Split Thread Scottish Independence

[Darat]

We were thinking of November, but we're constantly being told that the other parties will unite to block the white paper, so there you go.

Rolfe.

That's representational democracy for you! Has the SNP revealed what they want on the referendum ballot paper yet - can't remember reading anything about it recently.

ETA: Looks like Salmond was saying back in February that the November date was no longer on the cards, quite an interesting article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/feb/25/scotland-alexsalmond

What do the polls show for the SNP at the moment?

 

[Cleon]

Good old English food!

There's something about those words in that order that seems really, really, really wrong.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

I did, for 2 years, near London. I loved it.

I hate being near London. It just reminds me that I'm not in it.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

There's something about those words in that order that seems really, really, really wrong.

It seems only Americans have this stereotype about English food. I love it. Kebabs, Curry, it's all good.

 

[funk de fino]

Which is why I have to apparently every few posts repeat something like: from where we are now I think if a referendum was held in Scotland tomorrow and a true majority (e.g. a large majority of the population takes part) wanted independence then that should happen.

Ooh, ooh, those pesky "conditions" again eh.

 

[geni]

That isn't subtle and it isn't marginal. It's evidence of a completely different voting pattern compared to the rest of Britain. It demonstrates clearly why the SNP has a right to be treated as a "big player" in the context of Scotland.

Fair enough. So we shoud treat the SNP in exactly the same way as the DUP (who actualy have more seats)?

Now I hear all the reasons for not including the SNP in the 2010 debates. Scotland is too small to matter, it would bore the English viewers and they're the people who really count, and so on. Indeed. But the fact remains, the debate was shown in Scotland and watched in Scotland, and gave the LibDems the opportunity to increase their voting share in Scotland by a very significant margin. The SNP, excluded from being able to present their case, saw their vote drop by about the same margin.

Anybody think this was accidental?

Since the general assumption was that while the debates offered an opportunity for the lib dems it would be extemely hard for them to take it yes.

 

[Dragon]

On the TV debate issue I would argue that the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems earn the right to take part by contesting every parliamentary seat (outside NI, that is).
Can't say the same for the SNP. In fact UKIP have a bigger claim to take part in the TV debates as they're contesting over 500 seats.
Didn't you have a Scottish TV debate last night?

 

[Baylor]

It seems only Americans have this stereotype about English food. I love it. Kebabs, Curry, it's all good.

Yup, and the British's oral hygiene is the envy of the world.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Yup, and the British's oral hygiene is the envy of the world.

More renowned is French oral -- oops, sorry, this isn't community forum.

To relate this topic to secession addressed in a decent discussion at the history forum, it is sort of handy that the Constitution in England is not quite written down the way our (Yank) Constitution is. This leaves the rationale for leaving the Union open to a greater scope of uncertainty and debate as to "what is right" in terms of process.

But when I put on my thinking cap, what Union would, in an act against general self interests, go to the lengths of making clear the means of dismantling itself?

The NATO alliance has basically a one year "we quit" processing period (for example, Iceland gives notice in Brussels we quit, and as agreed, our effective quit date is one year from today, or one year from next Wednesday, volcanoes permitting ...) Thta said, NATO is hardly what the United Kingdom is -- it is a coalition, not a nation state.

So, for Darat: is it reasonable to expect the formalization of a disunion process to be pursued by a Union? Czecholslovakia did its dismantling on an ad hoc basis, IIRC, though I think Yugoslavia had a provision in its framework documents for various substates to leave.

We saw how nicely that worked out, yes?

DR

 

[Darat]

Ooh, ooh, those pesky "conditions" again eh.

Sorry no idea what you mean.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Sorry no idea what you mean.

I think he remembers 1978

The result of the referendum in Scotland was a narrow majority in favour of devolution (52% to 48%).[20] However, a condition of the referendum was that 40% of the total electorate should vote in favour in order to make it valid. Thus, with a turnout of 63.6%, only 32.9% had voted "Yes". The Scotland Act 1978 was consequently repealed in March 1979 by a vote of 301-206 in parliament. In the wake of the referendum the supporters of the bill conducted a protest campaign under the slogan "Scotland said yes". They argued that the 40% rule was undemocratic and that the referendum results justified the establishment of the assembly.

 

[funk de fino]

I think he remembers 1978

Correct. 10/10

Imagine those turnouts in recent times eh? The good old days.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

I suppose this split thread is the place to make this point, or I'll be accused of derailing.

LibDems enjoy Clegg bounce in Scotland at expense of the SNP

Let's just remind ourselves of the actual Scottish votes in the last election held in Britain - the 2009 European elections.

SNP 29.1%
Labour 20.8%
Conservative 16.8%
Liberal Democrats 11.5%

That isn't subtle and it isn't marginal. It's evidence of a completely different voting pattern compared to the rest of Britain. It demonstrates clearly why the SNP has a right to be treated as a "big player" in the context of Scotland.

Now I hear all the reasons for not including the SNP in the 2010 debates. Scotland is too small to matter, it would bore the English viewers and they're the people who really count, and so on. Indeed. But the fact remains, the debate was shown in Scotland and watched in Scotland, and gave the LibDems the opportunity to increase their voting share in Scotland by a very significant margin. The SNP, excluded from being able to present their case, saw their vote drop by about the same margin.

Anybody think this was accidental?

ETA: Opinion poll figures taken from the Herald article.

Before the debate

SNP 32%
Labour 34%
Conservative 17%
Liberal Democrat 12%

After the debate

SNP 26%
Labour 36%
Conservative 14%
Liberal Democrat 20%

If a party performs badly and their support then drops, they don't have much to complain about. However, excluding a main player in this way is nothing but a subversion of the democratic process.

Rolfe.

Should the Alaskan Independence Party take part in the US debates? After all, as you said, it's only fair considering how much they could benefit.

 

[Architect]

Should the Alaskan Independence Party take part in the US debates? After all, as you said, it's only fair considering how much they could benefit.

Well done for a completely irrelevant comparison to a party who - according to their own website - enjoy only 4% of the vote in their state as opposed to the SNP, the governing party in Scotland and who hold a substantial level of support in their own country.

Now, do you intend to bring any sensible comments to the discussion?

 

[Darat]

Correct. 10/10

Imagine those turnouts in recent times eh? The good old days.

Seriously do you think (I know I'm taking it to the point of absurdity but it's to make my point very clear) that if just three people in Scotland voted in the referendum on independence and two said "yes" and one said "no" that should then bind the rest of the residents of Scotland to independence? I can't see what is wrong or even unusual in a referendum for a certain percentage of the population to have taken part before it is considered valid.

 

[Lothian]

Well done for a completely irrelevant comparison to a party who - according to their own website - enjoy only 4% of the vote in their state as opposed to the SNP, the governing party in Scotland and who hold a substantial level of support in their own country.

Now, do you intend to bring any sensible comments to the discussion?

The SNP may be popular in some constituencies but so are the BNP. UKIP got more votes than the SNP last election; they would have more claim to a podium place.

I can see an argument why national parties, the greens, UKIP and the BNP could have been invited to one of the national debates.

I see no reason why local parties SNP, Sinn Fein, DUP & Plaid Cymru, should be given country wide airtime when they are not standing in the overwhelming majority of constituencies.

I have no problem with the Scottish parties (SNP, Scottish Socialist, Scottish Labour, Scottish Green, Scottish Unionist, Scottish Senior Citizens*, Free Scotland Party, & the Pensioners Party Scotland*) joining the main parties in a separate debate on BBC Alba.






*if the cold winters haven't killed them off.

 

[Lothian]

Well done for a completely irrelevant comparison to a party who - according to their own website - enjoy only 4% of the vote in their state as opposed to the SNP, the governing party in Scotland and who hold a substantial level of support in their own country.

Now, do you intend to bring any sensible comments to the discussion?

Perhaps the comparison is not that wild. In the last general election the SNP gained the support of 10% the Scottish electorate.

 

[martu]

Can someone on the pro independence side please explain to me why they don't want to share the governance of this island with the rest of us south of the (arbitrary) Scottish border? What do you guys want from your government that's different from the rest of us? What are you missing out on today because you are not independent?

If you think it's because you're a different from the rest of us here grow up and join the 21st century. Nationalism is ridiculous and irrational unless you lack representation in government.

 

[H3LL]

[Stir the pot]

I see some of the old hysterical historical arguments among the (nearly) new ones.

Because the English were not as efficient at eliminating assimilating the Scots as the Scots were with the Picts the constant whining continues.

Scottish Independence?

I don't see why not.

I doubt many Brits are bothered one way or another and most of the English could care even less ... probably.

Scotland has the new "safety-blanket" of the EU, the Euro and its old alliance with France to fall back on should it be needed.

A UK wide referendum would be an excellent idea, particularly as most Scots probably don't live in Scotland - That way you catch 'em all.

A Scotland only referendum misses all the ex-pat Scots and the other Brits that want the whining to stop. The more support the merrier.

Pity it wasn't done before the RBS (is that Scottish) went belly up. Might have saved the Brits a few bob.

Better still, my American friend that said he enjoyed his vacation in Scotland, England probably won't be quite so confused.

[/Stir the pot]


.

 

[H3LL]

Sort of - I'd try to arrange the splits to reflect geography and population density so we end up with regions of probably in the region of say 10 million, so bung up the likes of Northumberland and Cumberia with Scotland, which would make sense in terms of shared history, culture and facing similar issues - such as sparsely populated rural areas.

You're a bit short.

Population of Scotland = ~5,062,011
Population of Northumberland = ~311,400
Population of Cumbia = ~496,600

Total = 5,834,011

They've probably gone up a bit recently but probably not by 4,000,000+.

Even including Newcastle, Leeds, Liverpool and Manchester leaves you a few million short.

People in Manchester probably don't consider themselves very Scottish (apart from the Scottish ex-pats).





.