Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

CaledonianCraig wrote:

GSC wrote:The Scots voted to remain part of the UK.

The UK voted to leave the EU. Every Scottish vote counted the same as every other UK citizen. I don't see the issue.

The Scots (a good number if you look at post-ref stats from neutral sources) decided to vote no on varying issues. One of the main ones was because they feared losing their place in Europe. That won loads of votes for Better Together and has proved to be fruitless for the voters as they are now out of Europe.

The issue is that many Scots sees Scotland as its own country - sure not independent - but very close to it as they have their own government. However, when they vote by 62% to remain in Europe and end up being taken out of Europe it becomes a big issue to many. Yes we know the UK voted to exit but there are perhaps a million plus Scots who fail to recognize or accept being part of the UK or see themselves Scottish first and foremost and feel how they vote should hold more water than it does in the current union.

Sorry Craig, but that's democracy. Why should somebody in Edinburghs vote count more than someone's in London? Almost as ridiculous as Mhairi Black complaining that a region with more inhabitants had more MPs representing it than another region with less MPs.

But such is the politics of the SNP, always phrasing as Scotland vs the rest of the UK (or more accurately England) when Scotland voted to be part of the UK.

Musclular-mouse wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:The spin and lies peddled by both sides is a completely different debate.

What i'm stating is that 1 vote = 1 vote regardless of where you live. Forget that it's England, Scotland etc as it's really the UK and the majority voted to stay the UK, therefore yeah you gotta do what the head honcho's say.

bit like Devon does, Manchester does, Cardiff does and so on.

I think that comparing different cities within the same nation is a lot different than comparing 2 nations when it comes to election results. Saying that brighton voting to remain in the EU referendum whilst Hull never is the same as England voting to leave whilst Scotland voted to remain is wrong.

I'm not saying Scottish votes should mean more than English votes, I am saying that the Scottish people deserve to have another say on whether they want to be independent or whether they want to remain status quo. Something as big as leaving the EU when Scotland voted to remain surely is ample ammunition to trigger another Scottish independence referendum. I mean if leaving the EU isn't enough then what in your view is grounds for another Scottish referendum?

Utter nonsense. It's just scale. Cities and those in them would claim they have different identities (see sporting rivalries for one thing); the same as Nations. It's just scale and Scotland isn't some Utopian entity, deserving of some special treatment.

Maybe some Federal setup would work better for the U.K., but it seems Nicola et al don't like having the actual responsibilities when they're given them - can't blame things on the English then can they?

Derbymanc wrote:Yeah it was, wasn't England originally ruled over by Kings in all the seperate states.

I mean how far do you wanna go back?

Quite. Then again, Scotland is clearly a little bit special...

navyblueshorts wrote:

Ent wrote:The Scottish electorate is very interesting, a year after rejecting independence they more or less guarantee a conservative government by voting for SNP and costing Labour 40 seats.

Yeah, interesting that wasn't it? They didn't want independence, but thought they'd then vote SNP in droves come the GE. Pretty pathetic IMO.

It was one of the most genius political ploys of all time. Offer Scotland a referendum, knowing in all likelihood they would vote to remain and make Labour front the better together campaign. As a result Labour have taken most of the flak at the polls and they won't get back into power until they retake Scotland.

Musclular-mouse wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

superflyweight wrote:On your first point - it's democracy under UK electoral rules.  As I mentioned earlier - could have been different if people had bothered to vote in the PR referendum.  

On the second point - a minority SNP government plus the vegan wing of the SNP (Scottish Green Party) does not = the will of the Scottish people.  I repeat, a majority of people in Scotland do not want a second referendum at the moment.  

You are dealing in opinion polls. The SNP manifesto includes (quite clearly) its intentions to push for another referendum. It has been well-documented by ALL parties. That being the case then there is a simple way for people to show they don't want another referendum now and they would take their votes to Scottish Labour or Scottish Conservative at the upcoming General Election. However, all indications are that the SNP will garner almost half of the vote share again - hardly a sign that voters are so much against another referendum.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. If the SNP win a landslide election again (which everything shows that they will) then surely that proves that the Scottish people want another referendum because they are voting for a party who are fighting tooth and nail for another referendum.

Polls may say that the majority of the public don't want another referendum but yet when it comes to actual voting, those Scottish people are voting overwhelmingly for a party whose main aim is independence and who have put in their manifesto that they will seek an independence referendum if certain criteria are fulfilled.

No, he hit his thumb. That argument doesn't dovetail with Indyref and the 2015 GE results. Plenty clearly want the SNP to rule in Scotland (see GE 2015) but didn't have the balls (or thought it stupid) to actually go it alone with independence (see Indyref).

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

Musclular-mouse wrote:

GSC wrote:The same way that a Bill can be passed whether Yorkshire likes it or not, or London etc if the majority side differently. That's democracy.

In an independent Scotland will every citizen get a veto if a decision is made they don't agree with? Is a voter in Aberdeen worth more than 1 in Glasgow when counting votes?

Its a bit different with Scotland as they are a separate state to England. If I was Scottish and I wanted x y or z and the overwhelming majority of Scots wanted x y or z but we were told that we are getting B instead because that's what English people want I would feel hard done by and start wanting independence.

Basically there is no democracy in Scotland, Scottish people have no right to do what they want as they are in effect always going to be told to do what the majority of the English want. Scotland could have voted 100% for remain in the eu vote and yet their voice would still have been squashed because the English voice is louder.

Taxation - ability to increase and lower taxes
Health - devolved.
Education - devolved
Policing - devolved
Local Government - devolved
Legal system - devolved
Social Work - devolved
Housing - devolved
Tourism - devolved

Despite all that, the Scottish Parliament has only managed to pass one bill in the past 12 months - the budget - which they are constitutionally required to pass.  

Strange that eh? One might think the SNP etc are avoiding having to make painful decisions because it might make them look bad and they wouldn't be able to blame everything on "England" and "Westminster"...

Even more strange that Westminster and the unionist media paint the SNP as not doing a good job running Scotland yet you wouldn't back against them winning the majority of seats in Scotland again. What does that tell us then? That perhaps Scottish voters actually think the SNP aren't doing as bad as some with ulterior motives would have us believe? Voters will vote on performance of parties and if the SNP have been so disastrous then I await a disastrous result in June.

Could also be Scottish voters are stupid.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

Musclular-mouse wrote:

GSC wrote:The same way that a Bill can be passed whether Yorkshire likes it or not, or London etc if the majority side differently. That's democracy.

In an independent Scotland will every citizen get a veto if a decision is made they don't agree with? Is a voter in Aberdeen worth more than 1 in Glasgow when counting votes?

Its a bit different with Scotland as they are a separate state to England. If I was Scottish and I wanted x y or z and the overwhelming majority of Scots wanted x y or z but we were told that we are getting B instead because that's what English people want I would feel hard done by and start wanting independence.

Basically there is no democracy in Scotland, Scottish people have no right to do what they want as they are in effect always going to be told to do what the majority of the English want. Scotland could have voted 100% for remain in the eu vote and yet their voice would still have been squashed because the English voice is louder.

Taxation - ability to increase and lower taxes
Health - devolved.
Education - devolved
Policing - devolved
Local Government - devolved
Legal system - devolved
Social Work - devolved
Housing - devolved
Tourism - devolved

Despite all that, the Scottish Parliament has only managed to pass one bill in the past 12 months - the budget - which they are constitutionally required to pass.  

Strange that eh? One might think the SNP etc are avoiding having to make painful decisions because it might make them look bad and they wouldn't be able to blame everything on "England" and "Westminster"...

Even more strange that Westminster and the unionist media paint the SNP as not doing a good job running Scotland yet you wouldn't back against them winning the majority of seats in Scotland again. What does that tell us then? That perhaps Scottish voters actually think the SNP aren't doing as bad as some with ulterior motives would have us believe? Voters will vote on performance of parties and if the SNP have been so disastrous then I await a disastrous result in June.

That too many Scots believe the SNP-driven anti-English bile? You claim not to, but it clearly sells north of the Borders...

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

Musclular-mouse wrote:

GSC wrote:The same way that a Bill can be passed whether Yorkshire likes it or not, or London etc if the majority side differently. That's democracy.

In an independent Scotland will every citizen get a veto if a decision is made they don't agree with? Is a voter in Aberdeen worth more than 1 in Glasgow when counting votes?

Its a bit different with Scotland as they are a separate state to England. If I was Scottish and I wanted x y or z and the overwhelming majority of Scots wanted x y or z but we were told that we are getting B instead because that's what English people want I would feel hard done by and start wanting independence.

Basically there is no democracy in Scotland, Scottish people have no right to do what they want as they are in effect always going to be told to do what the majority of the English want. Scotland could have voted 100% for remain in the eu vote and yet their voice would still have been squashed because the English voice is louder.

Taxation - ability to increase and lower taxes
Health - devolved.
Education - devolved
Policing - devolved
Local Government - devolved
Legal system - devolved
Social Work - devolved
Housing - devolved
Tourism - devolved

Despite all that, the Scottish Parliament has only managed to pass one bill in the past 12 months - the budget - which they are constitutionally required to pass.  

Strange that eh? One might think the SNP etc are avoiding having to make painful decisions because it might make them look bad and they wouldn't be able to blame everything on "England" and "Westminster"...

Even more strange that Westminster and the unionist media paint the SNP as not doing a good job running Scotland yet you wouldn't back against them winning the majority of seats in Scotland again. What does that tell us then? That perhaps Scottish voters actually think the SNP aren't doing as bad as some with ulterior motives would have us believe? Voters will vote on performance of parties and if the SNP have been so disastrous then I await a disastrous result in June.

That too many Scots believe the SNP-driven anti-English bile? You claim not to, but it clearly sells north of the Borders...

Correction - anti-Westminster and I say good on them. Mammoth difference between anti-English and anti-Westminster.

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

superflyweight wrote:

Musclular-mouse wrote:

GSC wrote:The same way that a Bill can be passed whether Yorkshire likes it or not, or London etc if the majority side differently. That's democracy.

In an independent Scotland will every citizen get a veto if a decision is made they don't agree with? Is a voter in Aberdeen worth more than 1 in Glasgow when counting votes?

Its a bit different with Scotland as they are a separate state to England. If I was Scottish and I wanted x y or z and the overwhelming majority of Scots wanted x y or z but we were told that we are getting B instead because that's what English people want I would feel hard done by and start wanting independence.

Basically there is no democracy in Scotland, Scottish people have no right to do what they want as they are in effect always going to be told to do what the majority of the English want. Scotland could have voted 100% for remain in the eu vote and yet their voice would still have been squashed because the English voice is louder.

Taxation - ability to increase and lower taxes
Health - devolved.
Education - devolved
Policing - devolved
Local Government - devolved
Legal system - devolved
Social Work - devolved
Housing - devolved
Tourism - devolved

Despite all that, the Scottish Parliament has only managed to pass one bill in the past 12 months - the budget - which they are constitutionally required to pass.  

Strange that eh? One might think the SNP etc are avoiding having to make painful decisions because it might make them look bad and they wouldn't be able to blame everything on "England" and "Westminster"...

Even more strange that Westminster and the unionist media paint the SNP as not doing a good job running Scotland yet you wouldn't back against them winning the majority of seats in Scotland again. What does that tell us then? That perhaps Scottish voters actually think the SNP aren't doing as bad as some with ulterior motives would have us believe? Voters will vote on performance of parties and if the SNP have been so disastrous then I await a disastrous result in June.

Could also be Scottish voters are stupid.

Hmm it wasn't us that voted in favour of a Hard Brexit.

38% of you did.

I keep hearing the support for independence at about 40%

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Just had a look at the betting sites and an independence referendum by 2020 is the favourite to happen and also a yes vote in independence is also the favourite to happen according to the bookies.

Nobody voted for a "hard brexit"

The oracle that is the bookies lol.

When can we have our free prescriptions, it's not fair that Scots get them and we don't. How dare Westminster not look after me personally

GSC wrote:38% of you did.

I keep hearing the support for independence at about 40%

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Hmm 62% of Scots voted to remain in Europe compared to just under 55% voted to remain in the UK.

As for the 40% - yes that is correct if we are talking staunch yes voters. Equally the support for unionism is around the same. Why has independence not been voted for? Well I'd say just too big a portion are happy to stay with a status quo - the EU vote backs that up as well. That does not mean that they are staunch backers of the EU or union though just that they are uneasy with change.

Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

The thing is though that if there is another independence referendum, which there will be, then I'm pretty sure that the Scots will vote for independence this time round.

I'm pretty sure that they won't vote for independence; a future out of Europe with the UK or a future out of Europe with an uncertain future of possible membership?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I'm pretty sure that they won't vote for independence; a future out of Europe with the UK or a future out of Europe with an uncertain future of possible membership?

Well a yes vote for independence is the favourite outcome according to the bookies.

The bookies don't have a good recent record so I'll ignore them.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The bookies don't have a good recent record so I'll ignore them.

Well go ahead and bet money on a NO vote if youre so confident, you will get good odds.

I think the bookies are right on this one though and a YES vote is most likely. in 2011, the NO vote had a 30% lead over the YES vote in some polls. This gigantic lead continued for the next year or so with many polls showing the NO vote hovering roughly 25% above the YES vote.

The NO vote won with a 10% advantage.

Fast forward to 2017 and in the polls the YES vote and the NO vote are roughly equal. Some polls on some of the days show the YES vote ahead and some weeks the NO vote is ahead but its only by a few %.

So if the YES vote managed to get a swing of 20% from the start of the campaign to the election day, if that trend continues then the YES vote will easily overcome opinion polls which show support for YES and NO to be roughly equal.

When you take into account the surge of support the SNP have received since 2014 and the EU referendum result which a lot of Scots are not happy about you can easily see why the bookies have made the YES vote the favourite outcome.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Don't think the bookies is a good place to be looking to predict the outcome,

For one only 1 bookies is offering a bet on the outcome currently , leave 4/6 remain 11/10 - leave bets lose if no referendum by 2024.

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/scottish-politics/scotland-to-vote-for-independence-by-end-of-2024

the opinion polls suggest the voting pattern is similar to 2014

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/how-would-you-vote-in-the-in-a-scottish-independence-referendum-if-held-now-ask#line

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/when-do-you-think-anotherscottish-independencereferendum-should-be-held-asked-a#line

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/should-there-be-another-referendum-on-scottish-independence

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

Well no it wouldn't as there would be no official remain campaign and everyone would know it wasn't a referendum and so the vote result couldn't be taken seriously.

SNP would just go ahead and do this if what you say is the case.

Ent wrote:Don't think the bookies is a good place to be looking to predict the outcome,

For one only 1 bookies is offering a bet on the outcome currently , leave 4/6 remain 11/10 - leave bets lose if no referendum by 2024.

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/scottish-politics/scotland-to-vote-for-independence-by-end-of-2024

the opinion polls suggest the voting pattern is similar to 2014

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/how-would-you-vote-in-the-in-a-scottish-independence-referendum-if-held-now-ask#line

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/when-do-you-think-anotherscottish-independencereferendum-should-be-held-asked-a#line

http://whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/should-there-be-another-referendum-on-scottish-independence

Yes but that is my point. The opinion polls now show it is 6% in favour of NO. the opinion polls in 2011 showed the NO vote 30% above the YES vote. The YES vote managed to get a swing of 20% from 2011 up to 2014.

So with the opinion polls only showing a 6% advantage for NO, it will be a far easier task for YES to get the win. YES managed a 20% swing in 2011-2014 and all they need for the next referendum is a swing of only a few % to get the win this time round.

It doesn't work like that at all though, it's an over simplification of what is likely to happen.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It doesn't work like that at all though, it's an over simplification of what is likely to happen.

I think it does work like that hence why the bookies have made YES the favourite.

Would also add that over the past 12 months YES and NO have taken each other over in the poll. Sometimes YES is in the lead and sometimes NO is in the lead. in 2011 that was unheard of and NO had a massive 30% lead in the polls.

I think that indicates just how Scotland has shifted towards pro independence over the last 5/6 years.

Musclular-mouse wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It doesn't work like that at all though, it's an over simplification of what is likely to happen.

I think it does work like that hence why the bookies have made YES the favourite.

Would also add that over the past 12 months YES and NO have taken each other over in the poll. Sometimes YES is in the lead and sometimes NO is in the lead. in 2011 that was unheard of and NO had a massive 30% lead in the polls.

I think that indicates just how Scotland has shifted towards pro independence over the last 5/6 years.

It has been a natural upward progression since the Thatcher years in the early 80s. At that point support for independence stood around 25% and it has risen steadily since then to what I'd call a hard core 40% now. At no point in that time has there been a downward trend of any note. A smaller pocket of support for independence could be swept under the carpet most definitely but 40% hard core support and 20% waiverers hardly makes a no vote a nailed on certainty.

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

Well no it wouldn't as there would be no official remain campaign and everyone would know it wasn't a referendum and so the vote result couldn't be taken seriously.

SNP would just go ahead and do this if what you say is the case.

Of course people would know there was a referendum - it is not like it would be done in secret. It would be reported across the world (even if unofficial). Very true there'd be no remain campaign but a result would still be returned and if remain voters abstained all it would do would return a bigger percentage of yes voters and strengthen feelings that independence was wanted. That won't happen (an unofficial referendum) but the longer May tries saying 'Now is not the time' the more she gets people's backs up and turns waiverers into yes voters.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

Well no it wouldn't as there would be no official remain campaign and everyone would know it wasn't a referendum and so the vote result couldn't be taken seriously.

SNP would just go ahead and do this if what you say is the case.

Of course people would know there was a referendum - it is not like it would be done in secret. It would be reported across the world (even if unofficial). Very true there'd be no remain campaign but a result would still be returned and if remain voters abstained all it would do would return a bigger percentage of yes voters and strengthen feelings that independence was wanted. That won't happen (an unofficial referendum) but the longer May tries saying 'Now is not the time' the more she gets people's backs up and turns waiverers into yes voters.

Everyone would know it wasn't a real referendum, it would be pointless and the result would be false and would not be taken seriously. The SNP would be getting horrific abuse for wasting time and money on it instead of running Scotland.

If this was viable they would have done it already instead of the route they have gone down with an official referendum in 2014 and asking for another.

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

Well no it wouldn't as there would be no official remain campaign and everyone would know it wasn't a referendum and so the vote result couldn't be taken seriously.

SNP would just go ahead and do this if what you say is the case.

Of course people would know there was a referendum - it is not like it would be done in secret. It would be reported across the world (even if unofficial). Very true there'd be no remain campaign but a result would still be returned and if remain voters abstained all it would do would return a bigger percentage of yes voters and strengthen feelings that independence was wanted. That won't happen (an unofficial referendum) but the longer May tries saying 'Now is not the time' the more she gets people's backs up and turns waiverers into yes voters.

Everyone would know it wasn't a real referendum, it would be pointless and the result would be false and would not be taken seriously. The SNP would be getting horrific abuse for wasting time and money on it instead of running Scotland.

If this was viable they would have done it already instead of the route they have gone down with an official referendum in 2014 and asking for another.

I did say I don't think it will happen. Another referendum will happen though - when you have somewhere near one and a half million people backing independence and around 750,000 waiverers it can't be dismissed like a fart in the wind forever. That one and a half million are backed by a Scottish government made up of a pro-independence party in vast numbers. It will happen. When? That's another matter.

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

Well no it wouldn't as there would be no official remain campaign and everyone would know it wasn't a referendum and so the vote result couldn't be taken seriously.

SNP would just go ahead and do this if what you say is the case.

Of course people would know there was a referendum - it is not like it would be done in secret. It would be reported across the world (even if unofficial). Very true there'd be no remain campaign but a result would still be returned and if remain voters abstained all it would do would return a bigger percentage of yes voters and strengthen feelings that independence was wanted. That won't happen (an unofficial referendum) but the longer May tries saying 'Now is not the time' the more she gets people's backs up and turns waiverers into yes voters.

Everyone would know it wasn't a real referendum, it would be pointless and the result would be false and would not be taken seriously. The SNP would be getting horrific abuse for wasting time and money on it instead of running Scotland.

If this was viable they would have done it already instead of the route they have gone down with an official referendum in 2014 and asking for another.

You'd think so but they've gotten this far.

GSC wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

Well no it wouldn't as there would be no official remain campaign and everyone would know it wasn't a referendum and so the vote result couldn't be taken seriously.

SNP would just go ahead and do this if what you say is the case.

Of course people would know there was a referendum - it is not like it would be done in secret. It would be reported across the world (even if unofficial). Very true there'd be no remain campaign but a result would still be returned and if remain voters abstained all it would do would return a bigger percentage of yes voters and strengthen feelings that independence was wanted. That won't happen (an unofficial referendum) but the longer May tries saying 'Now is not the time' the more she gets people's backs up and turns waiverers into yes voters.

Everyone would know it wasn't a real referendum, it would be pointless and the result would be false and would not be taken seriously. The SNP would be getting horrific abuse for wasting time and money on it instead of running Scotland.

If this was viable they would have done it already instead of the route they have gone down with an official referendum in 2014 and asking for another.

You'd think so but they've gotten this far.

Hmmm like Westminster aren't wasting time and money on this snap election? At a time when they should be concentrating on Brexit negotiations - the exc...err..reason they gave for blocking a referendum. Only difference is I don't see pelters fired at Westminster for it. Still carry on with the double standards eh?

To be honest I think May played Sturgeon perfectly on that one.

If leaving Europe is your "reason" for needing a referendum, makes sense to wait until a final deal is agreed on the terms of a future UK relationship with Europe before Scots can make an informed decision. Left Sturgeon with no room to maneuvre.

GSC wrote:To be honest I think May played Sturgeon perfectly on that one.

If leaving Europe is your "reason" for needing a referendum, makes sense to wait until a final deal is agreed on the terms of a future UK relationship with Europe before Scots can make an informed decision. Left Sturgeon with no room to maneuvre.

Look at it how you like. I feel that waiting until a Hard Brexit is sealed and financial hardships kick in is not going to encourage people to vote no - especially if they voted to remain in Europe.

Musclular-mouse wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It doesn't work like that at all though, it's an over simplification of what is likely to happen.

I think it does work like that hence why the bookies have made YES the favourite.

Would also add that over the past 12 months YES and NO have taken each other over in the poll. Sometimes YES is in the lead and sometimes NO is in the lead. in 2011 that was unheard of and NO had a massive 30% lead in the polls.

I think that indicates just how Scotland has shifted towards pro independence over the last 5/6 years.

It really doesn't work like that, you might think it does but it doesn't.

Hasn't it been pointed out that the SNP have only ruled on 1 issue since the last referendum so isn't it double standards to say Westminister MPs are wasting time. (we could go round and round on this for months)

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Musclular-mouse wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:It doesn't work like that at all though, it's an over simplification of what is likely to happen.

I think it does work like that hence why the bookies have made YES the favourite.

Would also add that over the past 12 months YES and NO have taken each other over in the poll. Sometimes YES is in the lead and sometimes NO is in the lead. in 2011 that was unheard of and NO had a massive 30% lead in the polls.

I think that indicates just how Scotland has shifted towards pro independence over the last 5/6 years.

It really doesn't work like that, you might think it does but it doesn't.

ok whatever

GSC wrote:To be honest I think May played Sturgeon perfectly on that one.

If leaving Europe is your "reason" for needing a referendum, makes sense to wait until a final deal is agreed on the terms of a future UK relationship with Europe before Scots can make an informed decision. Left Sturgeon with no room to maneuvre.

The SNP would argue its the process behind leaving Europe that is the reason they want a referendum. Scotland voting to remain but being dragged out by England. They have said that on numerous occasions. So in essence the terms of the brexit and a final deal are irrelevant in terms of the snp wanting a referendum.

I would guess knowing what "no" entails is pretty relevant

Derbymanc wrote:Hasn't it been pointed out that the SNP have only ruled on 1 issue since the last referendum so isn't it double standards to say Westminister MPs are wasting time. (we could go round and round on this for months)

We could indeed but it doesn't change that Scottish voters are happy enough evidently.    

Nauseating thing is listening to the Tories preaching to Scottish government on their running of the NHS. Stats released in January clearly show that Scotland spends more per patient in the NHS than the rest of the UK and has the shortest waiting times at A and E. Sad thing is if the newspapers report the Tories slating the SNP it is taken as fact. And take a look at the prison system. According to prison warden's union the prison service in England and Wales (no mention of Scotland by them) is on the verge of implosion.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

With all due respect - bollox.

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

With all due respect - bollox.

Let me rephrase it - by that I mean if they still failed to recognize the desire for another referendum they'd look shabby. But don't get your Ian Poulter pants in a twist as did say don't see unofficial referendum happening.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

GSC wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

Well no it wouldn't as there would be no official remain campaign and everyone would know it wasn't a referendum and so the vote result couldn't be taken seriously.

SNP would just go ahead and do this if what you say is the case.

Of course people would know there was a referendum - it is not like it would be done in secret. It would be reported across the world (even if unofficial). Very true there'd be no remain campaign but a result would still be returned and if remain voters abstained all it would do would return a bigger percentage of yes voters and strengthen feelings that independence was wanted. That won't happen (an unofficial referendum) but the longer May tries saying 'Now is not the time' the more she gets people's backs up and turns waiverers into yes voters.

Everyone would know it wasn't a real referendum, it would be pointless and the result would be false and would not be taken seriously. The SNP would be getting horrific abuse for wasting time and money on it instead of running Scotland.

If this was viable they would have done it already instead of the route they have gone down with an official referendum in 2014 and asking for another.

You'd think so but they've gotten this far.

Hmmm like Westminster aren't wasting time and money on this snap election? At a time when they should be concentrating on Brexit negotiations - the exc...err..reason they gave for blocking a referendum. Only difference is I don't see pelters fired at Westminster for it. Still carry on with the double standards eh?

Look. Don't be daft. The GE is over by June 9th. Jimmy Cranky deliberately proposed Indyref2 at a time she knows it'll be a pain for May et al. No wonder she was told to piss off re. that agenda.

Musclular-mouse wrote:

GSC wrote:To be honest I think May played Sturgeon perfectly on that one.

If leaving Europe is your "reason" for needing a referendum, makes sense to wait until a final deal is agreed on the terms of a future UK relationship with Europe before Scots can make an informed decision. Left Sturgeon with no room to maneuvre.

The SNP would argue its the process behind leaving Europe that is the reason they want a referendum. Scotland voting to remain but being dragged out by England. They have said that on numerous occasions. So in essence the terms of the brexit and a final deal are irrelevant in terms of the snp wanting a referendum.  

No. It's an SNP excuse. Independence is dogma for them, whatever the cost.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

With all due respect - bollox.

Let me rephrase it - by that I mean if they still failed to recognize the desire for another referendum they'd look shabby. But don't get your Ian Poulter pants in a twist as did say don't see unofficial referendum happening.

Not a problem - I don't think much of IJP Design...

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

GSC wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

Well no it wouldn't as there would be no official remain campaign and everyone would know it wasn't a referendum and so the vote result couldn't be taken seriously.

SNP would just go ahead and do this if what you say is the case.

Of course people would know there was a referendum - it is not like it would be done in secret. It would be reported across the world (even if unofficial). Very true there'd be no remain campaign but a result would still be returned and if remain voters abstained all it would do would return a bigger percentage of yes voters and strengthen feelings that independence was wanted. That won't happen (an unofficial referendum) but the longer May tries saying 'Now is not the time' the more she gets people's backs up and turns waiverers into yes voters.

Everyone would know it wasn't a real referendum, it would be pointless and the result would be false and would not be taken seriously. The SNP would be getting horrific abuse for wasting time and money on it instead of running Scotland.

If this was viable they would have done it already instead of the route they have gone down with an official referendum in 2014 and asking for another.

You'd think so but they've gotten this far.

Hmmm like Westminster aren't wasting time and money on this snap election? At a time when they should be concentrating on Brexit negotiations - the exc...err..reason they gave for blocking a referendum. Only difference is I don't see pelters fired at Westminster for it. Still carry on with the double standards eh?

Look. Don't be daft. The GE is over by June 9th. Jimmy Cranky deliberately proposed Indyref2 at a time she knows it'll be a pain for May et al. No wonder she was told to piss off re. that agenda.

Do you look at timelines? Sturgeon asked for a date just before Brexit goes through and by then all the deals will be signed so we know what the situation will be. Given that this referendum proposal is to protect Scotland's place in Europe then could only be proposed for before the Brexit matter is finalized. In any case does the time matter? Reading all the comments on here and those coming from the unionists nobody wants another one anyway. That being the case - there is nothing to fear. Get it over and done with and sit back to wait for the customary no result. Simples.

Is European membership like a library card you can give to someone else

GSC wrote:Is European membership like a library card you can give to someone else

Well my stance on it is I could take Europe or leave it. No real strong feelings either way. I can see the merits of remaining in Europe as freedom of movement of key employees such as doctors and nurses do bolster the beleagured NHS. Closing borders then makes obtaining these much-needed staff much tougher. On exit side you get to set your own parameters on trade deals etc. As things stand now anyway Scotland will be out of Europe as part of the UK or if successful in the next referendum out of Europe as part of an independent Scotland.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

GSC wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Ent wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:Which makes them the majority, which makes it right that your still part of the UK etc etc, yaddah yaddah, majority voted for blah blah, tough cookies blah blah, no Scotland isn't some amazing place that deserves to do everything by itself etc etc

Of course it is. It (or England, Wales or Northern Ireland) are perfectly entitled to seek to end the union whenever they wish. There is nothing written into it stating the union to be for all eternity and unbreakable.

Constitutionally I'm not sure they are - there needs to be parliamentary approval for constitutional changes. Scotland have to ask for a referendum, they just can't have one.

Scotland could stage a referendum anytime they wish (theoretically) without approval from Westminster - it would be an unofficial one and cannot see that happening. If it did and yes vote won then Westminster would look pretty shabby if they failed to recognize the result.

Well no it wouldn't as there would be no official remain campaign and everyone would know it wasn't a referendum and so the vote result couldn't be taken seriously.

SNP would just go ahead and do this if what you say is the case.

Of course people would know there was a referendum - it is not like it would be done in secret. It would be reported across the world (even if unofficial). Very true there'd be no remain campaign but a result would still be returned and if remain voters abstained all it would do would return a bigger percentage of yes voters and strengthen feelings that independence was wanted. That won't happen (an unofficial referendum) but the longer May tries saying 'Now is not the time' the more she gets people's backs up and turns waiverers into yes voters.

Everyone would know it wasn't a real referendum, it would be pointless and the result would be false and would not be taken seriously. The SNP would be getting horrific abuse for wasting time and money on it instead of running Scotland.

If this was viable they would have done it already instead of the route they have gone down with an official referendum in 2014 and asking for another.

You'd think so but they've gotten this far.

Hmmm like Westminster aren't wasting time and money on this snap election? At a time when they should be concentrating on Brexit negotiations - the exc...err..reason they gave for blocking a referendum. Only difference is I don't see pelters fired at Westminster for it. Still carry on with the double standards eh?

Look. Don't be daft. The GE is over by June 9th. Jimmy Cranky deliberately proposed Indyref2 at a time she knows it'll be a pain for May et al. No wonder she was told to piss off re. that agenda.

Do you look at timelines? Sturgeon asked for a date just before Brexit goes through and by then all the deals will be signed so we know what the situation will be. Given that this referendum proposal is to protect Scotland's place in Europe then could only be proposed for before the Brexit matter is finalized. In any case does the time matter? Reading all the comments on here and those coming from the unionists nobody wants another one anyway. That being the case - there is nothing to fear. Get it over and done with and sit back to wait for the customary no result. Simples.

Any referendum on independence (if granted) would have to give a fair choice to the Scottish people, not just be at the most convenient time for the SNP when they think they will get their leave vote.