Does "Better Together" Make A Good Case For The Union?

[ImSoSweet]

Good post aikiwolf but it should be mentioned that the only reason Trident will definitely be kept is because current estaminets are that it would take 30 years to build other facility's capable of housing the UK's stockpile of nuclear arms. Something I fear will be a major problem for an independent Scotland.

Edit: I had herd 30 the telegraph says 20 year's before a facility capable of housing the UK's nucular arsenal could be constructed outside of Scotland.

[carlotah]

The English press are heavily invested in the unionist cause and so are Labour and the Lib Dems. Neither will stand in their way. It would be an easy sell.


The Scots are the only country in the UK who favour continuing EU membership. The million or so extra votes might make a big difference in a close referendum.


The IoM, channel islands and NI don't have 5 million people in them. If the Scottish economy turns and hundreds of thousands starts crossing the border (or vice versa) that produces political pressure to do something about immigration. It's not an inconceivable situation.

Don't go thinking that 10 years after independence, the UK is going to be treating Scotland any different to other European countries if the UK is no longer in the EU. For a start, how could the UK control EU immigration if all the Poles/Germans/Romanians need to do is fly into Glasgow then drive into England down the M74? How long do you think the UK would leave that 96 mile long loophole open for?

NI is part of the UK, so I don't see how the comparison holds.


From the analyses I've seen, they haven't been taking into account the admin costs of running a defense department. They've only been saying Scotland pays X towards defense and the MoD spend Y within Scotland with Y being less than X. It's incomplete analysis.


I agree, but the published figures are not the full story. I don't doubt that behind closed doors discussions have centred around the extra overhead, but I doubt they have any real idea of how much it is going to cost (since no one ever has a real idea about how much anything defense related is going to cost).


I forget where I read it.


But the license fee would no longer be paying for the BBC, it would be paying for a Scottish public broadcaster instead. It wont swing the referendum, but it is one of the clearer inconveniences of independence.



Devo max would have been a shoe in and fulfilled 90% of the aims of independence, but the SNP turned it down. The other 10% is basically defense + symbolism.


But BBC1 and BBC2 are still there. Post independence, Scotland couldn't even afford to operate a channel the size of BBC2.

[beasta5656]

Find me a defense project that was completed on time. I predict 40 years as an optimistic time scale. The tender process will take years in and of itself.

[carsya]

The Clyde yards are objectively better and BAE's best ship design engineers are in Scotstoun. If Scotland stay in the union, I'd bet the farm on one of the Clyde yards remaining open. If they don't...I don't know.

[Lis]

I think its clutching at straw's to say the availabilty of the bbc will be a factor in the outcome of the referendum even if your saying it will be a minor one, most of whats on the bbc is drudge, its hard to concive a scenario were it would be difficult to watch bbc programming in an independant scotland if you really wanted too and probably most importantly of all watching Tv programmes on an actual television is somthing in decline.

[outkast_950]

Sadly what is "better" is not the motivation for politicians. The Clyde ship yards have been in this position many times where they were the "better" option but lost out because of political interference.

Sadly, being the "better" option is not enough on it's own to keep them open.

[AutumnStorm]

You don't think there will be people worried about not being able to watch Doctor Who? Or Eastenders? Or comprehensive coverage of the 2016 Olympics? Of Wimbledon? Sure, there will be other ways of watching most of this stuff, but most of those ways will involve a monthly subscription.

As I say, it's not going to swing the referendum, but it is a clear counter to the idea that an independent Scotland is all upside.

[bluboi93]

BAE have a say in those kind of decisions and they will want to keep building ships on the Clyde. But if Scotland break away, then BAE wont want to risk the UK offering RN contracts internationally, and they'll probably move south.

[simonf]

mmm which mean's an Independant Scotland is going to be saddled with a uturn government that sucks up to the union and allows there weapons to remain on Scottish soil possibly for decades, or a government that sticks to the idele's of nucular disarmamint and gets into conflict with its geographiclly closest and most powerful neighbour, neither situation is very appealing. Perhaps the American's would be willing to house the stockpile if the uk government would go for it ? this is all conjecture right now of course but its the kind of issue I can see that would force the british government to undermine the results of any referndum. It's niave to think one of the worlds most powerful countrys will settle for disarmant because a country of 5 million wants to leave its rule but you would be amazed at the amount of anti nucular campaigners who think its that simple. It's things like this and other stuff the UK government point blank refuses to have any discussion on what would happen in the event of a yes vote that makes this all feel more antagonistic than it needs to be, its like there undermining us, I feel silly expecting anything else of Cameron and his illk but it still bugs me.

[itsmepasswd]

To be honest no I don't see it as in issue, if anything not having to pay the licence fee will be of larger appeal to most. Even if this was an issue its the kind of thing that I would expect to maybe sway a certain percantage of the youth and like I say watching tv programmes on a television is a declining activity among the youth.