Scottish Independence

Do you support Scotland's independence?

  • Yes

    Votes: 16 45.7%

  • No

    Votes: 10 28.6%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 5 14.3%

  • Don't care

    Votes: 4 11.4%
  • Total voters
    35
Rage Racer
Ha-ha :lol: I thought it's only possible in Russia:
_Xfvj_QB56E.jpg
Click to expand...

Another bit of silliness from America, Donald Trump weighed in via Twitter stating that the Yes vote lost due to support for wind farms.

Warning, this link presents some very funny material which some may find offensive due to language. Or due to thinking that Donald Trump's utterings should be respected.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/09/...-scotland-vote-and-scotland-weighs-in-on-him/
 
A couple of points where I would take issue with you, Famine

Famine
It seems to have got exactly where it needed to get...

One of Cameron's campaign pledges in 2010 was to solve "The West Lothian Question". This can broadly be expressed as "Why can a Scottish MP vote on a matter that will affect only English constituents, while an English MP cannot vote on a matter that will only affect Scottish constituents?"* - but it's a little more complex than that. In effect Scottish MPs can vote in Parliament in favour of bills for all of the UK knowing that Scottish MSPs (often, but not always, the same person as the Scottish MP) can reject the bill, resulting in consequences for English constituents but not the Scottish MP's own constituents**.

the English mp's vote on English issues seems like common sense and indeed, SNP MP's already refrain from voting on England-only issues. However it does get a little more complicated as it is not only Scotland that has some powers devolved - so do Wales northern Ireland & London, so it would be a bit complicated working out who votes on what. On top of that you could have a position where one party has a majority in England while another has the majority in the UK. I have no objection to the principle, if they can find a way to make it work.

You are incorrect to state that some MSP's are also MP's. There have been a very few instances of this but not since 2011
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefingsAndFactsheets/MSPs_with_Dual_Mandates_S4.pdf
There were moves to make it illegal - I am not sure if they ever came to pass.

The way you describe the legislative process is also misleading - it is not a case of the Scottish Parliament rejecting Westminster Bills - if these bills cover an area devolved to Holyrood they simply don't apply to Scotland. Tuition fees is a good example. When Westminster decided to introduce tuition fees this had no effect in Scotland as education is a devolved area.

Generally speaking, the Conservatives who have little to no presence in Scotland, don't like it while Labour, who do and who can rely on socialist support from the SNP at the UK Parliament like it just fine.


Salmond has been barking on about Scottish independence for decades, getting louder as he rose through the ranks - until he hit First Minister in 2007 where he could have done something about it but just kept making noises. It would seem that Cameron, knowing that Scottish support for independence has never been over a third (mainly in the M8 corridor) and knowing that the independence campaign basically rested on Saltire-waving, took a risk to call Salmond on it and offered him the referendum.

A couple of points here: yes Salmond has been "barking on" about Scottish Independence for decades: that is hardly surprising as that is the reason the SNP was founded - it would indeed e bizarre if he wasn't. You rightly state he became first minister in 2007 but 2 things prevented him doing anything about it: 1: he was leading a minority government & 2: the Scottish Parliament does not have the power to hold a referendum - that falls under Westminster's control.

The flag-waving and English-hating nature of the campaign has annoyed middle England. A lot.

Sorry for waving our flag & sorry if that offended you but "English-hating?". I heard none of that at all. I will not deny that you will find a few nutters on the internet and I am well aware that some reporting in the UK press would encourage this notion. I remember the Daily Telegraph printed some story about the English team at the Commonwealth Games being given advice on how to deal with the expected hostile reaction at the opening ceremony- they were cheered to the rafters. Trust me, Famine, our gripe is with Westminster not with the English either individually or as a Nation.

The question of why Scotland gets to vote in English affairs has come up during the process and made it current - suiting Cameron's agenda. It was inevitable Salmond would resign after literally pinning his flag to a failed independence vote and his resignation puts Scottish politics into a bit of disarray - suiting Cameron's agenda. Now he can make good on his election pledge to solve the West Lothian Question without interference from SNP - he might even be able to make good with a "well, only Scots could vote" argument to let only English MPs vote to solve it, and without Scotland his majority is huge (even more without Wales) - the Lib Dems could vote against it and it wouldn't matter a jot.

The failure of the Yes campaign hasn't really put Scottish independence or devolution back much at all - it'll still happen because nearly half of people voted for it and, with a better plan in future with questions like currency, borders, oil, Trident and the EU answered, it'll be the better for it.

I think a lot depends on how Westminster deliver on their "vow" to Scotland - if they keep their word (& their are hints already that the pre-referendum unity is under some strain) Independence may disappear for a generation. A lot depends too on what the SNP does post Salmond - in my opinion Nicola Sturgeon will be a capable leader but how united she can keep her party remains to be seen. The other thing that will affect the future is to what extent the people remain engaged in the political process. There are signs that there may be a lasting change but it is too early to be sure. the SNP, Green party & Scottish Socialist party are all reporting a significant number of new members since the referendum result (5000, 2000, 500+in the last 48 hours). My twitface feeds certainly suggest that loads of people are engaged in a debate as to where we go from here. Interesting times.

What it has done is provide a spot of panem et circenses for Cameron. No wonder he called Salmond on it.


He's not as stupid as he looks is Dave.

Cameron is the real winner out of all this - I'm not saying he was personally responsible for the victory (Scottish Labour did that mainly) - but he is the main beneficiary & Scottish Labour with close to 40% of their supporters defying them to vote yes may yet rue the day they stood shoulder to shoulder with Dave & George. Being pals with Tories is not a big vote winner in Scotland.


*Named because the two example MPs were for Blackburn in Lancashire (England) and Blackburn in West Lothian (Scotland).
**In effect it's like the representatives for Arizona helping to pass a federal bill and then rejecting it at State level.
Click to expand...
 
I thought of an excellent slogan for Scotland's "Arab Spring", maybe a little late but here goes;

"Occupy-the-noo!".

If that doesn't spur the Scots to seize independence from their West-masters then nothing will, for a number of reasons.
 
21st Century Scots stared into the face of dangerous freedoms and independence, and safely chose something else. Their Queen purred with satisfaction.
 
While it is true that they, as quoted in the article, "never give up on the money they are owed" it saddens me that the inverse is sadly not as true. It's far easier to take tax money than to give it back.
 
I've taken the liberty of renaming this thread to just 'Scottish Independence' (formerly 'Scottish Independence referendum 2014') since, as anyone who is following British politics is no doubt aware, the issue of Scottish independence is not yet resolved, despite what may have been said in the wake of the 2014 referendum result.

In the wake of the somewhat unexpected 'Brexit' result (which saw the UK as a whole vote to leave the EU) the pro-European (and pro-UK independence) Scottish government are making louder and louder rumblings about holding a second Scottish independence referendum, supposedly in the name of 'protecting Scotland's place in Europe'.

-

It is, however, a tad ironic that the (very much) pro-EU SNP are now using similar rhetoric to the (anti-EU) Leave campaign, arguing that Scottish independence will hand back 'control' to the Scottish people, despite the fact that the SNP wish for Scotland to either retain EU membership (which will not happen) or to rejoin the EU as quickly as possible. In other words, the SNP wish to 'take back control' from Westminster before handing it over to Brussels... I've always thought that this is a strange position to adopt, but there you go.

I voted against Scottish independence in 2014, and against leaving the EU in 2016.. I think Scotland is/will be better off in the UK, and that the UK is better off in the EU. Sadly, the latter is now off the table, and, so the argument goes, it ought to stand to reason that Scotland would now be better off leaving the UK and becoming a member of the EU in its own right... unfortunately I disagree, even though I was/am pro-EU. The reason is that an independent Scotland will not simply inherit the current UK 'relationship' with the EU - it will need to be negotiated from scratch, and will include joining the Euro...

In a situation where many Scots are dismayed at the prospect of leaving the EU and the potential barriers to trade and travel that this may well bring, it seems strange to me that the SNP are appealing to those who are dismayed by that prospect (e.g. the >60% of Scots who voted to stay in the EU) by advocating that Scotland does exactly the same thing with the UK, where Scots will not only face the prospect of being out of Europe, but also having to trade with our biggest trading partner (England) in a different currency and over a hard border...
 
Holdenhsvgtsr
It was also ironic is that the remain group said to vote to remain in the uk if we wanted to stay in the eu....
Click to expand...
It is ironic, but it was also true at the time.

Even more ironically, if Scotland had voted for independence in 2014, Scotland would already be out of the EU!
 
... and would never get back in, as far as I can tell from what's happening in Spain. Unlike what the brexit liars induced people to wrongly believe with the "Turkey will enter the EU and we'll be all doomed" kind of lines, unanimity is needed for new members to be admitted and Spain will never allow that kind of Pandora's box to be opened.
 
Spain would have block Scotland from entering the EU? How about now, will they block Scotland and Ireland if the both vote to leave the UK and try to rejoin the EU?
 
Rallywagon
Spain would have block Scotland from entering the EU? How about now, will they block Scotland and Ireland if the both vote to leave the UK and try to rejoin the EU?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Although Northern Ireland and Scotland are very different situations... while both voted to remain in the EU, there's no chance of NI 'voting to leave the UK' - indeed, the whole 'Northern Ireland being a part of the UK' thing has practically been a civil war for decades and is (in stark contrast to the Scottish independence movement) a very touchy subject and has cost thousands of lives. Fortunately, Scotland (despite passionate feelings on both sides of the debate) has (until now anyway) avoided the strife and violence of the 'Troubles' that have come to define the situation in Northern Ireland.

The UK leaving the EU poses a serious headache in Ireland in general though, since NI will be leaving the EU (despite voting in favour of remaining) while Ireland (Eire/the south of Ireland) is independent of the UK and will remain a member of the EU in its own right. That means that there will be a EU/non-EU border in Ireland which currently doesn't exist - as if the political situation in Ireland wasn't already enough of a clustershambles.
 
Touring Mars
Yes.

Although Northern Ireland and Scotland are very different situations... while both voted to remain in the EU, there's no chance of NI 'voting to leave the UK' - indeed, the whole 'Northern Ireland being a part of the UK' thing has practically been a civil war for decades and is (in stark contrast to the Scottish independence movement) a very touchy subject and has cost thousands of lives. Fortunately, Scotland (despite passionate feelings on both sides of the debate) has (until now anyway) avoided the strife and violence of the 'Troubles' that have come to define the situation in Northern Ireland.

The UK leaving the EU poses a serious headache in Ireland in general though, since NI will be leaving the EU (despite voting in favour of remaining) while Ireland (Eire/the south of Ireland) is independent of the UK and will remain a member of the EU in its own right. That means that there will be a EU/non-EU border in Ireland which currently doesn't exist - as if the political situation in Ireland wasn't already enough of a clustershambles.
Click to expand...
I must admit, I didn't realize that there was such a vehement spilt in Ireland. The stereotypes we get in the states are that of people like Ronnie Drew and Luke Kelly. Vocal strong independence Irish types. While I didn't think that was attributable to all, I didn't think it was something so divisive either.
 
Time to revive this thread... (sadly)

There are reports today that the SNP may be on the verge of ditching one of their flagship policies, that is for an independent Scotland to stay in/join the EU. This claim has already been dismissed by SNP supporters online, as well as Alex Salmond, but I am inclined to believe that there is a strong chance of this turning out to be true.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/snp-may-ditch-principle-of-full-eu-membership-gfz8n9ztj

I suspect that the sticking point is (or will be) the Euro. Until now, EU membership for Scots has not involved signing up to the Euro - but if an independent Scotland wishes to stay in/re-join the EU, it will (sooner or later) have to adopt the Euro. The SNP know, however, that this is universally unpopular in Scotland, and so they have a major problem.

The SNP are using the Brexit vote to justify calling a second independence referendum on the basis that 2/3rd of Scots voted to remain in the EU (but the UK as a whole voted to leave), but they also must now realise that they won't win a vote on it when people realise that it will mean accepting the Euro. The answer? A Norway-style deal with the EU that falls short of full EU membership but retains access to the European single market and allows Scotland to adopt its own currency. The problem with that, however, is that it completely undermines the supposed reason for calling another independence referendum (i.e. full EU membership). I think that is what they call trying to square a circle.

The Euro's unpopularity in Scotland is widespread and (IMHO) is not likely to improve any time soon. I expect the SNP will argue that EU membership won't necessarily mean accepting the Euro - ironically, an independent Scotland would not even qualify for membership of the Eurozone at the moment anyway - but it is almost certain that any application to stay or rejoin the EU would entail a commitment to joining the Euro eventually... indeed, the EU itself is likely to be pushing harder for all EU member states to adopt the Euro before much longer.

I expect the SNP will flat-out deny that they are considering anything less than full EU membership (because this would undermine the very reason for calling a second referendum), push for a second referendum and possibly even win it, begin the process of formally withdrawing from the UK and then announce that Scotland will not join the EU as a full member after all, and end up with a 'soft Brexit' style deal that neither Remain or Leave voters (i.e. the vast majority) will not accept.
 
Touring Mars
Time to revive this thread... (sadly)
Click to expand...

I've always been in favor of their freedom, oh brother I am a broken record in some regard. Sorry for that.

How can they be independent if the course is to stay with the EU? I'm probably confused, I'm not from there and I don't know all the ins and outs. Can they be their own people?
 
Ok, we all know Hollywood is what it is, I hope. That was a great movie btw, I'm not sure we should be looking for facts from a movie :lol:

I would like to know however, is it not a good idea that these people break free? Maybe at this point in time it does not matter in reality because no people are free anymore imo.
 
xyloscissor
How can they be independent if the course is to stay with the EU?
Click to expand...
Totally honest question. What do you think the EU is and what limits do you think it places on a nations independence?

If you could please post from what you think right now, without looking to google, etc. Its not I assure you an attempt in anyway to 'catch you out' I am genuinely interested in what an American with little actual exposure to it think it is.
 

Similar threads

Dotini
Global Energy Crisis
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Eunos_Cosmo
Eunos_Cosmo
TorqueHappenS08
  • Poll
hyundai the toughest car company of them all?
2 3
Replies
73
Views
11K
TorqueHappenS08
TorqueHappenS08
Sauc3
The reasons why Bush's government is corrupt
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Solid Fro
Solid Fro
M
Directory listing
Replies
28
Views
79K
toyomatt84
toyomatt84

Latest Posts

Back