Yep fine wth me but indepandance is exactly that, sort your own stuff out finance it too.
and no popping back to mums for sunday Dinner and a hand out when your wages for the month didnt quite last.
Serious question, if this goes ahead, shouldn't the English also have a referendum as to wether we actually still want a union with the Scots and Welsh?
I'm not sure why we still have the assumption that the English get anything from the Union.
Serious question, if this goes ahead, shouldn't the English also have a referendum as to wether we actually still want a union with the Scots and Welsh?
I'm not sure why we still have the assumption that the English get anything from the Union.
A very good point. It's like having the annoying person at the party that you end up waiting an eternity for them to leave - sometimes you're just better off kicking them out.
I'd like to know why the Referendum is only for the Scots? Us English and Welsh, have a say in what in or out of the Union.
Devolution was a sop to counter independance and all it has done is speed up the greed for ever more self determination. Whilst I have never objected to the excessive volumes of money lavished on the Scots whilst they were fucking up our Banks it seems that giving the dog a stretchy lead will eventually snap and smack him in the face.
re·tard·ed
/rɪˈtɑrdɪd/ Show Spelled[ri-tahr-did] Show IPA adjective
1.
characterized by retardation: a retarded child.
noun
2.
( used with a plural verb ) mentally retarded persons collectively (usually preceded by the ): new schools for the retarded.
Origin:
1800-10; retard + -ed2 and this thread
Related forms
non·re·tard·ed, adjective
un·re·tard·ed, adjective
Synonyms
backward, disabled, handicapped, Dipper, evilC.
re·tard·ed
/rɪˈtɑrdɪd/ Show Spelled[ri-tahr-did] Show IPA adjective
1.
characterized by retardation: a retarded child.
noun
2.
( used with a plural verb ) mentally retarded persons collectively (usually preceded by the ): new schools for the retarded.
Origin:
1800-10; retard + -ed2 and this thread
Related forms
non·re·tard·ed, adjective
un·re·tard·ed, adjective
Synonyms
backward, disabled, handicapped, Dipper, evilC.
I'm English and I like Scotland I think the Scots should just vote yes and Fook off its been dragging on and on for years, just go for it and get it out your system.. but it has to be 100% and a one way ticket.
And like I typed on the other post its a union so we the should all get a vote . And what currency would they use and would it have Gibsons face on the notes.
Salmond now has 2 years to put up as many barriers between Scotland and England as he can. So far, he's played all the other parties pretty well and a few sweeteners have got people voting for his lot. I'm not convinced that all these people want Scottish independence, they just think the SNP are more fit to rub the country than anyone else just now.
Salmond talks a lot about 'the people of Scotland" and what we apparently all want and are asking for. In actual fact it's simply that those who want independence are often extremely passionate about it, are very well informed on the reasons it will apparently benefit us to split and make a lot of noise about it all (in between watching repeats of Braveheart). They probably account for about 10% of the population (in my experience).
I'm firmly against it, but that's always been because I see no reason to change things from, when you look around a bit, a fairly successful system we have in Britain. However, with a referendum looming over us, I consider it time for me to do some research, and will be doing what I can to convince others to vote no, and remain part of the union.
Correct me if I'm wrong but if Scotland became independent and no longer sent MPs to Westminster then that would significantly change the dynamic of the UK Parliament. By my calculations, the tories would no longer need the libs for a majority
Currently, Westminster is tories 305, labour 255 & libs 57 but without the Scottish MPs, it would be tories 304, labour 214, libs 46
I'm surprised Dave isn't all behind the idea :lol:
The break up of the Union should be decided by ALL the Union members not just a minority north of the border. For that reason alone Cameron has got it right in so far as the UK Parliament should decide when the referendum should be and in addition it MUST be open to all the UNion members.
And do you know what would happen, it would be the biggest turn out to vote ever by folk who'd vote yes for a laugh south of the border.
It doesn't affect the people of England if Scotland are devolved, it affects us Scots though, and for that reason we should be the only country voting on it.
I voted no. I don't want Scotland to leave the union. It would be of huge detriment to all members of the union. As Mr Stone and Mr G5 have said before on other threads, the majority of Scots don't want it either.
Salmond knows this, hence he's trying for the more devolved situation, however, that is nothing like the independence he craves. It's easier for him to make Parliament out to be a bunch of meddling cunts, than accept that if it was a straight yes/no independence vote he'd lose.
Sorry to bring some moderate views and sense to this discussion.
I am curious as to how the finances pan out, as currently the revenue raised from north sea gas and oil all goes into the treasury, then through a formula calculated many years ago a sum of money is paid to the scottish government by the treasury. At the moment the sum of money the scottish government has per head is above what the british government has per head in England. Meaning the Scottish government has the money to offer free care for the elderly, free tuition fees for students and free prescriptions ... these are the ones I know about.
anyway if independance happens and the british government no longer recieves gas and oil revenue is this greater or less than what we have to pay out???????
will Scotland really be better off or is this really the reason this Salmond bloke sounds like he is edging towards a half way house with more powers but still a fat cheque from the british government.
It would be a remarkably stupid government that would allow Scottish independance AND the North Sea oil and gas revenues to go to Scotland - that would be fiscal suicide. I will lay odds that IF independance goes ahead then those revenues and future exploration sites, particularly in the Atlantic will still be under Westminster power. Scotland will lose out quite dramaticaly on its ability to raise revenues - God help the Scots in that situation.
The formula where Scotland gets about 50% more per head than English was only originally intended as a temporary measure that was expedient as part of devolution. It should be reassessed in anycase that will see a dramatic reduction in the per capita grant.
let them go it will be only way they will finally lose that chip on their shoulder planning to hold it on the 700 year anniversary of a battle they won just about says it all about the backward looking Celts
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own, why not England ?
maybe without a "UK" there would be less need for a 'UK' parliament at Westminster, it would have less power. So really Westminster is against Scotland splitting off because if it does it is then it becomes fairly irrelevant.
we would then have a situation where a parliament has no remit to rule. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland would be fine but England would have to be run has department of the Scottish parliament until England got a parliament together (if It wanted one, other wise Scotland would administer it, adinfinitum)
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Volkszone Forum
7.1M posts
80.5K members
Since 2003
A forum community dedicated to aircooled Volkswagen owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, restorations, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!