SNP still talking about 2nd referendum

KingBrian2

The SNP are not giving up on Independence just yet. It should be interesting to see what comes of this. Nicola Sturgeon's party is receiving a lot of support and the attitude of most Scots is one of unhappiness of the process of devolution which has not given them the fiscal powers they believe they deserve.

In the wake of two crucial decisions London's Westminster has to make, leaving the EU and further military actions overseas I don't see much of an appetite in keeping this pretend relationship with central gvt holding up. Some pretty clear differences of opinions in the way the UK should go.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/talk-of-second-referendum-will-damage-scotlands-economy-says-scottish-secretary-david-mundell-a6752856.html

Manach

I was in Scotland recently. In bookshops on the political aisle there were a considerable amount of books on the recent referendum and some not pleased with the result. Thus the issue might not be settled, at least for some of the stakeholders.

ancapailldorcha

I'm not surprised. Governments only offer referendums on alterations they desire. If memory serves, only 55% of Scots voted to keep the union so it's an issue that is far from resolved for many.

BoJack Horseman

take #2 will probably be reaffirmed again after the next Hollyrood elections.... perhaps sometime in the next 5 years.


The bill to give further powers to Edinburgh is still seemingly somewhere in the legislative process

KingBrian2

They should move to a more equal rooted bases in which the English Westminster and the Edinburgh gvt have shared powers. At the end of the day the Lion of Britain represents England and the Unicorn represents Scotland.

Both sides are very much comparable in terms of who rules the island and it would work a hell of a lot better to have co-decision making agreement instead of unilateral legislation from Westminster and the Edinburgh gvt attempting to undermine and unravel it.

BoJack Horseman

KingBrian2 wrote: »

They should move to a more equal rooted bases in which the English Westminster and the Edinburgh gvt have shared powers. At the end of the day the Lion of Britain represents England and the Unicorn represents Scotland.

Both sides are very much comparable in terms of who rules the island and it would work a hell of a lot better to have co-decision making agreement instead of unilateral legislation from Westminster and the Edinburgh gvt attempting to undermine and unravel it.

A country will always require a top dog though.

Scotland's 5 million inhabitant, single party state couldn't reasonably be considered an absolute equal to England's 50+ million inhabitants.

If the UK is fereralised to the utmost, there will still always be a single point of authority & rule.... even if the issues involved are minimised in their scope.

Hopefully the Scotland bill when passed next year will set the path for full devolution for Scotland... the less the SNP have to blame on Westminister, the better for Scots.

Shurimgreat

They can have any number of referendums but the essential problems facing an Independent Scotland are the same.

They won't be allowed join the EU for a long time, otherwise every region of Europe would be queuing up for independence.

There's uncertainty over what currency they would use, with Westminster adamant it won't be the pound and it also can't be the Euro.

The oil revenues will fluctuate up and down. At current oil prices an independent Scotland would not be viable.

There would be doubts whether they could attract foreign investment given that they would be outside the EU.

There are many many more questions too to be answered.

The SNP are great at making promises but not so great at facing up to realities.

masti123

It's far too early for that kind of talk. They had the referendum, and it's somewhat disrespectful to suggest people just weren't thinking clearly and maybe they'll get it right next time.

It puts me in mind of how shameful the EU referendum was here in Ireland and how disrespected our decision was.

KingBrian2

masti123 wrote: »

It's far too early for that kind of talk. They had the referendum, and it's somewhat disrespectful to suggest people just weren't thinking clearly and maybe they'll get it right next time.

It puts me in mind of how shameful the EU referendum was here in Ireland and how disrespected our decision was.

Not really Scotland is still waiting for the devolved powers to come their way. Scotland needs a fair hearing. A sizeable portion of the population are still expecting these decisions to be made more localised instead of an all controlling central office.

Jim2007

masti123 wrote: »

It's far too early for that kind of talk. They had the referendum, and it's somewhat disrespectful to suggest people just weren't thinking clearly and maybe they'll get it right next time.

It is not a question of getting it right or wrong. In a democracy the people are fully entitled to change their minds and to place a restriction on their ability to do that would in fact be undemocratic.

masti123 wrote: »

It puts me in mind of how shameful the EU referendum was here in Ireland and how disrespected our decision was.

The Irish constitution authorises the Government to negotiate on our behalf but we the people reserve the final decisions to ourselves. Any negotiation is not a one off yes/no answer nor does the constitution restrict it to such. So it should not be at all surprising that there may be several referenda on a given topic. The fact, not the opinion, is that we voted on a second offer and the anti-party failed to make their case the second time around. Now given the size of the EU and the fact that at least 3 countries will require referenda going forward, you can fully expect to see the process repeated in the future. That is how negotiations work and that is how our democracy works. Deal with it.

masti123

masti123 wrote: »

It puts me in mind of how shameful the EU referendum was here in Ireland and how disrespected our decision was.

And the divorce referendum.

keeponhurling

Don't think the conservatives will want to go through another referendum in this.

Maybe if Labour got into power ?

But really can't see another referendum within 10 years

ancapailldorcha

The Tories have enough on their plate with this EU referendum which hasn't even been given a date yet. The Scotland question has been shelved. For now at least.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Scotland had their chance and may never get another.
The SNP blew it by not having the answers to the serious questions that were being asked.
The SNP did not have detailed answers regards the currency, the royal family, passports, bbc, immigration, the scottish share of debt.
Pure arrogance from the SNP , they believed their own hype.

marmurr1916

Why would the SNP give up on independence? It's the issue which defines the party, much like achieving a united Ireland defines Sinn Féin. The SNP will never give up on independence. If it does, it will no longer be the SNP. Let's say the UK votes to remain in the EU when its referendum is held. Do you think that UKIP will say 'oh well, we lost, better give up trying to get the UK out of the EU'? Of course they won't.

marmurr1916

Vada Massive Knight wrote: »

Scotland had their chance and may never get another.
The SNP blew it by not having the answers to the serious questions that were being asked.
The SNP did not have detailed answers regards the currency, the royal family, passports, bbc, immigration, the scottish share of debt.
Pure arrogance from the SNP , they believed their own hype.

Currency - Scotland would continue to use sterling as its currency, either in a formal relationship with the UK or informally. If the former, it would pay its share of the UK's debts; if the latter, it would no longer take responsibility for debts in a currency it was not allowed to participate in regulating.

Scottish share of debt - to be paid if the UK agreed to joint control over sterling. If the UK didn't agree, Scotland would repudiate its share of the UK's debts on independence.

They did have detailed answers on the royal family (more precisely on the monarchy - their plan was that Scotland would remain a monarchy with a shared head of state with the UK, much like Canada or Australia or New Zealand...

Passports - Scotland would have issued its own passports; British passport holders (citizens) who were habitually resident in Scotland at the time of independence would have the right to live and work in Scotland

Immigration - Scotland would set its own immigration policies to suit Scotland's needs, which the SNP foresaw as requiring more skilled immigration.

BBC - BBC Scotland would become SBS, Scottish Broadcasting Service with a licensing agreement with the BBC to provide content to the BBC and receive content from the BBC.

I don't know where you get the idea that the SNP didn't set out detailed policies in these areas in the event that Scotland became independent. They were all set out in some detail in the Scottish Government's White Paper on independence:

http://www.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf

You might not have found the policies credible but you can't honestly claim they didn't provide answers.

marmurr1916

Jim2007 wrote: »

It is not a question of getting it right or wrong. In a democracy the people are fully entitled to change their minds and to place a restriction on their ability to do that would in fact be undemocratic.

Changing your mind is the essence of democracy. If the people couldn't change their minds, we'd have had one general election after independence and that would have been that....:D

dubscottie

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Currency - Scotland would continue to use sterling as its currency, either in a formal relationship with the UK or informally. If the former, it would pay its share of the UK's debts; if the latter, it would no longer take responsibility for debts in a currency it was not allowed to participate in regulating.

Scottish share of debt - to be paid if the UK agreed to joint control over sterling. If the UK didn't agree, Scotland would repudiate its share of the UK's debts on independence.

They did have detailed answers on the royal family (more precisely on the monarchy - their plan was that Scotland would remain a monarchy with a shared head of state with the UK, much like Canada or Australia or New Zealand...

Passports - Scotland would have issued its own passports; British passport holders (citizens) who were habitually resident in Scotland at the time of independence would have the right to live and work in Scotland

Immigration - Scotland would set its own immigration policies to suit Scotland's needs, which the SNP foresaw as requiring more skilled immigration.

BBC - BBC Scotland would become SBS, Scottish Broadcasting Service with a licensing agreement with the BBC to provide content to the BBC and receive content from the BBC.

I don't know where you get the idea that the SNP didn't set out detailed policies in these areas in the event that Scotland became independent. They were all set out in some detail in the Scottish Government's White Paper on independence:

http://www.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf

You might not have found the policies credible but you can't honestly claim they didn't provide answers.

Thats what the SNP claimed would happen.. In reality it was all a load of wishful bollox.

BoJack Horseman

dubscottie wrote: »

Thats what the SNP claimed would happen.. In reality it was all a load of wishful bollox.

Only because the electorate decided 'No'.

had it been a 'Yes', those above considerations would probably have happened.

The 'Yes' is not the end of the process... its really just the start .
Independence would have taken a few years and a huge amount of work to get in place before any formal independence day.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Currency - Scotland would continue to use sterling as its currency, either in a formal relationship with the UK or informally. If the former, it would pay its share of the UK's debts; if the latter, it would no longer take responsibility for debts in a currency it was not allowed to participate in regulating.

Scottish share of debt - to be paid if the UK agreed to joint control over sterling. If the UK didn't agree, Scotland would repudiate its share of the UK's debts on independence.

They did have detailed answers on the royal family (more precisely on the monarchy - their plan was that Scotland would remain a monarchy with a shared head of state with the UK, much like Canada or Australia or New Zealand...

Passports - Scotland would have issued its own passports; British passport holders (citizens) who were habitually resident in Scotland at the time of independence would have the right to live and work in Scotland

Immigration - Scotland would set its own immigration policies to suit Scotland's needs, which the SNP foresaw as requiring more skilled immigration.

BBC - BBC Scotland would become SBS, Scottish Broadcasting Service with a licensing agreement with the BBC to provide content to the BBC and receive content from the BBC.

I don't know where you get the idea that the SNP didn't set out detailed policies in these areas in the event that Scotland became independent. They were all set out in some detail in the Scottish Government's White Paper on independence:

http://www.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf

You might not have found the policies credible but you can't honestly claim they didn't provide answers.

I said they did not give detailed answers.
Telling the Scottish people that negotiations after the referendum is won will decide the most important questions is beyond nonsensical.
The SNP blew it and in time the Scots will grow to hate the SNP because of it.

BoJack Horseman

Vada Massive Knight wrote: »

Telling the Scottish people that negotiations after the referendum is won will decide the most important questions is beyond nonsensical

Expecting any politician to know the answer to all future scenarios is probably unreasonable....
Thats how people end up being lied to.

You don't honestly think its all sorted the day after the votes are counted?

A Dub in Glasgo

Vada Massive Knight wrote: »

Scotland had their chance and may never get another.
The SNP blew it by not having the answers to the serious questions that were being asked.
The SNP did not have detailed answers regards the currency, the royal family, passports, bbc, immigration, the scottish share of debt.
Pure arrogance from the SNP , they believed their own hype.

Scotland did and decided 55%-45% to remain part of the UK. That is not the decisive decision people here and in the media are making it out to be

The SNP did have proposals for everything you raise

dubscottie

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Only because the electorate decided 'No'.

had it been a 'Yes', those above considerations would probably have happened.

The 'Yes' is not the end of the process... its really just the start .
Independence would have taken a few years and a huge amount of work to get in place before any formal independence day.

But the people said NO.. The majority said NO.. Get use to it..


And the other fish, Sturgeon is looking at charges for taking bribes for the fox hunting vote in Westminster..

dubscottie

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Scotland did and decided 55%-45% to remain part of the UK. That is not the decisive decision people here and in the media are making it out to be

The SNP did have proposals for everything you raise

It was proposals.. Just that.

In reality Scotland would be Fecked had a Yes vote gone through.

dubscottie

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Only because the electorate decided 'No'.

had it been a 'Yes', those above considerations would probably have happened.

The 'Yes' is not the end of the process... its really just the start .
Independence would have taken a few years and a huge amount of work to get in place before any formal independence day.

As was explained at the time.. Sterling etc.. was not for negotiation.

The EU thing.. Scotland would need to apply.. Prove itself as Turkey has tried to do(and failed).

But a big thing that gets on my tits is the sudden love for bi-lingual signs..

And the Scottish hipsters that do everything in Gaelic.

Most young folk cant boil an egg so why the hell should they get to vote..

A few in the referendum thought they were voting for a flag!!

1eg0a3xv7b82of

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Expecting any politician to know the answer to all future scenarios is probably unreasonable....
Thats how people end up being lied to.

You don't honestly think its all sorted the day after the votes are counted?

the majority of Scots wanted independence but rightly they wanted some details before they said yes.

not all the answers, just the important ones.
For example.
Who was entitled to a Scottish passport was never answered properly because the SNP did not want to rock the boat.
Was it Anyone with a British passport who could apply for a Scottish passport or just British passport holders living in Scotland or only those who voted in the referendum, the SNP would give all 3 answers without a hint of shame.

The SNP lost that referendum because they had multiple answers to important questions, the handling of the referendum by the SNP is a study in incompetence.

A Dub in Glasgo

dubscottie wrote: »

It was proposals.. Just that.

In reality Scotland would be Fecked had a Yes vote gone through.

In reality, that is speculation on your part, maybe right maybe wrong. How is Scotland faring since the No vote?

Nichard Dixon

Vada Massive Knight wrote: »

the majority of Scots wanted independence but rightly they wanted some details before they said yes.

not all the answers, just the important ones.
For example.
Who was entitled to a Scottish passport was never answered properly because the SNP did not want to rock the boat.
Was it Anyone with a British passport who could apply for a Scottish passport or just British passport holders living in Scotland or only those who voted in the referendum, the SNP would give all 3 answers without a hint of shame.

The SNP lost that referendum because they had multiple answers to important questions, the handling of the referendum by the SNP is a study in incompetence.

Whatever the SNP may have not explained, passports were not the issue.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Nichard Dixon wrote: »

Whatever the SNP may have not explained, passports were not the issue.

Your wrong, its your post that is not the issue. :pac:

Shurimgreat

Any vote is going to be based on economics at the end of the day and realistically the economics of Independence don't stack up at the current time. When Ireland achieved Independence or partial Independence depending on your point of view, it took decades before the fruits of it showed. We were still a very poor country until at least the 1960s or 1970s. It probably took joining the EU for us to become a viable state economically. And I would say it would be the same with Scotland. Being able to join the EU would be absolutely critical in terms of attracting investment and being a stable economy. Also a stable currency would be critical too. People need to forget about history and emotion and Robert The Bruce and William Wallace and Bonnie Prince Charlie and all that and focus on the economics of it.

An Ciarraioch

Only way I can see a second referendum being held is if UK as a whole chooses Brexit, and Scotland opts to stay. That seems to be the basis on which Sturgeon is pursuing the devolution of referendum powers to Holyrood, at any rate.

KingBrian2

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Only way I can see a second referendum being held is if UK as a whole chooses Brexit, and Scotland opts to stay. That seems to be the basis on which Sturgeon is pursuing the devolution of referendum powers to Holyrood, at any rate.

So just on a case of clarification and for the record I have no horse in this race, interested in public opinion over in Scotland but say London decides for the UK to remove itself from the EU and all the legal safeguards and political ramifications are let loose then Scotland will have permission to refuse being part of a Nation that at its heart is opposed to Scottish political representation. Did I get that right?

A Dub in Glasgo

No - the SNP will probably enter the Scottish Parliament elections in May seeking a mandate to request another referendum from the UK Government if the vote in Scotland is to remain in the EU and the UK as a whole is to leave the EU

KingBrian2

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

No - the SNP will probably enter the Scottish Parliament elections in May seeking a mandate to request another referendum from the UK Government if the vote in Scotland is to remain in the EU and the UK as a whole is to leave the EU

That is what I said.

Mal-Adjusted

Didn't the promised "devolution max" conveniently get clogged up in Westminster? If so, I can see the SNP banging on about a second referendum as they were effectively lied to, then have Cameron swoop in with legislation to quiet the Scots and secure a second NO vote, pretty much putting the question to bed.

Leaving the E.U. might change that, but i'd treat the E.U. referendum the same way as the Scottish Independence one, lots of talk but when it comes down to it, they'll just get back in line.

BoJack Horseman

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Only way I can see a second referendum being held is if UK as a whole chooses Brexit, and Scotland opts to stay. That seems to be the basis on which Sturgeon is pursuing the devolution of referendum powers to Holyrood, at any rate.

I can still see referendum 2.0 irrespective of the EU vote.... if Breit occurs, it may accelerate any indie referendum... but one will occur again... certainly in the next decade.

It will be very tricky for Scotland if Brexit does occur...
If Scotland then opts for independence, they have the worst of all worlds.. neither UK or EU & accession to the EU takes a long time.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

The biggest mistake the SNP made regarding the referendum was not agreeing to England having one too.
There was a greater chance of the English voting out of the Union.
The SNP made some dreadful mistakes in their handling of their Referendum. It is hard to respect SNP, they even let Brown do a hatchet job on them before the referendum.
They let Brown act like the statesman he never was, it was beyond bizarre.

A Dub in Glasgo

Vada Massive Knight wrote: »

The biggest mistake the SNP made regarding the referendum was not agreeing to England having one too.
There was a greater chance of the English voting out of the Union.
The SNP made some dreadful mistakes in their handling of their Referendum. It is hard to respect SNP, they even let Brown do a hatchet job on them before the referendum.
They let Brown act like the statesman he never was, it was beyond bizarre.

I don't think you understand how this works

It is not in the gift of the SNP to allow England to have a referendum, that is the gift of the UK Parliament

Brown was part of the No side and was given ample air time by the media for his intervention, it was nothing to do with the SNP. His promises have proven to be crap but you will not hear the media report that. Again, not sure what you expect the SNP to do with the BBC giving Brown an exclusive prime time live airing covering his 50 minute stage managed speech

1eg0a3xv7b82of

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I don't think you understand how this works

It is not in the gift of the SNP to allow England to have a referendum, that is the gift of the UK Parliament

Brown was part of the No side and was given ample air time by the media for his intervention, it was nothing to do with the SNP. His promises have proven to be crap but you will not hear the media report that. Again, not sure what you expect the SNP to do with the BBC giving Brown an exclusive prime time live airing covering his 50 minute stage managed speech

Are you in the SNP

The SNP refused a referendum if England had one at the same time. It was a big mistake

Let me tell you how this works.
The SNP were for a yes and Brown was for no. If the yes wanted to win they had to be ready to neutralise the no argument. When Brown went after the Yes Side the SNP response was one of complete arrogance. They thought they had it won.

The SNP made a complete hash of it and when it finally dawns on the Scots that there is not another referendum coming, Labour will start to win back their seats.

A Dub in Glasgo

Vada Massive Knight wrote: »

Are you in the SNP

No

The SNP refused a referendum if England had one at the same time. It was a big mistake

What are you on about? The SNP has nothing to do with England having a referendum

Let me tell you how this works.
The SNP were for a yes and Brown was for no. If the yes wanted to win they had to be ready to neutralise the no argument. When Brown went after the Yes Side the SNP response was one of complete arrogance. They thought they had it won.

Yes, you tell me how this works.... in cloud cuckoo land

The SNP made a complete hash of it and when it finally dawns on the Scots that there is not another referendum coming, Labour will start to win back their seats.

You are absolutely deluded if you think Labour will win back seats because SNP supporters realise, in your own words, 'that there is not another referendum coming'

Nichard Dixon

Vada Massive Knight wrote: »

Your wrong, its your post that is not the issue. :pac:

What is so complicated about passports? The Freestate left the UK and issued passports. It is a complete non issue.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

No



What are you on about? The SNP has nothing to do with England having a referendum



Yes, you tell me how this works.... in cloud cuckoo land



You are absolutely deluded if you think Labour will win back seats because SNP supporters realise, in your own words, 'that there is not another referendum coming'

You come on here to post about something you know nothing about, and when I try and help you, you lash out. Dont take it so personal.
Your reaction here is how the SNP reacted to Brown.
you should join the SNP, you would be well suited.

A Dub in Glasgo

Vada Massive Knight wrote: »

You come on here to post about something you know nothing about, and when I try and help you, you lash out. Dont take it so personal.
Your reaction here is how the SNP reacted to Brown.
you should join the SNP, you would be well suited.

Nice assumption, I lived through the whole build up and actual referendum and what you are posting is not accurate. Review the substance of what you are posting and my responses

1eg0a3xv7b82of

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Nice assumption, I lived through the whole build up and actual referendum and what you are posting is not accurate. Review the substance of what you are posting and my responses

We all lived through it.
Salmond and sturgeon were outwitted by darling and brown.
It is embarrassing and humiliating for them.
The SNP won the lottery in getting the referendum in the first place and the failure to get the yes vote will haunt the SNP.

There only hope of ever getting another referendum is a coalition government with Labour in Westminster, but even then the math dont add up.

the SNP will never be allowed another referendum unless Labour can be sure of winning a general election without Scottish seats.
Turkeys dont vote for xmas.

KingBrian2

First of all why is my post coloured in blue? I hope someone can answer that.

As for the referendum it was combined Cameron Brown pact that thwarted Alex from achieving an independent Scotland. I still see a chance for independence coming his way if the Devo max formula does not work. The parliamentarians in Holyrood have to agree to whatever schemes the Tories put together in Westminster. Expect more support for SNP in coming years not less. Labour and the SNP might become allies in the future.

Fratton Fred

KingBrian2 wrote: »

As for the referendum it was combined Cameron Brown pact that thwarted Alex from achieving an independent Scotland..

No, it was because the majority didn't want an independent Scotland.

Iwasfrozen

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Changing your mind is the essence of democracy. If the people couldn't change their minds, we'd have had one general election after independence and that would have been that....:D

Oh? And would the SNP b offering Scots the opportunity to change their mind two years after a yes vote?

Don't think so mate.

KingBrian2

Fratton Fred wrote: »

No, it was because the majority didn't want an independent Scotland.

The majority may have be swayed if the atmosphere of fear over an independent were not overstated by the pro union population. Whatever the result the SNP have overwhelming majority in parliament.

dubscottie

I doubt there will be a referendum soon now the details are coming out about the SNP's part in the Forth Bridge..

Friend's I know (from Scotland) are turning away from the SNP big time.

A Dub in Glasgo

are those friends blaming the bin lorry crash on the SNP as well?

gallag

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Currency - Scotland would continue to use sterling as its currency, either in a formal relationship with the UK or informally. If the former, it would pay its share of the UK's debts; if the latter, it would no longer take responsibility for debts in a currency it was not allowed to participate in regulating.

Scottish share of debt - to be paid if the UK agreed to joint control over sterling. If the UK didn't agree, Scotland would repudiate its share of the UK's debts on independence.

Just want to point something out here that many don't seem to understand, I get that to the uneducated on the matter this seems an entirely reasonable request from the SNP, but it is not simply "sharing a currency" what would happen is the British people would be held accountable for the Scottish economy, if we shared the sterling from a central bank with Scotland as a partner then the Scottish economy would be backed up by the British people and if Scotland went bust the bill would be paid by the British people, the only way to protect the British people from acting as guarantor for Scotland is to have them adopt the sterling in an unofficial way.

Basically if a new independent Scotland was a partner in sterling they would also have the ability to crash the sterling in the event of their new country being unsuccessful financially, and I think the SNP know the UK government could never agree to this so it's just more SNP games, sure they would be bankrupt already and probably being bailed out by the British to protect the sterling if they had their way.