Scotland Watch

[vtsnowedin]

Could an independent Scotland not quickly sign a free trade agreement with the USA and perhaps sign an agreement for the USA to keep using their submarine and Navy base. Perhaps even rent out part of it to the UK as what better thing can the Scots do with it. ???

[UndercoverElephant]

Could an independent Scotland not quickly sign a free trade agreement with the USA and perhaps sign an agreement for the USA to keep using their submarine and Navy base. Perhaps even rent out part of it to the UK as what better thing can the Scots do with it. ???

Of course they could, apart from that the nationalists have ruled this out themselves.

[vtsnowedin]

Could an independent Scotland not quickly sign a free trade agreement with the USA and perhaps sign an agreement for the USA to keep using their submarine and Navy base. Perhaps even rent out part of it to the UK as what better thing can the Scots do with it. ???

Of course they could, apart from that the nationalists have ruled this out themselves.

Yes I've read that but often after an election the winners have to face realities that were not included in their stump speech.
While you are negotiation it or building a new base at Plymouth or Liverpool you can always have your subs stop in at Portsmouth New Hampshire for any services they might need.
http://www.navsea.navy.mil/shipyards/po ... fault.aspx
The least we could do for a NATO member.

[UndercoverElephant]

Could an independent Scotland not quickly sign a free trade agreement with the USA and perhaps sign an agreement for the USA to keep using their submarine and Navy base. Perhaps even rent out part of it to the UK as what better thing can the Scots do with it. ???

Of course they could, apart from that the nationalists have ruled this out themselves.

Yes I've read that but often after an election the winners have to face realities that were not included in their stump speech.

After the election the winners are not going to be the nationalists.

It's easy to promise a load of poorly-thought-out, idealistic, nationalistic claptrap if you're never going to deal with the actual reality. If the nationalists were to actually win, the first thing they'd do was crap themselves, and the second would be to start rowing back on every single promise they've made. They know they aren't going to win. They've known that for a long time.

[Little John]

I'm not quite as certain as you are about them not winning UE.l couldn't give a toss about the SNP. But, the socialists have always had a strong presence in Scotland and, if it gained independence, there would be every chance of a socialist government in Scotland at some point. Now that's something I would like to see.

[vtsnowedin]

I'm not quite as certain as you are about them not winning UE.l couldn't give a toss about the SNP. But, the socialists have always had a strong presence in Scotland and, if it gained independence, there would be every chance of a socialist government in Scotland at some point. Now that's something I would like to see.

Somehow the image of a socialist Highlander just doesn't come to mind. I probably have a romanticized version of how average Scots feel as it has been centuries sense that side of the family came over.

[3rdRock]

I'm not quite as certain as you are about them not winning UE.l couldn't give a toss about the SNP. But, the socialists have always had a strong presence in Scotland and, if it gained independence, there would be every chance of a socialist government in Scotland at some point. Now that's something I would like to see.

Would it make any real difference?

They'll be just as answerable to their corporate masters and equally compliant.

[UndercoverElephant]

I'm not quite as certain as you are about them not winning UE.l couldn't give a toss about the SNP. But, the socialists have always had a strong presence in Scotland and, if it gained independence, there would be every chance of a socialist government in Scotland at some point. Now that's something I would like to see.

There's an outside chance of a very small minority yes vote, but it would need a minor miracle. I'd actually love to see it happen, because it would be a spectacular example of "be careful what you wish for, because you might just get it." A yes vote would very quickly lead to a very big mess, owing to the Yes campaign having failed to sort out basic policy issues like currency and EU membership. It's all very well saying "they're bluffing" about the refusal of the rUK to even negotiate on a currency union, or "we've got three plan B's" for if it turns out not be a bluff, and then threatening to default on Scotland's share of the UK's debt if the rUK doesn't give them the currency union that would be a disastrous liability were we to accept. The Nationalists' problem is that it is Salmond who is actually bluffing (either that or he is a complete and utter fool) and a Yes vote would effectively call his bluff.

There is no way on Earth that the rUK will agree to a currency union, because to do so would be outright political suicide for any rUK government, regardless of its makeup. The electorate would never forgive them, and rightly so, because it is absolutely not in our interest to agree to it unless Scotland were to agree to rUK demands on so many other issues as to make independence a running joke. It's simply not going to happen. Salmond says his response to this will be to walk away from Scotland's share of the UK's debt, but that would be viewed internationally as a default, and Scotland would start its life as an independent nation as a Iceland-like pariah. Nobody would be willing to lend them money, and that would be a very serious problem indeed for a country which doesn't have its own currency. Scotland would be left with no central bank and no access to credit from other countries, which would mean it would have to run its economy at a surplus at a time when it was having to fork out massive amounts of money to pay for the costs of setting up a new state. This would result in cuts to public spending that would make the current "austerity" in the UK look like a tea party.

And all this would happen at the same time as Scotland was trying to negotiate entry in the EU at the same time as it became independent, with the Spanish committed to preventing them from doing so.

This all adds up to the Scottish people having a big wake-up call before independence is achieved, and probably before the general election next year in the UK. And given that it would only have been a tiny majority in the first place, I suspect the end result would be an overwhelming call from the Scottish people to overturn the result of the referendum and remain part of the UK after all.

Total nightmare for Scotland. I'd feel sorry for those who voted no, but be much amused by the yes voters finding out about the reality of independence.

ETA: And I think it would end up being in the best interest of the rest of the UK if Scotland left anyway. Most of the oil is gone, Scotland is a drain on the economic resources of the rest of the UK and the exit of Scotland from the union would, IMO, revitalise the political left and force it to re-invent itself.

[Snail]

Yes campaign having failed to sort out basic policy issues like currency and EU membership. It's all very well saying "they're bluffing" about the refusal of the rUK to even negotiate on a currency union, or "we've got three plan B's" for if it turns out not be a bluff, and then threatening to default on Scotland's share of the UK's debt if the rUK doesn't give them the currency union that would be a disastrous liability were we to accept.

FFS, what more can he say or do. Scotland would use pound, or peg to pound. Negotiation takes 2 sides. Post independence, ruk would have no choice but to discuss currency with Scotland. That's reality. As for the debt, that debt IS UK based. What's ruk's plan b? Seems UK is betting everything on no.

Here's a leak from behind the scenes:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/ne ... f.23823233

Who's bluffing who?

We all know that using sterling is short2medium-term. Longer term, Scotland will have its own currency/euro. This strategy is best for Scotland and England (actually, rest of UK just means England).

And given that it would only have been a tiny majority in the first place,

You don't seem to realise how close this will be. A tiny majority? 51% in favour means half of Scots wanting independence.

And I think it would end up being in the best interest of the rest of the UK if Scotland left anyway. Most of the oil is gone, Scotland is a drain on the economic resources of the rest of the UK and the exit of Scotland from the union would, IMO, revitalise the political left and force it to re-invent itself.

Scotland's a drain? Like north England, middle England, sw England, wales, and n.Ireland? Come on, you know how pathetically fragile the UK economy is/will be. As pathetically laughable as the military, foreign, health, energy etc policies are.

As for revitalising the left. Sounds like a hope based on a wish. What happened to getting real?

---

I'd like Salmond to be appear super-realistic. To say its a gamble (but a risk worth taking) and that nothing's guaranteed. But he'd be annihilated for saying that. It's that open-secret thing again. Nobody can yet admit that difficult times are coming. As if staying within UK is guaranteed prosperity.

[Standuble]

If Scotland wants independence they should go for it. It would be interesting to observe at least from south of the border.

However if all Europe is going to hell in a handbasket I think they should stay with England and enjoy the relative poverty whilst it lasts - I see it ending much sooner with their declining oil field of theirs if they go it alone.

[biffvernon]

If the Scots want to keep stirling, let them. England could then do the sensible thing and join the Euro.

[UndercoverElephant]

If the Scots want to keep stirling, let them.

Stirling is north of Edinburgh, so I expect they'll be keeping that...

[Tarrel]

LOL! If he was reading this, my farming neighbour would say; "Yes, but you're looking at this from such an English perspective." (As he has done to me several times when we've chewed the fat over Independence on Saturday mornings).

There is a discernible difference in trajectory between social policy in Scotland and that peddled by the, IMO, very London-centric Westminster establishment. I think it's born of a fundamentally different mindset, which goes right down to grass roots level. I don't know why the people of Scotland should have this more inclusive, egalitarian point of view. Perhaps its something to do with sparse populations struggling to survive in harsh conditions? I've seen similar attitudes in Canada.

This from Scottish historian Sir Tom Devine, who recently switched to the "Yes" camp:

"It is the Scots who have succeeded most in preserving the British idea of fairness and compassion in terms of state support and intervention. Ironically, it is England, since the 1980s, which has embarked on a separate journey."

Having made the move to Scotland in early 2012 and, before that, having shuttled a lot between the Highlands and the Home Counties, I see this difference in mindset very starkly, both in the attitudes of the people and the way things get done (priorities, etc). I am, however, conscious that I live in a smallish, tight-knit community in the Highlands, and not in the much more urban Central Belt, and that you would probably find such pockets of egalitarianism and strong community in parts of rural England and Wales. But, on balance, there is a difference between Scotland and South of the Border.

I can say from experience that it is very difficult for the average person south of the border to understand this difference in mindset, or to realise the grass-roots nature of the "Yes" campaign. I have no axe to grind when making this point, but I can say quite categorically that the "Yes" campaign is not all about Alex Salmond and/or the SNP. A lot of prospective "Yes" voters I know can't stand the guy, but they're looking at a bigger picture.

The "Yes" campaign is very much a grass-roots movement made up of local initiatives. Witness the number of different shaped logos and different slogans that I can see on a five minute walk from my house. One of the most active organisers in our town lives in a van in a council car park down by the shore. (He's lived there for years. Everyone knows him and nobody bothers him). By contrast, from what I've seen, the "No" campaign seems to be much more centrally organised and party-led. We even had Jim Murphy (Lab - East Renfrewshire, shadow cabinet member) show up in our little town with a megaphone the other day.

So, the Scots will do what they will do on September 18th. For those not living in Scotland, perhaps an interesting debate could centre around what things would be like south of the border in the event of a "Yes" vote, and how to make the best of a reshaped (Scotland-less) United Kingdom?

p.s. I'm voting...Aww you'll just have to guess!

[OrraLoon]

I'm not quite as certain as you are about them not winning UE.l couldn't give a toss about the SNP. But, the socialists have always had a strong presence in Scotland and, if it gained independence, there would be every chance of a socialist government in Scotland at some point. Now that's something I would like to see.

There's an outside chance of a very small minority yes vote, but it would need a minor miracle. I'd actually love to see it happen, because it would be a spectacular example of "be careful what you wish for, because you might just get it." A yes vote would very quickly lead to a very big mess, owing to the Yes campaign having failed to sort out basic policy issues like currency and EU membership. It's all very well saying "they're bluffing" about the refusal of the rUK to even negotiate on a currency union, or "we've got three plan B's" for if it turns out not be a bluff, and then threatening to default on Scotland's share of the UK's debt if the rUK doesn't give them the currency union that would be a disastrous liability were we to accept. The Nationalists' problem is that it is Salmond who is actually bluffing (either that or he is a complete and utter fool) and a Yes vote would effectively call his bluff.

There is no way on Earth that the rUK will agree to a currency union, because to do so would be outright political suicide for any rUK government, regardless of its makeup. The electorate would never forgive them, and rightly so, because it is absolutely not in our interest to agree to it unless Scotland were to agree to rUK demands on so many other issues as to make independence a running joke. It's simply not going to happen. Salmond says his response to this will be to walk away from Scotland's share of the UK's debt, but that would be viewed internationally as a default, and Scotland would start its life as an independent nation as a Iceland-like pariah. Nobody would be willing to lend them money, and that would be a very serious problem indeed for a country which doesn't have its own currency. Scotland would be left with no central bank and no access to credit from other countries, which would mean it would have to run its economy at a surplus at a time when it was having to fork out massive amounts of money to pay for the costs of setting up a new state. This would result in cuts to public spending that would make the current "austerity" in the UK look like a tea party.

And all this would happen at the same time as Scotland was trying to negotiate entry in the EU at the same time as it became independent, with the Spanish committed to preventing them from doing so.

This all adds up to the Scottish people having a big wake-up call before independence is achieved, and probably before the general election next year in the UK. And given that it would only have been a tiny majority in the first place, I suspect the end result would be an overwhelming call from the Scottish people to overturn the result of the referendum and remain part of the UK after all.

Total nightmare for Scotland. I'd feel sorry for those who voted no, but be much amused by the yes voters finding out about the reality of independence.

ETA: And I think it would end up being in the best interest of the rest of the UK if Scotland left anyway. Most of the oil is gone, Scotland is a drain on the economic resources of the rest of the UK and the exit of Scotland from the union would, IMO, revitalise the political left and force it to re-invent itself.

Oh dear, Mr Undercover"Home Counties" Interests Elephant, I think that you've left out the your usual [yet essential] bit about the population / resources balance.

[And did ypu see that bit in the 'Independence is now a serious (British Broadcasting Corporation) option debate' [unlike in the 1980s when I voted for a whacko Sovereign Weallth Fund] where they debated that subject? No, neither did I. So, why do I think that bank economist Salmond is one of yours?]

Anyway, about this place to stand...

[biffvernon]

it is very difficult for the average person south of the border to understand this difference in mindset,

Sound observations, Tarrel. I've visited Scotland many times and do see the different mindset. And I prefer it. I think I'm hoping for a 'No', not because I think a 'Yes' will be bad for Scotland but because it may be bad for England.