Scottish politics

Walleye

Well-known member
Messages
3,187
Reaction score
2,121
Aye B, with a strong sense of British Nationalism. Somehow believing that a UK Gov that presided over brutal atrocities all over the world, removing trillions from the economies of other nations, while disguising it as development of these nations, actually have the well being of the Scottish people as a core value. Utter tosh!!!
I mean these people still believe that Scotland is a poor nation because the UK figures say we are. I suppose we can count ourselves lucky that we've not been starved yet and we can doff our caps to our landlords while they perform the modern day equivalent of removing our common grazings.
All we need is another 20 years or so, just one more generation, and we will have brutally stolen pretty much all Scottish wealth there is to steal and then we can put the 2nd half of our plan in motion....
Once we have pocketed everything, we give you the independence you seek so your economy will crash and we can buy up all your homes to be our 2nd homes, retirement homes or holiday homes so we can keep hundreds of thousands of empty houses in Scotland for 1-2 weeks use per year while you lot live on the streets or feck off somewhere else.

It's a good plan, if it weren't for you pesky nats!

For the observant amongst you, you'll notice the first half of my post is very tongue in cheek. The 2nd part....pretty close to what will actually happen. Cheap housing, beautiful country, low cost of living, good fishing....Scotland will be an independent retirement home for the English.
 

Auldghillie

Active member
Messages
304
Reaction score
204
Sadly, as we both know, these inconvenient facts will just be dismissed as scaremongering by unquestioning Indy believers. It must of course be difficult to separate fact from fiction for anyone brainwashed into believing and trusting the SNP.
Thanks for posting that and it confirms reality. However, the Prof appears to have omitted the upcoming power gap. Two of our nuclear power stations are in trouble, both 2nd generation AGR’s I think - Hunterston and Torness. One is to close ASAP for age and safety reasons and the other is under heavy maintenance.

These generate base-load electricity in contrast to wind and hydro - how would the Sturgeon fund the replacement ? By charging us of course Or ruining more rivers with hydro- generation and the sea-bed with cable trenches buying the balance needed from England.
 

Fruin

Well-known member
Messages
3,387
Reaction score
365
Location
East Dunbartonshire
All we need is another 20 years or so, just one more generation, and we will have brutally stolen pretty much all Scottish wealth there is to steal and then we can put the 2nd half of our plan in motion....
Once we have pocketed everything, we give you the independence you seek so your economy will crash and we can buy up all your homes to be our 2nd homes, retirement homes or holiday homes so we can keep hundreds of thousands of empty houses in Scotland for 1-2 weeks use per year while you lot live on the streets or feck off somewhere else.

It's a good plan, if it weren't for you pesky nats!

For the observant amongst you, you'll notice the first half of my post is very tongue in cheek. The 2nd part....pretty close to what will actually happen. Cheap housing, beautiful country, low cost of living, good fishing....Scotland will be an independent retirement home for the English.
That already happens without the Indy part. Decades of under investment in Scotland and over investment in the south east has created a wealth gap.
 

keirstream

Well-known member
Messages
8,028
Reaction score
3,563
Location
Stirling
That already happens without the Indy part. Decades of under investment in Scotland and over investment in the south east has created a wealth gap.
God, do you never give up with your strange interpretation of living standards.
I've lived in the South East and I can tell you, they need the extra cash to survive down there in the middle of a concrete jungle.
You couldn't make me live in London for 10 times my earnings.
You know, life is all about contentment with your surroundings and way of life.
I am content in Scotland, the traditional (unless you guys screw it up) way of life is just perfect for me.:)
I'm content with my life here and as long as it stays this way, wild horses wouldn't drag me anywhere.
I have posted a caveat to that previously, at which point I would leave, quite willingly and leave it to the politics
of the mad house run by the s.n.p.:eek:
But, of course, that ain't going to happen.:D
 

ozzyian

Well-known member
Messages
5,494
Reaction score
1,470
Location
East Lothian
Thanks for posting that and it confirms reality. However, the Prof appears to have omitted the upcoming power gap. Two of our nuclear power stations are in trouble, both 2nd generation AGR’s I think - Hunterston and Torness. One is to close ASAP for age and safety reasons and the other is under heavy maintenance.

These generate base-load electricity in contrast to wind and hydro - how would the Sturgeon fund the replacement ? By charging us of course Or ruining more rivers with hydro- generation and the sea-bed with cable trenches buying the balance needed from England.

I believe the plan is to trade electricity supply in exchange for supplies of excess rainwater
 

Fruin

Well-known member
Messages
3,387
Reaction score
365
Location
East Dunbartonshire
Thanks for posting that and it confirms reality. However, the Prof appears to have omitted the upcoming power gap. Two of our nuclear power stations are in trouble, both 2nd generation AGR’s I think - Hunterston and Torness. One is to close ASAP for age and safety reasons and the other is under heavy maintenance.

These generate base-load electricity in contrast to wind and hydro - how would the Sturgeon fund the replacement ? By charging us of course Or ruining more rivers with hydro- generation and the sea-bed with cable trenches buying the balance needed from England.

If we can find a way to generate electricity from renewables then we should. It is a relatively fledgling industry compared to other more traditional methods and has hit constant stumbling blocks. The search for renewables is not new as I am sure you are aware and probably more qualified than myself to speak about it. I remember reading about many of the possibilities in the National Geographic many years ago and have always favoured tidal energy if we can find a system with the least impact on the environment.
The UK Gov has a long history of inflating prices for renewables, even changing reports carried pout by their own as far back as the 70's tp make it appear to be uneconomically viable. Even now they continue to heavily subsidise nuclear while reducing their subsidies to the renewables sector. It was only in the last few years that Scotland looked set to become one of the most innovative and progressive countries for developing renewables, until the UK Gov cut funding to it.
 

Fruin

Well-known member
Messages
3,387
Reaction score
365
Location
East Dunbartonshire
I believe the plan is to trade electricity supply in exchange for supplies of excess rainwater

It actually goes the other way Ozzy!

Charging us extra to supply their electricity for free under the UK arrangments. It's a bit like what the UK did to India, only allowing trade to happen with paper bonds controlled from the UK and charging the Indian traders in gold and silver to buy the bonds.
 

Roag Fisher

Well-known member
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
935
Location
Isle of Lewis
Use this as a starter if you want to educate yourself about "green" energy.


Plenty info in there about the scam.
 

Auldghillie

Active member
Messages
304
Reaction score
204

If we can find a way to generate electricity from renewables then we should. It is a relatively fledgling industry compared to other more traditional methods and has hit constant stumbling blocks. The search for renewables is not new as I am sure you are aware and probably more qualified than myself to speak about it. I remember reading about many of the possibilities in the National Geographic many years ago and have always favoured tidal energy if we can find a system with the least impact on the environment.
The UK Gov has a long history of inflating prices for renewables, even changing reports carried pout by their own as far back as the 70's tp make it appear to be uneconomically viable. Even now they continue to heavily subsidise nuclear while reducing their subsidies to the renewables sector. It was only in the last few years that Scotland looked set to become one of the most innovative and progressive countries for developing renewables, until the UK Gov cut funding to it.
The Govt appears hell-bent on finishing off salmonid fishing in Scotland. Since that has already happened in England, I am cynical and old too.

I find, in general, that life is ” swings-and-roundabouts “. By that I mean that little beneficial action can be taken without an equal adverse reaction elsewhere. Non-fishers want well-paid jobs over anything else. Governments thus go for economic growth out of self-interest. Growth equals environmental damage. Our interest group comes way down the pecking order.

Tidal barrages for power generation would be the kiss-of-death. The four in England saw rapid catch collapses. AG

ps water export is impractical nor needed ( Kielder/ Derwent schemes ) but that of people clearly is - would more Scots leave if independence happened ?
 
Last edited:

ozzyian

Well-known member
Messages
5,494
Reaction score
1,470
Location
East Lothian
Charging us extra to supply their electricity for free under the UK arrangments. It's a bit like what the UK did to India, only allowing trade to happen with paper bonds controlled from the UK and charging the Indian traders in gold and silver to buy the bonds.

Is it? :)
 

JRA

Member
Messages
67
Reaction score
6
Location
Ripon, North Yorkshire
Point to ponder.
There may be the same amount of money but at a vastly inferior exchange rate.
If the nightmare ever became reality, my cash, savings pensions the lot get transferred immediately into an English bank and the house goes on the market and I move to a nice place in the Mourne valley.
I could happily spend my time and my money there fishing the Mourne, Finn and Owenmore. Mibees even the Faughan if Ould Grumpy doesn't black ball me. :D
There would be loads like me.:(
That is what I think of this dangerous bunch of crooks.:mad:
But-----canny see me moving any time soon or even ever.(y)

I have followed this interesting thread for some time now. Most contributors are from committed views and being a Yorkshire man with few Scottish ties I look on with a degree of impartiality, allowing myself to side both ways at times.

I never thought that I would have anything concrete to contribute in this tetchy debate, but I had an interesting conversation with my 90 year old next door neighbour yesterday, who is as a fit as a fiddle and has a sharp mind to boot.

She originates from Scotland, I believe both Perth and Aberdeenshire, but has lived in England for more than half her life, yet she still has many close friends living in those areas she previously hailed from. When I asked her what her Scottish friends felt about the issue of independence she said almost all felt the same way. If they were young now, they would almost all of them leave Scotland for good and move to England, as they did not believe that Scotland would be a good place to prosper if independence was gained.

I confess to being taken aback at this and thought she might be ‘massaging’ the numbers, but she was quite adamant that most of her pals feared for their younger generation if change came about.

If Independence is brought about will there be a ‘brain drain’, a liquidation of assets and a move south for many and if so what effect would this have for a new economy?
 

mows

Well-known member
Messages
4,152
Reaction score
2,815
Location
edzell
Thanks for posting that and it confirms reality. However, the Prof appears to have omitted the upcoming power gap. Two of our nuclear power stations are in trouble, both 2nd generation AGR’s I think - Hunterston and Torness. One is to close ASAP for age and safety reasons and the other is under heavy maintenance.

These generate base-load electricity in contrast to wind and hydro - how would the Sturgeon fund the replacement ? By charging us of course Or ruining more rivers with hydro- generation and the sea-bed with cable trenches buying the balance needed from England.
Im not sure what your saying here.
I thought the nuclear power stations were part of the overall UK power generation strategy.
Are you saying Westminster is taking its eye off the ball and neglecting base power generation in Scotland?
 

Walleye

Well-known member
Messages
3,187
Reaction score
2,121
That already happens without the Indy part. Decades of under investment in Scotland and over investment in the south east has created a wealth gap.
I never mentioned the south east. Finally we northerners will have somewhere on these islands we can sell up and retire to. Expect a bit of a rush.
 

Horsbrugh

Well-known member
Messages
672
Reaction score
804
Location
Peebles
The UK Gov has a long history of inflating prices for renewables, even changing reports carried pout by their own as far back as the 70's tp make it appear to be uneconomically viable. Even now they continue to heavily subsidise nuclear while reducing their subsidies to the renewables sector. It was only in the last few years that Scotland looked set to become one of the most innovative and progressive countries for developing renewables, until the UK Gov cut funding to it.

It would appear that the SNP have certainly not backed the wave energy research.

 

ozzyian

Well-known member
Messages
5,494
Reaction score
1,470
Location
East Lothian

It actually goes the other way Ozzy!

Charging us extra to supply their electricity for free under the UK arrangments. It's a bit like what the UK did to India, only allowing trade to happen with paper bonds controlled from the UK and charging the Indian traders in gold and silver to buy the bonds.
I don't know a lot about energy supply but what I do know is that historically and globally it has been a major source of conflict and as such it is a highly manipulated political subject, so we probably agree on that so far :)

However the point was that (as referenced by Auldghillie) the starting base for YOUR argument about how Scotland will be self sufficient for energy with an excess to sell is all about who produces what and how - based on existing and potential production levels compared to requirement, yes?

When you take into account that nearly half of Scotlands production is generated in ageing nuclear facilities that are currently operating on specially created extended licenses (having exceeded design life) it is obvious that once these facilities are finally lifed your argument re net export ceases.

Being in 'extended' life this electricity is especially expensive (nuclear generally is anyway) You have to remember that the choice for nuclear is manyfold, it is reliable, supplies on demand, not reliant on diminishing resources, efficient in regards other than cost (relative environmental cost for example) - amongst other things. So as it stands, when these 2 reactors are closed you would be relying on

1. New atomic reactors/new fossil based production
2. The wind blowing
3. Wave/tidal energy

Since a progressive Scotland will be non nuclear (and presumably non fossil) your alternatives according to the currant situation will be

1. Buying it elsewhere
2. developing renewable production (and massive step change in energy storage)
3. errrr.....

So, you see (obvs you won't:)) that the little bit nationalist inspired 'information' about energy production, requirements, self sufficiency and excess production isn't actually as advertised. It's tiring and frustrating picking apart each of these little snp falsehoods btw.
 

Auldghillie

Active member
Messages
304
Reaction score
204
Im not sure what your saying here.
I thought the nuclear power stations were part of the overall UK power generation strategy.
Are you saying Westminster is taking its eye off the ball and neglecting base power generation in Scotland?
Sorry, yes but all of UK.

Delaying decisions on new nuclear plant and filling the energy-gap with gas occurred in Blair’s era.

Whilst botching up and de-rating older nuclear stations was done at the same time. The 1st generation being a public-con to obtain fissile material for bombs. I better close soon or I’ll get a visit from MI5.

Sizewell B Inquiry took years and the U.K. lost it’s in-house nuclear-build industry. Hence the new French/ China backed project ( of which there is no example successfully-commissioned ) and the abandonment of two others: Wylfa in Wales and in the North-West.

It’s much cheaper to re-use existing sites so avoiding unnecessary distribution costs.

I‘d expect more random water levels on hydro rivers once Hunterston closes when there’s no wind. AG

ps: fine example of the Tories collapsing our industrial base.
 
Last edited:

Fruin

Well-known member
Messages
3,387
Reaction score
365
Location
East Dunbartonshire
It would appear that the SNP have certainly not backed the wave energy research.

Except the assets are now government and local council owned and continue to be developed by the Scottish Government. So, rather than abandoning it, they refused to support a failing business but made sure the research and technology continues to develop.
 

Fruin

Well-known member
Messages
3,387
Reaction score
365
Location
East Dunbartonshire
I don't know a lot about energy supply but what I do know is that historically and globally it has been a major source of conflict and as such it is a highly manipulated political subject, so we probably agree on that so far :)

However the point was that (as referenced by Auldghillie) the starting base for YOUR argument about how Scotland will be self sufficient for energy with an excess to sell is all about who produces what and how - based on existing and potential production levels compared to requirement, yes?

When you take into account that nearly half of Scotlands production is generated in ageing nuclear facilities that are currently operating on specially created extended licenses (having exceeded design life) it is obvious that once these facilities are finally lifed your argument re net export ceases.

Being in 'extended' life this electricity is especially expensive (nuclear generally is anyway) You have to remember that the choice for nuclear is manyfold, it is reliable, supplies on demand, not reliant on diminishing resources, efficient in regards other than cost (relative environmental cost for example) - amongst other things. So as it stands, when these 2 reactors are closed you would be relying on

1. New atomic reactors/new fossil based production
2. The wind blowing
3. Wave/tidal energy

Since a progressive Scotland will be non nuclear (and presumably non fossil) your alternatives according to the currant situation will be

1. Buying it elsewhere
2. developing renewable production (and massive step change in energy storage)
3. errrr.....

So, you see (obvs you won't:)) that the little bit nationalist inspired 'information' about energy production, requirements, self sufficiency and excess production isn't actually as advertised. It's tiring and frustrating picking apart each of these little snp falsehoods btw.
Except the article specifically mentions the export of "wind power".
 

Lamson v10

Well-known member
Messages
9,807
Reaction score
4,003
That already happens without the Indy part. Decades of under investment in Scotland and over investment in the south east has created a wealth gap.

Do You just open yer mouth and let yer belly rumble
 

RUSH

Well-known member
Messages
1,550
Reaction score
214
Location
Carnwath
Did anybody hear Andrew Marr questioning whether the death of Prince Philip would impact the Scottish election, and specifically the SNP campaign? The journalist to whom the question was directed answered, pointedly, that not even the formation of a new independence party appeared to dent the dominance of the SNP in Scotland.

This little exchange was quite telling about politics in the UK. Firstly just how much out of touch the BBC are about Scottish politics. Whilst there may be a degree of respect for Royalty Scots, as a whole, are less inclined to the strange sycophantism often displayed by Union Jack clad members of the public south of the border. The complete cancellation of programming on Friday evening on the BBC was like something from the 1950s, but that is no surprise for an organisation so acquiescent too the tories.

Secondly, the SNP has not had it's troubles to seek over the last few years, many of them self-inflicted. But still its dominance continues. Conveniently portrayed as a evidence of a cult mentality by unionists, this assessment misses the mark widely. I have made this point before (and it seems to annoy some) but there has been a change in thinking in Scotland. The mood has switched towards independence and its seems that little can shake that movement. Many give the SNP their votes, not because they follow them as sheep, but because the SNP is an essential piece of the jigsaw that will deliver independence.

Thirdly, the new independence party, ALBA, may be the final piece of the jigsaw. Little wonder DRoss was in full panic mode in the aftermath, running around trying to formalise tactical voting. He had forgotten about Galloway, that complete charlatan, at the time though.

Interesting times....
And thats the problem the snp know that no matter what they do how badly they mess things up that the sheep will still vote for them independence at any cost that’s all they want 🙈
 
Top