River Cottage

What benefit would there be to Scotland to secede? I would not have thought their economy strong enough to achieve independence without serious social consequences, particularly given the higher levels of tax funding they presently receive on a pro-rata basis ...

I haven't looked into it, but do they really want full independence including defence, diplomacy etc.? That would add massively to the cost of running Scotland. Presumably there would no longer be any Scottish MPs at Westminster if they left the Union, and would we have to change the Union Flag? Presumably so.

 Ozzi, I think it is a nationalistic thing rather than common sense. Home rule for Wessex is what I say.

Tassie has been threatening to secede for almost two centuries - I understand the basic concept. Pity the maths do not add up. though in Tassies case, defence is less of a worry as Oz would rather not have us used by anyone to launch an attack on Victoria, so would presumably get in there and defend us even if we were separate (or take us over, now you think about it).

The Scottish people should be allowed to determine their own future; too long under English rule. If Scotland wants full devolution, that's what they should have; if they want partial devolution, theat's what they should have. If the want to stay in the UK, then that's what they should have. Let them decide.

Without a knowledge of Scottish history and a knowledge of Scotland today I really feel an informed opinion/view can't be made. 'I haven't looked into it'.

A nationalistic thing rather than common sense - that's a bit of an insult really.

Fully agree with you Sarah,its the Scots decision,not some Hooray Henry in London,

My question ,was the UK Government panicking,not if Scottish MPs should be in London,

Or will it benefit Scotland,

Would have thought once Devolved,there would be no need of Scottish MPs in London.

And its the Scots decision if Devolution would benefit them,Not England,hence my question.

I suspect anything that is done, or suggested by our Government, will be twisted by the SNP and selectively reported by the media, and I would be inclined to take the current positions with a pinch of salt.

There are numerous issues to which the SNP has not addressed, all of which are relevant to a democracy. For instance.....

1 - The SNP do not want the Electoral Comission to oversee the referendum, which means no independant scrutiny.

2 - The SNP states that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is divisible, so what if a part of Scotland does not want to be detached from the UK, the SNP assume Scotland is not divisible, but nobody has asked this question.

3 - The SNP state they want to retain Sterling as a currency, but how can an independant country with no central bank and no lender of last resort maintain parity without the Bank of England running the show, which would mean monetary policy set in the City of London. That doesn't sound very independant.

4 - The SNP want to reduce the age on voting to 16 for this one referendum. One presumes that once they have "broken away", the age of voting might return to 18. Or are we to assume that there will never be the need for another vote or referendum, after all, once out, they will never be allowed to have a referendum to see if they want to come back and join us again.

5 - The SNP want the vote for people only living in Scotland. What about Scottish people living in England, they consider themselves (quite rightly, and proudly) to be Scottish. And why can Welsh , Irish, or English people not have a say in what is effectively the break up of the United Kingdon???

6 - The SNP want a 3 way referendum with a middle route in the question, a sort of super devolution, whereby they have full independance but the Welsh, Northern Irish and English pick up the bill. Which is why I believe the question is not just for Scotland.

As to the "Crown Estates in an independant Scotland, is HM The Queen not directly descended from James V1 of Scotland, thus being the legitimate Queen Elizabeth 1st of Scotland??????

Lowlander, I had not looked into how much devolution the SNP is wanting, not that I had not taken an interest in it. Yes, to a great extent it is up to the Scots, but if they want full devolution, it will affect their taxes and will also affect England, Wales and Northern Ireland. To some extent Scotland is in the same position as Tasmania because the English do not want a foreign invader coming through Scotland. This has happened in the past and caused a lot of the problems between England and Scotland as Scotland was felt by the English to be too friendly with France.

In this age where Europe, for better or worse is forging stronger relations between countries, a small country like Scotland, or Wales for that matter, trying to break away from the Union does not make a lot of economic or political sense.

I certainly know enough about the history of Scotland to know that James I was Scottish and became King of both countries, although they were not formally united, and that the Queen Mother and therefore the Queen is descended from Mary Queen of Scots. From that point of view, the Royal Family at least has as much Scottish as English blood.

Jim, imo, the government is panicking on many fronts; and this is just another to add to the list. Several others that spring to mind are Forestry Commission, which has affected both it and Defra significantly,  and Europe. At present they seem to be trying to stand firm on the NHS, but think they will have to panic over that soon too.

More patronising claptrap. I'm out of here for good. Bye.

It would be good to have your point of view Lowlander... It might help balance the apparent lack of understanding you seem to feel is shown here.

It would be wrong for the matter to be decided purely on a Scottish vote. As Dave has said, the rest of the UK has an interest in the outcome and therefore should be involved in the decision making process.

I think that the Scots should think long and hard before they go it alone. Economically it could be disastrous for them. London and the South East are the powerhouse of the UK economy and everyone benefits from that. Is Scotland sufficiently equipped to stand alone in terms of business and revenue given it's small population?

The oil won't last for ever and then what?

Ireland is very much a case in point. It just doesn't have the 'economic momentum' to withstand this current financial crisis and is slipping down the plughole as a result. It, along with Greece etc. is now holding out the begging bowl and London is helping to bale them out.

Sinn Fein don't seem to objesct to Ireland asking for help when the going gets tough. Will Scotland be the same?

I'm certainly not trying to be antagonistic here; if it is viable for Scotland to be independent then I say go for it.