Scotland Indyref 2

only (roughly) half of Scottish people want a second referendum, therefore that comment about the vote going against Scotland was very much not true.

Surely the comment is approximately a half truth.

Scotland didn’t take the case to court so the decision can’t go against Scotland. The case was taken to court by a political party, not a country.

As a point of order, it was not taken to court by a political party. It was referred there by the Lord Advocate, a member of the Scottish Government. Don’t conflate the Lord Advocate and the SNP, whilst inevitably, she may be a member of the SNP she’s acting quite properly here as a law officer and raising a legitimate question of law, in contrast to how the current Attorney General tackles issues where that government’s legal position is far from certain.

The ability to have a referendum to determine the electorate’s view on fundamental issues of the constitution is surely a “win for Scotland” whichever side of the political divide you come from on what you want the outcome of that referendum to be.

This thread has grown arms and legs, and I’ve lost the place with it.

Declaring my hand – I was no and am now yes. I’m driven by two key thoughts, while conceding Indy will be a sh*tshow.

1) I would love the option to rejoin the EU, for all of its warts and flaws.
2) I have little hope that the UK will see the constitutional, political, electoral, or economic reform that it needs – so I see the current situation with Westminster as absolutely untenable.

So, for the Indy objectors (which I think is a legit stance), how would you answer these questions:

1) What is your biggest objection to Indy?
2) Is the current situation viz-a-vis Westminster tenable?

@Brexitrefugee

1 We will be poorer. I consider myself British and Scottish. We already control mostday to day issues.

2 Yes. The so called democratic deficit is no different from that suffered by non SNP voters in Scotland. You don’t always get your choice of govt.

As a point of order, it was not taken to court by a political party. It was referred there by the Lord Advocate, a member of the Scottish Government.

True, but I’d argue my basic point about this being the SNP, and not Scotland, still stands.

The ability to have a referendum to determine the electorate’s view on fundamental issues of the constitution is surely a “win for Scotland” whichever side of the political divide you come from on what you want the outcome of that referendum to be.

Possibly but not necessarily. The last referendum was an angry, bitter, divisive and at times violent affair that caused fall-outs between families, friends etc. A lot of us do not want to see that repeated.

And there are things like the timing (the world is in such turmoil at the moment so maybe when things have settled down), or the terms eg personally I think such a big decision requires more than a simple 50% plus 1 vote majority. Then there’s the fact we may have a third or fourth referendum forced on us if we don’t vote the “right” way.

As I said above, I could be persuaded that a second referendum is a good thing, but not what is being proposed just now.

1) What is your biggest objection to Indy?

I’ve never seen a poll on Independence that doesn’t slice the vote at about 50/50 (or a couple of points either side of that) If nothing else Brexit has demonstrated that on issues that are split as evenly; a simple (teeny) majority isn’t going to settle the question in the way that folks think it will. If it’d been 70/30 for years, we wouldn’t be having this debate. For the massive challenges and changes it would entail, I don’t think “about half” of the eligible vote is a good enough constituency.

2) Is the current situation viz-a-vis Westminster tenable?

It’s increasingly clear that this country (and not just Scotland) requires a better democratic settlement. We could easily devolve much more than we do regionally, and we ought to be looking at better ways to elect and support politicians to do a better job. If bits of the UK are so angry and fed up that they’re willing to confront the dangers (and opportunities admittedly) of going it alone as a smaller nation, then something has gone horribly wrong. That our politicians seem helpless or indecisive or unwilling about how to correct that should be a concern to everyone.

@kennyp

being the SNP, and not Scotland, still stands.

Not really support for independence is wider than just support for the SNP.
Also whilst it’s true to say that many people in Scotland support the union it’s as true to say that many people in Scotland support independence

True, but I’d argue my basic point about this being the SNP, and not Scotland, still stands.

You can argue it. But you’ll be wrong!

Possibly but not necessarily. The last referendum was an angry, bitter, divisive and at times violent affair that caused fall-outs between families, friends etc. A lot of us do not want to see that repeated.

Ok. Simple – don’t elect a government that will have a referendum. I don’t want to see lots of things, but if the government were elected on the basis that this is what they would do, then it must surely be better that democracy wins?

I don’t recall any violence? Are you sure it was referendum violence and not just violence that would happen anyway being labelled as that?

And there are things like the timing (the world is in such turmoil at the moment so maybe when things have settled down),

I agree. Actually, I think those issues don’t favour the SNP. BUT the message from Westminster is not, OK let’s talk about the timescales, its simple NO. I’d be all in favour of a proper constitutional convention to give the UK a chance to fix its politics/governance and then see if Scotland wants to leave the salvaged ship.

or the terms eg personally I think such a big decision requires more than a simple 50% plus 1 vote majority.

Oh I completely agree. There’s no doubt that introducing major constitutional upheaval for say 52% of the people who turn out and answer an overly simplistic question with yes or no is a really bad way to getting a cohesive route forward. It would of course be equally perverse if 52% of people who bothered to turn up voted for major change and the powers that be ignored that. I don’t know how you reconcile that, I also don’t know how you can ever hope to get a 45 or 48% who want something that it legitimately lost democratically to enthuse behind the alternative without some major change or compromise.

Then there’s the fact we may have a third or fourth referendum forced on us if we don’t vote the “right” way.

Where does the notion that it is forced on us come from? If the people of Scotland do not want referenda on independence because of the uncertainty, the division, the angst etc there is a really easy solution. They can vote for the other 3 major political parties in sufficient numbers that there is no holyrood majority to initiate one. The political system in Scotland was designed to stop any party (and particularly the SNP) having an outright majority.

Its forced on the people of Scotland the same way that “Scottish rates of income tax”, “Free bus transport for <22’s”, “Free prescriptions”, “Curriculum for Excellence”, “Not paying tuition fees” etc are. You might not like the policy, but there were other options available and people democratically chose this mix of parliamentarians to represent them.

As I said above, I could be persuaded that a second referendum is a good thing, but not what is being proposed just now.

the problem is that what is being proposed now is exactly what was accepted in 2014. If it was OK then, why not now? The answer is – in 2014 those who are objecting to a second vote now were more confident of winning. Ironically Westminster could have at least tinkered with the criteria if they were willing to engage.

I don’t recall any violence? Are you sure it was referendum violence and not just violence that would happen anyway being labelled as that?

After the No side won some Unionists got a bit over excited and decided to let the Yes side know they had lost in the only way they know how.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13187211.police-charge-32-people-following-probe-post-referendum-violence-glasgow/

So yes, one of the sides in this argument has violent tendencies. All the more reason to have another referendum and vote Yes this time, imo.

The last referendum was an angry, bitter, divisive and at times violent affair that caused fall-outs between families, friends etc. A lot of us do not want to see that repeated.

Not to diminish your experience @kennyp but I don’t remember it being like that at all (and I generally only hear this argument from those against a ref). The only violence I can recall was as per the post above. There were some healthy debates, but to be honest I thought that was a positive thing that people were engaging in politics. Other than a few roasters on social media, it was pretty civil IMHO. I certainly didn’t fall out with anyone.

We already control mostday to day issues.

Apart from immigration, energy, social security, trade and industry…..

Possibly but not necessarily. The last referendum was an angry, bitter, divisive and at times violent affair that caused fall-outs between families, friends etc. A lot of us do not want to see that repeated.

😆 wild

however they were elected through the first past the post system which has a huge number of flaws.

Point of order. Holyrood is elected on a proportional system.

I did not see any nastyness during the last referendum campaign. Indeed when bitter together complained eroneously about imaginary intimidation they were roundly rebuked by the chief constable for stirring up trouble

Only folk prosecuted where a unionist imported from NI who kicked a pregnant woman

Point of order. Holyrood is elected on a proportional system.

Only partly. And we still have the same problem we get at Westminster ie it is possible for one party to get the vast majority of the seats with only a minority of the vote.

In Scotland the vast majority of leave voters vote for one party, while the remain vote is split across three parties. With apologies to all the minor parties out there.

I did not see any nastyness during the last referendum campaign.

I pointed out (nicely) to a couple of activists that them hanging banners from a bridge over the bypass was causing long delays and could potentially cause an accident. They threatened to attack me if I didn’t leave. Called me a traitor to my country. A friend who had a No sticker on his car had his back window smashed by a brick the day after the vote.

To be fair though, the large majority of SNP supporting folk I met were great so I wouldn’t tar them all with the same brush. And I’m sure there were idiots on the other side too.

bitter together

Now you’re a very decent bloke TJ, and we’ve had various well mannered debates, but that sort of thing doesn’t sit too well.

Some friends of mine received letters from their employer telling them that they “could” lose their jobs if they voted Yes. This was a week or so before polling day. Not violence but still intimidation.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/sawmill-staff-feel-pressured-over-4162847

Only partly. And we still have the same problem we get at Westminster ie it is possible for one party to get the vast majority of the seats with only a minority of the vote.

Thats really not possible. Seats reflect votes to a few %

Its simply not possible for what you descibe to happen

Better together ran a very nasty negative campaign but point taken

Some friends of mine received letters from their employer telling them that they “could” lose their jobs if they voted Yes. This was a week or so before polling day. Not violence but still intimidation.

Blackmail, or “if we leave the UK we’re making the pragmatic decision to move to London”

In Scotland the vast majority of leave voters vote for one party, while the remain vote is split across three parties

True, however it also ignores the fact that a significant number of voters of traditionally unionist parties support indy (1/3 of the Labour membership iirc). To a lesser extent, the same could be said of SNP voters.

That’s it now, I’ve had enough of the Sunak/Truss show. Each trying to outdo each other with the most horrendous policies. If either of those two win the next election, then I’m voting for independence.

I’m rapidly coming to the same conclusion.

It’s not a vote for independence it’s a vote to distance us from that embarrassment we call a government .

Nothing may change.

It may be worse

But it’ll be different …. And at this stage I’ll take that

I did not see any nastyness during the last referendum campaign.

Must have been a busy spell at work because it was definitely there on a local level

Whilst I did’nt experience first hand any nastiness during the 2014 indy ref, I’m totally prepared to accept that others did. There are bampots on both sides. I did see some intimidation going on during the 2015 referendum the culprits were officers of the Libdems.
However the tit for tat claims are pointless we should all treat one another as we would like to be treated ourselves

I remember someone talking on Facebook in the 2014 vote, about someone deserving to get stabbed. This was directed towards electoral officials in Dundee on the basis that someone told them what they was seeing was vote rigging, there wasn’t any evidence provided but that didnt seem important.

No, hang on, there was another one not long after the vote, on the Cairngorm Mountain page where someone posted how they hated hearing English accents on the hill and theyd like to violently assault them for the vote being lost.

Memory is a bit more fuzzy on that one. More trolling than someone about to set out to attack people.

No, hang on, there was another one not long after the vote, on the Cairngorm Mountain page where someone posted how they hated hearing English accents on the hill and theyd like to violently assault them for the vote being lost.

So didn’t actually happen?

Elderly guy handing out pro Indy pamphlets assaulted. Ruth the liar tweeting that Indy supporters were campaigning outside a polling station( denied by police and polling station.) Then the rule Britannia Mob with their Nazi salutes in the after party. And that idiot Murphy trying to start shit everywhere. The too wee/too poor campaign run by bitter together (weird how unionists are touchy about it being mentioned now.) One of their office had their windows smashed, that’s what I remember from last time.

I’m Welsh but live in England since I was like 3 or 4 years old, so I’m essentially english, I’ve always tried to belive that the Union should be maintained in the UK and I belive the EU should be maintained at a more macro level.

But the last few years since brexit… well, damn…

With specific reference to the Scotts independance vote a few years back… that was a vote cast without knowing they were going to be dragged out of the EU against the will of the polulous.

The goal posts have shifted a bit since then, (hard brexit) to put it lightly, and that’s not what Scottish unionists voted for.

I’m not going to sit here and pretend to profess to know what’s best for Scotts in future, and I don’t have any skin in that game directly…

But what I do know, is that If I were Scottish, I’d be very much anti-UK, but pro-EU at the moment, And I’d probably be pushing for a second independance vote.

I don’t blame the Scotts for causing a massive stink about this, they were conned.

With the way the Conservative And Unionist Party behaves towards the union it professes to believe so important, frankly it deserves to get humped in the election and to lose Scotland (I would love this).

Let’s not pretend it will be easy or without significant problems. But it’s very simple in some regards:

*Is the status quo tenable? No.
*Is there any meaningful prospect of change from the Tories or Labour? No.

So, in honesty, what option does that leave the people of Scotland other than the nuclear option? Is it a good option – no, it has many possible downsides, but it is an option, and long-term is likely to be better than atrophying under the mendacious sh*tf**kery of the Tories (and, worryingly, possibly Labour too). And it’s the only option to break the stifling stalemate.

Well put

So didn’t actually happen?

As in an actual assault? Doubt it. Just online racism using the referendum as a reason to be a dick.

Is there any meaningful prospect of change from the Tories or Labour?

Why don’t you think Labour would do anything different?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/03/talk-to-the-snp-keir-starmer-tory

Why don’t you think Labour would do anything different?

Ive not seen anything from Starmer thats going to make any meaningful difference. Is there something you’re seeing that would?

Unless Labour are genuinely putting forward something that will stick well beyond a single term of government then I cant see how it makes any difference to the case. Bearing in mind that the Tories were bad enough before Brexit.

And then there is the historical precedents (and importantly their perception) of promises from Westminster.

So, in honesty, what option does that leave the people of Scotland other than the nuclear option? Is it a good option – no, it has many possible downsides, but it is an option, and long-term is likely to be better than atrophying under the mendacious sh*tf**kery of the Tories (and, worryingly, possibly Labour too). And it’s the only option to break the stifling stalemate.

This +1.

@molgrips Sadly Starmer has been pretty consistent on the theme of not engaging in any way with the SNP and he certainly isn’t minded to grant Indyref2. His calculation is seemingly that any quarter given to the SNP would open Labour up to brutal attack from the right wing press.

I’m not sure how he plans to win a GE without an electoral pact with the SNP in Scotland tho…

Starmer was on the new podcast that Alistair Campbell and Rory Stewart have launched – within the past fortnight or so. I really want to like Starmer, and he said some sensible things on the pod, but he reiterated the no-surrender to the SNP message, while failing to offer any hint of an idea that could break the stifling stalemate. And Starmer shot down any thought of electoral reform – no idea why he doesn’t want PR. And ironically, if it wasn’t for the PR that the Tories profess to hate, they simply wouldn’t be a presence in the Scottish Parliament.

There is a weird theme from some of the unionists outside of Scotland, where they seem to think that Scotland can be hated into staying. It’s like some batsh*t crazy Stockholm Syndrome mind trick.

Rightly or wrongly, my estimation is the only hope of Britain turning a corner to make things better is for Scotland to leave. There seems little hope for progressive politics at the moment.

And Starmer shot down any thought of electoral reform – no idea why he doesn’t want PR.

Because the unions don’t want it. They killed off the resolution in last years’ annual conference.

There is an argument that Starmer/Labour policies could, after a successful GE, create an environment in which Scotland is less driven towards independence. However, we’re not seeing what those policies might be and with ruling out PR, “fiscal prudence” and no prospect of a EU single market etc then I’m not seeing anything attractive in a Labour government. Of course, first they have to be elected and then it’ll only be temporary while the next lot of Tories ready themselves.

Labour have also shown themselves to be untrustworthy regarding devolution after all the promises of “The Vow” turned out to be meaningless.

I just can’t see a long term future in the UK.

In any case I’m still not seeing anything resembling an independence campaign from the SNP so the whole thread is moot.

Ive not seen anything from Starmer thats going to make any meaningful difference. Is there something you’re seeing that would?

Well, the fact he’s not Johnson is an absolutely major difference. You won’t see policies coming from them until nearer an election.

@molgrips Sadly Starmer has been pretty consistent on the theme of not engaging in any way with the SNP and he certainly isn’t minded to grant Indyref2.

I was talking about the UK not Scotland.

So, in honesty, what option does that leave the people of Scotland other than the nuclear option? Is it a good option – no, it has many possible downsides, but it is an option, and long-term is likely to be better than atrophying under the mendacious sh*tf**kery of the Tories (and, worryingly, possibly Labour too). And it’s the only option to break the stifling stalemate.

I’m a frequent silent reader of this thread (it’s not my first reason for visiting STW), but very much this for me. Well summarised.

It definitely wouldn’t be perfect, but independence has got to be better than the way things are now and are heading.