There is so much to unravel, the two nations are so intertwined that even if there is a 'yes' vote next autumn, it will take years to sort out the pros and cons. Everything from nuclear weapons to road tax will need to be discussed. Whatever the outcome, I bet that England, rather the English taxpayer, will come out of this badly. Shame that Northern Ireland doesn't want 'freedom' from England. The subsidies paid to this damp outpost are huge.
Cameron should never have allowed the referendum. Even if it fails it has disturbed the hornet's nest and will create greater and ongoing racial hatred. The Union has evolved over 300 years and the Scots play a big part in its dynamics. Sadly, they are in for a hideous shock if they do get the yes vote because a trained baboon could predict the outcome of their economy after the event. Misguided idealism in the extreme by Salmond & cronies and Cameron will be remembered only for this debacle as Bush & Blair will be remembered for Iraq
But denying their right to vote on their future would have only stoked the feeling of being dictated to by Westminster further.
Devolution will continually be fine tuned to satisfy every sensitive Scottish thought. What would Salmond be settling for had there been no potential oil revenues? This is not about independence - they already have it in real terms - this is a cock stand for Salmond, trying to power his way into the history books
So why don't the English stop moaning and start demanding representation ? A federal UK is the only way to keep everyone happy.
A very good question. Maybe some apathy behind it but in reality, Joe Public probably took it as a bit of a joke initially. Political correctness probably also partly to blame? Most importantly, who do we have as a populous in between us and Government to actually represent us? Our local MP, maybe, but this is a national issue and the facility to drive that, I would suggest, is simply not available in our current political set up.
"Apathy"..."political correctness". How disappointing, I honestly think a lot of the anti-Scotland comments (I include the "Scotland will bankrupt itself within moments of independence" comments in that) are because English people are jealous that they've never been given the option of determining their own future in the same way that the Scottish have. Regardless of what happens on Thursday Scots will have had their say, when will the English ?
Not sure the English want or need "their say". Labour proposals for regional parliaments were rejected and local election turnout is poor. For a long, long time I've thought that divisions and balance in Europe is town vs country and those with choices vs those with little choice. To this end I am disgusted with £9k tuition fees.
On a separate note I am one who has stated that Salmond is skating on thin ice re. economics. Why? Well I've seen first hand the speed at which capital moves...I've seen hundreds of millions move out of €uro based investments because someone didn't need the worry of a crash.
No one is trying to scare people or say Scotland is a basket case. Just that trying to stand alone in today's world looks brave but might not be sharp.
On self determination and my favourite place, London: I'd love it if we had more powers and less national decisions. More pilot schemes and less mega pan national IT failures. London is a different place and I believe much of its strength comes from being multi-national and integrated. I hope the Scottish people choose this path.
Although it can be reasonably assumed that most postal votes sent would have been No votes anyway as they would have been pre-filled by UK Labour Party activists on behalf of the owners of those postal votes.
Have you got any evidence or sources for your allegation of vote rigging? I can't find anything other than Labour raisising concerns over the integrity of the Electoral Register.
There is so much to unravel, the two nations are so intertwined that even if there is a 'yes' vote next autumn, it will take years to sort out the pros and cons. Everything from nuclear weapons to road tax will need to be discussed. Whatever the outcome, I bet that England, rather the English taxpayer, will come out of this badly. Shame that Northern Ireland doesn't want 'freedom' from England. The subsidies paid to this damp outpost are huge.
Cameron should never have allowed the referendum. Even if it fails it has disturbed the hornet's nest and will create greater and ongoing racial hatred. The Union has evolved over 300 years and the Scots play a big part in its dynamics. Sadly, they are in for a hideous shock if they do get the yes vote because a trained baboon could predict the outcome of their economy after the event. Misguided idealism in the extreme by Salmond & cronies and Cameron will be remembered only for this debacle as Bush & Blair will be remembered for Iraq
But denying their right to vote on their future would have only stoked the feeling of being dictated to by Westminster further.
Devolution will continually be fine tuned to satisfy every sensitive Scottish thought. What would Salmond be settling for had there been no potential oil revenues? This is not about independence - they already have it in real terms - this is a cock stand for Salmond, trying to power his way into the history books
So why don't the English stop moaning and start demanding representation ? A federal UK is the only way to keep everyone happy.
A very good question. Maybe some apathy behind it but in reality, Joe Public probably took it as a bit of a joke initially. Political correctness probably also partly to blame? Most importantly, who do we have as a populous in between us and Government to actually represent us? Our local MP, maybe, but this is a national issue and the facility to drive that, I would suggest, is simply not available in our current political set up.
"Apathy"..."political correctness". How disappointing, I honestly think a lot of the anti-Scotland comments (I include the "Scotland will bankrupt itself within moments of independence" comments in that) are because English people are jealous that they've never been given the option of determining their own future in the same way that the Scottish have. Regardless of what happens on Thursday Scots will have had their say, when will the English ?
Very pleased for the Scots in having their say.
We have our say in local & national elections and those are usually enough to allow democracy to be maintained.
In the case of this referendum - there is a lot more to this than meets the eye and I commented earlier, the Tories have a lot to gain by giving Scotland its electoral freedom.
The official title of the Tory party is "the conservative and unionist party". I think they'll be pretty unhappy with an independent Scotland, Cameron would also find himself as the conservative and unionist leader to break the union. Arguably making his position untenable.
Have the EU (anyone with real power and not just opinion) stated where Scotland stand if they vote yes? Will they just slide in and no one say yep or nope?
Unlikely from what I've read. There are certain parts of the EU stating that they'll need to go through the standard 5 yr application process which Juncker has recently said is now closed to new applicants
Have the EU (anyone with real power and not just opinion) stated where Scotland stand if they vote yes? Will they just slide in and no one say yep or nope?
Unlikely from what I've read. There are certain parts of the EU stating that they'll need to go through the standard 5 yr application process which Juncker has recently said is now closed to new applicants
The Spanish foreign minister said there are more 'ifs' in the process of Scotland joining the EU than the Rudyard Kipling poem.
Although it can be reasonably assumed that most postal votes sent would have been No votes anyway as they would have been pre-filled by UK Labour Party activists on behalf of the owners of those postal votes.
Have you got any evidence or sources for your allegation of vote rigging? I can't find anything other than Labour raisising concerns over the integrity of the Electoral Register.
There is so much to unravel, the two nations are so intertwined that even if there is a 'yes' vote next autumn, it will take years to sort out the pros and cons. Everything from nuclear weapons to road tax will need to be discussed. Whatever the outcome, I bet that England, rather the English taxpayer, will come out of this badly. Shame that Northern Ireland doesn't want 'freedom' from England. The subsidies paid to this damp outpost are huge.
Cameron should never have allowed the referendum. Even if it fails it has disturbed the hornet's nest and will create greater and ongoing racial hatred. The Union has evolved over 300 years and the Scots play a big part in its dynamics. Sadly, they are in for a hideous shock if they do get the yes vote because a trained baboon could predict the outcome of their economy after the event. Misguided idealism in the extreme by Salmond & cronies and Cameron will be remembered only for this debacle as Bush & Blair will be remembered for Iraq
But denying their right to vote on their future would have only stoked the feeling of being dictated to by Westminster further.
Devolution will continually be fine tuned to satisfy every sensitive Scottish thought. What would Salmond be settling for had there been no potential oil revenues? This is not about independence - they already have it in real terms - this is a cock stand for Salmond, trying to power his way into the history books
So why don't the English stop moaning and start demanding representation ? A federal UK is the only way to keep everyone happy.
A very good question. Maybe some apathy behind it but in reality, Joe Public probably took it as a bit of a joke initially. Political correctness probably also partly to blame? Most importantly, who do we have as a populous in between us and Government to actually represent us? Our local MP, maybe, but this is a national issue and the facility to drive that, I would suggest, is simply not available in our current political set up.
"Apathy"..."political correctness". How disappointing, I honestly think a lot of the anti-Scotland comments (I include the "Scotland will bankrupt itself within moments of independence" comments in that) are because English people are jealous that they've never been given the option of determining their own future in the same way that the Scottish have. Regardless of what happens on Thursday Scots will have had their say, when will the English ?
Not sure the English want or need "their say". Labour proposals for regional parliaments were rejected and local election turnout is poor. For a long, long time I've thought that divisions and balance in Europe is town vs country and those with choices vs those with little choice. To this end I am disgusted with £9k tuition fees.
It was pretty obvious early on that Salmond was trying to stir up the English in particular so that he could use a Scottish backlash in his favour. That plan failed because we have kept very quiet. I think we get our chance to 'vote' afterwards, Whatever the result, any further devolved powers (if a 'No' result) or independance negotiation successes for the Scotts (if a 'Yes') will be firmly resisted, despite the recent 'we'll give you anything you want' pledges from the 3 leaders.
Have the EU (anyone with real power and not just opinion) stated where Scotland stand if they vote yes? Will they just slide in and no one say yep or nope?
Unlikely from what I've read. There are certain parts of the EU stating that they'll need to go through the standard 5 yr application process which Juncker has recently said is now closed to new applicants
The Spanish foreign minister said there are more 'ifs' in the process of Scotland joining the EU than the Rudyard Kipling poem.
They just put it to Salmond on the Today Programme that the Spanish government have now, as in today, said they will have to apply as if they were a new applicant rather than his version of just making a few minor changes to some treaties. If it's Yes then Scotland could find itself outside the EU for a good few years.
Have the EU (anyone with real power and not just opinion) stated where Scotland stand if they vote yes? Will they just slide in and no one say yep or nope?
Unlikely from what I've read. There are certain parts of the EU stating that they'll need to go through the standard 5 yr application process which Juncker has recently said is now closed to new applicants
The Spanish foreign minister said there are more 'ifs' in the process of Scotland joining the EU than the Rudyard Kipling poem.
They just put it to Salmond on the Today Programme that the Spanish government have now, as in today, said they will have to apply as if they were a new applicant rather than his version of just making a few minor changes to some treaties. If it's Yes then Scotland could find itself outside the EU for a good few years.
Scotland doesn't become independent the day after the referendum - there will be a period of negotiation with both the UK and EU (Salmond reckons this will take 18 months which seems pretty unlikely) and I would imagine independence will be delayed until both are concluded.
There is so much to unravel, the two nations are so intertwined that even if there is a 'yes' vote next autumn, it will take years to sort out the pros and cons. Everything from nuclear weapons to road tax will need to be discussed. Whatever the outcome, I bet that England, rather the English taxpayer, will come out of this badly. Shame that Northern Ireland doesn't want 'freedom' from England. The subsidies paid to this damp outpost are huge.
Cameron should never have allowed the referendum. Even if it fails it has disturbed the hornet's nest and will create greater and ongoing racial hatred. The Union has evolved over 300 years and the Scots play a big part in its dynamics. Sadly, they are in for a hideous shock if they do get the yes vote because a trained baboon could predict the outcome of their economy after the event. Misguided idealism in the extreme by Salmond & cronies and Cameron will be remembered only for this debacle as Bush & Blair will be remembered for Iraq
But denying their right to vote on their future would have only stoked the feeling of being dictated to by Westminster further.
Devolution will continually be fine tuned to satisfy every sensitive Scottish thought. What would Salmond be settling for had there been no potential oil revenues? This is not about independence - they already have it in real terms - this is a cock stand for Salmond, trying to power his way into the history books
So why don't the English stop moaning and start demanding representation ? A federal UK is the only way to keep everyone happy.
A very good question. Maybe some apathy behind it but in reality, Joe Public probably took it as a bit of a joke initially. Political correctness probably also partly to blame? Most importantly, who do we have as a populous in between us and Government to actually represent us? Our local MP, maybe, but this is a national issue and the facility to drive that, I would suggest, is simply not available in our current political set up.
"Apathy"..."political correctness". How disappointing, I honestly think a lot of the anti-Scotland comments (I include the "Scotland will bankrupt itself within moments of independence" comments in that) are because English people are jealous that they've never been given the option of determining their own future in the same way that the Scottish have. Regardless of what happens on Thursday Scots will have had their say, when will the English ?
Very pleased for the Scots in having their say.
We have our say in local & national elections and those are usually enough to allow democracy to be maintained.
In the case of this referendum - there is a lot more to this than meets the eye and I commented earlier, the Tories have a lot to gain by giving Scotland its electoral freedom.
The official title of the Tory party is "the conservative and unionist party". I think they'll be pretty unhappy with an independent Scotland, Cameron would also find himself as the conservative and unionist leader to break the union. Arguably making his position untenable.
I agree fully - was suggesting that in theory Labour would have a lot less support if they lost the Scottish vote. Of course, there are many other variables which would affect Cameron's position but the Tories would probably benefit in terms of vote potential.
Have the EU (anyone with real power and not just opinion) stated where Scotland stand if they vote yes? Will they just slide in and no one say yep or nope?
Olli Rehn, vice president of the European Parliament and former commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, said keeping the pound without consent from Westminster "would simply not be possible" because EU membership requires countries to have access to an independent central bank. So, if they wanted to be in the EU, (setting aside the possibility of any one country vetoing that) they'd either have to set up their own currency or adopt the Euro.
Although it can be reasonably assumed that most postal votes sent would have been No votes anyway as they would have been pre-filled by UK Labour Party activists on behalf of the owners of those postal votes.
Have you got any evidence or sources for your allegation of vote rigging? I can't find anything other than Labour raisising concerns over the integrity of the Electoral Register.
It was more of a nod-wink to the fact that ever since the expansion of the postal vote by Labour, the incidence of electoral fraud has sky-rocketed and various sources have corroborated the allegations that Labour party activists are targeting those most likely to use a postal vote in order to vote on their behalf (which is illegal, albeit incredibly hard to prove due to the fact it is impossible to trace a vote to the person who cast it once it has been cast), and it wouldn't surprise me if their dirty tricks haven't been taken north of the border as well.
The funny thing is that if Scotland left the UK, the EU would definitely block any attempt to automatically join the EU, making them wait at least 5 years. Yet if the UK got the referendum it wanted and voted to leave, if Scotland then left the UK, I'd bet that the EU would fast-track their application to join just to spite the rest of the UK.
Although it can be reasonably assumed that most postal votes sent would have been No votes anyway as they would have been pre-filled by UK Labour Party activists on behalf of the owners of those postal votes.
Have you got any evidence or sources for your allegation of vote rigging? I can't find anything other than Labour raisising concerns over the integrity of the Electoral Register.
It was more of a nod-wink to the fact that ever since the expansion of the postal vote by Labour, the incidence of electoral fraud has sky-rocketed and various sources have corroborated the allegations that Labour party activists are targeting those most likely to use a postal vote in order to vote on their behalf (which is illegal, albeit incredibly hard to prove due to the fact it is impossible to trace a vote to the person who cast it once it has been cast), and it wouldn't surprise me if their dirty tricks haven't been taken north of the border as well.
The funny thing is that if Scotland left the UK, the EU would definitely block any attempt to automatically join the EU, making them wait at least 5 years. Yet if the UK got the referendum it wanted and voted to leave, if Scotland then left the UK, I'd bet that the EU would fast-track their application to join just to spite the rest of the UK.
Rightio, so it was just you presenting your opinions, assumptions and theories as fact again.
Moving on to the referendum I see that it's being reported that Tory backbenchers are jostling behind the scenes in what's likely to become a leadership contest if it all goes wrong for Cameron on Thursday with Gove sounding them out already.
Why also, have the Tory backbenchers chosen to kick off now of all times about the concessions made by the three parties to the Scottish parliament? As it happens I have some sympathy with their views but they could have kept their powder dry for another 48 hours rather than play into the Nationalists anti-Westminster agenda by stirring up the 'We want an English government too!" argument.
Although it can be reasonably assumed that most postal votes sent would have been No votes anyway as they would have been pre-filled by UK Labour Party activists on behalf of the owners of those postal votes.
Have you got any evidence or sources for your allegation of vote rigging? I can't find anything other than Labour raisising concerns over the integrity of the Electoral Register.
It was more of a nod-wink to the fact that ever since the expansion of the postal vote by Labour, the incidence of electoral fraud has sky-rocketed and various sources have corroborated the allegations that Labour party activists are targeting those most likely to use a postal vote in order to vote on their behalf (which is illegal, albeit incredibly hard to prove due to the fact it is impossible to trace a vote to the person who cast it once it has been cast), and it wouldn't surprise me if their dirty tricks haven't been taken north of the border as well.
The funny thing is that if Scotland left the UK, the EU would definitely block any attempt to automatically join the EU, making them wait at least 5 years. Yet if the UK got the referendum it wanted and voted to leave, if Scotland then left the UK, I'd bet that the EU would fast-track their application to join just to spite the rest of the UK.
Rightio, so it was just you presenting your opinions, assumptions and theories as fact again.
Moving on to the referendum I see that it's being reported that Tory backbenchers are jostling behind the scenes in what's likely to become a leadership contest if it all goes wrong for Cameron on Thursday with Gove sounding them out already.
Why also, have the Tory backbenchers chosen to kick off now of all times about the concessions made by the three parties to the Scottish parliament? As it happens I have some sympathy with their views but they could have kept their powder dry for another 48 hours rather than play into the Nationalists anti-Westminster agenda by stirring up the 'We want an English government too!" argument.
to be fair thats what a lot of posters are saying about the tories and the nhs on here.
If scotland goes independant (which it wont) then the arguement is pretty good for having seperate governments for all three of the remaining UK nations.
The whole "keep the pound" stance by the arch politician Alex Salmon is pure artifice to give him a plausible position on which to stand.
There is no chance that Scotland can force a sterling currency union. There is possibility that the UK will grant it although I doubt it (Plan A). It has been ruled out and it would take a huge volt face by UK politicians (or a settlement offered by the Scottish Govt which falls short of true independance - say Home Rule).
Scotland can of course adopt the pound without consent (as have some countries adopted the Dollar). (Plan but this would be incompatible with joining the EU because there is absolute certainty that the EU will demand:
a) that Scotland agree to join the Euro b) that to join the Euro, Scotland needs it's own central bank.
But Plan's A and B are "forseeable" outcome and he can hide behind blaming the rest of the UK for trying to bully Scotland.
It's enables him to avoid the real alternative Plan C which involves forming a Scottish Pound from scratch and massively spooking the markets and putting fear into the voters minds prior to the vote. That is a political risk that Salmond does not wish to announce BEFORE the vote has taken place.
If yes goes ahead he (and the B of E/ UK Govt) will need to reassure the markets to stop a run on the pound in Scotland and massive outflows of money from Scottish Banks. Partly that will be achieved by Scottish banks redomiciling their HQ's to England to remain under the B of E protection, and also by the B of E/UK Govt and The Scottish Government agreeing to work together to make an orderly transition to the independence over the next 18 months. The Scottish Govt will then have the space to create their own currency - initially pegged to the pound.
Although it can be reasonably assumed that most postal votes sent would have been No votes anyway as they would have been pre-filled by UK Labour Party activists on behalf of the owners of those postal votes.
Have you got any evidence or sources for your allegation of vote rigging? I can't find anything other than Labour raisising concerns over the integrity of the Electoral Register.
It was more of a nod-wink to the fact that ever since the expansion of the postal vote by Labour, the incidence of electoral fraud has sky-rocketed and various sources have corroborated the allegations that Labour party activists are targeting those most likely to use a postal vote in order to vote on their behalf (which is illegal, albeit incredibly hard to prove due to the fact it is impossible to trace a vote to the person who cast it once it has been cast), and it wouldn't surprise me if their dirty tricks haven't been taken north of the border as well.
The funny thing is that if Scotland left the UK, the EU would definitely block any attempt to automatically join the EU, making them wait at least 5 years. Yet if the UK got the referendum it wanted and voted to leave, if Scotland then left the UK, I'd bet that the EU would fast-track their application to join just to spite the rest of the UK.
Rightio, so it was just you presenting your opinions, assumptions and theories as fact again.
I never presented it as fact and I don't present opinions as fact, thank you very much. I was merely playing on a well-known phenomenon regarding postal votes with the current debacle in Scotland. If you want to attempt to undermine my integrity I suggest you actually have some integrity yourself by not lying about what I'm posting.
Moving on to the referendum I see that it's being reported that Tory backbenchers are jostling behind the scenes in what's likely to become a leadership contest if it all goes wrong for Cameron on Thursday with Gove sounding them out already.
Why also, have the Tory backbenchers chosen to kick off now of all times about the concessions made by the three parties to the Scottish parliament? As it happens I have some sympathy with their views but they could have kept their powder dry for another 48 hours rather than play into the Nationalists anti-Westminster agenda by stirring up the 'We want an English government too!" argument.
Maybe it's because:
a) A lot of Tory backbenchers are sick of Cameron and see a last-minute attempt to undermine his concessions to try to swing a No vote as a way of helping the Yes campaign, and most people are saying that if Yes wins, Cameron will walk.
b) Cameron has never actually discussed with his backbenchers the concessions, and generally Tory MPs like to actually be consulted before their leader make large changes in policy.
c) Tory MPs represent their constituents in England and if they feel that Scotland going it alone will help them secure what their constituents want due to a stronger Tory influence in what will remain of the UK, then they might feel piping up now might help that cause.
I'm not sure why Nats would feel threatened by an English Parliament or that it would help an anti-Westminster agenda. The main reason why England wants a devolved Parliament is because Scots and Welsh MPs won't stop turning up to votes that don't affect their regions due to devolution.
Stupid question that has probably been covered before, but in the event of a yes vote, what happens to the blue in the Union Flag?
and all those with Union jack tattoos?
Replaced with something from the Welsh flag I presume given it's not currently represented?
This was in one of the papers the other day. They said they would incorporate the Flag of St David, which is a Yellow (+) cross on a Black background, rather than the "Welsh" Red dragon on a green and white background
The British are fairly keen to leave the Union flag as it is, even if the second largest country in said Union, decide to naff orf. Personally i think that's wrong. But then the Cross of St George is my flag and will remain so.
Actually that's only part of the story. We who wish to see an English Parliament, wish to have equality, fairness and Democracy for England. Strange as it may seem we would like MP's representing English constituencies, putting forward the words England and English. Words that you never hear spoken in the (dis)UK Parliament. Even when they are discussing English issues. E.G. The NHS. There isn't an NHS. There are four NHS. Three are controlled by a devolved Parliament or Assembly. One (the English version) is controlled by MP's from all over the (dis)UK and is usually referred to as 'our NHS' 'this country's NHS' But never as England's NHS. It is simply time for England to be represented on an equal footing to the rest of the (dis)UK. If the Scots do decide to leave, that will make the likelyhood of an English parliament far greater. Hence i support 'Yes'
Sorry i messed up the quote thing. I was referring to this:
I'm not sure why Nats would feel threatened by an English Parliament or that it would help an anti-Westminster agenda. The main reason why England wants a devolved Parliament is because Scots and Welsh MPs won't stop turning up to votes that don't affect their regions due to devolution
To be fair, we have still kept the red cross of St Patrick even though most of Ireland seceded a hundred years ago, and our Head of State would remain monarch of Scotland even if Scotland went independent.
The Union Jack is meant to represent a united British Isles, and it hasn't represented this ever since the Republic of Ireland was formed. If Scotland goes, we can hardly justify continuing using the flag as half of what the flag represents will no longer be under the flag's authority.
I suggest instead we bring back the Royal Standard as the flag of what will remain of the UK:
Except we replace the Scottish lion rampant with the Welsh dragon.
Comments
On a separate note I am one who has stated that Salmond is skating on thin ice re. economics. Why? Well I've seen first hand the speed at which capital moves...I've seen hundreds of millions move out of €uro based investments because someone didn't need the worry of a crash.
No one is trying to scare people or say Scotland is a basket case. Just that trying to stand alone in today's world looks brave but might not be sharp.
On self determination and my favourite place, London: I'd love it if we had more powers and less national decisions. More pilot schemes and less mega pan national IT failures. London is a different place and I believe much of its strength comes from being multi-national and integrated. I hope the Scottish people choose this path.
scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-vote-rigging-fears-1-3533762
The fact is, people are voting Yes, with their hearts and not heads. But, the information people have been given is pathetic.
The info on here is more insightful than either campaign by Yes Or No party.
It's criminal for people to be making such a huge decision, with little information.
So, if they wanted to be in the EU, (setting aside the possibility of any one country vetoing that) they'd either have to set up their own currency or adopt the Euro.
The funny thing is that if Scotland left the UK, the EU would definitely block any attempt to automatically join the EU, making them wait at least 5 years. Yet if the UK got the referendum it wanted and voted to leave, if Scotland then left the UK, I'd bet that the EU would fast-track their application to join just to spite the rest of the UK.
Moving on to the referendum I see that it's being reported that Tory backbenchers are jostling behind the scenes in what's likely to become a leadership contest if it all goes wrong for Cameron on Thursday with Gove sounding them out already.
Why also, have the Tory backbenchers chosen to kick off now of all times about the concessions made by the three parties to the Scottish parliament? As it happens I have some sympathy with their views but they could have kept their powder dry for another 48 hours rather than play into the Nationalists anti-Westminster agenda by stirring up the 'We want an English government too!" argument.
If scotland goes independant (which it wont) then the arguement is pretty good for having seperate governments for all three of the remaining UK nations.
There is no chance that Scotland can force a sterling currency union. There is possibility that the UK will grant it although I doubt it (Plan A). It has been ruled out and it would take a huge volt face by UK politicians (or a settlement offered by the Scottish Govt which falls short of true independance - say Home Rule).
Scotland can of course adopt the pound without consent (as have some countries adopted the Dollar). (Plan
a) that Scotland agree to join the Euro
b) that to join the Euro, Scotland needs it's own central bank.
But Plan's A and B are "forseeable" outcome and he can hide behind blaming the rest of the UK for trying to bully Scotland.
It's enables him to avoid the real alternative Plan C which involves forming a Scottish Pound from scratch and massively spooking the markets and putting fear into the voters minds prior to the vote. That is a political risk that Salmond does not wish to announce BEFORE the vote has taken place.
If yes goes ahead he (and the B of E/ UK Govt) will need to reassure the markets to stop a run on the pound in Scotland and massive outflows of money from Scottish Banks. Partly that will be achieved by Scottish banks redomiciling their HQ's to England to remain under the B of E protection, and also by the B of E/UK Govt and The Scottish Government agreeing to work together to make an orderly transition to the independence over the next 18 months. The Scottish Govt will then have the space to create their own currency - initially pegged to the pound.
a) A lot of Tory backbenchers are sick of Cameron and see a last-minute attempt to undermine his concessions to try to swing a No vote as a way of helping the Yes campaign, and most people are saying that if Yes wins, Cameron will walk.
b) Cameron has never actually discussed with his backbenchers the concessions, and generally Tory MPs like to actually be consulted before their leader make large changes in policy.
c) Tory MPs represent their constituents in England and if they feel that Scotland going it alone will help them secure what their constituents want due to a stronger Tory influence in what will remain of the UK, then they might feel piping up now might help that cause.
I'm not sure why Nats would feel threatened by an English Parliament or that it would help an anti-Westminster agenda. The main reason why England wants a devolved Parliament is because Scots and Welsh MPs won't stop turning up to votes that don't affect their regions due to devolution.
Personally i think that's wrong. But then the Cross of St George is my flag and will remain so.
Strange as it may seem we would like MP's representing English constituencies, putting forward the words England and English. Words that you never hear spoken in the (dis)UK Parliament. Even when they are discussing English issues.
E.G. The NHS. There isn't an NHS. There are four NHS. Three are controlled by a devolved Parliament or Assembly. One (the English version) is controlled by MP's from all over the (dis)UK and is usually referred to as 'our NHS' 'this country's NHS' But never as England's NHS.
It is simply time for England to be represented on an equal footing to the rest of the (dis)UK.
If the Scots do decide to leave, that will make the likelyhood of an English parliament far greater. Hence i support 'Yes'
I'm not sure why Nats would feel threatened by an English Parliament or that it would help an anti-Westminster agenda. The main reason why England wants a devolved Parliament is because Scots and Welsh MPs won't stop turning up to votes that don't affect their regions due to devolution
The Union Jack is meant to represent a united British Isles, and it hasn't represented this ever since the Republic of Ireland was formed. If Scotland goes, we can hardly justify continuing using the flag as half of what the flag represents will no longer be under the flag's authority.
I suggest instead we bring back the Royal Standard as the flag of what will remain of the UK:
Except we replace the Scottish lion rampant with the Welsh dragon.