Home—Blog—Scotland should show Western leaders an example – by telling voters the truth
Mar 13, 2013, 02:33
Posted byMerryn Somerset Webb
Comments (65)
I wrote last week about the way in which the union argument has finally begun to be made in the Scottish press. That the argument is well made on both sides is absolutely vital, so I was pleased to see that the piece was pretty well read. It has now become one of our most commented on blog posts ever! So I thought you would like to know what the press were saying on the arguments last weekend.
First up, the Mail on Sunday, which makes the point about passports. According to the SNP, “Scots will continue to be British citizens even if the country votes to leave the UK.” They would still travel on British passports and use all the UK’s diplomatic services abroad – although over time, the government expects them to take dual citizenship and eventually be Scottish citizens.
Labour politicians in Scotland weren’t, as you might imagine, particularly impressed by this. What is the point of separation, they asked, if nothing is to change? And why would the British government be happy for Scots – having voted to leave the UK – to use the “facilities of any British embassy or consulate around the world, while the Scottish government would contribute nothing for those services?” Yet another example, everyone agreed, of the SNP not being much fussed about detail.
Next up, The Times, which noted that, under current calculations as part of the UK, Scotland is estimated to make contributions to the EU of around £124m. But under independence, assuming most of the North Sea oil is attributed to Scotland (as the SNP assumes), that contribution would rise to more like £378m. But even that calculation assumes that Scotland would continue to get the UK’s rebate.
The problem? There is no reason why it would. Instead, say the experts, there is “little chance”. The result? The cost of the EU to Scotland would rise to £673m. A total increase of £549m – “more than the entire spending on hospitals and GPs in Fife.”
The Sunday Times was worried about something else: poll fatigue. So many voters have “tuned out” of the debate that Sir John Farmer, one of the SNP’s big backers says he can’t see more than 40% of the electorate turning out for the vote – that’s particularly the case given the practical difficulties of getting 16 and 17-year-olds interested and on the register. If he is right, we do have a genuine disaster on our hands. Huge decisions such as this need full participation.
Sign up for a 3-week FREE trial of MoneyWeek and get the following free as well
"The only financial publication I could not be without." John Lang, Director, Tower Hill Associates Ltd
This week in the Falklands, over 90% of the electorate turned out to vote, and 99% of them voted for the same thing. There is no doubt there about the view of the people. Scotland needs to make sure that this is also the case in its own referendum.
The next thing the papers focused on is just as serious: Scotland’s finances. A leaked report has, says Gillian Bowditch, “revealed the naked truth on Scotland’s post-independence economy.” And it isn’t a pretty sight.
Last summer, John Swinney produced a report that made it clear that whatever the SNP might say in public, they expect Scotland to have a slightly larger deficit than the UK by 2016/17; that running an economy dependent on volatile oil revenues is tricky stuff and that an independent Scotland will have little choice but to have a go at cutting its welfare and pensions bill. It also recognises the extent of the set-up costs of a new country (think £500m-plus to create a new tax system).
Hamish MacDonell picked this story up in the Mail. Swinney’s leaked document has, he says, at one stroke “changed the entire atmosphere of the independence debate.” How? By putting the truth out there.
The SNP might say that these numbers aren’t valid anymore, but this report wasn’t put together very long ago, so there is little reason to think that anything has really changed. The fact is that Scotland would “have less to spend after independence... would have to obey strict rules laid down by the UK Treasury” and would have to cut both defence and welfare (pensions in particular) to have a hope of financial survival.
But MacDonell makes an excellent point on all this. This isn’t a Scottish problem. It is a Western problem. All governments “have been spending more than they earn for years now and it cannot go on.” So, instead of backtracking and pretending he said none of this stuff, Swinney would be a million times better off by confronting it.
He should say in public what he clearly says in private: that unless we do something soon, we will slide into an irreversible position of debt and depression. We have to earn more and spend less. Then, says MacDonell, he should go further.
He should say that an independent Scotland would start with massive financial problems. But that independence would give it the chance to do what no one else appears to “have the guts to do” – having a real go at cutting the spending it just can’t afford and living within its means.
This would be something of a risk of course, but there is a chance that an unexpected outbreak of honesty paired with conviction might actually attract voters to the independence cause. “It may seem odd to some politicians, but what voters actually want is to be told the truth.”
PS - Some good news – the Lonely Planet has just announced that Scottish food has improved so much that it is now “among the best in Europe”. Edinburgh is a veritable “connoisseur's delight” and Glasgow is a treasure trove of “quality cafes and restaurants”. So that is nice.
Published in Blog More articles by Merryn Somerset Webb
By Matthew Lynn, May 17, 2013
May 16, 2013
By Bengt Saelensminde, May 15, 2013
By Merryn Somerset Webb, May 09, 2013
Leave a comment
(13 March 2013, 02:54PM) Complain about this comment
Would Scotland not be a net recipient of EU funding (once membership was granted) e.g. The Cohesion Fund applies to member states if the GNI per inhabitant is less than 90% of the EU average? Works for Most of the new entrants!
(13 March 2013, 03:09PM) Complain about this comment
Might as well become independant and see what happens.Short term pain for long term gain? People don't like the idea of any pain though even if it leads to a better future.
(13 March 2013, 04:40PM) Complain about this comment
I used to think there was a point in voting too, that a vote matters. But of course I thought that, I was educated in their system and programmed to think it. The truth is it doesn't matter its only a part of a great charade. Voting only helps create a legitimacy for the so called ruling elite to tell us what to do and how to live. What is a vote for independence anyway? Independant of what exactly? Any vote, whether yes or no is a vote to be included as a one of 'the ruled'
(13 March 2013, 04:45PM) Complain about this comment
The 'arguments' you have used quoting right wing English newspaper and Labour politicians are very weak indeed. In fact, they're basically scaremongering stories. I would have expected better but maybe not and that's why I stopped subscribing to Moneweek. Which reminds me. You at MW are currently peddling an article entitled 'The End of Britain'. LOL! And you want the Scots to go down too?
(13 March 2013, 04:49PM) Complain about this comment
After independence Scotland will be the new Portugal: an underperforming midget with booze as its only real export. Except Scotland won't have Portugal's nice weather.
(13 March 2013, 04:51PM) Complain about this comment
Could Scotland not declare itself independent from the UK and leave the European Union?If you don't want to be ruled by Westminster, why would you want to be ruled by Brussels?Then everyone in England would be dead jealous!
(13 March 2013, 05:26PM) Complain about this comment
Like Aff at 3 above, I am feeling old and cynical about the democratic process right now. The UK and US governments primary function is to get their citizens (and future citizens) to underwrite any losses banks care to throw at them. There are no plans anywhere for anyone to live within their means - only plans on attempts to expand an already exhausted credit system.Honesty from politicians would be great but under our democratic system, they don't need to be honest. With only a few real marginal constituencies, democracy is only a word that is used to manipulate us into thinking casting our vote makes a difference.
(13 March 2013, 05:32PM) Complain about this comment
#5 BD.The biggest seller,Johnny Walker,is Dutch owned.Scotland does not export Whisky as much as distill it under license for foreign owners. A few Scots get a job, which is nice and the distiller gets a modest fee (4% of the selling price) the profit sits in a Dutch tax haven to benefit Diageo's overpaid execs.But I like the underperforming midget analogy. Accurate and offensive in one go.Merryn suggests it will cost each Scotty adult £190 a year in fees to the EU to buy its freedom. That is only £12.30 a year each for the rest of us.I for one will happily pay £12.30 pa to be shot of them.
(13 March 2013, 08:03PM) Complain about this comment
I have to say this is all getting very tedious and may end up being quite harmful and counter productive as a tool in promoting Money Week. We all know that most of the rubbish masquerading as newspapers in Scotland are owned and controlled from London and will therefore never contribute to a balanced and objective debate. As for glaikit eejits like Boris.......keep up the good work.
(13 March 2013, 08:12PM) Complain about this comment
@BorisJohnnie Walker is owned by Diageo which is British, headquartered in London and listed on the LSE. And has an English CEO. I think you are confusing it with Shell.
(13 March 2013, 10:02PM) Complain about this comment
#10 Shinsei. Diageo is listed on the London Stock Exchange,but their Johnnie Walker brand was passed to a subsidiary called UDV(SJ) BV in Holland. They sold it on to Diageo Brands BV. It is they who technically own the brand and keep the profit from sales to customers,while underperforming midget gets a small commsission for actually making the hootch. Diageo did this with most of their brands ,like J&B, getting an at least 18% tax avoidance advantage to line the pockets of their execs who habitually take £3million pa each for flogging booze to the poor.
(13 March 2013, 11:19PM) Complain about this comment
It appears that you are now attempting to transfer the Scottish Independence debate to this blog having been trounced on the previous one by those in favour of Scottish Independence. Anyone who makes an argument by parroting newspaper articles and opinions is lazy.It appeals to them because it is a substitute for research & thinking. The only truths to be found in any newspaper are THE RACING RESULTS. a articles from newspapers is a lazy way of making an argument. It replaces proper research ,analysis,and reaching a conclusion. The only truths to be found in any newspaper are THE RACING RESULTS.
(13 March 2013, 11:31PM) Complain about this comment
I have my freedom. So does everybody else in the UK which is why they are free to write this drivel.Presumably the two drivers for voters are the desire for independence as a matter of principle and/0r the prospect of being better off as an independent nation; largely an economic discussion.The SNP ( previously an acronym for say nothing positive) are allowing 16 year olds to vote in an attempt to appeal to enough hearts rather than heads. If they ever actually considered all of the practical and financial consequences, they wouldn't dare admit them.It's no coincidence the referendum is on the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn.
A small observation about federalism, the United Kingdom and the European Union. If federalism is undemocratic when it comes from Brussels, why would it not be undemocratic if it comes from Westminster?
(14 March 2013, 10:19AM) Complain about this comment
Despite the anti independence propaganda at the start of the article, I think the central theme of living within one's means is right on. I am all for independence if the purpose is to create a sound economy. If its to perpetuate the welfare culture that exists in some parts of Scotland now, where living on benefits is a career choice, then count me out.
(14 March 2013, 10:46AM) Complain about this comment
Yes, what would happen to a socialist Scotland when it becomes apparent that we would have to pay for it ourselves?Presumably our disproportionately large public sector workforce would have to pay more tax. Hang on a minute, who would be paying them in the first place? Oh bugger.Hopefully the border will remain open to allow emigration of those saddled with extra taxes to England. If companies are required to pay higher rates of tax in Scotland, that's where the jobs will be.
(14 March 2013, 04:53PM) Complain about this comment
What has this all got to do with the price of fish, or more precisely, gold, shares, bonds etc.? If I want to blog on an ill-informed debate about Scottish independence I will go to the Scotsman.com or similar where a selection of pro and anti trolls waste their lives posting their half truths and other nonsense. Merryn, get back to what you are good at - like predicting the price of gold, house prices collapsing, Japan resurgent - Oh I forgot, none of that has happened. Why do I bother with this rag? Must try and remember my banking internet thingy and cancel my direct debit.
(15 March 2013, 09:31AM) Complain about this comment
One thing I often wonder about is this. If the Scots leave the UK and it results in their poverty, would England, Wales and Northern Ireland, who would presumably benefit, allow them to come back in?
(15 March 2013, 10:34AM) Complain about this comment
I use to think the Economist was a well informed journal until it started talking about Scottish Independence. That's when I realised that it was ill informed, riddled with prejudice and unable to see beyond the M25. If that was all it knew of Scotland, which we are told is a fully integrated part of the UK, or "us" as they liked to say, what did they know of the wider World? So I cancelled my subscription as a waste of money.Now you are going the same way. It seems that "we" in Scotland are not part of "we" in the UK! Where your articles will always take an English perspective and are not a balanced look at the facts.The facts are that Scotland subsidises the rest of the UK (mainly London) to the tune of more than £800 per man, woman and child in Scotland. All we get from London are lies and broken promises. I would be a fool not to vote Yes, for these reasons alone.
(15 March 2013, 10:58AM) Complain about this comment
I have fallen into the trap of believing you (Merryn) are persuaded by this unionist claptrap. However, I have a higher opinion of you than that. Perhaps your journal "should show Western leaders an example – by telling voters the truth". Given the unassailable benefits for Scotland of independence, perhaps you should be telling your fellow EU and UK citizens to vote YES. or did you come into journalism to undermine democracy.
(15 March 2013, 12:40PM) Complain about this comment
Telling people how to vote is the democracy of dictatorships willie H.Explaining the differences so voters can make an informed choice should be a prerequisite of all those who seek common assent.Has the Economist altered its London centric view by cancellation of your subscription or might it have been better served by your continuing membership and observations on its short sightedness? Arguments where cultural differences are such that a union is no longer feasible need to be listened to and acted upon accordingly, ideally without recourse or rancour, but acted upon nonetheless. Those whose sole argument for independence is that they'd be financially better off, are purveyors of a poverty beyond that of money and some might argue we'd be well rid of, regardless from whence they came.Alex Salmond is a charismatic and pursuasive politician who it's worth remembering, is,in the final analysis,still a politician...
(15 March 2013, 01:43PM) Complain about this comment
If like Merryn, you believe all politicians lie then why should anyone believe one word that the better together campaigners are saying. After all according to money week us Brits are all doomed.
(15 March 2013, 02:48PM) Complain about this comment
Unfortunately Highlander, a comment such as yours is as far removed as any other from explaining the differences to allow an informed choice, even though there isn't a single lie contained within it.
(15 March 2013, 02:58PM) Complain about this comment
Why not go independent? Scotland has a proud history. Some things might go wrong in the short term but long term Scotland will be a nice sized Denmark, Norway economy-ideal. Just deal with the short term consequences and get on with it.
(15 March 2013, 05:16PM) Complain about this comment
@29 Romford DaveThere is absolutely no point in attempting to engage in any form of intellectual debate with those who can only hold one point of view in their head at any one time. It is obvious to me that the epigram known as Hanlon's Razor is at work here.
(16 March 2013, 10:25AM) Complain about this comment
205 Willie H "pressure on the UK Govt to cut a deal will mount"207 James H "Even more pressure on Unionist Scottish MSP,s" Made on previous blog on Scottish Independence. BBC NEWS TODAY " The Scottish Liberal Domocrat leader believes Unionist parties are getting closer to agreeing how Scotland should look if voters say no to Independence.He will tell his party conference there is "growing concensus" behind the drive for more Devolved powers.........He will tell delegates he now wants greater focus on possible alternatives," The process of "cutting a deal" has started.
(16 March 2013, 10:33AM) Complain about this comment
If we Scots are such a basket-case as your media quotes and some of the above comments suggest, why would the London government be so keen to keep us in the Union? I and many of my countrymen see London much in the same way as the English see Brussels: a remote and self-serving bureacracy that only turns its eye in our direction when there is revenue at stake.I plan to vote for independence partly because so many in the London establishment don't want it. I am not at all optimistic that it will be carried given the media propaganda.Perhaps the referendum should be extended to include those in the South East of England - who seem to be very keen to express their opinions. I for one would welcome their votes!
(16 March 2013, 12:36PM) Complain about this comment
In view of the fact that the SNP has now achieved it's objective of a freevote , in Scotland. for Scottish independence, the Scots have now lost out anyway. If the Scottish vote is yes the Scottish government and people will have to work extremely hard to make it economically sucessful or end up as Eire has. When Eire became independant the British Government no longer took into account the Irish people when setting policy such as interest rates and taxes etc. and why should it. Look what has happened to Eire.The fact that the British Government want the Scots to stay in the Union has encouraged them give to incentives to Scotland that other deprived parts of Britain have not received.After the election this will not be the case
(16 March 2013, 12:38PM) Complain about this comment
So after the election, if the Scots want to go it alone, and good luck to them, their welfare will no longer be Britain's affair. If on the other hand they vote to stay in the Union and I hope the do,the British Government, seeing that this issue will not raise it's head again for at least 50 years, will no longer feel obliged to give them sweeteners to stay in the Union. Scotland will just become another region of Britain and be treated accordingly.So whichever way the vote goes I feel the Scots have already lost
(16 March 2013, 01:55PM) Complain about this comment
It is rare to get an truly objective opinion on Scottish independence. The SNP, as you would expect tell only the advantages, the Unionist parties and the (mostly London dominated) Press like to make it sound as if independence will be the end of the world. Both visions are clearly wrong. What is needed in a true debate is a proper argument putting forward in a rational way the benefits and disadvanatages of independence. It would be great if at least one the pro-Union papers occasionally put forward some of the possible benefits of independence - which clearly do exist. As it is, reading most London based daily papers, they sound more like propaganda sheets for the Union, so much so it is hard to take them seriously. I do hope that Moneyweek will take a more objective stance.
(16 March 2013, 02:03PM) Complain about this comment
A common misconception is that a 'NO' vote will be a vote for the status quo - even hints at a bit more power for Scotland. Do not be fooled. it will be no such thing. Tory MPs in particular are itching to end the Barnett formula for funding Scotland. They will remain silent until after the referendum so as not to scare Scots away. If Scotland voluntarily ties itself to the Union for another generation, then all bets will be off. They are sure to cut funding. More, they will swiftly act to prevent a repeat of the referedum by curbing the powers of Holyrood, and there have already been hints at 'fixing' the voting system to prevent a single parth ever getting a majority again. I suspect that they will sieze power back again to the centre whatever they say now.
(16 March 2013, 03:24PM) Complain about this comment
The children about to be born here in Scotland will look back as 20 year olds, and tell their parents either they were wise or bigoted and stupid with their vote next year. Unfortunately for them, an impoverished third world Scotland wouldn't be likely to be allowed back into the UK, especially as more tax money is spent up here in Scotland than in England; so why would England want Scotland back? We are much stronger together .
(16 March 2013, 03:42PM) Complain about this comment
39 Jeremy R I agree. The SNP have issued a statement today in response to the Scottish Liberals that the referendum is a simple Yes or No to Scottish Independence. Neither they nor the Scottish electorate will be fooled into thinking that any vague promises of more powers sometime in the future will influence the result. I should have said @ 34 The Unionist parties attempt to cut a deal has started. Even they have come to realise that defeat is likely and think that this "red-herring" may be a way out.
(16 March 2013, 04:47PM) Complain about this comment
As several people have already quoted, Independence will not be as healthy as the SNP present it to be, but it probably won't be a bad as the rest of the UK think either. Although the SNP haven't really properly thought out the details.If Independence does happen, the likelihood is that the currency will have to change, as will insurances, banking, passports,house prices will drop, a border would have to be created etc etc.Being Independent might be a great way of sticking the two fingers up to London, but in reality there will be a lot to lose and much economic pain before any long term benefits are felt.
(16 March 2013, 09:15PM) Complain about this comment
@ AJ. I am really surprised at how emotional the English threads are on here - being neither Scottish or English. I thought empire building was a bit 19th century!If Scottish people do not feel represented, they should take whatever measures are necessary to get themselves represented. For me, living here in London, the current Tory ruling parties look anti democratic(and elitist) and England still supports a large and lazy feudal class that harks back to exploitative landowners. Scotland should make demands - indeed we all should!
(16 March 2013, 11:52PM) Complain about this comment
AJ in Scotland@42 - the best solution will be for Scotland to retain GBPounds for now (as the Channel Islands and Isle of Man do), but maybe in a few years float the currency. Ireland retained a 1:1 exchange rate from 1922 until 1979, when it entered the ERM. Why should insurances, banking etc have to change? They will be governed by Scots law for Scottish residents and under EU law it is possible to have a contract based on another country's law (eg England) anyway. Passports will no doubt be issued and car number plates will change, but no big deal. Scotland will no doubt join the Common Travel Area (like Ireland Channel Islands, Isle of Man), so no border controls will be required. Indeed, there are no land borders with passport controls left anywhere in Western Europe so why on earth would Scotland/England be an exception? And on house prices, my guess is that the Edinbugh area will enjoy a 20 year boom, as it becomes a fully fledged European capital.
(17 March 2013, 01:49PM) Complain about this comment
Perhaps the "independence" of Scotland may enable England to escape from the "Joel Barnet formula" which England has had to pay to the Scots for so many years
(17 March 2013, 02:29PM) Complain about this comment
Leo King 45 No "mays" about it. When Scotland becomes Independent it will retain all tax revenues raised in Scotland. The Scots will be much better off. Do you not understand this?
(17 March 2013, 06:05PM) Complain about this comment
#46. James H. Scotland will also retain all the logistical problems, like having much of it's population in remote places, with huge infrastructure implications just getting water and power to the newly independent Jocks.Have you considered the need to raise road tax in a free Scotland? Your underperforming midget country has 2,200 miles of roads,30% of the UK network . But little old Scotland has just 9% of the population. I make that a 240% rise in road and fuel duty just to fill the pot holes.
(17 March 2013, 06:21PM) Complain about this comment
I recall that Alex S used to point to Iceland as a model of how successful a small independent country could be. Bet he doesn't do that any more!
(17 March 2013, 06:53PM) Complain about this comment
#48 Iceland has 270,000 people. 5% of Scotland's population.But it does mange to looka fter 900 miles of roads.
(17 March 2013, 07:32PM) Complain about this comment
@ 47 Boris - I distinctively remember you blogging, admittedly some time ago, that good democracy cannot operate with large populations such as England. Scotland has 5 million - not a huge country but not inconsequential either. It certainly has a big enough population to be able to negotiate its way in the world.Correct me if I am wrong here, but I am interpreting a lot of what is being said on this thread as nothing more than bigotry against Scotland. And if bigotry against the Scottish is commonplace in England - this makes Scotland's case for independence very compelling.
(17 March 2013, 08:22PM) Complain about this comment
I remember the post too Ellen, it argued exactly as you've outlined.Scotland should do very well if they chose to go it alone, a passionate population in a land offering plenty, a few unrepaired potholes seems a small price to pay. I'm sure they must be used to potholes anyway, I know we are in Essex.
(17 March 2013, 08:27PM) Complain about this comment
47 Boris Donut. UK.GOV Estimated road length UK 2011. 245,000 miles BORIS DONUT Estimate?Made up? 7,000 miles AWAY AN BILE YER HEID !
(18 March 2013, 12:03PM) Complain about this comment
Salmond is not an idiot - he knows the independence vote will be lost but that is not what he wants! A substantial yes vote will give him a mandate to negotiate further independence - lite from Westminster while maintaining the Barnett formula (a Scottish subsidy from England) etc and continuing to vote on all UK matters. Indepence for London and the SE as the only nett contributors to the UK pot!
(18 March 2013, 12:20PM) Complain about this comment
27 Romford DaveWhat I am talking about is that Merryn by disseminating these unionist lies urges a No vote, when she should be advocating a Yes as that is plainly what is best for Scotland. By advocating No she is putting London before Scotland and to do that not presenting the true picture. For instance do you really believe that "John Swinney produced a report ". If you believe John Swinney, who at present manages £30 Billion has time to write such reports you have a very strange view of the World.I am fast coming to the conclusion I shouldn't waste money on this rag either.
(18 March 2013, 04:21PM) Complain about this comment
I found the headline to this article amusing. It's is fanciful to expect Scottish politicians like Alex S and his crowd to adopt an honest line on any argument put forward for independence. Today politicians of all persuasions are, almost by definition, career politicians; they are focused on their own ambition which is often 'dressed-up' as conviction. The future well-being of electorates is way down their 'to do list'. Alex S. is very skilled. Like all good marketeers he will 'pick and mix' with the truth, sow fear of continued union and rely on misinformation to convince the electorate that his way is the right way. And he'll sound plausible!I hope good sense prevails and that an informed majority of the Scottish people do not fall for it. If they need any examples of the machinations and downright dishonesty of politicians, recent history within the EU is a good starting point, (e.g larceny in Cyprus, Barrosso's laughable declaration that the euro crisis is over, etc).
(18 March 2013, 05:00PM) Complain about this comment
55 Martin 3 points. 1. The sole "raison d,etre" of the SNP since its foundation in 1934 has been Scottish Independence.It is not a pro-devolution party.It has successfully used the devolved Scottish Parliament, since it,s foundation in 1999, as a power base & stepping stone towards Scottish Independence. 2.The Barnett formula is not "a subsidy from England"It is what the UK Govt. estimates to be Scotlands pro-rata share of all taxes & revenues raised in the UK.The SNP has produced figures which prove that when Scotland becomes Independent and retains all taxes & revenues raised in Scotland,this figure will be substantially more. 3.At present the SNP MP,s at Westminster ,as a matter of principle,do not vote on any issues which solely affect England. When Scotland becomes Independent there will obviously be no Scottish representation at Westminster.
(18 March 2013, 07:31PM) Complain about this comment
@59 Boris, Don't put words in my mouth. I made no mention of roads or 'additional cost burden.' I did allude to what I would call your anti-Scottishness demonstrated in you post 23 above. Why would Scotland want to remain the junior partner in an alliance where their input is treated with this level of contempt? I am not Scottish but I would feel very patronised by some of the posts on here that suggest that Scotland need England to babysit them!
(18 March 2013, 08:00PM) Complain about this comment
#62 Ellen. How sad that your desperation to find fault has missed the point altogether. You said at #50 something about dmocracy only working in small countries,which I agree with. You seem to assume I have said Scotland won't work as an independent nation, when the point is I don't care if it sinks or swims. I just want rid of it. I am very anti-Scottish and do not seek to hide the fact. If it is a successful democracy so what? At least we don't have to put up with their moaning.PS you responded to my post 47 which indeed was about Scotland's inability to pay for it's roads.
(18 March 2013, 08:04PM) Complain about this comment
#52 James H. I refer to trunk roads which are administered by the Highways agency. Sorry my figures were rusty. England and Wales has 7,300 miles and Scotland 2,200. The rest are lanes and single track routes run by local authorities. It still shows Scotland has 25% of the roads with 9% of the population. So do try harder next time if you want to undermine my valid views with your nasty agenda.
(18 March 2013, 08:38PM) Complain about this comment
64 Boris Donut So it,s trunk roads now-are they the only ones with potholes? Get back to the stove and stick your head back in the pan.
(18 March 2013, 09:34PM) Complain about this comment
Boris, for your information, Ireland (the Republic of), has more roads for a smaller population than Scotland and seems to manage with a simliar level of road-related taxation to the UK. Try not to let your hatred of all things Scottish and your love of the sound of your own words prevent you from doing a little research.
(19 March 2013, 11:58AM) Complain about this comment
I'm English and living in Scotland, and I'm not alone. There are plenty of Scots living in England (many of them are MPs representing English constituencies, or running English companies, or employed by the English media). The "us" and "them" arguments are particularly unhelpful and ignorant. Votes in the independence referendum are to be given only to those who qualify under residency rules in Scotland - which will seem very unfair to many Scots temporarily residing elsewhere in the UK, and to RUK residents who care about the Union.... And I have yet to find out which passport(s) I will qualify for if the unthinkable should happen.
(20 March 2013, 03:53PM) Complain about this comment
#53 Bayard. That is irrelevant. Ireland has been independent for 90 years.
(20 March 2013, 03:54PM) Complain about this comment
Seems to have been some heavy handed censorship by the Unionists here. On my reckoning 29 posts have been removed, mostly from pro independence types.
(20 March 2013, 05:51PM) Complain about this comment
@56. Boris - It appears that we now have active censorship in progress. I agree with you that it appears to favour the pro unionist debate to the detriment of the pro Indy supporters. This is a very good example of the manipulation and control over the media which the Scots have been subjected to over the years via almost all media forms of expression. Even though I disagree with almost everything you say. I do wholeheartedly defend your right to say it.
(20 March 2013, 07:15PM) Complain about this comment
#57 Highlander. The whole point is being able to speak your mind,without the cod liberal restraints of political correctness.I wish you no ill. I just wish your country would leave us alone.In the heat of a debate, with a limit on words used, one has inevitably to put one's point in a blunt and often oafish manner.I stand by what I previously said. I am no racist. I just have little time for Scottishness. I do not deserve to be lampooned by nationalists when I overtly support their cause.MW brings it upon itself if it chooses to comment on such emotive issues as whether the average Englishman gives a damn about Scotland. My ten pence worth says we don't.
(20 March 2013, 09:50PM) Complain about this comment
57 HIghlander58 Boris Macdonut I agree that there has been censorship here & on the previous blog. MONEY WEEK YOU OWE US AN IMMEDIATE EXPLANATION !!!
(21 March 2013, 07:05PM) Complain about this comment
First, there'll be a quickening. Then there'll be a gathering and then there will be only one.Saor Alba
(21 March 2013, 08:32PM) Complain about this comment
" Facts are chiels that winna ding, an downa be disputed" Robert Burns.
(21 March 2013, 10:24PM) Complain about this comment
@61 James H - excellent choice given that the first casuality of this debate will be the truth.Burns would have been a happy man knowing that a date has now been fixed for the referendum. After Burns read Blind Harry's Wallace, he told a correspondent how "the story of Wallace poured a Scottish prejudice in my veins which will boil along there till the floodgates of life shut in eternal rest." Wallace's dream of an independent Scotland may yet be realised.
(22 March 2013, 12:07AM) Complain about this comment
Apologies for coming so late to this debate but, after Scottish independence (which I support if only to get rid of the whiners as Boris said), what about independence for the English regions within some sort of federation? I also agree with Boris that democracy in a centrally-governed country of 60 million+ is just a farce. 5 million is about the maximum, and England (with the exception of London) can easily revert along the lines of the old Saxon kingdoms to which (lets be honest now) most of us instinctively feel we belong.
(23 March 2013, 12:14PM) Complain about this comment
#63 spesbona. Thanks. Perhaps i'm not as mad as several posters like to imply. Scots are whingers in the view of most other Brits,even the Welsh. I wish them good luck with their indepenence .I expect their democracy to work better.i hope they seriously look at dumping the current Royal family and restoring Scotland's rightful King. But most of all I hope they will leave us alone.
(31 March 2013, 10:58PM) Complain about this comment
On the last blog on Scottish Independence I reported the opinion poll on Scottish Independence as 40% For 60% Against. The latest poll by Panel base on 22/3/2013 for the Sunday Times & Real Radio Scotland now shows For 44% Against 56%. The gap is closing fast and the real debate with the Scottish electorate is just beginning.The Independence Parties,SNP & The Greens,have 18 months to inform the electorate of all the policies & facts on Independence. I have no doubts whatsoever that Scotland will vote YES in 2014 and will be fully Independent in 2016.
Name This will be the name displayed with your comment.
Email This helps us verify comments are genuine. It will not be displayed anywhere on the site and is stored confidentially.
Comment Please keep your comment within 1,000 characters and relevant to the main topic. We encourage healthy debate, but we don't allow insults or bad language. Anything off topic or unpleasant, we'll remove. Enjoy the conversation! Thank you.
To prevent spam-related comments please enter the characters shown in the 'Captcha' box to the left.
Enter the text from the box above
Remember my details
By leaving a comment you accept our terms and conditions.
Our free daily email, Money Morning, is an informative and enjoyable analysis of what's going on in the markets. Written by our Editor, John Stepek, and guest contributors.Sign up FREE to Money Morning here.
16 May 13
14 May 13
16 April BBC Radio Scotland(From 1h 45m in)
21 March Radio 4: Moneybox Live
12 March Photogallery of Merryn's talk at BAB London
Become a smarter investor in just 3 minutes a day.
MoneyWeek is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.