Jump to content

Scottish Independence Referendum 2


Henry

Should Scotland be an independent country?  

275 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Scotland be an independent country?

    • Yes
      197
    • No
      78


Recommended Posts

 

Sturgeon says she will asks Scottish parliament to vote next week for second independence referendum

So her is her plan, she says.
She will continue to stand up for Scotland’s interests in the talks.
But she will act now to ensure Scotland has a choice at the end of this process.
Sturgeon says she will act now to ensure Scotland has an independence referendum at the end of the Brexit process.
She says she will ask the Scottish parliament to vote in favour of this next week.
She says the details of the referendum, including the timing, must be for Scotland to decide.
She says it should take place when the options are clearer than they are now, but while it is still possible for Scotland to stay in.
She says she expects the outcome to be clearer by next autumn. So that would be the earliest date.
She says it should take place between the autumn of 2018 and the spring of 2019.

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/mar/13/article-50-commons-lords-brexit-sturgeon-speech-corbyn-clarifies-his-position-on-second-scottish-independence-referendum-saying-hes-opposed-politics-live

Link to comment

First thought - Scotland voted to remain part of the UK, the UK voted to leave the EU. Deal with it (?)

True but the No campaign also ran their entire campaign on the premise that voting no was the only way for Scotland to stay in the EU. So no, deal with it is not a sensible argument.

  • Upvote 8
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment

I think the constitutional landscape surrounding the UK has changed sufficiently to merit a second referendum. It is going to be a long 18 months though, with a lot of deja vu. We can look forward to lots of "discussion" about the following:

 

  • British Pounds, Scottish Pounds and Euros
  • The previous "Independent Scotland" outlook being too heavily reliant on revenues from the North Sea
  • The EU isn't all that anyway (contrary to No argument just over 2 years ago.
  • Scotland having to apply for the EU (as I assume May will start the process of withdrawing the whole of the UK)
  • Scottish companies going to UK.
  • Companies in the UK moving to Scotland as they'll still be in the EU.

Not sure if I'm a fan of the timing. As it is, the UK exit from the EU is scheduled for roughly 2 years time, but Scotland will have referendum in 18 months, which makes the negotiation process messy for the exit, and speeds up a timetable for independence (I don't really understand how we can complete independence after UK exit from EU, as then we surely would need to reapply).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

True but the No campaign also ran their entire campaign on the premise that voting no was the only way for Scotland to stay in the EU. So no, deal with it is not a sensible argument.

 

I don't think that's true, the No campaign simply pointed out that (at that time) keeping the status quo would mean scotland remained in the EU,. whereas voting to leave the UK would also have put us out of the EU meaning we had to reapply to jojn.

 

So ti was a statement of truth at that time.

 

Jose Manuel Barroso said an independent Scotland would have to apply for EU membership and get the approval of all current member states, in the wake of a Yes vote in September's referendum.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-eu-bid-extremely-difficult-says-jose-manuel-barroso-9131925.html

 

Also, staying in the EU was not the central plank of the No campaign.

Link to comment

I hope the UK government rejects permission for a second referendum.

 

At the time of the first vote, the SNP leadership pledged (without caveat) to make it a once in a generation event and they should honour that.

 

Edit - if they agree to this, then the SNP will demand annual referendums, on the grounds that the BBC weather said it would be sunny next week, but it turned out it was overcast.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 3
Link to comment

 

I don't think that's true, the No campaign simply pointed out that (at that time) keeping the status quo would mean scotland remained in the EU,. whereas voting to leave the UK would also have put us out of the EU meaning we had to reapply to jojn.

 

So ti was a statement of truth at that time.

 

Jose Manuel Barroso said an independent Scotland would have to apply for EU membership and get the approval of all current member states, in the wake of a Yes vote in September's referendum.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-eu-bid-extremely-difficult-says-jose-manuel-barroso-9131925.html

 

Also, staying in the EU was not the central plank of the No campaign.

 

Brexit seems to have shown that abody can make it up as they go along.

 

There is a lot of grey. If Scotland wanted to remain in the EU while rUK didn't, then surely Scotland keeps the UK membership, and the rUK gives up it's share of that membership (you know, the same way that Scotland were going to give up their membership while rUK retained it's before the vote).

Link to comment

 

I don't think that's true, the No campaign simply pointed out that (at that time) keeping the status quo would mean scotland remained in the EU,. whereas voting to leave the UK would also have put us out of the EU meaning we had to reapply to jojn.

 

So ti was a statement of truth at that time.

 

Jose Manuel Barroso said an independent Scotland would have to apply for EU membership and get the approval of all current member states, in the wake of a Yes vote in September's referendum.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-eu-bid-extremely-difficult-says-jose-manuel-barroso-9131925.html

 

Also, staying in the EU was not the central plank of the No campaign.

 

I never said it wasn't true at the time. You're answering a question that hasn't been asked.

 

I'm saying this was a key campaign promise which would have been a key reason for many people voting no. Hence its reasonable to suppose that many people may understandably want to reconsider their stance on independence.

Link to comment

I hope the UK government rejects permission for a second referendum.

 

At the time of the first vote, the SNP leadership pledged (without caveat) to make it a once in a generation event and they should honour that.

 

Edit - if they agree to this, then the SNP will demand annual referendums, on the grounds that the BBC weather said it would be sunny next week, but it turned out it was overcast.

 

They did in fact caveat it in their manifesto which got them voted in to Scottish Parliament again.

Link to comment

 

 

 

Brexit seems to have shown that abody can make it up as they go along.

 

There is a lot of grey. If Scotland wanted to remain in the EU while rUK didn't, then surely Scotland keeps the UK membership, and the rUK gives up it's share of that membership (you know, the same way that Scotland were going to give up their membership while rUK retained it's before the vote).

 

 

I don't think there's a lot of grey at all.

 

The quote I posted above was the President of the European Commission previously making it clear that an independent Scotland doesn't get special treatment.

 

Scotland is part of the EU currently thanks to being part of the UK.

 

The only other way for Scotland to be part of the EU is to go through the application process as an independent country.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment

 

They did in fact caveat it in their manifesto which got them voted in to Scottish Parliament again.

 

But they didn't in their pledge to the Scottish people at the time of the first vote.

 

The pledge was to all of Scotland, the manifesto was to people inclined to vote SNP.

 

Either way, they have reneged on their pledge, their word is worthless. (hardly surprising for any kind of politician right enough)

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment

I hope the UK government rejects permission for a second referendum.

 

Surely referendums are the culmination of the democratic process no? Why would you deny the will of the people?

 

The SNP had a pesky little thing called a manifesto at the last election. They have a mandate for a second referendum. Denying it would be a non-starter for the Tories.

 

 

At the time of the first vote, the SNP leadership pledged (without caveat) to make it a once in a generation event and they should honour that.

 

Edit - if they agree to this, then the SNP will demand annual referendums, on the grounds that the BBC weather said it would be sunny next week, but it turned out it was overcast.

 

FAKE NEWS! No they didn't. It was never an SNP pledge. Salmond and Sturgeon made their personal views clear but it was never a pledge. Disingenuous? Perhaps. No more so than claiming they made a solemn pledge though.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

I don't think there's a lot of grey at all.

 

The quote I posted above was the President of the European Commission previously making it clear that an independent Scotland doesn't get special treatment.

 

Scotland is part of the EU currently thanks to being part of the UK.

 

The only other way for Scotland to be part of the EU is to go through the application process as an independent country.

 

 

And I am saying that things seem to get made up as they go along, and if Scotland being retained in the EU was viewed as being preferential for the EU, then they will make it happen.

 

I guess it would be seen as favourable to bring any other potential leavers in line if it was seen to split countries up. That said, Scotland will probably still find itself in a position of where it won't actually know what the EU position will be if independence is voted for.

Link to comment

 

But they didn't in their pledge to the Scottish people at the time of the first vote.

 

The pledge was to all of Scotland, the manifesto was to people inclined to vote SNP.

 

Either way, they have reneged on their pledge, their word is worthless. (hardly surprising for any kind of politician right enough)

 

That was going to be my next point. Politicians to some extent do what they believe is right and to some extent what they believe will get them voted in (ie what is popular). So either the SNP believe what they are doing is right, or they believe it will be popular. Either way, this means it is actually the correct thing to do. If it's popular then it means a significant number of people in Scotland want it. So a referendum seems like a good way to find out just how many.

 

Let's be honest, everyone knows the nation is split almost down the middle on this issue - it is very close, so to dismiss it off the table is to silence half the country. If the vote was 70% no, 30 % yes, then this would be dead and the SNP would most likely not be in power, but it wasn't, and they are, in fact going from 6 to 56 MPs at Westminster post-indyref.

 

Anyone trying to silence this issue is the one with the fingers in their ears.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

Worth of Scottish exports to rest of UK: £48.5 billion

Worth of Scottish exports to EU: £11.6 billion

 

Number of Scottish jobs linked to UK market: 1,000,000

Number of Scottish jobs linked to EU marker: 250,000

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/29/gordon-brown-tells-scots-uks-single-market-worth-far-more-than-e/

 

Why do the SNP seek to harm our economy by cutting off access to our main market, while pretending that the EU single market is the be all and end all?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment

Surely referendums are the culmination of the democratic process no? Why would you deny the will of the people?

 

The SNP had a pesky little thing called a manifesto at the last election. They have a mandate for a second referendum. Denying it would be a non-starter for the Tories.

I disagree for reasons already stated.

 

Plus polling shows most people opposed to a second vote.

 

FAKE NEWS! No they didn't. It was never an SNP pledge. Salmond and Sturgeon made their personal views clear but it was never a pledge. Disingenuous? Perhaps. No more so than claiming they made a solemn pledge though.

The then leader of the party said at the time it was a once in a generation vote.

 

But I agree with you their word is worthless, we have already established that on the thread.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...