Friday Thread: Scottish Referendum a UKIPY preview?

DonDaddyD

The Scottish Referendum felt like a precursor or preview of what it will be like should UKIP continue its political rise, the Euro-Skeptic Tories continue to have a voice and the In/Out EU referendum which is to be held 2017.

Honestly, I think I may be watching this all play out again next year and years thereafter. And it seems hypocritical, to fight hard for the British Union to stay together only to want to pull it out of another, much larger European union.

People are unhappy I get it, the Country was broke and we have a Government focused on rebalancing what is spent and where. Is all of that worth the political rebellions? Is being part of the UK really that bad, is being a part of the European Union really that bad and are the alternatives any better?

I think we actually need better politicians, these guys seem detactche, but that doesn't mean we throw our toys out of the pram and line up with the radicalists.

Discuss.

unixnerd

The SNP is popular up here as it's a choice away from the other parties. The campaign up here was amazing and uplifiting, you've only to look at the turnout to see that folk CAN be engaged in politics. Yes Scotland was built from the bottom up, at a community level. We may not have won the vote, but we've changed Scottish politics forever and for the better.

In a vast contrast to UKIP the SNP / Yes campaign was one of tolerance to all ethnic backgrounds and demand FOR EU membership. The SNP refuses to take seats in the Lords, it's not a party out for how much money it's MPs can make for themselves.

We need to reinvent British politics, I'd like to think we've shown you how. Now it's your turn.....

BigJimmyB

I'd like for us in England to have proper alternatives to the 'Big 3' parties - they all (to me) seem very much the same.

I'd like to have clear and direct access to party manifestos come election time, so I can see what they are about, backed up with facts. So if UKIP want us out of Europe or Lib Dem want us in etc. - I want the reasons given and backed up by facts.

On the flip side, I feel politics is (for most of the population) about personalities - we as voters should try to engage more in such matters and use our vote in an informed manner.

I'm glad Scotland stayed in and hope that as already said, it paves the way for some political reform.

Koncordski

unixnerd wrote:

......it's not a party out for how much money it's MPs can make for themselves....

Yet.

I think this was one of the most misleading concepts that the SNP put across, that it would all be different, somehow. All the expenses, corruption, lies and double talk that exists in Westminster would magically not exist because they are Scottish. Politics is global and universal in it's function, you don't get honest MPs based on their proximity to their constituents. Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

unixnerd

There may be something in what you say, and by no means would Holyrood be free of corruption. But it would be virginal white compared with Westminster and the scandals we know about, let alone those we don't.

Politics needs to be rebuilt from the grass roots upwards. I heard a telling comment from Better Together that when they tried to mobilise the Labour troops on the ground they found there weren't any left! Political parties need to get back in touch with the people they're supposed to be serving. Corruption flourishes when there is nobody to look or care.

Koncordski

unixnerd wrote:

There may be something in what you say, and by no means would Holyrood be free of corruption. But it would be virginal white compared with Westminster and the scandals we know about, let alone those we don't.

Politics needs to be rebuilt from the grass roots upwards. I heard a telling comment from Better Together that when they tried to mobilise the Labour troops on the ground they found there weren't any left! Political parties need to get back in touch with the people they're supposed to be serving. Corruption flourishes when there is nobody to look or care.

I agree with you 100%, i wish it was better down here i really do. Getting people in the street to engage in politics is the trick, without that you're back to the same old system

Stevo_666

unixnerd wrote:

the SNP / Yes campaign was one of tolerance to all ethnic backgrounds

Does 'English' count as an ethnic background?

unixnerd wrote:

and demand FOR EU membership.

Bit ironic then that if the YES camp had won, Scotland would have dropped out of the EU and had to reapply from scratch (this coming from the EU itself, not Westminster).

unixnerd

Alec is going to stand down as First Minister in November, everyone I've spoken to is just devastated. I've seen people openly crying in the main street tonight. It's so sad. I think the poor guy wore himself out in the past few months. We're all hoping he reconsiders. It's a massive loss. Many of us thought we'd lose the vote by a few %, but we never in our worst nightmares expected him to step down over it.

tailwindhome

I'm quite looking forward to seeing how UKIP argue for a referendum calling on a small island country to abandon a larger political and economic union to go it alone and govern their own country.

greg66_tri_v2.0

What dicks me off about UKIP supporters is the crap they spew about liking Farage because he seems like a "nice bloke" and "one of us", "down to earth", the sort of bloke you "could have a pint with".

Well excuse me, but I don't especially want an aimiable pub bore running the country, and IM not-so HO, any fool that does deserves to be stripped of their right to vote.

rjsterry

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

What dicks me off about UKIP supporters is the crap they spew about liking Farage because he seems like a "nice bloke" and "one of us", "down to earth", the sort of bloke you "could have a pint with".

Well excuse me, but I don't especially want an aimiable pub bore running the country, and IM not-so HO, any fool that does deserves to be stripped of their right to vote.

Quite. Not only that, but it's also a gossamer thin facade, as he has proved time and again to be exactly like the worst sort of career politician he claims to oppose.

tangled_metal

I thought there was a degree of freedom to go with conscience on this matter among the parties. That's why you got Scottish Labour. MSPs and I think MPs going with yes vote. Might be wrong but one of the splits in the voters is based on wealth. Poorer areas voted in higher proportions for yes vote. It is not surprising that those areas are probably Labour areas hence the loss of labour activists available to the no vote. In my mind that's not really surprising and now it is over they'll revert to political beliefs which means activism for Labour. A blip in their support for Labour for the length of the independence campaign. Don't worry they'll be back getting a Labour guy into Westminster next year. Just hope it'll be without power to vote on English matters but with further devolution to Scotland and the other nations too. How about working towards a new, written constitution the same for all?

unixnerd

It's certainly time for a constitution. We'd intended to put free education, free health care and a ban on nuclear weapons in ours.

It'll be interesting to see what the Yes Labour voters do, I think many won't be voting Labour any more after the way they were perceived as standing with the Tories. But time will tell.

rick_chasey

rjsterry wrote:

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

What dicks me off about UKIP supporters is the crap they spew about liking Farage because he seems like a "nice bloke" and "one of us", "down to earth", the sort of bloke you "could have a pint with".

Well excuse me, but I don't especially want an aimiable pub bore running the country, and IM not-so HO, any fool that does deserves to be stripped of their right to vote.

Quite. Not only that, but it's also a gossamer thin facade, as he has proved time and again to be exactly like the worst sort of career politician he claims to oppose.

He was a f@cking metals broker.

I know plenty of metals brokers, and plenty who use them. Best quote I ever heard 'you can trust one of them about as far as you can throw a 5 tonne load of aluminium they've just sold a warrant on. ' Presumably to chrome plate their 911 they've bought...

First.Aspect

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

What dicks me off about UKIP supporters is the crap they spew about liking Farage because he seems like a "nice bloke" and "one of us", "down to earth", the sort of bloke you "could have a pint with".

Well excuse me, but I don't especially want an aimiable pub bore running the country, and IM not-so HO, any fool that does deserves to be stripped of their right to vote.

UKIP will fizzle out. Eventually they will come to be widely regarded as racicst simpletons. Let them have some publicity and they will hang themselves.

The referendum up here wasn't a whole lot better. Reasoned argument set against an idealism lacking in substance. Any opinion from outside of Scotland was "insulting" (unless from an ex-pat Scot, that is) without any reasoned argument as to why.

Basically, any political party with "national" or "independence" as a root word anywhere in its title is fundamentalist and single-issue at its core. Eventually the UKIP bubble will burst and its bubble of support will slink back to the Tories.

FYI - more than one "Yes" voter up here has cited "being ruled by UKIP" to me as a reason for voting yes. Depressing, I know, but the right to vote is not based on intelligence.

tailwindhome

tailwindhome

UKIP voters' answers to Q5 are worth a moments reflection

seajays

First Aspect wrote:

The referendum up here wasn't a whole lot better. Reasoned argument set against an idealism lacking in substance. Any opinion from outside of Scotland was "insulting" (unless from an ex-pat Scot, that is) without any reasoned argument as to why.

Basically, any political party with "national" or "independence" as a root word anywhere in its title is fundamentalist and single-issue at its core. Eventually the UKIP bubble will burst and its bubble of support will slink back to the Tories.

This. I found the Yes campaign here to have taken on a disturbingly religious fervour, which required "faith" in unknowables rather than substance. It was a masterpiece of political campaigning by Salmond to unite completely contradictory factions under the "yes" banner, and manage to convince them they would all get what they wanted if they just voted "Yes" (take just one example of the polar opposite Green Party, with the "new Abu Dhabi" Oil faithful). This united front would have collapsed back to the competing factions as soon as the yes vote had been won but a lot of Yes voters were taken in by these promises of everyone getting what they personally wanted.

Salmond resigning? Another move in his political game. He knows that as first minister this was his one shot. In that position, he would have to accept the democratic decision of the majority and move on with "One Scotland", working to make Scotland better within the UK. That's unpalatable to him - the founding principle of the SNP since 1934 has been independence and their party faithful have that singular goal in mind - regardless of whether that is, or is not, better for Scotland. By removing himself to the back benches, he knows he's going to be able to continue to stir up resentment and keep the independence flame alive with a lot more freedom than if he continues as First Minister.

You have to give it to the man - he certainly knows how to play the political game. I for one certainly won't be shedding any tears for him.

Sewinman

The Yes campaign had it easy. They could point to all perceived 'wrongs' in 300 years of history and then paint a post-referendum picture of some kind of free Scotland elysium where everything is 'right'. You would have to be a pretty crappy politician not to get that one right. The reality would have been a better Scotland, a slightly better Scotland, the same Scotland, a bit worse Scotland or a bloody disaster. Who knows? The majority stuck with the devil they knew.

unixnerd

I suspect a lot of voters were swayed by the last minute promises made by the rUK party leaders. They've already missed one promised deadline. What will happen when they miss the rest I wonder? UKIP and Boris Johnson are in no mood to see those "vows" made by the big three honoured.

Had Yes not won an opinion poll the vote would have been far closer or possibly reversed as Westminster and the metropolitan media would have slumbered on in ignorance. Say what you like about the SNP, but they produced a 621 page document well in advance of the vote. We have scribbles on the back of a fag packet to go on now.

All sorts of rumours flying around about what will be next. I've heard a rumour they're going to try and turn back the Trident warhead convoys. Also heard a huge march on Westminster is in the offing. And in other news the SNP has double in size from 25,000 to 50,000 in a few days to become the UKs third largest party.

Sewinman

Out of interest, who is going to block Trident convoys? SNP voters or 45% of the Scottish population? Or some other group that probably would have tried to do so anyway?

unixnerd

I just stumbled across folk talking about it on a forum, no idea how serious or organised they were. Don't think they were a member of any organisation, just folk looking for an outlet for their newly found political awareness. Wish I'd kept the link now. Think they were mentioning this bunch (which I'd never heard of before) but they weren't part of it: www.nukewatch.org.uk

bompington

Aww bless, it's Greenham Common all over again. Makes me quite nostalgic for the 80s.

First.Aspect

unixnerd wrote:

I suspect a lot of voters were swayed by the last minute promises made by the rUK party leaders. They've already missed one promised deadline. What will happen when they miss the rest I wonder? UKIP and Boris Johnson are in no mood to see those "vows" made by the big three honoured.

Had Yes not won an opinion poll the vote would have been far closer or possibly reversed as Westminster and the metropolitan media would have slumbered on in ignorance. Say what you like about the SNP, but they produced a 621 page document well in advance of the vote. We have scribbles on the back of a fag packet to go on now.

All sorts of rumours flying around about what will be next. I've heard a rumour they're going to try and turn back the Trident warhead convoys. Also heard a huge march on Westminster is in the offing. And in other news the SNP has double in size from 25,000 to 50,000 in a few days to become the UKs third largest party.

Good to see that you are still taking in everything the great man has to say.

The "no" vote remained pretty set the whole way though. Bar one rouge poll, the eventual outcome was entirely predictable. Where do you get the notion that people were duped into voting "no"? I know you want solidarity with people being duped and all that, but its just not true.

Like many no voters, I voted no because I can count.

If you harvest 40 beans and then promise to give away 50 or 60 beans, it means you are going to have to go and harvest more beans. I have no problem with being asked to donate more of the beans. Nor do I have any issue with a fair distribution of beans. But I do have a problem with promising to give away tins of beans to everyone, in the absence of any clear idea of where to find a beanstalk.

Since I personally find devolving fiscal and tax raising powers (i.e. beans, in case you are a yes voter and having trouble following my bean analogy) to a bunch of spendthrift 80s throwbacks rather troubling, I didn't find the last minute stuff very helpful. Parfticularly since I'd already voted.

unixnerd

You make good point, they offered all these wonderful new powers after 20% of voters had done so by post. That doesn't seem like a good or fair way to run a referendum now does it?

Pretty sure we'd had been better off financially. No 100 billion for Trident, much smaller military (no US wars for us thanks), no Westminster and we get to keep what's left of the oil too.

You know, if the UK would commit to ditching a military we can longer afford I for one would be happier in the union. I have lots of English friends and don't want to rip the union up just for the sake of it. We are no longer a world power and should stop behaving like one, for one thing we can't sustain it. Have you seen how much planes and ships cost these days? It's madness, as is moving our reliance to part time soldiers because we can't afford to pay them full time. Far better to spend it on health and education.

First.Aspect

unixnerd wrote:

You make good point, they offered all these wonderful new powers after 20% of voters had done so by post. That doesn't seem like a good or fair way to run a referendum now does it?

Pretty sure we'd had been better off financially. No 100 billion for Trident, much smaller military (no US wars for us thanks), no Westminster and we get to keep what's left of the oil too.

You know, if the UK would commit to ditching a military we can longer afford I for one would be happier in the union. I have lots of English friends and don't want to rip the union up just for the sake of it. We are no longer a world power and should stop behaving like one, for one thing we can't sustain it. Have you seen how much planes and ships cost these days? It's madness, as is moving our reliance to part time soldiers because we can't afford to pay them full time. Far better to spend it on health and education.

So if I follow your argument, had the no voters been duped earlier, you would have lost by more?

UK spends about £30 Bn on defence. Its a lot, I agree. But only about 1/4 of NHS spending, 1/3 of welfare spending (of which Scotland gets a disproportionate share - rightly - but true none the less). Overall its about 4% of GDP. Say an independent Scotland would have halved it as a proportion of GDP - would than give us all a lot of beans, or would it be outweighed by the loss of economies of scale elsewhere incurred by leaving the UK?

You see, the cost of setting up and running all of the instruments of government which would ultimately be required for an independent Scotland would be... actually I simply don't know. Independence itself was uncosted by the Yes side, in their white paper (otherwise known as "Alec goes to Tinky Winkie Land") wasn't it? All they had to say on the matter was that they'd borrow what they needed. An unknown amount of an unknown currency at an unknown interest rate. Whilst at the same time threatening to abandon the Scottish share of UK debt, thereby ensuring a catastrophic credit rating.

Great. Can't think why I didn't vote for them.

First.Aspect

unixnerd wrote:

You make good point, they offered all these wonderful new powers after 20% of voters had done so by post. That doesn't seem like a good or fair way to run a referendum now does it?

Its also worth pointing out that the SNP turned down including a "devo max" option on the ballot - so it was always on the table. This is because it is inconvenient for a single issue party to be presented with a reasonable compromise.

As for "fair" - what is the problem with having both sides making an argument, rather than just the rowdy Yes supporters? They had it all to themselves for 23 1/2 months, so I think you are being churlish. In addition, any particular issue with people from eleswhere in the UK popping up and voicing an opinion? It does affect them, after all, but they didn't get to vote.

So much for solidarity eh? Basically, everywhere other than the south east feels screwed by Westminster, whereas "the Scots" (who aparrently were voting the other day, rather than the residents of Scotland) have their own parliament and are over represented per capita in Westminster. Rather than try to fix the problem with the UK, "the Scots" decided to say, "Screw you guys, we are going home". Mark my words, this will generate a lot of cross border resentment - particlarly if you bang on about it for another generation and put the whole country through it all again in another decade or two.

Personally, I think we should have had two ballot papers. One should have been, "Do you think Scotland should be an independent country?" The other should have been, "Do you think Scotland should stay in the United Kingdom?"

That way, we would probably have got to see just how stupid people really are.

rick_chasey

The day England has a "Scotland out of UK" party as its majority is the day the English/rUK has a referendum on whether Scotland should stay or not.

unixnerd

You know, it's not that we want to be special or different in Scotland. We don't think we're better than England (I'll admit your beer is generally superior). What we want is YOU to be like US and have the same values we all used to have in this country before Thatcher waved a wad of notes at you.

We want you to have:

The right to roam, free access to the land
Free health care and prescriptions
Free education
Free personal care for the elderly
Housing that normal people can afford (actually we'd like more of that too)
More new council houses
More police on the streets (1000 more since 2007)

Does make us your evil neighbour? Or does it make us the friend that wonders where you lost your way?

Most of us wouldn't even mind sharing the oil if you invested the money properly.

Many of us in Scotland think you're simply heading down a road where we don't want to follow. A country where pursuit of money for it's own sake seems to be more important than building a fair society. I'm sure many of my countrymen take as their perception of England the excesses of the London housing market. What we're not seeing is a balanced view of England, I suspect the bit of England between Watford and Hadrian's Wall is the place that's really losing out at the moment.

You need to have the conversation with the electorate that we just had. Watch Ed Milibands speech from this evening where he asks WHY 45% of Scots wanted to leave. For once he asks some good questions. I just hope you can find the answers before it's too late.

First.Aspect

Well, if you are interested, take a read. http://www.esrc.ac.uk/_images/Inequalit ... -29182.pdf

Headline seems to be, take London out and Scotland is no better than the rest of the UK. In addition, the main drivers of inequality seem to be reduced manufacturing in the economy, rather than Westminster policies.

Of course, Scotland's elite land ownership is far worse (less equal) than most of the rest of the UK. By far.

But I still can't see how buggering off and leaving the 50+ million British not resident in Scotland or London to stew was ever remotely the right thing to do. I live in Scotland and have done for a decade, but I found the whole premise offensive from almost all perspectives. As laudible as engagement in politics has been, I am dismayed at the 45% who are so inward looking in an increasingly interconnected world - the vast majority of the rest of which can't fathom why on earth the question of independence from one of the most prosperous, stable and democratic countries on earth ever arose.

I've just got back from a holiday in Mexico. The minimum wage there is US$5 a day, and yet there are supercars with Mexican plates cruising around Cancun. Perhaps the disaffected "Scots" should take a bit of a look around before spraffing off about how hard done by they are.

unixnerd

Perhaps the disaffected "Scots" should take a bit of a look around before spraffing off about how hard done by they are.

We're not the ones who are hard done by, YOU are (see above list)! Can't you see that? 45% wanted to leave because we don't want to end up going the same way against our will. We have a parliament that prioritises the things that are really important in a fair society (within the budget you let us have). YOUR parliament doesn't.