Reply to: Scotland warned it could lose the pound and be forced to join Euro

[TestMangler]

Why would we ban the English from Scotland? We do not hate the English, Some people hate the English, but I don't. They're just wankers. We, on the other hand, are colonized by wankers. We can't even pick a decent culture to be colonized by. We are ruled by effete arseholes. It's a shite state of affairs and all the fresh air in the world will not make any fucking difference.

FTFY

[vetran]

Why would we ban the English from Scotland? We do not hate the English, we simply want to be independent. Why do people automatically take that as meaning hatred.

Was intended to be slightly humour-us but after the university funding issue EU students don't pay but UK non Scottish students do it isn't that much of a leap. Also with both sides unable to agree whether Scotland is a cost or profit centre it seems unlikely there is going to be an amicable separation.

You may not personally dislike the English but quite a few do, suggesting the referendum is held on a historical battle date is hardly conciliatory is it?

[The_Equalizer]

. Either way that revolting little man Alex Salmond will be out of power.

Can't this be done without the break up of the United Kingdom? I am sure it will save a lot of trouble.

[BrilloPad]

I read somewhere that Scottish independence would much reduce Labour's chances of winning in England again.
For that reason alone its worth it. Now if only Wales would go too.

Why does it make any difference? I can't see there would be much difference if Labour were in power now. Of course if DC were to become more like Maggie.....

[doodab]

Shorn of public sector jobs, Nuclear jobs and public subsidies from the UK, What will probably happen is that a Scottish equivalent of a Tory party will emerge and turn Scotland into a Tiger economy.

You mean jobs in Scotland will end up on the verge of extinction?

[scooterscot]

If you are going down that route then you might want to look at the legal existence of a Scottish parliament.
I think the act of union states that Westminster is the only LEGAL government for the whole of the UK. Could be wrong on that one so happy to hear alternative evidence.

Thankfully decisions are based on knowing not thinking.

Regardless of legality it is clearly not appropriate to wave legal black card in the face of people who want change.

[DodgyAgent]

I dont know why we are bothering with legal minutiae.

Let the Scots have their independence and let them keep 90% of the Oil. They can have their own currency/join the Euro - call it what they like- have their own central bank. they take on their fair share of the UK debt. They raise their own taxes.
England can take back its Nuclear bases as required by the Scots, shut down all their public sector offices and relocate them somewhere else that is poor like Birmingham.
They can then take out their sense of entitlement with their own ruling parties.

I have not seen one single practical reason why it is in the UKs interests to keep Scotland within the Union.
Even if they leave nothing much is going to change. OK they will have to fund their own infrastructure projects, but at least they will be able to choose what these are.

Shorn of public sector jobs, Nuclear jobs and public subsidies from the UK, What will probably happen is that a Scottish equivalent of a Tory party will emerge and turn Scotland into a Tiger economy. Either way that revolting little man Alex Salmond will be out of power.

[Spacecadet]

I read somewhere that Scottish independence would much reduce Labour's chances of winning in England again.
For that reason alone its worth it. Now if only Wales would go too.

It was here

There is another added benefit to scotland becoming independant

Labour will lose the 41 westminster seats it currently holds north of the border, The conservatives will lose 0

[sasguru]

I read somewhere that Scottish independence would much reduce Labour's chances of winning in England again.
For that reason alone its worth it. Now if only Wales would go too.

[Arturo Bassick]

Where do you get that idea? It sounds to me as if you are implicitly adopting the doctrine that parliament is sovereign, which in fact is an English doctrine and is not the constitutional position in Scotland. The Act of Union did not change that, because the Union did not consist of Scotland becoming part of England and adopting her laws and constitution.

See for example the judgement in the case of MacCormick v Lord Advocate 1954 in the High Court. (That's the High Court in Edinburgh). Or refer to Mitchell's 'Constitutional Law' (pub. Green and Son, Edinburgh).

To be pedantic, either the Scottish or the English parliament could abrogate the Act of Union (the Scottish Act or the English Act respectively) - but the British parliament has no such power since it is not a party to either of the two Acts of Union. Since there is no English parliament at the moment, that leaves only the Scottish parliament with the right to abrogate the Act of Union.

If you are going down that route then you might want to look at the legal existence of a Scottish parliament.
I think the act of union states that Westminster is the only LEGAL government for the whole of the UK. Could be wrong on that one so happy to hear alternative evidence.

[Ignis Fatuus]

Anyone can hold a referendum any time that they like, but only the UK Government (not the Scottish government) has the legal authority to remove Scotland from the UK.

Where do you get that idea? It sounds to me as if you are implicitly adopting the doctrine that parliament is sovereign, which in fact is an English doctrine and is not the constitutional position in Scotland. The Act of Union did not change that, because the Union did not consist of Scotland becoming part of England and adopting her laws and constitution.

See for example the judgement in the case of MacCormick v Lord Advocate 1954 in the High Court. (That's the High Court in Edinburgh). Or refer to Mitchell's 'Constitutional Law' (pub. Green and Son, Edinburgh).

To be pedantic, either the Scottish or the English parliament could abrogate the Act of Union (the Scottish Act or the English Act respectively) - but the British parliament has no such power since it is not a party to either of the two Acts of Union. Since there is no English parliament at the moment, that leaves only the Scottish parliament with the right to abrogate the Act of Union.

[Incognito]

Dont be an arse. You are lecturing me on exactly the point I was making to Scooter. Current debt is a joint venture, something he is in denial about.

No, I was lecturing you on the fact that HBOS shouldn't be called a 'Scottish bank' with 'Scottish debt' as you said:

If anything an independent Scotland should take on Scottish debt so RBS and HBOS debts should go with the independence as well

[Arturo Bassick]

You do realise that HBOS was a merger between the Halifax and the Bank of Scotland? To call it a Scottish bank is wrong, it is quite clearly a British bank.

And the profile of the two at the top as it crashed and burned:

Andy Hornby and James Crosby, both English. However, unlike you I will look past the blinkers and not say it was an English problem. It was a City of London problem though.

Whilst 'Broon' may have been at the helm, he was no sole fallguy. Bills are put to Parliament where they are scrutinised, debated and then if accepted they are enacted. This was a British creation and saving the banks benefited the British because I will guarantee you that more English debt is tied up in both those banks than Scottish debt.

You want us to take the debt? Fine, we'll just call in all those English loans and mortgages. Not really a good idea though is it, (a) for Scotland or (b) for England.

Dont be an arse. You are lecturing me on exactly the point I was making to Scooter. Current debt is a joint venture, something he is in denial about.

[Freamon]

But that would be against EU regulations

Why?

[Paddy]

I don't think Scotland itself (the state) has any oil to sell. It's all extracted and sold by oil companies (some British, some foreign). The state collects tax revenue on the oil exported and the profits from its sale. I suspect that if the Scottish devolved government started trying to collect these taxes from BP itself and spend them locally, then Westminster would have something to say about it.

But that would be against EU regulations