2nd Indy Referendum?

[Nearly Sane]

Just to note that given the Scottish govt is a minority govt due to us having a proportional system, the SNP would be unable to request a Section 30 order from Westminster without support of others. It has been confirmed by Patrick Harvie of the Scottish Green Party, that they will support the request.

[Sriram]

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.

Whatever!  But the Scots knew at the time of their referendum that a NO vote for Brexit was not a guarantee. No one could have 'promised ' it. Cameron was already thinking of a  referendum and everyone knew that. So...they just have to accept the results.

People probably voted for Brexit under the strength that UK was one nation. Dividing it up now does not seem right (from an outsider perspective..let me add).

In that case, you should have one more Brexit vote. That could be a NO vote, in which case, the Scots might want to join back...so one more referendum there.
Based on the Scots joining back, people may once again feel like leaving the EU...so one more Brexit vote....ad infinitum! 

Anyway....I know its none of my business. But I would personally hate to see the UK breaking up! 

G'Night!

[Rhiannon]

Hate hate hate us us us them them hate.

[Nearly Sane]

Whatever!  But the Scots knew at the time of their referendum that a NO vote for Brexit was not a guarantee. No one could have 'promised ' it. Cameron was already thinking of a  referendum and everyone knew that. So...they just have to accept the results.

People probably voted for Brexit under the strength that UK was one nation. Dividing it up now does not seem right (from an outsider perspective..let me add).

In that case, you should have one more Brexit vote. That could be a NO vote, in which case, the Scots might want to join back...so one more referendum there.
Based on the Scots joining back, people may once again feel like leaving the EU...so one more Brexit vote....ad infinitum! 

Anyway....I know its none of my business. But I would personally hate to see the UK breaking up! 

G'Night!

Again as pointed out, that you think may people aren't justified in saying something doesn't mean that they won't and that's without you being factually incorrect on the position on the Brexit referendum. Further given the votes in the Brexit referendum there is no basis for your feeling that it was more likely to be an exit because of the Indyref. Indeed some of those most vociferous on the Brexit side were inclined to tell Scotland to fuck off.

[Nearly Sane]

Hate hate hate us us us them them hate.

not really. Been posting elsewhere on a discussion about how to conduct any campaign with people on both sides, and there is large scale agreement. Yes, we can all get annoyed on any subject under the sun - try a Dr Who forum to see that, and say things out of line but that we have discussions, and disagreements is inevitable.

[wigginhall]

I see Mrs May has said that Indyref2 will create division.   Talk about irony-ectomy. 

[Nearly Sane]

I see Mrs May has said that Indyref2 will create division.   Talk about irony-ectomy.

I also someone elsewhere point out that referendums don't make peopke say vile things rather that vile people say vile things. And that seems to be true of any subject under the sun.

Surely referendums are generally caused by division rather than the other way about?

[wigginhall]

I think people are forgetting what hard Brexit means.  The right wing want Free Enterprise Zones, with low paid workers, with little protection, a shrunken welfare system, and no regulations on imports and exports.  It sounds insane to me, and surely anybody sane will want to get away from it, e.g. the Scottish government.

[Aruntraveller]

I've been out most of the day so just catching up on this now. For what it's worth (and I do not reside in Scotland, so probably not much) I think Scotland should go.

At the previous Indyref I did argue for Scotland to stay - but so much has changed, and so in thrall to the tories are so many in England, that I would urge you to run for your lives and sanity.

I never thought I would argue for the breakup of the UK - but it is finished as a meaningful Union. I think the Brexit result just kind of sealed it.

Sad to see you go - but I see no alternative.

[Anchorman]

TV; you're right (But I WOULD say that!) The fact is that even many who oppose independence up here have little or no respect for the institution of Westminster. It cannot be right that the majority of a nation - any nation - show no respect for the central authority - regardless of which party is in power.

[wigginhall]

I think hard Brexit has sealed it.   It is an insane vision of right-wing deregulation and low wages, very good for profits.  The Brexit zealots love it, and they seem to have May in their grip.   

[Anchorman]

I think hard Brexit has sealed it.   It is an insane vision of right-wing deregulation and low wages, very good for profits.  The Brexit zealots love it, and they seem to have May in their grip.   

-
Yep.
And you can bet this will play into the YES camp - a hard line Tory PM with policies which seem at odds with the majority of Scots of whatever party, is not a great advert for her 'precious union'.

[wigginhall]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C60MQFnWoAIjKG6.jpg

[Aruntraveller]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C60MQFnWoAIjKG6.jpg

PMSL 

[Bubbles]

Hate hate hate us us us them them hate.

?

[Bubbles]

not really. Been posting elsewhere on a discussion about how to conduct any campaign with people on both sides, and there is large scale agreement. Yes, we can all get annoyed on any subject under the sun - try a Dr Who forum to see that, and say things out of line but that we have discussions, and disagreements is inevitable.

Yes, people can disagree without hating each other.

Whatever happens, we ALL have to be able to get on.

 Scotland isn't going anywhere 

[Nearly Sane]

Yes, people can disagree without hating each other.

Whatever happens, we ALL have to be able to get on.

 Scotland isn't going anywhere 

It might not be but I think the referendum has to take place. There would he a real issue were the UK govt oppose a referendum requested by the Scot gov on a specifically mandated manifesto commitment supported by another party.

[Jack Knave]

As Jim said, completely inevitable after hard Brexit looks likely.  In fact, I don't see how the Scottish govt could have avoided it.   Polls are showing 48-50% yes, so that is more than last time.

I had to laugh at Labour's reaction, of course, they are going to oppose it, to save Kezia's face, but it makes them look daft.

The basic principle of the self-determination of nations makes me say, vote yes.

But they want to join the EU. That will guarantee them to end up like Greece; a servant of Germany.

[Jack Knave]

Which is the position of the Lib Dems, i.e. a Brexit again after the deal is done but against the Indy one.


The Brexit vote was a substantial change in circumstance as covered in the SNP manifesto for the Scottish parliament so there is at least a justifiable democratic position on this. Again I think this sort of issue would be dealt with by having a threshold that is substantially higher than 50% for change.

Good idea set it so high it would make it very unlikely they would vote to leave. 

[Nearly Sane]

Good idea set it so high it would make it very unlikely they would vote to leave. 

indeed it does, despite me being in favour of voting Yes last time, think you need a full mandate for change, 1 vote isn't enough

[Nearly Sane]

But they want to join the EU. That will guarantee them to end up like Greece; a servant of Germany.

apart from the lazy generalisation of 'they' that is an ad consequentiam in this position, with a poisoning of the well, and a begging question. It's like Alan Burns on speed

[Jack Knave]

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"

The fact is they can't use the pound if they join the EU because to join the Euro they have to have their own currency. And once they do that the value of their state reduces because the currency would have no history with the markets and so effectively their currency would be devalued, making borrowing etc. harder and so financing their economy difficult. The Scots would see a drastic fall in living standards.

You're right the SNP are doing this for ideological reasons which will take Scotland to hell and back.

It wasn't Farage's or UKIP's job to provide a plan for Brexit it was Cameron's.

[Jack Knave]

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

I don't follow your point on the timing. For our 2020 elections or the EU one or what?

[Jack Knave]

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.

They are independent now because they are part of the EU and Euro. If they left the EU that would solve the boarder issue.

[Jack Knave]

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.

So what is your scenario if Scotland left the UK? What would you expect to be done?