NationStates Jolt Archive

What does that average NSer think about this issue of world importance? I'm personally against it, because I don't fancy paying for the refugee camps that'd spring up in Cumbria and Northumberland :P

What does that average NSer think about this issue of world importance? I'm personally against it, because I don't fancy paying for the refugee camps that'd spring up in Cumbria and Northumberland :P
What would be the point? We'll all be provinces of the United States of Europe soon :rolleyes:

Well that would be the end of "Britain" America would take us even less seriously and as much as I don't like the scottish I still like the idea of Britain more.

I suppose I can cope with the idea of devolution but against full independence.

What would be the point? We'll all be provinces of the United States of Europe soon :rolleyes:

Not provinces, fiefs.
yup.

completely for Scottish Independence

What?! There's separatists in Scottland?!? :confused:

What?! There's separatists in Scottland?!? :confused:

There's even a couple in Cornwall.

completely for Scottish Independence

Now why's that?

Fareweel to a' our Scottish fame,
Fareweel our ancient glory!
Fareweel ev'n to the Scottish name.
Sae famed in martial story!
Now Sark rins over Salway sands,
An' Tweed rins to the ocean,
To mark where England's province stands --
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

What force or guile could not subdue
Thro' many warlike ages
Is wrought now by a coward few
For hireling traitor's wages.
The English steel we could disdain,
Secure in valour's station;
But English gold has been our bane --
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

O, would, or I had seen the day
That Treason thus could sell us,
My auld grey head had lien in clay
Wi' Bruce and loyal Wallace!
But pith and power, till my last hour
I'll mak this declaration :-
'We're bought and sold for English gold'--
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

Not provinces, fiefs.
yup.
Maybe we should fight for the right to Make Mercia Independant.

Meh, who cares.

And I've hiked Northumberland. Good luck to anyone pitching a tent there in winter. :rolleyes:

What do the majority of Scottish citizens want?

Trans-human']What do the majority of Scottish citizens want?

Fags and whisky.

What would be the point? We'll all be provinces of the United States of Europe soon :rolleyes:

It's true, why fight it? I'll see if I can get special treatment for Great Britain though.;)

I'll trade Quebec for Scotland :D

Trans-human']What do the majority of Scottish citizens want?

The SNP used to be fairly popular, but after devolution most scottish people seem happy and theres less intrest in it.

The SNP still say Scotland can survive economically independent of Britain and they're pretty pro Europe. Anyway they say if elected they'd put it up to a refferendum. Ultamatly I'd say most Scottish people don't want it.

Independence for Faroë Islands

It's true, why fight it? I'll see if I can get special treatment for Great Britain though.;)

It's not rue! Resistance is building, as can be seen by the increasing support for UKIP.

When they win their first seat, maybe the debate will be reopened.

Now why's that?


just dont see why if there was a Conservative Parliament in England the Scottish people should be governed by it, when the Tories havent gained a majority of scottish seats since the emergence of labour

dont see why we should remain with a country who we are different in almost every possible way other than language

majority of Scots support EU, England is losing faith in it

The SNP used to be fairly popular, but after devolution most scottish people seem happy and theres less intrest in it.

The SNP still say Scotland can survive economically independent of Britain and they're pretty pro Europe. Anyway they say if elected they'd put it up to a refferendum. Ultamatly I'd say most Scottish people don't want it.

SNP are predicted to win the 2007 election with a slight majority(being a Pr system this is near impossible)

I'll trade Quebec for Scotland :D
Not a chance mate. We've already got various forms of Gaelic on our signs (I mean come on, historically Southern Scottish peoples didn't even speak Gaelic in time periods used to justify the other signs!) we don't need French on every Roadsign in the UK.

It's not true! Resistance is building, as can be seen by the increasing support for UKIP.

When they win their first seat, maybe the debate will be reopened.
Nah mate. UKIP have become unpopular now. Like the previous David Beckham haircut, only the slow and stupid have any affiliation with it now :p

SNP are predicted to win the 2007 election with a slight majority(being a Pr system this is near impossible)

That's what the SNP are claiming. Is there any actual evidence for it?

Nah mate. UKIP have become unpopular now. Like the previous David Beckham haircut, only the slow and stupid have any affiliation with it now :p

Hmmm, they increased their vote at the last election even without Kilroy Silk...Popular support for their EU stance certainly extends beyond their voting base.

Hehe, Scottish independence. Sure.

That's what the SNP are claiming. Is there any actual evidence for it?


any evidence against it?

i could see it happening, the coalition has taken a pounding lately due to the dawn raid stuff

with SNP being second biggest party, and Tories little more than a Fringe movement in Holyrood ,

Hmmm, they increased their vote at the last election even without Kilroy Silk...Popular support for their EU stance certainly extends beyond their voting base.

They've done well as a protest vote as EU representatives. But as far as parliament goes they're pretty hopeless I think doing worse last election.

Scotland wants to be free? Scotland wishes democracy?
There's only one answer, only one answer, hey!
Get yourselves invaded, invaded by the U-S-A!
We'll liberate you and your girly kilts
With M1A1's and Apaches at full tilt!
Showing you how to be independent
By installing your new government!

any evidence against it?


The burden of proof is on you, as you made the suggestion.

The burden of proof is on you, as you made the suggestion.


the coalition has taken a pounding lately due to the dawn raid stuff and Tories little more than a Fringe movement in Holyrood ,

so who is left to form an effective Government ?

ill have the evidence in 2007 ;)

Scotland wants to be free? Scotland wishes democracy?
There's only one answer, only one answer, hey!
Get yourselves invaded, invaded by the U-S-A!
We'll liberate you and your girly kilts
With M1A1's and Apaches at full tilt!
Showing you how to be independent
By installing your new government!

ROFL :):):)

the coalition has taken a pounding lately due to the dawn raid stuff and Tories little more than a Fringe movement in Holyrood ,

so who is left to form an effective Government ?

ill have the evidence in 2007 ;)

The Tories will greatly increase their vote, due to the effect of David Cameron. Labour will decline somewhat, but not by much as they are entrenched in many FPTP seats.

Perhaps we'll see a Lib Dem/Tory coalition.

The Tories will greatly increase their vote, due to the effect of David Cameron. Labour will decline somewhat, but not by much as they are entrenched in many FPTP seats.

Perhaps we'll see a Lib Dem/Tory coalition.


haha in scotland torries will never win.

haha in scotland torries will never win.

I didn't say win, I said increase their votes. But then again, the SSP and the Greens could make formation of any coalition difficult in the next parliament

The Tories will greatly increase their vote, due to the effect of David Cameron. Labour will decline somewhat, but not by much as they are entrenched in many FPTP seats.

Perhaps we'll see a Lib Dem/Tory coalition.

David Cameron is going to manage something that hasnt been done since 1911
id like to see that

especially when he doesnt even sit at Holyrood

if anything it will be a SNP/Lib Dem coalition

As an Irish Person, i can only say that i have great pride for the men and women of the 1916 easter rising who rebelled against English and British rule , and i can say for that, Ireland is now a better place for it ,and a free country , and all the Scots i know would rather have indepence.

I suppose, but I wouldn't go out of my way for it.

when the Tories havent gained a majority of scottish seats since the emergence of labour

Actually the Tories got a majority of the vote in Scotland in 1951! There had already been multiple Labour governments since then.

I'll trade Quebec for Scotland :D

Done - most Scottish people would probably rather be a province of Canada (to whose people we are closer in political views if nothing else) than a province of England paying for new sewers in Budapest

As an Irish Person, i can only say that i have great pride for the men and women of the 1916 easter rising who rebelled against English and British rule , and i can say for that, Ireland is now a better place for it ,and a free country , and all the Scots i know would rather have indepence.

Do you not think Britain as a world power could have had more influence with Ireland as part of it.

Depends on what the Scottish people want. From what I've seen of the results of the elections for the Scottish Parliament, they don't seem to particularly want full independence. But I think it's important that this country doesn't keep giving Scotland a raw deal like it's always done. The best way to take the wind out of an independence movement is to convince the people that they're better off with us.

As an Irish Person, i can only say that i have great pride for the men and women of the 1916 easter rising who rebelled against English and British rule , and i can say for that, Ireland is now a better place for it ,and a free country , and all the Scots i know would rather have indepence.

I'll have to take issue with that. I'm a Scot born and bred, but I don't want independence.

I'll try and not get on my high horse, but god... The Scottish Parliament gives you a vision of the hell independence would bring. Incompetence (cost of building the parliament was 10 x the estimate and _still_ late), corruption (McLeish, Sheridan, McLetchie, all leaders cut by their party), complacency (the constant holidays, the f^$*^%£ medals they gave themselves, the annual awards ceremonies), provincialism (a debate about the nuisance seagulls caused to streets in a town at the seaside should not occupy a national parliament's time), expense (over a 100 MSPs, their assistants, their lawyers, their civil servants, their researchers, their expenses!), and division (I don't want to undergo a change in my legal rights, obligations, and status when I cross the border into England, or have to take my bloody passport with me when I visit my little brother in Newcastle).

I can't claim to be an economist, so I won't mention those arguments. Even assuming all was viable (an immensely contentious claim!) I wouldn't want independence. I feel like a Scot without it, thank you, intellectually, emotionally, and viscerally.

I will admit that, like most Scotsmen, I once rabidly supported Anyone-Playing Vs. England, and poured over stories of Bannockburn. But then I reached puberty, and started to grow up!

I strongly support the break up of the reactionary British state and the creation of a Scottish republic where all forms of capitalism and imperialism will be gone forever. Recent polls have shown that more Scottish people support independence than oppose it and I believe a referendum which would follow a victory for the pro independence parties - SNP, SSP and Greens - could easily be won.

I strongly support the break up of the reactionary British state and the creation of a Scottish republic where all forms of capitalism and imperialism will be gone forever...

And you reckon most Scots want that too?

And you reckon most Scots want that too?
Yes I believe they do. As well as supporting independence a number of surveys have also found that the Scottish people are far to the left of those in England when it comes to social and economic issues.

Doubt it will happen unless something drastic swings people one way or another...

I strongly support the break up of the reactionary British state and the creation of a Scottish republic where all forms of capitalism and imperialism will be gone forever. Recent polls have shown that more Scots support independence than oppose it and I believe a referendum on it which would follow a victory for the pro independence parties - SNP, SSP and Greens - could easily be won.

Oh god, here we go... The Maryhill Mob! <jk, I used to live there when I was at Glasgow uni!> I don't _think_ the SNP have ever polled more than 25% in an election - it's for a reason!

I don't want to live in your socialist Scotland. I like it as it is. I don't want to be a region in the EU, what ties have I got to them? I'm not oppressed by Englishmen or Welshmen - it's other Scots who keep threatening to change my way of life! I don't favour the breakup of the British state, it's part of _my_ history, of _my_ culture; why would I want to break up my own country?

Elgesh']Oh god, here we go... The Maryhill Mob! <jk, I used to live there when I was at Glasgow uni!> I don't _think_ the SNP have ever polled more than 25% in an election - it's for a reason!

I don't want to live in your socialist Scotland. I like it as it is. I don't want to be a region in the EU, what ties have I got to them? I'm not oppressed by Englishmen or Welshmen - it's other Scots who keep threatening to change my way of life! I don't favour the breakup of the British state, it's part of _my_ history, of _my_ culture; why would I want to break up my own country?

Do you think that the Conservative Party should brand itself as the Unionist party in Scotland, so that Scots whose views run contrary to the SNP have a specific party to vote for?

Do you think that the Conservative Party should brand itself as the Unionist party in Scotland, so that Scots whose views run contrary to the SNP have a specific party to vote for?

I don't think that would help. I can't see anyway out of this dreadful morass devolutions got us into. I voted against it, and I'd vote to have it dismantled immediately if I could (as a Scot, I've got an MEP, MP, MSP, County Council, Local Councellor to pay for to keep me governed - help! All those hungry mouths to feed!).

However, I don't rate the possibility of independence as a serious enough of a threat at the moment to warrant a party devoting itself to fighting it. The grownup parties, Labour, Libdems, Cons, even half the SNP these days, don't bang the drum much about independence/unionism. It's a bit of a non-issue.

Elgesh']Oh god, here we go... The Maryhill Mob! <jk, I used to live there when I was at Glasgow uni!> I don't _think_ the SNP have ever polled more than 25% in an election - it's for a reason!
At the last election 35% of people supported the 3 pro-independence parties and there is a good chance this will rise further in 2007 due to the 46% support for independence in a recent poll (more than those who opposed it).

Elgesh']I don't want to live in your socialist Scotland. I like it as it is. I don't want to be a region in the EU, what ties have I got to them? I'm not oppressed by Englishmen or Welshmen - it's other Scots who keep threatening to change my way of life! I don't favour the breakup of the British state, it's part of _my_ history, of _my_ culture; why would I want to break up my own country?
If you are beneffitting from the present system then of course you don't want anything to change but in a wealthy country blighted by some of Europe's worst poverty something has to be done if the majority of the populaton are to be guaranteed a decent standard of living. I support our independence from both London and Brussels which is why I believe Scotland should withdraw from the EU although sadly as yet the SSP is the only party with this policy. You may say that we are not oppressed by the British state but if that was true then we would have access to our own oil wealth, a real effort would be made to protect our industry and a disproportionately high number of Scottish teenagers would no longer be forced into the army due to poverty.

At the last election 35% of people supported the 3 pro-independence parties and there is a good chance this will rise further in 2007 due to the 46% support for independence in a recent poll (more than those who opposed it).


If you are beneffitting from the present system then of course you don't want anything to change but in a wealthy country blighted by some of Europe's worst poverty something has to be done if the majority of the populaton are to be guaranteed a decent standard of living. I support our independence from both London and Brussels which is why I believe Scotland should withdraw from the EU although sadly as yet the SSP is the only party with this policy. You may say that we are not oppressed by the British state but if that was true then we would have access to our own oil wealth, a real effort would be made to protect our industry and a disproportionately high number of Scottish teenagers would no longer be forced into the army due to poverty.

With all due respect, I think you're attributing far too much drawing power to the prospect of independence in attracting voters to the Green Party, SSP, and SNP. One could just as easily suggest their ephemeral popularity's due to other platforms - notably the environment, socialism, and not-being-the-labour--party! :p

I agree, Scotland's poverty needs to be addressed. Not being an economist, I can't say what's the best way to do this. But I don't want a busy government harrassing me, telling me what I can and can't do - socialist governments tend to try to change society through legislation, and bully away civil rights - I'm not impressed at the prospect of this coming to a country near me!

Oil wealth? It's british money, discovered off the coast of Britain. If it happened, purely through geological accident, to be located off the coast of Kent, would would you say if there were calls for it to be spent only in England! :D No, this is fair. Heavy industry is failing in the west as our higher wages lead corporations to seek cheaper wages in third world countries. It isn't an english conspiracy! Sadly, Scotland had an overreliance on this industry (there's a thing in economics that warns against this, but I think 'don't put all your eggs in one basket' just about covers it!), so when it started to fail, we were hit disproportionately hard. I don't know how you fix that except by diversifying the industries you rely on, protecting against this in the future. And as for Scots being 'forced' into the army - well, that's one way to see it. The other is seeing them taking advantage of an opportunity not to drop below the poverty line by getting government work, and fair play to them for it.

Hmmm, they increased their vote at the last election even without Kilroy Silk...Popular support for their EU stance certainly extends beyond their voting base.You're comparing two sets of elections. Hardly ground breaking. And besides, they have representation in the institution they loathe and none in the institution they love. Pretty ironic really. And, really, any one-issue party is a passing phase.

And finally, in the last general election only 10% of their candidates saved their deposits, let alone take the ward.

Bleh, as far as I'm aware Scotland gaining independence would be much better for the rest of Britain than for Scotland. A lot of Scotland may not be rich as the south, but don't underestimate the redistribution of wealth from the South to the North.

As for North Sea gas, well, there's around 30 years left of that. Since it's discovery, in the 60s, we've used 4/7s of the reserves (found and 'yet-to-be-found'), and our consumption of gas is still rising. So even 30 years is an optomistic estimate.

Hey, if Scotland is given independence then at least we can shift the economic burden onto the rest of the Europe, and spend more of the rebate on ourselves.

Depends... are we talking "independence" like Canada, or independence like the US?

Either way, probably, no.

Do you not think Britain as a world power could have had more influence with Ireland as part of it.


why would i want britain to have more influence , and i would rather see my country run by my fellow country men and women, and i am not sure about scotland but when britain have control over ireland they mistreated it , that why we rebelled , and now have a free country .

I always thought it was funny once you crossed the Scottish border the pounds you recieved said bank of Scotland. So I figured they had some sort of independence.

I'm in favour of limited autonomy, but England did allow Scotland to work itself out of the poorhouse.

I am all for it. Scottish independence is the best thing that could happen to England.

@Tactical Grace, you must have been in the Cheviots. Northumberland is pretty big, and there are places you could put tents in the winter. It would still be pretty cold though.

Do you not think Britain as a world power could have had more influence with Ireland as part of it.

I do not believe so, by the time of the Easter rising the UK was overstretched, hence why the UK had such a hard time during WW1, besides the Empire was built on the blood of Irish and Scottish soldiers and despite the establishment of the IRish Free State many young irishmen volunteered to serve the British during the horrors of the western front.

As for independence, i am in favour as it will be all within the framework of the EU, and why stop at Scotland we can liberate the other potential nations europe, such as Wales, Euzkadi (Basqueland), Brittany, Frisia, Corsica and so on.

I do not believe so, by the time of the Easter rising the UK was overstretched, hence why the UK had such a hard time during WW1, besides the Empire was built on the blood of Irish and Scottish soldiers and despite the establishment of the IRish Free State many young irishmen volunteered to serve the British during the horrors of the western front.

As for independence, i am in favour as it will be all within the framework of the EU, and why stop at Scotland we can liberate the other potential nations europe, such as Wales, Euzkadi (Basqueland), Brittany, Frisia, Corsica and so on.

Why gift so much power to the EU? It's not self-determination, quite the opposite! With so many little tiny nations, the larger ones that maintain thier size will happily outvote and overrule them - unless you institute a veto system, in which case with dozens of little nations you'll never get anything done :p

Political union and the loss of sovreignty to faceless money-grabbers in some other country? Why?! I don't understand the desire to give up money, political rights and civil rights to another body. I don't know what the gain is: the chances of a war in old europe are next to nonexistant, economic and financial cooperation and strong links can exist without the loss of policital rights and in the absence of a federalist superstate, and I'm not even going to talk about the historical parralels of such an arrangement...

Let 'em have their independence. The British Isles needs a few more Anglo-Scottish wars anyway, History's been slightly dull in this place lately.

Elgesh']Why gift so much power to the EU? It's not self-determination, quite the opposite! With so many little tiny nations, the larger ones that maintain thier size will happily outvote and overrule them - unless you institute a veto system, in which case with dozens of little nations you'll never get anything done :p

Political union and the loss of sovreignty to faceless money-grabbers in some other country? Why?! I don't understand the desire to give up money, political rights and civil rights to another body. I don't know what the gain is: the chances of a war in old europe are next to nonexistant, economic and financial cooperation and strong links can exist without the loss of policital rights and in the absence of a federalist superstate, and I'm not even going to talk about the historical parralels of such an arrangement...

You make a valid point, however in the case of all the nations i mentioned there has been a desire fro greater autonomy if not outright independence for some time, i agree that the EU needs to work how to accomidate such nations . I think the point here is that in the case of the Scots and certainly the Basques nothing less than independence will do due to historical factors in which case these demands should be met, bottling up such sentiments has led to conflict in Europe (Ulster, Yugoslavia, Spain) in recent times.

The federalist superstate will be medium in which Europe as a whole can flex its muscles especially in light of the rise of China and to a lesser degree India in world market terms, and the recent problems in Europe have been down to disagreement between the UK and France/Germany i cannot remember any of the smaller nations (Faroe Islands, Luxemburg, Malta, Slovenia and so forth) causing any paralysis i believe the entrance of Scotland and hopefully Euzkadi to the EU as sovereign nations would not change the dynamics of the EU in any negative sense.

You make a valid point, however in the case of all the nations i mentioned there has been a desire fro greater autonomy if not outright independence for some time, i agree that the EU needs to work how to accomidate such nations . I think the point here is that in the case of the Scots and certainly the Basques nothing less than independence will do due to historical factors in which case these demands should be met, bottling up such sentiments has led to conflict in Europe (Ulster, Yugoslavia, Spain) in recent times...[snip]


Thanks for understanding my point :) I still think that on balance I'll have to disagree with your optimistic conclusion (damn, snipped it!) - an EU of lots of tiny nations and a half dozen large ones will always be prone to logjams (paralysis through opinions!) and 'soft' dictatorships (crude term, but you see the point - larger countries getting their way with the tiny ones).

On topic, you seriously overestimate the appitite for independence in Scotland - and I'm somewhat offended you compare us with yugoslavia et al. - I don't think the analogy fits at all! I can't speak for Basques and others - if they're a genuinely homogenous block, and all (or enough of 'all', you know what I mean!) want to follow the scheme laid out in your post, more power to them :) But I don't feel the same holds true in Scotland, for, as you say, historical reasons:

joint kingship (under a scots king!) with england;
voluntary union with england;
voluntary dissolution of the Scots parliament;
population growth and expansion of the (v.v. generally) 'british' 'central belt' scots, decline of the fringe populations;
a shared imperial and financial history post 18th C.;
political and economic integration in the 19th C. on.

Joining with England to form Britain has immensely benefited both countries, and formed a common cultural idea, 'Britain'. I don't want to be just a Scot, I want to be a British Scot, as do (in elections and polls) up to over 3/4 of my countrymen. Why should we be dictated to by a vocal (occasionally up to) 1/4? It's not right.

Elgesh']Thanks for understanding my point :) I still think that on balance I'll have to disagree with your optimistic conclusion (damn, snipped it!) - an EU of lots of tiny nations and a half dozen large ones will always be prone to logjams (paralysis through opinions!) and 'soft' dictatorships (crude term, but you see the point - larger countries getting their way with the tiny ones).

On topic, you seriously overestimate the appitite for independence in Scotland - and I'm somewhat offended you compare us with yugoslavia et al. - I don't think the analogy fits at all! I can't speak for Basques and others - if they're a genuinely homogenous block, and all (or enough of 'all', you know what I mean!) want to follow the scheme laid out in your post, more power to them :) But I don't feel the same holds true in Scotland, for, as you say, historical reasons:

joint kingship (under a scots king!) with england;
voluntary union with england;
voluntary dissolution of the Scots parliament;
population growth and expansion of the (v.v. generally) 'british' 'central belt' scots, decline of the fringe populations;
a shared imperial and financial history post 18th C.;
political and economic integration in the 19th C. on.

Joining with England to form Britain has immensely benefited both countries, and formed a common cultural idea, 'Britain'. I don't want to be just a Scot, I want to be a British Scot, as do (in elections and polls) up to over 3/4 of my countrymen. Why should we be dictated to by a vocal (occasionally up to) 1/4? It's not right.

But do you not feel that Europe interests would be better served within a federal superstate rather than the loosely connected federatrion we have at present. I do agree that Scotland has benefitted from being within the Union but it has had to make sacrifices in the interest of the Union, but if indeed 3/4 of Scots feel that the continuation of the Union of Scotland and England then there needs to be an alternative party for whom they may vote rather than Labour or the Tories who i feel do not govern in the interest of the regions wether it is Scotland, Cumbria, Wales, etc, etc. I am from London but being of neither English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh descent i was raised to believe in being british as were many who are from ethnic minorities, but on the whole most English want to be English not British, is not the cultural aspects of Britain fading away in favour of the national identities of Scotland, Englanda and Wales.

Are you in favour of the Scottish parliamnet or do you feel that power should return to Westminster?

I am a Scot, and for those of you who don't understand, power is never, ever going back to Westminster. We've made our messy parliament, paid ten times over for the building and got the most embarassing First Minister imaginable, so we're not abolishing all that.

People wouldn't want independence if Scotland weren't treated so unequally in the UK. It is my countrymen who live on top of nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons, not those in the South-East of England. It is the Gorbals, in my city, that is the poorest place in developed Europe, whilst the UK is one of the richest countries in the world. Send some money up here and stop treating us like second class citizens and we'll shut up, stop running your country and stop asking for 'oor wee bit hill an' glen' back.

People wouldn't want independence if Scotland weren't treated so unequally in the UK. It is my countrymen who live on top of nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons, not those in the South-East of England. It is the Gorbals, in my city, that is the poorest place in developed Europe, whilst the UK is one of the richest countries in the world. Send some money up here and stop treating us like second class citizens and we'll shut up, stop running your country and stop asking for 'oor wee bit hill an' glen' back.

Ever heard of Dungeness? There are nuclear reactors all over the UK, and it's only sensible to store our nuclear weapons in areas of low population density. How can you say Scotland is treated unfairly when the Barnett formula ensures that it gets more spending per head than England?

I suppose as a Scot, I should weigh in on this argument.

Firstly, it's probably important to mention my mother is Scots, and my Father English; important becuase growing up, I've had a balanced upbringing between the two cultures and countries.

I personally believe there's a number (by no means an overwhelming number) of Scots who are swept away not by the idea of a Scots Socialist Republic or whatnot, but by the chance to design a new flag, change the name of the country, burn down Balmoral Castle etc. I believe, especially within the newer generation of pseudo-socialists, a "Change for the sake of change" argument.

I think the whole issue of independence transcends mere materialism - Oil is finite, and it is not the future of Scotland, only its past. What's important is how the people feel about their own identity. I am proud to be both British an d Scots; the achievements of both give me pride, and don't work against each other.

I'm also just a little tired of people (Not specifically in this thread, but about the real world also) who spout lines such as "The majority of the Scots public back independence," or "Scotland is overwhelmingly against Britain," then when asked for evidence, show a poll with 40-50% in favour.

If an independence decision is to be made by referendum, a mark of 65% must be set, this is not a decision for simple Majority politics. Just reaching half the population is not a mandate to change the entire future of a nation.

For me, our oil isn't stolen, it's shared. For me, the English are no enemy, but an old friend whose accompanied us through some of the worst periods of history experienced by man (The World Wars spring to mind). Yes, I'm not blind to colonialism by the hands of the British, or the Scots Wars of Independence which ended in Bloody-handed English brutality, but one can forgive, even if he does not forget.

The Parliament of the United Kingdom is in Westminster. Yes, nobody should pretend this is neutral, but a union between a larger partner rarely results in the sort of equality seen in the Anglo-Scots Union of 1707 where our legal system and Scots Law were protected in a way no "Invading Power" would normally sanction.

We are represented by our Scots MPs at Wesminster, (Until recently in fact, by too many), and now with a devolved parliament many issues close at hand. People in England (Sellafield for example) Sit "Right on top of Nuclear Reactors," and many other oft-spun conspiracy theories about "Anti-Scots Englishness" is unfounded rubbish.


Our Queen is related to the first King to union England and Scotland, a Scot no less and Our Union Flag takes half its form from the Cross of St Andrew's. There is more in common than there is apart, and as you might have guessed, I can see no valid reason to break away.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v228/NSIndy/Kaenei/ScotlandandtheUK.jpg

I am a Scot, and for those of you who don't understand, power is never, ever going back to Westminster. We've made our messy parliament, paid ten times over for the building and got the most embarassing First Minister imaginable, so we're not abolishing all that.

People wouldn't want independence if Scotland weren't treated so unequally in the UK. It is my countrymen who live on top of nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons, not those in the South-East of England. It is the Gorbals, in my city, that is the poorest place in developed Europe, whilst the UK is one of the richest countries in the world. Send some money up here and stop treating us like second class citizens and we'll shut up, stop running your country and stop asking for 'oor wee bit hill an' glen' back.


So unequally? I was born and brought up in Glasgow. I never had a class size of more than 25. When my kids were born and raised in Edinburgh to the ages of 4 and 7 respectively, their nursery and school class sizes were in the same sort of range.
Now we live in Cambridge, class sizes are up to 30 for both of them. They share teachers.

When I lived and worked in Scotland, it was with the NHS. I was a staff nurse in A&E and in Orthopaedics and Haematology. The facilities we had to work with weren't great, but on visiting similar wards and departments down here........

Scotland is a great country, part of a pretty fine nation. I'm proud to be both Scottish and British. But when I hear this sort of whinging nonsense about Scottish poverty compared to English and Welsh, I would suggest to you that you go and visit parts of Merseyside, Coventry, inner City Manchester, inner city London...in fact parts of just about anywhere down here and then get a "wee bit" of perspective.

Nuclear reactors? Ther's one not too far away along the Norfolk Coast. And have you ever heard of Windscale/Seascale?

Nuclear Weapons? Yep, fair enough, but you can be damn sure that Salisbury Plain, Porton Down and all the major population centres (you know, those ones in the south of England) would have been targets as much as the Holy Loch.

Quite frankly, that kind of non argument is just downright embarrassing. As far as funding compared to taxes goes, it is quite simply a fact that Scottish tax payers receive more than they put in. Live with it. This nation (the UK) has been pretty good to us, and we've been pretty good to it.

Nuclear Weapons? Yep, fair enough, but you can be damn sure that Salisbury Plain, Porton Down and all the major population centres (you know, those ones in the south of England) would have been targets as much as the Holy Loch.


That's just reminded of something stupid I saw on TV today. The Labour MP for Hull North claimed that it was essential that Yorkshire and Humberside had one united police force, so that Hull could have some anti-terrorist protection.

What kind of terrorist is going to attack Hull?

I'd assume Hull has a decently-sized train station. I'd assume they have variously sizes shopping centres. I know they have a football/rugby stadium of some size and capacity.

All these have the temptation of being "soft" targets - Let's not forget that the London Underground before 7/7 was supposedly "Low-risk". There were Anti-Terrorist Officers patrolling Aberdeen not too long ago. You don't have to be a multi-million strong city, or capital, to be threatened.

That's just reminded of something stupid I saw on TV today. The Labour MP for Hull North claimed that it was essential that Yorkshire and Humberside had one united police force, so that Hull could have some anti-terrorist protection.

What kind of terrorist is going to attack Hull?


One with a town planning degree?

Hey theng yow.....

But do you not feel that Europe interests would be better served within a federal superstate rather than the loosely connected federatrion we have at present. I do agree that Scotland has benefitted from being within the Union but it has had to make sacrifices in the interest of the Union, but if indeed 3/4 of Scots feel that the continuation of the Union of Scotland and England then there needs to be an alternative party for whom they may vote rather than Labour or the Tories who i feel do not govern in the interest of the regions wether it is Scotland, Cumbria, Wales, etc, etc. I am from London but being of neither English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh descent i was raised to believe in being british as were many who are from ethnic minorities, but on the whole most English want to be English not British, is not the cultural aspects of Britain fading away in favour of the national identities of Scotland, Englanda and Wales.

Are you in favour of the Scottish parliamnet or do you feel that power should return to Westminster?

Nice to hear back from you, cheers!

I'm not really very concerned about 'Europe's' best interests. I'm not 100% sure what 'Europe' is; is it a geographical place, an economic sphere, a more ephemeral cultural idea, a new political area...? Whatever it might be, I'm sure it _would_ be better served by having more money, more people, more economic strength, etc.! The question is, why should I cede my political power and my country's sovreignty in order to benefit someone else?

But as to the matter in hand; yes, as you say, we've gained a lot more than we've lost through Union with England, and as for political parties - we already have different parties 'for' scotland: SNP, SSP, Scottish Lab., Libdem., Tories. They work in our interests. They are uniformly awful and embarassing, cannae organise a pissup in the proverbial. Worse, we have to _pay_ to be incompetently governed and represented by 3rd rate nobodies and numpties who couldn't get into the 'real' parliament at westminster. If this is what regionalisation of politics does, it's a dreadful error I wouldn't wish on any part of the UK or Europe.

I'd happily see 'wir par-le-ment' abolished and the sponging loafters that populate it left to go back to their real jobs (which many of them seem to have kept, coming in to work as MSPs on the 3 days a week [!!] they have to). Having set it up though, we're stuck with it for the time being; can only hope a future generation's able to dissolve it!

Elgesh']Nice to hear back from you, cheers!

I'd happily see 'wir par-le-ment' abolished and the sponging loafters that populate it left to go back to their real jobs (which many of them seem to have kept, coming in to work as MSPs on the 3 days a week [!!] they have to). Having set it up though, we're stuck with it for the time being; can only hope a future generation's able to dissolve it!

The problem is that in the current political climate, it's near nigh impossible to do. Labour are hardly going to let that happen while they're in office (as they created it) and David Cameron seems to be resigned to acceptance of devolution.

The problem is that in the current political climate, it's near nigh impossible to do. Labour are hardly going to let that happen while they're in office (as they created it) and David Cameron seems to be resigned to acceptance of devolution.
Oh, I completely agree, it's not an option now. Give it time, though, say 100 years; either it'll implode, britain'll be dissolved, we'll get lumbered with 'independence within the EU' (oh... great... what sort of independence is _that_?), or the world as we know it'll end and it'll be a moot point.

I am all for it. Scottish independence is the best thing that could happen to England.

@Tactical Grace, you must have been in the Cheviots. Northumberland is pretty big, and there are places you could put tents in the winter. It would still be pretty cold though.


perxactly the English have always wanted increased oil costs

perxactly the English have always wanted increased oil costs

Oil is nearly gone. What's Scotland supposed to live on after that? Tartan and shortbread?

I don't see any good reason why they shouldn't have the right to become independent :)

Oil is nearly gone. What's Scotland supposed to live on after that? Tartan and shortbread?


Git. I know this is a wind up, but, Arrgggh! Must not respondddd....

Ach well, here goes. Scotland could survive quite nicely as an independent nation. That to me has never been the point.

The reason Scotland shouldn't go it alone is nothing whatsoever to do with its ability to prosper or even to exist. It's because the UK has proven that you can take three warring countries and stop them from warring, make them successful and not lose the essence of what makes them different at the same time.

Frankly, I've always been surprised that more unionists aren't pro Europe. IN a sense, the UK is a microcosm of what a federal Europe could be if only UKIP and their international clones would get a grip and not look at a slice of Brie as if it is radioactive, and those at the other end of the spectrum would acknowledge the need to take their time a bit more about...well....just about everything.

Elgesh']Nice to hear back from you, cheers!

I'm not really very concerned about 'Europe's' best interests. I'm not 100% sure what 'Europe' is; is it a geographical place, an economic sphere, a more ephemeral cultural idea, a new political area...? Whatever it might be, I'm sure it _would_ be better served by having more money, more people, more economic strength, etc.! The question is, why should I cede my political power and my country's sovreignty in order to benefit someone else?

Good point but surely without Europeans helping Europeans our collective long term futures will be worthless in light of the growing financial clout of CHina and to a lesser extent India, united we have a chance but this requires all nations helping out specially now we have to invest in the new eastern european member states.

Elgesh']I'd happily see 'wir par-le-ment' abolished and the sponging loafters that populate it left to go back to their real jobs (which many of them seem to have kept, coming in to work as MSPs on the 3 days a week [!!] they have to). Having set it up though, we're stuck with it for the time being; can only hope a future generation's able to dissolve it!

Sounds a little like Westminster:)

Good point but surely without Europeans helping Europeans our collective long term futures will be worthless in light of the growing financial clout of CHina and to a lesser extent India,

Why? A country does not have to be large to be wealthy.

Why? A country does not have to be large to be wealthy.

Its not about size of landmass or population but about collective economic clout which hopefully the European superstate would provide.

I don't see any good reason why they shouldn't have the right to become independent :)

Well, we're a distinct 'people' already, and we do have the 'right' to become independent. It's whether or not we should exersize this right that's important! And, as I'm said, I don't think there's any merit in the idea at all :D

Good point but surely without Europeans helping Europeans our collective long term futures will be worthless in light of the growing financial clout of CHina and to a lesser extent India, united we have a chance but this requires all nations helping out specially now we have to invest in the new eastern european member states.



Sounds a little like Westminster:)

Economic cooperation, trade links? All for them! Political, legislative, and cultural superstate? No!

What does that average NSer think about this issue of world importance? I'm personally against it, because I don't fancy paying for the refugee camps that'd spring up in Cumbria and Northumberland :P

I think most Scots realise how much better off they are in the UK than they would be outside. Scottish separatists counter this by saying "It's alright, we have the North Sea Oil, that'd see us straight". They ignore the fact that this oil is due to run out within the next ten years. The sole reason that Scotland has an modern economy is solely due to investment by the Britisih state, supported by Scotland's over-representation in Parliament. It is why Scotland will never be a separate country. It has too much to lose.

As a Southern Brit, I don't really give a hoot whether Scots want independence or not. It would save £1.75 from every £3 collected by the treasury going up north. Also, I don't care because it isn't going to happen!

dont see why we should remain with a country who we are different in almost every possible way other than language
You're kidding, right? The English and Scots are far more alike than either is with, say, the French or Germans or Americans, despite the differences.

Scotland got far more out of the union than many like to admit. Prior to 1707, or indeed 1745, Scotland was a relatively primitive European backwater. It flourished educationally, culturally and economically within the union from the late 18th century onwards.

But I think it's important that this country doesn't keep giving Scotland a raw deal like it's always done.

You have got to be joking at that statement?

Scottish MPs make up around 12% of Parliament when their population is around 7% as ascertained by the Union Treaty in 1707? Scottish MPs being able to vote on affairs in England and yet English MPs not sharing the same right in Scotland due to devolution?

Scotland is one and the same as Britain. No. It helped build the Empire, its royal house was at one time shared with England's and it is an integral part of GB. I have some relation to the House of Stuart, and thus it would sadden me deeply to see Scotland secede.

What would be the point? We'll all be provinces of the United States of Europe soon :rolleyes:
Yes, but it might be better to be a full province of the United States of Europe rather than a region within a province of the USE.

Scottish MPs being able to vote on affairs in England and yet English MPs not sharing the same right in Scotland due to devolution?

In fairness, for the 300 years prior to devolution, English MPs voted on purely Scottish matters as well! But as this worked both ways (i.e. British MPs vote on British matter? Seems sensible...) until Blair's mob got in, this wasn't an issue... This new problem about Westminster Scots MPs voting on English matters but not vice versa represents another poorly-thought-out consequence of devolution...:rolleyes:

Its not about size of landmass or population but about collective economic clout which hopefully the European superstate would provide.
Its not JUST about size of landmass or population you mean :p That also comes with the EU, as well as the economic power the EU would wield. I am all for the EU superstate. I have had enough of the USA, China and Japan outstripping the EU. Enough. It is time we swallowed our bloody pride and created something we can truly be proud of.

Scotland wants to be free? Scotland wishes democracy?
There's only one answer, only one answer, hey!
Get yourselves invaded, invaded by the U-S-A!
We'll liberate you and your girly kilts
With M1A1's and Apaches at full tilt!
Showing you how to be independent
By installing your new government!

Ha ha, you're pretty funny.. Hauf the yanks claim tae be decendents fae Scots when ye holiday here takin up hauf the friggin pavement LOSE SOME WEIGHT staundin still catchin thur breath hauf way up the high street wi thur vidyo cameras gawpin at the wrang buildin askin "hey honey why'd the build the castle at the top of such a steep hill?" or "what time does the one o'clock gun go off?"
Yer jist jealous ay the kilt cos wuv got mair history under there than you've got in yer entire country.
Whit would USA be interested in invadin us for? It's not like there's a motive...
Oh no wait. We have got oil... Woops, did I say that out loud?

Its not JUST about size of landmass or population you mean :p That also comes with the EU, as well as the economic power the EU would wield. I am all for the EU superstate. I have had enough of the USA, China and Japan outstripping the EU. Enough. It is time we swallowed our bloody pride and created something we can truly be proud of.

Amen, thats how i feel, hence Scottish independence within a superstate would not be an issue save that for scotland they would be a soveriegn member of the union rather than the present state of affairs where they are represented by the UK. Europe future will be assured if we stand together otherwise we will become a backwater in terms of global clout, we are afterall europeans are we not??

Elgesh']I'll have to take issue with that. I'm a Scot born and bred, but I don't want independence.

I'll try and not get on my high horse, but god... The Scottish Parliament gives you a vision of the hell independence would bring. Incompetence (cost of building the parliament was 10 x the estimate and _still_ late), corruption (McLeish, Sheridan, McLetchie, all leaders cut by their party), complacency (the constant holidays, the f^$*^%£ medals they gave themselves, the annual awards ceremonies), provincialism (a debate about the nuisance seagulls caused to streets in a town at the seaside should not occupy a national parliament's time), expense (over a 100 MSPs, their assistants, their lawyers, their civil servants, their researchers, their expenses!), and division (I don't want to undergo a change in my legal rights, obligations, and status when I cross the border into England, or have to take my bloody passport with me when I visit my little brother in Newcastle).

I can't claim to be an economist, so I won't mention those arguments. Even assuming all was viable (an immensely contentious claim!) I wouldn't want independence. I feel like a Scot without it, thank you, intellectually, emotionally, and viscerally.

I will admit that, like most Scotsmen, I once rabidly supported Anyone-Playing Vs. England, and poured over stories of Bannockburn. But then I reached puberty, and started to grow up!


Please. Read a book will you? or did you stop doing that once you hit "puberty"?
You wouldn't need your passport you nincompoop.
And as for the incompetence and the building being 10* budget, it wasn't the Scottish Parliament who decided on the new building it was an albatross necklace given as parting gift from Westminster. (The building is bloody awful though)

Amen, thats how i feel, hence Scottish independence within a superstate would not be an issue save that for scotland they would be a soveriegn member of the union rather than the present state of affairs where they are represented by the UK. Europe future will be assured if we stand together otherwise we will become a backwater in terms of global clout, we are afterall europeans are we not??
Hear Hear! :D We are too afraid to call the EU a superpower I think. Its time to get some backbone and create a new future for ourselves.

However, if the UK decides to exit the EU and reform the Commonwealth as an economic entity (consisting of the UK, Australia, Canada, N. Zealand and potentially South Africa, or a seceded South African state), then it might want to keep hold of Scotland.

Elgesh'](as a Scot, I've got an MEP, MP, MSP, County Council, Local Councellor to pay for to keep me governed - help! All those hungry mouths to feed!).

What? And you wouldn't have an MP MEP and councillors (perhaps even a Mayor if London? *gasp*) if you lived in Englandshire?

Elgesh']
Oil wealth? It's british money, discovered off the coast of Britain.
Cough.
Coast of Scotland, only because we are under English rule is it deemed "British" and yes it always gets stolen, Gordon Brown has taken another slice recently.
We have other facts too,
Rosyth - fully built dry dock to refit submarines, contract given to a port in the South of England which had to then build another dry dock at expense to the tax payer.
Or how about the figure of £17bn in tax sent to Westminster only to recieve a paltry £5bn back?

There's even a couple in Cornwall.

That would be Mebion Kernow (Cornish for Sons of Kernow) wouldn't it?

I always thought it was funny once you crossed the Scottish border the pounds you recieved said bank of Scotland. So I figured they had some sort of independence.
Bank of Scotland - first bank in UK
Bank of England - founded by a Scot
The fact I get told I cannot use my STERLING currency when I am down south p*$$£$ me off no end.

Ever heard of Dungeness? There are nuclear reactors all over the UK, and it's only sensible to store our nuclear weapons in areas of low population density. How can you say Scotland is treated unfairly when the Barnett formula ensures that it gets more spending per head than England?
Low population density thanks to the English enforced clearances

Which idiot was comparing the Easter uprising of 1916 to an independent Scotland?

Bit different…. The world was VERY different 90 years ago!

A thought.. If it DID happen, Gordon Brown and Charles Kennedy would surely have to step down?! (assuming they were in charge of their respective parties at the time…)

One last thought…. Kilroy-Silk…. Am I allowed to say C*NT on this forum?!

;o)

What would the economic consequences of Scotland leaving be for the UK?

Our Union Flag takes half its form from the Cross of St Andrew's. There is more in common than there is apart, and as you might have guessed, I can see no valid reason to break away.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v228/NSIndy/Kaenei/ScotlandandtheUK.jpg
I think you'll find that the Irish and Welsh are in that flag too but that the George cross is the dominant part.
Personally I find your image of Scotland as a union jack distasteful.

The sole reason that Scotland has an modern economy is solely due to investment by the Britisih state, supported by Scotland's over-representation in Parliament. It is why Scotland will never be a separate country. It has too much to lose.

Argh, brain overload, sooooo many issues with this badly thought out post...

Scotland got far more out of the union than many like to admit. Prior to 1707, or indeed 1745, Scotland was a relatively primitive European backwater. It flourished educationally, culturally and economically within the union from the late 18th century onwards.
What like persecution eviction and clearances.
Hell the clearances CAUSED poorhouse living in cities as the people were forced off the land they lived on.
The sad thing is it was gold that the English used to buy Scotland, perhaps we don't deserve independence after all....
Parcel of rouges in a nation indeed.

Argh, brain overload, sooooo many issues with this badly thought out post...

Take a deep breath old chap!

<<Passes bottle of Laphroaig... >> ;o)

Hey, who thinks Chechnya deserve independence?

Hey, who thinks Chechnya deserve independence?
Not me. On the other hand, I would like the Afrikaaners to secede and create a separate state in South Africa, so who knows. :p I think Scotland should be independent, provided that the UK and Scotland both have little to lose. As for Chechnya. Again. No.

Take a deep breath old chap!

<<Passes bottle of Laphroaig... >> ;o)

Thanks.

Haa haa haaaaa.
Just reading
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/2565049.stm
Looked at the "choose a country" menu, no Scotland. Fantastic, way to go BBC
(Don't get me started on their sports commentary during olypics, English sportsperson wins and it's "England has won gold/silver/bronze" etc, Scotsperson wins and it is "Britain has...")

Haa haa haaaaa.
Just reading
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/2565049.stm
Looked at the "choose a country" menu, no Scotland. Fantastic, way to go BBC
(Don't get me started on their sports commentary during olypics, English sportsperson wins and it's "England has won gold/silver/bronze" etc, Scotsperson wins and it is "Britain has...")

To be fair, they don't have England either; we're all lumped in together mate.

And, as an Englishman, that ALWAYS pisses me off. I see no reason whatsoever why we can't all be listed seperately!

:mp5: why would you scotland want yo be free for it so overrated:sniper:

:mp5: why would you scotland want yo be free for it so overrated:sniper:
freedom... overrated?
What language is that?

To be fair, they don't have England either; we're all lumped in together mate.

Fair point

:mp5: why would you scotland want yo be free for it so overrated:sniper:

WTF?

<<Passes Englisg grammar book... >>

;o)

WTF?

<<Passes Englisg grammar book... >>

;o)

(In case you were wondering, "Englisg" was purposely spelt like that... )

:o)

And, as an Englishman, that ALWAYS pisses me off. I see no reason whatsoever why we can't all be listed seperately!
If we're treated separately, then so should Bavarians, Baden-Wurttemburgians, Californians, Ohians, West Bengalis and all the other peoples of states within nations.

If we're treated separately, then so should Bavarians, Baden-Wurttemburgians, Californians, Ohians, West Bengalis and all the other peoples of states within nations.

Oh God... such ignorance astounds me.

England & Scotland are COUNTRIES old chap, not fucking states.

Hey, I'm scottish! But I don't know what the word "Independant" means.

I say cut 'em loose.

The thing that REALLY pisses me off about devolution is that Scottish MPs can have a vote in Parliament on issues that only affect England, while the Scottish Parliament decides on issues that only affect Scotland.

An example is tuition fees - the Scotish parliament voted to abolish them in scotland, but when the vote for ENGLISH tuition fees was held they voted for them.

If a vote affects England only - tution fees in english universities, fox hunting in england and so on (where scotland have their own laws on the issue) there is no reason at all for them to have ANY say in how england decides the issue.

Oh God... such ignorance astounds me.

England & Scotland are COUNTRIES old chap, not fucking states.

Bavaria and Baden are countries, with an independent tradition going back to the early middle ages and lasting till 1870 with the formation of Germany, just thougth you should know;)

Oh God... such ignorance astounds me.

England & Scotland are COUNTRIES old chap, not fucking states.
They're no more countries than Bavaria or Saxony is, and, until devolution, we had a single, all-union government and parliament, whereas the German states/countries have always enjoyed considerable autonomy, ranging from a federal state to complete independence (for much of the 19th century). The cultural and linguistic differences between the Catholic High German-speaking south and Protestant Low German-speaking north are as great, too.

I say cut 'em loose.

The thing that REALLY pisses me off about devolution is that Scottish MPs can have a vote in Parliament on issues that only affect England, while the Scottish Parliament decides on issues that only affect Scotland.

An example is tuition fees - the Scotish parliament voted to abolish them in scotland, but when the vote for ENGLISH tuition fees was held they voted for them.

If a vote affects England only - tution fees in english universities, fox hunting in england and so on (where scotland have their own laws on the issue) there is no reason at all for them to have ANY say in how england decides the issue.
That problem is easily solved by a change in Parliamentary rules, to prevent Scots MPs voting on English matters. It doesn't require independence.

They're no more countries than Bavaria or Saxony is, and, until devolution, we had a single, all-union government and parliament, whereas the German states/countries have always enjoyed considerable autonomy, ranging from a federal state to complete independence (for much of the 19th century). The cultural and linguistic differences between the Catholic High German-speaking south and Protestant Low German-speaking north are as great, too.

yep the differances are great, i am Bayerische and we consider ourselves seperate, hell we even give the state the title 'Freistaat', we have a distinct dialect and customs to the rest of germany.

Bavaria and Baden are countries, with an independent tradition going back to the early middle ages and lasting till 1870 with the formation of Germany, just thougth you should know;)

I DO realise that thanks :oP

My main gripe was with England being compared as a similar entity to California.

I mean, come ON...

Hey, I'm scottish! But I don't know what the word "Independant" means.
Independence is a bit of a mirage in this age of the European Union and global economy, but it would give Scotland control over its own foreign policy, defence, currency and economy (to the extent that sovereignty over these matters isn't pooled in the EU, but even then, it would give Scotland its own voice at the negotiating table).

I DO realise that thanks :oP

My main gripe was with England being compared as a similar entity to California.

I mean, come ON...

true i see your point.

I say cut 'em loose.

The thing that REALLY pisses me off about devolution is that Scottish MPs can have a vote in Parliament on issues that only affect England, while the Scottish Parliament decides on issues that only affect Scotland.

An example is tuition fees - the Scotish parliament voted to abolish them in scotland, but when the vote for ENGLISH tuition fees was held they voted for them.

If a vote affects England only - tution fees in english universities, fox hunting in england and so on (where scotland have their own laws on the issue) there is no reason at all for them to have ANY say in how england decides the issue.

That is what is known as the "West Lothian question" which was posed by the Scottish MP Tam Dayell (retired) and which has never been satisfactoraly answered. To see Tam's good work go to http://www.theyworkforyou.com

I DO realise that thanks :oP

My main gripe was with England being compared as a similar entity to California.

I mean, come ON...
Although they don't have as long a history as England, Scotland or Bavaria, US states do vary a lot too. Try moving from California to Arkansas, and you'll notice the difference!

That problem is easily solved by a change in Parliamentary rules, to prevent Scots MPs voting on English matters. It doesn't require independence.
So if there are going to be different voting times for different issues the Scots MPs are going to do what? stand outside twiddling their thumbs? Why not give them the freedom from London altogether and let rule be scotland for Scotland and England for England (not to mention Ireland for Ireland and Wales for Wales)

Although they don't have as long a history as England, Scotland or Bavaria, US states do vary a lot too. Try moving from California to Arkansas, and you'll notice the difference!

That is absolutely fucking irrelevant!!!

If I go to Basildon, the Chavs there are a whole lot different from most other towns in Essex, but it doesn't make Basildon any less part OF Essex.

If we are arguing along these lines I can clearly never get my point across.

<<Sits in corner sulking>>

Well that would be the end of "Britain" America would take us even less seriously and as much as I don't like the scottish I still like the idea of Britain more.

I suppose I can cope with the idea of devolution but against full independence.


Jurgencube, Why do you dislike the Scottish? What have they done to rattle your cage?

Although they don't have as long a history as England, Scotland or Bavaria, US states do vary a lot too. Try moving from California to Arkansas, and you'll notice the difference!
Uh-huh but didn't they have a united dislike for the British rule?

Jurgencube, Why do you dislike the Scottish? What have they done to rattle your cage?

You have _read_ some of the humpty, snooty, snobby, posts we've all been making, right? :p _I_ wouldn't like us either! :D

Elgesh']You have _read_ some of the humpty, snooty, snobby, posts we've all been making, right? :p _I_ wouldn't like us either! :D

i would'nt say that, this has been a discusion thread.

I say cut 'em loose.

The thing that REALLY pisses me off about devolution is that Scottish MPs can have a vote in Parliament on issues that only affect England, while the Scottish Parliament decides on issues that only affect Scotland.

An example is tuition fees - the Scotish parliament voted to abolish them in scotland, but when the vote for ENGLISH tuition fees was held they voted for them.

If a vote affects England only - tution fees in english universities, fox hunting in england and so on (where scotland have their own laws on the issue) there is no reason at all for them to have ANY say in how england decides the issue.

You're entirely correct. I find it really odd that more English people don't seem to be angry about it. The intention of devolution in Scotland was to damage the SNP vote, not establish a fairer way of running the UK and frankly it shows.

Elgesh']You have _read_ some of the humpty, snooty, snobby, posts we've all been making, right? :p _I_ wouldn't like us either! :D

Hee hee :o)

I don't think you Scots are so bad mate (as long as we're beating you at the rugger that is... ) ;o)

Hee hee :o)

I don't think you Scots are so bad mate (as long as we're beating you at the rugger that is... ) ;o)
No worries, I think we all laughed though when thon Jona Lomu steam rollered over Will Carling...

I think you'll find that the Irish and Welsh are in that flag too but that the George cross is the dominant part.
Personally I find your image of Scotland as a union jack distasteful.
The Irish are in it, but the Welsh aren't, since Wales became, technically, part of England in the 1530s.

The St.George Cross is more prominent than St.Andrew or St.Patrick, but the Scottish blue background is more prominent than the English or Irish white.

No worries, I think we all laughed though when thon Jona Lomu steam rollered over Will Carling...

Ah, but many years have passed since old bum-chin was at the helm - I think we can all snigger at that now!

Hee hee :o)

I don't think you Scots are so bad mate (as long as we're beating you at the rugger that is... ) ;o)

Hah! Show you next 6 Nations... um... actually... no, we probably won't... But at least our new coach doesn't say we're crap (in _public_!) anymore! We'll beat Italy and 2 other teams this time round, I reckon...

Scotland should remaine as part of Great Britain not become Independent!!!

No worries, I think we all laughed though when thon Jona Lomu steam rollered over Will Carling...

One of the happiest and most awesome moments of my life up to that point :D

Elgesh']Hah! Show you next 6 Nations... um... actually... no, we probably won't... But at least our new coach doesn't say we're crap (in _public_!) anymore! We'll beat Italy and 2 other teams this time round, I reckon...

You boys have got a few good players - as you say, I think you just need the right coach.

If I go to Basildon, the Chavs there are a whole lot different from most other towns in Essex, but it doesn't make Basildon any less part OF Essex.
But Basildon has always been part of Essex. California has a separate history from the rest of the USA up to the mid-19th century, as a Spanish and then Mexican territory and then, briefly, an independent republic.

You boys have got a few good players - as you say, I think you just need the right coach.

That's always the way, we've got a few guys that are genuine international level, and the rest are really just pumped up club players - needs very canny coaching, playing to strengths, and innovative tactics to get the drop on the big teams. I like that Mike Blair, and Tom Philip though - was at school with them! :)

Uh-huh but didn't they have a united dislike for the British rule?
No - neither Arkansas nor California was ever ruled by the British. Arkansas was French until bought by the USA in the Louisania Purchase; California was Spanish and then Mexican until it became independent and then chose to join the USA.

But Basildon has always been part of Essex. California has a separate history from the rest of the USA up to the mid-19th century, as a Spanish and then Mexican territory and then, briefly, an independent republic.

But Scotland 'officially' became part of the UK at the start of the _18th_ century, and had had increasingly close ties since the start of the 17th with the union of the crowns - given that we're now 400 years on from the start of this process... well, it's a hell of a ways to turn the clock back!

The Irish are in it, but the Welsh aren't, since Wales became, technically, part of England in the 1530s.

1) Its Northern Irish not Irish.

2)If Wales "is technically part of England" then maybe someone should tell them that? You know, disband the national football team, rename the country West England, stamp out the use of that horrid language....
:rolleyes:

But Basildon has always been part of Essex. California has a separate history from the rest of the USA up to the mid-19th century, as a Spanish and then Mexican territory and then, briefly, an independent republic.

<<Smashes head against wall>>

Irrelevant again....

Can we call time on this now, we're clearly trying to prove ENTIRELY different things!!!

No - neither Arkansas nor California was ever ruled by the British. Arkansas was French until bought by the USA in the Louisania Purchase; California was Spanish and then Mexican until it became independent and then chose to join the USA.
I did not know that, thanks for the history lesson

Independence is a bit of a mirage in this age of the European Union and global economy, but it would give Scotland control over its own foreign policy, defence, currency and economy (to the extent that sovereignty over these matters isn't pooled in the EU, but even then, it would give Scotland its own voice at the negotiating table).
Pfff! I know what Independance means dummy! But what does independant mean?

However, if the UK decides to exit the EU and reform the Commonwealth as an economic entity (consisting of the UK, Australia, Canada, N. Zealand and potentially South Africa, or a seceded South African state), then it might want to keep hold of Scotland.
If the UK decides?? It's not a decision the UK can take - the Commonwealth consists of separate and equal independent nations. They've all gone on their own economic routes, and I'm not sure that any of them would want to return to a Commonwealth economic entity.

And why exclude the other 49 Commonwealth states (including the huge and up-coming markets of India, for example)?

Elgesh']But Scotland 'officially' became part of the UK at the start of the _18th_ century, and had had increasingly close ties since the start of the 17th with the union of the crowns - given that we're now 400 years on from the start of this process... well, it's a hell of a ways to turn the clock back!
I think it's past time religion and royalty (since they both go so closely hand in hand) should be ignored from country politics. Other than tourism (and the ceremonies like opening the parliament) what the hell have crows got to do with the people these days?

And why exclude the other 49 Commonwealth states (including the huge and up-coming markets of India, for example)?

Did you not see the countries he listed are all white (or former white) ruled?

Scottish MPs make up around 12% of Parliament when their population is around 7% as ascertained by the Union Treaty in 1707?
Problem solved. As of the last election, Scotland has 59 MPs instead of 72, bringing its representation of population into line with that of England.

If the UK decides?? It's not a decision the UK can take - the Commonwealth consists of separate and equal independent nations. They've all gone on their own economic routes, and I'm not sure that any of them would want to return to a Commonwealth economic entity.

And why exclude the other 49 Commonwealth states (including the huge and up-coming markets of India, for example)?
Well I meant the UK alongside any other similarly interested nations ( Canada has been expressing interest allegedly in increased trade with the UK). What I meant by a reformed Commonwealth is a trading bloc. India could be excluded due to its overwhelming size. What I meant was an economic alliance between Australia, the UK, Canada, South Africa and New Zealand.

I'm against Scottish independance, they wouldn't have enough money to be able to run an entire country.

I think it's past time religion and royalty (sonce they both go so closely hand in hand) should be ignored from country politics. Other than tourism (and the ceremonies like opening the parliament) what the hell have crows got to do with the people these days?

???!!! Sorry - I've got a bit of a cold today, so I'm mibbe not up to speed! Could you go into more detail? I'm having trouble following you; sorry to be a pain...

Elgesh']But Scotland 'officially' became part of the UK at the start of the _18th_ century, and had had increasingly close ties since the start of the 17th with the union of the crowns - given that we're now 400 years on from the start of this process... well, it's a hell of a ways to turn the clock back!

Ireland seems to be doing alright no?

Did you not see the countries he listed are all white (or former white) ruled?
That is mainly because I doubt non-whites would want to engage in such a union with the UK.

That is mainly because I doubt non-whites would want to engage in such a union with the UK.
Gee, wonder why that is... :p

Gee, wonder why that is... :p
Maybe because the Empire treated them so well they are scared it just might spoil them again and shower and smother them with affection? :p

Maybe because the Empire treated them so well they are scared it just might spoil them again and shower and smother them with affection? :p
lol!

Maybe because the Empire treated them so well they are scared it just might spoil them again and shower and smother them with affection? :p

Yeah and the descendents of the Highland clearences will be allowed to return:p

Yeah and the descendents of the Highland clearences will be allowed to return:p
Hey, you never know! :p Whatever the case may be, such an economic alliance would be most likely to take place between the white nations of the Commonwealth, and potentially South Africa, which are less reluctant of entering a union of this nature with the UK, and might even be pushing for it.

Ireland seems to be doing alright no?

yeah man in some respects Ireland is doing better than the UK!!

What Americans should be worried about is Scottish oppression (http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/12/22/student.kilt.ap/index.html) here at home.:D

What Americans should be worried about is Scottish oppression (http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/12/22/student.kilt.ap/index.html) here at home.:D

thats pretty cool :)

What would be the point? We'll all be provinces of the United States of Europe soon :rolleyes:
FREEDOM FOR MY SCOTTISH BRETHEREN!!!!

I can see no reason for Scottish independence what so ever apart from petty nationalism. How would independence benefit you?

Hi. I'm a Scot, from Glasgow, studying in England, and in favour of independence within Europe.

Many people have mentioned the pathetic incompetence of the current Scottish Parliament.

One of the reasons it's such a piece of nonsense is that it's not taken seriously. Yes, it's parochial in its concerns... because it's not allowed to have a say on important matters. (eg. military affairs, foreign policy, etc.). Yes, it's filled with numpties and wasters, mainly because anyone with any ability in the field of politics in Scotland stands for election for Westminster.

As far as concerns Scottish involvment in Europe, it should be noted that with independence, we would have a bigger say in such things as fishing. It's notable that the Principality of Luxembourg (landlocked tiny country - lovely, but tiny) has more say about European fishing policy than Scotland (much larger country where fishing provides a huge amount of work, and where any European rules and regulations will have a profound effect). This is nonsense. With a larger say in European matters, Scotland could take advantage of some of the marvellous things Europe can offer us. As it is now, these boons are rejected by the overwhelmingly europhobic part of England's population. This leaves the whole of Britain unable to reap the benefits of EU membership.

One thing that confuses me is the English opposition to independence for Scotland. I recognise that the majority of Scots don't favour it. If they did, we would have it. I accept that I'm part of a minority. What I don't get, though, is that the English (at least the ones I know) are so against independence for Scotland (and, incidentally, for England), when England would be so much richer without Scotland hanging on the top.

In terms of national identity, and suchlike, the use of that kind of arguments to define whether a country exists is a bit childish. I am Scottish, and having a British passport that says "European Union" on it doesn't make me any less Scottish. When I use Euros, or "Bank of England" notes, I don't feel any less Scottish in the slightest. I'm in favour of independence because my country would be financially better off and we would have a voice on the world stage, not because I'm a flag waving Eng-bashing nuisance.

I think you'll find that the Irish and Welsh are in that flag too but that the George cross is the dominant part.
Personally I find your image of Scotland as a union jack distasteful.

The Union flag existed for many years as only the St George's Cross and St Andrew's Cross. Wales is not included as a seperate entity, having been annexed in an Act of Union with England before the 1707 Union with Scotland.

Secondly, that's your right. However, as you said it's a personal opinion and my own personal opinion is I rather like it.

Hi. I'm a Scot, from Glasgow, studying in England, and in favour of independence within Europe.

Many people have mentioned the pathetic incompetence of the current Scottish Parliament.

One of the reasons it's such a piece of nonsense is that it's not taken seriously. Yes, it's parochial in its concerns... because it's not allowed to have a say on important matters. (eg. military affairs, foreign policy, etc.). Yes, it's filled with numpties and wasters, mainly because anyone with any ability in the field of politics in Scotland stands for election for Westminster.




One could argue the fact the Scots Parliament is so inept with their currently limited scope of powers, handing them anything more, especially as important as foreign policy, would be foolish.

Walk before you can run afterall -- The Parliament had stuttered from one crisis (Involving wasting money, usually) to the next (Wasting more money, and achieving nothing, usually). I'm a pro-UK Scot, and though I gave the Parliament my backing initially, I've little patience for a legislative organ as poorly assembled and stuttering as our own.

One thing that confuses me is the English opposition to independence for Scotland. I recognise that the majority of Scots don't favour it. If they did, we would have it. I accept that I'm part of a minority. What I don't get, though, is that the English (at least the ones I know) are so against independence for Scotland (and, incidentally, for England), when England would be so much richer without Scotland hanging on the top.


As an Englishman aganst independence it is partly patriotic, I believe Britain is a force for good in the world and commands respect in a way that England and Scotland wouldn't do alone. I also don't see that much difference between Scotland and England, he have a culture that diverges at points I add mit, but then so does my native Yorkshire culture with that of Kent or Shrophire. I think also think that the EU is not as stong as the bonds that tie Britain. Cutting bits of the UK worrys me and while it annoys me Scottland take more then their fair share of tax revenue It worries me less then a disjoined Britain.

... Scottland take more then their fair share of tax revenue...

My understanding is that this is needed due to the thinly spread out population of much of scotand - in order to have the same bands of levels of coverage in education, NHS, police, fire etc etc., you need more facilities per capita than you would if you were servicing a city with the same population; apart from the Central Belt (Glasgow to Edinburgh and the bits in between), communities are so spread out that you need more 'nodes', more facilities, to provide for people's needs locally.

Elgesh']My understanding is that this is needed due to the thinly spread out population of much of scotand - in order to have the same bands of levels of coverage in education, NHS, police, fire etc etc., you need more facilities per capita than you would if you were servicing a city with the same population; apart from the Central Belt (Glasgow to Edinburgh and the bits in between), communities are so spread out that you need more 'nodes', more facilities, to provide for people's needs locally.

Well then maybe the Scots should pay more council tax.

Well then maybe the Scots should pay more council tax.

Council tax/national taxes...this gets into matters of finance and economics that I'm not going to debate very much - sorry, it's incredibly boring to me... Suffice to say, the situation is that we need a different infrastructure based on geographical considerations of population centres. To maintain as consistant a level of coverage across the UK as possible (and so not punishing people for where they live), additional monies are needed to build and maintain this infrastructure. Is it fair to punsh people in taxation for the geographical circumstances in which they live, or should the country as a whole pay equally to ensure equity of coverage? You can't put (tp use a crude example) income tax at 70% in one area and 15% in another just because the geography's different!

The Scots should be grateful that the English are so nice to them. The majority of the income in the United Kingdom comes from them. Not to mention, independence breeds inept leadership based on petty nationalistic lines. If someones screws up, they just say, oh well, at least were not taking orders from someone else. Its like all the countries in Africa, imperialist countries controlled them and built schools and created infrastructure and culture, you give it back to them, they degrade it with constant civil war and misguided inept leadership and economic malaise.

Och aye Jimmy (yes)

The English are hardly "nice" to us, and we return the favour. I'm 100% against the union of Britain. Every nation deserves independence if that's what it democratically wants (IE, if the majority do) That's the case here in Scotland. As for income, aye sure, England will have greater income, they are about 8 time sbigger than us, but it's about product. Scotland is among the highest producers in Europe of oil, livestock, wool, whiskey, beer and clothing, amongst many other things. England is holding on to us, because if we go, they're power is down the drain. I can't see politics working in this situation, which is why I support organisations like the Scottish National Liberation Army (SNLA) and Scottish Maoists'.

The Scots should be grateful that the English are so nice to them. The majority of the income in the United Kingdom comes from them. Not to mention, independence breeds inept leadership based on petty nationalistic lines. If someones screws up, they just say, oh well, at least were not taking orders from someone else. Its like all the countries in Africa, imperialist countries controlled them and built schools and created infrastructure and culture, you give it back to them, they degrade it with constant civil war and misguided inept leadership and economic malaise.


english nice??? youre deluded buddy

is it nice to take a countrys oil revenue and then not spend a single penny of it in said country?

What does that average NSer think about this issue of world importance? I'm personally against it, because I don't fancy paying for the refugee camps that'd spring up in Cumbria and Northumberland :P

I am all for Scotlands freedom.
I think you could better manage your nation.
The SNP is on a rise and you have your own parliment now so it's just a matter of time.
You would have no problem with other nations recognizing your nation as a Sovreign State.

The Republic of Scotland sounds nice.

ALBA GO BRAGH

Elgesh']But then I reached puberty, and started to grow up!

We need some of that down here in Wales...........

(Yes I'm English living in Wales)

Sigh

As some one who was born and lives in England (I am not English though, I am British) I have to say that the English, Scottish and Welsh nationalists are fairly silly for demanding independence from each other.

I am not willing to see 300 years of united history go down the pan just because of petty nationalist sentiment, most of which is based on overly-romanticised nonsense like Braveheart. Does anyone really think that England, Scotland or Wales could have risen to become a world power by themselves? No. Where would England have been without the intrepid colonising spirit of the Scots in places like India, Africa and Northern Ireland? Where would Scotland have been without the English capital that catapulted Scotland to the forefront of the Industrial Revolution? Where would Europe had gone, had not the Scots, English, Welsh and Irishmen (under one banner) fought back Napoleon and Hitler from the Dover cliffs? We have all fought together united in the past: our blood has mixed in the heat of battle. Britain needs unity now more than ever, confronting a 21st century full of unknowns.

Sigh

As some one who was born and lives in England (I am not English though, I am British) I have to say that the English, Scottish and Welsh nationalists are fairly silly for demanding independence from each other.

I am not willing to see 300 years of united history go down the pan just because of petty nationalist sentiment, most of which is based on overly-romanticised nonsense like Braveheart. Does anyone really think that England, Scotland or Wales could have risen to become a world power by themselves? No. Where would England have been without the intrepid colonising spirit of the Scots in places like India, Africa and Northern Ireland? Where would Scotland have been without the English capital that catapulted Scotland to the forefront of the Industrial Revolution? Where would Europe had gone, had not the Scots, English, Welsh and Irishmen (under one banner) fought back Napoleon and Hitler from the Dover cliffs? We have all fought together united in the past: our blood has mixed in the heat of battle. Britain needs unity now more than ever, confronting a 21st century full of unknowns.


Can't get much more to the point than that. There is more uniting us than dividing us in spirit, purpose and reason to be.