Comments

• Sign up or log in to post something

• Drew, he's not suggesting anything of the sort. He's pointing out how beautifully unique and rich British culture is and how deeply intertwined the home nations are, merely neighbouring ventricles of the same beating heart. As a born and bred Weegie I think we are already an exceedingly fair, just and prosperous society and I'm deeply proud of that fact. Why why why would we not move for full devolution, heavens even federalism, before tearing apart the UK forever? Our three century old marriage, the foundations of which were laid over a millennium ago with the arrival of Christianity at Portmahomack in Pictland, should not be shattered with such cold rapidity. In such a world climate as we have now we should be building bridges not destroying ones that have endured for hundreds of years. Unity trumps separation every time.

  

  Bethan-Ann Scott , Author , 31/07/14 , 139 AP

  • Report
  c5853097-1cd8-4de9-87be-a37900107274
  

  • Aye, our culture has beauty, like all cultures. Independence won't change that.
    But the unfortunate truth is that the UK society is not fair and just. It is remarkably unequal for a developed society. In your own beautiful city, Glasgow, where my family are all from, it was estimated in 2012 that 33% of children live in poverty. Is that fair, just and prosperous? I suggest you have a look at some other available statistics about UK inequality.
    Now, you tell me why the punishment of the poor that is austerity, among many other greedy acts by the UK government, are fair and just. We demonise the poor, but don't even punish the irresponsible rich who caused the financial crisis. Bankers bonuses are at higher levels now than ever. MPs push for pay rises for themselves but won't even match benefits increases to the rate of inflation, let alone the cost of living.
    The fact of the matter is, we live in a country which needs food banks to feed its people. This is shameful. How can we be proud of the sheer level of inequality which is evident in that one fact?
    I'll cut to the point: Scotland wants the government it votes for. Scotland wants to help the poor, not hurt them. I hope Scotland wants to be free of immoral weapons of mass destruction, to be free of sending troops to fight illegal wars. The only sure thing in this referendum is that if we vote no, we will not get those things. We will get a government we didn't vote for, which helps the rich and demonises the poor. We will get a government which condones immoral nuclear weapons and sends our troops to die in illegal wars.
    Your romantic vision of a united kingdom is nice, but it has nothing to do with today's reality.

    

    Drew Walker , Illustrator , 31/07/14 , 866 AP

    • Report
    2c4f1858-7235-483c-842c-a37900321cc0
    

    • I could not disagree more, although I appreciate and identify with your passion for our country. The Glasgow poverty statistic is obviously heinous but is still lower than Tower Hamlets, Manchester, Middlesbrough, Derry, Belfast and Islington, and will not be improved by weakening Scotland's economic position (i.e. relying almost solely on a commodity with the most volatile prices in the world). It is a problem unfortunately faced by all large, developed cities and one we will be able to tackle more successfully within the UK. You mentioned austerity. Tell me how else the economy could have achieved escape velocity from the world financial crisis? And I'm sorry, if you call that a greedy act by the UK government then you seriously need to reassess your understanding of economics and democracy. If you want to see evidence of ACTUAL corruption just take a look across the Channel. Also, you'll have been keeping up to date with the news I'm sure, so remember that the UK has just become one of the world's toughest countries on banker's bonuses. As for demonising the poor, speak for yourself. I can't tell you how proud I am that the focus of the Commonwealth Games opening ceremony was on the UNICEF mass donation. Of course you want the government you vote for, but remember how democracy works. The majority of Scottish votes in 2010 went to Labour but don't just discount the half a million who voted Conservative, and the UK government has swung pretty much equally back and forth between Labour and the Conservatives for a century. Also, I find it utterly unfair and naive to blame the Iraq war on 'the government'. That was all Tony Blair. Stop generalising. I was very proud to call myself British when our government vote against intervening in Syria, consequently influencing the Americans. The UK is a truly incredible country with one of the world's richest and most fascinating histories.
      It's your romantic vision of independence that has nothing to do with today's reality.

      

      Bethan-Ann Scott , Author , 31/07/14 , 139 AP

      • Report
      33b4f410-5867-4b31-96f7-a37901669b1e

    • That statistic is not 'heinous'. http://www.endchildpoverty.org.uk/why-end-child-poverty/poverty-in-your-area
      So, because poverty is worse is some other areas, it makes that gross level of inequality in Glasgow OK? We have a responsibility to recognise the problem and act on it. How can you say that we can tackle poverty better in the UK? It's in the UK that poverty levels are rising! Poverty is not an endemic disease of modern economics or of cities. Poverty is a symptom of inequality of wealth and of policy. Many countries with much lower wealth than us have much lower poverty (e.g. Hungary, half our average income and has lower poverty rates. http://www.unicef.org.uk/Latest/Publications/Report-Card-11-Child-well-being-in-rich-countries/)
      
      Where are you getting your economic assumptions from? A Scottish economy would not be 'relying almost solely' on oil. If you think that's true, please reveal your sources of information. We have a wide variety of industry and export, which would be grown upon in an independent Scotland. Keep in mind that even without oil, Scotland's GDP is very very close to the UK GDP. With oil, our GDP exceeds the UK. Look up the figures if you don't believe me. And just imagine if, for example, we put revenues from oil into the green technology industry, an area we are already world leaders in (in terms of research and use). We could produce, use and export cutting edge green energy production technologies. That's just one of the many, many things we could do to build a stronger economy than we already have.
      And remember what the UK economy is based on: financial services. An industry just as volatile as oil.
      There is absolutely no doubt that Scotland is financially viable. Even Cameron agrees. That's not the issue. The issue is, are you happy with the status quo of the UK? If so, vote no. If not, vote yes. I want a fairer society, with much more equal wealth distribution. I cannot envisage that happening in the UK.
      
      I am a UNICEF donator. As a nation, we do very well on aid charity donation, it's something to be proud of. It has nothing to do with the policies of our government or independence. As if aid donations would drop if we went independent?
      
      On austerity; for starters, how about making corporations actually pay the taxes they owe? How about the 1.5 billion pounds of tax saved by millionaires last year in the tax cut? How about not wasting huge amounts of money on immoral, useless nuclear weapons? It should not be assumed that the only route to economic stability is through taking money away from those who need it.

      

      Drew Walker , Illustrator , 01/08/14 , 866 AP

      • Report
      0f0cfb03-81fb-4b2c-b21b-a37a0046025e

    • 
      I didn't mention corruption. I referenced a vested interest in inequality. Of the 29 members of the UK cabinet, 23 of them are personal millionaires. These people are out of touch with society. They do not represent our society, unless I'm missing something and 23 out of 29 people are millionaires. To put it bluntly, the rich benefit from larger equality gaps. Gaps which have been steadily increasing. Example: The UK now has more billionaires per head of population than any other country. At the same time, estimates of people using 3+ days of foodbank supplies has multiplied by about 40 since 2009 (from 19,000 to 900,000).
      
      There is a democratic deficit. We don't get the governments we vote for. We get policies we vote against. We generate more tax per head of population that we get back! Our parliament shouldn't have to expend political energy mitigating policies we don't agree with, like the bedroom tax (a policy born from people who live in mansions and don't understand how cramped living conditions can be). The fact that we did have to take action against such a policy underlines what is wrong.
      
      Who's generalising? You. Tony Blair was part of the government. It was his immoral, illegal action which incited our involvement in the war. But the Cabinet still decided to take involvement in the war. The Scottish Parliament voted to support the war. You are naive to suggest that as soon as one person says 'we're going to war', that it automatically happens. That dosen't wash Blair's hands of blood, and he did act outside of the bounds of law, but it's the truth. I simply want to be part of a nation which won't engage in war unless truly necessary.
      
      Interestingly, without MSP votes, that strike on Syria would have happened. Do you want to be part of a union where we can just barely vote not to take rash military action? We thankfully made the right choice. But the votes were, with rounding, 51% against and 49% for. That's a really, really close vote. You're proud of that?
      
      There's much to be proud of in the UK. But don't stick your head in the sand. There's much to be ashamed of too. This isn't black and white. A country isn't good or evil. Human society isn't as simple as that.
      An independent Scotland isn't some magical fairy tale. It's a complex issue which will require a hell of a lot of work and debate post-yes vote.
      The point I'm trying to make here is that I want a much more just and equal society. I think a yes vote is a stepping stone to Scotland being a more equal society. If you really think the state of things right now is ok, you haven't been looking and thinking enough about the poverty and inequality data.

      

      Drew Walker , Illustrator , 01/08/14 , 866 AP

      • Report
      8f68216e-979a-418e-b335-a37a004614d9

    • I do love a good debate :)
      You're the one who brought up the "romantic vision" jibe first... Of course human society isn't simple. Nothing could be more complex.
      
      I will say again that child poverty is heinous, heinous and heartbreaking. It is a problem faced by all large cities. I'm not sure why you brought up Hungary seeing as they have a considerable gap between the richest and poorest – the top 20% of the population earn four times as much as the bottom 20%. And in terms of employment, around 57% of people aged 15 to 64 in Hungary have a paid job, well below the OECD employment average of 65%. But anyway, you mentioned the bedroom tax. Did you know that on the 12th February just two SNP MPs bothered to turn up to vote against the bedroom tax in the House of Commons after a prosal to repeal the tax was put forward by Labour MP Ian Lavery. The proposal was submitted as a Ten Minute Rule Motion, giving MPs the chance to vote to put an end to the tax. Now I wonder why they did that...
      
      Yes, Scotland is financially viable, we just disagree on how successful it would be. Of course it is all just speculation but it remains a fact that twice as many Scots believe they would be £500 worse off after independence than better off, (according to a new Panelbase survey). In the same poll far more voters said the whole country would be worse off after independence, while 17% would consider leaving Scotland after a Yes vote – the equivalent of 700,000 people. And the economy itself could shrink by £8 billion, 5.5%, by creating a trade barrier with the rest of the UK.
      
      But let's talk about tax evasion. Take a look at the long-term trend. Remember the tax gap is compiled from about 30 separate estimates for different taxes. It is broken down by type of tax, customer group and customer behaviours, including tax evasion and avoidance, customer error, the hidden economy, criminal attacks and where tax cannot be collected because of insolvency. And the HMRC has reported the gap has indeed fallen steadily over the past six years, from 8.3% of tax due in 2005-06 to 7.1% in 2010-11 and 7% in 2011-12. Since 2010, the government has invested over £1bn in additional compliance initiatives over the spending review period and is on track to secure a further £44bn in tax revenues over the next two years. The actual truth is that anything other than an international agreement would achieve nothing. The current regulations were put together by the OECD, and the UK is at the forefront of pushing the OECD to work out new regulations in light of recent abuses. Be very careful what you wish for though. The UK benefits greatly from multi national companies, headquartered in the UK, but receiving most of their revenues from other countries. If we receive tax on UK revenues from Amazon et al, we'll lose taxes from companies like BP, BA, ARM, and even Vodafone. And it's very likely that CT revenues will fall rather than rise.

      

      Bethan-Ann Scott , Author , 01/08/14 , 139 AP

      • Report
      cd69ddb5-aba0-4aed-b937-a37a00b70d14

    • I agree trident should be scrapped. Check out this great page: http://www.cnduk.org/scraptrident/ and sign the petition if you haven't already. The final decision on Trident renewal comes in 2016 and I look forward to the right one. And yes I am proud of the vote against intervention in Syria. It was in no way a failure for anyone. In fact, this is a triumph, in that it shows democracy in action. Thank God we have a system that actually allows for a balance of power, and of multiple perspectives.
      
      Personally I think the independence debate has become as much about identity as about economics or politics. To hear Salmond speak you’d think Scotland was some deeply oppressed country, not one with higher GDP growth and GDP per capita than the rest of the UK, not one which boasts Europe’s fourth largest financial centre. What I’m getting really tired of is the insistence by the more extreme nationalists that Scotland is an ‘English colony’. This just defies reason. We were one of the kingdoms that united, our economies have been deeply intertwined for three centuries and indeed Glasgow was the engine of the British Empire. But back to what I said about identity. Ultimately, when we tick one of those boxes on 18th September I think it will come down to whether people want to be Scottish or British. What people need to realise is that this isn’t mutually exclusive.
      
      By remaining in the UK we will gain so many benefits. We will have a successful Scottish Parliament and a strong UK, truly the best of both worlds. Our Scottish Parliament has power over our schools, our hospitals, our transportation services, our police, and the strength and security of being a part of the UK. We will also continue to have higher government spending on us, and Scottish priorities, and quite rightly so, Scotland should be a priority. We have £1200 more per person in public spending than the UK average. And most of this is spent by the Scottish Parliament on priorities we decide like the NHS and our schools. And our education system is one of the best in the world - with more universities in the top 200 per head of population than any other country on the planet That is something to be very proud of indeed.

      

      Bethan-Ann Scott , Author , 01/08/14 , 139 AP

      • Report
      8ea0bde4-ffc7-4b4c-ba3d-a37a00b74716

    • We will also have more jobs and more customers - Scotland as a country of 5 million gets to sell goods and services within our home market of 60 million customers, as well as within the EU market of 500 million. And the reason we have such high foreign direct investment levels is because we are in this position. Within the UK and the EU. Foreign firms see us as a prime target for investment and expansion as we have excellent taxation levels, comparatively lower costs of living, and higher standards of living. And this is also a fact. The SNP’s own figures show that Scots firms currently sell twice as much to the rest of the UK as we do to the rest of the world combined! Why would we want to leave the UK when trade is interwoven so intimately with our neighbours. We would be severing our lifeblood’s connection. AND our scientists and inventors, all of our top research institutions, are backed by investment from the rest of the UK.
      
      As you so rightly mentioned Scotland has incredible green energy potential. And today the cost of building wind and wave generators is shared across the energy bills of 26 million households. If the cost of this had to be paid for by just 2.4 million Scottish energy bills we would have to choose between green jobs or much higher bills, a choice no country should have to face. But most important of all, by keeping the pound, interest rates will be kept lower. Today the UK pound is our currency, and our mortgages are backed by the BOE. If we leave the UK and have to join the Euro or set up a new currency from scratch it would cost us with higher mortgage bills and will make it more costly to trade with the rest of the UK, our biggest market.
      
      The point I'm trying to make is that the benefits of remaining a part of the UK far outweigh the costs. Each to his own, but I'm just as proud of being British as I am of being Scottish.

      

      Bethan-Ann Scott , Author , 01/08/14 , 139 AP

      • Report
      e74dc9ac-b026-46bd-849f-a37a00b79d3f

    • As someone who lives within 40 miles of Glasgow, and works there, I'll not quibble with your poverty stat. Certainly the East End and other areas are very deprived.
      
      I'm no fan of Westminster, but we have to be careful about laying the blame at their door. For the last 15 years we have had devolution and amongst devolved powers we have the Health Service, Education, Social Welfare and a host of other areas. It has been in the gift of Scotland to address this for the last 15 years and so, if we haven't made a serious dent by now, then how is simply being independent going to change this? Similarly, the SNP have been in for 3 years now and haven't made a great deal of difference if we're all honest. When it comes to Housing, Health, Education, Police, the Legal system etc. we have had the government we voted for for the last 15 years because they are all devolved issues.
      
      Getting rid of Trident or having a bigger say in Defence won;t do a thing for the East End.

      

      gtr71 , Musician/music production , 04/08/14 , 2 AP

      • Report
      fdabec4d-5775-4a71-a06e-a37d01332b9d

    • Couldn't agree more.

      

      Bethan-Ann Scott , Author , 11/08/14 , 139 AP

      • Report
      e97e7fe5-4d41-4cd0-8f4b-a38400bbce42

• I feel your pain! I don't want them to break up with us either...

  

  einniss , Writer , 30/07/14 , 193 AP

  • Report
  4337198e-c552-4f91-9a58-a37801034f9f

• I don't understand your premise. Are you suggesting that the creative output of my nation will flounder because of independence? That any collaboration between peoples of our nations will suddenly stop?
  Independence is about creating a fairer, more just and more prosperous nation. Doing that will only encourage creative output, not diminish it.
  So, don't be sad. Our cultures will still intermingle and we'll both be stronger for it.

  

  Drew Walker , Illustrator , 30/07/14 , 866 AP

  • Report
  3758e85e-ea6d-4e25-9501-a37800f72e4e