Scot Indy Ref #2

mr_goo

Who is in favour of giving our blue face painted neighbours another referendum on independence?

From my point of view. As it concerns the 'Union', I believe it should be a referendum for the whole union to consider and vote on.

Longshot

They'd probably have a good chance of winning it that way.

mr_goo

Longshot said:

They'd probably have a good chance of winning it that way.

That's where my viewpoint comes from.
I think there is a wind of change north of the border now and giving the whole of the UK the opportunity to excercise their democratic right is the only correct way forward.

Just so long as it's done in next couple of months and we can let them go before they host COP26 in November. They can then experience what it's like to pick up the tab.😅

roscoe

No no no!

The once in a generation vote, agreed by all sides, was to remain part of the UK. The SNP agreed to this.

The SNP have no mandate to force another vote on us. In the latest GE, the majority in Scotland actually voted for the other parties.

This is getting really tedious now. The SNP need to do what they were elected to do, run this country.

mr_goo

roscoe said:

No no no!

The once in a generation vote, agreed by all sides, was to remain part of the UK. The SNP agreed to this.

The SNP have no mandate to force another vote on us. In the latest GE, the majority in Scotland actually voted for the other parties.

This is getting really tedious now. The SNP need to do what they were elected to do, run this country.

So why are the majority of Scottish MPs from SNP?
I did have a hunch that the majority of right minded Scots were against independence but we never hear their voice.
All we ever get is Jimmy Krankie's diatribe.
And as for the SNP running a country. Not doing that great a job by all accounts.

tangled_metal

Because the SNP Get their vote out where it matters under the electoral system, FPTP in Westminster elections. Tories got a big majority but more voted for other parties I believe across the whole of the UK. Same issue with FPTP system. I'm sure you know.

haydenm

I get the feeling a sizable portion of SNP voters don't actually want independence either, a strong voice for Scotland in Westminster is no bad thing. It suits the SNP to be vocal, but it suits BoJo to keep them in rather than face more Labour seats at the next election. If he keeps Scotland and the north fairly happy he'll win the next election too.

This is part of the plan anyway, ask for another ref, get turned down, then use it as a political stick for a few years until something changes. Currently I don't think the polls suggest majority support, they only ticked into positive right at the height of BoJo proroguing parliament. I predict a steady drop in support over the next few years.

Also, it might just be that I work in finance and investment ~80% in Scotland but it strikes me that the missing link is the lack of currency planning. Keeping the GBP frankly means Scotland wouldn't be independent.

Longshot

roscoe said:

No no no!

The once in a generation vote, agreed by all sides, was to remain part of the UK. The SNP agreed to this.

The SNP have no mandate to force another vote on us. In the latest GE, the majority in Scotland actually voted for the other parties.

This is getting really tedious now. The SNP need to do what they were elected to do, run this country.

"It's the will of the people" !!

tangled_metal

Isn't indyref2 about distracting from the SNP performance in government north of the border?

bompington

tangled_metal said:

Isn't indyref2 about distracting from the SNP performance in government north of the border?

Not really - the Nats and their supporters are so fixated on independence that they simply don't care how badly they are governing.
I teach, and Scottish education used to be the envy of the world. Not any more.
Overall the SNP's actual governing philosophy is mainly "anything which makes us look a different and less nasty bunch than those horrible people to the south", but the soft left nanny-statism that it amounts to in practice is not very effective for much.

kingstongraham

mr_goo said:

Who is in favour of giving our blue face painted neighbours another referendum on independence?

From my point of view. As it concerns the 'Union', I believe it should be a referendum for the whole union to consider and vote on.

Map it to Brexit, and England/Wales/NI is the rest of the EU in that scenario.

bompington

The whole neverendum thing is a big issue as far as I'm concerned.

Brexit has set the bar for this: the idea that to make a massive upheaval you just have to sneak over the line in one vote is ridiculous. But the SNP's idea that you just keep trying until one day you get lucky is even worse.

But hey, perhaps we can start having referendums every year to ask us if we want to reverse the decisions?

Anyway, the SNP's claim that because they won a majority of seats it means the population wants independence is, as we say round here, mince. Opinion polls persistently show roughly the same majority against independence as there has been for years.

aberdeen_lune

Is it right that a Tory government in Westminster has decision rights on Scottish independence? The Torys in Scotland campaigned for the Union saying a vote for us is a vote for no referendum. They lost a heap of seats and now only have 6 mps in Scotland. Surely it is up to the Scottish people to decide not up to BJ?

Stevo_666

Have to say I am torn.

Part of me says let them go if they are going to be perpetually so grudging and ungrateful. Part of me says they signed up to a 'once in a generation' referendum on the subject so they need to live with the decision.

However, I think the tie breaker that swings it for me against another referendum is how much it will p!$$ off Wee Jimmy Krankie.

ballysmate

Got any nice graphs to show how pissed off Krankie is against how happy she would be?

Stevo_666

ballysmate said:

Got any nice graphs to show how pissed off Krankie is against how happy she would be?

If only it would be possible to predict that...

rick_chasey

Whatever argument I had for being anti Brexit is quite easy to recycle for anti independence.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

Whatever argument I had for being anti Brexit is quite easy to recycle for anti independence.

Quite. All arguments pro and con are nigh on identical.

rick_chasey

Apart from the whole member of the EU bit.

pblakeney

I think you misunderstood me.
Arguments for Indy = for Brexit.
Arguments against Indy = against Brexit.
I’m not defining independence.

tailwindhome

It may be interesting to ask why a Scottish Independence referendum should meet different criteria than that agreed for NI in the GFA

POLLS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 1
1. The Secretary of State may by order direct the holding of a poll for the
purposes of section 1 on a date specified in the order.
2. Subject to paragraph 3, the Secretary of State shall exercise the power
under paragraph 1 if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of
those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be
part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland.
3. The Secretary of State shall not make an order under paragraph 1 earlier
than seven years after the holding of a previous poll under this Schedule.



Brexit has led to a debate in NI as to what meets the criteria of "appears likely to him" and what a "majority" is.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

Have to say I am torn.

Part of me says let them go if they are going to be perpetually so grudging and ungrateful. Part of me says they signed up to a 'once in a generation' referendum on the subject so they need to live with the decision.

However, I think the tie breaker that swings it for me against another referendum is how much it will p!$$ off Wee Jimmy Krankie.

Surely the point is that it is only the SNP that keeps this in the news and a majority of the general population don't want to leave the union.

bompington

tailwindhome said:

Brexit has led to a debate in NI as to what meets the criteria of "appears likely to him" and what a "majority" is.

"Appears likely" can only mean that opinion polls show nationalist>unionist
"majority" - well there is certainly some scope for discussion, I personally think that a "50% of the votes + 1" majority isn't enough for a referendum on major constitutional issues with major long term consequences.

At least some effort has been made to be make a sensible plan and to make it clear, unlike in Scotland (or Brexit for that matter)

Pross

mr_goo said:

Who is in favour of giving our blue face painted neighbours another referendum on independence?

From my point of view. As it concerns the 'Union', I believe it should be a referendum for the whole union to consider and vote on.

Following that rationale, the whole of the EU membership should have had a vote on whether the UK could leave.

mr_goo

Pross said:

mr_goo said:

Who is in favour of giving our blue face painted neighbours another referendum on independence?

From my point of view. As it concerns the 'Union', I believe it should be a referendum for the whole union to consider and vote on.

Following that rationale, the whole of the EU membership should have had a vote on whether the UK could leave.

That's a fair comment. However one could take that further and say there should have been an EU wide referendum with 3 options per country. Disbanding the current structure and authority the EU has/ Leave and never come back/ Stay because it's perfect the way it is.

rjsterry

mr_goo said:

Pross said:

mr_goo said:

Who is in favour of giving our blue face painted neighbours another referendum on independence?

From my point of view. As it concerns the 'Union', I believe it should be a referendum for the whole union to consider and vote on.

Following that rationale, the whole of the EU membership should have had a vote on whether the UK could leave.

That's a fair comment. However one could take that further and say there should have been an EU wide referendum with 3 options per country. Disbanding the current structure and authority the EU has/ Leave and never come back/ Stay because it's perfect the way it is.

Which rather leads one to the conclusion that referendums are a terrible way for nations to go about their business.

bompington

Out of interest, who has ever said the EU is perfect the way it is, or that that is the reason for remaining in it?

veronese68

bompington said:

Out of interest, who has ever said the EU is perfect the way it is, or that that is the reason for remaining in it?

Nobody, but leavers have made it quite clear they don’t like facts.

surrey_commuter

bompington said:

tailwindhome said:

Brexit has led to a debate in NI as to what meets the criteria of "appears likely to him" and what a "majority" is.

"Appears likely" can only mean that opinion polls show nationalist>unionist
"majority" - well there is certainly some scope for discussion, I personally think that a "50% of the votes + 1" majority isn't enough for a referendum on major constitutional issues with major long term consequences.

At least some effort has been made to be make a sensible plan and to make it clear, unlike in Scotland (or Brexit for that matter)

A majority of the total electorate (not votes cast) would seem to be reasonable.

EU membership would be a material change so i would let them have second ref.

coopster_the_1st

My opinion has not changed. Losers need to learn to respect votes they lose.

aberdeen_lune

The whole argument is there has been a major change from the last Indy ref. We were told the only way to stay in the EU is to vote remain. If we went independent the EU wouldn’t have us or it would take years to gain entry.

The majority of Scottish voters voted to remain in the EU during the EU referendum.

As long as Scotland remain in the UK we have very little say on anything as we only have >10% of the votes. So we get dragged out of the EU against our will and get Tory governments we don’t vote for. The only way to have our own say is to be independent or to have some form of federal government relationship.