I must admit that I haven't followed this very closely, but what I have heard strikes me as a total shambles. When the two opposing sides aren't just taking cheap shots at each other, the Yes campaign seem to be following some romantic ideal that involves the Scottish population taking a massive leap of faith because there don't appear to really be any fully considered (or costed) proposals for how their devolution would actually work, while the No campaign's patronising scaremongering leaves me cold. So what have I missed? Are there any solid arguments, one way or the other, out there?
The Scots must make their decision. It could come down to a frighteningly small difference between the votes. (like the Quebec referendum in Canada which was apparently decided by 50,000 votes in favour of staying one country). If the Scots vote "yes", there'll be constitutional chaos for some years no doubt. But at least the severance will be clear, and England (and Wales and N Ireland) will be free to go their own way (presumably together, initially anyway). What worries me is that the Scots vote "No" and all the parties in Westminster turn cartwheels to give the Scots the most favourable terms at the expense of the rest of us. If Devolution-max means the Scots get full taxing raising powers etc and effectively govern themselves within the ambit of the UK, how can their 50 or so MP's continue to vote on English matters at Westminster, when English MP's have no rights in Scotland? Surely, there MUST be an English Parliament if we aren't to get throughly mugged off?
As a Scot I was talking to yesterday said, "Nationalism is intoxicating" and many are not seeing the pitfalls that await them. It will be disastrous for both sides if it's a yes as the hidden costs of so many facets of the separation will be crippling and we'll all be paying for it. However, the Scots will really be the losers as they'll be out of both the 'Union' and Europe, their oil revenues won't cover the cost. Another thing that was pointed out was their oil assets may be much smaller than they thought as international waters boundaries follow land boundaries and the England/Scotland border goes north-eastwards which takes a large chunk of the North Sea off them. The concessions the Scots will get if they vote No will cost a fortune anyway, so we really lose both ways. Salmond is a smart operator and would make a great snake oil salesman...
I think the campaign's been extremely dignified personally. Its a testament to the Scottish people that a question of this magnitude hasn't degenerated into mud slinging and bitterness. I'd have a different opinion Roller. I think the arguments have been extremely solid in as much as they can. The YES side can only do so much in that they can't predict the future. To be fair to them, they've given as detailed a response to all the issues as is possible IMO. The better together campaign have also argued well without recourse to threats of doom and disaster. There have obviously been exceptions but overall I think its been a very adult discussion. I've always been impressed by Alex Salmond but even more so now. Some of the interviews he's had to negotiate with dumbed-down southern journalists have been very difficult to watch. Continuous accusations of anti-Englishness, even though as far as I know he's never uttered an anti-English word, seem to be the best they can come up with along with other nonsense questions that are totally irrelevant. But he's treated these morons with a respect they frankly don't deserve and has calmly and assuredly dealt with every idiot point they try and catch him out on. That Richard bloke from Richard and Judy took the biscuit one day when I watched him make what he undoubtedly thought was an intelligent contribution to the debate but was everything I described above....only worse. After he made some analogy about a beaten wife in a marriage I switched off and felt the need to rush to the bathroom to purge myself. I think they should vote NO. Why break up a 300-odd year old union that's worked so well for so long? But the more it drags on, the more I find myself half-hoping that they vote YES if only so they can tell these w*nkers to fu*k off. But being a thrifty people (allegedly) I think the Scots will vote with their head rather than their heart and stay as they are rather than risk the economic uncertainty independence might bring.
It's getting beyond tedium, two shockingly prosaic and insultingly shallow campaigns. I'd disagree with your analysis of the Yes campaign though - they have not been romantic enough, trying to pander to naked individual greed with unsubstantiated and uncosted promises. The No's just majoring on the 'we fear change' tendency, very few positive messages about the Union. The self interest argument doesn't stack up - the cost of setting up a new state, transferring pension arrangements, the undoubted loss of some multinational head offices (and hence the tax revenue), legal requirement to move thousands of civil service jobs south etc etc, before we even get to currency. The practicalities are frightening - simple things like the ability and cost of setting up Scottish consular representation around he world. But if you sincerely believe that Scotland is a separate and distinct nation with the right to fully govern itself, that shouldn't matter, you would vote for independence in the full knowledge that it will be difficult - in fact the difficulties should be a part of nation building. If you vote yes purely because you think you will be better off as a result you will be deeply disappointed. Eventually Scotland would probably be ok as a separate country. There are many less viable "new" countries around doing ok - but they have all been born out of strife with peoples prepared to go through hardships to achieve self determination. I don't think that's the case in Scotland. Now we are faced with the worst possible situation, the vote looking very close, half the population being very unhappy whichever way it goes. Massive mistake by Cameron not to allow 'devo max' as a third option, which would have been the clear winner. I'm guessing it will be a narrow 'no' vote, but Salmond (how I despise him) and his merry bunch of idiots won't let it lie. The spirit of the Union is of course already dead. Matthew Parris in the Times today is sadly right. Swords, if you think the campaign has been dignified have a look at what has happened to Jim Murphy, one of the No campaigns more effective speakers (not saying much) who has been systematically targeted at public meetings. On the other side there have been death threats to Yes campaigners and someone has been convicted of threatening Salmond on line. Alistair Darling today accusing the Yes campaign of verbal and physical abuse. The level of debate has been very low and that's because of the quality of the protagonists.
Mrs Badger is a Scot exiled in England, she's gutted she can't vote and terrified what might happen if a yes vote succeeds. The No campaign has been limp and negative while the Yes campaign has simply tried to generate nationalistic fervour, reducing the debate to the age old England vs Scotland rivalry which it isn't about. The way they are promoting a Tory free utopia is short sighted and dangerous. I hope for the good of Scotland the undecided are actually all just No voters in hiding. Efforts to make No voters feel like they are not patriotic is dangerous and just wrong. Plus if it is a Yes vote I might end up with the in laws living a lot closer..for my sanity I hope it's No..
One of Churchill's pups says with no hint of irony Where's your other partner in crime? You're normally a double act please log in to view this image
The embarrassing pleading on behalf of the Westminster party leaders has been counter-productive. It would have been more effective if they had just shrugged their collective shoulders and said 'do as you like'. That would have spooked the separatists.
They'll vote NO out of cowardice and the acrimony will continue until **** knows when. Would have been better for all that they went, we have to accept where we are internationally; a small country like Slovakia or Macedonia but unlike them hated for our murderous foreign policy.
It's actually been quite a nasty campaign with plenty of threats on both sides. It seems to me that a lot of scots will vote yes just to get rid of any chance of a tory government. Very short sighted imo.
If they vote YES to rid themselves of the Tories, they could be condemning the rest of us to permanent Tory government.
A strategic error by Salmond, again - the SNP (490,000) only got 80,000 more votes than the Tories (410,000) in Scotland at the last general election, just the distribution of votes led them to get 6 seats and the Tories 1. The Lib Dems sat between them but got 11 seats. The Scottish Conservatives are the third biggest party in the Scottish Parliament, ahead of the Lib Dems. Scotland is not an inherently ersatz-socialist country - until 1964 the Tories were the most popular party by far. But they do hate Thatcher. Tony Blair would have had a resounding overall majority in the 1997 election even without the Scottish vote. England is not an inherently Tory country. There's a lot of disinformation out there. I have a strong suspicion that in the first Scottish election after a Yes vote Salmond would be kicked out, he's a very divisive figure.
If the opinion polls are anything to go by, Salmond has made very few errors. In fact, he's played a blinder. He's resisted the temptation to go romantic and has stuck rigidly to the bread and butter issues and its worked very well for him. Who'd have thought even 12 months ago that it'd be this close? The great and good English people should be united with the Scottish people as the UK however I can't help but feeling drawn to the YES side when I hear the likes of fanatical organisations like the Orange Order and public schoolboy Tory types from down south giving their full backing to the NO side. Its difficult to find oneself on the same side of anything with such people. Although he's a fruitcake in many ways, perhaps George Galloway's independent "just say naw" campaign which disassociates itself completely from that crowd will bring enough undecideds home to tip the balance toward NO. Then again, maybe his own divisive presence could turn a few the other way too.
Labour would lose 41 seats, though. A Yes vote would make it much more difficult for Labour to win a majority in Westminster. Should Labour win the 2015 election, or lead a coalition, there would almost certainly have to be another General Election in 2016 after Scottish independence is enacted.
Perhaps 'error' is the wrong word. Disingenuous may be better. He's led an anti Tory, anti Westminster, anti London 'we'll all be rich without them' campaign. And you are right, recently its been effective, helped by the complete ineptitude of the other side. But the onus is on him to have concrete, clear and deliverable plans for the future, and these are almost entirely missing. For example, there is a massive UK tax office in Cumbernauld, employing 11,000 people. It is illegal for the tax affairs of citizens to be administered in a foreign country, these jobs, or the vast majority of them, will have to come south, as will all the other government department jobs located in Scotland (the North East is the other major beneficiary of this to) bolster the local economy. Any idea how he's going to cope with this? Interesting that today he has said that the day after a yes vote will be a 'day of reconciliation'. yesterday his Finance Minister said it would be a 'day of reckoning'. None of which are reasons not to vote yes, if, as I said above, they believe its the right thing to do and are prepared to put up with the undoubted hardship it will cause. Doing it because you think you'll get more state cash and you don't like the Tories is the wrong reason. Of course if Scotland goes we can change our daylight saving to align with Europe which will be great. Plus our average rainfall will go down and average life expectancy will go up. All of these civil service jobs (I wonder what will happen to former civil servant Alex Salmond's pension), military bases, naval ship building etc will have to come south, with the tax revenue of the companies which move their registered offices to England.
I don't know the answers to your questions to be honest Stan but its very hard to have concrete answers on everything when in reality there's always going to be an element of delving into the unknown on a huge issue such as this. I suppose, as a politician, he's always going to be disingenuous as are practically all of them. I should say that when I referred to my dislike of public schoolboy Tory types above, I didn't mean them all. How could someone dislike Borris the Boy for example? Its just the small number of right-wing nutcases that think they're still living in the the 19th Century I was referring to. Every Country has them and they're not my cup of tea.
