Split from Scotland?
- Thread starter eggman
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
Mike1981
Regular.
I agree with eggman, If they want to be independent then let them
When the scottish parliament was founded, it was given a voting system that Blair thought would be impossible to have a majority government. This pacified those who were worried about the SNP getting a foothold.
After 2 terms of a labour/lib dem coalition, the SNP got a minority government term (by having only one seat more than labour)
Forward to the general election and lib dems forge a coalition with the tories.
Labour had clearly proven they were in a mess. Scottish voters wanted an alternative to a messy labour party, the lib dems were vilified for abandoning their principles and siding with the tories (as they were in english council elections as well) and people in scotland just dont vote tory.
That leaves the SNP. There was enough acknowledgement that despite their pro independence stance, they were the party doing the most for scotland, which lets face it is the job of the scottish government. So, fortified with disillusioned lib dem voters, they did what was thought to be impossible and won a majority, with voters knowing full well they could reject independence when the referendum came. (just like voters did with the AV referendum yet folk had still voted lib dem)
So, can someone explain to me why there is this pervasive attitude south of the border that scots are spongers who must be cast away and/or punished and vilified, just because one party is making it a big issue?
(and bear in mind the biggest 'subsidies' going are to london and the SE of england whilst the NE of england that is direly in need of extra funding is being ignored by Westminster)
After 2 terms of a labour/lib dem coalition, the SNP got a minority government term (by having only one seat more than labour)
Forward to the general election and lib dems forge a coalition with the tories.
Labour had clearly proven they were in a mess. Scottish voters wanted an alternative to a messy labour party, the lib dems were vilified for abandoning their principles and siding with the tories (as they were in english council elections as well) and people in scotland just dont vote tory.
That leaves the SNP. There was enough acknowledgement that despite their pro independence stance, they were the party doing the most for scotland, which lets face it is the job of the scottish government. So, fortified with disillusioned lib dem voters, they did what was thought to be impossible and won a majority, with voters knowing full well they could reject independence when the referendum came. (just like voters did with the AV referendum yet folk had still voted lib dem)
So, can someone explain to me why there is this pervasive attitude south of the border that scots are spongers who must be cast away and/or punished and vilified, just because one party is making it a big issue?
(and bear in mind the biggest 'subsidies' going are to london and the SE of england whilst the NE of england that is direly in need of extra funding is being ignored by Westminster)
graysalchemy
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2010
- Messages
- 53
- Reaction score
- 19
Why not let us in England have a vote on whether or not we want to split with the rest of the UK :hmm: :hmm:
(Sorry Dunfie, Keeping an eye on and joining in :lol:)
Could it be that for every £100 million pound of capital investment in England (things like hospitals roads etc) Scotland get £70 Million (I can't recall what Wales Get but it is significant) . . . from all UK Taxpayers . . . . Note that is the split defined as part of the formation of the Scottish Parliament and it is not dependant on proportion of the population or proportional on the tax revenue generated.
Now if it were true independence whereby the Scots government were reliant on their own tax revenue, Just how long would prescriptions remain free . . . and University places be free? . . . Even if they were given access to the North Sea oil tax revenue, which is nowhere near as much as it was in the 70's and 80's, I still think they would end up in a similar situation to Eire and Greece, I also fail to see why they should have access to the revenue from the North Sea prior to the formation of a fully independent Scotland, after all it was UK plc that invested in the North Sea.
(I know the vast majority of Scots are realistic about 'independence' as I have family up there)
Could it be that for every £100 million pound of capital investment in England (things like hospitals roads etc) Scotland get £70 Million (I can't recall what Wales Get but it is significant) . . . from all UK Taxpayers . . . . Note that is the split defined as part of the formation of the Scottish Parliament and it is not dependant on proportion of the population or proportional on the tax revenue generated.
Now if it were true independence whereby the Scots government were reliant on their own tax revenue, Just how long would prescriptions remain free . . . and University places be free? . . . Even if they were given access to the North Sea oil tax revenue, which is nowhere near as much as it was in the 70's and 80's, I still think they would end up in a similar situation to Eire and Greece, I also fail to see why they should have access to the revenue from the North Sea prior to the formation of a fully independent Scotland, after all it was UK plc that invested in the North Sea.
(I know the vast majority of Scots are realistic about 'independence' as I have family up there)
It was proved by the treasury that if scotland were independent, they would have been in deficit for something like 12 of the previous 20 years.
They ignored the fact scotlands 'share' of the uk deficit was considerably higher. When they calculate spending in scotland, they apportion a 'per head' percentage of defence spending to scotland despite the fact that in reality scotland gets less share of defence spend out of the UK.
Anyway, I guess the basis of your argument is the English think scotland gets too much money. Now, as you all seem to be so upset at the prospect of Scotland leaving the union, I guess we could assume you want them to remain in it, but they'd need to have their funding radically slashed therefore making them poorer.
Even ignoring the independence issue, there seems to be an equal level of opposition to 'devo max' which would grant scotland full fiscal autonomy, despite the fact that would mean no money from the treasury going to scotland. But isnt that what you want down there?
So what exactly is the ideal scenario for you? The return of thatcher? Edward the 1st?
Oh, and if your numbers are right, Scotland should have recieved an extra 4.41 billion pounds in capital expenditure last year, not the 443 million they did get.
They ignored the fact scotlands 'share' of the uk deficit was considerably higher. When they calculate spending in scotland, they apportion a 'per head' percentage of defence spending to scotland despite the fact that in reality scotland gets less share of defence spend out of the UK.
Anyway, I guess the basis of your argument is the English think scotland gets too much money. Now, as you all seem to be so upset at the prospect of Scotland leaving the union, I guess we could assume you want them to remain in it, but they'd need to have their funding radically slashed therefore making them poorer.
Even ignoring the independence issue, there seems to be an equal level of opposition to 'devo max' which would grant scotland full fiscal autonomy, despite the fact that would mean no money from the treasury going to scotland. But isnt that what you want down there?
So what exactly is the ideal scenario for you? The return of thatcher? Edward the 1st?
Oh, and if your numbers are right, Scotland should have recieved an extra 4.41 billion pounds in capital expenditure last year, not the 443 million they did get.
graysalchemy
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2010
- Messages
- 53
- Reaction score
- 19
I'm not unhappy at the prospect at all, as Aleman points out the English tax payer has been subsidising Scotland for years. I think the Tories have called the SNP's bluff and a referendum should be held now not in two years time when the commonwealth games are on and the 700 yr anniversary of Blà r Allt a' Bhonnaich. Alex Slmon knows he can't win a straight ballot on full independence and he knows all to well that Scotland couldn't support itself without some outside help. If they split from England would they take the euro if so then they won't be independent at all they will be governed by Brussels, and if they decide to stay with the British pound then The Bank of England will be setting interest rates.
In truth Scotland couldn't afford full independence, but perhaps the SNP doesn't actually want that at all.
And my final word on this is how come the scottish MP's can vote on england law. :hmm: :hmm:
In truth Scotland couldn't afford full independence, but perhaps the SNP doesn't actually want that at all.
And my final word on this is how come the scottish MP's can vote on england law. :hmm: :hmm:
Shug said:
Sums it up well.
I voted the SNP in this time as they are definitely the party to run Scotland. But they'll get their arses kicked in a referendum by people like me who will vote against independence.
snail59
Regular.
Bring it on. I would love to see Scotland go independent. And Northern Ireland and Wales and the rest of the commonwealth aswell.
graysalchemy
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2010
- Messages
- 53
- Reaction score
- 19
I have strong Scottish heritage which I was proud of. I was also proud to be British that was until I lived on the West coast of Scotland for three years. I am now proud to be English and proud to be a Northerner (from the right side of the pennines :lol:).
If Scotland gets independence will they take their share of the trillion pound debt we now have?
If Scotland gets independence will they take their share of the trillion pound debt we now have?
Dave1970
Landlord.
it's pretty obvious that the deal done with Scotland & Wales at the time of devolution was weighted in their favour. Presumably this was done to ensure that devolution was viewed as a success in Scotland & Wales. Otherwise how would people paying the same rate of tax get such a better deal? (student fees, prescriptions, elderly care)
Something should give, independence would be one route, the SNP's DevoMax could be another or the existing arrangement but with a renegotiation of the deal.
As an English taxpayer I don't see why we should continue to pay the same to get less
Something should give, independence would be one route, the SNP's DevoMax could be another or the existing arrangement but with a renegotiation of the deal.
As an English taxpayer I don't see why we should continue to pay the same to get less
bobsbeer
Well-Known Member
I don't believe the majority of Scots will actually fall for all the rhetoric being peddled by Alex Salmond. But I can understand that Scotland do not feel that MP's in London represent the interests of Scotland. They don't represent the interests of the Northern half of England never mind Scotland. If Scotland went independant then I would be more than happy to tack Cumbria onto Scotland. Perhaps we might get a better deal. We just need to move the wall a bit further south. Think of all the jobs that would create 
bobsbeer
Well-Known Member
Or maybe leave the original wall where it is and build a new one. Then we can declare independance for the North. We could have our Parliament in Bradford.
