Be Excellent To Each Other

An interesting thought occured to me yesterday. Just what happens to the Royal Mail? If Scotland becomes independent, this makes it tricky. You might immediately assume they'll just keep operating as normal but that isn't actually likely. You can post a letter across the sea to Northern Ireland for the price of a first class stamp, but if you want to pitch it over the southern border you have to pay far more on the 'Europe' tariff.

So clearly geographical convenience doesn't factor into the pricing structure, and with that in mind, how could they justify doing anything else for Scotland? Technically it'll be Europe, and not UK. I can see Alex Salmond attempting to nationalise the parts of the RM infrastructure in Scotland to have a Scottish Postal Service. That might sound mental and stupid, but that's the SNP for you.

You mean setting up a nationalised service to replace the current one that is being privatised by stealth?

Sarcasm aside, there are bits of Scotland that absolutely rely on the postal service. It genuinely is a public service up there still.

One of many economies you get when you're part of a larger government, and one that you lose if you want to go it alone. 46p to deliver something to the arse end of the highlands doesn't sound too feasible with a little local service.

There are a bunch of things along those lines that the SNP either isn't answering (instead going with BUT THE ENGLISH ARE EVIL) or is answering in an oddball kind of way. One response I read about the BBC was quite odd, with the SNP stating it might attempt to start up a Scottish equivalent. Yeah, good luck with that, funding-wise. The BBC isn't perfect, but it is what it is through volume. And the same goes for many other services.

Still, with the coalition repeatedly kicking the country in the kidneys, it'll be very interesting to see how the polling (now very much pro-status-quo) shifts by the time the referendum looms into view.

Back in the 1860s, the Confederate government wrote into their constitution that their postal service should be self-financing within two years. But I don't think Mr Salmond will be looking to them for inspiration.

I can't tell you how much I am hoping, nay aching for the Scottish independence gig to fail - and fail utterly and miserably at that. It's got nothing to do with my politics; merely the self-congratulationary, appeal-to-the- lowest-common-denominator bilefest and all the crass, tabloid-like imagery that is that website.

I was sad when you stopped posting for a few weeks Cavey; don't let it happen again

I suspect we're either going to end up with the rallying of support and a really tight vote that will cause legal rows and arguments for years, or something closer to the AV vote, where much of the pro support dries up for various reasons. That said, Cameron has stated that a no vote could open the doors to further negotiations, which I suspect will come back to bite him on the arse.

I seem to recall a similar thing prior to the AV vote - "Vote No, because although there is merit in the AV system, this isn't the right form of AV, and we can talk about that after the referendum". And after the referendum it all went mysteriously quiet...

There was a lot less of that in the AV vote though, not least because no-one wanted it. The anti camp wanted the status-quo, but the pro camp wanted STV or some other form of PR. Of course, the absurd nature of politics means we're pretty likely to end up voting for Lords using PR within the near future, despite Commons elections retaining FPTP. Argh.

In this case, a 'no' vote would be directly going against the wishes of a large number of Scots who were massively in favour of that, and therefore there is no way in hell the SNP will let the idea of further changes in Scotland go. That of course doesn't mean a British government would respond positively however.

The Metro has become my go to paper when I'm looking for a sense of inevitable doom. The letters page in Scotland is constantly turning over this debate and it seems, at least for what they're publishing, that many Scots will vote yes for one short-sighted reason or another, although one stuck out the other week. It basically said something like 'David Cameron says if we vote No we'll get some more powers, but if we vote yes we'll get them all!'.

I fear many will vote with this in mind.

Which website?

metro.co.uk?

http://www.beex.co.uk ?

Does The Metro print different letters in different areas?

Yup, a few regional variations I think and one or two articles are swapped out for more local stories. Unless you thought the whole of the UK reads the letters pages of people banging on about South east-based topics

All the letters in my local copy seem to be about London, so I assumed it was like all the other national papers

It's all about whippets and coal up here.

The one in Stockport I pick up every morning has recently switched to being all about That London. Annoying.

The more and more I see of it, the more convinced I am that Scotland should vote Yes. Mainly because I ended up watching Andrew Neil haranguing Alex Salmond this morning for the heinous crime of changing his mind on things because the economic situation had changed. And the likes of Cameron giving speeches in Scotland that say "A collective makes us stronger and better" while coming down here and smashing up the NHS.

They don't though, that's sort-of my point. What do they do for the online one?

I'm sure it does. It wouldn't take too many samples of the letters page to see how the topics are skewed. The online one I think is the London version. Figures.

It was only recently I realised they'd launched it outside London.

No, I mean, the letters in the one I read aren't all about London. Plenty of letters about other cities. And sometimes about computers. And sometime ABOUT MY BALLS.

I think it's only recently that Londoners have realised other parts of the UK exist. People were talking about 'the north' and they thought you meant Enfield.

Edit: Ha, having just seen your link I would say the other guy has a point. Word could very easily use the system locale when configuring language defaults, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't/didn't do that. Changing the dictionary is far beyond most people.

I've lived in the North!

I can see why Scotland would be pissed off for everone thinking Manchester constitutes part of 'The North'. It's barely halfway up the UK. Silly London mentality.

Some company or other emailed me a while back asking if I could pop in to see them for a chat and were really surprised to learn I lived in Manchester, nearly 200 miles away. They'd assumed I lived in London because apparently everyone does.

Oh, brilliant! Hahaha.

Mr Salmond wants a million friends:



Um... not exactly Alex...

Depends, given voter turnout and eligibility of the electorate, a million votes might be enough to win.

5 million in Scotland, assume at least a million aren't registered/don't qualify, 50% voter turnout, and boom, you're there. Terrifying.

Hmm...good point. Though I'd venture that clicking 'like' on Sinister Facebook or signing a petition is easier than actually making the physical effort to vote.

I'm starting to wonder if the other nations in the Union ought not to hold a referendum on the same day on whether Scotland should be forcibly evicted. If Scotland does want to leave, that will have knock-on consequences for the rest of us, and it'd be good to have a say in the future governance of these isles.

A Scot friend of mine is getting increasingly depressed about being told how to vote in the referendum by rich people who bang on about Scottish independence but refuse to actually live there. Increasingly feeling he's going to be even unhappier in 2014.

To be honest though, the opposition to independence is largely coming from rich people who don't live there either.

Aye, most of the folk that give a fuck either way* live outside Scotland...

*Politicians Self serving arseholes excepted obv.

Highly likely I'd say, given the already pretty nasty, rabid state of the 'debate' (if it could even be termed as such), some two-and-a-half fucking years even before the referendum is due to take place. I mean, surely it's peaked too early; what are they going to talk about between now and then, in all of that time, besides going over and over the same old shite that's to my mind basically little more than a rather unpleasant, grubby little exercise in naked self-interest, money and pseudo/imagined xenophobia passed off as 'nationalism'?

I don't tar everyone in the 'Cybernat Clan' with the same brush; a few of them seem able and willing to have a sensible, civil discussion and actual debate, relatively free of deeply unpleasant, naked bigotry. However, most don't, and are extremely tiresome/irritating in the process IMO.

BBC News piece.

So, they're going to give the power to hold the referendum to Holyrood and let 16-17 year olds vote.

First part I have no real issue with, other than a fear that if we get a 'No' vote on a tight margin the SNP will just make the Scots vote again (a-la any EU referendum in Ireland that goes against a treaty).

As for under 18s voting, well, I don't think we'll see much of a turnout other than amongst the political nerds. I'd just have preferred any decision to lower the franchise to have been taken after a Parliamentary debate on the matter.

The turnout of 18-24 year olds is dismal, so adding in 16-17 year olds isn't going to increase the votes by much. I have all along assumed that SNP have polled 16-17 year olds and they're in favour of independence, and that's the reason they're getting them the vote. A sad reflection on the state politics is in, that there isn't any response other than cynicism.

I'm half tempted to give you the £500 and have you campaign for my policies for a sensible, better, Britain. one looking forward to the future, and the reintroduction of a UK space program with all the money I'll cut from film makers.

I am amused at some of the reactions to the edict that you can only vote if you actually live in Scotland.

Please tell me it was mostly "They can disenfranchise us, but they cannae take our freedom"

Heh. It is mainly "Scotland is amazing (so amazing I live in London). I want Scotland to be independent (but I'm never moving back) Why can't I vote on a issue I am deeply passionate about for a country that I love (but left at the earliest opportunity)"

Indeed mate, depressing stuff.

"You're not old or responsible enough to buy a half-pint of beer at the local, or buy a pkt. of bangers for Bonfire Night or even buy a £1 scratch card - but hey, you can vote on the destiny of the country, indeed the entire Union [because we, the governing Party, cynically reckon that'll increase the Yes vote precisely because Minors are young, naive and impressionable enough to vote as such]"

The sheer disingenuity of the SNP laid bare, and not for the first time either? (See also the "Do you agree...." proposed wording of the actual referendum question - not that this'll ever be allowed to come to pass of course, much to their chagrin no doubt)

I actually wouldn't mind a straight, clean fight on this one, to resolve this tiresome issue/unhelpful distraction once and for all - but fat chance of that! Salmond is oilier than your typical sardine IMO, but his and the SNP's undoing will surely be their inability to formulate a credible, comprehensive plan encompassing all key aspects, post full Independence (plus the fact that only c.28% of *real, normal* Scots, those actually living and working in Scotland and not plugged into Twitter 24/7 raging at the Moon, even want independence anyway). I mean, The SNP are a ramshackle, single issue political party at the end of the day, a marriage of convenience, much like UKIP and others. Take away their whole raison d'être - independence - and they're clueless and disunited, be it about 'who gets the oil', NATO, relationship with the US, membership of the EU, fiscal policy/retention of the pound (and thus renunciation of any fiscal policy; bound to BoE interest rate and QE decisions) and so on. I could continue.

No True Scotsman would ever do that.

Oh my word, don't tempt me.

Cornish independence next.

And I shall install Mr Chris as Govenor.

Is that role something to do with Conservative education policy?

With a good sword and a trusty hand, a faithful heart and true, King James' men did understand what Cornish lads can do.

That said, I'm guessing by 2014, this will be a much closer contest, in part driven by people voting against the government rather than for independence. But, yeah, Salmond keeps twisting and squirming regarding many issues presented to him, and too often says something akin to "well, we can sort that out after the referendum". People want and need to know about every aspect of what will happen to Scotland 'free' of the UK, from the EU, currency and taxation through even to things like the BBC. (And on the EU, many Scots I know seem pretty angry that although the SNP wants to provide the choice of breaking free from the UK, EU membership is a cert and not being offered for a vote.)

Pundits seem to suggest what Salmond really wanted was 'devo max' and the government has outmanoeuvred him into a high-risk 'all or nothing' game. That said, commentary arguing the SNP will be doomed after a no vote is curious. I can't imagine the SNP vote would collapse—indeed, wouldn't the SNP's reason for existence be from 2014 to secure a better deal for Scotland, rather than outright independence (i.e. what many wanted all along)?

Question:

Would devolution not just make future (GB - Scotland) General Elections basically a fait accompli for the Tories?

For instance, discounting all current Scottish MPs, they would have a clear majority right now.