Alex Salmond: A second Scottish referendum is inevitible

ubersonic · 28 Jul 2015 at 16:38

lovelyhead said:
No you are twisting what I am saying. If you took the effort to read the whole thread you would see why you are wrong.

How can I be twisting what you're saying when I'm quoting it completely? XD

lovelyhead said:
Seems a little undemocratic to me. You can have a referendum but not before an arbitrary time period has elapsed which will be decided not by the voters.

Perhaps everyone in this thread seems undemocratic to you because you don't understand what it means? Having a democratic vote on something then having it again a few years later because a minority didn't get the result they wanted IS undemocratic.

lovelyhead · 28 Jul 2015 at 16:58

Uther said:
"The SNP are not planning another referendum, but equally it is not in the gift of any politician or party to rule it out indefinitely. The timing of any future referendum is a matter for the people of Scotland to decide – and not for a Tory prime minister to dictate," said an SNP spokesperson in response to David Cameron saying he is ruling out a second referendum in the next five years.

This is exactly what I have been saying.

Five.Stars · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:04

lovelyhead said:
This is exactly what I have been saying.

Yes, and you are as wrong as the SNP spokesman.

Without a legally binding agreement, signed by both the First Minister of Scotland and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, then any referendum held carries as much weight as my claim to being the new King of Scotland.

Therefore, it is safe to assume there will be no further referendum without the agreement of said Tory Prime Minister.

Or do you disagree?

lovelyhead · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:10

Moses said:
Nah, people just see Salmond as an excrement stirring knob/troll.

The only 'threat' I see is the SNP trying to stir up trouble to and create bad blood between the Scotch and the rUK (eg. going against their promise to not get involved in English only matters - as with the fox hunting vote... remember Sturgeon's lie regarding that? Doing just to troll the rUK/try and make the EVEL vs Scottish MPs 'thing' more of an issue than it needs to be).

Uggggh.

OK. First of all who are the Scotch?

Secondly, one of the reasons the SNP gave up their self imposed 'no voting on English matters' policy is because just prior to that the tories voted down a part of the Scotland bill that had the backing of 58 out of 59 Scottish MP's. They didn't just vote it down. What they actually did was not attend any of the debates prior to the vote then when the vote began they all trooped in and voted against it. To add insult to injury this happened:

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/104f505f-5376-4c63-9d19-6cd541592f1b?in=22:45:55&out=22:46:30

Loud cheers at defeating the Scots. Better together!

Five.Stars said:
No they would not. What they would have is a mandate to lobby Westminster to agree to hold another referendum, ala an Edinburgh Agreement part 2.

Unless you think a non legally binding referendum in which the rules would I assume be set out by the then Scottish government is the way to go, even though it would in effect hold as much validity as an online poll?

We have gone over this already. Please read my previous posts to see what I have already said on the matter.

Elixir · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:16

lovelyhead said:
This is exactly what I have been saying.

The problem is that the SNP will likely get in power again whether they have another independence mandate in their manifesto or not, due to the lack of any real opposition in Scotland. This will then be taken by people like you as the "will of the people" demanding another referendum, despite there recently being a decisive vote that the country does not want to be independent.

There should be at least 10 years before they can force it on us again.

lovelyhead · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:19

alx said:
What do you mean exactly? The number of SNP MPs as a percentage of the total Westminster MPs is roughly the same as the Scottish population compared with that of the UK.

What I was trying to get across is the SNP answer to no one at Westminster unlike Labour (Scottish branch), the Tories (Scottish branch) and the Lib Dems (Scottish branch).

The SNP vote however they like in the interests of the Scottish people but even with nearly 100% of all Scottish MP's they can't hope to make any sort real impact when the unionists team up. This leaves Scotland without a real voice at Westminster.

One of the many reasons the UK is terminally broken. It is either Independence or some sort of federal system where England has it's own parliament (Westminster is not England's parliament). Only one of these options has any possibility of happening and it isn't the federal system!

Halfmad said:
Similar reasons to my self, the fact it was a one off as far as I'm concerned has made me quite anti-second referendum. Let's get on with trying to sort the UK out rather than causing more strife.

So from a Scottish perspective how do you plan on changing the UK? We have no real power at Westminster and any power we do have, the tories are trying to water down with EVEL.

lovelyhead · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:21

gjrc said:
at what point does anyone in the SNP point out that Scotland cant afford to stand alone.

the rest of the uk would be bailing them out from day one.

SNP clowns.

Good argument. Very well made.

ubersonic said:
How can I be twisting what you're saying when I'm quoting it completely? XD

Perhaps everyone in this thread seems undemocratic to you because you don't understand what it means? Having a democratic vote on something then having it again a few years later because a minority didn't get the result they wanted IS undemocratic.

You spin me round round baby round round like a record...

Tefal · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:25

lovelyhead said:
Uggggh.

OK. First of all who are the Scotch?

Secondly, one of the reasons the SNP gave up their self imposed 'no voting on English matters' policy is because just prior to that the tories voted down a part of the Scotland bill that had the backing of 58 out of 59 Scottish MP's. They didn't just vote it down. What they actually did was not attend any of the debates prior to the vote then when the vote began they all trooped in and voted against it. To add insult to injury this happened:

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/104f505f-5376-4c63-9d19-6cd541592f1b?in=22:45:55&out=22:46:30

Loud cheers at defeating the Scots. Better together!

because that amendment didn't only affect Scotland, and would put the uk in a very dodgy position.

you cant expect the uk to give up full control of it's currency in Scotland (especially when the sums added up to a 10bn deficit on the Scottish side), remove the right to veto any ideas for spending and then still expect them to pay up when it all goes **** up.

you can hardly blame the tories can you there were 58 yes (all snp)

504 nos.

so that leaves only 43 mps who didn't vote, and im pretty sure that labor has slightly more than 43 seats don't you?

Tefal · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:26

Moses said:
What part of the Scotland bill? Was it a purely Scottish matter, or did it would it in someway affect rUK?

it was giving Scotland full fiscal autonomy and removing Westminsters right to veto changes.

Five.Stars · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:27

lovelyhead said:
We have gone over this already. Please read my previous posts to see what I have already said on the matter.

You put a few words together in a sentence. What you didn't do was answer the question.

How much validity do you or the international community place in a referendum which has no legal standing?

Given that there would presumably be no opposition to the YES campaign from within Westminster without an Edinburgh Agreement of sorts, then why would Westminster recognise any such referendum any more than a Daily Record online poll?

lovelyhead · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:32

Elixir said:
The problem is that the SNP will likely get in power again whether they have another independence mandate in their manifesto or not, due to the lack of any real opposition in Scotland. This will then be taken by people like you as the "will of the people" demanding another referendum, despite there recently being a decisive vote that the country does not want to be independent.

There should be at least 10 years before they can force it on us again.

Why 10 years? Why not 7? or 8? Who decides? You?

Repeating myself again, (I am sure I have already typed 'repeating myself again' before. This is like inception) there are other parties to vote for if you don't want an Independence referendum or if you don't like any other party don't vote.

A vote for the SNP, if they have a manifesto commitment for a referendum, is a vote of support for that referendum. You can't vote for a party and write a little note at the side of the ballot paper saying "but I don't support policy A, B and C.

Arguing otherwise is just daft and there is no chance of having a sensible debate with people that argue that line.

Five.Stars · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:32

lovelyhead said:
So from a Scottish perspective how do you plan on changing the UK? We have no real power at Westminster and any power we do have, the tories are trying to water down with EVEL.

Here is a thought. Actually embracing the UK and working with the other parties to better the lives of people throughout the land, regardless of whether they live in Glasgow, Liverpool, Edinburgh, or Cardiff.

But they can never do that whilst they maintain their very reason and I would maintain their only reason for existing - creating a platform, by any means, for Scottish independence.

And that, my "friend" cannot be denied when you have senior people from within the Scottish Nazional Party maintaining the proclamation that a second independence referendum is inevitable.

Five.Stars · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:36

lovelyhead said:
Why 10 years? Why not 7? or 8? Who decides? You?

Repeating myself again, (I am sure I have already typed 'repeating myself again' before. This is like inception) there are other parties to vote for if you don't want an Independence referendum or if you don't like any other party don't vote.

A vote for the SNP, if they have a manifesto commitment for a referendum, is a vote of support for that referendum. You can't vote for a party and write a little note at the side of the ballot paper saying "but I don't support policy A, B and C.

Arguing otherwise is just daft and there is no chance of having a sensible debate with people that argue that line.

So by that token, any policy in a party manifesto that you disagree with precludes you from voting for that party even if you agree with 99% of their manifesto?

gjrc · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:39

Five.Stars said:
Here is a thought. Actually embracing the UK and working with the other parties to better the lives of people throughout the land, regardless of whether they live in Glasgow, Liverpool, Edinburgh, or Cardiff.

But they can never do that whilst they maintain their very reason and I would maintain their only reason for existing - creating a platform, by any means, for Scottish independence.

And that, my "friend" cannot be denied when you have senior people from within the Scottish Nazional Party maintaining the proclamation that a second independence referendum is inevitable.

they wont put it in their manifesto as they know that people didn't vote for them in the general election of the back of an independence mandate.

they also know they cant afford independence. they need the payments from the rest of the UK and the SNP know it no matter how much they bleat on about how they don't.

V F · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:42

TwsT said:
My disdain for the snp is not a disdain for Scotland or it's people. You're allowed to vote for who you want I'm allowed to think it's a bad idea.

If people insult the SNP who the people voted for you're effectively insulting the whole nation who voted for them.

Tefal · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:44

V F said:
If people insult the SNP who the people voted for you're effectively insulting the whole nation who voted for them.

well except for the 50% + that didn't vote for them....

when you insult the Tories are you insulting the whole nation of the UK?

Five.Stars · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:45

V F said:
If people insult the SNP who the people voted for you're effectively insulting the whole nation who voted for them.

The whole nation most definitely DID NOT vote for the SNP.

TwsT · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:47

lovelyhead said:
Why 10 years? Why not 7? or 8? Who decides? You?

Repeating myself again, (I am sure I have already typed 'repeating myself again' before. This is like inception) there are other parties to vote for if you don't want an Independence referendum or if you don't like any other party don't vote.

A vote for the SNP, if they have a manifesto commitment for a referendum, is a vote of support for that referendum. You can't vote for a party and write a little note at the side of the ballot paper saying "but I don't support policy A, B and C.

Arguing otherwise is just daft and there is no chance of having a sensible debate with people that argue that line.

It's hard to have sensible debate with someone about UK politics, Referendums and Scottish parliament elections. When that person has repeatedly displayed his inability to understand UK politics, Referendums and Scottish parliament elections.

You are blurring the lines between voters for the Westminster GE and Scottish elections. You seem to think it's one and the same it isn't. People who didn't trust Alec salmond to run an independent Scotland can be quite happy to trust him to represent them in the UK government. That doesn't mean they want a Referendum or have suddenly had a change of heart about leaving the union.

It was made abundantly clear to them that they may not get another vote and they made their choice as such. They then made separate choices about how they want to be represented in the UK parliament.

Glaucus · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:50

TwsT said:
It's hard to have sensible debate with someone about UK politics, Referendums and Scottish parliament elections. When that person has repeatedly displayed his inability to understand UK politics, Referendums and Scottish parliament elections.

And thought Brown was in charge and could actually do what he said. ROFL.
Clearly absolutely deluded and hasn't got the first idea about such things.

TwsT · 28 Jul 2015 at 17:51

Brown in charge? pfft Even England don't want him