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
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
Comments
-
BonnieSituation wrote: »Yes. The people of Berwick will have their say in a hypothetical referendum after a discussion of the hypothesis on an Irish message board.
There is no talk almost anywhere about Berwick returning to Scotland. I fail to see how you managed to get yourself in an apoplectic twist given the nature of the discussion above.
We geddit, u no want Scotland indy!
Sheesh, I only asked if they’d get a say.
Why so touchy?0 -
-
BonnieSituation wrote: »Sure you did.:rolleyes:
Berwick has been "English" since the late 15th Century. There's not really much of a clamour anywhere for the status quo to change.
I know.0 -
-
BonnieSituation wrote: »So that's that settled so; just like Berwick's status.
I wasn't the one saying it should be changed:BonnieSituation wrote: »They should return it now so. Be much easier.
you then rather spectacularly threw a tantrum when i asked a simple question:BonnieSituation wrote: »Yes. The people of Berwick will have their say in a hypothetical referendum after a discussion of the hypothesis on an Irish message board.
There is no talk almost anywhere about Berwick returning to Scotland. I fail to see how you managed to get yourself in an apoplectic twist given the nature of the discussion above.
We geddit, u no want Scotland indy!
It seems Scottish nationalists, just like ardent Brexiteers, don't like being challenged on anything. The thing I find amusing, is that the arguments for Scottish independence seem to be no different to the arguments for Brexit, with anything negatove written off as "Project fear".
if you Scots want to leave, fine. That is your choice. Personally I think England and Scotland are better together and a hard border between the two would damage both countries, but I get it, you feel somehow your Scottish identity is undermined by being in the union.0 -
Advertisement
-
I wasn't the one saying it should be changed:
you then rather spectacularly threw a tantrum when i asked a simple question:
It seems Scottish nationalists, just like ardent Brexiteers, don't like being challenged on anything. The thing I find amusing, is that the arguments for Scottish independence seem to be no different to the arguments for Brexit, with anything negatove written off as "Project fear".
if you Scots want to leave, fine. That is your choice. Personally I think England and Scotland are better together and a hard border between the two would damage both countries, but I get it, you feel somehow your Scottish identity is undermined by being in the union.
Yes. I threw a tantrum. That's exactly what it was.
I must stick emojis or :sar: tags on my obviously tongue-in-cheek statements going forward lest you end up confused.
What was the challenging you were doing old boy?
Also, "you Scots"? Jesus! Unfortunately as an Irishman living in Dublin it's unlikely that I'll have a choice in the matter.
"Personally [you] think England and Scotland are better together"; so again, you can have "feels" but heaven forbid anyone else being emotive on any topic ever again for fear of being cast aside as "Brexit-Like".
I find it flabbergasting that someone can come on here, on an Irish forum, and state that a Scot could "feel somehow [their] Scottish identity is undermined by being in the union." Are you for real? I mean, 1922 called... It would like a word with you.0 -
Most posters here are Irish or of Irish connection. I just enquired about the issue of the Hadrian Wall line v's the actual boundary. Just an idiocyncracy like Strazbourg and many others around Europe. Not sure why you conclude that Scotland is better off being governed by London.0
-
Deleted User wrote: »It's now abundantly clear that the UK is solidly behind a Government of Brexit.
No revocation; no second referendum - just a get on with Brexit vote.
I suspect the chasm between the Tory's and Labour will grow once the absurdity of Labour's position becomes clearer in the minds of voters.
Great days for pro-Brexit supporters!
Whats your skin in the game?
You've said you are Irish, so being so gleefully and extremely pro-Tory is really unusual. Coz of history obv.
Also clearly the UK staying, either via Revoke or Ref2, would be the simplest and neatest solution purely from an Irish point of view, so it seems a strange angle for you to take.
You might be pro-Brexit because of a general 'want to see the EU crumble' libertarian attitude which would be fine. Or the old 'democracy must be respected' thing, but this doesn't really tally with say your opposition to SNP/Scottish independence?
It's confusing, and I should emphasize you are under no obligation to answer any of these questions.0 -
ArmaniJeanss wrote: »Whats your skin in the game?
You've said you are Irish, so being so gleefully and extremely pro-Tory is really unusual. Coz of history obv.
Also clearly the UK staying, either via Revoke or Ref2, would be the simplest and neatest solution purely from an Irish point of view, so it seems a strange angle for you to take.
You might be pro-Brexit because of a general 'want to see the EU crumble' libertarian attitude which would be fine. Or the old 'democracy must be respected' thing, but this doesn't really tally with say your opposition to SNP/Scottish independence?
It's confusing, and I should emphasize you are under no obligation to answer any of these questions.
Just because I'm Irish does not mean I cannot take a Eurosceptic position. There are many people in Ireland, admittedly small in number compared to the UK, who hold legitimate Eurosceptic perspectives.
Left-wing economics, particularly that espoused by the current Labour Party, I find thoroughly abhorrent. As a classical liberal-type of person, I could not possibly support the Labour Party. Whilst the Tory's are not perfect and are by no means entire subscribers to "classical liberal" values, they approximate far more in that direction and so have my support.
I'm not "against Scottish independence"; I don't particularly care. It's up to the Scots to decide. But what is obnoxious is the idea that Scotland can unilterally leave the Union. As a "Union", things must be decided by Westminster. That's the way it's structured. A referendum was held 5 years ago, and they voted to Remain. We have to respect that vote without foisting upon them a second vote.
Second, I object to the idea that "independence" would exist for Scotland. It will never make any sense to me why Scottish nationalists moan and groan about how "Westminster makes the decisions" for the Scottish people, then go on to argue how that power should be transferred from Westminster to Brussels.
In other words, if it's not independence when laws are taken from the UK, it surely cannot be independence when laws are taken from Brussels.
But I have no preference either way. I just don't believe that Scotland can determine Westminster policy. That's up to the Prime Minister of the day.
Furthermore, I'm not selfish either. I would rather a no deal Brexit, even if it were harmful to Ireland - not because I'm in favour of economic damage to Ireland, but because I think respecting democracy matters far, far more.0 -
BonnieSituation wrote: »YAlso, "you Scots"? Jesus! Unfortunately as an Irishman living in Dublin it's unlikely that I'll have a choice in the matter.
so you're not Scottish and not even living in Scotland, yet you are probably the poster who gets most animated about Scottish independence?
Odd.BonnieSituation wrote: »"Personally [you] think England and Scotland are better together"; so again, you can have "feels" but heaven forbid anyone else being emotive on any topic ever again for fear of being cast aside as "Brexit-Like".
huh?
I gave my opinion on the matter. A lot of the arguments are the same, are they not?BonnieSituation wrote: »I find it flabbergasting that someone can come on here, on an Irish forum, and state that a Scot could "feel somehow [their] Scottish identity is undermined by being in the union." Are you for real? I mean, 1922 called... It would like a word with you.
what in god's name are you on about? What has this being an Irish forum got to do with something that is going on in a foreign country?0 -
Advertisement
-
so you're not Scottish and not even living in Scotland, yet you are probably the poster who gets most animated about Scottish independence?
Odd.
Are you suggesting that we don't have interests outside of our lane?
I guess it's best if you avoid this thread in that case.
I'm not a pilot but like to peruse the Aviation forum. Can I continue to do that?huh?
I gave my opinion on the matter. A lot of the arguments are the same, are they not?
If they're the same, why such criticism? You're the one who compared it to Brexit and then you made a similar supposition that I called you on!what in god's name are you on about? What has this being an Irish forum got to do with something that is going on in a foreign country?
I feel that if you don't get the allusion I was making with that comment then I guess we'll just leave it there.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »I'm not "against Scottish independence"; I don't particularly care. It's up to the Scots to decide. But what is obnoxious is the idea that Scotland can unilterally leave the Union. As a "Union", things must be decided by Westminster.
So...it's entirely up to the Scots, but it's also up to England, and Wales, and Northern Ireland too? And what if the Scots universally return SNP representatives and Westminster still says no referendum? How is that remotely fair, or right? Are they to be trapped in the Union at the whims of the English/Welsh/Northern Irish against their own wishes?
If the people of Scotland want independence badly enough to elect entirely pro-indyref representatives and Westminster still says "lolno", how do you think Scotland will react?
We should probably make divorce illegal then. And abortion. And never vote for another Dáil again.Deleted User wrote: »A referendum was held 5 years ago, and they voted to Remain. We have to respect that vote without foisting upon them a second vote.
I mean, we voted for all those things before. Unfair to have them foisted upon us again.Deleted User wrote: »Second, I object to the idea that "independence" would exist for Scotland. It will never make any sense to me why Scottish nationalists moan and groan about how "Westminster makes the decisions" for the Scottish people, then go on to argue how that power should be transferred from Westminster to Brussels.
In other words, if it's not independence when laws are taken from the UK, it surely cannot be independence when laws are taken from Brussels.
Both Unions are structured very differently, and the laws are made in very different ways. They are not remotely comparable. Due to the structure of the two Councils and the Commission (equal representation regardless of country size) Scotland would arguably have more control over laws made in Brussels than laws made in Westminster.Deleted User wrote: »But I have no preference either way. I just don't believe that Scotland can determine Westminster policy. That's up to the Prime Minister of the day.
And if the Scottish no longer want it that way? How would you reconcile that? A people who want independence can only gain it one of two ways - and if you deny them the democratic way....
Is this the same democracy that the Leavers respected by breaking the law during the referendum, unlawfully proroguing Parliament, tried to cheat their way into No Deal (multiple times), and lying to people about what Brexit would mean?Deleted User wrote: »Furthermore, I'm not selfish either. I would rather a no deal Brexit, even if it were harmful to Ireland - not because I'm in favour of economic damage to Ireland, but because I think respecting democracy matters far, far more.
That democracy?
EDIT:Deleted User wrote: »I believe almost all politicians are blatant liars, or are, at the very least, very economical with the truth.
I have "no issues with democracy being subvented by foreign money and illegal methods" according to what evidence? Otherwise, you may need to retract.
Regarding the illegal methods.
As for the foreign money and interference, the UK Government is withholding the report into that so we cannot see what's in it until after the election. But there's some indications that their social media campaigns had an effect.0 -
BonnieSituation wrote: »Are you suggesting that we don't have interests outside of our lane?
I guess it's best if you avoid this thread in that case.
I'm not a pilot but like to peruse the Aviation forum. Can I continue to do that?
when you say interests,, do you mean that you find something interesting, or do you mean that it is in Ireland's interests for Scotland to become independent? When you say "Unfortunately as an Irishman living in Dublin it's unlikely that I'll have a choice in the matter." it gives the impression that believe it is the latter.
In which case, why is it in Ireland's best interests what happens in a foreign country?BonnieSituation wrote: »If they're the same, why such criticism? You're the one who compared it to Brexit and then you made a similar supposition that I called you on!
taking back control seems to be the common theme of both, is it not?BonnieSituation wrote: »I feel that if you don't get the allusion I was making with that comment then I guess we'll just leave it there.
No, I really don't. it is 2019 and we are talking about Scotland becoming independent from the UK. What 1922 and Ireland has to do with it is somewhat baffling to be honest.
Please explain.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »
I'm not "against Scottish independence"; I don't particularly care. It's up to the Scots to decide. But what is obnoxious is the idea that Scotland can unilterally leave the Union. As a "Union", things must be decided by Westminster. That's the way it's structured. A referendum was held 5 years ago, and they voted to Remain. We have to respect that vote without foisting upon them a second vote.
Second, I object to the idea that "independence" would exist for Scotland. It will never make any sense to me why Scottish nationalists moan and groan about how "Westminster makes the decisions" for the Scottish people, then go on to argue how that power should be transferred from Westminster to Brussels.
What?- Scotland and England (inc Wales) created the United Kingdom by passing laws in their respective parliaments that combined the parliaments and that combined parliament is in London.
Why do you think Scotland should not be allowed to decide to dissolve this arrangement?0 -
-
A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »Why do you think they should get a say?
The people of North Berwick will get a say
Don't start him off again.
It's been quite an afternoon "having tantrums".0 -
do the people of Berwick not get a say in this?
A newspaper poll was run a couple of years ago in Newcastle. Of the respondents, 55% said they would prefer "to run away with the neighbour"
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/thousands-call-north-england-become-9252787
While i do not for a minute believe it would happen, many of the comments are very interesting.0 -
A newspaper poll was run a couple of years ago in Newcastle. Of the respondents, 55% said they would prefer "to run away with the neighbour"
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/thousands-call-north-england-become-9252787
While i do not for a minute believe it would happen, many of the comments are very interesting.
Would that be in or out of the EU?0 -
A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »Why do you think they should get a say?
The people of North Berwick will get a say
why do I think Berwick should be given a say in switching from England to Scotland?
that's a tough one :rolleyes:BonnieSituation wrote: »Don't start him off again.
It's been quite an afternoon "having tantrums".
when you get a minute, could you maybe answer the questions I posted?0 -
Would that be in or out of the EU?
From the article, some of the comments were
The deliberations in Westminster are becoming increasingly irrelevant to the north of England. The northern cities feel far greater affinity with their Scottish counterparts such as Glasgow and Edinburgh than with the ideologies of the London-centric south.
The needs and challenges of the north cannot be understood by the endless parade of old Etonions lining the frontbenches of the House of Commons.
The north of England should join the newly independent Scotland and regain control over its own destiny.
I live in Newcastle and feel we are far more connected and cared about by Scotland than by London.”
So three questions for you -
- Which part of the EU caused these feelings ?
- How will leaving the EU address them?
- If leaving the EU does not address them, who will the right wing press blame then?0 -
Advertisement
-
From the article, some of the comments were
The deliberations in Westminster are becoming increasingly irrelevant to the north of England. The northern cities feel far greater affinity with their Scottish counterparts such as Glasgow and Edinburgh than with the ideologies of the London-centric south.
The needs and challenges of the north cannot be understood by the endless parade of old Etonions lining the frontbenches of the House of Commons.
The north of England should join the newly independent Scotland and regain control over its own destiny.
I live in Newcastle and feel we are far more connected and cared about by Scotland than by London.”
So three questions for you -
- Which part of the EU caused these feelings ?
- How will leaving the EU address them?
- If leaving the EU does not address them, who will the right wing press blame then?
if you would like to believe a local newspaper poll and 53,000 votes from an area that has a population twice that of Ireland fine, but I'll humour you for now.
The area you mention voted, quite convincingly, to leave the european union. If this new utopia came in to being, it would apparently be anti eu, hence why I asked the question.
Your questions had nothing to do with my post, but I guess that is the price of questioning the cult of scottish independence, so i will answer them as best I can.
I don't know, I don't live in the north of England, why don't you ask them?
I don't know, I am not advocating leaving the european union
I don't know, I don't read the right wing, or any of the tabloids to be honest
Now let me ask you a question, when Scotland frees itself from the shackles of Westminster and takes back control, who will the Scottish Nationalists blame for all their problems?0 -
if you would like to believe a local newspaper poll and 53,000 votes from an area that has a population twice that of Ireland fine, but I'll humour you for now.
The area you mention voted, quite convincingly, to leave the european union. If this new utopia came in to being, it would apparently be anti eu, hence why I asked the question.
Your questions had nothing to do with my post, but I guess that is the price of questioning the cult of scottish independence, so i will answer them as best I can.
I don't know, I don't live in the north of England, why don't you ask them?
I don't know, I am not advocating leaving the european union
I don't know, I don't read the right wing, or any of the tabloids to be honest
Now let me ask you a question, when Scotland frees itself from the shackles of Westminster and takes back control, who will the Scottish Nationalists blame for all their problems?
Ok so you make statements but when questioned about them - the response is I don't know. So the reason I asked is that from my experience, some of the EU referendum votes were anti-establishment (as much Westminster as Brussels - if not more). So that is why i asked - but this seems to have gone whoosh.
So in terms of my views on independence - I do not think Scotland would be a utopia after independence. I have haven't joined any cult recently.
I am certain Scotland will be a poorer country for a while. It believe it will take maybe 10 years to get to where things are now but in the longer term, it will be richer. That is a price I believe is worth paying for the future generations and yes I do have skin in this particular game.
If the Scots go independent then we have no-one to blame for the problems which is as it should be.0 -
Ok so you make statements but when questioned about them - the response is I don't know. So the reason I asked is that from my experience, some of the EU referendum votes were anti-establishment (as much Westminster as Brussels - if not more). So that is why i asked - but this seems to have gone whoosh.
I didn't make a statement, I asked a question and followed it up by presenting a fact, that the majority of people in the region you highlighted voted to leave the european union.
The Brexit vote seems to have been a number of things, depending on what agenda people want to push. racism, take back control, protest, blatant English Nationalism and a desire to return to the days of empire seems to be the favourite of certain posters on here, that doesn't really fit in with the narrative that 55% of the people north of Stoke want to become part of Scotland though.So in terms of my views on independence - I do not think Scotland would be a utopia after independence. I have haven't joined any cult recently.
I am certain Scotland will be a poorer country for a while. It believe it will take maybe 10 years to get to where things are now but in the longer term, it will be richer. That is a price I believe is worth paying for the future generations and yes I do have skin in this particular game.
If the Scots go independent then we have no-one to blame for the problems which is as it should be.
swap independence with Brexit and Scotland with Britain and you sound very much like a Jacob Rees Mogg.0 -
when you get a minute, could you maybe answer the questions I posted?
Could you honestly not figure out what I was getting at by mentioning "an Irish forum" and "1922" in relation to this:Aegir wrote:...you feel somehow your Scottish identity is undermined by being in the union...
Seriously?
On a Scottish independence thread you couldn't work that out?0 -
I didn't make a statement, I asked a question and followed it up by presenting a fact, that the majority of people in the region you highlighted voted to leave the european union.
The Brexit vote seems to have been a number of things, depending on what agenda people want to push. racism, take back control, protest, blatant English Nationalism and a desire to return to the days of empire seems to be the favourite of certain posters on here, that doesn't really fit in with the narrative that 55% of the people north of Stoke want to become part of Scotland though.
swap independence with Brexit and Scotland with Britain and you sound very much like a Jacob Rees Mogg.
Given you feel so strongly about it yourself, why do you think Scotland SHOULD NOT be independent?0 -
BonnieSituation wrote: »Could you honestly not figure out what I was getting at by mentioning "an Irish forum" and "1922" in relation to this:
Seriously?
On a Scottish independence thread you couldn't work that out?
so still avoiding the questions then :rolleyes:0 -
so still avoiding the questions then :rolleyes:
You don't seem to be able to do nuance. What's the point in engaging with someone like that?
I mean, I'm sure it wasn't so cryptic was it? Maybe I'm too much of a smart-arse and should speak in a manner more becoming of your abilities.
---
Go on reiterate your questions so you can get your end away.
And don't forget you have been posed one yourself.0 -
BonnieSituation wrote: »Given you feel so strongly about it yourself, why do you think Scotland SHOULD NOT be independent?
which part was difficult to read?if you Scots want to leave, fine. That is your choice. Personally I think England and Scotland are better together and a hard border between the two would damage both countries, but I get it, you feel somehow your Scottish identity is undermined by being in the union.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
BonnieSituation wrote: »You don't seem to be able to do nuance. What's the point in engaging with someone like that?
I mean, I'm sure it wasn't so cryptic was it? Maybe I'm too much of a smart-arse and should speak in a manner more becoming of your abilities.
I get that you are somehow trying to link Scottish independence to Irish independence, but I am interested to know why you think that is?BonnieSituation wrote: »Go on reiterate your questions so you can get your end away.
Let's just do the one, shall we?
when you say interests, do you mean that you find something interesting, or do you mean that it is in Ireland's interests for Scotland to become independent? When you say "Unfortunately as an Irishman living in Dublin it's unlikely that I'll have a choice in the matter." it gives the impression that believe it is the latter.
In which case, why is it in Ireland's best interests what happens in a foreign country?0 -
BonnieSituation wrote: »"damage both countries"
How would this manifest?
Is that a serious question?
They have been part of a union for over 300 years and have shared interests socially, politically, militarily and financially. Seperating the two, as we have seen with Brexit, would involve enormous upheaval and costs, for what are in reality little or no benefit.0 -
So the USA should be still under the control of London by your logic.
England should still have all it s colonies and the Empire should never have been dismantled.0 -
I get that you are somehow trying to link Scottish independence to Irish independence, but I am interested to know why you think that is?
The link I was making has more to do with your statement about being undermined in the Union. I mean, our independence was completely predicated on being undermined (at the very least) in the Union, but you don't think that's a valid reason for any Scot to want to leave the UK.
I think that's rather bat****, given our own history.
That's the link. It was very obvious, you admitted it yourself, but as is your wont, you'd rather be obtuse about it.Let's just do the one, shall we?
when you say interests, do you mean that you find something interesting, or do you mean that it is in Ireland's interests for Scotland to become independent? When you say "Unfortunately as an Irishman living in Dublin it's unlikely that I'll have a choice in the matter." it gives the impression that believe it is the latter.
In which case, why is it in Ireland's best interests what happens in a foreign country?
It can be both.
But, my interest is first and foremost I would like to see Scotland independent from the rUK.
Self-determination has such a psychological value that is immeasurable. (Please don't try and compare it to "Brexit" you know it's not the same thing and it would show you're not remotely interested in the question or the answer)
During the 1950s in this dank Dev-dominated kip would anybody have reversed the decision of 1921? Not on your nelly.
Secondly to that I believe it would be a catalyst for a UI (well, I believed it would have been moreso pre-Brexit vote, but that's clearly taking centre stage in the UI debate for now).
---
Scotland is economically and socially bring dragged back by its membership of the UK. That's very clear. The UK is England+2 and a bit. It's not a normal State.0 -
Is that a serious question?
They have been part of a union for over 300 years and have shared interests socially, politically, militarily and financially. Seperating the two, as we have seen with Brexit, would involve enormous upheaval and costs, for what are in reality little or no benefit.
Yes it is a serious question.
Separating the two would be nothing like Brexit because in the event that it would occur, it would be occuring between two parties that wish for it to happen on the back of a popular vote in Scotland.
Before the vote the questions would be answered and certain fears allayed (we can't help that the Vow and the scaremongering spooked some pensioners in 2014), so it woudl be nothing like what Brexit is. You know this. They're not comparable in how they would be handled.
Here's the White Paper for the referendum in 2014:
https://www2.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf
Nothing like that was produced befor Brexit outlining the benefits or reasons.
How come we were able to leave the UK given how interwined we were since the 12th century 'til the Act of Union in 1801 and subsequently through various Home Rule Bills and rebellions?
How can you not see the benefit?
Scotland never gets the government it votes for. It's more Social democratic and Civically Nationalist than England.0 -
Water John wrote: »So the USA should be still under the control of London by your logic.
England should still have all it s colonies and the Empire should never have been dismantled.
Interesting logic and no, I don’t think that at all.
Also interesting that you refer to English colonies, when the reality is the Scottish were every bit as colonial as the English, arguably more so. You have read about the Darian scheme I take it.
Using your logic though, would also mean the break up of pretty much every country in Europe, including what is now Scotland, when they return the Shetland, Orkney and Western Isles to Norway, along with all those lively oil fields.0 -
Advertisement
-
BonnieSituation wrote: »It can be both.
But, my interest is first and foremost I would like to see Scotland independent from the rUK.
Self-determination has such a psychological value that is immeasurable. (Please don't try and compare it to "Brexit" you know it's not the same thing and it would show you're not remotely interested in the question or the answer)
Self determination, but self determination that goes the way you'd like it to and if possible, you'd like to give it a helping hand?
And self determination by who, the Scots, or the people that live in Scotland? surely the sensible thing to do would be for it to be something for only the Scots to determine and any Scot regardless of where they live?BonnieSituation wrote: »During the 1950s in this dank Dev-dominated kip would anybody have reversed the decision of 1921? Not on your nelly.
even the hundreds of thousands who had to move to the UK? Great independence that.BonnieSituation wrote: »Secondly to that I believe it would be a catalyst for a UI (well, I believed it would have been moreso pre-Brexit vote, but that's clearly taking centre stage in the UI debate for now).
Now we are getting to the crux of the matter. It isn't really about any desire for self determination for the Scottish, it is more about self interest.BonnieSituation wrote: »Scotland is economically and socially bring dragged back by its membership of the UK. That's very clear. The UK is England+2 and a bit. It's not a normal State.
can you provide some evidence for that, or maybe a few examples?0 -
swap independence with Brexit and Scotland with Britain and you sound very much like a Jacob Rees Mogg.
Yes I suppose you could see it that way but we both know (or at least should) that the situations are different.
If you believe them to be the same, can you please provide some stunning insight as to why.0 -
one was produced very shortly after and before the letter was issued to Brussels. It wasn't too dissimilar and contained lots of "We will do this and this and this" but not much "This is how we will do it".BonnieSituation wrote: »Yes it is a serious question.
Separating the two would be nothing like Brexit because in the event that it would occur, it would be occuring between two parties that wish for it to happen on the back of a popular vote in Scotland.
Before the vote the questions would be answered and certain fears allayed (we can't help that the Vow and the scaremongering spooked some pensioners in 2014), so it woudl be nothing like what Brexit is. You know this. They're not comparable in how they would be handled.
Here's the White Paper for the referendum in 2014:
https://www2.gov.scot/resource/0043/00439021.pdf
Nothing like that was produced befor Brexit outlining the benefits or reasons.
Both white papers are also pretty dependent on the other guys agreeing with everything you say as well.BonnieSituation wrote: »How come we were able to leave the UK given how interwined we were since the 12th century 'til the Act of Union in 1801 and subsequently through various Home Rule Bills and rebellions?
How can you not see the benefit?BonnieSituation wrote: »Scotland never gets the government it votes for. It's more Social democratic and Civically Nationalist than England.
apart from 1997, 2002, 2005......0 -
Yes I suppose you could see it that way but we both know (or at least should) that the situations are different.
If you believe them to be the same, can you please provide some stunning insight as to why.
both seem to be on the basis that there is some form of democracy deficit from being in a larger union and leaving said union will bring great riches to all.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19528
Aegir:
can you provide some evidence for that, or maybe a few examples?Originally Posted by BonnieSituation
Scotland is economically and socially bring dragged back by its membership of the UK. That's very clear. The UK is England+2 and a bit. It's not a normal State.
I think if you investigate the 'West Lothian Question'
The English MPs consider Scottish MPs should not be allowed to vote on purely English matters because they have a devolved assembly for such matters that only apply to Scotland.
Now this is an interesting point of view - since if there was an assembly for England, it would not be those MPs who would be part of it. In other words, the English MPs consider themselves above the Scottish MPs.
Now if I were a Scottish MP, I would take exception to that POV. And they do. Add in the latest behaviour of Tory MPs to flee the chamber once a Scottish MP stands to talk in the HoC, and I would be out campaigning for IndyRef2.
Scotland has no place in the Tory controlled Parliament in Westminster.0 -
Advertisement
-
Sam Russell wrote: »I think if you investigate the 'West Lothian Question'
The English MPs consider Scottish MPs should not be allowed to vote on purely English matters because they have a devolved assembly for such matters that only apply to Scotland.
Now this is an interesting point of view - since if there was an assembly for England, it would not be those MPs who would be part of it. In other words, the English MPs consider themselves above the Scottish MPs.
Now if I were a Scottish MP, I would take exception to that POV.
by Scottish MPs, you mean MPs with a seat in Scotland, not Scottish MPs who have a constituency in England I presume.
So you see there being no parliament for England and MPs from Scotland (who are all Scottish) being able to vote on matters that only affect England as being an indication of the democracy deficit and how England is dragging down Scotland?
That is Alastair Campbell (ooh look, another Scotsman) level spin skills right there.0 -
-
Join Date:Posts: 19528
by Scottish MPs, you mean MPs with a seat in Scotland, not Scottish MPs who have a constituency in England I presume.
So you see there being no parliament for England and MPs from Scotland (who are all Scottish) being able to vote on matters that only affect England as being an indication of the democracy deficit and how England is dragging down Scotland?
That is Alastair Campbell (ooh look, another Scotsman) level spin skills right there.
I do not know whether you are being deliberately disingenuous or simply trying to pretend to not understand my point.
1: A Scottish MP is obviously an MP for a Scottish seat. The MP may or may not be Scottish - it is not a requirement either way.
2: As England does not have a regional parliament, some matters are devolved to the Scottish Assembly are therefore not handled by the Parliament in Westminster. However, those equivalent matters relating to England are.
3: English MPs (those sitting in an English seat) consider that only English MPs should decide such matters. This obviously implies that they are a higher form of life that Scottish MPs.
The matter has never been resolved, but it is a matter of great concern to English Nationalist MPs - mainly Tories.0 -
And is it your view that there is a democratic deficit in both unions?
No, I don't. I do believe an English parliament would have helped to avoid Brexit though.Sam Russell wrote: »I do not know whether you are being deliberately disingenuous or simply trying to pretend to not understand my point.
1: A Scottish MP is obviously an MP for a Scottish seat. The MP may or may not be Scottish - it is not a requirement either way.
No, but I'm pretty sure every MP in Scotland is actually Scottish, whereas there are a number of Scottish MPs representing seats in England.Sam Russell wrote: »2: As England does not have a regional parliament, some matters are devolved to the Scottish Assembly are therefore not handled by the Parliament in Westminster. However, those equivalent matters relating to England are.
yes, so it sounds as though the Scottish have a good level of self determination there.Sam Russell wrote: »3: English MPs (those sitting in an English seat) consider that only English MPs should decide such matters. This obviously implies that they are a higher form of life that Scottish MPs.
That is nothing short of bizarre, if not comical.
Surely a Scottish MP who think they have the right to vote on matters that only affect the English, or worse still, supports legislation that they know their own party would not support in Scotland, considers themselves superior?Sam Russell wrote: »The matter has never been resolved, but it is a matter of great concern to English Nationalist MPs - mainly Tories.
It isn't really though, is it? but why shouldn't it be? why shouldn't the English have the same rights and representation as the Scots do? Why would Scottish, (or Northern Irish or Welsh for that matter) MPs want to vote on matters that they do not affect their constituents?0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19528
No, I don't. I do believe an English parliament would have helped to avoid Brexit though.
No, but I'm pretty sure every MP in Scotland is actually Scottish, whereas there are a number of Scottish MPs representing seats in England.
yes, so it sounds as though the Scottish have a good level of self determination there.
That is nothing short of bizarre, if not comical.
Surely a Scottish MP who think they have the right to vote on matters that only affect the English, or worse still, supports legislation that they know their own party would not support in Scotland, considers themselves superior?
It isn't really though, is it? but why shouldn't it be? why shouldn't the English have the same rights and representation as the Scots do? Why would Scottish, (or Northern Irish or Welsh for that matter) MPs want to vote on matters that they do not affect their constituents?
There are issues that affect, say Gibraltar. Under your scheme no MP could vote on those.
The English Assembly could be set up on the same basis as the Scottish one, but why has it not been set up?
If such an assembly was set up, the Westminster MPs would not be involved with it. See, English MPs are superior to their Scottish equivalents.
Look at the English attitude to the Scottish Inner Court decision to find the PM had lied misled to the Queen. Outrageous.0 -
surely if an issue only affected Gibraltar, it would be handled by the Gibraltar Parliament, would it not?Sam Russell wrote: »There are issues that affect, say Gibraltar. Under your scheme no MP could vote on those.
good question, I think it should be and that the reason it hasn't is because Westminster spends too much time pandering to the Scottish, Irish and Welsh and neglects England, hence why i think an English parliament would have prevented Brexit.Sam Russell wrote: »The English Assembly could be set up on the same basis as the Scottish one, but why has it not been set up?Sam Russell wrote: »If such an assembly was set up, the Westminster MPs would not be involved with it. See, English MPs are superior to their Scottish equivalents.
this post should be recorded as one of the most bizarre leaps of logic ever to appear on boards.Sam Russell wrote: »Look at the English attitude to the Scottish Inner Court decision to find the PM had lied misled to the Queen. Outrageous.
err, the Scottish court and the English high court came to conflicting decisions, so the case was heard in the supreme court, which agreed with the Scottish court, did it not?
where's the problem here?0 -
-
Ok I am intrigued, can you tell me how you see an English parliament working within the confines of the UK in particular what that means for the UK parliament.
Not too dissimilar to the Scottish one. Devolved powers to manage things like education, NHS etc and ministers with special responsibilities for regions.
I would move it out if London as well, to somewhere like Nottingham.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19528
err, the Scottish court and the English high court came to conflicting decisions, so the case was heard in the supreme court, which agreed with the Scottish court, did it not?
where's the problem here?
No the English court came to the decision - 'Nothing to see here'. The Scottish court came to the conclusion that there was a need to hear the evidence, and having heard it, decided the Prorogue was unlawful on the grounds that HM the Q had been misled, in fact, grossly misled - which is an astonishing decision.
The case had to go to the Supreme Court whatever happened.
The only conflict was the English court decided it did not have jurisdiction, while the Scottish court did have jurisdiction. Having considered the evidence, they then came to a judgement. They could have decided differently.
My comment was on the reaction of BJ and No. 10, and many Tories, to the verdict, and the belief they espoused that it was a gross overstepping of their powers, Westminster was in England and not subject to Scottish law, etc. etc.
Most honest politicians would have resigned on the spot.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 19528
Not too dissimilar to the Scottish one. Devolved powers to manage things like education, NHS etc and ministers with special responsibilities for regions.
I would move it out if London as well, to somewhere like Nottingham.
Why Nottingham? Why not Colchester, or Chichester, or even Southampton?
It would have to move to Manchester, a major University City in Northern England. The BBC moved there, so it must be a good place.0 -
Advertisement
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement