Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 8
Discussion
No, I am not saying I am the only reason the Prime Minister decided to tell Nicola Sturgeon where to get off, but I did send the following to a well known minister a few days ago...
"Whilst life expectancy in Scotland is certainly lower than the rest of our country, I don't feel that 4 years is an accurate representation of a "generation" and I suggest you tell Nicola Sturgeon (also known as "Wee Jimmy Krankie" in our house), to get lost.
Perhaps, if she is determined enough to desire a second referendum, the penalty for losing again should be the abolition of the Barnett Formula...?"
"Whilst life expectancy in Scotland is certainly lower than the rest of our country, I don't feel that 4 years is an accurate representation of a "generation" and I suggest you tell Nicola Sturgeon (also known as "Wee Jimmy Krankie" in our house), to get lost.
Perhaps, if she is determined enough to desire a second referendum, the penalty for losing again should be the abolition of the Barnett Formula...?"
dromong said:
We've already seen the outcome of a close referendum result. I don't think enough has changed to warrant another, not to give a more diverse result, and the bitterness will be larger and last longer this time, whether it goes the other way - and roughly half of the country is dragged out of the UK against it's will because roughly half of the country wanted to leave due to being dragged out of the EU against it's will, by a government who chooses only to listen to half of it's citizens - or if it's the same, roughly half of the country will scream Tory and disown the other half having lost twice.
What's more, we have (rather recently) seen the flaws of referendums illustrated oh so vividly. Division, binary options, irreversible decision, etc.
Yet the SNP have an insatiable desire to roll the dice on yet another, forget all the problems that need resolved in Scotland, lets just hammer Indyref2 relentlessly. Talk about one track minds FFS.
I'm a Scot and I am sick to the back teeth of the SNP, Please don't tar us all with the same brush folks, its really unfair.
Ditto. What's more, we have (rather recently) seen the flaws of referendums illustrated oh so vividly. Division, binary options, irreversible decision, etc.
Yet the SNP have an insatiable desire to roll the dice on yet another, forget all the problems that need resolved in Scotland, lets just hammer Indyref2 relentlessly. Talk about one track minds FFS.
I'm a Scot and I am sick to the back teeth of the SNP, Please don't tar us all with the same brush folks, its really unfair.
jsf said:
The next time a referendum is granted, it should be stipulated that if Scotland decides to stay in the union, the Scottish Parliament is dissolved and rule returns to Westminster.
If they decide to leave the union, the Bank of England should stipulate they will not be able to use the GBP as a currency of last resort. It isn't their choice what currency they choose, it is the UK governments choice who can use it.
Devolution has been a cancer, you give an inch and they want more, you give another inch and they want more. All this is doing is driving up costs and making any changes more cumbersome, which is not good for long term stability of growth.
Apart from the first line I'm all for binning hollyrood lock stock and barrel. If they decide to leave the union, the Bank of England should stipulate they will not be able to use the GBP as a currency of last resort. It isn't their choice what currency they choose, it is the UK governments choice who can use it.
Devolution has been a cancer, you give an inch and they want more, you give another inch and they want more. All this is doing is driving up costs and making any changes more cumbersome, which is not good for long term stability of growth.
pingu393 said:
jsf said:
The next time a referendum is granted, it should be stipulated that if Scotland decides to stay in the union, the Scottish Parliament is dissolved and rule returns to Westminster.
That, I suggest, would guarantee a Yes vote.Who in their right mind is going to make a long term investment in Scotland when they know there will be a chance of them destroying themselves every generation? It's a bonkers situation.
Drip, drip, drip....
Another day, another "announcement" by the SNP.
Today's snippet is Nicola is open to talks to discuss "other potential dates for a second referendum".
Has the SNP ever considered that there may be higher priorities to the rest of the UK than Scottish independence?
The SNP MP on QT last night tried to turn the whole programme into an SNP broadcast, despite the event coming from Bognor Regis, about as far from Scotland as you can get in the UK without getting wet!
She went a bit quiet when the subject of which currency would be used in the event of a YES vote......
Another day, another "announcement" by the SNP.
Today's snippet is Nicola is open to talks to discuss "other potential dates for a second referendum".
Has the SNP ever considered that there may be higher priorities to the rest of the UK than Scottish independence?
The SNP MP on QT last night tried to turn the whole programme into an SNP broadcast, despite the event coming from Bognor Regis, about as far from Scotland as you can get in the UK without getting wet!
She went a bit quiet when the subject of which currency would be used in the event of a YES vote......
Angus Robertson- Scotland WILL have a 2nd referendum, May is panicking and you cant stand in scotlands way.....
Nicola Sturgeon- Maybe the date for a referendum is up for debate.....
Meanwhile back in the real world: The SNP need to have the backing of holyrood, then take it to Westminster and ask for permission for another referendum. At the moment its all a bit handbags at dawn.....
Nicola Sturgeon- Maybe the date for a referendum is up for debate.....
Meanwhile back in the real world: The SNP need to have the backing of holyrood, then take it to Westminster and ask for permission for another referendum. At the moment its all a bit handbags at dawn.....
The Flying Ox said:
The problem with that is it ties independence in with other political beliefs, like the riders that go on bills in the US.
I propose a simple addition to the ballot paper, seeing as some people might vote SNP but not want a referendum and so their votes would be counted as "for" unfairly, just as some folks might vote Labour but want a referendum and their votes would be counted as "against" unfairly.
Have a 3rd box on the ballot: "Do you support the idea of a second referendum on Scotland's independence from the United Kingdom?"
Everyone can vote for whichever party they want without having to also weigh any manifesto promises for referendums or otherwise, and there'd be a definitive answer on whether the appetite is there.
Too complicated and risks the continued absurdity of a one trick pony party being in power, pissing in the tent at every whiff of an opportunity.I propose a simple addition to the ballot paper, seeing as some people might vote SNP but not want a referendum and so their votes would be counted as "for" unfairly, just as some folks might vote Labour but want a referendum and their votes would be counted as "against" unfairly.
Have a 3rd box on the ballot: "Do you support the idea of a second referendum on Scotland's independence from the United Kingdom?"
Everyone can vote for whichever party they want without having to also weigh any manifesto promises for referendums or otherwise, and there'd be a definitive answer on whether the appetite is there.
There's no reason to complicate it. People need to get off their arses and get off the fence to finish this bullst once and for all. The Scottish people are being done a massive disservice by these clowns with key matters for the Scottish parliament playing second fiddle and being run into the ground for a pet project that the majority of Scots have already rubbished once.
FN2TypeR said:
Why would they need a majority? They aren't the only party that are proponents of independence - the greens support it too and they do well enough at Holyrood, in comparison to their south of the border counterparts anyway.
In case you missed it, read r11co's post. It covers my view entirely.Sums things up quite nicely I thought...
Mrs May added: "They are happy to see power rest in Brussels. But if those powers come back to London, they want them given to Edinburgh, so that they can try to give them back to Brussels.
And now they apparently say that an independent Scotland would no longer seek to become a member of the EU after a vote for separation. It is muddle on muddle."
http://news.sky.com/story/nicola-sturgeon-says-pms...
Mrs May added: "They are happy to see power rest in Brussels. But if those powers come back to London, they want them given to Edinburgh, so that they can try to give them back to Brussels.
And now they apparently say that an independent Scotland would no longer seek to become a member of the EU after a vote for separation. It is muddle on muddle."
http://news.sky.com/story/nicola-sturgeon-says-pms...
motco said:
Is it an absolute gold-plated certainty that any, some, or all of the revenue from oil would be passed to a successfully independent Scotland? Or are they taking it for granted just because they say it is so, as usual?
Probably not. Precedent is that the known reserves are split proportionally. This is to discourage a region finding a gold mine or equivalent and immediately declaring independence to avoid national sharing.Cold said:
It is a shame. I had hoped that when Sturgeon came to be leader that she would do some good for Scotland. Back then she seemed to be making the right noises. These days she's just morphed into a poor impersonation of Salmond which isn't what Scotland needs at all.
If you swapped wigs they even look the same.Question is, have they ever been seen in the same room at the same time?
s2art said:
motco said:
Is it an absolute gold-plated certainty that any, some, or all of the revenue from oil would be passed to a successfully independent Scotland? Or are they taking it for granted just because they say it is so, as usual?
Probably not. Precedent is that the known reserves are split proportionally. This is to discourage a region finding a gold mine or equivalent and immediately declaring independence to avoid national sharing.Edinburger said:
In your view simoid, what's more likely: 1) an independent Scotland, or 2) a fully federal UK constitution?
Don't know, hadn't considered lieklihood until now. One has been rejected by a very clear majority for a generation, and the other doesn't appear to have much traction so they're both highly unlikely.What's your view?
Murph7355 said:
Cold said:
It is a shame. I had hoped that when Sturgeon came to be leader that she would do some good for Scotland. Back then she seemed to be making the right noises. These days she's just morphed into a poor impersonation of Salmond which isn't what Scotland needs at all.
If you swapped wigs they even look the same.Question is, have they ever been seen in the same room at the same time?
Oil companies, but it will cost the taxpayer through tax-relief.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/09/cost-de...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/09/cost-de...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff