Scotland Indyref 2

The same as Northern Ireland, for example, where a “political generation” is defined as seven years?

The same as Northern Ireland, for example, where a “political generation” is defined as seven years?

So you are saying having a vote every 7 years until the result is Yes? & do we continue to have that vote every 7 years afterwards?

But at the last election, those two parties combined still got less than 50% of the vote, so are you saying that a minority of voters represents the “the people of scotland”?

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.

So, you just have to assume that if a party says something in it’s manifesto and that party returns the most MPs/MSPs then that is the ‘will of the people.’

In the same way that the tories only got 43% of the vote in the last election and that resulted in a 90 seat majority, it’s not really fair but it is what it is.

The only way to truly know what the will of the Scottish people is is to have a referendum on having a referendum.

Until then we just have to go with the democratic process we have.

So you are saying having a vote every 7 years until the result is Yes? & do we continue to have that vote every 7 years afterwards?

The easy way to avoid that is not to vote for pro-indy parties.

I don’t think you can conclude that represents a vote for independence, because that’s not the only issue on the table.

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

& do we continue to have that vote every 7 years afterwards?

If a post independence Scottish government returned a majority government with a manifesto commitment to rejoining the UK then another ref would be democratic

it’s a tough call to get indy passed I think. Just from the previous full weight of the Westminster parties, their electioneer psychologists and uk mainstream media all pushing for a No. It’s quite a task, even after the total hash of a government we have.

I suspect that, should it go ahead, we’d see the same hard push against it from rUK.

maybe I’ve been taken in my the indy brainwashing ;-), but as an Englishman living in Scotland for the last 20+ years. There is a distinct difference between the politicians we see here and those in the HoC, and for all the bashing the SNP get from the unionists here, at least you can make some sort of sense of their direction and objectives. it just seems a bit more transparent than the political wankery, smoke and mirrors ego gameshow that is westminster.

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.

If there’s a way to have that, even if it doesn’t mean full independence, I’m game.

I don’t think you can conclude that represents a vote for independence, because that’s not the only issue on the table.

True, it’s not a vote for independence, I never said it was. It is, however, a vote for an independence referendum.

Even if you don’t agree and you were actually voting for other manifesto commitments, if it’s in the manifesto you’ve still voted for an independence referendum.

That’s how May was 100% correct when she said 80% of voters voted for parties in favour of exiting the EU in the 2017 election. It’s also why I would never vote for Labour with it’s current commitment to no Single Market, no CU, etc.

If a post independence Scottish government returned a majority government with a manifesto commitment to rejoining the UK then another ref would be democratic

Yes, but it isn’t as simple as that is it? The rest of the UK would have to agree to the Union being re-formed

Yeah – but a referendum on it would be democratic.

Yeah – but a referendum on it would be democratic.

Fair point

Yes, but it isn’t as simple as that is it? The rest of the UK would have to agree to the Union being re-formed

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…

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.

YouGov linky thing

? “How can you justify this continuing refusal to allow the people of Scotland to have a say on their own future?”

? @mrjamesob tears into the news that @ScotParl cannot legislate for #indyref without Westminster approval – regardless of how Scotland votes. pic.twitter.com/3lJ8HfsISx

— Yes (@YesScot) November 23, 2022

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.