Scottish independence?

12 Jan 2012

Quote by foxylady2209
Personally I don't think the occupants of this region (England) should have a say in the collective decision of that other region (Scotland)

What about the occupants of Wales & Northern Ireland - should they get a say in this matter?

12 Jan 2012

I love Scotland and the Scottish people, I had the priviledge of living there for a few years and I have many Scottish friends, I admire thier love of thier heritage and thier nationalism, if they want independance from England, Wales and Northern Ireland they should be free to take it, they are really no different to many of our former Commonwealth allies such as Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe).
But if they opt for independance then independance it should be, they would have to be a Country in thier own right with no say in what happens in the rest of Britain and the British having no say in what they do, they should decide for themselves wether to apply to be part of the EU, they should apply to become members of NATO and have thier own armed forces, financial institutions, border control authorities, criminal, tax and dometstic laws, thier own responsibility for everything from medical to education, ie be 100% independant of Britain, whilst they are part of Britain it is great for them to have some control over such things independantly of London especially when regional needs are taken into consideration but they cannot have it both ways, independance has to mean they are totally independant, which includes immigration to Britain and vice versa, they should have Scottish passports and not British passports since they would no longer be British.
I think we would miss them as part of Britain and owe them much for the service (especially military service) they have done for the UK over the years but times change and independance is something they have the right to choose.

12 Jan 2012

Quote by spideyuk
Personally I don't think the occupants of this region (England) should have a say in the collective decision of that other region (Scotland)

What about the occupants of Wales & Northern Ireland - should they get a say in this matter?
Of course not. Should people living in Liverpool have a say in what people in Norwich decide to do? That would be silly.
The fact is the 4 regions of the UK are each separate in some ways. Ever seen an advert for car insurance? I will guarantee that there is a disclaimer at the end that it is not applicable in NI (Northern Ireland). Welsh is included on all public signs in Wales, Scotland has Highers and England has A levels.
We have never truly been the fully United Kingdom of Great Britain (England, Scotland, Wales) and Northern Ireland. Although we have had more links at different times. But if we split, only the residents of the splitting away region can choose.
What I would like to see is an English Government, with all the connotations of management and control but only over English affairs and a UK Parliament with all its connotations of equals discussing shared concerns.

12 Jan 2012

Each of the 4 home nations has their own Parliament, flag, identity.
Dissolve the Union.

12 Jan 2012

mmmmmm, so the last few views have sort of been
english assembly/parliament
welsh assembly/parliament
north ireland assembly/parliament
scottish assembly/parliament
then 'above' this a UK Parliament that 'overseas' and co-ordinates things that are cross the 4 countries.
followed the last 2 posts correctly ?
in other words a sort of federated UK. Commend it to the House, it's a vote winner especially amongst the the Tory right once termed this way
lol

12 Jan 2012

Quote by essex34m

And what of those who live in England and work in Scotland, this could effect them, should they not have a say?

No they shouldn't. They should only have a say in the country of their residence.
Westminster is the parliament of the the United Kingdom. MPs from Scotland, Wales, Northern IReland and England sit in Westminster. But when they legislate on devolved matters such as Health, Education, Transport and the Environment they are passing legislation that affects only England. Why should Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs have any say on these England only issues?

12 Jan 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009
Why should Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs have any say on these England only issues?

:thumbup::thumbup:
is northeren ireland actually part of the uk? in that i meen are they not responsible for all that they do for the Norther ireland peeple? i am unsure on the NI issues to be honest.
in a nutshell give scottish peeple two choices, to stay as part of england or go it alone. for me i would rather scotland broke away as i would want wales and ireland to do the same. so england is england.
we shall see what the scottish peeple want but there seems to be some who want a third box to tick. why make it more complicated when reely a simple yes or no will do here. dunno

:dunno:
lets seperate all of them and see which one prospers the best, no guessing for me. ireland in general is already skint, wales have nothing to offer except some fields and snowdonia and scotland is always bloody raining and cold. give me england over any of them any day of the week. :thumbup:
i give scotland ten years before they want to become part of england again.:notes:
can someone explain that if they broke away would they then not get any money from england and how would wales for instance get there revenue? come to think of it how would scotland? or maybe they want to break away but still get lots of money from westminster?
a complete split from england i would be in total favour of :giggle:

12 Jan 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
Why should Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs have any say on these England only issues?

:thumbup::thumbup:
is northeren ireland actually part of the uk? in that i meen are they not responsible for all that they do for the Norther ireland peeple? i am unsure on the NI issues to be honest.
in a nutshell give scottish peeple two choices, to stay as part of england or go it alone. for me i would rather scotland broke away as i would want wales and ireland to do the same. so england is england.
we shall see what the scottish peeple want but there seems to be some who want a third box to tick. why make it more complicated when reely a simple yes or no will do here. dunno

:dunno:
lets seperate all of them and see which one prospers the best, no guessing for me. ireland in general is already skint, wales have nothing to offer except some fields and snowdonia and scotland is always bloody raining and cold. give me england over any of them any day of the week. :thumbup:
i give scotland ten years before they want to become part of england again.:notes:
can someone explain that if they broke away would they then not get any money from england and how would wales for instance get there revenue? come to think of it how would scotland? or maybe they want to break away but still get lots of money from westminster?a complete split from england i would be in total favour of :giggle:
They believe they will live very nicely on their oil revenues.

12 Jan 2012

It is not widely known but Welsh scientists have made significant advances in teh development of a slate fuelled combustion engine.
This should tide us over until such time as water is more valuable than oil.

13 Jan 2012

Quote by Max777
They believe they will live very nicely on their oil revenues.

Like the populations of Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran do? To think the oil revenue would be fairly distributed across the whole of the Scottish population is naive.
If the Yes campaign are to believed, Scotland will be the northern hemisphere's version of Saudi Arabia. Scots won't have to work because the massive oil revenues mean they don't have to. They can sit on their asses watching daytime Alba TV (the BBC from south of the border will probably be jammed). At least the UK unemployment problem will be solved...all the menial jobs will be done by migrant workers from England, Wales and NI.

13 Jan 2012

The talk of Scotland living of of its oil revenues its all pretty patchy TBH. For a start if you look at it historically most of the early work is done by BP and Shell British companys not Scottish. I know first hand as I have family there people involved in the industry. Its certainly not all Scots working on the rigs and neither is the infrastructure. In fact the some of the Scots I know who work on rigs work for a Canadian comany dunno

Geographically the oil is nearer to Scotland (Or some say its nearer to Norway and the Falkland islands are closer to Argentina lol

) however Can anyone deny that North sea oil is a British venture?
I dont now know the exact structure but it would sound like we will all still be using our expertise in workers comanys and technologies to provide Scotland an income? Does not sound right to me.

13 Jan 2012

Quote by spideyuk
They believe they will live very nicely on their oil revenues.

Like the populations of Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran do? To think the oil revenue would be fairly distributed across the whole of the Scottish population is naive.
If the Yes campaign are to believed, Scotland will be the northern hemisphere's version of Saudi Arabia. Scots won't have to work because the massive oil revenues mean they don't have to. They can sit on their asses watching daytime Alba TV (the BBC from south of the border will probably be jammed). At least the UK unemployment problem will be solved...all the menial jobs will be done by migrant workers from England, Wales and NI.
interesting to note that you equate Scotland with Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran. So if the oil revenues go to the Scottish Exchequer, in which way do you think they will be unfairly distributed?

13 Jan 2012

dubai had lots of oil and will soon run out.
they have changed the infrastructure to cope with that, by making it a tourist hot spot from peeple all over the world. they have wonderful beeches and the weather is amazing, so will atract tourists for yeers to come.
what happens when scotland runs out of oil? what are they going to do with the money to build there infrastructure? is there actually anything to build upon?
i have been to scotland once and would never want to go back there again i am afraid to say.
apart from haggis and ben nevis is there anything else worthwhile there? dunno

give them the independance if that is what they crave, but NONE of englands money. they are on there own if that is what they choose to do, but they will soon come scurrying back when they realise they hey actually england have been and will be our saviours again, and without england over the last 300 yeers they would be like wales is now. a bit of a miserable place to live in lol

like scotland i have been to wales once the other side of snowdonia and was the most bleakest desolate place on earth. i mean can anyone tell me anything that scotland has achieved over the last 100 yeers? anything at all rotflmao

they would have done even less than nothing without englands money :thumbup:

13 Jan 2012

Quote by tweeky
The talk of Scotland living of of its oil revenues its all pretty patchy TBH. For a start if you look at it historically most of the early work is done by BP and Shell British companys not Scottish. I know first hand as I have family there people involved in the industry. Its certainly not all Scots working on the rigs and neither is the infrastructure. In fact the some of the Scots I know who work on rigs work for a Canadian comany Geographically the oil is nearer to Scotland (Or some say its nearer to Norway and the Falkland islands are closer to Argentina ) however Can anyone deny that North sea oil is a British venture?
I dont now know the exact structure but it would sound like we will all still be using our expertise in workers comanys and technologies to provide Scotland an income? Does not sound right to me.

The nationality of the companies that have invested and built the oil infrastructure does not matter. They get to keep the oil but pay a tax for the privilege of extracting the oil. Currently this revenue goes to the UK Exchequer but Alex Salmond will lay claim to 90% of this should Scotland obtain independence. At the same time, he will look for Scotland to take on board 8% of the UK national debt, based on the proportion of the UK population currently living in Scotland.
The whole drive for independence is underpinned by the oil revenues.

13 Jan 2012

Quote by Max777
The talk of Scotland living of of its oil revenues its all pretty patchy TBH. For a start if you look at it historically most of the early work is done by BP and Shell British companys not Scottish. I know first hand as I have family there people involved in the industry. Its certainly not all Scots working on the rigs and neither is the infrastructure. In fact the some of the Scots I know who work on rigs work for a Canadian comany Geographically the oil is nearer to Scotland (Or some say its nearer to Norway and the Falkland islands are closer to Argentina ) however Can anyone deny that North sea oil is a British venture?
I dont now know the exact structure but it would sound like we will all still be using our expertise in workers comanys and technologies to provide Scotland an income? Does not sound right to me.

The nationality of the companies that have invested and built the oil infrastructure does not matter. They get to keep the oil but pay a tax for the privilege of extracting the oil. Currently this revenue goes to the UK Exchequer but Alex Salmond will lay claim to 90% of this should Scotland obtain independence. At the same time, he will look for Scotland to take on board 8% of the UK national debt, based on the proportion of the UK population currently living in Scotland.
The whole drive for independence is underpinned by the oil revenues.
Diary of Independance in Newspaper headlines;
Day 1. "Hooray, we're Independant, now to be rich with all that oil money"
Day 2. Cold Fusion perfected, unlimited supplies of cheap electricity for all
Day 3. Alex Salmond qouted as saying "Oh Fuck!!!"
John

13 Jan 2012

Quote by Geordiecpl2001
[
Diary of Independance in Newspaper headlines;
Day 1. "Hooray, we're Independant, now to be rich with all that oil money"
Day 2. Cold Fusion perfected, unlimited supplies of cheap electricity for all
Day 3. Alex Salmond qouted as saying "Oh Fuck!!!"
John

Haha.

13 Jan 2012

As long as Scotland remains part of Great Britain or the United Kingdom it is only right that the revenue from the Scottish Oil fields is handled by the British Government, the distribution of that income is a matter for the voters, the government, and people of much more intelligence (and yes perhaps much more corrupt or politically motivated) than me, but whilst it is British Revenue that has to be the way of it in just the same way as the tax revenues from each part of agriculture and industry is given for distribution.
However who owns the equipment that extracts and converts the crude oil is imaterial in this matter, as someone said the tax, rent or whatever income is given by the companies it what will have to be decided on and that has to go to the Governing country be that Britain or an independant Scotland.
As for Northern Ireland and Wales, the current situation that we know of is that the majority of the voting population of those areas wish to remain British, that may change and referendums in all 3 nations should be held to decide that, the people themselves must decide.
If Scotland or either of the other two parts of Great Britain do decide to take independance I am sure it will be a similar situation to the beneficial relationship we have always enjoyed with the Republic of Ireland, sometimes stormy but always friends and allies from the majority of the population, the Irish have fought for us (like the Welsh and Scottish) in every conflict we have ever fought, though of course the Republic of Ireland chose to side with us without the need for control by the British Government and the obvious other conflicts like the Scottish fight with the English for independance and yes I do know that there were SS Regiments recruited from Ireland during WWII but the majority of Irish people fought with the allies not the axis forces.

13 Jan 2012

Quote by Max777
The talk of Scotland living of of its oil revenues its all pretty patchy TBH. For a start if you look at it historically most of the early work is done by BP and Shell British companys not Scottish. I know first hand as I have family there people involved in the industry. Its certainly not all Scots working on the rigs and neither is the infrastructure. In fact the some of the Scots I know who work on rigs work for a Canadian comany Geographically the oil is nearer to Scotland (Or some say its nearer to Norway and the Falkland islands are closer to Argentina ) however Can anyone deny that North sea oil is a British venture?
I dont now know the exact structure but it would sound like we will all still be using our expertise in workers comanys and technologies to provide Scotland an income? Does not sound right to me.

The nationality of the companies that have invested and built the oil infrastructure does not matter. They get to keep the oil but pay a tax for the privilege of extracting the oil. Currently this revenue goes to the UK Exchequer but Alex Salmond will lay claim to 90% of this should Scotland obtain independence. At the same time, he will look for Scotland to take on board 8% of the UK national debt, based on the proportion of the UK population currently living in Scotland.
The whole drive for independence is underpinned by the oil revenues.
But what I am saying is I dont believe any part of the UK owns it, its joint owned part of the UK. So If Scotland wanted it they could buy everyone else out or elect to recieve a % of the revenue in some kind of deal. I know its been mentioned before in other threads but what actually says Scotland owns North sea oil? It was all very patchy and circumstanstial from what I can remember.

13 Jan 2012

12 miles from your coast innit?

13 Jan 2012

Quote by tweeky
But what I am saying is I dont believe any part of the UK owns it, its joint owned part of the UK. So If Scotland wanted it they could buy everyone else out or elect to recieve a % of the revenue in some kind of deal. I know its been mentioned before in other threads but what actually says Scotland owns North sea oil? It was all very patchy and circumstanstial from what I can remember.

It is owned by the UK at present but if Scotland gains independence Salmond and co believe it has a valid claim to most of it. The following quote is from Wikipedia
Given that Scotland is not a sovereign state, it has no effective maritime boundaries; and any claims Scotland may assert are subsumed as part of claims made by the United Kingdom. It could be argued that there is no definitive 'Scottish' sector of the North Sea in the same way there is a Norwegian sector or a Danish sector, or indeed a UK sector. However due to the existence of two separate legal systems in Great Britain — that of Scots law pertaining to Scotland and English law pertaining to England and Wales, constitutional law in the United Kingdom has provided for the division of the UK sector of the North Sea into specific Scottish and English components. The Continental Shelf Act 1964 and the Continental Shelf (Jurisdiction) Order 1968 defines the UK North Sea maritime area to the north of latitude 55 degrees north as being under the jurisdiction of Scots law meaning that 90% of the UK's oil resources were under Scottish jurisdiction. In addition, section 126 of the Scotland Act 1998 defines Scottish waters as the internal waters and territorial sea of the United Kingdom as are adjacent to Scotland. This has been subsequently amended by the Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundary Order 1999 which redefined the extent of Scottish waters and Scottish fishery limits

13 Jan 2012

Quote by Max777
But what I am saying is I dont believe any part of the UK owns it, its joint owned part of the UK. So If Scotland wanted it they could buy everyone else out or elect to recieve a % of the revenue in some kind of deal. I know its been mentioned before in other threads but what actually says Scotland owns North sea oil? It was all very patchy and circumstanstial from what I can remember.

It is owned by the UK at present but if Scotland gains independence Salmond and co believe it has a valid claim to most of it. The following quote is from Wikipedia
Given that Scotland is not a sovereign state, it has no effective maritime boundaries; and any claims Scotland may assert are subsumed as part of claims made by the United Kingdom. It could be argued that there is no definitive 'Scottish' sector of the North Sea in the same way there is a Norwegian sector or a Danish sector, or indeed a UK sector. However due to the existence of two separate legal systems in Great Britain — that of Scots law pertaining to Scotland and English law pertaining to England and Wales, constitutional law in the United Kingdom has provided for the division of the UK sector of the North Sea into specific Scottish and English components. The Continental Shelf Act 1964 and the Continental Shelf (Jurisdiction) Order 1968 defines the UK North Sea maritime area to the north of latitude 55 degrees north as being under the jurisdiction of Scots law meaning that 90% of the UK's oil resources were under Scottish jurisdiction. In addition, section 126 of the Scotland Act 1998 defines Scottish waters as the internal waters and territorial sea of the United Kingdom as are adjacent to Scotland. This has been subsequently amended by the Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundary Order 1999 which redefined the extent of Scottish waters and Scottish fishery limits
An interesting and valid point but if Scotland do opt for total independance surely they can also apply to whoever agrees such matters to become a Sovereign state in thier own right, King Bruce perhaps, or the current head of the Wallace clan maybe (a member of SH no less).
The remaining British MPs from NI, Wales and England should support such an application and having granted them independance would have to support them in that I believe, if granted then they can like the rest of the sea bordering world claim maritime boundaries and if they take a British example (300 mile exclusion zone around the Falkland Islands, the oil field revenue could be all thiers)

14 Jan 2012

Quote by Max777
interesting to note that you equate Scotland with Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran. So if the oil revenues go to the Scottish Exchequer, in which way do you think they will be unfairly distributed?

My point about Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran is that they are all oil-rich countries yet there is still a rich/poor divide. The Scottish electorate are being led to believe that post independence, the oil revenue will solve all the social problems, raise living standards across the board and catapult Scotland into an economic superpower overnight.
Scotland only has to look across the North Sea to Norway and see the high standard of living, the sovereign wealth funds awash with £billions and the minimal overheads (in defence and foreign policy compared with the UK) they have.
What the SNP conveniently forgets is their responsibility to the United Kingdom and the responsibilities the UK has across the globe. North Sea oil revenue will have an effect on the UK bank balance if Scotland gains independence. This will in turn have an economic effect on all the regions of the UK. It seems to me they are prepared to turn their back on the Union that got Britain (and Scotland) to the privileged position we are in today.
Personally I think Alex Salmond is sleepwalking into disaster. But as the recession bites deeper independence can only look more attractive, especially with the promise of economic prosperity and a secure financial future.
As for they actual wording on the referendum ballot paper. Can it be anything else except a simple YES/NO?

14 Jan 2012

Aye and Nay perhaps?

14 Jan 2012

Why all the debate over what happens where when and if? Just been looking at some history briefly and seems that The treaty of the nations article 20 originally would have covered this possible event (In edit actually no lol). Dunno if that stands still or has been amended or whatever. Though I would have thought that if any one part of the union want to leave there should be a clear and desisive exit method. If there is not one maybe one should be devised by all four parliments with equal rights so that no one can screw the others over dunno

If nations be it Scotland or one of the others want to leave thats fine though one thing I will say is anyone leaving should bear the entire costs of the whole operation. You want it you pay for it.

14 Jan 2012

Quote by spideyuk
interesting to note that you equate Scotland with Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran. So if the oil revenues go to the Scottish Exchequer, in which way do you think they will be unfairly distributed?

My point about Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran is that they are all oil-rich countries yet there is still a rich/poor divide. The Scottish electorate are being led to believe that post independence, the oil revenue will solve all the social problems, raise living standards across the board and catapult Scotland into an economic superpower overnight.
Scotland only has to look across the North Sea to Norway and see the high standard of living, the sovereign wealth funds awash with £billions and the minimal overheads (in defence and foreign policy compared with the UK) they have.
I still don't see your point. The population of Venezuela is 28 million, Iran's 75 million and Nigeria 158 million, whereas the population of Scotland is 5 million, very similar to Norway's. As you state, Scotland only has to look across the North Sea to Norway, so why shouldn't their model be similar to Norway's as opposed to the other 3 countries you mention?
What the SNP conveniently forgets is their responsibility to the United Kingdom and the responsibilities the UK has across the globe. North Sea oil revenue will have an effect on the UK bank balance if Scotland gains independence. This will in turn have an economic effect on all the regions of the UK. It seems to me they are prepared to turn their back on the Union that got Britain (and Scotland) to the privileged position we are in today.
I doubt the SNP thinks it has any responsibilities to the rest of the UK and the whole point of independence is to turn their back on the Union.
Personally I think Alex Salmond is sleepwalking into disaster. But as the recession bites deeper independence can only look more attractive, especially with the promise of economic prosperity and a secure financial future.
As for they actual wording on the referendum ballot paper. Can it be anything else except a simple YES/NO?
I think Salmond is a very articulate and astute politician and Westminster will do well not to underestimate him. I'm in agreement with you about the wording of the referendum but Salmond wants a fall back situation. Westminster will have to be very skillful to outflank him.

15 Jan 2012

I had a bit of a think and a bit of a read up on some stuff which is unusual for me lol

What I came up with was this. Scotland was happy to sign the treaty of the union mainly for its own bennefit and happy to bennefit from it for the best part of 250 year during which the UK was for a large period the worlds foremost power. Now only 80 years on from the end of the largest empire the world has ever seen and with things not so rosie Scotland want out (possibly) and with the largest asset the UK has. With friends like that who needs enemys? Just seems a good way to screw over the rest of the UK. Not like much would change for Scotland. Join the EU they can all continue working here those that need to that is. Is anyone likely to Nuke Scotland? Just about as likely as Canada for the same reason. One down side would be Scottish mail! I mean now the Royal mail man will probably hand the sack to the Scottish mail man :lol: variation in name only I would guess. Day in day out not much would change for Scotland other than the possibility of greater financial security.
From the small nhumber of Scots I have spoken to it would seem they are not overly bothered by independance. Seems to be more of a Political thing but thats not to say Scotts wont vote for it if they see financial bennefit. I guess time will tell but if what they want is out and if for the reasons mainly stated above then I would say .... off and dont come back either.

15 Jan 2012

To me it is all about empire building, nothing more, let them have independence, as long as that is what it is. Like most I know a few Scots, and on the whole they could not give a shit, or appreciate know where their bread is buttered. Alex Salmond and his cronies are only interested in their own kudos. Nothing more.

Quote by tweeky
I had a bit of a think and a bit of a read up on some stuff which is unusual for me What I came up with was this. Scotland was happy to sign the treaty of the union mainly for its own bennefit and happy to bennefit from it for the best part of 250 year during which the UK was for a large period the worlds foremost power. Now only 80 years on from the end of the largest empire the world has ever seen and with things not so rosie Scotland want out (possibly) and with the largest asset the UK has. With friends like that who needs enemys? Just seems a good way to screw over the rest of the UK. Not like much would change for Scotland. Join the EU they can all continue working here those that need to that is. Is anyone likely to Nuke Scotland? Just about as likely as Canada for the same reason. One down side would be Scottish mail! I mean now the Royal mail man will probably hand the sack to the Scottish mail man :lol: variation in name only I would guess. Day in day out not much would change for Scotland other than the possibility of greater financial security.
From the small nhumber of Scots I have spoken to it would seem they are not overly bothered by independance. Seems to be more of a Political thing but thats not to say Scotts wont vote for it if they see financial bennefit. I guess time will tell but if what they want is out and if for the reasons mainly stated above then I would say .... off and dont come back either.

16 Jan 2012

Money, personal wealth will be the decider for this one, "what's in it for me", if whoever it is gets to a referendum stage or voting stage and says to the Scottish people "do you want independance" each voter will be asking what the benefits will be for them personally not as a nation.
Most English people know who William Wallace was, albeit the film industry version of him, most Scottish people you talk to think he and Robert the Bruce were the greatest things to ever happen to thier nation, which Robert the Bruce most could not tell you until the movie was released. They have a monument to William Wallace, not a pretty site, covered in rubbish and falling apart, the local council want to pull it down and turn it into a car park, the Wallace Clan want money to restore it and make it better and more befitting of his status but the simple fact is that they cannot get anyone to donate or invest in the cause.
I think that says a lot.
If you are Scottish (or any Nationality) and want to contribute to the "save the monument fund" mail me and I will give you the contact details of the organisers

17 Jan 2012

Independence
- so presumably they'll have to apply to join the EU and wait the usual length of time
- own defence
- own currency
- own Foreign Office and Embassies
- own Border and Immigration
- own Passports
- own banking system, including full costs of RBS afterall they are scottish banks who just happen to own Natwest
- be treated as a foreign banks elewhere in UK
OR
their Devolution Max idea, so keep rest of UK
- for defense
- bailing out scottish banks
- Foreign Office and Embassies
- UK passports
- UK Border and immigration
- £ as currency
can understand why Alex is talking up the former, but bet secretly wishing the population like the idea but baulk at it and choose the latter so as to keep the financial support/bail out option.
SNP if you going to do it, then do it right and have the full break and all that it entails rather than keeping the option to run home when/if it goes wrong