Tuesday, 9 September 2014


We interrupt the normal programming on this blog for a party political statement from our sponsor....

I've been watching with interest the Scottish Independence debate as the date for the poll gets closer.  The YES campaign slowly catching up the NO vote to the point where now in some polls the YES vote is predicted to win (btw how can a poll of approx 1,000 reflect the outcome from an electorate about 4 million?).

OK - cards on the table here, whilst not a Scot and living about as far away from Scotland as it is possible to in the UK I want them to stay in the Union.  Why?  Well I just feel we are better together (as the slogan goes).  I feel that it is better to work together on the issues of inequity in society etc.  I also like that the Scots are very pro the EU and I'd like to stay in that, losing them before that referendum may be a blow to the rest of the UK.

However I do feel now strongly that the Scots are getting their vote next week that the rest of the UK should have the right of reply on some of the issues raised.  Let us say they vote YES. The timetable then says that they will negotiate a separation with the rest of the UK.  This is a huge deal for everyone in the UK questions like
  • How much of the UK debt will Scotland take on?
  • Defence strategy?
  • Use of the pound in Scotland...

Do the rest of the electorate in England, Wales and Northern Ireland get any say?  We've seen the disaster of the Eurozone in recent years where currency integration without political integration has been a major problem, the slow recovery in the Eurozone is a direct result of this problem.  I'll admit some years back I thought we should rush into the Euro to help the UK in its trade with the rest of the EU.  Now our decision not to is completely vindicated and I'm a born again pound supporter.  So would I like a "Poundzone"?  No.  Simple Eurozone didn't work I fail to see any argument to convince me otherwise.  Also if Scotland is a new sovereign state then they can't get entry to the EU without taking the Euro by my reading of the rules.

The Scottish YES campaign have long stated that they would ensure the removal of UK nuclear weapons from Scottish bases.  To me therefore they cannot be part of a unified defence strategy - rightly or wrongly we currently maintain a nuclear deterrent, once you have that decision made then your whole defence strategy has to be worked around that both strategically and from a cost base point of view.  I fail to see how you can have a truly integrated strategy with one party not committed to that strategy.

Interesting that 4 million (less than half the population of London) seem to be determining some major issues for the rest of the country without those people then having a right of reply I feel.  Is this truly democracy at work?


  1. Well, I'm in the Yes camp although I understand there are huge but not insurmountable difficulties ahead. I don't blame the Scots for wanting to get rid of us -- as this country continues its inevitable drift to the right, with two more or less identical rightwing parties endlessly swapping power, they're tired of not being able to implement a political programme that more suits their needs.

    The currency is a bit of an awkward question, although as a last resort they could use their own pound, like the Isle of Man or the Channel Islands do.

    How did the gig go?

  2. I live in Scotland and am firmly in the "no" camp. Reasons on my blog at www.cosmicsurfer.co.uk :-)

  3. I can't help feeling the Scotland "Yes" votes are about to commit suicide and are dragging us with them. If they break off, there will be monumental issues detrimentally affecting defence, trade and our general standing in the world - for both them and us. As Cameron said, it's not like it's a light-hearted decision that can be reversed in five years with a general election. This decision is monumental and will last for the next few centuries!

  4. I have been uninterested I must say but Husband explained his views to me yesterday - I did ask - and now I hope they stay. I think they will.

  5. Obviously, I have no dog in this fight being from the USA, but I'm curious if, post election, the conspiracy theories have started up about election fraud, etc.? I do know there were some pretty powerful interests in the "no" camp (banking, finance, our own Yank govt.,etc.) with lots of money to throw around, and the results of the vote seemed to have been somewhat counter to the polling data. As we have had our own issues over here with potential shenanigans in elections (see Bush 2000 election as the most recent example), I was wondering if there's been any negative aftermath, or if things have gone back to business as usual?

    1. Far from it! Lol... the Scottish 1st minister who'd been the leader of the independence campaign has resigned. However the govt promised a bunch of devolved powers to sway the vote to staying in the UK. They promised an aggressive time line. Guess what? Back tracking already! What a surprise. Also now there is a whole bunch of talk of an English only parliament, regional assemblies in the North and the Midlands.... Well have more layers of government soon than a Mille-feuille!