Scotland Indyref 2

Alternatively, one can consider the "real" reasons why the SNP backtracked on raising income tax

Laffer anyone?!?

There is therefore likely to be a significant revenue risk associated with increases to the Scottish additional rate of income tax above that applicable in the rest of the UK. [b]A further risk will impact on future tax revenues where an increased additional rate of tax reduces the attractiveness of locating in Scotland in the future and reduces the potential economic and tax growth rates[/b]. HMRC’s enforcement and compliance processes ensure that individuals do not manipulate their address without genuinely relocating residence from Scotland. Some of the behaviour effects will be from legitimate migration from Scotland, either for an individual to commute to Scotland from outside Scotland, or to simply fully relocate residence and employment away from Scotland.

That's a pity BW, how's the MTBing in Norway? I feel sorry for a lot of the foreigners I know having to put up with the ridiculous bigoted attitudes being shown by so many these days.

Well, not great with all the snow. Snow biking is fun for about five minutes but at some point you just want to ride your bike rather than pushing all the time. Also, my time in the saddle's not been helped much by the fact that I've had two surgeries in the past six weeks, one to get my appendix out and one to have a perianal abscess drained. A perianal abscess somehow manages to be less fun than it sounds 🙂

Still, couple more months and Åre will be open 🙂

Delighted to see that Mrs May has listened to the will of the Scottish people and said that this is not the correct time for another referendum.

I would probably be back in Glasgow within the year if it wasn't for Brexit. I have an Italian girlfriend and two kids born in Norway.We were planning on moving back but the absolutely toxic attitudes towards foreigners

That's a bit harsh, Glasgow isn't [b][i]that[/i][/b] bad, making it out to be some sort of racist hell hole just shows how little you know about Scotland.

Mundell has added - "it's not fair" 😆

“And more than that, I think it wouldn’t be fair to the people of Scotland because they’re being asked to make a crucial decision without all the necessary information - without knowing what the future partnership would be, or what the alternative of an independent Scotland would look like.”

Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/theresa-may-will-block-indyref2-until-after-brexit-1-4393668

Change the wording in the quote above from Scotland to UK to see what hypocritical nonsense it is.

If May really does attemp0t to block a referendum all she is doing is making independence more likely

That's a bit harsh, Glasgow isn't that bad, making it out to be some sort of racist hell hole just shows how little you know about Scotland.

That's a bit harsh, Glasgow isn't that bad, making it out to be some sort of racist hell hole just shows how little you know about Scotland.

I maybe didn't make myself clear. It's the xenophobic and racist policies the government is proposing like making firms publish the number of foreigners they employ and getting schools make up lists of foreign born kids that scares me. Until my family can be protected from this sociopathic government I don't want them back in the UK

If I thought Glasgow was a racist hellhole I wouldn't be so homesick for the place 🙂

Phil your right I don't know Brucewee 😀 but I have a good nose for horseshit.

"making firms publish the number of foreigners they employ and getting schools make up lists of foreign born kids that scares me"

To be fair to us between 2003 and fairly recently we were actively helping to slaughter brown people on a completely fictional pretext. If all we're doing now is writing lists of Europeans we're moving in the right direction, you could give us some credit for that.

Vote on something that is tangible or

Vote on something that is unknown (unless you are Nicola the clairvoyant)

Which is more sensible?
Which would the party with more to hide push and how (cue: "the nasty Westminster Tories are pursuing a hard Brexshit") ?

Obvious and sensible response from May. Neither agree nor rule out. She's getting better at this stuff surprisingly.

The proposed timing is poor on all counts, other than for mischief makers/narcissists

teamhurtmore - Member
Vote on something that is tangible or

The rest of us are in the dark about brexit, tbf!

I think if permission is refused she will use that to increase support and hold one anyway without Westminster permission.

If she does that then the simple response from the no majority would be to just ignore it and not bother voting. If both sides are not engaged in the process then westminster would have every right to ignore the result.

I'm not in favour of the next Holyrood election being some sort of gating factor as regards the next referendum or it basically [i]becomes [/i] a referendum. I can see why the Tories would like it. They'd expect the Unionist vote to coalesce round them, basically forcing Scotland into a two party split with Labour, Greens and LibDems all squeezed out. It would then be up to D'Hondt to determine the number of MSPS.

"Obvious and sensible response from May. Neither agree nor rule out."

Agree. Put it off forever is the least worst option.

The UK should never hold a Referendum again IMHO, unless there really is no 'wrong' answer.

scotroutes - Member
I'm not in favour of the next Holyrood election being some sort of gating factor as regards the next referendum or it basically becomes a referendum. I can see why the Tories would like it. They'd expect the Unionist vote to coalesce round them, basically forcing Scotland into a two party split with Labour, Greens and LibDems all squeezed out. It would then be up to D'Hondt to determine the number of MSPS.

Smartest thing would be for the SNP to accept the principle. then not run on it at the next election, leave till 2025 or so then run on it..

**** canny believe I'm talking about 2025 as if it's no far away, I'm getting on a bit! 😆

Much of what the SNP would like to do they cannot because Holyrood does not have the power Things like making income tax and benefit tapers less regressive

Holyrood has had the power to vary income tax up or down by 3p for nearly 20 years and has never used that power. In fact last year even more income tax powers have been devolved.

tpbiker - Member

I think if permission is refused she will use that to increase support and hold one anyway without Westminster permission.

If she does that then the simple response from the no majority would be to just ignore it and not bother voting. If both sides are not engaged in the process then westminster would have every right to ignore the result.

Thats the danger that the unionists boycott it and a low turnout would make it difficult / impossible to claim its the settled will of the people unless more than half the POSSIBLE voters voted yes

corbyn has said tho its up to the scots - I can't see labour going for a boycott although the lib dems and Tories might. As a significant part of the scottish labour party want independence and a lot of their voters do it would be suicide for Labour in scotland to boycott

KennyP - yes and the powers that Holyrood have remain very limited and are designed in such a way as to make any changes unworkable. Quite right not to use the 3p power. Holyrood does not have the power to make major changes to rtes, to thresholds, to0 allowances or to anything but crude changes to rates

Holyrood has had the power to vary income tax up or down by 3p for nearly 20 years and has never used that power.

Like many of the devolved powers, it appears to give some responsibility without fear of anyone ever using it.

Thats the danger that the unionists boycott it and a low turnout would make it difficult / impossible to claim its the settled will of the people unless more than half the POSSIBLE voters voted yes

Not even that as then the arguement could be made that as no didn't even campaign, the result, even if 50% said yes, is void.

I don't see how voting now is in scotlands best interests. Surely if brexit is going to be a disaster as sturgeon says it will (i agree) then the sensible thing is to wait it out, see what happens and then go to the pools.

As a committed no voter last time, i'm less sure this time round, however i don't want to be making the decision based on not knowing the landscape from either side.

Sturgeon clearly wants to use the uncertainty to her own ends, this is not what is in the best intrests of Scotland. She doesn't want to take the chance that brexit will be a huge success, which is irresponsible and opportunist. The woman should spend the next 2 years running the country, which is her job.

[quote=tpbiker ]The woman should spend the next 2 years running the country, which is her job.That's a nice soundbite but we also criticise our politicians for only concentrating on the current parliament and getting to the next election without considering the more strategic, long-term commitments necessary to develop our country. There's never a 10, 15, 20+ year plan in place.

And if uncertainty is a bad thing, do we really need the current Brexit uncertainty, a settling-in period of uncertainty and then yet another indy campaign uncertainty? I'd much rather it was all got over with at the same time, one way or the other.

bit daft for the tories to come out and completely reject the section 30 thing before it's even been voted for in the Scottish Parliament.

Gives the SNP a very easy argument.

scotroutes

one way or the other.

Sensible.
Personally, thats why I always cross the road without looking, wearing my headphones and refusing to acknowledge traffic from [i]either[/i] direction 🙂

seosamh77

bit daft for the tories to come out and completely reject the section 30 thing before it's even been voted for in the Scottish Parliament.

Gives the SNP a very easy argument.

Maybe they think it'll force the SNP to explain to the scottish people why they think its the [i]right[/i] time? (even though the polls show a vast majority of scots saying "not now").

EDIT
Even harder for the green party (ha!) to make their manifesto case for the surge in Scottish public opinion they said they were waiting for. There is clearly no surge in favour.

even though the polls show a vast majority of scots saying "not now"

Source?

Given that something like 45% of Scots would vote for independence its difficult to see how a "vast majority" can be against holding a vote that would allow them to do just that

That's a nice soundbite but we also criticise our politicians for only concentrating on the current parliament and getting to the next election without considering the more strategic, long-term commitments necessary to develop our country. There's never a 10, 15, 20+ year plan in place.

There is a balance to be had and you can't tell me with a straight face that you think sturgeon does that. If we have a ref in 2018 then pretty much 4 of the last 6 years will have been spent camapaigning full on for independence. What has she actually achieved up until now in role for scotland? I'm not seing alot of output from her tbh.

Scotland could come out of this mess smalling of roses if we wait until after brexit. We've managed 300 yesrs in the union, why so desperate to leave now?

Bring back Maggie

[img] :large[/img]

eat_the_pudding - Member

Maybe they think it'll force the SNP to explain to the scottish people why they think its the right time? (even though the polls show a vast majority of scots saying "not now").

Is there any evidence Mrs T ever actually made that quote? I've been Googling and can't see any. Am not 100% saying she didn't say it, but it seems highly unlikely given her normal views.

tpbiker the timing is as it has to be because it would make remaining in the EU much easier

I'm sure they will think that. On the other hand, it just looks like the tories dictating to scotland. SNP get their result. Tories also get the result they're after too. Further polarises the british/scottish nationalist nature of scotland.

This

ever since the brexit result (and the promises made by No in the indyref) this very situation has been coming,

(massively helped along by May's poorly thought out speech in Glasgow and threats of repatriating powers 2 weeks ago)

Assuming what Mrs May meant was that she would agree to a referendum after Brexit has happened, what is the problem? If, as the SNP say, Scotland will sail quite happily into the EU then the timing is largely irrelevant? If Scotland has (supposedly) waited 300 years for independence, what's another year or two?

And given that just about every opinion poll says that the majority of Scots do not want another referendum, surely Mrs May is just going along with the wishes of the majority of the Scottish people? And going along with the wishes of the Scottish people is what Nicola is always demanding she do.

kennyp - Member
And given that just about every opinion poll says

kennyp

And given that just about every opinion poll [b]conducted by tory think tanks[/b] says that the majority of Scots do not want another referendum, surely Mrs May is just going along with the wishes of the majority of the Scottish people?

You're welcome

Well. Apart fro the fact that they can still stick to the manifesto pledge, they just can't dictate the timing. The problem is, the only way the SNP stand a chance of winning this is if they manipulate everything they can in their favour. Don't really see why the UK govt should have to allow them that advantage.

You're welcome

Care to show us some polls you regard as independent (if you'll pardon the pun) then?

And what evidence do you have that the polling organisations whose results you don't like are in fact "tory think tanks"? Or are you just saying that?

Well, question to that is, what trumps what? A manifesto pledge and a majority in the scottish parliament, or opinion polls...

A fair question indeed. Yes, it was in their manifesto pledge so they have every right to request a referendum. Equally though, the majority of voters in that election voted for parties who are in favour of not splitting the UK, and current opinion polls suggest it is a minority of Scots who want another referendum.

If anything I guess it forwards the case for PR being a fairer voting system than first past the post.

Or that we have a referendum on whether we have another referendum.

imnotverygood
Well. Apart fro the fact that they can still stick to the manifesto pledge, they just can't dictate the timing. The problem is, [b]the only way the SNP stand a chance of winning this is if they manipulate everything they can in their favour[/b]. Don't really see why the UK govt should have to allow them that advantage.

They're already playing it pretty well - by making noises about another indy referendum before brexit negotiations have even begun they've also strengthened the hand of the EU negotiators - fishing / farming / oil / renewable energy etc. etc. based in Scotland are all bargaining chips for the UK when seeking a good deal leaving the EU, the EU could turn round & say they'd welcome Scotland with open arms & have access to those industries anyway...

The SNP also made it abundantly clear in their manifesto that they'd seek another referendum if the political landscape (i.e. brexit) changed & were still democratically elected, voters knew this - it's not like they promised never to do it again, everyone knew it was always a matter of time & it will be.

By saying she'd refuse a second referendum Teresa May is only bolstering the pro-independence cause & gives Nicola Sturgeon free reign to portray her as running roughshod over the democratic process - it's not just rabid Scottish nationalists that voted against brexit...

kennyp
Care to show us some polls you regard as independent (if you'll pardon the pun) then?

Ok, forget I said anything...

However - would you then care to show me a sample of polls [i]you[/i] regard as independent, displaying statistical significance in support of [i]your[/i] original claim?

[b]And given that just about every opinion poll says that the majority of Scots do not want another referendum[/b]

?

KennyP - the majority of the electorate voted for pro independence parties and the majority of the parliament is pro independence. SNP. Green (and RISE) well over 50% of the vote

[quote=tjagain ]KennyP - the majority of the electorate voted for pro independence parties and the majority of the parliament is pro independence. SNP. Green (and RISE) well over 50% of the vote

Aye, but in a General Election, folk are voting on a range of issues. That's the danger of putting off another referendum until after the next Holyrood GE - it becomes Kenny's referendum on a referendum by default!

It would be churlish to believe, however, that folk voting SNP were not aware of their desire for independence.

Just correcting Kenny when he said the majority voted for pro union parties

NOT True!

You're confusing seats with votes

Just imagine Brussels had told the UK that they are not allowed to have a referendum. That's the difference between Scotland's 'two Unions.'

KennyP - the majority of the electorate voted for pro independence parties

Don't think they did. By my calculations the combined SNP/Green vote was 2,177,000 and the combined Tory/Labour/Liberal vote was 2,272,000.

If you are going to include the minor parties then the pro-union parties still got more votes than the pro-separation parties.

Where are you getting your figures from?

Just correcting TJ when he said the majority voted for pro independence parties.

Aye, but in a General Election, folk are voting on a range of issues.

Indeed, and it has been suggested that a fair number of folk who voted SNP did so because the Labour Party was in such disarray, rather than any desire for another referendum. Of course at that point the Brexit result was unknown.

Just imagine Brussels had told the UK that they are not allowed to have a referendum.

And had Mrs May told Scotland another referendum was totally not allowed I would have disagreed with her 100%. All she said was that this is not the right time, and opinion polls rather tend to suggest she is in tune with public feeling.

Ok, forget I said anything...

Until you back up your jibe about "tory think tanks" then I'm happy to.

Kenny - I did have a look and it depends what values you take constituency or list votes or an average of both.

Certainly the majority in parliament is pro independence

Just imagine Brussels had told the UK that they are not allowed to have a referendum. That's the difference between Scotland's 'two Unions.'

The two unions are completely different, particularly in their legal structure. One is an international treaty, one is an internal domestic matter.

The UK membership of the EU is legally for the UK parliament to determine. The UK parliament can choose to leave if it wishes. Brussels has no say in the matter.

UK constitutional affairs are reserved to the UK parliament too. So under UK law, a referendum on constitutional matters is a matter for the UK parliament. That's also the position of international law - internal devolution is an internal matter for sovereign governments to determine.

That's the law. Do we not follow the law in this country?

(Before someone suggests it: In international law, self-determination is secondary to territorial integrity. UDI is not a lawful option and self-determination does not permit votes to break up a state.)

[quote=tjagain ]Just imagine Brussels had told the UK that they are not allowed to have a referendum. That's the difference between Scotland's 'two Unions.'

The only difference?

kennyp
Until you back up your jibe about "tory think tanks" then I'm happy to.

Smashing, any further forward on this monumental list of anti-independence opinion polls & i'll point them out to you? 😆

[b]And given that just about every opinion poll says that the majority of Scots do not want another referendum[/b]

tpbiker the timing is as it has to be because it would make remaining in the EU much easier

Wasnt aware of that. Not saying its not true, but where has this been stated? Any definitive proof of this?

I want whats best for scotland. Waiting seems to mehe best option

TJ, I took the results from the 2015 wiki page. I totalled up the number of votes cast for each party, both constituency and list.

Am happy to have my arithmetic proved wrong, but not seeing yet where/if I've made a mistake. What figures do you get and from where?

Am also happy to admit the SNP did win the majority of the seats, but still contend that the majority of voters did not vote for pro-independence parties.

PS off out now so won't see any reply for a few hours.

tpbiker
The theory is that Scotland would remain in the EU and the rUK would leave both the UK and the EU at the same time. Its much easier for a fudge to be found that would allow Scotland continuing membership than leaving the EU as part of the UK then reapplying as iScotland

Its not a sure fire thing but we know that most in the EU would like Scotland to continue as a member for a whole load of reasons not least of which is the fishing and the oil

Its cool Kenny. Your arithmetic is correct.

Smashing, any further forward on this monumental list of anti-independence opinion polls & i'll point them out to you?

Here you go then... [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39264468 ]opinion polls[/url]

Cheers TJ......I have been proved wrong about these things many times before admittedly!!

(-:

And will be again.

Nice link Kenny - Curtis is perhaps overly fair to the SNP so his analysis certainly has no unionist bias

tjagain, you've got to be factually correct or you'll appear like a fanatic and no one will be swayed by your arguments. As I understand it one member could veto Scotland's addition to Europe and at least one member has already said not on my watch, back of the line please.

I thought even the SNP has acknowledged this by softening their (probable manifesto promise) to we'll join the EFTA.

[quote=tjagain ]The theory is that Scotland would remain in the EU and the rUK would leave both the UK and the EU at the same time.

I thought I'd already debunked that one - and you don't appear to have replied to my post to explain how Scotland can become independent from the UK in 6 months when it was going to take 18 months last time. I'm open to discussion on this, but it's a point which doesn't seem to have been addressed.

Just imagine Brussels had told the UK that they are not allowed to have a referendum. That's the difference between Scotland's 'two Unions.'

TJ thay's exactly why the UK is getting [b]OUT[/b] of Europe before it's too late and Brussels does have a veto. It also reflects the key and vital difference between the UK and Scotland, one is an independent country seeking to remain independent and the other is a "nation" / region trying to gain independence. Thats a massive difference. BTW many of my French relatives who are very hostile to the EU feel it's too late for them as they have adopted the €.

n how Scotland can become independent from the UK in 6 months when it was going to take 18 months last time.

Or how the UK will take at least 2 yrs to dissolve a 40yr old union but the SNP think a 300yr old union can be dissolved in 6 months.

But I don't think there will be an indyref until after Brexit. It isn't acceptable to compromise Brexit negotiations by trying to do indy negotiations at the same time.

As Brexit is the reason for the new referendum is makes sense to wait until after Brexit to hold the indyref. So we can see exactly what Breixit is before voting.

The UK is 300 yrs old. What difference does another year or two either way make?

kennyp - Member
Am also happy to admit the SNP did win the majority of the seats, but still contend that the majority of voters did not vote for pro-independence parties.

As @aracer says the SNP are skewered over the timing, they can't have a Referendum soon enough to exit the UK before we exit the EU - even if they held it tomorrow. May is quite right to push Indy Ref 2 until post March 2019 as actually it makes no difference as even if it was in Sep 2018 the SNP can't action it fast enough.

kennyp
Here you go then...

Ok, that BBC article mentions 2 of 5 polls conducted this year - one for the Herald, one for The Sunday Times & gives us an average of 48% v 52% in favour of Scotland rembrexiteering - shenanigans aside, it's a bit close for comfort for the PM - especially with the police investigation into tory election fraud hanging over her, a brexit secretary who doesn't have a clue what's happening, a treasurer who can't count, and she's under fire for ignoring the democratic will of the Scottish electorate - lucky she can rely on the BBC to blame everything on Jeremy Corbyn eh? 😆

aracer - Member
tjagain » The theory is that Scotland would remain in the EU and the rUK would leave both the UK and the EU at the same time.
I thought I'd already debunked that one - and you don't appear to have replied to my post to explain how Scotland can become independent from the UK in 6 months when it was going to take 18 months last time. I'm open to discussion on this, but it's a point which doesn't seem to have been addressed.

No real point in arguing the point though till the SNPs position is made clear, as you can't win it from a stay in perspective, at the moment.

[quote=seosamh77 ]I don't think it's debunked(as I think if political will is there(beyond campaign) it could happen.)

Becoming independent in 6 months, or some political wrangling to keep Scotland in the EU whilst still being part of a UK which has left the EU? The former isn't really related to political will, it's about the practicalities of separation which can't be done tomorrow (and the required political will has to come from both sides unless iS wants to have a really shit deal). The latter would require an unthinkable level of political will from the 27 which I'm not sure they're capable of.

Hence my opinion that it's political posturing and power positioning rather than a real attempt to have a referendum then. I suspect your opinion on whether a referendum will happen depends on your opinion on how accurate the SNP are in portraying it as a way Scotland can stay in the EU (rather than rejoin), though as already pointed it this is a risky strategy anyway given the significant proportion of those pro independence who also want to be independent from the EU.

As I understand it one member could veto Scotland's addition to Europe and at least one member has already said not on my watch, back of the line please.

Secondly- which country has said they'd veto Scotland. The Spanish have already said that the Scottish situation is completely different from the Catalan one.

"Secondly- which country has said they'd veto Scotland. The Spanish have already said that the Scottish situation is completely different from the Catalan one."

If the 27 remaining EU nations are happy to give Scotland membership (including EZ), let them come out and say so.

It would allay fears on both sides.

Aracer - as I said its not without its problems and its not certain but its the best way for and independent scotland to stay in the EU hence the need for the referendum before the UK leaves the EU

the UK leaving the EU changes the situation with the spanish completely - and remember that the spanish fishing fleet need access to scottish waters

outofbreath - Member

If the 27 remaining EU nations are happy to give Scotland membership (including EZ), let them come out and say so.

Edit, which is a fair political tactic and one that scottish nationalists need to understand they negotiate very smartly.(a difficult task, given it's not really provable from their perspective till after the fact.(unless the SNP have a card up their sleeves.(uncertain at the moment, as is their position on the EU too.)))

The theory is that Scotland would remain in the EU and the rUK would leave both the UK and the EU at the same time. Its much easier for a fudge to be found that would allow Scotland continuing membership than leaving the EU as part of the UK then reapplying as iScotland

Its not a sure fire thing but we know that most in the EU would like Scotland to continue as a member for a whole load of reasons not least of which is the fishing and the oil

as has been pointed out timings mean that hat approach wont work.

Sturgeon is clearly being an oportunist, trying to capatilise on the uncertainty of brexit. If we vote no again then i fully expect her to call yet another vote once we have actually left europe and things have fallen apart for the uk.

That is a far more justifiable time to call another referendum, but then again she is perhaps not so confident that brexit will be a disaster as myself, and will miss the opportunity. Cant understand how people can't see this for what it blatantly is, self serving politics at its finest. She clearly doesn't have our best interests at heart.

Also, given shes been telling us for the last 5 years that joining the EU is a sure thing for an indpendent scotland, why does it matter if we leave as part of the UK and then rejoin after independence. That was always the plan anyhow wasn't it?

Some in the EU have suggested that Scotland could go into some sort of constitutional "holding pen" post Brexit and prior to its situation being resolved. That would avoid any in-out-in faff. Of course, there's nothing in the treaties about this situation and I can't see any top officials saying much before an indy vote as they'd be seen to be interfering in internal UK politics.

no tpbiker - the plan was always to have continueing EU membership

IN some ways its actually easier this way as some of the untangling for rUK and Scotland is the same issues

, why does it matter if we leave as part of the UK and then rejoin after independence.

"I can't see any top officials saying much before an indy vote as they'd be seen to be interfering in internal UK politics."

Yeah, that'll be the reason. 🙂

Well, they've said that's the reason. Of course, they could all be in on some sort of nationalist conspiracy....