2nd Indy Referendum?

[Nearly Sane]

I found it odd last time that the comparison with Ireland was not mentioned a lot.   Obviously, there are big differences - the Irish were trying to reject English (and Norman) rule for a very long time, is it 800 years? and the armed struggle was part of this.  The Act of Union is quite different.   However, self-determination is self-determination.   Another point is that the argument for Irish independence was not so much economic, and Ireland was economically poor until the 1960s.   

Corbyn may be accused of English chauvinism,  in other words,  self-determination applies to all countries in the world, except Scotland.   Eh?

Of course if you read Mad Mel's piece last week you woukd know that the Irish state is a nonsense and that the British Isles is the real state

[wigginhall]

Well, after Irish independence, there was a lot of sneering at this poor,  Catholic-dominated country, what was the point in independence?  I suppose there was quite a lot of romanticism in it, 'wherever green is worn' and so on.  But would the Irish want to come back to the UK now?   What a laaf.

[Sriram]

I think it's even more likely that Brexit would have happened and the numbers bear that out.

How could anyone make out a case that there would be no Brexit....even before the referendum?!  The Brexit referendum was announced  before the Scottish referendum...and so they knew it could go either way. 

[Nearly Sane]

How could anyone make out a case that there would be no Brexit....even before the referendum?!  The Brexit referendum was announced  before the Scottish referendum...and so they knew it could go either way.

Well first of all it wasn't announced as happening before the Scottish referendum took place. Secondly even if it had been, as you put it, the referendum could go either way so Brexit was not a fact. Third you ned to ask those who campaigned on a No vote to independence being the only way Scotland would be guaranteed to stay in the EU about their argument.

[wigginhall]

It's a killer argument, isn't it?  Scots were promised retention of EU membership with a No vote.   But no, we have hard Brexit, apparently. 

[Sriram]

Well first of all it wasn't announced as happening before the Scottish referendum took place. Secondly even if it had been, as you put it, the referendum could go either way so Brexit was not a fact. Third you ned to ask those who campaigned on a No vote to independence being the only way Scotland would be guaranteed to stay in the EU about their argument.

Well...ok. But it seems rather strange to keep vacillating once a decision is made. A referendum is a referendum.

[Sriram]

It's a killer argument, isn't it?  Scots were promised retention of EU membership with a No vote.   But no, we have hard Brexit, apparently.

How could anyone 'promise' a no vote...when a referendum was due?

[Bubbles]

I'm opposed to a second referendum, I'm also opposed to Scotland being able to use the pound if they succeed.

Once they are independent, than that's exactly what they should be, and use the Euro once they join the EU in their own right.

I don't think the SNP have the Scottish people's interests at heart at all, and are just " power hungry"  they don't seem to have any more plans than Nigel Farage had after brexit.

I think before they can have a "valid" referendum it has to be agreed by Westminster.

Westminster is likely to say "NO"

[Gordon]

I'm opposed to a second referendum, I'm also opposed to Scotland being able to use the pound if they succeed.

Once they are independent, than that's exactly what they should be, and use the Euro once the join the EU in their own right.

I don't think the SNP have the Scottish people's interests at heart at all, and are just " power hungry"

I think before they can have a "valid" referendum it has to be agreed by Westminster.

Westminster is likely to say "NO"

Super - and your experience of matters from a Scottish perspective is?

[Bubbles]

Super - and your experience of matters from a Scottish perspective is?

I don't need a "Scottish perspective" just a "UK perspective".

It will affect everyone, so it isn't just the business of the Scots.

I'm sure if it was Cornwall ( who also have their own language and traditions ) campaigning for independence and it was adversely going to effect Scotland I've no doubt Scots would be vocal about it.

[Nearly Sane]

In addition since the Scottish referendum there have been two elections, one Westminster, one Holyrood where we have had the majority of votes for parties against leaving the EU and committed to oposing it. In the Holyrood manifesto a specific commitment to a further Indyref if there was a significant change in circumstances ), i.e. Brexit. And a 62 -38 majority in Scotland in the referendum against Brexit.

Further, the initial position of the Scottish govt was to look to work together if they felt that there was a way to do in line with Scotland's interests. Now it may be that the UK govt felt there were certain aspects of the proposal that were problematic but negotitiable but they didn't make that case and appeared uninterested in doing so. Combined with the collapse of the Labour party into a morass of soft coups, and the rump of the Lib Dems being in no position to be any real break, then it looks like Tories for the next 20 years unless things go humungously tits up because of Brexit. And since that is what you are seeking to avoid, the combined factors make this inevitable even if the timing might be questioned.

As a speculation, i wonder if the timing might have been influenced by discussions with EU reps, particularly Verhofstadt

[Nearly Sane]

I don't need a "Scottish perspective" just a UK perspective.

It will affect everyone, so it isn't just the business of the Scots.

So the Irish shouldn't have been given independence?

[Nearly Sane]

How could anyone 'promise' a no vote...when a referendum was due?

They weren't. As already pointed out the EU referendum was not in place at the time of the Scottish one.

[Nearly Sane]

Well...ok. But it seems rather strange to keep vacillating once a decision is made. A referendum is a referendum.

Is that ok including an acceptance that you were factually wrong about the timings? Because you repeated that error in reply to wigginhall after this post of your's.

I am not sure why you think a referendum is magic. People were not vacillating in the details in my post . They were showing continued oppositiom on elections and a referendum of being in favour of remaining on the EU.

[Bubbles]

So the Irish shouldn't have been given independence?

That's not what I wrote.

The independence of Southern Ireland was before my time and you could argue that Ireland still isn't totally independent as Northern Ireland is still part of the UK.

It's a different question and situation is not comparable, to Scotland.

[Gordon]

How could anyone 'promise' a no vote...when a referendum was due?

You misunderstand Sriram - in 2014 we were told by the unionist parties (inc. a Tory-led government) that to stay in the EU we should reject independence: we did, and then the Tories were stupid enough to have EU referendum for party reasons and now we have Brexit - Scotland didn't vote for Brexit. Plus, with the demise of the Labour party, we have the prospect of a Tory-dominated UK where, currently, the Tories have just one MP in Scotland.

So, that some of us don't view a UK state in that it is dominated by those who support both Brexit and the Tory party as being attractive is no great surprise.

[Nearly Sane]

I don't need a "Scottish perspective" just a "UK perspective".

It will affect everyone, so it isn't just the business of the Scots.

I'm sure if it was Cornwall ( who also have their own language and traditions ) campaigning for independence and it was adversely going to effect Scotland I've no doubt Scots would be vocal about it.

Despite the fact of substantial differences between Cirnwall and Scotland, such as Scotland having separate legal  and educational systems, i doubt that many Scots would care that much. Also of those i know in the independence movement, any who have expressed an interest in the small movement for independence in Corneall have been supportive.

[Nearly Sane]

That's not what I wrote.

The independence of Southern Ireland was before my time and you could argue that Ireland still isn't totally independent as Northern Ireland is still part of the UK.

It's a different question and situation is not comparable, to Scotland.

Didn't say it was what you wrote. That's why it had a question mark at the end. Obviously it's a different question but i am trying to work out what principles you are using. When the Irish gained independence, it affected the rest of the UK, do why wouldn't they just be right to have refused?

It should, of course, be noted that as part of international law, we are signed up to the principle of self determinatiom. Do you think that the UK should breach international law?

[Gordon]

I don't need a "Scottish perspective" just a "UK perspective".

It will affect everyone, so it isn't just the business of the Scots.

I'm sure if it was Cornwall ( who also have their own language and traditions ) campaigning for independence and it was adversely going to effect Scotland I've no doubt Scots would be vocal about it.

Then you miss the point: the UK doesn't reflect the political ethos of Scotland which should be obvious when you look at its political representation in Westminster and Holyrood along with the result of the EU referendum here.

Our interests aren't best served by remaining in a Tory dominated UK.

[Anchorman]

The situation when Scotland continually voted to elect a party other than the Thatherites in the eighties led to a great deal of unrest here. Despite voting Labour in every election, what we got was a Tory shower whose policies were either rejected by Scotland or simply hated in a very destructive way. We're in the same situation now, the only difference is that the only real opposition to the Tories in Westminster is provided by the SNP block, labour being mired in internal disunity. Another twenty years of policies Scotland manifestly rejects and opposes at every turn is simply untenable - but that's what we face unless we can end this 'precious union' the woman we did not vote for bleats about.

[Nearly Sane]

An oldie from the Mash but still fun



http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/sturgeon-suggests-scotland-could-somehow-become-angrier-2015060298818

[Anchorman]

Here's a comment from Paul Kavanagh - the "Wee Ginger Dug" - and, no, he is not an SNP member. https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2017/03/13/we-have-work-to-do/

[Sriram]

You misunderstand Sriram - in 2014 we were told by the unionist parties (inc. a Tory-led government) that to stay in the EU we should reject independence: we did, and then the Tories were stupid enough to have EU referendum for party reasons and now we have Brexit - Scotland didn't vote for Brexit. Plus, with the demise of the Labour party, we have the prospect of a Tory-dominated UK where, currently, the Tories have just one MP in Scotland.

So, that some of us don't view a UK state in that it is dominated by those who support both Brexit and the Tory party as being attractive is no great surprise.

But I think well in 2013 Cameron had said that he would hold a referendum for Brexit (if he was elected). So...a NO vote was not a guarantee and no one could have 'promised' it.  That is my point. It is not that someone went back on their word or anything like that.

[Gordon]

But I think well in 2013 Cameron had said that he would hold a referendum for Brexit (if he was elected). So...a NO vote was not a guarantee and no one could have 'promised' it.  That is my point. It is not that someone went back on their word or anything like that.

Cameron did this in order to, he thought, rid his party of annoying eurosceptic Tories: he didn't expect the result he got. He put party first.

[Nearly Sane]

But I think well in 2013 Cameron had said that he would hold a referendum for Brexit (if he was elected). So...a NO vote was not a guarantee and no one could have 'promised' it.  That is my point. It is not that someone went back on their word or anything like that.

No, he said it would be held if his bout of diplomacy didn't pay off. This didn't complete until well after the Scottish referendum. It then went through post the 2015 election at which Scotland returned no Mp in favour of Brexit.

That people in the No campaign, including Cameron,  promised this was the only way to guarantee Scotland stayed in the EU is a fact. Whether you think they were justified in making that is irrelevant to that fact.