Indyref 2

[HappyAsHellas]

Nicola now preparing legal framework for indyref 2...........

[Beefster]

Ballsy move.

[Pretty Boy]

Ballsy move.

:agree:

Possibly hoping for a big reactive vote, especially if Westminster tries to block it. On the flip side a lot of people may wish to hold off to see the realities of the 'divorce settlement'.

I absolutely think there is a case for a new referendum, given the massive change in circumstances and the continuing differences betwee the voting patterns of Scotland the rest of the UK. It could well be too soon imo as the public must be becoming increasingly jaded with the number of votes in the last 2 years.

[Geo_1875]

:agree:

Possibly hoping for a big reactive vote, especially if Westminster tries to block it. On the flip side a lot of people may wish to hold off to see the realities of the 'divorce settlement'.

I absolutely think there is a case for a new referendum, given the massive change in circumstances and the continuing differences betwee the voting patterns of Scotland the rest of the UK. It could well be too soon imo as the public must be becoming increasingly jaded with the number of votes in the last 2 years.

I think there must be a decision made soon while Brexit vote is still fresh in the memory. There is a danger of people assuming that nothing has changed if we wait until the end of the 2 year negotiation period.

[bawheid]

Westminster will block and SNP will go for unilateral independence.

Having been a bit quiet over the past few months, there's going to be a lot of noise from the SNP from now on. Angus Robertson sounded positively raging on the radio this morning.

Bring it on.

[Moulin Yarns]

:agree:

Possibly hoping for a big reactive vote, especially if Westminster tries to block it. On the flip side a lot of people may wish to hold off to see the realities of the 'divorce settlement'.

I absolutely think there is a case for a new referendum, given the massive change in circumstances and the continuing differences betwee the voting patterns of Scotland the rest of the UK. It could well be too soon imo as the public must be becoming increasingly jaded with the number of votes in the last 2 years.


There are also Council elections next year, not sure Indyref2 would be a good move as, if it failed, it really would be "once in a generation"

[HibeeLR]

Ohhh exciting times ahead! This news has weakened the blow of today's results for me, there is hope 👍

[SneakersO'Toole]

Bursting with joy at the thought of more petty squabbling, scaremongering, fabrications, divisions, endless tension and a complete lack of community and country unity that comes with a Indy ref. Wonderful.

[RyeSloan]

Bursting with joy at the thought of more petty squabbling, scaremongering, fabrications, divisions, endless tension and a complete lack of community and country unity that comes with a Indy ref. Wonderful.

Add in he fact that there would be no clear idea what we would be divorcing from in that the UK would not have finalised its non EU end state then you have room for a right mess.

Divorce from soon to be non EU rUK but keep the pound but look to join the EU but who knows when....fck and some people think that this concept would be a great idea?

Surely common sense would suggest that you wait until it is clear what an non EU UK would look like then ask the people if they want to remain a part of that or not.

And that's before you consider the ramifications this may have on the EU itself...again an Indy movement would be based on re-entering into a union with a organisation that may be radically changing at the same time.

Bonkers the lot of it.

[easty]

Add in he fact that there would be no clear idea what we would be divorcing from in that the UK would not have finalised its non EU end state then you have room for a right mess.

Divorce from soon to be non EU rUK but keep the pound but look to join the EU but who knows when....fck and some people think that this concept would be a great idea?

Surely common sense would suggest that you wait until it is clear what an non EU UK would look like then ask the people if they want to remain a part of that or not.

And that's before you consider the ramifications this may have on the EU itself...again an Indy movement would be based on re-entering into a union with a organisation that may be radically changing at the same time.

Bonkers the lot of it.

Not for me. Common sense would suggest we go our own way. Scotland is its own country. A country that didn't vote to be run by the Tories. A country that didn't vote to leave the EU. I can't see how common sense should suggest we just continue to have the decisions we as a country vote for, count for nothing.

If IndyRef2 comes back with the same outcome, then under current circumstances, I can't see how there would be any argument for a 3rd. If we don't want independence now, then when would we ever?

[High-On-Hibs]

Bursting with joy at the thought of more petty squabbling, scaremongering, fabrications, divisions, endless tension and a complete lack of community and country unity that comes with a Indy ref. Wonderful.

I wouldn't worry about any of that happening this time around. The NO Campaign are all out of fabrications and scaremongering. They've been shown up for the absolute liars that they are. Wrong on Scotland's safety in the EU. Wrong on the safety of the pound. Wrong on the safety of jobs, the NHS, public spending..... They have been shown up big time.

I expect a much quieter referendum this time around.

[SneakersO'Toole]

Add in he fact that there would be no clear idea what we would be divorcing from in that the UK would not have finalised its non EU end state then you have room for a right mess.

Divorce from soon to be non EU rUK but keep the pound but look to join the EU but who knows when....fck and some people think that this concept would be a great idea?

Surely common sense would suggest that you wait until it is clear what an non EU UK would look like then ask the people if they want to remain a part of that or not.

And that's before you consider the ramifications this may have on the EU itself...again an Indy movement would be based on re-entering into a union with a organisation that may be radically changing at the same time.

Bonkers the lot of it.

Of course that is the sensible way forward, unless you are High-On-Hibs who going by his comments this morning is high on something else.

[Hannah_hfc]

Add in he fact that there would be no clear idea what we would be divorcing from in that the UK would not have finalised its non EU end state then you have room for a right mess.

Divorce from soon to be non EU rUK but keep the pound but look to join the EU but who knows when....fck and some people think that this concept would be a great idea?

Surely common sense would suggest that you wait until it is clear what an non EU UK would look like then ask the people if they want to remain a part of that or not.

And that's before you consider the ramifications this may have on the EU itself...again an Indy movement would be based on re-entering into a union with a organisation that may be radically changing at the same time.

Bonkers the lot of it.

Agree completely, typical of Sturgeon etc to give the knee jerk reaction while the public hysteria is there rather than actually think about the long term.

On another note I can't see Westminster granting another referendum any time soon.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Rasta_Hibs]

Of course that is the sensible way forward, unless you are High-On-Hibs who going by his comments this morning is high on something else.

Lindsay Lohan had a similar meltdown online last night during the referendum count!

[easty]

Of course that is the sensible way forward, unless you are High-On-Hibs who going by his comments this morning is high on something else.

Didn't take long for debate to drop to this level then. Well done.

[easty]

Lindsay Lohan had a similar meltdown online last night during the referendum count!

Well done you too.

[Rasta_Hibs]

Well done you too.

Ockt im just having a wee bit fun! Lighten up!

[Benny Brazil]

I wouldn't worry about any of that happening this time around. The NO Campaign are all out of fabrications and scaremongering. They've been shown up for the absolute liars that they are. Wrong on Scotland's safety in the EU. Wrong on the safety of the pound. Wrong on the safety of jobs, the NHS, public spending..... They have been shown up big time.

I expect a much quieter referendum this time around.

I don't.
It will be worse than last time - only there will be so much more mud slinging from both sides about the last indyref, the EU vote and very little in the way of actual detail of how an independent Scotland would work. Cant wait :rolleyes:

[SneakersO'Toole]

Didn't take long for debate to drop to this level then. Well done.

Exactly the point. The strength of opinion on both sides is such that what I highlighted above is inevitable on all levels.

Indy ref 2 is not what that Scotland or the UK need right now and I'm furious that it's been put on the table so soon after what is a terrible day for the country.

[easty]

[/B]

I don't.
It will be worse than last time - only there will be so much more mud slinging from both sides about the last indyref, the EU vote and very little in the way of actual detail of how an independent Scotland would work. Cant wait :rolleyes:

I wonder if it'll just come down to who puts a bigger number on the side of a bus, telling us how much better off we'll be, then after winning, getting smug as can be for a few hours, before putting on a straight face to go on the telly and say that's not really what we meant. It works, so why change it?

[High-On-Hibs]

[/B]

I don't.
It will be worse than last time - only there will be so much more mud slinging from both sides about the last indyref, the EU vote and very little in the way of actual detail of how an independent Scotland would work. Cant wait :rolleyes:

Just as there was no detail on how an independent Britain would work outside the EU, which will equally effect us.

It seems that referendums are won on a lack of detail in the UK. So perhaps a lack of detail replaced with knuckle dragger slogans such as "lets take our country back!" is exactly what we need this time. As people clearly don't like to actually engage their brains.

[johnbc70]

More people in Scotland voted to remain part of the UK than voted to remain part of the EU.

So while I agree with a second Referendum then there is still around 400,000 more Scots who voted to remain part of the UK than voted to remain part of the EU.

[High-On-Hibs]

More people in Scotland voted to remain part of the UK than voted to remain part of the EU.

So while I agree with a second Referendum then there is still around 400,000 more Scots who voted to remain part of the UK than voted to remain part of the EU.

That would be a fair point if you completed ignored the far lower turn out in this referendum compared to the Scottish one. You could also say that half the number of people in Scotland voted to leave the EU in comparison to the number who voted to remain in the UK. That's a difference of over a million votes.

[Hibbyradge]

More people in Scotland voted to remain part of the UK than voted to remain part of the EU.

So while I agree with a second Referendum then there is still around 400,000 more Scots who voted to remain part of the UK than voted to remain part of the EU.

Where did you find those numbers? I've been looking, but obviously in the wrong places.

[johnbc70]

Where did you find those numbers? I've been looking, but obviously in the wrong places.

On the BBC site.

Guess the point I am making is while I do support another Referendum it won't be as clean cut as some may think. Infact it's a complete mess as who knows what kind if EU we would be part of.

[easty]

Where did you find those numbers? I've been looking, but obviously in the wrong places.

He's right.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014

2m voted no in Scottish ref

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028

1.6m voted stay in EU ref

[High-On-Hibs]

On the BBC site.

Guess the point I am making is while I do support another Referendum it won't be as clean cut as some may think. Infact it's a complete mess as who knows what kind if EU we would be part of.

What kind of UK will we be apart of if we don't vote to leave? It's a complete mess whether we decide to have a referendum or not. So what difference does it make now?

[Hibbyradge]

On the BBC site.

Guess the point I am making is while I do support another Referendum it won't be as clean cut as some may think. Infact it's a complete mess as who knows what kind if EU we would be part of.

Thanks.

We will know what the exit package looks like by the time Indyref2 comes along.

In the meantime, we face job losses, higher mortgage rates, falling house prices (good for some), more austerity, probably Boris as PM with an unelected Farage in the cabinet, and the possibility of another recession.

Scotland will be gagging to leave.

[Pretty Boy]

[/B]

I don't.
It will be worse than last time - only there will be so much more mud slinging from both sides about the last indyref, the EU vote and very little in the way of actual detail of how an independent Scotland would work. Cant wait :rolleyes:

If there is an Indyref2 the Yes campaign simply has to produce sonething better than the padded election manifesto that was the white paper. Hopefully they have learned from their mistakes and do so.

[Hibbyradge]

He's right.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014

2m voted no in Scottish ref

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028

1.6m voted stay in EU ref

Yeah, I know.

A much lower turnout and some tactical voting means we're not comparing like for like.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I wonder if it'll just come down to who puts a bigger number on the side of a bus, telling us how much better off we'll be, then after winning, getting smug as can be for a few hours, before putting on a straight face to go on the telly and say that's not really what we meant. It works, so why change it?

That wasnt farage. He wasnt part of the campaign that did that

[easty]

That wasnt farage. He wasnt part of the campaign that did that

Aye ok then...

Where's Boris to tell us that's not what he meant then? Or will he just ignore it til it goes away.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Aye ok then...

Where's Boris to tell us that's not what he meant then? Or will he just ignore it til it goes away.

I dont know. I was just pointing out that your ire was aimed at the wrong scapegoat. Or is it only brexiters that blame everything of hate figures without regard for the accuracy?

[Iain G]

On the BBC site.

Guess the point I am making is while I do support another Referendum it won't be as clean cut as some may think. Infact it's a complete mess as who knows what kind if EU we would be part of.

I think we need to hold on and let the dust settle. What does the UK outside of Europe look like; what will Europe without the UK (and anyone else who jumps on the UK's coat tails) actually look like and how will it function? We need to get a clear picture of what we would be voting in or out of before we can build a case for either.

Promoting a quick vote now stinks of desperation from the SNP to push this through instead of waiting and giving us a proper, grown up view of what Scotland in either of these new "states" would look like.

It is too important to try and rush this through.

[JeMeSouviens]

More people in Scotland voted to remain part of the UK than voted to remain part of the EU.

So while I agree with a second Referendum then there is still around 400,000 more Scots who voted to remain part of the UK than voted to remain part of the EU.

I don't know how exactly much difference it would've made but the electorate was considerably smaller in the EU ref than Indyref1 as only UK and Irish nationals got to vote.

[JeMeSouviens]

I think we need to hold on and let the dust settle. What does the UK outside of Europe look like; what will Europe without the UK (and anyone else who jumps on the UK's coat tails) actually look like and how will it function? We need to get a clear picture of what we would be voting in or out of before we can build a case for either.

Promoting a quick vote now stinks of desperation from the SNP to push this through instead of waiting and giving us a proper, grown up view of what Scotland in either of these new "states" would look like.

It is too important to try and rush this through.

On the other hand, if we don't push for continuing membership now, we may find it considerably harder to get back in and might end up with a break where EU nationals would have to move out of Scotland and Scots out of other EU countries.

[Iain G]

On the other hand, if we don't push for continuing membership now, we may find it considerably harder to get back in and might end up with a break where EU nationals would have to move out of Scotland and Scots out of other EU countries.

There will be a big vacancy to fill in about just over two years time, no rush :greengrin

[marinello59]

I think we need to hold on and let the dust settle. What does the UK outside of Europe look like; what will Europe without the UK (and anyone else who jumps on the UK's coat tails) actually look like and how will it function? We need to get a clear picture of what we would be voting in or out of before we can build a case for either.

Promoting a quick vote now stinks of desperation from the SNP to push this through instead of waiting and giving us a proper, grown up view of what Scotland in either of these new "states" would look like.

It is too important to try and rush this through.

Nicola Sturgeon is taking exactly the path you suggest, all possibilities will be considered in the coming months. She didn't promote a quick vote today , she has quite rightly set the legal wheels in motion so that we can have a vote if required. The timing for this really doesn't suit the SNP leadership, Cameron's reckless gamble has left us having to make decisions according to a timetable not of our making.

[JeMeSouviens]

There will be a big vacancy to fill in about just over two years time, no rush :greengrin

well, yes, but we'd better be ready. Snooze, you lose!

[Bristolhibby]

Agree completely, typical of Sturgeon etc to give the knee jerk reaction while the public hysteria is there rather than actually think about the long term.

On another note I can't see Westminster granting another referendum any time soon.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Maybe that's part of the plan. Let the English tell the Scottish Parliament no and watch support for Indy soar.

(Felt like I typed a line from Braveheart there, "ride round to the right flank, and let the English see you do it". LOL.

J

[ronaldo7]

If there is an Indyref2 the Yes campaign simply has to produce sonething better than the padded election manifesto that was the white paper. Hopefully they have learned from their mistakes and do so.

Maybe we should just take a leaf out of the Leave book, and peddle a pack of lies, without a clear indication of what's on offer.

Seemed to work for them.

[lord bunberry]

I think we need to hold on and let the dust settle. What does the UK outside of Europe look like; what will Europe without the UK (and anyone else who jumps on the UK's coat tails) actually look like and how will it function? We need to get a clear picture of what we would be voting in or out of before we can build a case for either.

Promoting a quick vote now stinks of desperation from the SNP to push this through instead of waiting and giving us a proper, grown up view of what Scotland in either of these new "states" would look like.

It is too important to try and rush this through.

The EU isn't going to be in the mood to do anyone any favours. I suspect we will get a take it or leave it offer, that won't include the option of waiting to see if the grass is greener on the other side.

[The Harp Awakes]

If there is an Indyref2 the Yes campaign simply has to produce sonething better than the padded election manifesto that was the white paper. Hopefully they have learned from their mistakes and do so.

I agree with you but you can already see a possible deal Sturgeon could do with the EU in advance of an indyref2. The EU would get some credibility back if Scotland was to join the EU on the back of a UK exit. She would want a deal for Scottish fishermen and no compulsory sign up to the Euro and maybe a few other things. Continued membership of the EU, happy Scottish fisherman and flexibility on currency = resounding Yes vote in indyref2.

[stokesmessiah]

The EU isn't going to be in the mood to do anyone any favours. I suspect we will get a take it or leave it offer, that won't include the option of waiting to see if the grass is greener on the other side.

I dont think it will be like that at all. I honestly think if Scotland goes to Europe and says they might not want in but we do, i think they would bend over backwards to make it happen.

[Pretty Boy]

Maybe we should just take a leaf out of the Leave book, and peddle a pack of lies, without a clear indication of what's on offer.

Seemed to work for them.

Could well work.

To be serious though the issue with the white paper was it was too much like a manifesto. As and when a new paper is required it has to clearly answer questions like the currency issue, clearly map out the path to EU membership etc. Essentially cover all the questions that were used last time to win the day for No.

[lord bunberry]

I dont think it will be like that at all. I honestly think if Scotland goes to Europe and says they might not want in but we do, i think they would bend over backwards to make it happen.

I don't see it that way. They've got no real reason to bend over backwards for us. They could easily block our attempt to remain in the EU and use the political unrest it would cause in this country as an example to others who think of leaving. I suspect they won't go that far, but I don't expect them to do us many favours. We will have to adopt the euro and have our interest rates set by the European Central Bank.

[stokesmessiah]

I don't see it that way. They've got no real reason to bend over backwards for us. They could easily block our attempt to remain in the EU and use the political unrest it would cause in this country as an example to others who think of leaving. I suspect they won't go that far, but I don't expect them to do us many favours. We will have to adopt the euro and have our interest rates set by the European Central Bank.

It was England that voted out, seeing Scotland break off and become a part of Europe and England being left as an isolated state might well appeal to our European cousins.

[Hibbyradge]

I think we need to hold on and let the dust settle. What does the UK outside of Europe look like; what will Europe without the UK (and anyone else who jumps on the UK's coat tails) actually look like and how will it function? We need to get a clear picture of what we would be voting in or out of before we can build a case for either.

Promoting a quick vote now stinks of desperation from the SNP to push this through instead of waiting and giving us a proper, grown up view of what Scotland in either of these new "states" would look like.

It is too important to try and rush this through.

I think they need to do this as quickly as possible.

They will want to capitalise on the anger people feel about this decision, the downturn in the economy, and the fact that another Tory, probably who went to Eton, will be given the job of UK Prime Minister, without being elected, and without even a glance towards Scotland.

At the same time, there will be painful negotiations going on between the UK and the EU, which will not make for pleasant viewing. There will be no trade agreements in place and the UK's future will remain in doubt.

Some countries will want to co-operate with the UK, some will want to punish us and extract the strictest terms in any agreements. It only needs one country to veto any proposed agreement and the UK hasn't exactly been making friends.

The UK is going to be a mess for the next few years at least, and that will massively help the SNP's case.

The last thing they'll want to do is wait till it settles down and we all get comfy again.

Edit: And there's the "continuing membership" rather than fresh application argument which I have no doubt will be used extensively.

[JeMeSouviens]

I don't see it that way. They've got no real reason to bend over backwards for us. They could easily block our attempt to remain in the EU and use the political unrest it would cause in this country as an example to others who think of leaving. I suspect they won't go that far, but I don't expect them to do us many favours. We will have to adopt the euro and have our interest rates set by the European Central Bank.

You can't just "adopt the Euro". You have to meet the various entrance criteria including having your own currency for at least 2 years and joining ERM2. Sweden has theoretically been obliged to "adopt the Euro" since its accession but has just decided not to bother with ERM2 so de facto doesn't have to join.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden_and_the_euro

[Hibrandenburg]

I think they need to do this as quickly as possible.

They will want to capitalise on the anger of this decision, the downturn in the economy, and the fact that another Tory, probably who went to Eton, will be given the job of UK Prime Minister, without being elected, and without even a glance towards Scotland.

At the same time, there will be painful negotiations going on between the UK and the EU, which will not make for pleasant viewing. There will be no trade agreements in place and the UK's future will remain in doubt.

Some countries will want to co-operate with the UK, some will want to punish us and extract the strictest terms in any agreements. It only needs one country to veto any proposed agreement and the UK hasn't exactly been making friends.

The UK is going to be a mess for the next few years at least, and that will massively help the SNP's case.

The last thing they'll want to do is wait till it settles down and we all get comfy again.

Edit: And there's the "continuing membership" rather than fresh application argument which I have no doubt will be used extensively.

:agree:

Also the threats of uncertainty being used as an argument against is nullified so long as there's also uncertainty about post EU Britain. Get it done asap before article 50 is initiated

[ronaldo7]

Could well work.

To be serious though the issue with the white paper was it was too much like a manifesto. As and when a new paper is required it has to clearly answer questions like the currency issue, clearly map out the path to EU membership etc. Essentially cover all the questions that were used last time to win the day for No.

Totally agree. The work has already started.:greengrin

[McD]

Yeah, I know.

A much lower turnout and some tactical voting means we're not comparing like for like.


I saw several 'Yes' voters openly stating they would vote 'Leave' purely to enhance the chances of IndyRef2

[lord bunberry]

You can't just "adopt the Euro". You have to meet the various entrance criteria including having your own currency for at least 2 years and joining ERM2. Sweden has theoretically been obliged to "adopt the Euro" since its accession but has just decided not to bother with ERM2 so de facto doesn't have to join.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden_and_the_euro
That's quite interesting, I was (wrongly) under the impression that we would have to start using the euro within a certain timeframe.

[PeeJay]

I dont think it will be like that at all. I honestly think if Scotland goes to Europe and says they might not want in but we do, i think they would bend over backwards to make it happen.

Doubt it. Think initial reaction from the EU leaders is "if they want to go, let's get the UK out of here as quickly as possible." The EU has no wish to wait for the Tories to choose a new leader or for the Scots to hold a referendum and then disentangle themselves from the UK: this lengthy and unnecessary uncertainty all impacts negatively on the EU.

[degenerated]

I don't know how exactly much difference it would've made but the electorate was considerably smaller in the EU ref than Indyref1 as only UK and Irish nationals got to vote.
And 16 & 17 year olds got a vote too.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

And 16 & 17 year olds got a vote too.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

Indeed.

I found the numbers:

Indyref: 4,283,938
EU ref: 3,987,112

So almost 300K more eligible voters in the Indyref.

I think there was probably a certain amount of complacency among Remainers in the EU ref and that that was partly down to the late swing to No in the Indyref.

[Hibrandenburg]

BBC reporting that the UK is no longer the 5th largest economy in the world claiming we've now been overtaken by France.

[Finn2015]

Think this time, although not guaranteed, we will see the break up of the Union

[Hibbyradge]

I saw several 'Yes' voters openly stating they would vote 'Leave' purely to enhance the chances of IndyRef2

I know of one so there will be a few.

Risky game but they got it right from their point of view.

[mmmmhibby]

Add in he fact that there would be no clear idea what we would be divorcing from in that the UK would not have finalised its non EU end state then you have room for a right mess.

Divorce from soon to be non EU rUK but keep the pound but look to join the EU but who knows when....fck and some people think that this concept would be a great idea?

Surely common sense would suggest that you wait until it is clear what an non EU UK would look like then ask the people if they want to remain a part of that or not.

And that's before you consider the ramifications this may have on the EU itself...again an Indy movement would be based on re-entering into a union with a organisation that may be radically changing at the same time.

Bonkers the lot of it.

Too true, I also think various other EU member states such as Holland, France and Italy may get a referendum soon. There is elections in France and Germany next year......the whole EU project may be dead within a few years.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Realistically, what's the earliest date a second referendum could be called, and how long would an EU application take?

[Hibernia&Alba]

Think this time, although not guaranteed, we will see the break up of the Union

I voted No in 2014, but didn't sign up for this. Many of us would move across to Yes next time, I think. I will have no association with such a rejection of progressive international cooperation. I think the UK has just signed its own death warrant.

[High-On-Hibs]

I voted No in 2014, but didn't sign up for this.

That's the thing though, you did.

You voted to "Remain part of the United Kingdom". That's what was on the ballot paper. You voted to maintain a system that unifies the vote across the British isles on massive issues such as this. It's all part of being a UK citizen.

So you can't say you never signed up for it. It's exactly what you signed up for.

Not trying to be wide by saying that. Just stating the fact of the matter.

[Hibernia&Alba]

That's the thing though, you did.

You voted to "Remain part of the United Kingdom". That's what was on the ballot paper. You voted to maintain a system that unifies the vote across the British isles on massive issues such as this. It's all part of being a UK citizen.

So you can't say you never signed up for it. It's exactly what you signed up for.

Not trying to be wide by saying that. Just stating the fact of the matter.

No I didn't. I signed up for internationalist principles of cooperation and tolerance; principles that have now been repudiated. Had the ballot paper said in 2014 that remaining part of the UK meant accepting EU withdrawal, I would have voted for independence then. I didn't sign up for a UK outside the EU, and reserve the democratic right to change my mind when circumstances change.

[Pretty Boy]

That's the thing though, you did.

You voted to "Remain part of the United Kingdom". That's what was on the ballot paper. You voted to maintain a system that unifies the vote across the British isles on massive issues such as this. It's all part of being a UK citizen.

So you can't say you never signed up for it. It's exactly what you signed up for.

Not trying to be wide by saying that. Just stating the fact of the matter.

Not entirely true though. The landscape has been changed massively overnight. Many were told that a No vote protected our membership of the EU and that has now been proven to be false.

If people feel feel the situation has changed enough for them to change their minds that should be welcomed rather than a previous vote been thrown back at them imo.

[ronaldo7]

No I didn't. I signed up for internationalist principles of cooperation and tolerance; principles that have now been repudiated. Had the ballot paper said in 2014 that remaining part of the UK meant accepting EU withdrawal, I would have voted for independence then. I didn't sign up for a UK outside the EU, and reserve the democratic right to change my mind when circumstances change.

Quite right. Welcome aboard.:greengrin

[Hibernia&Alba]

Not entirely true though. The landscape has been changed massively overnight. Many were told that a No vote protected our membership of the EU and that has now been proven to be false.

If people feel feel the situation has changed enough for them to change their minds that should be welcomed rather than a previous vote been thrown back at them imo.

Absolutely. I didn't vote for this in 2014 - no way.

[High-On-Hibs]

No I didn't. I signed up for internationalist principles of cooperation and tolerance; principles that have now been repudiated. Had the ballot paper said in 2014 that remaining part of the UK meant accepting EU withdrawal, I would have voted for independence then. I didn't sign up for a UK outside the EU, and reserve the democratic right to change my mind when circumstances change.

There was nothing on the ballot paper that guaranteed Scotland's continued place within the European Union either. It was one simple question as to whether you wanted Scotland to remain in the United Kingdom or not. I'm pretty sure before you put that cross in the box, you were well aware of how the voting system worked on UK wide issues.

You're only changing your mind now because the system you voted in favour of has worked against you. But it doesn't change the fact that you still signed up for that system in the first place.

Again, i'm not trying to pass negative judgement on you, just making a relevant point.

[Hibernia&Alba]

There was nothing on the ballot paper that guaranteed Scotland's continued place within the European Union either. It was one simple question as to whether you wanted Scotland to remain in the United Kingdom or not. I'm pretty sure before you put that cross in the box, you were well aware of how the voting system worked on UK wide issues.

You're only changing your mind now because the system you voted in favour of has worked against you. But it doesn't change the fact that you still signed up for that system in the first place.

Again, i'm not trying to pass negative judgement on you, just making a relevant point.

You aren't making a relevant point because the EU Referendum wasn't on the cards in 2014. Had there been any such possibility and the possibility of the UK withdrawing, I would have rejected that in 2014 in favour of independence within the EU. I thought I was signing up for international cooperation in 2014, but now feel betrayed. If I'm going to be consistent, internationalism is now best served within the EU, IMO.

[lord bunberry]

Absolutely. I didn't vote for this in 2014 - no way.
You voted for it despite the warnings that were dismissed by the same people that have led us into the situation we find ourselves now.
I think we are in a position most of us didn't want and we need to find a way of rectifying that. Theres more chance of Scotland uniting and sorting our selves out than the rest of the U.K.

[Hibernia&Alba]

You voted for it despite the warnings that were dismissed by the same people that have led us into the situation we find ourselves now.
I think we are in a position most of us didn't want and we need to find a way of rectifying that. Theres more chance of Scotland uniting and sorting our selves out than the rest of the U.K.

I neither believed nor expected a No vote in2014 would mean EU withdrawal; let me put it that way. Many, many things were said by both sides, as was the case in yesterday's vote.

[Moulin Yarns]

There is a possibility that the question Will be something like.

Do you wish to remain part of the United kingdom or be a member of the European union?

[lord bunberry]

You aren't making a relevant point because the EU Referendum wasn't on the cards in 2014. Had there been any such possibility and the possibility of the UK withdrawing, I would have rejected that in 2014 in favour of independence within the EU. I thought I was signing up for international cooperation in 2014, but now feel betrayed. If I'm going to be consistent, internationalism is now best served within the EU, IMO.
I'm sorry, but that's not true. An EU referendum was on the cards.

[High-On-Hibs]

You aren't making a relevant point because the EU Referendum wasn't on the cards in 2014. Had there been any such possibility and the possibility of the UK withdrawing, I would have rejected that in 2014 in favour of independence within the EU. I thought I was signing up for international cooperation in 2014, but now feel betrayed. If I'm going to be consistent, internationalism is now best served within the EU, IMO.

The Eu referendum not being on the cards in 2014 is irrelevant. It became on the cards in 2015 and now we are here in 2016. You can't base your political decisions on the "right now" and assume things will just stay that way forever. You knew the system in which you were voting for. Now that system has worked against you. But isn't that democracy?

[Hibernia&Alba]

I'm sorry, but that's not true. An EU referendum was on the cards.

No it was not. It was announced by Cameron in the run up to the general election of 2015, after the Scottish referendum. That's an undeniable fact.

[lord bunberry]

The Eu referendum not being on the cards in 2014 is irrelevant. It became on the cards in 2015 and now we are here in 2016. You can't base your political decisions on the "right now" and assume things will just stay that way forever. You knew the system in which you were voting for. Now that system has worked against you. But isn't that democracy?
An EU referendum was on the cards.

[lord bunberry]

No it was not. It was announced by Cameron in the run up to the general election of 2015, after the Scottish referendum. That's an undeniable fact.
It was maybe announced as an official manifesto pledge in 2015, but it was common knowledge that it was going to happen during the Scottish referendum.

[Hibernia&Alba]

The Eu referendum not being on the cards in 2014 is irrelevant. It became on the cards in 2015 and now we are here in 2016. You can't base your political decisions on the "right now" and assume things will just stay that way forever. You knew the system in which you were voting for. Now that system has worked against you. But isn't that democracy?

Democracy also means I have the right to change my mind when circumstances change. I will not support EU withdrawal but will support another path that enables the continuation of the present relationship, in the spirit of internationalism. That's the best way for any country to live, IMHO.

[SkintHibby]

I know of one so there will be a few.

Risky game but they got it right from their point of view.

I tactically voted Leave and am an SNP pro Euro supporter. It worked out even better than I imagined!

Indy ref #2. Bring it on!:agree:

[Hibernia&Alba]

It was maybe announced as an official manifesto pledge, but it was common knowledge that it was going to happen.

Then perhaps I'm not privy to 'common knowledge' but will instead vote with what I believe is best suited to my principles at any given point. I will not support what I believe is intolerance, nor that which damages those at the bottom of our society.

[Pretty Boy]

Are some people wilfully trying to drive people away from their side?

IF there is an Indyref2 the Yes campaign need at least a 6% swing to win. Decrying people who have expressed a desire to change their vote is hardly the way to win hearts and minds, telling people they voted the 'wrong' way likewise.

[blaikie]

I tactically voted Leave and am an SNP supporter. It worked out even better than I imagined!

Indy ref #2. Bring it on!:agree:

I had a moment in the polling station, but I couldn't bring myself to vote leave the thought of voting for Farage and Bojo was enough to make me vote remain.

Also I had The Proclaimers - Scotland's Story playing over and over in my head 😁

[High-On-Hibs]

Democracy also means I have the right to change my mind when circumstances change. I will not support EU withdrawal but will support another path that enables the continuation of the present relationship, in the spirit of internationalism. That's the best way for any country to live, IMHO.

I'm not challenging that. Of course you have the right to change your mind and personally hope you do. I was just challenging your assertion that you didn't sign up for a system that has led to Brexit.

[lord bunberry]

Democracy also means I have the right to change my mind when circumstances change. I will not support EU withdrawal but will support another path that enables the continuation of the present relationship, in the spirit of internationalism. That's the best way for any country to live, IMHO.
On that you are 100% correct. It's not the way I wanted this country to become independent, but I think it's the way it's going to happen.
Once the anger has died down, we will all have to realise that were on the same side and get on with doing what's necessary.

[lord bunberry]

Are some people wilfully trying to drive people away from their side?

IF there is an Indyref2 the Yes campaign need at least a 6% swing to win. Decrying people who have expressed a desire to change their vote is hardly the way to win hearts and minds, telling people they voted the 'wrong' way likewise.
I doubt tip toeing around the facts will hoodwink the no voters into changing their minds. There's going to be a fair amount of bloodletting in the next few weeks and the people who need to be convinced don't need hearts and minds, they need to make a decision on what they want for themselves and this country. Yes voters are already convinced of the independence argument, it will be people who previously voted no that will turn the tide.

[High-On-Hibs]

No, a country that voted to remain part of the U.K in a democratic vote, to abide by democratic decisions.
the caveat regarding a major shift was not on the ballot paper, it was added after the people of Scotland made their democratic decision.
convince me independence would be better, Salmond couldn't.
what would be the currency? The English pound, how would that work now? or do we take our share of the reserves and the debt?
I take it the plan would be for Scotland to join the EU?
I think NS has cheek to talk about democracy.
once in a lifetime decision.
this is not about Alex Salmond, this is not about the snp, this is about the people of Scotland.

aye?

Well, unless the people of Scotland don't want what we want.

shameless liars.

I'll try and make sense out of this.

You're arguing that Scottish Independence was a once in a life time opportunity, despite a colossal game changer that Scotland roundly rejected. You say that Nicola Sturgeon has a cheek to talk about democracy, even although she has made it clear that she won't call another referendum until it's clear that a majority of people living in Scotland have a desire to exit the United Kingdom.
I think the argument for a sterling currency union is now pretty much dead, as it will soon be considered a crippled currency in comparison to the strength that it was at within the European Union. As for the debt/reserves, these figures will have to be negotiated with the UK Government. Although I believe that there is a strong argument that the UK Governments mismanagement of the oil industry when it was performing strongly, puts the pressure squarely at their own doorstep.

If the next couple of years of consistent increases in xenophobic attitudes and behaviour beyond the Scottish border doesn't convince you that we're better off in a more modern, open, international union, then nothing probably will to be honest.

[Pretty Boy]

I doubt tip toeing around the facts will hoodwink the no voters into changing their minds. There's going to be a fair amount of bloodletting in the next few weeks and the people who need to be convinced don't need hearts and minds, they need to make a decision on what they want for themselves and this country. Yes voters are already convinced of the independence argument, it will be people who previously voted no that will turn the tide.
I just don't see what's to be gained with the told you so's.

Someone has said they have decided if there is a referendum to change their vote to Yes. That should be welcomed with open arms not subjected to the 3rd degree.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Bursting with joy at the thought of more petty squabbling, scaremongering, fabrications, divisions, endless tension and a complete lack of community and country unity that comes with a Indy ref. Wonderful.


Yes voters didn't turn their backs and leave anyone at the side of the road on the trip to Hampden recently.:wink:

You're due us one.:greengrin

17014

[lord bunberry]

I just don't see what's to be gained with the told you so's.

Someone has said they have decided if there is a referendum to change their vote to Yes. That should be welcomed with open arms not subjected to the 3rd degree.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
You're right, but it sticks in the craw a bit that some people on this forum were so smug after the no vote and we kept getting the once in a lifetime choice rammed down our throats are now proposing a new referendum. I wish I could be as magnanimous as you.

[Hibernia&Alba]

I'm not challenging that. Of course you have the right to change your mind and personally hope you do. I was just challenging your assertion that you didn't sign up for a system that has led to Brexit.

You're getting into the mechanics of the electoral system. I'm speaking of a genuine belief of mine in 2014 that continued UK membership was consistent with continued EU membership. Of course there was the possibility some contingency, as there is in any moment of life, but, then again, Scotland could have voted out yesterday in the way Wales did. We can only each do as we think best at any moment, having evaluated all possible scenarios. If you want me to say "If I'd known in 2014 what I know now......", then, yes, I would have acted differently; but I genuinely didn't think UK membership was inconsistent with EU membership. ​

[JeMeSouviens]

It was maybe announced as an official manifesto pledge in 2015, but it was common knowledge that it was going to happen during the Scottish referendum.

Cameron announced intent to call a referendum in Jan 2013 (the Bloomberg speech). However, until it happened, it was doubtful the Tories would get a majority to implement it. Fwiw, I always thought they would because I could never see Milliband convincing anyone he could be PM.

[Hibernia&Alba]

You're right, but it sticks in the craw a bit that some people on this forum were so smug after the no vote and we kept getting the once in a lifetime choice rammed down our throats are now proposing a new referendum. I wish I could be as magnanimous as you.

I wasn't smug at all. I deliberately stayed out of the referendum thread, and think this is the very first time I've revealed how I voted in 2014.

[McIntosh]

I wanted remain in 2014 now independence is the only way forward.

[Velma Dinkley]

No I didn't. I signed up for internationalist principles of cooperation and tolerance; principles that have now been repudiated. Had the ballot paper said in 2014 that remaining part of the UK meant accepting EU withdrawal, I would have voted for independence then. I didn't sign up for a UK outside the EU, and reserve the democratic right to change my mind when circumstances change.

Everybody knew that a no vote did not protect our EU membership

[marinello59]

You're right, but it sticks in the craw a bit that some people on this forum were so smug after the no vote and we kept getting the once in a lifetime choice rammed down our throats are now proposing a new referendum. I wish I could be as magnanimous as you.

Were they any more smug than the 'We are the 45" group? What a self congratulatory load of bollocks that was... We were right and you were wrong. I was one of the 45 but that stuff was ill judged.
We should be leaving that all behind and trying to win the next referundum if it happens. Every single vote will count. Time to look forward and welcome everybody who wants to vote Yes whilst making a good argument to sway others.

[lord bunberry]

I wasn't smug at all. I deliberately stayed out of the referendum thread, and think this is the very first time I've revealed how I voted in 2014.
I would like to make it absolutely clear mate that I wasn't referring to you in any way. There quite a few people on here that got on their high horse after the no vote that are now changing their minds or trying to justify their positions.
I stayed up all night to watch the results come in and I've not really slept, so I'm probably a bit more cranky than normal :greengrin

[NAE NOOKIE]

There is a point to be made that this vote may well create a domino affect around Europe .... there is probably more Euro scepticism in the likes of France and funnily enough Poland than there has been previously. The EU may not break up, but the pressure for it to reform and become more directly accountable to the elected governments of its member states will grow, especially under the threat of more countries demanding their own referendums encouraged by the UK one. This may well lead to the reforms the Brexiters say could never happen.

As for Indy ref 2

From my point of view it comes down to how you see Scotland's place in the world. Are we as part of the union in an equal partnership of nations, or are we merely a region of what is in effect greater England?

Scotland has 1 ( one ) Conservative MP out of 59 and yet is run by a Tory government. Scotland voted 62% to 38% to remain part of the EU and yet we will no longer be part of it ....... If Scotland really is a country in the true meaning of the word, its a strange one indeed that allows its peoples views on political and social issues to be ridden roughshod over by another country whose views are so politically and in many cases socially at odds with its own.

If that is the state of affairs we are happy to live with then fine, but in that case in my opinion we have no more right to call ourselves a country than Yorkshire or Cornwall ..... Its the ability and will to conduct your affairs on the world stage with your approach to those affairs determined by your peoples outlook and attitudes that makes you a country ...... If at every turn Scotland's attitudes and approach can only ever be those of England as far as our dealings with the rest of the world goes then we are nothing more than a troublesome English region.

None of this is England's fault, none of this is due in any part to an anti Scottish attitude from England .... It is merely the unavoidable consequence of a country of 5 million people being in partnership with a country of 60,000,000

The only way Scotland will ever be able to allow its peoples unique outlook and attitudes to determine its dealings with the world will be if it is an independent country ..... If the people of Scotland do not want it to be independent then we must resign ourselves to being nothing more than England's largest geographical region in all but name ........ that's the reality and no amount of outward chest thumping and flag waving will change it.

To quote Sheldon Cooper's mum from the Big Bang Theory .......... "my cat can give birth to kittens in the oven, it doesn't make them biscuits"

[lord bunberry]

Were they any more smug than the 'We are the 45" group? What a self congratulatory load of bollocks that was... We were right and you were wrong. I was one of the 45 but that stuff was ill judged.
We should be leaving that all behind and trying to win the next referundum if it happens. Every single vote will count. Time to look forward and welcome everybody who wants to vote Yes whilst making a good argument to sway others.
I hate it how you're always right :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

Were they any more smug than the 'We are the 45" group? What a self congratulatory load of bollocks that was... We were right and you were wrong. I was one of the 45 but that stuff was ill judged.
We should be leaving that all behind and trying to win the next referundum if it happens. Every single vote will count. Time to look forward and welcome everybody who wants to vote Yes whilst making a good argument to sway others.

Couldn't agree more.

[High-On-Hibs]

Were they any more smug than the 'We are the 45" group? What a self congratulatory load of bollocks that was... We were right and you were wrong. I was one of the 45 but that stuff was ill judged.
We should be leaving that all behind and trying to win the next referundum if it happens. Every single vote will count. Time to look forward and welcome everybody who wants to vote Yes whilst making a good argument to sway others.

I agree that we need to move on. But it also needs to be understood that people are understandably angry about this after putting so much energy into a campaign warning people that something like this was always possible, only for it to fall on death ears. Today has just reopened the wounds and it's going to take time for things to settle down again. You may not like it, but it's inevitable.

[degenerated]

No it was not. It was announced by Cameron in the run up to the general election of 2015, after the Scottish referendum. That's an undeniable fact.
Actually it was

David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

I agree that we need to move on. But it also needs to be understood that people are understandably angry about this after putting so much energy into a campaign warning people that something like this was always possible, only for it to fall on death ears. Today has just reopened the wounds and it's going to take time for things to settle down again. You may not like it, but it's inevitable.

Maybe some of the NO voters woke this morning with that feeling in the pit of their stomachs that we had on September 19th. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy, so we should welcome them in with open arms. The more the merrier.:greengrin

[Hibernia&Alba]

Actually it was

David Cameron promises in/out referendum on EU - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21148282

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

He was in a coalition in the Lib Dems then and nobody foresaw a Tory majority government. It was just part of the usual mid term fluff we hear from everybody all the time, as he played to the gallery. I didn't believe for a moment he would be in a position to deliver such a pledge, and, in truth, nor did anybody else. It was only after the shock 2015 election result that we suddenly knew there was a fight ahead. If I were back in 2014 in exactly the same position, I would vote No again, but here in 2016, after the EU vote, I feel compelled to change my opinion, in keeping with what I feel is the best approach.

[Bristolhibby]

No, a country that voted to remain part of the U.K in a democratic vote, to abide by democratic decisions.
the caveat regarding a major shift was not on the ballot paper, it was added after the people of Scotland made their democratic decision.
convince me independence would be better, Salmond couldn't.
what would be the currency? The English pound, how would that work now? or do we take our share of the reserves and the debt?
I take it the plan would be for Scotland to join the EU?
I think NS has cheek to talk about democracy.
once in a lifetime decision.
this is not about Alex Salmond, this is not about the snp, this is about the people of Scotland.

aye?

Well, unless the people of Scotland don't want what we want.

shameless liars.

If the people of Scotland don't want it after a huge shift in the political landscape, then vote in again.

Referendums are never "once in a lifetime". They can come any time a party with a mandate wants them. And yes, Scotland can keep going to the polls until Independence is secured. Just like people go to the polls every 5 years. Political decision doesn't stop on one vote otherwise we'd be celebrating 300 years of Whig power.

J

[marinello59]

I agree that we need to move on. But it also needs to be understood that people are understandably angry about this after putting so much energy into a campaign warning people that something like this was always possible, only for it to fall on death ears. Today has just reopened the wounds and it's going to take time for things to settle down again. You may not like it, but it's inevitable.

You have already stated that you have absolutely no interest in winning others over. Really, all you want to do is rant. I might just vote No in the next referundum to make you an even angrier person. :na na:

[stantonhibby]

I agree that we need to move on. But it also needs to be understood that people are understandably angry about this after putting so much energy into a campaign warning people that something like this was always possible, only for it to fall on death ears. Today has just reopened the wounds and it's going to take time for things to settle down again. You may not like it, but it's inevitable.

Death ears sound scary

[Hibbyradge]

I'm not challenging that. Of course you have the right to change your mind and personally hope you do. I was just challenging your assertion that you didn't sign up for a system that has led to Brexit.

What are you trying to achieve? :confused:

It's like you're trying to kick him for his original vote or rub his face in it in the worst kind of "it's your fault" manner.

The SNP are hoping to woo people who voted No, but didn't sign up for Brexit, exactly like H&A.

[Hibbyradge]

Everybody knew that a no vote did not protect our EU membership

Really? Everybody?

Even though we were told the opposite?

[High-On-Hibs]

What are you trying to achieve? :confused:

It's like you're trying to kick him for his original vote or rub his face in it in the worst kind of "it's your fault" manner.

The SNP are hoping to woo people who voted No, but didn't sign up for Brexit, exactly like H&A.

Do you always pick random people on here and decide you're just not going to like them and twist around or deliberately misinterpret what they are saying? That's the impression you give.

As i've already (clearly) stated twice already, I was not trying to bring the fellow poster down. I just felt that it was wrong for them to state that they didn't sign up for something, which was part of a system that they chose to support at the time. That's the only (factually correct) point I was making. I'll leave it at that.

[lord bunberry]

Really? Everybody?

Even though we were told the opposite?
You were told the opposite, but must have known that a Tory victory in the forthcoming general election would lead to a in out referendum. For the avoidance of doubt David Cameron announced his plans for an in out referendum in January 2013, well before the Scottish referendum.

[lord bunberry]

Do you always pick random people on here and decide you're just not going to like them and twist around or deliberately misinterpret what they are saying? That's the impression you give.

As i've already (clearly) stated twice already, I was not trying to bring the fellow poster down. I just felt that it was wrong for them to state that they didn't sign up for something, which was part of a system that they chose to support at the time. That's the only (factually correct) point I was making. I'll leave it at that.
I think you're correct mate.

[Hibbyradge]

Do you always pick random people on here and decide you're just not going to like them and twist around or deliberately misinterpret what they are saying? That's the impression you give.

As i've already (clearly) stated twice already, I was not trying to bring the fellow poster down. I just felt that it was wrong for them to state that they didn't sign up for something, which was part of a system that they chose to support at the time. That's the only (factually correct) point I was making. I'll leave it at that.


Firstly, I'm not the only person to criticise your comments.

Secondly, we were told that a No vote would protect our EU membership.

Therefore, if people believed that, then they didn't sign up for Leave.

And those are exactly the people we need to change their vote next time.

Why is it so important for you to be technically correct?

[Hibbyradge]

You were told the opposite, but must have known that a Tory victory in the forthcoming general election would lead to a in out referendum. For the avoidance of doubt David Cameron announced his plans for an in out referendum in January 2013, well before the Scottish referendum.

What are you on about?

I voted Yes in 2014 and I voted Remain yesterday.

[Hibbyradge]

I think you're correct mate.

What's he correct about?

[lord bunberry]

What's he correct about?
He's correct about the fact that people were warned of what might happen if they voted no. It may have been unlikely at the time, but it's now a stark reality.

[ronaldo7]

What's he correct about?

I can see your hackles rising as you typed this.:faf:

[lord bunberry]

What are you on about?

I voted Yes in 2014 and I voted Remain yesterday.
Apologies, I do remember you coming out on the yes side in the referendum. My point was aimed at the no voters and the people that were having a go at high on hibs.

[marinello59]

Death ears sound scary

My favourite post on this thread. :greengrin

[Hibbyradge]

He's correct about the fact that people were warned of what might happen if they voted no. It may have been unlikely at the time, but it's now a stark reality.

I don't remember the possibility of leaving the EU if you voted No was ever warned against.

Quite the opposite.

[Hibbyradge]

My favourite post on this thread. :greengrin

It's a good post, but it's nonsense.

If he'd said "death ears hear scary" then I'd agree.

Pedants 1 Gagmeisters 0

:greengrin

[lord bunberry]

I don't remember the possibility of leaving the EU if you voted No was ever warned against.

Quite the opposite.
David Cameron was committed to a referendum if he won a majority well before the Scottishl referendum vote. The warnings were there, maybe some just didn't want to see them.

[#FromTheCapital]

I don't remember the possibility of leaving the EU if you voted No was ever warned against.

Quite the opposite.

Surely it would've been up to the Yes campaign to highlight this?

At the time a no vote was the only way that we'd remain in the EU because a yes vote meant starting from scratch and applying to join. It was always a possibility that this would happen but unfortunately nobody had a crystal ball to say for definite.

[Hibbyradge]

Surely it would've been up to the Yes campaign to highlight this?

At the time a no vote was the only way that we'd remain in the EU because a yes vote meant starting from scratch and applying to join. It was always a possibility that this would happen but unfortunately nobody had a crystal ball to say for definite.

Exactly. That's what I'm saying.

[#FromTheCapital]

Exactly. That's what I'm saying.

No probs, thought you meant the better together campaign.

[Hibrandenburg]

Everybody knew that a no vote did not protect our EU membership

Really?

[Hibbyradge]

David Cameron was committed to a referendum if he won a majority well before the Scottishl referendum vote. The warnings were there, maybe some just didn't want to see them.

Maybe some didn't see them.

I certainly didn't see a leave vote winning until Newcastle declared and I was still shocked when I woke this morning to see the result.

[Hibrandenburg]

Were they any more smug than the 'We are the 45" group? What a self congratulatory load of bollocks that was... We were right and you were wrong. I was one of the 45 but that stuff was ill judged.
We should be leaving that all behind and trying to win the next referundum if it happens. Every single vote will count. Time to look forward and welcome everybody who wants to vote Yes whilst making a good argument to sway others.

:agree:

Except the stupid members of the electorate of course :wink:

[Hibbyradge]

Really?

Well done.

[lord bunberry]

Maybe some didn't see them.

I certainly didn't see a leave vote winning until Newcastle declared and I was still shocked when I woke this morning to see the result.
Fair enough, but you can't deny it was a possibility or that it wasn't becoming more likely as the polls predicted.

[Hibbyradge]

Fair enough, but you can't deny it was a possibility or that it wasn't becoming more likely as the polls predicted.

I do deny it. Utterly.

Brexit was never predicted in September 2014.

The line was Vote No to stay in Europe.

The uncertainty then was whether an independent Scotland would be able to gain entry to the EU.

No one said vote Yes to stay in Europe. No one.

Why won't you concede that?

[Hibernia&Alba]

I do deny it. Utterly.

Brexit was never predicted in September 2014.

The line was Vote No to stay in Europe.

The uncertainty then was whether an independent Scotland would be able to gain entry to the EU.

No one said vote Yes to stay in Europe. No one.

Why won't you concede that?

I agree with this. No way were we asked to contemplate that staying in the UK might mean leaving Europe. Indeed, we were told that voting to remain in the UK guaranteed our European membership. I voted for internationalism, or so I thought.

[Hibbyradge]

Just saying we were told it was once in lifetime opportunity.
apologies but I don't understand your first sentence. Not a criticism, my bad.

Once in a generation, not lifetime, (maybe once in 20 years or so), someone guessed, assuming the world wouldn't change much.

But they were wrong because they didn't forsee what was going to happen on 23 June.

[degenerated]

The tide definitely appears to be turning

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160624/526460cf09f5e54bfcd9d6a0babce54a.jpg

Read that Henry McLeish was now backing independence

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

The tide definitely appears to be turning

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160624/526460cf09f5e54bfcd9d6a0babce54a.jpg

Read that Henry McLeish was now backing independence

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

Amazing what can happen once you've alienated a huge percentage of your readership.

[lucky]

I wouldn't worry about any of that happening this time around. The NO Campaign are all out of fabrications and scaremongering. They've been shown up for the absolute liars that they are. Wrong on Scotland's safety in the EU. Wrong on the safety of the pound. Wrong on the safety of jobs, the NHS, public spending..... They have been shown up big time.

I expect a much quieter referendum this time around.

It's crap like that this that will lose a second referendum. Where's the positives in your statement? You honestly think people are going to change their minds based on you telling them they are liars and were wrong? 1 in 3 scots voted out the EU who bothered to vote, NHS is devolved, tax powers could have been used to offset the cuts, are you really arguing that iScotland will use the pound controlled by rUk govt and central bank? What jobs have been lost because we stayed part of the U.K.?

If EU membership is a big thing to Scots why was the turnout so low in Scotland compared to the rest of the U.K.?

[lord bunberry]

I do deny it. Utterly.

Brexit was never predicted in September 2014.

The line was Vote No to stay in Europe.

The uncertainty then was whether an independent Scotland would be able to gain entry to the EU.

No one said vote Yes to stay in Europe. No one.

Why won't you concede that?
Brexit might not have been predicted, but it was a possibility. In 2014 we knew that there was going to be a general election in 2015. The prime minister was on record as saying that if his party won that election they would hold an in out referendum.
I will concede that it wasn't a big issue in the independence referendum, but it wasn't as if voters didn't know about it either.

[Hibbyradge]

no, it was said.
Scotland voted to remain a part of the United Kingdom, so we abide by the democratic decisions made by the majority who vote.
except when petulance kicks in

Petulance? Have you seen what's happened since Thursday?

It's a financial and political catastrophe.

$2 Trillion wiped off markets and that's in 1 day. I can't imagine what the UK'S economy will look like in the years leading up to the actual exit.

I keep hoping that someone in the UK government will do something to stop Brexit, but I'm kidding myself.

But our parliament can do something about it and not to do so because someone used a phrase, would be utterly irresponsible.

Here's some startling information about the financial collapse, if you're interested.

It makes for frightening reading.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/24/bank-of-england-markets-pound-shares-plummet-brexit-vote-carney

[johnbc70]

Brexit might not have been predicted, but it was a possibility. In 2014 we knew that there was going to be a general election in 2015. The prime minister was on record as saying that if his party won that election they would hold an in out referendum.
I will concede that it wasn't a big issue in the independence referendum, but it wasn't as if voters didn't know about it either.

I was told a Yes vote would put our EU membership in doubt. Unless you had a crystal ball then you could have given me no guarantees that Scotland would have sailed into the EU in the event of a Yes vote.

So a Yes vote was putting EU membership in doubt and a No vote was also putting it in doubt, but at the time as you say it was not really a big issue so I would say a No vote at the time was less of a risk if you wanted to remain in the EU. How wrong everyone was.

[johnbc70]

Petulance? Have you seen what's happened since Thursday?

It's a financial and political catastrophe.

$2 Trillion wiped off markets and that's in 1 day. I can't imagine what the UK'S economy will look like in the years leading up to the actual exit.

I keep hoping that someone in the UK government will do something to stop Brexit, but I'm kidding myself.

But our parliament can do something about it and not to do so because someone used a phrase, would be utterly irresponsible.

Here's some startling information about the financial collapse, if you're interested.

It makes for frightening reading.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/24/bank-of-england-markets-pound-shares-plummet-brexit-vote-carney

The FTSE 100 ended up higher on Friday than where it was on Monday. But I agree with the sentiment and think we are in for another recession and downturn.

[ronaldo7]

The tide definitely appears to be turning

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160624/526460cf09f5e54bfcd9d6a0babce54a.jpg

Read that Henry McLeish was now backing independence

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

:agree: He was on Scotland tonight saying the time was now right to explore Indy. It seems that Labour are now trying to find their own answers to the Indy questions rather than relying on others to lay it out for them. Good on them.

https://t.co/dCBVK6PVgW

[Hibbyradge]

The FTSE 100 ended up higher on Friday than where it was on Monday. But I agree with the sentiment and think we are in for another recession and downturn.

I saw that.

The FTSE 250 is often cited as a better barometer of the economy's welfare. It was down about 850 over the same period.

[lord bunberry]

I was told a Yes vote would put our EU membership in doubt. Unless you had a crystal ball then you could have given me no guarantees that Scotland would have sailed into the EU in the event of a Yes vote.

So a Yes vote was putting EU membership in doubt and a No vote was also putting it in doubt, but at the time as you say it was not really a big issue so I would say a No vote at the time was less of a risk if you wanted to remain in the EU. How wrong everyone was.
:agree: I do agree with that. All I was saying was that it was known that an in out referendum was planned in 2014 during the independence referendum. People chose to believe the side that was to eventually lead us into our current predicament.

[BroxburnHibee]

:agree: He was on Scotland tonight saying the time was now right to explore Indy. It seems that Labour are now trying to find their own answers to the Indy questions rather than relying on others to lay it out for them. Good on them.

https://t.co/dCBVK6PVgW

Labour need to embrace the fact a large section of their support was alienated by their support for Better Together.

[RyeSloan]

I saw that. The FTSE 250 is often cited as a better barometer of the economy's welfare. It was down about 850 over the same period.

FTSE250 opened at 16,422 on Monday and closed 16,088 Friday....hardly a catastrophe.

Anyway you know as well as I do that taking short term moves in the market to prove a point is a fools game.

Sure Brexit was always going to create volatility and maybe some short term pain but there is no doubt that a UK free from the shackles of the EU has a unique opportunity now to forge its own path in trade deals and many many other areas of the economy. It might not take it or it might take longer than some would like but when you look at just how slow the EU is in doing trade deals and its excruciating process for developing legislation then Brexit can easily be painted as an exciting opportunity just as easily as you are painting it as some sort of unmitigated disaster.

[lucky]

Labours leadership is meeting today in Glasgiw. Could be an interesting day but I'm not holding my breath

[stantonhibby]

It's a good post, but it's nonsense.

If he'd said "death ears hear scary" then I'd agree.

Pedants 1 Gagmeisters 0

:greengrin

Apologies (must do better)

[mmmmhibby]

FTSE250 opened at 16,422 on Monday and closed 16,088 Friday....hardly a catastrophe.

Anyway you know as well as I do that taking short term moves in the market to prove a point is a fools game.

Sure Brexit was always going to create volatility and maybe some short term pain but there is no doubt that a UK free from the shackles of the EU has a unique opportunity now to forge its own path in trade deals and many many other areas of the economy. It might not take it or it might take longer than some would like but when you look at just how slow the EU is in doing trade deals and its excruciating process for developing legislation then Brexit can easily be painted as an exciting opportunity just as easily as you are painting it as some sort of unmitigated disaster.

Australian MP Tony Abbott tweets saying it will be easy to strike a trade deal with UK now. Intersting.

[Hibrandenburg]

Brexit might not have been predicted, but it was a possibility. In 2014 we knew that there was going to be a general election in 2015. The prime minister was on record as saying that if his party won that election they would hold an in out referendum.
I will concede that it wasn't a big issue in the independence referendum, but it wasn't as if voters didn't know about it either.

It was a big issue for me but most of my friends thought I was nuts. It was always going to happen with the rise of the right in England and their new found desire to try and find some kind of national identity other than their British one. Any separation now will be much more bitter than it would have been in 2014 and with the marching season approaching it wouldn't surprise me one bit if that bitterness turned violent.

[Mr Grieves]

Labours leadership is meeting today in Glasgiw. Could be an interesting day but I'm not holding my breath
It's a tricky one for them.

Noticed on twitter that Malcolm Chisolm is supporting an indyref2

It was a big issue for me but most of my friends thought I was nuts. It was always going to happen with the rise of the right in England and their new found desire to try and find some kind of national identity other than their British one. Any separation now will be much more bitter than it would have been in 2014 and with the marching season approaching it wouldn't surprise me one bit if that bitterness turned violent.

[Mr Grieves]

Sorry, never meant to quote Hibrandenburg!

[IndieHibby]

If you were in charge of negotiating a new relationship for the EU with
a) a UK containing Scotland, England, NI and Wales
b) An independent Scotland, with a 10% budget deficit and decling oil revenues

who would you worry about giving the best deal to?

[High-On-Hibs]

If you were in charge of negotiating a new relationship for the EU with
a) a UK containing Scotland, England, NI and Wales
b) An independent Scotland, with a 10% budget deficit and decling oil revenues

who would you worry about giving the best deal to?

Well it's a good thing the people in charge of negotiating a new relationship with the EU aren't faced with that choice. As choice A is overly vague. As you completely ignore the UK deficit, a deficit that may well increase without the privilege of the single market. Choice B is also factually incorrect. Oil revenues "were" declining. But value is creeping back up, albeit at a slow pace.

[MyJo]

If you were in charge of negotiating a new relationship for the EU with
a) a UK containing Scotland, England, NI and Wales
b) An independent Scotland, with a 10% budget deficit and decling oil revenues

who would you worry about giving the best deal to?

an independent scotland wouldn't be negotiating a new deal, they just want to keep the existing arrangements in place.

Why would the EU want to give a good deal to the UK? We are the ones that rejected membership. I can't imagine them being keen on the UK voting out of the EU but wanting to keep the good bits that suit them.

There are already people saying "leave means leave" with no special arrangements or preferential treatment being given to the UK.

[IndieHibby]

Well it's a good thing the people in charge of negotiating a new relationship with the EU aren't faced with that choice. As choice A is overly vague. As you completely ignore the UK deficit, a deficit that may well increase without the privilege of the single market. Choice B is also factually incorrect. Oil revenues "were" declining. But value is creeping back up, albeit at a slow pace.

The medium to long term yield from North Sea Oil is a concern, is it not? And it would feature significantly in any appraisal of the economic potential of an independent Scotland in joining the EU as a new entity. The day-to-day oil price was not what I intended to refer to and would not be a significant consideration, in my opinion.

As for the UK deficit; I am less worried by it's 10%, even without the single market - which will not be denied to the UK in the brexit deal. To think otherwise is truly blinkered.

[Hibrandenburg]

an independent scotland wouldn't be negotiating a new deal, they just want to keep the existing arrangements in place.

Why would the EU want to give a good deal to the UK? We are the ones that rejected membership. I can't imagine them being keen on the UK voting out of the EU but wanting to keep the good bits that suit them.

There are already people saying "leave means leave" with no special arrangements or preferential treatment being given to the UK.

It could be argued that it's in the EU's interest to make an example of the UK leaving to ensure no one else does it, one way to do that would be to hold up a prospering Scotland against a struggling rest UK.

[High-On-Hibs]

an independent scotland wouldn't be negotiating a new deal, they just want to keep the existing arrangements in place.

Why would the EU want to give a good deal to the UK? We are the ones that rejected membership. I can't imagine them being keen on the UK voting out of the EU but wanting to keep the good bits that suit them.

There are already people saying "leave means leave" with no special arrangements or preferential treatment being given to the UK.

Indeed. Brussels will have very little motive to give a good deal to the UK. Because if they did so, it would cause other countries to consider their position with the EU as well. They would be thinking "If the UK can get the good without the bad by leaving, then why not us?".

It's a situation they will want to avoid as much as possible.

[Leith Green]

If we can negotiate an independent Scotland to remain in the E.U and adopting the euro as our currency then that is the way forward for me. The currency was a major stumbling block in 2014 and quite rightly so as were unsure what exactly we would do if we became independent, the uncertainty was too much for some to take the gamble. Now there is just as much doubt about the uk and the pound. Hopefully Scottish labour can wake up and position itself as a party that will help bring about an independent Scotland that will be in the E.U and rebuild itself and our country as a whole. There was too much of what we wouldnt have ,get , or be able to do in 2014. Lets see a forward thinking scottish labour and Snp drive on a new positive outlook for an independent Scotland, then we can decide which parties policies are right for us when required. The UK parties were great at pumping us silly with fear about what would happen to us if we voted yes, the reality is they dont give a toss about Scotland, its people, or the electorate.. Look where the current uk government are taking us ... We are and will continue to be dictated to by England , this may be our last chance to get out, i really fear for us if we dont pull away now.

Fwiw i accept and respected the outcome in 2014 and fully respect anybody who voted no in 2014 and can toyally understand why some were sceptical about where we would be heading, but surely they can see how the situation now has reversed and why we need to look after what Scotland wants and deliver what its people vote for.

[High-On-Hibs]

The medium to long term yield from North Sea Oil is a concern, is it not? And it would feature significantly in any appraisal of the economic potential of an independent Scotland in joining the EU as a new entity. The day-to-day oil price was not what I intended to refer to and would not be a significant consideration, in my opinion.

As for the UK deficit; I am less worried by it's 10%, even without the single market - which will not be denied to the UK in the brexit deal. To think otherwise is truly blinkered.

Why should it be a concern? We always knew that oil was a volatile market with periods of huge growth and reduced growth. The sad thing is, the periods of huge growth have been grossly mismanaged by a UK Government with their own self invested interests. It's time we took the oil industry into our own hands before the next period of growth is mismanaged yet again by a Government trying to fill the economic void caused by Brexit.

Why would you be less worried about a 10% deficit in a country outwith the European Union and the single market compared to a country with a 10% deficit within the European Union with full access to the single market? I fail to see the logic of your argument.

[IndieHibby]

Well it's a good thing the people in charge of negotiating a new relationship with the EU aren't faced with that choice. As choice A is overly vague. As you completely ignore the UK deficit, a deficit that may well increase without the privilege of the single market. Choice B is also factually incorrect. Oil revenues "were" declining. But value is creeping back up, albeit at a slow pace.

The medium to long term yield from North Sea Oil is a concern, is it not? And it would feature significantly in any appraisal of the economic potential of an independent Scotland in joining the EU as a new entity. The day-to-day oil price was not what I intended to refer to and would not be a significant consideration, in my opinion.

As for the UK deficit; I am less worried by it's 10%, even without the single market - which will not be denied to the UK in the brexit deal. To think otherwise is truly blinkered.

[marinello59]

Why should it be a concern? We always knew that oil was a volatile market with periods of huge growth and reduced growth. The sad thing is, the periods of huge growth have been grossly mismanaged by a UK Government with their own self invested interests. It's time we took the oil industry into our own hands before the next period of growth is mismanaged yet again by a Government trying to fill the economic void caused by Brexit.

Why would you be less worried about a 10% deficit in a country outwith the European Union and the single market compared to a country with a 10% deficit within the European Union with full access to the single market? I fail to see the logic of your argument.

If you want to comment on the oil industry less of the ill informed rants and more research.

[High-On-Hibs]

If you want to comment on the oil industry less of the ill informed rants and more research.

Oh, so you're the expert are you? Please enlighten me about this huge imminent disaster for the oil industry and how it will never ever recover?

[Mr Grieves]

Apparently the Sunday Post have done an indyref2 poll.

59% yes for independence
32% no for independence
9% Don't know

Poll is Scotland only, 1700 people. No other info yet

[IndieHibby]

Why should it be a concern? We always knew that oil was a volatile market with periods of huge growth and reduced growth. The sad thing is, the periods of huge growth have been grossly mismanaged by a UK Government with their own self invested interests. It's time we took the oil industry into our own hands before the next period of growth is mismanaged yet again by a Government trying to fill the economic void caused by Brexit.

Why would you be less worried about a 10% deficit in a country outwith the European Union and the single market compared to a country with a 10% deficit within the European Union with full access to the single market? I fail to see the logic of your argument.

The cyclical argument you propose here isn't actually the problem. While the spot price of oil may recover in ththe future (although how far is anyone's guess in light of Iran being brought in from the cold recently) the reserves in the North Sea are in long term decline.

The logic of my argument surrounds the fundementally different economies of Scotland and the rest of the U.K.

[goosano]

Why would you be less worried about a 10% deficit in a country outwith the European Union and the single market compared to a country with a 10% deficit within the European Union with full access to the single market? I fail to see the logic of your argument.

You need to have a <3% deficit to be eligible as an EU member. Outwith the EU as part of the UK then what individual regions do is unimportant as long as the UK's deficit is controlled overall.

[JeMeSouviens]

Apparently the Sunday Post have done an indyref2 poll.

59% yes for independence
32% no for independence
9% Don't know

Poll is Scotland only, 1700 people. No other info yet

Jesus H Christ! That's 65% ex DK Yes. Can't be right, I'm off to look...

[JeMeSouviens]

You need to have a <3% deficit to be eligible as an EU member. Outwith the EU as part of the UK then what individual regions do is unimportant as long as the UK's deficit is controlled overall.

Have you checked the size of the UK deficit in any of the last few years? Hint - it hasn't been below 3% for a decade.

Why do people just make things up?

[degenerated]

Apparently the Sunday Post have done an indyref2 poll.

59% yes for independence
32% no for independence
9% Don't know

Poll is Scotland only, 1700 people. No other info yet
Excluding don't knows that'll be 65% yes. There's going to be a heat of the moment element to that but it's a fairly epic jump on any other poll prior.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

Oh, so you're the expert are you? Please enlighten me about this huge imminent disaster for the oil industry and how it will never ever recover?

Im no expert.
65000 direct jobs gone so far due to the current downturn but all is well I guess.

[The Harp Awakes]

Jesus H Christ! That's 65% ex DK Yes. Can't be right, I'm off to look...

https://www.sundaypost.com/news/political-news/end-uk-new-survey-shows-59-support-scottish-independence-brexit-vote/

[Mr Grieves]

Apparently there's also a Sunday Times poll, excluding don't knows.

52% Yes
48% No

[Mr Grieves]

Going by Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats reaction after speaking to Nicola Sturgeon, indyref 2 isn't the SNP's first option for staying in the EU. Any other ideas as to how this would be possible?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Why should it be a concern? We always knew that oil was a volatile market with periods of huge growth and reduced growth. The sad thing is, the periods of huge growth have been grossly mismanaged by a UK Government with their own self invested interests. It's time we took the oil industry into our own hands before the next period of growth is mismanaged yet again by a Government trying to fill the economic void caused by Brexit.

Why would you be less worried about a 10% deficit in a country outwith the European Union and the single market compared to a country with a 10% deficit within the European Union with full access to the single market? I fail to see the logic of your argument.

Its a concern because the economics of an independent scotland were predicated on it being at an unrealistically high level.

[lord bunberry]

Going by Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats reaction after speaking to Nicola Sturgeon, indyref 2 isn't the SNP's first option for staying in the EU. Any other ideas as to how this would be possible?
They could claim that they have a mandate to keep Scotland in the EU by virtue of the vote on Thursday. The decision then doesn't become about independence, it becomes about enforcing the will of the people of this country. Independence would just be a consequence of us continuing our EU membership. It's pretty tenuous imo.

[Leith Green]

Going by Scottish Labour and the Scottish Liberal Democrats reaction after speaking to Nicola Sturgeon, indyref 2 isn't the SNP's first option for staying in the EU. Any other ideas as to how this would be possible?



Will play out along the lines of... Sturgeon will demand continued EU membership for Scotland whilst remaining in UK. EU will knock that back based on Scotland being part of a UK that is leaving EU. Sturgeon will then demand a vote on independance for Scotland based on that.

[johnbc70]

Will play out along the lines of... Sturgeon will demand continued EU membership for Scotland whilst remaining in UK. EU will knock that back based on Scotland being part of a UK that is leaving EU. Sturgeon will then demand a vote on independance for Scotland based on that.

According to some reports this is already happening, EU have said Scotland is part of the UK and must leave. If you want back in then you apply like everyone else.

[coldingham hibs]

Apparently there's also a Sunday Times poll, excluding don't knows.

52% Yes
48% No

Does anyone still believe the polls?.

[Leith Green]

According to some reports this is already happening, EU have said Scotland is part of the UK and must leave. If you want back in then you apply like everyone else.


It has got to be cast iron for us to go to the polls imo. An agreement in principal with the EU will need to be in place prior to another vote on independence. That and currency are the fundamentals here.

[MyJo]

Sturgeon dropping the mic! :hilarious:

[degenerated]

According to some reports this is already happening, EU have said Scotland is part of the UK and must leave. If you want back in then you apply like everyone else.
This was said by the mail on sunday, hardly a credible and unbiased source.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[degenerated]

Just let this sink in

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160626/9d306055e6a597041db517e02fa5ff1d.jpg

So the pm resigns and the chancellor goes AWOL. Labour come to praise Caesar in another introspective circle jerk and the only person in the whole of the UK with a plan seems to be Nicola Sturgeon.

Would independence be that much of a leap in the dark to try and maintain our place in EU.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[MyJo]

Just let this sink in

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160626/9d306055e6a597041db517e02fa5ff1d.jpg

So the pm resigns and the chancellor goes AWOL. Labour come to praise Caesar in another introspective circle jerk and the only person in the whole of the UK with a plan seems to be Nicola Sturgeon.

Would independence be that much of a leap in the dark to try and maintain our place in EU.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

No more a leap in the dark than we are about to embark on with Captain Boris as the helm of the good ship Brexit

[Pretty Boy]

No more a leap in the dark than we are about to embark on with Captain Boris as the helm of the good ship Brexit

On the bright side with the Johnson and Trump dream team we'll all likely be obliterated within 2 years so we'll be spared any long term pain.

[Rasta_Hibs]

On the bright side with the Johnson and Trump dream team we'll all likely be obliterated within 2 years so we'll be spared any long term pain.

What do you mean exactly? Obliterated by who?

[Future17]

What do you mean exactly? Obliterated by who?

By Trump and Johnson. :-)

[Pretty Boy]

What do you mean exactly? Obliterated by who?
It wasn't an entirely serious comment.

Although given the general political mood throughout the world at the moment I can't say I feel particularly positive about the future.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Rasta_Hibs]

It wasn't an entirely serious comment.

Although given the general political mood throughout the world at the moment I can't say I feel particularly positive about the future.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I would agree in the sense that Scotland, The UK and it's people need to come together now more than ever regardless of their political leanings or we are going to tear apart our communities.

In a political sense I fear about the lack of respect being given to a democratic vote. Talk of blocking the vote by Nicola Sturgeon is a disgrace. She should grow up and accept the democratic vote.

The EU referendum was a UK vote not an independent vote for Scotland.

What we have is a leader in Nicola Sturgeon is not someone who wants what's best for Scotland, we have a leader who does not respect democracy. She is only interested in her self proclaimed life time dream of Scottish Independence. That is it. Her dream, not what is best for Scotland but her own life's dreams.

I fear for Scotland with her in charge.

[bigwheel]

I would agree in the sense that Scotland, The UK and it's people need to come together now more than ever regardless of their political leanings or we are going to tear apart our communities.

In a political sense I fear about the lack of respect being given to a democratic vote. Talk of blocking the vote by Nicola Sturgeon is a disgrace. She should grow up and accept the democratic vote.

The EU referendum was a UK vote not an independent vote for Scotland.

What we have is a leader in Nicola Sturgeon is not someone who wants what's best for Scotland, we have a leader who does not respect democracy. She is only interested in her self proclaimed life time dream of Scottish Independence. That is it. Her dream, not what is best for Scotland but her own life's dreams.

I fear for Scotland with her in charge.

Well I am a whole lot more confident Scotland will be in a much stronger position in the coming dialogues with Sturgeon as our voice. There are deeply differing views across the UK. The vote has shown that. There is no "United" kingdom currently. The thought of this happening without a strong devolved government seeking to look after the best for Scotland is terrifying. Her job is to look after Scotland, not the UK. She seems to be the only leader currently doing her job...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[degenerated]

No more a leap in the dark than we are about to embark on with Captain Boris as the helm of the good ship Brexit
Here it is in video.

https://twitter.com/sgardner/status/747059883128692737?s=09

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[Colr]

Here it is in video.

https://twitter.com/sgardner/status/747059883128692737?s=09

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

..and Farage has said there is no £350m benefit for the NHS or whoever now.

[degenerated]

..and Farage has said there is no £350m benefit for the NHS or whoever now.
And Dan Hannan has said that it won't cut immigration drastically either.

They really have sold them a pig in a poke, here's hoping we can extricate ourselves from this omnishambles.



Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

The European bandwagon has started to roll. Last Night we had the Belgians welcoming talks with the FM, and today the Germans.

Lets get this show on the road:greengrin

https://t.co/zT2zWmr2e2

[Arch Stanton]

Well I am a whole lot more confident Scotland will be in a much stronger position in the coming dialogues with Sturgeon as our voice. There are deeply differing views across the UK. The vote has shown that. There is no "United" kingdom currently. The thought of this happening without a strong devolved government seeking to look after the best for Scotland is terrifying. Her job is to look after Scotland, not the UK. She seems to be the only leader currently doing her job...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Totally agree - Nicola is playing a blinder on this one.

Once Article 50 has been invoked it cannot be revoked but the UK can't quit EU unless MSPs pass the necessary legislation (the so-called veto).

In other words, Nicola can leave the whole process in limbo if she doesn't get concessions she needs from London and Brussels.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Totally agree - Nicola is playing a blinder on this one.

Once Article 50 has been invoked it cannot be revoked but the UK can't quit EU unless MSPs pass the necessary legislation (the so-called veto).

In other words, Nicola can leave the whole process in limbo if she doesn't get concessions she needs from London and Brussels.


Im not sure this is correct - the scottish parliament cant veto this i dobt think - its not a devolved power (international relations)??

[heretoday]

And Dan Hannan has said that it won't cut immigration drastically either.

They really have sold them a pig in a poke, here's hoping we can extricate ourselves from this omnishambles.



Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

Dan Hannan. He knows a lot.

The thing is - no one knows what the future holds. Recent events bear this out.

[johnbc70]

Totally agree - Nicola is playing a blinder on this one.

Once Article 50 has been invoked it cannot be revoked but the UK can't quit EU unless MSPs pass the necessary legislation (the so-called veto).

In other words, Nicola can leave the whole process in limbo if she doesn't get concessions she needs from London and Brussels.

Wrong, Westminster can just ignore it and proceed as planned. You genuinely believe The UK will not leave the EU on the basis of Scottish MSPs? Really?

[johnbc70]

Totally agree - Nicola is playing a blinder on this one.

Once Article 50 has been invoked it cannot be revoked but the UK can't quit EU unless MSPs pass the necessary legislation (the so-called veto).

In other words, Nicola can leave the whole process in limbo if she doesn't get concessions she needs from London and Brussels.

Besides this being wrong, where is the democracy when England and Wales voted to leave the EU but we in Scotland feel we are more important than them so can halt the whole thing? That will do down well in England and Wales.

[bigwheel]

Besides this being wrong, where is the democracy when England and Wales voted to leave the EU but we in Scotland feel we are more important than them so can halt the whole thing? That will do down well in England and Wales.

As England and Wales have voted against the wishes of Scotland , I guess many will feel that is only fair ....

[Arch Stanton]

Besides this being wrong, where is the democracy when England and Wales voted to leave the EU but we in Scotland feel we are more important than them so can halt the whole thing? That will do down well in England and Wales.

I'm sorry but on my ballot paper it only asked if I wanted UK to leave or not.

However, neither me nor anyone else was given information about what exactly 'leave' would entail for the precise reason that no such information existed.

So,. out of this total lack of information you can divine that something is 'wrong' - neat trick.

It's not a matter of being more important anyway - the Scottish Executive is duty bound to act in the interest of Scottish people - not the Welsh or English.

[johnbc70]

As England and Wales have voted against the wishes of Scotland , I guess many will feel that is only fair ....

Death of democracy?

[DaveF]

Besides this being wrong, where is the democracy when England and Wales voted to leave the EU but we in Scotland feel we are more important than them so can halt the whole thing? That will do down well in England and Wales.

I suppose you can flip that around and lay the case for 62% of Scottish voters plus a good chunk of leave voters who voted that way on the basis of made up figures and false promises?

[bigwheel]

Death of democracy?

As many are exploring it's not a straight forward topic. Many feel that as membership of the EU was used in a big way to sway the voters in the Indy ref...as that has been taken out of our hands against the wishes of the people of Scotland, then there is now a democratic right for the people of Scotland to revisit that topic..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[johnbc70]

I suppose you can flip that around and lay the case for 62% of Scottish voters plus a good chunk of leave voters who voted that way on the basis of made up figures and false promises?

You can and it shows what a complete mess this whole thing is. But we voted as a nation to remain in the UK and that means if the UK votes as one we respect that decision, just like a general election. I never saw the SNP trying to overturn that result? Why is this so different?

The SNP should just go about this in the proper way, accept the result and build their strategy for what they want to happen next, done in the right way.

[DaveF]

You can and it shows what a complete mess this whole thing is. But we voted as a nation to remain in the UK and that means if the UK votes as one we respect that decision, just like a general election. I never saw the SNP trying to overturn that result? Why is this so different?

The SNP should just go about this in the proper way, accept the result and build their strategy for what they want to happen next, done in the right way.

See bigwheel above. The EU was a major topic in the Indyref and that has now gone even though Scotland clearly want to remain in. No democracy there!

[johnbc70]

As many are exploring it's not a straight forward topic. Many feel that as membership of the EU was used in a big way to sway the voters in the Indy ref...as that has been taken out of our hands against the wishes of the people of Scotland, then there is now a democratic right for the people of Scotland to revisit that topic..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

We should do it via the ballot box then, not trying to overturn a UK result based on the fact the people of Scotland did not want it. As I said why did the SNP not try to overturn the election of a conservative government at the general election, we never voted for a Tory government?

Do it properly and nobody can have any complaints. Call Indy2 and have the question 'Should Scotland be Independent from the UK and be part of the EU' Yes/No

[johnbc70]

See bigwheel above. The EU was a major topic in the Indyref and that has now gone even though Scotland clearly want to remain in. No democracy there!

Nobody had a crystal ball, things change so respond in the right way. As I say why did we not try and overturn the election result last year then? We never voted for the torys.

[bigwheel]

You can and it shows what a complete mess this whole thing is. But we voted as a nation to remain in the UK and that means if the UK votes as one we respect that decision, just like a general election. I never saw the SNP trying to overturn that result? Why is this so different?

The SNP should just go about this in the proper way, accept the result and build their strategy for what they want to happen next, done in the right way.

The Scottish Government have the task to look after Scotland, not the UK. They are right to be considering all options. If they want to ask the people again about independence then the democratic wishes of the people of Scotland will be heard, in an environment that has changed against their wishes...

[johnbc70]

The Scottish Government have the task to look after Scotland, not the UK. They are right to be considering all options. If they want to ask the people again about independence then the democratic wishes of the people of Scotland will be heard, in an environment that has changed against their wishes...

See above, we never voted for the Torys, why did they not protect our interests and vote to have the results overturned?

[bigwheel]

See above, we never voted for the Torys, why did they not protect our interests and vote to have the results overturned?

Because in the UK government, the people get a representative for their voice...their MP....

You seem to be ignoring the material positioning of the U.K. Government in regard to the Scottish Indy ref...their claim that the only way to remain in EU was to vote to stay in the UK...that has turned out to be false. Therefore, the people of Scotland have the right to expect their government to reflect on all considerations...

For any people who voted and won the recent EU referendum, they surely can't be surprised that after winning, there are many people who are deeply concerned as to the ramifications of a change that has no plan...I'm delighted Sturgeon seems serious about looking after Scotland's interest. As there seems a major vacuum of any other leadership in the UK over the weekend....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[#FromTheCapital]

Besides this being wrong, where is the democracy when England and Wales voted to leave the EU but we in Scotland feel we are more important than them so can halt the whole thing? That will do down well in England and Wales.

Agree. The whole idea that Nicola sturgeon and co can halt Brexit on the back of 1.6 million voters who want to remain is quite frankly ridiculous. I suspect this is all part of the grand plan. She knows this won't work and will use it as further ammunition for Indy ref 2.

[Leith Green]

The E.U membership was used as a pawn against a yes vote in 2014 by th no campaign, the EU backed No and were firm on their stance then and basically supported the UK. The EU leaders will feel like they have been dumped on from a great height on this, this will only go one way from here and i fully expect us to leave the UK and become an independent EU member by 2018.

[johnbc70]

Because in the UK government, the people get a representative for their voice...their MP....

You seem to be ignoring the material positioning of the U.K. Government in regard to the Scottish Indy ref...their claim that the only way to remain in EU was to vote to stay in the UK...that has turned out to be false. Therefore, the people of Scotland have the right to expect their government to reflect on all considerations...

For any people who voted and won the recent EU referendum, they surely can't be surprised that after winning, there are many people who are deeply concerned as to the ramifications of a change that has no plan...I'm delighted Sturgeon seems serious about looking after Scotland's interest. As there seems a major vacuum of any other leadership in the UK over the weekend....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So could you have given a guarantee that a Yes vote equaled EU membership? Please don't say you could have as nobody could. We could have been made to apply as a new country, exactly what looks like happening now.

It could be argued a Yes vote was more of a risk as nobody knew what the position would be for an independent Scotland.

[RyeSloan]

Agree. The whole idea that Nicola sturgeon and co can halt Brexit on the back of 1.6 million voters who want to remain is quite frankly ridiculous. I suspect this is all part of the grand plan. She knows this won't work and will use it as further ammunition for Indy ref 2.

Indeed and not to mention that it conveniently ignored the fact that 1m scots voted to leave, seems like their views count for nothing in Nicola land and about as much as the 2m votes that voted No two years ago...

[johnbc70]

The E.U membership was used as a pawn against a yes vote in 2014 by th no campaign, the EU backed No and were firm on their stance then and basically supported the UK. The EU leaders will feel like they have been dumped on from a great height on this, this will only go one way from here and i fully expect us to leave the UK and become an independent EU member by 2018.

Done the right way via the ballot box and nobody can have any complaints.

[johnbc70]

Agree. The whole idea that Nicola sturgeon and co can halt Brexit on the back of 1.6 million voters who want to remain is quite frankly ridiculous. I suspect this is all part of the grand plan. She knows this won't work and will use it as further ammunition for Indy ref 2.

I think her plan is to veto it, Westminster will ignore (quite rightly) she then says look they are ignoring us and the will of the Scottish people, roll on Indy2.

It's what I would do in her position.

[Leith Green]

Done the right way via the ballot box and nobody can have any complaints.



Do you mean future indyref? Or the brexit/previous indyref??

[#FromTheCapital]

I think her plan is to veto it, Westminster will ignore (quite rightly) she then says look they are ignoring us and the will of the Scottish people, roll on Indy2.
.

Precisely

[High-On-Hibs]

Indeed and not to mention that it conveniently ignored the fact that 1m scots voted to leave, seems like their views count for nothing in Nicola land and about as much as the 2m votes that voted No two years ago...

So when more people in Scotland vote to remain in the UK than those who don't, it counts. But if more people in Scotland vote to remain in the EU than those who don't, it doesn't? Right, gotcha! :aok:

[Arch Stanton]

Agree. The whole idea that Nicola sturgeon and co can halt Brexit on the back of 1.6 million voters who want to remain is quite frankly ridiculous. I suspect this is all part of the grand plan. She knows this won't work and will use it as further ammunition for Indy ref 2.

So MSPs should vote according to Westminster's wishes? They don't actually strike me as being so craven.

[bigwheel]

So when more people in Scotland vote to remain in the UK than those who don't, it counts. But if more people in Scotland vote to remain in the EU than those who don't, it doesn't? Right, gotcha! :aok:

[emoji6][emoji106]

[#FromTheCapital]

So when more people in Scotland vote to remain in the UK than those who don't, it counts. But if more people in Scotland vote to remain in the EU than those who don't, it doesn't? Right, gotcha! :aok:

What a daft comment. The independence referendum was a Scottish only vote, the EU referendum was a UK vote. You know, the same UK that we voted to stay part of less than 2 years ago?

[johnbc70]

Do you mean future indyref? Or the brexit/previous indyref??

Future Indy ref.

[bigwheel]

What a daft comment. The independence referendum was a Scottish only vote, the EU referendum was a UK vote. You know, the same UK that we voted to stay part of less than 2 years ago?

Yes, under misinformation and false promise it now turns out - anyway, you'll be happy that people of Scotland would have to vote for independence. Therefore, relax everyone will get a chance to have their choice

[johnbc70]

What a daft comment. The independence referendum was a Scottish only vote, the EU referendum was a UK vote. You know, the same UK that we voted to stay part of less than 2 years ago?

Yes, this is the difference between the votes and nobody can claim otherwise. One was uniquely Scottish, the other was UK wide, which as pointed out was the same UK we voted to remain part of.

[johnbc70]

Yes, under misinformation and false promise it now turns out - anyway, you'll be happy that people of Scotland would have to vote for independence. Therefore, relax everyone will get a chance to have their choice

It's great being so clever after the event. Did you have a crystal ball at the time and know for a fact that this would happen?

[bigwheel]

Yes, this is the difference between the votes and nobody can claim otherwise. One was uniquely Scottish, the other was UK wide, which as pointed out was the same UK we voted to remain part of.

As a defender of democratic rights - why aren't you up in arms with the false information and slight of hand in the Indyref of 2014 around EU membership , or the blatant a lies and misinformation of both poorly run campaigns this time around ?? Those are more material issues than whether people get another choice to make surely ?

[#FromTheCapital]

Yes, under misinformation and false promise it now turns out - anyway, you'll be happy that people of Scotland would have to vote for independence. Therefore, relax everyone will get a chance to have their choice

Misinformation and false promise works both ways, seem to remember a whole load of bull**** coming from the yes camp in 2014, but that debate is for another day.

If/when there's another independence referendum and we vote to leave the UK then fair enough, as much as I'd like us to stay I couldn't have any arguments.

[bigwheel]

It's great being so clever after the event. Did you have a crystal ball at the time and know for a fact that this would happen?

You're going to have to explain that one -

Tbh it feelsLike you are happy with the outcomes but seem uncomfortable with other people and politicians reflecting on the impact and options ?

[Leith Green]

If this is democracy then we are done for ...

[johnbc70]

As a defender of democratic rights - why aren't you up in arms with the false information and slight of hand in the Indyref of 2014 around EU membership , or the blatant a lies and misinformation of both poorly run campaigns this time around ?? Those are more material issues than whether people get another choice to make surely ?
Ok, in 2014 did you know that in 2016 there would be a vote to leave the EU and that the result would be to leave the EU? Yes or No?

[pacoluna]

EU referendum voting procedure should have been an opt in/out system giving fairness to each of the 4 nations. The voting system used was undemocratic giving population differences.

If scotland has to stay in a corrupt union England likes, it's only fair England has to stay in a corrupt union Scotland likes.

Indyref2 now inevitable, bring it on.

[Leith Green]

Misinformation and false promise works both ways, seem to remember a whole load of bull**** coming from the yes camp in 2014, but that debate is for another day.

If/when there's another independence referendum and we vote to leave the UK then fair enough, as much as I'd like us to stay I couldn't have any arguments.


The difference being No won. They won it on the back of a vow they havent delivered on and on continued EU membership. We were told we would get the complete opposite of what we have.

[RyeSloan]

So when more people in Scotland vote to remain in the UK than those who don't, it counts. But if more people in Scotland vote to remain in the EU than those who don't, it doesn't? Right, gotcha! :aok:

You are either rather stupid or deliberately being obtuse...as others have pointed out the first was a Scotland only vote, a vote that led to Scotland remaining a part of the U.K. and part of a political union with it. The second was a UK vote so relevant to Scotland in that the UK wide result would be binding on Scotland, a state of affairs the people of Scotland had voted for only two years previously.

Considering the above its rather difficult to find Nicola's mandate but that's not going to stop her or the Indy supporters from claiming she has one despite it being based on the Scottish result of one UK wide referendum while ignoring the result of a Scottish only referendum. Duplicity at its best.

[johnbc70]

You're going to have to explain that one -

Tbh it feelsLike you are happy with the outcomes but seem uncomfortable with other people and politicians reflecting on the impact and options ?

Your reflecting on events that happened last week and then using them as the basis of how we were told lies in 2014. You can't see that? How did you know they were lies in 2014 unless you knew what would happen in 2016.

[Mon Dieu4]

You are either rather stupid or deliberately being obtuse...as others have pointed out the first was a Scotland only vote, a vote that led to Scotland remaining a part of the U.K. and part of a political union with it. The second was a UK vote so relevant to Scotland in that the UK wide result would be binding on Scotland, a state of affairs the people of Scotland had voted for only two years previously.

Considering the above its rather difficult to find Nicola's mandate but that's not going to stop her or the Indy supporters from claiming she has one despite it being based on the Scottish result of one UK wide referendum while ignoring the result of a Scottish only referendum. Duplicity at its best.

I would imagine her mandate is getting 47% of the vote last month when it was in her manifesto and in the process getting more votes than the other parties combined

[bigwheel]

Ok, in 2014 did you know that in 2016 there would be a vote to leave the EU and that the result would be to leave the EU? Yes or No?

No...and that is the point - we were promised by staying in the UK, we would remain part of the EU.

As that promise has turned out to be changed against the will of the Scottish people. As a proponent of democracy, are you not relaxed if the people of Scotland are given another chance to vote, now they have fuller information ?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

I think her plan is to veto it, Westminster will ignore (quite rightly) she then says look they are ignoring us and the will of the Scottish people, roll on Indy2.

It's what I would do in her position.


Precisely

Can you tell me how she's going to veto it when she's not got a Parliamentary majority?

[Leith Green]

Can you tell me how she's going to veto it when she's not got a Parliamentary majority?

The independence supporting greens allied with the SNP give a majority

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I'm sorry but on my ballot paper it only asked if I wanted UK to leave or not.

However, neither me nor anyone else was given information about what exactly 'leave' would entail for the precise reason that no such information existed.

So,. out of this total lack of information you can divine that something is 'wrong' - neat trick.

It's not a matter of being more important anyway - the Scottish Executive is duty bound to act in the interest of Scottish people - not the Welsh or English.


Yea but onlt in those areas where power is devolved to it by the westminster parliament - and i dont think this is one.

Thw uk parliament also represents the interests of scottish people, thats why we send 56 mps there

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

See bigwheel above. The EU was a major topic in the Indyref and that has now gone even though Scotland clearly want to remain in. No democracy there!

There is democracy. You cant null a vote that happened 2 years ago on something rhat has happened two years hence.

[ronaldo7]

The independence supporting greens allied with the SNP give a majority

So it's not the FM all alone then. I believe wee wullie Rennie is supporting too.

I've watched the news all day today, and every time she's been asked about the debacle we find ourselves in, she's talked about the Scottish Parliament and not the SNP.

[johnbc70]

No...and that is the point - we were promised by staying in the UK, we would remain part of the EU.

As that promise has turned out to be changed against the will of the Scottish people. As a proponent of democracy, are you not relaxed if the people of Scotland are given another chance to vote, now they have fuller information ?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Nobody can promise you the future. What they did say was to give you the best chance of staying in the EU vote No. They were wrong, but unless you knew what would happen in 2016 it was a perfectly reasonable assumption to make. No misinformation at all, an opinion at the time that proved to be wrong.

Your making out like it was a deliberate lie when it clearly was not.

[RyeSloan]

I would imagine her mandate is getting 47% of the vote last month when it was in her manifesto and in the process getting more votes than the other parties combined

Fair enough. Although 47% is less than 50% so her mandate is provided by a minority of the voting electorate to ignore a UK vote that was impacting on Scotland because of a vote by the majority of the voting electorate two years ago. <head spin> ;-)

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

The difference being No won. They won it on the back of a vow they havent delivered on and on continued EU membership. We were told we would get the complete opposite of what we have.

I have hesrd from pollsters thst this is a myth. Yes were already losing, due to major economic uncertainty.

The vow made no differrnce to votes supposedly

[#FromTheCapital]

Can you tell me how she's going to veto it when she's not got a Parliamentary majority?

The point is she won't be vetoing anything, the thought of her doing so is laughable. She likely knows this and when she's told in no uncertain circumstances that it won't happen, she will use it as a further argument for another independence referendum.

[johnbc70]

One thing I think we all agree on is what a ******* mess this all is.

[bigwheel]

There is democracy. You cant null a vote that happened 2 years ago on something rhat has happened two years hence.

You are right, you can't void the vote - but you can vote again - given that people now have quite a different understanding than they did then...let the people choose again, now they have a fuller understanding


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bigwheel]

One thing I think we all agree on is what a ******* mess this all is.

I'm on your team on that one - for sure....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[High-On-Hibs]

You are either rather stupid or deliberately being obtuse...as others have pointed out the first was a Scotland only vote, a vote that led to Scotland remaining a part of the U.K. and part of a political union with it. The second was a UK vote so relevant to Scotland in that the UK wide result would be binding on Scotland, a state of affairs the people of Scotland had voted for only two years previously.

Considering the above its rather difficult to find Nicola's mandate but that's not going to stop her or the Indy supporters from claiming she has one despite it being based on the Scottish result of one UK wide referendum while ignoring the result of a Scottish only referendum. Duplicity at its best.

You must have forgot the Scottish Elections where the SNP won overwhelmingly with the possibility of calling for another referendum if there was material change. That's the manifesto that people in Scotland have voted for. That's the manifesto that will play out. That's democracy.

Or do Scottish Elections and manifestos not count for anything in the narrow minds of British Nationalists?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

She is ignoring the fact that our uk parliament would have to vote for a further referendum.

[bigwheel]

Nobody can promise you the future. What they did say was to give you the best chance of staying in the EU vote No. They were wrong, but unless you knew what would happen in 2016 it was a perfectly reasonable assumption to make. No misinformation at all, an opinion at the time that proved to be wrong.

Your making out like it was a deliberate lie when it clearly was not.

I'm saying it is a material change - a promise that has turned out not to be within their gift....I am saying there were deliberate lies and misinformation this time round though.....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk