Manchester City Forums
http://www.mancityforum.co.uk/forum/

Scotland?
http://www.mancityforum.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=9650		 Page 2 of 5
Author:  DarloBlue [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:05 pm ]
Post subject: 
Winston_Smith wrote:
But they will be run by socialists not tories.
They will continue to be benefits crazy until the cash runs out.
(See G.Brown)


True. I don't think an independent Scotland is liable to happen as there simply isn't the support for it - as much as the Conservatives being in power in Westminster is liable to boost support for an independent non-Conservative Scotland, the majority of undecided votes are likely to go with maintaining the current status quo (as usually happens with referendums).

I tend to find that the argument about Scotland currently being subsidised by England is just a skilful piece of misdirection from English people opposed to Scottish independence (or just opposed to Scots). The North East of England is also heavily subsidised by the rest of the country - as is the South West, Wales, Northern Ireland, most of the Midlands, most of Yorkshire and most of the North West. I'd venture a guess that the net flow of government income and spending sees money going from London and the South East to pretty much everywhere else. The fact is that an independent Scotland wouldn't have the tax revenue of the UK, however it wouldn't necessarily need it. It can easily be argued that the Scottish economy being 'subsidised' is as much the fault of UK economics being dominated by London than it is Scotland necessarily being weak.
Author:  Timpblue [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:07 pm ]
Post subject: 
just so long as we keep the oil money
Author:  Winston_Smith [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Image

This is why I'm pro independence.

:)
Author:  gibbonicus_andronicus [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
i think we have a realistic claim to 30-50% of the north sea cash. and a navy with which to enforce said claim.
Author:  Timpblue [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
how long did it take you to colour that in?
Author:  DarloBlue [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:12 pm ]
Post subject: 
Winston_Smith wrote:
Image

This is why I'm pro independence.

:)


Doesn't really account for population density, does it? All that is an argument for is that [S]twats[/S] tories live in the countryside.
Author:  South East Citizen [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:13 pm ]
Post subject: 
DarloBlue wrote:
Doesn't really account for population density, does it? All that is an argument for is that [S]twats[/S] tories live in the countryside.


Not a lot of blue in Scotland though is there, I think that's his point.
Author:  Winston_Smith [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:13 pm ]
Post subject: 
I think you'll find there would have been a decent tory majority if you discounted Scotland. There probably always would be tbf.
Author:  gibbonicus_andronicus [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:17 pm ]
Post subject: 
without going over the lines as well
Author:  DarloBlue [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:20 pm ]
Post subject: 
Winston_Smith wrote:
I think you'll find there would have been a decent tory majority if you discounted Scotland. There probably always would be tbf.


In the last election it would have been a clear majority, not a huge one. It certainly wouldn't have prevented the likes of the 1997 and 2001 drubbings - even if the Conservatives do manage to fix the boundaries (my current constituency will take an hour to drive from one end to the other, not accounting for traffic - God knows how an MP is meant to be representative of that sort of area), Labour governments would still be possible. An independent Scotland is liable to drive the rest of the UK toward a two-party system (tories v the rest) so it would be goodbye to a lot of Lib Dems.
Author:  Winston_Smith [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:24 pm ]
Post subject: 
I dream of a Tory/Ukip coalition.

*Looks wistfully into the distance*
Author:  Timpblue [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
*shudders*
Author:  gibbonicus_andronicus [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
more likely ukip will cause a splintering of tory party, as the more rabid eurosceptics part company with the run of the mill c nts and join ukip.
Author:  Winston_Smith [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:39 pm ]
Post subject: 
If Cameron agreed to a referendum on the Lisbon treaty UKIP were prepared to stand aside. This would have resulted in a slender majority IIRC.

UKIP are ace, Farage is one of our best orators and Monkton is always good for a laugh.
Author:  Barna Azul [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
DarloBlue wrote:
Nah, historically England and Wales have always been fairly close and the appetite for independence is fairly minimal.






I'm pretty sure one of the first things an independent Scotland would do would be to apply for membership of the EU (if they weren't automatically granted it). Initially they'd use pound sterling only from the Bank of Scotland rather than the Bank of England. Kinda how they do already. It certainly isn't an issue that would require dealing with immediately.

.


Im not sure its that simple and they wouldnt have a lot of clout if they were able to join the EU. Population wise it would put them on par with Ireland, Finnland, Denmark and Slovakia. It also smaller than the region of Cataluña in Spain.

The rest of the UK government probably wouldnt allow it to be GBP anymore, in case they devalued it somehow, but then you have the risk of different values for the two currencies. Like US and Canadian dollars.

Plus you also have the tax agreement issues (VAT and so on)that they would need.

I think its potentially a lot more complex.
Author:  Timpblue [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
i say let the sweatrieshave their own country back, we are bored telling them what to do

question - who legally has the right to call a referendum on this? us or them
Author:  Barna Azul [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
Timpblue wrote:
i say let the sweatrieshave their own country back, we are bored telling them what to do

question - who legally has the right to call a referendum on this? us or them


I guess they can call one due to having their own parliment.
Author:  Tresidentevil [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
Political parties, two sides of the same coin. All pointless.
Author:  Timpblue [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
Barna Azul wrote:
I guess they can call one due to having their own parliment.


ah yes, but they don't have complete powers. Isn't the right to let a referendum take place enshrined in the Union of the Crowns act

*looks nervously at Darlo*
Author:  Tresidentevil [ Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:55 pm ]
Post subject: 
The act of union was a bill in westminster, the scots parliament has no way of back tracking that act. essentially scottish decision making was given to westminster in the act of union. the scots parliament exists because westminster allows it to, via devolution.

it means very little though, laws, instutions can be changed and/or ignored. IF the scots people want to force independance they can at any time. problem is they don't, only 30% according to survey x.
Page 2 of 5 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/