Scottish Independence discussion area

SharpshooterTom · 08-09-2014 03:22PM

I think 'No' will win narrowly also. I used to think it was going to be a landslide victory for No, getting up towards 70% with anything over 40% for Yes being a great result. Now around 45% is possible for Yes, meaning even if Scotland does say No its not a resounding result it once could have been and Scotland is very divided over independence. English people will be less trustworthy of them seeing so many still voting Yes and the concept of "Rule Britannia" and British patriotism in general with some question marks over it.

Mal-Adjusted · 08-09-2014 03:30PM

stevedublin wrote: »

I can see Scotland dropping out of the UK, but can't see it dropping out of the EU.
If Scotland automatically falls out of the EU upon declaring independence, they'll probably apply to join quickly enough.

If they do vote yes, it will be many months to a year (or more) before Sotland would actually become independent as various institutions will have to be disentangled/built from scratch. It's not as if the vote comes in and the SNP can just flip a swith on 19/9 and hey, presto! new country. They would most likely apply for E.U. membership in the coming weeks and have all their ducks in a row by the time Independence arrives.

Maybe an academic idea anyway as i think it'll probably be a no vote.

Paramite Pie · 08-09-2014 03:32PM

snowstorm445 wrote: »

There's an issue relating to this topic that I often wonder about.

Presuming the Scots vote yes in this referendum (although IMO they will probably end up saying no), and secedes from the UK, will it still be regarded as the UK? Will the rump state of England, NI and Wales still refer to itself as a United Kingdom? Will the overall demonym still be "British"?

The United Kingdom of Great Britain And Ireland was only created in 1801 when Ireland joined (and it's name changed when we left), prior to that the Kingdom of Great Britain was the term used to describe the older 1707 Union of Scotland & England. So if Scotland stayed and NI left, it would no longer be the United Kingdom as that term was created when Ireland joined.

The format would still be the United Kingdom of _____ & Northern Ireland. What the 'blank' would be... I cannae say. The naming dispute between Ireland and the NI/UK was never resolved, so it's likely there will be no agreed outcome.

Donkey Oaty · 08-09-2014 03:37PM

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

If they do vote yes, it will be many months to a year (or more) before Sotland would actually become independent

Alex Salmond has said he wants 24rd March 2016 to be independence day.

Exactly a week after St Patricks Day, so easy to remember if it becomes a national holiday, and he may have had a canny eye on some commercial link-ins there.

Michael D Not Higgins · 08-09-2014 03:40PM

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Alex Salmond has said he wants 24rd March 2016 to be independence day.

Exactly a week after St Patricks Day, so easy to remember if it becomes a national holiday, and he may have had a canny eye on some commercial link-ins there.

Probably a parade down the Royal Mile that'll reuse the American marching bands. Sure, half of them are playing bagpipes and wearing kilts anyway.

Jimoslimos · 08-09-2014 04:14PM

I would like to see an independent Scotland but I reckon it'll be a No vote. However, regardless of whichever way the vote goes the most disappointing element of this campaign has been the condescending manner the No camp have treated the prospect of an independent Scotland,

It takes some amount of bare-faced hypocrisy to cast aspersions on Scotland's ability to operate a currency union with the UK whilst offering eleventh hour concessions of power including economic ones.

If Scotland (or indeed any other similar sized population in the UK) aren't capable of managing themselves independently then that reflects poorly, not on Scotland, but the UK itself. The No camp should instead be questioning themselves as to why Scotland couldn't thrive independently and also why there is a sizable proportion of the population (even if it is a minority) unhappy with the current state of affairs.

In the event of a No vote I think Scotland's best chance of improving itself lies not in additional tidbits of power from Westminster but rather in developing stronger economic and political links with the North of England (Newcastle, Leeds, Manchester, Liverpool, etc). However the current (unfair) "first past the post" voting system makes this highly unlikely to happen any time soon, which suits the status quo of Tory and Labour governments.

"Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them"

westcoast66 · 08-09-2014 04:15PM

What if ourselves and NI joined Scotland? Would everyone be happy then?!

spiralism · 08-09-2014 04:50PM

Think the recent polls show the downside of negative campaigning in a referendum vote yet again..

This is strikingly similar to the first Lisbon Treaty referendum where instead of having it explained to us Biffo and his merry men instead told us about all the bad things that would happen if we didn't and that we'd be very bold not to do what we're bid. The electorate didn't exactly react well to being patronised like bold children and we weren't given any reason why it was good for us to accept it.

Likewise, the No campaign in scotland has adopted this tactic, telling Scottish voters that this bad thing and that bad thing will happen if they say Yes and they've lost massive ground. Telling an electorate voting in an independence referendum to do as they're told or else isn't exactly a very wise tactic

Muahahaha · 08-09-2014 05:04PM

spiralism wrote: »

Think the recent polls show the downside of negative campaigning in a referendum vote yet again..

This is strikingly similar to the first Lisbon Treaty referendum where instead of having it explained to us Biffo and his merry men instead told us about all the bad things that would happen if we didn't and that we'd be very bold not to do what we're bid. The electorate didn't exactly react well to being patronised like bold children and we weren't given any reason why it was good for us to accept it.

Likewise, the No campaign in scotland has adopted this tactic, telling Scottish voters that this bad thing and that bad thing will happen if they say Yes and they've lost massive ground. Telling an electorate voting in an independence referendum to do as they're told or else isn't exactly a very wise tactic

I think you've hit the nail on the head there, the Yes campaign has done nothing but scaremongering and now we're less than 10 days from the vote and the opinion polls have tightened they are now going into full blown panic mode with Gordon Brown announcing town hall meetings all over the country and this new notion that Scotland will get more power by next year if they vote against independence is just going to be seen by many Scots as last minute desperation and actually make them more likely to vote for independence now that they see how much London is panicing.

As a slightly distant observer I hope Alex Salmond carries the day and wins the referendum. It'll certainly make things interesting in Northern Ireland, where unionists see themselves as brethern of the Scots. If Scotland votes for independence many people are going to say how bizarre it is for Scotland not to be in the United Kingdom and for Northern Ireland still to be so.

I reckon Salmond will win the referendum. He has to put in some good performances between now and the 18th but he's already proven himself to be more than capable of that. The Tory/Labour/Lib Dem axis is going full out now and he's got a real dogfight on his hands. Nonetheless his campaign has momentum which is something the No campaign never had. It is very difficult to stop momentum in electoral politics, we all saw how Barack Obama came from nothing to being US President in the space of 18 months on the back of a slowly but effectively built momentum. I dont know what the feelings are like on the ground in Scotland right now but I'm sensing there is a wave of optimism for independence shining through and that many Scots are not fearful of going it alone and the more scare stores Westminister spins the more they are likely to vote Yes. If that is the case then a Yes vote that has momentum will prove to be very difficult to stop at this late stage.

LiveIsLife · 08-09-2014 05:36PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I'm not a big fan of Cameron, although he is growing on me. However, I fail to see what choice he had. The right to a referendum goes back (I believe) to the formation of the Scottish parliament and devolution.

Well Salmond has claimed the English side wouldn't let Devo Max be on the ballot paper when the referendum was proposed a couple of years ago. So they presumably just assumed a vote on independence would fail but Devo Max might pass. Which makes their current offers of more devolution look more ridiculous

A Dub in Glasgo · 08-09-2014 05:46PM

Muahahaha wrote: »

I think you've hit the nail on the head there, the Yes campaign has done nothing but scaremongering and now we're less .

You mean the No campaign?

Saadyst · 08-09-2014 06:06PM

Still find it hilarious simple-minded when someone points out potential problems and risks and it's called scaremongering. :rolleyes:

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 08-09-2014 06:09PM

Saadyst wrote: »

Still find it hilarious simple-minded when someone points out potential problems and risks and it's called scaremongering. :rolleyes:

What potential problems such as Scotland will be at risk of attack by aliens or Putin will be invading after he finishes with the Ukraine or any of the rest half arsed tactics

biko · 08-09-2014 06:10PM

There are risks and almost certainly a backlash from England but in the long run I think it's a great idea.
If it happens I can see Wales going for a similar bid at some point.

LiveIsLife · 08-09-2014 06:39PM

biko wrote: »

There are risks and almost certainly a backlash from England but in the long run I think it's a great idea.
If it happens I can see Wales going for a similar bid at some point.

Possibly but the Welsh aren't really known for their backbone, I'd say they're content enough with the status quo.

P_1 · 08-09-2014 06:45PM

Must say that there is a certain irony in Westminster proposing Home Rule given the year that's in it.

eeepaulo · 08-09-2014 07:03PM

Holyrood cost £414 000 000 + spiralling costs of maintenance

I saw someone earlier quote £200 000 000 for an entire governmental infrastructure

thats positive thinking

Gordon · 08-09-2014 07:12PM

biko wrote: »

There are risks and almost certainly a backlash from England but in the long run I think it's a great idea.
If it happens I can see Wales going for a similar bid at some point.

Wales can't, they don't have as much resources and industry to go it alone.

P_1 · 08-09-2014 07:16PM

Gordon wrote: »

Wales can't, they don't have as much resources and industry to go it alone.

Yeah I'd imagine there would be a greater chance of Cornwall going for independence than Wales.

Now could we see a London bid for independence at some stage...

Fratton Fred · 08-09-2014 07:25PM

LiveIsLife wrote: »

Well Salmond has claimed the English side wouldn't let Devo Max be on the ballot paper when the referendum was proposed a couple of years ago. So they presumably just assumed a vote on independence would fail but Devo Max might pass. Which makes their current offers of more devolution look more ridiculous

The English side?

It isn't rugby.

Iwasfrozen · 08-09-2014 07:33PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Scotland is a country, it is in a union with another country that is obviously unequal therefore a decision is to be made if Scotland would like self-determination

Scotland is a region of a country.

A Dub in Glasgo · 08-09-2014 07:39PM

Like Ireland was a region of a country?

Its Only Ray Parlour · 08-09-2014 07:39PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Scotland is a region of a country.

No, Scotland is a country. The UK is a sovereign state.

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 08-09-2014 07:41PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Scotland is a region of a country.

Oh Dear :eek:

:pac:

A Dub in Glasgo · 08-09-2014 07:45PM

LiveIsLife wrote: »

Well Salmond has claimed the English side wouldn't let Devo Max be on the ballot paper when the referendum was proposed a couple of years ago. So they presumably just assumed a vote on independence would fail but Devo Max might pass. Which makes their current offers of more devolution look more ridiculous

They (UK Government) were patting themselves on the back that they thwarted 'Salmond's consolation prize'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10224305/Dont-give-Salmond-the-consolation-prize-he-craves.html

Kermit.de.frog · 08-09-2014 08:15PM

Its Only Ray Parlour wrote: »

No, Scotland is a country. The UK is a sovereign state.

Scotland is a region of the United Kingdom as the UK is a sovereign country. That is how I see it. Same with Wales and the North.

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 08-09-2014 08:16PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Scotland is a region of the United Kingdom as the UK is a sovereign country. That is how I see it. Same with Wales and the North.

You can see it how you like but you are wrong Scotland is a country in its own right

LordSutch · 08-09-2014 08:18PM

I suspect that you're both correct.

EunanMac · 08-09-2014 08:19PM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Scotland is a region of a country.

It's the united kingdom, not untied region

Were Ireland, India, etc. etc. regions or countries before independence ?

Kermit.de.frog · 08-09-2014 08:21PM

EunanMac wrote: »

It's the united kingdom, not untied region

Was Ireland a region or a country before independence ?

Region in Ireland's case as part of UK. It's a simple fact that London is the sovereign parliament of the UK and Scotland has a regional parliament. It's a region, not a country. That could change in 10 days though.

Scottish Independence discussion area

Comments