|
Feb 2014
9:48am, 22 Feb 2014
14,841 posts
|
*jono*
iaincr - I've always considered myself British, I don't like the little Englander mentality and honestly believe that we within this Island nation are unique, and have made a strong country together.
Daviec's arguments are no different to a Labour supporters argument about the present Government and who lives in Bolton - he and the SNP have turned genuine concerns regarding cuts into soley a Scottish question - its a lie.
Parties on both sides of the argument cannot guarantee anything, Scots may ask *whats in it for me if we stay in the union* - I don't understand that statement, you want more than someone who lives in Tenby?
and now we have a statement of *I don't care if we stay in Europe* and *we will die by our own sword*
The SNP are playing, despite their denials to the Brave heart sentiment - far from wanting to be part of a union / Europe they resort to we'll be okay on our own, companies will flock to invest in Scotland, private enterprise will re-create all the jobs lost after independence - why?
and no Daviec I can't suggest that you hate your Mom, thats silly.
Okay lets talk about nuts a and bolts - the Scottish Government has said that it wants a UK regulatory body for the Security Industry. To obtain a Security Industry Licence you have to under go a Criminal Record check, this information is obtained from the Police National Computer.
Post independence the Scottish Government will have to create its own Police National Computer, its own regulatory scheme for the private security industry in Scotland (and Christ knows it was difficult to set that up in the first place) - all these things are important because the Scottish Government has said that it will only employ security company's that are part of the Accredited Contractors.
Scheme.
After Independence that will be gone - security companies that operate both sides of the border will have to work to 2 regulatory systems - I can imagine that this will be repeated in more than one industry.
|
|
Feb 2014
10:00am, 22 Feb 2014
21,806 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
Just a wee one on companies moving away from Scotland. I too work for a bank and 3 things are the case:
 We are a UK originated company, but we have business all over the world. Whereever it makes commercial sense for us to be: Korea, Ireland, Poland, USA etc.
We place centres of work where it is best for customers and best for business - good English (language) and high skilled, low cost workers. So we have call centres and IT centres in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Newcastle and Mumbai. We have commercial people in Edinburgh, London, New York and Hong Kong.
Just a thunk! :-)G
|
|
Feb 2014
10:02am, 22 Feb 2014
20,675 posts
|
Johnny Blaze
I used to work for a large company that had about half its turnover and more than half its staff in the States. The company originated in the UK however. It was a company publicly quoted on the US and the UK stock exchanges, but it had its "Head Office" in Dublin. Purely for tax reasons.
When you visited the office there were about 20 people there and a floor of empty offices with names on the door like "Chief Executive" and "COO". There was no sign that anyone actually worked in those offices, because really, nobody did. It was all there for show. All purely because Ireland has advantageous tax rates.
Scotland could go down that route, but it strikes me that it is a soulless way to "do business" and obv the jobs could go tomorrow if another country undercuts them and also, the jobs there don't really "do" anything. It didn't turn out too well for Ireland either.
Personally I still don't get what the resolution of the "Scottish Banks" problem is. If the credit crunch had happened in an Independent Scotland then the country would lack the resources to bail out two very very large banks (compared to which the Irish banks were minnows), so if the UK govt is effectively still the lender of last resort for these guys, why wouldn't they insist that the banks re-locate a lot of their functions back in England or Wales? I don't know the answer to questions like this, but I do know that the SNP can do very little other than say "it'll be alright, trust us" when in fact they a) don't have a scooby how long it will take to disentangle all this b) have no idea which way the dice will fall and c) are whistling in the dark if they think that the rUK govt will simply bend over and give them advantageous terms across the board. Scotland is a smaller country with a much smaller population and a much smaller economy, and that isn't a good hand to have to play in what will undoubtedly be fractious and tough negotiations. Sorry, but them's the facts and to pretend otherwise is naive at best and dishonest at worst. The transitional period will take years in my opinion and some things may go badly against both parties and it will all get messy, particularly if Alec wraps himself in the Saltire every time the rUK govt doesn't give him what he wants.
|
|
Feb 2014
10:05am, 22 Feb 2014
21,807 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
jono - all the things you say above are true. They are essential parts of splitting off a separate country - they are costly, time consuming and hard. But they're not impossible. They're a cost of splitting. And cost is one argument and consideration about whether to stay or go. But it's not the only one. So I agree with all you say, take it all into account and I think: let's do the right thing, not just the cheap, efficient or easy thing.
Thanks for your inputs by the way jono. I think you are bringing good information to make a balanced set of arguments. All each voter can do is to come to their own conclusions. I hope we get a >80% turn out, not sub 60%! :-)G
|
|
Feb 2014
10:07am, 22 Feb 2014
20,676 posts
|
Johnny Blaze
The UK currently owns the biggest "Scottish bank" and has a substantial shareholding in the other. The Bank of England is the lender of last resort if the banks go tits up again. Why would David Cameron want 20,000 RBS employees in Scotland or whatever the number is if there are unemployment blackspots all over England and Wales?
When you want to know where power lies, you just have to do one thing - follow the money.
|
|
Feb 2014
10:08am, 22 Feb 2014
6,375 posts
|
Bazoaxe
It's the uncertainty and trust us it will be better mentality that leads me to a no vote. I have seen no argument to persuade me it's a change we need and the more you think of the problems we will have to create our own versions of things we leave behind just makes me question why. What is it that is so bad right now that we have to take such a risky step into a real unknown.
|
|
Feb 2014
10:09am, 22 Feb 2014
14,842 posts
|
*jono*
but to operate on such a multi national level your company must have a highly developed strategy, a great deal of thought and resources must go into making everything work? and therefore there must be an expenditure?
sorry I've got toast to eat, laters:)
|
|
Feb 2014
10:14am, 22 Feb 2014
21,808 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
I'm just sprinkling the crumbs over the keyboard jono  4 slices so far - jam, honey, peanut butter and choc spread. Illy espresso coffee and now on to some vanilla tablet taken home in doggy bag from the restaurant last night. :-)G
|
|
Feb 2014
10:45am, 22 Feb 2014
4,533 posts
|
katypie
Scottish banks? Ah all the natwest customers and halifax customers, Scottish name British bank. FYI amazon are not actually based in the amazon
|
|
Feb 2014
10:52am, 22 Feb 2014
4,534 posts
|
katypie
excuse the grumpy pregnant lady
|
