The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Doublethink of a number

Posted on February 17, 2017 by

The one great pillar of the argument against Scottish independence – greater than not being allowed into the EU, greater than being forced to barter with beads and potatoes because we wouldn’t have a currency, greater than losing Doctor Who or having the Chinese take their pandas back – is the economy.

Scotland is far too wee and too poor to be independent, they say – while indignantly denying that they’re saying it – because we only survive now thanks to a vast bailout every year from the rest of the UK, by which they in fact mean England. (Because it’s sure as heck not coming from Wales or Northern Ireland, which by any measure you care to choose are far poorer than Scotland.)


The name and size of this bailout vary wildly. Sometimes it’s a “deficit”, sometimes it’s a “black hole”, sometimes it’s a “fiscal transfer”, and it can be £8bn, £9bn, £10bn, £15bn, £28bn£32bn or any other figure up to a hundred and eleventy thousand million bajillion squillion depending on who you’re talking to.

(The last one’s probably either David Coburn or Jackie Baillie.)

And while there are a dozen separate and compelling reasons why that argument is complete rubbish, none of them have any traction with diehard Unionists determined to believe that one of the richest and most blessed nations on Earth couldn’t possibly manage its own affairs like, say, Latvia or Ireland or Kuwait or Slovakia can.

But it turns out there IS a – surprisingly simple – way to get Unionists to categorically deny that England subsidises Scotland. You just have to ask them.


Because if you ask No voters flat-out whether England subsidises Scotland or not, barely a third of them – 36% – will agree that it does, with 42% disagreeing. Just 32% of Labour voters and 29% of Lib Dems agree that generous England happily hands over a fortune to keep the terrible whinging Scots in the UK, with significantly higher numbers disagreeing.

In the whole country, more than twice as many Scots – 54% to 26% – reject the idea that they’re sustained only by the largesse of the English as believe it. And that’s the rational view, because the idea that Tory governments in particular would hand over billions of pounds every year to an ungrateful nation that only elects one Tory MP, purely out of kind-hearted patriotic sentimentality, is so self-evidently ludicrous we’re embarrassed to even type it out.

(The so-called “fiscal transfer” is in fact simply a debt transfer. Westminster doesn’t give Scotland money, it borrows money on our behalf that we didn’t ask for and didn’t need, spends it on stuff we don’t want, then makes us pay it back. If an independent Scotland ran a deficit – like almost every country on the planet including the UK does – we could borrow it for ourselves and make our own decisions about how much we needed and what to use it for.)

And yet, simply by couching the proposition in different terms and supporting it with carefully-selected and massaged stats, hammered home daily by London-owned media and cringing Scottish politicians with an eye on the House Of Lords, the No campaign manages to get Scots to swallow the idea that they’re a nation of reckless beggars who can’t be trusted with their own purse strings.


We have to give them credit for salesmanship.

Print Friendly

    2 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 22 06 17 12:17

      Blood and soil and English supporters of Scottish independence - Autonomy Scotland

    2. 05 08 17 18:15

      What Ships Are Built For | A Wilderness of Peace

    122 to “Doublethink of a number”

    1. Conan the Librarian says:

      Westminster doesn’t give Scotland money, it borrows money on our behalf that we didn’t ask for and didn’t need, spends it on stuff we don’t want, then makes us pay it back

      Nail. Head.

    2. kendomacaroonbar says:

      Excellent piece. Well done Stu

    3. Scott says:

      I should have posted this on this story.

      Scott says:

      17 February, 2017 at 10:30 am

      This is a bit O/T but it ties in with what Brexit means and how Westminster works.

      Were we not told that we would not get any of the assets after independence.

    4. When the price of oil goes down at the pumps it is bad for Independence. When the price of oil goes back up at the pumps …

    5. Bob MACK says:

      We most certainly can manage ourselves Look at Poland who joined the EU with a fairly run down economy. Where are they now?

      Governments can make a country grow and thrive. Westminster has been peddling this rubbish for decades. We live like the family servant, in the attic, paid on minimum wages ,docked for board and keep and menacingly told we should be grateful for the position of serving our entitled superiors and betters.

      Time for a new employ.

    6. Proud Cybernat says:

      Putting them right…

    7. Anagach says:

      The only money I am confident is largely spent in Scotland and on Scotland is the money the Scottish Government gets.

      While some money that the UK Treasury spends “on behalf
      of Scotland” definitely comes to Scotland, a lot does not.

      And I do not think there is a snowball’s chance in hell of any
      detailed clarity from the UK Treasury. The general areas of
      spending are published but the actual money that goes to Scotland is not.

      The MOD for instance used to publish such figures but these
      stopped in 2007/8 perhaps because the shortfall became too embarrassing during the annual questions from Angus Robertson.

    8. Proud Cybernat says:

      The price is wrong…

    9. Glamaig says:

      Even our oil and gas is a burden on the UK according to Ian Murray on GMS this morning.

      Yet Westminster seems strangely reluctant to devolve energy to us. So generous of them to relieve us of the useless stuff.

    10. Chitterinlicht says:

      Well said.

      We pay to service UK debt.

      Think of all the stuff we would not need borrow to spend money on an independent Scotland?

      Whole fiscal/deficit argument is false and couched in terms to make us feel beholden to Westminster.

      Like any budget, from household to nations, it is not just what you earn it is also what you spend that gives the final position.

    11. Sandy says:

      The deficit or fiscal transfer is often also referred to as the ‘Barnett Formula’ which gives Scotland billions each year for free, as, of course a country as poor as Scotland contributes nothing to the munificent Westminster Treasury in the first place.

    12. Az says:

      Another excellent and enlightening piece.

      It always amazes me how Scotland is allegedly hirpled by debt and a crippling “deficit”, yet the profligacy of the UK regime is not even worthy of comment.

      When mentioned, the retort is along the lines of “the SNP have been in power for a decade”, as if that should have endowed them with some ability to magic up money that didn’t come from the block grant.

      I do get the impression that our message is getting through, and on the basis of the results above, perhaps better than I could have hoped.

    13. Joemcg says:

      As said before, the main reason there was utter panic by both sides at the last GE about the SNP possibly holding the balance of power in a coalition government was that we could have got accesss to the books and would have exposed this lie once and for all.

    14. Proud Cybernat says:

      Something doesn’t add up…

    15. Craig P says:

      It would be better to compare the money raised in Scotland (c £50bn) with the budget of the Scottish Parliament (c £30bn) and ask, on what is Westminster spending the difference? Make them justify why they are saddling us with huge debt payments when our own Parliament clearly spends far less than is raised here.

      A slight shift in perspective, and the whole question is turned on its head.

    16. Dr Jim says:

      Ian Duncan Smith live on the telly now telling us 80% of Scotland trade is with England
      The porkies are coming thicker and faster and piling higher than ever before
      I’m practically to be convinced now my life expectancy is shortening by the day without Englands munificence
      All the other countries that extricated themselves from English rule must be total wastelands by now

      Oh wait! They’re not! How can that be?

    17. stupidactingsmart says:

      To me the simple poof of this was the rhetorical question which no Unionist was ever able to answer: if Scotland drains England/rUK of resources, why does England/rUK so desperately want to keep it?

      But they still voted no. Logic might never be enough.

    18. Andy Anderson says:

      Well done Stu, more info for me when I go round the doors, once the gun is fired for freedom.
      I have enjoyable ‘conversations’ with die hard unionist friends who say ‘naw’ but then I give them references to proof. Fingers crossed they will see straight in time.
      Nice to read everyone’s comments.

    19. Bob MACK says:

      If England do not want to buy Scotlands food and products fair enough. Mind you ,they will get very hungry ,very quickly considering the amounts we do supply to them. Especially true if they have no trade deals in place with countries who have similar products to our own.

      Eat your shoes like Charlie Chaplin? Think not.

    20. Dr Jim says:

      I can’t help myself the man’s off again:

      Ian Duncan Smith has now just said both Spain and France will veto Scotlands entry into the EU even if we’re Independent

      This guy just doesn’t care what he says
      I suppose they figure they’ve got away with telling huge outright lies so just go for broke and keep them coming

    21. Bob MACK says:

      Ps Cooking of food would have to be done on a rotational basis,as we supply most of their energy. Especially as it looks like Hinksey is not going ahead.

      Cold Turkey anyone?

    22. Johnny says:

      Yes, Rev, indeed.

      It is LAUGHABLE (but not funny) that people who would otherwise tell you that they don’t trust politicians (and especially Tories) then turn around and say they think the very same people dole out money to ‘ungrateful’ Scots.

      Like most politicians, if the Tories will give out anything at all, it will be to people in their heartlands (see T May, Surrey, NHS money).

    23. Training Day says:

      Excellent piece Rev.

      ‘..the idea that Tory governments in particular would hand over billions of pounds every year to an ungrateful nation that only elects one Tory MP, purely out of kind-hearted patriotic sentimentality, is so self-evidently ludicrous we’re embarrassed to even type it out.’

      You shouldn’t be. This notion has gained unfathomable traction among default unionists, partly as you say due to the colonial media and unionist politicians (the real wasters/beggars here). But even the briefest moment’s reflection would demonstrate that, unless you believe there really are fairies at the bottom of your garden, unless you believe in Santa and that Theresa May is actually Mother Teresa, the idea that one country through sheer largesse and humanitarian goodwill subsidises another is utterly preposterous.

      Undoubtedly unionists have amazing telepathic powers, given their uncanny knack of knowing what Scots want, but most unionists I encounter have amazing difficulty with even the briefest moments of reflection..

    24. Proud Cybernat says:

      The Yoons know its a lie just like anyone on the Indy side does. But it’s a ‘convenient untruth’ they will use on those who are much less politically aware and who simply DON’T know this truth. That’s how the Yoons and their compliant colonial media operate – lie, lie, lie through your teeth; mornin’, noon and night; 24/7. Then REPEAT.

      Fake news and outright lies are all they have.

    25. Betty Boop says:

      Looking at that 47% of Con voters who think England subsidises the other countries of the UK, I am wondering what sort of education they’ve paid for which doesn’t encourage them to think. Obviously, they’ve been conned. Oops, did I just say that?

    26. John Walsh says:

      So the gazillion dollar question. Why keep us tethered to their abundant table? Not like the Tories to feed a winging mongrel . And with the disrespect that is shown to Scottish MP’s (yes even) Mundell the biscuit fetcher. ( sit oot side the room) then we wonder what on earth do we have that keeps us enslaved.
      A base for Trident, (2 trillion to build a new one down Saarff) .
      A dump for nuclear waste maybe .
      Or our abundance of pure clean water.( England will be needing our water by -2030).
      And perhaps the Empire bully needs a victim and we( Scots) play that willingly after 300 yrs of subjugation.
      Actually the list of our riches is endless, we are the only nation who can’t see it ,Too-poor Too wee.

    27. Craig P says:

      Another way of looking at it is by GDP. From google, the UK’s GDP in 2010 was 2,408bn USD. 8.6% (Scotland’s UK population percentage) of that is 207bn USD. In fact, (google again), Scotland’s GDP in 2010 was 216bn, slightly higher than the population ratio.

      From these sort of figures, the UK government raised (in 2017 now) £716bn, not including debt (UKPublicRevenue). By population ratio, Scotland’s contribution towards those taxes would be £62bn. As we have seen, Scotland’s GDP is higher than the population ratio suggests. Assuming that more GDP under the same tax regime would return more tax, it is a reasonable guess that Scottish revenues would be closer to £64bn.

      Yet according to the UK government, Scotland only raises £53bn.

      So – to where are Scotland’s lost taxes being assigned? What assumptions and figures are wrong?

      Tbh it is hard to see how anybody can ever know the true picture until we have our own set of figures. But I would like it if a few more Scottish and UK journalists did a bit of digging and stopped taking the UK Government’s Better Togetheresque statements as gospel.

    28. liz says:

      IDS can spout as many lies as he wants because the man is responsible for the deaths of many due to austerity cuts he forced through with his Dickensian attitude to the poor.

      So why anyone would ever believe that Scotland is subsidised by the likes of him, are clowns

    29. Jonny says:

      The daily mail unbelievably printed in 2007, who the real subsidy junkies were, watch John Jappy’s excellent 5 minute video ‘Hiding the truth’.

    30. heedtracker says:

      (The so-called “fiscal transfer” is in fact simply a debt transfer. Westminster doesn’t give Scotland money, it borrows money on our behalf that we didn’t ask for and didn’t need, spends it on stuff we don’t want, then makes us pay it back.”

      Succinct yoononomics in their Scotland region of greater England. You can also apply that to the Aberdeen City Council great citadel of yoondom, its makes you want scream at the spectacular way Wullie Young pisses away money, on garbage, giant white elephants of garbage.

      “City council debt will hit £1billion next year.”

      Press and Journal-15 Feb 2017

      Aberdeen City Council’s debt will climb to more than £1.2billion by 2019 according to forecasts by financial officers. In a budget report,

    31. Andy Anderson @ 11.34 am.

      Aye Andy, your first paragraph reiterates just what I said to Professor John Robertson this morning. We’re gradually chipping away at the lies, and disinformation, given out by the M.S.M, and their acolytes, usually unionist politicians.
      It’s a slow process, but a lot of people who would once have taken the media at its word, are now beginning to question the reliability of their stories, and wising-up to “fake news”.
      As you say, more facts for us to impart on the doorstep.

    32. Macart says:

      That’s a keeper.

      Long and short of it? We are not now, nor have we EVER been too poor to stand on our own two feet financially. The only damn thing that holds our economy down and in check are those who currently control the levers of that economy.

    33. Sunniva says:

      Scotland the subsidy junkie seems to be a popular view with Conservative voters. 47% of them think so.

    34. handclapping says:

      The standout figure in that is the 55% of the didn’t vote who didn’t know. Combine it with the 22% of Nos who also didn’t know and we have a constituency ripe for turning.

      We need to get after GERS from its inception as a wizzard wheeze by Ian Laing(?) to its 20 year history of Westminster mismanagement of the UK let alone Scotland to its total lack of applicabilty to the economics of an independent Scotland. Its the economy stupid wins votes and that promises 3% new voters and 8% changing sides or 53:47 and independence to us just on GERS alone. Lets do it.

    35. Lenny Hartley says:

      Another way to look at the wealth of a nation is too look at difference between imports and exports . An I Scotland would be a net exporter so would getting richer every year as it’s taking in currency for its exports while England is a net Importer getting poorer every year as they have to borrow to pay for the imports.

    36. Tony Little says:


      Re: Taxes. The answer may well be that Scotland has a far higher proportion of lower income tax-payers than rUK? I could be wrong but seem to recall reading that somewhere.

      However, I have also read that most years Scotland contributes MORE per head in taxes than the rest of the UK.

      Trouble is, no one has (or at least they won’t publish) the actual data. It was common up tis 1921 to show Scotland’s contribution (always positive by a huge margin) to the UK. I saw a treasury file for (I think) 1993 which also showed Scotland as a significant contributor to UK revenues (far higher than our population share). I am convinced that is still the case.

      But, we probably won’t know unless we become independent. My own “conspiracy theory” is that if the figures were as indicated in GERS, the Treasury would have published them with glee in the first IndyRef. So, by default, I assume we are in a far healthier position.

    37. Craig P says:

      The English economy is an imperial economy based on debt and expansion. Has been since the 12th century.

      As long as it keeps expanding, the debt is no problem.

      The empire is over so any shrinkage in England’s economy would cause them (and us, we are tied to them) problems due to the level of debt accrued. Fortunately through the city of London they have the world’s money markets sewn up. They don’t need an empire any more.

      If they lost control of the banking system though – that would be painful for them.

    38. yesindyref2 says:

      Westminster doesn’t give Scotland money, it borrows money on our behalf that we didn’t ask for and didn’t need, spends it on stuff we don’t want, then makes us pay it back.

      Yup. Exactly.

      In fact we have absolutely no control over what Westminster spends “on our behalf”, the only control we have is over the money provided for devolved matters like the NHS, education, policing and that part of transport that’s devolved. In total, the block grant and subsequent Barnett consequentials.

    39. Lawrence Target says:

      It is bamboozling that anyone who imagines figures doesn’t just ask themselves the simplest of questions.
      Why does Westminster hold on to Scotland ?
      is it because they like us lol?
      is it ( as these unionists seem to want to believe) that they just like throwing money at us? When they have never done that with any country at any point in history ever.
      Or is it that Scotland generates far more money than we cost? That would be a good reason.
      Any unionists out there have another reason?
      Why does Westminster hold on to Scotland ?

    40. Clootie says:


      You made the point well regarding Westminster spending money on projects and allocating a “bill” to Scotland.
      However not only do they spend money on projects an Independent Scotland would not (Trident / Aircraft carriers / Astute class submarines / High speed rail / Nuclear Power stations etc etc)……but it is a double whammy. They allocate a share of borrowed money used to buy things we don’t want or need AND then also allocate a share of the interest on that borrowed money.

      They decide the polices, the spend and the debt burden, we get no say…..just a bill.

    41. heedtracker says:

      Its also a UK cultural phenomena, the scrounger drunk Scots. Take a big bow, who ever cooked up Rab C Nesbit. Oh how we laughed. Scroungers, dirty, work shy, Buckfast swigging, violent etc. And then, at the end of another hard BBC Scotland day, they all went home to West End Glesga, Bearsden etc. Hilarious.

    42. winifred mccartney says:

      “The so-called “fiscal transfer” is in fact simply a debt transfer. Westminster doesn’t give Scotland money, it borrows money on our behalf that we didn’t ask for and didn’t need, spends it on stuff we don’t want, then makes us pay it back.”

      This would make a great poster for the poster campaign and show that this is Scotland’s share of WESTMINSTER debt. We should be shouting this from the roof-tops.

    43. DerekM says:

      oh ffs not the black hole again you would all resort to being caveman joe if we were not here to hold your hand.

      Okay tories lets say we do have this shocking deficit want to know how we plan to sort it,you will love this by increasing the cost of our energy and fuel exports.

      So still want to play who has the biggest stick,i wonder just how all those down in the tory shires would react to a dramatic increase in energy and fuel costs?

      Okay now i have told you our plan how about telling us how you intend to clear off 1.9 trillion with a pound that is on its arse,i cant wait to see it David Copperfield could not pull off that magic trick.

      Oh and tombstone tony you should keep your stupid gub shut and pray to your god lucifer that we do not win because YOU will be the first name on our wanted criminals list.

    44. sensibledave says:

      stupidactingsmart 11:34 am

      You wrote: “To me the simple poof of this was the rhetorical question which no Unionist was ever able to answer: if Scotland drains England/rUK of resources, why does England/rUK so desperately want to keep it? But they still voted no. Logic might never be enough.”

      …. I think you are a bit over excited, confused and rather jumping to some enormous conclusions for which there is absolutely no evidence.

      Who is England/rUk? Why do you think “they” desperately want to “keep it”? What evidence do you have? When did “they” vote No?

    45. heedtracker says:

      They decide the polices, the spend and the debt burden, we get no say…..just a bill.

      We do get a lot of bullshit though or, their famous, “consequentials.” Which Chrome spell check doesn’t like. You see UK gov pumps hundreds of billions into England, infrastructure stands out, and then we Scots get some of their lovely and free UKOK “consequentials.”

      Its so much better than say a Norwegian style state oil pension fund for example, these consefuckingquenstials.

      Must be true, Andrew Neil’s always bashing on about consequentials because,

      Andrew Neil ?@afneil 6h6 hours ago
      North Sea oil revenues in 1st half 2016/17 = minus £280m. Salmond white paper on case for iScot forecast £8bn for year. A wee bit out

    46. Proud Cybernat says:

      “Andrew Neil ?@afneil 6h6 hours ago”

      Andrew Kneel. There – fixed.

    47. mogabee says:

      My Stu, you must have hit a nerve yet again as the periodic Dave who thinks he’s sensible is back!

      Funny that?

    48. yesindyref2 says:

      @Craig P
      That’s a great idea. Scotland raises £50bn in taxes, spends £30bn, and Westminster spends the other £20bn, without our control. On what?

      Another is to use an analogy perhaps. You have a cottage at the end of a track, and your neighbour has a mansion. They get mains water put in along the track at a cost of £5,000 and send you half the bill. You have a well.

    49. DerekM says:

      Dont be an ass all your life Dave you know perfectly fine what he meant.

    50. Muscleguy says:

      Sorry Rev but the question as asked cannot be used to do the work you want it do, not to the same extent anyway. Northern Ireland for eg is subsidised and AFAIK the Welsh situation is 50/50 at best on that question.

      Had you asked just about Scotland some of your respondents, those well informed, might well give contrary opinions. If 2/3 of devolved nations are subsidised then on a binary yes/no answer yes is not an unreasonable response.

    51. Muscleguy says:

      BTW that photo of Monckton always makes me think he’s auditioning to play Lemony Snicket.

    52. yesindyref2 says:

      @Craig P
      I’d better change that for the “deficit”.

      Scotland raises £50bn in taxes, spends £30bn, sends £20 bn to Westminster which borrows another £15bn, and spends that £35 bn without our control. On what?

    53. Dabeach says:

      These are the hard facts that need to be fanned out in every possible way, twitter is a lost cause. It’s boots on the ground with subtle conversations within that will spread the real reality, word of mouth is golden.

    54. yesindyref2 says:

      I wondered about that too. But the way it’s put by the Unionists generally is that it’s England subsidises us, so the “England” part of the question is OK.

      And the media make it plain that Northern Ireland and Wales are heavily “subsidised”, so that’s OK to be included too.

      If people are aware that Scotland would be less “subsidised”, I think the question as it is would be more likely to make people say yes to the idea of subsidy than the other way around, so if anything it could reduce the number of people who say we’re not subsidised.

    55. orri says:

      We know that people living in Scotland don’t believe we’re a drain on the UK, or at least as much of a drain as the rUK given the national dept is still climbing and until relatively recently Scotland was the only part showing a positive balance.

      What is of more interest is just how many in the rUK believe we’re such a drain. That’s where the unionist parties problems lie. Given the rise in UKIP and self interest driving the urge to the hardest Brexit it’s going to be hard for them to convince us in Scotland of one picture whilst painting a different one in England.

      The whole keeping the UK together out of some charitable impulse isn’t going to wash with the very people that the government hopes will vote for them. The idea of a Scottish Six has, thankfully, passed. However all it would have become would have been a way of controlling to an extent our ability to keep track of just how bad things were outwith Scotland and how we’re being seen by them.

      No doubt there’ll be someone trotting along with the Barnett calculations and so on. Thing about those is that the increase per-capita is that required to maintain parity with the rUK in publicly funded services and infrastructure. Arguably it’s a benefit of being in the UK as we’d have to restructure our spending otherwise. However the whole point about being independent is we’d be able to drop some of the outrageous spending on nuclear weapons and vanity projects in order to focus it in a more rational way.

      Even if May deludes herself that simply refusing a Section 30 she’ll prevent a second referendum I doubt she’d be able to do so as any one of the 650 odd MPs might table a motion proposing it. If the propaganda regarding how much of a scrounging bunch of wasters has taken root then MPs that have already folded to pressure over Brexit might feel the same need to do so over Scottish independence. Especially if Brexit negotiations are going tits up due to the uncertainty of whether it’s the UK or rUK that the deal is being made on behalf of. It’s all very well negotiating away, or at least agreeing to not take back, rights to Scotlands EEZ as part of an exit deal but that deal would be void if Scotland were to become independent.

    56. mike cassidy says:

      A quantum moment, but Sensible Dave has a point.

      Is there any evidence that the people of rUK want to hold on to Scotland.

      Its the rUK establishment that does –

      and we’ve elaborated on the reasons for this over the years.

      Cost of a new Faslane etc

      Hell, lets have a referendum in rUK asking if they want to hold on to Scotland.

      The “yes” side would then have to explain that all that too wee, too much debt propaganda was just a great big “Better Together ” laugh.

      I’ll venture south and campaign for the “no” side!

    57. sensibledave says:

      DerekM 1:32 pm

      You wrote “…. you know perfectly fine what he meant.”

      Yes, He meant that because he disagrees with a very small number (by head count) of politicians, celebs and talking heads based in England/rUK, who appeared in the media and who voiced an opinion that they wanted Scotland to vote No in indyref1 – he then projects that they are representative of the views of the vast majority of folk in England/rUK.

      … which is why he is a fool and why he needs to be corrected. Then, he may learn to understand that it was only Scottish voters that voted in the indyref and it is they that he needs to convince. The “people” in England/rUK didn’t vote in indyref1 and whilst they watched with interest, they were quite happy to go with whatever the outcome was. And, as I have mentioned before, there was no “movement”, no marches, indeed hardly a detectable preference either way from the “people of England/rUK.

      Why is it that Snats “need/want” normal England/rUK folk to oppose them on the subject of Scottish independence? On the whole, they appear not care much either way.

    58. yesindyref2 says:

      Just taking Wales and Northern Ireland for anyone of an open mind, by the way, to get away from Scottish politics, just look at a google map at Wales (same for NI), zoom in and out and move around, and check out the motorway and major A road network, and compare with England. Yes, England has a higher density of population, but Wales has a very poor road network, apart from the M4 to make it easier to get back and for to London, and the M56 to get to Manchester / Liverpool.

      In fact (from a poster from Bangor in the Grun days), anyone from Bangor who has a hospital appointment in Cardiff would drive out of Wales onto the M6, then down the M6, M5 and back into Wales on the M4 – and it would be much quicker than driving the “direct” route.

      There’s a simialr thing with trains, and this is because of decades of neglect of Wales by Westminster, before Wales got devolution. It’s similar for NI.

      It was the same for Scotland, but mich progress has been made since 1999 and devolution, and is being with for isntance the dualling of the A9 – at last. In fact even the M74 wasn’t to start with, just sections.

      Scotland does get more of our money back – because of oil and the threat of Independence which has also been there for decades. Wales is not so lucky.

      Perhaps Sensibledave would like to give us his opinion about the decades of neglect by the Westminster Government of Wales, Northern Ireland, and much of England apart from where it was useful to get faster transport of manufactured goods to the Home Counties?

    59. Bob MACK says:

      “There was no movement, no marches” Trafalgar Sq rally must have been my imagination then Dave boy.

    60. heedtracker says:

      Why is it that Snats “need/want” normal England/rUK folk to oppose them on the subject of Scottish independence? On the whole, they appear not care much either way.

      Sensible, if you’re smart you should focus on the oncoming Brexit catastrofuck for England, instead of trolling on WoS. But what do I know sensible.

      Talk about shooting yourself right between the eyes sensible.

    61. HnadandShrimp says:

      Sensible Dave

      On the whole what you said in your last is sensible. The opinion polls indicated that the population in England was leaning against Scottish independence but I doubt it was the burning issue that Cameron et all made it sound as if it was. Most of the popular press, particularly Express and Mail like to push the Subsidy Jock Myth a la Simon Heffer at al so a fair few may well consider our departure a bonus.

      I think the only thing that Scots of an independent mind would ask from rUK voters is fair play. Those that have no view or only a passing interest need not be overly concerned. We will make excellent neighbours and keep the hedges trimmed.


    62. Dan Huil says:

      Westminster wants to keep control over Scotland, purely for Westminster’s selfish motives. To plunder Scotland’s natural resources, a base for nuclear weapons, saving its seat in the UN security council etc.

    63. yesindyref2 says:

      I said “Wales is not so lucky.”

      I should have added that the copper, tin, iron, minerals, silver and gold, and much of the coal was already gone from Wales so who cares, apart from getting steel from Port Talbot. Oh.

    64. Conan the Librarian says:

      “Is there any evidence that the people of rUK want to hold on to Scotland.”

      It’s not the People of England, it’s the establishment, they ken the true figures.

      Remember that petition that wanted Scotland thrown out of the UK? Most of the signatures were from Scotland 🙂 🙂 🙂

    65. mike cassidy says:

      re my 1.52

      This would be the “yes” side.

      I’m definitely campaigning for the “no” side

    66. call me dave says:

      Hmm! My sister believed that in 2014! We had words and it took a few months to get back on terms again.

      I suspect she will be seriously considering a YES in Indy 2 now as a few vows have been broken.

      What’s Tony like eh!


      Mr Peffers…Is that you as a X-word clue in the National today?

      ‘Old Bob’? 16:across. 9,5 Very apt. 🙂

    67. Proud Cybernat says:

      “And Mr Izzard, a Labour supporter who has been a strong supporter of Mr Snow’s Let’s Stay Together Campaign, said: “We would really love you to stay with us. You will make your own decisions. It’s totally up to you but if you vote ‘No, thank you’ then you will get more powers. So why not try it rather than separating from us forever.”

      We tried it, Eddie:

    68. Capella says:

      Ruth Davidson is in Washington pontificating about UK foreign policy.

      “THE UK Government is already reassessing America’s reliability as an ally because of Donald Trump, the leader of the Scottish Conservatives has claimed.

      Ruth Davidson told an audience in Washington DC the re-evaluation was part of a “massive, massive shock” induced across Europe by the arrival of the unpredictable President.

      Referring to the UK-US relationship, she said: “We’re going to want to make sure that any deals that are done he’s going to honour. We have to be sure of that.”

      She also said the Trump White House was “chaotic” because of “a lack of professionalism and moral seriousness”, with staff who were one step away from “white supremacist bloggers”.

      Ms Davidson named Mr Trump’s chief strategist Steve Bannon, the former chair of the controversial far-right website Breitbart News.

      You may wonder how Ms Davidson, Leader of the Ruth Davidson Stranger to the Truth Party (North British Branch), is so familiar with UK Government Foreign Policy.

      “Ms Davidson does not attend cabinet meetings, but has a standing invite to attend Mrs May’s “political cabinets”, when political strategy is discussed rather than government business.”

      From the Herald front page but it won’t archive.

    69. heedtracker says:

      mike cassidy says:
      17 February, 2017 at 1:52 pm
      A quantum moment, but Sensible Dave has a point.

      Is there any evidence that the people of rUK want to hold on to Scotland.

      I was in England during end of ref 1 campaign and not much was said by the English, until the last week that is, and to say eyes were popping out of heads is putting it mildly. Its pretty butch and masculine though, lots of territoriality going on, our Scotland is our UK, ingrate jocks kind of stuff. Pretty angry all round really and disbelief, that anyone would want to not be British, oh and its all due to the very hated Alex Salmond’s fault. That hate is one of tory BBC led media great propaganda triumphs in England. Guess who’s no 1 hate target now?

      A mad old unionist fart like sensibledave might explain things better.

      Nothings changed either. The only oddity is that most young English people I know are not bothered at all. Brexit’s freaked them out a lot though.

    70. Socrates MacSporran says:

      I know, I know, we should ignore Sensible dave on the day shift and his mucker Rock on the night shift, but.

      dave, stupidactingsmart didn’t use the word “English” in his post, he used: “Unionist”, subtle difference.

      By the way dave I accept your point about the average Englishman or woman not being too-bothered about Scotland. From my experience, which included a period living among them, I have lang syne concluded, to the average Englishman or woman, Scotland is a small, far-away country of which they know nothing or care even less.

      But, a lot of otherwise politically-aware Sassenachs, including a good number who post their ignorance in the btl part of the Guardian, appear to think, wrongly, England is subsidising Scotland.

      More and more of us up here are realising this is now and always has been pish.

      Just take the roads network as an example. The M6 was finished as far as Carlisle 25-years ago, we then had the long, long wait before the “Cumberland Gap2 was filled-in to link it with the M74. Even finishing the M74, back in the last years of the 20th century, before devolution, saw money diverted away from other Scottish roads schemes (the A9 for instance) to pay for finishing the M74 as far as Gretna.

      Look at Stranraer/Cairn Ryan, one of Scotland’s busiest ports and a major link between Scotland and Northern Ireland. The A75 – Stranraer to Gretna is single- carriageway for most of its length, while the A77 – Stranraer to Ayr, the main link between the port and central Scotland is also single-carriageway.

      Compare that with Felixstowe or Harwich, which, in English terms are about the equivalent of Stranraer, both of these ports are linked to the motorway network by dual carriageways.

      There is no north/south main road in Wales, while the A5, which carries a lot of traffic between Holyhead and the English Midlands is for most of its length inadequate single-carriageway.

      The Celtic nations of the United Kingdom have long been neglected, so that money can be spent on English infrastructure, and, that’s a fact.

    71. heedtracker says:

      Why is yoon culture so itchy and scratchy today, sensibledave? One not insane BBC QT last night and

      Historywoman Retweeted
      Kevin Hague ?@kevverage 4h4 hours ago
      @davybrook see thread – point is that “£2.9bn cut” headline from SNP is arrant nonsense, grievance-mongering bullshit

    72. heedtracker says:


      Historywoman Retweeted
      Muriel Gray ?@ArtyBagger 16h16 hours ago
      Authoritarian playbook.1st attack MSM, (informed questions) then academics (free thinking) Then the judiciary (pesky law) Bit close to home

    73. heedtracker says:

      In swings Kenfarq too, because he’s got a prod from uncle Rupert maybe?

      Historywoman Retweeted
      Kenny Farquharson ?@KennyFarq 3h3 hours ago
      I wrote this in 2006 about Andrew McIntosh, the “tartan terrorist” who is back in the news today in Daily Record. ]

    74. ScottieDog says:

      Tax payers don’t fund anything..

      “State and local governments are similar to a household in the sense they face financial constraints on their spending. They have to raise funds before they can spend. Sure enough, state and local governments have a taxing power that households do not possess. But this is a matter of degree not form……
      The necessity for a government to tax in order to maintain both its independence and its solvency is true for state and local governments, but it is not true for a national government.”

      In other words, it is nonsensical to compare Scotland with a currency issuIng govt like the UK

      At the aggregate level, spending = income. Income yields tax which goes back to government. The central banks reserves taxed from accounts have to be spent into existence in the first place.

      Pretty obvious that London and the SE is going to have a lower deficit now. The previous banking bailouts maintained the big salary and bonus culture which in turn gets taxed!!

    75. heedtracker says:

      Yoon culture has really gone a bit mad today.

      Historywoman Retweeted
      freddiemac No60 ?@freddiemac1 5h5 hours ago
      @2351onthelist you are a brave woman jill, and a fantastic asset to keeping the union. If you weren’t so good you wouldn’t be getting abuse.

    76. Proud Cybernat says:

      Tony Blair: “People have the right to change their mind.”

      Just not in Scotland.

    77. heedtracker says:

      Nice display of Muriel’s academic free thinking, all for one BBC QT show.

      Historywoman ?@2351onthelist 15h15 hours ago

      @BloodyPolitics And these fuckers from south of the border who wouldn’t have to suffer it talk it up. No words too strong…..

    78. Breeks says:

      Whether we can or we can’t thrive as an independent Nation is the argument the Unionists want to be having.

      Whether should or shouldn’t, is the debate we Independentists want to be having.

      Unionists have to argue we cannot be independent, because they can lie, and use propaganda to make their assertions sound convincing. In the argument of whether we should or we shouldn’t choose independence, … they lose, because it’s a choice, and they cannot articulate a positive reason for choosing the Union.

    79. Dr Jim says:

      For the life of me I cannot understand talking to these Arsehole Troll Yoons who only appear when they look like losing….again!

      Oil! We know it’s worthless that’s why all these big companies spend millions digging the stuff up and then when it’s dug up it’s worth even less they sell it all over the world because nobody wants it, Jeezus these Trolls are thick as shite to believe we’re thick as shite

      Economy! Aye right we don’t have one except outside of London Scotland has the wealthiest economy in these Islands

      Subsidised! Wales and Northern Ireland I don’t mean to be disrespectful but these places are penniless and without Scotland as part of the UK to subsidise them England goes broke doing it themselves

      Now for the big and main reason England suffers without Scotland: Strategic location Location Location we’ve got it England desperately wants to keep it, end of!

      Importance in the world is one the Yoons love to blabber about! England is vastly diminished in that respect anyway but without Scotland their financial rating goes down making their borrowing capacity and rating rubbish

      Scotland exists and we live in it England lives in London where even the rest of England is disenfanchised by the greed of the wealth sucking monster that is London

      Lastly! The Fukcing banks did it not me and not every other normal person, the stupid telly and media folk even told us it was the fukcing banks then Davie Cameron said don’t tell them that, tell them we’re living beyond our means and make them pay for austerity so the idiots fell for it
      Then they told the same idiots it was all the fault of the nasty immigrants, and they fell for that too
      Now they’re telling the same idiots that they’re in charge and were brainy to vote for Brexit and the government is only doing what the will of the people told them to do
      and the idiots are falling for that too

      It was the fukcing banks! Is it ever going to be possible that the idiots will learn anything

      Their little army of Trolls certainly don’t

    80. heedtracker says:

      It was the fukcing banks! Is it ever going to be possible that the idiots will learn anything

      You’re bust without us, so stay, sucking at our ample Britannic boobies.

    81. Valerie says:

      @Capella, thanks for the update on Ruth Harrison.

      Just wtf is her game right now??? Down in London, then over the pond. Why is she putting herself about, and does Big T approve all these nasty words about Trump etc?

      Seems very odd she is undermining May, by badmouthing Trump, who May insisted will do good trade deals.

      I wonder if May is going to see this year out as PM. BoJo is still waiting in the wings, so is Ruth his minion?

    82. McDuff says:

      Westminster did everything short of military intervention to keep Scotland in the Union,they were hysterical. They have never adequately explained why, only that “we are stronger together” when they really know they would be weaker if we left the UK.

    83. Capella says:

      On QT Mark Littlewood compared Scotland’s economy to Portugal. Here’s what wikipedia says about GDP and per capita GDP for each country. I think Scotland compares very well considering the much smaller population. The most recent estimates for Scotland however, are 2013.

      Pop 10.5 m
      GDP $204 b (2016 estimate)
      GDP per capita $19,611

      Pop 5.5 m
      GDP $245 b (2013 estimate)
      GDP per capita $45,904

    84. sensibledave says:

      to various above!

      Are you familiar with the word “irony”?

      For example Heedy wrote “Why is yoon culture so itchy and scratchy today, sensibledave?

      Do you see the projection? Heedy, as so many here do, determines that because I am not a Scottish Nationalist – I must be a “yoon”! Therefore I can be the enemy, and therefore a subject of projected stereotype grouping/deriding. Now, being derided by Heedy is no great problem or achievement I grant you. There over 60 million people in the UK that didn’t vote Yes in the Scottish Independence referendum and therefore I wont feel too lonely.

      Socrates wrote: “dave, stupidactingsmart didn’t use the word “English” in his post, he used: “Unionist”, subtle difference.”

      Oh dear Socrates! This is the paragraph they wrote “To me the simple poof of this was the rhetorical question which no Unionist was ever able to answer: if Scotland drains England/rUK of resources, why does England/rUK so desperately want to keep it? But they still voted no. Logic might never be enough.”

      … do you want to try again?

    85. yesindyref2 says:

      @Socrates MacSporran
      Yes, you’re right, the M74 was finished before Devo – apart from that connection.

      But it’s not all England did well with roads, it’s still the poor congested A69 across from Newcastle to Carlisle, the A66 to Darlington, a round route from Preston to Leeds, and look at the state of Norfolk and Essex. Not to mention Cornwall which had its metals and minerals stripped bare many years ago. Westminster even fsks England.

      In fact comparing England with Germany which had autobahns and restplaces built in the 30s, and think of Beeching cutting rail all over the place, Westminster has just been sheeet full stop.

    86. Capella says:

      @ Valerie – according to The Herald Ms Harrison-Davidson was:
      Speaking at the Women in the World event in the US capital on Wednesday, Ms Davidson said caution was required with a President whose early actions should “worry us all”.

      The Herald doesn’t tell us who organised it or who else was there. They must have had a awful big venue to accommodate all the Women of the World. Or maybe it’s like their “World Series” football where only the US participate. Plus Ruth.

      The Herald blanks out articles now unless you subscribe but you can open it in an incognito window. Won’t archive unfortunately:

    87. yesindyref2 says:

      Just like Rock you want to make a thread all about you, playing the victim card. Sob. They’re all out to get me.

    88. Johnny says:

      Dr Jim @ 3:26pm

      Yes, one day Boris Johnson turned up on telly and said ‘it’s time to stop bashing the bankers’. They’d never been properly ‘bashed’ (jail etc) but the media fell into line anyway.

      I was unhappy about that then, and still am now, because it was replaced by blaming the poor and weak for something they did not cause. Cowardly.

    89. heedtracker says:

      sensibledave says:
      17 February, 2017 at 3:46 pm
      to various above!

      Are you familiar with the word “irony”?

      For example Heedy wrote “Why is yoon culture so itchy and scratchy today, sensibledave?

      Its just more yoon troll distraction sensible. Or who cares what you think. Rock will be along soon to demand who can and cant vote in Scotland and we’ll all play his dafty boy game too, wont we:D

    90. Conan the Librarian says:

      Concern trolls.

      Don’t ye just love them?

      Exuding bonhomie for all us lesser creatures, desperately trying to conceal the contempt they actually feel from their carefully crafted missives when one of us – lesser – beings counter those semantic gym exercises they employ.

      Oh the irony indeed.

    91. daideo says:

      Is’nt this the way that polls are conducted? Ask a couple of people their views then extrapolate the figures to match your ‘sensible’ view. Just ask David Mundell(I think he’s a tory!)1 vote in Scotland to remain in the EU and then extrapolate to include the whole of Scotland wanting to remain because he said so!

    92. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Is there any evidence that the people of rUK want to hold on to Scotland.”

      Nobody’s talking about the PEOPLE of the rUK, they’re talking about the UK government. The people of the rUK have no say in the matter.

    93. CameronB Brodie says:

      “Snats” is it? Go fuck yourself, WANK.

      Like all human rights, the right to development belongs to everyone, individually and collectively, with no discrimination and with their participation. The Declaration recognizes the right to self-determination and to full sovereignty over natural wealth and resources.

    94. Jack Murphy says:

      Capella said at 3:53pm:
      “……………..The Herald blanks out articles now unless you subscribe but you can open it in an incognito window.
      Won’t archive unfortunately:…….”

      It has many adverts and pop-ups appearing VERY slowly—-this takes a long time and may be the problem—won’t Archive until the page is fully settled in.
      Here it is Archived:-

    95. DerekM says:

      Dave Dave Dave me old mucker i do not need a fake explanation about what you were up to me old son.

      You were trolling a new poster.

    96. Richardinho says:

      Think it’s worth pointing out again that Christopher Monckton was UKIP’s Scottish president.This is a party which currently has a European member of parliament for Scotland. The unionist mindset really makes the mind boggle at times.

    97. sensibledave says:

      Good Afternoon Rev

      You wrote “Nobody’s talking about the PEOPLE of the rUK, they’re talking about the UK government. The people of the rUK have no say in the matter.”

      Because I have been visiting the site for a few years now, I know some of the charters and characteristics of many of the commeneters. However, in these times, we all need to be careful and not be lazy when we make assertions. For example, the poster above used the description “England/rUK”. Regulars here might well know what he meant – but it isn’t what he wrote is it.

      I do believe however that your cause is not helped by the use of lazy, or shorthand, or “club banter” when discussing some matters. As an example, and after all this time, I am still not clear what people actually mean when they use the term “yoon” for instance. Is it only Scottish voters that voted No that are Yoons (clearly not)? Is it non Scots that actively want to keep Scotland in the UK – and say so? Or is it that everyone in the UK, that didn’t vote Yes, a yoon by default?

      Do you recognize the term “yoon” as being a description appropriate to the folk that you come into contact with on the whole here in England? I am guessing not. So, how many yoons do you think there are, roughly, based in England? 200, 2000, 200,000 2,000,000 or 20,000,000?

    98. Lenny Hartley says:

      Yesindyref2 talking about English roads, Lincolnshire has very few dual carriageways never mind motorways, brilliant for bikes though 🙂

    99. yesindyref2 says:

      @Lenny Hartley
      Yes, Linconshire as well! Even getting across from Manchester to Sheffield isn’t easy, specially via Snake Pass.

    100. Craig P says:

      Yesindyref2, that’s a great point.

      Less than half the spending (including debt payments) allocated to Scotland is actually given to Holyrood, which has to cover almost everything we do except defence and foreign affairs. All we want is a clear explanation of what that money is going on…

    101. sassenach says:

      For goodness sake, have we still not learned NOT TO FEED TROLLS??

      If we all simply ignored ‘sensible & rock’ posts, they would soon give up. Why do we keep engaging – unless there are some other trolls amongst us!

    102. Conan the Librarian says:

      Indeed sassenach. Trolls prosper upon unthinking and aggressive responses; however if you compliment their technique and give them marks out of ten, they will run, and run far.

      Dave is an old and seasoned campaigner. He won’t run easily, but has done many… many times before. And will again.

    103. Thepnr says:

      Trying to debate with Trolls is not worth it. Take my word.


    104. Conan the Librarian says:

      @ Thepnr

      The technique is to talk about them… 😉

    105. Jock McDonnell says:

      Thing is, the ones that believe it are the ones we need to target, most of the others are probably hard core yoons.

    106. manandboy says:

      Scotland is crippled alright – by propaganda which causes a serious neurological disease known as brainwashing, the principal symptoms of which are to believe anything the Westminster Establishment says, and to become angry and violent towards anyone who debunks the Government’s never-ending lies.

    107. Ghillie says:

      So those who DO still believe that England subsidises Scotland are in for a rare sook in when Scotland is no longer robbed to subsidise them.

      Will Buck Palace mibbee need to use b&q budget paint?

    108. Robin Stevenson says:

      I DO have to say, one of the best pieces written. In particular:

      “The so-called “fiscal transfer” is in fact simply a debt transfer. Westminster doesn’t give Scotland money, it borrows money on our behalf that we didn’t ask for and didn’t need, spends it on stuff we don’t want, then makes us pay it back”.


    109. Breeks says:

      Who is this History Woman?

      I mean, I know she’s a retired academic who taught history, but in the scheme of things she’s just another lightweight bellyacher with a twitter account yeah? I don’t see why she features so regularly. From what I’ve read she lives on a different planet and talks a desperate load of shite, or have I missed something???

    110. Conan the Librarian says:

      @ Breeks

      But she’s an academic!

      The MSM love them, it’s as if they’re better than you or I…

    111. Rock says:

      “The so-called “fiscal transfer” is in fact simply a debt transfer. Westminster doesn’t give Scotland money, it borrows money on our behalf that we didn’t ask for and didn’t need, spends it on stuff we don’t want, then makes us pay it back.”

      The “sovereign” kingdom of Scotland, habited by the “sovereign” people of Scotland.

    112. Al-Stuart says:

      Apropos the photograph of that twit in a bowler hat at the top of this article. The offensive UKIP crackpot in the picture is NOT a Lord. Monckton does NOT sit in the House of Lords. Like our WoS dog-food-salesman this character is from what the upper class call the trades. In this case Monckton is just a posh-shirt-salesman. With delusions of grandeur. Well maybe delusions of adequacy.

      Nothing wrong in being a shirt flogger per se. Though he is a bit of a failure having had to sell his family pile because of his arrogance in putting up a £1,000,000 prize for anyone who could solve his amazing puzzle game.

      No, this Monckton’s credentials as a “Lord” are about as valid as Scots-hating UKIP leader Paul Nuttall’s assertion he is should be called “Dr Nuttall” due to his fake PhD credentials.

      Worse, Christopher Monckton believes anyone with AIDS should be locked up – for life – in a concentration camp.

      Stu., you have a talent for locating pictures of incredibly horrendous people.

    113. heedtracker says:

      Breeks says:
      17 February, 2017 at 8:29 pm
      Who is this History Woman?

      Its the quiet ones you have to watch. Old street fighters dictum.

    114. heedtracker says:

      Also, Julie-san, fighting not good. But if must fight… win. Sergeant Kesuke Miyagi, Karate kid 3.

    115. Clapper57 says:

      Please go onto youtube and watch and listen to this video where lying b**tard Monckton talks shit about Scotland.

      This man is a King cnut for sure.

      called :


      on The Kev Baker show

      Filmed 2 years ago.

    116. stupidactingsmart says:

      @sensibledave says:
      >>>I think you are a bit over excited, confused and rather jumping to some enormous conclusions for which there is absolutely no evidence.
      I disagree, and while I suppose my use of pronouns could have been clearer, I don’t think what I said is especially hard to understand nor much of a leap from what was said in the article. Nevertheless, I’ll break it down for you.

      “To me the simple poof of this was the rhetorical question which no Unionist was ever able to answer: if Scotland drains England/rUK of resources, why does England/rUK so desperately want to keep it?”
      England/rUK was clearly desperate to keep Scotland, as evinced by their politicians, mass media and forgotten actors and actresses campaigning for Scotland to remain in the UK. (I’m sorry, but to me, all that is bleedin’ obvious).

      “But they still voted no. Logic might never be enough.” The they, I refer to here, are the Unionists in my first line, and in my mind, Unionist voters in Scotland, to whom the question I refer to would (and indeed was) posed. E.g. “dear Mr/Ms No Voter, English politicians say Scotland drains their resources and you say we get more out of the UK than we put in. If this is so, why do they want to keep us?”
      Hope that breaks it down sufficiently for you. I will try to be clearer in any future posts but I maintain that I was not “over excited, confused” and nor did I “jump to enormous conclusions for which there is no evidence.” Do you think there is “absolutely no evidence” that England/rUK wanted to keep Scotland in? Or are you arguing semantics about what England/rUK means?

    117. stupidactingsmart says:

      P.S. Why do you feel the need to call me “a fool” Dave?

    118. Ghillie says:

      OT: Watching Nicola taking questions at Artic Circle gathering and wanted to share this with you 🙂


    119. Am I correct in saying that the UK Treasury have already stated that, in the event of Scotland’s secession they would honour the full UK debt?

    120. Am I correct in saying that the UK Treasury have already stated that, in the event of Scotland’s secession they would honour the full UK debt? Any good links to how that “true’ proportional figure Scotland would pay might be reached?

    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

    ↑ Top