Scottish independence

A Dub in Glasgo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Why do people want an English Parliament when Westminster is effectively exactly that?

Johnson thinks it as well

https://www.thenational.scot/news/17739039.johnson-we-have-an-england-only-parliament-its-westminster/?ref=twtrec

Sam Russell

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Why do people want an English Parliament when Westminster is effectively exactly that?

The Westminster Parliament is the UK Parliament. It is not the English Parliament, although the English MPs think it is. I think the people in the North of England might prefer more of a say in their present and future well being.

It was also the Irish Parliament up to 100 years ago, but is not any more. Scotland deserves the same. So does the north of England as they have lost most of their manufacturing industry, coal, steel etc.

ancapailldorcha

Sam Russell wrote: »

The Westminster Parliament is the UK Parliament. It is not the English Parliament, although the English MPs think it is. I think the people in the North of England might prefer more of a say in their present and future well being.

It was also the Irish Parliament up to 100 years ago, but is not any more. Scotland deserves the same. So does the north of England as they have lost most of their manufacturing industry, coal, steel etc.

Right but the overwhelming majority of MP's are from English constituencies. Save for the blip of 2017, the other constituent members of the UK never get a look in so it is a de facto English Parliament with an enhanced ambit.

Sam Russell

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Right but the overwhelming majority of MP's are from English constituencies. Save for the blip of 2017, the other constituent members of the UK never get a look in so it is a de facto English Parliament with an enhanced ambit.

De facto does not mean it is right or just.

NI has a de facto Unionist majority and look what that caused over the years - so much so that special de Hont rules had to be put in place to remove 'majority rule'.

Under 'English' rules Scotland will never get an IndyRef2 vote.

ancapailldorcha

Sam Russell wrote: »

De facto does not mean it is right or just.

NI has a de facto Unionist majority and look what that caused over the years - so much so that special de Hont rules had to be put in place to remove 'majority rule'.

Under 'English' rules Scotland will never get an IndyRef2 vote.

I didn't say it was right or just. I just said that it's effectively an English Parliament with some allocations to the other three member states.

bob mcbob

For me the arguments for English devolution are exactly the same arguments as for Scottish independence.

Power (soft and hard), wealth and opportunities are totally skewed towards London and the South East. It is interesting that even the staunch Unionist on this forum identify the need to move (English) power away from London but the step of Scotland going fully independent is seen as mistaken (a cult even).

This is an article about the North / South divide in England. And for what it is worth I think Northern England is being utterly screwed over by the current set-up in the UK and if you want to know why - look South (East) not North.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/07/manifesto-for-the-north-message-positive-change-election

bob mcbob

bob mcbob wrote: »

For me the arguments for English devolution are exactly the same arguments as for Scottish independence.

Power (soft and hard), wealth and opportunities are totally skewed towards London and the South East. It is interesting that even the staunch Unionist on this forum identify the need to move (English) power away from London but the step of Scotland going fully independent is seen as mistaken (a cult even).

This is an article about the North / South divide in England. And for what it is worth I think Northern England is being utterly screwed over by the current set-up in the UK and if you want to know why - look South (East) not North.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/07/manifesto-for-the-north-message-positive-change-election

were you referring to me as a staunch unionist? Is that what anyone who think Scottish independence isn't a great idea is called?

if so, then 55% of Scotland must be staunch unionists as well.

Anyway, I do believe that an English Parliament should be outside of the capital. London is a freak of a city and as the Brexit referendum showed, its needs and wants are often as odds with the rest of the country. I do believe that the very pro eu capital (Ignoring Gib, the top six highest remain votes were in London) distorted Westminster's opinions on how a referendum would go.

England clearly has issues that need to be addressed. The problems the North has are largely ignored, because there is no political party that speaks for them. There is no Plaid Cymru or SNP campaigning purely for the benefit of the North East, there isn't even a Minister for England. I honestly believe that these blatant inequalities are what has driven an increase in English nationalism (that and a serious lack of an English nationalist party free from the knuckle draggers and fascists) and has manifested itself in a Brexit vote.

derrymcorry

Scotland voted to remain in the EU. They are historically a country and a substantial amount don't identify as British. They should be granted a second referendum and I would wager the result will be to leave the UK.

This would be great for a future border poll, the part of the UK that the unionists identify with would no longer be part of it so they may reconsider.

derrymcorry

derrymcorry wrote: »

Scotland voted to remain in the EU. They are historically a country and a substantial amount don't identify as British. They should be granted a second referendum and I would wager the result will be to leave the UK.

This would be great for a future border poll, the part of the UK that the unionists identify with would no longer be part of it so they may reconsider.

It never stopped being a country.

derrymcorry

Nicola Sturgeon launched the SNP's manifesto today and it had some very good points.

An independent Scotland would be a stepping stone to a successful united Ireland.

Kermit.de.frog

Be careful what you wish for.

I'm told the Scottish equivalent of the IDA has an exact replica of our industrial strategy for foreign investment waiting to be dusted off.

Best for us they remain restricted through being part of the UK.

Zubeneschamali

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Best for us they remain restricted through being part of the UK.

Then you'd better hope Brexit doesn't happen, since it will destroy the union.

eire4

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Then you'd better hope Brexit doesn't happen, since it will destroy the union.

It really does look that way. it is hard to see Scotland not wanting back into the EU if brexit finally comes to pass and I don't see them losing a second vote this time given how ironically one of the biggest pressure points the no side put up last time late on when the outcome was in doubt was that if you vote yes your out of the EU with no guarantee of getting back in.

Fr Tod Umptious

eire4 wrote: »

It really does look that way. it is hard to see Scotland not wanting back into the EU if brexit finally comes to pass and I don't see them losing a second vote this time given how ironically one of the biggest pressure points the no side put up last time late on when the outcome was in doubt was that if you vote yes your out of the EU with no guarantee of getting back in.

But there are no guarantees that an independent Scotland will get back into the EU.
Will the pro-independence side in a referendum still say they want to keep the pound even though new EU membership involves having to adopt the Euro ?

And if they do get back in it will take a long time.

Even before that any sort of Scotland rUK withdrawal agreement will make Brexit look like a holiday camp.

BonnieSituation

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But there are no guarantees that an independent Scotland will get back into the EU.
Will the pro-independence side in a referendum still say they want to keep the pound even though new EU membership involves having to adopt the Euro ?

And if they do get back in it will take a long time.

Even before that any sort of Scotland rUK withdrawal agreement will make Brexit look like a holiday camp.

There are no guarantees but it's very likely.

Also the adoption of the euro canard needs to be put away.

Sam Russell

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But there are no guarantees that an independent Scotland will get back into the EU.
Will the pro-independence side in a referendum still say they want to keep the pound even though new EU membership involves having to adopt the Euro ?

And if they do get back in it will take a long time.

Even before that any sort of Scotland rUK withdrawal agreement will make Brexit look like a holiday camp.

The first step is for the IndyRef2 to be passed. If it takes a pledge for A, B or C to get it passed, then so be it, but how do they negotiate a separation agreement? Share out of the National debt, defence and nuclear weapons, assets, etc. - all of these would need to be sorted.

However, there will need to be a follow on Ref to get approval to rejoin the EU, and those terms would need to be spelt out. Fishing, Sterling, FOM, etc could all be part of the policies that would be discussed.

At the end of the day, an Independent Scotland will make its own decision at the time. England will be a distant memory, so why would they shackle themselves to a minor currency?

CrabRevolution

Sam Russell wrote: »

The first step is for the IndyRef2 to be passed. If it takes a pledge for A, B or C to get it passed, then so be it, but how do they negotiate a separation agreement? Share out of the National debt, defence and nuclear weapons, assets, etc. - all of these would need to be sorted.

However, there will need to be a follow on Ref to get approval to rejoin the EU, and those terms would need to be spelt out. Fishing, Sterling, FOM, etc could all be part of the policies that would be discussed.

At the end of the day, an Independent Scotland will make its own decision at the time. England will be a distant memory, so why would they shackle themselves to a minor currency?

I think some pro-EU/pro-Independence Scots are falling into the same "we'll negotiate preferential terms when we enter the EU, just because" trap that the brexiters are in.

There's no evidence anywhere that fisheries or FOM policies can be opted out of if Scotland joins the EU. Currency can be fudged by deliberately going slow and not actually meeting the criteria for euro adoption, but that's a pretty unique case.

Sam Russell

CrabRevolution wrote: »

I think some pro-EU/pro-Independence Scots are falling into the same "we'll negotiate preferential terms when we enter the EU, just because" trap that the brexiters are in.

There's no evidence anywhere that fisheries or FOM policies can be opted out of if Scotland joins the EU. Currency can be fudged by deliberately going slow and not actually meeting the criteria for euro adoption, but that's a pretty unique case.

That is a misrepresentation.

The argument for IndyRef2 is the same argument as the Brexiteers used - 'Bring back control to Scotland from Westminster!'. and 'We should decide our own destiny'.

The negotiation with the EU is a totally different one. Why would they want to stay with a currency controlled from the Bank of ENGLAND' which will set economic policy to suit ENGLAND.

If the choice is to rejoin the EU, then they must agree to the terms, whatever they are at the time.

Currently they are fully compliant, except for the UK opt outs. They would be quite certain of the rules if they wish to rejoin.

CrabRevolution

Sam Russell wrote: »

That is a misrepresentation.

The argument for IndyRef2 is the same argument as the Brexiteers used - 'Bring back control to Scotland from Westminster!'. and 'We should decide our own destiny'.

The negotiation with the EU is a totally different one. Why would they want to stay with a currency controlled from the Bank of ENGLAND' which will set economic policy to suit ENGLAND.

If the choice is to rejoin the EU, then they must agree to the terms, whatever they are at the time.

Currently they are fully compliant, except for the UK opt outs. They would be quite certain of the rules if they wish to rejoin.

I'm not sure how it's a misrepresentation, I wasn't even referring to the leaving the UK aspect of it.

When it comes to an independent Scotland subsequently (re)joining the EU, I have seen more than a few commentators suggest that they can obtain opt-outs from the EU for things like fisheries, to placate one of the most vocal anti EU sectors in Scotland.

That's the part I'm saying is unrealistic, not the principle of leaving the UK.

Sam Russell

CrabRevolution wrote: »

I'm not sure how it's a misrepresentation, I wasn't even referring to the leaving the UK aspect of it.

When it comes to an independent Scotland subsequently (re)joining the EU, I have seen more than a few commentators suggest that they can obtain opt-outs from the EU for things like fisheries, to placate one of the most vocal anti EU sectors in Scotland.

That's the part I'm saying is unrealistic, not the principle of leaving the UK.

The misrepresentation I am talking about is to suggest that the negotiations for the EU are related to the IndyRef2 campaign.

They have to leave the UK to get their country back. (That is a good slogan!).

If they successfully leave the UK, and even if they vote for it, it will be a long road till they eventually do leave, then they can decide to join the EU or decide the Norway model might suit them better. It will be up to them at that time.

rn

Such a large tory majority means Brexit will happen and definitely no Scottish referendum for next 5 years.

Limpy

Scots had their chance and rejected independence. Move along sir.

darem93

People can change their minds though... If that's the case why bother having elections every couple of years?

pixelburp

Limpy wrote: »

Scots had their chance and rejected independence. Move along sir.

One of the key pillars of the "better together" campaign for a No, explicitly made throughout the buildup, was that voting no kept Scotland in the EU. A mere 5 years has shown that statement to now be utterly redundant, if not plain fraudulent. And as we also know, Scotland voted 2/3s to remain in the EU in 2016. Brexit is happening contrary to Scotland's desire, so they should absolutely have the right to think again on the decision, no matter how recent it was.

Contexts, economies, moods change. Was a border poll in the North ever likely in our lifetimes before Brexit? Of course not, but again, things change and suddenly NI is no longer an equal in the UK.

A Dub in Glasgo

Limpy wrote: »

Scots had their chance and rejected independence. Move along sir.

The only move happening at the moment is in the direction of independence

eire4

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The only move happening at the moment is in the direction of independence

I was a little surprised at Sturgeon coming out so quickly for a second independence referendum. But it was probably a very smart move as it just gives further fuel towards Scottish independence when London as I assume they will say no. It allows her to point and use that as even more reason for Scottish independence.

A Dub in Glasgo

The Tories will continue say no to another look at independence. They have already started to frame the SNP performance in the General Election as nothing - no mandate at all to call for another referendum by stating that the SNP only got 45% of the vote in Scotland. This is actually higher than the Tory vote across the UK but they get to rule over everyone without any thought for the majority of folk who did not vote for them

The independence movement needs another party to go for independence and that party should be the Labour Party (who are decimated in Scotland due to them heading up the Tory Better Together front in 2013/14

Labour councillor and President of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities came out today to support another referendum.

https://twitter.com/AlisonEvison/status/1205824013718753285

SafeSurfer

Sam Russell wrote: »

The first step is for the IndyRef2 to be passed. If it takes a pledge for A, B or C to get it passed, then so be it, but how do they negotiate a separation agreement? Share out of the National debt, defence and nuclear weapons, assets, etc. - all of these would need to be sorted.

However, there will need to be a follow on Ref to get approval to rejoin the EU, and those terms would need to be spelt out. Fishing, Sterling, FOM, etc could all be part of the policies that would be discussed.

At the end of the day, an Independent Scotland will make its own decision at the time. England will be a distant memory, so why would they shackle themselves to a minor currency?

Sterling is by no means a minor currency. It is the fourth of the top 5 major world currencies.

timsey tiger

I think that people here who think that an independent Scotland will be our "friend" are naive. They went out of their way not vote for us to host the rugby world cup ffs. They will also be our direct competitors in the eu with the significant competitive advantage of a direct land connection to the mainland via channel tunnel.

I think that if they achieve independence and apply for eu membership we should be waiting with a long list of demands to secure our interests.

1. Rockall
2. tbc

Celtic kin bs should have no place in it, it wasn't even worth enough to them for something as unimportant to them as picking us over France for rugby world cup.

Marlow

Honestly ... Rockall ?

If that rock is all that floats your boat, you may as well be off with the fairies

/M