Friday Thread: If Scotland vote YES will TWH have to leave?

surrey_commuter

meanredspider wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

I have huge respect for Salmond, if he wins he wins, if he loses he wins. He wanted devomax and Cameron said no.

Did he? I thought Salmond asked for a referendum on independence and that's what he got.

Salmond wanted to hedge his bets with 3 questions - yes, no, devomax. Cameron was so confident he insisted on yes/no.

surrey_commuter

lol - Cameron traded it for giving the vote to 16-17 year olds.... Briefcase Winker

http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/ ... dependence

YIMan

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Can I point out that my 'Yes' vote won't be anti-English in any way, shape or form? Quite aside from the fact that I would never base such a huge decision on anything so petty, the fact that I am in actual fact English, my wife is English and both our families live in England may help convince you of this.
.
.
.
.
.
For years I've seen my native North-East passed over for everything, left to rot by Westminster. Do I think that anything will change in the way that happens? Certainly not if Scotland doesn't force the UK's hand. I understand the need for a global city of London, but not if it's to the detriment of the rest of the country.

I see it a different way. By voting yes you're kicking your native north-east in the teeth and leaving it to rot.

YIMan

UndercoverElephant wrote:

elbowloh wrote:

Yeah, yeah, but look at the cost of a beer in Iceland!

Since the collapse of the currency, it's not that bad...

I may see if the company I work for will pay me in US dollars.

meanredspider wrote:

You're living in a different Scotland from the one I'm living in

I think I may be. Perhaps that's the benefit of living in the prosperous South-East, rather than the forgotten North.

HA! I see it now....twenty years time.....the Highland Independence issue "I don't want to be ruled by that lot hundreds of miles away in the south-east at Holyrood"

meanredspider

YIMan wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote:

elbowloh wrote:

Yeah, yeah, but look at the cost of a beer in Iceland!

Since the collapse of the currency, it's not that bad...

I may see if the company I work for will pay me in US dollars.

meanredspider wrote:

You're living in a different Scotland from the one I'm living in

I think I may be. Perhaps that's the benefit of living in the prosperous South-East, rather than the forgotten North.

HA! I see it now....twenty years time.....the Highland Independence issue "I don't want to be ruled by that lot hundreds of miles away in the south-east at Holyrood"

Twenty years? I might be starting it in 2 weeks time!!

anonymousblackfg

How on earth did Cameron think it could go any differently?

Some etonian toff giving the chance for the Scots to give him the finger at a point where everyone has suffered 5 sh*t years of drudgery while the party who they blame for onward march of economic and technological progress 30 years ago giving their industries a good shoeing is in power...

aberdeen_lune

I think your right there, it all goes back to Thatcher getting into power in 79. Through her policies she wiped out the Tories in Scotland and sowed the seeds for independence. It was inevitable.

What a mistake we made in the 79 referendum.

meanredspider

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

What a mistake we made in the 79 referendum.

Funny you should say that. A friend says he voted Yes in '79 and says what a terrible mistake that was. I wonder how many of the young people in Scotland today will have the same view in 35 years time

meanredspider

meanredspider wrote:

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

My yes vote is getting posted in the morning. Loving the mad panic from Westminster now.

What are your thoughts on the likes of Raigmore hospital and its staffing crisis? There are at least 5 consultants in my village, only one of which is Scottish. Raigmore already has real problems in recruiting skilled staff. Do you think your Yes vote will improve the situation? If so, how?

Same goes for any and all specialist skills in the Highlands.

Still interested in the response

aberdeen_lune

meanredspider wrote:

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

What a mistake we made in the 79 referendum.

Funny you should say that. A friend says he voted Yes in '79 and says what a terrible mistake that was. I wonder how many of the young people in Scotland today will have the same view in 35 years time

In what way was it a mistake then? What terrible thing happened apart from Thatchers government?

aberdeen_lune

meanredspider wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

My yes vote is getting posted in the morning. Loving the mad panic from Westminster now.

What are your thoughts on the likes of Raigmore hospital and its staffing crisis? There are at least 5 consultants in my village, only one of which is Scottish. Raigmore already has real problems in recruiting skilled staff. Do you think your Yes vote will improve the situation? If so, how?

Same goes for any and all specialist skills in the Highlands.

Still interested in the response

I don't see why not being Scottish is that big an issue. An Independent Scotland will hopefully be cosmopolitan and we should be able to make it an attractive place to work. We will also be able to set up an immigration policy not based on net migration target numbers so we should be able to bring talent in from around the globe.

UndercoverElephant

YIMan wrote:

I see it a different way. By voting yes you're kicking your native north-east in the teeth and leaving it to rot.

Really? How will things actually change if Scotland votes no? Sure, we could keep voting for the status quo, but I think the carrot of devo-max will change less about the UK than is needed - even if it does happen this time. It's a decisive issue up here, I've been arguing in the pub with workmates about it tonight, and I have no idea how it will go, but we have a once in a generation chance to make a stand. As a colleague puts it: I believe in independence but I don't hate the English and I think Braveheart was a dreadful movie.

meanredspider

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

I don't see why not being Scottish is that big an issue. An Independent Scotland will hopefully be cosmopolitan and we should be able to make it an attractive place to work. We will also be able to set up an immigration policy not based on net migration target numbers so we should be able to bring talent in from around the globe.

I explained above. All the English/Welsh/Irish coming up here to fill the job shortages will be working in a foreign country. It already doesn't have enough appeal. You're throwing up another barrier. Given the current types of job vacancies, immigration rules aren't a barrier anyway (we, at LifeScan, were able to have non-EU join - we just couldn't attract them). I think it's incredibly naive to believe it'll be OK. As for cosmopolitan, walk around Inverness and spot the non-white - it's starkly Caucasian.

aberdeen_lune

It's up to whatever Scottish government we elect to make it an attractive place to live and work. The quality of life can be better away from the big cities and congestion down south so it's mainly the financial elements that need to be improved. It's not insurmountable and we will have the powers to do something about it.

anonymousblackfg

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

It's up to whatever Scottish government we elect to make it an attractive place to live and work. The quality of life can be better away from the big cities and congestion down south so it's mainly the financial elements that need to be improved. It's not insurmountable and we will have the powers to do something about it.

Yes, outside of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Inverness and Stirling it's a beautiful example of welcoming cosmopolitan charm. Just ask my aussie mate of korean descent and a good friend who's half Shrilankan how welcoming scotland was when they went out for a drink in Ayr the night before I got married.

Koncordski

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

My yes vote is getting posted in the morning. Loving the mad panic from Westminster now.

What are your thoughts on the likes of Raigmore hospital and its staffing crisis? There are at least 5 consultants in my village, only one of which is Scottish. Raigmore already has real problems in recruiting skilled staff. Do you think your Yes vote will improve the situation? If so, how?

Same goes for any and all specialist skills in the Highlands.

Still interested in the response

I don't see why not being Scottish is that big an issue. An Independent Scotland will hopefully be cosmopolitan and we should be able to make it an attractive place to work. We will also be able to set up an immigration policy not based on net migration target numbers so we should be able to bring talent in from around the globe.

You want to get rid of the UK and jump straight into bed with Europe, despite the fact that Spain will more than likely throw endless spanners at that, and even if you join you think you'll have the clout to dictate immigration policy to Brussels? Wake up and smell the coffee.

aberdeen_lune

anonymousblackfg wrote:

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

It's up to whatever Scottish government we elect to make it an attractive place to live and work. The quality of life can be better away from the big cities and congestion down south so it's mainly the financial elements that need to be improved. It's not insurmountable and we will have the powers to do something about it.

Yes, outside of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Inverness and Stirling it's a beautiful example of welcoming cosmopolitan charm. Just ask my aussie mate of korean descent and a good friend who's half Shrilankan how welcoming scotland was when they went out for a drink in Ayr the night before I got married.

Yes it's a shame about the nutters but you get them in lots of countries.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

Yes it's a shame about the nutters but you get them in lots of countries.

How very true. But most countries are able to keep them well away from positions of responsibility or power:

Former SNP deputy leader Jimm Sillars wrote:

Scottish independence: FORMER SNP deputy leader Jim Sillars has claimed there will be a “day of reckoning” for major Scottish employers such as Royal Bank of Scotland and Standard Life after a Yes vote.

Speaking from his campaign vehicle the “Margo Mobile”, Mr Sillars insisted that employers are “subverting Scotland’s democratic process” and vowed that oil giant BP would be nationalised in an independent Scotland.

Earlier this week, a number of banks, including Lloyds Banking Group and RBS, said they would look to move their headquarters south of the border in the event of a Yes vote.

Mr Sillars, who earlier this week claimed he and First Minister Alex Salmond had put their long-held personal differences behind them to campaign together for independence, also revealed that he would not retire from politics on 19 September but said he would be “staying in” if Scotland became independent.

He claimed there is talk of a “boycott” of John Lewis, banks to be split up, and new law to force Ryder Cup sponsor Standard Life to explain to unions its reasons for moving outside Scotland.

He said: “This referendum is about power, and when we get a Yes majority, we will use that power for a day of reckoning with BP and the banks.

“The heads of these companies are rich men, in cahoots with a rich English Tory Prime Minister, to keep Scotland’s poor, poorer through lies and distortions. The power they have now to subvert our democracy will come to an end with a Yes.”

He added: “BP, in an independent Scotland, will need to learn the meaning of nationalisation, in part or in whole, as it has in other countries who have not been as soft as we have forced to be. We will be the masters of the oil fields, not BP or any other of the majors.”

He said that under an independent Scotland, Standard Life would be required by new employment laws to give two years warning of any redundancies - and reveal to the trade unions its financial reasons for relocation to any country outside of Scotland.

From http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3539754

aberdeen_lune

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

Yes it's a shame about the nutters but you get them in lots of countries.

How very true. But most countries are able to keep them well away from positions of responsibility or power:

Former SNP deputy leader Jimm Sillars wrote:

Scottish independence: FORMER SNP deputy leader Jim Sillars has claimed there will be a “day of reckoning” for major Scottish employers such as Royal Bank of Scotland and Standard Life after a Yes vote.

Speaking from his campaign vehicle the “Margo Mobile”, Mr Sillars insisted that employers are “subverting Scotland’s democratic process” and vowed that oil giant BP would be nationalised in an independent Scotland.

Earlier this week, a number of banks, including Lloyds Banking Group and RBS, said they would look to move their headquarters south of the border in the event of a Yes vote.

Mr Sillars, who earlier this week claimed he and First Minister Alex Salmond had put their long-held personal differences behind them to campaign together for independence, also revealed that he would not retire from politics on 19 September but said he would be “staying in” if Scotland became independent.

He claimed there is talk of a “boycott” of John Lewis, banks to be split up, and new law to force Ryder Cup sponsor Standard Life to explain to unions its reasons for moving outside Scotland.

He said: “This referendum is about power, and when we get a Yes majority, we will use that power for a day of reckoning with BP and the banks.

“The heads of these companies are rich men, in cahoots with a rich English Tory Prime Minister, to keep Scotland’s poor, poorer through lies and distortions. The power they have now to subvert our democracy will come to an end with a Yes.”

He added: “BP, in an independent Scotland, will need to learn the meaning of nationalisation, in part or in whole, as it has in other countries who have not been as soft as we have forced to be. We will be the masters of the oil fields, not BP or any other of the majors.”

He said that under an independent Scotland, Standard Life would be required by new employment laws to give two years warning of any redundancies - and reveal to the trade unions its financial reasons for relocation to any country outside of Scotland.

From http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/t ... -1-3539754

Yes he's a bit of a nut job. There are embarrassments on both sides of the debate. Luckily he has no power and no prospect of getting any.

rick_chasey

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

Err, finance and banking companies presently in Scotland have already said they will be off if there is a Yes vote.

.

On this. a point of order. (more in relation to the press 'revelations' than Gregg's comments)

This is not even a story or secret.

RBS (for example), and any of the others are for all intents and purpose HQ'd in London.

They've been planning for the relocation since 2007. Hence, y'know, that massive office they have & the purchase of ABN Amro.




I can also exclusively reveal that while Lloyds shares an official headquarters with Scottish Widows, just off Fountainbridge in Edinburgh.

The Lloyds contact page lists its “head office” as a building in Gresham Street, near St Paul’s, with the Edinburgh address directing to a post office box.

Look: http://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/our-group/contact-us/

Even the head of RBS says this in the FT:

"Banks such as RBS and Lloyds Banking Group have strong Scottish connections but they can scarcely be described as Scottish banks.

"In reality they are run from London, and that is where they are regulated. The customers, assets and ownership are global, even if the holding company happens to be registered in Edinburgh."


"This is a nonsense. This has already happened. RBS already has major head office operations in London"

"Most people wouldn’t know Lloyds Banking Group currently has its head office in Scotland. It’s just a brass plaque."

Sewinman

It may be only moving the registered office, but they are doing it because they think their credit rating will tank if they are domiciled in an independent Scotland. Not a good sign for the Scots inevitable need to borrow lots of cash! Interest rates will be higher.

I am off to Scotland next week for a holiday, so will be interesting to see. I won't visit again if they vote yes.

rick_chasey

I think it's more they are considered by all their customers, clients & couterparts as a British regulated bank, and so the business is founded on that. That carries advantages. They want to keep that, given they are, as above, British, London based companies.

The link to Scotland is ceremonial nowadays. That's it.

meanredspider

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

It's up to whatever Scottish government we elect to make it an attractive place to live and work. The quality of life can be better away from the big cities and congestion down south so it's mainly the financial elements that need to be improved. It's not insurmountable and we will have the powers to do something about it.

Excuse me if I say that's a wishy-washy reply. I'm not sure what these additional powers are going to be. NHS and education are already fully devolved. I'm not sure about Police Scotland. Companies are already able to hire scarce skills from anywhere in the world pretty much (I hired people from Mexico, India and USA). Persuading people that they want to come and take the risk - there's the problem. It's just going to be that much harder to persuade other UK people they want to come and those that are here that they want to stay (starting with Mrs MRS)

dhope

Rick Chasey wrote:

I think it's more they are considered by all their customers, clients & couterparts as a British regulated bank, and so the business is founded on that. That carries advantages. They want to keep that, given they are, as above, British, London based companies.

The link to Scotland is ceremonial nowadays. That's it.

Yes, but it becomes material if Scotland is separate. So they'll make the move official to avoid the ratings cut.

rick_chasey

:roll: I'm just saying it's more fundamental than ratings.

tailwindhome

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

But most countries are able to keep them well away from positions of responsibility or power:

That's clearly untrue

And in a unintended segue Big Ian (RIP) didn't make it long enough to see the UK fall apart

aberdeen_lune

meanredspider wrote:

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

It's up to whatever Scottish government we elect to make it an attractive place to live and work. The quality of life can be better away from the big cities and congestion down south so it's mainly the financial elements that need to be improved. It's not insurmountable and we will have the powers to do something about it.

Excuse me if I say that's a wishy-washy reply. I'm not sure what these additional powers are going to be. NHS and education are already fully devolved. I'm not sure about Police Scotland. Companies are already able to hire scarce skills from anywhere in the world pretty much (I hired people from Mexico, India and USA). Persuading people that they want to come and take the risk - there's the problem. It's just going to be that much harder to persuade other UK people they want to come and those that are here that they want to stay (starting with Mrs MRS)

At the moment we don't have the powers to do much about it. Immigration policy is not devolved and although the NHS is we don't have the power to decide whether we spend a billion on the NHS or a billion on nuclear weapons.

Why do you think we are better together? Are we better together or is it just status quo together?

dhope

Rick Chasey wrote:

:roll: I'm just saying it's more fundamental than ratings.

Not sure what your point is. You said at first they're basically already in London. Yep, agreed.

And that being a British bank carries advantages. Yes, and those advantages in the stable and prestigious environment they're in are reflected in the rating, which is what their counterparties actually care about.

The move from Scotland is largely ceremonial. Unless they don't do it, in which case it's a huge change not to change.

walkingbootweather

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

Are we better together or is it just status quo together?

To be fair, I'm not sure anyone in their right mind could recommend status quo

rick_chasey

dhope wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

:roll: I'm just saying it's more fundamental than ratings.

Not sure what your point is. You said at first they're basically already in London. Yep, agreed.

And that being a British bank carries advantages. Yes, and those advantages in the stable and prestigious environment they're in are reflected in the rating, which is what their counterparties actually care about.

The move from Scotland is largely ceremonial. Unless they don't do it, in which case it's a huge change not to change.

The initial point was that those using 'Scottish' banks 'leaving Scotland' as a result of independence are scaremongering since they were never really there.