Should Scotland be an independent country?

Darling's eyebrows are still troubling

What consequences will they be then?

I genuinely think I'd be torn. Instinctively, I'd always thought independence would be a good thing, and it does seem strange to me (an outsider, without much at stake) that it's this close. I really thought it would be "yes", no competition.

@uber_gruber do you think it is impossible for a socially progressive government to be elected in a United Kingdom? To me it seems like a far easier thing to achieve than a strong, independent Scotland. It is highly likely Scotland will face economic headwinds if it votes for independence. Serious uncertainty over currency and EU membership will give rise to a flight of capital and a probable recession. Add a brain drain (as there are undoubtedly people on the No side who will relocate to the rest of the UK), high cost of borrowing for an infant state, a rump UK that will drive a very punishing bargain on the terms of independence, and intense competitive challenges from ongoing globalization. Scotland could be looking at a lost economic generation before any of the promises of independence can be achieved.

In addition it will have a weak democracy, as there will be no effective opposition to the SNP. How long will it take for a credible party of opposition to emerge? Without an established constitutional model and with no opposition to hold them to account, do you trust the SNP leadership to tackle the profound challenges of negotiating independence and accession to the EU, founding new state institutions, and guiding the economy in a period of intense uncertainty? A sad but very possible outcome is for Scotland to find itself in need of the Bretton Woods institutions and being force fed neo-liberal policies in return for the loans. Rupert Murdoch is cheer leading independence because he's a cold businessman seeking advantage for News Corp; revenge on the 'establishment' is merely the cherry on the cake.

Many in Britain are dissatisfied with the status quo. If there was some magic button we could press to change it, we would. A rational analysis suggests a vote for independence is not that button. Hope needs to be measured against reality. We have a better chance of forging a socially just Britain together than either nation does if it goes alone.

This is the magic button. People just need to HTFU.

I just read some of the Wee Blue Book. Oh dear.

Threats that Scotland will be ejected (even temporarily) from the EU are hollow, impossible to ever put into practice.
Page 3

This is explicitly refuted within the book itself

Anyone, on either side of the debate, claiming to know as a matter of certainty what would happen to an independent Scotland’s EU membership status is a liar
Page 48

If no-one knows what will happen, surely the possibility of Scotland failing to gain membership is not a hollow threat?

I salute the Wee Blue Book as an effective partisan argument pitched at a register that will be compelling to some. But to accept its assertions as facts would be extremely dangerous.

Luckily the vote will be 'no'. The thing to dread is the consequences of a no vote.

That's also part of why I now want a decisive Yes. Finish what has been started rather than leave it up in the air for decades as a source of so much toxicity.

TV those are the very same arguments I have used with people - a lot of people up here I know accept all of that, but they still intend voting Yes. It is very much a feeling of a movement up here - just yesterday in Aberdeen there was a big rally of approx 1000 Yes campaigners, people in cars festooned with flags and banners, loads or noise. I counted a few very small pockets of Better Together campaigners who really looked like were trying to sell bibles at a heavy metal concert. For the very first time I am seriously having to consider that it may well be a Yes vote and what that means. September 19th people will still get up eat toast drink coffee go to work etc etc - the golden dawn will feel very ordinary I would say.
It doesn't matter if you tell them about the poor areas in England - about Beaumont Leys estate or places in Birmingham or Coventry that make places like Motherwell look positively charming - or horrible estates in London - they do not care, that is England's problem. I don't feel it is an anti-English thing, but it is very much an anti Westminster 'Elite' thing (which does offend me actually, the idea that there aren't actually hard working decent MP's and they are ALL on the take - that's BS)

It almost doesn't matter what argument you use there are a hell of a lot of people intending to vote Yes because literally 'ANYTHING is better than these cnuts'

'ANYTHING is better than these cnuts'

My parents on the West Coast report very similar sentiments. The idea that things can't get any worse is ludicrous. Thinks could get very significantly worse. The tragedy of nationalism is that it drives rationalism out of the window.

The 5 or so hard working, decent MP's are very nice people, 2 of them ain't on the take either.

I bet there are plenty of people in jobs in Westminster that don't feel very 'Elite'

I just read some of the Wee Blue Book. Oh dear.

Threats that Scotland will be ejected (even temporarily) from the EU are hollow, impossible to ever put into practice.
Page 3
This is explicitly refuted within the book itself

Anyone, on either side of the debate, claiming to know as a matter of certainty what would happen to an independent Scotland’s EU membership status is a liar
Page 48
If no-one knows what will happen, surely the possibility of Scotland failing to gain membership is not a hollow threat?

I salute the Wee Blue Book as an effective partisan argument pitched at a register that will be compelling to some. But to accept its assertions as facts would be extremely dangerous.

good work fella by the way

There are plenty of people working in banks who ain't cunts, the guys in charge most certainly are though.

T-V

@uber_gruber do you think it is impossible for a socially progressive government to be elected in a United Kingdom?

Gordon Brown just came out and said he'd rather a UKIP/Tory government than an Independent Scotland. Ed Milliband just said that a fairer society is 'fantasy'. Please tell me what political party in the UK offers a socially progressive government?

It is highly likely Scotland will face economic headwinds if it votes for independence.

No question. But even Cameron admits that Scotland has the resources and capability to be successful.

Serious uncertainty over currency and EU membership will give rise to a flight of capital and a probable recession.

Come the 19th I don't think there will be much uncertainty-rUK will want to protect the pound, and make all the right noises of co-operation. EU membership: there's not really much reason for a state, that's democratically seceded and already complies to EU law, from being excluded, is there?

Add a brain drain (as there are undoubtedly people on the No side who will relocate to the rest of the UK),

This really hits home for me. Scotland exports 30,000 young people every year, and 'brain drain' has being going on for centuries with mass emigration. The primary reason is London-centric economic policy and lack of job creation north of the border, combined with de-industrialisation.

...for high cost of borrowing for an infant state, a rump UK that will drive a very punishing bargain on the terms of independence, and intense competitive challenges from ongoing globalization. Scotland could be looking at a lost economic generation before any of the promises of independence can be achieved.

It says a lot about how positively people feel about the current state of affairs that so many people are still prepared to take on these challenges and risks, doesn't it?

In addition it will have a weak democracy, as there will be no effective opposition to the SNP.

What the hell are you basing this preposterous statement on? If nothing else, the Scottish parliament operates on Proportional Representation in a system that favours cross-party coalition. Despite so many traditional Labour supporters backing independence, this isn't a general election, and post independence, if it happens, most will go back to voting for their local party leader (mine used to be Charles Kennedy, very popular and competent Lib Dem who sadly died last year). Personally, I'll be voting for Patrick Harvie of the Greens to form the core of a coalition government.

How long will it take for a credible party of opposition to emerge? Without an established constitutional model and with no opposition to hold them to account, do you trust the SNP leadership to tackle the profound challenges of negotiating independence and accession to the EU, founding new state institutions, and guiding the economy in a period of intense uncertainty? A sad but very possible outcome is for Scotland to find itself in need of the Bretton Woods institutions and being force fed neo-liberal policies in return for the loans. Rupert Murdoch is cheer leading independence because he's a cold businessman seeking advantage for News Corp; revenge on the 'establishment' is merely the cherry on the cake.

As entertaining as this hypothesis is, Salmond has already invited Darling, Brown, and others to form a committee for drafting a new constitution and assisting with the task of making these new institutions. The rest of your statement is laughable, we already have a democratically elected and accountable parliament and a wealth of experienced diplomats, financial and political experts to rely on.

Many in Britain are dissatisfied with the status quo. If there was some magic button we could press to change it, we would. A rational analysis suggests a vote for independence is not that button. Hope needs to be measured against reality. We have a better chance of forging a socially just Britain together than either nation does if it goes alone.

If you call your post a 'rational analysis' then that's your opinion. I find little in it of much substance and your reality is very different to mine as someone who has grown up very conscious of the inherent limitations of living in Scotland as it is now.

I just read some of the Wee Blue Book. Oh dear.

Threats that Scotland will be ejected (even temporarily) from the EU are hollow, impossible to ever put into practice.
Page 3

This is explicitly refuted within the book itself

Anyone, on either side of the debate, claiming to know as a matter of certainty what would happen to an independent Scotland’s EU membership status is a liar
Page 48

If no-one knows what will happen, surely the possibility of Scotland failing to gain membership is not a hollow threat?

I salute the Wee Blue Book as an effective partisan argument pitched at a register that will be compelling to some. But to accept its assertions as facts would be extremely dangerous.

Oh dear indeed. The section you refer to in page 3 (a very brief 5 point summary of the case for independence)

People are sensible. At the moment, the No campaign
has a vested interest in making things sound like they’d
be as difficult as possible for an independent Scotland. But
the day after a Yes vote, the opposite instantly becomes
true - it’s then in everyone’s interest to sort everything out
as quickly and cleanly as possible.
If you accept that the EU would want Scotland as a member

• and it would - then nobody gains from making that
  process slow and complicated and awkward.
  If you accept that the rUK and an independent Scotland
  would still be major trading partners and allies - which
  they would - then nobody gains from a hostile, drawn-out
  negotiation process.
  

What you site, from page 48, is a preface to a fullsome, quite grounded discussion of why Scotland would be allowed in the EU, and why they make that assumption, despite, as they recognise and you so usefully highlight, that there is no absolute certainty. You seem to be cherry picking some parts to suit your claim that this is 'pitched at a register' when it goes out its way to be even and measured in its appraisal. They themselves do not ask you to accept their assertions as 'facts' but to weigh up the likelihood:

i) The EU

Anyone, on either side of the debate, claiming to know as a
matter of certainty what would happen to an independent
Scotland’s EU membership status is a liar. Nobody knows
for sure
whether an independent Scotland would be
admitted directly, because although the EU has offered to
answer that question, it will only do so if asked by the UK
government, and the UK government refuses to ask.
“The UK government has said it would not ask
the European Commission’s view on whether an
independent Scotland would remain a member of
the EU.
The statement follows confirmation from the
commission that it would offer its opinion if asked
to by a member state.”
[99
]
It’s very difficult to imagine why the UK government
would refuse to ask that question if it was confident that
its position (namely that Scotland’s membership would be
delayed for years) was correct.
What is certain is that no serious politician, commentator
or EU bureaucrat has ever suggested that the EU - an
expansionist organisation - wouldn’t want resource-rich
Scotland as a member state. So the only real debate is
on how Scotland would go from being part of a member
state to being a member state in its own right, and if you
accept the premise
that the EU wants Scotland in, then it’s
clearly in everyone’s interests to sort that out as quickly and
smoothly as possible.
For that reason, most impartial experts, and even honest
Unionists, expect
the process to be made very quick and
easy - not as a special favour to Scotland but because it’s
the common-sense plan, and also because the alternative
would be to cast the entire continent into unimaginable,
unprecedented and completely needless chaos from which
absolutely no-one would benefit.
Scotland is currently in the EU (as part of the UK), which
means that hundreds of thousands of Scots live abroad,
and hundreds of thousands of EU citizens live in Scotland.
Were Scotland to be ejected even temporarily, millions of
people - including Scots living in England and vice versa -
could lose their rights of residence overnight and have to
be thrown out of their respective countries.
No mechanism exists within the EU for ejecting existing
citizens against their will. The administrative mayhem
would last for decades, which is why the pro-Union MP Eric
Joyce
dismissed
the idea in February
this year as:
“Manifest nonsense. I want Scotland to remain
part of the UK, but not on the basis of an argument
deploying blatant threats and lies.”
[100
]
Graham Avery, the Honorary Director-General of the
European Commission and senior policy adviser at the
European Policy Centre in Brussels with four decades
of
experience in negotiating EU enlargement (including the
UK’s own entry), told the UK Parliament in 2012 that:
“From the political point of view, Scotland has been
in the EU for 40 years; and its people have acquired
rights as European citizens. If they wish to remain
in the EU, they could hardly be asked to leave and
then reapply for membership in the same way as the
people of a non-member country such as Turkey.
The point can be illustrated by considering another
example: if a break-up of Belgium were agreed
between Wallonia and Flanders, it is inconceivable
that other EU members would require 11 million
people to leave the EU and then reapply for
membership.”
[101
]
In 2014 he also told Holyrood’s European committee:
“A situation where Scotland was outside the
European Union and not applying European rules
would be a legal nightmare for the people in the rest
The Wee Blue Book
50
51

1. Europe and the world: (i) The EU
   of the United Kingdom and the British Government
   has to take account of that.
   I think it would be very, very unfortunate for the
   rest of the United Kingdom if Scotland was not a
   member from day one of independence.”
   [102
   ]
   In February 2013 Lord Mark Malloch-Brown,
   former Deputy
   Secretary-General of the UN and
   a Foreign Office minister
   in the last UK Labour government, told the BBC that:
   “Whatever the legal formalities, in terms of
   the political will if Scotland were to vote for
   independence, I think
   Europe would try to smooth
   its way into taking its place as a European
   member.”
   [103
   ]
   In July 2014, Sionaidh Douglas-Scott,
   professor of European
   law and human rights at Oxford University and author of a
   book on EU constitutional law, agreed:
   “Despite assertions to the contrary from UK
   lawyers, EU lawyers and EU officials, any future
   independent Scotland’s EU membership should be
   assured, and its transition from EU membership
   as a part of the UK to EU membership as an
   independent Scotland relatively smooth and
   straightforward.”
   [104
   ]
   And the same month, European Commission president
   Jean-Claude Juncker was reported as saying Scotland
   would be treated as a
   “
   special and separate case
   ”, rather
   than a new applicant
   [105
   ]
   .
   Scotland currently has no seat at the table in the European
   Union or the United Nations. Its interests are represented
   by the UK, and the UK’s duty is always to look after the
   greatest number of its own people.
   With just 8.4% of the UK population, any time that
   Scotland’s interests conflict with the rest of the UK’s, the UK
   government must always put Scotland’s interests second to
   those of the majority
   of the UK.
   “Secret papers, released today, have revealed how
   the Scottish fishing fleet was betrayed by the
   government 30 years ago to enable Britain to sign
   up to the controversial Common Fisheries Policy.
   Prime Minister Edward Heath’s officials estimated
   that up to half the fishermen in Scottish waters
   
2. then 4,000 men - could lose their jobs, but the
   decision was taken to go ahead with plans to sign
   up because it was believed that the benefits to
   English and Welsh fishermen would outweigh the
   disadvantages in Scotland.”
   [106
   ]
   The UK government continues to behave in the same way
   today. In November 2013 it decided, against the views of
   ALL parties in Holyrood, to distribute £182 million in extra
   EU funding to farmers across the whole UK, although it arose
   solely and specifically
   from the low level of Scottish subsidies
   and should have all gone to Scottish farmers.
   
   
   

EU membership: there's not really much reason for a state, that's democratically seceded and already complies to EU law, from being excluded, is there?

Orly?

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso expressed the view early this year that Scotland would be automatically excluded on becoming independent and would find readmission to the 28-member bloc "extremely difficult, if not impossible".

Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/09/14/uk-scotland-independence-eu-insight-idUKKBN0H90DT20140914

Scotland will have to apply for membership, which requires unanimity. Do you think Spain, Belgium or Italy will give a second thought to saying no? In addition, new applicants now have to join the Euro as a condition of membership. Will Scotland do that?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29202728

So 20 out of some 3,000 odd workers sign a letter and suddenly it's news?

The rest of your statement is laughable, we already have a democratically elected and accountable parliament and a wealth of experienced diplomats, financial and political experts to rely on.

If you think the challenges of running a devolved parliament are of the same order of magnitude as running a government post independence, you are living in cloud cuckoo land.

I put it to you that if the SNP were capable of handling complex matters of state they would have anticipated the possibility of being denied a currency union, and they would have developed a detailed policy plan and time table for implementing a new currency as a means of calling the UK governments bluff. The idea that Scotland could pursue a policy of sterlingisation is insane. It would be better off with Bitcoin, which at least isn't subject to the decisions and interests of a separate sovereign state. Are you conversant with the impacts that monetary policy has on an economy?

mine used to be Charles Kennedy, very popular and competent Lib Dem who sadly died last year

Whut? Chuckiebum died?

T-V in reply to @uber_gruber

EU membership: there's not really much reason for a state, that's democratically seceded and already complies to EU law, from being excluded, is there?

Orly?

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso expressed the view early this year that Scotland would be automatically excluded on becoming independent and would find readmission to the 28-member bloc "extremely difficult, if not impossible".

Source: uk.reuters.com/article/2014/09/14­/uk-scotland-independence-eu-insight-idU­KKBN0H90DT20140914

Scotland will have to apply for membership, which requires unanimity. Do you think Spain, Belgium or Italy will give a second thought to saying no? In addition, new applicants now have to join the Euro as a condition of membership. Will Scotland do that?

Really? This was addressed in February-Baroso (as a Spaniard) was making his comments on a personal capacity, but don't let that get in the way of the lazy sensationalism. http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/8752-barroso-backtracks-on-kosovo-comments-as-pressure-builds-on-ec-president
or from the Scotsman:

But Mr Currie said: “I think he was unwise to express the opinion he expressed in terms of the virtual impossibility of Scotland becoming a member state of the EU.

“I think that was extremely unwise.

“I don’t think he was correct and I don’t necessarily think that opinion is shared either among all the member states or even necessarily within the Commission.”

Mr Currie said it was unclear whether Mr Barroso was speaking on behalf of the Commission or as an “outgoing President” of the Commission.

Mr Barroso compared Scotland’s situation with Kosovo, but Mr Currie said a more appropriate parallel would be German unification where the political situation required a degree of pragmatism. In the event, East Germany was incorporated into the EU in a matter of months “Kosovo was an unfortunate example,” he said.

“Scotland already has been applying the highest principles of democracy and human rights.”

He added: “We would be talking about a territory which is currently part of a full member state. We’re dealing with people who would have certain rights as EU citizens and which would be very difficult to take away, and nobody would want to.

“The bottom line for me is that it would be dealt with in a pragmatic way, and it would involve inevitable negotiations which would be rather tough.”

Apart from that, Scotland also has 60% of the EU's natural resources, and at a time when Russia is going psychotic on its neighbours, do you think that fears over Catalan seperatism will outweigh having a stable oil producing nation in the heart of the EU?

http://news.sky.com/story/1250880/scotland-is-lynchpin-of-eu-energy-security

Wrong Charles Kennedy... He was an independent when he died funnily enough, despite all these fears of partisan, rampant SNP domination turning Scotland into Soviet-style state.

LOL if you bothered to read it yourself you'd know that it's more than a slightly mendacious presentation of 3 sentences from a 60-page booklet.

I put it to you that if the SNP were capable of handling complex matters of state they would have anticipated the possibility of being denied a currency union, and they would have developed a detailed policy plan and time table for implementing a new currency as a means of calling the UK governments bluff. The idea that Scotland could pursue a policy of sterlingisation is insane. It would be better off with Bitcoin, which at least isn't subject to the decisions and interests of a separate sovereign state. Are you conversant with the impacts that monetary policy has on an economy?

Again, this willful reduction of Independence to being just the SNP.

And, the irony of one minute being expected to defend the performance of Blair, Brown and Darling as Scottish actors in New Labour and representative of Scottish reach and power at Westminster, and then told that Scotland lacks the potential to produce people capable of handling complex matters of state...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=av512z9ySow&app=desktop

L - O - L

do you think that fears over Catalan seperatism will outweigh having a stable oil producing nation in the heart of the EU?

Yes. The energy security argument is nonsense. Scotland will want to sell their oil to whoever wants to buy it. Do you think Salmond will sulk and take his ball home if he isn't granted access to the EU?

In addition, José-Manuel García-Margallo hardly welcomed Scottish entry with open arms did he? I would be fairly worried reading his comment that the intention is to exercise a veto over Scottish entry. Lastly, Barroso back-tracked because it wasn't appropriate for him to make such comments given his position, not because the core of his argument (that Spain would oppose Scottish entry) is wrong.

Shout down other arguments or view points by all means, but there is a massive degree of uncertainty over the EU and currency and to simply ignore that is dangerous. I suspect that the UK and other EU states won't be particularly generous in bending the rules and doing Scotland favours.

I doubt I will change your view though and I'm unlikely to change my own, so I'm going to call it a day.