The Referendum Thread

[Drew]

Johann Lamont is comedy gold - watch her reading her script at FMQ's. She has all the lines written for her but just cannae quite deliver the insults in a believable manner. A bit like a ben elton "comedy"

She was an English teacher for 20 years (never promoted) before getting into politics...

Her ENRON line last week was utterly preposterous.

At least Blair had a couple of decent script-writers for all his attrocious, smug spouting. I think Alex Salmond appoints Lamont's speech drafters. She is utterly hopeless in opposition.

[Seaside Nipper]

I agree, keep Scotland in Stirling, or should that be Stirling in Scotland?

I'm confused.

[Stuart Dickson]

You couldn't have picked a worse example if you tried. Do you honestly think any Croat wanted to use yugoslav currency or the former Yugoslav political set-up ?

It's not ridiculous at all, in fact it's particularly relevant - especially if you look at the case of Montenegro.

Montenegro was initially on of the eight constituent parts of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. In 1944 Yugoslavia became a socialist republic and it remained that way until 1992 when - in a referendum - the population voted to form the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia which incorporated a political union between Serbia and Montenegro. In 1996 Montenegro's government severed ties with the Serbian regime under Slobodan Milsevic. In 2002 both countries came to a new agreement again and in 2003 the Yugoslav Federation was replaced by a decentralised state union named Serbia and Montenegro. Then in 2006 Montenegro voted to become independent of Serbia.

Here's where the history lessons are to be learned though. For example in 2006 Serbia were declared as the legal successor to the former state of Serbia and Montenegro. Montenegro had to reapply for membership to the UN, NATO and to the EU. Their application still hasn't gone through and they remain a candidate state to this date which should ring alarm bells amongst those who take yesterdays white paper as gospel.

Secondly in 1996 Montenegro adopted the Deutsche Mark as it's de facto currency and when Germany moved to the Euro in 2002 so did Montenegro. However this brought it into constant conflict with the European Commission and the European Central Bank as the country failed to meet the strict rules of the ERM and as a result the EU has released many statements making it clear that there has to be strict adherence to the convergence criteria which would include spending at least 2 years in the ERMII system and that a unilateral introduction of the Euro is not compatible with the Stabilisation and Association Agreement. In practice the ECB hasn't stopped Montenegro from using the Euro but it did threaten at one point to force Montenegro to stop circulating the Euro and to creating their own currency whilst waiting on the EU to consider their application for membership.

Now to put that into context - it means that if Scotland were to use Sterling, assuming the remaining constituent parts of the UK allowed it to do so, as it's de facto currency during an interim period and then subsequently decided to apply for full membership of the EU Scotland would still have to complete two years using it's own currency to follow the strict ERMII rules.

Now none of this is made up at all. It's readily available information following the progression of a country who recently declared independence from the political union it was in and it's historically and factually accurate. I've no idea why people would be so willing to accept Salmonds assertions given the recent history within the EU regarding Montenegro. Salmonds assertions seem to all be based on the EU waving through Scotland because of North Sea Oil but Montenegro is an emerging oil and gas country with a great deal of exploration and production tendering currently going on around their coast line.

[Seaside Nipper]

I would agree, I think any tort govt would be a tad bitter

[bluto]

The problem is Scotland has voted Labour year in year out and Labour were in charge from 1997. Did things get any better? The idea that deprived areas need to fight Tory policies together is a nonsense, the Labour party are full of posh Oxbridge graduates and are as bad as they are these days.

maybe you're too young, but yes, things WERE better than they were under Tory Thatcher, despite me hating the copouts from Blair and Broon. They failed to reverse her policies and didn't deliver stuff for which they had an overwhelming mandate.

Broon - neither English nor Tory - kept Britain out of the euro ( I thought that wrong at the time, but... I was wrong, as things stand currently).

It impresses me that someone can honestly believe that nothing changed... Almost as much as it depresses me to think you cannot see any point in like-minded people joining together to achieve a goal.

I guess deprived areas should just sit back and accept shite...

Unless, of course, it's due to the shite-deliverers being of a different nationality... Can't be cos the graduates of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews are as cosmopolitan as those of Oxbridge...

In short, your post is pointless and makes no sense. Sorry.

[Stuart Dickson]

maybe you're too young, but yes, things WERE better than they were under Tory Thatcher, despite me hating the copouts from Blair and Broon. They failed to reverse her policies and didn't deliver stuff for which they had an overwhelming mandate.

Broon - neither English nor Tory - kept Britain out of the euro ( I thought that wrong at the time, but... I was wrong, as things stand currently).

It impresses me that someone can honestly believe that nothing changed... Almost as much as it depresses me to think you cannot see any point in like-minded people joining together to achieve a goal.

I guess deprived areas should just sit back and accept shite...

Unless, of course, it's due to the shite-deliverers being of a different nationality... Can't be cos the graduates of Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews are as cosmopolitan as those of Oxbridge...

In short, your post is pointless and makes no sense. Sorry.

Things have certainly changed. During Thatchers era we had the threat of obliteration at the press of a button, the Berlin Wall was still standing, the USSR was still occupying countries in the Baltics and we had major issues with the Iranian government. We also had a lazy workforce that would strike at the drop of a hat - literally - and trade unions who were being funded by foreign governments in a bid to bring down the UK state. Yet somehow Thatcher managed to modernise our economy, make home ownership commonplace, smash the stranglehold unions had over our workers and industry, and - along with her senile pal from the States, Ronald Regan, she managed to negotiate a peaceful end to the cold war and an end to living our life in fear of a four minute warning.

During the Tony Blair / Gordon Brown era we managed to create new fights with Iraq and Afghanistan. Along side their demented pal from the US George Bush, they've managed to see a world that allowed nuclear weapon production in India, Pakistan, and most bizarrely of all North Korea and they've done all of this whilst bankrupting the UK economy and seeing the collapse of our banking system.

Sometimes we just have to accept that it's better to accept that no matter how unfashionable it may in modern thinking - sometimes it's best to have a cabinet of "better educated" people than it is to have one with fannies like Dr John Reid, Jack Straw, Ed Balls, Yvette Cooper and Alan Johnston.

[salmonbuddie]

Permission is required from HM Treasury for Scottish banks to issue Sterling notes.

While we're part of the UK, not as a seperate nation.

[salmonbuddie]

 

It's not ridiculous at all, in fact it's particularly relevant - especially if you look at the case of Montenegro. 

 

Montenegro was initially on of the eight constituent parts of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. In 1944 Yugoslavia became a socialist republic and it remained that way until 1992 when - in a referendum - the population voted to form the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia which incorporated a political union between Serbia and Montenegro. In 1996 Montenegro's government severed ties with the Serbian regime under Slobodan Milsevic. In 2002 both countries came to a new agreement again and in 2003 the Yugoslav Federation was replaced by a decentralised state union named Serbia and Montenegro. Then in 2006 Montenegro voted to become independent of Serbia.

 

Here's where the history lessons are to be learned though. For example in 2006 Serbia were declared as the legal successor to the former state of Serbia and Montenegro. Montenegro had to reapply for membership to the UN, NATO and to the EU. Their application still hasn't gone through and they remain a candidate state to this date which should ring alarm bells amongst those who take yesterdays white paper as gospel. 

 

Secondly in 1996 Montenegro adopted the Deutsche Mark as it's de facto currency and when Germany moved to the Euro in 2002 so did Montenegro. However this brought it into constant conflict with the European Commission and the European Central Bank as the country failed to meet the strict rules of the ERM and as a result the EU has released many statements making it clear that there has to be strict adherence to the convergence criteria which would include spending at least 2 years in the ERMII system and that a unilateral introduction of the Euro is not compatible with the Stabilisation and Association Agreement. In practice the ECB hasn't stopped Montenegro from using the Euro but it did threaten at one point to force Montenegro to stop circulating the Euro and to creating their own currency whilst waiting on the EU to consider their application for membership. 

 

Now to put that into context - it means that if Scotland were to use Sterling, assuming the remaining constituent parts of the UK allowed it to do so, as it's de facto currency during an interim period and then subsequently decided to apply for full membership of the EU Scotland would still have to complete two years using it's own currency to follow the strict ERMII rules. 

 

Now none of this is made up at all. It's readily available information following the progression of a country who recently declared independence from the political union it was in and it's historically and factually accurate. I've no idea why people would be so willing to accept Salmonds assertions given the recent history within the EU regarding Montenegro. Salmonds assertions seem to all be based on the EU waving through Scotland because of North Sea Oil but Montenegro is an emerging oil and gas country with a great deal of exploration and production tendering currently going on around their coast line. 

The difference being that we are already EU citizens. Are they going to take that away from us? No? Didn't think so.

[Stuart Dickson]

The difference being that we are already EU citizens. Are they going to take that away from us? No? Didn't think so.

Where is your evidence that they won't? Where is the historical precedent backing up your case? Montenegro were told that Serbia were the legal successors to Serbia and Montenegro and they were made to apply again. Historical precedent has been set. There is no evidence to suggest that Scotland would be made a special case.

[salmonbuddie]

We are already EU citizens. Are they going to take that away from us? No? Didn't think so.

[Stuart Dickson]

We are already EU citizens. Are they going to take that away from us? No? Didn't think so.

Again - where or what do you base your assumption on that an Independent Scotland would be waved on into the EU?

In October 2011 Angela Merkel threatened Greece with expulsion from the EU if it held a referendum on the single currency rescue deal that had been put before it. Greece is a country that has properly integrated into the EU and which has adopted the Euro as it's national currency, yet had it not done as it was told here was Europe's most powerful politician threatening it with expulsion. Yet somehow you think that an Independent Scotland - that hasn't been fully integrated into the EU, which doesn't use the Euro, and which has instead stated it's intention to use Sterling as a de facto currency is going to get the kind of special treatment that wasn't given to any of the former Yugoslav states. That is exactly the kind of arrogance that is supposed to have sickened Scots off their English counterparts.

[oaksoft]

Once again you describe democracy but dwell on the fact that occasionally you don't get your own way with the result! The reason that there's a COALITION ( I made it big in case you missed the news) government is because that's what the majority of people voted for. Danny Alexander's electorate is not an English one. Neither are those of Fort William, or Dumfries. And I'd bet all the Labour voters throughout Scotland didn't vote Tory, either. (There's a small clue in the adjective I used to describe them.).

It also annoys me in my travels that the rest of the world uses England as catch-all description for the Uk/GB but that is our own fault as historically it's how we sold ourselves as a brand to the world. I do my bit to proclaim Scotland , almost as much as I laud Paisley.

But my main point is about democracy - it doesn't always deliver what we want. As a Londoner (we voted for Ken throughout the Thatcher years) I know your problem and how it feels. But I wouldn't be so daft or selfish as to want to run away from the fight (against the forces of greed) and leave the less well-equipped to struggle alone.

For the majority of my lifetime Scotland has been ruled or jointly ruled by Tories.

For the majority of that time Wales and Scotland have voted overwhelmingly for Labour and Northern Ireland haven't voted the Tories in anyway.

That's 3 out of 4 constituent nations consistently voting for someone other than the Tories and the English vote carrying the day.

That is a democratic deficiency and is hard to defend.

As for your point about coalition, Scotland didn't vote Lib Dem either.

Neither did Northern Ireland or Wales so I'm not sure what your point is in this regard.

[faraway saint]

Drive past Stirling a while ago, granddaughter asked where are we, I said not sure, could be Scotland or maybe not, still waiting on conformation.

Back on topic, I might be persuaded to vote yes.

[bud77]

Again - where or what do you base your assumption on that an Independent Scotland would be waved on into the EU?

In October 2011 Angela Merkel threatened Greece with expulsion from the EU if it held a referendum on the single currency rescue deal that had been put before it. Greece is a country that has properly integrated into the EU and which has adopted the Euro as it's national currency, yet had it not done as it was told here was Europe's most powerful politician threatening it with expulsion. Yet somehow you think that an Independent Scotland - that hasn't been fully integrated into the EU, which doesn't use the Euro, and which has instead stated it's intention to use Sterling as a de facto currency is going to get the kind of special treatment that wasn't given to any of the former Yugoslav states. That is exactly the kind of arrogance that is supposed to have sickened Scots off their English counterparts.

Just after a few hours after the manifesto was published someone form the EU was stating, again, that Scotland would need to apply to join the EU. Possible while we still hold British passports we could be considered as EU citizens but we'd be living in a country outside the EU until the application was granted. With it being a new application, it would not be inconceivable that part of it would be a commitment to join the euro as all other new applications have to do. There are conditions to joining the euro, one of which is that the country must have their own stable currency and be a member of the ERM for two years.

For the majority of my lifetime Scotland has been ruled or jointly ruled by Tories.

For the majority of that time Wales and Scotland have voted overwhelmingly for Labour and Northern Ireland haven't voted the Tories in anyway.

That's 3 out of 4 constituent nations consistently voting for someone other than the Tories and the English vote carrying the day.

That is a democratic deficiency and is hard to defend.

As for your point about coalition, Scotland didn't vote Lib Dem either.

Neither did Northern Ireland or Wales so I'm not sure what your point is in this regard.

I didn't vote SNP and neither did the majority of people who voted.in the last Scottish election. We have still been landed with them. The SNP won because they had the majority of seats, not because they had the majority of the vote. Is that another democratic deficiency ?

[bluto]

For the majority of my lifetime Scotland has been ruled or jointly ruled by Tories.

For the majority of that time Wales and Scotland have voted overwhelmingly for Labour and Northern Ireland haven't voted the Tories in anyway.

That's 3 out of 4 constituent nations consistently voting for someone other than the Tories and the English vote carrying the day.

That is a democratic deficiency and is hard to defend.

As for your point about coalition, Scotland didn't vote Lib Dem either.

Neither did Northern Ireland or Wales so I'm not sure what your point is in this regard.

My bad.

I hadn't considered that you have a closed mind.

[Drew]

Just after a few hours after the manifesto was published someone form the EU was stating, again, that Scotland would need to apply to join the EU.

You are quick enough to decry what Salmond et al pronounce, yet are happy to accept this as gospel.

Can't have it both ways.

[RickMcD]

For the majority of my lifetime Scotland has been ruled or jointly ruled by Tories.

For the majority of that time Wales and Scotland have voted overwhelmingly for Labour and Northern Ireland haven't voted the Tories in anyway.

That's 3 out of 4 constituent nations consistently voting for someone other than the Tories and the English vote carrying the day.

That is a democratic deficiency and is hard to defend.

As for your point about coalition, Scotland didn't vote Lib Dem either.

Neither did Northern Ireland or Wales so I'm not sure what your point is in this regard.

You're wrong about Northern Ireland. The Ulster Unionist Party and Democratic Unionist Party would traditionally vote with the Tories for obvious reasons. The Good Friday Agreement and the dreaded D'Hondt PR system has muddied the waters but Unionists generally still vote with the tories. Sinn Fein are yet to see the light.

[bud77]

You are quick enough to decry what Salmond et al pronounce, yet are happy to accept this as gospel.

Can't have it both ways.

And you're happy enough to accept everything Salmond says as gospel ? Why can't the yes camp admit there will be negotiations to complete, a cost involved in setting things up and that not everything in their blue print will come to pass ?

At the very least they should have been more honest with the voters instead of promising everything will be absolutely fantastic if only we trust them.

[flyingscot]

maybe you're too young, but yes, things WERE better than they were under Tory Thatcher, despite me hating the copouts from Blair and Broon. They failed to reverse her policies and didn't deliver stuff for which they had an overwhelming mandate.

Broon - neither English nor Tory - kept Britain out of the euro ( I thought that wrong at the time, but... I was wrong, as things stand currently).

It impresses me that someone can honestly believe that nothing changed... Almost as much as it depresses me to think you cannot see any point in like-minded people joining together to achieve a goal.

I wasn't going as far back as Thatcher, that is an era ago now. I was comparing the last 10 or so years of the current government with the latter of the Brown and Blair years and I fail to see much of a difference.

There is nothing wrong with like minded people wanting to achieve the same goal, but the only goal I want is for a decent economy, fair taxes, decent public services and a government that keeps out of people's business. I'll vote for whoever and whatever I think is best placed to do this and if it is not the same as others or other areas so be it, that's democracy.

I have to laugh at the "deprived areas should just sit back and accept shite". Deprived areas have voted Labour for years and what do they get? Paisley was Labour controlled for years and it took the votes for granted. Same all over Scotland. Blair and Brown took us into wars which we didn't want, were in cahoots with the investors letting them away with murder which nearly saw the collapse of the banks, ran up masses of debt and pretty much destroyed the economy so much so that I sat in a room in 2008/9 with people worried about their jobs. Braw times.

If the North East want to vote differently to the rest of their fellow countrymen I can't see how that's Scotland's fault.

Edited November 27, 2013 by flyingscot

[salmonbuddie]

 

Again - where or what do you base your assumption on that an Independent Scotland would be waved on into the EU?

 

In October 2011 Angela Merkel threatened Greece with expulsion from the EU if it held a referendum on the single currency rescue deal that had been put before it. Greece is a country that has properly integrated into the EU and which has adopted the Euro as it's national currency, yet had it not done as it was told here was Europe's most powerful politician threatening it with expulsion. Yet somehow you think that an Independent Scotland - that hasn't been fully integrated into the EU, which doesn't use the Euro, and which has instead stated it's intention to use Sterling as a de facto currency is going to get the kind of special treatment that wasn't given to any of the former Yugoslav states. That is exactly the kind of arrogance that is supposed to have sickened Scots off their English counterparts. 

We are already EU citizens. Are they going to take that away from us? No? Didn't think so.

[oaksoft]

Just after a few hours after the manifesto was published someone form the EU was stating, again, that Scotland would need to apply to join the EU. Possible while we still hold British passports we could be considered as EU citizens but we'd be living in a country outside the EU until the application was granted. With it being a new application, it would not be inconceivable that part of it would be a commitment to join the euro as all other new applications have to do. There are conditions to joining the euro, one of which is that the country must have their own stable currency and be a member of the ERM for two years.

I didn't vote SNP and neither did the majority of people who voted.in the last Scottish election. We have still been landed with them. The SNP won because they had the majority of seats, not because they had the majority of the vote. Is that another democratic deficiency ?

Yes it is a deficiency.

Or it WOULD have been a deficiency if it was true.

In 2011, there were 902,915 constituency votes for the SNP and 876,421 list votes.

Labour scored 630,441 and 523,559 respectively.

Labour voters really need to accept they lost that election really heavily.

Edited November 27, 2013 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

You're wrong about Northern Ireland. The Ulster Unionist Party and Democratic Unionist Party would traditionally vote with the Tories for obvious reasons. The Good Friday Agreement and the dreaded D'Hondt PR system has muddied the waters but Unionists generally still vote with the tories. Sinn Fein are yet to see the light.

Northern Ireland did NOT vote Tory. Just because the Unionists TRADITIONALLY vote with the Tories doesn't make them part of the Tory party.

Edited November 27, 2013 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

And you're happy enough to accept everything Salmond says as gospel ? Why can't the yes camp admit there will be negotiations to complete, a cost involved in setting things up and that not everything in their blue print will come to pass ?

At the very least they should have been more honest with the voters instead of promising everything will be absolutely fantastic if only we trust them.

Who is saying there won't be negotiations?

Nobody on the Yes side is saying there won't be any negotiations.

[bluto]

I wasn't going as far back as Thatcher, that is an era ago now. I was comparing the last 10 or so years of the current government with the latter of the Brown and Blair years and I fail to see much of a difference.

There is nothing wrong with like minded people wanting to achieve the same goal, but the only goal I want is for a decent economy, fair taxes, decent public services and a government that keeps out of people's business. I'll vote for whoever and whatever I think is best placed to do this and if it is not the same as others or other areas so be it, that's democracy.

I have to laugh at the "deprived areas should just sit back and accept shite". Deprived areas have voted Labour for years and what do they get? Paisley was Labour controlled for years and it took the votes for granted. Same all over Scotland. Blair and Brown took us into wars which we didn't want, were in cahoots with the investors letting them away with murder which nearly saw the collapse of the banks, ran up masses of debt and pretty much destroyed the economy so much so that I sat in a room in 2008/9 with people worried about their jobs. Braw times.

If the North East want to vote differently to the rest of their fellow countrymen I can't see how that's Scotland's fault.

Ah. I now understand.

You're too young to understand the pain of Thatcher.

And due to to being young, you assumed cos Labour were in power in Paisley miracles could have been achieved. The Mills shut and the car factory died due to the jobs being exported to cheaper labour. That trauma certainly hurt me, too.

But I didn't blame it on local politicians.

That doesn't explain to me why anyBuddie would be willing to swallow the pie in the sky of a NEW set of politicians.

I'd trust none of them to deliver on the promises. And at no time did I decry your right to vote as you wish.

Wire in. Vote for freedom...

[bluto]

Northern Ireland did NOT vote Tory. Just because the Unionists TRADITIONALLY vote with the Tories doesn't make them part of the Tory party.

You're no even very good at semantics and splitting hairs!