Scottish Independence

[grunt]

So the work would be unlikely to come to an independent Scotland?
Who knows? Not me for sure.

[Ozyhibby]

There's a lot of 'will' in your statement. How can you know that? Will Scotland be in NATO? It's an issue given the very recent (and contested) change in position. Will Scotland try to join NATO but not allow nuclear weapons on land or territorial area. Will trident be aloowed? Would the US allow their technology to be used in Scottish yards? I don't know the answer to these questions, but the answers are all material to the discussion.

I don’t see any scenario where Scotland does not become a member of NATO?
Can you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Yes. But if we are to believe the UK Defence Journal complex ships for the navy are not built abroad. Yards in Barrow in Furness were extremely pissed that they didn't get the work.

They definitely were pissed because as part of the deal bae Govan spent 300 million fitting out the docks to modernise. This deal will mean them going ahead with the 100 million indoor facility. It's unmatched anywhere else. Bae can use it to supply any country in the world although I'm sure ruk army will be first in line as its a British wide company and will stay that way.

Uk does many cross country builds. The nlaw anti tank weapons sales have exploded due to its successful use in Ukraine. That's built jointly in Ukraine and sweeden

[archie]

They definitely were pissed because as part of the deal bae Govan spent 300 million fitting out the docks to modernise. This deal will mean them going ahead with the 100 million indoor facility. It's unmatched anywhere else. Bae can use it to supply any country in the world although I'm sure ruk army will be first in line as its a British wide company and will stay that way.

Uk does many cross country builds. The nlaw anti tank weapons sales have exploded due to its successful use in Ukraine. That's built jointly in Ukraine and sweedenBut there's a realpolitik here. It's possible that Scotland could deliver a massive up yours to Westminster and leave the UK. But the idea that after that everything would continue as normal is fanciful. The points you make about BAE as a yard are valid, but this is not private sector work. The idea that the rUK government would say that's fine, we'll just give the work to Scotland is at least worth some scruitiny. Bluntly what's in it for them? Why would they support work in a foreign country against the interests of their own voters and against the principle of building complex warships at home? Given the time to transition to independence could be five to ten years there would be plenty time for yards to gear up. You guys paint a picture of Westminster being uniquely venal and spiteful. Why would that change if there was an independent Scotland? This isn't making a pro or anti-independence point - I just can't see what's in it for them.

[archie]

I don’t see any scenario where Scotland does not become a member of NATO?
Can you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes. The SNP were late converts to NATO and there was a lot of kicking and screaming about it, including MSP resignations. It would depend on the make up of a Scottish Parliament, but I don't think it's a done deal. I suspect opposition to NATO has softened with the invasion of Ukraine, but a lot would depend on the terms of joining. I guess attitudes to Trident would be a critical part of that discussion.

[archie]

Indeed. But think about foreign spending in other parts of the armed forces.

There's bits and bobs bought from many countries to keep our weapons systems going. Think of all the stories of Russian systems being crippled without their overseas bits. Most countries are the same.

Parts of aircraft are built overseas, lots of them, indeed the whole aircraft on the new aircraft carriers are designed and built in the USA. And if you think of the ultimate weapon, our nuclear deterrent again its the good ol' USA again.

It is an absolute nonsense to suggest warships couldn't be built in Scotland.I don't think anyone is saying they couldn't (though there might be questions about how the US feels about the use of it's technology in an independent Scotland). It's why would rUK do it? What's in it for them?

[Ozyhibby]

Yes. The SNP were late converts to NATO and there was a lot of kicking and screaming about it, including MSP resignations. It would depend on the make up of a Scottish Parliament, but I don't think it's a done deal. I suspect opposition to NATO has softened with the invasion of Ukraine, but I a lot would depend on the terms of joining. I guess attitudes to Trident would be a critical part of that discussion.

The SNP are in favour of NATO. The Labour Party are in favour of NATO. The Tories are in favour of NATO. And the Lib Dems are in favour of NATO.
And most importantly, the Scottish public want NATO.
I’m not sure what kind of election results you are expecting post Indy but surely we can put them in the ‘close to zero chance’ category?
You expecting a Green landslide?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

Unsure if this is the right thread

More good news for Scottish shipbuilders.

The UK Prime Minister has announced a £4.2 billion contract to build five new Royal Navy warships on the Clyde and support 1,700 jobs in Govan and Scotstoun.

The deal awarded to BAE Systems for five more Type 26 frigates comes on top of the three already under construction, with all expected to be operational by the middle of the next decade.

Déjà vu. I'll believe it once some toff has smashed a bubbly bottle into the side of them.

[Kato]

Ok shall I put it on the SNP thread as a comparison to their boat building success [emoji849] …brace yourself for the onslaught and defence of the SGHow can it be compared when the latest announcement is words from Tories? Their words are very cheap. Every chance they won't even start to build them, like 40 new hospitals.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[archie]

The SNP are in favour of NATO. The Labour Party are in favour of NATO. The Tories are in favour of NATO. And the Lib Dems are in favour of NATO.
And most importantly, the Scottish public want NATO.
I’m not sure what kind of election results you are expecting post Indy but surely we can put them in the ‘close to zero chance’ category?
You expecting a Green landslide?


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI think you are probably right. But it's not a slam dunk. I think issues that will swirl around this are: cost of joining; attitudes to nuclear weapons; and how resistant the 'bairns not bombs' protesters are to being sidelined.

[JeMeSouviens]

I don't think anyone is saying they couldn't (though there might be questions about how the US feels about the use of it's technology in an independent Scotland). It's why would rUK do it? What's in it for them?

They don't have a shipyard capable of this particular kind of work without a large investment, so ££££ and time. They might decide it's worth it to keep the work out of foreign hands though. :dunno:

[archie]

They don't have a shipyard capable of this particular kind of work without a large investment, so ££££ and time. They might decide it's worth it to keep the work out of foreign hands though. :dunno:I think there's also the timeframe. Even if there was a yes vote the transition would take some years, so the sunk cost in Glasgow may be less significant.

[Stairway 2 7]

But there's a realpolitik here. It's possible that Scotland could deliver a massive up yours to Westminster and leave the UK. But the idea that after that everything would continue as normal is fanciful. The points you make about BAE as a yard are valid, but this is not private sector work. The idea that the rUK government would say that's fine, we'll just give the work to Scotland is at least worth some scruitiny. Bluntly what's in it for them? Why would they support work in a foreign country against the interests of their own voters and against the principle of building complex warships at home? Given the time to transition to independence could be five to ten years there would be plenty time for yards to gear up. You guys paint a picture of Westminster being uniquely venal and spiteful. Why would that change if there was an independent Scotland? This isn't making a pro or anti-independence point - I just can't see what's in it for them.

Because if they want to order a frigates instead of 500 million from Govan it will 500 million plus 400 million minimum to kit the yard. Regardless Scotland will have one of the world's best frigate factories. The way defence spending is going there will be a queue, although I'm certain uk will try to be first.

Why is England using sweeden, Spain , Turkey and more to build military equipment just now? Because price and facilities

[archie]

Because if they want to order a frigates instead of 500 million from Govan it will 500 million plus 400 million minimum to kit the yard. Regardless Scotland will have one of the world's best frigate factories. The way defence spending is going there will be a queue, although I'm certain uk will try to be first.

Why is England using sweeden, Spain , Turkey and more to build military equipment just now? Because price and facilitiesYes military equipment is built abroad, but not complex ships. £400m in, say, 10 years won't be that big a deal. Yards need upgraded all the time. I want the work to stay in Scotland. I just don't see what's in it for rUK if Scotland was independent. It's exactly the same rationale that saw the ferries built on the Clyde.

[grunt]

Yes military equipment is built abroad, but not complex ships. £400m in, say, 10 years won't be that big a deal. Yards need upgraded all the time. I want the work to stay in Scotland. I just don't see what's in it for rUK if Scotland was independent. It's exactly the same rationale that saw the ferries built on the Clyde.
So where have we got to with this discussion? Are you saying that Scotland shouldn't be independent of fear of losing MOD contracts for frigates?

Or do we acknowledge that things may well be different in an independent Scotland and that at least the decisions about our future will be our own?

[Stairway 2 7]

Yes military equipment is built abroad, but not complex ships. £400m in, say, 10 years won't be that big a deal. Yards need upgraded all the time. I want the work to stay in Scotland. I just don't see what's in it for rUK if Scotland was independent. It's exactly the same rationale that saw the ferries built on the Clyde.
400 million is a massive deal they simply aren't going to spend it when a British company has a facility already built and more importantly the trained staff. This isn't just a yard upgrade ha.

RFA Tidespring was just built in South Korea the reason they have the yard set up for this ship. We're about to sign a 1.3 billion deal for navy support ships to either Turkey or South Korea

It's one of the best facilities in the world for frigates your painting it as a bad thing a country of 5 million having it. Every g20 nation have announced increased military spending this year for obvious reasons, it won't be short of work

[Jack]

Yes military equipment is built abroad, but not complex ships. £400m in, say, 10 years won't be that big a deal. Yards need upgraded all the time. I want the work to stay in Scotland. I just don't see what's in it for rUK if Scotland was independent. It's exactly the same rationale that saw the ferries built on the Clyde.

What about the complex aircraft on the 2 aircraft carriers? Around £100 million each for 24 (minimum). Bought from the USA?

[archie]

So where have we got to with this discussion? Are you saying that Scotland shouldn't be independent of fear of losing MOD contracts for frigates?

Or do we acknowledge that things may well be different in an independent Scotland and that at least the decisions about our future will be our own?Not at all. But it is a decision that should be made with eyes wide open.

[archie]

What about the complex aircraft on the 2 aircraft carriers? Around £100 million each for 24 (minimum). Bought from the USA?I think you have answered your question. They're not ships.

[Stairway 2 7]

I think you have answered your question. They're not ships.

I'll repost

RFA Tidespring was just built in South Korea the reason, they have the yard set up for this ship. We're about to sign a 1.3 billion deal for navy support ships to either Turkey or South Korea

[archie]

I'll repost

RFA Tidespring was just built in South Korea the reason, they have the yard set up for this ship. We're about to sign a 1.3 billion deal for navy support ships to either Turkey or South KoreaThey are support ships, not complex warships. Operated by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary.

[Stairway 2 7]

They are support ships, not complex warships. Operated by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary.

Haha clutching at straws now. The three that will probably go to Turkey are 500 million pounds each, they aren't wee 20 footers. Tidespring was part of a 450 million 4 ship deal. That's 2 billion that they sent abroad, due to expertise and dock facilities.

It's quite a jewel for Scotland to have such a shipyard

[ronaldo7]

I wouldn't hold out much hope for yards such as Cammell Laird to take up the slack. They're more into block building ships these days. They can't even fit out the RFA's which were built in South Korea on time.

RFA Tidespring arrived on Merseyside on 8th February for her inaugural docking. A Cammell Laird press release at the time said this new vessel would undergo a planned 4-month inspection and maintenance period. Nearly 7 months has passed and the ship has not left the yard.

When asked about this delay CL would not comment themselves and referred our query to the MoD. An official from DE&S stated “The programme for RFA Tidespring is not running late. The dates in Cammell Laird’s original announcement were estimates”.

The claim that the project is not running late is hard to believe on several counts. RFA Tidespring is a new ship and the primary reason for docking was to conduct a hull survey and inspection to maintain her Lloyds Certification. This process should be fairly straightforward, HMS Queen Elizabeth completed a similar inspection in Rosyth in just 6 weeks. Even if CL’s 4-month figure was only an ‘estimate’, the project has now taken more than 50% longer which is a considerable miscalculation. It is reasonable to assume that when CL bid for the FISS contract to maintain the Tide class ships, the time and man-hours for each job would have been carefully calculated as far a possible, although allowing for some contingency for the unexpected. In theory, the time needed for first docking should have been one of the easiest and simplest to predict.

Further evidence of complications comes from recent unconfirmed reports from sources on Merseyside who say that there has been additional work to rectify problems with Tidespring’s original construction, including a vibration issue with her uptakes and funnels. In November 2018 the UK Defence Journal reported a series of build faults with the ship including fireman valves, engine mounts and cracks in the funnel.

Barrow have specialised in Subs, however it's nice to see a private company in Scotland getting some Uk contracts which were promised a while back now coming to fruition.

[archie]

Haha clutching at straws now. The three that will probably go to Turkey are 500 million pounds each, they aren't wee 20 footers. Tidespring was part of a 450 million 4 ship deal. That's 2 billion that they sent abroad, due to expertise and dock facilities.

It's quite a jewel for Scotland to have such a shipyardI don't think it's clutching at straws at all. It's not a complex warship - that is a fact. But we can go round in circles with this one. The position as I see it is that an independent Scotland will be less likely to get rUK naval work due to a mix of policy and political factors. I've set these out in previous posts. Your (and other posters) position appears to be nothing to see here, it'll all be fine. Now none of us knows the answer for sure. I happen to think my take is more plausible, for the reasons I gave. Is that a reason not to vote for independence? That's up to individual voters. But I think there has to be some agreement that arrangements that currently exist will change. That may or may not be for the better. But change they will.

[Stairway 2 7]

I don't think it's clutching at straws at all. It's not a complex warship - that is a fact. But we can go round in circles with this one. The position as I see it is that an independent Scotland will be less likely to get rUK naval work due to a mix of policy and political factors. I've set these out in previous posts. Your (and other posters) position appears to be nothing to see here, it'll all be fine. Now none of us knows the answer for sure. I happen to think my take is more plausible, for the reasons I gave. Is that a reason not to vote for independence? That's up to individual voters. But I think there has to be some agreement that arrangements that currently exist will change. That may or may not be for the better. But change they will.
If they aren't complex it makes your argument make less sense. Why give 2 billion for 7 ships to foreign countries if they aren't complex and can be built in England. It's because they are very complex and so is training workers and creating docks.

I think it's utterly bizarre saying having one of the worlds top naval building yard in your country is anything but a bonus.

[archie]

If they aren't complex it makes your argument make less sense. Why give 2 billion for 7 ships to foreign countries if they aren't complex and can be built in England. It's because they are very complex and so is training workers and creating docks.

I think it's utterly bizarre saying having one of the worlds top naval building yard in your country is anything but a bonus.The complexity relates to the fact that they are warships. The policy is to build warships in the UK (that doesn't preclude parts being made abroad). The policy is described in detail here: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/definition-of-warship-clarified-by-mod-in-wake-of-support-ship-international-tender/

Nothing I have said suggests that I think it's not good having the BaE yard on the Clyde. It is a great source of high quality employment. I want it to continue. It's not bizarre to point out the risks to that continuation. Wishing these away just won't wash.

[Stairway 2 7]

The complexity relates to the fact that they are warships. The policy is to build warships in the UK (that doesn't preclude parts being made abroad). The policy is described in detail here: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/definition-of-warship-clarified-by-mod-in-wake-of-support-ship-international-tender/

Nothing I have said suggests that I think it's not good having the BaE yard on the Clyde. It is a great source of high quality employment. I want it to continue. It's not bizarre to point out the risks to that continuation. Wishing these away just won't wash.

The fact is if the 2 billion in ships could be built in England they would, but they don't have the shipyards or trained staff.

They also don't have trained staff or shipyards to build warships. They simply aren't spending half a billion on making a port comparable to Govan. They can't even justify half of hs2 or the northern rail plan.

We're going to see an explosion in military building and spending over the next decade. Bae will be able to be picky

[archie]

The fact is if the 2 billion in ships could be built in England they would, but they don't have the shipyards or trained staff.

They also don't have trained staff or shipyards to build warships. They simply aren't spending half a billion on making a port comparable to Govan. They can't even justify half of hs2 or the northern rail plan.

We're going to see an explosion in military building and spending over the next decade. Bae will be able to be pickyThey don't need to build them in England because they have excellent capacity in the UK.

[Stairway 2 7]

They don't need to build them in England because they have excellent capacity in the UK.

No the 7 ships costing 2 billion that are being built in South Korea and Turkey. Fact is you go to the yard where the equipment and expertise is. Thanks to the planned 200 million pound upgrade the Clyde will be that choice in Britain in most of our lifetimes

[archie]

No the 7 ships costing 2 billion that are being built in South Korea and Turkey. Fact is you go to the yard where the equipment and expertise is. Thanks to the planned 200 million pound upgrade the Clyde will be that choice in Britain in most of our lifetimesWhy are you ignoring the policy that complex warships are built in the Uk? That'll mean that they won't be built in an independent Scotland. The Scottish yard will be able to bid for other work from the navy. Just not the stuff it builds now. The upgrade is irrelevant if it's not in the UK.

[Stairway 2 7]

Why are you ignoring the policy that complex warships are built in the Uk? That'll mean that they won't be built in an independent Scotland. The Scottish yard will be able to bid for other work from the navy. Just not the stuff it builds now. The upgrade is irrelevant if it's not in the UK.

There will be no facilities in the uk that can build warships without half a billion investment, the policy will change promptly. They are the ones who will be chapping its a problem for them. We'll have one of the best facilities in the world with unlimited customers. We'll not be short of customers going forward.

It'll all be mute as we'll have a joint agreement going forward, we're too linked. Bae Govan regardless is a huge bonus to either independent or non independent Scotland, saying anything different is just politicking

[archie]

There will be no facilities in the uk that can build warships without half a billion investment, the policy will change promptly. They are the ones who will be chapping its a problem for them. We'll have one of the best facilities in the world with unlimited customers. We'll not be short of customers going forward.

It'll all be mute as we'll have a joint agreement going forward, we're too linked. Bae Govan regardless is a huge bonus to either independent or non independent Scotland, saying anything different is just politickingOK - we've pretty much talked this out, but in response to your point that it's just politicking to suggest their might be an issue going forward. To adopt your position the rUK Government would: change it's position on building complex warships abroad that it has held for over a century. It will face down opposition at home to build abroad. It will seek to reward an independent Scotland that has said up yours with long term work. It will also refuse to invest in its own stategic defence infrastructure. All for £200 or £300 or £500 million. I hope you are doing the negotiations on Hibs next transfers.

But in any event the yard will have 'unlimited customers'. So no 'politicking' going on here then!

[Stairway 2 7]

OK - we've pretty much talked this out, but in response to your point that it's just politicking to suggest their might be an issue going forward. To adopt your position the rUK Government would: change it's position on building complex warships abroad that it has held for over a century. It will face down opposition at home to build abroad. It will seek to reward an independent Scotland that has said up yours with long term work. It will also refuse to invest in its own stategic defence infrastructure. All for £200 or £300 or £500 million. I hope you are doing the negotiations on Hibs next transfers.

But in any event the yard will have 'unlimited customers'. So no 'politicking' going on here then!

Agreed on your second point, about every g20 country has announced large increased military spending. Bae are wanting to open another dry graving Dock in Govan due to increasing demand.

[archie]

Agreed on your second point, about every g20 country has announced large increased military spending. Bae are wanting to open another dry graving Dock in Govan due to increasing demand.That demand is based on a long term commitment from UKG. How many ships are they currently building for other buyers (a real question, I don't know the answer)?

[Stairway 2 7]

That demand is based on a long term commitment from UKG. How many ships are they currently building for other buyers (a real question, I don't know the answer)?

It only 1 yard the frigates being built will be the only ships it can build until they are done. They will be getting built for about 18 years. That's why bae are wanting to build another outdoor dock and are building an indoor dock, to be able to build other ships bar the frigates. Although this is obviously a problem for a few decades time

[grunt]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhraDN0WAAAbdz2?format=jpg&name=large

[Ozyhibby]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhraDN0WAAAbdz2?format=jpg&name=large

Big day for democracy in Scotland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Since90+2]

Big day for democracy in Scotland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My guess is they simply won't make a ruling and pass it back to the parliaments, which I understand is one of 3 options, and actually the worst possible outcome for the SNP. The optics would be far better, as it were, if they ruled it wasn't legal rather than simply refusing to rule on it

I hope I'm wrong though.

[Ozyhibby]

My guess is they simply won't make a ruling and pass it back to the parliaments, which I understand is one of 3 options, and actually the worst possible outcome for the SNP. The optics would be far better, as it were, if they ruled it wasn't legal rather than simply refusing to rule on it

I hope I'm wrong though.

I think there is a good case that they don’t rule but they also know if they do that then it will be back in front of them in a couple of months anyway. One of the judges pointed that out during the hearing making the point that the courts time was precious.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

The fact the judgement is being delivered so quickly suggests they won't rule as the bill is still draft. The SNP can't really complain as they argued the same last year when Martin Keatings took court action.

A wasted few months potentially and on to the de facto referendum at the next GE, and then yet another referendum debate if somehow the pro Indy parties get over 50%.

And then on to the Scottish Elections in 2026 where it will be vote SNP for IndyRef2.

[ronaldo7]

The fact the judgement is being delivered so quickly suggests they won't rule as the bill is still draft. The SNP can't really complain as they argued the same last year when Martin Keatings took court action.

A wasted few months potentially and on to the de facto referendum at the next GE, and then yet another referendum debate if somehow the pro Indy parties get over 50%.

And then on to the Scottish Elections in 2026 where it will be vote SNP for IndyRef2.

The last Scottish elections, the Tories and Labour said a vote for the SNP was a vote for Indyref2

They changed their minds when they got humped.

Now it's back to now is not the time, or never, never, never.

[James310]

The last Scottish elections, the Tories and Labour said a vote for the SNP was a vote for Indyref2

They changed their minds when they got humped.

Now it's back to now is not the time, or never, never, never.

Of course they did, just like Nicola Sturgeon claimed before the election a vote for her wasn't a vote for IndyRef2 and then immediately after said every vote for the SNP was a vote for IndyRef2.

[ronaldo7]

Big day for democracy in Scotland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Starmer has already decided we're not having one, even if the Supreme Court say we are.

He knows best.

[ronaldo7]

Of course they did, just like Nicola Sturgeon claimed before the election a vote for her wasn't a vote for IndyRef2 and then immediately after said every vote for the SNP was a vote for IndyRef2.

She won though. They lost. Democracy and all that, or don't you do that?

[Kato]

Of course they did, just like Nicola Sturgeon claimed before the election a vote for her wasn't a vote for IndyRef2 and then immediately after said every vote for the SNP was a vote for IndyRef2.I think she it was a vote for their manifesto, which included Indyref2.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[James310]

She won though. They lost. Democracy and all that, or don't you do that?

She won and promised a referendum in 2023, like she promised one in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and so on
Looks like 2023 will slip by like the others and then it's looking like 2025 for next promise.

[Ozyhibby]

She won and promised a referendum in 2023, like she promised one in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and so on
Looks like 2023 will slip by like the others and then it's looking like 2025 for next promise.

Love how you equate the UK govt using the law to frustrate Scottish democracy as NS breaking promises. Keep up the quality trolling.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

She won and promised a referendum in 2023, like she promised one in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and so on
Looks like 2023 will slip by like the others and then it's looking like 2025 for next promise.

It looks like you don't do democracy then. Thanks for the post, it's nice looking at the timeline of Ukgov continuing to deny the people of Scotland what they voted for.

[James310]

It looks like you don't do democracy then. Thanks for the post, it's nice looking at the timeline of Ukgov continuing to deny the people of Scotland what they voted for.

What we voted for? That would be no in 2014. I have always said I agree with Nicola Sturgeon.

"To propose another referendum without strong evidence that a significant number of those who voted No have changed their minds would be wrong and we won’t do it. It would not be respecting the decision that people made."

[ronaldo7]

What we voted for? That would be no in 2014. I have always said I agree with Nicola Sturgeon.

"To propose another referendum without strong evidence that a significant number of those who voted No have changed their minds would be wrong and we won’t do it. It would not be respecting the decision that people made."

Did you say 2014 James?

Since you're happy posting about elections and promises. Maybe you could tell us how many we've had since then. 😂

[James310]

Did you say 2014 James?

Since you're happy posting about elections and promises. Maybe you could tell us how many we've had since then. ��

Promises Nicola Sturgeon has made that she has failed to deliver.

Here she is firing the starting gun for IndyRef2.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/13/nicola-sturgeon-fires-starting-gun-on-second-scottish-independence-referendum


In 2017.

[ronaldo7]

Promises Nicola Sturgeon has made that she has failed to deliver.

Here she is firing the starting gun for IndyRef2.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/13/nicola-sturgeon-fires-starting-gun-on-second-scottish-independence-referendum


In 2017.

Any more?

[James310]

Any more?

"Accusing Theresa May of thwarting Scotland’s desire for a special deal with Europe, the first minister confirmed she plans to hold the vote between autumn 2018 and spring 2019 unless the UK government offers substantial last-minute concessions.

Déjà vu?

[ronaldo7]

"Accusing Theresa May of thwarting Scotland’s desire for a special deal with Europe, the first minister confirmed she plans to hold the vote between autumn 2018 and spring 2019 unless the UK government offers substantial last-minute concessions.

Déjà vu?

Don't hold back mate. Keep them coming. 😂

[Callum_62]

She won and promised a referendum in 2023, like she promised one in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and so on
Looks like 2023 will slip by like the others and then it's looking like 2025 for next promise.Great point though

Showing how the democratically elected leader of our countrys attemps at sticking to manifesto promises are being thrwathed by.... Checks notes, the tories in Westminster [emoji106]

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Great point though

Showing how the democratically elected leader of our countrys attemps at sticking to manifesto promises are being thrwathed by.... Checks notes, the tories in Westminster [emoji106]

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

This is why democracy can’t be taken for granted. People like James are happy to do away with it so long as it suits his narrow political goals. Not everyone in this country is committed to keeping even the partial democracy we have just now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

This is why democracy can’t be taken for granted. People like James are happy to do away with it so long as it suits his narrow political goals. Not everyone in this country is committed to keeping even the partial democracy we have just now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If that makes you feel comfortable then fine, of course I would argue I am respecting the democratic result of the only actual vote we have had on Independence.

The fact we are going round in the same circles in 2022 and nearly 2023 which were had in 2017 etc doesn't seem to worry you then fine as well, lack of any real concrete progress on Indy doesn't exactly bother me.

[Hibrandenburg]

What we voted for? That would be no in 2014. I have always said I agree with Nicola Sturgeon.

"To propose another referendum without strong evidence that a significant number of those who voted No have changed their minds would be wrong and we won’t do it. It would not be respecting the decision that people made."


Surely the strongest evidence that people have changed their minds would be to ask them :dunno:

[Just Alf]

Surely the strongest evidence that people have changed their minds would be to ask them :dunno:Stop being sensible, anti-democratic folks don't like it.

[James310]

Surely the strongest evidence that people have changed their minds would be to ask them :dunno:

We do ask people, when asked in polls it shows people don't want a referendum in 2023 and all major polling companies when asking people about Independence tells us Yes is losing in pretty much every single poll.

When Nicola Sturgeon made that comment I posted earlier how would she have judged people had changed their minds? By reading them?

[greenlex]

We do ask people, when asked in polls it shows people don't want a referendum in 2023 and all major polling companies when asking people about Independence tells us Yes is losing in pretty much every single poll.

When Nicola Sturgeon made that comment I posted earlier how would she have judged people had changed their minds? By reading them?

The best way is to ask all the people what they want not just a selective few. That’s democracy for you.

[WeeRussell]

We do ask people, when asked in polls it shows people don't want a referendum in 2023 and all major polling companies when asking people about Independence tells us Yes is losing in pretty much every single poll.

When Nicola Sturgeon made that comment I posted earlier how would she have judged people had changed their minds? By reading them?

So, the man that doesn’t want us going round in circles and repeating ourselves wants us to just keep having polls on independence rather than a democratic referendum which will actually prove the will of the people and decide, fairly, on how Scotland moves forward.

We could stop having so many polls, and you could find a new Nicola Sturgeon to post about every day.

[grunt]

We do ask people, when asked in polls it shows people don't want a referendum in 2023 and all major polling companies when asking people about Independence tells us Yes is losing in pretty much every single poll.

When Nicola Sturgeon made that comment I posted earlier how would she have judged people had changed their minds? By reading them?

You are so scared!

[James310]

The best way is to ask all the people what they want not just a selective few. That’s democracy for you.

Polls don't ask a selective few, they are a representative sample. You can't ask everyone in polls, but we did in 2014.

[James310]

You are so scared!

Yes really scared. As I have said before I think Independence is further away than it's ever been, that's how scared I am.

[James310]

So, the man that doesn’t want us going round in circles and repeating ourselves wants us to just keep having polls on independence rather than a democratic referendum which will actually prove the will of the people and decide, fairly, on how Scotland moves forward.

We could stop having so many polls, and you could find a new Nicola Sturgeon to post about every day.

Doesn't bother me rehashing the same arguments over and over year after year, it's obviously doing nothing for Independence at all.

[The Modfather]

Polls don't ask a selective few, they are a representative sample. You can't ask everyone in polls, but we did in 2014.

I’d have thought it was in everyone’s best interest to have a second referendum and put it to bed one way or another. I’m in favour of independence, and see Brexit as the material change that justifies a second referendum. Lose the second referendum and I’ll still be in favour if independence but not see any game changers on the horizon, like Brexit, that would justify a third referendum so would be time to accept the people of Scotland had definitively spoken and best to get on with making the best of the here and now.

[WeeRussell]

I’d have thought it was in everyone’s best interest to have a second referendum and put it to bed one way or another. I’m in favour of independence, and see Brexit as the material change that justifies a second referendum. Lose the second referendum and I’ll still be in favour if independence but not see any game changers on the horizon, like Brexit, that would justify a third referendum so would be time to accept the people of Scotland had definitively spoken and best to get on with making the best of the here and now.

Far too sensible. It’ll never work.

[WeeRussell]

Doesn't bother me rehashing the same arguments over and over year after year, it's obviously doing nothing for Independence at all.

Why does it bother you rehashing the argument by way of a referendum so much? Especially if you’re so sure of getting the result you desire?

[archie]

I’d have thought it was in everyone’s best interest to have a second referendum and put it to bed one way or another. I’m in favour of independence, and see Brexit as the material change that justifies a second referendum. Lose the second referendum and I’ll still be in favour if independence but not see any game changers on the horizon, like Brexit, that would justify a third referendum so would be time to accept the people of Scotland had definitively spoken and best to get on with making the best of the here and now.Why do you think it would put it to bed?

[The Modfather]

Why do you think it would put it to bed?

Because, lose it and I fail to see any justification for a third referendum (subject to another Brexit size change happening) and time to work with what we’ve got. Without Brexit I’d not see any justification for a second referendum. Despite being in favour of independence.

[archie]

Because, lose it and I fail to see any justification for a third referendum (subject to another Brexit size change happening) and time to work with what we’ve got. Without Brexit I’d not see any justification for a second referendum. Despite being in favour of independence.Thanks for the prompt reply. The reason I ask is that it appeared to me that calls for a second referendum started pretty much after the first one. I know in Quebec the second referendum had that effect, but I'd seen that disputed as applicable here.

[James310]

Why does it bother you rehashing the argument by way of a referendum so much? Especially if you’re so sure of getting the result you desire?

I said it doesn't bother me, if we are going over the same arguments in another 5 years in 2027 going into 2028 then I would suggest it's your side that has the problem.

[WeeRussell]

I said it doesn't bother me, if we are going over the same arguments in another 5 years in 2027 going into 2028 then I would suggest it's your side that has the problem.

Ah right my mistake. You’re perfectly happy with the upcoming referendum taking place.

[James310]

Ah right my mistake. You’re perfectly happy with the upcoming referendum taking place.

What referendum?

[Moulin Yarns]

Polls don't ask a selective few, they are a representative sample. You can't ask everyone in polls, but we did in 2014.

And why not do it again, rather than give private polling organisations money to do it for us?

What is so difficult to understand that the most democratic way to find out what people think today, rather than 8 years ago, because, believe it or not, people can change their minds.

[James310]

And why not do it again, rather than give private polling organisations money to do it for us?

What is so difficult to understand that the most democratic way to find out what people think today, rather than 8 years ago, because, believe it or not, people can change their minds.

Where is the evidence people have changed their minds? Do you have any?

How do you think Nicola Sturgeon would have demonstrated a significant number of No voters would have changed their minds when she said "without strong evidence that a significant number of those who voted No have changed their minds would be wrong and we won’t do it. It would not be respecting the decision that people made"

How would she have demonstrated the strong evidence people who voted No had changed their minds?

[greenlex]

Polls don't ask a selective few, they are a representative sample. You can't ask everyone in polls, but we did in 2014.

Polls absolutely ask a selected few. It also depends very much on what exactly the question being asked. The whole point of a new referendum is to ask everyone the same question to get an up to date answer. Again it’s called democracy. If it’s yes it’s yes and if it’s no it’s no. Unionists seem awfully afraid if one. For someone who is sure independence is so far away you’re spending an awful lot of time and energy on this thread opposing a new referendum.

[WeeRussell]

Polls absolutely ask a selected few. It also depends very much on what exactly the question being asked. The whole point of a new referendum is to ask everyone the same question to get an up to date answer. Again it’s called democracy. If it’s yes it’s yes and if it’s no it’s no. Unionists seem awfully afraid if one. For someone who is sure independence is so far away you’re spending an awful lot of time and energy on this thread opposing a new referendum.

… and the rest of his time insisting it really doesn’t bother him and it’s us that have the problem.

[Hibrandenburg]

Polls don't ask a selective few, they are a representative sample. You can't ask everyone in polls, but we did in 2014.

Let's just do away with elections and just use opinion polls to decide for the country.

[James310]

Polls absolutely ask a selected few. It also depends very much on what exactly the question being asked. The whole point of a new referendum is to ask everyone the same question to get an up to date answer. Again it’s called democracy. If it’s yes it’s yes and if it’s no it’s no. Unionists seem awfully afraid if one. For someone who is sure independence is so far away you’re spending an awful lot of time and energy on this thread opposing a new referendum.

It depends on the question? The question in the polls is always the same. That's why we get Yes or No answers.

Typing out a few words on a keyboard and pressing submit is not spending an awful lot of time and energy, people who are members of political parties and campaign and leaflet etc are the ones spending energy and effort.

Referendums are divisive and generally very unpleasant, so unless there is clear evidence people have changed their mind I don't want one.

[Ozyhibby]

It depends on the question? The question in the polls is always the same. That's why we get Yes or No answers.

Typing out a few words on a keyboard and pressing submit is not spending an awful lot of time and energy, people who are members of political parties and campaign and leaflet etc are the ones spending energy and effort.

Referendums are divisive and generally very unpleasant, so unless there is clear evidence people have changed their mind I don't want one.

Don’t want one and are happy to deny people democracy to prevent one.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Don’t want one and are happy to deny people democracy to prevent one.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not at all, I have been consistent in saying if there is evidence people have changed their minds and Yes for example was polling significantly ahead in the polls then I am all for another one.

Keep putting people into your comfortable little boxes though, I guess it stops you looking at the actual Independence case and wondering why despite everything that's happening support remains pretty well stuck.

[Ozyhibby]

Not at all, I have been consistent in saying if there is evidence people have changed their minds and Yes for example was polling significantly ahead in the polls then I am all for another one.

Keep putting people into your comfortable little boxes though, I guess it stops you looking at the actual Independence case and wondering why despite everything that's happening support remains pretty well stuck.

We don’t need polling. We had an election and returned a parliament that voted for one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Callum_62]

We don’t need polling. We had an election and returned a parliament that voted for one.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkThat's a novel ideal

I'm sure the brexit referendum was only held as leave had a 60% plus lead in all opinion polls?

Infact, was indy ref1 held because 'stay in the union' was way ahead in the polls initially?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Where is the evidence people have changed their minds? Do you have any?

How do you think Nicola Sturgeon would have demonstrated a significant number of No voters would have changed their minds when she said "without strong evidence that a significant number of those who voted No have changed their minds would be wrong and we won’t do it. It would not be respecting the decision that people made"

How would she have demonstrated the strong evidence people who voted No had changed their minds?

The only way to get the evidence you desperately want is to put it to the population and ask them. Maybe a referendum is the only way to find out. 😁

[Since90+2]

Let's just do away with elections and just use opinion polls to decide for the country.

Yip, why bother with democratic, nationwide, elections with a party being elected on a mandate of another independence referendum.

Forget all that, let's just run it by opinion polls.

Absolute nonsense argument.

[grunt]

Yip, why bother with democratic, nationwide, elections with a party being elected on a mandate of another independence referendum.

Forget all that, let's just run it by opinion polls.

Absolute nonsense argument.I think you'll find he was being sarcastic.

[archie]

I'm seeing a lot of chat around democracy here. Out of interest would any group of people have a democratic right to vote to leave a country?

[Since90+2]

I think you'll find he was being sarcastic.

I think you've missed the point of my post 😂

[weecounty hibby]

I'm seeing a lot of chat around democracy here. Out of interest would any group of people have a democratic right to vote to leave a country?

The UK isn't a country. Its a voluntary union made of individual countries. In theory it should be very straight forward to remove a country involved in a voluntary union. For example see Brexit!

[ronaldo7]

That's a novel ideal

I'm sure the brexit referendum was only held as leave had a 60% plus lead in all opinion polls?

Infact, was indy ref1 held because 'stay in the union' was way ahead in the polls initially?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

I think we had many "don't know" at the time, and still do. If only we had a way to give them a voice, like a referendum. :greengrin

It'd be nice if the Unionists on here would accept that the stance they're taking is denying democracy given the election results, and manifestos, rather than continuing to trot out the Tory/Labour mantra of now is not the time, or get back in your box, you're not having one.

[archie]

The UK isn't a country. Its a voluntary union made of individual countries. In theory it should be very straight forward to remove a country involved in a voluntary union. For example see Brexit!But the UK is a country. Brexit was the withdrawal from a treaty agreed by a number of countries. It's not the same

[archie]

I think we had many "don't know" at the time, and still do. If only we had a way to give them a voice, like a referendum. :greengrin

It'd be nice if the Unionists on here would accept that the stance they're taking is denying democracy given the election results, and manifestos, rather than continuing to trot out the Tory/Labour mantra of now is not the time, or get back in your box, you're not having one.

So is your view that anyone at any time can have a vote to leave a country?

[weecounty hibby]

But the UK is a country. Brexit was the withdrawal from a treaty agreed by a number of countries. It's not the same

The act of union was a treaty signed by two countries so therefore exactly the same

[archie]

The act of union was a treaty signed by two countries so therefore exactly the sameThe agreement to join the then EEC did not set up a unitary state. The treaty of union did.

[ronaldo7]

So is your view that anyone at any time can have a vote to leave a country?

I think you're probably going to play the island card here however we work within the confines of international law, or we used to. If any political movement within a nation or nation groups asks the people if they want to leave that group of countries, then so be it. See Brexit.

[archie]

I think you're probably going to play the island card here however we work within the confines of international law, or we used to. If any political movement within a nation or nation groups asks the people if they want to leave that group of countries, then so be it. See Brexit.So to be clear, anyone can have a referendum to secede at any time. Incidentally, what 'international law' are you referring to?

[ronaldo7]

So to be clear, anyone can have a referendum to secede at any time. Incidentally, what 'international law' are you referring to?

I think this has been covered a number of times on here. Just go back on the thread and find it.

We Jimmy at the end of my street doesn't get involved with the rest of us and wants to change the voting structure of the estate. He's the only one. Does he have the right to change the rules for the estate? Or will he just leave and move to another estate.

[Kato]

The agreement to join the then EEC did not set up a unitary state. The treaty of union did.Was the Union setting up a unitary state? Scotland still has its own laws, institutions and education system. Not much unitary about that.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

The agreement to join the then EEC did not set up a unitary state. The treaty of union did.

The treaty of union did not set up a unitary state.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

Was the Union setting up a unitary state? Scotland still has its own laws, institutions and education system. Not much unitary about that.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Yes it did set up a unitary state. Off the top of my head the US and Germany operate in a similar way. Are they also not unitary states?

[Stairway 2 7]

Got a feeling the two sides won't come to a consensus on this thread 😆

[archie]

The treaty of union did not set up a unitary state.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you could show me a source for that it would be really helpful to my understanding.

[archie]

Got a feeling the two sides won't come to a consensus on this thread 😆

I think that's emblematic of the debate. But it shouldn't be hard to show the terms of the union that demonstrate that the UK isn't a unitary state.

[JeMeSouviens]

The treaty of union did not set up a unitary state.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It absolutely did. Sure there are quaint local asymmetric arrangements, but all power resides in the Westminster parliament. Any Scots law Holyrood makes can be instantly overridden as they so choose, any policy Holyrood makes for Scots education, the Scottish NHS etc etc, all of it can be overridden by Westminster at any time.

The notion that we are a "member" of a "union" is just a con trick.

[JeMeSouviens]

So to be clear, anyone can have a referendum to secede at any time. Incidentally, what 'international law' are you referring to?

If you mean, eg. could Shetland secede from iScotland? Then, in my view, absolutely yes. If that's the popular will of Shetlanders, then I'm all for it.

[archie]

If you mean, eg. could Shetland secede from iScotland? Then, in my view, absolutely yes. If that's the popular will of Shetlanders, then I'm all for it.
That's interesting. There was a lot of social media noise about whether following a successful independence referendum whether parts of Scotland could vote 'not to be dragged out of the UK'. Yes commentators seemed to see this in the same way as partition in Ireland and India.

[ronaldo7]

I think that's emblematic of the debate. But it shouldn't be hard to show the terms of the union that demonstrate that the UK isn't a unitary state.

It's probably easier to show that it is a unitary state, if it exists.

[archie]

It's probably easier to show that it is a unitary state, if it exists.

This is an interesting (if dated) discussion that is probably a bit more neutral than some https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-52-issue-06/the-union-and-the-law/

[ronaldo7]

This is an interesting (if dated) discussion that is probably a bit more neutral than some https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-52-issue-06/the-union-and-the-law/

Can't open the link on my phone, but I'll take a look when I get home. Cheers.

[archie]

Can't open the link on my phone, but I'll take a look when I get home. Cheers.

Give me a shout if I've stuffed up the link. Also on phone and standing in pouring rain!

[Ozyhibby]

Give me a shout if I've stuffed up the link. Also on phone and standing in pouring rain!

Apologies, my understanding of unitary state was wrong. Just had a read up.
However, you appear to be arguing that Scotland now should have no right to independence ever? I don’t see that as politically sustainable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

I think you've missed the point of my post 😂Too early in the morning for me.

[archie]

Apologies, my understanding of unitary state was wrong. Just had a read up.
However, you appear to be arguing that Scotland now should have no right to independence ever? I don’t see that as politically sustainable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think there is a difference between constitutional and political routes. It's not unusual for a unitary state to forbid secession. Germany is an example. But clearly political campaigning is perfectly legitimate.It was a political deal that gave us the 2014 referendum.Whatever the Supreme Court opines next week, it would still, in my opinion, need a political solution.

[J-C]

The agreement to join the then EEC did not set up a unitary state. The treaty of union did.


The 1707 treaty was a merging of 2 parliaments and not the merging of the countries, hence we still have separate legal and education systems. We lived for around 100 years with the same monarch for both countries with England pushing for a parliament merger many times prior to 1707. The treaty and merger had zero say from the people of Scotland as we didn't get the vote until late 1800's/early 1900's, prior to that it was the aristocracy and middle classes who were allowed to vote, hence the riots in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee and Aberdeen when it was announced.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/jeremy-hunt-refers-to-uk-government-as-english-government-in-slip-up-in-the-house-of-commons-3922247


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

I think there is a difference between constitutional and political routes. It's not unusual for a unitary state to forbid secession. Germany is an example. But clearly political campaigning is perfectly legitimate.It was a political deal that gave us the 2014 referendum.Whatever the Supreme Court opines next week, it would still, in my opinion, need a political solution.

Forbids secession - yes. Unitary state - no.

[Glory Lurker]

The Shetland scenario was excitedly put about with the inference they'd get the oil fields. They wouldn't. They'd get a 12 mile zone within Scotland's area as the coastal state.

They also don't appear to want to leave, which is a fact that those who push that agenda often don't realise, or care about more to the point.

If anywhere wants to go it alone though they should be allowed to do so. I've no truck with that.

[archie]

Forbids secession - yes. Unitary state - no.
It's a federal Formally we're not, though in practice Scotland has significant powers.

[Kato]

Unitary "forming a single or uniform entity."

There some uniformity within the UK but enough differences; law, education, cultural institutions, which can rule out the idea that it forms unitary entity.



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

It's a federal Formally we're not, though in practice Scotland has significant powers.

Yes, exactly. Federal, not unitary.

Scotland is a region of a unitary state. Our parliament has authority devolved from Westminster to exercise a limited subset of powers on Westminster's behalf. So formally, informally, in or out of practice, we're not.

[marinello59]

Yes, exactly. Federal, not unitary.

Scotland is a region of a unitary state. Our parliament has authority devolved from Westminster to exercise a limited subset of powers on Westminster's behalf. So formally, informally, in or out of practice, we're not.

I’ve read that a couple of times on ISpy now and both times I thought you were saying we were a feral state. I’m going with that. :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

It depends on the question? The question in the polls is always the same. That's why we get Yes or No answers.



I saw this this morning and was too busy to respond. I really expected another supporter of a referendum to correct you but it looks like it is up to me!


The question asked for indyref1 was 'should Scotland be an independent country?' and this is often the case for opinion polls, HOWEVER, there are several opinion polls which have used the Brexit question instead, 'should Scotland REMAIN or LEAVE the UK?

The wording of the Brexit question often skews the response in favour of Remain.

You probably won't believe that, but surely the only way to test it is to put it to the people with the correct wording as used in indyref1 and call it indyref2. That way we can bypass the opinion poll companies.

[archie]

I saw this this morning and was too busy to respond. I really expected another supporter of a referendum to correct you but it looks like it is up to me!


The question asked for indyref1 was 'should Scotland be an independent country?' and this is often the case for opinion polls, HOWEVER, there are several opinion polls which have used the Brexit question instead, 'should Scotland REMAIN or LEAVE the UK?

The wording of the Brexit question often skews the response in favour of Remain.

You probably won't believe that, but surely the only way to test it is to put it to the people with the correct wording as used in indyref1 and call it indyref2. That way we can bypass the opinion poll companies.

Why do you think the wording in 2014 was 'correct'?

[greenlex]

Why do you think the wording in 2014 was 'correct'?
My point about polls is that the way a question is worded makes a. difference to the outcome. Whether a referendum is called shouldnt be dependent on a set of polls that are essentially diffident polls. Which wording is neither here nor there for that point.

[archie]

My point about polls is that the way a question is worded makes a. difference to the outcome. Whether a referendum is called shouldnt be dependent on a set of polls that are essentially diffident polls. Which wording is neither here nor there for that point.

That's why the wording of any question is such a battleground.

[Ozyhibby]

That's why the wording of any question is such a battleground.

I doubt the electoral commission would allow a change now.
The only battleground just now is for democracy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

Way back in 2014 I said that salmond getting his way over the question was a shrewd move and it was a big mistake by Cameron who was overconfident. A mistake he repeated with brexit despite the near miss in 2014.

fwIW I agree Scotland should have the right to choose, but there needs to be clear and agreed criteria. We cannot just have a referendum all the time

I remain confident that if we had a referendum tomorrow, we would still choose to be part of the uk.

As James keeps pointing out, sturgeon is playing her hand very badly despite the numerous mistakes by the other side.

[archie]

I doubt the electoral commission would allow a change now.
The only battleground just now is for democracy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why do you doubt that.

[James310]

Way back in 2014 I said that salmond getting his way over the question was a shrewd move and it was a big mistake by Cameron who was overconfident. A mistake he repeated with brexit despite the near miss in 2014.

fwIW I agree Scotland should have the right to choose, but there needs to be clear and agreed criteria. We cannot just have a referendum all the time

I remain confident that if we had a referendum tomorrow, we would still choose to be part of the uk.

As James keeps pointing out, sturgeon is playing her hand very badly despite the numerous mistakes by the other side.

It's like Sturgeon has been given an open goal with Brexit, Covid, Boris Johnson, party gate, Liz Truss etc but can only muster a Diana Ross attempt at goal. (One for the oldies, yes was nearly 30 years ago)

[The Modfather]

Way back in 2014 I said that salmond getting his way over the question was a shrewd move and it was a big mistake by Cameron who was overconfident. A mistake he repeated with brexit despite the near miss in 2014.

fwIW I agree Scotland should have the right to choose, but there needs to be clear and agreed criteria. We cannot just have a referendum all the time

I remain confident that if we had a referendum tomorrow, we would still choose to be part of the uk.

As James keeps pointing out, sturgeon is playing her hand very badly despite the numerous mistakes by the other side.

Is that clear and agreed criteria not as simple as put something in your manifesto and if the electorate vote you in you have a mandate to deliver that manifesto pledge?

[Skol]

Is that clear and agreed criteria not as simple as put something in your manifesto and if the electorate vote you in you have a mandate to deliver that manifesto pledge?

That is one approach I agree. You and others will disagree but I think the bar should be higher. Yes we elect an snp government, but a majority of independence supporting msps did not come from over half the votes. I know that’s all moot. The key though should be to have clear criteria agreed. I hope that’s an outcome from the Supreme Court but suspect they will leave us in the current Groundhog Day scenario which is no good to anyone.

[He's here!]

Way back in 2014 I said that salmond getting his way over the question was a shrewd move and it was a big mistake by Cameron who was overconfident. A mistake he repeated with brexit despite the near miss in 2014.

fwIW I agree Scotland should have the right to choose, but there needs to be clear and agreed criteria. We cannot just have a referendum all the time

I remain confident that if we had a referendum tomorrow, we would still choose to be part of the uk.

As James keeps pointing out, sturgeon is playing her hand very badly despite the numerous mistakes by the other side.

I'm unclear what Sturgeon's whinging about with regard to today's autumn statement. A good many of Hunt's proposals broadly chime with her own.

Public sector wages are set to rise by the average rate of inflation, the pensions triple lock looks set to be retained and the windfall tax will be a big source of revenue, all of which Sturgeon actually supports. In addition, Hunt's tax measures are similar to those already adopted in Scotland.

It's all too easy to play the austerity card, but while the Truss/Kwarteng 'mini-budget' didn't help, the UK is far from alone in having to cope with the effects of the Ukraine war, soaring energy costs and inflation. How else does she expect the books to be balanced than by introducing the measures we've seen today? Oh, independence of course.

[James310]

I'm unclear what Sturgeon's whinging about with regard to today's autumn statement. A good many of Hunt's proposals broadly chime with her own.

Public sector wages are set to rise by the average rate of inflation, the pensions triple lock looks set to be retained and the windfall tax will be a big source of revenue, all of which Sturgeon actually supports. In addition, Hunt's tax measures are similar to those already adopted in Scotland.

It's all too easy to play the austerity card, but while the Truss/Kwarteng 'mini-budget' didn't help, the UK is far from alone in having to cope with the effects of the Ukraine war, soaring energy costs and inflation. How else does she expect the books to be balanced than by introducing the measures we've seen today? Oh, independence of course.

Also tax changes to increase the tax on unearned income from dividends and capital gains tax, some SNP supporters were calling for exactly that.

Interestingly as well the approach of increasing public spending but below the rate of GDP growth that Jeremy Hunt announced is exactly the same policy that was in the SNPs Sustainable Growth Commission paper.

[Kato]

I'm unclear what Sturgeon's whinging about with regard to today's autumn statement. A good many of Hunt's proposals broadly chime with her own.

Public sector wages are set to rise by the average rate of inflation, the pensions triple lock looks set to be retained and the windfall tax will be a big source of revenue, all of which Sturgeon actually supports. In addition, Hunt's tax measures are similar to those already adopted in Scotland.

It's all too easy to play the austerity card, but while the Truss/Kwarteng 'mini-budget' didn't help, the UK is far from alone in having to cope with the effects of the Ukraine war, soaring energy costs and inflation. How else does she expect the books to be balanced than by introducing the measures we've seen today? Oh, independence of course.Did Sturgeons plans include putting a patsy in place as Prime Minister, losing £30B for no need some of which lined the pockets of some hedge-funding pals then forcing ordinary people to foot the bill?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[GlesgaeHibby]

I'm unclear what Sturgeon's whinging about with regard to today's autumn statement. A good many of Hunt's proposals broadly chime with her own.

Public sector wages are set to rise by the average rate of inflation, the pensions triple lock looks set to be retained and the windfall tax will be a big source of revenue, all of which Sturgeon actually supports. In addition, Hunt's tax measures are similar to those already adopted in Scotland.

It's all too easy to play the austerity card, but while the Truss/Kwarteng 'mini-budget' didn't help, the UK is far from alone in having to cope with the effects of the Ukraine war, soaring energy costs and inflation. How else does she expect the books to be balanced than by introducing the measures we've seen today? Oh, independence of course.

Public sector wages rising at the rate of inflation, really? Where?

[grunt]

I'm unclear what Sturgeon's whinging about with regard to today's autumn statement. A good many of Hunt's proposals broadly chime with her own.

Public sector wages are set to rise by the average rate of inflation, the pensions triple lock looks set to be retained and the windfall tax will be a big source of revenue, all of which Sturgeon actually supports. In addition, Hunt's tax measures are similar to those already adopted in Scotland.

It's all too easy to play the austerity card, but while the Truss/Kwarteng 'mini-budget' didn't help, the UK is far from alone in having to cope with the effects of the Ukraine war, soaring energy costs and inflation. How else does she expect the books to be balanced than by introducing the measures we've seen today? Oh, independence of course.

This is a completely unbelievable post.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Kato]

This is a completely unbelievable post.


Sent from my iPad using TapatalkVerges on gaslighting.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

I'm unclear what Sturgeon's whinging about with regard to today's autumn statement. A good many of Hunt's proposals broadly chime with her own.

Public sector wages are set to rise by the average rate of inflation, the pensions triple lock looks set to be retained and the windfall tax will be a big source of revenue, all of which Sturgeon actually supports. In addition, Hunt's tax measures are similar to those already adopted in Scotland.

It's all too easy to play the austerity card, but while the Truss/Kwarteng 'mini-budget' didn't help, the UK is far from alone in having to cope with the effects of the Ukraine war, soaring energy costs and inflation. How else does she expect the books to be balanced than by introducing the measures we've seen today? Oh, independence of course.

You’re so right, we’re lucky to have them.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibby Bairn]

I'm unclear what Sturgeon's whinging about with regard to today's autumn statement. A good many of Hunt's proposals broadly chime with her own.

Public sector wages are set to rise by the average rate of inflation, the pensions triple lock looks set to be retained and the windfall tax will be a big source of revenue, all of which Sturgeon actually supports. In addition, Hunt's tax measures are similar to those already adopted in Scotland.

It's all too easy to play the austerity card, but while the Truss/Kwarteng 'mini-budget' didn't help, the UK is far from alone in having to cope with the effects of the Ukraine war, soaring energy costs and inflation. How else does she expect the books to be balanced than by introducing the measures we've seen today? Oh, independence of course.

Well said 👍.

Easy when all you have to really think about is spending money. SNP have been "pickpocketing" middle earners (SNP calla these high earners) for years with freezing tax thresholds. I think we are now about £7k adrift of rest of UK at the £43k level v £50k level for circa 40%.

Toon cooncillors the lot of them.

[Hibs90]

It's like Sturgeon has been given an open goal with Brexit, Covid, Boris Johnson, party gate, Liz Truss etc but can only muster a Diana Ross attempt at goal. (One for the oldies, yes was nearly 30 years ago)

So you would agree with the things you have listed then, that a lot has changed in the political landscape since 2014, and with pro independence parties continuing to dominate Scottish elections with an independence referendum in their manifesto’s, that the only way to settle the debate is by allowing the Scottish people to choose? That is democracy after all.

[James310]

So you would agree with the things you have listed then, that a lot has changed in the political landscape since 2014, and with pro independence parties continuing to dominate Scottish elections with an independence referendum in their manifesto’s, that the only way to settle the debate is by allowing the Scottish people to choose? That is democracy after all.

If a referendum is the way to settle the debate how come it never settled it last time?

[Ozyhibby]

If a referendum is the way to settle the debate how come it never settled it last time?

Brexit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Brexit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Right, so another referendum won't settle it then?

And remember nearly 40% of SNP voters voted for Brexit.

[He's here!]

This is a completely unbelievable post.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

And yet it's all true.

[Since90+2]

And yet it's all true.

All public sector wages are due to rise in line with inflation? I'm assuming you have some sort of evidence to back that up.

[Since90+2]

Well said 👍.

Easy when all you have to really think about is spending money. SNP have been "pickpocketing" middle earners (SNP calla these high earners) for years with freezing tax thresholds. I think we are now about £7k adrift of rest of UK at the £43k level v £50k level for circa 40%.

Toon cooncillors the lot of them.

Scotland has had a fairer and more progressive tax system than the rUK for years now. Just because that doesn't suit your personal circumstances doesn't make that untrue.

Most people in Scotland pay lower income tax than those south of the border.

[Hibs90]

And yet it's all true.

It’s not.

[Hibs90]

If a referendum is the way to settle the debate how come it never settled it last time?

You didn’t answer my question.

[The Tubs]

Well said 👍.

Easy when all you have to really think about is spending money. SNP have been "pickpocketing" middle earners (SNP calla these high earners) for years with freezing tax thresholds. I think we are now about £7k adrift of rest of UK at the £43k level v £50k level for circa 40%.

Toon cooncillors the lot of them.


You’re squabbling over a few pennies while the tories are screwing the UK left, right and centre. They’ve done you up like a kipper.

[grunt]

... the UK is far from alone in having to cope with the effects of the Ukraine war, soaring energy costs and inflation. The UK here, far from alone in having to cope with blah blah

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fhw8FcvXkAE0k-O?format=png&name=medium


... while the Truss/Kwarteng 'mini-budget' didn't help...Any post that includes these words automatically qualifies as a stupid post IMO.

[Kato]

The UK here, far from alone in having to cope with blah blah

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fhw8FcvXkAE0k-O?format=png&name=medium

Any post that includes these words automatically qualifies as a stupid post IMO.

Not much point in arguing I'm afraid. You might as well shout at the front page of the Daily Mail.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Public sector wages rising at the rate of inflation, really? Where?

Reacting to Hunt’s Autumn Statement today, IFS director Paul Johnson said proposals to increase public spending by 1% a year from 2025 onwards would still mean cuts for unprotected departments.




Public spending up 1% inflation up 10% you have to be a tory to understand 😉

[Kato]

Reacting to Hunt’s Autumn Statement today, IFS director Paul Johnson said proposals to increase public spending by 1% a year from 2025 onwards would still mean cuts for unprotected departments.




Public spending up 1% inflation up 10% you have to be a tory to understand [emoji6]He's using yesterday's budget to have a go at Sturgeon and people who want the Tories out the way.

Pathetic enough to raise a laugh considering the fairy story included.

Remember Johnson and his henchmen stating Scotland was lucky to have the "broad shoulders of the Uk" to protect us during the pandemic? Turns out the shoulders are sloped and acting as chute to dump sh*t on everyone below.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Why do you think the wording in 2014 was 'correct'?

Because it was a yes/no option rather than a more emotional option of remain and leave.

[WhileTheChief..]

If we want to keep putting more money into public services, we all need to pay more.

That’s going to be the debate for the next 2 years.

Some will be fine with that, others not so much. It doesn’t need to be an argument though!

[archie]

He's using yesterday's budget to have a go at Sturgeon and people who want the Tories out the way.

Pathetic enough to raise a laugh considering the fairy story included.

Remember Johnson and his henchmen stating Scotland was lucky to have the "broad shoulders of the Uk" to protect us during the pandemic? Turns out the shoulders are sloped and acting as chute to dump sh*t on everyone below.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
Just out of interest, what would you have done differently?

[Ozyhibby]

Just out of interest, what would you have done differently?

Tax non-doms? Take away the loopholes on the energy companies windfall tax?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

If we want to keep putting more money into public services, we all need to pay more.

That’s going to be the debate for the next 2 years.

Some will be fine with that, others not so much. It doesn’t need to be an argument though!

Outside of the single market we are heading very much in wrong direction. We will end up with Scandinavian levels of tax on Eastern European level wages.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jack]

The UK here, far from alone in having to cope with blah blah

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fhw8FcvXkAE0k-O?format=png&name=medium

Any post that includes these words automatically qualifies as a stupid post IMO.

Cyprus, Malta and Ireland (now independent from the UK) all seem to be doing quite well.

[archie]

Because it was a yes/no option rather than a more emotional option of remain and leave.I think you're doing a lot of spinning here! This is an interesting discussion on the significance of how the question is framed https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/would-the-scots-vote-for-independence/

[Kato]

Just out of interest, what would you have done differently?Go back 40 years and not sell off the family silver?

Go back 4 months and not have a walking talking moron as PM?

Go back 4 months and not have a hedge fund employee as Chancellor?

Pursue Covid fraud criminals?

Pursue Covid PPE dud contractors for the money they stole?

Get rid of non-doms?

Shut down the Magic Banks on the King's Islands that he rules?

Hit multi-national corporations with an actual tax system that takes a fair share of their massive profits?

Get the energy companies around the table and find a way to tax their profits with a windfall tax that is larger than 35%?

Invest as much as possible in education?

Make companies pay workers properly so that tax payers aren't topping up peoples wages whilst the companies extract huge profits?

Not accept the idea benefits are "compassionate"?

What would you do, Archie?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Outside of the single market we are heading very much in wrong direction. We will end up with Scandinavian levels of tax on Eastern European level wages.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkThings will crumble into chaos. Probably in two years just as the Tories are chucked out.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Eaststand]

Cyprus, Malta and Ireland (now independent from the UK) all seem to be doing quite well.

They are, but they were probably warned that they were far too small to succeed without being governed by the good old British Empire.

Serious question, has there ever been a case of a country becoming independent, but then trying to rejoin the commonwealth or union at a later date ?

GGTTH

[archie]

Go back 40 years and not sell off the family silver?

Go back 4 months and not have a walking talking moron as PM?

Go back 4 months and not have a hedge fund employee as Chancellor?

Pursue Covid fraud criminals?

Pursue Covid PPE dud contractors for the money they stole?

Get rid of non-doms?

Shut down the Magic Banks on the King's Islands that he rules?

Hit multi-national corporations with an actual tax system that takes a fair share of their massive profits?

Get the energy companies around the table and find a way to tax their profits with a windfall tax that is larger than 35%?

Invest as much as possible in education?

Make companies pay workers properly so that tax payers aren't topping up peoples wages whilst the companies extract huge profits?

Not accept the idea benefits are "compassionate"?

What would you do, Archie?

Sent from my SM-A528B using TapatalkA lot of the stuff you cite isn't in the gift of the Chancellor to deliver. I agree with you on non-doms and windfall taxes. I'm struggling to see how you straightforwardly tax multinationals or make companies pay wages beyond the minimum wage. I think the support for pensioners and people on benefits is a good thing (and smart politics) but I do think some tough decisions have been kicked to down the track. A generous interpretation is that people can only take so much pain. A less generous one is to narrow the options for the next government.

[Hibby Bairn]

You’re squabbling over a few pennies while the tories are screwing the UK left, right and centre. They’ve done you up like a kipper.

Nah mate. For someone uber rich on £49k per year the difference in take home pay is about £1300 a year between England and Scotland.

In Scotland someone on £49k per year (£3k net per month) will take home about £5,300 per year less than 2 people each on £24,500.

That has implications for families with only one parent working whilst the other brings up children. It also has implications for people who are self employed (who help create employment) about whether the extra effort required to earn profits of between say £40k and £50k is worth it.

[The Tubs]

Nah mate. For someone uber rich on £49k per year the difference in take home pay is about £1300 a year between England and Scotland.

In Scotland someone on £49k per year (£3k net per month) will take home about £5,300 per year less than 2 people each on £24,500.

That has implications for families with only one parent working whilst the other brings up children. It also has implications for people who are self employed (who help create employment) about whether the extra effort required to earn profits of between say £40k and £50k is worth it.

Come on, old boy, do what any decent chap would do and take it offshore.

[Ozyhibby]

A lot of the stuff you cite isn't in the gift of the Chancellor to deliver. I agree with you on non-doms and windfall taxes. I'm struggling to see how you straightforwardly tax multinationals or make companies pay wages beyond the minimum wage. I think the support for pensioners and people on benefits is a good thing (and smart politics) but I do think some tough decisions have been kicked to down the track. A generous interpretation is that people can only take so much pain. A less generous one is to narrow the options for the next government.

We live in a country that the govt deliberately sabotages the economy and you want to stay part of that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Nah mate. For someone uber rich on £49k per year the difference in take home pay is about £1300 a year between England and Scotland.

In Scotland someone on £49k per year (£3k net per month) will take home about £5,300 per year less than 2 people each on £24,500.

That has implications for families with only one parent working whilst the other brings up children. It also has implications for people who are self employed (who help create employment) about whether the extra effort required to earn profits of between say £40k and £50k is worth it.

Self employed people generally have the ability to spread the wage between the two members of the household.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Go back 40 years and not sell off the family silver?

Go back 4 months and not have a walking talking moron as PM?

Go back 4 months and not have a hedge fund employee as Chancellor?

Pursue Covid fraud criminals?

Pursue Covid PPE dud contractors for the money they stole?

Get rid of non-doms?

Shut down the Magic Banks on the King's Islands that he rules?

Hit multi-national corporations with an actual tax system that takes a fair share of their massive profits?

Get the energy companies around the table and find a way to tax their profits with a windfall tax that is larger than 35%?

Invest as much as possible in education?

Make companies pay workers properly so that tax payers aren't topping up peoples wages whilst the companies extract huge profits?

Not accept the idea benefits are "compassionate"?

What would you do, Archie?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Yeh, but apart from all that, what could we possibly do differently?[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

We live in a country that the govt deliberately sabotages the economy and you want to stay part of that?


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI think the current UK government has taken catastrophic economic decisions, but I don't accept that they have deliberately done so to sabotage the economy. I guess I don't share your faith that a Scottish Government would automatically make good decisions.

[grunt]

Nah mate. For someone uber rich on £49k per year the difference in take home pay is about £1300 a year between England and Scotland. Correct. The Scottish Gov has taken the decision to increase Income Tax rates. Look further up the thread and you'll see plenty of people applauding this approach, even encouraging them to increase them further..


In Scotland someone on £49k per year (£3k net per month) will take home about £5,300 per year less than 2 people each on £24,500. That has implications for families with only one parent working whilst the other brings up children.Exact same principle applies in England. The difference in England is about £4,000 (as you point out above). Are you suggesting we tax the lower paid more?


It also has implications for people who are self employed (who help create employment) about whether the extra effort required to earn profits of between say £40k and £50k is worth it.Taxes are a bugger aren't they?

[Ozyhibby]

I think the current UK government has taken catastrophic economic decisions, but I don't accept that they have deliberately done so to sabotage the economy. I guess I don't share your faith that a Scottish Government would automatically make good decisions.

It was you that put forward the suggestion.
The SG would definitely not always make good decisions. There would be a lot more accountability in a much smaller state though. And a PR parliament would be a lot more stable and stick closer to the centre ground than what we have had in the UK.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

I think the current UK government has taken catastrophic economic decisions ...We agree.


I think the current UK government has taken catastrophic economic decisions, but I don't accept that they have deliberately done so to sabotage the economy. It's a question of intent isn't it? Difficult to prove. Did Truss mean to tank the economy? Possibly not. Nonetheless she has caused incredible damage to the country which we are now having to pay for.


I guess I don't share your faith that a Scottish Government would automatically make good decisions.Doesn't need faith. Just look at many of the good decisions they've made already.

[archie]

It was you that put forward the suggestion.
The SG would definitely not always make good decisions. There would be a lot more accountability in a much smaller state though. And a PR parliament would be a lot more stable and stick closer to the centre ground than what we have had in the UK.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

These are big assertions. But interestingly you are suggesting that Scotland would have vaguely centerist politics. Isn't that what the Chancellor delivered yesterday? In any event, it's some distance from the notion that some have that Scotland would be somehow radical.

[Santa Cruz]

Go back 40 years and not sell off the family silver?

Go back 4 months and not have a walking talking moron as PM?

Go back 4 months and not have a hedge fund employee as Chancellor?

Pursue Covid fraud criminals?

Pursue Covid PPE dud contractors for the money they stole?

Get rid of non-doms?

Shut down the Magic Banks on the King's Islands that he rules?

Hit multi-national corporations with an actual tax system that takes a fair share of their massive profits?

Get the energy companies around the table and find a way to tax their profits with a windfall tax that is larger than 35%?

Invest as much as possible in education?

Make companies pay workers properly so that tax payers aren't topping up peoples wages whilst the companies extract huge profits?

Not accept the idea benefits are "compassionate"?

What would you do, Archie?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

This (and most of your other stuff obvs)

The Chancellor yesterday on the face of it appeared to show compassion by doing the right thing and applying a rise to benefit claimants in line with inflation. He followed through by saying all UC Claimants would now be invited to meet with a Job Coach to encourage them to earn more and work more hours. The encouragement is going to lead to sanctions if people can not comply with what will be asked of them. They'll get that 10% rise back of a fair chunk of UC claimants.

[Ozyhibby]

These are big assertions. But interestingly you are suggesting that Scotland would have vaguely centerist politics. Isn't that what the Chancellor delivered yesterday? In any event, it's some distance from the notion that some have that Scotland would be somehow radical.

I agree on your last point. People project all sorts of notions about what an Indy Scotland will deliver for them without realising that they will still need to win these arguments with the population at large. Indy is not a solution to everything. Politics will continue and the battle of ideas will go on. In the meantime, without that referendum, the battle of ideas has paused. We are at an impasse.
Win or lose, Scotland needs that vote because we can’t move on without it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

I agree on your last point. People project all sorts of notions about what an Indy Scotland will deliver for them without realising that they will still need to win these arguments with the population at large. Indy is not a solution to everything. Politics will continue and the battle of ideas will go on. In the meantime, without that referendum, the battle of ideas has paused. We are at an impasse.
Win or lose, Scotland needs that vote because we can’t move on without it.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkThese are interesting observations. Have you ever considered that it could be the constitutional question that's blocking the 'battle of ideas'?

[The Tubs]

These are interesting observations. Have you ever considered that it could be the constitutional question that's blocking the 'battle of ideas'?

The UK constitutional question? Absolutely.

[Ozyhibby]

These are interesting observations. Have you ever considered that it could be the constitutional question that's blocking the 'battle of ideas'?

It is the constitutional question that has put normal politics on hold. There is no getting away from that. It can’t be wished away though. The argument has to be had. And you can say we did that in 2014 but the fact remains that two years later, the UK govt chose to change the constitutional settlement again and so the Yes movement was revived. Without Brexit, it would be nowhere near as big an issue. Now the argument has to be fought again.
The issue won’t go away without a vote.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

I think the current UK government has taken catastrophic economic decisions, but I don't accept that they have deliberately done so to sabotage the economy. I guess I don't share your faith that a Scottish Government would automatically make good decisions.Everything the Tory Party has done since 2015 points to them following the ideology frameworked in William Rees-Moggs "The Sovereign Individual". That demands wrecking the economy, setting the population against each other and ruining the state just as the worst of climate change kicks in.

If you rule out ineptitude and see Johnson/Truss as the distracting puppets they were, the vision in Moggs book is well underway. What looks like stupidity sometimes has another purpose.

No one believed that Thatcher was following the plan in the Ridley Report but what she carried out in her tenure followed it to the tee.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[grunt]

These are big assertions. But interestingly you are suggesting that Scotland would have vaguely centerist politics. Isn't that what the Chancellor delivered yesterday? In any event, it's some distance from the notion that some have that Scotland would be somehow radical.
No


Just listened to Hunt explaining his budget decisions and it is actually horrifying how smoothly and self-righteously he lies. He claims he hasn’t wanted to do anything to damage growth but, when challenged on our nose-diving GDP, he insists that joining the Single Market is not what people want and there are ‘other ways’ to achieve ‘unfettered’ trade. Of course he doesn’t explain what those ‘other ways’ are. And isn’t made to. He’s supremely fluent in his deceit.

[Kato]

NoBut he said the word "compassionate" a lot. Him and Sunak and some of their henchmen said it a lot leading up to the budget.

They must be compassionate if they are using the word a lot.

Workers don't need compassion.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

But he said the word "compassionate" a lot. Him and Sunak and some of their henchmen said it a lot leading up to the budget.

They must be compassionate if they are using the word a lot.

Workers don't need compassion.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

It’s a bit like Tory and Labour politicians saying the word growth a lot these days. They think by saying it a lot it will happen. None of them have an actual plan for how though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

It’s a bit like Tory and Labour politicians saying the word growth a lot these days. They think by saying it a lot it will happen. None of them have an actual plan for how though.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkIt's gaslighting. Conning. Lying. Grifting. Call it what you will.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

I think the current UK government has taken catastrophic economic decisions, but I don't accept that they have deliberately done so to sabotage the economy. I guess I don't share your faith that a Scottish Government would automatically make good decisions.

Good post. Yesterday's measures were relatively generous to Scotland. I think Hunt has got the balance about right. I can only assume from Sturgeon's reaction that she wants the measures to fail - hardly helpful to the Scottish population.

[JeMeSouviens]

These are big assertions. But interestingly you are suggesting that Scotland would have vaguely centerist politics. Isn't that what the Chancellor delivered yesterday? In any event, it's some distance from the notion that some have that Scotland would be somehow radical.

Centrist government in a PR parliament with much more local accountability is a radical departure from what we have now. In fact not behaving like a shower of total ********s is pretty radical compared to the party we've been governed by for 2/3 of my life.

[grunt]

Good post. Yesterday's measures were relatively generous to Scotland. I think Hunt has got the balance about right. I can only assume from Sturgeon's reaction that she wants the measures to fail - hardly helpful to the Scottish population.
LOL. He desperately needs Scotland's energy.

Why on Earth do you believe Hunt and not Sturgeon? I don't understand.

[archie]

It's gaslighting. Conning. Lying. Grifting. Call it what you will.

Sent from my SM-A528B using TapatalkAre you seriously arguing that Labour and the Tories don't want growth? There's different economic models and philosophical approaches to getting there, but the idea that they don't want growth is fanciful. The Greens don't want growth and the SNP has wobbled a bit on it, with notions of the 'wellbeing economy'. I supose underpinning your comments is a view that the Tories have deliberately chosen to trash the economy. Not made errors or mistakes, but to deliberately wreck the economy. Do you really believe this or is it just some hyperbole? Why do you think they would do that?

[archie]

Centrist government in a PR parliament with much more local accountability is a radical departure from what we have now. In fact not behaving like a shower of total ********s is pretty radical compared to the party we've been governed by for 2/3 of my life.You see I think the SNP is pretty centralist and centralising. So I'm not sure how PR would change that.

[Ozyhibby]

You see I think the SNP is pretty centralist and centralising. So I'm not sure how PR would change that.

We already have PR. That’s probably why the SNP is centrist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

We already have PR. That’s probably why the SNP is centrist.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkIt's a variant of it, but my impression was that proponents of PR didn't like it.

[grunt]

Are you seriously arguing that Labour and the Tories don't want growth? There's different economic models and philosophical approaches to getting there, but the idea that they don't want growth is fanciful. The Greens don't want growth and the SNP has wobbled a bit on it, with notions of the 'wellbeing economy'. I supose underpinning your comments is a view that the Tories have deliberately chosen to trash the economy. Not made errors or mistakes, but to deliberately wreck the economy. Do you really believe this or is it just some hyperbole? Why do you think they would do that?
I sometimes feel that I'm becoming like a tinfoil hatted weirdo, but it's a fact that under Truss there were multiple ERG members in Cabinet, and the ERG appears to have complex links to some horrific far right supporters of white supremacy and eugenics. Kato alluded to this earlier today when referencing "The Sovereign Individual".

[JeMeSouviens]

You see I think the SNP is pretty centralist and centralising. So I'm not sure how PR would change that.

I agree and PR doesn't address that. PR stops a party being able to take power with the support of only 35-40% at either end. The UK is what happens when the rich govern for themselves while throwing just enough to the fairly well off to keep them onside and to hell with the rest.

A state with 65M+ people and power centralised in one corner is terrible. A state with 5M+ people and power centralised in one corner is better but still not great. A state with 5M+ people and power distributed locally is where I'd like us to end up. If we never start moving we'll never get there.

[grunt]

It's a variant of it, but my impression was that proponents of PR didn't like it.LOL again. If the Scottish Parliament didn't have the list system how many Tory MSPs would there be?

[archie]

LOL again. If the Scottish Parliament didn't have the list system how many Tory MSPs would there be?Depends on what sort of PR was in operation.

[JeMeSouviens]

It's a variant of it, but my impression was that proponents of PR didn't like it.

I'd rather have STV personally, but our list system is almost infintely better than fptp.

[archie]

I sometimes feel that I'm becoming like a tinfoil hatted weirdo, but it's a fact that under Truss there were multiple ERG members in Cabinet, and the ERG appears to have complex links to some horrific far right supporters of white supremacy and eugenics. Kato alluded to this earlier today when referencing "The Sovereign Individual".TBH I think that is a bit smeary. Yes to ERG members in Cabinet, but links to white supremicy and eugenics!!! You'd really need to be able to demonstrate these links for your argument to be credible. I could argue that the Scottish Government had Mike Russell in the cabinet - a published author arguing for privatisation of the NHS and dismantling of public services. But I don't think it follows that somehow there was a hidden plot in the SNP government to do this.

[Ozyhibby]

I'd rather have STV personally, but our list system is almost infintely better than fptp.

The current system does deliver PR pretty well but a system that goes for full PR prob would be more accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Are you seriously arguing that Labour and the Tories don't want growth? There's different economic models and philosophical approaches to getting there, but the idea that they don't want growth is fanciful. The Greens don't want growth and the SNP has wobbled a bit on it, with notions of the 'wellbeing economy'. I supose underpinning your comments is a view that the Tories have deliberately chosen to trash the economy. Not made errors or mistakes, but to deliberately wreck the economy. Do you really believe this or is it just some hyperbole? Why do you think they would do that?I don't think the Tories want to grow the economy. Their implementation of a managed decline which was aimed at certain areas of the country in the 80's now applies to the whole country outwith the square mile.

What have they done to grow the countries economy in the past 12 years? Name two things.

Labour? The question Ozy raised was whether they had a plan or not. They may well have but by the time they take it won't worth a sook.


Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[grunt]

TBH I think that is a bit smeary. Yes to ERG members in Cabinet, but links to white supremicy and eugenics!!! You'd really need to be able to demonstrate these links for your argument to be credible. I could argue that the Scottish Government had Mike Russell in the cabinet - a published author arguing for privatisation of the NHS and dismantling of public services. But I don't think it follows that somehow there was a hidden plot in the SNP government to do this.It's not a discussion for this thread.

[archie]

It's not a discussion for this thread.I don't want to be juvenile - but you started it!

[grunt]

I don't want to be juvenile - but you started it!Even that is debatable. You asked whether Truss deliberately crashed the economy and I responded that there is a line of thought that suggests she may have done. I don't know if I believe it, but it's out there and I don't know enough to tell if it's true or not. Even Hunt said yesterday that Truss's policy was the right one.

[Hibby Bairn]

Correct. The Scottish Gov has taken the decision to increase Income Tax rates. Look further up the thread and you'll see plenty of people applauding this approach, even encouraging them to increase them further..

Exact same principle applies in England. The difference in England is about £4,000 (as you point out above). Are you suggesting we tax the lower paid more?

Taxes are a bugger aren't they?

Not at all. I'm simply replying to the post that suggested it was a squabble over a few pennies.

[ronaldo7]

This is an interesting (if dated) discussion that is probably a bit more neutral than some https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-52-issue-06/the-union-and-the-law/

Finally got round to it. Thanks for the link.

Not sure what it brings to the table tbh.

[Moulin Yarns]

I think you're doing a lot of spinning here! This is an interesting discussion on the significance of how the question is framed https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/would-the-scots-vote-for-independence/

That pretty much agreed with what I said, there is more emotion used in a pro EU remainer having to think about what a leave vote is.

[He's here!]

LOL. He desperately needs Scotland's energy.

Why on Earth do you believe Hunt and not Sturgeon? I don't understand.

It's not a question of who to believe, it's about facing up to reality. Sturgeon understands perfectly well that cutting back on spending and raising taxes was an inevitability if borrowing is to be controlled (incidentally, when it comes to borrowing it's worth remembering that one of her arguments for independence is that it would enable Scotland to borrow more heavily on the international markets). She also knows fine well that the UK government has no more to give yet continues to demand more - ironic given the fact Swinney has told unions demanding pay rises in Scotland that the well is dry and that a tax rise next year is the most likely way to plug the gap. Instead of providing any sort of suggestion as to how she would approach the current crisis she simply offers up independence as some sort of catch-all magical solution. It's the usual protest politics, stoking up division by opting for conflict over resolution despite, as I said earlier, a good many of Hunt's proposals chiming with her own views.

It's not just the SNP who are finding ways to decry ideas they themselves would likely replicate if they enjoyed both power and responsibility. Labour have almost nowhere to go on this as Hunt's plans could in the most part have been taken from the Starmer playbook.

[grunt]

It's not a question of who to believe, it's about facing up to reality. IMO you have been totally taken in by the Tory lies and nothing I say will change your thinking. Good luck with your Tory future. I want no part of it.

[Hibby Bairn]

IMO you have been totally taken in by the Tory lies and nothing I say will change your thinking. Good luck with your Tory future. I want no part of it.

But in all likelihood you'll have to be part of it cos Indy isn't happening any time soon.

[He's here!]

IMO you have been totally taken in by the Tory lies and nothing I say will change your thinking. Good luck with your Tory future. I want no part of it.

What lies? It's hard to see how Hunt could have been more brutally honest about what lies ahead of us. As for a Tory future, there most likely won't be one a couple of years down the line. Trust in this government has taken a pounding of late and there will be precious little good news that they can deliver once the cost of living crisis takes full hold. Sturgeon is clearly eager to make political capital from this by ramping up resentment but I'm unlcear what else, if anything, she's offering that makes independence a winning alternative.

[The Tubs]

What lies? It's hard to see how Hunt could have been more brutally honest about what lies ahead of us. As for a Tory future, there most likely won't be one a couple of years down the line. Trust in this government has taken a pounding of late and there will be precious little good news that they can deliver once the cost of living crisis takes full hold. Sturgeon is clearly eager to make political capital from this by ramping up resentment but I'm unlcear what else, if anything, she's offering that makes independence a winning alternative.

Three-quarters of my life has been spent under the conservatives. They are the perennial UK government and nothing will change that. The only immediate escape, as mentioned on another thread, is to leave. Pity going to Europe is now more complicated for most.

[grunt]

What lies? It's hard to see how Hunt could have been more brutally honest about what lies ahead of us.


The Chancellor’s Autumn Statement will go down as one of the most dishonest political statements in living memory

https://bylinetimes.com/2022/11/17/all-the-bad-news-jeremy-hunt-hid-in-his-autumn-statement/

[grunt]

A quarter of my life has been spent under the conservatives. They are the perennial UK government and nothing will change that.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fh3IH_KWYAUg7Vy?format=png&name=small

[Ozyhibby]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fh3IH_KWYAUg7Vy?format=png&name=small

Supreme Court decision is very important. It will change the language of the debate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fh3IH_KWYAUg7Vy?format=png&name=small

What's the source of this?

[marinello59]

What's the source of this?

By the looks of it MacGlashan from Absolutely.
I’m a big fat Yes but some of the more hysterical stuff from our side is really unhelpful to say the least .

[Bostonhibby]

Tax non-doms? Take away the loopholes on the energy companies windfall tax?


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkNot having lord Deighton's fast track,totally unchecked tendering process for PPE and the semblance of a vetting process for handing out interest free loans of £50k to, well anyone really, might have helped?

As would a serious effort to recover money fraudulently obtained by the favoured few?

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Mr Grieves]

It's not a question of who to believe, it's about facing up to reality. Sturgeon understands perfectly well that cutting back on spending and raising taxes was an inevitability if borrowing is to be controlled (incidentally, when it comes to borrowing it's worth remembering that one of her arguments for independence is that it would enable Scotland to borrow more heavily on the international markets). She also knows fine well that the UK government has no more to give yet continues to demand more - ironic given the fact Swinney has told unions demanding pay rises in Scotland that the well is dry and that a tax rise next year is the most likely way to plug the gap. Instead of providing any sort of suggestion as to how she would approach the current crisis she simply offers up independence as some sort of catch-all magical solution. It's the usual protest politics, stoking up division by opting for conflict over resolution despite, as I said earlier, a good many of Hunt's proposals chiming with her own views.

It's not just the SNP who are finding ways to decry ideas they themselves would likely replicate if they enjoyed both power and responsibility. Labour have almost nowhere to go on this as Hunt's plans could in the most part have been taken from the Starmer playbook.

It's difficult to take anything you say seriously when a few weeks ago you were all for Liz truss's tax cuts and thought the Scottish government should follow suit.

[Bostonhibby]

It's difficult to take anything you say seriously when a few weeks ago you were all for Liz truss's tax cuts and thought the Scottish government should follow suit.To be fair, the current chancellor seemed to think dim lizzy might have been onto something as well.

Or was it on something?

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[James310]

By the looks of it MacGlashan from Absolutely.
I’m a big fat Yes but some of the more hysterical stuff from our side is really unhelpful to say the least .

It's probably Alba party propaganda, they are into the whole Scotland is a colony thing.

It's "Fringe Nationalists" that promote the Scotland is a colony thing according to this SNP MSP.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/snp-msp-faces-online-abuse-23379754

[Glory Lurker]

Let's face it, the UK is economically knackered. Way more knackered than it was after the financial crash. Anyone disagree?

The UK government is miles more right wing than it was even just ten years ago. Anyone disagree?

The crucial "red wall" that now determines the governance of the UK is, er, pro Brexit. Anyone disagree?

But we're best served being part of this. Oh, I know, folk agree.

[Skol]

Let's face it, the UK is economically knackered. Way more knackered than it was after the financial crash. Anyone disagree?

The UK government is miles more right wing than it was even just ten years ago. Anyone disagree?

The crucial "red wall" that now determines the governance of the UK is, er, pro Brexit. Anyone disagree?

But we're best served being part of this. Oh, I know, folk agree.

All good points that cannot be argued with.

If only sturgeon would address how she would deal with the risks and set out a clearer plan.

But wait it won’t be sturgeon or the snp in charge or so we are told.

[archie]

Let's face it, the UK is economically knackered. Way more knackered than it was after the financial crash. Anyone disagree?

The UK government is miles more right wing than it was even just ten years ago. Anyone disagree?

The crucial "red wall" that now determines the governance of the UK is, er, pro Brexit. Anyone disagree?

But we're best served being part of this. Oh, I know, folk agree.I think the UK economy is in trouble, but I don't think it's alone in that. Is the government more right wing? I think that's arguable. I'm not sure that the recently announced benefit uplift could be described as 'right wing'. I think a lot of the red wall was an anti politics response to the political establishment. All the poll evidence suggests they will return to Labour. In my view too many people caricature brexit voters in a lazy way.
The establishment politicians didn't take them seriously and paid the price. It suits a political narrative to suggest that leave voters were racist or stupid, but I don't think that is anywhere close to the full picture. I think underpinning your comments is the view that things would automatically be better if Scotland left the UK. That's a big assertion.

[He's here!]

It's difficult to take anything you say seriously when a few weeks ago you were all for Liz truss's tax cuts and thought the Scottish government should follow suit.

Yep, I got that spectacularly wrong :agree:

Nothing wrong with her ambition to turn the UK into a high growth nation but I was unaware she was a bampot.

[He's here!]

Three-quarters of my life has been spent under the conservatives. They are the perennial UK government and nothing will change that. The only immediate escape, as mentioned on another thread, is to leave. Pity going to Europe is now more complicated for most.

A Labour government is a near certainty at the next general election.

[James310]

I think the UK economy is in trouble, but I don't think it's alone in that. Is the government more right wing? I think that's arguable. I'm not sure that the recently announced benefit uplift could be described as 'right wing'. I think a lot of the red wall was an anti politics response to the political establishment. All the poll evidence suggests they will return to Labour. In my view too many people caricature brexit voters in a lazy way.
The establishment politicians didn't take them seriously and paid the price. It suits a political narrative to suggest that leave voters were racist or stupid, but I don't think that is anywhere close to the full picture. I think underpinning your comments is the view that things would automatically be better if Scotland left the UK. That's a big assertion.

It goes on all the time on here, putting people into their comfortable little boxes to avoid any proper analysis of the underlying issues. Brexit voters are all stupid and racist (nearly 40% of SNP supporters voted for Brexit, yet none seem to admit it on here), people that don't support Independence are all orange order members who sing God save the King and so on. And then we get the Scottish exceptionalism layered across it as well which is the icing on the cake.

[He's here!]

I think the UK economy is in trouble, but I don't think it's alone in that. Is the government more right wing? I think that's arguable. I'm not sure that the recently announced benefit uplift could be described as 'right wing'. I think a lot of the red wall was an anti politics response to the political establishment. All the poll evidence suggests they will return to Labour. In my view too many people caricature brexit voters in a lazy way.
The establishment politicians didn't take them seriously and paid the price. It suits a political narrative to suggest that leave voters were racist or stupid, but I don't think that is anywhere close to the full picture. I think underpinning your comments is the view that things would automatically be better if Scotland left the UK. That's a big assertion.

Spot on.

[grunt]

It suits a political narrative to suggest that leave voters were racist or stupid, but I don't think that is anywhere close to the full picture.


Spot on.On the other hand, I've never met a Leave voter who wasn't stupid. :greengrin

[WhileTheChief..]

It goes on all the time on here, putting people into their comfortable little boxes to avoid any proper analysis of the underlying issues. Brexit voters are all stupid and racist (nearly 40% of SNP supporters voted for Brexit, yet none seem to admit it on here), people that don't support Independence are all orange order members who sing God save the King and so on. And then we get the Scottish exceptionalism layered across it as well which is the icing on the cake.

Surprised at the 40% figure, I thought it would have been closer to zero!

I don't think I've ever read a post from an SNP or Indy supporter on here in favour of Brexit. Why do we never hear the FM talk about these people? It's always made out that it's the bad Tories down south inflicting stuff on us.

Your points about little boxes is so true. It's not just on here though, it's everywhere.

Everyone's got to be labelled as something so you know how to treat them. Doesn't matter what you actually think, that's already been decided on your behalf depending on the box you've been put in.

[James310]

Surprised at the 40% figure, I thought it would have been closer to zero!

I don't think I've ever read a post from an SNP or Indy supporter on here in favour of Brexit. Why do we never hear the FM talk about these people? It's always made out that it's the bad Tories down south inflicting stuff on us.

Your points about little boxes is so true. It's not just on here though, it's everywhere.

Everyone's got to be labelled as something so you know how to treat them. Doesn't matter what you actually think, that's already been decided on your behalf depending on the box you've been put in.

I checked and it's estimated to be about 36% so not quite 40%. But who in the SNP represents these people, nobody it seems. They don't seem to exist here either!

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14950013.36-snp-labour-supporters-backed-brexit-finds-survey/

[greenginger]

Surprised at the 40% figure, I thought it would have been closer to zero!

I don't think I've ever read a post from an SNP or Indy supporter on here in favour of Brexit. Why do we never hear the FM talk about these people? It's always made out that it's the bad Tories down south inflicting stuff on us.

Your points about little boxes is so true. It's not just on here though, it's everywhere.

Everyone's got to be labelled as something so you know how to treat them. Doesn't matter what you actually think, that's already been decided on your behalf depending on the box you've been put in.

Why would Indy supporters not vote for Brexit. We would hardly be independent if we were part of EU.

Currency, economic policy, foreign policy , legal issues etc etc would all be controlled from Brussels , Strasbourg and other EU policy making bodies.

Not exactly independence is it.

[He's here!]

On the other hand, I've never met a Leave voter who wasn't stupid. :greengrin

Does that include well over a third of SNP supporters who voted for Brexit?

36% of SNP and Labour supporters backed Brexit, finds survey | HeraldScotland (https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14950013.36-snp-labour-supporters-backed-brexit-finds-survey/)

This is a dated article but it shows up the 'racist, too stupid' claims as the lazy generalistion they were:

I voted to leave the EU. That doesn’t make me an idiot or a xenophobe | Paul Mokuolu | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/30/voted-leave-eu-racist-idiot-intolerance-brexiters)

[degenerated]

Yep, I got that spectacularly wrong :agree:

Nothing wrong with her ambition to turn the UK into a high growth nation but I was unaware she was a bampot.

It's not like there were any hints or that :greengrin

https://youtu.be/rX5En0JpIFk

[He's here!]

I checked and it's estimated to be about 36% so not quite 40%. But who in the SNP represents these people, nobody it seems. They don't seem to exist here either!

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14950013.36-snp-labour-supporters-backed-brexit-finds-survey/

I've made a similar point.

As you say, few seem to have any answer to such contradictions, hence the reason the independence cause has become increasingly crystallised around simply hating Tories (or 'despising' them as Sturgeon puts it). Keeps it straightforward (and it's a key part of the reason Sturgeon is so desperate to squeeze in a referendum before the next election when a Labour government will all but certainly take power).

[Hibs90]

I checked and it's estimated to be about 36% so not quite 40%. But who in the SNP represents these people, nobody it seems. They don't seem to exist here either!

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14950013.36-snp-labour-supporters-backed-brexit-finds-survey/

You still haven’t answered my question James.

[J-C]

It goes on all the time on here, putting people into their comfortable little boxes to avoid any proper analysis of the underlying issues. Brexit voters are all stupid and racist (nearly 40% of SNP supporters voted for Brexit, yet none seem to admit it on here), people that don't support Independence are all orange order members who sing God save the King and so on. And then we get the Scottish exceptionalism layered across it as well which is the icing on the cake.
Where do you get 40% of SNP supporters? The split on Brexit was 60/40 to stay in, that's 40% of all Scottish voters which are Labour, Tory, Libdem, Green and SNP.

[CropleyWasGod]

Surprised at the 40% figure, I thought it would have been closer to zero!

I don't think I've ever read a post from an SNP or Indy supporter on here in favour of Brexit. Why do we never hear the FM talk about these people? It's always made out that it's the bad Tories down south inflicting stuff on us.

Your points about little boxes is so true. It's not just on here though, it's everywhere.

Everyone's got to be labelled as something so you know how to treat them. Doesn't matter what you actually think, that's already been decided on your behalf depending on the box you've been put in.

Your last paragraph describes humankind as it has always been 😀

[The Tubs]

A Labour government is a near certainty at the next general election.

One scabby swallow does not make a summer.

[He's here!]

Where do you get 40% of SNP supporters? The split on Brexit was 60/40 to stay in, that's 40% of all Scottish voters which are Labour, Tory, Libdem, Green and SNP.

See the links posted earlier.

[Ozyhibby]

Unionists worried nobody is speaking up for Brexit voters.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Unionists worried nobody is speaking up for Brexit voters.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I did wonder if an e mail had been sent. 🙈

It'd have to be both the labour and tory voting Brexit parties working together though. Oh wait...

[archie]

Unionists worried nobody is speaking up for Brexit voters.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI find it astonishing that you would have no interest in why people voted for a position you disagreed with. Including many members of the SNP. The funny thing is, the SNP has a quite a patchy record when it comes to the EU. In the 70s they were ferociously opposed to the EU. The position switched in the 80s, probably for tactical reasons. In 2007 the SNP joined with the Tories to call for a referendum on the EU treaty, claiming it was bad for Scotland. In 2014 a yes vote would have meant Scotland left the EU - and it would have had to apply to rejoin. So maybe the iron clad commitment isn't as robust as is portrayed.

[archie]

I did wonder if an e mail had been sent. ��

It'd have to be both the labour and tory voting Brexit parties working together though. Oh wait...What do you mean?

[ronaldo7]

What do you mean?

Standing joke mate. 👍

[grunt]

I find it astonishing that you would have no interest in why people voted for a position you disagreed with. Including many members of the SNP. The funny thing is, the SNP has a quite a patchy record when it comes to the EU. In the 70s they were ferociously opposed to the EU. The position switched in the 80s, probably for tactical reasons. In 2007 the SNP joined with the Tories to call for a referendum on the EU treaty, claiming it was bad for Scotland. In 2014 a yes vote would have meant Scotland left the EU - and it would have had to apply to rejoin. So maybe the iron clad commitment isn't as robust as is portrayed.
Where's the evidence for this?

[Ozyhibby]

I find it astonishing that you would have no interest in why people voted for a position you disagreed with. Including many members of the SNP. The funny thing is, the SNP has a quite a patchy record when it comes to the EU. In the 70s they were ferociously opposed to the EU. The position switched in the 80s, probably for tactical reasons. In 2007 the SNP joined with the Tories to call for a referendum on the EU treaty, claiming it was bad for Scotland. In 2014 a yes vote would have meant Scotland left the EU - and it would have had to apply to rejoin. So maybe the iron clad commitment isn't as robust as is portrayed.

I voted for Brexit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

Unionists worried nobody is speaking up for Brexit voters.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's not the point being made is it? It's simply a reminder of the inconvenient truth that not far shy of 40% of SNP voters went with a yes vote for Brexit. Whether that many would still do so (and indeed whether a majority of UK-wide voters would still do so) isn't the issue. The fact is it happened yet it would appear from SNP supporters on here that a hefty chunk of their fellow supporters can be dismissed as stupid.

[James310]

That's not the point being made is it? It's simply a reminder of the inconvenient truth that not far shy of 40% of SNP voters went with a yes vote for Brexit. Whether that many would still do so (and indeed whether a majority of UK-wide voters would still do so) isn't the issue. The fact is it happened yet it would appear from SNP supporters on here that a hefty chunk of their fellow supporters can be dismissed as stupid.

Putting up barriers with your biggest trading partners is kind of a silly thing to do...oh wait.

[Ozyhibby]

Putting up barriers with your biggest trading partners is kind of a silly thing to do...oh wait.

Hunt already talking about softening those trade barriers?
Most of our trade with UK is in services so not affected by any border issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk