The Scottish Government

It strikes me that the SNP is missing a trick. I may be wrong but I haven't seen any details published of those who would qualify for Scottish citizenship if independence becomes a reality. If the criteria were defined and the SNP started collecting expressions of interest they would undoubtedly see considerable support building up from UK citizens with Scottish origins living outside Scotland which would not only help any future negotiations but undoubtedly help to increase their political donations.
My grandfather was a Scot and my scottish ancestry is by far the most important to me. If I could apply for a Scottish passport I would do so tomorrow.
The Irish introduced rules allowing those with a grandparent who was an Irish citizen to apply for Irish citizenship. What would the SNP do? Like many Scots, my grandfather was born in India-would that disqualify me?
Given the far-flung nature of the Scottish community there must be considerable numbers of people who have an interest in this debate but have not been directly brought into it by the lack of detail.

Why can't Scotland just formally declare her Independence, just as Norway did in 1905.

What is stopping Scotland from doing that.

No-one wants bloodshed, but what does it take to get Independence . Civil Disobedience and the like come to mind, I wish the Scottish people would unite, Thats my wish. I think they really all want the same thing but are afraid. Where is the bravehearted scots we all hear about.

I just listened to an interview, with Charlie Rose (USA) and the President of Georgia.

He could have been discussing contemporary Scotland.

I suggest everyone who is for Freedom listen to this interview. He suggested that too many people don't mention Freedom enough . That is the essence of this whole debate and should be acknowledged more and more.

I just listened to an interview, with Charlie Rose (USA) and the President of Georgia.

He could have been discussing contemporary Scotland.

I suggest everyone who is for Freedom listen to this interview. He suggested that too many people don't mention Freedom enough . That is the essence of this whole debate and should be acknowledged more and more.

It shouldnt matter if 'we' fail once given independance atleast we will be empowered to learn from our own mistakes. The Union has been a shambles from start to the present.Its time to depart company with the south look at gun crime in Manchester and the rapes,murders and child poverty . What do westminster do with all our oil money, what about housing Gordon B can forget education and health without housing its fruitless.He instructed the bank of england in the 90's to deduct housing from the inflation rate calculations, now look at the fine mess hes got us into !!

There is a new confidence in Scotland brought about by the removing of the London Party domination of political power all over the country, and in Holyrood especially. And there's James McFadden.

In international terms, who knows what having our own voice on the world stage would bring to our pride in our country.

I'm also sure that the special social qualities we all have, and the respect that the Scottish people around the globe, would be a welcome additional brogue in the UN alongside the Home County accent that currently represents all of Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

I'm for self-determination from individual choice to the largest collective, and Scotland becoming a nation state again would be an excellent start.

1585. David Robertson – Inverness
I have read all you comments and you appear to me to be a very level headed person with thoughtful ideas that I think are definitely worthy of serious discussion. Unfortunately your reasoning on Scots dependency sounds too much like the truth. As I see it, the Labour party has constructed a dependency culture that has enfeebled Scots. The Tories have aided and abetted this, whilst the Liberal Democrats would climb into any relationship that gave them a whiff of power. A chaotic mixture of state controlled panic added to by whatever the media broadcasts as the ills that would destroy life as we know it.
I am unsure about leaving the EU. I feel that it would be better if the various treaties were renegotiated to suit our distinctive Independent structure. I do know that the Interest rate within the EU was and is two points below whatever the rate has been here. I feel that the media have seriously misled the UK with continual negative reporting on the EU. They certainly never seemed to refer to that fact.
Within the EU standards of living rose and fell dependent on the amount of work being undertaken, not on the false god of property values that are so dependent on supply and demand. It appears to me that whole UK industries have been built on this sand castle. I cannot say that this is a major source of EU financial target planning. Therefore, I do not see why Scotland should have to play into this UK politically engineered scheme given the vast amount of underused land and our falling population.
I would like to see all small business, i.e. less than 30 people, have their taxes cut to such a small rate that it would encourage long term investment. Then, a graduated tax level above that number of employees. I would like to see all ‘working’ farmers pay no taxes but lose every penny of subsidy. Apart from those brave souls who populate those areas of Scotland that only Yeti’s are familiar with.
I strongly feel that serious research should be undertaken into how and why certain political decisions were taken in the past without consultation or referral to any kind of discussion, or inquiry by any of the medias alluded too, social responsibility.
Therefore, I would impose obligatory electoral voting with loss of all social benefits for upto three years should you fail to vote, as the Belgian nation currently enforces.

1584. Alex – Largs - Drenched in Optimism
“Yep. That’s why nationalists are always telling us how awful everything is, when in fact things are all right, and improving for the majority.”

How come Alex you have not answered the points I raised? Am I too negative for you? I am not surprised at your selective responses. You obviously stay somewhere that is safe and good and simple and bright with improvements in the offing ‘for the majority’. You simply cannot admit the reality of life in this utopia that you apparently live in. I have been a committed Nationalist since my parents returned to this country from Australia. Almost 40 years now. I compare my standard of living with those who I regard as an equal in the EU. Your unionist media will never show you the truth of research like this.
Alex how come if everything in your garden is so rosy has those numbers seeking separation grown? Are those who seek this, have they somehow lost their ‘unbounded’ faith in improvements?
Are those Germans working in one of the their many car production plants, using steel produced in Belgium or the Dutch working in their shipbuilding industry any different from me. I do not think so but I know that their children will have a chance at a job within those industries and all those other equally successful industries that Scotland no longer has.

But Alex, I definitely know that they will not have a hope in hell of finding that kind of work in Scotland, therefore that’s not being negative Alex, that’s being HONEST. So please do not insult me with your dishonest selective reasoning.

Each of these independent countries also have their own large financial centers where their academically gifted can enjoy rewards that do not exist for the average worker here.
Look to your unionist success. Enlighten me please as to what they are Alex. Is it the new multi million pound chemical plant being built in Prescott’s fiefdom? Or the 12 to 14 billion pound investment in the rail link to Heathrow from the City of London? Or is it the regeneration of London known as the Olympic games at an unknown figure. So Alex, if they cannot give a definite figure for that, how can unionists know what the truth is on Scotland’s finances?

I’m sorry; I forgot the 180 million investments that the BBC has made in a digital studio in Glasgow. Unfortunately I am a wee bit negative about this Alex as in Castle Douglas you have to invest in Sky to be able to receive a digital signal. So what is taken for granted in the majority of places down South and for which service I am forced to pay for in my license Tax, I am told, I will have 2008/9.

How can you know with such certainty that we Scots will be worse of? You obviously have access to information that only optimistic unionists like yourself are privy to. Is that why all those unionist parties are completely opposed to giving Scots a referendum on separation?

1584 Alex.Largs. Condescending type of chap aren't you.

Regarding your polemics on the definitions of positive and negative; any country, currently a member of a union with other countries, seeking to become independent is a positive move.

It may be a negative move for the union and it may create negative effects on the country seeking independence but it's positive in the pure sense that it creates movement and destroys inertia.

I've a couple of question for you. What will you do should Scotland choose independence?

And, should Scotland decide to stay in the union, will it cause you concern that at least 25% of your fellow citizens are dissatisfied with that situation?

For instance; will your 2% effect the policies of the 85% enough to mitigate erase the concerns of the 25% Scottish minority?

Sorry three questions,but hopefully you'll indulge me.

1585. David Robertson said “I would like to thank Alex for his contribution to the debate so far…”

Why, thank you kind sir….

“… At the very least he has provided a consistent critique of the independence position…”

Nothing like a full critique. I have just asked for any positive arguments the nationalist posters might have in support of independence. You have said that there are none, which I suspected anyway, since none are ever promulgated by any nationalists I have ever debated with.

A “critique” of the independence position would have to be broad ranging and, crucially, it would depend upon someone providing a rationale which was worthy of critiquing…. Not happened so far, David.

“…. and challenged those who support it to think through why they do…”

That’s the purpose. .. so far not many persuasive answers (none actually).

“….. I would suggest that his position may be summed up as "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."

Not at all. Some gambles are worth taking, otherwise why get up in the morning? But sensible people weigh the odds. They look at the facts. They assess the risks. They take many factors into account, including any positive arguments for a particular course of action. “A bird in the hand” is too simplistic to explain it.

My general position is: what’s the point, beyond sheer bloody-mindedness, of destroying a perfectly good relationship? You don’t knock down a perfectly good edifice unless you are pretty sure that its replacement will be better in some (or many) important ways.

So I would expect nationalists to tell me: what are the overwhelming (and they would have to be great to outweigh the costs) gains to offset against the destructions and demolition of an institution (or series of institutions) which has worked well in the past, continue to work well in the present, and of which there is no proof (saving you providing it) that there is anything wrong with that cannot be put right under the existing constitutional arrangements?

There’s an old joke about a man who jumped through a plate glass window. When asked why, he replied: “it seemed like a good idea at the time”.

We don’t want to get to independence plus ten days or ten years for the forlorn cry to go up: “but you told us it was a good idea at the time….”

“..There must be many in Scotland who do not wish to endanger their way of life by launching on what appears to them to be a dangerous expedition into the unknown…”

It would not be the “unknown” if nationalists would explain it more clearly, which leads me to suspect that they don’t explain it more clearly because they haven’t a clue what it would look like….Or they do have a clue, but don’t want to reveal it to scrutiny for fear it would be too unattractive to the majority of voters...

Which unattractiveness seems to be the conclusion the public has drawn so far….

Showing that the voters are actually quite cute… they’re no daft…..….no pigs in pokes today thanks….