One Word Post - Should Scotland Be An Independent Country? Yes Or No.

[JeanieD]

I fear that the standard of tonight's debate might be surpassed only by the dross served up every evening on "Super Scoreboard" but I would be delighted if it were not!

[jaggybunnet]

i rest my case, shambles

[ScottyDFA]

Darling's closing statement was the usual fear-mongering garbage about an uncertain future. If we stay in the UK it'll be uncertain whether the next government is right-wing (New Labour) or very right wing (Conservative); therefore I have no idea if social justice, as a goal, will take a kicking or a shafting.

 

Hopefully the "uncertainty" red herring has been smelled by all who will be voting next month.

 

Come on Scotland.

 

LET'S DO THIS!!!

[gianlucatoni]

Turgid debate - thought Salmond should have been better prepared for BTs continued illusion of uncertainty relating to the currency - he missed a real opportunity to stand up and make a decent pitch whilst nailing that snake Darling.

 

Not too worried about BT being allegedly ahead in the polls as most of the No's that I've spoken to have confided that they will most probably not be ars*d to go vote on the day - cannae beat the apathy!

[Norgethistle]

Salmond was very poor by his debating standards, still no answer on currency, I'd give darling that debate on points

[Norgethistle]

Turgid debate - thought Salmond should have been better prepared for BTs continued illusion of uncertainty relating to the currency - he missed a real opportunity to stand up and make a decent pitch whilst nailing that snake Darling.

 

Not too worried about BT being allegedly ahead in the polls as most of the No's that I've spoken to have confided that they will most probably not be ars*d to go vote on the day - cannae beat the apathy!

 

Most ones I know are going to vote or even fly in to do so

[Jaggernaut]

Being "stranded" in Japan at the moment, I didn't see the debate. But, surprise surprise, the opening clips for both speakers on the "BBC" were 39 sec for Salmond, and 43 sec for Darling, the extra time at the end for Darling consisting of applause from the audience. The applause at the end of Salmond's opening statement was edited out.

 

And the "BBC" denies bias....

 

This is what we are up against, folks.

Edited August 6, 2014 by Jaggernaut

[MerryHell]

Was really disappointed with Salmond last night and I'm a Yes voter. Why he spent time on the 'driving on right side of road' or 'increased exposure to alien landing' nonsense is beyond me. I wanted him to boss Darling, and he should have.

 

Clear winners last night for me were BT as they are already leading most polls and I can't see too many jumping to Yes camp based on last night.

 

I can't believe that nobody in BT hasn't read the currency options/proposals. Why they want them ranked A-E is bizarre to me.

[jaggybunnet]

 

I can't believe that nobody in BT hasn't read the currency options/proposals. Why they want them ranked A-E is bizarre to me.

 

we have but its all pros but no cons which is rubbish and so vague on detail but that shouldn't be a shock.

[MerryHell]

 

 

we have but its all pros but no cons which is rubbish and so vague on detail but that shouldn't be a shock.

 

So given you think it's all rubbish, why is it so important that one of them be given the label 'Plan B' let alone naming a C, D or E?

 

Both camps are equally guilty of the 'all pros, no cons' approach.

[jaggybunnet]

So given you think it's all rubbish, why is it so important that one of them be given the label 'Plan B' let alone naming a C, D or E?

 

Both camps are equally guilty of the 'all pros, no cons' approach.

 

i said that it was rubbish that they failed to show any cons of the euro and a separate/new currency and yes i agree ref both sides approach.

 

have said this before but here we go again the yes camp (as they are the ones that want the change) should be the ones that have all the information and should have had it ready to go, the very fact that they don't worries me that they either don't really have any plan or that there plans looks so bad that it would put people off, the information i have seen seems to say the latter.

[Jaggernaut]

i said that it was rubbish that they failed to show any cons of the euro and a separate/new currency and yes i agree ref both sides approach.

 

have said this before but here we go again the yes camp (as they are the ones that want the change) should be the ones that have all the information and should have had it ready to go, the very fact that they don't worries me that they either don't really have any plan or that there plans looks so bad that it would put people off, the information i have seen seems to say the latter.

 

So, what is this "information" that you have "seen"?

[jaggybunnet]

So, what is this "information" that you have "seen"?

 

the fact that Scotland runs at a yearly debt of £8bn (snps own gers numbers)

and this with what we pretty much know about the currency and eu tell me it wont work, if you have information that proves otherwise please feel free to show it.

Edited August 7, 2014 by jaggybunnet

[The Jukebox Rebel]

Tough gig for Alex the other night with neither gains nor losses. Hostile audience, verging on the rude. Darling, animated and loud, was like a dog with a bone on the currency question - what sort of tactic is that?

 

How ironic that the camp who insist we are "better together" are the camp who will seek to damage Scotland by post-independence belligerence on issues such as our continued use of the pound. Who wants to be together with people like that?

 

Are the no-camp fooling the middle million? I'm not so sure. I wouldn't like to be the guy who's bet a quarter of a mill that says they are.

[jaggybunnet]

Tough gig for Alex the other night with neither gains nor losses. Hostile audience, verging on the rude. Darling, animated and loud, was like a dog with a bone on the currency question - what sort of tactic is that?

 

How ironic that the camp who insist we are "better together" are the camp who will seek to damage Scotland by post-independence belligerence on issues such as our continued use of the pound. Who wants to be together with people like that?

 

Are the no-camp fooling the middle million? I'm not so sure. I wouldn't like to be the guy who's bet a quarter of a mill that says they are.

 

it was the same for darling and if eck actually answered the question that would solve his problem.

[Norgethistle]

Tough gig for Alex the other night with neither gains nor losses. Hostile audience, verging on the rude. Darling, animated and loud, was like a dog with a bone on the currency question - what sort of tactic is that?

 

How ironic that the camp who insist we are "better together" are the camp who will seek to damage Scotland by post-independence belligerence on issues such as our continued use of the pound. Who wants to be together with people like that?

 

Are the no-camp fooling the middle million? I'm not so sure. I wouldn't like to be the guy who's bet a quarter of a mill that says they are.

 

Its like a break-up of a marriage you will mention how better things can be together as a couple and how sharing the house, wages and the bills etc will help, but once that divorce goes through why would you share your wages, house or help out with the bills, as they say " if you make your bed"

[The Jukebox Rebel]

He was quite right not to cede a cheap headline along the lines of "We'll have a Scottish pound".

 

He's standing for a currency union and a British Pound. It's really that simple.

 

Post-independence, if the English people are going to be deliberately obstructive then we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. An interim English pound without agreement followed by a Scottish pound in due course is perfectly do-able.

 

What I can't get my head around is why Scottish people (i.e. those in the No Camp) would seek to damage Scotland post-independence by supporting moves to block the currency union.

 

The desperation really is rather ugly.

[Norgethistle]

He was quite right not to cede a cheap headline along the lines of "We'll have a Scottish pound".

 

He's standing for a currency union and a British Pound. It's really that simple.

 

Post-independence, if the English people are going to be deliberately obstructive then we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. An interim English pound without agreement followed by a Scottish pound in due course is perfectly do-able.

 

What I can't get my head around is why Scottish people (i.e. those in the No Camp) would seek to damage Scotland post-independence by supporting moves to block the currency union.

 

The desperation really is rather ugly.

 

The rUK would be within its rights to as a currency union without an economical union could destable the rUK currency and their economy, if iScotland set a lower tax for example the value of the goods would be differeent and trade etc would impact on the pound differently across the rUK and iScotland.

 

If independance is wanted then go independant and set up an independant currency, don't rely on the UK's or Europes (Would be disaterous to join the Euro)

[The Jukebox Rebel]

There's no danger that Scotland would destabilise the British Pound. For a start, the economic outputs of both countries per capita is virtually identical. If anything, it could be the other way about. Like the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands we will be solid partners for the union.

 

In the highly unlikely event that the English government will be able to legally block a deal between Scotland and the Bank of England (who are open minded to the prospect) English businesses would be damaged.

 

Why would two large trading partners tolerate self imposed barriers? Business leaders won't stand for it - on both sides of the border. Despite the threats - it won't happen. The currency union would, and should, go ahead.

[Norgethistle]

There's no danger that Scotland would destabilise the British Pound. For a start, the economic outputs of both countries per capita is virtually identical. If anything, it could be the other way about. Like the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands we will be solid partners for the union.

 

In the highly unlikely event that the English government will be able to legally block a deal between Scotland and the Bank of England (who are open minded to the prospect) English businesses would be damaged.

 

Why would two large trading partners tolerate self imposed barriers? Business leaders won't stand for it - on both sides of the border. Despite the threats - it won't happen. The currency union would, and should, go ahead.

 

Jim Sillars speaks a lot of sense here, but it seems the YES campaign are starting to turn on Salmonds stubbornish just at the time they need to be rallying

[P-R]

News to me if YES are turning on Salmond, extremely daft if true but the only thing I saw was a story in the Daily Record today with many "senior figures" mentioned but no names. For all we know Torcuil Crichton could be the source.

[Norgethistle]

News to me if YES are turning on Salmond, extremely daft if true but the only thing I saw was a story in the Daily Record today with many "senior figures" mentioned but no names. For all we know Torcuil Crichton could be the source.

 

Well Jim Sillar isn't exactly reeping the 1st ministers praises over his handling of the currency debate, and another friend of the SNP Sir Sean has stated he would like to see Scotland stay in the union

[The Jukebox Rebel]

Very interesting Norge – thanks for posting that. Yes, I agree Sillars does talk a lot of general sense there. Though I don't think he should be taking a pop at his own, especially at this stage.

 

It reinforces my view that the tactic endorsed by the No Campaign and supported by the English MPs to spread fear and doubt about the pound is quite disgraceful. Classic divide and conquer routine.

 

In essence, both Sillars and Salmond are saying the same thing but the latter seems determined not to dilute his headline message by repeatedly talking about the plan B. It’s a normal political practice. Plan B is in place for all to see – as Sillars acknowledges. There’s nothing to stop Sillars and whoever else talking about plan B, the Scottish pound, and that’s fine. Whether Sillars agrees or not, Salmond, in the eyes of the media, is the leader of the Yes campaign. He knows that his every utterance is scrutinized, analysed and always one slip away from a negative headline.

 

Both men acknowledge that the Scottish Pound is the lesser of the two options. We simply don’t want to be promoting that lesser option in the headlines. I guess that’s why Alex Salmond is First Minister and Jim Sillars isn’t. I think it’s called strength of leadership – a crucial trait for a would-be prime minister.

[Norgethistle]

By insisting that is what will happen Salmond is causing uncertainty for voters and for businesses alike, at the time when he needs to win them over.

Sillars plan would only be hindered by not being in the EU or EEA where there would be no free trade between Scotland and rUK where Scotlands biggest exports go, yes a trade agreement would be in the interest of all to a great extend, but would rUK make it easier to import from Scotland at risk of rUK business?

[P-R]

Well Jim Sillar isn't exactly reeping the 1st ministers praises over his handling of the currency debate, and another friend of the SNP Sir Sean has stated he would like to see Scotland stay in the union

 

Yes, but Jim Sillars was always outspoken and I doubt fellow YES activists are about to lynch Salmond for one mediocre performance.Sean Connery for the union? Surprised by that, do you have a link? Again I've only seen 1 source that suggested this which I found here http://arts.nationalpost.com/2014/08/07/sean-connery-mick-jagger-among-stars-urging-scottish-voters-to-oppose-independence-referendum/ but when you follow the link to http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11018148/Sir-Mick-Jagger-joins-200-public-figures-calling-for-Scotland-to-stay-in-the-UK.html his name isn't on the list.