One further question from me. At present all MPs, all judges and all higher officers in the Police and Military swear an oath of allegiance to the present person calling herself Queen (and to her successors). The question of the abolition of the monarchy is one theme which cannot, legally, be discussed in parliament - hardly the mark of a developed democracy. Why do the SNP want to preserve this royal connection ?
Spurf - the No campaign should hire you - I think you have managed to persuade almost everybody on here that the Yes campaign has no real substance and that if there are real facts as opposed o oppinions they do not favour the Yes campaign.. If you followed the Watford board more you would find it full of trendy lefty strike supporting teachers, civil servant and public force people All right you bunch that last was only for fun. Although I had to go up to the Royal Free again today with Mrs L and surprise surprise there was a strike on the Central underground line. .... and welcome back Yorkie - now accept my chess challenge as I am feeling good as we think we have finally managed to buy a house here in Selsey - 350 yards from the beach - Mrs L is over the moon.
Bearing in mind I am not the SNP therefore this is just my view. I believe the SNP thinks they have to be careful about the monarchy because of the strong support in Scotland by a large number of people for that institution. They don't want to alinate voters by threatening 'their Queen' However there is no guarantee that Scotland will elect the SNP in 2016 following Independence so it is for the people of Scotland to decide her fate. The sooner the better IMHO That should upset a few Watford Royalists
New Labour? Right wing neo liberal organsiation. Did you not work that out yet? Just remembered you had the right wing winger John Barnes didn't you. The one dribble wonder! Any hopes for your team this season?
It did I always consider myself middle of the road disliking Cameron as much as Milliband - I would vote for any politician who actually would carry out 10% of what they promised. They are all rubbish. Yet on here I think I come across as somewhat to the right of marvelous Maggie T and Attilla the Hun
you have just moved onto very dangerous ground John Barnes is a god in human form to many of us. The jury is well out n this season for us. Some good players but still to be forged into a team. Good result for Spurs last night.
I am a lifelong Spurs fan from a Spurs family and look for their results almost as soon as I look for ours. Only difference is that the family moved to Watford when I was 11 and I went to watch Watford with friends and then could get to and afford to have a Watford season ticket - which is why they became my number one. Yes - Selsey in west Sussex - a lovely quiet little fishing village not far from sandy west wittering.
This is the Sir Ian Wood who heads a company that has a licence for Fracking at Lomond in Scotland. No wonder he is keen to work for a NO vote.
Woods interests are in the oil industry and whats best to sustain it for his not inconsiderable companies to make profits. Read into that what you like, I for one am also interested in whats best for the industry which by default is best for me, best for society (oil is not just for burning, do you take medicine or use plastics?) and best for Britain. I am not aware of any fracking licence in Lomond, indeed as I am aware there is no authorized consented fracking project anywhere in the UK but I wish there were..... Wood owns a large share in a US feracking company but we in the UK are lagging badly, we have ambition to lead the fracking revolution in Europe but its not happening....yet.
Spurf, your obsession is clouding your judgement. A professional from the oil industry gives you facts, something you tell us you are seeking. Rather than say how these facts fit into your view, you change the subject to suggest that another professional is only producing reports, that most accept to be reasonable, to suit his own outside interests. You have not convinced me that apart from trotting out Yes vote material you have a case.
I could not convince this bunch of old right wing thatcherites of anything. If I showed you a blue sky you would tell me it's black. Fortunately I don't have to convince you as most on here don't have a vote anyway. This is about spreading the news that Westminster is a corrupt institution and providing a little evidence. There will be others that are interested. oldfrenchhorn you are judging something you know little about and your assesment of what is or isn't a fact is perhaps 'clouded' ,to use your expression, by too much french wine but thanks for providing an example of gullibility. Never mind it was a good result for you all yesterday against that bunch hooligans.
AS you didn't answer my previous question:- [video=youtube;TN7nvWvPWro]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=TN7nvWvPWro[/video]
What question? This is nothing new or interesting to me. What's clair a project we in the industry have been working on for quarter off a century got to do with Ian Wood, Fracking, Loch Lomond or independence? Just remember what you see in the public domain and what is discussed in public forums is around 5 to 15 ywears behind what is actually being worked on strategically now. I'm telling you a fact, if there is Scottish Independence and if this results in instability in terms of investment environment and any uncertainty as to whether there will be a tax grab this will result in a halting of investment in the Scottish oil industry. This is the reality, we have the highest lifting costs in the world and this is only offset by favorable political stability and "low" risk of changes in licence structure, Take those pull factors away and we have nothing. I suggest you take a chill, research the history of UK oil and what has stimulated boom, bust cycles why we're currently in a stable position but with a short term (hopefully) decline in exploration activity and long term projects dominated by heavy oil (low tax take to make economic so for your info even if we produce another half a million barrels a day of heavy the tax revenue to the exchequer to fund independent Scotland would only be the equivalent of an additional 100,000 bbl and we're losing traditional oil at a much higher rate than we'll be able to replace with heavy therefore tax take will be significantly lower, its not just a bbl equation its the type of bbl, whether it be heavy, light, off Shetland (also lower tax take) or not, old or new field, just research it all with an open mind and work out what's needed to ensure we continue to find and produce. Then ask yourself if this is something that could/would be delivered by an independent Scotland or if it will be delivered by Westminster with devolved powers to Edinburgh? You along with everybody else are quite entitled to reach your own conclusion and then vote accordingly.
