Francesca R
Girl
You should no doubt thank Farage for helping too!
Indyref 2: This time it's personal.
- Thread starter Archie Gemmill Goal
- Start date
I think Farage is a literal as well as figurative 'Little Englander'.
Francesca R
Girl
He helps almost any politician look good.
Follow the UK not the English.
Francesca R
Girl
May's preferred outcome is evidently:
--"Best deal" for UK which has Scotland moderately onside
--No IndyRef 2
--Lollipops for afters
This puts the ball in Sturgeon's court for (i) trying to push the idea of Scotland having closer EU relationship while still "Brexiting", or (ii) pushing for IndyRef2 whether officially authorised or not.
Unless the two of them sort things out of course. May has sent several signals from minute one that her view is (i) UK stays a union (ii) the May Tories would like to be more relevant to Scots. There would need to be carrots associated with (ii) I am sure, revising the Barnett Formula isn't one apparently.
--"Best deal" for UK which has Scotland moderately onside
--No IndyRef 2
--Lollipops for afters
This puts the ball in Sturgeon's court for (i) trying to push the idea of Scotland having closer EU relationship while still "Brexiting", or (ii) pushing for IndyRef2 whether officially authorised or not.
Unless the two of them sort things out of course. May has sent several signals from minute one that her view is (i) UK stays a union (ii) the May Tories would like to be more relevant to Scots. There would need to be carrots associated with (ii) I am sure, revising the Barnett Formula isn't one apparently.
I don't understand what Scots want. I know Scots keep repeating that the majority of them voted in favour of remaining in the EU - but that may be impossible and it could only be possible if and when Scotland separates from the UK.
Of course, the overriding aim of the SNP is separation from the UK so you'd think that Sturgeon would welcome the EU referendum result as a golden opportunity to push immediately for another shot at breaking Scotland lose from the UK but she seems reluctant to do that.
I suggest that someone in the government keeps count of how many times an SNP MP asks a question reminding the government that Scotland voted remain: then, as part of the answer, they could say, "I thank the member for asking that question for the three hundredth time and can assure him/her that once the SNP make some practical proposals on how they would like to proceed, I will give those proposals my immediate consideration."
Of course, the overriding aim of the SNP is separation from the UK so you'd think that Sturgeon would welcome the EU referendum result as a golden opportunity to push immediately for another shot at breaking Scotland lose from the UK but she seems reluctant to do that.
I suggest that someone in the government keeps count of how many times an SNP MP asks a question reminding the government that Scotland voted remain: then, as part of the answer, they could say, "I thank the member for asking that question for the three hundredth time and can assure him/her that once the SNP make some practical proposals on how they would like to proceed, I will give those proposals my immediate consideration."
Francesca R
Girl
Well many Scots want independence from the UK but membership of the EU. I can't speak for the internal consistency of this, with many it is linked to the idea that "Westminster has screwed Scotland over for centuries".
The Scotland-voted-remain result gives those with that view and extra push for wanting independence which is not surprising. My local authority voted remain a lot more heavily than Scotland did but nobody ever wanted the London Borough of Islington to become independent (though one sees wacky suggestions that way now) so it doesn't figure the same way. Without the pre-existing view (and case for) independence the fact that some parts of the UK voted different from the outcome is, well, just tough luck.
As (I think) I pointed out on page 1, the background conditions for Scottish independence now are pretty unarguably less favourable than they were in 2014 and Sturgeon knows this. Additionally she would want to be 99% sure of winning a second referendum (I don't know what polling currently indicates but I think it spiked on 24 June, but it would probably have to hold up at landslide levels for a while)
The Scotland-voted-remain result gives those with that view and extra push for wanting independence which is not surprising. My local authority voted remain a lot more heavily than Scotland did but nobody ever wanted the London Borough of Islington to become independent (though one sees wacky suggestions that way now) so it doesn't figure the same way. Without the pre-existing view (and case for) independence the fact that some parts of the UK voted different from the outcome is, well, just tough luck.
As (I think) I pointed out on page 1, the background conditions for Scottish independence now are pretty unarguably less favourable than they were in 2014 and Sturgeon knows this. Additionally she would want to be 99% sure of winning a second referendum (I don't know what polling currently indicates but I think it spiked on 24 June, but it would probably have to hold up at landslide levels for a while)
Last edited:
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
Not from what Davis has been saying.
Meh, I just don't think May has the skill to stop it.
Sturgeon is far more popular in Scotland than May is in the UK and has more coherent support.
Again, I don't see May as having anything to offer.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
Well I'm happy to try to add any clarity I can but 'what Scots want' is just as diverse a range of thing as 'what English people want' so it's not easy to pin down a single definition.
Looking at the votes and as I said earlier it seems that the majority want to stay in the UK as a member of the EU.
That seems to be what is currently being explored by Nicola Sturgeon (along with Gibraltar and probably Northern Ireland too). Whether it's possible or not that seems to be the desire. I reckon it's probably a 5% chance. Maybe less. It's a long-shot anyway.
Failing that, and remembering that despite all the spin the Indyref result wasn't all that more convincing that the Leave vote at 45/55, then there is a sense that at least some people who voted No would rather be independent and remain within the EU than stay part of the UK and leave.
As such circumstances have changed. If the only way Scotland can stay within the EU is to declare independence then I think that question needs to be put to the nation again. The timing of any referendum would be tricky. I don't think it could be left until we know what kind of deal the EU and UK have agreed sadly.
Ideally we'd also have a clear picture from May on exactly what she is and isn't prepared to offer Scotland in terms of further powers. A clear picture of the decision would be great. I don't think, yet again, that we will have that luxury.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
I don't think anyone who thought about it for any length of time would find any inconsistency to be honest.
If you are of the opinion that the EU is the right place to be then it makes nothing but sense that you would want your country represented within it as a full member - not a region of another state with a tricky relationship with that union.
If that other state also decides it wants to leave and you don't then the logic becomes even more clear.
The idea that somehow Nationalism means isolating yourself and not co-operating with any of your neighbours is an alien one in Scotland. It seems that a lot of people struggle with the concept, perhaps understandably given how nationalism has represented itself in other places.
Francesca R
Girl
Rather early days to call that one I think. I am rather optimistic about May's competence. We'll see (and will have to wait post "honeymoon" if there even is one)
Again early days. Sturgeon doesn't have a parliamentary majority in Scotland (though of course has a more than 95% majority of Scottish Westminster seats), May does have one (just) in the UK
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
Thats a false comparison due to different systems.sturgeon has a greater percentage of the popular vote if were talking about levels of support that's maybe a fairer comparison though I'm not sure it's relevance to the question to be honest.
Certainly there are 4 things that Scotland wants given its demographics and its cultural heritage. It wants to access to the common market, it wants EU migration, not only does it want it but it's demographic make up requires it, it wants access to science, research, regional development and University funding and it wants to keep current eu legislation liike the Bill of rights. There are many more things but these are some of the things that it wants. I think the rest of the U.K. have to remember that since the 1200s Scotland has had treaties with European countries (namely the auld alliance) long before it had treaties with England. This is part of its cultural and political heritage.
Really? No English cringe?
From wiki (definition of Scottish cringe):
"The cringe is said to manifest as feelings of low self-worth and embarrassment felt by Scottish people in response to overt expressions of Scottish cultural identity"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_cringe
Have you ever read the Guardian? The opinion pieces are virtually all English cringes.
Haven't you seen Labour MP's posting pics of white van man with his St. George cross flying? (think it was Thornberry)
Saying that there is a special Scottish Cringe sounds like you are trying to find a reason to explain why people seem embarrassed when fervent Nats start holding forth at social gatherings.
I think there are a number of issues.
1) The SNP are a minority government, they may not be able to gain enough support to promote another referendum.
2) The UK government will be interested in other issues. They may say the last referendum was once in a life time. Go away get a mandate from the electorate at the next elections (2020?) and we can take it forward then.
3) Even once there was a referendum there would be a significant amount of work to split the union, and I suspect this will be behind the UK exiting the EU in priorities.
4) There is a significant political risk to saying if one part of a region opts to stay in a union they have the right to do so. This would give the Northern Isles an argument that if they voted to remain in the UK they would have the right to do so.
5) It is not clear an independent Scotland would wish to be in the EU. Scotland probably has most to gain in the UK by exiting the EU. There is a reason why Norway, Iceland, Greenland, the Faroes, are not part of the EU.
6) There is a strong democratic argument that a) Scotland voted to remain in the UK and b) the UK voted to leave the EU. Opposing this is 'undemocratic'. (Even though I agree with the sentiments).
The consequence is that I cannot realistically see an independent Scotland coming into existence until the UK has left the EU. An independent Scotland would have to negotiate to join the EU, there would need to be a referendum on joining the EU and this might not what Scotland decides.
1) The SNP are a minority government, they may not be able to gain enough support to promote another referendum.
2) The UK government will be interested in other issues. They may say the last referendum was once in a life time. Go away get a mandate from the electorate at the next elections (2020?) and we can take it forward then.
3) Even once there was a referendum there would be a significant amount of work to split the union, and I suspect this will be behind the UK exiting the EU in priorities.
4) There is a significant political risk to saying if one part of a region opts to stay in a union they have the right to do so. This would give the Northern Isles an argument that if they voted to remain in the UK they would have the right to do so.
5) It is not clear an independent Scotland would wish to be in the EU. Scotland probably has most to gain in the UK by exiting the EU. There is a reason why Norway, Iceland, Greenland, the Faroes, are not part of the EU.
6) There is a strong democratic argument that a) Scotland voted to remain in the UK and b) the UK voted to leave the EU. Opposing this is 'undemocratic'. (Even though I agree with the sentiments).
The consequence is that I cannot realistically see an independent Scotland coming into existence until the UK has left the EU. An independent Scotland would have to negotiate to join the EU, there would need to be a referendum on joining the EU and this might not what Scotland decides.
I think that as part of the Union treaty, Scotland adopted the English pound because the Scottish currency was on a downer (on a 10:1 exchange rate). Historically I think the pound is English, is issued by the bank of England. Scotland can go back to the pre union state and issue 10 Scots pounds for each English pound. It may be more sensible to switch to the Euro once independent. It makes as much sense as continuing to use the pound sterling. Rather more if Scotland is to be part of the EU.
But does it want it at a cost of losing access to the UK common market?
But will they like it when they get it? England did not. Although England equally needed it.
But does it want this at the risk of losing access to English science and research?
Actually I think this is council of Europe not EU
The Treaty of Lambeth between England and France predates the 'Auld Alliance'. The treaty of York between England and Scotland predates the 'Auld Alliance'. Nice mythology but not true. It is worth remembering the oldest extant treaty in the world is that between England and Portugal 1373.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
No I was careful with my words. I said England and meant England. It is England that is on the dark path. The choice for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is whether they continue to follow it.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
This is one position. Of course that position would also logically entail that the debt is not Scotland's either. Which was something that FrancescaR seemed to get quite upset about.
A more reasonable position might be that the assets and liabilities are shared between all parts of the UK and that a negotiation is needed to agree any future split in the event of the UK separating.
At the time of the Union money was paid to Scotland (used to pay off the Darien scheme) to compensate Scotland for taking a share of the National debt of England. So this issue was addressed at the time of Union. The exact details of a share can be arged, but Scotland accepted a share at the time of Union.