You would still have an EU passport, so not much would change

Yes, just like Northern Ireland, who sponge off the British taxpayer

Purse strings more like.

If Scotland gained ‘Independence’ yet stayed in the Commonwealth, with Queen Elizabeth as head of state then what is the point?

An attendance of circa seven thousand says your referendum will deliver no more than twenty over cent in favour of independence .That would be the end of it for another hundred years. What a pathetic sight to behold but history repeats itself.

@Noel – You clearly don’t understand what the Commonwealth actually is. Its an organisation of 70 independent states of which only 16 or so have the Queen as Head of State and some of which are republics and so don’t even have a monarchy.
And even if Scotland did retain the Queen as Head of State that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be independent. Australia is a country in the Commonwealth which has the Queen as Head of State. Are you saying that you don’t consider Australia as independent? Or New Zealand? Or Canada? Becuase all of them would be the same as Scotland.

Independence would allow Scotland to control its own income and expenditure, set its own foreign policy, decide far more about its own internal affairs than it currently does. I think that would be the point!

@Jim, thanks for the lesson but yes I do understand the Commonwealth. It was suggested in the thread that Salmond would be happy to stay in Commonwealth with Queen Elizabeth as head of state. That is why I question the point of it.

I don’t consider any country with a foreign monarch as their head of state as truly independent. That includes Canada, NZ and Australia.

I think it will all boil down to the contracts on the oil and if any more is found out there, plus advances in wave & wind power. That’s where their money will come from. It’s all about money at the end of the day.

I’d safely say we could rule out Scotland as a source of Solar energy unless Global warming really goes mad

ffffffeeeeeedddddoooommmm!!

Agreed

The U.S. wants to steal the oil.

Nobody advocates independence for the north.

Irish people in the north want re-unification with the rest of the country, which offers the opportunity to create a new, revamped Republic for the 21st Century.

People in the north who identify more with Britain /NI would like to remain within the UK.

I completely disagree, other than enjoying your countries culture for recreational or traditional purposes, national identity is a dated concept that contributes nothing to the well being of people.

Could form a club? “Na na na na na na!!”

Anyway, I agree with the statement, just had to laugh at the club thing! Although there is the potential for some kind of union between Scotland and Ireland, I find it hard to see any beneficial union happening anytime soon, you can’t just make something from an old Celtic heritage that both islands share. Ultimately there has to be something in it for both sides.

My experience from the viewpoint of people I know, I don’t know anyone who’s against independence. I’ve read of people, both everyday citizens and high profile figures, that are opposed to it but I don’t know anybody personally. However, of those I do know, they either say Scotland will never get it (even although we’re closer to it now than ever) or they don’t really believe that Scotland can deliver the economic substance that it needs to go it alone. I’m pro independence myself, I’d vote yes in the referendum but I’m not convinced Scotland can do it. In saying that though, I do believe we would get there in the long term, but it will a) Be a struggle to begin with and b) Many yes voters will probably regret voting yes. The way I see it though is that I believe it will be a good thing in future, 50…100, 200 years down the line. I could be wrong but it’s just what I think from the little I know. Ideally I’d see Scotland be ruled from Hollyrood in MY lifetime. I read the other day there that Scotland would consider itself a neutral country. It would have one naval and air base. The trident will leave our country and we would withdraw from NATO. Is it enough? The main problem in my opinion is Alex Salmond himself. He’s his own worst enemy. On one hand he stands up to Westminster but on the other hand, he can come across as childish and his arguments and come backs as trivial. I like him sometimes. I cringe other times. I don’t know if it will happen, I hope it does. It’s a chance I believe is worth taking. There’s no point in spending 300 years moaning about not having it and then getting the opportunity of a lifetime and not grasping it with both hands!

On another note, it’s my belief that if Scotland were to gain independence, we would gradually see the break up of the union as it stands. I would find it hard to see Wales leaving the union in the near future but I think the next to leave after Scotland would be Northern Ireland….But it won’t be anytime soon. That chapter still has quite a way to travel I think. But I see an independent Wales even further off.

Whether it happens or not, whether its soon or not. The union won’t last forever. It will fall apart. It’s not a question of IF but rather a question of WHEN.

“Devo Max” with full fiscal powers devolved to Holyrood, while remaining part of the United Kingdom, would be the best option. And according to opinion polls, favoured by most Scots.

Don’t forget there are over 800,000 Scots living in the rest of the UK

So Conor, what are we (the English) to do with all the Irish and Scottish folk that live in England??……if the English aren’t allowed to join ‘your club’?!?!

Why would Scotland want to form a club with Ireland? Ireland is corrupt to the core, and is nothing more than a tinpot dictatorship run by a gang,consisting of priests, farmers, bankers, the GAAA and priests sons! I’d say the scots will give us a wide berth.

Of course it does – it’s synonymous with identity. you may as well say that Mayo will not care about being beaten tomorrow. ;)

There is something perverse in the SNP logic about objecting to political union with England – a country to which Scotland is linked by language, culture, TV-watching and newspaper-reading habits, 400 years of history and family ties – while embracing political union with a corrupt and undemocratic EU

“Hath not God first united these kingdoms, both in language and religion and similitude of manners? Hath He not made us all in one island, compassed by one sea?”
King James I

Yorkshire is the most beautiful county in the British Isles – it has inspired countless generations of writers with its haunting mystic countryside. Withering heights is my favourite novel

Jesus man, try clicking “REPLY” not “ADD COMMENT”.

Withering Heights?

Withering Heights a ghost estate in Cavan I believe. Looks like Yorkshire. Bit of a WHOLE apparently.

Ever been to Yorkshire? Some of the most beautiful countryside in these islands.

What are you talking about? It’s not a case of ‘giving independence’, the British government has stated that they will accept whatever the Scottish voters choose, and as for the idiotic castles comment, Alex Salmond has stated that the queen will remain as head of state so I’m sure she’ll keep her castle!

Scotland would remain in the commonwealth so the Queen could still be their head of state and keep all her property in Scotland

Anyway i dont think scotland could afford to separate from England. Could they afford to set up their own navy, their own army, their own embassies all around the world etc etc

Salmond has already said he would remain in the monetary union with England, and keep the pound sterling, so Scotland’s interest rates, mortgates rates etc would still be decided in London – so much for “independence”

Ireland got her “independence” but we all speak English here and you go into Henry street and it is all English chains in business

I don’t imagine the people of Yorkshire would be happy to be called a whole. . . Or a hole for that matter! Your comments are pretty outdated. Welcome to the 21st century!

Ahem…..

*HOLE* not WHOLE – do you hate the English so much you have to try to rape the language?

‘hole’ Gareth, hole!

I thought they will have to negotiate entry to the EU?

East Germany didn’t have to negotiate anything. We had to accept their admission albeit as part of unified Germany. The only quid pro quo was the German acceptance of the euro

Technically you are correct

But the EU dont operative by legal niceities. An “independent” Scotland would automatically still be in the EU

@ Kingstown – East Germany did not join the EU, so they did not have to ask fir permission to join the EU. What happened was that the DDR ( East Germany ) ceased to exist. I don’t think a country is obliged to ask the EU, or any other international institution, if it has permission to implode.

Brian…..where would you get your dole if it wasn’t for Frau Merkel?

I believe an indepdent Scotland will have to apply for membership of the EU

Sorry Michael, but Scotland, if it becomes independent, will automatically be assured membership of the EU. The EU has already clarified this, stating that as a successor state it will not be excluded from the EU. The only possible hiccup could possibly come from Spain, itself worrying about the increasing demands for independence from the Basques and the Catalans. But even then the Spanish government stressed recently that it would not stand in the way of automatic Scottish membership.

Stupid statement Gareth.

What an idiotic comment

Dave Cameron has already said he will respect the democratic vote of the Scottish people

@ Gareth

Everyone that has read your comment is a little but dumber as a consequence.

Gareth makes a reasonable enough point. The Irish people voted for Home Rule for a full thirty years before it was granted – too late – and India agitated for independence for decades too. Add to that, Scotland has oil – and remind me, what did Iraq have again? The majority of Scots voted for devolution in the 1970s and it was denied them – something a lot of the people who red thumbed Gareth’s comment were probably blissfully unaware of. But you don’t have to be educated to fashionably Anglophile these days. I’m not suggesting they would send in a full blown invasion but it would be extremely naïve to believe that a Tory PM would just let Scotland go after a referendum. There’s plenty of dirty tricks to be played if London doesn’t get what it wants.

Yes, the Irish MP’s voted for Home Rule for over 30 years, but it was continuously rejected by the House of Lords. The parliament act of 1911, stripped the Lords of its powers and finally in 1914, Ireland got Home Rule. But unfortunately a world war broke out and it had to be delayed …

The men of 1916 couldn’t wait for the war to end and they bombed the GPO. The rest is history …

IN 1979 51.% voted in favour of a Scottish Assembly. But this total represented only 32.9% of the registered electorate as a whole, which wasn’t enough to pass

And the 1916 approach was ratified in 1918 Brian. The Scottish referendum of 1979 is hardly an advertisement for democracy. If the non voting end of the electorate was taken as a no vote in every instance nothing would ever really be decided which is why the Westminster decided to wreck the referendum in this very deliberate fashion. I’m afraid that you really don’t have a point.

They definitely won’t listen if you continue to misuse the application of “your”. Congratulations, you’RE a dope on 2 levels now.

The 1979 referendum was not on independence. It was for an Assembly with very limited powers. So the Scottish people have never voted in favour of independence

Or they won’t listen when grammar/punctuation is so bad….

Tim.. Just wanted to say Home Rule was never granted to Ireland.

It was granted Rebecca – under the 1914 Act which was postponed and under the 1920 Government of Ireland Act which only came into force for a legal moment to allow for legal continuity to be provided for Saorstát Éireann. But thank you for your object lesson in how not to successfully nitpick.

In 1914 Asquith declared there would be HR but not implemented until after the war. Nothing was set in stone. Then with the disaster of 1916, the breakdown of Lloyd george’s convention and the death of John Redmond again put it on the long finger. It was never legally granted.

Asquith promised it in 1914 and said it would be implemented after the war, which was only expected to last until the winter. It was not passed in Westminster. Then with the disaster of the rising, the breakdown of lloyd George’s convention and the death of Redmond it was once again put on the long finger in 1918. Again, it was never legally implemented in irealnd.

I’d love to have a look at the book u got that info from.

Rebecca, for it to have been called an Act it had to have been passed and therefore granted. It was implemented in 1920, briefly – which I note you haven’t countered – probably because google hasn’t equipped you with your answers yet. Now get back under your bridge!

If u don’t like it then sure u may as well head home

Why do you live here then if its that bad? Your certainly not united as your over here! Alba gu brath!

Typical moaning about not getting handouts that I might expect from a down at heel Glaswegian, a city that spends a third of its council tax on social workers. I don’t see Edinburgh being as tolerant of funding ned infested estates as London has been. Fair enough we don’t have an NHS but a Scot, criticising our roads when you build motorways through city centres and have never managed a by-pass for Aberdeen, a oil city bigger than Cork? And without going into the legal nitty gritty, the failure to build that by-pass is down to the vagaries of the Scotland Act and cannot be blamed on Holyrood.