Independence

[baz]

The question: What extra would independence give? keeps going round and round in my head. The more I consider the 'What extra?' question, the more I feel that breaking away is the wrong move.

The answer: Independence means not being dependent.
A sovereign Scotland would be responsible for its own resources, and the welfare of it's people.
It would negotiate it's own role and participation within international organisations,
starting afresh, to meet it's own needs.
It would be able to regulate the banking and financial sectors.
It would determine all tax revenue, not just Stamp Duty and Landfill Taxes.
Collection of tax in Scotland, would be for the benefit of Scotland.
It would have the power not to send it's people to their deaths, in illegal or speculative wars.
It would rid our country of weapons of mass destruction.

I could go on, but my question to you is .....
What "extra" does the Union provide, that Scotland couldn't provide for itself?

[Mzz pasico]

Yes from me.

[Hume]

Shona,

Will the UK be in or out of the EU after the referendum on the EU?
What will the basic, higher and additional rates of income tax be in the UK in 5 years?
Who will be in No.10 in 2020?
What further devolution will Scotland get if it votes No on 18th Sept?
Will the Barnett Formula be abolished?
If not, what will the block grant be in each of the next five years? Can you guarantee it won't be reduced?

You see where I am going. Uncertainty. The future is uncertain. I would rather Scotland had the power to adapt to that uncertainty in a way that benefits us.

International precedent and principle would support rUK as the 'continuing state' while Scotland would have to start everything afresh. It would have to apply to join the EU, NATO, replicate the work of the FCO, establish embassies and trade missions, set up an intelligence and security service, protect the nation, and much more.

How do other countries manage?

The question: What extra would independence give? keeps going round and round in my head. The more I consider the 'What extra?' question, the more I feel that breaking away is the wrong move.

Well, on a very basic factual level it would give control over Welfare, Defence, Immigration (within the framework of the EU admittedly), Fiscal Policy i.e. all the big areas that are currently reserved to Westminster. You know that though, you just think these are best handled by Westminster on our behalf, which is your entitlement and where we disagree.

Above all, Independence is about self determination, the ability of a country to make its way in the world. Does Scotland somehow not deserve that right?

[Shona]

Hume, if the suggested sterling currency union is achieved, then there would be no autonomy with regard to fiscal policy. As a member of NATO, Scotland would not have autonomy with regard to defence. When it comes to defence (and I regard the security and intelligence as integral to defence), I feel Scotland is better served by being in the UK than on the outside.

Philosophically, nationalism leaves me cold. It was the actions of a nationalist who wanted independence for his small country that precipitated a world war 100 years ago. Nationalism and a warped sense of identity lead to the Holocaust. Nationalism helped to create a civil war in Northern Ireland. Slobodan Milosevic was the nationalist architect behind the violent collapse of Yugoslavia. Not to forget the BNP on these shores.

[Hume]

Hume, if the suggested sterling currency union is achieved, then there would be no autonomy with regard to fiscal policy. As a member of NATO, Scotland would not have autonomy with regard to defence. When it comes to defence (and I regard the security and intelligence as integral to defence), I feel Scotland is better served by being in the UK than on the outside.

No fiscal policy? There would be no constraints imposed on Scotland that a well run government would not impose on itself. Do you mean no monetary policy?

Are you saying then that the uk, as a member of nato, has no autonomy with regard to defence at present, or any of the other 28 or so members? Would it just be scotland that had no autonomy?

Philosophically, nationalism leaves me cold. It was the actions of a nationalist who wanted independence for his small country that precipitated a world war 100 years ago. Nationalism and a warped sense of identity lead to the Holocaust. Nationalism helped to create a civil war in Northern Ireland. Slobodan Milosevic was the nationalist architect behind the violent collapse of Yugoslavia. Not to forget the BNP on these shores.

I cant believe you are making that comparison about what is happening here at the moment. Civic nationalism maybe, not what you have described.

[Shona]

Point taken re fiscal and monetary policy, Hume.

Can't help how I feel regarding nationalism, though. When the word nationalist is mentioned those are the things that come to mind.

[EMDEE]

“If Scotland has the temerity to vote for Independence on 18 September, it is likely that the Ten Plagues of Egypt will be visited upon the nation by the Almighty.

The only way to avoid this eventuality is for Scotland to vote to remain as part of the UK.”

(Just a suggestion for Alastair Darling and the “Better Together” campaign and the "completely neutral" BBC.)

[tarmmaker]

A few posts have suggested the BBC are anti Independence. I hear both sides' arguments on news reports. If there are more comments made against, that is what is reported. BBC Scotland have loads of Independence news.

Just occurred to me, might the BBC pull out of Scotland to make way for the SBC or whatever, to be funded solely by Scotland?

[EMDEE]

Aye, the BBC seem to promote the No campaign quite a bit. I watch the BBC News Channel quite a lot, and have to say that when some "oracle" or other makes a statement which can be construed as anti-independence it is promoted for the rest of the day as if it was the last word on the matter.

To be fair, they did report that Willie Walsh had come out in favour of Independence, but there was very little prominence given to Michael O'Leary when he also came out in support of Independence. One commentator even had the cheek to say that they would be in favour of Independence anyway because in Ireland Independence meant a different thing.

However, the Standard Life story got wall to wall coverage for the whole day, and they didn't even say they would leave Scotland in the event of Independence.

Before this all started I was fairly ambivalent about the whole thing. I have since heard that many spurious stories of doom and gloom from the No campaign that my mind is now made up.

I see in the Press and Journal today that Douglas Alexander is saying that we should "Act boldly" on new Scots powers and is advocating more devolution. I say that if it takes us to the brink of Independence for a prominent Scottish politician to make such a pronouncement it is too little too late. "Ye've had yer chance"!

[tarmmaker]

You know, what's happening in Ukraine makes all this Independence lark pale into insignificance. We can be sure that whatever happens in Scotland we won't have riot police marksmen shooting anyone they don't like.

[Govangirl]

However, the Standard Life story got wall to wall coverage for the whole day, and they didn't even say they would leave Scotland in the event of Independence.

Standard Life stated quite clearly it was drawing contingency plans to move some of its operations out of Scotland in the event of independence. This is one of Scotland's biggest employers. Surely with a country at this late stage in the proceedings still unsure about a number of issues - including the big one, being unable to state what sort of currency would be used in an independent Scotland - that company is taking its responsibility to its customers seriously in protecting their interests.

There are too many unanswered questions. Is Standard Life and all the other banking and investment firms not afraid of Salmond's plan regarding the huge debts of the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS? The cost of the bailout to HBOS alone is reported to be in excess of £30bn yet Salmond is on record as saying that the UK government should still be liable for the full £187bn that is propping up RBS, even if Scotland says Yes, despite the fact that it was he who supported the RBS takeover of ABN Amro, a move that led to the near collapse of the bank. Is that a basis on which to build an independent country?

[baz]

Standard Life stated quite clearly it was drawing contingency plans to move some of its operations out of Scotland in the event of independence.

Standard Life has in practice already moved part of its business out of the UK by setting up subsidiary companies in the Channel Islands to take advantage of the less oppressive tax regime available to some of its investors.

Interestingly, among the directors of Standard Life are:

• Keith Skeoch who is on the board of Reform Scotland, the neo Conservative lobby group which wants to
  abolish the minimum wage, privatise the NHS and pensions and restrict Trafe a Union rights.
• Garry Grimstone, Chairman, "lead non-executive" at the Ministry of Defence in London.
• Noel Harwerth, also Director of 'London First'
• Crawford Gillies also a Chairman of Control Risk Group of London, heavily peopled by ex MI5 and MI6 officers.

Standard Life not only pays tax to the country it operates in but it collects tax, such as VAT, various duties and PAYE .
Not to mention that they must pay corporation tax to that country.
Which highlights some of the hidden ways the UK currently gains from firms who operate in Scotland.
Upon Independence that stops and Scotland gains these dividends.

"(Standard Life) is putting in place contingency plans to relocate funds and staff to England if what it sees as fundamental uncertainties about money and regulation are not sorted satisfactorily."
Note that these "uncertainties" are created by Westminster so that these scare stories have a modicum of traction.
It's quite sad how a once great state still finds itself reacting like the old colonial masters.

"But there is real uncertainty about how any of these matters would be settled in the event of a Yes vote and the outcome would depend on negotiations between the two governments."
Of course, should an Independent Scotland reduce corporation tax ........

This is the same vote of no confidence Standard Life gave to devolution and it was proved wrong then.

Salmond is on record as saying that the UK government should still be liable for the full £187bn that is propping up RBS, even if Scotland says Yes.

The RBS Group, a banking corporation in which the UK is a major investor, but is not State owned or operated.
This would not change with Independence.
Of course, the UK government could sell its shares, as it did with Northern Rock at a 50% discount.
It was the taxpayer who bore that financial burden

[Govangirl]

That doesn't answer the question about the immoral position of Salmond and the country's debt.
Just asking Baz, you have contributed 17 posts on here, all about independence. Is there no other topic on here that interests you? I'm just wondering if you have some sort of vested interest in promoting the Yes stance?

[baz]

:@ That doesn't answer the question about the immoral position of Salmond and the country's debt.

Why is it an immoral position?
Should Scotland vote Yes for independence, and split from the UK, then there would need to be a proportionate split
of both assets and liabilities.
Scotland's share of Sterling is an asset that would be denied to it collectively by the political parties in Westminster.
Indeed, there are a great many assets that Scotland is likely to be denied of it's legitimate share.
Do you not consider Westminster's position immoral?

Just asking Baz, you have contributed 17 posts on here, all about independence. Is there no other topic on here that interests you?

Not as yet, but I'm confident you will notice when I do.

I'm just wondering if you have some sort of vested interest in promoting the Yes stance?

Yes, I do.
As does everyone in Scotland, whether they realize it or not.

[Govangirl]

I'm meaning the debt he will walk away from as he has threatened to do.

Indeed, there are a great many assets that Scotland is likely to be denied of it's (sic) legitimate share.

(The (sic) is there because I know you like that! )
What are these assets then that you are being denied?

Not as yet, but I'm confident you will notice when I do.

Looking forward to it!