Coffee House

Alex Salmond’s reassuring St George’s Day address

23 April 2014

23 April 2014

St George’s Day is one of those festivals that politicians are particularly earnest about, for fear someone accuse them of being ashamed of England. But today’s most interesting pointed St George’s Day celebration comes from a man more accustomed to suggesting that Englishness is something he is quite separate from. Alex Salmond is hopping across the border to give a speech in Carlisle.

The SNP leader wants to reassure English people on St George’s Day that they can still be chums with the Scots. They’re not going to become surly dragons after independence. Instead, Salmond will say Scots and English people will still cross that border to work and to marry, and will continue to watch many of the same television programmes.

Subscribe from £1 per week


This isn’t a change of tack from Salmond: his independence-lite model has always grabbed as many of the cultural things that show the Union is an emotional one with deep roots.

But there’s something quite amusing about the SNP leader choosing the day that celebrates Englishness to do it. St George’s Day and the whole concept of Englishness are difficult for politicians because they are difficult to pin down as distinct from Britishness. Ed Miliband had a good go at it in 2011, but did spend a lot of time talking about his family not sitting under oak trees as he tried to unravel the concept.

Meanwhile Salmond’s success has been partly in creating divisions between Scots and those in the rest of the UK to make the case for independence a mainstream one. It’s a trick as old as the hills: Shakespeare explored the way man artificially ‘others’ those who are really quite similar in much of his writing (read Daniel Hannan’s cover piece on Shakespeare as the voice of Britain here). And as Salmond’s speech today shows, those divisions aren’t quite as instinctive as the ‘yes’ camp would have you believe.


More Spectator for less. Subscribe and receive 12 issues delivered for just £12, with full web and app access. Join us.

Show comments
  • PROF EVIL

    We love the English, but not in any sort of Gay way, so don’t get any ideas if you are an ex public schoolboy. (or a Tory MP for that matter)

  • Bob Waugh

    An interesting discussion to read through, but deeply depressing. As a Scot living in England, who has no plans at the moment to return to my native land after independence, my experience has mostly been that most English people think well of the Scots, respect that we are a different people, and often admire our refusal to join the neo-liberal madness that started in the 1980s. I have many friends in Scotland who are English-born, very happy and have no plans to evacuate in the event of a Yes vote, not least as some plan to vote that way.
    So to enter this strange world is a great shock. It appears that there are comers of England inhabited by people of the utmost self-hatred who have no capacity for positive thinking, and who delight in imagining the catastrophe they have to believe will descend on an independent Scotland. This is not just anti-Scottish bile; it goes deeper. It is a deep refusal to believe that the world can be better, that it is not really powered by a desire to trample upon one another in the scramble to the top of the midden. The deep optimism of the Yes campaign is anathema to people infected with this ailment.
    After Scotland resumes full self-government (not “goes”) there will be a need to reconstitute a new United Kingdom, assuming that the populations of Wales and N.Ireland agree. That could be a healthy and democratic process and we could all end up the better for it. But please cure yourselves of this need to believe in failure – it is the rancid detritus of Thatcherism.

  • John fae Oban

    To claim that the Scottish government has “threatened” to renege on it’s share of the liabilities is disingenuous. The SG have stated from the start that it is willing to pay a fair share of the liabilities. This is of course dependent on the status given to both sides under International Law. If rUK is unwilling to share in the assets they cannot demand that iScotland take any responsibility for the liabilities. The rUK will need a currency union far more than iScotland will and I tend to agree with anonymous government minister that there will “of course” be a currency union.
    The family ties and cross border friendships are not going to disappear after a Yes vote, the problem that Scotland has is not with the English people (or the other two states in the UK) it is with the Westminster government and the corrupt political establishment that can see no further than the M25. UK politics is broken and cannot be fixed from within, a YES vote is a vote for CHANGE,

  • http://peterabell.blogspot.co.uk/ Peter A Bell

    We don’t even get to the end of the first paragraph before the lies begin. Far from being “accustomed to suggesting that Englishness is something he is quite separate from” Salmond has famously described himself as a “fully signed up Anglophile”.

    As this buffoon, Isabel Hardman, begins, so she finishes. Like almost every arrogant, ill-informed metropolitan hack she knows nothing whatever of the referendum campaign or Scotland’s politics and so resorts to commenting on the caricatures conjured by her own dumb prejudice.

    Ludicrously, Hardman accuses Salmond of “creating divisions between Scots and those in the rest of the UK” when, as anyone with the vaguest notion of what is actually going on must be fully aware, it is Darling and his Tory masters who are the ones talking about ending all relationships with Scotland in the event of a Yes vote. It is the anti-independence campaign which talks incessantly of barriers and “separation” and abolishing perfectly functional arrangements in a fit of petulant pique.

    If, instead of listening to others within their wee bubble, Hardman and her ilk bothered to listen to what was being said in the referendum campaign, or if they were not so .intent on dishonestly misrepresenting the independence case, they would have heard Salmond talk of the six unions, five of which he wants to preserve while British nationalists are bent on destroying them all.

    • http://Thegrouse.tumblr.com The Grouse

      Independence will lead over time to a socialist republic likely using the euro and it is that choice that should be being debated. The keep the good bits but drop the Tories rhetoric is clever politics but fundamentally dishonest.

      • http://peterabell.blogspot.co.uk/ Peter A Bell

        A socialist republic sounds fine. I’ll vote Yes for that. The euro? It’s just a currency.

        • http://Thegrouse.tumblr.com The Grouse

          Shame your mates couldn’t be just as honest and put it in their prospectus for independence – then we could all have an honest vote on it

          • http://peterabell.blogspot.co.uk/ Peter A Bell

            Not sure who you mean when you refer to my “mates”. I doubt if you do either. And if you are not aware of the prospectus for independence then you must have been keeping your head in a dark, moist place for the past several months.

            • http://Thegrouse.tumblr.com The Grouse

              Sorry We must be looking at different publications. The version I have doesn’t mention ditching the monarchy, pound or imply that a social democratic republic is a logical consequence of independence. I thought you had devoted a large part of your career to the nationalist movement and again I am sorry to have been mistaken.

              • http://peterabell.blogspot.co.uk/ Peter A Bell

                Apparently you’re not done with being mistaken. You evidently don’t understand the nature of the document to which you refer. It is, in part, a white paper setting out the route to becoming independent and, in part, one party’s manifesto for being independent. It is this latter part which seems to be causing you some rather embarrassing confusion.

                You seem to be under the impression that the Scottish National Party is in a position to dictate what Scotland will be like once our nation’s rightful constitutional status is restored. This is a very foolish notion which requires that we ignore the fact that there will be elections to the Scottish Parliament following independence. The path that Scotland takes will be decided by the people of Scotland, not by one political party.

                As far as the monarchy is concerned, there was no way that the independence referendum could have also been a vote on Scotland becoming a republic. The point – one of many that you totally miss – is that restoring our independence gives us the ability to ditch the monarchy as and when we so choose. Something that we will never be able to do whilst bound to the British state.

                Nobody has ever claimed that “a social democratic republic is a logical consequence of independence”. Such silly straw men are yet another facet of your foolishness. The only “logical consequence” of a Yes vote is that Scotland will always have the government that the people of Scotland vote for. If past voting patterns are a reliable guide, this will tend to be a social democratic government. Whether it is the government of a constitutional monarchy or a republic is, as I have pointed out, entirely a matter for democratic debate and decision at some point in the future.

                Having said all that, it may well be that monarchy is not in keeping with the kind of nation that Scotland aspires to be. It is perfectly conceivable that our new written constitution will include an affirmation of popular sovereignty which is totally incompatible with the concept of monarchy and inimical to the institution.

                But this is no more a “logical consequence” of independence than your daft idea that there will be permanent SNP government.

                • http://Thegrouse.tumblr.com The Grouse

                  Thanks Peter. We may have more in common than either would like to acknowledge. My point is that the SNP document has tried to portray an independence for softies type message which I personally find offensive. A return to a declaration of Arbroath version of kingship or presidency would not be a problem for me as my kinsman were signatories to the original.
                  In my personal and humble opinion wee Eck is a dishonest power grabber modeled on the worst of the Eastern Europeans and has his own self interests higher in his priorities than those of the people of Scotland.
                  If your real agenda is to establish a republic using the euro, with you as it’s first president have the decency to say so.

                • http://peterabell.blogspot.co.uk/ Peter A Bell

                  The document produced by the Scottish Government, Scotland’s Future, sets out a rational route to independence and a pragmatic assessment of what independence will be like on day one. It is concerned entirely with the practicalities of becoming independent. If the SNP’s plans had included an insistence on including things such as getting rid of the monarchy then we wouldn’t be having the referendum at all and independence would still be a distant dream rather than being within our grasp.

                  Otto von Bismarck said it all when he said, “Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable – the art of the next best”.

                  There will always be those who prefer glorious defeat to the more difficult process of winning some sort of victory at a price.

                  Your caricature of Alex Salmond is ludicrous. The person you describe is not the First Minister of Scotland. Such a person could not rise to power within Scotland’s political system. This is real life, not a comic-book.

                  While Salmond may be young enough to yet be President of a Scottish republic, and may well have many of the necessary qualities, I’m as certain as anyone might be that he has much more pressing matters to occupy his mind at this time. And adopting the euro has been ruled out as an option for the foreseeable future, even if it were actually an option anyway.

  • Gwangi

    Wasn’t what we think of as Scottishness cobbled together and invented as a fantasy by Sir Walter Scott and the Victorian English anyway?
    Salmond likes the English in the same way extremist Muslims like Christians and Jews – they’re people of faith too and better than infidel atheists. But don’t expect a love-in. A bloodbath maybe, but nope, not a love-in…
    But without Salmond, what is the SNP – a party mostly supported by the uneducated lower classes, rather like the BNP in England actually.
    Anyone is Scotland who thinks they’ll be able to keep Sterling, Defence contracts, subsidies from England and EU membership if they choose to split a union in a referendum (which the English and Welsh should have a vote in too actually) has better lay off the Buckfest – coz they’re gonna have one heck of a hangover.

    • northernsoul

      Utter fanny ^^^

      • AMF

        Ah, you have a mirror?

    • Brian McNeil

      I sincerely hope you’re referring to what people inside that ‘London bubble’ think of as a Scottish identity.

      Your comments are racist, ignorant, boorish and cringe-worthy.

      • Gwangi

        Well, you obviously know nothing about how Walter Scott basically invented the things we think of as Scottish identity – and created a tartan industry into the bargain with all the silly myths about clan names etc – and then the Victorian English latched into the idea and spread the fantasy of Scottishness around the world. And yes, it is cringe-worthy – it has about as much basis in reality as Star Trek.
        Try watching Ian Hislop’s excellent BBC 2 series – part 2 of that nailed it and explained to many ignorant fantasists like yourself where your symbols of Scottishness came from.
        Added to which, if one looks at genetic research, one can see that the whole concept of a united Scottish Celtic genetic identity as opposed to the supposedly Anglo-Saxon English is utter piffle. Not much difference genetically between the populations of Scotland and England. I suppose you’re now going to say that genetic DNA testing is all wrong and racist and boorish eh?

  • Stephen Gash

    I was interviewed by ITV about what Scottish independence would mean for Cumbria (to be broadcast tonight). The whole tenor of the questions was ‘would Cumbrians be better off in Scotland?’ That’s the name of the game; hive off bits of England like Cumbria and Berwick-upon-Tweed, just as Monmouthshire was stolen from England and put into Wales in 1972. Moving the border south brings more oil and other resources like wind farms under Scottish control.

    The next thing is to make London a city state and thus, also removed from England.

    • Andy

      We should move the border North ! I’m sure there are bits of Scotland that would prefer to remain in the Union, so they could be incorporated into England. The NatFascists would love that idea !

      • Jambo25

        Worked really well in Ireland. Didn’t it?

        • Gwangi

          Yes, and if Scotland becomes independent that the vile sectarian and religious hatreds that get drowned out by being part of a greater union will come to the fore, as in Yugoslavia.
          People will say there is no chance of civil war of course – but have you ever talked to rabid Celtic fans or rabid Rangers ones?

          • Jambo25

            Strangely enough, I was out in a West Lothian pub last night drinking with some pals who support a variety of teams and come from a variety of religious backgrounds. We managed to get through the night without destroying the centre of Linlithgow in a religious/ethnic civil war.
            In reality, Scotland is a remarkably peaceable place entirely free from large scale civil strife. There is, of course, a part of this great Union of ours where large scale rioting is a recurring feature of lived experience. When is Tottenham due to kick off again or will it start somewhere else next time. Very violent people the English.

    • Bob Waugh

      “The next thing is to make London a city state and thus, also removed from England.”
      So it not that already? Ever heard of Bojo?

    • Gwangi

      Errr I really don’t think the England/Wales border changed in 1972, just the names of counties which happened everywhere.

      Monmouthshire was always treated as thought it were Welsh – just a historical anomaly. Look at the geography. Monmouthshire is Welsh and was never ‘removed from England’:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/England%E2%80%93Wales_border

      The Welsh border is long and porous; the whole reason why Scotland did not in effect join England back in the 14th century like Wales was its geography – all those mountains and bleak barren hills. It’s geography alone that created that history. Watch that Plantagenets BBC2 series – that explains the history in detail.

    • Gwangi

      And you could indeed argue that England took some Welsh areas from Wales:

      “many historically Welsh names are also found east of the border, particularly around Oswestry in northern Shropshire, such as Gobowen; in southern Shropshire, such as Clun; and in southern Herefordshire, such as Kilpeck and Pontrilas. Most of these areas were not incorporated fully into England until the 16th century, and native Welsh speakers still lived there until at least the 19th century.”

  • FF42

    As English people don’t get to vote in the Referendum, we have to assume his real target audience is Scottish voters. He wishes to reassure them that the English will still be chums if Scotland decides to leave the Union.

    And why wouldn’t we be chums? But that’s not the point. An exit from a highly integrated union with benefits for both parties will have profound implications for Scotland – most of them bad.

    • Inverted Meniscus

      I don’t think Salmond gives two hoots about whether or not we will remain “chums”. His only concern is whether or not the UK taxpayer can be duped into picking up the enormous transition costs associated with separation.

      • terregles2

        Why would you not want good relations with your nearest neighbouring country. How strange.

        • Inverted Meniscus

          I am not aware that I have expressed any such opinion. I am merely pointing out that as a UK taxpayer, I have no enthusiasm for paying any of the enormous transition costs that independence will bring. I personally have no objection to Scottish residents exercising their democratic rights and hopefully will remain on good terms with them. I have, however, no enthusiasm for paying for the consequences of Scottish independence be they positive or negative when I have not exercised my democratic rights. Vote yes but please do not expect the UK tax payer to cover the cost of splitting the DVLA, air traffic control etc etc etc. it does not seem unreasonable to suggest that if we have not had the chance to vote on the matter the costs should sit with those who have voted.

          • terregles2

            I think you are being rather negative. Many countries have negotiated independence in a fair and amicable way. I have no reason to suppose that two great countries like Scotland and England will not do the same and both go on to be prosperous and more democratic.
            There will be robust negotiations with both sides pushing for the best deal for their country but that is no more than we would expect.

            • Inverted Meniscus

              Well that is all very idealistic but not particularly realistic. One had only to read these threads to appreciate that there is a considerable undercurrent of ill feeling. Also, Mr Salmond seems unwilling to compromise on anything and threatens to repudiate Scotland’s per capita share of the National debt. I have negotiated contracts for most of my professional career and his attitude does not suggest a basis for productive negotiations. Besides, why should the UK taxpayer face any of these costs when they had no say in the break up of the UK?

              • terregles2

                You are basing a great deal on supposition. Nobody knows what either Scotland or England will take to the negotiating table. You are referring to his attitude the negotiations will not be between individual politicians. They will be between two teams from each country. Personally I would prefer Scotland to start with a new currency but we will see what proposals emerge from negotiations. You mention that the rest of the UK has no say in Scottish independence. Everyone living in Scotland and registered to vote will decide on independence. These are the rules set out by the Westminster Electoral Commission and I think they are quite fair. The alternative would be to ask the much larger population of EWNI to decide if the small 5.3 million Scots should have independence. Hardly democratic.

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  Just about everything on this thread is ‘supposition’ and so we can ignore that argument. Correct, I doubt that Salmond will actually conduct the negotiations but any ‘team’ as you call them will work within parameters set by elected politicians including Salmond and so yes his attiotude will have a considerable influence on the conduct of said negotiations. To argue that the rest of the UK has a voice in the independence debate is patently disingenuous unless, of course, we were all to ‘up sticks’ and take up residence north of the border. The residents of England, Wales and Northern Ireland will not be able to exercise a vote in the what might be the break up of the UK and thus it is inappropriate to expect any of us to pick up any of the enormous transition costs. Mr Salmond remains determinedly mute on this subject. Scotland is welcome to continue using Sterling, for one thing we cannot stop you, but emphaticallythe not as part of a currency union. We did not instigate independence debate and should not therefore have to shoulder this cost and future burden. Quite how Salmond believes his team of negotiators who will represent 8.7% of the existing UK population will prevail over the interests of those representing 91.3% of the existing population is difficult to fathom. Such is the arrogance of the man and his evident disdain for the rest of the UK.

                • terregles2

                  I think your last paragraph really puts the case for Scottish independence succinctly. As you say Scotland has 8.7% of the UK population and EWNI has 91.3%.
                  The needs and aspirations of Scotland have never been recognised or met by the Westminster parliament.
                  I do not mean that as a criticism. It would be wrong for Westminster not to put the needs on 91.3% before the needs of 8.7%. Westminster has a duty to try and respond to the needs of the majority of the population.That does not mean that Scotland should carry on not being governed in the way that we would wish. The only way Scotland can have the government that it needs and wants is by choosing independence. I am sure that independence will work well for both Scotland and England.

  • Your Correspondent

    I have news for Salmond: we won’t still be friends with a bunch of socialist Scottish separatists. If he wants to come south of the border after independence we are going to make him stand in a queue for four hours clutching a visa application. That’ll learn him!

    • terregles2

      Well we will not reciprocate. You and all other English residents will always be welcome in Scotland.

    • Jambo25

      Time for your largactil dear.

  • Durham Dan

    It’s the arrogance of Salmond that never ceases to amaze. Who is he to pontificate on future English and Scottish relations? Has he consulted a divine oracle? He has no idea whether relations between an independent Scotland and England would be cordial or not. It is incredibly naive to assume that they will. The worrying thing is I suspect many people on both sides of the border have assumed exactly that. I don’t think a lot of people have even begun to consider the enormous ramifications a Yes vote will have on us all, but especially those in the border country.

    Given that England won’t be bullied into a currency union by the arrogant Salmond, and given that Scotland has already threatened to renege on its share of the debt, my guess is relations won’t exactly get off to a great start. Add in to the mix that immigration policy is likely to be heading in totally different directions and I’m not sure how long the English will be happy to have an open border.

    The fact is, nobody really knows what relations between the two countries will be like in years to come if Scotland votes yes.

    • asalord

      I’ll still love you, Dan.

      • Wessex Man

        oh dear Dan, I feel for you really I do.

    • Inverted Meniscus

      Some very good points Dan. To suggest that all will be sweetness and light having threatened to renege on Scotland’s per capita share of the National debt is an astounding piece of disingenuous claptrap and hypocrisy. The point is further reinforced when you consider Salmond’s petulant response to the UKs sensible refusal to consider a currency union. Salmond knows that a currency union is vital for Scotland because it has no record of issuing debt in its own name and even if the market accepts the ludicrously optimistic economic forecasts of S & P etc newly issued Scottish debt will still carry a huge premium without UK Treasury support and that means higher mortgage/borrowing costs for Scottosh citizens. Try and get a ‘yes’ supporter to acknowledge that inconvenient piece of reality however. Also, Salmond never mentions the huge transition costs that will arise from separation and will not and must not be borne by the UK taxpayers who have had no opportunity to exercise their democratic rights in this respect. I respect the right of the Scottish people to determine their own future but the UK will not pay the costs attaching to the exercise of those rights and a bit of ‘soft soap’ in Carlisle will not alter that fact.

      • Kitty MLB

        Oh I get it, SNP want a independent Scottish economy to be controlled
        by the Bank of England and the UK treasury in a currency union with
        a country that they loath and want independence from. Labour and the Lib Dems will be in oblivion without Scotland, so the ‘ evil’ Tories will
        be controlling the Scottish economy, even more distant then before
        as England will be a foreign country… Apologies if all that was not correct.

        • Inverted Meniscus

          No Kitty. I think the point is that Mr Salmond wants a currency union in order that Scotland can issue as much public debt as it wants safe in the knowledge that it will all be underwritten by the treasury of a foreign country ( the UK). Naturally, he does not envisage anything so inconvenient as having to ask that foreign country such tedious questions as ‘how much’? and ‘how long’? Can I borrow that money for. He also wants the same foreign country to act as lender of last resort to Scottish banks with no questions asked. In short, I want independence but the UK tax payer can pick up the bill. All of this of course precludes any mention of the gigantic transition costs associated with separation but you can safely assume that that will also be for the account of the UK taxpayer who, lest we forget, does not get any say in the matter via the ballot box.

          • Richard McHarg

            What a pile of ill-informed crap. I suggest strongly that before writing any more of your nonsense, you take some time to look at the facts, rather than what you see in your ridiculous press.

            You clearly know nothing of the issues, or what has been proposed by the Scottish Government, but since you are subject to the rubbish reported by London’s media, that is not surprising.

            England/UK does not own Scotland. We are not a possession! We will decide our future, and then negotiate our relationships with our neighbours. It will be for both sides to decide and that has always been Salmond’s position.

            As for the economy, the truth will hit you hard!

            http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/where-does-scotlands-wealth-go/

            • Calum

              yeah, some of these ill-informed rants by the little-englanders are pathetic if not racist. good riddance.

              • Inverted Meniscus

                So you define objection to joining a currency union with Scotland, a wholly rational position, as being racist. I will let George Osborne know but I don’t expect it to make any difference. A truly paranoid and pathetic comment which demonstrates your inability to understand a fundamental economic issue.

                • Calum

                  read the comments, and we already have a currency union.

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  Yes we do because there is a complete fiscal, monetary and political union between the constituent countries of the United Kingdom I.e. total borrowing and expenditure limits are determined by the Westminster Parliament. Post independence, Scotland will be a separate country outside of the UK and presumably would want to determine its own monetary and fiscal policies and the the amount of money it borrows via the public debt markets. Why would the remaining countries of the UK want to enter a currency union with a foreign country and thus be responsible for any debt it might issue when it has no means of controlling how much that foreign country borrows and for how long. A currency union might work if the UK could control the amount of money Scotland borrows by that would hardly be independence would it? Also, why would the UK want to act as lender of last resort to the banks of a foreign country? Scotland can of course continue to use Sterling but it makes no sense to the UK taxpayer for that usage to be part of a currency union. There might be some translation risk between the UK and Scotland but corporate treasurers manage such risks every day and so that is a non issue. No doubt, you believe my views on fiscal and monetary alignment and foreign currency translation risk as racist but that is just a risk I will have to take.

            • Inverted Meniscus

              Great news then if you are telling me that Scotland does not want a currency union with the UK. By the way, why did Salmond want a currency union with a country which you seem to be suggesting will be a basket case after Scotland departs? Surely that is something to be avoided at all costs and yet he threw a strop the moment this was refused. Very curious. I have ignored the rest of your hysterical rant assuming that you have serious problems with a contrary opinion.

    • Colonel Mustard

      He’s no different to other modern politicians who assume they have the right to invoke change because of their personal beliefs. Few if any of them understand the concept of guardianship, of caretaking, of preserving the best of the past for the children of the future and not embarking on rash, ego-basting projects of unknown consequence or embarking on them only with caution and an eye to the lessons of the past.

      They are all arrogant. Cameron, Clegg, Miliband and Salmond. All living for the present in the belief that what they promote will be only as they envisage it. A fallacy that any study of history soon reveals.

    • terregles2

      Well if the UK can have good relations with the Republic of Ireland after all the conflict and bloodshed. I am sure relations with an independent Scotland will be as cordial as the the Anglo/Irish ones.

      • Durham Dan

        Anglo/Irish relations are thankfully better than they have been in most people’s lifetimes. But as you concede yourself in your post, only “after all the conflict and bloodshed”. Now I’m not suggesting that Anglo/Scottish relations will be that bad, merely that they may not be as wonderful as Salmond is suggesting.

        I’m not sure comparing Anglo/Scottish and the history of Anglo/Irish relations is a very useful exercise but, if you’re going to, it’s not exactly a great case study for those trying to persuade us that we’ll all be able to skip merrily through the borders as though nothing has changed in the event of independence.

        • terregles2

          I am sure that you will concede that there is not the slightest comparison to be made between Anglo/Irish history and Anglo/Scottish history.
          I merely mentioned Ireland to illustrate that if a country with such a turbulent recent history with the UK can now enjoy a good relationship then Scotland and England with no animosity in 300 years will undoubtedly enjoy a friendly relationship after independence.

          • Andy

            But you CyberNats are busy stoking the animosity with your anti-English bigotry.

            • PROF EVIL

              All I see is anti-Scottish bigotry. Salmond has given the feather of peace, you throw it back in his face because of a currency union – that we currently have right now!

              • Andy

                Salmond has demanded a currency union. To make such a thing work (look at the Euro for a good example of how not to do it) you need Fiscal Union and that would mean the Scots would have to surrender a great deal of sovereignty to the Bank of England and London. Given the general anti-English attitude of Cyber-NatFascists that isn’t going to happen. I would’t touch it with a barge pole.

                • melanie mckellar

                  Alex Salmond hasn’t ‘demanded’ anything, he has put forward, from recommendations, a preferred plan for the currency in an Independent Scotland. It is seen as being the ‘best option’ for both Scotland and the rUK and will be part of the negotiations following a YES vote. The UK government media response has been that they won’t negotiate on it but that remains to be seen.

                  Further Andy there is no anti-English attitude but there is an anti-Establishment attitude in Scotland that resounds throughout the UK. The difference is Scotland are doing something about it . It is the Westminster, BT and the No campaign who call this ‘Separation’ and implant barriers in the minds of all who care to listen. Scotland is voting on taking a different political path from what is on offer from Westminster is that really such a bad thing?

                • Andy

                  Salmond has hardly ‘put forward’ any plan. He has been seeking to dictate what will be post independence – listen to the hysterical screeching from the ghastly Sturgeon. The three parties at Westminster have stated, quite clearly and without equivocation that there ‘will be NO currency union’ following independence. It might be your ‘best option’ but to many of us it is not our best option and as I have repeatedly said I doubt that the Nats will be willing to surrender the necessary sovereignty required to make such a union work, and give their attitude frankly they would not be trusted.

                  There is plenty of anti-English attitude around from ScotsNats like yourself. You conveniently describe it as ‘anti-Establishment’, but you could have used ‘anti-Westminster’, ‘anti-Tory’ etc. Underneath this silly veneer is good old fashioned hate and loathing of the English and of England. If this were not so many of you would treat us (English people) and England with far more respect. We have views too and a right to express those views.

                  Oh and I wish England had been treated as well as Scotland in 1998. Many of us can’t wait for you to take back your 41 Fascist Labour MPs (and LibDems) who meddle in English affairs where they have no right to do so.

                • melanie mckellar

                  It seems to me Andy that the only one spitting venom and hate is yourself.
                  Time will tell the outcome.

                • Andy

                  You don’t like home truths being point out to you. Well tough. Lots of us are fed up with the anti-English bile and hate of the CyberNat Fascists.

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  But he has threatened to repudiate Scotland’s per capita share of the national debt if Scotland cannot join a currency union with the UK which looks like demanding a currency union to any reasonable observer. Whilst happy to repudiate Scotland’s share of the National debt he will, no doubt, still be demanding a per capita share of the national assets.

              • Inverted Meniscus

                So we do but if Scotland becomes independent the only way it could join a currency union with the UK would be to entirely surrender fiscal and monetary sovereignty to the UK and that would hardly be independence would it? You could not reasonably expect the UK to underwrite the newly issued public debt of a foreign country without limitation as to amount or term. The UK has already undertaken to guarantee all existing public debt making Salmond’s threat to repudiate Scotland’s share a typically empty threat.

                • PROF EVIL

                  No assets no debt! This is a possible outcome for Scotland. Of course you will need somewhere to put your WMDs??

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  As members of the NATO alliance we will find a home for our nuclear detterent. No doubt Scotland will not be applying to join NATO as I am sure none of you could be so dishonest and hypocritical to seek membership of what is essentially a nuclear alliance.

                • PROF EVIL

                  I don’t see England housing the WMDs do I?? Put them on the Thames. I don’t see other NATO countries except the permanent security members with WMDs either. Will you expel Holland,Germany, Austria,Belgium,Denmark etc etc. If you are a permanent member of the security council then you have WMDs. Besides, what you don’t realise is that rUK cannot leave them to Scotland anyway. there is a treaty whereby one country cannot pass nukes onto another under the non proliferation treaty. It would be illegal for Scotland to have them unless they were part of the UK. That is assuming you wish to keep them.

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  Holland, Germany etc are happy to accept the protection of the permanent members who have nuclear weapons – is Scotland happy to do likewise? If the answer is no, then it would be hypocritical in the extreme to apply for NATO membership. And get this absolutely straight, we are the UK not the rUK. You get to vote on independence but what we call ourselves after the departure of 5.3 million people is not the business of the exUK.

                • PROF EVIL

                  Scotland cannot take the WMDs as I already explained. If it did it should get a seat as a permanent member of the security council and have the keys to the weapons. Proliferation is not allowed. Yes I suppose you would still be united with Wales!! Good luck with that and NI!

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  Well we will be free of hypocrites like yourself.

                • PROF EVIL

                  These are facts! I’m not making it up. You cannot transfer WMDs to another country under the non proliferation treaty. Look it up. Scotland will not be part of the UK and a foreign country (as we are all reminded – borders etc). You cannot just hand them your WMDs!

    • PROF EVIL

      Did Ireland pay their share of Debt? No!! If Scotland is to pay Debt it must receive a fair share of assets. If no assets then no debt – got it? When Russia and Ukraine split Russia kept the seat at the UN security council and Ukraine gave up its WMDs. Scotland will also give up its WMDs. If we are to keep them then payment must be given.

    • monty61

      Indeed, don’t believe a word of Salmond’s nonsense. Even in a Scottish accent, try and be a Tory or even just argue Tory policies north of the Border and you’ll be howled down in seconds as ‘the enemy within’. Tories = evil, England votes Tory therefore England = Evil (with a few exceptions like the sainted Tony Benn).

      Salmond’s St George’s Day stunt fools no-one apart from the a vanishingly small but amusingly vocal number of soft-headed Scots-resident English ‘persuaded’ of the independence argument.

  • asalord

    “Why! all delights are vain, but that most vain
    Which, with pain purchas’d, doth inherit pain:
    As, painfully to pore upon a book
    To seek the light of truth, while truth the while
    Doth falsely blind the eyesight of his look.
    Light, seeking light, doth light of light beguile;
    So ere you find where light in darkness lies,
    Your light grows dark by losing of your eyes.”

    Delicious to see such desperation from the British nationalist media.
    They who want the union to continue are doing the most to end it – sweet justice.

    • Kitty MLB

      I had a chat with a much older and wiser recently retired chum who was a
      journalist for The Scotsman. He is quite concerned that all the bleating
      we hear are from the SNP and their followers. Yet there are huge unreported
      amount of Scottish people who do not support the SNP, do not trust Salmond
      and we strangely never hear their voices. Only the vituperations from the likes
      of you, so we shall see.

      • terregles2

        Kitty you are right very many Scots do not support the SNP. They are YES voters but are members of the several other political parties who are campaigning for a YES vote. We even have another group recently formed. Scottish Conservatives for Independence. Nick Johnston former Tory parliamentarian has signed up as a YES voter.

      • Jambo25

        Then they’ll vote No and get their way in September.

      • Brian McNeil

        I’m not a member of any political party. Nor am I a follower of the SNP. As seems to escape many people outside Scotland, the SNP is a rather broad coalition in the first place. The primary uniting cause is Scottish Independence.

        The UK-wide parties, all united in opposing Scottish Independence, had already become clones of each-other before this debate started. Sat on their well-upholstered seats in Westminster, they’re being well-kept by the City’s financiers and so on.

        For me Scottish Independence is about breaking with that, now totally corrupted, mother—-er of a parliamentary system. It is about democracy, something denizens of the Houses on the Thames have long-forgotten.

        This isn’t about Alex Salmond. We know we’re voting for keeps on this one; beyond Alex Salmond’s lifetime, not just his time in Bute House.

        As many south of the border are fond of bleating “Ye cannie come back, we’ll no hae yee!” We won’t want to come back. Has anybody else? Ireland? India? South Africa? Australia? The United States?

        Scotland is a different country. It needs to be governed for the people, thus by the people of Scotland. Who knows? Maybe having democratically responsible parliament might encourage change south of the border too?

  • anyfool

    On a scale of 1 to 10, I doubt it would make -5 as a point of interest in the referendum, the people in Carlisle cannot vote.
    It could indicate he is so sure of winning that this is an exercise in soft soaping the English, before the negotiations begin in earnest.
    You can call him any names under the sun, but stupidity is not one you can apply.
    What is stupid was letting G Brown in on the act, the No campaign should be on suicide watch, the two lead characters are now two people who destroyed the best pension system in the world and what were the first words of Brown, a scare story about pensions, you really really could not make this up.
    The politicians operating this side of the border are not in the same class as Salmond and you can see clearly why Labour destroying the country went unopposed.

    • Keith D

      The simple fact that Salmond has disenfranchised those of us who’ve had to seek a living, albeit temporarily, south of the border exposes the utter sleekitness of the man. He’s assumed how we’d vote and cut us off. After 40 years contributing to Scotlands wealth I’m not chuffed at being denied a say.

      • anyfool

        Be that as it may, looking at the way the No campaign is apparently self destructing you would have to wonder, even if all Scots regardless of where they are would make any difference.

        • Keith D

          The No campaign is suffering from the general disconnect between UK politicos and the wishes of the electorate. I readily understand why a Scottish Parliament, with a desire to grant the voters wishes, is a more attractive proposition than those corrupt ivory tower dwellers in Westminster.

      • ChuckieStane

        It wasn’t bogeyman Salmond that “disenfranchised” you. It was simple practicalities. I assume you have a vote in next month’s euro election in your current constiuency – do you want 2 votes? Strange democracy.
        Would a ninety year old Australian who emigrated as a baby get a vote? Should your equivalent but English born chap working in Scotland be denied a vote?
        You are also a bit presumptious with your “he’s assumed how we’d vote” bit. My sister in Canada is “not chuffed” that she can’t vote either as she (like many others) would be a definite Yes.

        • Keith D

          You get an extra vote dont you?
          A bit presumptious that I’m a No arent we?..Not that it matters a flying ….; I dont get a say.

          • Jambo25

            You don’t live here any longer. Tough.

            • Keith D

              You come across as a right fud. This is a UK constitutional matter and deserves a UK wide decision.
              And I’m willing to bet I’ve contributed more to Scotland than you.
              I’ll give up my livelihood of 5 years to gert a vote?
              Numpty.

              • Bob Waugh

                If it is “a UK constitutional matter “, where is the UK-wide debate?

              • Jambo25

                To start off with: I don’t, generally, start a posting by calling someone else a “right fud”. I leave that up to obvious super achievers like your good self. Nor do I generally term those I disagree with “buckie swallower”. I leave that up to obvious super achievers like your good self as well.
                Now, why don’t you flit off to think up some more witless insults whilst contributing so much to dear old Scotia?

                • Keith D

                  No thanks. And I said you came across as one. You do.
                  Are you 16?. No ?. then the buckie swallower is a reflection then of some, by no means all, who get a vote ahead of me. Not therefore directed at you. If you’re going to reply to posts, have the gumption to read the ones you object to.

                  I doubt I’d have to be a super achiever to burst your bubble.
                  Thanks for playing champ.

                • Jambo25

                  Have difficulty in the old reading comprehension stakes, do we?. If you can find where I suggest that “buckie swallower” refers to myself then please quote whatever you think is there. I simply find such terminology insulting and needlessly abusive whoever its directed at.

                • Keith D

                  Nor do I generally term those I disagree with “buckie swallower”. I
                  “leave that up to obvious super achievers like your good self as well.”
                  It was you I was disagreeing with. Comprehension eh ?
                  You know what ? Have a nice evening. I’m sure you’re very nice in real life.

      • MichtyMe

        The Union state recognises no such thing as a Scot. It only recognises persons resident in Scotland and that is how the electoral register is compiled. If you wish an official identity as a Scot then you must hope for a yes vote.

      • NotYouNotSure

        Arguing for a country to be denied independence because it owes money to another is absolutely not going to win over any support, rather it will create more pro independence supporters.

        • Keith D

          So who’s doing that arguing then?

      • terregles2

        The rules and regulations for voting in the Scottish referendum are overseen by the Electoral Commission in England. The referendum is following the rules on who votes etc from Westminster not Holyrood. This is just one reason why the NO campaign is in trouble. All sorts of hysterical accusations have been made against Salmond which on investigation turn out not to be true.

        • Keith D

          The NO campaign is in trouble because its run by troughing Westminster orientated numpties who’ve spent the last 20 years destroying the very fabric of British society.

          Its really that simple.

          • Jambo25

            Then why object to those of us who actually live up here and want to leave the wonderful UK Union?

        • Andy

          The Electoral Commission is a UK organisation, not ‘in England’. Go look at their website. Subtle anti-English bigotry at work there as usual – ‘all the fault of the cursed English’.

          • terregles2

            I wish you would stop denigrating the English. You are the only one who does it. Show some respect many of us have English ancestry.
            English people are mostly great. I don’t even believe that you are English you sound too nasty to be that. The cursed English what a horrible thing to say.

            • Andy

              Then stop your anti-English bigotry.

              • terregles2

                I have English ancestry and I have no anti- English bigotry so please stop making false accusations.
                I still have a lot of family in England and don’t like to hear England or English people being denigrated thank you.

      • Jambo25

        Then live in Scotland or at least have an electoral address here. If not then tough luck.

  • Kitty MLB

    Condescending little man. He wishes to break up England and turn Scot against Scot,
    they do not all support him and there are thousands of proud Scottish people who
    live just over the border that cannot vote- he will say anything to win !
    Friends- the hypocrisy- the man, has loathing seeping out of his every breath.
    Scotland, will be competing with England for jobs and investment, contributing
    nothing to English taxes. He wishes to dump their share of the dept on us,
    demanding currency union over the heads of the English taxpayer- as a security
    blanket for them- and we do not get a say in this. Salmond wished us to fund their
    renewable energy and will single out English university students to pay fees-
    that man is a utter villain and a disgrace.
    May I also add, as well as it being St Georges Day ( that should be a national holiday)
    It is also the birthday of he that was an example of the creative genius of the human
    mind, the great William Shakespeare.

    • dougthedug

      “Condescending little man. He wishes to break up England and turn Scot against Scot,they do not all support him and there are thousands of proud Scottish people who live just over the border that cannot vote- he will say anything to win !”

      As far as I’m aware Alex Salmond has absolutely no interest in breaking up England. Do you have a link to where he said that or are you confusing England with the UK?

      • Kitty MLB

        It was a slip of the tongue, I meant the United Kingdom. But thank you
        most graciously for pointing out my error. It would be useful if we could delete posts sometimes like you can elsewhere, but unfortunately that
        is not possible.

        • terregles2

          Perhaps Kitty is was a Freudian slip. Have no worries after Scottish independence England will still remain unbroken and unscathed. Hopefully both countries will go on to prosper and be good neighbours.

        • Wessex Man

          Well actually Kitty he did say that the North of England would be better off as a seperate country in Liverpool in 2003.

    • terregles2

      Break up England>>>?????? Who has suggested breaking up England. Is there some new political party appeared from nowhere.?

      • Kitty MLB

        Sweetie, I have explained to the person below, a wee slip of the tongue, I am sure everyone catches my drift.

        • terregles2

          We did indeed catch your drift sweetie.

    • terregles2

      He certainly has not turned Scot against Scot. He has brought together Scots English and other nationalities living in Scotland. They are all out campaigning together for a YES vote.

      • Wessex Man

        Er so the Scotman was lying when it reported a month ago that the Shetlands and Orkney wanted a seperate referendum to say whether they want to stay in the UK.

        I’m sure Alex is so comnfident that he will grant it!

        • terregles2

          Er ….yes they were. Trying to cause trouble like all the desperate unionists worried at the rise of the YES vote.
          i am surprised at you bringing up that silly story. I know that you are a passionate supporter of Scottish independence.The only person I have heard as enthusiastic about Scottish independence as your good self is Alex Salmond.

  • Andy

    Yet more Salmond hypocrisy. No one has done more to stoke Scots hate of the English and England than that ugly oaf. And it is that hate of the English which he hopes will give him is victory in September.

    • MichtyMe

      And can you perhaps give an example of all that hate, just the one would do please?

      • Bluesman_1
        • Colonel Mustard

          To be fair I would agree with the Lothian and Borders Police that it was an attack on the Etonian clique in cabinet rather than the English per se. Of more concern that we have reached a state where pejorative terms like “Lord Snooty” can be considered a police matter by some. My own inclination would have been to prosecute Colin Shaughnessy for wasting police time.

          If the current “Conservative” cabinet in Westminster can alienate a rural Englishman then the scepticism of the Scots is perfectly understandable.

        • MichtyMe

          Oh dear, dear, that’s risible and had to go back four years to find it. Now, callling UK cabinet ministers “incompetent Lord Snooty’s” may be viewed as class prejudice but as anti English..naw.

          • Alexsau91

            Yeah, because you know… if it’s four years ago, that’s like what?… almost as if it never actually happened. Oh dear dear…

            Alex Salmond spouts anglophobia everytime he opens his mouth. It doesn’t need to be direct – hate speech get’s him no where. It ranges from snide comments about English and Scottish history, to the contempt he has for English voters – because somehow, the 5 million Scots are less entitled to a Tory government they didn’t vote for, than the Southern English are to a Labour government they didn’t vote for. Or maybe his support for the Scots who tried to run Nigel Farage out of Scotland.

            Alex Salmond’s campaign is divisive, not only politically as intended, but socially – turning Scots against English.

            • MichtyMe

              Aw, poor Nigel, a few pimply youths shout at a pretend politician, including English students from the Uni, tut tut.

            • terregles2

              England did actually vote for the Blair government. He came to power with a majority of 167 seats. Only 52 of them were Scottish MPs.

              • Jambo25

                Do not confuse Alexsau91 with mere facts.

                • terregles2

                  It is incredible the amount of people who insist that Blair came to power on Scottish votes. Show them the government website with the evidence that he had a landslide victory IN 1997 winning 419 seats and a majority of around 167 seats. Show them the names of the 56 Scottish MPs who went to Westminster and they will still say that it was the Scots vote that got him elected. It is extraordinary.
                  A bit like someone arguing that the world is flat after being shown a world globe.

                • Jambo25

                  There are 3 things at work here. One is a genuinely worrying lack of knowledge about political and social affairs amongst the general public. I think a very dumbed down culture, especially in the media, has a lot to answer for here. I’m now old enough to have some kind of medium-long term perspective on this and it has definitely got worse over the past 30 or 40 years.
                  Secondly there is a particular lack of knowledge about the details of Scotland and Scottish life amongst large numbers of English people. We, Scots, may assume that people down south know as much about us as we do about them but why should they? We are a much smaller country and society than England. A much lower percentage of the English population have dealings with Scots and Scotland than the percentage of Scots who deal with England or the English. The general ignorance of many English journos and politicians is another matter. We would expect them to be more clued in. After all, that’s supposed to be part of their job.
                  Lastly is the tendency for ‘No’ supporters to fight against the SNP/’Yes’ campaign that they would like to be there; not the one that actually exists. So rather than it being a mild civic nationalism only tangentially involved with ‘Blood and Soil’, identity etc it must become something really, nasty, threatening etc. Pulling families apart and encouraging violent activities etc. So Salmond is an evil genius, tub of lard, vicious anti-English bigot etc (Take your pick.). The SNP/’Yes’ supporters are persecuting that nice Mr. Bowe or frightening multi-millionaire businessmen in charge of multi-billion turnover companies. Ms Hardman gets rather close to this in suggesting that Salmond’s rather good humoured, somewhat anodyne speech, in Carlisle, was really a wee bit sinister.

                • terregles2

                  I agree especially about what some English people know about Scotland. In my previous job we had an English member of staff from SE England who was sent to work for a few weeks in our Glasgow office.
                  He was genuinely apprehensive really nervous about visiting Scotland especially Glasgow. He had heard so much rubbish about people hating the English and all the other negative rubbish that seems to pass as fact in some areas.
                  When he came he was most surprised to meet so many other English people and other nationalities working here. He was really surprised that in less than a one hour drive from Glasgow he could be standing on the shores of the beautiful Loch Lomond. Also he could be in Edinburgh within the hour by train. He loves visiting here now and can laugh at how he used to think. As you say though there are few opportunities for the majority of people in England to find out very much about Scotland.

              • Wessex Man

                I’ve pointed out to you and Jambo25 enough times that although there were only 52 Scottish MPs there were and it is a matter of public record twenty Scottish Cabinet Ministers in the Cabinet 1997-2001 and all of them had signed the Scottish Claim of Right.

                • terregles2

                  That is an entirely different point. I am saying that some people insist that if Scotland had been independent in 1997 there would not have been a Labour government in Westminster.
                  The fact is that if Scotland had been independent in 1997 Tony Blair would still have had a landslide victory and a majority of over 100 seats in the Westminster parliament.

            • Jambo25

              Then give hard examples of that Anglophobia that Salmond spouts. An example of his “snide comments about English and Scottish history” would do for a start.

          • Inverted Meniscus

            Lord Snooty was designed to represent the epitome of privileged ‘Englishness’ and Salmond clearly meant this reference as a veiled ant-English remark. To argue otherwise is disingenuous and dishonest. It is equally illogical and absurd to suggest that because the remark is 4 years old, it is no longer of any consequence or, in effect, didn’t happen.

            • MichtyMe

              Jings, crivvens, help ma boab, cannae believe I’m reading this.

              • Inverted Meniscus

                Perhaps you could enlighten us all by confirming the statute of limitations on speeches made by Alex Salmond. Clearly, something he said 4 years ago no longer exists so it is presumably 4 years or less but please let us all have an actual figure so that we are all clear on when he can be safely ignored.

            • terregles2

              Have you read some of the outrageous insults that the MSM have thrown at Alex Salmond.

              • Inverted Meniscus

                You seem to be suggesting that any criticism of his views should be classified as an “outrageous insult”.

                • terregles2

                  Far from it. We expect politicians to take flack. I just thought that calling a democratically elected First Minister a dictator as some MSM did was rather OTT.

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  I cannot comment being unaware of the specific circumstances. Personally, I find Mr Salmond superficial, devious and disingenuous. The suggestion that the UK should enter a currency union with an independent Scotland or face Scotland repudiating its per capita share of the existing National debt. Such a union is manifestly not in the best interests of UK taxpayers, who would not get to vote on the matter. Similarly, his refusal to address the serious issues of transition costs leads me to believe he is happy to promise all the positives of independence whilst failing to address the costs. I have no objection to Scots exercising their democratic rights and wish them only good fortune but do not want to pick up any of the costs attaching thereto. That does not seem unreasonable and I am entitled to my opinion of Salmond even if it is negative.

                • terregles2

                  Of course you are entitled to your opinion and like every other opinion it should be given respect.
                  I think though that it is important to remember that the YES voters come from a wide range of political parties and a wide range of differing political aspirations. The negotiations on independence will be done by cross party teams from both Scotland and England. Until the negotiations are underway there is little point in speculating what the results will be. I am confident that both countries are more than capable of arriving at agreement that will be both fair and honest for Scotland and England. Of course there will be costs which must be equally shared but the result will be something that is priceless. It will be greater democracy for both Scotland and England. This referendum is not about any one politician. it is about opening up democracy in the UK and giving both people living in Scotland and EWNI a stronger voice in how they are governed.

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  I have no objection to Scotland leaving the UK and wish you all well. I am equally confident that a whole range of residents of all nationalities and political persuasions favour independence. That said it is utterly absurd to suggest that taxpayers from England, Wales and Northern Ireland should shoulder any of the costs let alone equally. UK resident taxpayers did not instigate any of this change and we will not get to vote one way or another and yet you seem to think it is equitable for us to pay for separation and that is patently absurd. These will not be costs of our making but incurred solely and totally at the behest of a majority of Scottish residents. Should you choose to buy a new car you would not, I suspect, knock on your neighbour’s door and ask him or her for a contribution even if you had discussed with them your plans to buy the car beforehand. Oh and for the record, the people of Wales and Northern Ireland will be party to the negotiations, if any, as well.

                • terregles2

                  I appreciate what you say but you should not forget that Scotland and England have shared assets. People living in Scotland have been paying income tax some of us higher rate tax for a very long time.
                  We send all our tax to Westminster along with all the revenue from all oil, gas whisky and our other exports. Westminster then sends us back a proportion of our money to run the devolved government. Scottish tax payers though still continue to pay our share into the non devolved departments.
                  If two people have been living together and sharing their savings and sharing the mortgage and one of the partners decides to leave they do not walk away without their share of the assets.
                  Scotland will have our share of the assets which will be in proportion to the size of our population and in proportion to what we have paid in taxes and money raised from our not inconsiderable natural resources.
                  We will also take our share of the debt in proportion to the size of our population.
                  I think most people would agree we would not be expected to take a share of the debt without taking a share of the assets.
                  I am sure that a fair and honest agreement for both countries will be agreed.

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  The argument is not about the division of assets and liabilities which would probably be based on a per capita division of both. The costs of transition, incurred entirely at the behest and choice of The Scottish electorate can only, in equity, be for the account of the Scottish electorate/taxpayers. The remainder of the UK will not have incurred these costs and thus must not pick up the bill. My analogy to you purchasing a new car remains apposite.

                • terregles2

                  I am sure that the EWNI team who will be negotiating will be very aware of the points that you have raised and include those costs when discussing terms. I have great confidence in all the UK countries. I think we will do well and reach a satisfactory deal for all concerned.

                • Andy

                  We don’t. I assume all Scottish MPs will be withdrawn from Westminster after a Yes vote in September and I assume Parliament will be dissolved and new elections called. After all Scottish MPs and Peers can have no say on rUK negotiating position.

                • terregles2

                  All Scottish peers should be told to go leave immediately. Parliament should be dissolved and new elections take place in EWNI but that is something that only the Westminster parliament can decide to do. It is entirely up to them.

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  I do not share your rather optimistic outlook. I see only bitterness and rancour following separation because Scotland will, very likely, not get the deal,it is hoping for and the UK will become increasingly resentful of the cost and inconvenience imposed upon its people. By all means vote for independence but do not kid yourself that all will be sweetness and light thereafter.

                • terregles2

                  I don’t think life can ever be all sweetness and light. Scotland and EWNI will all face problems and challenges in the future that is just life. We would however still face problems and challenges if we remain in the union. world events dictate the challenges. The only difference will be both countries will deal with those challenges in the way they think best. I think more resentment is caused when people feel that their democratic voice goes unheard.
                  I still remain optimistic about the future for all the UK nations.

                • Bob Waugh

                  How reasonable of you having “no objection to Scotland leaving the UK”. But maybe this sort of discussion could be elevated a bit if unionists would stop to actually think about that kind of statement.
                  the UK is a union of “Great Britain” with N.Ireland (1922). GB itself was created by an earlier union, that of 1707. Dissolve that Union, and the other one is in question; it will be necessary to create a new UK.
                  That could be a very positive process but not if it conducted in the sort of chip-on-shoulder, know-nothing tone characterising most unionist contributions here.

                • PROF EVIL

                  You will be picking up costs. When Scotland leaves a large part of your economy will leave with it. Why do you think that the unionist Brit-Nats are desperate to hold onto Scotland? it’s not because of the good of their hearts. The Union is the last line in the sand. There will be no longer any Great Britain. Put your petty squabbles aside and try and see a wider picture.

                • Inverted Meniscus

                  There seems to be a fundamental failure of understanding on your part. Of course the UK economy will shrink by around 9% if Scotland leaves. My point concerns costs not revenues. Specifically, there will be transition costs incurred in say splitting up the DVLA, air traffic control, Revenue and customs etc etc etc. none of these costs will have been incurred at the instigation of the taxpayers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland and thus it seems inequitable that we should have to pick up costs incurred following a vote by Scottish residents. None of these costs will be of our making, we will not be exercising our votes etc, and so why should any of them fall to our account. By all means vote for independence but do not expect the rest of us to pick up the costs.

            • Jambo25

              My, what clairvoyant powers you have o mighty one. If ‘Lord Snooty’ is anti-English in your view then perhaps you can spot the anti-semitism in me when I say that “baked beans are orange red in colour and are nice with bacon”.

              • Inverted Meniscus

                You seem to be part of what Iain Martin refers to as the SNP rapid rebuttal squad or somesuch and thus impervious to contrary opinions so what would be the point. Not to suggest of course that your childish and sarcastic rant constitutes a point.

                • Jambo25

                  Nah. I’m just more intelligent than you. It doesn’t make me very special. Just one of a very large number of people.

      • Doggie Roussel

        The graffiti on the wall of Glasgow Central railway station: F$*k the English… is that a good enough example ?

        • MichtyMe

          Gosh, and Salmond did that. Cameron, a graffiti artiste on the walls of England, I suppose.

        • Kitty MLB

          Its all about appeasing the lowest common denominator.
          I assume the more affluent and reasonable from such places
          as Edinburgh do not behave the same.
          Just shrieking, screeching, bluff and bluster that lies at the
          very heart of Scottish Politics.

        • terregles2

          Where is it on the station.? I am in that station often and have never seen it. Tell me where you saw it and I will complain to the station manager immediately.

          • Kitty MLB

            I can imagine you there with your mop and bucket of soapy
            water actually :)

            • Andy

              The daft cow will be there with a bucket of whitewash as per usual.

              • terregles2

                I’ll need to find it first Andy. Doggie is not giving us any location yet.

            • terregles2

              Kitty I commute between Glasgow and Edinburgh and when I pass through Central if I was wearing my Louboutin flats I would be happy to take a mop and soapy water to any grafitti that I might see. But we girls know what it’s like when we are walking on the big heels… a tad too risky to do manoeuvres with a mop and pail..
              I would however ask a member of staff to have it removed if it were there. I’ll let you know if anyone manages to find it.

              • Kitty MLB

                Best to leave it whilst travelling to work. I unfortunately living
                in the country spend most of my time in Hunter Wellington Boots and have never owned a pair of ‘ Louboutin Flats’
                but may I say if they were flats then their big heels should
                not bother you. Oh send my regards to beautiful Edinburgh
                I first met lovely Hamish in that city..memories and all that !!

                • terregles2

                  Well nothing wrong with Hunter wellington boots and nothing wrong with living in the country. Good for the soul. Many like myself take to the hills at every opportunity in our leisure hours.
                  Big heels don’t bother me but I still don’t want to have to deal with a mop and bucket at the same time.
                  If I ever locate the grafitti I will certainly make sure it is removed. Doggie though is being very reticent about the location.

        • terregles2

          Where is the grafitti. I phoned the station manager and he did not know that there was any graffiti on any wall. He is most concerned., If you can let him know where it is it will be immediately removed.

        • you_kid

          Well, at least we are asserted that Farage is not doing that.

        • PROF EVIL

          Wow, that must be the SNP then that did that eh Sherlock!

        • allymax bruce

          Does it have your phone number underneath it, Doggie?

      • Reconstruct

        You are extraordinarily naive if you think the hate that the SNP has sown against the English will confine itself to targets south of the border after the referendum (no matter what the result). The hunt for ‘traitors’ will be enthusiastic, vituperative and no doubt endless. Dark days ahead.

        • terregles2

          Considering a large amount of English people who live in Scotland are SNP members I don’t know where any hatred is supposed to exist.
          People are voting against English government not against English people. YES voters do not hate Englsih people. You constantly saying that they do will never make it so.

        • Jambo25

          How prescient. My masters at Cybernat Central have already tasked me to set up a tartan SS and prepare ‘camps’ . I’ve got my eyes on the island of Inchcolm for the first and the so and so at number 14, down the street, is going to be the first shipped out there. I heard him cheering on England, at Rugby, once.

        • PROF EVIL

          Of course mein englishman. The internment camps are being built as I write this. Ve plan to annex Wales (at least a bit of Swansea and the good bit of Cardiff – but we’re leaving Birmingham untouched).

      • LeoLeo

        If my child goes to university in Scotland he will pay fees, while students from any other country in Europe will receive free tuition. A policy that Mr Salmond put in place while continuing to accept annual subsidy payments from UK taxpayers.

        • MichtyMe

          The Westminster govt decided that the English should pay fees and presumably Mr Salmond, in an act of friendly cooperation, declined to pay the fees of the English at Scots universities rather than frustrate the will of Westminster that the English pay fees, what’s wrong with that.

          • Reconstruct

            It will be a rich reward for this piece of vile anti-English discrimination that, if Scotland votes yes, it will find its students having to pay the full ‘international student’ fees in English universities. I wonder if they’ll complain?

            • MichtyMe

              The Scots Govt pays for Scots residents, the Scots Govt not pay the fee of English residents, the Westminster Govt does not pay for English residents, the Westminster Govt does not pay for Scots in England. So why do you think it is reasonable for the Scots Government to pay for English residents?

              • chui1996

                The Scots government pays for nothing it has no money. Its the taxpayers who pay for everything.

            • terregles2

              England is the only EU country to charge students high fees. Most EU countries have either no tuition fees of very low ones. You should put pressure on Westminster to stop squandering tax payers money on renewing Trident,HS2, House of Lords, Bankers, Afghanistan,Iraq etc.
              They should spend the money on education instead. If they did it would make them like most other EU countries. They spend the money on the wrong things.

            • PROF EVIL

              You won’t find many of our students studying in England then will you!!

        • melanie mckellar

          LeoLeo..just to put the record straight. It was Westminster that chose to charge tuition fees in English Universities. Education I’d devolved in Wales, N.I. and Scotland and as such each has the right to spend that budget as they see fit. In Scotland we believe that education should be free and not just for those who can afford it as a result the Scottish Parliament chose to use their education budget to pay tuition fees. Wales and N.I. have their own policies.
          Scottish students studying in any of the home Nations have to pay the fees in that country. E.U. Law states that students from E.U. Countries have to have the same as students from the home country so E.U. Students in Scotland get free tuition and E.U. Students in England have to pay £9000. However because the UK is member state and their fees are set at £9000 and Scotland receives a budget from said UK it means that the E.U. Law doesn’t apply to RUK students in Scotland.
          So in reality LeoLeo your complaint should be directed at Westminster and you should be applauding the Scottish Parliament for their stance not just in Education but also in things like free prescriptions, bus passes and free personal care for the elderly.
          It is not perfect but it is the best Scotland can do with the restricted powers available….for now at least!

    • The_Missing_Think

      Your own seething blind hatred of Salmond is palpable.

      At least he is honest, open and true, whilst you are a confused, tangled web of ‘bitter together’ contradictions.

      So please spew it out real good, for all your worth… drive that Yes vote higher.

      • Andy

        I think Salmond is a liar and a hypocrite. And you think he is ‘honest, open and true’, which he is anything but. Take his pronouncements on a Currency Union. He is busy telling us what will be, arrogantly trying to dictate to everyone what will happen – he is a bully. Those who disagree with him, like the three main Westminster parties are not to be believed according to him, no one can tell the truth except him. On what evidence can he say that ? Just because your glorious Saint tub of lard Salmond says today is Monday does not make it so, save to fools like you.

        • Kitty MLB

          On the other thread today in relation to this subject, I have mentioned 8 significant questions that the Scottish people
          have for Salmond ( will not bore others by repeating, and its long). A lot of Scottish people are suspicious of independence,
          and rather sick of Salmonds bluff and bluster- the anti- English insults are getting a little tedious now as well . This is not about
          the utopian dream of his empire but the future of Scotland.
          And, and here in England as well.

          • Wessex Man

            Yes but I still wish the Yes Campaign well in September Kitty!

            • Kitty MLB

              Yes indeed we all do.

              • The_Missing_Think

                Then why are you two, and all the others, spitting such vile toxic venom, at the man that made it possible?

                Spill over from Operation Fear perhaps, my frit, leg thumping English lion-bunnies?

        • The_Missing_Think

          Not true, Salmond has simply pointed out that the British £ was forged and defended with Scottish efforts and sacrifices as well, so the Scottish have earnt the dual right of ownership.

          But if your kind insist on denying that right… fine… you can’t have it both ways… have all the debt as well. That’ll be a combined rUK decision, not his.

          And why do you think a senior cabinet minister ‘accidentally’ let slip that a currency union was on the table, post Yes vote… because the debt forces it to be perhaps?

          More maths, how can the three mighty élites, be bullied by just one ‘tub of lard’?

          Look, don’t worry, in a year from now, you’ll be wondering what you were so frit about… you know he’s not towing it into the middle of the Atlantic or building another wall don’t you?

          • Andy

            Sterling is the ancient currency of the Kingdom of England. At Union in 1707 the Scottish currency was exchanged for Sterling at a rate of 12:1, reflecting the fact that Scotland was bankrupt and the currency all but worthless. By what dint of Scottish Imperialism do you deem to say that you ‘have earnt the dual right of ownership’ to something that was never yours ? The arrogance of you Nats is amazing.

            Oh and the reason there should not be a currency union is shown across the channel. Look at Greece etc. A currency union can only work with Fiscal Union, and the Tartan Fascists are never going to agree to surrender the sovereignty necessary for that to work. And in any case Salmond has injected so much poison into the relationship I would not trust a Scottish Government one inch.

            • The_Missing_Think

              So when the Scottish invetor Yogi Baird singlehandely created the TV, it didn’t help the British £ or economy at all?

              It’s game-changer realities like this, since 1707, that give them their part ownership
              rights.

              That’s just one example of many, that I think as an Englishman in England, should give
              the Scottish people the option of forming a currency union with rUK, IF they want it.

              Are you happy to be paying off all Scottish debt, or do you think the Scottish should pay
              it off as well? I think they should.

              Then you have to share both ways, as that’s one of the iron rules of hardball.

              There is no numerical comparison to be made between the Greek and Scottish economies.

              “By international standards Scotland is a wealthy and productive country. There is no doubt that Scotland has the potential to be a successful independent nation.”

              “The paper concluded that Scotland had “more than enough resources” if it had the powers of independence.”

              http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22607827

              • Andy

                ‘That’s just one example of many, that I think as an Englishman in England, should give the Scottish people the option of forming a currency union with rUK, IF they want it.’

                Again, like so many Cyber Nat Fascists you miss the main point. First, it is not for you to dictate if there will be a Currency Union – it is by agreement. We don’t agree. All three Westminster Parties have said they would not form one. So that’s that. Secondly the Tartan Fascists wont surrender the necessary sovereignty over Fiscal affairs to make such a union work. You would be the first to moan that economic policy was being ‘dictated by London’ – you can write the script, so we are back to ‘we hate the English and England’ Scottish politics.

                The lying tub of Lard Salmond said he was joining the Euro – he had no time for Sterling describing it as a rubbish currency (oldest one in the world) – so why is he now not rushing to join the Euro ??

          • Wessex Man

            So why did he say the the pound Sterling was a Millstone around Scotland’s neck?

        • terregles2

          You think Salmond is a liar and a hypocrite and a bully but then you also called me a daft cow.
          Don’t think Salmond has ever called any woman that.
          You then go on to call him Saint tub of lard. Are you sure that political exchange is quite your forte. You sound rather overwrought. Not good for your blood pressure.

          • Andy

            You are a daft cow. You have come on here before with your anti-English bigotry – we have argued before. You’re just another of these Nat-Cyber Fascists who infest the net whenever there is mention of Scotland.

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here