Scottish nationalists will hold us to ransom if Labour blocks English votes', William Hague warns, Daily Mail

 England risks being held to ransom by Scottish Nationalists unless Labour agrees to implement a system of ‘English votes for English laws’ at Westminster, William Hague said yesterday.

The Leader of the Commons said Ed Miliband was refusing to back a veto for English MPs over legislation that applies only to their constituents, to keep open the possibility of a Labour-SNP coalition.

The Conservatives said they planned to strip Scottish MPs of the power to impose tax changes, education and health reforms on England, given the Scottish Parliament will soon have control of all these issues.

The reform would make it impossible for an incoming Labour government to press ahead with its plan to raise the top rate of tax to 50p in England, for example, without winning the support of a majority of English MPs.

Mr Hague said it was a ‘simple matter of fairness’. But his blueprint prompted a furious response from Labour and the SNP – as well as some Right-wing Tories who want to go further and create an effective English Parliament.

Read more here:

Comment:

Why should  Scottish, Northern Irish and Welsh Members of Parliament have the right to vote on matters such as Education, Health etc  that only effects English hospitals and schools etc, etc when those matters in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales have been devolved to the Scottish Parliament, Northern Ireland and Welsh Assemblies  for the electorate and the citizens of those parts of the United Kingdom ?.   I believe those matters only affecting England should only be voted on by English MP’s. This is known as the West Lothian Question.

Read more on the West Lothian Question

Scotland’s fateful choice The case for union is overwhelming. The path of separation is a fool’s errand, The Financial Times

The United Kingdom ranks as one of the most successful marriages in history. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have survived ancient hatreds, tribal rivalry and war. Each nation has been enriched by a journey of enlightenment, empire, shared energy and enterprise.

In eight days’ time, this splendid mess of a union, to quote Simon Schama, the British historian, risks being separated into its national parts. Scotland will vote in a referendum to decide whether to stay in the UK or sunder bonds stretching back to 1707. Opinion polls suggest the result is too close to call, a prospect which has alarmed financial markets, wrongfooted allies and sent a complacent coalition government scrambling to find a last-minute sweetener to win over the Scots.

Empires and nation states are not immune to break-up, but there is little precedent for a hitherto stable modern democracy splitting apart in peacetime, in the middle of an economic recovery. This is not the time for recrimination. For the moment, it is enough for this newspaper to declare that the path of separation is a fool’s errand, one fraught with danger and uncertainty.

Scotland is a proud and vibrant nation. Scots have contributed disproportionately to the union. They have played a leading role in arts, commerce, literature, the military, politics and sport. But a vote in favour of secession would be an irreversible act with profound consequences, not merely for 5m Scots but also for the other 58m citizens of England, Wales and Northern Ireland (including 750,000 Scots living and working outside Scotland who under the terms of the referendum have no say on the future of their country).

The act of separation would diminish the UK in every international body, notably the EU. It would raise complex – and still unanswered – questions about the common defence of the British Isles, the future of the currency and political arrangements for the rest of the UK. Above all, a Yes vote would ignore the lessons of the 20th century, a chapter in European history indelibly scarred by narrow nationalism.

Read more here:

Why don't we tell the Scots to shove off! In a personal view (which the Mail disagrees with) SIMON HEFFER says what we fear many English people think, Daily Mail

Alex Salmond's offensive comparison of Scots voting for independence to the ending of apartheid and blacks being given the vote in South Africa took the rank dishonesty of the nationalists’ campaign to a new low yesterday.

Mandela went to prison for his beliefs, something that doesn’t appear to have happened to any Scottish Nationalists.

And, far from being victims of a cruel and unjust system, they have been encouraged to participate in the political process, and to live in a Union replete with opportunities — unlike millions in South Africa who were excluded from politics and advancement simply because they were the wrong race.

It was equally offensive to see Mr Salmond embracing immigrants from Eastern Europe and telling them that their intention to vote ‘Yes’ would be the culmination of their own long walk to freedom.

They chose to come to Scotland not because independence promises an extra layer of liberty, but because of the hard won, wide-ranging freedoms already available throughout the UK, and bestowed upon the Scots as they are bestowed upon every other Briton. 

Enough, frankly, is enough. We have long tolerated Mr Salmond’s mendacity, and his twisted loathing of the English, largely because many felt he would be the loser of this fight and should be indulged.

So when he dropped hints that the NHS would be privatised if there wasn’t a ‘Yes’ vote, or made up the rules about Scotland’s continuing membership of the EU as he went along, or exaggerated the wealth from Scottish oil revenues, we felt slightly patronising towards the old rogue, assuring ourselves of his inevitable humiliation in the September 18 vote.

Now that humiliation appears less certain, and the arrogant dishonesty is so overwhelming, it is time to tell him what some of us really think.

Read more here:

SIMON HEFFER: Ten burning questions if Scotland votes yes. Daily Mail

1)     Would the Queen remain Queen of Scotland?

The Queen will be Queen of Scotland even after independence, just as she is Queen of Australia or Canada, since the Union of the Crowns of 1603 — when James VI of Scotland also became James I of England — precedes even the Union of the nations of 1707. However, the Scots could, as a sovereign nation, choose to become a republic, inside or outside the Commonwealth.

A third alternative, though less likely, is that they could choose to ignore the ‘Glorious Revolution’ of 1688, which saw King James II of England (who was also James VII of Scotland) deposed in favour of William of Orange.

If they did so, they could invite the man regarded by some as James’s legitimate heir, the ‘Stuart Pretender’, to replace the English Queen. That would mean the present Duke of Bavaria becoming King Francis II of Scotland. However, Duke Franz claims to be perfectly content where he is.

Read more here:

Queen's fear over break up of Britain: Poll puts Scottish separatists in lead as Westminster convulses. Daily Mail

1.      The Queen has held talks with David Cameron after poll put separatists ahead

2.    Said to be 'great concern' at Buckingham Palace over 300-year-old Union

3.     Her Majesty is thought to be strongly in favour of Scotland remaining in UK

4.    Will be in Scotland at Balmoral on day of the vote as a sign of 'continuity'

5.     SNP say Queen will stay as head of state if country votes for independence

6.     But SNP's James Mason is calling for a referendum to replace the monarch

The Queen held talks with David Cameron yesterday amid panic at the prospect of the end of the 300-year-old Union.

With a shock poll putting Scottish separatists ahead for the first time, there was said to be ‘great concern’ at Buckingham Palace.

The Queen, who is thought to strongly favour the Union, will be in Scotland on September 18 – the day it could vote to break away from the rest of the UK.

Pro-Union MPs said her presence at Balmoral would be a sign of continuity.

‘There is a strong anti-monarchy element in the Scottish National Party,’ said former defence secretary Liam Fox.

‘You can bet your bottom dollar as soon as they get independence, their next target is going to be Scotland being a republic.’

Read more here:

Scots, What the Heck? NY Times

Next week Scotland will hold a referendum on whether to leave the United Kingdom. And polling suggests that support for independence has surged over the past few months, largely because pro-independence campaigners have managed to reduce the “fear factor” — that is, concern about the economic risks of going it alone. At this point the outcome looks like a tossup.

Well, I have a message for the Scots: Be afraid, be very afraid. The risks of going it alone are huge. You may think that Scotland can become another Canada, but it’s all too likely that it would end up becoming Spain without the sunshine.

Comparing Scotland with Canada seems, at first, pretty reasonable. After all, Canada, like Scotland, is a relatively small economy that does most of its trade with a much larger neighbor. Also like Scotland, it is politically to the left of that giant neighbor. And what the Canadian example shows is that this can work. Canada is prosperous, economically stable (although I worry about high household debt and what looks like a major housing bubble) and has successfully pursued policies well to the left of those south of the border: single-payer health insurance, more generous aid to the poor, higher overall taxation.

Does Canada pay any price for independence? Probably. Labor productivity is only about three-quarters as high as it is in the United States, and some of the gap may reflect the small size of the Canadian market (yes, we have a free-trade agreement, but a lot of evidence shows that borders discourage trade all the same). Still, you can argue that Canada is doing O.K.

Read more here:

The final push for Alex Salmond’s land of fantasy, Telegraph

It is Thursday morning on Buchanan Street, Glasgow’s busiest shopping thoroughfare, and Scotland’s First Minister is doing what he does best: smirking.

Working his way through a boisterous crowd of placard-wielding Yes supporters, Alex Salmond revels in the adoration of his fans and poses for countless “selfies” with starstruck Nationalists out to pay homage on the 10th anniversary of his return as leader of the Scottish National Party.

The choice of location for this event, right in the middle of Glasgow, is very deliberate. With less than a fortnight until Scots vote on whether to leave the United Kingdom, Scotland’s largest city has turned into the front line in the referendum battle. To win, the Nationalists need to convert voters in the west of Scotland, where Labour has traditionally been strong.

Mr Salmond, a gambler and racing-loving punter who relishes the thrill of the chase, is confident he has Labour and the Better Together pro-Union campaign on the run. “The ground is shifting below their feet,” he says.

The race has certainly tightened. Last week, a poll by YouGov showed the No lead narrowing sharply to only six points (53 to 47 per cent when don’t knows are stripped out).

It prompted concern at Westminster, and in the City the markets were spooked. Investors who had presumed there was no chance of a Yes vote sold off shares in companies that trade on both sides of the border between England and Scotland. Polls this weekend are expected to show Yes getting even closer.

Read more here;

Beyond the Scottish Independence Question, Looking at a Greater Devolution in The United Kingdom, A Perspective, Updated

Like many of you, I have been following the Scottish Independence Debate from various media sources,  and  I think we in the United Kingdom of Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) and Northern Ireland need to ask ourselves and our political leaders some questions about the future shape of our country ?

Personally I feel that Alex Salmond is an astute politician, however his desperation for self promotion from the First Minister of Scotland to the President of Scotland,  (although he has stated that the Queen is the head of state,   I feel there is a possibility at her Majesty’s passing, some voices in the Scottish National Party will call for Scotland to be a republic.) Mr Salmond economic arguments for Scotland to be independent quite simply don’t add up,  for the last few years, the revenues from North Sea Oil have been decreasing year on year.   His latest interaction to say that Scotland will keep the pound and if they’re not allowed to keep the pound,  a newly independent Scotland will not pay it’s share of the UK National Debt  is more like the politics of the playground,  where Mr Salmond is telling everyone if I don’t get my own way,  I will throw my toys out of the pram.

Brian Wilson: Show us the money, Mr Salmond

He has now decided that Scotland will keep the pound, in the some sort of informal currency union, or dollaristion scheme (A sterling zone)  the Panama Option,  (Panama uses the US Dollar as it’s currency) many students  of history would know  what happened when Scotland last looked at a Panama Option,  they suffered economic turmoil and eventually bankruptcy because of a Ponzi scheme known as the Darien Colony.

Currently under the Barnett formula, the Scottish Government receives it’s income from the United Kingdom Treasury ,  and is generally allowed to spend this at it sees fit,  Mr Salmond’s dream of  creating a Nordic Model of a Free Market Economy with a Welfare State (Social Democracy)  is reliant on the UK Taxpayer,  if Scotland did vote for Independence  on the 18^th September 2014,  after any successful negotiation by Scottish and United Kingdom Governments,  Scotland even if it  decided to keep the Pound, it would either have to enter a time of austerity or drastically increase taxation,  the Nordic Model of Social Democracy does mean high taxation to pay for it’s welfare state,  on it’s current tax revenues and because it receives more back from Westminster that it pays to Westminster,  The Scottish Social Democracy model would not be sustainable  long term after 2016.

 An Independent Scotland of 2016 onwards will see falling tax revenue from North Sea Oil and Gas and other sources.  A large part of the Scottish Finance Sector would move  south of Hadrian’s Wall because a majority of it’s customers will be in the United Kingdom and  due to the  financial uncertainty caused by dollarization,  it would be extremely difficult or indeed impossible for Scotland to borrow money from International sources  at reasonable rates because Scotland would not have the standing of the United Kingdom,  although it’s possible that China and / or the Gulf States or indeed Russia  could lend money to Scotland, this of course would come with conditions such as access to Scottish Oil and Gas for Chinese Companies or the opening of Scottish Ports to Chinese Naval Vessels.

Read this important report to see why an Independent Scotland doesn't add up

Institute for Fiscal Studies , Fiscal sustainability of an independent Scotland

 Scotland also would have to negotiate to join international organisations such as International Monetary Fund,  The United Nations and The European Union,  although because of Spain facing issues with both the Basque Region and Catalonia wanting  independence,  the Spainish  Government could veto an newly independent  Scotland joining the EU Club.

The Westminster Government and the Opposition,(  The Conservatives, The Liberal Democrats and the Labour Party) have recently offered that if the people of Scotland  if they vote to remain part of the United Kingdom this is known as the Devo Max option, that Scotland would be more responsible for its income and expenditure , this would see a decrease in the money from the Barnett Formula and the Scottish Government would see either Tax raising or Tax varying powers,  if  the people of Scotland are given the option, it’s my opinion  that both the Welsh Assembly Government and the Northern Ireland Assembly Government  should also be given the option of having their own equilvalent versions of Devo Max  depending on their needs and requirements, for example the Welsh Assembly Government could use some of it’s income and perhaps borrow on the international finance markets or from the European Union or the Westminster Government  for capital projects such as improving North – South Wales transport and infrastructure links.

 Before the 19^th Century many of the United Kingdom’s largest cities such as Leeds, Manchester and Newcastle were virtual city states it was due to the rise of  Railway Networks that a fragmented country came together,  if the people of Scotland,   Northern Ireland and Wales are given their own versions or types of  fiscal federalism,   the people of  the English Regions should also be given fiscal federalism .

 The United Kingdom needs to move away from a  centralised London and South East of England  system of Government  and Economic Management and the people of the English Regions,  Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales should be given greater autonomy,  and responsibility to run their own affairs although agree with a centralised government for larger picture issues s such as defense, legal issues, foreign relations and currency.

I also believe that the British Overseas Territories such as the Falkland Islands and Gibraltar should be represented  in a more United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Further Reading:

Scottish independence: Ed Miliband calls on SNP to 'come clean' on currency

Banks ‘could quit’ if dollarisation used post-Yes

Ed Miliband Says The Poorest Would Suffer If Scotland Went Independent

Salmond's Scottish Independence Plans Could Harm Businesses, Warn MPs

The Yes Scotland and the SNP’s Plan B for Currency Union, Plan B will not work

Independence Would Be 'Disastrous' For Scotland's Banks, Says Report

Blair Humphreys

8^th August 2014

Southport, Merseyside, England

VIEWPOINT: Why Alex Salmond is deluded... Vote against political union is also a vote against currency union By SIR ANDREW LARGE AND SIR MARTIN JACOMB. Daily Mail, Updated

Successful partnerships or unions depend on give and take. Political unions provide for this. Money raised from taxpayers can then be transferred to wherever in the union needs it: in bad times and good, and over time. Our Union, as the UK including Scotland, has worked like that pretty well over the past 300 years.

One element of a political union is common money, underpinned by a currency union. That’s why we all have the pound. The money we use matters to us all. It must be universally accepted in payment; prices must be stable. And crises like 2008 must not undermine it.

So Mr Salmond’s claim that if Scotland votes ‘Yes’ there will be no change for Scotland’s money is a delusion at best. A vote against political union is also effectively a vote against currency union.

The Scottish Nationalists think that the three political parties who rule out a currency union are bluffing. But why would the rest of the UK wish to support Scotland with their taxpayers’ money?

Claims that it is in the UK’s interests to continue the currency union forget the potentially open ended longer-term commitments: whatever the short-term trade benefits.

And to insist that Scotland would be stronger than the UK is not self-evident. The lessons are there in the European Union. The UK rejected the euro because we knew this needed political union.

The euro’s difficulties won’t be overcome until that can be achieved. It’s not there yet, and the lack of political union today prevents wealth transfers where needed: resulting in mass unemployment in Spain, Portugal and Greece.

Of course Scotland has other options. They all involve change, and risk. Scottish nationalists may feel the risks are worth it. But they need to know what they would be.

Scotland could continue to use the pound but with no formal agreement with the rest of the UK. Some small countries do this: Kosovo uses the euro, Panama the US dollar and Jersey the pound. 

The consequence for the Scots would be that they would have no say over monetary policy. The rest of the UK would issue the pound, and look first to its own interests, not Scotland’s.

Another consequence is that banknotes issued by Scottish banks could be in jeopardy. Today these are equivalent to Bank of England notes, but people might think otherwise if the bank was in a foreign country.

Mr Salmond could peg the Scottish pound to sterling. But Scottish taxpayers would need to build a multibillion pound reserve to defend this against speculators, to avoid what happened when the UK itself was forced out of the parity with the developing euro [ERM] as recently as 1992

Read more here:

Further reading here:

No pound, no euro: With a vote on Scottish independence imminent, why Scotland needs a plan C

 

'You are really scrabbling around now!' Alistair Darling takes the fight to Alex Salmond in first live TV debate on Scottish independence

Tom Peterkin: Salmond causes frustration for SNP

Senior SNP figures stick the knife into Alex Salmond after his disastrous showing in the TV indy debate

Scottish independence: Salmond says 'we're keeping the pound' BBC News

In 2003, Mr Salmond told me Scotland would be independent in 20 years. After that debate I doubt it By STEPHEN GLOVER. Daily Mail

 During the 2003 Scottish elections I found myself walking around the back streets of Dundee with Alex Salmond. He was not then leader of the Scottish Nationalists, though he had been, and would soon be again. I remember him as an amiable and rumpled figure.

At one of our pit-stops he said something that chilled my blood. He told me that in 20 years, if not before, Scotland would be an independent country. He asserted this so calmly and confidently that it was hard to disbelieve him.

I wonder whether Tuesday evening’s debate with Alistair Darling will mark the point when Mr Salmond and the rest of the world began to realise that his prophecy of an independent Scotland has been confounded, at any rate for a generation.

And I also wonder whether the debate might remind Labour that Mr Darling (still only 60) is a considerable but often underrated politician who in most respects stands head and shoulders above the party’s present leader, Ed Miliband.

 The debate had been billed as a contest between the wily, charming Mr Salmond, and the boring, bank managerish Mr Darling. Some supporters of the Union had had so many qualms about the former Chancellor that there had been private talk of replacing him with the more pugnacious John Reid, a Cabinet minister in the Blair administration.

In the event, though, it was the supposedly plodding Mr Darling who easily won the day. An instant Guardian/ICM poll after the debate gave him victory by 56 per cent to 44 per cent. It is hard to find anyone even in the Yes camp who thinks their man did well.

By the way, let me say how outrageous it was that the contest could not be viewed south of the border except online, and even then the picture was often interrupted. These two men were discussing the future of our country, Britain, and yet most citizens of the United Kingdom were excluded from the debate.

Read more here:

Further reading here:

We are the underdogs now, admits Salmond: Support for independence slumps after his TV mauling, Daily Mail

Plan B or not Plan B: Salmond rejects the question,  The Scotsman

Scottish Independence, a Vehicle for Alex Salmond's Grandiose Ego ?

First Minister Alex Salmond warns that without the pound an independent Scotland would refuse to take its share of UK debt and claims debate was a success for Yes camp.

COMMENT: Bookmakers were wrong to tip gambler Alex Salmond in independence TV debate, Scottish Daily Express

The bookies obviously reflect the mood of their punters, who do not as a rule enjoy taking too many risks with their hard-earned cash.

But sometimes bookies, and their punters, can be wrong, and last night they were.

Almost everyone has at least a grudging admiration for the swashbuckling, everconfident manner of Mr Salmond - which is why he was the bookies' favourite - but with little more than a month before the referendum, most people were watching from the comfort and safety of their own homes.

And they will have been looking for reassurance and stability.

Now that we are virtually on the last lap of this seemingly interminable campaign, the thought of taking the kinds of risks that Alex Salmond and his Nationalist supporters propose is distinctly unappealing.

Mr Salmond, as lubricious as ever, did not fail his admirers.

But most of last night's viewers, I suspect, would not wish to follow this man - and his wonky financial nous - into the dense thicket of uncertainty he proposes.

That is why, in the absence of any immediate verdict by STV's 350-strong audience, last night's winner - out there in the real world - was Alistair Darling.

He was never going to set the studio in Glasgow's Royal Conservatoire alight with his booming oratory, but his calm, incisive delivery, and his ability to unravel the untold consequences of Mr Salmond's reckless venture, will surely have told on the electorate.

Read more here:

Further Reading:

Duel that ignored the hard questions: MAX HASTINGS delivers his forthright verdict on last night's Scottish independence debate . Daily Mail

'You are really scrabbling around now!' Alistair Darling takes the fight to Alex Salmond in first live TV debate on Scottish independence Daily Mail,

Scottish Independence, a Vehicle for Alex Salmond's Grandiose Ego ?

Alex Salmond's must-win fight for independence played out on live TV as Alistair Darling is urged to 'keep it boring' Daily Mail

 

  First Minister to go head-to-head with former Chancellor tomorrow night

  Salmond wanted debate with Cameron but Darling is leading No campaign

  Voters have their say in the independence referendum on September 18 

Alex Salmond will tomorrow face one of the biggest tests of his political career as he prepares for a TV showdown that he must win to have any hope of referendum victory.

The First Minister is under intense pressure going into the STV debate, with a new poll revealing that only a quarter of No voters expect Mr Darling to win the contest.

Failure to land a killer blow could end Mr Salmond's hopes of splitting the United Kingdom, and he is receiving help from taxpayer-funded civil servants and a lifestyle guru in a last throw of the dice before the referendum.

Campaign leaders in both camps are taking the two-hour TV programme very seriously, right down to the colour of tie the two politicians should wear, and the broadcaster is hoping for an audience in seven figures. However, experts have warned such programmes rarely reshape the political landscape.

As an uneasy truce for the Commonwealth Games comes to an end, there will now be open warfare between both sides for the final few weeks of the referendum battle, with families set to be bombarded by mailshots costing taxpayers more than £850,000.

Time is running out for the SNP, with a new poll for The Scottish Mail on Sunday showing Unionist campaign's lead has increased slightly in recent days.

The findings are a massive humiliation for Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, who used a Sunday newspaper interview yesterday to claim that Scotland's stunning success in the Commonwealth Games could give the Yes campaign the 'momentum' to win the referendum. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg last night accused her of 'sullying' the Games.

Read more here:

Further Reading:

Alex Salmond must leave Alistair Darling 'on the floor' in independence TV debate

Scottish Independence, a Vehicle for Alex Salmond's Grandiose Ego ?

Comment:

To put it quite simply,  Scottish Independence would be both an economic and financial disaster for Scotland and it’s people,  The SNP have no sound economic plan and can’t even decide what currency they want to use,  without the Westminster  Block Grant and the Pound,  any post independence  Scottish Government would either have to borrow heavily from the International Financial Markets and/or raise Taxation. 

Blair Humphreys

Tom Hunter publishes Scottish independence info, The Scotsman

With just weeks to go until Scotland’s historic independence referendum, new leaflets and information booklets are being made available to help voters north of the border make up their minds.

A new e-book has been launched today, featuring contributions from leading academics who have been examining key issues in the debate.

A paperback version of the book, titled Scotland’s Decision - 16 Questions to think about for the referendum on 18 September, is also planned by its producers, which include businessman Sir Tom Hunter’s Hunter Foundation.

At the same time the Scottish Government is spending £550,000 sending a 12 page guide to the opportunities it says independence offers to all 2.5 million homes north of the border.

Meanwhile the UK Government will this week start sending out a leaflet to Scottish homes, setting it out what it believes are the five main benefits of remaining in the Union.

But Sir Tom said the decision voters will make on September 18 was “too important to leave to politicians to inform us”.

The Ayrshire-born entrepreneur said: “Like many voters, I am genuinely undecided, but I don’t feel that the campaigns so far have given me the facts and unbiased assessment to make a properly informed decision. I know I am not alone in thinking this way.

“A recent poll commissioned by the Hunter Foundation and published in early July showed 56% of undecided voters simply don’t feel they have enough impartial information to make a decision. And 45% of all voters claim they don’t trust either the UK or the Scottish Government’s predictions

“This series of papers we hope will bring some light upon the critical issues voters may wish to consider in making up their minds when they put a cross on the ballot paper on September 18.”

Read more here:

Darling’s ultimate TV test... save the Union in two hours. Daily Mail.

It will be the most important televised clash in British history. On Tuesday night, Alex Salmond and Alistair Darling will debate Scottish independence.

 With only six weeks to go to the referendum, more than a million Scots are expected to tune in. Salmond has two hours to revive the flagging case for Scottish independence – and Darling two hours to secure the Union.

Salmond has been preparing intensively for this debate. The word is that he is relying on a lifestyle coach to help make sure he sounds sufficiently upbeat.

As one of his opponents observes: ‘If shouty Salmond turns up, he’ll turn off women.’

Darling is under a different kind of pressure. One big slip and he puts the entire Union in jeopardy. He will spend this weekend conducting mock debates against people playing Alex Salmond.

His team feels that after two years of public meetings and interviews on independence, he knows what he wants to say and how he wants to say it.

But this hasn’t stopped nervousness in London about how Darling will perform. Some Cabinet Ministers are fretting that Darling isn’t Scottish enough.

This might seem a bizarre thing to say about someone who went to school and university in Scotland and sits for Edinburgh South West in the House of Commons.

But in Salmond’s world, Westminster is a foreign country.

‘Salmond will play dirty,’ warns one Cabinet Minister. ‘He won’t hesitate to try to portray Alistair as an English lackey.’

Read more here:

Commonwealth Games fail to deliver ‘Braveheart bounce’ to Salmond’s YES drive in favour of Scottish independence. Daily Mail

  First poll of Scottish voters conducted since the Games began puts ‘Yes’ vote on 40% – down one point on last month

  Those in favour of keeping the Union remain static on 46%

  Nationalists hoped Games would lead to surge of anti-UK votes 

Alex Salmond begins the most crucial week yet in the battle for Scotland’s future – without the hoped-for Commonwealth Games ‘bounce’ in favour of independence.

Three days before Mr Salmond’s live TV debate with anti-independence campaign leader Alistair Darling, a poll for The Mail on Sunday revealed no boost for the ‘Yes’ campaign from the Games in Glasgow.

The Survation survey, the first of Scottish voters to be conducted since the Games began, puts the ‘Yes’ vote on 40 per cent – down one point on last month – and ‘No’ unchanged on 46 per cent. The outcome will be a bitter disappointment for Scottish Nationalists, who had hoped that scheduling the independence referendum on September 18 on the back of the Games would lead to a surge of votes to break up the UK.

It also flies in the face of reports that a feel-good factor at Glasgow’s success in staging the Games and Scotland’s record haul of medals would provide a so-called ‘Braveheart bounce’ and revitalise the ‘Yes’ campaign.

But the survey does show that Scottish First Minister Mr Salmond is a clear favourite to win Tuesday night’s debate – the first head-to-head contest between the two campaign leaders.

Read more here:

Scottish independence would be economic disaster, finance experts warn just as the SNP say the economy is key battleground, Daily Mail

  Businesses and academics warn country would be plunged into turmoil

  Scotland would join the list of impoverished European countries

  Another says there would be 'utter panic' if voters back independence

Finance experts, academics and business leaders have raised fears that independence would destroy the economy, hit investment and force companies to migrate to England.

In an unprecedented survey that will prove devastating for the SNP, analysts believe a Yes vote in the referendum could lead to the loss of thousands of jobs and plunge the country into turmoil.

One finance insider suggested Scotland would be added to the list of impoverished European countries left on their knees. Another said there would be 'utter panic' among finance firms and several warned of a 'disaster' for Scotland.

Alex Salmond's separatist vision was dismissed as 'economically incoherent'; there were warnings that 'skilled labour' would leave; and creating a new border would cut gross domestic product (GDP) by as much as 3 per cent. 

The findings are particularly humiliating for Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, who yesterday predicted the economy would be the key battleground in the referendum campaign.

The Financial Times asked a number of high-profile economists and eminent university professors to examine the impact of a Nationalist victory in September.

Read more here: