# Scottish Independance



## ag (Sep 12, 2002)

Am I the only person that thinks that with Numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street being occupied by Scotsmen, that the proposed referendum should really be about the independance of England & Wales from Scotland and not vice-versa?

Whilst not all of the country's woes can be laid directly at Gordon's door, although some are specifically his fault, his inability to deal with problems with a liberal dose of Mea Culpa & a truck load of utter bullsh1t like his predecessor, whilst admirable, makes him look weak in comparison.


----------



## saint (Dec 6, 2002)

You've got two differing issues there.

Independance for Scotland - ah the old chesnut. Until the oil/gas runs out it'll never happen.

And poor Wales always getting lumbered along with England..... bet it regrets being a principality.

What England should do is push for more local government, similar to what is happening in Scotland and Wales, along the lines of what the NE wants.

Bloated central government trying to make local area decision is madness.


----------



## skydiver (Oct 12, 2006)

saint said:


> You've got two differing issues there.
> 
> Independance for Scotland - ah the old chesnut. Until the oil/gas runs out it'll never happen.
> 
> ...


Good points.

I am getting increasingly angered by Gordon Browns poor performance. I really thought he would step up to the plate but he has not.

The fact he is Scottish should NEVER be brought into the equation. It seems to me the fact he is doing a bad job is linked to the fact he is Scottish and he must be doing that on purpose...... yeah right he is just not good enough to be PM.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

..agreed GB is incompetent, uncharismatic, unpopular, and is effectively leading new labour out of power. Being Scottish is irrelevant, although my Scottish friends do have my sympathy that such a prat as GB is in some way seen as typifying 'being Scottish'.

What is needed is a union where Scottish, Welsh and English members can only sit in ONE parliament/assembly (preferably their own country's) and not on two as some are currently permitted.


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

garyc said:


> Being Scottish is irrelevant


Agreed - Tony Blair was born in Edinburgh too. So what?



garyc said:


> What is needed is a union where Scottish, Welsh and English members can only sit in ONE parliament/assembly (preferably their own country's) and not on two as some are currently permitted.


Absolutely agree - it is a nonsense to be able to sit in both.


----------



## ag (Sep 12, 2002)

I was only joking. To be perfectly honest I don't care who is in government as long as they represent the views of the people that put them there. Brown and Badger's bungling of the budget shows that they don't even know who put them in power, let alone care. I totally agree that their lack of competence in their current roles is absolutely nothing to do with their genes or upbringing and everything to do with being arrogant, innumerate and deaf to their electors.

I actually thought that Gordon would be a refreshing change to Lionel and his mysterious world of spin and bullshit. Oh, was I ever wrong. Blair was all style and absolutely no substance, Gordon is no style and, apparently, no substance either.

And now we have Boris as Mayor of London. At this rate I will be looking back on the Pre-Iraq New-Labour days as halcyon times.


----------



## chrisabdn (Aug 15, 2007)

i was all set to get my claymore out and start swinging when i read this thread at first, but it's good to laugh at one's self too from time to time.

the fact that the people who have recently been making a mess of our currently are scottish is irrelevant ... the english have a far greater history of doing much worse, i guess it's just more galling when it's not one of your own. remember the scottish have had to suffer years of anglocentric english rule, so don't expect us to feel too sorry for you if things aren't entirely to your liking for a few years compared to a few centuries.

i think it's a great thing that scotland and wales have their devolved parliaments ... whether england needs such a thing remains to be seen, but it'd probably just an unecessary expense ... what should be the case is that only english mps should vote on english issues, but i believe that's the defacto status more or less already.

for the record, tony blair was a scot and i don't think he was all bad, far better than leaving the tories in charge, but he did blot his copybook and that's a shame ... gordon brown has been one our best chancellors, but even in that capacity he's done some terrible things ... now he's prime minister he's evidently not up to the job, which is disappointing as many had high hopes for him ... he could have ridden the anti-blair wave and built up a head of steam, but the man can't surf and that's plainly evident ... he's not use, but that's got feck all to do with him being scottish, and everything to do with him just being another feckless politician in a role that's far too big for him.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

chrisabdn said:


> i was all set to get my claymore out and start swinging when i read this thread at first, but it's good to laugh at one's self too from time to time.
> 
> the fact that the people who have recently been making a mess of our currently are scottish is irrelevant ... *1. the english have a far greater history of doing much worse, i guess it's just more galling when it's not one of your own. * remember the scottish have had to suffer years of anglocentric english rule, so don't expect us to feel too sorry for you if things aren't entirely to your liking for a few years compared to a few centuries.
> 
> i think it's a great thing that scotland and wales have their devolved parliaments ... whether england needs such a thing remains to be seen, but it'd probably just an unecessary expense ...* 2. what should be the case is that only english mps should vote on english issues, but i believe that's the defacto status more or less already.*for the record, tony blair was a scot and i don't think he was all bad, far better than leaving the tories in charge, but he did blot his copybook and that's a shame ... gordon brown has been one our best chancellors, but even in that capacity he's done some terrible things ... now he's prime minister he's evidently not up to the job, which is disappointing as many had high hopes for him ... he could have ridden the anti-blair wave and built up a head of steam, but the man can't surf and that's plainly evident ... he's not use, but that's got feck all to do with him being scottish, and everything to do with him just being another feckless politician in a role that's far too big for him.


1. Don't confuse happily managed oppression with mis-management of economy and counyt's internal/external affairs. :wink:

2. This is not the case. Plenty of dual voting takes place.

GBs days were always numbered with the poison challice TB dealt him, but he has made it many times worse for himself and moreover the UK as a whole.

Spending Â£2 billion yesterday (well borrowing actually) to 'buy' the Nantwich Bi-Election to cover over the 10p tax rate issue debacle, will also bite him in the arse.

He really cannot win and really does not deserve to. :twisted:


----------



## BAMTT (Feb 22, 2004)

garyc said:


> ..agreed *GB* is incompetent, uncharismatic, unpopular, and is effectively leading new labour out of power. Being Scottish is irrelevant, although my Scottish friends do have my sympathy that such a prat as GB is in some way seen as typifying 'being Scottish'.
> 
> What is needed is a union where Scottish, Welsh and English members can only sit in ONE parliament/assembly (preferably their own country's) and not on two as some are currently permitted.


*GB* how Ironic


----------



## tt9060 (Mar 10, 2004)

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/language/scots/

this is as good a reason as any as to why we should NOT have independance. What a bunch of f**Kin [email protected] - its embarrasing. I am scottish and I can hardly understand a word. utter nonsense.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

I can not understand how since 1997 new Labour have had 2 agendas, after 400 years of a "United Kingdom", devolution of power to Scottish and Welsh Parliaments and it would appear handing over our sovereignty to become a state within the "United States of Europe"


----------



## Jac-in-a-Box (Nov 9, 2002)

chrisabdn said:


> i think it's a great thing that scotland and wales have their devolved parliaments ...


You're not serious?

An unecessary, costly and irrelevant additional tier of administration.

Filled with egocentric and toothless dogs - since spending the Â£400 million plus on giving them an arena bitch and gripe, I'm hard pressed to think of one significant benefit they've achieved for Scotland...can you?

Dave


----------



## qooqiiu (Oct 12, 2007)

Scrapping of student tuition fees.


----------



## tt9060 (Mar 10, 2004)

Jac-in-a-Box said:


> chrisabdn said:
> 
> 
> > i think it's a great thing that scotland and wales have their devolved parliaments ...
> ...


here here. Â£400,000,000 on a new building ! ! !
am sure they wont screw up the Â£300,000,000 tram project in edinburgh :roll:


----------



## chrisabdn (Aug 15, 2007)

Jac-in-a-Box said:


> chrisabdn said:
> 
> 
> > i think it's a great thing that scotland and wales have their devolved parliaments ...
> ...


of course i'm serious ... politics are a very personal thing, what you prefer is up to you, but i for one feel more comfortable having more control in scotland than 'down south'.

i'll grant you that a horrendous amount of money was wasted on the building, but that's an old argument and we need to get over it and move on ... the parliament is here to stay, regardless of that, and i for one would not get rid of it. bear in mind we're not the only government who's good at wasting money on buildings ... millenium dome, anyone?

as for significant benefits, where have you been living since the parliament was setup ... where will i start?

1. the smoking ban, bravo to the scottish government for having the balls to implement this and taking the lead over the rest of the uk - this alone is worth it all.

2. free personal care for the elderly

3. central heating programmes for the elderly

4. cheaper higher education

5. abolition of graduate endowments

6. reduced rates for small businesses

7. freezing of council tax rates

... and it doesn't end there (but you only asked for one, there's 7 for you) ...

the scottish government has done more in these areas, and invested more in scottish people, than their counterparts have done south of the border.

ok, so you can argue about the pros & cons of the decisions made either side of the border ... the implementation and the people involved ... but i for one feel better that we have a more localised government looking out more closely for our own needs.

c.


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

chrisabdn said:


> Jac-in-a-Box said:
> 
> 
> > chrisabdn said:
> ...


Mostly paid for by the English tax-payer under the Barnet formula. :x :x :x :x :x


----------



## qooqiiu (Oct 12, 2007)

The Scots haven't got it so cushy.

Their mortality rate is not enviable!


----------



## Molehall (Jan 8, 2003)

qooqiiu said:


> The Scots haven't got it so cushy.
> 
> Their mortality rate is not enviable!


That's because they:

1. Drink like fishes

2. Smoke like chimneys (though they did ban smoking before England, which is several points in their favour)

3. Eat like weasels (I'm not sure what weasels actually eat, but I'm told that apart from "neaps" there are no vegetables in Scotland)


----------



## Jac-in-a-Box (Nov 9, 2002)

chrisabdn said:


> of course i'm serious ... politics are a very personal thing, what you prefer is up to you, but i for one feel more comfortable having more control in scotland than 'down south'.
> 
> i'll grant you that a horrendous amount of money was wasted on the building, but that's an old argument and we need to get over it and move on ... the parliament is here to stay, regardless of that, and i for one would not get rid of it. bear in mind we're not the only government who's good at wasting money on buildings ... millenium dome, anyone?
> 
> as for significant benefits, *where have you been living since the parliament was setup*... where will i start?


In the land of reality...read on :wink:



chrisabdn said:


> 1. the smoking ban, bravo to the scottish government for having the balls to implement this and taking the lead over the rest of the uk - this alone is worth it all. *wonderful and worth every penny that it's cost to fund a Scottish Parliament*
> 
> 2. free personal care for the elderly
> *underfunded scheme. Even the most basic care ie 1hr/week of homehelp costs a tenner. What funding is in place is swallowed up in "admin cost"*
> ...


----------



## chrisabdn (Aug 15, 2007)

you're entitled to your opinion jac, but you do seem quite grumpy about it ... perhaps you should move? :lol:

i disagree but that's the beauty of opinions, they're entirely personal. we could go back and forth forever on this, but the crux of it is that i actually don't give a sh*t ... i live here, i like it here, i'm not going to move and it's unlikely the scottish government is going anywhere whether you like it or not ... so either way, what you think, or i think, doesn't matter.

politics and religion - two emotive issues with, unfortunately, no right/wrong answers otherwise we'd all vote and believe the same thing.


----------



## Jac-in-a-Box (Nov 9, 2002)

chrisabdn said:


> you're entitled to your opinion jac, but you do seem quite grumpy about it ... perhaps you should move? :lol:
> 
> i disagree but that's the beauty of opinions, they're entirely personal. we could go back and forth forever on this, but the crux of it is that i actually don't give a sh*t ... i live here, i like it here, i'm not going to move and it's unlikely the scottish government is going anywhere whether you like it or not ... so either way, what you think, or i think, doesn't matter.
> 
> politics and religion - two emotive issues with, unfortunately, no right/wrong answers otherwise we'd all vote and believe the same thing.


Congratulations on your considered and erudite reply :wink:

I had hoped my response to your 7 "significant benefits" would have elicited a more worthy reposte than an assumption on my disposition today :roll: ...which by the way, is pretty much spot on!

Still, if your happy to wrapped up in the cosy blanket of security you percieve the Scottish parliament to provide, I'm happy for you - meanwhile, I (and more than a few others) will continue to shudder at the antics of our noble and wise politicians dabbling around the peripherys of some of the more important issues affecting Scotland.



Molehall said:


> Mostly paid for by the English tax-payer under the Barnet formula. :x :x :x :x


Statistics, politicians and lies...choose who what/ever you want to believe!

Figures from a paper published by Oxford Economics (a couple of years old granted, but the figures will be proportionally similar today)

Myth 1: Scots get more public cash
Fact:
Northern Ireland Â£10,271 per head 
London Â£9748
Scotland, Â£9631

Myth 2: English taxes pay for Scotland's high spending
Fact: Tax haul from Scotland Â£49bn, compared with total spending of Â£49.2bn.

Includes the North Sea revenues of Â£9.7bn for 2005-06 at a time when Brent crude was trading at as much as $50 per barrel. Today it is more than $100.

Scots corporation tax runs slightly above the national per-capita average, at Â£3.51bn in total.

So where is Scotland in a league table of contributors to the national UK coffers? Only Londoners contribute more, per capita.
London Â£10,947 per head
Scotland Â£9593 per head

Myth 3: Scots take more from the welfare state than anyone else
Fact:
North-east England average at Â£3284
Northern Ireland - Â£3256 per head
Wales - Â£3136.
Scotland - Â£3086
North-west England - Â£3066
London - Â£2876,
England - Â£2736.
State pensions in Scotland amounted to Â£4.7bn, against Â£46.4bn in England.


----------



## chrisabdn (Aug 15, 2007)

sarcasm and passion, gotta love politics (yawn).

you know your stuff jac, must confess i'm not interested enough to make this more, um, interesting for you - you're obviously very passionate about the subject. i certainly don't have the facts to hand to make this much of a debate, unfortunately.

hope you're not planning any guy fawkes type antics though? :lol:

i reckon all politicians are a bunch of feckless idiots, and governments can't please all of the people all of the time ... or even some of the people some of the time in certain cases ... but the most any of us can do is vote and see what happens.

genuinely interested in any facts that illustrate whether westminster did a better job of running scotland _for_ scotland than we're doing at present though ... as opposed to just general negativity about the scottish parliament? for every pro-westminster / anti-holyrood person you know, surely you know another on the flip side, i certainly do. at least we can't blame westminster when things go pear shaped now, surely it's better to be more in control of our own destiny (though i would draw the line at full independence).

i originally replied to this post as i took issue with the racist implication in the OP ... i should learn to think before i speak though as there's often a political animal waiting to jump on a stray phrase, and sometimes you wish you'd kept your trap shut :lol: no besting these crazy kids!

hats off to you for being so passionate about it jac, too much political apathy in this country (perhaps myself included), and if all you achieve is making people think then that's better than nothing.


----------



## skiwhiz (Feb 17, 2008)

saint said:


> What England should do is push for more local government, similar to what is happening in Scotland and Wales, along the lines of what the NE wants.
> 
> Bloated central government trying to make local area decision is madness.


Remember NE voted against because they were not offered local decision making it was a Prescot version.

Remember despite the crap about oil income england has always subsidised scotland based on the funding formula, something many choose to forget


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Jac-in-a-Box said:


> North-east England average at Â£3284


Where do I apply for my state handout I feel left out. :lol:


----------



## ag (Sep 12, 2002)

We are all averse to paying more in tax, especially when we can't see the justification. The difference between parties or philosophies essentially boils down to how the tax revenue is spent and their motivation. At the end of the day no government can increase spending in all areas, difficult decisions have to be made and enevitably some people will be better off and some worse. Our current system of government with re-elections on a regular basis and with a huge majority means that the most decisions are based on short term feel-good actions instead of longer term solutions to anticipated issues. The present incumbents have actually effected very little change in this country and spent a vast amount of tax revenues on unsustainable and poorly managed projects. Investment for the future has been based more on leaving edifices to the glory of Socialism and less about giving the men and women of the UK the tools perform in the future, and also the here and now.

Adding more layers of government simply costs more and makes the upper echeolons more removed from the issues that matter. In business, hierachies are being flattened to promote communication and reduce costs. Government is doing the opposite.

The current government is the worst possible example of a bunch of idealists with deep pockets, unfortunately in other people's trousers.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Its a union! At a time when it makes sense to stick together we are looking to make ourselves smaller. what next splitting by county?

No referendum, no Scottish/welsh or Irish parliaments - its simply costs four times as much for them to do the same, nothing. O and while we're at it scrap the european parliament - that's just a case cow for former MPs.


----------

