The Referendum Thread

[oaksoft]

So, Standard Life are threatening to bail-out in the event of a YES vote.

To be fair they are not saying they'll go if the vote is Yes.

It's the result of the negotiations and the financial climate up here which will dictate that - they talk about tax rates etc.

I'm not actually sure why they've made this announcement before the vote unless they are deliberately trying to influence it.

Again I'm not sure what the response will be.

What we would be seeing is rich Tory politicians and rich bankers threatening us with everything from removing our currency to increased mobile phone charges.

Yes, this is real jobs we're talking about here but I suspect this will drive people into a hard Yes position.

Only one side is issuing threats and those threats are becoming louder and louder every day.

Isabella's view is that we cower down and surrender. That just doesn't sit right with me.

[oaksoft]

The investment / life / pensions sectror in Scotland is massive and employs 000s of people and covers many large companies.

The majority of their customers are in the rest of the UK and the success of these companies in winning business in the rest of the UK wouldn't have been possible without a union.

The loss of companies like this would be a devasting blow to the Scottish economy. Indeed, with the uncertainty due to the referendum, I wouldn't be suprised to see this sector start losing business in the run up.

Its all very good for the pro independence lot to play at being braveheart... but this is real people's livelihoods at stake here.

What you are asking people to do is to surrender in the face of threats.

Do you not know Scottish people at all?

[Drew]

The investment / life / pensions sectror in Scotland is massive and employs 000s of people and covers many large companies.

The majority of their customers are in the rest of the UK and the success of these companies in winning business in the rest of the UK wouldn't have been possible without a union.

The loss of companies like this would be a devasting blow to the Scottish economy. Indeed, with the uncertainty due to the referendum, I wouldn't be suprised to see this sector start losing business in the run up.

Its all very good for the pro independence lot to play at being braveheart... but this is real people's livelihoods at stake here.

Standard Life said the same thing prior to the devolution referendum.

Are we to surrender the democratic process on the basis of the sabre-rattling of a few commercial businesses?

If that is the type of society you want to live in, good luck.

[bluto]

Standard Life said the same thing prior to the devolution referendum.Are we to surrender the democratic process on the basis of the sabre-rattling of a few commercial businesses?If that is the type of society you want to live in, good luck.

Again, the wanting bread buttered on both sides argument. Tch.

Nats have already surrendered the democratic process cos they didn't like the result of the votes it supplied. We don't like that game, so we want to go away and play in our own wee game....

Which has always been my distaste.

You've already surrendered the democratic process.

Edited February 27, 2014 by bluto

[oaksoft]

You've already surrendered the democratic process.

...er......what?

[Seaside Nipper]

So, Standard Life are threatening to bail-out in the event of a YES vote.

What is the term that Shull is so fond of using...?

season ticket validity

Edited February 27, 2014 by Seaside Nipper

[Drew]

...er......what?

Indeed....

[bluto]

...er......what?

So, it's true.

Wanking makes you blind as well as deaf.

[Drew]

So, it's true.

Wanking makes you blind as well as deaf.

Nah, that's not going to cut it. I'm afraid you'll need to clarify for us lesser mortals.

[Stuart Dickson]

I've looked at the figures you've quoted for North Lanarkshire

Those against

All Scotland Pensioners Party - 5793

British National Party - 2214

Christian Party "Proclaiming Christ's Lordship" - 3173

Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party - 14,870

Scottish Labour Party - 82,459

Scottish Liberal Democrats - 3318

Scottish Unionist Party - 1555

UK Independence Party - 1263

TOTAL - 114645

You also included the following

Socialist Labour Party - 2483 There party policy is quite clear regarding a neutral stance

Scottish Homeland Party - 337 Couldn't get there manifesto, only a video where there is no mention of their thoughts on independence.

Hugh O'Donnell Independent - 821 The former Lib-Dem list MSP who resigned and if you click on his twitter seems to be pro independence.

And for

Scottish Green Party - 5634

Scottish National Party - 108,261

Scottish Socialist Party - 820

Solidarity - 559

Total - 115274

Lovely pic BTW.

You're right. That's exactly how I counted up the votes.

If we look at the contentious parties I know I'm right on at least two.

The Scottish Homeland Party http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottishpoliticalarchive/5709724117/in/photostream/ campaigned hard in my constituency and received a great deal of publicity. Their candidate was a former "glamour model" who was investigated for posting (ahem) leaflets into care homes appealing for elderly men to "befriend" her. There were allegations that she was doing so in a bid to scam them out of money. Her campaign leaflet stated that their policy was to stop the creep of Sharia Law into the UK and EU and they proposed to do this by banning Turkey from the EU because if they were admitted this would mean that Muslims would have a majority vote. She claimed that she would donate all of her £55,000 per annum MSP salary to elderly care homes and when she was asked where she stood on Independence she claimed that she believed the UK should stay together. If you want to count them as one of your Independence friends though it's fine by me. They appeared to be more right wing than the National Front.

And the Socialist Labour Party are a UK Party. Even the page you link to talks about Scotland and Wales and the loss of heavy industry. On the front page of their website they say The Socialist Labour Party was launched at its first congress on 1 May 1996. It was initiated by leading trade unionists and campaign activists following the final abandonment by Tony Blair's New Labour of any commitment to progressive change for socialism in Britain. However, the Party represents far more than just a reaction to developments in the Labour Party. The SLP aims to build on the heritage of all the movements of resistance to the free-market offensive in Britain over the past two decades. In particular, it is the political heir of the year-long miner's strike of 1984-5 and the tremendous movement of solidarity it inspired in all sections of British society.

On Independence they would only say that they supported the right of Scots to have a referendum, not that they supported independence. As they are a UK wide party, ran by UK trade unionists I think it's pretty safe to say that they were not a party of Independence.

[bluto]

Nah, that's not going to cut it. I'm afraid you'll need to clarify for us lesser mortals.

Sorry, Drew.

I outlined my reasons for believing this process to be a meaningless, costly, wasteful of time, energy and resources ploy long ago at the start of this thread.

There already exists - a democratic process that has served generations of Scots well, as has the Empire.

I agree that the results for some decades have not been as I would have wished them, but I am seriously troubled that so many Scots are running away from that fight, not realising that turning their backs on economic and power realities is even less likely to succeed than staying united to change the results.

If I need to repeat the bleeding obvious every time I make the point, it's going to be a dreich journey to September.

[Stuart Dickson]

As for business leaving Scotland - my sister works for a Norwegian Petroleum company who this week announced that they were retreating from Scotland, moving key personnel to their Oslo office and closing operations in Scotland. The company had made a worldwide profit of $150,000,000 US last year.

Now no-one has explained why they made this move but it must be a bit of a disaster for the SNP that even in the petroleum industry profitable companies are closing their Scottish Offices before the referendum.

[bluto]

F'ckem! :

[Stuart Dickson]

Nah, that's not going to cut it. I'm afraid you'll need to clarify for us lesser mortals.

I think he means that Nationalists ceded the democracy argument when they started to campaign for Independence on the basis that if you didn't like the outcome of the last democratic Westminster General Election you should vote for an Independent Scotland.

Fair point I reckon.

[Stuart Dickson]

The Scottish Homeland Party and Glamour Models canvassing old men in care homes...only in Wishaw. NSS wid be interested in that care home for his later years. We demand to see photographs of said glamour model on the "wid ye?" thread.

In Paisley we'd probably get the Scottish Breaking Bad Wind Party fronted by someone like StuD.

Erm she wasn't all that....

http://www.flickr.com/photos/scottishpoliticalarchive/5709723911/in/photostream/

Aparently this was the leaflet she was dropping round care homes

http://gillrockatansky.x10.mx/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Bentleyflyer.jpg

Edited February 27, 2014 by Stuart Dickson

[oaksoft]

Nah, that's not going to cut it. I'm afraid you'll need to clarify for us lesser mortals.

To be honest, the bread buttered on both sides line lost me as well.

[oaksoft]

Sorry, Drew.

I outlined my reasons for believing this process to be a meaningless, costly, wasteful of time, energy and resources ploy long ago at the start of this thread.

There already exists - a democratic process that has served generations of Scots well, as has the Empire.

I agree that the results for some decades have not been as I would have wished them, but I am seriously troubled that so many Scots are running away from that fight, not realising that turning their backs on economic and power realities is even less likely to succeed than staying united to change the results.

If I need to repeat the bleeding obvious every time I make the point, it's going to be a dreich journey to September.

Equating your personal beliefs with "the bleeding obvious" is stretching things a little far.

As for your comment about the "Empire" and running away from fights? WTF?

Edited February 27, 2014 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

As for business leaving Scotland - my sister works for a Norwegian Petroleum company who this week announced that they were retreating from Scotland, moving key personnel to their Oslo office and closing operations in Scotland. The company had made a worldwide profit of $150,000,000 US last year.

Now no-one has explained why they made this move

No but in the absence of either a company name, a web link to the announcement or a reason for them pulling out (if indeed that is true), you reckon guessing is a good move?

[Drew]

I think he means that Nationalists ceded the democracy argument when they started to campaign for Independence on the basis that if you didn't like the outcome of the last democratic Westminster General Election you should vote for an Independent Scotland.

Fair point I reckon.

Its a preposterous point.

The very concept of democracy is evolutionary, and subject to change on a broad and context-specific basis.

Sometimes there are incremental tweaks in democtratic processes, and sometimes there are paradigm shifts. I wonder how the argument that you (and, it seems, your learned associate who resides dahn saaf) are subscribing to would stack up in an analysis of the evolution of democracies across the world.

Do you actually believe that Scottish people are so utterly devoid of independent thought (and inteligent reasoning skills) that they would consider a historical change to their governance and constitution because they're in the huff at not getting what they want in London? That's beneath insulting, and staggeringly simplistic even for you.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Sorry, Drew.

I outlined my reasons for believing this process to be a meaningless, costly, wasteful of time, energy and resources ploy long ago at the start of this thread.

There already exists - a democratic process that has served generations of Scots well, as has the Empire.

I agree that the results for some decades have not been as I would have wished them, but I am seriously troubled that so many Scots are running away from that fight, not realising that turning their backs on economic and power realities is even less likely to succeed than staying united to change the results.

If I need to repeat the bleeding obvious every time I make the point, it's going to be a dreich journey to September.

I wouldn't call it running away bluto. I think it's using the only tools that we have to achieve change.

Successive Westminster governments have played Scotland in the same way. This isn't going to change, esp as red ed needs to be more right wing to get the south of England votes.

[bluto]

Its a preposterous point.The very concept of democracy is evolutionary, and subject to change on a broad and context-specific basis.Sometimes there are incremental tweaks in democtratic processes, and sometimes there are paradigm shifts. I wonder how the argument that you (and, it seems, your learned associate who resides dahn saaf) are subscribing to would stack up in an analysis of the evolution of democracies across the world.Do you actually believe that Scottish people are so utterly devoid of independent thought (and inteligent reasoning skills) that they would consider a historical change to their governance and constitution because they're in the huff at not getting what they want in London? That's beneath insulting, and staggeringly simplistic even for you.

But, of course, I never said that and I would expect you to twist my words.

I said, "Nats have already surrendered the democratic process cos they didn't like the result of the votes it supplied. We don't like that game, so we want to go away and play in our own wee game...."

And in the later post I said, "some Scots"

NOT the Scottish people because I believe most Scots will reject this. Only the Nats are so obtuse.

And there's no need to attempt the lecture on democracy.

My post was specifically pointing out that democracy should be evolutionary, not giving up petulantly and running away from the fight. Again, though, I expect my words to be twisted.

It gets us off of discussing Standard Life, I suppose.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Ive just woken up. Are RBS planning to do the same or is Scotland going to have to support a bank that continues to lose £8bn annually? And does Alex Salmond still think RBSs falling share price it's all the fault of LSEs Spivs and Speculators

Shame you didn't waken up a few days ago when rbs announc d pkans to sell off a large part of their company and change their current business model.

Do you plan to actually bring anything relevant to this thread? KNOB

[bluto]

I wouldn't call it running away bluto. I think it's using the only tools that we have to achieve change.

Successive Westminster governments have played Scotland in the same way. This isn't going to change, esp as red ed needs to be more right wing to get the south of England votes.

Ach, it's no the ONLY tools, though.

Is my point...

And, again, raking over old coals, some of those successive governments were jostling with Scots, so why should an Embra clanjamfrie-full make any difference?

It all redounds to: do the power and economics stack up?

And I'm of the opinion that it probably doesn't.

Edited February 27, 2014 by bluto

[oaksoft]

My post was specifically pointing out that democracy should be evolutionary, not giving up petulantly and running away from the fight. Again, though, I expect my words to be twisted.

It gets us off of discussing Standard Life, I suppose.

Running away from the fight? Petulant?

If there is anyone on here who can decipher this I'm willing to listen.

I'm assuming you're making comparisons again with Paisley or Shetland getting someone they didn't vote for in an independent Scotland.

Are Paisley and Shetland writing up independence proposals of their own?

If so I'd support them.

If people want localisation of power because they believe that people who live and work in an area are better placed to know what those people need then I support that as a democratic principle.

They'd have to win majority opinion in a democratic election first though.

Local government provides a small amount of autonomy but not on the most important things.

Small government is the way forwards.

Edited February 27, 2014 by oaksoft

[Drew]

But, of course, I never said that and I would expect you to twist my words.

I said, "Nats have already surrendered the democratic process cos they didn't like the result of the votes it supplied. We don't like that game, so we want to go away and play in our own wee game...."

And in the later post I said, "some Scots"

NOT the Scottish people because I believe most Scots will reject this. Only the Nats are so obtuse.

And there's no need to attempt the lecture on democracy.

My post was specifically pointing out that democracy should be evolutionary, not giving up petulantly and running away from the fight. Again, though, I expect my words to be twisted.

It gets us off of discussing Standard Life, I suppose.

FFS, I quoted Dickson.

A tad over-sensitive today, no?

I'm sorry, but the above post doesn't really enhance your argument from my perspective. Running away from what fight, exactly? That just sounds like a glib political protestation, as opposed to a measured contribution to the discussion.

I think a lot of people who support independence are doing so in order to feel more attached to the democratic process, so your notion of running away doesn't really fit. I've already talked about assuming greater ownership for the decision making process as being one motivating factor for supporting the full devolution that would come with independence.