Scottish independence - less or more likely with Tory victory?

A Dub in Glasgo

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

Who gets to decide if a new referendum is run?

The process is outlined in post 3 of this thread

Jelle1880

There's also something called the Edinburgh Agreement which pretty clearly states (Salmond signed it too) that a referendum regarding independence is a once in a lifetime thing.

Doing it again a few years later isn't exactly that.

Lovely Bloke

Jelle1880 wrote: »

There's also something called the Edinburgh Agreement which pretty clearly states (Salmond signed it too) that a referendum regarding independence is a once in a lifetime thing.

Doing it again a few years later isn't exactly that.

Which line of it?

A Dub in Glasgo

Jelle1880 wrote: »

There's also something called the Edinburgh Agreement which pretty clearly states (Salmond signed it too) that a referendum regarding independence is a once in a lifetime thing.

Doing it again a few years later isn't exactly that.

It states no such thing

alaimacerc

Jelle1880 wrote: »

There's also something called the Edinburgh Agreement which pretty clearly states (Salmond signed it too) that a referendum regarding independence is a once in a lifetime thing.

You may be mistaking "the Edinburgh Agreement", and electoral rhetoric about the prospects of getting another such chance.

The traditional phrase was also "once in a generation", which is significantly different.

feargale

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

The first past the post system distorts the results dramatically.

Even if they did get another referendum, there's no guarantee that it would pass anyway, Scotland has rejected independence already in 2014.

Maybe the Tories will introduce PR for general elections, but confined to Scotland only. After all, there was no problem about introducing it for local government in Northern Ireland alone at the time, or for Sligo Borough elections in 1918 to prevent a Nationalist clean sweep. I love how people and parties question legitimacy when it suits them, and ignore the greatest illegitimacy of all. No referendum required for a total rejig ofconstituencies, only for PR.
I agree with little of UKIP, but Carswell was on the ball in his victory speech when he said FPTP exemplifies a dysfunctional political system. FPTP has been rejected by every other European democracy.
Between the Greens, UKIP, and what's left of the Lib-Dems ( a few million voters, incidentally, a number distorted by the system, ) I don't believe we have heard the last of PR.

mg1982

Even though the SNP gained a lot of seats in this election a many of the voters who voted SNP wouldnt necessarily vote to leave the UK. Another referendum isnt likely for another 10 plus years IMO.

alaimacerc

eire4 wrote: »

We could see a constitutional crisis as eary as 2017 if Britain votes to leave the EU as the SNP have made clear they will not accept that for Scotland [...]

The constitutional crisis only really arises if firstly, the SNP stand for Holyrood on a manifesto that they'll run another referendum if there's BrExit, secondly, they get a majority on that basis, thirdly, there's a vote to leave the EU, and lastly, the Tories refuse to grant them one.

Jelle1880

alaimacerc wrote: »

You may be mistaking "the Edinburgh Agreement", and electoral rhetoric about the prospects of getting another such chance.

The traditional phrase was also "once in a generation", which is significantly different.

My bad, you're right, I was thinking about Salmond's comments after signing it.

alaimacerc

feargale wrote: »

Maybe the Tories will introduce PR for general elections, but confined to Scotland only. After all, there was no problem about introducing it for local government in Northern Ireland alone at the time, or for Sligo Borough elections in 1918 to prevent a Nationalist clean sweep.

Very unlikely; huge difference between different systems in different bodies, and different systems for different seats in the same body.

Indeed, so obviously fishy it strikes me as appealable to the European courts. Unless of course the Tories have BrExited from those by then, too...

Fleawuss

Sad to see the return of nationalism. The re-Balkanization of Europe is underway.

alaimacerc

feargale wrote: »

Between the Greens, UKIP, and what's left of the Lib-Dems ( a few million voters, incidentally, a number distorted by the system, )

Incidentally, Paddy Ashdown read out a list of "number of voters to elect an MP from each party". Starting with the SNP (who support PR, incidentally) with 26k per, ranging up to Ukip (several million for one). The LDs are somewhere in the middle, at 290k.

A Tory cabinet minister was on Question Time this week, still in auto-propaganda mode, complaining about the "unfair" boundaries, and how they should have been "reformed" to further disenfranchise urban constituencies with large under-registration of voters. Meanwhile in the real world... Tories with 50.8% of the seats on 36.9% of the vote, as against Labour's 35.7% from 30.6%. Appetite growing in the eating, perhaps?

Pocaide

Fleawuss wrote: »

Sad to see the return of nationalism. The re-Balkanization of Europe is underway.

Are you for real

marmurr1916

firemansam4 wrote: »

I think the results can be a bit misleading though. Yes the SNP seems to have litererly taken control of Scotland with there support. But if you look at the percentage of the vote I think they have 50%

All the other parties in contention where all pro-union and all the pro-union votes have been split between the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats, thus none of them really beeing able to compete for seats.

Also I wonder how many people who voted to keep the Union are a little peeved with not getting all that was promised to them before the Independance referendom and are now just showing a protest vote...

The Scottish Green Party are pro-independence. They didn't get much of the vote (1.3%) but it brings the total vote for pro-independence candidates/parties to 51.3%.

The general election result shouldn't be used as a guide to how people might vote in a second independence referendum.

There are major differences in the categories of people who could vote in each.

Everyone aged 16 or over who lived in Scotland could vote in the referendum.

Voters had to be 18 or over to vote in the general election.

Only British, Irish and Commonwealth citizens could vote in the general election whereas all residents of Scotland could vote in the referendum.

There was also a much higher turnout in the referendum than for the general election and a fair few people who voted for the SNP or the Green Party don't support independence.

I think the most realistic route to independence for Scotland is a gradual approach.

More devolved powers for now, eventually leading up to control over all affairs apart from monetary policy, foreign affairs and defence (Home Rule) would set the stage for independence after a few years of competent government and a stable, successful economy.

There's always the risk that this would be enough to satisfy a majority permanently but it's one the SNP seem to be prepared to take.

It's also risky on the economic front. Some claim that there would be a much bigger deficit in Scotland if it were to achieve full fiscal autonomy now.

Others claim that this is distorted by the fact that some tax receipts are allocated to the UK's accounts rather than Scotland's and that it doesn't take account of the fact that the SNP's taxation and spending plans would be very different under full fiscal autonomy.

I'm not sure it would act as a permanent barrier to independence anyway.

The Scottish economy is a modern, advanced economy and full fiscal autonomy would give it the scope to use taxation and spending policies to increase its wealth more rapidly than the rest of the UK.

And even if that didn't happen there are bound to be long periods when Scotland's economy does well and the public perception of possible risks from independence is very low.

marmurr1916

Fleawuss wrote: »

Sad to see the return of nationalism. The re-Balkanization of Europe is underway.

Any of the western European nations where there is currently high demand for independence also want to remain in the EU.

Whatever you might think of the EU it is an organisation that facilitates peaceful international co-operation, the opposite of Balkanisation whereby states retreat into aggressive isolationism and paranoia towards their neighbours.

marmurr1916

fryup wrote: »

just 9 months back they voted 55 - 45 % to stay in the UK

and now this i'm baffled

Why? People have been known to change their minds now and again.

marmurr1916

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The Scots are Brits, I think we as Irish people tend to forget that and impose our own history onto the Scots.

A clear majority of Scottish born people no longer regard themselves as British.

If it hadn't been for English and voters of other nationalities voting mainly No, Scotland would have voted in favour of independence as 52.7% of Scottish born voters chose Yes last September.

The British identity is declining in Scotland and is now mainly held by a minority of people born in Scotland, mainly older people.

blatantrereg

Scotland gained independence a little bit after the end of the Braveheart movie. Then when Elizabeth I died without any children, James V, king of Scotland inherited the English throne as well. He brought into being the act of union between the two countries.

Irish people must understand this because it is very important for us to base our political views on historical events no matter how little bearing they have on current situations.

eire4

alaimacerc wrote: »

The constitutional crisis only really arises if firstly, the SNP stand for Holyrood on a manifesto that they'll run another referendum if there's BrExit, secondly, they get a majority on that basis, thirdly, there's a vote to leave the EU, and lastly, the Tories refuse to grant them one.

As things stand the only of the above that in doubtful is IMHO is that a referendum on leaving the EU lead by the Tories will pass. The SNP are already clear on their EU position they will not accept a withdrawl from the EU. Given the massive victory in yesterdays election it is hard to see them not winning another overall majority in next years Scottish elections. At that point given the Tories are committed to the referendum it comes down to how that vote goes in 2017. If its yes and Britain is out then either the Tories grant another referendum or there will be a constitutional crisis at that point.


There is also the factor of the Tories wanting to reduce the number of Scottish seats in parliment from 59 to 52. If they go ahead with this move this will only add fuel to the SNP fire.

alaimacerc

marmurr1916 wrote: »

A clear majority of Scottish born people no longer regard themselves as British.

You're extrapolating an entirely different inference from data that doesn't support it. And happily, there's data that directly goes to how many Scottish people "do not regard themselves as British" -- and it's not a clear majority at all, it was for example 26% in one such survey.

In fact, if you compare attitudes across the UK, the English "do not regard themselves as British" to a greater extent.

The issue of independence, or civic nationalism, is not the same thing as the "identity" question.

alaimacerc

eire4 wrote: »

As things stand the only of the above that in doubtful is IMHO is that a referendum on leaving the EU lead by the Tories will pass.

The likelihood is that the Tories will be leading (... and splitting over, admittedly) the campaign to not leave. That's Plan Cameron, at least, whatever that's worth.

The SNP are already clear on their EU position they will not accept a withdrawl from the EU.

It could stand to be a lot clearer -- and likely will be, come the SP elections, it must be said. There's a difference between "not accepting" such an outcome in for example the SF sense (i.e. grouse ineffectually about it) and committing to another iReferendum in such a circumstance.

There is also the factor of the Tories wanting to reduce the number of Scottish seats in parliment from 59 to 52. If they go ahead with this move this will only add fuel to the SNP fire.

To be fair, this isn't an anti-Scottish move, as they want to do the same across the UK. It's an anti-Labour -- and anti-democracy -- one.

Iwasfrozen

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The Scots are Brits, I think we as Irish people tend to forget that and impose our own history onto the Scots.

Well it's not as bad as the Scots imposing partition on us.

Too soon?


The SNP will kick up enough of a fuss before an In/Outh referendum to make sure they stay in the EU no matter what. Maybe a guarantee of their own referendum if the English decide to leave.

That said, it'll be a while before the referendum. Cameron doesn't want to leave, Clarke (who probably has more influence than anyone else in the party) doesn't want to leave, Boris (looking for the leadership before the next election) certainly doesn't want to leave. Cameron will make sure all the signs are right before a vote is held.


As for the SNP, they won't hold another vote until it's absolutely guaranteed they'll get a yes, it would be stupid otherwise.

dubscottie

At the end of the day.. The SNP got less than 50% of the vote..

When the elections happen for the Scottish parliament next year we will see the true result.

I am Scottish, my family is all Scottish and we all voted NO for independence.. So any claim it was "non Scots" that killed that vote is BS

Jelle1880

Deleted User wrote: »

Well it's not as bad as the Scots imposing partition on us.

Too soon?


The SNP will kick up enough of a fuss before an In/Outh referendum to make sure they stay in the EU no matter what. Maybe a guarantee of their own referendum if the English decide to leave.

That said, it'll be a while before the referendum. Cameron doesn't want to leave, Clarke (who probably has more influence than anyone else in the party) doesn't want to leave, Boris (looking for the leadership before the next election) certainly doesn't want to leave. Cameron will make sure all the signs are right before a vote is held.


As for the SNP, they won't hold another vote until it's absolutely guaranteed they'll get a yes, it would be stupid otherwise.

Is that even possible ?

Let's say that the UK votes to leave the EU (which I don't think will happen, I believe the latest polls showed something like 60% for staying in the EU). Scotland wants to stay in but they can't force the rest of the UK, so they want to go at it alone. Which also won't work since several countries/politicians/... have already made it clear that Scotland would have to follow the standard application process if they wish to enter the EU as an independent country.

alaimacerc

dubscottie wrote: »

At the end of the day.. The SNP got less than 50% of the vote..

I was a little puzzled by this point, as it was widely reported as a vote shate of 50.0%. I had to go dig out the precise turnout, whip out the calculator, and go to four significant figures... it's actually 49.97%. May those 800 people -- fewer than voted for the Scottish Socialist Party! -- be a comfort to you!

I am Scottish, my family is all Scottish and we all voted NO for independence.. So any claim it was "non Scots" that killed that vote is BS

Unless you have an especially large family, I think we can assume that makes the above 800 people look actually significant. Anecdotal rounding-error stuff.

Jelle1880

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Is that even possible ?

Let's say that the UK votes to leave the EU (which I don't think will happen, I believe the latest polls showed something like 60% for staying in the EU). Scotland wants to stay in but they can't force the rest of the UK, so they want to go at it alone. Which also won't work since several countries/politicians/... have already made it clear that Scotland would have to follow the standard application process if they wish to enter the EU as an independent country.

I'd assume that like the Independence referendum the parties will make sure to get everyone to the polls and prevent an "Out". The SNP could easily push things a lot so that they'll stay in. Long story short, they won't vote to leave and Scotland will have a lot of conditions (just like before the independence referendum) to make it even scarier.

eire4

dubscottie wrote: »

At the end of the day.. The SNP got less than 50% of the vote..

When the elections happen for the Scottish parliament next year we will see the true result.

I am Scottish, my family is all Scottish and we all voted NO for independence.. So any claim it was "non Scots" that killed that vote is BS

They won 56 out of 59 seats like it or not that is a massive result for the SNP no matter how you try and minimize it. It gives them a very strong mandate to represent Scotland now at Westminister and at the very least demand devo max including full fiscal autonmy.

alaimacerc

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Which also won't work since several countries/politicians/... have already made it clear that Scotland would have to follow the standard application process if they wish to enter the EU as an independent country.

I think you're thinking of the likes of Rajoy -- *coughcough* Catalonia. *cough* -- making "helpful" commentary in the case of Scotland leaving the UK while the UK was still an EU member. Many were somewhat skeptical about how convincing these self-serving protestations were, even in that case. There might be similar comments from the EU in this case, so as to "encourage" pro-EU, pro-independence voters to vote "no" to exit, rather than "yes".

But come any actual UK exit: what actual benefit is it to the rest of the UK to obstruct a speedy iScotland accession, by one mechanism or another, in the scenario the rest of the UK is already leaving? And do realize it is, above all, a political decision.

eire4

alaimacerc wrote: »

The likelihood is that the Tories will be leading (... and splitting over, admittedly) the campaign to not leave. That's Plan Cameron, at least, whatever that's worth.


It could stand to be a lot clearer -- and likely will be, come the SP elections, it must be said. There's a difference between "not accepting" such an outcome in for example the SF sense (i.e. grouse ineffectually about it) and committing to another iReferendum in such a circumstance.


To be fair, this isn't an anti-Scottish move, as they want to do the same across the UK. It's an anti-Labour -- and anti-democracy -- one.

I agree with you there will not be a united front by the Tories on the EU referendum. Which is why I would say the outcome of the EU referendum is doubtful. Having said that polls suggest that the majoity of voters want to leave so Britain leaving the EU is a real possibility and certainly not a long shot.




Not sure how much clearer the SNP can be when their party leader Nicola Sturgeon said that another independance referendum would only be called if there was a material change in cicumstances and Britain voting to leave the EU but a majority of Scots wanting to stay would justify another referndum.




I agree with you the Tories move to reduce Scotlands number of seats in Westminister from 59 to 52 is not an anti-Scottish move and yes they are clearly trying to do some gerrymandering of their own in England as reagrds Labour seats. But in the current climate (nasty Tory anti-Scottish campaign rhetoric included) given the sheer monster size of the SNP's win yesterday any move to reduce Scottish seats will just add further wind to the SNP's sails.

Jelle1880

alaimacerc wrote: »

I think you're thinking of the likes of Rajoy -- *coughcough* Catalonia. *cough* -- making "helpful" commentary in the case of Scotland leaving the UK while the UK was still an EU member. Many were somewhat skeptical about how convincing these self-serving protestations were, even in that case. There might be similar comments from the EU in this case, so as to "encourage" pro-EU, pro-independence voters to vote "no" to exit, rather than "yes".

But come any actual UK exit: what actual benefit is it to the rest of the UK to obstruct a speedy iScotland accession, by one mechanism or another, in the scenario the rest of the UK is already leaving? And do realize it is, above all, a political decision.

No doubt that many of the Spanish, Belgian,... politicians who talked about it had their own domestic reasons to say that an iScotland would not just be accepted in the EU as a matter of fact.

Most of the comments were prior to the referendum and mostly dealt with the question of currency, in which Olli Rehn (then a vice president in the European Parliament) made it clear that in order to be allowed into the EU Scotland would have to solve the currency issue first, since there is precedent where countries like Iceland and Montenegro had their application rejected for those exact reasons.

Then again, this is all speculation since I don't think the UK will leave the EU any time soon.