Scotland "FREEDOM!!!" and a Republic of Jamaica?

greg66_tri_v2.0

daviesee wrote:

Who needs a national airline that is nearly bankrupt?

Well, now technically, it is the pension fund that is bankrupt. The airline is just an adjunct to the pension fund.

Still, better that than your former central bank being bought by a northern building society then being part nationalised to keep it afloat :P

What are you going to do for a central bank when you become independent, btw? It's most unconventional to have your central bank owned by another bank and a foreign government...

Perhaps you could buy back in exchange for, oh, well, whatcha got?

[This is great. It's like Monopoly. But with real people and their livelihoods!]

tailwindhome

Greg66 wrote:

This is great. It's like Monopoly. But with real people and their livelihoods!]

That's what Osbourne said to Cameron

rick_chasey

Greg66 wrote:

What are you going to do for a central bank when you become independent, btw? It's most unconventional to have your central bank owned by another bank and a foreign government...

Perhaps you could buy back in exchange for, oh, well, whatcha got?

[This is great. It's like Monopoly. But with real people and their livelihoods!]

Wait for it.....

Set up another?

RBS isn't a national bank, despite its name :P. It's a private company.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Rick Chasey wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

What are you going to do for a central bank when you become independent, btw? It's most unconventional to have your central bank owned by another bank and a foreign government...

Perhaps you could buy back in exchange for, oh, well, whatcha got?

[This is great. It's like Monopoly. But with real people and their livelihoods!]

Wait for it.....

Set up another?

RBS isn't a national bank, despite its name :P. It's a private company.

Err, it's Bank of Scotland. BoS was set up by the Scottish Parliament before the Act of Union. RBS was originally a private non banking enterprise and received its banking charter from the British Parliament after the Act of Union. To compete with the untrustworthy BoS.

So now you know.

rick_chasey

Greg66 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

What are you going to do for a central bank when you become independent, btw? It's most unconventional to have your central bank owned by another bank and a foreign government...

Perhaps you could buy back in exchange for, oh, well, whatcha got?

[This is great. It's like Monopoly. But with real people and their livelihoods!]

Wait for it.....

Set up another?

RBS isn't a national bank, despite its name :P. It's a private company.

Err, it's Bank of Scotland. BoS was set up by the Scottish Parliament before the Act of Union. RBS was originally a private non banking enterprise and received its banking charter from the British Parliament after the Act of Union. To compete with the untrustworthy BoS.

So now you know.

Pretty sure Bank of Scotland operates like a clearing house (i.e. private firm) >

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_Scotland > kinda. It's a commerical bank which does some clearing.

Ain't no central bank.

Just so you know :P

Anyway, if Scotland joins the Euro it's a moot point anyway.

rick_chasey

double post.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Rick Chasey wrote:

Pretty sure Bank of Scotland operates like a clearing house (i.e. private firm) >

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_Scotland > kinda. It's a commerical bank which does some clearing.

Ain't no central bank.

Just so you know :P

Anyway, if Scotland joins the Euro it's a moot point anyway.

Ah, we've discretely dropped RBS, have we? Most wise.

BoS is a clearing bank NOW, which is why I referred to it six posts up as "former central bank". As in "no longer". Not since 1707, when the Bank of England became the central bank for Great Britain.

And at the risk of stating the bleedin' obvious, should Scotland exit the Union and become independent, it will need a central bank to, oh, print money (contrary to popular belief, that being something that does not grow on trees).

Joining the Euro (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)

Sorry.

Joining in the Euro (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)

Ahem.

Being in the Euro won't obviate the need for a central bank. Eg Banque de France, Deutsche Bundesbank, Banco de Espana, Banca d'Italia...


Confusing RBS and BOS. I dunno...



OK. It's *possible* I was looking for an excuse to use that gif

rick_chasey

What can I say? I figured someone like you wouldn't know about the BoS?...

Once Europe has stopped fannying about, if it exists, there won't be a pressing need for national banks :P since, y'know, It'll all be Euro-bonds from Frankfurt anyhow :P

*sighs*

And like I said, they'd start a NEW central bank, rather than try bring the BoS Bank right?

SimonAH

Surely there must be some sort of deal doable whereby England could swap, say, Swansea and Glasgow for Jamaica?

rjsterry

SimonAH wrote:

Surely there must be some sort of deal doable whereby England could swap, say, Swansea and Glasgow for Jamaica?

So who gets Swansea and Glasgow?

SimonAH

The Jamaicans?

rjsterry

SimonAH wrote:

The Jamaicans?

Can't see them going for that really.

mitchell_inman

I will be quite happy for the Scottish Govt to hold a 3 option referendum in 2014, and then make my choice. I'd even be happy for the referendum to be held earlier.

I'd be less than happy to see a yes/no independence referendum, imposed by the UK govt, the purpose of which wouldn't be to give the Scottish people an opportunity to voice their opinion, but rather to gerrymander a particular result (No to independence).

Personally, I'm quite happy with devolution and would probably vote for devo-max, and it looks like I'm not alone. I suspect that many Scots would feel that they hadn't had the opportunity to settle the issue if it was a simple yes/no vote. You can't just make the support for devo-max vanish simply by insisting it's not on the ballot.

Maybe the Tories don't like the idea of a govt actually doing something they promised...

Stone Glider

Dave pulled a 'fast one' with the last referendum over AV, dodgy questions, dubious campaigning, etc. Do you think he would get away with it twice? does anyone trust him now? If the choices on the ballot paper are selected by Dave the offer on the table will be utterly unattractive.

Paul E

The Scottish Gov can set up any referendum it likes but as i said before it's result won't be legally binding, yes the UK Gov can impose things as it's still in charge as you have Scottish MP's sitting in it who also vote on matters that affect England and Wales, do we get up in arms and say we are being imposed on all the time, not that I can remember on the news or speaking to friends.

But if devo max happens, the only tax the Scottish Gov will have to spend will come from the Scottish not any from Westminster as happens now.

The issue for the referendum is independence, not "give us more powers please but ask us if we want to go it alone too if you don't mind"

Just saying!

SimonAH

Seriously though, apart from national pride, what would be the advantage of devolution to the Scots or the Welsh?

Jamaica is a different thing altogether.

suzyb

Are you guys talking about Bank of Scotland or Royal Bank of Scotland?

greg66_tri_v2.0

suzyb wrote:

Are you guys talking about Bank of Scotland or Royal Bank of Scotland?

I was talking about Bank of Scotland. Rick started talking about Royal Bank of Scotland, then realised that was the wrong bank, and started talking about Bank of Scotland.

cjcp

SimonAH wrote:

Seriously though, apart from national pride, what would be the advantage of devolution to the Scots or the Welsh?

Jamaica is a different thing altogether.

I'm struggling to see the benefit of independence for Wales. What has the Welsh Assembly done for places around Port Talbot or the end of the M4?

greg66_tri_v2.0

I just had a canter through the SNP's 2010 manifesto. Interesting. Independence is what's trumpeted. There is a single reference to allowing the opposition parties to put forward an alternative (in the form of increased devolution) on a referendum paper. But not to that being a plank of the SNP's position.

So, being a cynic, I might guess that Salmond knows he won't win an independence referendum. So he has bottled and added devo max to his slate, more confident that the can bring that home. But he sure as hell doesn't want to have the responsibility for running the finances of a country while the global economy is in the shitter. So he wants to wait a couple of years in the hope that things pick up in the meantime.

Cameron's probably rerunning the tactic he used to damage Brown when there was a possibility of Brown calling a snap election after he took office. Brown ended up bottling, lost the moment, and from there on watched his world turn to sh1t in front of him.

Oh, and there's a lot of stuff in the SNP manifesto about desperately trying to keep in place the level of funding handed put by Westminster to Scotland. Make of that what you will.

daviesee

SimonAH wrote:

Seriously though, apart from national pride, what would be the advantage of devolution to the Scots or the Welsh?

Jamaica is a different thing altogether.

Self rule with decisions made by those closer to the area. I know some people in the Middlesborough area that are well peeved by the decisions Westminster makes so it is not a Scottish/English thing.
Then again, people on the Western Isles feel as close to Edinburgh as I do to Brussels.

The main thing driving it I suppose is that the elected ruling SNP party have wildly different views on how the Country should be run compared to the Coalition. Or Blairite Labour-Lite. The only way that things can change is by getting more powers.

rebs

Not sure if this is a silly question. But how scottish will someone need to be to vote in such a referendum?

daviesee

It can't be that stupid a question as one MP felt the need to ask it in the House yesterday.

As per any other election - if your registered postal address is in Scotland, you will get a vote. So you don't have to be Scottish at all.

whitestar1

bails87 wrote:

The Empire is crumbling!

Next thing you know, the colonists in America will want independence.

I agree, the Empire has gone down the toilet! Been a Queen's man myself and a second generation Jamaican I am a bit of a conundrum. As for Jamaica, easier said than done I would say to Portia Simpson Miller - just a sound bite. Any how it wouldn't affect the UK one way or the other.

As for the Scott's good for them to get full independence. What exactly has the Scots economy done for England or the Midlands for that matter? From my understanding we can't even use their currency here. Though my knowledge does only go as far as 1066 and Brave Heart.

tailwindhome

Greg66 wrote:

I just had a canter through the SNP's 2010 manifesto. Interesting. Independence is what's trumpeted. There is a single reference to allowing the opposition parties to put forward an alternative (in the form of increased devolution) on a referendum paper. But not to that being a plank of the SNP's position.
So, being a cynic, I might guess that Salmond knows he won't win an independence referendum. So he has bottled and added devo max to his slate, more confident that the can bring that home. But he sure as hell doesn't want to have the responsibility for running the finances of a country while the global economy is in the shitter. So he wants to wait a couple of years in the hope that things pick up in the meantime.

Cameron's probably rerunning the tactic he used to damage Brown when there was a possibility of Brown calling a snap election after he took office. Brown ended up bottling, lost the moment, and from there on watched his world turn to sh1t in front of him.

Oh, and there's a lot of stuff in the SNP manifesto about desperately trying to keep in place the level of funding handed put by Westminster to Scotland. Make of that what you will.

You get what you can get now and then move on to the next thing you want. It's called strategy.

I think it's too cynical to say Salmond doesn't want the "responsibility for running the finances of a country while the global economy is in the shitter", I think it is more that he thinks a 'Yes' vote will be harder to get in the current economic climate.

tailwindhome

Why would Britain/England not want Scotland to gain independance?

daviesee

TailWindHome wrote:

Why would Britain/England not want Scotland to gain independance?

Given the perception that Scotland is a drain on the economy, that would be a very good question.
Maybe Scotland offers more than is obvious?

First.Aspect

If Scotland was independent, where would all of England's new nuclear power stations go?

And to the guy who is confused about the currency in S
Scotland - that's precisely why the English should not be part of the referendum.

daviesee

First Aspect wrote:

If Scotland was independent, where would all of England's new nuclear power stations go?

That has already been decided. No new nuclear power stations will be built in Scotland.
The SNP is an anti-nuclear party and as they are in power......

Maybe that is the reason to keep Scotland on board. Get rid of the SNP, install a "friendly" party and Scotland gets new nuclear power stations. Hmmm......

W1

mitchell_inman wrote:

I will be quite happy for the Scottish Govt to hold a 3 option referendum in 2014, and then make my choice. I'd even be happy for the referendum to be held earlier.

I'd be less than happy to see a yes/no independence referendum, imposed by the UK govt, the purpose of which wouldn't be to give the Scottish people an opportunity to voice their opinion, but rather to gerrymander a particular result (No to independence).

Personally, I'm quite happy with devolution and would probably vote for devo-max, and it looks like I'm not alone. I suspect that many Scots would feel that they hadn't had the opportunity to settle the issue if it was a simple yes/no vote. You can't just make the support for devo-max vanish simply by insisting it's not on the ballot.

Maybe the Tories don't like the idea of a govt actually doing something they promised...

FFS - do you want true independence or not? It really is a yes/no answer, unless what you really want it to be able to retain the benefits of the Union whilst ditching the bad bits - which is evidently unreasonable.