Scottish Independence

[Journeyman]

The first paragraph is moving towards a debate on the impacts of Brexit. I disagree with your assertions, but I'll leave it there. If you want to go further, we should do it in the main EU thread.

I was simply speculating on what may be an outcome, that has relevance to this debate. I think the SNP want an indyref sooner rather than later, because if Brexit ends up having a neutral or positive* impact then support for independence will fall. I think they'd rather have the referendum now, while things are uncertain, because it preys on peoples' uncertainty and anxiety.

Timing is everything - they were only desperate for an election in December, because Salmond is about to go on trial for some very serious sexual offences.

* I consider a positive outcome to Brexit to be highly unlikely, but hey, it might happen.

 

[edwin_m]

I think "contempt towards Scotland" is the wrong phrase to use, and plays into the hands of the SNP with their grievance politics.

I used the phrase quite deliberately, and it is the contemptuous attitude of the Westminster government that plays into the hands of the SNP not the fact I have described it as such. Since at least 1979 Tory governments have paid little attention to the needs and wishes of the Scots. Perhaps a little less so with the Cameron government, which offered a referendum and where the Scottish government may have cushioned austerity a bit more than elsewhere, and at least Cameron seemed to have a bit of humanity. Noted for completeness that they had the same attitude to the English regions.

But Brexit was very much against the expressed will of Scotland and as mentioned has broken one of the main promises made to secure a majority for the Union in 2014. It has now brought us a government with the most untrustworthy and self-centered leader in recent British history, who has shown no interest whatsoever in Scotland, was quite happy to destroy the Scottish Tory Party to further his plans, and is now prioritising the English regions which rubs salt in the wound.

I was simply speculating on what may be an outcome, that has relevance to this debate. I think the SNP want an indyref sooner rather than later, because if Brexit ends up having a neutral or positive* impact then support for independence will fall. I think they'd rather have the referendum now, while things are uncertain, because it preys on peoples' uncertainty and anxiety.

Timing is everything - they were only desperate for an election in December, because Salmond is about to go on trial for some very serious sexual offences.

I think they want a referendum sooner rather than later because it is the moment of maximum disgust in Scotland and to get out before the likely damage of Brexit hits Scotland too hard. Commentators often say that a Tory government is the best recruiting officer for the SNP, and I've also heard it suggested that they pushed for the election because they expected the outcome of a big Tory majority and a hard Brexit which would maximise the incentive for Scotland to get out from under.

 

[Journeyman]

I think they want a referendum sooner rather than later because it is the moment of maximum disgust in Scotland and to get out before the likely damage of Brexit hits Scotland too hard. Commentators often say that a Tory government is the best recruiting officer for the SNP, and I've also heard it suggested that they pushed for the election because they expected the outcome of a big Tory majority and a hard Brexit which would maximise the incentive for Scotland to get out from under.

True. Sturgeon must have been rubbing her hands with glee when she saw the size of the Tory majority.

 

[Failed Unit]

True. Sturgeon must have been rubbing her hands with glee when she saw the size of the Tory majority.

I think that is why the SNP didn’t try too hard to campaign to stay in the EU. They secretly wanted the UK to leave so they could push forward with independence. Scotland maybe voted to stay, but they also had the lowest turnout in the UK. Had the turnout being higher we would be remaining in the EU (assuming they voted by the same % as the rest of Scotland)

Scotland had the chance to influence the UK staying in the EU. But prefers to blame the English rather than its own low turnout.

 

[GrimShady]

The thing is, the SNP are only going down the left-wing social democratic road because that happens to be what wins elections in Scotland at the moment. They were known as the Tartan Tories for many years, because they were politically much further to the right of where they are at the moment.

Let's face it, they have only one agenda, which is breaking up the Union, and they'll happily do or say whatever they think it will take to bring it about. If they figured that the cause of Scottish independence would be advanced by them becoming hard-right fascists, they'd do it in a heartbeat.

Fully agreed. IMO they have completely wasted any good will they may have had by constantly pushing this silly agenda. They had a real chance to prove they were different from the rest.

 

[edwin_m]

I think that is why the SNP didn’t try too hard to campaign to stay in the EU. They secretly wanted the UK to leave so they could push forward with independence. Scotland maybe voted to stay, but they also had the lowest turnout in the UK. Had the turnout being higher we would be remaining in the EU (assuming they voted by the same % as the rest of Scotland)

Scotland had the chance to influence the UK staying in the EU. But prefers to blame the English rather than its own low turnout.

Are you sure?
UK: Leave 1,018,322, Remain 16,141,241, majority 1,269,501
Scotland: Remain 1,661,191, Leave 1,018,322, majority 642,869
(source: https://www.electoralcommission.org...-referendum/results-and-turnout-eu-referendum)
So roughly three times as many Scots would have had to vote to overturn the UK-wide majority, assuming they voted in the same proportions. But the turnout in Scotland was 67.2%.

 

[arbeia]

And all along our Scottish people seem to forget that it was a United Kingdom, as a whole, Referendum, not a Regional one. All votes counted in the same pot.

 

[Busaholic]

It was amazingly convenient for the SNP that Alex Salmond's trial date was announced before the General Election but to take place after the election because, regardless of the outcome (and presuming Salmond doesn't do a Chris Huhne and plead guilty an hour before it's due to start) a lot of dirty washing and stuff that'll prove tiresome for the SNP as a party will come out, regardless of who says it and whether it's believed in the end. Salmond's previous links with Trump when the latter was merely an arrogant, bumptious, superrich American airhead without a huge power base will probably get an airing too, in an attempt to show his true colours. Can't wait, personally! And, yes, Scottish nationalism was once very associated with right wing, even Fascist, ideology within my own memory and I'm not Methusalah! No wonder I don't call myself the full name on my birth certificate, unlike my grandfather.

 

[najaB]

Leaving the UK so they are not controlled by London so they can join the EU and be controlled by Brussels. Makes a lot of sense to me.

It really isn't that simple. I have always been a staunch Unionist. Having spent a large part of my life living in a small country I'm acutely conscious of the fact that you are better off being part of a larger union than being a small totally independent country. I voted No in the 2014 referendum.

I also voted Remain in the 2016 referendum because I also firmly believe that the UK as a whole is better off with a seat at the table of the largest trading and political bloc in the world than we will be by ourselves.

And that is the big thing - the UK was not, is not and would never have been "controlled by Brussels" since the EU, unlike the UK, doesn't operate on a simple majority rules basis.

Up until recently I have considered myself a British person who lives in Scotland. The sheer contempt which the UK governement has displayed towards both Scotland and Northern Ireland has made me start to review that sense of self-identity. Is it enough to mean that I would vote to leave the UK if there was another independence referendum?

I don't know, but given the attitude of the UK government and the fact that there doesn't seem to be a credible opposition with the power to hold them to account due to both Labour and the Lib Dems deciding to internally conflict themselves into irrelevance, I'm not sure that the historical ties to the 55 million people with whom we share a common history are strong enough to outweigh the shared future that we could have with the 300 million people of the EU.

 

[bramling]

It really isn't that simple. I have always been a staunch Unionist. Having spent a large part of my life living in a small country I'm acutely conscious of the fact that you are better off being part of a larger union than being a small totally independent country. I voted No in the 2014 referendum.

I also voted Remain in the 2016 referendum because I also firmly believe that the UK as a whole is better off with a seat at the table of the largest trading and political bloc in the world than we will be by ourselves.

And that is the big thing - the UK was not, is not and would never have been "controlled by Brussels" since the EU, unlike the UK, doesn't operate on a simple majority rules basis.

Up until recently I have considered myself a British person who lives in Scotland. The sheer contempt which the UK governement has displayed towards both Scotland and Northern Ireland has made me start to review that sense of self-identity. Is it enough to mean that I would vote to leave the UK if there was another independence referendum?

I don't know, but given the attitude of the UK government and the fact that there doesn't seem to be a credible opposition with the power to hold them to account due to both Labour and the Lib Dems deciding to internally conflict themselves into irrelevance, I'm not sure that the historical ties to the 55 million people with whom we share a common history are strong enough to outweigh the shared future that we could have with the 300 million people of the EU.

What contempt has been shown by the UK to Scotland over the referendum? By not completely blocking a UK-wide result on the basis of remain majority within Scotland?

 

[Meerkat]

And that is the big thing - the UK was not, is not and would never have been "controlled by Brussels" since the EU, unlike the UK, doesn't operate on a simple majority rules basis.

It does partly operate on majority rules, and worse than that it partly operates on country voting so tiny places like Malta have massively disproportionate influence. I would also suggest there is a high level of control when UK law must conform with EU law and be subject to European court rulings.
The EU also clearly intends to gain more power, and needs more federal powers if it is to succeed on its current path. But it boils the frogs, doing it slowly so less chance of a big step frightening the horses (though we didn’t even get a referendum on the huge Treaties)

 

[najaB]

What contempt has been shown by the UK to Scotland over the referendum? By not completely blocking a UK-wide result on the basis of remain majority within Scotland?

No. Nobody expected the UK referedum result to be overturned. But there has been almost zero outreach from the UK Government to get the Scottish Government involved in Brexit negotiations or planning.

 

[najaB]

I would also suggest there is a high level of control when UK law must conform with EU law and be subject to European court rulings.

Conveniently ignoring that the UK would have played a major role in drafting those laws. Could you perhaps provide an example of an EU law that the UK is bound by which was clearly, provably to the UKs detriment?

 

[Meerkat]

Conveniently ignoring that the UK would have played a major role in drafting those laws. Could you perhaps provide an example of an EU law that the UK is bound by which was clearly, provably to the UKs detriment?

“Major role” is a conveniently ill defined concept. And our role would be civil servants a long way from public gaze.
What is detrimental depends on your political view - Corbyn would say the state aid rules are detrimental for example.
Anyway, we disagree, I respect your position - we better get back on topic to Scottish independence??

 

[edwin_m]

What contempt has been shown by the UK to Scotland over the referendum? By not completely blocking a UK-wide result on the basis of remain majority within Scotland?

The logical and conciliatory response to a close referendum result would have been to propose a form of Brexit which preserved as much as possible of the links with the EU and thereby gave the 48% something of what they thought was important. Instead they have gone for just about the hardest possible option with no recognition at all of the large numbers in Scotland and elsewhere who disagreed - in fact a majority according to most polls since 2017.

 

[furnessvale]

Conveniently ignoring that the UK would have played a major role in drafting those laws. Could you perhaps provide an example of an EU law that the UK is bound by which was clearly, provably to the UKs detriment?

Ports Directive.

 

[Meerkat]

The logical and conciliatory response to a close referendum result would have been to propose a form of Brexit which preserved as much as possible of the links with the EU and thereby gave the 48% something of what they thought was important. Instead they have gone for just about the hardest possible option with no recognition at all of the large numbers in Scotland and elsewhere who disagreed - in fact a majority according to most polls since 2017.

You can’t preserve much without effectively staying in, as they EU won’t let you cherry pick. Therefore you have BRINO and your appeasement of the 48% largely ignores the wishes of the 52%.
That is the problem - it’s like deciding to have children or not, there isn’t really any middle ground that doesn’t fundamentally ignore the ‘loser’s’ desires.

 

[edwin_m]

You can’t preserve much without effectively staying in, as they EU won’t let you cherry pick. Therefore you have BRINO and your appeasement of the 48% largely ignores the wishes of the 52%.
That is the problem - it’s like deciding to have children or not, there isn’t really any middle ground that doesn’t fundamentally ignore the ‘loser’s’ desires.

The EU will let you cherry pick but every option has consequences. The option now likely to happen bears very little resemblance to what Leave campaigners proposed at the time of the referendum, and if both sides had been strictly truthful in 2016 then the result might have been different anyway. The logical and conciliatory answer to that would be to have another referendum on the proposed detailed arrangement, but they went out of their way to avoid that too. Another slap in the face for Scotland and for Remainers in general.

 

[Journeyman]

No. Nobody expected the UK referedum result to be overturned. But there has been almost zero outreach from the UK Government to get the Scottish Government involved in Brexit negotiations or planning.

The current Scottish government shows nothing but contempt towards Westminster, though.

 

[arbeia]

Conveniently ignoring that the UK would have played a major role in drafting those laws. Could you perhaps provide an example of an EU law that the UK is bound by which was clearly, provably to the UKs detriment?

Fishing?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It really isn't that simple. I have always been a staunch Unionist. Having spent a large part of my life living in a small country I'm acutely conscious of the fact that you are better off being part of a larger union than being a small totally independent country. I voted No in the 2014 referendum.

I also voted Remain in the 2016 referendum because I also firmly believe that the UK as a whole is better off with a seat at the table of the largest trading and political bloc in the world than we will be by ourselves.

And that is the big thing - the UK was not, is not and would never have been "controlled by Brussels" since the EU, unlike the UK, doesn't operate on a simple majority rules basis.

Up until recently I have considered myself a British person who lives in Scotland. The sheer contempt which the UK governement has displayed towards both Scotland and Northern Ireland has made me start to review that sense of self-identity. Is it enough to mean that I would vote to leave the UK if there was another independence referendum?

I don't know, but given the attitude of the UK government and the fact that there doesn't seem to be a credible opposition with the power to hold them to account due to both Labour and the Lib Dems deciding to internally conflict themselves into irrelevance, I'm not sure that the historical ties to the 55 million people with whom we share a common history are strong enough to outweigh the shared future that we could have with the 300 million people of the EU.

Do you think giving Scotland the power to raise its own taxation and thus not be controlled by Westminster would help?

 

[Journeyman]

Fishing?

Not that old chestnut. Brexiteers seem obsessed with it, despite it being a tiny and declining industry.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Not that old chestnut. Brexiteers seem obsessed with it, despite it being a tiny and declining industry.

Yes - because of the EU!!!!!

 

[furnessvale]

Not that old chestnut. Brexiteers seem obsessed with it, despite it being a tiny and declining industry.

If fishing in UK territorial waters is as you describe, why is the EU making such a big fuss about it as we approach trade negotiations/

 

[ComUtoR]

https://www.in-cumbria.com/news/181...ects-second-scottish-independence-referendum/

Boris Johnson has formally rejected a call for Holyrood to be given the power to hold a second independence referendum.

The Prime Minister said holding such a vote would mean "political stagnation" for Scotland.

He said it was instead time for the the nations to "work together and unleash the potential of this great country".

Scots voted by 55 per cent to 45 per cent to stay in the United Kingdom in a referendum in 2014.

In his letter to Ms Sturgeon, the PM said he had "carefully considered" the arguments she made.


But he said Ms Sturgeon and her predecessor Alex Salmond had made a "personal commitment" that the 2014 referendum would be a "once in a generation" event.

"The UK Government will continue to uphold the democratic decision of the Scottish people and the promise that you made to them," he said.

"For that reason I cannot agree to any request for a transfer of power that would lead to further independence referendums."

I'll just leave that there :/

 

[najaB]

Ports Directive.

I'm not in the industry so don't claim to be an expert on it by any stretch but it seems to me that it is entirely possible for the UK to comply with the legislation without causing too much disruption to our ports industry. The requirement, as I understand it, is that the services need to be offered at to public tender. There's nothing that binds the port to accept any specific bid - so simply offer the tenders on terms that specifically favor the intended supplier.

 

[furnessvale]

I'm not in the industry so don't claim to be an expert on it by any stretch but it seems to me that it is entirely possible for the UK to comply with the legislation without causing too much disruption to our ports industry. The requirement, as I understand it, is that the services need to be offered at to public tender. There's nothing that binds the port to accept any specific bid - so simply offer the tenders on terms that specifically favor the intended supplier.

How long do you believe such tactics would survive an appeal to our lords and masters at the ECJ?

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I've also heard it suggested that they pushed for the election because they expected the outcome of a big Tory majority and a hard Brexit which would maximise the incentive for Scotland to get out from under.

I never understood this argument. A Tory government has a maximum of five years life before having to seek re-election. Succession seems an awfuly long-term solution to what is a comparitively short term solution. Besides, what if there is a Labour majority next election, or a Labour landslide? Surely if the thought of a massive Tory majority is an argument for independence then what happens when that majority eventually disappears?

 

[d9009alycidon]

Do you think giving Scotland the power to raise its own taxation and thus not be controlled by Westminster would help?

Scotland already has powers to raise Taxation, and they are making an right hash of it, resulting in middle earners having to pay a combind deduction of 53% for national Insurance and income tax on earnings over £43,500. and they have the cheek to call it fair

 

[edwin_m]

I never understood this argument. A Tory government has a maximum of five years life before having to seek re-election. Succession seems an awfuly long-term solution to what is a comparitively short term solution. Besides, what if there is a Labour majority next election, or a Labour landslide? Surely if the thought of a massive Tory majority is an argument for independence then what happens when that majority eventually disappears?

It looks like in the 45 years from 1979 to 2024 all but 13 will have had Tory or Tory-dominated governments at Westminster. With Labour losing most of its Scottish representation it's virtually impossible to imagine a party holding power in Westminster and also enjoying anything like majority support in Scotland.