The result of the EU referendum:

[Bubbles]

Wrong - Westminster cannot stop the government in Holyrood running a second referendum in Scotland - that is entirely in the hands of the Scottish parliament. What Westminster can do is refuse to acknowledge its validity and refuse to act on it. But that would be tricky and would open a can of worms if they were accepting the validity of the EU referendum. Note that both would merely be 'advisory' in legal terms.

Well it sounds to me like not everyone in Scotland wants one.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/684174/Nicola-Sturgeon-Brexit-referendum-Scotland-betrayal-EU

[ProfessorDavey]

Well it sounds to me like not everyone in Scotland wants one.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/684174/Nicola-Sturgeon-Brexit-referendum-Scotland-betrayal-EU

That's an entirely different point. I was responding to your assertion that Holyrood cannot hold a referendum in Scotland without the permission of Westminster - that is not true.

On whether the people of Scotland want a referendum is a critical issue and one that will exercise Sturgeon greatly over the next few weeks and months.

My feeling is that the UK feels almost punch-drunk from the recent events and I suspect that Scotland will feel so doubly after the IndyRef and then EU-Ref. Is there an appetite for even more division and turmoil. I'm not sure there is.

I suspect I'm not alone in kind of wanting the whole world to simply go away at the moment. Or perhaps to wake up and realise that the past 6 days have all been a bad dream.

[Bubbles]

According to this they do.


Any moves to hold an independence referendum would need to be agreed in Westminster.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/683263/Nicola-Sturgeon-calls-SECOND-Scottish-referendum-Brexit

Westminster could refuse permission

[ProfessorDavey]

According to this they do.


Any moves to hold an independence referendum would need to be agreed in Westminster.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/683263/Nicola-Sturgeon-calls-SECOND-Scottish-referendum-Brexit

Westminster could refuse permission

Sorry but after last week anyone who holds the Daily Express to be a beacon of the truth really needs their head examined.

The Westminster government has no authority to stop the Holyrood government holding a referendum in Scotland. What Westminster can do, in advance, is to state that it will simply ignore it therefore negating its validity as Westminster are the only authority who can actually grant Scotland independence.

So back in 2014 Cameron couldn't stop the referendum taking place, but on this occasion he accepted its validity (albeit on the basis of an advisory referendum). The Westminster government does not have to accept its validity but it cannot stop it taking place.

[Bubbles]

No in 2014 they had a temporary permission from Westminster  to hold an independance referendum

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014

The power is held at Westminster on anything that effects the constitution and union.

Scotland cannot hold a second referendum on independance without approval from Westmister.

Which is why in one of my links Nicola Sturgeon says she thought it unlikely Westmister would refuse.

Well they can.

[Bubbles]

This link may be better

Westminster may not even allow it
First things first: Scotland may have its own parliament, but to hold a national referendum it still needs permission from Westminster in London. Over 55% of the country voted to stay in the UK in the last independence referendum in 2014, undoubtedly a healthy margin which surprised expectations.

But following a decisive Scottish vote to remain in the EU, the post-Brexit anger in Scotland could be enough to make Westminster politicians think twice about allowing another independent Scotland vote. And there is no constitutional obligation for the UK government to allow it to happen, Dr. Catterall says:

"The argument the UK government may put forward is that it needs to approve a second Scottish referendum and could, in theory, withhold the consent. When the Americans wanted independence in 1776 they did it by violence. We don’t want that — we want to follow constitutional procedure. The question then becomes, how far do you push against the inevitable?

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-why-scotland-will-not-get-an-independence-referendum-2016-6

[Nearly Sane]

That's an entirely different point. I was responding to your assertion that Holyrood cannot hold a referendum in Scotland without the permission of Westminster - that is not true.

On whether the people of Scotland want a referendum is a critical issue and one that will exercise Sturgeon greatly over the next few weeks and months.

My feeling is that the UK feels almost punch-drunk from the recent events and I suspect that Scotland will feel so doubly after the IndyRef and then EU-Ref. Is there an appetite for even more division and turmoil. I'm not sure there is.

I suspect I'm not alone in kind of wanting the whole world to simply go away at the moment. Or perhaps to wake up and realise that the past 6 days have all been a bad dream.

While I have on occasion disagreed with you in the past on such matters, in full agreement here. We seem set for more constitutional shenanigans for the foreseeable future and while it might be that a referendum appeals as a idea, th reality may be different.

[L.A.]

While I have on occasion disagreed with you in the past on such matters, in full agreement here. We seem set for more constitutional shenanigans for the foreseeable future and while it might be that a referendum appeals as a idea, th reality may be different.

I can see that there might be a reluctance to have another referendum so soon after the last, but will another opportunity like this one ever come again?

I'd say it's now or never.

[Nearly Sane]

Just to note my understanding of the ability to hold a referendum isn't either that Holyrood has the ability or th Westminster can stop it, rather a referendum called by Holyrood without Westminster can be challenged by individual citizens.

[Bubbles]

I can see that there might be a reluctance to have another referendum so soon after the last, but will another opportunity like this one ever come again?

I'd say it's now or never.

Westminster can refuse to give permission ( see links above) and I think they should.

ATM there is enough to cope with

Scotland voted in, so that's that.

[Bubbles]

Holyrood would need Westminster’s legislative approval to stage an official referendum, as it did in 2014. Cameron had previously said no UK government would give that again so soon, but Sturgeon said on Friday it would be inconceivable for Westminster to ignore a democratic vote by MSPs requesting that authority.


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/24/alex-salmond-second-scottish-independence-referendum-is-certain

Lucky for Scotland I'm not an MP.

Yet!

[L.A.]

Westminster can refuse to give permission ( see links above) and I think they should.

ATM there is enough to cope with

In theory maybe, but thanks to the Brexit fiasco the Scots now have a very strong case, and almost certainly a significant majority of voters in favour.

[Nearly Sane]

I can see that there might be a reluctance to have another referendum so soon after the last, but will another opportunity like this one ever come again?

I'd say it's now or never.

I was more expressing personal agreement with Prof Davey of a severe ennui of constantly talking about the constitution, which we will just get more of for any forseeable time. It may well be that this is the only time to fit in a referendum, who knows? But I would like more governing and less campaigning

[L.A.]

. . .  .
But I would like more governing and less campaigning

Surely, if it was worth all the hassle of having a referendum before when the time was obviously wrong - it must be worth trying now when all the factors are lined-up in your favour.

[Bubbles]

In theory maybe, but thanks to the Brexit fiasco the Scots now have a very strong case, and almost certainly a significant majority of voters in favour.

Yes I know.

Once they get a second referendum we would have to abide by the result.

I'm as unhappy about that as Jeremy P is about Brexit.

Once the votes are cast though, if they choose to leave then I feel it's a matter of honour to fulfil that.

It's the same with Brexit.

If you block the referendum, it does away with the problem.

If we hadn't been offered the EU referendum in the first place, we wouldn't be in this flippin mess.

[Bubbles]

Surely, if it was worth all the hassle of having a referendum before when the time was obviously wrong - it must be worth trying now when all the factors are lined-up in your favour.

No it just means they dive in and make a bigger mistake on the back of the EU one.

It doesn't mean an independant Scotland is going to be any more of a resounding success ,than us leaving the EU.

It's all dreams.

People and their dreams.

 

[Nearly Sane]

Surely, if it was worth all the hassle of having a referendum before when the time was obviously wrong - it must be worth trying now when all the factors are lined-up in your favour.

What hassle did I have having the last referendum?


Things may be lined up in favour of a second referendum. But that's not my favour. See you thing is the material change in circumstance cuts both ways. Just now I am not even sure what the circumstances are. We have a cellophane PM, an official opposition that can't oppose anything other than itself, an unresolved refugee problem and no fucking plan. We are going to indulge in a Tory party wankfest to electronic a PM amongst 150,000 people. And the a will they, won't you Article 50 bore.


As evil Willow would say, 'Bored now', and then flay them

[L.A.]

What hassle did I have having the last referendum?

Remarkable if you didn't.

Things may be lined up in favour of a second referendum. But that's not my favour. See you thing is the material change in circumstance cuts both ways. Just now I am not even sure what the circumstances are. We have a cellophane PM, an official opposition that can't oppose anything other than itself, an unresolved refugee problem and no fucking plan. We are going to indulge in a Tory party wankfest to electronic a PM amongst 150,000 people. And the a will they, won't you Article 50 bore.

You seem to be listing really good reasons for independence - but hey, it's your choice - just don't decide you want one in five years time because it's a fair bet that everything will have changed.

[Nearly Sane]

Remarkable if you didn't.You seem to be listing really good reasons for independence - but hey, it's your choice - just don't decide you want one in five years time because it's a fair bet that everything will have changed.

It's a fair bet everything will have changed in 1 day. You seem to be saying that I, as an individual can't change my mind - that seems a trifle odd. Do you think that you're not allowed to change your mind?

[Hope]

We have a cellophane PM,...

Not a cellophane one, but one definitely dead in the water.  Mind you, I'm not sure what else he could have done in the circumstances.

We are going to indulge in a Tory party wankfest to electronic a PM amongst 150,000 people. And the a will they, won't you Article 50 bore.

I'd suggest the more serious issue is that of the Labour Party who seem to be at war with itself, as you say.  Whilst it's official policy towards Europe was, as was the Tory policy, to stay in, it seems that its historical antagonism to Europe going back to the original referendum in 1975 has never gone away.  Its either been swept under the carpet for 40 years or its been ignored.  At least we've always known where we stand with the Tories.

[ProfessorDavey]

No in 2014 they had a temporary permission from Westminster  to hold an independance referendum

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014

The power is held at Westminster on anything that effects the constitution and union.

Scotland cannot hold a second referendum on independance without approval from Westmister.

Which is why in one of my links Nicola Sturgeon says she thought it unlikely Westmister would refuse.

Well they can.

Absolute rubbish.

The Holyrood government can choose to hold a referendum on whatever it like in Scotland. What it cannot do, necessarily is deliver on the result of that referendum because it only has authority to change actually enact changes in certain areas.

So, for example, Holyrood could decide to hold a referendum on whether Scotland should ditch the monarchy and become a republic. Westminster cannot stop them, but they do not have the authority to actually make that happen - that power rests in Westminster. So 99% of the people of Scotland could vote for a republic and Westminster can shrug its shoulders and say - tough, not your decision.

And that was the case for IndyRef - the power to enact Scottish independence rested entirely in Westminster. But what Westminster did do was to take a decision to recognise the referendum, in other words to accept its findings - but that was its choice.

So on IndyRef 2 - Westminster cannot stop it happening, but it can simply state that it refuses to recognise it, therefore ignoring its findings whether pro independence or anti independence.

[L.A.]

It's a fair bet everything will have changed in 1 day. You seem to be saying that I, as an individual can't change my mind - that seems a trifle odd. Do you think that you're not allowed to change your mind?

Of course you can change your mind, I'm just pointing out that it will probably be a very long time before the opportunity will  come round again - so don't complain if you have to endure a Boris Government.

[Nearly Sane]

Of course you can change your mind, I'm just pointing out that it will probably be a very long time before the opportunity will  come round again - so don't complain if you have to endure a Boris Government.

It appears I might have to do that way in advance of any referendum so why not?

[Nearly Sane]

Not a cellophane one, but one definitely dead in the water.  Mind you, I'm not sure what else he could have done in the circumstances.
 I'd suggest the more serious issue is that of the Labour Party who seem to be at war with itself, as you say.  Whilst it's official policy towards Europe was, as was the Tory policy, to stay in, it seems that its historical antagonism to Europe going back to the original referendum in 1975 has never gone away.  Its either been swept under the carpet for 40 years or its been ignored.  At least we've always known where we stand with the Tories.

The split in Labour isn't about the EU. Gisela Stuart isn't being attacked for her Leave stance or even coming up with the bus £350M slogan. This is a shadow cause. It's much much more to do with the Middle East.

[jakswan]

No it just means they dive in and make a bigger mistake on the back of the EU one.

It doesn't mean an independant Scotland is going to be any more of a resounding success ,than us leaving the EU.

It's all dreams.

People and their dreams.

 

I think Scotland would be fine and independence for Scotland would be better for everyone. At the very least indeyref2 will settle the issue for a generation, really this time.