Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
IvanV
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2660
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 11:12 am

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by IvanV » Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:04 am

Interesting article by David Allen Green on some of the detailed wordings of the recent Supreme Court Judgement and whether parts of the UK have unilateral rights to leave.

My understanding is that Ethiopia's constitution gives regions unilateral rights to leave, via democratic process, which was a deliberate adjustment following the very nasty war that led to Eritrea leaving. It also very considerably redrew its internal boundaries at that point, to make them more suitable for that purpose. As far as I am aware, that was reasonably fair, not a gerrymander to prevent it happening. Unfortunately, Eritrea is an entirely artificial region in ethnic terms. It is defined by the colonial border, what Italy managed to hold onto for a while. That border runs through the middle of the Tigray ethnic region. Most Eritreans are Tigrinya (the ethnic term for Tigray people), or a very closely allied group called Tigré.

That has not prevented the current war in Tigray. They didn't even mention the possibility of democratic secession. But I think that is because powerful interests in Tigray wanted to rule more than Tigray, as they used to when the Tigray People's Liberation Front was the ruling party of all Ethiopia for about 27 years from the fall of Mengistu until the accession of Abiy. This also explains Eritrea's antagonism to Tigray, who they suspect of wanting an anschluss.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Bird on a Fire » Fri Nov 25, 2022 2:36 pm

plodder wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:38 am
discovolante wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:12 am
So, section 30 is primary legislation that was passed through proper parliamentary procedure, fair enough to that extent (although actually I'm ignorant about the debates that took place then about what exactly should be reserved and devolved and so on, or what was discussed during the preceding referendum, a massive gap i know). But the question being discussed here seems to be dancing around the issue of whether Westminster knows what's better for Scotland than the Scottish government does. It's totally fair to have reservations about how an independence referendum should be held, and perhaps even to question whether most of Scotland wants one, but that's not the same thing as saying the Westminster government is better placed to decide that than Scotland is.
And this is the crux of it. It’s a fundamental debate about what Westminster is for (and whether people want to keep it that way). Current position is clearly that the Scots are trapped in the union.
I do wonder whether major Westminster reform is overdue. Maybe Commons becomes English assembly, with elected Lords doing "federated" stuff. Currently it's a pretty colonial setup.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

IvanV
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2660
Joined: Mon May 17, 2021 11:12 am

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by IvanV » Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:37 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 2:36 pm
I do wonder whether major Westminster reform is overdue. Maybe Commons becomes English assembly, with elected Lords doing "federated" stuff. Currently it's a pretty colonial setup.
A federal set-up is exceedingly unbalanced if one of the pieces is England.

User avatar
TopBadger
Catbabel
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:33 pm
Location: Halfway up

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by TopBadger » Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:43 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 2:36 pm
I do wonder whether major Westminster reform is overdue.
Of course it's overdue.

However, to my mind we need PR. The UK has generally polled more for centre / left parties than the right, but the right keeps winning in FPTP.

Scotland seems to lean left perhaps more so than any region of the country and so I can understand them feeling aggrieved at having successive right wing governments forced upon them.

With PR we'd have seen a succession of Labour minority governments with support from the Lib Dems and most Scots would probably be ok with that in terms of social policy. We wouldn't have left the EU. The political views of most Scottish people wouldn't be a world away from the elected government in Westminster.

But for the vast majority of the time (~30 of the last 42 years) Scotland has had to put up with a government that is essentially the polar opposite of what most Scots want.
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Woodchopper » Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:52 pm

discovolante wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:41 am
EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:23 am
discovolante wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:12 am
So, section 30 is primary legislation that was passed through proper parliamentary procedure, fair enough to that extent (although actually I'm ignorant about the debates that took place then about what exactly should be reserved and devolved and so on, or what was discussed during the preceding referendum, a massive gap i know). But the question being discussed here seems to be dancing around the issue of whether Westminster knows what's better for Scotland than the Scottish government does. It's totally fair to have reservations about how an independence referendum should be held, and perhaps even to question whether most of Scotland wants one, but that's not the same thing as saying the Westminster government is better placed to decide that than Scotland is.
The obvious counterpoint is that Scotland had an independence referendum quite recently and the nationalists lost. Now they want another one, and presumably if they lose that one, they'll want another and another until however narrowly one goes their way, at which point of course they will declare the settled will of the people means there can be no going back.

They want, in effect, to utterly disregard the results of the previous referendum, which ought to have been regarded as settling the matter for some time.

And of course they particularly want one now, as having an exceptionally unpopular national government would shift opinion in their favour - but whether it would still do that after a general election is another matter entirely.
And why is it up to the Westminster government to decide how many referendums is too many (I'm ignoring Brexit here by the way which is the biggie as far as I'm concerned)? Normally if a government does something the electorate doesn't like, the answer is to vote them out at the next election*.
It’s up to Westminister because Scotland isn’t yet independent.

An independence referendum doesn’t just affect Scotland, it also affects the rest of the UK. Independence would be very costly for many people in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The uncertainty around a vote also has costs.

Issues that have significant consequences for the whole of Britain are decided in Westminster. That’s how devolution works.

User avatar
discovolante
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4084
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by discovolante » Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:18 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:52 pm
discovolante wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:41 am
EACLucifer wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:23 am


The obvious counterpoint is that Scotland had an independence referendum quite recently and the nationalists lost. Now they want another one, and presumably if they lose that one, they'll want another and another until however narrowly one goes their way, at which point of course they will declare the settled will of the people means there can be no going back.

They want, in effect, to utterly disregard the results of the previous referendum, which ought to have been regarded as settling the matter for some time.

And of course they particularly want one now, as having an exceptionally unpopular national government would shift opinion in their favour - but whether it would still do that after a general election is another matter entirely.
And why is it up to the Westminster government to decide how many referendums is too many (I'm ignoring Brexit here by the way which is the biggie as far as I'm concerned)? Normally if a government does something the electorate doesn't like, the answer is to vote them out at the next election*.
It’s up to Westminister because Scotland isn’t yet independent.

An independence referendum doesn’t just affect Scotland, it also affects the rest of the UK. Independence would be very costly for many people in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The uncertainty around a vote also has costs.

Issues that have significant consequences for the whole of Britain are decided in Westminster. That’s how devolution works.
You're right about that, but it doesn't seem to be something Westminster politicians are hugely keen on pointing out. (ETA so much so that I think - I might be wrong - that you're the first person to bring this up in the entire discussion.)
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Bird on a Fire » Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:28 pm

IvanV wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:37 pm
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 2:36 pm
I do wonder whether major Westminster reform is overdue. Maybe Commons becomes English assembly, with elected Lords doing "federated" stuff. Currently it's a pretty colonial setup.
A federal set-up is exceedingly unbalanced if one of the pieces is England.
Plus ça change.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
sTeamTraen
After Pie
Posts: 2551
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:24 pm
Location: Palma de Mallorca, Spain

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by sTeamTraen » Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:31 pm

dyqik wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:13 pm
Steamy, you do know that the border isn't anywhere near Hadrian's Wall, right?
I take inspiration from tabloid second mentions. So my choice for evoking the border was north of either Hadrian's Wall or Gretna Green.
Something something hammer something something nail

User avatar
dyqik
Princess POW
Posts: 7526
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by dyqik » Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:34 pm

sTeamTraen wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 11:31 pm
dyqik wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:13 pm
Steamy, you do know that the border isn't anywhere near Hadrian's Wall, right?
I take inspiration from tabloid second mentions. So my choice for evoking the border was north of either Hadrian's Wall or Gretna Green.
There's lots of England north of both.

Millennie Al
After Pie
Posts: 1621
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Millennie Al » Sat Nov 26, 2022 4:47 am

plodder wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:15 am
To clarify: the referendum could be held on the specifics “we will become a self governing nation” and the details will be left up to democracy.
What's the difference between details and specifics?

A plain yes/no on independence is exactly what we had with Brexit, leading to many people each thinking it meant different things (generally expressed on a scale of soft vs hard) and getting very disappointed when they realised that whatthey thought they were voting for was not what they were being forced to accept. This has reached the quite ridiculous heights of Lord Frost and Boris now saying that the very deal they negotiated was a bad deal.

plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2981
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by plodder » Sat Nov 26, 2022 8:59 am

The key bit for me would be the promise to hold an election immediately afterwards. All the parties present their plans anyway, the election would give the electorate the choice as to which approach formed the negotiating position.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Woodchopper » Sat Nov 26, 2022 9:02 am

TopBadger wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:43 pm
Bird on a Fire wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 2:36 pm
I do wonder whether major Westminster reform is overdue.
Of course it's overdue.

However, to my mind we need PR. The UK has generally polled more for centre / left parties than the right, but the right keeps winning in FPTP.

Scotland seems to lean left perhaps more so than any region of the country and so I can understand them feeling aggrieved at having successive right wing governments forced upon them.

With PR we'd have seen a succession of Labour minority governments with support from the Lib Dems and most Scots would probably be ok with that in terms of social policy. We wouldn't have left the EU. The political views of most Scottish people wouldn't be a world away from the elected government in Westminster.

But for the vast majority of the time (~30 of the last 42 years) Scotland has had to put up with a government that is essentially the polar opposite of what most Scots want.
I don’t think you should assume that Britain with PR would consistently vote in centre left governments. As we saw in 2010 the Liberals might join a right wing coalition.

More importantly, under PR the current party system would likely break down. If Britain were to be like other Northern and Western European states then we’d see the addition of:

- a populist party which stood for high tax and spending along with being anti-immigrant and socially conservative.

- a radical left party.

Both would under PR get enough seats to make them viable parties.

Both could make life difficult for the remaining centre left party as they would get some votes currently going to Labour.

However, centre left parties in Northern and Western Europe find it difficult to form coalitions with either the populists or the radical left. The radicals scare the voters too much while the populists are just too nasty.

Meanwhile the centre right parties find themselves able and willing to form coalitions with the populists.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by EACLucifer » Sat Nov 26, 2022 9:19 am

PR is not a silver bullet. You can absolutely have situations where due to the way the system works you end up with equal shares of the votes between different blocs, but if one has a different number of parties in it, or the votes are differently distributed between parties so that more votes are wasted on one side than the other, one bloc can get a substantial advantage in seats.

User avatar
Sciolus
Dorkwood
Posts: 1313
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Sciolus » Sat Nov 26, 2022 9:59 am

veravista wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 12:57 pm
Still the once in a generation shite I see. And I quote...

Mr Salmond’s foreword to the government’s independence White Paper in 2013 read: “The debate we are engaged in as a nation is about the future of all of us lucky enough to live in this diverse and vibrant country. It is a rare and precious moment in the history of Scotland - a once in a generation opportunity to chart a better way.”

Not really a binding policy document.
Thanks for digging that out. So what started as a warning that "Westminster will never let us do this again" has been twisted by Westminster (and its useful idiots, many of whom aren't normally such idiots) into "you promised you would never ask again". Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy.

User avatar
discovolante
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4084
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by discovolante » Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:31 pm

discovolante wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:18 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:52 pm
discovolante wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:41 am


And why is it up to the Westminster government to decide how many referendums is too many (I'm ignoring Brexit here by the way which is the biggie as far as I'm concerned)? Normally if a government does something the electorate doesn't like, the answer is to vote them out at the next election*.
It’s up to Westminister because Scotland isn’t yet independent.

An independence referendum doesn’t just affect Scotland, it also affects the rest of the UK. Independence would be very costly for many people in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The uncertainty around a vote also has costs.

Issues that have significant consequences for the whole of Britain are decided in Westminster. That’s how devolution works.
You're right about that, but it doesn't seem to be something Westminster politicians are hugely keen on pointing out. (ETA so much so that I think - I might be wrong - that you're the first person to bring this up in the entire discussion.)
If Scotland becoming independent (aside from just the issues arising from the actual holding of a referendum) would leave the rest of the UK worse off then UK politicians need to be open and honest about that, but I don't see that they are being. Because if they were they would also have to openly acknowledge that many of the policies and principles UK parties are pursuing don't seem to be what Scotland wants to vote for, based on how it does vote in elections, and that they need to make it worth Scotland's while to stay in the UK* rather than just making general threats about divisiveness and distraction.


*I'm aware of general voting intention in a hypothetical referendum, I'm talking about the reasons the UK government gives for not allowing one.
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Woodchopper » Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:48 pm

discovolante wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:31 pm
discovolante wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:18 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 4:52 pm


It’s up to Westminister because Scotland isn’t yet independent.

An independence referendum doesn’t just affect Scotland, it also affects the rest of the UK. Independence would be very costly for many people in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The uncertainty around a vote also has costs.

Issues that have significant consequences for the whole of Britain are decided in Westminster. That’s how devolution works.
You're right about that, but it doesn't seem to be something Westminster politicians are hugely keen on pointing out. (ETA so much so that I think - I might be wrong - that you're the first person to bring this up in the entire discussion.)
If Scotland becoming independent (aside from just the issues arising from the actual holding of a referendum) would leave the rest of the UK worse off then UK politicians need to be open and honest about that, but I don't see that they are being. Because if they were they would also have to openly acknowledge that many of the policies and principles UK parties are pursuing don't seem to be what Scotland wants to vote for, based on how it does vote in elections, and that they need to make it worth Scotland's while to stay in the UK* rather than just making general threats about divisiveness and distraction.


*I'm aware of general voting intention in a hypothetical referendum, I'm talking about the reasons the UK government gives for not allowing one.
The current UK government has a problem there. Most of the costs involved in breaking up the UK also apply to Brexit. It’ll be very difficult for Sunak to simultaneously argue that Brexit has made everyone better off but Scottish independence would involve costs for everyone.

User avatar
discovolante
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4084
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by discovolante » Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:57 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:48 pm
discovolante wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:31 pm
discovolante wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:18 pm


You're right about that, but it doesn't seem to be something Westminster politicians are hugely keen on pointing out. (ETA so much so that I think - I might be wrong - that you're the first person to bring this up in the entire discussion.)
If Scotland becoming independent (aside from just the issues arising from the actual holding of a referendum) would leave the rest of the UK worse off then UK politicians need to be open and honest about that, but I don't see that they are being. Because if they were they would also have to openly acknowledge that many of the policies and principles UK parties are pursuing don't seem to be what Scotland wants to vote for, based on how it does vote in elections, and that they need to make it worth Scotland's while to stay in the UK* rather than just making general threats about divisiveness and distraction.


*I'm aware of general voting intention in a hypothetical referendum, I'm talking about the reasons the UK government gives for not allowing one.
The current UK government has a problem there. Most of the costs involved in breaking up the UK also apply to Brexit. It’ll be very difficult for Sunak to simultaneously argue that Brexit has made everyone better off but Scottish independence would involve costs for everyone.
So, with Brexit the UK government has created a problem that Scotland didn't vote for, but can't admit that it's a problem and therefore can't be honest about the impact of Scottish independence on the rest of the UK, so instead they (and Labour) are stuck with having a go at the SNP and not allowing Scotland to sort out the referendum issue itself, which takes us back to the question as to why, politically (if not legally), a referendum should be Westminster's gift to give.
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.

plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2981
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by plodder » Sat Nov 26, 2022 2:34 pm

I suppose the political solution in the short term is for Westminster to devolve a bit more power to Scotland

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Bird on a Fire » Sat Nov 26, 2022 4:41 pm

They could have their own currency. The crypto-punnd or something.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

User avatar
dyqik
Princess POW
Posts: 7526
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by dyqik » Sat Nov 26, 2022 5:02 pm

They already issue their own banknotes.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Princess POW
Posts: 7057
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Woodchopper » Sat Nov 26, 2022 7:28 pm

discovolante wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:57 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:48 pm
discovolante wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:31 pm


If Scotland becoming independent (aside from just the issues arising from the actual holding of a referendum) would leave the rest of the UK worse off then UK politicians need to be open and honest about that, but I don't see that they are being. Because if they were they would also have to openly acknowledge that many of the policies and principles UK parties are pursuing don't seem to be what Scotland wants to vote for, based on how it does vote in elections, and that they need to make it worth Scotland's while to stay in the UK* rather than just making general threats about divisiveness and distraction.


*I'm aware of general voting intention in a hypothetical referendum, I'm talking about the reasons the UK government gives for not allowing one.
The current UK government has a problem there. Most of the costs involved in breaking up the UK also apply to Brexit. It’ll be very difficult for Sunak to simultaneously argue that Brexit has made everyone better off but Scottish independence would involve costs for everyone.
So, with Brexit the UK government has created a problem that Scotland didn't vote for, but can't admit that it's a problem and therefore can't be honest about the impact of Scottish independence on the rest of the UK, so instead they (and Labour) are stuck with having a go at the SNP and not allowing Scotland to sort out the referendum issue itself, which takes us back to the question as to why, politically (if not legally), a referendum should be Westminster's gift to give.
Yes, it’s all f.cked up.

As for “why, politically (if not legally), a referendum should be Westminster's gift to give.”

That’s what the Scottish people voted for.

They voted in 1997 for a devolved parliament in which matters that affected Scotland would be decided in Edinburgh and matters that affected the UK would be decided in Westminster (eg defence, macroeconomic policy, diplomacy etc).

They had the opportunity in 2014 to change and vote for independence and the right to decide upon everything in Edinburgh, and they voted against that. Prior to that vote the referendum legislation was passed in Westminster not Edinburgh.

It seems to me that Edinburgh deciding upon a referendum would amount to Scotland being independent in effect, but without it actually having become an independent state.

User avatar
discovolante
Stummy Beige
Posts: 4084
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by discovolante » Sun Nov 27, 2022 7:51 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 7:28 pm
discovolante wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:57 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:48 pm


The current UK government has a problem there. Most of the costs involved in breaking up the UK also apply to Brexit. It’ll be very difficult for Sunak to simultaneously argue that Brexit has made everyone better off but Scottish independence would involve costs for everyone.
So, with Brexit the UK government has created a problem that Scotland didn't vote for, but can't admit that it's a problem and therefore can't be honest about the impact of Scottish independence on the rest of the UK, so instead they (and Labour) are stuck with having a go at the SNP and not allowing Scotland to sort out the referendum issue itself, which takes us back to the question as to why, politically (if not legally), a referendum should be Westminster's gift to give.
Yes, it’s all f.cked up.

As for “why, politically (if not legally), a referendum should be Westminster's gift to give.”

That’s what the Scottish people voted for.

They voted in 1997 for a devolved parliament in which matters that affected Scotland would be decided in Edinburgh and matters that affected the UK would be decided in Westminster (eg defence, macroeconomic policy, diplomacy etc).

They had the opportunity in 2014 to change and vote for independence and the right to decide upon everything in Edinburgh, and they voted against that. Prior to that vote the referendum legislation was passed in Westminster not Edinburgh.

It seems to me that Edinburgh deciding upon a referendum would amount to Scotland being independent in effect, but without it actually having become an independent state.
Well, if you want more control and you're given an opportunity to have it, you will probably take it.

2014...well we've kind of been over that, Brexit is significant.

Fundamentally I think I take issue with the conflation of the questions 'should Scotland have another independence referendum' with 'should Westminster allow Scotland to have another referendum', particularly when the reasons given for the answer to the second question being 'no' are pretty dishonest (er that was a weirdly constructed sentence).
To defy the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave.

Millennie Al
After Pie
Posts: 1621
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Millennie Al » Mon Nov 28, 2022 1:53 am

plodder wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 8:59 am
The key bit for me would be the promise to hold an election immediately afterwards. All the parties present their plans anyway, the election would give the electorate the choice as to which approach formed the negotiating position.
That would be a stupid thing to vote for. Why should the people be forced to accept some result which has not even been decided upon? And why should negotiation be done on party polictical lines? What would it mean if the electorate votes for independence and they voted for Labour or the Conservatives to decide the terms? Your scenario would be effectively giving the SNP (as it is surely they who would win the second vote) a free hand to do whatever they wanted in the negotiations - a repeat of the Brexit "Will of the People" nonsense.

plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2981
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by plodder » Mon Nov 28, 2022 11:03 am

Millennie Al wrote:
Mon Nov 28, 2022 1:53 am
plodder wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 8:59 am
The key bit for me would be the promise to hold an election immediately afterwards. All the parties present their plans anyway, the election would give the electorate the choice as to which approach formed the negotiating position.
That would be a stupid thing to vote for. Why should the people be forced to accept some result which has not even been decided upon? And why should negotiation be done on party polictical lines? What would it mean if the electorate votes for independence and they voted for Labour or the Conservatives to decide the terms? Your scenario would be effectively giving the SNP (as it is surely they who would win the second vote) a free hand to do whatever they wanted in the negotiations - a repeat of the Brexit "Will of the People" nonsense.
Well it’s easy to criticise but until you can come up with a better option, you know.

Millennie Al
After Pie
Posts: 1621
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am

Re: Scotland: Unilateral Declaration of Independence

Post by Millennie Al » Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:24 am

An honest way to do it would be to have three (or more) steps:
  1. Hold a vote to ask if there should be negotiations for independence
  2. If the answer is Yes, the Scottish government negotiates terms
  3. Then the people get a referendum chosing between:
    • independence on those terms
    • keep negotiating,
    • no independence for some specified fixed period (e.g. 10 or 25 years)

Post Reply