Is the United Kingdom doomed?

First topic message reminder :

Exactly what I’ve been predicting for a long time. I said that if the Tories, so hated in Scotland that they have only one MP, came to power at Westminster again, the Scots would decide that they’d rather go it alone. Apparently, Scottish independence now has majority backing north of the border and in the UK as a whole, according to a new poll.

Research by ComRes for ‘The Independent on Sunday’ and ‘The Sunday Mirror’ found that support for the move had risen sharply over recent months. The results are a boost for First Minister Alex Salmond as his Scottish National Party prepares to hold its autumn conference in Inverness.

In the UK overall, 39% of those surveyed agreed that Scotland should be an independent country - an increase of six points since May. The number disagreeing with the statement had fallen four points to 38%.
In Scotland, the proportion supporting independence was up 11 points over the period at 49%. Some 37% disagreed - down by nine points.

The SNP, which won an unprecedented overall majority in May elections, has promised to hold a referendum on independence towards the end of its five-year term.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/majority-back-scottish-independence-193447501.html

Red
"this amongst others is why I fully support independence!" This part of the post was written by April Thompson and my response to it was
Well its just as well you don't have a vote then isn't it

It's that sort of attitude that makes independence so attractive to so many Scots tbh.

I think our chum bobby is just shooting from the hip in frustration. The Scots do seem to want it all - leave the UK and yet keep all the frills they actually like. When Salmond is told he can't have his cake and eat it, he immediately and pathetically accuses 'Westminster' of 'bullying'. So does his schoolgirl assistant. For heaven's sake man, get a grip!

Such an attitude is bound to raise the blood pressure of the likes of bobby - I have lost a good deal of respect for Salmond myself.

I fear that those north of the border may vote to leave us and that is to be regretted - not least by them in due course, perhaps. If they go, we should not fall over ourselves to save them from their own folly, should they find life is a trifle tricky after all...

bobby wrote:Red I personally don't give a tinkers cuss about the Scott's, as far as I am concerned the only purpose they serve is to provide us with 41 Labour MP's.

 
Bobby what has happened to you "Get Out of the Bed on the Wrong Side Today"   You are wrong on so many counts about the people of Scotland and prefer to believe the CRAP put out by the SNP party who in my opinion are no different to the Tory gov't in Westminister they do not call Salmond the Tartan Tory for NOWT.
 
At the moment it is England that has the problem because Davy boy and Diddy Giddy would rather lose Scotland to Independence than lose the 2015 general election to the Labour party, if you just take a second to think about it the UK gov't could do plenty to put the Scots off voting yes by reminding people of the LIES the SNP have told the Scots about the legal advice they did not have.  Or they could say if Scots want to use the pound and have the BOE be the bank of last resort for Scotland the people of England would have to decide via a referendum, as they do not have a say in Scotlands referendum on the     18th September.   Maybe I am out of line here but I have a theory that there has been a back room deal between Salmond & Davy boy, Salmond gets Scotland and Davy boy and the Tories get to have a permanant gov't in Englsnd.
 
I hope to change your thinking most Scots do not want to LEAVE the UK, the reason is the nasty cuts that are coming to Scotland  from Westminister from the Tory led gov't when Scots NEVER vote Tory and Salmond is using that to its ultimate.   Why do you think I went down to Eastleigh in Hampshire to help Labour in the by-election 2013 its because I am not needed here in Scotland and after we get a NO here on 18th September I will hit the trail down to  England to help any Labour MP fight the Tories so we can get a FAIR gov't for all of the UK in 2015. 

Phil Hornby wrote:I think our chum bobby is just shooting from the hip in frustration. The Scots do seem to want it all - leave the UK and yet keep all the frills they actually like. When Salmond is told he can't have his cake and eat it, he immediately and pathetically accuses 'Westminster' of 'bullying'. So does his schoolgirl assistant. For heaven's sake man, get a grip!

Such an attitude is bound to raise the blood pressure of the likes of bobby - I have lost a good deal of respect for Salmond myself.

I fear that those north of the border may vote to leave us and that is to be regretted - not least by them in due course, perhaps. If they go, we should not fall over ourselves to save them from their own folly, should they find life is a trifle tricky after all...

Most of us Scots do not want it all its the bloody SNP that want it all, as for Salmond as soon as anybody says anything about the yes campaign they are SCAREMONGERING, I would suggest you read my reply to bobby and let me know what you think of my conspiracy theory PH, I would like some feed back from yourself if you would not mind.

The Scots must do as they wish. I'm not sure whether anyone else is entitled to intervene. Once having made their own bed, it's themselves who will have to lay in it.

Redflag - thanks for asking, but I wouldn't put too much trust in any opinion of mine vis-a-vis the Scottish Referendum.

What I will say is that there is nothing that Cameron wouldn't do to secure his hold on power - and that would include abandoning Scotland to the Scots! We may see more clearly his true intentions once the European Election results are known and he is forced to fine-tune his strategy for clinging on to Downing Street. He would not align with Salmond out of choice , but he cannot rule out the advantages of a Scots-free Parliament at Westminster. Equally, he can't be seen to care nothing for the Union.

QUOTE: " Equally, he can't be seen to care nothing for the Union."

Indeed. Mrs. Queen would not be amused in the slightest. Not least because DC is regarded as "family".

Especially if President Salmond put up the rent on Balmoral...

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we practise to deceive.

In September 2014, the residents of Scotland vote on whether or not to move from their current devolved state to full independence.

In my blog post, I have mischievously shown a political map of the UK after the 2010 General Election with a white line running from the River Severn in the West to The Wash in the East. The only significance of this line is that many socio-political experts cite this as being the divide between the ‘North’ and ‘South’ of the UK. This line is very arbitrary and there will doubtless be areas both above and below the line that wish they were on the other side of it. It is however, a very good trigger for further debate.

Scotland’s possible breakaway as an independent country following the referendum in September this year should make every one of us in the UK re-evaluate where our best futures lie in terms of our political values, economic interests and ‘natural allies’ in the UK regions.

Ever since the Labour Party rejected the recommendation of the Plant Report that the UK should adopt ‘Supplementary Vote’, a more proportional system of election to the Westminster Parliament, I have harboured a fear that Tony Blair’s reaffirmation of his support of ‘First Past The Post’ after his landslide victory in 1997 was a slow but inexorable electoral death sentence for left of centre parties in the UK.

The historical electoral statistics demonstrate that it is in the Conservation Party’s interest that Scotland should break away following a yes vote in an independence referendum as their electoral performance is so weak north of the border whereas Labour’s is so strong.
The 2005 General Election in Scotland, produced the following return of seats for each party:
Labour 41
Lib Dem 16
SNP 6
Con 1

If Scotland had been independent in 2005, the General Election in that year would have produced the following result in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (the number of seats won by each party or grouping is given first then Scotland’s contribution deducted):
Labour 356 – 41 = 315
Con 198 – 1 = 197
Lib Dem 62 -16 = 46
Other* 24 – 6 = 18
*Excludes 3 Sinn Fein seats that are not taken by them in Westminster

In 2005, The Labour Party would have had an overall majority of 54 in the ‘Rump UK’, reduced from an overall majority of 72 when Scotland’s seats are included.

The 2010 General Election in Scotland, produced an identical return of seats for each party to 2005, as Labour won back the two it had lost in bye-elections over the five years between General Elections:
Labour 41
Lib Dem 16
SNP 6
Con 1

If Scotland had been independent in 2010, the General Election in that year would have produced the following result in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (the number of seats won by each party or grouping is given first then Scotland’s contribution deducted):
Con 307 – 1 = 306
Labour 258 – 41 = 217
Lib Dem 57 – 16 = 41
Other* 23 – 6 = 17
*Excludes 5 Sinn Fein seats that are not taken by them in Westminster

With an independent Scotland, the Conservative Party would have had an overall majority in Westminster of 31 seats in 2010 from the ‘Rump UK’, meaning they would not have needed to enter a coalition with the Liberal Democrats to form an administration.

41 Labour seats returned from Scotland in 2005 and 2010 represented 11.5% and 15.9% of Labour’s total respectively as Labour’s seats fell everywhere in the UK except Scotland where the number of seats remained solid. Without this bedrock of Scottish Labour seats, Labour’s prospects of victory in a ‘Rump UK’ General Election would be significantly weakened and could be damaged beyond recovery by a future boundary commission review of the existing constituencies (only prevented in this Parliament by the Liberal Democrats refusal to support the review that the Conservatives were baying for).

Since the collapse of much of the UK’s manufacturing and heavy industries, the South East has prospered from a service, finance and property based economy close to the Eurozone as the rest of the UK has suffered economic decline.

No recent Government (including 13 years of Labour administration) has done enough to ‘rebalance’ the economy and has paid lip service to the regeneration of the regions outside the South and East. For example, Major’s Tory government failed to wholeheartedly back Manchester’s unsuccessful Olympic Bid in 1992. London won the Olympics for 2012 with full Labour Government backing and the siphoning of huge amounts of government money from northern regeneration schemes to a small area of East London.

I believe that if HS2 is started it will never go North of Birmingham due to spiralling costs. This will exacerbate the economic divide further between ‘North’ and ‘South’, wherever that fuzzy line may actually be.

Living in Lancashire, I would rather be governed from Edinburgh than London. I have more in common with the Scots politically, socially and economically. I am far more on their wavelength than I am with most people in the Home Counties who may as well be from a different country. Many in the South have little or no idea of the suffering and deprivation in large areas of the North and show few signs of caring. Perhaps the North seems like a different country to a lot of people in the South and East too.

I have no idea how the Scots will vote. I won’t blame them if they decide to break away but will be saddened feeling that Scotland and the ‘Rump UK’ will be weaker for it. I will also feel resentment that I can’t go with them as they decouple from Westminster with its centralising, power hungry, partisan arrogance and ineptitude. I want a referendum to be held asking all regions of the ‘Rump UK’ whether they want to join Scotland or remain with Westminster’s middle class Oxbridge clowns. I can only guess at how any such vote in my speculative fantasy land would go. Ask most Lancastrians whether they have more in common with people in rural Cheshire or South Wales and I think the Welsh would get the nod, so it is complicated. Perhaps the line from the Severn to the Wash would instead be from the Mersey to the Wash with Wales added to the North and Scotland. Northern Ireland is anybody’s guess.

Ideally, I would prefer for the existing UK to remain together, with radical constitutional and electoral reform for the Westminster Parliament, a return to ‘whole nation’ politics that commits equally to the prosperity of all of the regions, together with decentralisation of power to those regions to the lowest possible level. Then, and only then will I ever contemplate sticking with the South and East, Westminster and all that comes with it.

Phil Hornby wrote:Redflag - thanks for asking, but I wouldn't put too much trust in any opinion of mine vis-a-vis the Scottish Referendum.

What I will say is that there is nothing that Cameron wouldn't do to secure his hold on power - and that would include abandoning Scotland to the Scots! We may see more clearly his true intentions once the European Election results are known and he is forced to fine-tune his strategy for clinging on to Downing Street. He would not align with Salmond out of choice , but he cannot rule out the advantages of a Scots-free Parliament at Westminster. Equally, he can't be seen to care nothing for the Union.

Thank you PH for taking the time to answer my query, if Davy boy does not do enough to make sure there is a NO vote it will not look good on his CV that Scots left the UK while under his watch. Which could lead to Plyaid Cymru (Wales) asking to leave the UK, then maybe Northern Ireland and if you think about it the UK could split up into sections leaving the Tories with just the SE of England.  

If Northern Ireland ever wanted to 'go it alone' I will go out and buy a hat, which I shall thereafter eat...

Chas
Thanks for your analysis - I find myself in full agreement with your sentiments, although, here in Norfolk, there's no chance of escaping the Tory blue - I really hope Scotland stays in the Union

The UK can never be doomed all the while there is Norfolk to visit - a walk along the coast from Holkham beach and afternoon tea ,or dinner, at Byfords in Holt.

But I'd better get my passport ready for Scotland...

Phil Hornby wrote:The UK can never be doomed all the while there is Norfolk to visit - a walk along the coast from Holkham beach and afternoon tea ,or dinner, at Byfords in Holt.

But I'd better get my passport ready for Scotland...

Let us hope thst you will not need a passport to visit us here in Scotland PH, I do not want to think of leaving the UK because I do not think I am going to like what Salmond has in store if Scotland says Yes.

Have I got this right?   
 
Many Europeans say to the UK: “Don’t leave the EU, we’re stronger together.”
 
Right-wing Tories and UKIP say to the Europeans: “The UK doesn't need bureaucrats in faraway Brussels, and politicians we didn’t vote for, telling us what to do.”
 
The SNP says to the Tories: “Scotland doesn't need bureaucrats in faraway London, and politicians we didn’t vote for, telling us what to do.”
 
The main Westminster political parties say to the SNP: “Don’t leave the UK, we’re better together.”

IVAN I am not sure about the EU are we better in or out, there are a few things that makes me think ie the EU has not had its books audited for about 13 years plus I think there needs to be controlls on how many can come into the UK from another European country as it has gone beyond a joke the amount of people coming to the UK, what it will cost us for more schools more hospitals doctors ect.

But I do hope that Scotts stay within the UK as I do not want to be ruled by the Tartan Tory Salmond, he is no better than Davy boy as soon as the divorce was agreed Salmond would be selling off the family silver to whoever would buy it.

Ancient Chinese curse:

May you live in interesting times!

Ivan --- interesting parallel - hadn't thought of that

I’m no great fan of nationalism – the belief that your country is better than all others (as distinct from patriotism, which is the love of one’s country). So I’ve never been a fan of the Scottish National Party (SNP) or Plaid Cymru in Wales, although the latter is currently led by a socialist (Leanne Wood), and judging from their past voting records, I can’t see too many people in either Scotland or Wales supporting right-wing policies. When Nigel Farage turned up in Edinburgh, he had to leave again in a hurry and needed police protection in order to do so!
 
I also don’t like referendums, for reasons that have been outlined on another thread:-
 
https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t837-is-it-undemocratic-to-be-opposed-to-an-eu-referendum
 
The dilemma with any referendum is: what if the result is close or the turnout is low? As Kevin McKenna has written: “My straw poll of nationalists last weekend found almost universal support for a second referendum if the result of this one is a narrow defeat.” A referendum can cause a deep division in a country, and it may not resolve anything.
 
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/04/polls-are-narrowing-nationalists-are-march-and-scotland-divided
 
There may or may not be a referendum on our membership of the EU, but there will certainly be one on independence for Scotland on 18 September, and opinion polls in recent months have suggested a significant narrowing of the gap between Yes and No. An ICM poll for the Scotland on Sunday newspaper shows support for independence is at 39%, while opposition has fallen to 42%. Excluding people who have not yet made up their minds, the results put Yes on 48% and No on 52%. A second poll by Survation for the Sunday Post puts a Yes vote up one point to 38% and a No vote down one point to 46%. When the "don't knows" are stripped out, the results are 55-45 in favour of keeping Scotland in the UK.
 
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/20/scottish-independence-campaign-gaining-ground-polls
 
I have to agree with Alex Salmond that the No campaign is “stuck in a rut of negativity". I like Alistair Darling. I think he was an excellent chancellor when faced with the global credit crunch, and he had the economy growing again by the second quarter of 2010 – only for that moron Osborne to talk it down and snuff out the growth with savage cuts and a VAT rise. But as the leading spokesperson for the ‘Better Together’ campaign, I think Darling has been awful. Instead of trying to scare people into believing that Armageddon will occur if Scotland leaves the UK, why not put a positive case for the benefits of the union? It’s the same with our membership of the EU, which I support; instead of Nick Clegg and Richard Branson telling us of the dire consequences of withdrawal from the EU, why don’t they just spell out the advantages of our membership which go largely unreported by right-wing tabloids?
 
There was plenty of scaremongering back when devolution for Scotland was on the table. In 1995, Michael Forsyth said that an Edinburgh parliament with tax-raising powers would lead to “a jobs holocaust in Scotland”. James Maxwell describes that as “a classic piece of Tory hyperbole”, adding how in the run up to the 1997 referendum “the Tory Party used every scare tactic, no matter how ridiculous, to push for a No vote”.
 
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/04/snp-should-stop-playing-it-safe-independence
 
More recently, we’ve had that old bigot Simon Heffer trying, and probably succeeding, in sending many Scots into the arms of the independence camp:-
 
“English money is propping up the most welfare, drink and drug-addicted nation in Europe. Nowhere is public spending per head higher in the UK than in Scotland — where new road schemes, libraries, schools, hospitals and other state-of-the-art publicly-funded institutions are in an abundance rarely spotted in England. Also, Scots receive a range of services free of charge, including prescriptions, long-term care for the elderly and university tuition — all of which attract hefty charges in England. What Scotland is most short of, sadly, is hard-working, wealth-creating Scots. Those with drive and determination seem mostly to be in England, where they can escape the various degrees of state socialism that pass for government in today’s Scotland.”
 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2424713/scots-must-vote-independence-itll-save-rest-fortune-says-simon-heffer.html
 
Could Scotland survive outside the UK? Of course it could. It has a population of 5 million, about the same as Norway, a country which is not in the EU but is in the European Economic Area (EEA); Scotland could be in both, there are already smaller countries than Scotland in both.
 
What effect would Scottish independence have on politics in the rest of Britain? Labour would still have won clear (but smaller) majorities in 1997, 2001 and 2005. With 41 fewer MPs, it would be harder for Labour to win elections, but Scotland's vote has only affected the outcome of two UK general elections in the last 50 years.
 
I don’t want to see the Scots leave the UK, but I fully understand why they may wish to do so and make their country a Tory-free zone for ever. It’s always been unfortunate that the capital city of the UK is tucked away in the far south-east, rather than closer to the geographical centre (somewhere like Leeds). That must have created a feeling of remoteness from the government for the Scots, and 18 years of Tory rule that they didn’t vote for couldn’t have helped. Devolution was supposed to take the edge off demands for complete independence, but the return of Tory rule at Westminster in 2010 may just have placed the final nail in the coffin of the UK. We shall find out later this year.

As the day of the Scottish Independence ballot draws ever nearer, the true beliefs of interested parties will become more apparent. Some of those will surprise ordinary people in their vehemence. There are many possible unforeseen results. e.g. Pension funds, share of National Debt, NATO commitments, free trade and apportion of historical obligation, together with implications for existing companies that find themselves trading in separate jurisdictions.

I think the arrogance and bullying of so many strutting English may well pull off a job I thought impossible, namely convincing the Scots to take a big risk. It's a bit like the behaviour of the Army in Dublin way back when while the population were booing the rebels - their ignorant yobbish murders secured the Republic against all the odds!

Nobody likes to feel that they have been jilted, and it's possible that current English casual indifference to Scottish ambitions will turn decidedly bitter if they do decide to tak the high road.

Penderyn wrote:I think the arrogance and bullying of so many strutting English may well pull off a job I thought impossible, namely convincing the Scots to take a big risk.   It's a bit like the behaviour of the Army in Dublin way back when while the population were booing the rebels - their ignorant yobbish murders secured the Republic against all the odds!

Penderyn you have made a good point, however my problem is how will Salmond run Scotland if we vote Yes because I do not think he has Scotlands best interests at heart, he wants Independence but is willing to hand all of Scotlands finances back to the BOE which is ruled by who ever is in gov't in Westminister, so why Independence is it because Salmond will then be able to claim the title of First President of Scotland or that his name will go into the history books no matter what happens to the Scots.

Alex Salmond will, if successful, be running Scotland for the principal benefit of Alex Salmond.

oftenwrong wrote:Alex Salmond will, if successful, be running Scotland for the principal benefit of Alex Salmond.

I have come to the same conclusion OW, but worry why others have not seen through Salmond and the SNP ruse.

Redflag. Here we have some of your compatriots, showing their heartfelt appreciation to Cameron for his recent visit north of the border.....   
 

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bn1nszzIYAA1OSw.jpg

In such a situation, David Cameron habitually makes a promise he knows he can't keep. What might he be saying in the above pic?

In 1978, Labour passed the Scotland Act, which made provision for a referendum on a devolved assembly for Scotland. During the passage of the act, a Labour MP called George Cunningham successfully inserted an amendment which required not only a majority vote in favour of devolution but that it would be approved by 40% of Scotland’s total electorate.
 
When the referendum was held on 1 March 1979, a majority of those who voted (51.6%) opted for devolution. However, as only 63.8% of Scots bothered to cast a vote, it meant that just 32.9% of the electorate had voted for devolution, so it didn’t happen.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_devolution_referendum,_1979
 
The left-hand extract below, from the Glasgow Herald of the day before the referendum, contains the reassurance of Thatcher (then leader of the opposition) that a ‘no’ vote would not mean the end of devolution for Scotland. Needless to say, once she got into power two months later, devolution was shelved; it wasn’t put on the table again until Labour returned to office in 1997.
 
With reference to the right-hand extract, you can’t be surprised if the Scots aren’t convinced by a promise from another Tory leader, namely Cameron, that ‘no’ to independence will mean more devolved powers. If you never believe anything a Tory promises, you won’t go far wrong.
 

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnwIaaWIcAAbLpt.jpg

In the general election of 1992 the opinion polls got their forecasts comically wrong - predicting a Labour victory. Instead, John Major strengthened the Conservative majority. The explanation seemed to be that Tory voters had lied (!) to pollsters about their real intentions.

A similar situation might apply in the Scottish referendum on Independence. A yet unknown number of Scots are by no means ready to break-up the Union, but feel obliged to maintain a façade of loyalty to their own roots in the meantime.

oftenwrong. Yes, opinion pollsters were given a bloody nose in 1992 because of ‘STS’ – shy Tory syndrome. They had been predicting a hung parliament with Labour as the biggest party. And far from “strengthening the Conservative majority”, John Major was returned to power with 336 seats and a majority of 21, 40 seats fewer than Thatcher achieved in her third win in 1987:-
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1992
 
That was the last time that the Tories won a majority in a general election, and I hope sincerely it will be the last time. I don’t know how significant it was that as many as 500,000 voters did not register to vote in that election because they wanted to avoid paying the poll tax.  

 talk about shooting yourself in the foot!!!

On Thursday 18th September 2014 the people of Scotland will be given the opportunity to vote on wether to remain as part of the United Kingdom or to become an Independent nation.

How do you think this will affect you as either Scottish or British or possibly both?

Who stands to benefit most from this election?

Who stands to lose most from this election?

Well speaking for myself. I have grown up with the UK being one country and to be 100% truth full with you all, I have had many Scottish friends in that time too.  Its always been my own view that we in England have always benefited from have Scotland with us. As in many cases they bring a more libertarian view to all UK debates within the UK.

How do you think this will affect you as either Scottish or British or possibly both?

Well in many ways it will effect us in England very little, other than to making it much harder to elect a left of centre government. But we will also loss a lot of our more libertarian views from within the Government and I for one would be sad about that. On the other side I think many Scots will come to roo the day they walked out on an UK government. As I believe Scotland will have a much weaker economy in the long run as a result. So do agree with the Bank of England views on an independent Scotland.  

Who stands to benefit most from this election?

I think there are two winners from an independent Scotland. One being English right wingers and the other being the SNP. Yet in saying all of this to you, it will cost them both in the long run. As any move to an independent Scotland will at some point cost us all within and without the whole of the UK economy. As we have shown in the past that we work better together in areas of science and economic growth. But for many people understanding how international trade effects the economy leaves many people cold but it is absolutely essential. As if you hope to have a complete understanding of macroeconomics and how it works. This understanding is also important because politicians are constantly suggesting policies such as tariffs and exchange rate controls that are aimed squarely at international trade. All these effects do in turn reverberate throughout the whole domestic economy. Its my own view but feel that Scotland will end up with a trade deficit with England. But opponents always play down trade deficits while many people do not find them scary. Its only when companies with trade deficits and they start to talk about land trading due to international trade do people sit up. As then you end up with such things as transfers of property. Then you hear folks say.. oh no, johnny foreigner is taking over our country.. its my own view that this will happen beteew England and Scotland as the trade deficit starts to grow. Then they ask the real question of how independent are we really? The aswer is your not really independent at all?

 Who stands to lose most from this election?

I would say both England and Scotland will lose the most together.. but in terms of politics its the centre left.. but in terms of both economic growth and international trade both will lose out more. As one of the most important jobs of any government is helping to promote the invention of new technologies. As businesses and governments spend hundreds of billions on research and development funds each year. Its my best guess that with Scotland going its own way there will be less money for both countries to spend on development. But it Scotland that will end up with a much smaller development and research fund base. So in the long term Scotland could well find itself with far fewer new innovations and that could well see a drop in there standard of living in time.. as a Scottish government would not have such a large cash pot to subsidise new technologies within scotland that it once enjoyed..  

As I've said previously, the 'No' campaign in Scotland is so awful that you can't help wondering if the intention is to drive more voters into the pro-independence camp. And the booklet 'Better Together' doesn't exactly present a convincing case for preserving the union:-
 
Better Together vs the truth
 
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/05/better-together-vs-truth

Phil Hornby wrote:Especially if President Salmond put up the rent on Balmoral...

Like to see him try. The Castle and estates are owned by the Queen, are they not.

And they want to keep the monarchy anyway. It's all a bit moot if you ask me. The 'yes' vote was riding along at 34% at the last poll. They'd have to convince nearly all the 'don't knows' to vote 'yes' to have a chance. Scotland would have to come up with a new national pastime as well, seeing as they would no longer be able to blame the English for everything

I'd imagine the blaming of the English could continue for years after any independence. After all, Cameron is still banging on interminably about Gordon Brown and  - at the slightest encouragement - would probably even put a bad word in for Harold Wilson or Clement Attlee.

Meanwhile, Alex Salmond continues to put on a convincing display each and every time he is confronted with awkward questions about an independent Scotland and, in making fools of his opponents, persuades Scots ( mistakenly in my view) that they would be better off unhindered by being a part of Great Britain. If only the Labour Party could find a leader who was a tenth as effective in dismantling spurious Coalition arguments...    

The number of people wishing for a stronger/charismatic/not weird Leader for the Labour Party, are balanced by realists who understand that there's only one honest game in town. All the alternatives are worse.