• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Scotland votes no to Independence

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Chew Chew

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
511
I notice you were in the minority for both Aberdeenshire and Aberdeen City voted No :p

It strikes me that Aberdeen has done rather well over the last 30 years. I can remember it pre- "Union Square" et al.

Have you been to Cults, Rubislaw or Milltimber recently Million Pound Houses !!!

Tell that to the people of Torry, Kincorth, Balnagask, Garthdee, Seaton, Tillydrone, Northfield, Powis, Middlefield or Woodside.

Aberdeen is a city of extremes.

There are lots of very poor people in Aberdeen. There are lots of people in Aberdeen stuck in private rental because they cannot get on the housing ladder and there is a severe lack of social housing.

If you have a job in the oil it is a great place to live, if you don't then very much less so.
 
Last edited:

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
I notice you were in the minority for both Aberdeenshire and Aberdeen City voted No :p

It strikes me that Aberdeen has done rather well over the last 30 years. I can remember it pre- "Union Square" et al.

Have you been to Cults, Rubislaw or Milltimber recently Million Pound Houses !!!

I also notice that I was in the minority in Moray, my previous home. However I would have been in a majority in my original home of North Lanarkshire.

Not that any of that makes any difference, I was in the minority in Scotland and that is all that counts.

Aberdeen is a very expensive city with great inequality. Lots of money floating around, often held by people who only live in the city for work purposes and actually call elsewhere home. Meanwhile, the high prices penalise the locals. How many people would pay £750 for a studio flat? (Outside London, of course).

Aberdeen needs an exit plan from oil or else this massive bubble is going to burst; I don't know when, but certainly within my lifetime. I'd have argued that that would have been a good reason for Aberdeen to vote yes.
 

ExRes

Established Member
Joined
16 Dec 2012
Messages
5,761
Location
Back in Sussex
Aberdeen needs an exit plan from oil or else this massive bubble is going to burst; I don't know when, but certainly within my lifetime. I'd have argued that that would have been a good reason for Aberdeen to vote yes.

As it seemed that the main future economic plan for an independent Scotland was income from oil production, how would voting Yes have helped Aberdeen if the oil bubble was likely to burst ?
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
As it seemed that the main future economic plan for an independent Scotland was income from oil production, how would voting Yes have helped Aberdeen if the oil bubble was likely to burst ?

By utilising the oil money (which will be around for decades to come) to generate a more sustainable economy for the North East in the long term, meaning that when oil starts to decline there are other jobs available locally, and ensuring that Aberdeen remains a vibrant and important city.
 
Last edited:

NotATrainspott

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2013
Messages
3,223
If you look at the way the UK Government has dealt with North Sea oil it is more than obvious that it has no plan for when it runs out at all. So long as there is more economic growth in London, the complete failure of the Aberdonian economy would be irrelevant on the UK scale. Because an independent Scotland would have to consider oil much more, it would have to actively plan for its decline so when it inevitably comes, the damage is minimised.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
If you look at the way the UK Government has dealt with North Sea oil it is more than obvious that it has no plan for when it runs out at all. So long as there is more economic growth in London, the complete failure of the Aberdonian economy would be irrelevant on the UK scale. Because an independent Scotland would have to consider oil much more, it would have to actively plan for its decline so when it inevitably comes, the damage is minimised.

Of course, the sole benefit of a no vote for me and 1.6M others is that we can moan a lot about every Westminster decision at the moment say "I told you so" in a few decades time. :p (With no real evidence that independence would have been better, of course, but we'll keep on moaning regardless!)

Of course, there's no guarantee that an independent Scottish government would have had a contingency plan for oil, and if it didn't the downfall would have been proportionately greater. However, I think it's reasonable to say that such governments would have likely have had at least some reserve plans for the North East, and that we would have been more likely to have a plan under independence than we will under Westminster, who appear to be happy to milk the North Sea for all it's worth whilst giving almost nothing back to the towns and cities in Scotland (and England for that matter) that generate the wealth.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
Though surely the Scottish Government can take steps to deal with the problems that Aberdeen will face once the oil runs out? Or is there some power required which is not yet devolved? Offer a tax break or other subsidy for companies to locate there? Fund enhancements to infrastructure to ensure better connections between Aberdeen and the rest of Scotland and the UK?

What specifically could an Independent Scotland do for Aberdeen that Scotland cannot currently do?
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Can do, but it's ultimately allocating funding already allocated by Westminster. They've allocated the oil funding, and Scotland as a whole "loses out" here; i.e. most of the money generated by oil doesn't go back to where it came from. Holyrood have limited power in business development, trade and industry, energy development and the other economic powers needed to generate proper investment, and cannot yet raise the money to do so whilst maintaining public services elsewhere.

Holyrood can take some steps to help matters. But they can't do much to redirect the oil money other than getting on their hands and knees and asking Westminster to "please give us some more". And, in fairness, Westminster are using that money wisely elsewhere (and, indeed, not so wisely in other areas) - money is tight all around at the moment, and to stimulate the proper investment needed, the current government would almost certainly choose to raise this money via service cuts.
 
Last edited:

Butts

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
11,323
Location
Stirlingshire
Interesting story emerging that Alex Salmond's plans to stand for election to the Westminster government have settled on Danny Alexander's Lib Dem seat of Inverness!

Looks like he'll be applying for his old job back as press officer with Cairngorm National Park then :p
 

Johnuk123

Established Member
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Messages
2,802
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/po...ion-shipbuilding-contract-mod-admits-1.679712

The Ministry of Defence could renege on a promise made during the independence referendum to build new Type 26 frigates in Scotland, the head of Royal Navy has admitted.

Instead the contract could be moved abroad, according to First Sea Lord Admiral George Zambellas, exactly the type of arrangement two Defence Secretaries said could not apply to an independent Scotland before September’s vote.

People who voted Yes will be mightily upset by this news, of course promises made by politicians can never be said to be reliable far from it of course.
 
Last edited:

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Sounds about right. Another empty promise from Unionists. Before the referendum, we were told by the Unionists that Scottish shipyards could only build Royal Navy ships if we were in the union, now they're outsourcing it to France. We were promised billions in investment and job security for thousands of shipbuilders; indeed, the promise of job security would have been used to encourage those in the shipbuilding industry to vote no. And now that they've got what they want, they show their true colours.

I don't really want to say "I told you so", but... I told you so.
 

Butts

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
11,323
Location
Stirlingshire
Sounds about right. Another empty promise from Unionists. Before the referendum, we were told by the Unionists that Scottish shipyards could only build Royal Navy ships if we were in the union, now they're outsourcing it to France. We were promised billions in investment and job security for thousands of shipbuilders; indeed, the promise of job security would have been used to encourage those in the shipbuilding industry to vote no. And now that they've got what they want, they show their true colours.

I don't really want to say "I told you so", but... I told you so.

Does it come as a shock to you to find out that Politicians do not always keep their promises ?

This does not result in a call for another election every time it happens - otherwise we'd be at it every six months.:p
 

ExRes

Established Member
Joined
16 Dec 2012
Messages
5,761
Location
Back in Sussex
Anyone ever thought that Zambellas may be talking out of line, that he might be putting his own spin on things

This report from the BBC this evening quotes the MoD and the Scottish Secretary saying that there are no plans to change from building UK ships in the UK

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-30032217

Just because one person says something doesn't make it true, believe it or not
 

Butts

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
11,323
Location
Stirlingshire
Anyone ever thought that Zambellas may be talking out of line, that he might be putting his own spin on things

This report from the BBC this evening quotes the MoD and the Scottish Secretary saying that there are no plans to change from building UK ships in the UK

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-30032217

Just because one person says something doesn't make it true, believe it or not

Some people wish to believe it as it fit's their own agenda. Had the decision to build in Scotland been confirmed would they have posted saying how pleased they were the pledge had been honored :idea:
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
I think this has more to do with trying to whip BAE into trying to actually be efficient and competative. I rather suspect that overseas builders would be able to put Royal Navy warships together cheaper than BAE can but because we want to 'buy British' (and can you imagine being the Defence Secretary that gets to annouce that France will be building the Royal Navy's new frigates!) we've never actually opened procurement to outside nations.

Also don't forget that the Government has a contract with BAE to supply it with a certain amount of work over a certain time period (that's why the Royal Navy is getting some new patrol ships, to give BAE work not because we need them). Breaking that contract would likely be hellishly expensive.

This is nothing more than a rumour probably aimed at putting the frighteners on BAE. This ships will be built on the Clyde and I'd put money on it. But don't let that stop anyone decrying the 'betrayal' of Scotland. Meanwhile has the shipyard in Portsmouth finally closed it's doors since preference was given to the Clyde yards or does that still have a bit longer to go?
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
Sounds about right. Another empty promise from Unionists. Before the referendum, we were told by the Unionists that Scottish shipyards could only build Royal Navy ships if we were in the union, now they're outsourcing it to France.....

Just read that again:
"Scottish shipyards could only build Royal Navy ships if we were in the union".
That means that if we (Scotland was not in The Union, it couldn't build RN ships). The obverse cannot be assumed from those words that if Scotland was in The Union, then all (or even some) ships would be built there.
 

St Rollox

Member
Joined
2 Jun 2013
Messages
650
Six months out from a westminster election.
The main unionist party leaderless and trailing way way behind in the polls.
Scottish politics has never been more interesting.
 

me123

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2007
Messages
8,510
Does it come as a shock to you to find out that Politicians do not always keep their promises ?

This does not result in a call for another election every time it happens - otherwise we'd be at it every six months.:p

Of course it doesn't. In fact, I'm pretty sure I'll be saying "I told you so" quite a lot over the next couple of years. To "yes" supporters, it's the only good outcome of a no vote.

Interesting to note a poll demonstrating that, although more people distrust the SNP than trust the SNP, they look positively credible by comparison to the three main parties. Link. "Only" 40% of people claim to trust Alex Salmond on constitutional issues (with Ms Sturgeon doing marginally better), but that's much more than Darling's 34%, Cameron's 26%, Jim Murphy's 24% and Johann Lamont's 23%.

Quite interesting that the 55% have lost trust in their political figureheads (or possibly never had the trust in the first place), whereas the 45% still seem to be trusting of the SNP by comparison.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Or the result so unpredictable :idea:

Interesting to think that the safest Labour seat on this island (Coatbridge and Chryston) was in an area who overall voted yes (Lanarkshire) - losing that seat would be catastrophic for Labour. And for the first time, I think it's definitely a possibility. 65% of the Scottish population according to that poll above believed that Labour "badly" represented Scotland.

Although it is worth remembering that Labour are about the only party in town around here, so the swing would need to be incredible to switch any seats to SNP - in Coatbridge and Chryston for example the majority is currently 20714, with almost 50% of the vote. SNP would need to convince 10,000 labour supporters in this seat alone to switch in effect to stand a chance (although the inevitable loss of a few thousand LD and Tory seats may also help them).

45% of the electorate voted yes, in contrast to the 19.9% who voted SNP in 2010, and in contrast to the 20.7% who voted for pro-independence parties. If the 45% of yes supporters do all vote for pro-independence parties (which is a possibility - the latest polls show SNP support in the Westminster election at 43% ).

I would guess that Labour will make some gains at the expense of the Lib Dems (Dunbartonshire East and Edinburgh West look likely, as areas with low support for independence), but overall they're looking set to lose key seats across the densely populated Glasgow and the West, where a loss in support across the three main parties will most likely benefit the SNP.

I suspect the UKIP surge will be non-existent in Scotland. We've only really ever voted them in once, in the last Euro elections. That was a big break for them in Scotland, but even then it only really elevated them to the ranks of anti-EU protest vote, whereas that's where they started from in England. They'll remain a non-entity up here I would think. Their support comes mostly from a depletion of Tory support, which is pretty much non-existent up here anyway. One of their policies is to abolish the Scottish Parliament as it stands, which would be wildly unpopular amongst even the most staunch unionists (in the last poll only 7% of people wanted to abolish the Scottish Parliament, although that was taken in January, before the referendum).
 
Last edited:

St Rollox

Member
Joined
2 Jun 2013
Messages
650
The only way Labour could hold on to seats in west central Scotland would be if many hard core unionists bother to vote for them.
Basically the old Tory working class vote.
We know it's there because it turned out at the referendum.
To get them to vote for Labour guys like Jim Murphy or Tom Clarke would take a serious political somersault.
More likely they'll vote SNP to kick out the old enemy.
It's not as though there's another referendum any time soon to frighten them with.
If you don't like Labour past or present it's a win win.
I doubt even Jim Murphy could turned it around in a few months.
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,857
Caught my eye on Twitter before:

BBC News said:
Details have been released of a pilot which could lead to a new daily, pro-independence newspaper for Scotland.

Sunday Herald editor Richard Walker told a 12,000 crowd of SNP supporters at Glasgow's Hydro that The National would be published from Monday.

However, Mr Walker said publishers Newsquest had only committed to running the newspaper for five days.

Mr Walker, who will edit the paper, said independence supporters needed to convince them there was a market.

The Sunday Herald was the only Scottish newspaper to actively support independence during the referendum.

The new newspaper, which will cost 50p, will be available in newsagents and in an electronic version via online subscription.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-30160999?ocid=socialflow_twitter
 

Butts

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
11,323
Location
Stirlingshire

That's quite a remarkable turnaround for The Herald - or should I say Glasgow Herald to give it it's former and some would say proper name - see Guardian (Manchester).

I can remember when The Glasgow Herald was Conservative supporting newspaper , the daily version didn't come out in support of Independence only the Sunday version. Neither did the Evening News which it also publishes.

Half the people they dug out in Glasgow to vote Yes were just about capable of putting a cross in a box so I wouldn't worry about them being able to read this new publication.
 

St Rollox

Member
Joined
2 Jun 2013
Messages
650
And now it's good-bye from Gordon Brown.

Certainly the Labour faction of Scottish Unionism seems to be falling apart.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,824
Location
Yorks
50p for a serious newspaper ?

Someone would have to be prepared to put a lot of dosh towards it in this day and age.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top