The Referendum

[David]

We already pay for all of those under the public services budget, a portion of which is devolved £1.5bn of the total £2.5bn spend. There already regional DVLA offices, some of which are about to close as Westminster trims back on civil servants. So unlikely to have much impact on the greater scheme of things. Tax and Passport offices already exist so no change there.
Much of the cost projections are contained in the white paper. Now, obviously they will be on the optimistic side as this document is here to promote the idea, but then there is little argument about whether independence is affordable even Cameron acknowledged it's financial feasibility.

edited: to correct the figures for public and common services.

Don't buy that:

They are UK offices and will cease to service Scotland's needs if Independence happens - their physical location is irrelevant. It clearly will be a cost to reinvent these organisations.

[tut]

Next UK election will be hung again, probably a Labour win but not enough for a Majority, so back to bedfellows.

The only way of course that the Liberal's will ever get a look in, their last session in power ended in 1915, so they will grasp at any straw.

tut

[Mikie711]

We already pay for all of those under the public services budget, a portion of which is devolved £1.5bn of the total £2.5bn spend. There already regional DVLA offices, some of which are about to close as Westminster trims back on civil servants. So unlikely to have much impact on the greater scheme of things. Tax and Passport offices already exist so no change there.
Much of the cost projections are contained in the white paper. Now, obviously they will be on the optimistic side as this document is here to promote the idea, but then there is little argument about whether independence is affordable even Cameron acknowledged it's financial feasibility.

edited: to correct the figures for public and common services.

Don't buy that:

They are UK offices and will cease to service Scotland's needs if Independence happens - their physical location is irrelevant. It clearly will be a cost to reinvent these organisations.

From the white paper ........

Agreement with the rest of the UK
The independence agreement with the rest of the UK will cover a range of matters, mainly the approach to the assets and liabilities of the UK, the delivery of services and the position of individuals working within public services. There will also need
to be agreements on cross-border operational matters, as is the case now, and on transitional arrangements for those areas where a period of adjustment will be the most sensible approach.
The over-riding priority will be the seamless delivery of public services on independence to citizens of both countries. This applies both to those services currently delivered to Scotland from locations elsewhere in the UK, and to those services currently delivered from Scotland to citizens elsewhere in the UK.

[Lazydonkey]

So that's talking about a transition. I'm talking about the end game. That will cost money. Lots and lots of money and i'm not sure it's been accounted for.

Also if you were the rest of the Uk, why would you make it easy for an independent Scotland to share these resources? What's in it for them ?

[Rosssco]

[j2 lot]

Given that no-one ever doubts that that things like centralising the police saves money overall (granted it could have other consequences)

You're right - it looks like it will have other consequences. On Police Scotland:
Although not a stated objective of reform, one of the main drivers was to save money, with savings of £1.1bn expected by 2026.
But Audit Scotland said it was not yet clear how this would be achieved.
It said the costs and savings estimates for the reforms were based on the outline business case prepared by the Scottish government in September 2011.
But these estimates were not updated, and a full business case had not been prepared

it wasnt questioned but should have been.

Add it to the list of finger in the air calculations;
Scottish Parliament
Edinburgh trams
Police Scotland
INDEPENDENCE

[kenny]

What infuriates for me is how Eck has managed to sneak through the 16 year old votes... They aren't old enough to be trusted with alcohol or a driving license, but can be trusted to have a balanced view on the future of our nation? I know 16 year old me would probably have voted 'yes' in a torrent of pride and misplaced bravado, but older me sees the big picture. It's the most transparent example of his trying to load the dice in the most cynical fashion - for that alone, I hate the man.

At a time when the green shoots of recovery are showing, why on earth would we want to cut free from the stabilising force of the UK Exchequer? Given the level of talent visible in Scottish politics, I'd be terrified to live in a country where all our livelihoods depended on them getting it right. Mike - I hear what you're saying about the theoretical possibilities for Scotland alone, but looking at the stuffed turnips in Holyrood on the news every night, can you put your hand on your heart and tell me you think they are remotely capable of running a country. I'm sorry, the people in Westminster aren't faultless, but it's a level above the dross that's filtered into Holyrood...

Finally (and the telling point, personally) - nobody has yet explained to me why I don't want to be British? I've grown up exceptionally proud of my Scottish heritage, gone through the period in my youth where I railed against English rule, then realised that being British as well as Scottish is a source of pride for me as well. Scotland has been a cornerstone of Britain for hundreds of years - in the last hundred, our part has been acknowledged more and more. I don't feel a desire to turn my back on that.

My /2c, YMMV, etc. etc...

F*cking nail/head interface right there. Post of the year in amongst some of the verbose pro-independence drivel being spouted on this thread.

[johncam]

What infuriates for me is how Eck has managed to sneak through the 16 year old votes... They aren't old enough to be trusted with alcohol or a driving license, but can be trusted to have a balanced view on the future of our nation? I know 16 year old me would probably have voted 'yes' in a torrent of pride and misplaced bravado, but older me sees the big picture. It's the most transparent example of his trying to load the dice in the most cynical fashion - for that alone, I hate the man.

I was thinking exactly the same thing Shug, however giving sixteen year olds the vote looks to have really back-fired on him....

http://news.stv.tv/north/239978-thousan ... eferendum/

Remember - this happened in Salmond's back yard. What is encouraging to see is that the no vote returned a much higher percentage than any of the polls around at the moment so perhaps these kids will take their opportunity to vote seriously. It will be the first time they will have voted so I'd hope there would be a decent turn out from them if only to experience the process. The Union is obviously something they feel strongly about which really is a welcome surprise.

[point n squirt]

Ok this may sound silly but if we vote yes can the rest of the country still fly the union Jack or is the saltire to be removed , can hardly be a union flag can it.

[PhilA]

We have just had Team GB inspire a generation - who are now going to vote for/against independence - GB.. im hopeful the Kids of Today are feeling the benefit of a stable UK, vs those that were hurt by the 70s/80s experiments.
Currency - Pound isnt a currency. Pound Sterling is, and thats Bank of England controlled.
Even the SNP talk of a Sterling Area - a group of countries (rest of GB + Scotland) who are all using Bank of England as last resort.
Can you imagine what happens if you have a group of countries that have an Area currency and yet different policies for running the economy? Look at the Euro and Greece. It doesnt work when the policies are different. That lesson has been learnt and that is why Major and the Welsh minister both said No Way to a Sterling Area, and if they think that then others in power will too. Plus, the Bank of England, which runs the Pound Sterling, is bound to Westminster which is likely to run a different set of policies than Scotland. It wont work and there wont be an agreement - unless it involves money associated with the Debt, with Oil and with Interest rates. Not really the separation that the SNP "white paper" suggests will allow it to do what they want to do.
IF that is the case that Pound Sterling is no go, then we could have our own Pound, eh? Aye, we could - the Pound Thistle or something apt. But that is a new currency. The "Bank of Scotland" or whatever its called, would be a noob to the markets. We wouldnt have the same interest rates as just now. Financially its poop.
We could go Euro, which is what Salmond said originally in 2011 - "The sterling, well, it really depends on the financial circumstances of the time. We would tend to stay within the sterling area until such time as it is to our advantage to join the Euro and then we would only do it with the consent of the people."
Ive listened to this story for a while and really the SNP are changing their minds lots, and never answering the real questions with real answers. Their answers are "we will give scottish people what they want" and then painting the picture of the outcome of discussion that have yet to be had.

[PhilA]

I dont want to Gamble. I am not a Gambler, unless its the National Lottery - which is GB, btw.

[PhilA]

Guess we could have the Postcode Lottery, or the Peoples Lottery............

[PhilA]

With regards "Scotland didnt vote for Westminster"... speak for yourself. I did, I voted Tory.
As have most of my family for years. In fact, I remember Tayside being mostly Blue when growing up. But the point is that Tayside is 1 voting area. So are parts of Deven, of NE england, of NI, of Wales, of Norfork, of Orkney. We are a diverse country, GB, and we are better for it. The idea is that the person who is voted in for your area speaks for your issues.
With regards being independent, how much More say will Orkney have, given that Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Glasgow have the majority of population? It will be the same.
We wouldnt be in the EU, we would have to reapply. What does that mean? It means the rebate, the "deal" we have just now as being part of the UK - including not having to use the Euro - will not stand, they will be gone. The EU isnt making consessions for small nations to join with special deals, and countries that have potential breakaway areas, such as Spain, will make sure that no precendents will be made. In other words, to be in the EU, we would have to use the Euro. Why break up what we have and take out a new contract? Will we land more fish...?

[PhilA]

the White Paper is full of assumptions of the outcomes of discussions to be had.
BBC, Sterling Area, EU, Nato, Interest Rates, Passports, etc etc.
SNP, dressed up as Scottish Government paper, state what they "will do"... but the will is really the outcome that they want, it could be different.
That is dodgy.

[PhilA]

I watched Question Time last night. Interesting that the Greens want a socialist country - they are voting for Yes. SNP are more Conserative in policy, also voting for Yes.

A Singer spoke with the same arguments as i hear in daily life - we have a chance to make our own choice... they want to vote Yes because we can...
Because we were so hard done by in 1707 that now we (the Scottish people) get the chance to choose instead of it being forced upon us.
She even said she doesnt care about money.

Really? 307 years is fresh in the memory? Ok, so England bought Scotland to keep the same Monach and stop Scotland going off and being an enemy. Scotland wanted the union to get access to the trade markets. The people seemed to not want it. Thats 300 years ago.


Devolution has made a difference, independence is a totally different kettle of fish.