oldfrenchorn, let me guess. Your post on the the perceptions in France shows that there would appear to be even more misconceptions there than in England. Obvoiusly you are better placed than I to report such things but I can only respond with laughter, as it is so wide of the mark. Is this stuff in the French media or is it people picking this up from the English media once removed.
Fair enough. Not that English anymore then, unless you think an independent Scotland is in England's best interests? I have a sister who's made her home in Scotland with her (also) English husband and their English born children. I do wonder how independence will affect them. No idea how they intend to vote btw, assuming they too are eligible. Though I strongly suspect NO.
I do think an independent Scotland is in Englands best interests. I have explained all this on the thread on Independence on the Spurs page. Forgive me if I do not go through it all again. Large numbers of English people are actively supporting the YES campaign in Scotland.
You forget that we are ahead of you. To answer your question in detail would be boring for all, but I will say that the system for getting into health care is becoming very difficult because of the huge overspend, and the officials are looking at every possible means available to prevent people joining. The current EU law is being flouted in many people's eyes as the government strives to cut back. The driving licence that I mentioned is actually law, so no way round that. French government ministers have stated openly that Scotland could not piggy back into the EU. They would not wish to see parts of France try and use that, but it is unlikely that people will have the chance to have a say. Corsica would like to be independent, but does have it's own regional government with tax raising powers they could use, but don't. I have no say in what happens in Scotland and it will not have an effect on me, but I do have a number of friends born in Scotland who are worried about what their status out here could become.
Camerons government have already made it clear that anyone in Scotland will be able to retain their British passports if they so wish whatever happens. So I am not sure how the French could discriminate. These still sound like scare stories to me for the benefit of Corcsicans or any other parts of France thinking about going for Independence. There have been delegations from all over the world visiting Scotland to learn how this is all working. The small countries are all very excited about what is happening in Scotland. The Belgians, The Basques, The Catalans, and so on. There are a surprising number of small 'nations' in Europe trying to break away from a larger neighbour. Independence within the EU is a widespread aspiration that will probably see the break up of the established order. Scotland is just the beginning.
You passport shows where you were born. Try to even buy a house here without a birth certificate, marriage certificate, divorce papers if you have any. To join the system you need a birth certificate, translated into French before they will even accept your application. Easiest thing going to see where you come from.
YOur quote is from one member of the Adam Smith Institute who happens to be a "Yes" supporter. Thereclearly are other views - but you do not accept that. Try another Adam Smith Institute article. Would an independent Scotland sink or swim? Written by Henry Hill As the United Kingdom approaches its date with destiny and the 2014 Scottish independence referendum, the debate surrounding the possible shape of a post-Union Scotland are only going to get fiercer. What Scotland might look like outside the United Kingdom, whether Scandinavian utopia or isolated backwater, is one of the key fronts on which the battle for the hearts and minds of Scottish voters will be fought. Alex Salmondâs vision, designed to maximise separationâs appeal, is of a Scotland with options: joining the Euro; membership of the Common Market without the single currency; keeping the pound. All intended to give the impression that an independent Scotland would be the master of its own economic destiny. Yet there are good grounds for suspicion that this is not the case. For a start, it is unlikely that Scotland would be able to claim automatic membership of the European Union as the SNP often claim. In the instance of Scottish independence, the continuity-UK would almost certainly qualify for âsuccessor stateâ status under international law, due to possessing (much) more than 50% of the territory and population of the United Kingdom as presently constituted. Thus the UK would retain its identity and membership, leaving none for Scotland to inherit. Were Scotland to then apply for membership in its own right, there are further hurdles. The UKâs treasured opt-out from the single currency is not offered to new members; likewise the option of joining the European Economic Area without acceding to the EU. Thus Scotland would either have to join the EU, single currency and all, or not at all. Even assuming the SNP retained their former enthusiasm for the single currency and took the plunge, thereâs no guarantee theyâd be accepted. Spain, Italy and Belgium are all wrestling with their own separatist movements and will not want to establish the precedent of secessionists gaining EU membership â see Spainâs position vis-Ã -vis Kosovo. If not Europe, then what? In an effort to soften the blow for soft-unionist Scots, the SNP are keen to stress the links that they would seek to retain with the UK. Scotland could, the nationalists argue, keep the pound, and British submarines could still be stationed at Faslane to fend off the fear of defence cuts. Assuming all this was true (and in the case of defence it almost certainly isnât), Scotland on the pound would be tied to the British economy without having a say in the governance of it, while trying to keep whole communities going via sustaining now-foreign military bases. The SNP thus risk locking Scotland out of the UK without breaking free from it. As the pro-Union campaign put it, there are polities outside the UK with similar relationships. Until recently, they were called âdependenciesâ. Sorry but you made a little foolish assumption that I am a NO supporter without knowing anything about me too. In that you are incorrect. I support neither side. I do not follow the NO Camp's strategy - all I do is ask the sensible questions that need to be asked. The defensiveness of the Yes campaign is frightening. Is it wrong to ask questions about what indepemdence means BEFORE the die is cast? Of course it is. Any sensible person who buys something questions and gets facts in advance of committing themselves. I find your view that you should vote Yes and then find out what you have got incredible.
Henry Hill is a young man with a political axe as can be seen from the description. The YES supporter is The Director of the Adam Smith Institute. Hardly a fair fight is it. If you think your position is neutral it highlights the attitude prevalent in the shires of England that has simply no idea what is happening in Scotland. You may indeed think you are neutral but your argument, probably through no fault of your own, comes across as the standard NO position. This is the effect of only hearing one side of the argument. Believe me I have heard these arguments over and over again so forgive me for being dismissive. It is not meant as attack on you. I am sorry that you think I am 'one eyed' but I am not in the least repentant. The MSM and Westminster dominate with their NO campaign. It is clear that in England this has been a non event and little proper information has been made available. I do believe that the BBC, after a large protest in Scotland of thousands of people demonstrating at Pacific Key, are trying to be even handed but the establishment is so engrained in their DNA they are finding it difficult. Faced with this war against the YES position we use the internet as has happened in other world events, such as Obama's election as president and The Arab Spring; just two examples. Better Together (NO) named their own campaign Project Fear and that has been their tactic throughout, not without some success. YES has chosen to be upbeat and rely on presenting the facts. In the last week a change has occurred as YES highlights the potential danger of the NHS situation for Scotland. [QUOTE I find your view that you should vote Yes and then find out what you have got incredible. ][/QUOTE]. That is not my view at all. We have a great deal of information about an Independent Scotland BUT I am not a politician I do not go in for spin we try to tell it as it is. Some questions as I have said are not answerable until after the vote. They needn't be! If Westminster wanted to it could pre negotiate but Cameron made it clear that he would not do that. It is not clever or subtle to then ask the YES camp questions which you know are not answerable because your side is not joining in. That is just political games. As each day goes by more people in Scotland are seeing through this spin and the tide is now beginning to move quite quickly to the YES position. Many of us now believe we are winning this referendum. Canvassing is bringing in very high percentages voting YES 60%plus. This flies in the face of the opinion polls who have consistently given NO a lead, but even they have shown a move towards YES in recent days.
Spurf - we can agree to disagree on this. You are obviously a clever bloke who has made up your mind and believe in your point of view. Fair play. I hear both sides of the argument but as I am not allowed to vote I do not have to choose a side. I just think that it is sensible to ask questions before you make a decision and if that is the No campaign's tactic then it seems sensible. In fact I deliberately tried to frame the question to exclude people like you who live in Scotland as you all have probably got it in your faces all the time. I wondered what the rest of hte UK thought about it all - if they did at all .
Well - anyone who really thinks it's going to be yes might as well get down the bookies because you can still get 9/2. I agree with Leo that this is pretty much under the radar and it is strange. It would be folly to think that a yes vote will not have an impact on all of us even if we don't know exactly what that impact will be!
I brought this up with my colleagues at work and was almost lynched! They think that they can vote to leave the Union. My view is that they can hold a vote to see if Scotland wishes to leave the Union and if yes the whole of the UK should vote to decide whether the UK should be broken up or become smaller. I think the rest of the UK would vote YES!
What would you expect from the lefty BBC? I would no longer have to watch BBC Scotland programmes/news when I would rather watch BBC national programmes/news.
Agree. There are also a number of what I would call intelligent people supporting the Yes vote but Mr Salmond is really relying on the poor, dependant and those on benefits to carry the vote by offering them lower taxes, better pensions, services etc. Yes I think the English don't care or even think about it. One benefit of a yes vote would be that we would very seldom see a Labour government in Westminster wrecking everything every 10 years. The climate is not that wretched, just a few degrees cooler that's all (Where was all the flooding this year?). I think you are right about the chip on the shoulder goes back hundred's of years and they seem unable to move on. More recently the hate is directed at Mrs Thatcher for a number of reasons, not least the Poll tax (bad move on her part, testing it on the Scots), where most could not see they were actually going to be better off with it.
A number of very large signs stating Yes or No Thanks have been appearing around here of late and it is perhaps indicative of the intolerance of the Yes voters that the No Thanks signs are being defaced or destroyed. So much for free speech & democracy. Enough of my rantings, more tomorrow maybe, to stir the pot a little more.
