Forum menu
What this decision means is there is no way for Scotland to leave the UK without permission. Thats not a voluntary union or one of equals.
One thing that occurs to me is that decision seems to strengthen the argument that under UN law Scotland has a right to chose independence if it wants.
No – but you can conclude it was a vote to have another referendum. Clear manifesto commitment, 3 elections at least that a majority government was elected on a manifesto commitment to have another referendum.
Well it's moot - you may not want a ref but if you vote SNP for other issues you know they're going to try and get one wether or not you personally care. Loads of issues.
I do however think that ScotGov should be allowed to have one. Of course, the court decision today only interprets the law which arose from the devolution act, so it needs another act to change it.
So all these folk who tell us that Scotland isn’t a separate country, just a country/region within the UK & NI, are they also demanding that England & Wales immediately leave the World Cup and for the next one we’ll play as the United Kingdom (and Northern Ireland)?
Those are just sporting teams in a competition, they don't necessarily have anything to do with political boundaries. See also:
Serbia and Montenegro in 2006 world cup
Ireland rugby union
England cricket
Various Olympic teams that are dependent territories or other e.g. Palestine, Kosovo
Of course, the court decision today only interprets the law which arose from the devolution act, so it needs another act to change it.
TBH I can't believe there's any real surprise at the court's decision. Saying this is only an advisory referendum so it doesn't really count was never ever going to be a convincing legal argument.
Well it’s moot – you may not want a ref but if you vote SNP for other issues you know they’re going to try and get one wether or not you personally care. Loads of issues.
That's the thing. If all the other SNP policies were so attractive to voters then AN Other party (just for arguments sake, let's call them Labour in Scotland) could adopt all those policies except that of an IndyRef.
don't think anyone is surprised at the outcome. I thought there was a chance it could go the scottish government way because its so obviously perverse and anti democratic and that the supreme court might therefore give a pragmatic decision.
You can only play the game in front of you. Until Westminster and Holyrood elections are purely proportional representation then it’s difficult to assign exact percentages to opinions on policies.
My word, that's incredible clutching at straws!
Not only do the polls generally reflect that there should not be independence (albeit not by much), but there's an even greater majority opposed to another referendum, so clearly not the "will of the people" or whatever to have another vote.
Do the Tories have "No Indi ref" in their manifesto?
The opportunity to be governed properly, by politicians who seem to at least want to try to address some of the issues presented, is an opportunity I’d like to take.
+1
My word, that’s incredible clutching at straws!
Not only do the polls generally reflect that there should not be independence (albeit not by much), but there’s an even greater majority opposed to another referendum, so clearly not the “will of the people” or whatever to have another vote.
I will see your single poll and raise you 12 polls all within the last two years, every one of which shows most people in favour of a referendum:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence#Timing_of_a_second_referendum
It's almost like the answer you get in polling depends on how you ask the question.
Polls are not votes anyway. Successive elections have produced a majority in parliament of representatives who stood on a platform of having a second referendum.
crossed Full Member
Just say that Westminster say yes to another indy referendum, the votes are cast and counted and again the Scots vote against independence.What happens then?
Do the same vocal pro-independence people just carry on shouting the odds about how unfair it is? Do we just keep having referendums on it every few years until the vocal few get what they want?
Normally I think there should be an implicit acceptance of a decent period between such referendums, not least to avoid the "neverendum" issue. (I am avoiding the issue of what would count as a "decent period" and what chance there is that any agreement on it could ever be made between the parties involved.)
However Brexit really does feel like a material change in what the UK is, a lot of the arguments during the 2014 referendum campaign involved the UK's membership of the EU and in the 2016 referendum Scotland showed a majority in favour of remaining in the EU, so the UK's membership in it was probably an important factor in the No vote in 2014. So for that reason I felt that another referendum is justified, irrespective of how soon it it after the last.
(Also at this point it is going to be a minimum of 9 years since the last vote by the time another happens, and probably longer. That's a not inconsiderable portion of the oft-quoted (and frequently argued over) "once in a generation" stance taken by some in 2014, with generations considered to be about 20-30 years, according to Google.)
This is verging on the faintly ridiculous, picking and choosing numbers that suit your agenda.
Those 12 polls do show that, when you are talking about the question of WHEN to have a referendum. If you're asking whether or not to have one at all, the four polls directly above ALL show majority opposition to a referendum, with the most recent at 59% to 28%.
Parliamentary majorities are not the same as support for a single cause, and the YouGov link I posted earlier backs that up as independence is middling to low in voter priorities.
No – but you can conclude it was a vote to have another referendum. Clear manifesto commitment, 3 elections at least that a majority government was elected on a manifesto commitment to have another referendum.
To deny this manifesto commitment is a clear affront to democracy. I was talking to a died in the wool unionist today who agrees its a clear denial of democracy
This clear manifesto commitment has already been ignored repeatedly so why is this time different? I have friends in Scotland who are strongly against independence but have voted for the SNP as the alternative was a wasted vote or a Tory. They felt comfortable doing this as the SNP leadership has repeatedly put off any sort of actual commitment to another referendum.
The biggest problem of this thread is that it's not even close to being representative of Scotland, it's very pro indy, but the reality is that Scotland has a lot of unionists, monarchists, etc who will never vote for the SNP, it's a bit like having a pro indy chat on a rangers forum 😂
I find that a really odd analysis Gribs given that Sturgeon has made it clear that once the dust had settled from Covid she was going for it
2014 a majority voted no, 2022 Supreme Court says Scotland can’t decide alone if they can have a referendum. Angry Scottish pensioners still want one and think it’s unfair, young Scottish people say they are relieved.
We can get some idea of how that might go if we look at other territories that have left the UK, decided they didn’t like it, and applied to rejoin…
Genuine question, which territories were they?
This is verging on the faintly ridiculous, picking and choosing numbers that suit your agenda.
Those 12 polls do show that, when you are talking about the question of WHEN to have a referendum. If you’re asking whether or not to have one at all, the four polls directly above ALL show majority opposition to a referendum, with the most recent at 59% to 28%.
I agree, it is ridiculous.
I said, 'We have to go with who voted for which party and what was in their manifestos'.
You said, 'Ha! Look at my POLL that have I have picked that supports my view!'
I said, 'Ha! Look at all my POLLS that support my view (but actually polls can't be trusted because who commissions them and the wording of the questions greatly affect the outcome)!'
You said, 'Hey, you can't just go and pick polls that support your view!'
By the way, have a look at who the clients were for each of the polls you're citing. I think you'll find their neutrality is questionable, to say the least.
Anyway, as TJ says, polls aren't votes. The only way to settle this question is to have another referendum.
Can we stop this now, please?
Argee - actually we have all shades of opinion from Scotland represented here
We have ideological nationalists, we have pragmatic nationalists, we have pragmatic unionists and we have ideological unionists
IMO its split roughly into thirds in Scotland. Yo have the ideological nationalists for whom independence no matter the cost is key. We have the Ideological Unionists for whom the union is all and we have in the middle those pragmatists like me who will vote on what they believe will give us the best government.
My preferred solution would be a proper federal UK with properly representative democratic voting processes. Its not on offer and never will be so my choice is between the corrupt, undemocratic and dysfunctional UK or a decent chance of a progressive properly democratic government. Its a no brainer
Edit:
If labour were offering proper electoral reform and re-entry into the EU my enthusiasm for independence would be diminished greatly. Im a pragmatist
Genuine question, which territories were they?
There are none - thats the point
Genuine question, which territories were they?
Good question. Surely there must be at least one...
It's been said many times and I think a great deal hangs on the fact that in 2014 the switherers were assured that an independent Scotland would be out of the EU on its ear.
Two years later the majority of Scottish votes indicated that being part of the EU was the preferred option. We were dragged out, along with many others, by a series of lies. Given the new political landscape another vote is not unreasonable.
Although I do think that negotiations with Westminster on a reasonable package would prove impossible as, as we have seen, you can't negotiate if the other side doesn't bother engaging.
Although I do think that negotiations with Westminster on a reasonable package would prove impossible as, as we have seen, you can’t negotiate if the other side doesn’t bother engaging.
The really annoying thing for me about that is being unco operative would damage rUK as well
unco operative
Misspelling or do you mean 'A remarkable worker' Unco being a Scottish word, maybe its a bit of sneakiness most English people here wouldnt recognize.
useless spelling I'm afraid
Argee – actually we have all shades of opinion from Scotland represented here
We have ideological nationalists, we have pragmatic nationalists, we have pragmatic unionists and we have ideological unionists
I've read mainly pro nationalist stuff for pages now, STW is left leaning, always has been, and that predominantly one sided view hides the real reason why things happen, Brexit happened because we all ignored the 'dafties', they won, same as the stuff i read on this thread, you're ignoring the fight from the unionists and so on, which will be full volume when/if IndyRef2 happens.
Although I do think that negotiations with Westminster on a reasonable package would prove impossible as, as we have seen, you can’t negotiate if the other side doesn’t bother engaging.
New broom in charge now so maybe some progress on that?…
[i]Speaking at Prime Minister's Questions, he said: "The people of Scotland want us to be working on fixing the major challenges that we collectively face, whether that's the economy, supporting the NHS or indeed supporting Ukraine.
"Now is the time for politicians to work together and that's what this government will do."[/i]
My preferred solution would be a proper federal UK with properly representative democratic voting processes. Its not on offer and never will be
Why not though? Serious question?
Also, question 2: do you think an Indy Scotland and possible successful joining of the EU is likely before the UK eventually goes crawling back?
Why not though? Serious question?
Totally rejected by both main parties in Westminster
do you think an Indy Scotland and possible successful joining of the EU is likely before the UK eventually goes crawling back?
Yes. No major issues with iScotland joining, the will is there on both sides, it could be done in a very short timespan.
Uk - its not happening for decades if ever
They've not worked out the cost, either positive or negative of joining the EU, or actually understanding the time it would take to join, and what happens in-between, so many questions that need answers to either support independence, or be against it.
They’ve not worked out the cost, either positive or negative of joining the EU, or actually understanding the time it would take to join, and what happens in-between, so many questions that need answers to either support independence, or be against it.
Yea, the UK government would never allow a referundum on leaving a union without this kind of detail being available.
Oh...
They’ve not worked out the cost, either positive or negative of joining the EU,
Thats not rocket science. We will be net contributors and IIRC at a smaller rate per head of population that the UK. We of course know that every £ paid into the EU you get back multiple times in increased trade. all well known stuff
or actually understanding the time it would take to join
given we are compliant with EU law there is no need for it to take very long at all. last time around the Scottish government wanted to ask questions like this. EU can only respond to questions from the UK government. The Uk government refused to ask. Now post brexit the EU will be able to answer these questions when presented by the scots government
Last time the Scots Government published a lengthy paper detailing much of these sorts of questions and i am sure will do so again
Yes. No major issues with iScotland joining, the will is there on both sides, it could be done in a very short timespan.
Uk – its not happening for decades if ever
Well the whole 'Independent Scotland' has been on the go for over 800 years. I think we're ok with waiting 😉
or actually understanding the time it would take to join
2030. With Ukraine. Assuming support for independence now increases beyond that which a UK government can not ignore, and I wouldn’t bet against that now the nature of the relationship is being made clearer. Desperate stuff all this… all it needed was for the devolved administration to have been involved and have a say in what form Brexit took, and for that to enable deeper devolution, and the support for an Indy Scotland could have been dying away now.
Yes. No major issues with iScotland joining, the will is there on both sides, it could be done in a very short timespan.
Uk – its not happening for decades if ever
Point is, you have to win a referendum first. And it should take a LONG time to actually leave, and rightly so.
Thats not rocket science. We will be net contributors and IIRC at a smaller rate per head of population that the UK. We of course know that every £ paid into the EU you get back multiple times in increased trade. all well known stuff
TJ, i was meaning for the DefactoRef, give the facts and sell it then, focus on that over the next year or two.
Both sides know what they're doing though, UK Gov know the longer the SNP are in power in the current format, the more they can flounder, the next year or so is recession hell as well, so more negativity, it's the same for SNP, they want IndyRef2 now as the tories are eating themselves, the country (and world) is in a bad state and so on.
All i know is that i hear two stories, those independents who want it without care of the positives or negatives, and those wall sitters who want to know if they will be better or worse off.
And it should take a LONG time to actually leave, and rightly so.
Why?
The quicker its done the less disruption.
It needs to be done right not rushed through, like Brexit. This kind of negotiation is very complicated and should take time. I'm sure you'll say "it's perfectly simple" but I'm not convinced.
It's just a poll, but it's still interesting assuming it gives us an insight into where the country is starting from:
https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1595498834695958528
Hmm.. that seems to suggest that independence as a concept is less important than the usual healthcare/schools/jobs etc. Maybe people don't realise that healthcare/schools/jobs are what's at stake here?
Maybe people don’t realise that healthcare/schools/jobs are what’s at stake here?
Or they realise that's exactly what's at stake.
You seem to be suggesting healthcare/schools/jobs will all suffer under independence. Maybe people believe these things are going to suffer more under the union than under independence.
If it could lead to the leaving the UK. Meanwhile the courts have rules it’s that it can’t be done like that and the last referendum showed that more than 50% don’t want to leave.
If it could lead to the leaving the UK. Meanwhile the courts have rules it’s that it can’t be done like that and the last referendum showed that more than 50% don’t want to leave.
tbh, I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that because of the court ruling everyone has to get back in their box and be quiet?
Also, you are aware that there has been a fairly significant development since 2014 that many would argue makes the No arguments from back then null and void?
It may be that the SNP voters know that there'd simply be a referendum in which they could vote No, thereby cancelling out their SNP vote.
What that poll says to me is that many folk would be voting for independence - because from that question thats what voting SNP would mean - because they believe as I do those things that are important ie schools and hospitals would be better if we were independent. IE pragmatic independence supporters like me. So Schools and hospitals are the most important issue. Independence is how we achieve better
Independence is not the aim - its the vehicle
It may be that the SNP voters know that there’d simply be a referendum in which they could vote No, thereby cancelling out their SNP vote.
No molgrips - read it. They know that voting SNP at the next election - and thats a significant increase in the vote - would lead to independence without another poll
If the SNP do make the next GE a defacto referendum I will vote SNP - something I have never done before
Maybe people don’t realise that healthcare/schools/jobs are what’s at stake here?
Thats the reverse of what that poll says - it says that people understand independence is the best way to improve services
This kind of negotiation is very complicated and should take time. I’m sure you’ll say “it’s perfectly simple” but I’m not convinced.
This. What is the current proposal for a currency for an independent Scotland? (That's where they lost it for me last time...there was no coherent plan in place).
No plan as yet. I'm sure there will be and like yo I want a better answer than last time
The problem is adopting the euro is the obvious best answer but after 20 years of anti EU propaganda its a vote loser
Yep, but remaining tied to GBP isn't independence 😉
So would using the euro be? Are you saying Germany is not independent?
Remember the bank of england is the UK reserve bank so partly belongs to Scotland.
There are also several countries that use the dollar
No molgrips – read it. They know that voting SNP at the next election – and thats a significant increase in the vote – would lead to independence without another poll
I have read the tweet - is there a link to the actual poll questions?
I think the SNP has to get away from saying there is one single plan this time around. Most decisions are going to rely on a series of previous decisions.
As far as currency goes, I would lay out options and make clear what the preferences are. For example: 'We'd prefer a currency union but failing that our next option would be our own currency, followed by the Euro, followed by using the pound without a currency union.' Not my opinion, by the way, just an example.
My question to the No side would be, what is the exchange rate between the Euro and the Pound going to be in 5 years time? What are interest rates going to be in 5 years time?
If you're going to demand assurances and guarantees from the Yes side I think it's only fair you provide assurances and guarantees yourself.
The union is no longer the stable option.
So would using the euro be? Are you saying Germany is not independent?
Tbh honest I don't fully understand how the ECB operates with member states, whether they have any freedom to set monetary policy (assume they do with fiscal policy).
The difference is, Germany chose to join a union and currency...Scotland would have voted to leave UK so to continue to use GBP would seem odd, to say the least
I have read the tweet – is there a link to the actual poll questions?
Bit more info here:
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/23146084.channel-4-poll-half-scots-vote-snp-leave-uk/
But yeah, it's just a poll and nothing for anyone to get too carried away about.
My feeling is that support for independence is ebbing away as the realities of the effects of brexit start to be felt. It's easy to say that you'd be willing to sacrifice some wealth (at least in the short term) for more control, but once you see what sacrificing a bit of wealth actually feels like it becomes less attractive. It's only anecdotal, but I've certainly heard a lot more of the "brexit is a mess and independence would be even more of a mess" sentiment recently.
There will be a lot of heat about whether Scotland should be allowed to hold a referendum or not, but personally I think it's pointless talking about it unless and until there is a solid 60% supporting independence.
It needs to be done right not rushed through, like Brexit. This kind of negotiation is very complicated and should take time. I’m sure you’ll say “it’s perfectly simple” but I’m not convinced.
Based on Westminsters actions and Brexit there's little/no negotiation possible, so we just go.
Yep, but remaining tied to GBP isn’t independence 😉
Says who? Remind us of your expertise. Next you'll be telling us that joining the EU means giving up our sovereignty.
Its not what the polls say roverpig. Indeed that poll above shows a few % increase
Its been hovering in the high 40% area for a while
I think most of us would prefer a decisive result / opinion one way or the other.
There will be a lot of heat about whether Scotland should be allowed to hold a referendum or not, but personally I think it’s pointless talking about it unless and until there is a solid 60% supporting independence.
And you'll come to that (60%) conclusion how exactly?
Remind us of your expertise.
😂
Like most on here, I'm not an expert, but I'm allowed to voice my opinion. (I did spend several years working to mitigate the impact of Brexit on one small area of financial services (passporting) so do have some experience of how complex even a small thing like that can be).
To say "we can just leave" is naive nonsense.
roverpig
Full Member
My feeling is that support for independence is ebbing away as the realities of the effects of brexit start to be felt.
My feeling is that support for independence is growing as the realities of the effects of brexit start to be felt. People would rather get away from that Tory-led shit show, and the feeling that the Governing/Leadership was the issue rather than Brexit itself
That's always going to be a difficult sell roverpig.
There was a 40% of the electorate requirement for devolution in 1979.
That was so poorly defined that people who had emigrated or died but whose names were still on the electoral roll were were still counted, effectively voting against devolution.
Why should we accept a 60% requirement from the same folk who gave us the previous seriously flawed deal in 1979
I don't read roverpigs post as saying there should be a supermajority but that it would be best if the result was decisive and also echos what Sturgeon said - that she wanted to see polls in the 60% region before another referendum
To paraphrase Churchill, 50% + 1 vote is the worst way to decide a referendum.
Apart from all the other options.
tbh, I’m not sure what you’re saying here. Are you saying that because of the court ruling everyone has to get back in their box and be quiet?
Also, you are aware that there has been a fairly significant development since 2014 that many would argue makes the No arguments from back then null and void?
No, I’m saying it’s not as simple as the SNP being voted it in will allow it to happen.
Yes I am aware but one other thing is the number of young Scottish who can also now vote. It would seem most of those also want to remain.
Regardless it’s won’t happen quickly, it could take decades or not happen at all.
And you’ll come to that (60%) conclusion how exactly?
Well brexit, if nothing else, shows that a razor thin majority is a terrible idea for changing a status quo. It would probably have swung the other way if the same vote had happened a month later
Do you honestly think we should have left the EU based on a tiny percentage of swing voters who were probably too stupid to understand the issues or who’s vote would change from one day to the next, yet these people have impacted the state of our country for generations to come
Yes I am aware but one other thing is the number of young Scottish who can also now vote. It would seem most of those also want to remain.
What are you basing that on? My understanding is the majority of young voters are Yes voters.
Regardless it’s won’t happen quickly, it could take decades or not happen at all.
You sound very certain. Again, what are you basing that on?
Do you honestly think we should have left the EU based on a tiny percentage of swing voters who were probably too stupid to understand the issues or who’s vote would change from one day to the next, yet these people have impacted the state of our country for generations to come
True, but the fact is we're no longer voting for the status quo vs a change. There is no status quo anymore thanks to brexit.
It's a vote for one type of change vs another type of change.
[quote[If you’re going to demand assurances and guarantees from the Yes side I think it’s only fair you provide assurances and guarantees yourself.
I'd prefer if the No side didn't provide any assurances or guarantees. They did last time and it was mostly lies to sway the vote. 'A vote to leave the UK is a vote to leave the EU'. Oh, the hilarity.
Tbh honest I don’t fully understand how the ECB operates with member states, whether they have any freedom to set monetary policy (assume they do with fiscal policy).
EU states have no power to set their own monetary policy, it's entirely controlled by the ECB (ask Greece or Italy how well that works for them). If Scotland left the UK and joined the EU, it would simply be switching which central bank controls its currency. The question I'd be asking if I had a vote would be whether Scotland has more or less influence over monetary policy as part of the UK or EU. I think the answer to that is obvious, given that one union has 2 members and the other 27.
The only way Scottish independence makes sense is if they have their own currency. Last time I looked the SNP were't proposing that so independence would be a dead duck from day one.
I think the answer to that is obvious,
Indeed it is. As a part of the EU we would have some influence. As a part of the UK we have none. Scotlands underperformace economically is because UK financial policy is set for london and normally works against Scottish interests
Same as in the EU we would have some influence politically whereas now we have none
I think the answer to that is obvious, given that one union has 2 members and the other 27
And yet in one block Scotland would have a veto and in the other it doesn't. You would think it would be the block with only 2 members but...
As has been shown with this judgement, there is no 'block' of two countries here. There is England.
There is England.
No, there's the UK. We all get the same representation at Westminster. If an English issue were split 51/49 then Scottish votes in Westminster would sway it. So no, it's not just England.
UK financial policy is set for london and normally works against Scottish interests
I don't disagree but if you think Scotland would have more influence over the ECB I think you're looking through EU-tinted specs. The ECB is as - if not more - intransigent as the BoE. They were prepared to drive an entire country into the sea and impoverished million in order to maintain their control over Greece. The only country who has real influence over the ECB is Germany.
We have no influence over the BoE. We would have a little over ECB
Molgrips - the point is that Scotland is completely ignored and has zero influence over Uk policy thus only Englands ( and NI if the unionists there are useful) have any influence. What England needs wants and votes for it gets. What scotland needs wants and votes for it does not. Your example talks about England
Thanks for the feedback folks. It's actually good to hear that my perception is not shared by everyone.
I'm not arguing for a super majority. I just don't see the point in fighting hard for another referendum unless there is a clear majority in favour of independence.
To be clear, as an Englishman who has lived here for over 25 years now, I'm in favour of independence. I voted Yes last time too, but my gut feeling is that pushing for a vote now would be counter-productive as I can't see anything to convince me that it would actually be won by the Yes side. If we got to the point where polls showed a consistent and significant majority for independence then I think things would be very different. Obviously 60% is an arbitrary number, but 51/49 just suggests a very divisive campaign and when people are suffering already I think it would be very hard to convince a majority to vote for more chaos (which is how it would be portrayed). Happy to be proved wrong though.
I think you are right. Sturgeon herself said the same years ago
the problem is that there is a strong tendency within the SNP and the wider independence movement that think she is delaying ( for reasons that simply do not add up IMO) and thus she cannot wait any longer or the party will split, she will be out on her ear and the chance is gone
also the longer we are under brexit the harder rejoining the EU is
I think most of us would be much happier if it were clear cut
One thing to remember tho is in the last campaign when people actually got to hear the arguement yes went from 30% to 45%. I would expect the next campaign to show a similar rise in the yes vote.
What England needs wants and votes for it gets
Does it bollocks. BITS of England do. BITS of the UK do.
Please stop lumping millions of people together like this. It's awful to read, it's actually making me feel sick to my stomach tbh.