Scottish Independence discussion area

Lnaa

ArielAtom wrote: »

How profound!!! It was humour😉

I didn't laugh.

spiralism wrote: »

It's been that way for a long time though. London governs for London. They've been ****ing anywhere north of Reading over since Thatcher.

That's the thing though, it was a London vs Scotland issue

Yes, and devolution had to start somewhere... Having seen Scotland and Wales make a go of it, the appetite for it in other areas, especially in Manchester, is on the rise. I would be surprised if Manchester, at the least, doesn't have some form of devolved power within 5 to 10 years. People are fed up with London. These things take time, but people are waking up to the fact that London gets everything.

Berserker

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

A ridiculous & insulting notion.

Oh, the bitterness will flow from the Irish Nationalist posters for many, many days now that they have decided to vote 'No'. The Nationalist posters motives are based on anti-English sentiment, as opposed to the democratic right of the people of Scotland. Don't be fooled into thinking otherwise.

flazio wrote: »

The result reminded me of a US presidential election result, perhaps we can do this every 4 years.

It's done for another generation, both sides have agreed that. The 'No' side cannot be as bad next time round. The 'Yes' side should learn from the mistakes it made with it's lack of economic planning. However, Scotland will not be in a strong position wrt it's oil and gas when the next vote comes around.

Anyway, I have found the whole debate very interesting and as an Irish person, I am very happy with the result.

who the fug

Lnaa wrote: »

Now, lets stop píssing around discussing how to give x, y and z to Scotland and concentrate on what's really needed... devolved powers to cities like Manchester and Liverpool and regions like Yorkshire that are suffering far more than Scotland from being in the headlock of London.

Last time i was up there Yorkshire was doing OK , and going by the 2004 vote the the population do not want another set of muppets wasting their money.

A lord mayor for Liverpool and Manchester with powers similar to what London has (IE **** all but it looks good) I would agree with.

Francie Barrett

SpaceTime wrote: »

I'd actually say there's significantly more chance of the UK voting to exit the EU.

There is no chance that the UK will ever leave Europe. UKIP only have got about 25% of the vote in the last European elections, and a good chunk of that was a protest vote against the status quo. If you put a Yes/No question to the British electorate - the anti-EU faction would be destroyed.

Beefy78

namloc1980 wrote: »

No it can't. Any future referendum would require the consent of the UK government just like this one required consent from Westminster.

If there's a mandate for another vote then there will be another vote but this isn't an EU referendum and you can't keep asking the same question until you get the answer you like.

Cameron has played a blinder here by tying the English question to the movement for more powers to Scotland as that will be a real vote winner against Labour.

SpaceTime

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

Yip, I don't think NO to EU would be as motivated to vote, we certainly wont be getting 85% turnout.

It'll be a mediocre turnout with the anti-EU side very motivated and the rest going "meh".

There are plenty of non-UKIP voters who will quite gleefully burn bridges with Brussels. I wouldn't just calculate it based on UKIP support in elections.

Also remember Scotland and NI views won't really matter. The vast majority of the UK population is in England.

bilston

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

You forgot 9 in your sentence

With draft legislation by the end if January.

How quickly do you actually think these things can happen?

ArielAtom

Lnaa wrote: »

I didn't laugh.



Yes, and devolution had to start somewhere... Having seen Scotland and Wales make a go of it, the appetite for it in other areas, especially in Manchester, is on the rise. I would be surprised if Manchester, at the least, doesn't have some form of devolved power within 5 to 10 years. People are fed up with London. These things take time, but people are waking up to the fact that London gets everything.

Well I pissed myself.

namloc1980

Beefy78 wrote: »

If there's a mandate for another vote then there will be another vote but this isn't an EU referendum and you can't keep asking the same question until you get the answer you like.

Cameron has played a blinder here by tying the English question to the movement for more powers to Scotland as that will be a real vote winner against Labour.

I agree. Cameron has pulled off a brilliant piece of politicking by tying the two issues together. He got Labour to do the donkey work for the no campaign and even before the result was official he screwed them over with his speech. Brilliant, unfortunately some Scots may also feel screwed over.

comongethappy

Berserker wrote: »

The Nationalist posters motives are based on anti-English sentiment, as opposed to the democratic right of the people of Scotland. Don't be fooled into thinking otherwise.

Ridiculous, sweeping & frankly false.

I supported independence & posted same.
I have no anti-english sentiment.

Stupid post.

namloc1980

bilston wrote: »

With draft legislation by the end if January.

How quickly do you actually think these things can happen?

That's the key word there. Cameron said the additional powers would only happen side by side with powers for England which will be left to the next parliament. He basically made a general election campaign statement.

Francie Barrett

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

A ridiculous & insulting notion.

It's not really though. A lot of businesses were drawing up contingency plans to pull out of Scotland should it get independence. I would say that was also the decisive element in Scotland itself - there is no trust in their own politicians to run things.

BoJack Horseman

namloc1980 wrote: »

That's the key word there. Cameron said the additional powers would only happen side by side with powers for England which will be left to the next parliament. He basically made a general election campaign statement.

And seeing as even if the Tories win, he won't be the leader, he has committed to absolutely nothing.

SharpshooterTom

Highland has declared, all 32 constituencies have been counted final vote is indeed 44.70% YES - 55.30% NO

iDave

Wasn't too bothered by this but now they've said no Im disappointed in them as a nation. A golden opportunity to transition to independence peacefully. A luxury a lot nations aren't afforded. Also considering the trend since the 20th century has been to individual nation states and away from empires, kingdoms and city states. I won't be able to stop myself from chuckling the next time I hear them singing about sending home to think again.

BoJack Horseman

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

Highland has declared, all 32 constituencies have been counted final vote is indeed 44.70% YES - 55.30% NO

Woe to those betting on a greater than 45% 'Yes' vote.

spiralism

Lads, there's not a fear they'll be given those devolutionary powers they were promised. Not a fear. They had no intention of even discussing it until the no campaign pissed themselves two weeks ago and realised they actually had to campaign so all of a sudden they threw that in, they have approximately zero intention of doing that.

Beefy78

Francie Barrett wrote: »

After all the hype of the referendum being too close to call, the No vote ended up winning quite easily in the end. Having said all that, I think it's for the best. I don't think the Scots would be capable of taking charge anyway.

Of course they would have done. I'm glad that they voted no but Scotland would have been fine on its own.

SharpshooterTom

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Woe to those betting on a greater than 45% 'Yes' vote.

I re betted and rather madly put £200 on 40-45.01 since I couldn't cash out. I actually ended up winning a bit more that way as it turns to cancel out the £100 I had on 45.01-50.

raymann

Deleted User wrote: »

More like a decade, and a lot can happen in the meantime.
North sea oil could decline to the point that it's no longer a major economic force for starters.

the quote from salmon was not for another generation and from nicola s fifteen years. i suspect the rest of the uk wont have a huge appetite to do this again.

bilston

spiralism wrote: »

Lads, there's not a fear they'll be given those devolutionary powers they were promised. Not a fear. They had no intention of even discussing it until the no campaign pissed themselves two weeks ago and realised they actually had to campaign so all of a sudden they threw that in, they have approximately zero intention of doing that.

I doubt you are correct. If they want to keep Scotland in the Union they will have to deliver on their promise. Their problem is that they also have to deliver for Northern Ireland, Wales and England. That's why it will take time.

Of course they should have had a plan in place before the campaign.

Berserker

iDave wrote: »

I won't be able to stop myself from chuckling the next time I hear them singing about sending home to think again.

An interesting thought iDave, I have to agree. Perhaps they could alter that line and put in something about taking greater control of their own economic affairs.

Beefy78

namloc1980 wrote: »

I agree. Cameron has pulled off a brilliant piece of politicking by tying the two issues together. He got Labour to do the donkey work for the no campaign and even before the result was official he screwed them over with his speech. Brilliant, unfortunately some Scots may also feel screwed over.

I don't think they should feel screwed over. Up to yesterday I was convinced that Westminster would backtrack rapidly but tying a resultion to the West Lothian question to increased devolved powers means that so long as there's not a Labour majority after the Election it is now in everyone's interest that it happens.

Barely There

iDave wrote: »

Wasn't too bothered by this but now they've said no Im disappointed in them as a nation.

I'm sure they'll get over it.

rozeboosje

Looks like I'm going to have to go back to funny cat pictures for my lulz

Hunterbiker

Beefy78 wrote: »

I don't think they should feel screwed over. Up to yesterday I was convinced that Westminster would backtrack rapidly but tying a resultion to the West Lothian question to increased devolved powers means that so long as there's not a Labour majority after the Election it is now in everyone's interest that it happens.

Unless Labour changes its tune about Scottish Labour MPs not voting on English / Welsh NI matters there wont be a Labour majority. The Conservatives have pretty much started the next UK General Election Campaign this morning and unless the others react now they will be ahead...

Beefy78

iDave wrote: »

Wasn't too bothered by this but now they've said no Im disappointed in them as a nation. A golden opportunity to transition to independence peacefully. A luxury a lot nations aren't afforded. Also considering the trend since the 20th century has been to individual nation states and away from empires, kingdoms and city states. I won't be able to stop myself from chuckling the next time I hear them singing about sending home to think again.

But would you say that Scotland were that similar to the nation states that you're talking about?

I'd say that the UK is more like the US, Italy or Germany - all three of which have been unified far more recently than the UK has.

The key now is to move to a more fair and federal structure - which is what is being demanded in England and is surely what is being now mandated in Scotland.

iDave

Barely There wrote: »

I'm sure they'll get over it.

And I'm sure you'll allow me to have an opinion

SharpshooterTom

raymann wrote: »

the quote from salmon was not for another generation and from nicola s fifteen years. i suspect the rest of the uk wont have a huge appetite to do this again.

If they're going to do it again they surely have to have polls showing a desire actually for Scottish independence this time, i.e. the YES vote ahead in quite a few of them.

No point holding another one if YES languishing into the 30s. YES has to show its going to win, before we can talk about it.

Barely There

iDave wrote: »

And I'm sure you'll allow me to have an opinion

You're allowed as pompous an opinion as you like.

iDave

Barely There wrote: »

You're allowed as pompous an opinion as you like.

And your allowed smart arse responses it seems.

WesternZulu

iDave wrote: »

Wasn't too bothered by this but now they've said no Im disappointed in them as a nation. A golden opportunity to transition to independence peacefully. A luxury a lot nations aren't afforded. Also considering the trend since the 20th century has been to individual nation states and away from empires, kingdoms and city states. I won't be able to stop myself from chuckling the next time I hear them singing about sending home to think again.

I'm a bit disappointed that they passed up on this opportunity as well...in reality they're too afraid to give up suckling on London's tit.

Barely There

iDave wrote: »

And your allowed smart arse responses it seems.

Some people get very upset when their little bubble of pomposity is pricked - some don't.

I can't really control it so it doesn't really bother me either way.

bnt

The Money has Spoken, as well it should. An independent Scotland would have swum or sunk on the back of the economy, and the Yes camp didn't do anywhere near enough to answer those questions adequately. It was quite clear that "currency union" was not a workable option, whether that union was agreed with Westminster or not (currency pegging), yet they persisted in pushing the idea.

LorMal

I am trying to understand why so many Irish people feel so angry and bitter about Scotland not voting for Independence.
Seems to threaten them for some reason?

BoJack Horseman

Barely There wrote: »

Some people get very upset when their little bubble of pomposity is pricked - some don't.

I can't really control it so it doesn't really bother me either way.

So, to sum-up.
What part of him holding an opinion got your goat the most?

There must be something?
People usually aren't as snide as you without something behind it?
(Unless that's just what you are like?)

Berserker

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

If they're going to do it again they surely have to have polls showing a desire actually for Scottish independence this time, i.e. the YES vote ahead in quite a few of them.

No point holding another one if YES languishing into the 30s. YES has to show its going to win, before we can talk about it.

The problem for the 'Yes' side is that the 'No' campaign cannot be as weak next time round. We all agree that they were useless and an asset to the 'Yes' campaign. I'd say that Cameron is one relieved man this morning. Scottish independence and the damage that that could have done to the UK, would have been his legacy as British PM.

LorMal wrote: »

I am trying to understand why so many Irish people feel so angry and bitter about Scotland not voting for Independence.
Seems to threaten them for some reason?

It's anti-English/British sentiment. They are obsessed by the Union and the break up of the Union is a wet dream for them. They were never interested in Scottish independence for the good of the Scottish people. Don't be fooled by that.

iDave

Barely There wrote: »

Some people get very upset when their little bubble of pomposity is pricked - some don't.

I can't really control it so it doesn't really bother me either way.

And some people dont like their intellectually bankrupt responses getting called out for what they are.

BlibBlab

LorMal wrote: »

I am trying to understand why so many Irish people feel so angry and bitter about Scotland not voting for Independence.
Seems to threaten them for some reason?

Why would it threaten us? If anything an independent Scotland would be a bigger threat to us

Wurzelbert

as expected, the chance of a lifetime squandered...seems fear got the better of the scots after all, like they have really had all courage and self-esteem hammered and bred out of them...and i reckon non-scottish eu nationals living there may have played a role as well...life goes on...

WesternZulu

LorMal wrote: »

I am trying to understand why so many Irish people feel so angry and bitter about Scotland not voting for Independence.
Seems to threaten them for some reason?

I think it's because they have had the opportunity to go their own way without a drop of blood being spilt in the process...and they bottled it!

Unfortunately, it's an opportunity that Ireland never had.

ArielAtom

Lnaa wrote: »

Just about sums up the attitude, and lack of knowledge, of many on the yes side. This wasn't a Scotland v England issue. Its sad, in this day and age, that there is still so much racism against England and the English. Its even sadder that people don't realise that the north of England is suffering far more under London's hegemony than Scotland is.

Now that I'm sitting at my desk in London I will reply.

That was not racism.

who the fug

The people of Scotland took a look at the options , and made a rational decision based on the information supplied.

That is what happened folks, they did not bottle it, they are not stupid and democracy works

Dirty Dingus McGee

LorMal wrote: »

I am trying to understand why so many Irish people feel so angry and bitter about Scotland not voting for Independence.
Seems to threaten them for some reason?

I would have liked to see them get independence as I think it may have been good for them but Scotland voting no makes me feel much better about Ireland and our own independence.It just shows how brave we were to take that step and decide to go it alone and that it was the correct decision to decide to look after ourselves.Ireland may not be perfect but I'd much rather than an imperfect Irish state than taking orders from Westminister.Also its probably better for Ireland that Scotland isn't independent as its one less competitor for us as a country.

Beefy78

WesternZulu wrote: »

I think it's because they have had the opportunity to go their own way without a drop of blood being spilt in the process...and they bottled it!

Unfortunately, it's an opportunity that Ireland never had.

But Ireland and Scotland are two completely different cases and were in the UK for two completely different reasons.

It seems like people here are trying to draw a comparison which doesn't exist.

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

I would have liked to see them get independence as I think it may have been good for them but Scotland voting no makes me feel much better about Ireland and our own independence.It just shows how brave we were to take that step and decide to go it alone and that it was the correct decision to decide to look after ourselves.

Again....

Red Pepper

Red Pepper wrote: »

Experience. The Yes side peaked a little too early and the No side got time to retaliate on the one issue that really matters - the economy.

A 51/49 win to the No side would be an astounding victory for the Yes campaign given where they started but I expect the 'Dont-knowers' will come out in droves as No and help give a 56/44 win to No.

I should have backed 55/45.

iDave

Beefy78 wrote: »

But would you say that Scotland were that similar to the nation states that you're talking about?

I'd say that the UK is more like the US, Italy or Germany - all three of which have been unified far more recently than the UK has.

The key now is to move to a more fair and federal structure - which is what is being demanded in England and is surely what is being now mandated in Scotland.

I would of likened the UK more to the old Yugoslavia where some are happy to be there as it suited them economically and some would rather get out.
That broke up into its various constituent states eventually along with Czechoslovakia, Soviet Union etc. While the old European empires almost entirely broke up due to the will of the individual states. The UK itself already went through a break up in the 20s.
But look that's democracy and the Scots have spoken.

LorMal

BlibBlab wrote: »

Why would it threaten us? If anything an independent Scotland would be a bigger threat to us

I didn't say it threatens us. I said that it appears many Irish people seem threatened by the result.
I think it undermines the narrow world view we are taught in school. 800 years of oppression, brave little Ireland fought back and sent the British packing.

This 'one version of the truth' was controlled by our politicians who were originally primarily made up of the group who took up arms. (many of our current politicians still claim family heritage back to Old IRA/IRB.). We still teach our children this narrative.

Are we better off independent? Our economy has been a complete mess for most of the last 100 years. We were completely dominated and controlled by the church with the full backing of the state. We took a ridiculous neutrality stance in WW2 which Hitler would have laughted at had the Nazis won the Battle of Britain. We have a corrupt police force , corrupt politicians, a lousy health service, poor infrastructure, a bloated and inefficient public service, one of the highest national debts per capita in the world.......and we are shocked that Scotland voted No??

Some of the lack of historical knowledge witnessed in this discussion has been astonishing. How many posters have referred to Braveheart the movie as their reference point.

Soft Falling Rain

Can't understand the anger towards the vote either on here. I'm always weary of rhetoric being the catalyst of a political campaign and no real effort was made by the Yes side to map out a real plan going it alone.

1 in 7 were going into this vote undecided as of Wednesday and that says it all. You can call it fear and bottling it if you want; I'd call it a normal reaction to a lack of any real information on what would happen in the occurence of a Yes vote.

Cameron is just as guilty of this too, using emotional language about a "family" being broken up instead of making a genuine effort to explain what would happen if the people voted for independence. At the end of the day though that onus really isn't on him, it was on the Yes campaign, and they came up short.

2ndcoming

Whatever way you look at it the only winners are the SNP. Westminster has a fairly serious issue to address in the fact that 45% of the population of the second biggest region of the UK doesn't want anything to do with them.

The Tories will be fairly happy I'd say. In the long run they don't want anything more to do with Scotland than they do with NI. They'd offload the pair of them if they had half a chance.