iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Scottish Independence: Salmond Offers To Hold Talks With Westminster

Alex Salmond

First Posted: 13/01/12 13:38 GMT Updated: 13/01/12 16:06 GMT

Amazing
 Inspiring
 Funny
 Scary
 Hot
 Crazy
 Important
 Weird

Alex Salmond has offered to hold talks with David Cameron and Nick Clegg, after a week of animosity between Westminster and Holyrood.

Salmond said he was willing to meet the prime minister “in Edinburgh, in London or wherever”.

The SNP leader made the approach in Dublin where he is attending a summit of the British-Irish council with Nick Clegg.

Clegg's spokesperson welcomed the move, telling the press association: "If this means that Alex Salmond is saying he is going to engage constructively and join the conversation, then we welcome that."

However the spokesperson added that Scottish Secretary Michael Moore had already invited Salmond to talks with the government.

On Friday morning Salmond struck a less conciliatory tone, comparing Scotland with Ireland and hitting out at "Westminster politicians":

"I am sure many people in Ireland will remember that sometimes people who are in leadership positions in big countries find it very difficult not to bully small countries. What we have seen over the last week is a most extraordinary attempt to bully and intimidate Scotland by Westminster politicians," he told Irish broadcaster RTE.

Salmond added that Clegg, Cameron and Osborne would no longer be "dictating terms to Scotland."

It comes the day after George Osborne suggested an independent Scotland would not be able to keep the pound as its currency, as he spoke of "taking the fight" to the SNP.

Relations between Westminster and Scotland have reached the level where Northern Ireland's Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness joked that he could facilitate peace talks between the British and Scottish leaders.

He said: "(First Minister) Peter Robinson and I have a castle in Belfast and I'm sure we will be prepared to make it available for peace discussions between the British Government and Scotland."

Hadrian's Wall
1  of  10
PLAY
FULLSCREEN
ZOOM
SHARE THIS SLIDE 
After failing to crush the Caledonian tries, the Roman Emperor Hadrian erected a wall to protect his English colony.
MORE SLIDESHOWS NEXT >   |   < PREV

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

Alex Salmond has offered to hold talks with David Cameron and Nick Clegg, after a week of animosity between Westminster and Holyrood. Salmond said he was willing to meet the prime minister “in Ed...
Alex Salmond has offered to hold talks with David Cameron and Nick Clegg, after a week of animosity between Westminster and Holyrood. Salmond said he was willing to meet the prime minister “in Ed...
Related News On Huffington Post:
 

Filed by Dina Rickman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 245
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
bumblewyck
8 Fans
02:02 PM on 01/14/2012
It's funny really how we are all getting so worked up about something that may or may not happen, all this is doing is putting more of rift between the Scot's and English than is necessary, after all it is all speculation as to what will or will not happen.
Permalink  |
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Allyb999
50 Fans
10:12 PM on 01/14/2012
The referendum will definately happen, the result of that referendum well thats the unknown. SNP supporters have known there would be a referendum for ages, its just that Westminster has finally realised.
Permalink  |
Raldor
33 Fans
01:07 PM on 01/14/2012
Tony Blair opened Pandora's Box and it can no longer be closed. Now the UK is neither untied nor federalist. The three regional Parliaments/Assemblies have different rules and the largest element, England is denied its own Parliament.

Who can blame Salmond and the SNP wanting out of this Union.

It's a great pity that the debate on a federal UK may not now happen. Each country could have had control over their own affairs, natural resources, budgets but still comie together on mutual areas of benefit such as defence and foreign policy.

Very sad.
Permalink  |
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
west lothian questioner
285 Fans
01:54 PM on 01/14/2012
Westminster was asleep and missed the opportunity to do the right thing. Should it have happened that way a few decades ago the arguments we're having now may never have arisen.
Permalink  |
emillio11
90 Fans
02:04 PM on 01/14/2012
We already have a coming together.. it's called the United Kingdom and it's national government in Westminster with the variation of nationalsitic and local representation in the form of the respective councils or as some like to call them... parliaments. People do not have to disunited state in order to satify the whims of a few to outweigh the sense and wishes of the many.
Permalink  |
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Allyb999
50 Fans
07:42 PM on 01/14/2012
Surely it should be the nation involved that decides if they want to stay in the union? This is hardly on a whim but yet again carry on because views like yours really do sway the moderate Scottish people towards leaving the union.
Permalink  |
DPICT
60 Fans
12:51 PM on 01/14/2012
Funny how so many reject the European Union but embrace the British Union, shurely if we are stronger united then the bigger the union the better but then that does'nt seem to be the case at all does it. Union is not always good for it's members especially when they dont support the leadership.

If London rule is such a good thing why did America, Canada, India, Australia, New Zealand etc want out and why have they not been campaigning to return to being ruled by warminsters majority of English MP's, i doubt that concept would find much support however.
Permalink  |
emillio11
90 Fans
02:13 PM on 01/14/2012
The countries you mention are thousands of miles away and have their own administrations and rightly so, which is what they rightly deserve. Scotland is part of the British Isles and need to remain an integral part, admistrativley speaking for mutual support and respect. If Scotland devolves from the UK, they cannot expect to come back to the rest of the UK as and when they want it, as when it suits them. They make their bed and they lie in it...some may say good riddance... not me and neither do the people with a view to the future want. The future together is far more rosier than one with Scotland cut off as is the will of the Fat Controller.
Permalink  |
DPICT
60 Fans
03:01 PM on 01/14/2012
You miss my point though, if Union is the best way for nations, why then all the problems with the EU?

Why did Norway not stick with Danish rule and why did the Catalans not reject devolution, could it be that they felt that being ruled by others was not good for them?

How can we have a rosy future if we are governed by politicians we dont vote for?just how democratic is that.

Thatcher is still hated here for many reasons, can you assure me that history wont repeat itself, mind you theres not much left here to axe or sell off nowadays is there and they are unlikely to find a leader who hates Scotland so much, according to her we are a weak race who could not stand together because we hate each other so much more than anyone else, aparently thats why we prefer to be ruled by westminster than our own.

If Scotland does go indepandant i very much doubt that we would ever consider returning to dependance, dependancy is not a good state to be in but thats my opinion.

The global economy means that we wont be cut off from the world. Oh and Scotland is already devolved from the UK

Apart from that you are spot on.
Permalink  |
Techwood
20 Fans
08:12 PM on 01/14/2012
What a bizarrerational and comparison. Picking up one point the only reason Labour managed 13 years of power was because the people of Scotland voted for them which allowed many laws policies to be put upon the English wthout it effecting Scotland. As stated today it is not just up to the people of Scotland but the peoples of the Union so lets have a national ballot as to whether we want Scotland to be part of the Union.
Permalink  |
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Allyb999
50 Fans
10:05 PM on 01/14/2012
Knew it would not be long before the Scottish got blamed for the whole Labour term in office. It is up to the people of Scotland and them only to decide if they want to remain in the Union or not. If you want a referendum on staying in the Union for your own country, then by means feel free to ask for it.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Norman Mitchison
92 Fans
 
12:50 PM on 01/14/2012
Take him to the Tower, hang,draw and quarter him then stick his head on a spike over Traitors Gate. Salmand? No. Clegg.
Permalink  |
Arkleson
99 Fans
11:49 AM on 01/14/2012
It's funny that Salmond says that big countries find it very difficult not to bully small countries. When and if Scotland gain independence, they will be a very small country indeed.
Permalink  |
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
lenuk
127 Fans
11:53 AM on 01/14/2012
Look on the bright side.

Your UK pound will go a lot further north of the border.
Permalink  |
robroy21
9 Fans
12:45 PM on 01/14/2012
The uk Pound has already fell at least 25%,even against 3rd world currencies.
Permalink  |
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
west lothian questioner
285 Fans
01:58 PM on 01/14/2012
Not if Gideon gets his way len. If Scotland is removed from the Sterling zone then any Sterling notes offered here would have to be changed into whatever currency is adopted. Exchange rates may vary, but be sure, the money changers will want their commissions. Bang goes any increased spending power.
Permalink  |
DaveSS
17 Fans
11:59 AM on 01/14/2012
Not really, an independent Scotland with 5M population would be a fairly average sized country - similar in size to Denmark.
Permalink  |
Arkleson
99 Fans
12:14 PM on 01/14/2012
You obviously missed my point. Current population of GB - about 62 million (22 highest in the World). Far greater than 5 million (in the 110s).
Permalink  |
weskirk1
600 Fans
11:28 AM on 01/14/2012
We are 40 years too late, regarding independence,
we have missed the boat, as the saying goes.
The undermining of Scotland has went on for years,
we have little industry left, oil and gas has not long too go.
We never reaped the benefit of our natural resources.
Why go independent now, nothing left soon.
wes
Permalink  |
Robbie4U
3 Fans
11:41 AM on 01/14/2012
Weskirk, we are never too late, but I agree with you comments on undermining. No good looking back though self determination is all about making our own choices as opposed to others doing it for us.
Permalink  |
weskirk1
600 Fans
12:00 PM on 01/14/2012
Yes fair point robbie4u, as i am at the end of my working life,
i will leave these choices too the younger generation.
The Scots are a proud and hard working people,
most anyway, a few let us down though.
Massive changes would have too be made if we became independent,
i do not know if we could handle that in these austere times.
As i said this is a choice for the younger generation,
all the best.
wes
Permalink  |
katertaif
My wife thinks I have one fault. Everything I do!
521 Fans
11:10 AM on 01/14/2012
I am becoming mor and more suspicious of Mr. cameron's agenda. he says he is passionate about keping the Union, but is he? An independent Scotland would mean far fewer Scottish labour MP's in Westminster. That could ensure labour is never in power again. The poll say that about a third of Scots actually want independence, so I can See why Salmond and co want to wait, so they can persuade enough to get what they want. On the face of it Cameron wanting the vote sooner, is in accord with his passion for the union, but his heavy handed talk of legalities and you cannot keep the pound etc. will only annoy people, Perhaps enough to swing the vote Salmond's way.
Permalink  |
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
west lothian questioner
285 Fans
02:10 PM on 01/14/2012
"That could ensure labour is never in power again"

Without looking up all the figures myself (mainly cos i dont give a hoot which party would rule England if Scotland leaves the union) I'm sure you'll find that in the majority of times in recent decades, the party which gains a majority in England is the one which forms the next Westminster government and in most cases does not depend on Scottish MPs votes to maintain their majority position. My only backing for this as I sit nursing a fresh cuppa is David Dimbleby's statement to that effect on QT a couple of nights ago.

Cammo wants the vote now so that he can cash in on the fact that too many Scots are not aware of the possibilities of independence. Eck, on the other hand is taking the wider and more democratic view that people can only make such momentous decisions once they are fully informed of the facts for and against both sides of the debate.

The heavy handed bullying does the union's case no good. Nobody likes being bullied and sooner or later the one being bullied is likely to rise up and stick a fist in the bully's face.
Permalink  |
katertaif
My wife thinks I have one fault. Everything I do!
521 Fans
06:30 PM on 01/14/2012
In effect, that is exactly what I said. Cameron wants the vote now, while the polls still show a majority of Scots are against the breakup of the Union. That at least is on the face of it. Having said that, no matter who wns the argument, no referendum will take place this year at least. Then you have this heavy handed bullying as you put it. Nothing will annoy the Scots more, and perhaps persuade them to vote for independence. I am saying that I am suspicious of Cameron's real motives. he says he is passionate about keeping the Union, but is going the very way that may kipper it. As for the majority of seats in Scotland, I don' t think anyone can deny that Scotland sends a lot of MP's to Westminster, mostly Labour, and if they were lost, The Conservatives would gain a larger percentage of the available seats. I haven't worked out the figures either, but it is simple maths I don't give a hoot either, except for a one party state being bad all round, for an independent Scotland as well as for England.
Permalink  |
Techwood
20 Fans
08:22 PM on 01/14/2012
If this is the case the Tories had a landslide in England at the last election 299 seats why do we have a Con-Dem coalition?

Surley as we English have a say in this and should have a vote as to if we wish Scotland to stay in the union?
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roy Fowler
I try....I really do!
106 Fans
11:06 AM on 01/14/2012
Mr Salmond; "Empty vessels make the most noise".

Whats that?"........"Sorry; just a buzzing annoying whining sound again"..........
Permalink  |
tabasco2152
6 Fans
10:07 AM on 01/14/2012
If Scotland becomes independant -will they manage their own benefits system or will claimants still expect England to pay?
Permalink  |
photo
BeeJayCeee
I still loathe Thatcher
144 Fans
10:29 AM on 01/14/2012
Scotland subsidises the union. *We* pay for *your* benefit claimants. If Scotland votes for independence it's you who will have to fill a huge hole in your finances.
Permalink  |
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
west lothian questioner
285 Fans
03:52 PM on 01/14/2012
Do try thinking before posting. It will help make your thoughts and questions rational and relevant.
Permalink  |
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
lenuk
127 Fans
09:35 AM on 01/14/2012
And now for some crystal-ball gazing:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086465/What-Scotland-did-alone.html

;-)
Permalink  |
photo
BeeJayCeee
I still loathe Thatcher
144 Fans
10:30 AM on 01/14/2012
The word "ball" is in there, right enough, Len. Plural, I reckon.
Permalink  |
DaveSS
17 Fans
12:16 PM on 01/14/2012
Written by someone who seems to think that the Northern Isles are part of the Hebrides...

Well Alex, you'll just have to call it off, the Daily Mail knows better.

On a serious point there are a number of issues raised which do need to be confirmed prior to a vote. Some of them are potentially complex and will require negotiation, which is one reason why we can't just "have a vote now" as the thought-free demand.
Permalink  |
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BuxtonBlueCat
Most beautiful cat in the world! :)
40 Fans
 
09:28 AM on 01/14/2012
'Salmond said he was willing to meet the prime minister “in Edinburgh, in London or wherever”.' Sounds like someone is rolling over and showing his neck to me. Perhaps AS has finally realised that devolution is more than spouting a lot of hot air. This will affect people's lives and employment and should not be seen as a political game.

'Salmond added that Clegg, Cameron and Osborne would no longer be "dictating terms to Scotland."' I understood these were meant to be open debates to protect those Scots not interested in devolution and joining the euro. Although, looking at today's news, it would be a very unwise move to have the euro replace the pound. (sorry should have said groat - pound not allowed after devolution!)
Permalink  |
photo
BeeJayCeee
I still loathe Thatcher
144 Fans
10:33 AM on 01/14/2012
"Sounds like someone is rolling over and showing his neck to me."

And you sound like someone who hasn't the faintest clue about Scotland or our politics.

"devolution"

We already have devolution. This whole debate is about *independence*. Haven't you been paying attention?
Permalink  |
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BuxtonBlueCat
Most beautiful cat in the world! :)
40 Fans
 
10:48 AM on 01/14/2012
... apologies - must have dozed off with boredom ... such constant repetition ... zzzzzzz
Permalink  |
Robbie4U
3 Fans
10:43 AM on 01/14/2012
Alex Salmond is not playing political games it is the unionist parties, anyone with any sense can see this. The only reason that Westminster is getting involved now is because they never took things seriously before. The people of Scotland knew what the SNP policies were and voted accordingly. That gives the SNP the moral high ground to push for their terms. Westminster Politicians can not have it all ways, the present coalition was pushed onto the people of the UK they were not voted in.
Alex Salmon has he is willing to meet the UK Government, that does not mean that he will role over and cave into the demands of the Unionist parties. It is quite simple in my book the SNP should hold the referendum with the questions that they feel fit.If the answer comes back as a resounding yes for straight independence then the normal legal wrangles will ensue. If it comes back as a straight no then there is the answer,(the clamour for independence will not go) It the answer comes back about wanting more powers then that also will have to be negotiated with Westminster, With that three way vote, everyone will know for certain where the real feelings lie within Scotland and if the answer is the half way house, this will indicate that the state of the Union as it is needs changing. I want independence but I know there are many people who will propably vote the half way sollution.
Permalink  |
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BuxtonBlueCat
Most beautiful cat in the world! :)
40 Fans
 
11:41 AM on 01/14/2012
... many Scots will be frightened of going it alone, when the world fiscal situation is so unstable. Over the centuries, families have integrated across the borders which no doubt will affect any vote they may give. I agree the coalition was pushed onto the UK but anything is better than labour at the moment. Good luck to your dreams ... because that is what I think they are. When it comes to the crunch, the majority will give a resounding no.
Permalink  |
photo
HisScaliness
90 Fans
07:05 PM on 01/14/2012
You say Salmond is not playing games, and yet first he refused to discuss the matter, then he changed his mind and wanted to speak to Cameron and Clegg, but he won't speak to the Scottish Secretary in any case, for some weird reason, even though he is the man placed in precisely that position by Westminster until the event of independence.

And Salmond knows that. He's playing silly buggers.
Permalink  |
photo
yormerlin
31 Fans
09:23 AM on 01/14/2012
When North sea oil was developed in the British North Sea was it for the benefit of Britain or the benefit of Scotland, were there any stipulations that Scotland would be able to claim any wells they deem to be in Scottish waters or were the benefits of British oil in British waters meant to be for the benefit of the Whole of the United Kingdom.
Scotland is not an indEpendent country as yet, if we do vote for a split from the rest of the UK and then we discover more oil in our designated Scottish waters then we can claim that to be Scottish oil but how the hell can we honestly claim oil developed for the benefit of Britain in British waters as Scottish oil.
Alex Salmond and his bunch of SNP activist Buds are barking up the wrong tree if they are thinking of trying to grab British oil reserves as being for Scotland only.
Permalink  |
photo
BeeJayCeee
I still loathe Thatcher
144 Fans
10:34 AM on 01/14/2012
He's doing a yormerlin!
Permalink  |
This comment has been removed.
Permalink  |
Robbie4U
3 Fans
11:11 AM on 01/14/2012
The SNP are not stupid off course we will claim for all the money, but provision has been made in budgetary thinking for the fact that the decision will not be made by the UK but by International law and so future financial predictions are based on getting all the revenue or geting partial revenue, but what is true when Scotland becomes independant then we will get a far far higher rate than any other part of the UK and all of that will be negotiated but you had better understand that it will not be Westminster who will be the arbiters.
Permalink  |
gejb
4 Fans
09:04 AM on 01/14/2012
Has independence been fully thought through. I assume the English can also vote and agree the terms. Firstly border controls will need to be introduced, to keep the Scottish out. Hadrian's wall could be reinstated! Then Scottish people presently in England would need to be repatriated, including politicians. UK Defence can then be removed from Scotland and Faslane closed. Government departments presently in England and Wales can be cut back as DVLA, NHS, DWP and all other government agencies would no longer need to consider Scotland which would have to make its own arrangements. The sooner independence comes and we no longer have to put up with bailing out the Scottish the sooner the rest of the UK will recover from its present financial problems.
Permalink  |
photo
BeeJayCeee
I still loathe Thatcher
144 Fans
10:38 AM on 01/14/2012
"I assume the English can also vote and agree the terms."

No, not in this referendum. Only those who live in and are registered to vote in Scotland have a say.

"to keep the Scottish out"

Why would you want to do that? Unless of course you hate Scottish people?

"Then Scottish people presently in England would need to be repatriate­d, including politician­s."

So you *do* hate Scottish people and want to ethnically cleanse your country of us. How nice.

"Faslane closed"

That's a decision for an independent Scotland. And yes, you can take your WMDs with you.

"we no longer have to put up with bailing out the Scottish"

Scotland subsidises the union; we bail *you* out.

"the sooner the rest of the UK will recover from its present financial problems."

Well, no. If Scotland becomes independent you'll have a huge gap in your finances.
Permalink  |
Robbie4U
3 Fans
10:45 AM on 01/14/2012
You are a pleb as your thought processes show.
Permalink  |
bumblewyck
8 Fans
08:55 AM on 01/14/2012
let them have their independence, but not our currency, military, or anything else let them stand on their own two feet and watch them fall
Permalink  |
photo
BeeJayCeee
I still loathe Thatcher
144 Fans
10:41 AM on 01/14/2012
"let them have their independen­ce"

That is a decision for *us*, you don't get to "let" us do anything.

"military"

How many Scots serve in the UK armed forces? We'll be taking our fair share, that *we've* paid for.

"let them stand on their own two feet and watch them fall"

Oh, how very nice of you. We subsidise your public services, our soldiers have fought and dies in their tens of thousands to keep your country free and that's what you wish on us? Is it any wonder we want out?
Permalink  |
bumblewyck
8 Fans
12:25 PM on 01/14/2012
I spent most of my life living in Scotland and listening to the racist remarks because I am English, you subsidise nothing in England and the Scots that serve in the forces are the British Army not scottish soldiers,They also did not do it just to keep my country free they did it for United Kingdom. Salmond only wants the status of being Scotlands first PM he doesnt give a crap about the effect it will have on the Scottish people, it is purely his own Ego boosting.
How much money is it going to cost to change your passports,driving licences, etc etc have you thought about what will happen to you NHS or British telecom etc etc are these still going to supply you as an independent country???
Permalink  |
Robbie4U
3 Fans
10:48 AM on 01/14/2012
What are you so scared off. I am an SNP supporter have been since I could vote I am now into my fifties. I do not hate the English and get fed up with SNP supporters being dismissed in some quarters as narrow biggots. Well your comments and others like yours shows that narrow mindness is rife south of the border.
Permalink  |
bumblewyck
8 Fans
12:35 PM on 01/14/2012
It has nothing to do with Narrow mindedness south of the border it is the simple fact that the English are fed up of Scotlands constant moaning about how England treats them so badly, how you subsidise us, its all rubbish we are stronger United and who knows maybe even one day go back to being a Country that was feared and respected by the world. If Scotland gets what it wants then I wish them all the best and hope they can make it work(which I very much doubt). However we have nothing to be scared of as nothing will change for England with Scotland gone
Permalink  |
ladybird4x4
113 Fans
08:54 AM on 01/14/2012
Assuming Scotland vote in favour of independence and subsequently the EURO it will be interesting to see JUST HOW MUCH OF THE UK DEBT is transfered to Scotland and "IT WILL." or hasnt Salmond disclosed this yet
Permalink  |
photo
BeeJayCeee
I still loathe Thatcher
144 Fans
10:55 AM on 01/14/2012
This has already been factored in, we will take out fair share.
Permalink  |
GC007
37 Fans
01:34 PM on 01/14/2012
So you are privy to the budgets and accounts already ? I am impressed. You are very sanctimonious BJC and scornful of any other point of view (like Salmond himself) but at the same time you must realise that not only the Scots will be affected by such a move. I personally don't agree with a "break away" but I do think that if it happened we, south of the border, would be better off financially. You try to give the impression that you are so knowledgable but do the maths. You can't expect Westminster to fund your "breakaway" and quite frankly you have no idea what it is going to cost to start this ball rolling, let alone keep it rolling. I can read your answer now, mocking and condescending, but, instead of trying to sound superior on the Huff Post, spend some time with a pen and paper and work out the maths, then come back.
Permalink  |
ladybird4x4
113 Fans
02:24 PM on 01/14/2012
Thats too much bullshit for me and everyone else I suspect. The trouble is your interpretation of "SHARE" will be grossly different from what the key negotiator decides. Namely Westminster. In that respect you have no negotiation powers.
Permalink  |
ianbeag
3 Fans
04:27 PM on 01/14/2012
Don't forget that we in Scotland have also paid for 9% of all the UK's assets including embassies, military hardware, etc. etc. and it would only be fair to offset this against the debt figure. We're going to return your nuclear subs thought!
Permalink  |
ladybird4x4
113 Fans
04:37 PM on 01/14/2012
That sounds reasonable to me but the Scots net deficit will be massive
Permalink  |
 
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)