What effect would scottish independence have on the UK tree industry?

[wrsni]

Not general opinion Geoff, just mine, probably best if you just ignore it.👍

 

Think about it this way.

 

Many years ago when the old Milk Marketing Boards were under threat, the head of ours always used this analogy.

 

Take a single twig, you can snap it no bother. But bind it together with a bunch of other twigs and see if you can snap it then.

 

It's a good analogy I think!

[Mull]

Think about it this way.

 

 

 

Many years ago when the old Milk Marketing Boards were under threat, the head of ours always used this analogy.

 

 

 

Take a single twig, you can snap it no bother. But bind it together with a bunch of other twigs and see if you can snap it then.

 

 

 

It's a good analogy I think!

 

 

It's a good analogy, and very easy to see how it can work with twigs.

[wrsni]

Serious questions.

I'm English, can I just ask how Westminster differs in the way it governs Scottish people to the way it governs the English?

I get the fact you are a different country and don't want to be told what to do by Westminster.

Is that the only reason?

 

Nearly twenty years ago a vast majority of the people of Northern Ireland decided that giving some power to the guys with the guns in return for peace was a good trade off.

 

Whether that was a sensible thing to do or not could be (and over here is) debated long and hard with no definitive answer. What is very plain however, is that the country was better governed direct from Westminster.

 

The only thing that saves the day a bit is that we are now the most subsidised region of the UK but even with that level of subsidy we're still lagging way behind the rest in just about every economic measure.

 

Scotland should pay heed!

[daltontrees]

Not general opinion Geoff, just mine, probably best if you just ignore it.👍

It is one of teh great attractions of independence that Scotland would do away with nuclear weapons and would not participate in the expensive and blood-soaked invasions of Iraq/Afghanistan that make Britain a target for hatred form so many parts of the world. And the cost saving of a revised bit-part stance on the world stage would be enormous. What's the benefit really of being a big hitter politically as long as you have a sound economy? It's just politicians beating their metaphorical chests in the jungel clearing that is world politics.

[daltontrees]

Serious questions.

I'm English, can I just ask how Westminster differs in the way it governs Scottish people to the way it governs the English?

I get the fact you are a different country and don't want to be told what to do by Westminster.

Is that the only reason?

 

 

Personally I don't see that even as one of the reasons. And the following poitns are personal views also, an individual scot's perspective.

 

Scotland would like to diverge its economy and society from that of England. It aspires to be able to manipulate the economy differently from how Westminster manipulates it. The current parliament with its SNP majority has aligned the government deprtments around its five Strategic Objectives that it says underpins its Purpose and describes the kind of Scotland it wants to live in - a Scotland that is Wealthier and Fairer, Smarter, Healthier, Safer and Stronger. It then brings its every action and decision back to one or more of those. Whehther it achieves it or not is a different matter, but it really is quite refreshing to be able to point to its manifesto and judge its progress.

 

The scottish parliament is 'unicameral', decisions made in the parliament are final, there is no House of Lords of hereditary or politically appointed peers to interfere with the will of the peoples' elected representatives. The parliament has partial proportional representation so that parties like the greens (and even the tories) are able to have a say and a seat at the table. It's really quite a civilised advance on the UK system.

 

And after me saying on here that it shouldn't be about individuals, quite frankly I cringe when I see William Hague representing Britain abroad, or that buffoon Michael Goave meddling with the education system, and (personally) I find Cameron slimy, disingenuous and he might as well be on Mars for all he means to me. We would like the right to choose our own slimy gits, thanks, and to be able to get rid of them when they don't do our bidding. As for Cameron-clone-Clegg, the U-turn meister, oddly I think his party is doing some good in holdiing the fascist elements of the coalition in check, but he does seem to have sold (no, given away) the LDP jerseys to get his snout in the trough.

 

I have held my tongue when the opposition to nationalism has cropped up on the Forum, I see England as having a deeply unsavoury nationalistic aspect (as evidenced by UKIP) which but for the lack of proportional representation would probably have a good few MPs by now. They want to get out of Europe. So do some of the tories. I would rather be in an independent scotland applying to get into the EU than be dragged under by a UK trying to get out of it.

 

Independence could be a nightmare, it could go badly wrong at first, but like a boy named Sue, it would have to get tough or die. Scots are tough. I think it would be OK in the long run. When you've no-one to blame but yourself it makes you a man.

[scotspine1]

It is one of teh great attractions of independence that Scotland would do away with nuclear weapons and would not participate in the expensive and blood-soaked invasions of Iraq/Afghanistan that make Britain a target for hatred form so many parts of the world. And the cost saving of a revised bit-part stance on the world stage would be enormous. What's the benefit really of being a big hitter politically as long as you have a sound economy? It's just politicians beating their metaphorical chests in the jungel clearing that is world politics.

 

Salmond has said he will allow USA nuclear armed submarines to dock in an independent Scotland on a 'we wont ask, you don't tell us if there's missiles on board' basis.

 

He wants to be part of NATO, but this wont happen because Scotland would be the first NATO member in history to ask for nuclear weapons to be removed from their country. NATO simply wouldn't allow it. The UK's nuclear submarine fleet would be moved to the east coast of the USA and Scotland would not get into NATO leaving us defenceless and having no influence what so ever in NATO foreign policy. His policy on nuclear arms is not credible.

 

Re Iraq/Afghanistan, if you think it's bad having the USA and it's western allies running the world just now, just wait until you see a world dominated by China.

[Gnome]

You are assuming that once independence happens that the SNP (and Salmond) will be voted in as the governing party.

 

IF independence happens there will an election to decide who governs Scotland.

 

The 4 party system in Scotland might not happen. If all those mp's who vote no decide that the grass is greener in England and want to further there careers( cos it is clearly not about principles anymore for many).

 

In an Independent Scotland we could have new parties with the Scottish people at the centre. You could have an OAP party, a youth party, Disabled party, Business owners party, Workers party, as well as your green party which could then get a larger voice.

 

These parties could then work together to create a fairer, forward looking country.

 

We won't need the stale LAB CON LIB SNP parties.

 

No House of Lords. That should be enough reason to go independent in itself.

[ArthurBottlesworth]

You are assuming that once independence happens that the SNP (and Salmond) will be voted in as the governing party.

 

IF independence happens there will an election to decide who governs Scotland.

 

The 4 party system in Scotland might not happen. If all those mp's who vote no decide that the grass is greener in England and want to further there careers( cos it is clearly not about principles anymore for many).

 

In an Independent Scotland we could have new parties with the Scottish people at the centre. You could have an OAP party, a youth party, Disabled party, Business owners party, Workers party, as well as your green party which could then get a larger voice.

 

These parties could then work together to create a fairer, forward looking country.

 

We won't need the stale LAB CON LIB SNP parties.

 

No House of Lords. That should be enough reason to go independent in itself.

 

I think really clever thing would be to avoid political parties 100%

 

no one will explain to me how they help democracy

 

I can see how they help politicians, but not how they help the country

 

We wouldn't have gone into Iraq if we'd had true democracy

 

Switzerland seems to be nearest to real democracy and they aint doing too bad , but it does mean binning aristocracy, royal family, petty politics etc

[wrsni]

Independence could be a nightmare, it could go badly wrong at first, but like a boy named Sue, it would have to get tough or die. Scots are tough. I think it would be OK in the long run. When you've no-one to blame but yourself it makes you a man.

 

Well now you see that's coming a lot closer to the Jim Sillars point of view which I find much more genuine and admirable than anything Salmond does.

 

Salmond is trying to sell it on the basis that everything will be much better, Sillars just sells it on the basis of a desire to be independent and everything else will be whatever is necessary to BE independent. No gloss, no conjecture, frankly..........no bullshit, let's get on with it and see what we can do.

[daltontrees]

Salmond has said he will allow USA nuclear armed submarines to dock in an independent Scotland on a 'we wont ask, you don't tell us if there's missiles on board' basis.

 

He wants to be part of NATO, but this wont happen because Scotland would be the first NATO member in history to ask for nuclear weapons to be removed from their country. NATO simply wouldn't allow it. The UK's nuclear submarine fleet would be moved to the east coast of the USA and Scotland would not get into NATO leaving us defenceless and having no influence what so ever in NATO foreign policy. His policy on nuclear arms is not credible.

 

Re Iraq/Afghanistan, if you think it's bad having the USA and it's western allies running the world just now, just wait until you see a world dominated by China.

 

OK I had forgotten about the NATO difficulty. A bit awkward to resolve. Or not even try. If anyone invades we'll all charge down teh hillsidew with claymores in the time-honoured tradition of scots as cannon-fodder.