2nd Indy Referendum?

[Nearly Sane]

Because they are far too small and haven't that much going for them as independent units, imo.

But Ireland would work even though it is the same size as Scotland? What about Belgium, or Switzerland or New Zealand?

[Aruntraveller]

Because they are far too small and haven't that much going for them as independent units, imo.

This is patently untrue. Much smaller countries than Scotland do function perfectly well.

I think it is quite likely that living standards would fall in Scotland - but hey they are going to do that under BREXIT anyway.

One of the issues is the trading position of Scotland which does some 44% of it's trade with the rest of the UK as opposed to some 10% with the EU. So any advantage that may be gained by somehow managing to get into the EU (difficult as highlighted elsewhere because of the Spanish problem with Catalonia) could well be offset by any deal arrived at with rUK.

All very complex and living standards cannot be the sole criteria that a decision is based on - there is the emotional aspect, nationalism and much else to consider.

[Anchorman]

Because they are far too small and haven't that much going for them as independent units, imo.

Eh? Tell that to Ireland Iceland Luxemburg Sweden Finland Latvia Estonia Lithuania and over a hundred other small nation states.

[jeremyp]

indeed and it was the requirement that Sweden committed to join it.
As I said I am not opposed to it in some time but the idea that in the short term or for as long as Sweden hasn't moved is specious.

Sweden joined in 1995. They may have an exception like we do.

Countries in Europe  don't follow fiscal and monetary policies so the idea that this works absolutely or will do is wrong. Or are you suggesting that France and Germany follow the same fiscal and monetary policies? Because you would be wrong if you did.

I'm saying that for the Euro to be really successful, the countries in the Eurozone need to have coordinated fiscal and monetary policies. The Greece crisis nearly brought it down and such things will probably happen periodically until the Eurozone does get better coordinated or the Euro collapses completely.

With regard to Scotland and the rUK sharing the pound, it would be economic folly and politically impossible for that to happen without Scotland accepting some control from the rUK. They couldn't for example, set their own interest rates and there would have to be limits on their spending. The same would apply to them being in the Euro, of course, but that would be politically more acceptable to Scots, I think and the English wouldn't care.

[jeremyp]

It's an argument against all acts of self-determination, isn't it?  It's what the French said in Algeria, well, for a while, that Algeria is French, and 'united we stand'.   However, the Algerians had other ideas.  See also the USA.

When a set of the states of the USA tried to apply the "we want our independence" trope, it caused a bloody war and they are still in the USA. Is that the example you are thinking of?

As a general rule, better together really does work, which is why the UK is one country and not dozens of little Saxon/Welsh/Scottish kingdoms.

[Nearly Sane]

This is patently untrue. Much smaller countries than Scotland do function perfectly well.

I think it is quite likely that living standards would fall in Scotland - but hey they are going to do that under BREXIT anyway.

One of the issues is the trading position of Scotland which does some 44% of it's trade with the rest of the UK as opposed to some 10% with the EU. So any advantage that may be gained by somehow managing to get into the EU (difficult as highlighted elsewhere because of the Spanish problem with Catalonia) could well be offset by any deal arrived at with rUK.

All very complex and living standards cannot be the sole criteria that a decision is based on - there is the emotional aspect, nationalism and much else to consider.

I think given the clear encouragement from Verhofstadt that thus idea if difficulty of entry into the EU on the basis of Spain is highly questionable. Many of the EU states are ones that come from previous larger states.


Also if I do vote yes, it is because I believe in getting power to the appropriate levels, and to having a clear link between power and responsibility. Not for emotion or nationalism.

[Nearly Sane]

I have stated my opinion, and others have stated theirs, we will have to see who is right and who is wrong, if Scotland votes for independence next time around.

No, you stated an opinion on size that was provably wrong with facts.

[Aruntraveller]

I think given the clear encouragement from Verhofstadt that thus idea if difficulty of entry into the EU on the basis of Spain is highly questionable. Many of the EU states are ones that come from previous larger states.


Also if I do vote yes, it is because I believe in getting power to the appropriate levels, and to having a clear link between power and responsibility. Not for emotion or nationalism.

I fully accept that if you vote yes, it is for that reason. I don't accept that your fellow countrypersons will necessarily use the same reason. As with BREXIT there will be a number of reasons for why people vote the way they choose.

[Nearly Sane]

I fully accept that if you vote yes, it is for that reason. I don't accept that your fellow countrypersons will necessarily use the same reason. As with BREXIT there will be a number of reasons for why people vote the way they choose.

Absolutely, wasn't suggesting that people would all vote for the sane reason which is why I phrased it as my belief. Incidentally for the first referendum ever for me,including the couple I was too young to have a vote in, I am not sure what way I will vote. It's quite a novel experience.

[Aruntraveller]

Absolutely, wasn't suggesting that people would all vote for the sane reason which is why I phrased it as my belief. Incidentally for the first referendum ever for me,including the couple I was too going to have a vote in, I am not sure what way I will vote. It's quite a novel experience.

It is not a choice I envy I must admit.

[Nearly Sane]

It is not a choice I envy I must admit.

there are many worse things, though the campaigns for these things are often depressing. I have to say that I think the unionist parties brought about this in part by always mentioning independence. I think they should have avoided talking about it, as if it were a dead subject, and concentrated on attacking the SNP record in Holyrood, and where appropriate working with the SNP.

[Bubbles]

I have stated my opinion, and others have stated theirs, we will have to see who is right and who is wrong, if Scotland votes for independence next time around.

I happen to agree with Floo on this one, including about Ireland being a separate landmass with a different history.

England, Wales and Scotland

Together I think we have more influence, separately not so much so.

[Aruntraveller]

there are many worse things, though the campaigns for these things are often depressing. I have to say that I think the unionist parties brought about this in part by always mentioning independence. I think they should have avoided talking about it, as if it were a dead subject, and concentrated on attacking the SNP record in Holyrood, and where appropriate working with the SNP.

What a novel approach to politics 

[Nearly Sane]

What a novel approach to politics 

Labour shot themselves in the foot, knee, groin and anywhere else they could reach by merely going SNPbad all the time and linking themselves to the Tories quite so closely at Indyref1. They should have campaigned on a more open approach and while having a policy against Indy, allowed thatvit would be not surprising for members  supported to vote Yes. As it is they pushed those supporters to the SNP causing the cull of the last GE. Neatly they have also managed to let the Tories emerge as the major player in Unionism pushing votes to them.

[Nearly Sane]

I happen to agree with Floo on this one, including about Ireland being a separate landmass with a different history.

England, Wales and Scotland

Together I think we have more influence, separately not so much so.

I would quite like not to have the influence of weapons of mass destruction 15 miles down the road.

[Aruntraveller]

Labour shot themselves in the foot, knee, groin and anywhere else they could reach

It is now their preferred modus operandi. 

[Nearly Sane]

It is now their preferred modus operandi. 

Though to be fair to Jeremy Corbyn, I think the current position of vote against requesting the Section 30 order in Holyrood but not at Westminster, is perfectly logical.

[Nearly Sane]

Looks like Nicola will stop at nothing 



http://newsthump.com/2017/03/13/nicola-sturgeon-to-make-sure-scotland-votes-the-right-way-this-time-by-printing-fantastic-lies-on-a-bus/

[Nearly Sane]

I disagree with some of it. I think it asks for too much knowledge of future events, and ignores the effects of the the newscycle and social media on our perception of what is said.

But some strong points that reflect some of my own position.


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/14/scottish-independence-referendum-snp-vote-brexit

[Gordon]

Moderator:

Since this topic is likely to be relevant for some time yet it has been 'stickied'.

[Nearly Sane]

It's already clear that this is going to be a bit different. The SNP is going to have issues with those members and voters who voted for Brexit. It also looks as if there will be more SLab members voting Yes but I doubt there enough of them to make a difference. Despite the current odds that Yes will win being odds on, i feel it unlikely. Any such result will have very interesting repercussions here.

[Nearly Sane]

This is from a couple of weeks ago by Alex Massie, I think it covers the issue that this is not what might have been the chosen timing well. I do wonder if there might be a hope in a few very senior SNP people that the UK govt does refuse to allow the referendum  on the proposed timescales, and that in doing so allows a Take Back Control narrative to be used.



https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/03/scottish-independence-looks-riskier-than-ever-but-dont-bet-against-it/

[Gordon]

This is from a couple of weeks ago by Alex Massie, I think it covers the issue that this is not what might have been the chosen timing well. I do wonder if there might be a hope in a few very senior SNP people that the UK govt does refuse to allow the referendum  on the proposed timescales, and that in doing so allows a Take Back Control narrative to be used.



https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/03/scottish-independence-looks-riskier-than-ever-but-dont-bet-against-it/

I think that would be how any stalling tactics by a Tory government would be portrayed here: on one hand this would intensify the feelings of those who are already pro-independence, and perhaps May et al hope that dragging things out will eventually see even enthusiasts for independence worn down by the delay, but it comes with the risk that as the insanity of Brexit unfolds it might make independence more attractive to those who are currently undecided or against.

That Brexit has been instrumental in indyref2 is undeniable, since it is the 'material change of circumstances' grounds, but the oft-repeated 'will of the British people' argument we hear from unionists seem to be rarely accompanied by a recognition that the 'will of the people' in Scotland and NI was opposition to Brexit but even so I think it would be a mistake though to see indyref2 as just being a response to Brexit.

Looking at the Westminster general election results from 1970 onward show the maximum number of SNP MPs prior to 2015 was 11 in the second 1974 election, which went down to 2 in 1979 and remained at 2 in 1983, and thereafter was 3 (in 1987 and 1992), 6 in 1999, 5 in 2001, 6 again in 2005 and 2015 - but then 56 in 2015, which reduced the three main unionist parties with one seat each. The situation regarding Westminster since 2015 is therefore fundamentally different - prior to 2015 the bulk of Scottish MPs were from unionist parties that were either part of the government party or part of the main opposition party and, therefore, there was some shared commonality with political representation in rUK, but with the implosion of Labour everywhere and with the Lib-Dems being sent to the naughty step (for now anyway), highlights what is glaringly obvious: that the political makeup of Westminster no longer reflects the political makeup of Scotland.

So, it now seems likely that for as long as Scotland remains part of the UK it cannot feel represented by what may be a permanent Tory government in Westminster (given the demise of Labour everywhere) that has just one seat here in Scotland and was daft enough to let Brexit happen in the farcical way it did for party reasons, and where despite their attempts to portray Brexit as being an elegant purse it is clearly a sow's ear. 

[Bubbles]

There is an argument that tying the brexit and independence issues  is a mistake.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/779229/double-blow-Nicola-Sturgeon-humiliation-public-support-Scotland-EU

How much of that is wishful thinking, I'm not sure.

Is there a lot of anti EU feeling amongst Scots who voted for independence? Enough to sway the vote to a decisive vote to stay in the UK?

[Anchorman]

As has been pointed out, although the EU is a vital issue, Rose, it isn't the main one. That Scotland faces at least a further decade of Tory rule (I'd suggest y two), yet rejected Tory candidates in all constituancies save one, is a 'democtratic deficit'. You can bet that any future YES campaign will not be slow in pointing this out. I well remember the frustration of the '80's, when, election after election saw Scots wishes overan by governments she did not only not elect, but loathe. That atmosphere was depressing, and toxic. I don't want a re-run -but with Labour in an even worse state up here than it is in the RUK, independence becomes a serious option.