Scottish Independence

[Leo]

Spurf is right on one thing which he stated much earlier in the thread. Democracy works better in small units. If you take party political membership as an indicator of active political participation then the UK, and also Germany have rates of party membership running at under 2% of their populations. Smaller countries like Belgium, Austria and Finland have rates of over 10% - Austria being the highest, no less than 17% of their population are members of political parties. My belief is that Scotland may follow this trend with a marked `politicization' of its population. The present party system would indergo many changes in an independent Scotland - you cannot expect parties born out of Great Britain (Scottish Labour, Tory etc.) to remain intact permanently. Also the SNP must change as the reason for its existence would have gone. The only party in Scotland which is truly European in its origins is the Green Party - and, judging by their success in Ireland, they would do well in an independent Scotland with PR. Other than that new 'Scottish' parties would develop which would change the political landscape. I have no doubt that Scotland would be more democratic as a result. So, in the long term, this is not about the SNP but rather about Scotland. I also think that they would succeed economically. We are focusing very much upon Scotland here without asking the question - where does this leave England ? Would we finally realise our mistakes only upon seeing the disappearance of the Union Jack ? Would we feel smaller and even less significant in the eyes of the rest of the World ? Would we see a redefining of the idea of 'Englishness' ? And - more directly, would our negotiating position within the EU be weakened ? We would lose seats in Brussels because of reduced population - but could there be other consequences ?

I can't get excited about thinking about the effect on England while the yes campaign still trail by 11% in the poll of polls. Despite everything they have made precious little inroad into the No vote - they seem to pin all their hopes on the undecided going to them. I shall think about England in the unlikely event that the Scots hit the self destruct button.

UK politics has always been very different to Europe so am not sure lessons there are very valid. All I know is that even the Scots prefer to vote in UK elections - 66% over the last 5 against 52% for the Scottish Parliament. That does not say much for Scottish Independence or small country voting - and the failure of the "dual" PR system to prevent a party with less than 45% of the vote gaining overall control in Parliament with 54% of seats does not say much for Spurf's New Age Democracy there. It is no good BB going on about England's first past the post system and the Tories getting control with 36% of the vote or whatever you quoted. We do not seem to like Coalitions nor PR but prefer to say "let the biggest party rule" We do not understand as they do in Europe that you cannot blame each coalition party for some policies that get enacted that they oppose but have to accept as a compromise. Personally I prefer PR and coalitions - but perhaps that is just me.

 

[yorkshirehornet]

. Personally I prefer PR and coalitions - but perhaps that is just me.

ditto.....

 

[oldfrenchhorn]

I don't think that small units do produce better democracy. As a Parish Council in England, and you don't get much smaller than that, we had an issue where we thought people living in the village should have their input. So we thought that the best way was to ask every household for their view. We set out two short paragraphs, pro and con, and asked three questions which required a box to be ticked. There was then a box for any remarks they wished to make. We delivered them to every house, 230, and set up several collection points to make it as simple as possible. After the 4 week period we had asked people to state their view, 17 had been returned.

This would not give any real indication of people's feelings, so we went out to try and collect them directly from the houses. The common feeling was straight forward. We simply elect the council, then expect you to do the best you can for us. If we wished to be involved we might stand for election.

It was the last time we bothered with that approach. That for me sums up the view of people in England getting more involved in local issues, and as for local/national politics forget it.

 

[Spurf]

How very typical of you to pick the figures that best suit you. I made clear my figures were the average of the four Scottish Parliament elections and the last five UK elections. As there are two strands to each Scottish Parliament, Consituency and List I took the combined average - there were few differences between those. You however choose the only election where the SNP have done well. Their share of UK votes - with a decent turnout of 66% on average have been 22,22,20,18 and 20 (that last in 2010 being only 3% more than the Tories ) In Scottish elections the SNP got 28,22,32 and 45. on an average turnout of just over 50%. Note SNP is a one trick pony - without Salmond in 2003 they got just 22% salmond knows this is a once in a lifetime chance - no other SNP leader will come close to matching him.

Scotland in reality is not voting for Independence but for the rhetoric of one man. That has a dangerous precedent.

Are you a politician? Because you twist words and spin just like one. The rhetoric of one man! and now you attempt the nazi slur. You just lost your argument and any respect I might have for your position.

The figures I quote are simply the current situation I have no interest in proving anything with them. I post them as your post did not make clear the current Scottish Parliament situation which IMO is the more important one going into this referendum.

I am not here to defend the SNP or any other party I am only interested in promoting the YES vote so that Scotland can decide for itself who it wants as a government. I will make my decision on who to vote for once an Independent Scotland is offered the manifestos of its new parties for a new country.

As I said in my post that you quote. Independence will bring change.

 

[zen guerrilla]

Are you a politician? Because you twist words and spin just like one.

Something, perhaps, you are not guilty of as well?

Independence will bring change.

I agree with you Spurf, independence or separatism (depending on your viewpoint) will bring change, and it may not be for the better for either party.

 

[Leo]

Are you a politician? Because you twist words and spin just like one. The rhetoric of one man! and now you attempt the nazi slur. You just lost your argument and any respect I might have for your position.

The figures I quote are simply the current situation I have no interest in proving anything with them. I post them as your post did not make clear the current Scottish Parliament situation which IMO is the more important one going into this referendum.

I am not here to defend the SNP or any other party I am only interested in promoting the YES vote so that Scotland can decide for itself who it wants as a government. I will make my decision on who to vote for once an Independent Scotland is offered the manifestos of its new parties for a new country.

As I said in my post that you quote. Independence will bring change.

Excuse me but when did you show any respect for me or my position - I have only had insults from you, but as I have seen you insult others who disagree with you that is par for the course.
Your figures were ridiculously confusing as you did not even bother to set them out well. I have given more than a one time view- 300 years of history is surely worth more than one last election. I have shown that barring that one vote (on a 50% turnout) the Scots have shown no enthusiasm for Independence or even the SNP.
You promote the Yes vote with half truths and selective, blinkered quotations, slagging off all quotes and facts that do not fit your pre-conceived model. Unlike you I am not really bothered by the outcome of the vote - but as a statistician I like to see facts used correctly. If the Yes campaign could show exactly what they would do after they have torn apart a structure that has endured 3 centuries and produced the greatest change in history elvating a small island to world importance - and even now an economic power far beyond its size I would consider their arguments. However they do not know what they will do about the EU, the currency or variations in oil revenues. These are fundamental to the future of Scotland and matter to Scots. My brother and his wife want to vote Yes but are unable to as he says "the yes lot are unable to make a sensible case for how it would all work, beyond insisting they are right.... Leaves a no as the only sensible vote....."

As for the slur as you put it - it does not relate as you narrow mindedly think to Germany but to many more examples where a charismatic dictator comes to power, sometimes on the back of a popular vote and leads his country to disaster. I am not going to quote the examples to you but leave you to do some of the research you so love. I do not think Salmond is an evil man like some of them - but he is single minded and ruthless in pursuing his own dream even though it is clear he has not thought it through properly and the Scots children and grandchildren will pay for his obsession and folly.

 

[colognehornet]

I can't get excited about thinking about the effect on England while the yes campaign still trail by 11% in the poll of polls. Despite everything they have made precious little inroad into the No vote - they seem to pin all their hopes on the undecided going to them. I shall think about England in the unlikely event that the Scots hit the self destruct button.

UK politics has always been very different to Europe so am not sure lessons there are very valid. All I know is that even the Scots prefer to vote in UK elections - 66% over the last 5 against 52% for the Scottish Parliament. That does not say much for Scottish Independence or small country voting - and the failure of the "dual" PR system to prevent a party with less than 45% of the vote gaining overall control in Parliament with 54% of seats does not say much for Spurf's New Age Democracy there. It is no good BB going on about England's first past the post system and the Tories getting control with 36% of the vote or whatever you quoted. We do not seem to like Coalitions nor PR but prefer to say "let the biggest party rule" We do not understand as they do in Europe that you cannot blame each coalition party for some policies that get enacted that they oppose but have to accept as a compromise. Personally I prefer PR and coalitions - but perhaps that is just me.

One of the biggest problems with Britain's present voting system is that so many people vote through fear ie. they know that the party they like has no chance in a particular constituency and so they vote defensively or tactically ie. to stop Labour or the Tories. The end result of a whole nation voting in this way is a disaster. People remain within eg. the Labour or Tory camps not through conviction but simply to 'stop' the others getting in. Another feature of British politics which is unique is the incredible difference between regions in terms of their voting. There are some constituencies in eg. Surrey where even a gorilla could be elected for the Tories - alternately parts of the North East, South Wales etc. where the same could be said for Labour. To an extent this is true in some other countries but it's not as extreme as in Britain. In Germany it would be unheard of for any party to gain more than 50% of the vote, anywhere or at any time - although Bavaria comes closest. Coalition government needs time to develop - because parties have to first develop into realistic coalition partners, and in England you have only 3 to choose from - in Germany there are 7 parties with a realistic chance of getting into office (ie capable of getting over the 5% hurdle at a general election) such a situation takes time to develop.

 

[oldfrenchhorn]

Strangely I have a Dutch neighbour who wishes that their system was more like the first past the post. He tells that after a recent election they went for fourteen months without a proper government as the various parties could not agree a coalition.

I have been quite happy with the coalition in the UK. They promised upgrades to my pension, and have delivered.

 

[bragantino]

Accepting that Scotland is likely to gain independence and there is going to be a realignment of the political party system there. I think a Scottish Conservative party will struggle on as a minor right of centre party, some sort of liberal/democratic party will rise from the centre ground as the current Liberal Democrats have really shot themselves in their collective feet by allying themselves to the Tories, both parties are almost non-existant in current Scottish parliamentary politics both in Edinburgh and Westminster. There are quite a few left of centre parties, SNP, Scottish Labour, Greens and then there are a couple of independents from the Highlands and Islands. Then there is the Scottish Socialist Party who have, currently, no MSPs.
Being used to an almost two party system, as the Liberals haven't really been a political force for some time, will Scotland revert to that type of model - as late as the 1950s Conservative representation was quite strong - or will they go for a wider coalition based government.
One thing I do see is that if all the promises made in the attempt to get people to vote for the Yes campaign are kept Scotland will need some extremely creative bookkeeping to remain anywhere near balancing their collective books.

Another thing I saw and must take issue with is the contribution made to the UK economy by Scotland as an entity, did these figures include an element taken from oil revenues? This surely is a figure that is for the UK as a whole and not really something that can be divided up easily. Also whatever the oil reserves are (25bn barrels, less or more) this quantity will reduce as it is extracted, oil is a finite resource once it is gone that's it there is no more; and I feel that is something the Yes campaign has not grasped.

I have several Scottish friends and their political views are right across the board, so judging from them I have no idea how this vote will go. Although if the tax take is increased to fund a more frofligate fiscal programme they will be voting with their feet.

 

[vic-rijrode]

The overwhelming impression I am getting, judging by some of the bile pumped out by our friend Spurf and others, is that, such is the hatred of all things English and especially Westminster, many Scots would rather live in a independent Scotland regardless of how dubious the economics may turn out to be. They prefer to convince themselves that all their ills are down to how they are treated by the folks south of the Border.

I don't believe Spurf for one moment when he says it is not anti-English - it's blatant that it is!

Jolly good luck to them, I say, if that's what they want.

 

[scullyonthewing]

The overwhelming impression I am getting, judging by some of the bile pumped out by our friend Spurf and others, is that, such is the hatred of all things English and especially Westminster, many Scots would rather live in a independent Scotland regardless of how dubious the economics may turn out to be. They prefer to convince themselves that all their ills are down to how they are treated by the folks south of the Border.

I don't believe Spurf for one moment when he says it is not anti-English - it's blatant that it is!

Jolly good luck to them, I say, if that's what they want.

I must say that I'm really warming to the idea of them leaving the union. I would love to see the smug boy Salmond struggle to find the money to meet all of his financial promises.

 

[Leo]

One of the biggest problems with Britain's present voting system is that so many people vote through fear ie. they know that the party they like has no chance in a particular constituency and so they vote defensively or tactically ie. to stop Labour or the Tories. The end result of a whole nation voting in this way is a disaster. People remain within eg. the Labour or Tory camps not through conviction but simply to 'stop' the others getting in. Another feature of British politics which is unique is the incredible difference between regions in terms of their voting. There are some constituencies in eg. Surrey where even a gorilla could be elected for the Tories - alternately parts of the North East, South Wales etc. where the same could be said for Labour. To an extent this is true in some other countries but it's not as extreme as in Britain. In Germany it would be unheard of for any party to gain more than 50% of the vote, anywhere or at any time - although Bavaria comes closest. Coalition government needs time to develop - because parties have to first develop into realistic coalition partners, and in England you have only 3 to choose from - in Germany there are 7 parties with a realistic chance of getting into office (ie capable of getting over the 5% hurdle at a general election) such a situation takes time to develop.

I am not sure fear is correct Cologne but I do agree a lot of present day voting seems to be against a party rather than for a party. Perhaps that is because we no longer think our politicians are honest or capable so we vote against those we think will mess us up most. The regional differences are huge - but more it is city versus shire. We also have a strong "blame" culture in this country that runs far deeper than politics - whatever goes wrong is never our own fault - we always find someone else to blame.

Accepting that Scotland is likely to gain independence and there is going to be a realignment of the political party system there. I think a Scottish Conservative party will struggle on as a minor right of centre party, some sort of liberal/democratic party will rise from the centre ground as the current Liberal Democrats have really shot themselves in their collective feet by allying themselves to the Tories, both parties are almost non-existant in current Scottish parliamentary politics both in Edinburgh and Westminster.

-
Polls still show an 11% lead for NO, Brag - I don't necessarily believe polls but there is certainly no foregone conclusion either way yet. Also don't underestimate the Tories and Liberals they still have substantial support if not seat representation - in UK last 5 elections they have averaged together 35% of the vote; and in the Scottish Parliament 21%. In an Independent Scotland with no "Westminster" baggage both will expect to do better.

The overwhelming impression I am getting, judging by some of the bile pumped out by our friend Spurf and others, is that, such is the hatred of all things English and especially Westminster, many Scots would rather live in a independent Scotland regardless of how dubious the economics may turn out to be. They prefer to convince themselves that all their ills are down to how they are treated by the folks south of the Border.

I don't believe Spurf for one moment when he says it is not anti-English - it's blatant that it is!

Jolly good luck to them, I say, if that's what they want.

I agree Vic - the Scots do seem to have a big chip against the English and Westminster in particular (Salmond cannot appear anti-English so he has used Westminster as his whipping boy). Spurf is acttually English which makes you wonder how he can be so passionate in all this. Perhaps he hates the Scots and is joyfully trying to get them to shot themselves in both feet

 

[Leo]

I must say that I'm really warming to the idea of them leaving the union. I would love to see the smug boy Salmond struggle to find the money to meet all of his financial promises.

Trouble is he wont care - he will go down in history alongside Bravheart, rob Roy and the rest - he fought the English and won. What does he care if generations to come pay for his arrogance?

 

[aberdeenhornet]

Salmonds in a win win situation. If he can magic up some dollars (watch the chinese come in as he sells the kitchen sink for a short term buck) he'll deliver and it'll be his success though it'll be the 20-50 year time-frame that will pay with true third world poverty. If he fails to borrow cash then it'll all be the fault of Westminster-the bank of England, why do you think he wants to keep the pound? Without backing of the lender of last resort its farsical to think that any government can build a robust economy on the world stage. Democracy is a failed concept when you give idiots the vote!

 

[oldfrenchhorn]

In a short break I turned on the news just as they were getting a report from Wales about how they perceive the goings on. Seemingly the Welsh National party has come out strongly against sharing the pound with Scotland. What they are hoping for is a debate about the funding they receive from Westminister. They would like more money to spend as they wish, but seemed to accept the fact that Hertfordshire would like more as well.

 

[Spurf]

The overwhelming impression I am getting, judging by some of the bile pumped out by our friend Spurf and others, is that, such is the hatred of all things English and especially Westminster, many Scots would rather live in a independent Scotland regardless of how dubious the economics may turn out to be. They prefer to convince themselves that all their ills are down to how they are treated by the folks south of the Border.

I don't believe Spurf for one moment when he says it is not anti-English - it's blatant that it is!

Jolly good luck to them, I say, if that's what they want.

Anti Westminster I certainly am. The English bit is far fetched I AM English.

I see I am getting acused of bile and lies and all sorts of mischief. I will admit to not being polite all the time but I think the problem here is the same as always when peoples little bubbles of belief are challenged.

I see vic-rijrode you have returned to your original position of thinking this is all about the English, which is a shame because it really is not. There are many English people involved in this campaign. Last night I sat around a table with 16 people 6 of whom were English, all working hard for Scottish Independence. It really is gutter press stuff to try to portray this as an anti-English agenda issue.

 

[Leo]

I see I am getting acused of bile and lies and all sorts of mischief. I will admit to not being polite all the time but I think the problem here is the same as always when peoples little bubbles of belief are challenged..

Bile and lies accusations eh? Show us these accusations - or do you consider accusations of half truths to be bile and lies? How are your bubbles then? You seem to be having trouble with them being popped too much.

 

[Spurf]

I hope some people, perhaps just viewing, have found my contribution to this thread useful. My intention has been to try to counter the Establishment view which is pretty much all you get in England.

I have to say that there is a core of guys on here who have fought their corner and pretty much represent some of the problems of what a biased media can do to peoples perceptions. In the face of ignorance, prejudice and misinformation I think I have kept pretty calm.

Why am I doing this on an English football site? Because I genuninely believe that Scottish Independence will in the long run be in the best interests of England, therefore it is important that the debate spreads down south. The UK will have to change in the coming years I have no doubt of that.

 

[Spurf]

Bile and lies accusations eh? Show us these accusations - or do you consider accusations of half truths to be bile and lies? How are your bubbles then? You seem to be having trouble with them being popped too much.

The thread is there for all to see.

 

[Leo]

The thread is there for all to see.

So you cannot find it eh? Nobody is going to look through 339 postings - show us if it is there.