Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Kingsmills

Indepencence Referendum 2018/2019

74 posts in this topic

With the starting pistol having been fired at Bute House this morning, it's probably time to open a new and distinct thread to facilitate discussion.

Given the passionate and strongly held views on both sides of the argument, it's probably also appropriate to post a reminder of the site rules with a view to promoting healthy and robust debate but without resorting to unnecessary and unhelpful personal abuse of those, of whichever side, holding opposing views.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the Head Girl gives the Junior Prefect permission to retrieve her lost money from the bookies to put once more on the losing horse she promised not to back again for a generation, I at the moment can't aee myself contributing much here. It's much more fun winding up Cybernats of various degrees of literacy and political nous on Facebook and in any case, the divisive nature of this whole referendum thing is such that I would prefer not to differ serially and abrasively on here with various other valued contributors with whom I otherwise find considerable common cause.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it will actually be some time before there is a referendum, if indeed, there is one at all.  May is clearly pretty contemptuous of Sturgeon and could take the line of refusing it on the basis that the 2014 referendum settled it.  She could claim that requesting a 2nd referendum is in breach of the Westminster Agreement.  I don't, however, think she will risk the backlash this would create from a very vocal minority.

Nor do I think she will simply call Sturgeon's bluff and simply tell her to get on with it.  She is not going to allow an independence referendum to take place whilst Brexit negotiations are on-going.  Apart from the obvious distractions, remember that the Brexit negotiations will be taking place to take account of the whole of the UK.  Were Scotland to vote for independence whilst those negotiations were still on-going, it would mean that details that had been agreed would require to be renegotiated in the light of the changed position.  May will say (and quite correctly) that she has a duty to the people in the rest of the UK to act in accordance with their instructions - and the people of the UK as a whole will demand that she does.  Brexit negotiations will not be complete till the Spring of 2019 and therefore by choosing this as the latest date for a referendum, Sturgeon is simply giving herself negotiating room.  Subsequently agreeing to a later date will allow her to claim it as a huge compromise when in reality she will be well aware that it can't happen any earlier.

I think it more likely that May will agree to a referendum but will be far more prescriptive about the terms than Cameron was.  There are lots of possibilities here but one that I find appealing is a 2 stage approach.  This would involve a referendum to ask the electorate if they wish the 2 Governments to negotiate a deal for independence on which the people would then vote in a 2nd (or is it 3rd?) referendum.  In that way, the mandate would be clear and we would also know what we are voting for.  Both these factors would give greater validity to the outcome whatever it is.  

There is a half way house between this option and simply refusing.  That is to say that there is no question of a referendum whilst Brexit negotiations are taking place because the outcome of one referendum must be dealt with before embarking on another.  She could then say that consideration of the Section 30 request will take place only after the Brexit negotiations are complete.

The Prime Minister has a big decision to make and it will be fascinating to find out how she is going to respond to the formal request when it comes.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

...  Apart from the obvious distractions, remember that the Brexit negotiations will be taking place to take account of the whole of the UK.  Were Scotland to vote for independence whilst those negotiations were still on-going, it would mean that details that had been agreed would require to be renegotiated in the light of the changed position. 

But the cat is now out of the bag. The negotiations will now have to take into account the possibility - 50-50 at the moment, if anyone still believes pollsters - that Scotland will leave the UK in the near future. If the UK government ignores that during negotiations then that will boost the pro-independence argument.

Key to the whole thing will be the EU's attitude towards an independent Scotland. I would expect the Scottish government to be trying to talk to the EU as much as possible - on and off the record - over the next couple of years. The question is whether the EU will talk to them. Or whether the EU will be willing to talk about Scotland during Brexit negotiations, even if the UK government is reluctant.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kingsmills said:

With the starting pistol having been fired at Bute House this morning, it's probably time to open a new and distinct thread to facilitate discussion.

Given the passionate and strongly held views on both sides of the argument, it's probably also appropriate to post a reminder of the site rules with a view to promoting healthy and robust debate but without resorting to unnecessary and unhelpful personal abuse of those, of whichever side, holding opposing views.

Best to correct your spelling mistook 1st!

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

I think it will actually be some time before there is a referendum, if indeed, there is one at all.  May is clearly pretty contemptuous of Sturgeon and could take the line of refusing it on the basis that the 2014 referendum settled it.  She could claim that requesting a 2nd referendum is in breach of the Westminster Agreement.  I don't, however, think she will risk the backlash this would create from a very vocal minority.

Nor do I think she will simply call Sturgeon's bluff and simply tell her to get on with it.  She is not going to allow an independence referendum to take place whilst Brexit negotiations are on-going.  Apart from the obvious distractions, remember that the Brexit negotiations will be taking place to take account of the whole of the UK.  Were Scotland to vote for independence whilst those negotiations were still on-going, it would mean that details that had been agreed would require to be renegotiated in the light of the changed position.  May will say (and quite correctly) that she has a duty to the people in the rest of the UK to act in accordance with their instructions - and the people of the UK as a whole will demand that she does.  Brexit negotiations will not be complete till the Spring of 2019 and therefore by choosing this as the latest date for a referendum, Sturgeon is simply giving herself negotiating room.  Subsequently agreeing to a later date will allow her to claim it as a huge compromise when in reality she will be well aware that it can't happen any earlier.

I think it more likely that May will agree to a referendum but will be far more prescriptive about the terms than Cameron was.  There are lots of possibilities here but one that I find appealing is a 2 stage approach.  This would involve a referendum to ask the electorate if they wish the 2 Governments to negotiate a deal for independence on which the people would then vote in a 2nd (or is it 3rd?) referendum.  In that way, the mandate would be clear and we would also know what we are voting for.  Both these factors would give greater validity to the outcome whatever it is.  

There is a half way house between this option and simply refusing.  That is to say that there is no question of a referendum whilst Brexit negotiations are taking place because the outcome of one referendum must be dealt with before embarking on another.  She could then say that consideration of the Section 30 request will take place only after the Brexit negotiations are complete.

The Prime Minister has a big decision to make and it will be fascinating to find out how she is going to respond to the formal request when it comes.

 

 

By a 'very vocal minority' I am assuming you are meaning MSPs from two parties together winning  a majority in a democratically elected parliament less than a year ago when each of those parties had clearly stated in their manifestos an intention to hold a second referendum in the circumstances that now prevail.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh joy, after 6 years of referendum campaigns, here we go again. This one's likely to cost me a lot of money as I'm getting increasingly close to throwing things at the telly. My initial thought was not to contribute to this thread, as nothing I say will change anyone's mind here, but on the other hand I need to let off steam otherwise I'll explode.

Sturgeon made references yesterday to "an informed choice" but the timing she's angling for means the opposite. We don't know how things will transpire in the unchartered territory of Article 50 - what sort of terms will the UK end up with, how long will it take to get there (someone suggested 10 years today, and there's still scope for Brexit to fall through altogether as these matters progress and sentiment changes. Meanwhile, we don't know whether Scotland would even gain membership to the EU (needing the approval of all 27 member states including a couple who are fending off their own separatist movements), and if we got in, how many years would it take and what would the terms be - considerably less favourable than the UK's current deal, for sure. And that's before all the uncertainty on borders and trade with the UK, which I doubt we'll get a straight or honest answer to from either side.

How on earth can anyone be expected to make an informed decision? These things can be pretty complex at the best of times, but this proposition is just a stab in the dark and cannot possibly be fair on the electorate.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you would prefer to wait until it is too late and the die has been cast ? As was always going to be the case, the first major issue is whether the timing of this test of opinion will be decided by the democratically and recently elected Scottish Parliament which, we were informed would be 'the most powerful devolved administration in the world' or by a party which, mini revival notwithstanding, has but a single MP and has failed to gain more than a quarter of the popular vote in any nation wide election for almost four decades.

Personally, I am rather tied to the idea of democracy.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kingsmills said:

So you would prefer to wait until it is too late

Too late for what, exactly?!

As you well know, Scotland is not a member of EU and it is doubtful whether we'd be accepted any time soon not just because of Spain etc but because of the chronic state of our public finances. It would take many years of very painful measures to get our annual deficit down from a basket case 10% of GDP to the 3% stipulated by the EU, slashing public spending and hiking taxes. (Regardless of the EU, an independent Scotland would have to take these measures to live within its means anyway once the huge English subsidies stop).

I'm with the 2/3rds of Scots who don't want another referendum at this stage. What's that phrase, "Scotland's voice must be heard"! Aye, when it suits Nicola.

As for your points about the "democratic deficit" they do have some merit but have been debated many times and resoundingly rejected by Scotland - democratically.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curiously, on Reporting Scotland tonight Sturgeon appeared to be backtracking on  wanting her independent Scotland to be in the EU!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two political leaders with opposing views on an important matter. One refuses to discuss the matter point blank other than entirely on their terms. The other, despite having a much higher personnel net approval rating and a more recent electoral mandate has declares and continues to declare a willingness to talk with a view to at least attempting to reach a compromise.

If you were parachuted in with no bias or preconceptions, which one would you say is 'playing politics' ?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sturgeon, obviously, because she made a request in the full knowledge that it would not be granted. That is the epitome of "playing politics".

She is perfectly entitled to request a referendum of course, and equally the PM is perfectly entitled to decline it at this juncture. With 2/3rds of Scots being against a 2nd referendum, we are in the strange and unprecedented situation of the UK PM standing up for the people of Scotland while our FM pursues an agenda against our wishes!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a lot of you Scots were very upset about the result of the referendum but you can't keep having a re-vote when you don't get what you want. My own thoughts, for what they are worth, are that the FM should accept the result and move on. IF the 2nd ref' returned the same result (with perhaps a bigger majority) which there's ever chance it will, what would happen then? Would there be a 3rd and so until you get what you (don't) want? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Gringo said:

I know a lot of you Scots were very upset about the result of the referendum but you can't keep having a re-vote when you don't get what you want. My own thoughts, for what they are worth, are that the FM should accept the result and move on. IF the 2nd ref' returned the same result (with perhaps a bigger majority) which there's ever chance it will, what would happen then? Would there be a 3rd and so until you get what you (don't) want? 

Much as I profoundly disagree with your position, I am delighted that you have joined the debate and get a perspective from somebody south of the border.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Yngwie said:

Sturgeon, obviously, because she made a request in the full knowledge that it would not be granted. That is the epitome of "playing politics".

She is perfectly entitled to request a referendum of course, and equally the PM is perfectly entitled to decline it at this juncture. With 2/3rds of Scots being against a 2nd referendum, we are in the strange and unprecedented situation of the UK PM standing up for the people of Scotland while our FM pursues an agenda against our wishes!

What are you basing the 2/3rds figure on out of interest ? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Opinion polls. Latest one today (Panelbase) shows only 32% want one on Sturgeon's timeframe. For info, the same poll puts Yes support at 44%.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/03/2017 at 2:56 PM, Kingsmills said:

By a 'very vocal minority' I am assuming you are meaning MSPs from two parties together winning  a majority in a democratically elected parliament less than a year ago when each of those parties had clearly stated in their manifestos an intention to hold a second referendum in the circumstances that now prevail.

No.  I mean the minority of people who voted for Independence in the 2014 referendum and the minority who, according to the polls, currently want independence.

 

On 16/03/2017 at 1:27 PM, Kingsmills said:

So you would prefer to wait until it is too late and the die has been cast ? As was always going to be the case, the first major issue is whether the timing of this test of opinion will be decided by the democratically and recently elected Scottish Parliament which, we were informed would be 'the most powerful devolved administration in the world' or by a party which, mini revival notwithstanding, has but a single MP and has failed to gain more than a quarter of the popular vote in any nation wide election for almost four decades.

Personally, I am rather tied to the idea of democracy.

I am very tied to the idea of democracy.  That is why I think:-

  1. It is a democratic outrage that a Government which tells its people that a referendum relating to major constitutional change is a "once in a generation" event, and which signs a formal agreement with another to agree that the result of that referendum will be considered decisive and will be respected, should, less than two years later, put a policy to have a 2nd referendum in their manifesto.
  2. It is a democratic outrage that the Scottish Government thinks that words in an election manifesto for the Scottish Parliament have greater democratic validity than the result of a single issue referendum when more than 55% of a record turnout affirmed their wish to remain a part of the UK.
  3. It is a democratic outrage that the excuse which the SNP have used to justify their breach of the Westminster Agreement is exactly the scenario which, in their official independence proposition paper, they told us we would have to accept if we rejected independence and it occurred.
  4. It is a democratic outrage that having used the the fact that a majority of Scottish voters voted to remain in the EU as their justification for having a 2nd independence referendum, the SNP now seem to be both demanding their referendum and back tracking on whether an independent Scotland would even apply to join the EU!
  5. It is a democratic outrage that we are even talking about a 2nd referendum.  At no point in the democratic history of Scotland has there ever been a clear wish for independence from the people as a whole.  We face the possibility of a permanent change to an independent state just because on a single day in our history, one more person might be in favour of independence than against.  How can anyone with any respect for democracy think that is right?
  6. I would support a referendum if there was evidence to show that independence was the clear and settled will of the people.  
  7. If and when a clear and settled desire for independence is demonstrated, a referendum should be be held on the basis of voting whether or not to accept a package for separation negotiated between the 2 Governments.  In that way the people would know what they are voting for.  

 

21 hours ago, Kingsmills said:

Two political leaders with opposing views on an important matter. One refuses to discuss the matter point blank other than entirely on their terms. The other, despite having a much higher personnel net approval rating and a more recent electoral mandate has declares and continues to declare a willingness to talk with a view to at least attempting to reach a compromise.

If you were parachuted in with no bias or preconceptions, which one would you say is 'playing politics' ?

May has previously said the independence question is settled in line with the Westminster Agreement which the UK has honoured and which the UK has every right to expect the Scottish Government will also honour.  Until such time as the Scottish Government go to Westminster with a formal request for a Section 30 amendment then it would be inappropriate for May to say anything further.

This will presumably change in the coming week when the elected Scottish Parliament is expected to vote to betray the Scottish People and go against the wishes of over 2 million people in the most historic and important vote in Scotland's history.  I used the phrase "democratic outrage" above because that is the phrase the First Minister used when describing the position should Westminster block the will of the Scottish Parliament.  Far from that being a democratic outrage, the Prime Minister may feel she has a duty under the Westminster Agreement to respect the result of the 2014 referendum and to stop the Scottish Government from acting against the clearly stated will of the Scottish people.

As I said in an earlier post, I don't think the Westminster Government will give an absolute refusal.  But let's be clear about this.  Anything other than an absolute refusal will represent a compromise and would be more than this unprincipled and manipulative SNP Government deserves.

-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worth mentioning the Greens here. Their manifesto stated that they would only support an indyref2 if it was "the will of the people". It clearly isn't.

Presumably the Queen of Democratic Outrage will be scathing in her criticism of them for this breach of their manifesto and will refuse to accept their votes to get this through Holyrood. :laugh:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, Yngwie said:

Opinion polls. Latest one today (Panelbase) shows only 32% want one on Sturgeon's timeframe. For info, the same poll puts Yes support at 44%.

Would that be the one in the Times? The one in which respondents are asked to choose between a referendum in "the next year or two", a referendum "in about two years"(after negotiations), or no referendum "in the next few years".  Can you explain how a referendum, possibly taking place some time between Autumn 2018 and September 2019, when the terms of the negotiations should clear, or even be ready to be debated in all EU Parliaments, do not conform to both "the next year or two" and "in about two years" questions...making that 32% + 18% (ie 50%) in favour of Nicola Sturgeon's time frame....and 50% preferring "not for a few years"  which could be any time after "about two years" ...couldn't it?  Anyway, it is pretty much the same split as in the last poll.

I notice,  incidentally, that a Comres poll has 52% of those polled saying that any second Scottish referendum on independence should not wait until  Britain has completed the process of leaving the EU....which does fit nicely with the preferred option of Nicola Sturgeon..

The last seven polls have had three with an increased pro-indy vote, two with the pro-indy vote much as it was in 2014 and two with a drop in the pro-indy vote that one and one  which does not include the 16 and 17 year olds in their sampling.

Must admit, I have never given polls any credence since I was once polled, during a General Election in a constituency with an SNP candidate(who won incidentally) but there was no SNP(or "Other" option) on the form...so I was put in by the person asking the questions as a Lib/Dem...and I haven't believed a poll since.  But they're fun to talk about.

 

 

 

Edited by Oddquine
4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Oddquine said:

Would that be the one in the Times? The one in which respondents are asked to choose between a referendum in "the next year or two", a referendum "in about two years"(after negotiations), or no referendum "in the next few years".  Can you explain how a referendum, possibly taking place some time between Autumn 2018 and September 2019, when the terms of the negotiations should clear, or even be ready to be debated in all EU Parliaments, do not conform to both "the next year or two" and "in about two years" questions...making that 32% + 18% (ie 50%) in favour of Nicola Sturgeon's time frame....and 50% preferring "not for a few years"  which could be any time after "about two years" ...couldn't it?  Anyway, it is pretty much the same split as in the last poll.

I notice,  incidentally, that a Comres poll has 52% of those polled saying that any second Scottish referendum on independence should not wait until  Britain has completed the process of leaving the EU....which does fit nicely with the preferred option of Nicola Sturgeon..

The last seven polls have had three with an increased pro-indy vote, two with the pro-indy vote much as it was in 2014 and two with a drop in the pro-indy vote that one and one  which does not include the 16 and 17 year olds in their sampling.

Must admit, I have never given polls any credence since I was once polled, during a General Election in a constituency with an SNP candidate(who won incidentally) but there was no SNP(or "Other" option) on the form...so I was put in by the person asking the questions as a Lib/Dem...and I haven't believed a poll since.  But they're fun to talk about.

 

 

 

You have my support Oddquine :clapping: I could not imagine you as a LIB/Dem :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Gringo said:

I know a lot of you Scots were very upset about the result of the referendum but you can't keep having a re-vote when you don't get what you want. My own thoughts, for what they are worth, are that the FM should accept the result and move on. IF the 2nd ref' returned the same result (with perhaps a bigger majority) which there's ever chance it will, what would happen then? Would there be a 3rd and so until you get what you (don't) want? 

Gringo I was not upset just disappointed!  Like all political parties we don't give up the SNP support independence so we will keep trying just like all parties in Scotland.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, IBM said:

You have my support Oddquine :clapping: I could not imagine you as a LIB/Dem :lol:

It was hilarious. Every time I answered a question with "SNP", she came back with "if there was no SNP candidate, who would you vote for"...and I said....given the choices probably LibDem.  I was so chuffed at being polled for the first (and only) time in my life that it took me a while of this "SNP/probably LibDem" responses to everything that I realised she was ticking boxes. I asked her if she was recording the order of voting preferences(SNP1 LD 2) and that was when I found I'd become a LibDem voter. I guess the polling company hadn't heard about the SNP at that time.(or were doing the poll for the LibDems and were being paid by favourable results).   I always wondered how much it had skewed the expectations of the LibDems in an area with a fairly decent SNP vote if she had picked on a lot of the wrong people to talk to on Forres High Street.    :laugh:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These days, it's far more likely that the Lib Dems would be the party considered too niche to be an option on the poll!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Yngwie said:

Worth mentioning the Greens here. Their manifesto stated that they would only support an indyref2 if it was "the will of the people". It clearly isn't.

Presumably the Queen of Democratic Outrage will be scathing in her criticism of them for this breach of their manifesto and will refuse to accept their votes to get this through Holyrood. :laugh:

That old thing called democracy again that the Unionists seem so selective in their backing for. Shortly after the Brexit vote they convened an EGM where their members voted overwhelmingly to push for a fresh referendum given the change of circumstances.. However, given that they have backed independence for decades I doubt that their position on the matter comes as a surprise or indeed a disappointment to many who voted for them.

In any event, the government does not require the support of the Greens to 'get this through Holyrood'. Should the greens abstain the matter would still be passed with votes to spare.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The change of policy got the approval of their members, but not of the people who had voted for them. There's a huge difference in principle (although not so much in practice, I acknowledge)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.