The Scottish referendum debate...

It truly feels like the "Neverendum"!

This (actually posted elsewhere by my Yorkshireman SIL) explains it better than I could.

"Scottish tax revenue goes to Westminster. Westminster decides how much or how little we get back and there's nothing we can do about. If they cut our budget, Scotland has to find savings".

They've promised Devo Max with tax raising powers (which will be decided, discussed, vetoed, watered-down by Westminster over months and years if we're lucky), so potentially, after a No vote we have a budget cut and can only make up the shortfall by raising the basic rate of tax in Scotland. A UK-tied, post No vote Scotland becomes the only part of the UK with higher taxes to try maintain the same level of services as before... But wait, those higher taxes? Where does that revenue go? Ah yes - Westminster. Who decides how much of it we get back? Westminster.

And on the subject of privatisation, a private company's first loyalty is to its shareholders. These companies will be in receipt of public money, our money that will be there to make a profit for their shareholders. There is no profit motive in nationalised institutions but these companies are only about profit. And step one will be extending the hours and cutting the wages of the immigrants and low paid staff of the service sectors they will provide.

It is not to the cancer patients, the elderly or the sick these companies have any allegiance to. They will pick the easiest, most profitable work and leave the rest to the NHS to clear up. And if they mess up or find the subsidies aren't worth bothering with anymore? The patients and the services will STILL have to be provided by the NHS funded by public money. This has already happened in England. Do you want your terminally ill loved ones cared for by an international hedge fund or a bank? Go ahead... Vote No.

WAIT!!! How can I guarantee you that things won't be like this after a Yes vote? what's to stop all of this happening in an independent Scotland? Well, you've got me there. I can't guarantee it won't happen in an independent Scotland, but I CAN guarantee you that if it does happen the Scottish people's displeasure will democratically voiced at the Scottish ballot box and the ordinary Scot's vote will count and not be only 10% of the rest of the UK's latest Farage-mongered whim.

When it comes to this referendum, ironically for the first time as a Scottish voter the choice in the ballot box is 100% yours. Good luck."

As there are two threads running again this is a repeat .

If you are genuinely interested in the NHS in Scotland watch last weeks Scottish Parliament debates on the BBC Parliament channel. You will see and hear from the horses mouth not from reports that 'may' be politically motivated or biased toward the yes or no campaigns. It is quite interesting in parts.

I watched most of the debates and to be honest it just showed the lack of truth, honesty and answers to the questions asked. There was a lot of rhetoric and blame game going on but very little factual evidence on many topics.

This will be head over heart or heart over head as there is so little substantiated evidence to vote on.

jane10, I like it

There is an NHA local group started up in Scotland, bags.
If you read the NHA article you will see that if there is already privatisation in the health service, then the TTIP will apply. You actually say that Chisholm says there has been an increase in privatisation in Scotland. Therefore there must have been some in the first place, so the TTIP will apply.
That is what Labour, Tories and the Libdems want.
If Scotland says no, the TTIP will apply as they are ruled by London.

"The claim that this would be threatened by independence is patently absurd. The Scottish Government's independence White Paper, could hardly be clearer on health. It affirms that the NHS would remain in public hands as a fully state-funded public service. However, it is difficult to see how this uniquely Scottish arrangement could continue if Westminster continues to control the purse strings.

The Scottish Parliament is responsible for health in Scotland but funding remains with Westminster through the Barnett Formula, which increases or decreases every year in line with health spending in England. The intention of the UK health reforms is to get private companies to take on more and more of the work of the NHS, reducing the contribution made by the taxpayer. This will inevitably reduce the funding that comes to Scotland, even assuming the Barnett Formula is retained. George Osborne has pencilled in a further £35 billion in cuts to health spending. As consultant surgeon Philippa Whitford has argued, this means the Scottish Government might be forced to go along the same privatisation route to fill the gap.

But there is a further threat facing the NHS. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is the fruit of long-running negotiations between the EU and the US over trade liberalisation. One of its fundamental principles is that services, including state services, should be open to private competition from American multinationals. According to Garcia Bercero, the EU Commission official with responsibility for TTIP, health services in Europe will be opened to private competition, but only where privatisation is already established. In other words, where there is an existing state monopoly, foreign companies cannot sue the government in question for unfair competition."

This supports what Granny23 says.

www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/forget-the-latest-scare-story-the-real-threat-to-our-health-service-is-a-no-vote.24735142

The rest of the article is here if you want to read it.

Re Malcolm Chisolm's piece from the Labour Party Website -

Should the £100 cut quoted not be 1million??

'Public expenditure in Scotland on private Health contracts has increased 23 per cent in the last year' - but Mr Chisolm fails to mention that these are mainly rental and maintenance payments to the contractors for Hospitals built & equipped under the Public, Private Partnerships so beloved by the previous Labour/Libdem administration.

The NHAP does have a branch and members in Scotland.

Now, which one is liable to print un-biased information - NHAP or the Labour Party?

So the second debate looms up tomorrow evening and I gather we can all watch it down south this time if we wish. I am inclined to do so even though I wonder whether the sight of two Scotsmen cutting themselves to pieces again in public should be construed as a blood-sport and banned. Surely there can be no pleasure in it?

Papa - I have just seen this on Youtube. It is one of thousands of contributions to the 'debate'. I wonder if you think this will persuade anyone to vote NO?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEY732C-sn0

NB. This is not suitable for person's of a nervous disposition.

And for the sake of balance here's a contribution from the other side of the debate:

aworkingclassman.com/jim-murphys-hecklers-reveal-true-danger-labour/

I do enjoy a witty heckle, G23. I remember a very well attended political meeting years ago being addressed by the sitting member, a dry boring old stick called Hurd (yes, father of..). A loud voice piped up from the back of the hall...Hurd? You should have been called never heard, 'cos you haven't spoken in the house for two years!...brought the house down.

Not a political heckle, but I remember at Kirkcaldy High School in about 1957, a Geography lesson where the teacher was trying to extract the name of a Fife holiday resort out of an unco-operative class. Eventually someone offered "Kirkcaldy?" Immediately a loud aside came from the back of the room "That's a last resort!"

There were no Observers when I went shopping today, so I bought the Sunday Post. This article on the front page is rather worrying for the Yes lobby.
www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/independence-referendum/independence-on-trial/oaps-panic-over-yes-vote-1.539040

However, I find it rather hypocritical of the Tory spokesperson to say that Salmond does not know what he is offering. Of course he doesn't. The Tories will not tell him because they want a No vote. If it's a Yes vote there will be lots of negotiation before the two countries split.

Why do pensioners think they will lose their pensions if they vote yes? They cannot have their pensions taken away from them.

They think so because some scaremonger has suggested it will happen. Scum! No need to fabricate tales to influence the vote.

Scaremongering indeed, Elegran. Today's pensioners have paid their National Insurance dues to the UK Exchequer who MUST continue to pay their pensions, even if Scotland becomes a 'foreign country' - just the same as people who retire abroad receive their UK pension. For people yet to retire, they will be credited with their contributions up to independence day and thereafter their contributions will be paid to the Scottish Exchequer. Then either the RUK treasury transfers all the monies paid in to date to Scotland - making them responsible for paying the whole pension or each person's pension comprises 2 parts (pre and post independence. Check out the Republic of Ireland pensions website to see how it works there, even with many people who have worked back and forward between Irish Republic, Northern Ireland and mainland UK. (While you are there check the amount of basic pension payable and marvel at this wee, impoverished, bankrupt (Alastair Darling's words) independent state (with no oil! but there again no nuclear weapons) being able to pay over £180 per week basic state pension.

As to Private pensions - my own miniscule one started off with Sun Life of Canada, was sold to a Swiss based company, then Windsor Life and now a company called Reassure. However, I have received exactly the same amount monthly no matter where it has come from.

I know several people who will retire with Public Service pensions who have received letters from their employer and/or their Union reassuring them that their pensions are guaranteed. However, I know of various instances of 'No' campaigners spreading fear among current and potential pensioners that this will not be straightforward.

So how is the Yes campaign going to counter this scaremongering?
I do not know that many Scots to tell them it's rubbish.

Jen The YES campaign have produced leaflets specifically on the pensions issue and copies of the letters received from employers and Unions. We distribute these from the YES hubs and street stalls etc. Also take them with us when canvassing and try to allay the fears of any pensioners or soon to be retired people we encounter. Of course with all the MSM on the NO side it is difficult to reach a wide audience but YES supporters use any and all avenues open to them - mainly comments sections of newspapers, Face Book and Twitter. Older people are the least likely demographic to be involved with the digital media but often their children or grandchildren will ask on-line for factual information to pass on to them.

There were 9 of us out doorstepping this afternoon in my village. We all encountered people with questions about the safety of their pensions. The debate seems to have moved on from currency to NHS and pensions, so I hope these topics are fairly aired in tomorrow night's (I suppose it is tonight's now) debate.

Lets hope the debate tonight concentrates on the serious issues and doesn't just dry up in the sterile quicksands of petty nationalism and point scoring on both sides. Personally, I don't think the SNP have prepared their case at all well and I don't think the UK government have worked out the consequences of all this. The loosers will be all the people of the UK. There will be no winners.

I`ve just read in the Scotsman that income tax would have to go up to 30% or we`d have to face swingeing cuts just to pay for all the "jam tomorrow" that we`re being promised by Salmond. I`m sure that will be strenuously denied by the yes campaigners but its a lingering thought that underpins all my multitude of concerns regarding this proposed independence.

I find this a very enlightening link about the debate.
It is not party political, just gives you the full facts as known or not, as the case may be. Even the Tories use this company to verify their facts.
https://fullfact.org/scotland/

Thanks for reference to the Fullfact site, durhamj, its about the most reasonable analysis I've seen of independence statistics, and confirms my view that the consequences of all this have not been properly worked out by both sides and that the SNP are rushing Scotland into a big black hole. On that basis, if I had a vote, I would be voting 'No' but as time goes on I shall be interested to see if I can be persuaded otherwise.

Talking of debates - I was sent a link to this one this am. Better together trying to justify more scaremongering, this time in their own leaflet.

Here's the link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVwGbwcP1Ac&feature=share&app=desktop

shall watch tonight - Salmond gives me the creeps though and as for Sturgeon!