The result of the EU referendum:

[jeremyp]

There is a big difference in having a referendum 40 odd years after the EEC one, on what has changed hugely in that time and another one in a couple of years.

Either change legitimises a new referendum or it does not. Given the right concessions from the EU, a new prime minister could justify a new referendum.

Boris will only get to be PM if he promises many Tories to honour the Vote. Any deal with Europe would set off another leadership challenge, probably by Gove.

That maybe, but it is still just speculation. I don't say my scenario is likely but it could happen.

This has been too serious, too divisive and is a much bigger decision than the Irish example.

But that doesn't mean a second referendum couldn't happen.

Also I am not convinced about the Scottish referendum, certainly not in the short term. Polls indicate a majority opposed to the idea of another referendum in the result of a UK leave, Scotland stay
 Nicola won't call one unless there is a long period of polls showing Yes in front.

I agree that there will not be another referendum in Scotland unless the Independence vote is certain to win, but if we vote out and the majority of Scots vote in, I think the certainty is there.

In the scenario where Britain votes leave but Scotland votes remain by More than about 60%, I'd put money on a new Scottish referendum within five years.

[jeremyp]

Link to evidence please?

He doesn't need evidence, he said "I think" which means it is an opinion.

[Nearly Sane]

Odds moved further to stay,  now 5\2 on

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Gove takes the piss.

Asking people to vote for democracy.

If you've got a vote you've got democracy...................

[Udayana]

Either change legitimises a new referendum or it does not. Given the right concessions from the EU, a new prime minister could justify a new referendum.
...

Well, what are the right concessions? Who in the EU is going to offer them? Angela?

To get any significant reform these need to be drafted, agreed by the reformers and a massive consensus in the EU countries built up to support them and start treaty change.

If we are talking about exemptions to existing treaties just for the UK then this is easier, but still requires the UK to get agreement from the heads of government of all of the other countries, each of which have their own list they would want supported in exchange. Negotiating this is an activity that Cameron, at least, has proved inept at. Would Johnson, Gove or even Corbyn do any better? Or maybe we rely on Donald Tusk to be able to convince the other leaders that they can't manage without the UK?
 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

More on Gove on democracy

Gove introduced 8 regional schools commissioners answerable to him above local control.

Conservatives proposed removal of local management of schools.

Gove suddenly a friend of democracy and NHS.

[floo]

More on Gove on democracy

Gove introduced 8 regional schools commissioners answerable to him above local control.

Conservatives proposed removal of local management of schools.

Gove suddenly a friend of democracy and NHS.

Gove is an idiot he wrecked the education system!

[jakswan]

Gove is an idiot he wrecked the education system!

Metrics?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Metrics?

The number of teachers leaving the profession.
The number of trainees not following up teacher training.
Teacher shortages in key subjects.
The number of teachers leaving within 5 years.
The number of days lost due to industrial action on his watch.
The amount of accredited courses.
The number of vocational oriented courses which count as education.

[Nearly Sane]

Either change legitimises a new referendum or it does not. Given the right concessions from the EU, a new prime minister could justify a new referendum.

That maybe, but it is still just speculation. I don't say my scenario is likely but it could happen.

But that doesn't mean a second referendum couldn't happen.

Of course, it's speculation but what we are talking about is likelihood. The justification for another referendum will not feel the same as your EEC example because of the time difference. They are only superficially analogous. That a second referendum could happen is not the issue, it's the whole question of what is likely.

I agree that there will not be another referendum in Scotland unless the Independence vote is certain to win, but if we vote out and the majority of Scots vote in, I think the certainty is there.

In the scenario where Britain votes leave but Scotland votes remain by More than about 60%, I'd put money on a new Scottish referendum within five years.

I really don't get where you can use a term certainty here. There is enough ambivalent statements coming out of the SNP about this to cause at least some doubt. Recently Humza Yousaf made comments casting doubt on a second referendum, and link below is to a Marco Biagi article outlining why.


http://www.thenational.scot/comment/marco-biagi-holding-second-indyref-after-brexit-would-risk-throwing-the-independence-campaign-into-disarray.18905

[Nearly Sane]

He doesn't need evidence, he said "I think" which means it is an opinion.

though I could certainly be asked for reasons. As I see it any deal would have to involve something significant in terms of freedom of movement, it sermshighly unlikely that this would be seen simply as an exemption to treaties for the UK since it is by nature a mutual treaty with the other countries. In that case that would trigger the need for referendums in certain countries.

[Nearly Sane]

Except it's bollocks, as explained by NS.

ERM, thanks, I think but it's not really what I was attempting to do. I'm having a perfectly reasonable discussion with Jeremypx I think he's incorrect in his view that there is any significant possibility of a renegotiation referendum but we are both just offering opinions.

[jeremyp]

Of course, it's speculation but what we are talking about is likelihood.

No, the word I used was "feasible" not "probable". I also said that anybody voting Leave in order to bring about my scenario is playing a very dangerous game of chicken. The reason I said that is because the likelihood is that a vote to Leave will result in us leaving the EU.

The justification for another referendum will not feel the same as your EEC example

You missed the point. My EEC example was just that: an example to show that referendums are not absolute for all time.

I really don't get where you can use a term certainty here.

Because, in my opinion, in the scenario I suggested, I think the shift in favour of Scottish independence would make the referendum result a certainty or at least certain enough for Sturgeon to be confident of winning. I'm dead against Scottish independence, but if we vote leave even I'd be urging the Scots to at least save themselves

[Nearly Sane]

No, the word I used was "feasible" not "probable". I also said that anybody voting Leave in order to bring about my scenario is playing a very dangerous game of chicken. The reason I said that is because the likelihood is that a vote to Leave will result in us leaving the EU.

You missed the point. My EEC example was just that: an example to show that referendums are not absolute for all time.

And since I am not arguing that they are it's a specious point. I'm also not saying that you do think it is highly probable, you have made it clear that you do not think it is. I am  discussing the likelihood though and saying I don't think it will happen at no point have I said that it can't.

Because, in my opinion, in the scenario I suggested, I think the shift in favour of Scottish independence would make the referendum result a certainty or at least certain enough for Sturgeon to be confident of winning. I'm dead against Scottish independence, but if we vote leave even I'd be urging the Scots to at least save themselves

Again I know it's your opinion but I don't see where you get to certainty which you talked of. It may be that there is a referendum but based on current polling it's not wanted by a majority. That may change but I am not convinced that it will. With the independenve referendum, the GE, the Scottish Election and this referendum, we have been in campaign mode here for almost 2 years. I am a self confessed political geek but another referendum would try my patience.

[L.A.]

Again I know it's your opinion but I don't see where you get to certainty which you talked of. It may be that there is a referendum but based on current polling it's not wanted by a majority. That may change but I am not convinced that it will. With the independenve referendum, the GE, the Scottish Election and this referendum, we have been in campaign mode here for almost 2 years. I am a self confessed political geek but another referendum would try my patience.

Surely, if there was a Brexit vote, it would seem highly likely that Scottish public opinion would change drastically in favour of independence?

[Nearly Sane]

Surely, if there was a Brexit vote, it would seem highly likely that Scottish public opinion would change drastically in favour of independence?

I suggest you read the Marco Biagi article I put the link in for earlier. I agree that it might happen but based on the arguments in Biagi's article and that polls show a majority of Scots do not agree with another referendum in the result  of a UK Out vote and Scotland Remain, I don't see how we can conclude that it is 'highly likely'.

[L.A.]

I suggest you read the Marco Biagi article I put the link in for earlier. I agree that it might happen but based on the arguments in Biagi's article and that polls show a majority of Scots do not agree with another referendum in the result  of a UK Out vote and Scotland Remain, I don't see how we can conclude that it is 'highly likely'.

I think Marco Biagi is wrong. If I lived North of the border I would have voted against independence last time, but I would be infuriated if England caused us to leave the EU - that would change everything. 

I think I would be a strong advocate of a second independence referendum in those circumstances.

[wigginhall]

I was just musing about Corbyn's point, when asked about limits to immigration, who said that free movement contradicts that.   This seems obvious - as soon as you set a limit, you do not have free movement.

But historically, this is fascinating, since the right have traditionally advocated market economics, (which includes movement of capital, people, goods and services), and the left have criticized it.  But now in the EU debate you seem to have the reverse, the right-wing are recommending state control of immigration, and the left arguing against it, (even though it may lower wages).

Of course, there are other arguments against free movement, for example, Farage's idea that I would not like to live next to Romanians, or whoever.  And this argument seems to be heard on the campaign trail - there are too many of 'them' here.

But I think  that in classical economics, migration is a response to labour shortages.  I think Rhiannon mentioned the potato farmer who desperately needs pickers, and East Europeans turn up to do it.   I'm not sure how the state is supposed to interfere with that, but it poses the interesting spectacle of a right-wing government controlling the economy in certain ways.

[Nearly Sane]

I think Marco Biagi is wrong. If I lived North of the border I would have voted against independence last time, but I would be infuriated if England caused us to leave the EU - that would change everything. 

I think I would be a strong advocate of a second independence referendum in those circumstances.

Yes, I know you think he's wrong but you seem to be saying that based on simply ignoring his argument and using you own feelings as indicative of what would happen. Given the lack of follow through in how people said they would react with a Tory Govt, and how they then felt afterwards, Biagi, an ex SNP  MSP has facts while you have your personal opinion about what you would do.

Added to the comments from Humza Yousaf, it would seem that the SNP are clearly not confident of what will happen. Indeed I know a number of long term members of the party who think it will make Scottish independence harder to achieve. One of the issues that the Yes campaign struggled with was the lack of clarity around continued EU membership. Given Brexitx that's only going to become less clear.

[L.A.]

Yes, I know you think he's wrong but you seem to be saying that based on simply ignoring his argument and using you own feelings as indicative of what would happen. Given the lack of follow through in how people said they would react with a Tory Govt, and how they then felt afterwards, Biagi, an ex SNP  MSP has facts while you have your personal opinion about what you would do.

Added to the comments from Humza Yousaf, it would seem that the SNP are clearly not confident of what will happen. Indeed I know a number of long term members of the party who think it will make Scottish independence harder to achieve. One of the issues that the Yes campaign struggled with was the lack of clarity around continued EU membership. Given Brexitx that's only going to become less clear.

What he seems to saying (in a nutshell) is that the SNP couldn't get their act together, but the major factor he is ignoring is that a Brexit vote would turn virtually all the arguments that were presented last time on their head.

[Nearly Sane]

What he seems to saying (in a nutshell) is that the SNP couldn't get their act together, but the major factor he is ignoring is that a Brexit vote would turn virtually all the arguments that were presented last time on their head.

No, he pointed out that despite people saying they would move to support independence if the Toriesgot elected, they didn''t. Therefore your idea that people would just move to Yes, isn't borne out. As I have already pointed out, current polls are opposed to a new referendum even in result of UK out, Scotland In.

He's also not talking solely about the SNP but the whole Yes side. In addition a Brexit vote turns no argument on its head and makes the whole question of whether EU membership is achievable less clear.

[L.A.]

No, he pointed out that despite people saying they would move to support independence if the Toriesgot elected, they didn''t. Therefore your idea that people would just move to Yes, isn't borne out. As I have already pointed out, current polls are opposed to a new referendum even in result of UK out, Scotland In.

He's also not talking solely about the SNP but the whole Yes side. In addition a Brexit vote turns no argument on its head and makes the whole question of whether EU membership is achievable less clear.

While I wouldn't pretend to have the slightest grasp of the working of the SNP, the simple fact remains: last time, independence would have been a very risky option - if there were a Brexit vote independence could be the safe option.

[Nearly Sane]

While I wouldn't pretend to have the slightest grasp of the working of the SNP, the simple fact remains: last time, independence would have been a very risky option - if there were a Brexit vote independence could be the safe option.

and again you are using your opinion to extrapolate what other's might do, which as Biagi points out people don't even get right themselves. This has nothing to do with the working of the SNP, other than they won't want a second referendum unless they are sure they can win. I don't think it is clear what will happen to public opinion in the event of UK Out, Scotland Stay.

[Nearly Sane]

Odds swinging further to Stay now about 13/4 on

[jakswan]

Odds swinging further to Stay now about 13/4 on

Laid staying @1.29.