The Scottish referendum debate...

I would have liked to watch it Papaoscar, like you I can't understand why we couldn't.
I read an article the other day (can't remember where) suggesting that Alex Salmond could well come unstuck, being a less able debater than Alistair Darling and having more to lose.
Will be interested to hear the views of others who were able to watch it.

I would have liked to have had the opportunity to watch it. I thought it could have been covered on channels that serve Wales, Northern Ireland and England.

It might be a vote for the people residing in Scotland only but it will impact on the the other 3 union countries after all.

I agree it will be interesting to see what those who watched it think but only if it is related to us without party politics or bias being shown but I don't think that is likely. That is why we should have been able to view it for ourselves to make our own minds up.

Quite right, POGS and janeA, but it ended up as a shouting match. I was quite disappointed at the low standard of debate and control by the chairman. You didn't miss much.

Didn't miss much then.

What a shame people need answers not lessons in partisan squabbles.

Who did take the role of chairman ?

"The debate is repeated on STV Glasgow at 11.15pm. If you’re not in the Glasgow area you can still watch the repeat on The STV Glasgow live stream. Just click on STV Glasgow.

player.stv.tv/live/glasgow/

A full replay of the debate for a worldwide audience is expected to be available within hours of the end of the programme on the STV Player.

Exclusive clips of the debate will shared by STV on social media during the debate.

The debate will be followed by a special extended edition of Scotland Tonight from 10.30pm featuring analysis of how the two politicians performed in the face-off.

Scottish viewers will be able to watch Scotland Tonight programme as normal on the STV Player.

International and UK viewers will be able to watch a livestream of the reaction show by clicking on our Scotland Tonight page."

I watched STV online to see the debate. Very poor control by the Chair led inevitably to a shouting match.

I thought Alistair Darling came across a bit better than Alex Salmond.

Totally agree that it should have been broadcast more generally on BBC or ITV. The streaming from STV was poor and kept breaking down.

Who took the role of chairman?

The Chair was Bernard Ponsonby...a Scottish journalist.

For those who missed the debate - you didn't miss much. Both 'debaters' seemed to be playing the man rather than the issues and the chair failed to silence them when they talked over each other. Chair (Bernard Ponsonby) also failed to put some very good questions from the floor to the speakers and appeared to be grandstanding. Then we kept cutting to adverts and miscellaneous commentators, who all said exactly what you would expect them to say according to their known bias.

Don't think it advanced the debate one iota - very disappointing

I think it's going to be on BBC Parliament channel tonight at 7pm, if anybody is interested.

Didn't watch it as I have no time for TV debates. They just seem to me to be an American import with nothing to offer and they cause plenty of heat with very little, if any, light. It's much more interesting, in my view, to discuss the topic with friends and family in order to come to one's own decision. As I keep saying, this is not a presidential election (at the last count, the only part of the British Isles which has such a thing is Ireland) and so what's the point in such an artificial thing as a TV debate?

It was a lovely evening here last night and so the time was better spent enjoying the fine weather!

I didn't watch either as I reckoned it would be too disappointing.
I agree with when as I too talk to friends and family, although some folk are not saying what they will vote for fear of being attacked (verbally I mean) by those who disagree.
That has happened to me but I am too old to get upset.
We are all entitled to vote as we see fit.

That's a shame, Crow, that you have had verbal fights about the subject. I have been fortunate in that when I have been in a discussion which seems to be getting a bit heated, it has deliberately been turned on to another course. I have a couple of friends who, I'm pretty sure, are of a different mind to me, and we haven't discussed it much, by mutual consent. In the end, it is a secret ballot and so nobody needs to know how anyone else votes.

On reflection following the debate, some thoughts for consideration on Scottish independence before I voted (if I had a vote, that is)

1) The currency. There appear to be great big holes in the SNP position and a serious lack of planning.
2) Defence. Is it wise to dismantle the existing arrangements and leave Scotland practically defenceless?
3) Oil. If the pound is claimed to be jointly Scottish, then the oil is similarly jointly British and will not exclusively benefit the Scottish exchequer.
4) The EU. What is the point of Scotland walking away from one reasonably succesful union, towards another one with much less certain consequences?
5) Nostalgia, tourism, myth and legend will not pay for all the good things the SNP promise, in terms of health, education, social care etc., etc. Scotland just cannot expect to have its cake and eat it.

I agree that these so-called media debates are often pretty poor, and in this case the chairmanship and structure of it was most unsatisfactory, as was the shambolic STV coverage.

Papaoscar what a shame you were not able to voice your points at the debate, I think they sum it up very neatly, irrespective of whether one is pro or anti separatist. I am an exiled Scot, so don't have a vote and would have loved to have seen the debate, may watch it on the Parliament channel this evening, but I dont know if my blood pressure can stand too much of Alex Salmond's smug yes we can answer to all the questions that he is unable to answer honestly. I do get irritated when he trots out the 'Scotland did not vote for the bedroom tax' stuff, neither did I! We are not all Tories in England, far from it, and we too are represented by a government that nobody voted for ( where does it say coalition on a ballot paper) so he is disingenuous to trot out this old chestnut. the man is a charlatan and a fool and will do Scotland a great disservice. I have now gone public on my views but had to thank papaoscar for the succinct way he summed it all up.

Has Scotland not realised that, if they become independent they will no longer be able to compete in University Challenge . [I've been watching that wonderful series about the programme]

WBund..many thanks. I'm part Scots and feel quite sad that the Scots are being encouraged by egotistical politicians to step into the unknown consequences of independence on the flimsiest of evidence. Hopefully, common sense will prevail and it will all work out for the best for Scotland and the UK.

papaoscar As an English person, I don't have a vote but I'm still interested in the debates. I understand Scotland's wish to be independent but originally hoped it would be a no vote. I'm not so sure now as I don't like the ongoing rather patronising tone of the argument - that independence will be a disaster for Scotland but of little consequence to anyone else.

Who is to say whether SNP politicians are any more egotistical than any other politicians? I think that your comment "Scots are being encouraged ...." suggests that somehow the "poor natives" are not capable of thinking for themselves but have merely been led by the nose by those whose motives are disreputable.

From the comments you make, it appears that you see the "common sense" outcome as being a rejection of independence. This implies that those who have a different view from your own are somehow deficient in their ability to think rationally. That is your opinion rather than a fact.

I certainly did not view papaoscar's post as being in anyway derogatory against the people residing in Scotland who will vote.

I think a poster stating his/her opinion is normal.

If we all had to post on factual evidence only what would be the point to some threads.

Now, now, Eleothan, you really mustn't jump to conclusions. I have no axe to grind over Scotland's decision, its for the Scots to decide their future, but I think it should be done on the basis of facts not fiction. Having been bamboozled over many years by all flavours of politicians I tend not to believe their blandishments any more and would not want them to lead the Scots up the garden path. I have to say, though, that even if I had a vote in this matter I really wouldn't know to use it at the moment. What does pain me is that I do not have the opportunity to vote in this matter which, after all, could lead to the break-up of my country, the UK.

I have always thought, that any country had to have gold reserves to match the currency in circulation, otherwise notes and coins are worthless.
I don't understand where Scotland's gold reserve is going to come from, if its a yes vote. If it becomes independent, it surely cannot share English gold, because that is not independence, or will it borrow England's gold.
It does concern me how much our pound would be worth

Of course voicing an opinion is normal. There wouldn't be much point having a forum if nobody gave their point of view.

I just felt that describing one side of the argument as "common sense" is suggesting that those who feel differently are automatically wrong-headed.

Newist don't you remember that Gordon Brown sold off the UK's (not England's) gold at a knock down price and then indulged in what is euphemistically called 'Quantative Easing' which basically is the Bank of England (which is in fact the Bank of the UK) printing and circulating bank notes, without security, to enable trade to continue during a downturn, depression or financial crisis. Everytime you accept a Sterling Bank Note in return for goods or services, you are in effect lending £5, £10 or £20 to the Bank of England. If a lot of people simultaneously lost faith in the pound and exchanged their money for Euros or USA$ then the whole charade would collapse and the pound in your pocket (or bank account) would be worthless.

The so called Bank of England belongs as much to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as England. If there is to be a 'divorce' then either Scotland would be entitled to a percentage share of the assets including the gold (if any remains!) and liable for the same percentage share of the debts, which are much bigger than the assets - OR - as David Cameron has said, RumpUK declares itself to be the successor state, refuses a currency union with Scotland and inherits all the assets but also all the liabilities. That scenario leaves Scotland with 18 months from the referendum until Independence day to set up its own Central Bank and decide whether to use Sterling without a currency union, set up a Scottish Currency or join the Euro - many options and a startup balance sheet with no inherited debt.

It is also worth pondering that the major surety for the massive amounts of money that the UK has borrowed over the past few years is the Oil Reserves in the North Sea and the new fields yet to be developed to the West of Scotland. If there is an iScotland and RUK currency union then these reserves will remain in the sterling zone as collateral for the loans: If Scotland has to create a currency of its own then its 90+% of the oil reserves will be more than sufficient to provide indemnity for Scotland's needs but what about the rest of the UK? What assets can they 'mortgage' if the bulk of the oil is outwith their control?