read this today and was pleased at the news; some sunshine on the horizon.

     

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-24279995

     

    Bank of Scotland business monitor shows surge in Scottish economic activity

     

    (obviously the referendum really bad for business as predicted the pro-union camp).

     

     

    But what made me particularly pleased is the feeling I’m doing my wee bit too. I'm having a bit of a 'warm glow' moment for the moment...

     

    As mentioned in the past, my colleagues and I started a university spin-out company back in 2006. It’s grown slowly but organically now to 20 staff, working mainly on specialist consultancy services and technical laboratory studies for oil and gas majors.

     

    We’ve also been developing something that’s finally hit the big time.

     

    After various small trials, it’s now being applied for the first time in the field in its full capacity. It has been crucial in extending the life of a fair sized gas field (Nuggets) by 3 years already, allowing the production of an additional 2.8 million BoE (barrels of oil equivalent with a value of ~300 million USD) so far (spot the Times journalist mistake, but then in the industry they’ll know a ‘million’ is missing as 2.8 barrels isn’t much for 3 years!). Also reduced methanol dosing from 28% to 0%, saving the client a lot in terms of OPEX. They (TOTAL E&P) have recently published a paper on the success of the project, much to our pleasure.

     

    Was reported in the Times Scotland business supplement a couple of days ago (below link and attached) as part of an issue on uni start-ups etc.

     

    http://www.times-scotland.co.uk/

     

    (the lady on the front page is on our board).

     

    SPE paper by TOTAL:

    http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/app/Preview.do?paperNumber=SPE-166596-MS&societyCode=SPE

     

     

    What I am most proud of is not so much being involved in development etc (for it wouldn't have happened without all our staff), but in the fact we’ve created jobs and with this technology taking off, should create many more. Decently paid jobs too in a company that values its staff highly (we are something of a co-operative with staff getting shares and bonuses based on profits). Watching the staff celebrating this breakthrough really ended up being quite emotional for me.

     

    We have a highly educated, innovative workforce here in Scotland.

     

    Come on Scotland; no need to be feart. We can do 'being a real country' just as well as any other can.

    I used to work in a hydrates research lab - Im going back a bit ( 1997 to 2000). Glad that the technology is now in commercial use.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet

    I'd be worried if Scotland was not growing swiftly now given the data coming out for the UK as a whole. Well done though SS.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: New York City
  • Location: New York City

    I’m going to blow my own trumpet a bit. Well sort of…

     

    I read this today and was pleased at the news; some sunshine on the horizon.

     

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-24279995

     

    Bank of Scotland business monitor shows surge in Scottish economic activity

     

    (obviously the referendum really bad for business as predicted the pro-union camp).

     

     

    But what made me particularly pleased is the feeling I’m doing my wee bit too. I'm having a bit of a 'warm glow' moment for the moment...

     

    As mentioned in the past, my colleagues and I started a university spin-out company back in 2006. It’s grown slowly but organically now to 20 staff, working mainly on specialist consultancy services and technical laboratory studies for oil and gas majors.

     

    We’ve also been developing something that’s finally hit the big time.

     

    After various small trials, it’s now being applied for the first time in the field in its full capacity. It has been crucial in extending the life of a fair sized gas field (Nuggets) by 3 years already, allowing the production of an additional 2.8 million BoE (barrels of oil equivalent with a value of ~300 million USD) so far (spot the Times journalist mistake, but then in the industry they’ll know a ‘million’ is missing as 2.8 barrels isn’t much for 3 years!). Also reduced methanol dosing from 28% to 0%, saving the client a lot in terms of OPEX. They (TOTAL E&P) have recently published a paper on the success of the project, much to our pleasure.

     

    Was reported in the Times Scotland business supplement a couple of days ago (below link and attached) as part of an issue on uni start-ups etc.

     

    http://www.times-scotland.co.uk/

     

    (the lady on the front page is on our board).

     

    SPE paper by TOTAL:

    http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/app/Preview.do?paperNumber=SPE-166596-MS&societyCode=SPE

     

     

    What I am most proud of is not so much being involved in development etc (for it wouldn't have happened without all our staff), but in the fact we’ve created jobs and with this technology taking off, should create many more. Decently paid jobs too in a company that values its staff highly (we are something of a co-operative with staff getting shares and bonuses based on profits). Watching the staff celebrating this breakthrough really ended up being quite emotional for me.

     

    We have a highly educated, innovative workforce here in Scotland.

     

    Come on Scotland; no need to be feart. We can do 'being a real country' just as well as any other can.

     

    Great to hear about the success of your spin out company.

     

    Yes Scotland churns out a lot of science graduates but there are no jobs for them.  I'm trying to relocate to Glasgow and can't get an interview to save my life (believe me I have an excellent CV), decent jobs come up at a rate of 1 per 3 months.  Soon the workforce will have to move elsewhere unless things change.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Great to hear about the success of your spin out company.

     

    Yes Scotland churns out a lot of science graduates but there are no jobs for them.  I'm trying to relocate to Glasgow and can't get an interview to save my life (believe me I have an excellent CV), decent jobs come up at a rate of 1 per 3 months.  Soon the workforce will have to move elsewhere unless things change.

     

    Yes, it’s tough.

     

    When I graduated in 1999 took me 9 months before I finally got on the career ladder. Was not fun at all; very depressing. ‘Too qualified’ or ‘Not enough experience’ were the hurdles. In the end though, three offers came at once. A bit like buses maybe. You’ve just got to keep at it.

     

    We have five recent graduates on our team now. Most were in a similar boat, so was very nice to be able to take them on as I remember what it’s like.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL
  • Location: Carryduff, County Down 420ft ASL

    Big Jessie Cameron has refused to meet with the First Minister in a live tv debate before the referendum. Personally I'm not surprised as he would have been ripped apart.

     

    Can't see Salmond taking on Darling, maybe send Nicola Sturgeon instead, would be good to woo the wavouring female voters and unlikely to be sent to sleep by Alistair droning on and on...

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire (this lockdown) Freuchie, Fife (normally)
  • Weather Preferences: cold and snowy in winter, a good mix of weather the rest of the time
  • Location: Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire (this lockdown) Freuchie, Fife (normally)

    Big Jessie Cameron has refused to meet with the First Minister in a live tv debate before the referendum. Personally I'm not surprised as he would have been ripped apart.

     

    Can't see Salmond taking on Darling, maybe send Nicola Sturgeon instead, would be good to woo the wavouring female voters and unlikely to be sent to sleep by Alistair droning on and on...

     

    I think Darling has to debate Canavan - seems only fair since both are the chairs of the relative campaigns. Sturgeon did very well against Michael Moore but Anas Sarwar managed to avoid a proper debate by acting like a petulant 5 year old, which seems to be a fairly common SLAB trick.

    I think if Cameron won't debate Salmond we just have to have a Scottish leaders debate with Salmond, Harvie, Lamont, Davidson and Rennie, but it seems amazing that a leader who currently decides so much of Scottish policy with no mandate and whose government constantly publishes papers railing against independence is afraid to actually put forward his case for the union. He didn't have much to say when he was given an entire page in the Sunday Herald to put his case so maybe he doesn't have one...

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Paris suburbs
  • Location: Paris suburbs

    I'd be worried if Scotland was not growing swiftly now given the data coming out for the UK as a whole. Well done though SS.

    Indeed, but it seems that Scotland's GDP has returned to pre-recession levels whereas the UK's as a whole is still some £12 000 000 off its Q1 2008 figure. Scotland's economy is so tied with the rest of the UK and the EU that even small differences between economic statistics are significant.http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2009/nov/25/gdp-uk-1948-growth-economy
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Stoke Gifford, Bristol
  • Location: Stoke Gifford, Bristol

    Big Jessie Cameron has refused to meet with the First Minister in a live tv debate before the referendum. Personally I'm not surprised as he would have been ripped apart. Can't see Salmond taking on Darling, maybe send Nicola Sturgeon instead, would be good to woo the wavouring female voters and unlikely to be sent to sleep by Alistair droning on and on...

    Let the Scots decide on their own - who needs a televised debate? Here's my prediction a full 12 months ahead - 60/40 in favour of NO independence.
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    In theory, a debate between Scotland’s PM and FM would seem appropriate. It won’t happen however. There’s no real reason for it.

     

    Scotland is totally lost to the Tories. It is also now totally lost to the Lib dems. The only ones holding out some hope are Labour as they still have their Scots MPs. For now.

     

    If polls are to be believed, Scotland’s No. 1 party is now the SNP at both Holyrood and Westminster level.

     

    Now, imagine a UK cross-party promise was made for more powers ahead of the referendum and a narrow No vote followed based on this. Who would the Scots elect to Westminster to make sure this happens? Well, the SNP of course, just like the polls are suggesting.

     

    So, why on earth would any UK party offer a package of more powers – which can’t happen anyway without serious UK-wide electoral reform as it’s already too asymmetrical – only for Scotland to reward them by voting SNP? Obviously, this applies most to Labour who are the only party with a remote hope of squeezing a few Labour MPs out of Scotland in 2015.

     

    So, there will be no more powers. Maybe some talk of it, but nothing concrete.

     

    Furthermore, Alex and Dave have been negotiating the outcome of a Yes vote since MAy 2011 when AS first popped down to visit George post election. His big smile and punch in the air as he exited was not for nothing. We’re not sure what was said that day, but rumour is that George said to AS that the only thing that was going to need tough discussion was defence and foreign affairs. That’s why the Calman Bill was rushed through with minimal fuss and the Edinburgh agreement signed in the same way; Dave and George knew the end was nigh and there was nothing that could be done. However, what to do with trident and the UN seat etc. Now that was more tricky.

     

    Anyway, if Scotland votes Yes, it will immediately be independent in the eyes of the world. It will be recognised by the international community rapidly due to its status as a nation in the UK under international treaty and because the UK government has recognised the result. Places like Russia will jump at recognising Scotland.

     

    This is why I have said many times that negotiations about the aftermath are going on right now and we’ll start to hear the outcome when the white paper is released / joint UK-Scottish Government is made. This will also outline what will happen if there is a no vote.

     

    In terms of Yes, we’ll hear that NATO has agreed, the EU has agreed, the currency will be this etc. It can’t be any other way. Scotland has the largest oil and gas reserves in the EU; the oil majors alone would be screaming their heads off at the prospect of Scotland finding itself currency-less and out of the EU. The USA, UK, NATO would be in mass panic mode about huge strategic hole in NATO with WMDs in a ‘rogue’ state.

     

    So, all is being pre-negotiated. Scots will know what they are voting for in 2014. Many of the uncertainties they fear will be gone.

     

    Now, what about the aftermath of a No vote? Well, the UK might try to say ‘if it’s a No, then no more referendums for X period of time’. They might also say ‘no more powers – not possible’. How about ‘Scots MPs will no longer vote on English domestic matters’ as they’ve been proposing already. Of course the first would instil horror into the devo maxers. The second would have Labour MPs jumping ship to independence, especially as the electorate is swinging increasingly to indy…

     

    A little more patience is required.

     

    Nice however that the polls are closing before any of this actually comes to pass.

     

    Anyway, since Scotland started this journey over 70 years ago, Westminster MPs (including Scots ones) have done absolutely everything to stop a referendum. They did this because they knew if the Scots voted for one they couldn’t stop it legally and so they’d have to negotiate the aftermath beforehand. If they did that, then the fears they could use to encourage a no would be out of their arsenal and a Yes would be the most likely probability.

     

    As the years have passed, so a Yes has become even more probable, as evidenced by Yes going comfortably ahead in 1997/98 and late 2011. It is only fear holding a Yes back and that fear will begin to evaporate soon enough.

     

    Dave knows the game’s up and there will be a new UKoGB from September 2014. One where Scotland is devo-maxed super excel, i.e. independent but still part of the UK (Lizzie as head of State) in the £-zone, in a freedom of movement zone with Ireland, with a joint GB defence plan etc. The saltire will just fly higher than the (monarchical) union flag at Holyrood palace. That will keep businesses, the markets and the international community happy. The Scots electorate will vote for it too.

     

    I may be wrong, but logic says there can’t be any other way without serious international and economic implications. Really serious ones.

     

    It’s also why Dave, Ed and Nick have made at most token gestures in terms of battling to keep Scotland. In fact the latter two haven’t really done anything, with the former seemingly just trying to push for a Yes occasionally by belittling Scotland and coming up with silly scare stories that are subsequently rubbished (e.g. credit rating, mobile phone charges). Ed’s One Nation is England; you can tell by the flag.

     

    It’s also why Scottish Labour are running around like headless chickens. They’re out of the loop yet have a fair idea what’s going on. Their nice MP positions and future ermine coats are disappearing off into the sunset a little more each day.

    Let the Scots decide on their own - who needs a televised debate?Here's my prediction a full 12 months ahead - 60/40 in favour of NO independence.

     

    Just out of interest, is this based on something?

     

    I'd be keen to know how you came up with it. Obviously, I've gone to great lengths in this thread to explain my reasoning for probable outcomes.

     

    Thanks in advance.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Stoke Gifford, Bristol
  • Location: Stoke Gifford, Bristol

    SS - My view of the independence vote outcome, over the last couple of years, hasnt really changed.

    A hunch? A considered view based on anedoctal 'evidence'?

    I just believe your fellow Scots will let 'the fear of the unknown' make up their minds....or at least the proportion of current 'dont knows' will plump for "No", enough to give a rough 60/40 "No".

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion

    I am fuming about what I've just found out between the disaprity between what the BBC spend on Football coverage in England compare to Scotland.

     

    The English Leagues get £186 million a year, the Scottish Leagues £500k, yes, despite having 10% of the population, Scotland only gets 0.2% of the amount English football, do Scottish voters 0.2% of the licence fee that England pays?

     

    If Unionists really want to get serious about saving the Union, it is perhaps well overdue as to how they address these types of things.

     

    ps. Well done to the mighty Greenock Morton.

     

    How does that compare with N Ireland or, until recently, Wales?I suspect in an Independent Scotland, more people would still tune in to watch Liverpool v Man Utd than Clyde v Peterhead?  And that's what it's all about - nothing whatsoever to do with anglocentricism.The EPL is the most watched football league in the world, like it or not.  At least at present your national broadcaster is spending the money on matches from the same country - in future, the Scottish Boradcasting Corporation (or whatever) will be spending more money to broadcast foreign games than it does domestic ones. btw, as an aside, STV makes TV programmes for the BBC

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion

    SS - My view of the independence vote outcome, over the last couple of years, hasnt really changed.A hunch? A considered view based on anedoctal 'evidence'?I just believe your fellow Scots will let 'the fear of the unknown' make up their minds....or at least the proportion of current 'dont knows' will plump for "No", enough to give a rough 60/40 "No".

     

    I actually think it may be closer than that - perhaps 55/45? I'd rather it was a clear majority in favour or against, but suspect it'll be close enough that whatever the result there will be moans and groans and demands for another referendum for years to come by some parties.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    I actually think it may be closer than that - perhaps 55/45? I'd rather it was a clear majority in favour or against, but suspect it'll be close enough that whatever the result there will be moans and groans and demands for another referendum for years to come by some parties.

     

    Don't you mean 'the electorate'?

     

    It's up to them, not political parties. The SNP, Greens, Margo etc just put 'referendum on indy' in their manifestos and the electorate voted for them in majority.

     

    2/3 of them want Devo Max or indy. If the former doesn't appear, what is that 1/3's (devo maxers) other option?

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion
  • Location: Evesham, Worcs, Albion

    Don't you mean 'the electorate'?

     

    It's up to them, not political parties. The SNP, Greens, Margo etc just put 'referendum on indy' in their manifestos and the electorate voted for them in majority.

     

    2/3 of them want Devo Max or indy. If the former doesn't appear, what is that 1/3's (devo maxers) other option?

     

     

    But the electorate do not vote for PMs on the basis on one issue alone.  We agree a long time ago that a vote in a UK GE for SNP is NOT a vote for independence, even though that may be one of many hundreds of policies in their manifesto. Though this touches more on my general distain for the whole political/electorial system we have.  Which is outside the scope of this thread.Anyway, I hope it's a clear result one way or t'other :) 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    SS - My view of the independence vote outcome, over the last couple of years, hasnt really changed.A hunch? A considered view based on anedoctal 'evidence'?I just believe your fellow Scots will let 'the fear of the unknown' make up their minds....or at least the proportion of current 'dont knows' will plump for "No", enough to give a rough 60/40 "No".

    Thanks BB.

     

     

    I guess the difference is that I have more faith in the 'get up and go' of the Scots electorate.

     

    I'm basing this on the fact they've proven themselves on this in 1979, 1997, 2007 and finally 2011. 

     

    For the most recent examples of 1997 and 2011 which involved voting for a major change to the status quo, on both occasions we saw 'cold feet' setting in ahead of the vote, with this then vanishing rapidly as the day approached (I have no polls for 1979 and that was a rather fragmented campaign too).

     

    The 2011 election is obviously classic; a 15% swing in just a matter of weeks taking Labour from 45% to 30% and the SNP the opposite. That's what the electorate wanted to do, it's just they got cold feet about the huge implications. However, on the day, they swallowed hard and did it.

     

    I may be wrong, but the electorate were saying Yes in 2011. Have they fallen in love with Tory governments since then? Have they decided devo max was a silly idea and Westminster rule was cool. Obviously not.

     

    The (raw) gap between Y and N has closed from ~24 points to ~11/12 over the past Year; the peak being late 2012 (includes DKs). It is already close to Essan's figure (56N/44Y) for those polls showing solid agreement with polls dating back quite far for consistency reference (ICM, Panelbase, Angus Reid and TNS-BMRB). I predict something close to parity by early next year. Already, as seen in the recent panelbase poll which gave 44Y/43N, when you get people to forward project or put some simple thoughts on the matter before them, the parity becomes more obvious. ICM showed similar when they asked if people would neither be better nor worse off how they would vote and got 47Y/53N ex DK's. No prosperity carrot, just nothing to worry about (the £500 better off carrot caused 15% to opt for Yes and gave 47/Y/37N or 56Y exc DKs).

     

    More powers will be the decider. That and who the electorate think will win the next UKGE.

     

    Oh, and if you plot up historical data, when the DK's show consistent swing, it's to Yes, not No (try XY plotting Y vs DK and N vs DK). That's what really pushed the Yes out in front of the No in 2011.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    But the electorate do not vote for PMs on the basis on one issue alone.  We agree a long time ago that a vote in a UK GE for SNP is NOT a vote for independence, even though that may be one of many hundreds of policies in their manifesto. Though this touches more on my general distain for the whole political/electorial system we have.  Which is outside the scope of this thread.

    Anyway, I hope it's a clear result one way or t'other Posted Image

     

    Oh I agree, but if you really want the status quo with no more devolution then you are crazy voting e.g. SNP. Hence support for them is minimal in the 'status quo' supporting section of the electorate.

     

    As voting day approached, the papers finally admitted that it looked like the SNP would win and win big. People still went out and did it. 

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    I just believe your fellow Scots will let 'the fear of the unknown' make up their minds....

     

    I might add, would that not be a really awful thing?

     

    That Britain continued on for a wee while longer because it (or those advocating the union) had succeeded in suppressing the wishes for the Scots electorate for more home rule (I'm assuming no further devolution for reasons detailed extensively in the past) only through fear?

     

    I'm not sure how anyone could feel proud of such an outcome. Imagine the EU did similar to Britain; made constant threats about travel and trade (all of which were largely baseless) which scared the UK electorate into sticking with it and voting No to an exit. How would people feel about that?

     

    What it should be about is what Scots think is best for their country based on what facts are available. A positive case for the union vs a positive one for independence. At the moment, we're only getting that from the pro-indy camp.

     

    The facts will however be presented to them ahead of the vote. I'll eat my sporran if they are not.

     

    Some things can be concretely established; EU, NATO, currency.

     

    Others can't, e.g. prosperity long term, taxes, who will lead the government etc. However, the same applies for the UK. What people feel here must be taken on faith.

     

    -----------

     

    Here's the letter from Dave to AS.

     

    As noted, I don't think a head to head debate is of importance.

     

    I just wanted to put this up in support of earlier arguments; Dave is not getting involved at all really. You can see it by the fact he doesn't know who's leading campaigns etc.

     

    Posted Image

     

    Just to clarify....

     

    Alex Salmond = FM of Scotland

    David Cameron = PM of Scotland / the UK

     

    Neither are involved in campaigns in any official capacity.

     

     

    Dennis Canavan (former Labour MP, then MSP then independent MSP) = Chair of Yes

    Alastair Darling (Labour MP) = Chair of No

     

    Blair Jenkins (formerly BBC Scotland) = Campaign Director of Yes

    Blair McDougal (Labour campiagn manager) = Campaign director for No

     

    Those are your direct comparisons.

     

    Nicola Sturgeon (DFM and Yes Board) would be the only SNP rough match for e.g. Anas Sarwar (deputy leader of Labour in Scotland) or Michael Moore (Lib Dem SoS for Scotland main UK gov / Scot gov go between).

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet

    Personally my opinion is also that a 'No' vote will occur with the 'Yes' vote gaining 42-44% so better than AV but probably not close enough to warrant a massive 'but we had only x% turnout' or enough for the SNP to call another before at least 2030. 

     

    I do however believe that Westminster will roll over and give them pretty much devo-max, probably as part of some other power devolution to more English regions so they can deny they are rolling over and take credit for empowering people.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Personally my opinion is also that a 'No' vote will occur with the 'Yes' vote gaining 42-44% so better than AV but probably not close enough to warrant a massive 'but we had only x% turnout' or enough for the SNP to call another before at least 2030. 

     

    I do however believe that Westminster will roll over and give them pretty much devo-max, probably as part of some other power devolution to more English regions so they can deny they are rolling over and take credit for empowering people.

     

     

     

    As per BB, I'd ask what you are basing your prediction on?

     

    As noted, it's not the SNP who would call a new referendum, they'd just need to put it in their manifesto. Other parties the same (greens, SNP, Margo, SSP etc). Then the electorate decide whether they want to vote for that policy as part of what's on offer.

     

    Remember, Scotland's parliament is a PR-type system; effectively no tactical voting.

     

    A No of >70% is really required to put the matter to bed, if only to tell the SNP et al. to drop the matter.

     

    Of course the same applies for Yes, i.e. if it was 60% yes and Scotland became independent. It would just be that 'unionist' parties in an independent Scotland would be (in theory) asking people to vote for some newly agreed union which the rUK had offered.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Bramley, Hampshire, 70m asl
  • Location: Bramley, Hampshire, 70m asl

    Perhaps the UK should move it's capital to Berwick, Carlisle or Newcastle??

    Surely a more central location would make sense.

     

    South Island, NZ, muted independence in the dim distant past and this was one of the reasons for moving the capital from Auckland to Wellington.

    Not sure why the Aussies thought Canberra was a good idea though!!

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet
  • Location: Leeds/Bradford border, 185 metres above sea level, around 600 feet

    Simply my own interpretation of what I have seen (a lot from this thread) over time.

    The PR point is a good one but the SNP hold the cards there and it would probably be somewhat damaging to keep holding referenda every 5 years or so.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...