Is tripartisanship over the SNP's bid to retain the £ bullying?

[visualnickmos]

But when all is said and done Scotland is not known for good weather; Languedoc is. And the delicious wine that results from such weather.

I should add that I actually love Scotland. I think because I mentioned the weather, one or two folk have assumed that I must be anti-Scotland!!!!

And whatever happens - a yes or no - there will be issues to be addressed, but in a modern democratic Europe, that will happen in a friendly and productive way. The world will still carry on, night will follow day. And if HM doesn't like a no vote - well - she must get used to the fact that the world doesn't stand still.

[ahinton]

But when all is said and done Scotland is not known for good weather; Languedoc is. And the delicious wine that results from such weather.

I should add that I actually love Scotland. I think because I mentioned the weather, one or two folk have assumed that I must be anti-Scotland!!!!

And whatever happens - a yes or no - there will be issues to be addressed, but in a modern democratic Europe, that will happen in a friendly and productive way. The world will still carry on, night will follow day. And if HM doesn't like a no vote - well - she must get used to the fact that the world doesn't stand still.

No, Scotland is indeed not known for its good weather; it's just that the picture that you painted could well be taken to suggest that it has hardly any at all! I think that we all accept already that Perpignan's climate is better than Perth's and that Montpellier's is balmier than Montrose's, but I think that what you referred to applies far more to the western isles than to the south and the east mainland. That said, whilst the wines of the Languedoc have improved in quality over the years and are now consumed far more widely outside France than was once the case (sorry!), France is no match for Scotland in whisky production (and why indeed should it be?!) and, let's face it, Scotch whisky is very popular in France! The maire of the small southern Charentais village where I hope to end up, for example, posseses a substantial collection of very fine Scotch malts and even certain local supermarkets sometimes offer selections of them that would be the envy of Waitrose!

I hope that the issues to be addressed will indeed be approached and dealt with "in a friendly and productive way" but there's no absolute guarantee of that, especially with such widespread and fundamental differences of opinion over Scotland's EU membership, its currency, its monarch et al - and there's no small number of people, in England especially, who are concerned that "British oil" might become "Scottish oil" overnight. As I've now stated several times, these and others should have been properly ironed out before the referendum was announced, so that voters would at least have a much clearer idea of the implications of a "Yes" vote just as they do of those of a "No" vote.

[P. G. Tipps]

... so that voters would at least have a much clearer idea of the implications of a "Yes" vote just as they do of those of a "No" vote.

I'm not at all sure that many in Scotland would agree with you on that last point!

Whilst it is undoubtedly true that a 'Yes' vote would entail more obvious risk than a 'No' vote all the UK parties are on record as saying the current status quo will not continue following the vote whatever the result. They realised long ago that, even if lost, the independence vote is almost sure to be far too large to be simply ignored by Westminster.

So the likeliest result of a 'No' vote will be a sort of 'Devo-Max' for Scotland after all, and which even the Unionist parties there want, but what that will actually entail is anybody's guess!

[ahinton]

I'm not at all sure that many in Scotland would agree with you on that last point!

On what grounds do you conclude that? The point concerned was
"As I've now stated several times, these [issues - i.e. Scotland's EU membership, its currency, its monarch] and others should have been properly ironed out before the referendum was announced, so that voters would at least have a much clearer idea of the implications of a "Yes" vote just as they do of those of a "No" vote".
As the referendum is to proceed despite the remaining uncertainty over all of these fundamental issues, what makes you think that most Scots would disagree with the unavoidable and arguably shameful truth that the implications of a "Yes" vote are far less clear than those of a "No" vote?

Whilst it is undoubtedly true that a 'Yes' vote would entail more obvious risk than a 'No' vote all the UK parties are on record as saying the current status quo will not continue following the vote whatever the result. They realised long ago that, even if lost, the independence vote is almost sure to be far too large to be simply ignored by Westminster.

Yes, there's few either side of the border that would likely disagree fundamentally with much of that.

So the likeliest result of a 'No' vote will be a sort of 'Devo-Max' for Scotland after all, and which even the Unionist parties there want, but what that will actually entail is anybody's guess!

Indeed - except that, as the changes brought about by Devo-Max would inevitably be vastly less than those that might arise from as much "independence" as the referendum opportunity offers (no particular need to deal with the monarchy or currency issues, for starters - and British oil would presumably remain British oil), the fact that the details remain uncertain is accordingly less of a concern than in the case of "independence".

That said, the first time I heard the term, I thought that Devo-Max had been coined as a means of describing the process by which the ever-prolific Sir Peter might subcontract the writing of some of his works to others, which presumably only goes to show how dense I can be sometimes!

[visualnickmos]

No, Scotland is indeed not known for its good weather; it's just that the picture that you painted could well be taken to suggest that it has hardly any at all! I think that we all accept already that Perpignan's climate is better than Perth's and that Montpellier's is balmier than Montrose's, but I think that what you referred to applies far more to the western isles than to the south and the east mainland. That said, whilst the wines of the Languedoc have improved in quality over the years and are now consumed far more widely outside France than was once the case (sorry!), France is no match for Scotland in whisky production (and why indeed should it be?!) and, let's face it, Scotch whisky is very popular in France! The maire of the small southern Charentais village where I hope to end up, for example, posseses a substantial collection of very fine Scotch malts and even certain local supermarkets sometimes offer selections of them that would be the envy of Waitrose!

I hope that the issues to be addressed will indeed be approached and dealt with "in a friendly and productive way" but there's no absolute guarantee of that, especially with such widespread and fundamental differences of opinion over Scotland's EU membership, its currency, its monarch et al - and there's no small number of people, in England especially, who are concerned that "British oil" might become "Scottish oil" overnight. As I've now stated several times, these and others should have been properly ironed out before the referendum was announced, so that voters would at least have a much clearer idea of the implications of a "Yes" vote just as they do of those of a "No" vote.

Scotch whisky is indeed very popular here. I once saw a bottle of a rare whisky (ie only a small amount is produced, and I knew this whisky name via a Scottish friend from the village where it's distilled) in a tiny village shop in Languedoc! Every year the various larger supermarché chains have special whisky promotions - well, small shows, actually. So whether a 'yes' or a 'no' Scotch whisky distillers can rest assured - the French will always be here! In fact, I have the impression that whisky is as popular with women here, as it is with men. Is that so north of the border? That's not meant to be sexist - just an observation that means pretty much nothing.

Languedoc has now found it's place as being a leading quality wine producer, with many vignerons able to boast that they supply wines to many 'top' London restaurants (one shudders to think what the final price of a bottle is once it reaches your table in Mayfair!) If you are ever in Cavendish Square you can visit the Maison du Languedoc-Roussillon which is an export outlet and showcase for produce from the region. Have a look.

As for your other points (monarch, currency, et al) well - we'll have to wait and see. I would think that even if it's 'yes' it may be years before things are ironed out enough for an actual independence day to be announced. But the whole issue and debate has been rushed, and there are these huge grey areas (especially in the Western Isles!) Couldn't resist that one..... sorry! Interestingly, I have a few Scottish friends all of whom want a very definitive 'no' result.

I am rather enjoying this thread, now - it is sparking my interest in the issue more than I would have imagined.

[MrGongGong]

Returning from the North today after a swift visit i'm inclined to think that this is likely to be very close indeed.
What was inspiring was the way in which the young students I met yesterday were energised by the whole process and felt that it was something that they could actually have a say in. Even though there isn't much love for the SNP people do seem to feel that in spite of all the uncertainties (currency, EU etc etc ) this is a chance to get away from Cameron and his fellow travellers once and for all.

People seem to want to vote FOR the romantic idea even though they probably realise that it won't bring the supposed economic benefits that they are being told. Some folks I met also feel that its a chance to get away from the dodgy foreign policies of the last 2 Governments
....

Interesting times indeed

[P. G. Tipps]

Ahinton, I was simply querying what you actually typed which was: ...

'so that voters would at least have a much clearer idea of the implications of a "Yes" vote just as they do of those of a "No" vote' ...

and not what you may have 'stated several times' beforehand or afterwards!

I understood from above (obviously mistakenly) that you thought that voters had a clear idea of the implications of a 'No' vote.

Apologies if I have somehow misinterpreted your words!

[aeolium]

Returning from the North today after a swift visit i'm inclined to think that this is likely to be very close indeed.
What was inspiring was the way in which the young students I met yesterday were energised by the whole process and felt that it was something that they could actually have a say in. Even though there isn't much love for the SNP people do seem to feel that in spite of all the uncertainties (currency, EU etc etc ) this is a chance to get away from Cameron and his fellow travellers once and for all.

People seem to want to vote FOR the romantic idea even though they probably realise that it won't bring the supposed economic benefits that they are being told. Some folks I met also feel that its a chance to get away from the dodgy foreign policies of the last 2 Government....

Interesting times indeed

Something of that atmosphere is picked up in this article:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/05/independence-referendum-debate-intoxicated-scotland

And one great benefit of the debate, whatever the outcome, is that it should impress on the Westminster government that really the status quo of centralised politics is now widely discredited. There ought to be, as the article suggests, a much greater devolution of power to all parts of Britain. Had this happened earlier then the drive for the independence referendum might never have taken place, or have gathered the momentum it now seems to have.

[P. G. Tipps]

According to the BBC Today Programme on Radio 4 this moaning, Alex Salmond has already been trumped in his own quest for Scottish Independence.

I distinctly heard one commentator reporting from Calais clearly refer to the 'English Government'.

According to her Twitter account her name is McLeod, she is in fact Welsh (no surprise there!) and talks with an English accent.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

But when all is said and done Scotland is not known for good weather; Languedoc is. And the delicious wine that results from such weather.

I should add that I actually love Scotland. I think because I mentioned the weather, one or two folk have assumed that I must be anti-Scotland!!!!

And whatever happens - a yes or no - there will be issues to be addressed, but in a modern democratic Europe, that will happen in a friendly and productive way. The world will still carry on, night will follow day. And if HM doesn't like a no vote - well - she must get used to the fact that the world doesn't stand still.

Bad weather occurs when there is a heatwave in June, July or August: it's unbearably hot, the sun burns your eyes out, antisocial neighbours blast out their music through open windows, motorists are impatient, the hay fever is worse and people don't smell too good.

Long live the wind and the rain.

[Serial_Apologist]

Something of that atmosphere is picked up in this article:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/05/independence-referendum-debate-intoxicated-scotland

And one great benefit of the debate, whatever the outcome, is that it should impress on the Westminster government that really the status quo of centralised politics is now widely discredited. There ought to be, as the article suggests, a much greater devolution of power to all parts of Britain. Had this happened earlier then the drive for the independence referendum might never have taken place, or have gathered the momentum it now seems to have.

I think that debate in other parts of the UK would more likely occur in the event of a Yes vote.

[Flosshilde]

people do seem to feel that in spite of all the uncertainties (currency, EU etc etc ) this is a chance to get away from Cameron and his fellow travellers once and for all.

I think that's the problem - a lot of people see it in terms of a very short-term gain. Cameron - & the conservatives - aren't going to be in government for ever, Labour shows signs of getting back to its roots, so there's every sign of the current flavour of government at Westminster changing. And once independent Scottish politics could change too, and a conservative government holdsway (the SNP is economically conservative; witness the proposal to cut business rates by 3%, & the lack of use of the power to increase income tax).

[visualnickmos]

I think that's the problem - a lot of people see it in terms of a very short-term gain. Cameron - & the conservatives - aren't going to be in government for ever, Labour shows signs of getting back to its roots, so there's every sign of the current flavour of government at Westminster changing. And once independent Scottish politics could change too, and a conservative government holdsway (the SNP is economically conservative; witness the proposal to cut business rates by 3%, & the lack of use of the power to increase income tax).

I think you've summed it up perfectly. Nothing more to add. Except perhaps that nobody can predict the future. Whether yes or no, we will just have to wait and see how things progress (or not)

[P. G. Tipps]

The way I see it ... and Salmond & Co clearly see it the same way ... the Independence constituency in Scotland is made up of three main components, the last two directly connected to the politics of the Left.

a) The historical ... opponents prefer the word 'romantic' ... attachment to Scotland regaining its place as a separate state. Nothing more. Those with such a view tend to come mostly from rural areas and are a mixture of folk with broadly conservative/nationalist or liberal views. This group has always been around and has consistently posted around 25-30% support in opinion polls.

b) Disaffected and even normal Labour Party supporters whose blind hatred of the Tories is so intense they'll consider almost anything, however otherwise damaging and destructive, in an effort to get rid of their favourite Westminster bogeymen and women.

c) CND supporters who simply want nuclear weapons gone from Scotland and ultimately from the rest of the UK. Again, however admirable this view may seem to some, this group seems wholly uninterested in any other factors in the debate however important to the future of Scotland.

Whilst I disagree with the first group I wholly respect and understand their position but, irrespective of political leanings, I find the existence of the other two groups deeply depressing.

Furthermore, Salmond has deliberately and successfully encouraged them to grow in number and now, it seems, 'Yes' is actually ahead in the latest poll. The English media love to patronisingly term this as 'interesting'. I would describe it as 'frightening' if only by contemplating the likely carnage on the stock and currency markets next week if the vote actually does go the independence way.

Did the 'referendum-happy' David Cameron ever even consider the huge unknown consequences for the whole of the UK if the vote were lost when he made that agreement with the much more politically-astute Salmond, who was always going to get something out of a substantial 'No' vote regarding greater powers for Edinburgh, in any case?

Talk about the men and the boys!

[MrGongGong]

I think that's the problem - a lot of people see it in terms of a very short-term gain. Cameron - & the conservatives - aren't going to be in government for ever, Labour shows signs of getting back to its roots, so there's every sign of the current flavour of government at Westminster changing. And once independent Scottish politics could change too, and a conservative government holdsway (the SNP is economically conservative; witness the proposal to cut business rates by 3%, & the lack of use of the power to increase income tax).

Actually I think it's more a long term thing.
There's no one in politics that doesn't believe in the whole free market economics thing.
The Labour party have blown it
The Lob Dems have f*cked up big time
and the credible alternative of the Greens wont be voted for enough because people believe more in self interest than altruism.

So there's no real change at all