Saturday 9 November 2013

10 Reasons why Scotland is better being part of the UK says USDAW

The Union of Shop Distributive and Allied Workers has come out for NO. Here, in light face, are their reasons for doing so. My responses are in bold.

  1. Nationalists argue that an independent Scotland will continue to use the sterling as its currency. This means Scotland will be part of an economic Union with the rest of the UK over which it no longer has economic or political influence. Scotland will find itself in the same position as Greece, Portugal and Ireland, only instead of going cap in hand to Europe for help Scotland will be left to go cap in hand to the rest of the UK – the very same countries that an independent Scotland will have severed all social, political and cultural ties with.
Nonsense on so many levels. Sterling is Scotland’s currency as well as that on the rest of the UK; we have every right to use it. Scotland will not find itself in the same position as Greece, Portugal and Iceland.  Why would you think that it would? Scotland will not need to go cap in hand to anyone. It will be the third richest country per capita in the EU. And Scotland will not have severed social ties or cultural ties with the rest of the UK. It will have severed most political ties, but we will continue to be in many international organisations including the EU, Nato and the UN together with the rest of the UK.

  1. An independent Scotland would need to reapply to join the European Union. There is uncertainty that Scotland's re-entry would be granted quickly, if at all, whilst there is absolute certainty, that an independent Scotland would be required to join the Euro as a condition of membership. (Source:  Jose Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission, 12 September 2012)
Barroso didn’t really say that at all, and many countries have already said that they look forward to welcoming Scotland if that is the Scot’s people’s will. The EU is an expansionist organisation. It started with 6 nations and it has grown and grown.  Greenland, on getting self rule, wanted to leave the EU. It was a long and drawn out process.  Scotland would not be required to join the Euro. Sweden hasn't; Croatia hasn’t. Why would Scotland? The Uk government could get a definitive answer on Scotland's future relationship with the EU, but for some reason refuses to do so, preferring doom and gloom instead. Mot EU expert agree that there is no reason when Scotland wouldn't be accepted almost immediately and certainly within the 18 months that the government has specified.

  1. Two-thirds of Scottish exports are to England, Wales and Northern Ireland. (Source: Scottish Government)
So? We import and export to countries all over the world and particularly in the EU. rUK will probably be in the EU, Scotland will be in the EU. What’s the problem?

  1. One in every five workers in Scotland is employed by English, Welsh and Northern Irish firms. (Source: HM Treasury)
There’s an awful lot of them employed by American, French, German, Chinese, Japanese companies. They still get paid. Where's your problem. You are beginning to sound like the BNP.

  1. 31,000 Scottish Civil Servants work for UK wide Government departments. Like those based in Glasgow and responsible for the operation of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme for the whole of the UK. (Source:  HMG Departmental Employment Statistics)
So, do you not think that we will require having a criminal injuries compensation scheme here, and there are civil service jobs in England and Wales that we will need to fill. It should be a big boost to employment.

  1. The future of Scottish Banks was secured with a £470 billion bailout from taxpayers across the UK. (Source: Scottish Parliament Information Centre and National Audit Office)
For god’s sake. This is pathetic.Scottish and English and UK banks were also bailed out by the American government and many others because a country cannot possibly be responsible for what its banks do when they are being regulated by a foreign government’s regulators. The UK government regulators allowed the British banks (and they are international even if they have Scotland in their name. RBS is Nat West and HBOS stands for HALIFAX Bank of Scotland) to run riot lending to people who could never pay it back, bundling up securities and a million other things that even THEY didn't understand. That's why they had to fork out. If the FSA had done its job there would have been a lot less debt. Stop the lies about it all being down to Britain. If Britain had had to bail these people out, then it would have sunk without a trace.

  1. 800,000 Scots live and work in England and Wales without the need for papers or passports. (Source:   General Registrar Office for Scotland)
Are you remembering that NI is a part of the UK? I used to work in France; my friend Stanislav used to work in Bulgaria, because he is Bulgarian; my friend Daní used to work in Hungary, because he is Hungarian; my friend Uta used to work in Germany, because she is German. Try to pull yourself into the 21st century.  How many Irish people work in Ulster and the opposite. My friends in Ulster go shopping in Eire because some things are cheaper. The world has changed. Borders aren't a big deal. Island mentalities!

  1. Being part of the UK ensures a seat at the UN's top table alongside Russia, China and America. (The UK is a permanent member of the UN Security Council.)
Wow. And what exactly does that do for us? Does it feed the poor? No. Does it fix the potholes? No. What it does is means that when the USA says jump, the UK jumps, because if the USA decided tomorrow that we were no bloody use to them, we, and France would be removed. France and the UK are two small powers which used to have empires and now have debts and deprivation. We would be far better out of the PMUNSC.

  1. The pensions of 1 million Scots are guaranteed by the UK welfare system. (Source:  DWP)
No it’s not. The pension money, which we have paid, has been squandered on wars and nuclear weapons of mass destruction. There isn't a penny piece. Current taxes have to pay for pensions, which is why the Uk government is putting the pension age up and up.  Never mind that people are often unemployable after 60. They will soon have to work, or beg for social security from Iain Duncan Smith. Scotland has a far better chance of being able to pay these pensions. Just as it has a far greater chance of being able to keep the lights on. Where did you get this guff?

  1. Scottish Taxpayers contribute £53 billion to the Treasury's Tax Bill annually. Scotland receives £63 billion of the UK's overall spending. (Source:  Scottish Government spending figures, GERS)
Haven’t a clue where you got that from, but the truth is that Scotland has been subsidising the rest of the Uk for years. Secondly, the Barnett formula which gives back Scotland a slightly larger share of what it pays in  will almost certainly be scrapped. Labour wants to get rid of it, and if the threat of independence goes, then, just like in 1979, we will start to feel the wrath of the London elite.  The Barnett formula will go, and our money will be reduced. We will be obliged to sell of our health service to the highest bidders as the English are doing; we will have to stop looking after our elderly, we will lose our cherished free education, a monumental blunder, and we will be obliged to sell off our water, so that people can make a profit out of what falls from the skies. In short we will have to accept that we will live in a right wing non democratic country with an hereditary monarch, a house of unelected aristocrats, and a parliament consisting of right wingers chosen largely by the people of the South East of England, where nearly half the population lives.  Everything that can be, will be privatised and we all know how well that works for ordinary people, don’t we.  Still the Chinese will build us a nuclear power station, so maybe we won't freeze to death.

That a trades union could support this kind of thing is beyond all belief. I wonder if they asked their members to vote on this?


  1. Most unions have become corrupted as with their political allies the Labour party feeding on a fear indoctrinated population.

    Helen Eadie MSP has died today of cancer after 2 weeks of being diagnosed with the disease a shock and surprise to all no matter party affiliation, commiserations.

    1. The arguments were nonsense.

      I'm sorry to hear about Helen Eadie. By all accounts she was a good MSP and will be missed by her constituents and parliament in general, across the parties. Some very nice tributes paid to her.

      It was very quick after the diagnosis, but that is almost surely the best way.

    2. ch

      anti trade union why am i not surprised

    3. Niko trade unions like the Labour party have succumbed into individual wealth grabbers at the expense of those below.

      Reading through the lines

      I grew up mired in politics. I joined the Labour Party at 17, and stayed a member until my mid-twenties. I came to the party, and to the trade union movement, early in my life because I believed that in unity there is strength, and I knew that we had a government which didn’t care about ordinary working people. I remember hearing, even as I was growing up, that unemployment was a “price worth paying”, I remember wee flashes of news stories from when I was about nine or ten, of miners fighting with police officers.

  2. Excellent post Tris. I'm disappointed and horrified that any TU can come out in favour of the neo-liberal hellhole that is the UK and uses such thoroughly debunked nonsense as its "reasoning".

    On Helen Eadie, I'll be honest don't know much about her. Condolences to friends and family. There will be a by-election, which will be much more informative than the neighbouring one (after Walker) in feeling the nation's pulse. Is Labour really making inroads and recovering from 2011?

    1. Safe Labour seat. Popular and good MSP. Tragic death.

      It's a sad way to have to find out though.

      I can't say I always agreed with her, but she seems to have been a decent woman. Labour can ill afford to lose people of her quality.

  3. yep USDAW have given a honest factual compelling reason
    to treat any YES propaganda with deep scepticism.

    1. Well honest as in a pack of lies, yeah Niko

      And was this view balloted or was it just decided by folk with cushie jobs at the top of the union...?

    2. Yes as honest as Iraq being able to deploy WMD on UK in 45 mins or the Labour party being a party of the poor , jokers one and all.

    3. Yes... or Dr Kelly committing suicide....

      They should write books... fairy stories.

    4. East Glasgow Has A Life Expectancy Lower Than Some War Zones

      Vote for the working mans party as they have done for decades and reduce your life expectancy by 25% so that their elected representatives can live the life of Riley on those red benches.

    5. Yes. I read you are more likely to live longer in Palestine with bombs going off, water being rationed by your enemy and a shortage of food and medical supplies.

  4. Thing is Tris, there are very few Scottish trade unions left. Apart from the Scottish Teaching Unions I don't really know of any other Unions whose membership is exclusively based in Scotland.

    Expecting the Scottish based bits of the British GMB or the British USDAW to come out for independence is like expecting the Scottish based bit of British Labour to come out for independence.

    1. The Scottish Firemen's Union and the Prison Offiicer's union?

      Both pro independence.

    2. Yeah, that's true Doug. English based unions are hardly going to want independence for Scotland leaving them with London. I must admit, I hadn't thought about the fact that so many of them are run from London and have the interests of English workers (maybe) at heart.

      BTP... The Scottish unions are much more likely to be for independence as they can see better conditions ... Post Office workers in Scotland too I think?

    3. True, but neither is affiliated to the Labour party.

    4. Tris, Inner Bearsden Snotty Urchin has a point about the SFU and the POA but as I said in my previous comment, neither are affiliated to the Labour Party.

      I don't think it's a case of the GMB or USDAW or others putting the interests of English workers over Scottish workers but more a case of British labour organisations who are closely linked with the British Labour Party simply following the Labour line.

      I've always wondered why Labour in Scotland are so hostile to independence and so slavishly devoted to the UK when their avowed goals of a free and fair society can be achieved just as easily, perhaps even more easily, in an independent Scotland but Labour in Scotland take their party line from their British headquarters and owe their advancement and position to the patronage and structures of the British party.

      What we hear from the GMB and from USDAW is just the same. The British management line parroted by Scottish managers.

    5. Yes, fair comment Doug.

      But in fairness, I wouldn't criticise the UK wide unions for putting the interests of English workers first. It makes sense to care for the biggest possible number of your members... and they are English.

      Neither do I blame the BBC for a news diet that is largely English. there are 50 million English people in the UK, and 5 million Scots.

      That is, I guess the whole point of wanting independence, so that you aren't a little thought of adjunct somewhere in the north.

  5. I am just at the first "reason" which can be distilled into a simple argument.
    Scotland will become just like Greece and have to ask Mother England to help us out.

    Too wee, too stupid and consigned to be for evermore too poor.

    1. Maybe we should just listen to them. After all, we never invented anything, never made anything, never achieved anything, and don;t have any decent universities...

      We would be better to learn fromt eh wisdon of the likes of Cameron and Osborne, IDS and Hunt. And that nice Mr Mitchell too.

      Maybe after we absorb all they can teach us about running things we might manage a stab at it ourselves.

      What is it about these trades unionists that they would rather have David Cameron than a Scot.

  6. Good lord in earth did the republic of Ireland cope when it decided to leave the Union, Keep sterling, the monarchy and stay in the commonwealth? By 1935 it would choose to abolish the monarchy in Ireland and become a true republic. But it still kept Sterling. By 1949 it would leave the commonwealth, but it still kept sterling. It eventually left sterling in 1971. But then so did many other nations as sterling was no longer seen as a safe place, largely because of the US abandoning the Bretton woods agreement.

    The problem with the above argument is simply ignorance. Ignorance of history, of how we got here. Ignorance of the contributions made to the UK by Scotland, that continues to punch above its weight. It also suffers from logical fallacies.

    1: Scotland as subsidy junkie. This little gem appeared around 1987 as the conservative party tried to make sense of Scotland's increasing hostility to them & their politics. Scotland was no more dependent of state funding of industry than any other industrial area of the UK at the time. When the tories destroyed it, they didn't really think about the consequences, but them community was difficult a concept to grasp. Far more easier to portray it as whinging scots moaning about benefits.

    2. The banking crisis. This is simple projection. here they take a crisis and project it onto "Independent Scotland" that does not yet exist at the moment and assume it would have made all the same mistakes as the UK and then assume it would not have been able to bail out one bank. Its fallacious as here we see them sell a failure of the system; Quantitive easing, as a benefit of the Union, and then go one step further and place the entire amount of QE onto the Scottish banking system. Apparently no other bank in the UK needed bailing out? Frankly better regulatory oversight would have been far superior - ask Norway.

    1. 3. 2/3rds of exports are to the rest of the rest of the UK. the implication here is that for some reason, never given. Is that the rUK would cease trading with us. This is not how economies work, its not how business works. This is fear mongering pure and simple.

      4. The civil service - well of course there would still need to be a civil service in an indy Scotland. Some of those are part of the Scottish executive, some like the Registers of Scotland (land and propery register) operate as trading funds, taking no money from the block grant. This is a non argument and is once more simple fear mongering.

      4. Pensions. Sorry its not protected by the UK, its goes into a big pot and its been raided once too many times. The policy now it seems is to make people work until they die, so they don't have to pay it out. Contributions were increased but the actual payouts were decreased. Pay more for less. Its a tax on being alive, in the earnest hope you'll be dead before you can ask for any of it back.

      5. The top seat at the table argument. The UK is old mutton trying to pass itself off as spring lamb. Its pathetic and embarrassing, we do need to grow up, act our age.

      6. the whole immigration angle. that's the whole UK is mighty scared of foreigners argument. that must be why it sold its nuclear power industry to EDF, which is 85% owned by the French state.

      These are old arguments that they have been repeating for the last 2 years. It portrays a Scotland that is not really part of Britain. It is merely a recipient of UK largesse. We all live off the fruit of other peoples labours. We contribute nothing to the UK, because we are a nothing people. Extinguished under the treaty of Union, bereft of culture, history, language, indentity. We cannot run businesses, banks or schools. How could a nothing people ever be expected to run their own affairs.

      If this was true...what does this say about the Union? What is so great about it, that it reduced Scotland to such a state of dependency? Why do unionists feel there is nothing to be ashamed of as they tell everyone they're "proud scots...but" But the 500lb gorilla in the room is what does England get out it?

      they have just seen 3000 jobs sacrificed in Plymouth so s to issue a direct threat to Scotland. Stay in the UK and you get to keep your jobs, leave and the jobs go back to England. What incentive is there, for any Englishman to want Scotland to stay.

      In a single stroke, they have set one group of people in the union against another. Way to go UK.

    2. Superb, James,

      The myth that Scotland would have been obliged to find hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out RBS is one that has been debunked by every economist. But NO continue to pedal it because they believe that we are too stupid to see how illogical it is.

      It was the regulators' responsibility to ensure that banks were behaving prudently. As you say, it is possible that outwith the City of London, a law unto itself and seemingly above UK legislation, the Scottish banks would have been regulated by a more responsible body, who spent a little less time supping claret and a little more looking into banking practices.

      Currency unions work perfectly well as long as a buit of common sense is applied. The UK talks big now about how England would force its hand, but, in reality, when it comes about it would be to their detriment to be heavy handed with Scotland. A separate Scottish currency would undoubtedly hurt them badly.

      Ireland and the UK worked nicely as do the other small countries which share the pound. In Africa, the CFA which used to be valued with the French Franc has worked well for France's ex colonies. And many countries have used, and some still do use, the American dollar as their de facto currency, outwith domestic purchases.

      But you put it all far more eloquently that that... :)

    3. James

      In a single stroke, they have set one group of people in the union against another. Way to go UK.

      Umm the old racist argument only you try not wery well to
      make it more palatable under ' group of people '
      when really its the poor worker being exploited by the politicians and the shipyard owners.

      The truth is the workers of both the English and Scottish shipyards have far more in common than the snp would dare to admit.

      you and the snp are just trying foment racist sterotypes in the hope of causing ill feeling between the English and the Scots.
      Goes along wid the snp/nats mantra the English dont like us and would like to see the back of us.


      ' eloquentl '

      Yep they all said Goebbels was as well

    4. LOL I suppose he was. Although he's not really my style. But then neither was Churchill.

      I can't remember one time when the SNP has tried to set one group of people against another.

      All the Yes said are trying to do is get cotland run by the people who live here, and you'll note that is people who live here regardless of where they came from, Blackpool or Bratislava, Bengal or Brazil.

      Let me ask you.

      Do prefer the Scottish model where water is owned by the government, or the English one where private companies own it?

      Do you prefer the Scottish model of NHS, or the English one which is selling off bits to private companies to operate at a profit?

      Do you like Scottish schools run by the council, or the English model where they are run by anyone who wants to run them, with trained or not trained teachers, religious fanatics, big business selling off the playing fields for housing development?

      Do you prefer the dental service in Scotland where you can easily get NHS treatment, or the one in England where it hardly exists?

      Do you like to pay massive amounts of tax to help build a railway that won't come anywhere near your country never mind your town?

      Are you happy that you ahd to pay for the building of a super sewer in London?

      Do you feel that you will get much of a return on your tax money for the massive Cross Rail project that you are helping to build in London?

      Do you like Tory government?

    5. tris Id prefer a European model which put the citisens first
      your dream of a socialist light Scotland is a mirage.
      Grangemouth was just a small example of how tiny wee
      Scotland would be crushed by big multi national corporations
      with no way of withstanding them.

      Id like massive amounts of tax payers money go to were it would help the most amount of people who need it. And not
      just to those who are considered representative of a race.

      As for schools the fact this conservative cabal aided by the libdem quislings are handing them out as rewards/bribes to there supporters is truly outstandingly shocking.

      Lloyd George used to hand out peerages for cash but at least it didn't hurt the children . Unlike the bung a school to yer mates Cameron is doing just wonder why nobody informs the polis.

      Alex liked Thatcher economics he said i never did its not getting rid of Tory government which will transform our future.
      getting rid of Thatcherite economics will.

    6. Well the model that The Jimmy Reid foundation came up with is based on the nordic model. I just don't see why that wouldn't work for us.

      There may be higher taxes in Scandinavia, but you don;t hear of many starving or being homeless. As I understand it, no one has died of the cold in the Northern countries for a long time, whereas around 30,000 dies in much warmed Britain, because they just can't keep themselves warm. Charities are predicting far more this year because of bedroom taxes, and even higher electricity bills and lower rises in wages and benefits.

      You say that you would want taxes money to help people who needed it, and not a race, and of course I agree with you. I'm sure that we wouldn't be saying to Pakistanis or French people or Englishmen... you're not getting any of our taxes're foreign. Mr Cameron wants to do that in Britain though. He accuses Europeans of going to England to get healthcare (bad choice seeing as they seem to kill them off there at a great rate). He wants Europeans not to be able to claim benefits where. And apart for his PR man, and the Bank of England blokey, he doesn't want foreigners getting jobs in the UK.

      Of course, if we REALLY are international socialists we must realise that all of us are incredibly well off, compared to say the people in the Philippines and all our money should be redirected there, where they are dying in their thousands.

      I think we have to be content with sending some money and looking after whoever lives within our borders. Internationalist doesn't stop at Dover though...

      I wonder that Cameron can't count on the police now, after the debacle with the Plebman. But when something the UK government does is found to be illegal, they simply change the law retrospectively and everything is just dandy.

      I think that Salmond was misquoted on that business of Tahtcher. As he seems to have taken his policies in the exact opposite direction of all of hers, I can only assume that he's certainly not a fan of anything she did.

      I wonder though why you think Scotland would be swamped by international companies, and yet all the other small countries in Europe, most of which are better off than we are, are not swamped? Do you think there is something lacking in Scots which is there in Luxemburgers or Danes or Finns or Icelanders or Irish?

    7. BTW, as far as I can make out (well from listening to Tony Benn) peerages have always been a source of income to whoever had them in his/her gift. First it was the King, then the prime minister. Whether he used the money for himself or his party.

      I mean it can't be coincidence that so many donors to the Tory party recently, regardless of how disreputable they are, are now noblemen....

    8. Woah, Niko,

      that has to be the most insulting and frankly idiotic reply to a post I have seen in a while. The "old racist" argument? Do you even know what that means? because I sure as hell don't.

      The workers in Plymouth had their jobs sacrificed by Westminster so as to secure and then directly threaten jobs in Scotland. They may have had something in common once, but this my friend, puts one side against the other. You casually dismiss it by accusing me of being racist? I am decrying an act of sheer stupidity being used as leverage for a Scottish vote - and that makes me racist? Are none of you unionists capable of defending your position without resorting to such lazy and moronic smears of your opponents? But saving the best to last, you then cross the line and accuse me of being similar to a Nazi war criminal. This is the sort of casual lazy smear to dismiss an argument that drove me from being a don't know to yes supporter. If you can't defend or promote your position without the use of threats, smears and downright lies, then frankly your position is untenable.

      Tris cuts your a lot of slack, I'm not sure why. But you want to debate me, keep the snide insults to yourself in future.

  7. From "Rangers Fans for Independence":

    The GMB Union in Scotland have taken it upon themselves to take sides in the Independence referendum and have come out in support of the Unionist Labour Party and a no vote in the Scottish Referendum. They claim to have conducted a lengthy consultation process with the 60,000 Scottish GMB members but that claim has been widely rejected. In fact it is counter claimed that GMB held a few poorly attended meetings and did not hold a vote in most of those. The fact that Trade Unions support the Labour Party both politically and financially comes as no surprise to anyone as that support has been well documented over the years. What is concerning to many members throughout the Trade Union Movement is this arrogant assumption by those Trade Unions that they can offer members support and finances to the Labour Party without the need to ‘properly’ consult those members first.

    Perhaps the large Unions may have been able to get away with that arrogant assumption back in the day when the Labour Party was the only chance of workers being fairly treated by the government they elected. The Unions claimed it was necessary to provide that political and financial support en bulk in order to compete with the wealthy donors of the Conservative Party. However, these days there is very little difference between the Labour Party policies and those of the Conservative Party. Workers are not prepared to see their monthly fees or their political support diverted to a political institution that no longer shares their values or no longer represents their best interests. This is even more apparent north of the border and the GMB Union have no right whatsoever to get involved in a ‘Constitutional Referendum’ on behalf of their members when they have not given those members a proper say in the matter. Holding a few poorly attended clandestine meetings and then claiming that is evidence of wide spread consultation is not the same as a ballot of all Scottish members. This disgraceful deceit may offer the Unionists some moral boost in the run up to the referendum itself but the consequences of this blatant arrogance may yet backfire on the GMB Union and the Unionist Labour Party they are propping up.

    Chic Macgregor

    1. Its pretty sad when Labour politicians and union leaders threaten workers of their jobs if they vote yes. I suppose it could be worse

    2. Absolutely. The winners in war are the people who sell arms, and Britain is one of the biggest in the world. It's one of the few industries that the Thatcher creature didn't bulldoze. Possibly her husband had money toed up in it. Certainly her son seems to.

      When the Eton Spiv goes on tour to the middle east with businessmen, it's always to sell these non democratic regimes arms.

      We re quite happy for them to have an unstable middle east. It brings in money to our purveyors of death.

      it was the same in ireland. That miserable witch Thatcher swore she would not talk to terrorists. Of course what she means was catholic terrorists, because they were working hand in glove with the other side.

  8. Further on in the paper was a page by columnist Donald McLeod. He finishes his pro Indy piece with these words

    “What we have at the moment is not working and anyone who tells you otherwise is either lying or is a complete imbecile.
    Some one once remarked that when you’re dead you don’t know you’re dead, it’s everybody else who suffers – well it’s the same when you’re a fool.
    And Scotland has more than its fair share of them,believe me!”

    Never a truer word spoken.

  9. "and there are civil service jobs in England and Wales that we will need to fill. It should be a big boost to employment."++++++++++++++++++
    Oh, really? England will be independent so who do you think will get those jobs?
    "For god’s sake. This is pathetic. Scottish and English and UK banks were also bailed out by the American government"++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ It was the two Scottish banks that went bust. Barclays looked after itself and the Westminster Scottish Raj forced Lloyds to put money into the B of Scot and ruined it in the process.
    The biggest problem Scotland has is that England wants the divorce and Scotland is the spouse hanging on in pathetic desperation.


    1. OK. Let me make this simple for you, Anonymous.

      At present there are some UK civil service jobs in Scotland. The union says that they will all go.

      There will be a loss of jobs.

      But we will need to provide these civil service functions in Scotland, and we will also need to provide the far greater number of civil service jobs which are in London, dealing with UK including Scottish matters.

      So we will need to set up an office for external affairs (you call it a foreign office, currently in England). We will need a licensing office for vehicles (you call it DVLA currently in Wales), we will need a passport office (currently in Northern Ireland).

      By the same token, the pensions office and a few other UK functions sent to Scotland to appease us after Thatcher and her English Raj (to borrow your rather inappropriate phrase) all but closed this country down to concentrate all efforts and money on making London the centre of the known universe, will have to return to the UK… and the union is right. They wouldn't want their civil service to be dealt with by foreigners (unless of course you include the DWP’s Indian call centres…)

      Did you hear about Northern Rock, Bradford Bingley ? Did you know that the bulk of the Bank of Scotland (and the first name in the title) is HALIFAX... which to the best of my memory, is in Yorkshire... ENGLAND?

      Are you saying that the head of Lloyds a massive company owned by shareholders, just folded when that idiot Brown, who denies being Scottish, suggested a takeover? Well, he made a good CEO, didn't he? He saw the possibility of a killing, a load of money and he and his greedy board took it.

      There were other English banks that went broke, but the most important fact is that the bank has to be bailed out by the government which regulates it. In the case of Scottish, English or British banks, that would have been the FSA, and that would be the UK government. As I said RBS was bailed out FAR more by the USA.

      Barclays, I seem to recall was far from clean. LIBOR

      I don’t blame the English (or Welsh or Ulstermen) for wanting a divorce. They have been fed rubbish for as long as I can remember about how they subsidise us lazy, feckless, useless, drunken, drug addicted scum jocks.

      Of course very few of them have been here so they haven’t seen how we live for ourselves, and it is very easy to forget some of the less Mayfair like parts of London, or Birmingham, Manchester of Liverpool, where I venture to suggests there are elements of drunkenness and laziness and drug taking. London’s newspapers and TV stations perpetuate the myth, as do people like Boris Johnson.

      I don’t think you'll see us hanging on much longer.

      Then we shall see who subsidies whom.

    2. #BizforScotland destroys the No Campaign’s bank bail-out lies

      Barclays was bailed out to the tune of £552.32bn (at backdated exchange rates) by the US Federal Reserve and £6bn by the Qatari Government. Or to put it another way, foreign governments bailed out Barclays to the tune of more than twelve times more money than the UK Government’s capital support for RBS (£45bn).

      If that is Barclays looking after itself I wonder who is looking after you Anonymous!

    3. Thank you CH.

      I had a feeling that Barclays needed someone's money, A GREAT BRITISH bank bailed out by Qatar and USA.