vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
In answer to that I am afraid not. As it is in Scottish waters an independent Scotland would have sole control of any oil in its waters the same with fishing quotas etc. The sad thing is many people believe his comments about how Scotland will be one of the wealthiest nations in the world. I just hope we never get to find out if he was right or wrong.
It seems to be that the best campaign for a "yes" vote was the Cameron-Clegg alliance. It was they who said that if Scotland were independent, they would have to effectively rebuild Hadrian's wall as illegals would travel to Scotland instead of Calais in order to enter the rest of the UK. The more the Westminster crowd plead for a "no" vote, the stronger the "yes" support seems to get.
It turns out it was Cameron that blocked a third option, that of greater devolved powers for Scotland whilst remaining a member of the UK. Had this been included, it is unlikely that "yes" for full independence would have gained an overall majority.
I suspect at the time Cameron was confident the outcome would be a "no", and as he didn't feel that a "yes" outcome, he wasn't prepared to allow the third option for greater powers to be included as he felt this would probably get the most support, and would have to go ahead.
Now the "yes" outcome looks credible, the Cameron crowd are in something of a panic, trying to first scare the Scots away from voting "yes", and then making promises of greater devolved powers if they vote "no".
It would appear that Scotland cannot lose, it is merely choosing what form it's victory will take. The only loser can be Parliament in Westminster, who will have it's position on the international stage dented if Scotland go fully independent.
Any promises being made now in the dying days of the campaign should have been made and implemented long ago.
The problem with Westminster is that their priority has always been London and the South East, with "the North" being allowed to fend for itself whilst struggling with the disadvantage of being further away from where most big decisions are made.
A major opportunity was missed in 2012. They could have been staged near Birmingham or Manchester, which would have put a Northern city on the international map. Instead, London got them, despite a serious fear that it's so crowded that transport failures would embarrass the city and the UK.
The Olympics could even have been held in a Scottish city. If they then claimed there were no decent transport links, then who's fault is that!
If Scotland votes "yes", the negotiations may well begin with a Tory-Lib alliance, but they won't end with one
If Scotland vote "no", it would be foolish for any party to backpedal on the promises made given the proximity of the next election, in which a non independent Scotland will play a significant part. The SNP MPs elected will make sure the promises don't get forgotten.