What the UK does not want Scotland to know about independance

The whole situation is mute really, what needs to happen is that the people of Scotland need to vote on what they want. I do not see what waiting 2 years to do this will do, surely the people already know and the uncertainty is only damaging economically for Scotland.

As for the oil, I doubt Westminster will allow it all to be dished straight back to Scotland, I'd expect that part of the deal of ratifying any independence vote would be that England gets to keep much of the oil reserves. Lets remember here that a referndum does not make something law and that it has to be ratified by parliment first. Regardless, the oil income is not great anyway as it is all farmed out commercially, it is people like BP that make the money out of oil, not the government. The UK's 80% tax on fuel far outweighs any income from the oil reserves themselves.

reply to post by michael1983l


Waiting two years conforms with what the SNP have always said they would do. (Have the referendum towards the end of their term in office). It also lets the mush that's happening in Europe sort itself out. It is also the year that Glasgow hosts the commonwealth games - the SNP hope to take advantage of positive nationalism.

As for the oil - that really is a moot point. Oil revenue makes up but a fraction of Scotland's GDP and there is such a thing as international law regarding who gets what with the oil revenue. 90% of it lies in Scotland's waters. BP might make the money - but they merely lease the fields from the host nation. Perhaps - perhaps not - the Scottish government would renegotiate the terms of those leases. BTW - there is still as much oil in the North Sea remaining as has been extracted already.

Further - in another decade Scotland will be the world's first exporter of green energy (courtesy of tidal turbines). I always knew our rotten weather and stormy seas must be good for something.

reply to post by christina-66


But surely the independence vote should not be about convincing people but actually about what the people want. Holding it back will actually discourage new international business from setting up in Scotland or investing in Scotland as there will be too much uncertainty over its currency and its economic stability, plus the whole taxation system is likely to change upon independence.

And of course Scotland will have to find the extra cash for its citizens, as you can see below with how much public money is spent per head in Scotland compared to the rest of the UK

England £7,121
Scotland £8,623
Wales £8,139
Northern Ireland £9,385

Scotland currently creates about £35 Billion in taxation annually, which only raises around £6370 per head leaving the Scottish people with a £2253 shortfall on current government spending per head.


Figures courtesy of various Wikipedia articles.

Also I wonder what will happen with the National debt, we owe nearly £1 Trillion. Surely if Scotland is to go independent, then it is only fair that they absorb a percentage of this debt pro rata? So Scotland would start its independent life with a massive debt and defecit probably.

Scotland must be freed from the oppression of the Englishman.The Englishman has looted the hydrocarbon wealth of Scotland which can make Scotland one of the richest nations on earth.The cunning and treacherous English plan to now loot the wealth of Argentine Falklands and is already looting the resource wealth of Libya alongside France.

British imperialism must be brought to an end.

reply to post by mkgandhas


Hmm, well Scotland has not really been looted, look at the tax expenditure above on the Scottish people. Secondly the Falkland Islands has never belonged to Argentina, so laying a claim to something that has never been theirs is just plain crazy and that is even before you take into account that the population of the island unaminously do not want to be part of Argentina. Then lets take into account that throughout the entire recorded history of the Islands only 11 Argentinians have ever lived there.

As for Libya and Egypt, well we have absolutly no political control over their country's at all, so how that makes us imperialistic I do not know. You do realise that democracy as we know it was born in the UK right?

reply to post by mkgandhas
I am an Englishman please explain how I have oppressed you?

I see the national stereotype of some one points and the Scots make a courageous charge may not be just based in legend.

You believe I am your problem then you are in for a very big suprise once your charge towards freedom is over.

reply to post by colin42


The English do not opress Scotland at all. They have a devolved government and make their own decisions on most Scottish issues. The tax distribution is certainly at minimum fair and at maximum in Scotlands favour. Scotland also takes an active part in the UK military and has many bases located in Scotland. All in all if you take Scottish and ?English nationalism and steriotypes aside for one minute, there is nothing but a mutual realationship that appears to be good for both countries. Some Scottish people do not believe this to be the truth and if they feel enough that way then they are free to vote themselves out of the UK in the up and coming referendum. Australia recently held one of these and they voted to stay under the Queen's head of state. I do not expect Scotland to be any different.

reply to post by michael1983l


Independent or no Scotland has to deal with debt whether it is in or out of the union. I assume that as we have about 8% of the UK population we would indeed take on the debt pro rata. There's a lot of speculation about the over subsidisation of Scotland. The barnett formula had to consider the comparatively large distances to be covered by public services in the rural part of Scotland compared to the denser populations to the south....that is why Scotland receives more spending per capita.

You will note that from your own figures the constituent of NI get more - and Scotland receives just £500 more than those in Wales. Many Scots may consider £500 per annum a small price to pay for self determination.

reply to post by michael1983l


Read the Op m8. The figures your showing is but a small part of a bigger picture. More money travels south then north. Much more

Originally posted by mkgandhas
Scotland must be freed from the oppression of the Englishman.The Englishman has looted the hydrocarbon wealth of Scotland which can make Scotland one of the richest nations on earth.The cunning and treacherous English plan to now loot the wealth of Argentine Falklands and is already looting the resource wealth of Libya alongside France.

British imperialism must be brought to an end.

Kashmir and Sri Lanka must be freed from the oppression of India, you have used your military to massacre thousands in both of these regions, where you have no right to do so. I call on Pakistan to make a stand or threaten a first strike nuclear attack on Mumbai if India's imperialism and murderous government are not brought to task.

reply to post by christina-66


You are right that is the formula it is derived from, Scotland can self determ should the majority of its people choose that is best for Scotland. you seem to have forgotten that Scotlands tax take is far less than that is currently spent on the people. So it is not £500 per head we are talking about, it is over £2000 per head. that will involve tax rises, should you wish to keep public services at their current level. Of course expenditure will also be increased should Scotland choose to have their own armed forces.

It is not as cut and dry as the SNP would lead you to believe, I also have to admit that the Daily Mail and the rest of the english media do not paint the correct picture for the argument of the union. It is probably somewhere in the middle of the two.

However there is a saying, you should be careful what you wish for. I myself I think am pro Scotlands Independence. Not because I think economically that it will be beneficial for either nation, I am just sick and tired of the resentment displayed by the Scotts against what they perceive to be English rule. I have read about many Irish folk saying since this economic collapse that their nation would have been better off staying in the union. I hope Scotland doesn't meet the same fate should they choose to go it alone.

I suppose one posative for the English should independence happen is that Labour will never get voted in again.

reply to post by Scott495



I do not believe it does. Like I have mentioned in the above theread, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Originally posted by AtheistFishMonkey
Leaving the U.K is fishy to me , they don't seem to understand just how serious this is , i mean , why not just join the long list of countries currently screaming " NUKE ME ! "

We hard working English taxpayers are sending billions up to our ungrateful neighbours every year , that will stop as soon as they get their "independence", Oil is a dying business and with competitors like America / England / Russia / China ... who needs enemies ? plus , most of the Oil that goes through scotland isn't actually theirs .

Once out , they can`t keep the £ , so ..... "its euros for you"

, they`ll have to pay for their own prescriptions , their own education , and will even have to spend a fortune on building their armed forces too since an independent country needs to be able to defend its own borders, and Scotland`s Army, Navy + Air Force are........ well......... a fraction .... of the British Army , Navy + Air Force , so pulling out of the U.K is pulling out of Britain, which means pulling out of the British Armed Forces , ( you cant have your cake and eat it ) , which can only mean bad news for Scotland as they would be too close to England for them to not be considered a threat. And since we've got all the nukes / subs / destroyers / and bombers , the S.A.S , and all the allies , not forgetting the British Army being the toughest force on the face of the Earth , i think Scotland needs to just S.T.F.U.

An independent Scotland will be the next country that goes to the I.M.F "cap in hand"..... either that or the next country to be "liberated" by England and the JEW . S . A.

Who`s going to pay for all the cider and tracksuits ?

That is the biggest load of rubbish I have ever read yet on this subject matter. Please take your bigotry and racism elsewhere you imbecile. You're giving your fellow country men a bad name.

reply to post by HallamFoe

That is the biggest load of rubbish I have ever read yet on this subject matter. Please take your bigotry and racism elsewhere you imbecile. You're giving your fellow country men a bad name.

That maybe so, but pot and kettle spring to mind.

reply to post by Freeborn


Round two!? DING! DING!

Originally posted by Scott495
reply to post by rigel4

 

True some feel this way but oil will allow Scotland to develop the need to no longer depend on oil. I think also there are other issues like changing taxes to encourage development, other exports and renewables. All in all from what i have gathered we would still be better off. It is however frustrating no one seems to know all the facts or is willing to share them with the rest of us.

There isn't that much oil in the North Sea anymore - it is not the booming market that it was in the 60s and 70s.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
Scotland must be freed from the oppression of the Englishman.The Englishman has looted the hydrocarbon wealth of Scotland which can make Scotland one of the richest nations on earth.The cunning and treacherous English plan to now loot the wealth of Argentine Falklands and is already looting the resource wealth of Libya alongside France.

British imperialism must be brought to an end.

nonsense. Scotland might have had money from oil in the past, but it isn't anywhere near as lucrative as people like to believe (anymore). An independent scotland would be a financial nightmare - chances are you aren't going to be allowed to use the £ ... I don't even know if I have to go further than that. It is really a very serious undertaking to propose introducing an entirely new currency into international money markets.