Yes Craigmillar

Being independent - it is better if decisions about Scotland are taken by the people of Scotland.

This page has been created for the people within Craigmillar, Niddrie & Bingham Community Who Suport a Yes Vote for Independenceand also for those who are still Undecided Giving you all access to the latest news and information on the campaign trail.

Click 'Like' and join us on our journey to Liberate Scotland!

***WHY SHOULD SCOTLAND BECOME INDEPENDENT?***

Well over 1 million people in Scotland want our nation to be independent. A similar number want the Scottish Parliament to have more powers. Many people are still to make up their mind.

There are many reasons people support independence, but for most it is because they believe independence will allow us to create a fairer and more prosperous country. They look at all the resources Scotland has, our ingenuity as a people, and they wonder why we aren’t doing better? They ask themselves, if current arrangements are so good, why is Scotland so unequal?

Becoming independent is not like waving magic wand and all Scotland’s problems disappear. But what independence means is that the people who care most about Scotland – that is the people of Scotland – will be in charge of our nation’s future. We have the greatest stake in making our country more successful.

As a nation, we will do the best job of looking out for, and looking after, the people who live in Scotland. And, over time, using our vast resources, our own tax base and untapped assets, like our great international reputation, we will be able to build a country that reflects more closely our own values and priorities.

Becoming independent is a big step and we know it is a decision the people of Scotland will only take after considering all the pros and the cons. Up until now the debate has been dominated by politicians, who present the case for and against in black and white terms. However, that is not good enough given the scale of the decision. On these pages, we provide information about what being independent means. We hope that you will come to this issue with an open mind and with a determination to do what is right for you, your family and Scotland.
----------
***HOW WILL AN INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND BE DIFFERENT?***

As an independent country it will be the people who live in Scotland who will be in charge. That’s why being independent will mean a fairer and more successful Scotland. We’ll be able to take the right decisions for our future, based on our shared values and priorities and using our wealth of resources and talent.

The referendum in 2014 will be on the basis of the Scottish Government's proposals for an independent Scotland. That means, on day one as an independent country we will have a parliament and government just as we do now. But it will take all the decisions for Scotland. It will be elected in the same way, and so the people of Scotland will be able to choose the government they want: whether SNP or Labour, Green, Tory, SSP or Lib Dem.

All the Scottish politicians who are currently in the House of Commons will be able to stand for the Scottish Parliament, so, for example, some of the more experienced Labour politicians currently at Westminster may well be challenging to become the Scottish Government. The Scottish parties will all be able to field their strongest teams.

The Scottish Government’s proposals mean that the Queen will be our Head of State and the pound our currency. There will continue to be close links with the rest of the UK and we will remain part of the same family of nations.

There will be new government departments based in Scotland. We will have our own Treasury and Department of Foreign Affairs. But instead of paying for these services to be based in London, we will have them in Scotland, creating jobs here and boosting the Scottish economy. All civil servants working in Scotland for UK departments will be able to work for the new Scottish Government.

There will be some costs to setting up these new departments in Scotland, but this will be more than offset by the money we save. For example, none of the political parties propose that Scotland should be a nuclear weapons state, so we will have a £250 million annual saving from no longer contributing to the cost of the UK’s nuclear weapons. And, there will be a £50 million annual saving from no longer paying for the Westminster Parliament.

And where we already run things independently – the NHS, education, local government and our legal system – things will continue to operate in the same way as they do now.
----------
***WILL SCOTLAND CONTINUE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE EU?***

An independent Scotland will remain an integral part of the European Union and will not have to re-apply for EU membership from the outside.

Scotland’s most pre-eminent authority on EU law, Professor Sir David Edward, former judge on the European Court of Justice, has now given his opinion on an independent Scotland's relationship with the EU.

In an article for a respected academic website (http://www. scottishconstitutionalfutures.org/OpinionandAnalysis /ViewBlogPost /tabid /1767 /articleType /ArticleView /articleId /852 /David-Edward-Scotland-and-the-European-Union. aspx), Professor Edward specifically rejects the contention, made “most recently by the President of the EU Commission that an independent Scotland, as a new State, would be outside the EU and would have to apply to join”.

His conclusion is that “in so far as we are entitled to look for legal certainty, all that is certain is that EU law would require all parties to negotiate in good faith and in a spirit of cooperation” before Scotland became independent.

Professor Edward’s contribution to the debate confirms much of what has been argued recently by another independent expert, Graham Avery, who worked for 40 years as a senior official in Whitehall and Brussels, and took part in successive negotiations for EU enlargement. Mr Avery is a senior member of St Antony’s College, Oxford; senior advisor at the European Policy Centre, Brussels, and has been fellow at both the Center for International Affairs at Harvard University and the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at the European University Institute, Florence. He is honorary director-general of the European Commission.

In a submission to the House of Commons (http://www. publications. parliament. uk /pa /cm201213 /cmselect /cmfaff /writev /643 /m05. htm), he said: “From the political point of view, Scotland has been in the EU for 40 years; and its people have acquired rights as European citizens. If they wish to remain in the EU, they could hardly be asked to leave and then reapply for membership in the same way as the people of a non-member country such as Turkey. The point can be illustrated by considering another example: if a break-up of Belgium were agreed between Wallonia and Flanders, it is inconceivable that other EU members would require 11 million people to leave the EU and then reapply for membership.

“Arrangements for Scotland’s EU membership would need to be in place simultaneously with independence; Scotland’s 5 million people, having been members of the EU for 40 years, have acquired rights as European citizens. For practical and political reasons they could not be asked to leave the EU and apply for readmission. Negotiations on the terms of membership would take place in the period between the referendum and the planned date of independence. The EU would adopt a simplified procedure for the negotiations, not the traditional procedure followed for the accession of non-member countries. ”

The main argument put forward by the No campaign is that if Scotland becomes independent it would simply cease to be part of the EU and that we would have to re-apply for membership from outside. This has now been rejected, on legal grounds, by Scotland’s leading authority on EU law.

There is also a common sense reason for rejecting the No campaign’s claim - what they say about Scotland would apply equally to a place like Flanders if it sought independence. As Mr Avery states, it is “inconceivable” to think that Flanders would be asked to leave the EU to then re-apply, especially considering that the seat of European Government, and the European Parliament, could then be outside the EU.

Yes Scotland has made clear there are many common sense reasons why Scotland would continue to part be of the EU, and there are also important legal reasons for rejecting the claims put forward by the No campaign. As Professor Edward highlights in his article, their claims are based on international law, rather than EU law.

It is specifically EU law that will ultimately decide the European question.

There is now a provision in the EU treaties which puts in place a mechanism for member states to negotiate their way out of the EU. (There is also the precedent of Greenland, which went through a prolonged period of negotiation to remove itself from what was then the European Community). It is simply not credible to suggest that the EU would spend two years negotiating to arrange Scotland’s withdrawal from the EU to then follow that with two years negotiating to get Scotland back in to the EU.

The new withdrawal clause was put in place to protect the interests of people across the EU. A prominent QC and expert on constitutional law, Aidan O'Neill, said that independence doesn't give Scotland a “get out of EU-gaol free” card. He also queries whether independence could require people in Scotland to be deprived of rights they’ve acquired as EU citizens.

His conclusion - based on EU law - is that an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK “should each succeed to the UK’s existing membership of the EU, but now as two States rather than as one” (http://eutopialaw.com/2011 /11 /14 /685 /).

Taken together, what this tells us is that an independent Scotland will remain an integral part of the European Union and will not have to leave and then re-apply for EU membership from the outside.
----------
***CAN SCOTLAND AFFORD TO BECOME INDEPENDENT?***

The debate on whether Scotland can afford to be independent has been dominated by what appear to be two totally contradictory arguments (http://www. scottishconservatives.com/news /news /gers-figures-reveal-that-scotland-is-better-off /1737) and some of the arguments presented in this article have been specifically challenged (http://conservativefriendsoftheunion.com/2012 /10 /03 /words-vs-facts /).

Most of us have heard that Scotland is subsidised – that more is spent in Scotland than our population share in comparison to the amount spent elsewhere in the UK. There is some truth in this, but it only presents part of the picture. The 2011-2012 Government Expenditure and Revenue figures (http://www. scotland. gov. uk /Resource /0041 /00415871. pdf) show that Scotland has 8. 4% of the UK population and we receive 9. 3% of UK public spending to run our services. However, what many people don’t know is that is that we generate 9. 9% of UK taxes (up from 9. 6% the previous year).

When we include all sides of the balance sheet - spending, tax revenues and borrowing - what this means is that, in the most recent year that full figures are available (2011-12), Scotland contributed £4. 4 billion more in comparison to the rest of the UK.

The reason we generate so much extra tax is because revenues from things like fuel are much higher in Scotland. And we also generate more in VAT and corporation tax and in revenues from oil & gas (that is the tax paid by companies from the profits they make in Scottish waters in the North Sea). 2011-12 was a good year for oil revenues, so it is also necessary to look over a longer period. 30 years of figures published by the UK government, based on Scottish Government analysis, suggest that we’ve contributed an extra £19 billion over and above "our share".

Earlier this year the UK government published figures for a shorter time period - the years since devolution began in 1999 until 2010-11. On these figures, the difference between Scotland's finances and those of the UK amounted to just £1 per person each year (http://www. guardian. co. uk /politics /scottish-independence-blog /2013 /jan /08 /danny-alexander-pound-for-scotland). If the UK government were to rerun the same calculations in light of the 2011-12 figures, they would now show that Scotland's public finances have been stronger than the UK's looking at the whole period since devolution.

What we know, therefore, from the published figures is that over the past 30 years Scotland's finances have, on average been healthier than the UK's. If we look solely at the period since devolution our finances have more than matched the UK's but if we take just the past 5 years, including the most recent year, Scotland's 'national accounts' have, once again, been healthier than those of the UK.

However, to get the full picture, we need to look in more detail at the figures. For example, if we look in more details at the numbers for 2011-12, they show that we have a current account deficit of around £3. 4 billion or 2. 3% of our national wealth (GDP). You may have heard a larger number, but those higher figures deliberately exclude revenues from oil & gas, which would go to the Scottish Exchequer if we were independent. But, excluding revenues from the North Sea for Scotland would be like excluding revenues from the City of London from the UK – it just doesn’t make sense and is an attempt to mislead.

The current deficit is due in large part to the financial crisis and economic downturn. But this doesn’t mean that Scotland can’t afford to be independent because, at the moment, very few countries in the world are earning more than they spend. And the very small number of countries that do manage to run surpluses just now are small independent countries like Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.

Scotland has, in fact, had a current account surplus in three of the past seven years (we’ve been “in the black”). This is one of the best financial records in Europe. In contrast, the UK has had a current account deficit in each and every one of those years. Financially, Scotland is also heading in the right direction.

When we look at revenue contribution v spend (including spending on defence and welfare), two years ago our current account deficit was 5. 3% of our national wealth, whereas last year it was only 2. 3% . In comparison, the UK deficit was 6. 9% two years ago, and last year had only reduced to 6% . What this means is that Scotland is in a stronger financial position than most other independent nations. That means we have strong enough financial foundations to become an independent country, if we so choose.
----------
***WILL AN INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND BE FINANCIALLY SECURE?***

What will happen to an independent Scotland if the worst happens - if we are faced with another banking collapse or global financial crisis? Will we be in a stronger position to face such a challenge if we are independent?

There are, of course, no guarantees for the future with either the Union or as an independent country. However, we can make an assessment based on likely risk and the steps Scotland can and should take to protect our nation in times of adversity.

Scotland is fortunate to have, for the next 40 years, revenues from oil & gas. The wholesale value of that oil & gas is over £1 trillion – that’s 10 times our share of the UK national debt. This is a massive safety net and one that gives Scotland, if we become independent, the sort of financial protection that very few other nations have.

You might have heard some people say that the oil isn’t actually Scotland’s. However, international law makes clear that fields generating around 90% of the revenues will be in Scottish waters. This figure is based on comprehensive analysis undertaken at Aberdeen University (http://www. scotland. gov. uk /Resource /0039 /00390421. pdf). The companies that currently hold the licenc es for the various oil fields will continue to operate as now, but the taxes they pay will come to the Scottish Exchequer rather than go to the Chancellor in London.

If the worst happens again, we will be able to use this resource to protect us from the sort of financial problems facing other nations today. How do we know this? In the 1970’s, at a time when many people were predicting North Sea oil & gas would run out within 20 years, the UK government was able to use future revenues from the North Sea as collateral to ensure that it could pay its bills. Scotland, with 40 years of revenues ahead of us would be in an even stronger position.

But of course, Scotland’s oil and gas is running out. It will not provide a safety net forever. But that’s true everywhere in the world and as oil becomes scarcer, the value will go up.

We have the opportunity to save just a portion of the revenues from the North Sea to put into a rainy day fund. This is the approach adopted by Norway 20 years ago, and in that time they have been able to build up an oil fund worth over £400 billion. That is enough to cover Scotland’s national debt - and the total cost to the UK of bailing out the banks – with plenty left over.

People also say that we should not base our future on just one resource. However, we are doubly fortunate in Scotland and are already moving away from reliance on oil & gas. As our oil reserves run out, we will be reaching peak production from offshore renewable energy. Scotland has up to 25% of the EU’s offshore tidal and wind power potential (http://www. scotland. gov. uk /Topics /marine /education /questions /wave): a clean, green energy resource that will be in demand as the world moves to a low carbon future. The EU is already looking to build a North Sea electricity transmission grid to take green energy from Scotland and Norway to energy-dependent markets elsewhere in Europe.

Across the world natural resources are becoming more and more important. Not just energy, but also things like water (which Scotland also has in abundance). We have the opportunity to use our ample supplies of water to attract a range of businesses that rely on a steady and reliable source of water, creating a new source of tax revenues and jobs.

These are just some of the ways that we can extend the safety net, giving Scotland the sort of financial guarantees for the future that few other nations enjoy. And, more importantly, the opportunity not just to protect ourselves in difficult times, but also to use these resources to create more jobs and opportunities in Scotland in normal times.

As we are seeing from events in Spain, large countries can face severe economic hardship and financial difficulty just as much as small countries. Iceland was hit badly during the first stages of the financial crisis but was able to respond quickly, and with some agility, which means that now their economy is recovering strongly and, in terms of wealth per head, they are ahead of the UK (http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki /List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita).

In the 1990s Sweden, a country of similar size to Scotland was hit with a banking crisis. Those were difficult times for that nation, but lessons were learned and steps taken to ensure the same could never happen again. What that meant was, when the global banking crisis hit a few years ago, Sweden’s banks were in a position to weather the storm. Scotland too has learned the lessons of the recent banking crisis and we can also ensure that our banks are never again in a situation where they need so much government support.

One of the main problems for Scotland was that the main UK financial regulators had little or no presence in Scotland. They were not close enough to our banks to see what was really going on. That same mistake would not be made in an independent country. However, it looks as though the same mistake is being repeated in the UK.

Some people say that Scotland could not have afforded to bail out the banks. You might have heard some huge figures suggesting that Scotland would have needed £470 billion or more to support RBS and HBOS (http://www. bbc. co. uk /blogs /radioscotland /2011 /07 /newsweek-scotland. shtml #more). However, the total cost to the UK government of the bank bailouts was just £66 billion (http://www. economist.com/blogs /freeexchange /2011 /06 /bailed-out-british-banks).

Andrew Hughes-Hallett, Professor of Economics at St Andrew's University and Virginia's George Mason University, has said: “By international convention, when banks which operate in more than one country get into these sorts of conditions, the bailout is shared in proportion to the area of activities of those banks, and therefore it’s shared between several countries. In the case of the RBS, roughly speaking 90% of its operations are in England and 10% are in Scotland, the result being that the rest of the UK would have to carry 90% of the liabilities of the RBS and Scotland 10% . “

It is also worth noting that RBS was supported financially by both the UK and US, and Fortis Bank, which is based in three countries, was supported by all three of those states - Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

We have faced a once in a life-time financial crisis. We were unprepared as part of the UK and are continuing to pay the price today in terms of squeezes on family budgets, a double-dip recession and massive cuts to public spending. Will we make the same mistakes again as an independent country? As Harvard Kennedy School scholars, Price and Levinger (http://www. scribd.com/doc /61465105 /Flotilla-Effect-Adam-Price-and-Ben-Levinger) have argued: “while the US or the UK may conceivably witness a rerun of the events of the recent crisis, it’s highly unlikely that Icelanders or the Irish will ever make the same mistakes again, painfully embedded as they already are in national consciousness and institutional memory. ” The same can be the case for Scotland.

As an independent country we will have a natural resource safety net to protect us from even the most catastrophic financial shock. We will have the ability to put in place a rainy day fund of the type that meant Norway was more resilient in the face of financial crisis than nations like the UK. We will be able to ensure the hard lessons recently learned are not forgotten and sit at the very heart of our policy choices. Together these provide three layers of protection - if we are faced with crisis once again they will put Scotland into a stronger position to endure and recover than we are in today.
----------
***WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS FOR THE ECONOMY AND JOBS?***

As an independent country we can take forward policies designed for Scotland. We can work to make our economy more competitive and to attract more businesses to Scotland, helping us create more jobs.

Being independent will mean the people who care most about making our nation more prosperous, fairer and more successful, that is the people of Scotland, will be taking the decisions about our future. We will have the economic levers we need to create and protect jobs, make the most of our green energy potential and deliver higher levels of sustainable growth.

For example, the current Scottish Government has calculated that a reduction of just 3% in the corporation tax rate in Scotland will generate as many as 27, 000 new jobs. This is one policy option not currently available to Scotland. There will be different economic levers that the various political parties favour, but each would be designed for Scotland's particular economic circumstances. For example, the Labour Party has argued for a reduction in VAT, something that cannot be delivered by the Scottish Parliament at the moment.

Crawford Beveridge, former head of Scottish Enterprise, has said: “During my time at Scottish Enterprise our numbers about Scotland's finances came down in favour of financial independence. Independence could focus the minds of politicians to create the conditions for economic growth, which would translate to better jobs, higher wages and stronger communities. ”

We have the people, resources and ingenuity to prosper. We should be asking, why isn’t Scotland doing better, given all the natural and human wealth we enjoy?
----------
***WHAT CURRENCY WOULD WE USE?***

The Scottish Government's proposal is that an independent Scotland will continue to use the pound sterling, just as we do today. The pound is what is known as a fully tradeable currency, which means there are no barriers to Scotland using it.

Scottish ministers point out that across the world many countries share the same currency – it is a normal thing to do. 11 of the 20 wealthiest countries in the developed world are in currency unions.

There are, of course other, options. Some political parties believe that Scotland should have its own currency and some people argue that Scotland should join the euro. These issues will be part of the ordinary political debate once we are independent and the people of Scotland can, if they wish, choose a government at that point which would make a different currency choice.

On independence day Scotland will be part of the EU, but we will not be a member of the euro. You may have heard it said that we would be forced to join the euro, but EU law makes clear that this is not the case.

As Drew Scott, Professor of European Union Studies, at the University of Edinburgh, has said: "There is simply no precedent or mechanism under EU law whereby an EU member state can be dragooned, unwillingly, into membership of the eurozone. "
----------
***HOW WILL AN INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND BE GOVERNED?***

When we become an independent country we will have a parliament and government just as we do now. It will take all the decisions for Scotland with MSPs elected, as today, by proportional representation.

The elections for the first parliament of an independent Scotland will take place in May 2016. The people of Scotland will be able to choose the MSPs and the government they want whether SNP, Labour, Green, Tory, SSP or Lib Dem.

All the Scottish politicians who are currently in the House of Commons will be able to stand for the Scottish Parliament, so, for example, some of the more experienced Labour politicians currently at Westminster may well be challenging to become the Scottish government. The Scottish parties will all be able to field their strongest teams.
----------
***WHAT ABOUT THE COSTS OF BECOMING INDEPENDENT?***

On day one, an independent Scotland will look pretty much as it does today. Becoming independent is just the starting point.

There will be new government departments based in Scotland. We will have our own Treasury and Department of Foreign Affairs. But instead of paying for these services to be based in London, we will have them in Scotland, creating the jobs here and boosting the Scottish economy.

There will be some costs to setting up these new departments in Scotland, but this will be more than offset by the money we save. For example, we will have a £250 million annual saving from no longer contributing to the cost of the UK’s current nuclear weapons. And, there will be a £50 million annual saving from no longer paying our share of the cost of all those Lords and politicians in the Westminster Parliament.
----------
***IS SCOTLAND TOO SMALL TO BE INDEPENDENT?***

When the United Nations was formed there were just over 50 independent countries in the world. Today, that figure has risen to almost 200.

Scotland’s population places us at exactly the mid-point among those countries: half the countries in the world are bigger – and half are smaller – than Scotland. Of the 10 countries that joined the European Union in 2004, most became independent after 1990, and Scotland is bigger than six of them. All of these nations now have a seat at the EU top table, a right Scotland should enjoy too.

According to the International Monetary Fund our near neighbours Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Ireland (all of a similar size to Scotland) are wealthier than the UK – Scotland has as much going for it as any of these nations, except being independent.
----------
***WHY IS IT ASSUMED THAT A NEWLY INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND WOULD NECESSARILY BE A MONARCHY?***

Scotland is currently a monarchy and will remain so until the people of Scotland decide otherwise.

The proposal of the current Scottish Government, which will feature in the white paper on independence due to be published in 2013, is that with independence, the Queen will remain Head of State in Scotland. This would be one of the ways we preserve the social union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland. In total, there are 16 independent countries, from Australia to Canada, and New Zealand to Jamaica, who have Queen Elizabeth as Head of State.

Others, for example, the Scottish Green Party and the Scottish Socialist Party, believe that Scotland should have an elected Head of State.

In 2016 we will see the next Scottish Parliament elections. If there is a Yes vote in the 2014 referendum, the elections in 2016 will be the first to an independent Parliament. Each party will put forward a manifesto and you will get to choose the government you want for Scotland. It is at this point that the people of Scotland will be able to choose between the different parties’ policies on the Head of State.
----------
***SHOULD NOT THAT HAVE BEEN THE SECOND QUESTION? OR EVEN A SUBSEQUENT QUESTION?***

The 2014 referendum is on the question of whether Scotland becomes independent. A Yes vote means that decisions about Scotland’s future will be in the hands of the people who live and work here in Scotland – it is at the election in 2016 and in subsequent elections that people get to choose the social and economic path Scotland should take.
----------
***WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE QUEEN AND THE ESTATES THAT SHE OWNS IN SCOTLAND, ONCE INDEPENDENCE IS ACHIEVED?***

The current laws and arrangements applying to land ownership, including the Queen’s estates, will remain in place unless or until a future Scottish Parliament decides to change them.

However, with independence, the Crown Estate in Scotland, that is the land held by the Crown rather than the Queen as a private individual, would come under the responsibility of the Scottish Parliament rather than the Westminster Parliament.
----------
***WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PRIVATE PENSIONS? WILL MY PRIVATE PENSION RETAIN ITS VALUE?***

Your private pension will not be affected by Scotland becoming an independent country. Your contract with your pension provider will continue as now. The Scottish Government's proposal is that an independent Scotland will have sterling as its currency, meaning your pension would be paid in the same pounds and pence as it is today.
----------
***WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO PUBLIC SECTOR PENSIONS SUCH AS FOR THE POLICE, NHS STAFF AND TEACHERS?***

Scotland has its own Scottish Public Pensions Agency, which administers the NHS and teachers’ pension schemes. It also develops the regulations for the police, fire and local government schemes. (In Scotland, these are administered on a regional basis). Independence will not change these arrangements. Public sector pensions will continue to be paid just the same as they are now. Your pension rights will not change as a result of Scotland becoming independent.
----------
***WHAT ABOUT PENSIONS FOR CIVIL SERVANTS IN UK-WIDE SCHEMES OR EMPLOYEES OF THE ROYAL MAIL, GIVEN THE UK GOVERNMENT HAS TAKEN ON PENSION LIABILITIES?***

The Scottish Government will take on these pensions - and employees will continue to contribute to them on the same basis as before independence. The rights you have earned will not be affected by Scotland becoming independent. Scotland has successfully administered pension schemes for hundreds of thousands of public servants under devolution: an independent Scotland will also be able to successfully administer your pension scheme with independence.

The UK government has recently changed conditions and contributions for public sector pension schemes. In an independent Scotland these decisions would be taken by a Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament, rather than by Westminster.
----------
***WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE STATE PENSION? WILL IT BE PAID? WHO WILL PAY IT? WILL THE CHANGES TO THE AGE THE PENSION IS PAID BE CHANGED?***

Your entitlement to the state pension or pension credits on Day One of an independent Scotland will be the exact same as your entitlement before independence. The Scottish Government has said that “benefits, tax credits and the state pension would continue to be paid as now in an independent Scotland. It would be for future Scottish administrations to deliver improvements to the system, designed for Scottish needs. ”

The state pension and pension credits would be paid through the Scottish Government, rather than through the UK Department of Work and Pensions (DWP). However, you would continue to receive your payments in the same way as you do today.

At the moment, the UK welfare system is administered separately in Northern Ireland, so payments are made through the Northern Irish government rather than by the DWP. If Northern Ireland is able to administer the welfare state, so too can Scotland.

In 2016 you will elect the first independent government for Scotland. Each party will put forward a manifesto, which will include proposals on pensions and the welfare state (just like happens now in UK general elections). Those manifestos could include policies like increasing the state pension or could seek to amend current UK proposals to change the state pension age. You will be able to vote for the party you think has the best proposals for you and for Scotland. Scottish elections will decide these issues, not independence.
----------
***HOW CAN WE AFFORD PENSION PAYMENTS?***

Scotland currently spends a smaller share than the UK of both our national wealth and tax revenues to deliver pension and welfare payments in Scotland. So the pension or pension credit you receive is more affordable for Scotland than it is for the UK.

The official figures for 2011 /12 show, in terms of national wealth, Scotland spends 14. 4% of GDP on “social protection” compared to 15. 9% for the UK. For 2010 /11 the equivalent figures were 15% and 16% . In fact, we've had to spend a smaller share of our national wealth on pensions and the welfare state than the UK for each of the past six years.

In terms of tax revenues, 2011 /12 figures show we spend 38% of Scottish revenues on the different parts of the welfare state, compared to 42. 3% of tax revenues for the UK as a whole. (The figures for 2010 /11 were similar - 40% and 42% respectively). All this goes to show that pension and welfare payments are more affordable in Scotland.

Because pension and welfare payments are more affordable in Scotland, you can be assured at that as an independent country we will - at the very least - be able to continue paying the state pension and pension credits as we do today.
----------
***WHO WILL BE PAYING THE STATE PENSIONS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT PENSIONS IN 2015, 2016 BEFORE SCOTLAND BECOMES INDEPENDENT?***

If there is a Yes vote in the referendum, in 2015 and for part of 2016 your state pension will continue to be paid through the UK Department of Work and Pensions. It is only after Scotland becomes independent that pensions will be paid through the Scottish Government.

For public sector pensions like the NHS, local government, teachers, police and fire services there will be no change – they will continue to be administered in Scotland and paid in the same way as they are today.
----------
***OIL AND GAS?***

In May 2012 the UK government announced that 224 applications were handed out in the latest licensing round for oil and gas, the highest since licensing began in 1964 and 37 more than the previous high. In January 2012, Wood MacKenzie published a report showing that in 2011 capital investment in the UK oil industry was £7. 5 billion, the highest ever, with these high levels of investment continuing for the next few years. What this tells us, is that there are many more years of oil & gas production - and revenues - left in Scottish waters.

More than half of the value of the North Sea's oil and gas reserves have yet to be extracted – that’s 24 billion barrels with a wholesale value of well over £1 trillion.

Over the 30 years from 2010 /11 to 2040 /41, based on the UK's independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecast, cumulative North Sea revenues would be around £108 billion (2010 /11 prices). This represents approximately £3. 6 billion a year.

In the most recent Government Expenditure and Revenue accounts, 90. 5% of oil & gas revenues came from Scottish waters. At a 90% level, Scottish revenues over the next thirty years would be approximately £97 billion or £3. 2 billion a year. This would be equivalent to over £1, 300 on average a year per Scottish household or approximately £40, 000 for every Scottish household between now and 2040 /41.

However, these figures do not take into account the recent increase in investment, which promises to increase anticipated production levels in Scottish waters. As Professor Alex Kemp, from Aberdeen University, said in the Press & Journal on 13th July 2012:

"The North Sea is doing very well at the moment, there is a lot of new investment, " he said. "I am not sure the OBR has factored in what we have found in our modelling - the fruits of this investment. In the short term it means tax revenues will be reduced because they have got more allowances which reduces the amount they have to pay. But in the longer term we are finding that the effect of all the investment now will be that the tax revenues in the long term will be rather higher than might otherwise have been anticipated. "

For many years opponents of independence have been saying that oil & gas are running out. Indeed, in the 1980's they were telling us that they would run out 12 years ago! Of course, revenues from oil & gas will slowly diminish, however, just as we receive less from one offshore energy bonanza, we will start to enjoy revenues and jobs from our second energy windfall - Scotland's vast offshore wind and tidal energy.
----------
***OFFSHORE RENEWABLES?***

Scotland is blessed with 25% of the EU's offshore wind and tidal energy potential and this can translate into jobs and investment in the years ahead. Offshore wind alone could bring an estimated £30 billion of inward investment into Scotland and could support up to 28, 000 directly related jobs and a further 20, 000 indirect jobs in Scotland by 2020.

The Marine Energy Action Plan, published on 21 June 2012, shows significant progress since 2009, including exclusivity agreements to develop 1. 6 GW of marine energy capacity off the north Scottish coast in the world's first commercial wave and tidal leasing round.

An independent Scotland will continue to operate in a single Great Britain-wide integrated market – after all, England will need Scottish renewables if it is to meet its climate targets and guarantee electricity supply. Scotland provides 40% of the UK’s renewables – making a significant contribution to the UK’s legally binding EU renewables targets.

Business is preparing for more Scottish electricity exports – Ofgem has announced a fast tracking of £7billion grid upgrades in Scotland to boost capacity, creating 1, 500 new jobs.

As David Kennedy, UK Government adviser and chief executive of the Independent Committee On Climate Change, said on 24 June 2012: “I don’t think it’s the case that we’re just investing in Scotland at the moment because it is part of the UK. My angle is whether you can imagine investment with an independent Scotland and I think yes you can. Scotland would clearly need to export some of its renewable energy and be paid for that by England but the fundamental economics would support that. ”
----------
WHAT ABOUT OUR SCHOOLS, HOSPITALS AND OTHER SERVICES?

Scotland already runs many of the most important public services independently. These include the NHS, our schools, universities and colleges, local government and our police, courts and legal system. For these services, things will continue to operate in the same way as they do now.

The most recent government accounts, showing all the money spent in Scotland and all the taxes raised, tell us that over the past 6 years Scotland has been in relative surplus compared to the rest of the UK. That means Scotland more than pays her way. And it also means that we will have the resources we need to protect and invest in the public services we value most. And, of course, just like in Ireland, viewers in Scotland will still be able to watch their favourite TV programmes, including on the BBC.
----------
***TEN THINGS TO TELL YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY?***

1. Being independent means that the people of Scotland will be in charge of Scotland’s future. Together, we care most about our nation, so nobody else is going to do as good a job of making Scotland a success.

2. If Scotland votes yes, the first independent parliament will be elected in 2016 – we will get the government we vote for, unlike today, with a government in London the majority of voters in Scotland did not support.

3. Scotland more than pays her way in the UK. We get 9. 3% of UK spending, but contribute 9. 6% of UK taxes. We are in a stronger financial position than the rest of the UK, to the tune of £500 per person last year - that's over £1000 for each Scottish household. As an independent country, this money would stay in Scotland.

4. Scotland already pays for all the government services we need as an independent country - we don't have to start from scratch. However, the money will be spent in Scotland, rather than London, creating thousands of Scottish jobs.

5. With independence we'll save on some UK spending - so the initial start up costs will be met by the £250 million annual saving from the UK's existing nuclear weapons and the £50 million annual saving by no longer paying for politicians at Westminster.

6. Scotland would remain part of the EU. EU law doesn't allow for Scotland to be unilaterally kicked out on independence. And, EU law also makes clear that Scotland can't be forced to join the Euro. We will continue to use the Pound, just as we do today.

7. Scotland has 25% of the EU's offshore wind and tidal energy potential. By 2020 our renewable energy could be generating £2 billion a year of exports and by 2050 the value of electricity from offshore renewables could be £14 billion.

8. Scotland doesn't need oil to become independent, but our oil and gas resource is worth over £1 trillion and gives us a safety net for the future. Last year saw record investment in the North Sea and in October, BP said they expected North Sea oil and gas to flow for at least another 40 years.

9. The UK government doesn't include oil and gas when it talks about Scotland's finances. But, if you do include oil and gas in our national accounts, we would be the 6th wealthiest nation per capita in developed world.

10. Scotland has a wealth of talent - for our size we have more world-class universities than any other nation and our research tops world league tables.
----------
***STILL UNDECIDED?***

We know that the decision you make on 18th September 2014 could well be the biggest political decision you make in your lifetime.

If you plan to have your say in the referendum but have not yet decided which way to vote, Yes Scotland would like to hear from you. Please complete the form here: http://www. yesscotland.net/undecided and let them know which issues or questions you have which would help you to come to a decision.
----------