Indyref 2: This time it's personal.

[Craig B]

Sturgeon should now call for a re-run of the USA election, seeing as how the democratic result was the wrong one, in her opinion.

What was the democratic result? "Crooked Hillary" got more votes than Trump. If the election had been held in the same way as the Scottish Independence or UK European Union referendums, Hillary would be on her way to the White House. But that is a matter for the US constitution.

Is Sturgeon calling for a re run? In the UK the constitution is no longer functioning in respect of the constituent countries of the Union. A change is coming. If we have Indyref 2 here, it won't be a re run, but a new referendum necessitated by new circumstances.

If Scotland objects to being dragged out of the EU, it's because Scotland voted - by a substantial majority, and in every electoral division - to remain within that union.

 

[ceptimus]

Good luck. Please get on with the next referendum ASAP. Just stop Sturgeon from posturing about it and get her to actually do something. She's like a cracked record.

 

[Craig B]

Good luck. Please get on with the next referendum ASAP. Just stop Sturgeon from posturing about it and get her to actually do something. She's like a cracked record.

That's very feeble stuff, ceptimus. This is an extremely complex issue, and nobody has the slightest idea what the future, even the quite near future, holds.

 

[ceptimus]

When you've already heard her say the same thing a few hundred times, do you really want her to keep repeating herself until she's made up her mind about this 'complex issue'? I just wish she'd keep her mouth shut unless and until she has something new to say.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Good luck. Please get on with the next referendum ASAP. Just stop Sturgeon from posturing about it and get her to actually do something. She's like a cracked record.

You do know she is doing something, right?

I mean even Brexiters arent that uninformed, are they?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

When you've already heard her say the same thing a few hundred times, do you really want her to keep repeating herself until she's made up her mind about this 'complex issue'? I just wish she'd keep her mouth shut unless and until she has something new to say.

Why have you brought Theresa May into this suddenly?

 

[MCel58]

@ceptimus many Scots are at least considering Independence as it actually runs in the opposite direction from that of the Brexiteers.

It's because many Scots no longer want to belong to a nation which thinks immigrants and migration are "bad" for the country. Where those same people become scapegoats for any problem a nation faces rather than deal with the facts that in a world mainly controlled by global companies that only global solutions and joint approaches will find solutions.
Where social policy and public spending are seen as the problem.
Where the values of UKIP are extolled as virtues rather than the hate filled dogma they represent.
Where there is no system of democracy that enables smaller parties a voice.

In Scotland there is considerably less disconnnect between the electorate and the politicians.

Scotland with it's social democratic agenda and modern voting system is actually a better fit with Europe than the U.K. There is a general understanding in Scotland that the EU is not only about trade but about social values like equality for all citizens. That is what Nicola Sturgeon has been trying to achieve and has been trying to plan since the day after the referendum - a way to keep Scotland in the EU Because 68% of her electorate want to stay in the EU and Scotland does not want to make the same mistakes as England and have the electorate feel disenfranchised and disengaged from politics.

So where you want her to be quiet, her electorate want her to continue to be that broken record and to keep planning as she is the only one on the side of the countless people who either did not vote for Brexit or who now wish they had not. It is not acceptable to the Scottish people to allow the rhetoric of xenophobia as demonstrated by UKIP and at the Tory Party Conference and and the increase of racist attacks to go unchallenged and they expect their politicians to make those challenges.

 

[Mid]

Ok I know bumping this thread risks a major bicker fest but it seems the right place to point out the mind numbing gall of Teresa 'Brexit as hard as diamond' May claiming other parties are obsessed with single issues detrimental to their country. In particular this line makes me want to vomit:

An SNP government interested only in stoking-up endless constitutional grievance and furthering their obsession with independence, at the expense of Scottish public services like the NHS and education

If I was living in Scotland still and there was another independence referendum I'd so vote yes just to get away from the whole nauseating Brexiting lot of them.

 

[Craig B]

I think it might in fact be seemly to reopen this thread now. We may have occasion to contribute to it soon. May's criticism of a National Party politician who is head of a devolved government, and whose party utterly dominates the devolved parliament, is that this politician is "obsessed" with independence (what is such a person more likely to be concerned about?) and is "playing politics" (what else is a politician likely to be playing?).

These absurdities suggest that panic is now taking hold of May's mind.

 

[Mid]

I imagine she realises she could well go down in history as the PM that dissolved the UK, rather than BoJo or which ever Tory follows her (I'm assuming the UK government won't be non Tory for the next decade or so at least). Given that any possible delaying tactic will be sort after as no one wants Davey Cameron's 2nd worst PM of the modern era spot.

 

[abaddon]

I think it might in fact be seemly to reopen this thread now. We may have occasion to contribute to it soon. May's criticism of a National Party politician who is head of a devolved government, and whose party utterly dominates the devolved parliament, is that this politician is "obsessed" with independence (what is such a person more likely to be concerned about?) and is "playing politics" (what else is a politician likely to be playing?).

All fair points.

These absurdities suggest that panic is now taking hold of May's mind.

If indyref2 were held and passed, I think May would have to deal with a hard Scotexit from the UK.

 

[ceptimus]

Note that the SNP still don't have the confidence to actually ask for/demand a second Indyref.

If and when they do, I imagine that the British government's response will be that yes, the Scots can hold a second referendum, but only after the Brexit negotiations are complete.

That way Scots will know the outcome of the Brexit negotiations and will have a clearer choice between remaining in the UK or becoming independent and attempting to rejoin the EU.

If Indyref 2 is held before Brexit is completed then the Scots will have a less clear choice - they still won't know whether they can join the EU and on what terms, but they also won't know the format of the UK they'll be leaving.

 

[Rolfe]

Timing is everything.

It's simply not possible to announce a new independence referendum before the formal triggering of article 50. That hasn't happened yet. It may happen on the Ides of March, in which case there may well be an announcement during the First Minister's speech to SNP conference on 18th March.

However it has been pointed out to me that delaying any firm announcement until after the local council elections at the beginning of May could well be a more sensible strategy. With that in mind I wouldn't be at all surprised if the conference speech doesn't include a firm commitment and that we'll have to wait another six weeks or more for that.

Bear in mind that Nicola Sturgeon's entire strategy to date has been to try to negotiate Brexit terms for Scotland that take account of Scotland's particular needs. This started off perfectly sincerely and to date the Scottish government document outlining the possibilities in that respect is the single most detailed document looking at the practicalities of Brexit produced by any government. However, it has been ignored. May, to whom the union is so precious, is keen to talk about a special deal for the City of London and even for Nissan, but not for one of the two partner kingdoms in the UK. Instead she tells us that there will be no Scottish government representation in the Brexit talks and that she intends to revoke the all-important Sewell Convention - which was going to be enshrined in statute according to one of the main promises of the 2014 No campaign, but of course that promise like all the others was broken. She is going to strip powers from the Scottish parliament even as her lackeys mouth meaningless words about "new powers from Brexit".

So that's up the creek now, but the First Minister still has to go through the motions. No new referendum can be called until all the possibilities for getting a tolerable Brexit deal for Scotland have been exhausted, and seen to be exhausted. Today has brought us nearly there, but not quite.

So, it's not about confidence but timing. Possibly 18th March, but actually more likely to be into May. Nobody in the SNP seriously imagines that a new referendum will not be called.

And then there is the timing of the referendum. It has to be before Brexit actually happens, that is within the next two years. The choice is clear enough. We've been given plenty only slightly-coded messages from Europe that if we get a Yes vote before actual Brexit, we won't be leaving the EU at all. A "holding pen" has been mentioned, and also the possibility of Scotland inheriting the UK's membership with just a bit of renegotiation of contributions and opt-outs and so on. It's also extremely clear that May is heading for a hard Brexit that will be particularly disastrous for Scotland, and that in particular she intends to sell out our fisheries (again) and our agriculture for some concessions for the City of London. A third point is that the EU may not look too favourably on a delay - if Scotland seems to be hedging its bets, they could blow a lot cooler.

So if it comes to a battle of wills on when the referendum is, watch this space. Our main problem is the implacably unionist nature of our foreign-owned media. If newspapers and broadcast media told the half of it, we'd be on 65% Yes by tomorrow. But then if they'd done that in 2014 we'd have been on 65% Yes then too, so we'll just have to get on with it. Which we are doing.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/levelling-the-field#/

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Note that the SNP still don't have the confidence to actually ask for/demand a second Indyref.
.

I notice Theresa doesn't have the confidence to trigger Article 50 yet either. You think she is having second thoughts?

 

[ceptimus]

If Indyref 2 were to happen prior to completing Brexit negotiations, then you could theoretically end up with RUK having better access to the EU single market than a newly independent Scotland. I know that's not likely, but it is possible.

Wouldn't it be better for Scotland to wait and see what the Brexit negotiation outcome is before deciding whether or not to leave the UK?

In any case, I don't think the British government will be minded to allow Indyref 2 while they are busy with Brexit negotiations. The government wouldn't want to be handling two sets of complex constitutional negotiations at the same time - everyone says that the Brexit negotiations alone represent a huge amount of work. Even if the referendum were held and lost, the government would still have suffered the distraction of Indyref 2 campaigning while they should really have been concentrating on getting the best Brexit deal for all concerned.

 

[ceptimus]

I notice Theresa doesn't have the confidence to trigger Article 50 yet either. You think she is having second thoughts?

Because of the interference by Gina Miller and the resulting court decision, the Prime Minister can't invoke Article 50 yet. She's doing her best to get on with it, but the remain camp are trying their utmost to thwart or delay the process in any way possible.

 

[Garrison]

Because of the interference by Gina Miller and the resulting court decision, the Prime Minister can't invoke Article 50 yet.

So I guess making our courts sovereign over British Law was yet another Brexiteer lie? You do understand that the courts being sovereign means they have to actual make judgements right? Not just rubber stamp whatever vague hallucinations Theresa May has thrown together as a Brexit, well plan is obviously too strong a word.

 

[Garrison]

I notice Theresa doesn't have the confidence to trigger Article 50 yet either. You think she is having second thoughts?

Yet to see evidence presented she had any first thoughts other than 'must get into Number 10'.

 

[ceptimus]

So I guess making our courts sovereign over British Law was yet another Brexiteer lie? You do understand that the courts being sovereign means they have to actual make judgements right? Not just rubber stamp whatever vague hallucinations Theresa May has thrown together as a Brexit, well plan is obviously too strong a word.

Of course I understand. I was just explaining to Archie why his claim that Theresa doesn't have confidence was wrong.

 

[Rolfe]

If Indyref 2 were to happen prior to completing Brexit negotiations, then you could theoretically end up with RUK having better access to the EU single market than a newly independent Scotland. I know that's not likely, but it is possible.

No, it really isn't. Not only that, but all the poisonous, destructive rhetoric we're getting from the unionists threatening to cut off English trade with an independent Scotland is so much hot air because England will have to trade with Scotland on the same basis as it trades with all the other EU states after Brexit. And they keep telling us how much trade there will be.

Wouldn't it be better for Scotland to wait and see what the Brexit negotiation outcome is before deciding whether or not to leave the UK?

Point of order. Scotland won't be "leaving the UK". When one partner in a two-partner union leaves, there is no union. But that's just semantics.

If Scotland delays all this until after Brexit, two bad things happen. First, Scotland leaves the EU and is then faced with the problem of rejoining. OK, people have indicated that this could be done in two or three years but we'd rather not have the hassle thanks. Second, Scotland seeming to hesitate between the EU and Brexit will not go down well with the EU and the present high level of sympathy and desire to be accommodating could cool off.

So no.

In any case, I don't think the British government will be minded to allow Indyref 2 while they are busy with Brexit negotiations. The government wouldn't want to be handling two sets of complex constitutional negotiations at the same time - everyone says that the Brexit negotiations alone represent a huge amount of work. Even if the referendum were held and lost, the government would still have suffered the distraction of Indyref 2 campaigning while they should really have been concentrating on getting the best Brexit deal for all concerned.

May can try to dictate all she likes but she won't necessarily get it all her own way. We do actually have a government in Scotland and they are actually quite smart and we don't necessarily have to lie down and be dictated to.