exile

Are signatories all people who can vote?

So maybe you are seeing lots of Yes people and banners on the streets, but have a horrible nagging feeling that there are a lot of silent invisible Nos out there. But would you rather that you were seeing lots of No people and banners on the streets, and had to hope that there are lots of silent invisible Yeses? He did look distinctly queasy

Nicky Campbell keeps saying there will be more powers. The BBC have bought the propaganda.

Time for wee dugs and sausage rolls to re-enter the debate?

Oh and one guys says, it's not about all about Salmond, we're a movement, and the No people answered by keeping referring to Salmond!

Generating more heat than light. Each answer cheered or booed according to whose side you're on. Probably a score draw? Most of the arguments seemed familiar ground. But interesting that BBC bias made it on to the agenda. Ruth Davidson's response to the BBC protests was not to consider if there was a problem with how our democracy is working, but saw it as a campaign advantage for them, that all those people were not out there persuading voters.

The case for the prosecution

Checked out the timescale of More Powers in one of the papers. It spells out the dates of various stages through to a draft bill.... but there is no time set on when those powers (whatever they'd be) would be delivered. They would simply dissolve into the May Gen Election campaign?

BBC website report of it http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29196912 But... surely it's not about one man (Nick Robinson) or one Q&A session. It has to be seen in context of the generous coverage given to Gordon Brown and the three party leaders earlier in the week

It's not about the millionaires, it's about the millions

Independence: Home Rule for Grown-Ups

But they say they will. As long as they believe they will, their MPs will fight tooth and nail to prevent powers heading to Scotland if that meant removing power of Scots MPs to help deliver a Labour programme. And as long as each Westminster party believes it could win power, it will need to placate its English and Welsh MPs... making the reality of 'more powers' a shaky proposition

Sunday Times reporting the fallout in event of a no vote. Tory MPs warning it would be a 'slow motion bloodbath' If Scots had full tax raising powers, Tories could move to disallow Scots MPs to vote on financial / tax matters in England. This would mean Labour would have difficulty getting their tax policies through. "Bye by [to Ed] Balls' first budget" http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/ScottishReferendum/article1459005.ece What chances of more powers?

This is what we used to see on our TV screens - protesting crowds - an embattled state broadcaster. This is Glasgow.

I don't understand your post? 'Hysterical' was referring to last week's predictions of economic catastrophe in event of yes vote. Posted on 11th. I think the article does give a sense of perspective.

I don't know about Dundee but after yesterday's edition I would not treat what the Independent says as being impartial 'independent' information. They had a scare story on their front page implying 'vicious' campaign, and intimidation by Yes, citing only Better Together sources and no right to reply from Yes.

Ok here's another one to add to my 'economics for beginners / waverers' Joseph Stiglitz: Independence has costs and benefitshttp://www.scotsman.com/news/joseph-stiglitz-independence-has-costs-and-benefits-1-3541038 in today's SoS

David McWilliams A key statement is at 1:39: "Going independent now is probably the best time they [ie Scots] could ever do so" Also an article here: http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2014/09/11/independent-scotland-will-play-the-irish-card-and-steal-our-investment-strategy

I think back to the Iraq war, which divided the country, and was very polarised pro and anti, especially in the run up to the 'decision' to go to war. But it defused and healed after a while. This was partly because the way the war went - and the revelations of the WMD, the anti-war side being in some senses being vindicated - and the acceptance by some of those who had been pro-war accepting they'd been conned, and admitting they would not have supported it had they known the truth. There are several possible parallels to draw on here, that point to different conclusions to be drawn (but no time to spell them out,...)

Just checking Gordon's timetable "On the day after a No vote (19 September) the pro-union parties have vowed to get cracking with drawing up the package of new powers." But Labour party conference starts on 21st, so seems unlikely any joint package would be agreed by the three amigos, to put to Labour members, by then. So through the conference season, the parties would not be debating the jointly proposed powers. They would not be deciding anything till return of House of Commons on 13th October. At which point, the rUK backbenchers would be invited to give a scared-into-voting-no Scotland a raft of new powers for nothing.

I might have been away when this originally came up - anyone remember any publicity about this, or any follow-up? US banks plan ahead for UK exit from EUWall Street banks are drawing up preliminary plans to move some London-based activities to Ireland to address concerns that the UK is drifting apart from the EU. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9b555ed6-25f1-11e4-8bb5-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3DHKs2Q4C The report says: "Ireland’s attractions for US banks include its low corporate tax rate, English speaking population, English-style legal system and eurozone membership." Now, are there any other countries that might sound like that?

I think no one should be jumping into bed with Murdoch or bowing down to anyone However, if the Sun or the Pyongyang Times or Tehran Press & Journal come out for independence - or gleefully breaking up Britain or Balkanising Europe - then there is nothing anyone can do about it.

Of course a few may switch - others might abstain. But you are talking here about people with enough political awareness to act on principle to not follow the line Murdoch wants via the Scottish Sun, but if they vote no, then they are following what Murdoch's Times, at least, has been arguing Scots voters to do, throughout. In this sense you can't avoid doing what one of Murdoch's papers wants. I wouldn't want to overestimate the significance of Murdoch and the Sun, which is at best a fairweather friend - or a fairweather enemy's enemy - for any cause.