Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Scottish independence

1585961636472

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,393 ✭✭✭Grassey


    If the mindset holds as the demographic ages then surely its only a matter of when...




    Redfield & Wilton Strategies carried out the poll on November 26-27, days after the UK Supreme Court ruled another independence referendum cannot be held without Westminster’s consent.


    Support for independence was higher than a comparable poll on 18 September last year, when 44% of respondents said they would vote Yes while 47% said they would vote No.


    The latest poll, of 1,000 Scottish voters, also found 46% said they would support a referendum on Scottish independence being held in the next year, while 43% would oppose one, 9% said they would neither support nor oppose the prospect, and 2% said they did not know.



    New Scotland Poll ICYMI: Independence support grows. Here are details on YES lead by age group:


    16-24: 64%

    25-34: 61%

    35-44: 55%

    45-54: 51%

    55-64: 53%

    65+: 39%



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,630 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    The numbers for the younger demographics make it a case of 'if' and not 'when' independence happens. If Starmer came out strongly against Brexit, that might be enough to shift the numbers to hold things off in the short-term; but, as things stand now, England's politics makes Scottish independence inevitable.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,767 ✭✭✭eire4


    The numbers look good there especially under 35 but also when you look at all the ages only 65 and older does not have a majority in support of independence. Personally I think brexit was the nail in the coffin so to speak in terms of the UK. Just a matter of when now really.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,630 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    I see Ian Blackford has resigned as the SNP's Westminster leader. Stephen Flynn the favourite to replace him - I must admit I don't know anything about him.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,803 ✭✭✭satguy


    So poor old Ian Blackford has resigned as the SNP's Westminster leader.

    I can feel his pain, it is a thankless job.. The Tory Party wanted Brexit so bad, they lied to the people and their Queen.

    With that said, there was a vote,, and it was to stay in the UK..

    With that said.. Brexit and the Tory Party did pull Scotland out of the EU,, So, Now the question is " Does that invalidate that last Scottish independence vote. ??????

    For me the answer is YES ,, and in the next year or so we should see another Scottish independence Referendum,, The outcome of which is binding for the next hundred years or so.. If it is again a NO



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,690 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    There seems to be this weird notion in the UK that a referendum is some kind of Harry Potter incantation that will magically produce a settled and enduring consensus where none existed before.

    In mature democracies we do not generally labour under this delusion.

    A referendum is just one more decision-making tool in the toolbox of democracy. A decision made by referendum is as susceptible of further democratic review as any other decision — why would it be, unless you think of a referendum not as a tool of democracy but as a tool for terminating democracy?

    If the political, economic, etc circumstances that influenced a particular decision change, there is absolutely no reason not to revisit the decision. The fact that the decision was taken by referendum is certainly not such a reason.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,285 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    100% agree Peregrinus

    The amount of times unionists have said the 2014 referendum settled it and you have no right to even consider another referendum is unreal. They would gladly take Scotland being annihilated as long as Scotland was not an independent cou ntry



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I presume if/when the SNP win a referendum, the case will then be settled forever?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    No more ‘forever’ than “that” 2016 referendum, or Ireland’s own 1922 ‘referendum’ (-after a fashion) 😉

    Never is a long time and, ironically enough, it’s always absolutists like unionists who forget that first…when it suits.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,064 ✭✭✭Christy42


    It depends if there is significant will to rerun the referendum. Obviously this would dependent on the UK taking them back as well. However I would suspect that unless there is a massive collapse after an independence referendum that a party with unionism as its main aim would not be winning election after election like the SNP in Scotland are doing currently.


    Obviously the matter is not currently settled given the SNP keep winning elections while campaigning for an independent Scotland.


    It is the way of these things that the vote for no change tends to have those that don't care as much so if enough people vote for change it leaves the opposition in a massive minority as their numbers were boosted by those who don't care as much or just go for the status quo and they no longer match the status quo. The exception being Brexit which was a disaster and took a long time to actually enact anything resembling the initial promise of leaving the EU that those following the status quo didn't switch over.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Unionists are absolutists? where on earth did you drag that one from? Surely if nationalists believe that a yes vote settles the question for ever, then they are absolutists as well? Suggest a referendum in Ireland on rejoining the UK and watch the nationalists throw around phrases such as traitor, or more likely in our case "If you don't like it, then **** and live somewhere else".

    I can however, understand the SNP's impatience. The call for Independence is about the only thing they are managing not to completely **** up at the moment, so resorting to good old fashioned nationalism is their best option to getting re-elected. It is an ideal distraction from failing education standards, a health care system so near collapse they are considering a two tier system and the hundreds of millions wasted in dodgy ferry and steel deals.

    Even the UN are criticising them now, such is their rush to introduce more populist laws.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    if yes wins by 2 - 3% then there will be significant will to re run the referendum, whatever the outcome.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,064 ✭✭✭Christy42


    I doubt it. Check out the divorce referendum here. Took two runs and barely passed at all. Barely a word about it afterwards. People saw the world didn't collapse and didn't care enough to fight for a new one.


    I am sure that some will try and push for a re run but I would expect it to be a vocal minority. I would add that if it is more than that I would support a re run.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    Anyone who believes that a referendum could ever settle a democratic or political question ‘forever’ is an absolutist.

    They’re a tool in the box of democratic consultative processes, mandatory or not according to legislative circumstances, with outcomes binding or not likewise according to legislative circumstances. And they can be used as frequently, or infrequently, as due process or political opportunities dictate. Nothing more, and nothing less.

    There’s no need to float the strawman-esque notion of an Irish referendum to “rejoin the UK”, when there is precisely zero political appetite for it anywhere, and still less of that under the current stats and figures demonstrating the dividend of Ireland’s EU membership vindicating the earlier democratic choices about same.

    I don’t particularly follow or support the SNP, so that diatribe about “failing education standards, a health care system so near collapse they are considering a two tier system and the hundreds of millions wasted in dodgy ferry and steel deals” is quite wasted on me I’m afraid. But objectively, looking at the southerly neighbour over the last few years…there’s a pot of a decidedly dark shade of grey, that wants a word with a kettle.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,720 ✭✭✭serfboard


    Another example would be the abortion referendum. After it passed, Gerard Quinn, who would be on the oppposing side, conceeded that it would be a generation before the issue could/would be looked at again.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You mentioned Ireland's own 1922 referendum, I presume as you considered it a relevant point.

    Unlike your whataboutery, which isn't valid.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,050 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Works for Sinn Fein and if it is by elections each individual area would not get voter fatigue.

    One problem for the SNP though that many NI parties have learned is that constant campaigning is a massive drain on cash.

    I wouldn't go that route if I was SNP because I think it suits their image to be grownups which are is short supply in Westminster.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,994 ✭✭✭ambro25


    I took care to mention “after a fashion” (there was no referendum then, though there certainly was a democratic decision through a vote in June), which you seem to have missed: Ireland regained its sovereignty in 1922 through that vote, yet that did not stop it from re-pooling aspects of its sovereignty with the EU some decades later, did it?

    So, quid of ‘forever’.

    As for my ‘whattaboutery’, who put 50p in you, then? 🙄



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,285 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    No, if that is what the people want. The difference here is I see no problem reconsidering a decision made by the people. You appear not want the people to reconsider


    Meanwhile, in other news




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,690 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    No. The case is settled forever — or as near "forever" as any political question can be — when Scotland actually becomes independent.

    There are examples in history of successful independence referendums which did not proceed to deliver independence because, e.g., political circumstances changed and the support for independence dissipated before independence could be achieved. That could happen in Scotland.

    But I'm not aware of any historical instance in which a nation voted for independence, achieved independence, and later changed its mind and voluntarily went back into the larger state from which it had seceded. If Scotland does leave the UK it is very, very unlikely that it will ever rejoin.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,864 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Just think of the situation here in Ireland.

    I doubt that a vote to rejoin the UK (in the unlikely event such a vote was called) would get much more than 10%, if even that, because we like being who we are and see that best served by being independent - even if we make mistakes.

    Also, a vote to leave the EU would get very little more support than that - because we know that we like the EU. I think there is no single issue that would galvanise even a little traction to get a leave campaign going.

    I am sure that the Scottish would be the same if ever they get as far as voting to be independent.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,561 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I think the Irish electorate are cannier than they get credit for. Take the Peter Casey thing, for instance. They were happy to indulge him a bit and feed him some rope but when it came to crunch time, he got a mere fifth of the vote. It's one thing to entertain the nuclear option, another entirely to actually commit to it.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,864 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    That is one of the mistakes I referenced. Occasionally a nasty individual rises from the sewers and gets publicity and gets traction from the media and appears to get some level of popularity. But then we rise above populism and we choose the best choice - Michael D.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Looks like contextually, that 56% was arrived at when the Don't Knows were ignored: either way, the numbers tick, tick, tick upwards.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,285 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo




  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,864 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    That is a very low number for Don't Know.

    More important is the 'Not voting'.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,561 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    The last result anyone wants is a narrow win for either side. Look at the rancour that still persists in the Brexit referendum with it's 51.9% vote for Leave.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,064 ✭✭✭Christy42


    I think it is more important to have a clear referendum and to enact what is promised. I would go as far as to suggest initial independence be mild but include the ability to gain more independence. If you see Ireland which initially remained within the commonwealth.


    For a referendum see Ireland's divorce referendum. It was run twice in quick succession and passed the 2nd time by an incredibly narrow margin (and if you see the map, many places were close to 50% but Dublin was the only place in the country that had more than 50% yes). And yet barely a word after it. Have a clear result from the referendum, enact it as promised. Don't promise 2nd votes or single markets and then pull back.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Yes, but unlike Brexit, there WILL have to be a clear, codified path out of the union involving years of negotiations. Easy to forget just how long a road post-Yes will be. It'd be impossible not to, and I've seen no evidence this independence movement is that irrational they'd wing it to the extent Brexit did.

    A narrow win might simply involve more functional concessions towards the "losing" unionist vote, I daresay the degree to which Yes might win would dictate the ... severity of independence. I just don't see the kind of acrimony at the heart of this movement at all compared with Brexit



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,864 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The most contentious topic in Ireland in the last 40 years was the abortion issue. 1983, the push for a referendum came out of nowhere and was pushed by FF as a away to get votes and into power.

    The wording was dreadful, but it was pushed from every pulpit in the land.

    Unleashing an issue was unwise in that it would bring abortion when there was no push for it. Hard cases caused the subject to be revisited three times, with looser rules each time.

    No politicians wanted to visit the subject because it was so divisive. Few even wanted it raised.

    However, the Citizen's Assembly was invented and came to the rescue. 99 represented citizens were selected to consider the subject, being informed by a series of experts of many different views. They voted on various aspects and their considerations were eventually put to the people. The vote was carried by almost the same proportion as the CA had i their vote on the matter.

    So, if Scotland wants to decide on independence, that is the methodology to follow. Expert advice, closely argued by interested citizens acting honestly for the common good.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,690 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Before the 2014 referendum, the Scottish government published a detailed white paper, setting out their policy for an independent Scotland and how they proposed it would be implemented, plus a draft interim constitution for Scotland. They couldn't obviously, guarantee that they would deliver every detail of that programme, since in the event of a successful referendum the terms of independence would have to be negotiated with Westminster, but at least there was a clear programme that they would pursue, and people voted with that knowledge. And, had the referendum passed, they could justifiably have claimed a mandate for the independence programme that they had put before the people.

    The contrast with the Brexit referendum two years later is striking. There was no programme, no plan, just an all-things-to-all-men, all-the-benefits-with-none-of-the-costs, all-options-on-the-table, we-hold-all-the-cards Brexit offered to the people. The result was that people voting to leave were voting against EU membership, but they weren't voting for anything in particular. I don't need to remind everybody of the shitshow that ensued, and is still ensuing.

    The irony is that the UK made such a massive hames of the Brexit referendum so shortly after the Scots had shown them how a referendum could and should be done. If there is another Indyref, there is zero chance that the Scots will repeat the errors of the Brexit referendum. They knew how to conduct a referendum in 2014, and the Awful Example of 2016 will just reinforce the wisdom of what they already knew.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,395 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    The Scottish white paper in 2014 was nothing, it was just aspirational stuff.

    A few weeks ago when the UK supreme court ruled out anything but a referendum by Westminster consent we were told here that it would drive on the nationalist cause.

    But it's still stuck in the mid 50s.

    Scouts are either weary of nationalist debate or either are very lukewarm towards nationalism.

    The groundswell just isn't there.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,690 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    The 2014 white paper was aspirational in the sense that the entire independence project is, necessarily, aspirational. But it offered meaningful answers to a lot of questions that arise in connection with the independence project. (Will independent Scotland be a monarchy? What currency will it use? What will its defence policy be? What kind of armed forces will it maintain? Will it join NATO? Will it host nuclear weapons? What are the tax implication of independence? How will the tax system change? How will the social security implications of independence be addressed? Etc, etc.)

    These are all aspirational questions in the sense that Scotland currently lacks the legal powers to address any of them. Some of them are also aspirational in the sense that the answers would not be in the exclusive control even of an independent Scottish government. (E.g. "will Scotland join NATO?" depends in part on the views of the existing NATO members.) Nevertheless they are real and meaningful question that not only can but would have to be addressed in the context of Scottish independence. You might like the answers posed in the White Paper or you might not, but you can't say that the questions were ignored or were waved off with Brexiter-type delusions.

    As for support for Scottish independence "still stuck in the mid-50s", there have been a grand total of two opinion polls published since the Supreme Court judgment, by different polling companies. Your rush to judgment on such scanty evidence (and to a judgment which, by an astonishing coincidence, confirms the view you have always advocated) is very telling but, in truth, it tells more about you than about support for independence. Observers less hasty to reassure themselves that they are right might reckon that the effects of the Supreme Court ruling might take a little longer to play out. The ruling itself is not a tremendous surprise; what matters now is how the Scottish government, and the independence movement more generally, respond to it and how they employ it in their campaign. I don't think we're going to know the answers to those questions until well into next year, and the effect on public opinion until after that.

    If you insist on using the two recent polls to discern a trend, well, each of the polling companies concerned shows increased support for independence relative to the last poll it conducted before the Supreme Court ruling (IPSOS/MORI 7% margin in favour of independence in last poll rises to 11%; Redfield & Wilton 3% margin against independence in last poll turns into 4% margin in favour) so maybe things are not quite so much "as you were" as you have convinced yourself.

    Me, I'll wait for more and better data.

    Post edited by Peregrinus on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,630 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    New poll out with a solid lead for Yes:


    With the don't knows excluded, it's 54% Yes, 46% No.

    Certainly seems like the momentum is with independence.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,630 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Rishi Sunak has indicated today the British government might block Scotland's new gender recognition bill. If the UK took such a step, that could prove a significant moment in the independence campaign.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,395 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    Or it might go the other way.

    From what I know about it this gender recognition bill is very divisive.

    People might look at it as a advantage to have some thing like Westminster as a "back stop".



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    It could go either way, it all depends on the messaging both from Holyrood and Westminster, and the latter needs to be careful to seem considered and respectful. Boris Johnsons "love bomb" idea wasn't entirely without merit - even if the ideas themselves had none.

    The bill might be ideologically divisive, and perhaps London seen as a check in this instance ... but what about the next time? And how often do human beings push back when someone says "you can't have that"? We don't like being told No and even if someone disagrees with the principle of the gender bill they mightn't appreciate a Tory centric Westminster telling the Scots what they can or cannot do.

    Legally the outcome might be correct but we all know there's more at play here and emotion can drive the narrative.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,285 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    The Gender debate is very divisive and the SNP seems to put all their energy into this subject to the detriment of everything else. The bill had cross party support although most people I know do not know why it is taking such a disproporionate amount of parliament time. I can see a situation that the UK govt block this bill through a section 35 order which the Scottish parliament will then go to the courts



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,064 ✭✭✭Christy42


    I mean, blocking it would take more parliamentary time. Not sure of the benefit of England showing Scotland it only pretends to give it autonomy. I could see the exact nature of the bill becoming irrelevant if Westminster go down that route.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,285 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    UK parliament could legislate the Scottish parliament out of existance but politically it will not. The only way the UK parliament can block the bill is if they think it impinges on reserved powers and issues a section 35 order (this is what is claimed as the Equalities Act is reserved). The Supreme Court will probably adjudicate


    To me, it seems a strange basket to put all your independence eggs in if indeed the current leadership of the SNP are truly interested in independence



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,864 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The independence egg is a bit of a curates egg.

    There are definite downsides to independence - just as there was with Brexit. [Of course we all now know that there are no upsides to Brexit.]

    The main upside to Scottish independence is that whatever upsides or downsides are purely up to the Scots - with no Westminster to blame. And that surely is the whole point of it. Let Scotland decide for Scotland.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,585 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    The biggest question to me to date unanswered and even unasked is the question of citizenship. Of course the SNP would insist that in an independent Scotland, it's people would still be British citizens. However I doubt that Westminster would ever go along with this, as it would mean they could vote in every federal election, same as British citizens living overseas for 15 years.

    Another big question would be on how long to transition? How long until an independent Scotland was part of the EU again? How long until an independent Scotland would be part of NATO? How long would it take for an independent Scotland to have a decent naval or air force defense, if the submarines by the Royal Navy are always scapegoated. ( of course the SNP would always maintain it would be "seamless" however I would doubt that very much. Thus the question lingers, low long does it really take? )

    The problem is also that the way the Westminster government is going, it seems that the risk for Scotland is evenly split at some point. With independence being of a similar size risk ( the kind of risks the SNP certainly won't mention) as opposed to all the risks of a dysfunctional Brexit-UK-union with all it's economic misery as a risk.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,864 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The question of citizenship is really irrelevant.

    Citizenship is open to choice by the holder. Scottish people to day are British citizens and if Scotland became independent tomorrow, they would still be British citizens.

    They would also be Scottish citizens the day after the independence. Now there might be a choice there, because some might not want Scottish citizenship, but not many would be in that camp, unless there was a definite downside to Scottish citizenship - such as liability to tax.

    Anyway, this question of citizenship would be completely covered in the settlement and very clearly determined. However, the De Souza case showed how duplicitous the UK Home Office can be in not implementing the GFA into British Nationality Law.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,585 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    It would be relevant to me, if I was affected. It would also be relevant regarding any Westminster federal election. It would also be relevant, on how fast an independent Scotland was really part of the EU ( not political SNP promises ) so people would see the advantages of Scottish citizenship with free movement as opposed to British without free movement within the EU.

    How was it in Ireland in 1921? Did everyone have a choice between British and Irish back then?

    Did the Irish vote in British federal elections after 1921?

    Also would there be a free movement between Scotland, Ireland and the rest of the UK like it always was between Ireland and the UK ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,050 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    What federal elections are you talking about ?

    Do you mean referendums ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,285 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    How can it be relevant to you if you are not affected?

    If you currently reside in Scotland and are a UK citizen, who is going to remove your UK citizenship?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,585 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    A Westminster federal election, - I think I was clear enough. British citizens are entitled to vote for a duration of 15 years living outside of the UK.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,050 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    I don't have a clue what that is. If you are talking about voting for MPs I have never heard that or any vote in the UK being called "federal" despite having taken part in a number of them.

    It would not be at all the same as an emigrant UK citizen because how exactly would a Scottish person vote post independence when they would no longer have a constituency as the Scottish ones would be gone.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,285 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    I have never heard of the Westminster election being described as a federal election, have you ever voted in one?



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,864 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The Irish in the UK vote exactly as UK citizens - they are not aliens and are treated exactly as if they were British citizens (in nearly all cases). They not only were entitled to vote in all post 1921 election, but still are. Those born in Ireland prior to 1948 were entitled to British passports if they wanted one, while Irish citizens born at anytime are allowed to vote in any election if the comply with requirement re-residence. They cannot vote for the head of state, but then no-one can.

    Anyone born in Scotland before independence would still be a British citizen (if that is what they still call England and Wales post independence) and a common travel area is almost a certainty following independence. What happens after independence depends on the terms of settlement.

    What is this 'federal election' business?



  • Advertisement
Advertisement