So, this Scottish Independence thing Cameron's banging on about…

You couldn’t exactly call that period cabinet government.

The situation is probably better than Druidh says in that post as some of what is marked as Scottish spending in the Government Expense and Revenue – Scotland reports is actually spent in England – for example defence spending – more is allocated to Scottish expenditure than is spent here. There are other examples of this.

Scotland would also be able to make savings by a non nuclear defense and similar policies

Commitment:
Anyone who thinks that Alex Salmond doesn’t really want Scottish independence, and that this is all some sort of bluff, is living in cloud-cuckoo land. The man has dedicated his life to this cause.

They said that the SNP would never get into power in Scotland. In 2007 they did just that.

The “architects” of devolution came up with a voting system specifically designed to prevent the SNP ever gaining an overall majority. In 2011, the SNP did just that.

There is a movement and a will which is heading inexorably in one direction. All we’re now arguing over is the timing and some of the fine detail.

TandemJeremy – Member
The situation is probably better than Druidh says in that post as some of what is marked as Scottish spending in the Government Expense and Revenue – Scotland reports is actually spent in England – for example defence spending – more is allocated to Scottish expenditure than is spent here. There are other examples of this.

I’m trying to keep it simple.

Exactly Druids, this is a lifelong cause for which the case is apparently so strong. It is AS’s raisin d’être and the thing that will commit him to history. He has been focused on this for his whole political career and here is his chance handed to him on a plate by a Tory Pm who know nothing about Scotland.

To bottle it now on the basis of manifesto weasel words would be a massive show of cowardice. The Tories are giving him the best ammunition, strengthening his case, he has the slam hand in spades. Lead the first card, show conviction and win the referendum with the ease that it deserves. Or is he just a Clegg in disguise?

Devo-Max:
Has already done the job it was supposed to do. By raising the possibility of a further, significant, increase in powers for the Scottish Parliament – including all revenue and spending powers – it is polarising public opinion into those who want more and those who are happy with the way things are.

Not surprisingly, the more camp are regularly coming up as the largest in any polls. If Devo-Max doesn’t appear as an option, what way do you think they will vote? Do you think they’ll all opt for the status quo, or will enough of them take the next step?

teamhurtmore – Member
Exactly Druids, this is a lifelong cause for which the case is apparently so strong. It is AS’s raisin d’être and the thing that will commit him to history. He has been focused on this for his whole political career and here is his chance handed to him on a plate by a Tory Pm who know nothing about Scotland.

Read again what I wrote.

derekrides – devolution, in the form of the Scotland Act, was a Bill from the Westminster Government, a government with 650 MPs of which 119 represented Scottish Constituencies (not all of whom supported the Bill) – but you think it was forced upon the UK? The Bill then had to go to the Lords, and ultimately achieve Royal Assent – but “you” were not democratically included in this process. How about the previous time in 1974?

Is it the general principle of Democracy you don’t like or only when the result of the Ballot doesn’t agree with your personal preference?

It’s a one way road, surely. The case is obvious. Forget devo-max, devo- lite. This is a time for balls under his kilt. The more camp momentum, the crass Tories, the economic case…….no need to tarry.

Druids please help a simpleton like me. It has to be more than an apparently forced manifesto statement? The detail like Europe (apparently) can wait. The case etc us there, put it to the vote. If not, there has to be more than manifesto pledges. Since when has that been a driver in the realpolitik?

Anydody want to bet it will be small steps rather than the full split at first? I would be terrified by an immediate sundering of the union. But an incremental split,to a planned frame of years; yes please.

Is it not the case that any referendum will be “advisory” and that Westminster can just say “No” to any result they do not care for ?
Not an expert on constitutional/parliamentary laws but everything I’ve read in laymans language suggests that there’s no mechanism for a unilateral declaration of independence by any part of the Union…..

teamhurtmore

I beleive there is a tactical edge to it as well – Salmond wants to run on the SNPs record in a majority government and to compare this to Camerons record. The later the referendum the better the SNP will look. There is also the aspect that there remains much to be discussed and decided and this takes time.
The uncertainty and the constant banging on about a referendum are coming from the unionist parties only.

However he is also doing something rare in a modern politician – sticking to his word. The whole political ethos under which he works is different to Westminster.

Ah well I would read it as a lot of people in Scotland although pro independence are understandably nervous at the thought of unanticipated consequences. The 3rd way option proposed by the where Scotland would gain more independence, but still be part of the union / have someone else to blame for failings (depending on your political outlook) giving them a chance to get comfy with the concept and decide at leisure what path to follow may well appeal to a lot of the electorate.
I’m assuming that Cameron is thinking that given the all or nothing options, people don’t feel sufficiently disenfranchised to make the leap, and Salmond’s dreams are shattered.
Alternatively he may just not have much of a problem with the concept of separation, and just wants to hurry it along. Though that seems unlikely.
Either way I don’t really see a problem, likewise if it boost SNP support, that’s fine too.

I beleive there is a tactical edge to it as well – Salmond wants to run on the SNPs record in a majority government and to compare this to Camerons record. The later the referendum the better the SNP will look.

You could be right, but it’s a bit worrying if Scottish people would be basing their vote on the performance of the SNP. The vote after all would/should be on the proposal for an independent Scotland, rather than an SNP governed Scotland.

IanMunro – Member
Ah well I would read it as a lot of people in Scotland although pro independence are understandably nervous at the thought of unanticipated consequences. The 3rd way option proposed by the where Scotland would gain more independence, but still be part of the union / have someone else to blame for failings (depending on your political outlook) giving them a chance to get comfy with the concept and decide at leisure what path to follow may well appeal to a lot of the electorate.

It’s worth looking at the example of Czechoslovakia. Whilst negotiating for a looser form of federalism, the two governments disagreed so much that they ended up fully independent…..

The point about running on the record is it allows Salmond to say – we were able to do this under devolution and it worked, but under independence we could do this+ and it would work better.

One of the arguments for the union is effectively that Scotland is not able to run its own affairs

Ian I tend to agree with you. This is a fundamental question on the independence of Scotland not a question of whether the SNP can navigate the current troubles better than the Coalition.

That would point to a straight vote ASAP.

But thinking about the tactics for a moment. Was AS “forced into the 2H” commitment earlier by the pro-union lobby and now secretly fearful of being seen to be reactive to their initiative again? It seems that he is danger of looking like Clegg if he tries to put tactics over conviction.

But it still odd – independents tell me that he has a strong case, he is holding all the cards for the grand slam of his political career. And a Tory MP just led the wrong card by aggravating the Scottish population. The tricks are all there to be won and yet he seems to be blinking. Has he miscounted his trumps?

THM;I am not so sure it is as clear as that. I think Alex the Fish might be hoping the Tories proceed to do their usual nosedive in Scotland,thus building the momentum a bit. I also think he wants to find a way of ensuring the biggest tunout possible to avoid any of the arguements caused by the poor turn out in the 70’s.

thm
Are you trolling or do you genuinely not understand?

The tricks are all there to be won and yet he seems to be blinking

It’s entirely possible that he’s been caught on the hop – he’s a canny politician, but that’s not the same as being infallible!

I think TJs right regarding the timing – it’s to allow time to establish a credible track record of competent governance, although I suspect that a referendum on Independence is more likely to succeed if the economic outlook is more optimistic than at present. People are understandably nervous of making a radical move when the European economy is in such a shambles with no clear political route map as to how the problems are going to be resolved. Scotland may or may not be economically viable in the long term, but economic decision-makers have a long track record of ‘spooking’ without much rational cause, and it doesn’t seem to take much to have them all wetting their panties at the present time.

Interesting debate in the office:

Apparently we will feel more British in 2012 because of the Olympics; and we will feel more Scottish in 2014 because of the Commonwealth Games (in Glasgow for an extra bonus) and 700 years since Bannockburn.

I’m not convinced but I could imagine political advisors could see such things – hence the rush.

Apparently we will feel more British in 2012 because of the Olympics

It’s fair to say the only way is up in terms of how ‘British’ I feel. So the observation may be accurate, but it won’t change the way I’d vote in an Independence referendum.

I don’t think salmond has been caught on the hop. teh scottish unionistparties have been pushing for an early referendum on and off for a while. there is a lot of automatic gainsaying of the SNP position which is rather amusing as it leads to scottish labour and tory voting against proposals that are Westminster policy

The scottish unionist politicians blocked the previous atttempt at a referendum

1) having made a commitment then he needs to stick to it – no u turns and showing integrity
2) there is no way he can agree to Westminster setting the timing and question on a referendum – its an issue for Scotland to decide on and how can he let a Westminster government override a scottish government manifesto pledge
3) there is the tactical advantage of going later

Cameron is already backtracking anyway

2) there is no way he can agree to Westminster setting the timing and question on a referendum – its an issue for Scotland to decide on and how can he let a Westminster government override a scottish government manifesto pledge

I heard something similar this morning, and it struck me as a bit of an own goal. If people are fed up with Westminster government meddling, give them this one last meddle and then vote them out for good.

override a scottish government manifesto pledge

SNP maifesto said nothing about timing of the referendum.

SNP maifesto said nothing about timing of the referendum.

True.

“We think the people of Scotland should decide our nation’s
future in a democratic referendum and opinion polls suggest
that most Scots agree. We will, therefore, bring forward our
Referendum Bill in this next Parliament”

I can’t see any reference in the manifesto to when the vote should be held.

http://votesnp.com/campaigns/SNP_Manifesto_2011_lowRes.pdf

But the question of whether Scotland should be independent can only be decided by the people of Scotland and that includes the timing. The unionists had a chance in the last parliament to allow a vote which I think they would have won. They bottled it though. Now with the SNP overall majority (achieved despite a voting system expressly designed to prevent it) the ball is in Salmond’s court. He will only get one chance. Cameron is only increasing the risk of the UK breaking up by interfering and making a vote for independence into an anti-tory vote. If anything is likely to increase the pro vote then that is it.

Nobody, not even the SNP anticipated their overall majority. If they can achieve that then independence is possible.

druidh – Member
There is a movement and a will which is heading inexorably in one direction. All we’re now arguing over is the timing and some of the fine detail.

I agree, most people I know are for independence. Only people i hear who aren’t are unionist politicians. Mind you I know I may live in a more polarised solcial grouping and voting patterns may be different, but still i do think a vote would win us independence.

I think its a polarised social grouping – most folk I know are undecided or unbothered by it but I do know some strongly pro independence folk

I doubt a referendum will ever vote yes.

If the Partie Quebecois couldn’t get a majority for independence from Canada even with the far more radical seperatist tendancy there I dounbt if the SNP can get a majority.

Which is why I say give the rest of the UK a chance to expel Scotland!

TandemJeremy – Member
thm. Are you trolling or do you genuinely not understand?

Well, you see TJ I have been following your helpful posts for understanding. Starting from the outset:

TandemJeremy – Member

The SNP have in their manifesto a obligation to have a referendum towards the end of their term. Cameron is threatening to force a referendum earlier than that and that he would set the question. Is he so dim as to be unable to see what a boost that would give the SNP? Really everytime he opens his mouth on Scotland the SNP gain support and so does independence.

The SNP would prefer a straight yes / no referendum. [i]DC’s foolish opening lead to 7 (brave) hearts[/i]

Self determination is all [i]so no need for tactical timing. Its a matter of principle[/i]. However cash flows out of Scotland into England so most commentators believe Scotland would be better off without having to support England.

Reasons why Scotland would be better off independent. No foreign adventurism / wars and no expensive nuclear power or deterrent. NO wasted money on such nonsense as foundation hospitals and city academies, no massive austerity cuts damaging the economy.

Scotland’s economy remains in surplus as it has been for a long time. No deficit here, no national debt being created in Scotland [i]really is a slam hand – 39 or 40 points? 9-10 brave hearts[/i]

Cameron is posturing here for his own party. I cannot believe he is so dim as to give Salmond – the best political operator in the UK such an easy open goal as to interfere in a referendum on Scottish independence [i]exactly![/i]

Now you are the expert here and you have laid it out very clearly. So no, I don’t understand the delay and the upset (allegedly) caused by DC offering Scotland the chance for the vote that you all seem to want. So I was being really thick until you enlightened me finally on this page:

I doubt a referendum will ever vote yes.

No, even a simple bloke like me gets it!

Which is why I say give the rest of the UK a chance to expel Scotland!

and Northern Ireland, a waste of tax payers money and resources for decades.

So I did email the SNP asking why there was little info on a post independence settlement on their website using the examples of

nato membership, what happens to the army, what happens the nuclear sub bases
Embassies, how to divide up the tax and benefits system and all these
details. Central bank formation, national debt allocation

Teh answer

Thank you for your email.

More information on an independent Scotland can be found at http://www.scotlandforward.net

However, the issues that you mention would be subject to negotiation between Scotland and Westminster following a yes vote, so it is impossible to give a definitive answer.

With thanks
Susan

So teamhurtmore – you are actually just point scoring and being argumentative not interested in the issues

On the contrary TJ – I am merely following your posts with interest and starting to understand the issue a lot better with your help. Thank you. I was just puzzled why the bit about a yes vote not succeeding didn’t come earlier. It would have helped thicko’s like me understand it so much better.

No sure what you mean about point scoring? Am I not agreeing with you?

OOI, reading the NS’s comments on Miliband’s position today:

Since becoming Labour leader, Ed Miliband has said little about Scottish politics, despite the reality that his party has the most to lose from an independent Scotland. But in the Q&A session following his speech to London Citizens, he was finally forced to address the subject.

Miliband said that he supported David Cameron’s decision to call for an early referendum on independence and called for “greater clarity about the legal position, what is actually going to happen and when it’s going to happen.” He also made an impressive and extensive defence of the Union, referring to the “sense of solidarity that exists across the border” and to shared institutions such as the NHS and the BBC.

Who would have thought that the two most important politicians in Westminster (give or take a few) would make such a horlicks of the issue?

There is a movement and a will which is heading inexorably in one direction. All we’re now arguing over is the timing and some of the fine detail.

This +1

Even if Scotland votes “no” this time around thanks to Westminster interference, then it reflects the pattern over devolution – rigged “no” vote in 1979, then several years suffering the impact of Tory economic policy on our social and economic infrastructure led to an overwhelming desire to vote “yes” twenty years later.

Whether we vote “yes” now or in 20 years time, it will happen eventually.

Whether we vote “yes” now or in 20 years time, it will happen eventually.

We’ll all look forward to Alex’s dream of the Arc of Prosperity finally being truly realised then

OI! Stop sniggering at the back!!! 😉

The yes vote not succeeding is my opinion – one not shared by druidh for example. I don’t think it has any bearing on the reasons why the vote should be organised by the people of Scotland for the people of Scotland in line with previous commitments.

This is what you don’t want to see – its not about political opportunism. Its about integrity, honouring commitments and doing what you believe to be the best for the country.

Please note labour and Tory parties worked together to stop a vote in the last holyrood parliament – they are making u turns and its cheap grandstanding from them which diminishes them in Scotland.

Labour and Tory parties worked together to stop a vote in the last holyrood parliament – they are making u turns and its cheap grandstanding from them which diminishes them in Scotland.

Although in the case of the Tories, there’s not much left to diminish…

Anyway, who needs oil when the south of England is slowly turning into an arid desert – it won’t be long before we can charge you about as much for water as we will for oil. Not to mention that we won’t be subsidising the electricity you get over the interconnector anymore either.

TJ – What do I not see? I have read your points and understand your view about integrity etc. entirely. AS is a man of integrity and honesty versus a couple of political chancers. As you say the Tories and Labour party don’t have a clue here.

So instead of an advisory referendum you are being give the opportunity/invited to a legally binding, yes/no vote (which you tell me the SNP want) at the best possible time – wont Scotland beat England at M’field in a few weeks time. What momentum.

This “matter of principle” is nothing to do with opportunism, so why wait for the economy to recover? Its there on a plate for you. And its in the interests of Scotland as you say.

And if druidh is correct, then wey hey!