Anyone else on here lucky enough to visit Inverliever Lodge in Argyllshire when they were at school? The ILEA leased it and lots of London Comps like my school Crown Woods regularly went there. I had two visits there in 1978 and 1980. A most wonderful place, it was on a hill that looked over Loch Awe. I have not travelled the whole world but I find it hard to believe there are more beautiful places than the West Highlands of Scotland.
I read this post with interest Riviera. I was at Crown woods from 1961 to 1965 and remember being asked by my tutor Don Naismith my opinion for a location of a school lodge. I had camped with the scouts in Scotland so recommended the country. The Inverliever Lodge project started just as I was leaving C.W. and I never had the opportunity to visit the lodge.
Anyone else on here lucky enough to visit Inverliever Lodge in Argyllshire when they were at school? The ILEA leased it and lots of London Comps like my school Crown Woods regularly went there. I had two visits there in 1978 and 1980. A most wonderful place, it was on a hill that looked over Loch Awe. I have not travelled the whole world but I find it hard to believe there are more beautiful places than the West Highlands of Scotland.
True. The further you go up the more beautiful it gets. I have been back in Medway 2 weeks now and I miss jumping in a car and heading out already.
Anyone else on here lucky enough to visit Inverliever Lodge in Argyllshire when they were at school? The ILEA leased it and lots of London Comps like my school Crown Woods regularly went there. I had two visits there in 1978 and 1980. A most wonderful place, it was on a hill that looked over Loch Awe. I have not travelled the whole world but I find it hard to believe there are more beautiful places than the West Highlands of Scotland.
I read this post with interest Riviera. I was at Crown woods from 1961 to 1965 and remember being asked by my tutor Don Naismith my opinion for a location of a school lodge. I had camped with the scouts in Scotland so recommended the country. The Inverliever Lodge project started just as I was leaving C.W. and I never had the opportunity to visit the lodge.
Thanks JfN, I loved my trip there in the seventies.
I have no Scottish blood, but I hope they vote 'no'. This is partly because I love the place, but mainly because if Scotland goes the rest of us would be lumbered with Tories forever. I appreciate that that wouldn't be a problem for most people on here, but a bit of balance never hurt.
You are correct Uboat. We would lose 41 labour M.P.s - 2 lib dems - and 1 conservatives if they voted for independence. I visited Holyrood on the day the independence date was debated. The Nats argue they are ruled by a foreign dysfunctional government (Westminster is greater in distance from Edinburgh than Brussels is from London) by a government that serve's the interests of London and the South East of England rather than Scotland. They are pro. E.E.C. and would vote to stay in Europe against what they view as an English debate to leave Europe driven by U.K.I.P and the Right wing of the Tory party. Nigel Ferage was chased out of Edinburgh where U.K.I.P. has little support. The Conservatives are now down to one Scottish M.P. at Westminster. I hope they remain in the union because if they left we would have English politics dominated by the Conservative's most probably out of Europe and become an insignificant country in the Atlantic ruled by King Charles and Queen Camilla. Dread the prospect.
This is from a Tory blog:
Of the six Labour governments since 1945 only twice – in 1964 and February 1974 – was the party reliant on Scottish votes to help keep the Conservatives from office. The last three Labour governments in particular have all enjoyed comfortable overall majorities, which the loss of Scottish seats would not have overturned. In 1997 Labour’s majority was 178, of which only 56 were Scottish seats; in 2001 their majority was 166, of which 55 seats were Scottish; and in 2005 Labour’s majority was 65, of which 40 were Scottish seats. Nor does Labour’s recent electoral record in England suggest that the Tories would possess an innate advantage there. In 1997, for example, Labour obtained a majority in England alone of 127; in 2001 they had a majority there of 117; and in 2005 they secured a majority of 43.
English politics !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! like we have now you mean ?with Welsh Irish and Scots having their own parliaments and voting on THEIR issues but also being allowed to vote on what you would call "English" issues------------------------------yes nice and fare now isnt it.
Devolution -------is shit brought to you by Labour
I have no Scottish blood, but I hope they vote 'no'. This is partly because I love the place, but mainly because if Scotland goes the rest of us would be lumbered with Tories forever. I appreciate that that wouldn't be a problem for most people on here, but a bit of balance never hurt.
You are correct Uboat. We would lose 41 labour M.P.s - 2 lib dems - and 1 conservatives if they voted for independence. I visited Holyrood on the day the independence date was debated. The Nats argue they are ruled by a foreign dysfunctional government (Westminster is greater in distance from Edinburgh than Brussels is from London) by a government that serve's the interests of London and the South East of England rather than Scotland. They are pro. E.E.C. and would vote to stay in Europe against what they view as an English debate to leave Europe driven by U.K.I.P and the Right wing of the Tory party. Nigel Ferage was chased out of Edinburgh where U.K.I.P. has little support. The Conservatives are now down to one Scottish M.P. at Westminster. I hope they remain in the union because if they left we would have English politics dominated by the Conservative's most probably out of Europe and become an insignificant country in the Atlantic ruled by King Charles and Queen Camilla. Dread the prospect.
This is from a Tory blog:
Of the six Labour governments since 1945 only twice – in 1964 and February 1974 – was the party reliant on Scottish votes to help keep the Conservatives from office. The last three Labour governments in particular have all enjoyed comfortable overall majorities, which the loss of Scottish seats would not have overturned. In 1997 Labour’s majority was 178, of which only 56 were Scottish seats; in 2001 their majority was 166, of which 55 seats were Scottish; and in 2005 Labour’s majority was 65, of which 40 were Scottish seats. Nor does Labour’s recent electoral record in England suggest that the Tories would possess an innate advantage there. In 1997, for example, Labour obtained a majority in England alone of 127; in 2001 they had a majority there of 117; and in 2005 they secured a majority of 43.
Although it means nothing due to FPTP, in 2005 the Tories did win the popular vote in England.
English politics !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! like we have now you mean ?with Welsh Irish and Scots having their own parliaments and voting on THEIR issues but also being allowed to vote on what you would call "English" issues------------------------------yes nice and fare now isnt it.
Devolution -------is shit brought to you by Labour
I have no Scottish blood, but I hope they vote 'no'. This is partly because I love the place, but mainly because if Scotland goes the rest of us would be lumbered with Tories forever. I appreciate that that wouldn't be a problem for most people on here, but a bit of balance never hurt.
You are correct Uboat. We would lose 41 labour M.P.s - 2 lib dems - and 1 conservatives if they voted for independence. I visited Holyrood on the day the independence date was debated. The Nats argue they are ruled by a foreign dysfunctional government (Westminster is greater in distance from Edinburgh than Brussels is from London) by a government that serve's the interests of London and the South East of England rather than Scotland. They are pro. E.E.C. and would vote to stay in Europe against what they view as an English debate to leave Europe driven by U.K.I.P and the Right wing of the Tory party. Nigel Ferage was chased out of Edinburgh where U.K.I.P. has little support. The Conservatives are now down to one Scottish M.P. at Westminster. I hope they remain in the union because if they left we would have English politics dominated by the Conservative's most probably out of Europe and become an insignificant country in the Atlantic ruled by King Charles and Queen Camilla. Dread the prospect.
This is from a Tory blog:
Of the six Labour governments since 1945 only twice – in 1964 and February 1974 – was the party reliant on Scottish votes to help keep the Conservatives from office. The last three Labour governments in particular have all enjoyed comfortable overall majorities, which the loss of Scottish seats would not have overturned. In 1997 Labour’s majority was 178, of which only 56 were Scottish seats; in 2001 their majority was 166, of which 55 seats were Scottish; and in 2005 Labour’s majority was 65, of which 40 were Scottish seats. Nor does Labour’s recent electoral record in England suggest that the Tories would possess an innate advantage there. In 1997, for example, Labour obtained a majority in England alone of 127; in 2001 they had a majority there of 117; and in 2005 they secured a majority of 43.
But you should also consider the unfairness of the current system whereby Labour-held seats have on average 4000 less constituents than Conservative-held seats. For an extreme example The Isle of Wight, has 115,000 voters but Wirral South only 55,000. So, Labour voters get more MPs for their votes than Conservative ones do. If you factor in the Boundary Commission's suggested changes to constituency boundaries and the loss of Scotland, it may well be a closer battle in future years. It's not an exact science obviously but it has been guestimated that if the Boundary Commission's recommendations were adopted the Conservatives would lose 2% of their seats in England, Labour 7.3% and the Lib Dems 23.25%. It is perhaps then no surprise that Clegg, strongly supported by his MPs blocked the most recent attempt to introduce fairness to the electoral system. It is however somewhat ironic that the Lib Dems have a particular fondness for the use of the word "fair" in so many of their policy statements.
Love Scotland - beautiful scenery and great people - try to get there at least once a year, if not more.
Hope they stay, although the reality of the situation is that they aren't voting for 'independence' anyway, it's more like 'devo max'. I think that Salmond's been raising expectations to the point that if they did win he'd cack himself as he'd have to deliver on all his 'land of milk and honey somehow still managing to maintain a low taxation rate' promises!
It shouldn't really matter as they could just join the Euro. But of course- that is not a popular option so Salmond is in a weak position on that particular issue. The best outcome for the SNp would be to lose the vote anyway, as they won't be needed anymore if they win it!
I don't think they can 'just join the euro'. After the problems in the euro zone any future membership will only be if the prospective member can meet certain criteria. And threatening to renege on debt would probably rule them out.
I'm sure they would accept them if they wanted to apply - but they won't be able to have their cake and eat it and I think a lot of scots know that the SNP are trying to offer that!
Unless they meet the economic criteria I'm not sure they would be accepted as easily as you think. Germany and France wouldn't want any more financial implications for them either in the EU or the Eurozone.
They'd have to join the EU before joining the Euro and there is no guarantee they would be accepted.
They almost certainly would be accepted (though Spain and others might try to stop it). More importantly theer woudl be at least an 18 Month gap between independence and joining the EU (according to the SNP itself) and presumably longer to join the euro. So, at the very least there would have to be a stopgap currency.
There's no reason why the Scots could not simply declare that sterling (or euros or dollars) are legal tender in Scotland. Nobody could stop them. But they aren't entitled to a currency union in which they get a say in interest rates, banking regulation etc unless the rUK is agreeable as well. Independence for Scotland means independence from Scotland for the rest of the UK as well.
If they were to go their own way but couldn't get the necessary agreements to use Sterling, England, Wales & NI could really rub it in by rebranding the UK as Poundland.
So European commission says it will be "difficult if not impossible" for Scotland to join the EU. Coming after the chancellor has said they wont get the pound, SNP has replied to both saying not to worry about it and that they don't know what they're talking about.
Sounds to me like the one issue party is sticking its fingers in it's ears and shouting "CANT HEAR YOU"
Will be fascinating to see where the SNP and Salmond go after they lose the referendum. Their whole raison d'être was to get to the point where independence was a serious option. Once that is put to bed what do they actually stand for ?
Will be fascinating to see where the SNP and Salmond go after they lose the referendum. Their whole raison d'être was to get to the point where independence was a serious option. Once that is put to bed what do they actually stand for ?
Interesting point S.H.G. Where the S.N.P. and Alex Salmond go after the referendum should they lose would probably depend on the result. If it was fairly close then I think they will pursue another referendum in a few years time. I was at Hollyrood during the independence date debate and it was suggested by one of the opposition that this was the last chance for the independence vote, to which was quickly seized upon by the
Will be fascinating to see where the SNP and Salmond go after they lose the referendum. Their whole raison d'être was to get to the point where independence was a serious option. Once that is put to bed what do they actually stand for ?
Interesting point S.H.G. Where the S.N.P. and Alex Salmond go after the referendum should they lose would probably depend on the result. If it was fairly close then I think they will pursue another referendum in a few years time. I was at Hollyrood during the independence date debate and it was suggested by one of the opposition that this was the last chance for the independence vote, to which was quickly seized upon by the
Will be fascinating to see where the SNP and Salmond go after they lose the referendum. Their whole raison d'être was to get to the point where independence was a serious option. Once that is put to bed what do they actually stand for ?
Interesting point S.H.G. Where the S.N.P. and Alex Salmond go after the referendum should they lose would probably depend on the result. If it was fairly close then I think they will pursue another referendum in a few years time. I was at Hollyrood during the independence date debate and it was suggested by one of the opposition that this was the last chance for the independence vote, to which was quickly seized upon by the Interesting point S.H.G. Where the S.N.P. and Alex Salmond go after the referendum should they lose would probably depend on the result. If it was fairly close then I think they will pursue another referendum in a few years time. I was at Hollyrood during the independence date debate and it was suggested by one of the opposition that this was the last chance for the independence vote, which was quickly seized upon by the S.N.P. for clarification. The remark was withdrawn and I got the impression (maybe wrongly) that the S.N.P. do not see this as a final opportunity for independence. If the vote goes against independence they may believe another opportunity will arrive if the U.K. votes to withdraw from Europe as the Scots are very pro European.
Comments
I was at Crown woods from 1961 to 1965 and remember being asked by my tutor Don Naismith my opinion for a location of a school lodge. I had camped with the scouts in Scotland so recommended the country. The Inverliever Lodge project started just as I was leaving C.W. and I never had the opportunity to visit the lodge.
Of the six Labour governments since 1945 only twice – in 1964 and February 1974 – was the party reliant on Scottish votes to help keep the Conservatives from office.
The last three Labour governments in particular have all enjoyed comfortable overall majorities, which the loss of Scottish seats would not have overturned. In 1997 Labour’s majority was 178, of which only 56 were Scottish seats; in 2001 their majority was 166, of which 55 seats were Scottish; and in 2005 Labour’s majority was 65, of which 40 were Scottish seats.
Nor does Labour’s recent electoral record in England suggest that the Tories would possess an innate advantage there. In 1997, for example, Labour obtained a majority in England alone of 127; in 2001 they had a majority there of 117; and in 2005 they secured a majority of 43.
Devolution -------is shit brought to you by Labour
It is perhaps then no surprise that Clegg, strongly supported by his MPs blocked the most recent attempt to introduce fairness to the electoral system. It is however somewhat ironic that the Lib Dems have a particular fondness for the use of the word "fair" in so many of their policy statements.
But of course the larger question is: what would Andy Murray be if he lost a tennis match?
Hope they stay, although the reality of the situation is that they aren't voting for 'independence' anyway, it's more like 'devo max'. I think that Salmond's been raising expectations to the point that if they did win he'd cack himself as he'd have to deliver on all his 'land of milk and honey somehow still managing to maintain a low taxation rate' promises!
Germany and France wouldn't want any more financial implications for them either in the EU or the Eurozone.
There's no reason why the Scots could not simply declare that sterling (or euros or dollars) are legal tender in Scotland. Nobody could stop them. But they aren't entitled to a currency union in which they get a say in interest rates, banking regulation etc unless the rUK is agreeable as well. Independence for Scotland means independence from Scotland for the rest of the UK as well.
Vote for independence, we do not need youses! ;-)
Sounds to me like the one issue party is sticking its fingers in it's ears and shouting "CANT HEAR YOU"
Where the S.N.P. and Alex Salmond go after the referendum should they lose would probably depend on the result. If it was fairly close then I think they will pursue another referendum in a few years time.
I was at Hollyrood during the independence date debate and it was suggested by one of the opposition that this was the last chance for the independence vote, to which was quickly seized upon by the
It's not as if it's the same country anyway.