Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Kyo, Mar 13, 2017.
Let's not call it Project Fear, hey? In both referenda it was Project Reality.
An independent Scotland wouldn't be part of the EU either so any form of Brexit doesn't change a thing. The still cannot answer key questions and it's been shown that their projected figures last time were complete bull. We had our say and voted against it. The referendum was the most divisive thing I've seen in Scotland in my 31 years and it caused so many arguments between family and friends.
Well, Scotland could immediately start the process of rejoining. And in the long term the UK will probably have to give up the pound sterling when we ultimately reapply to join the EU on worse terms that we currently enjoy.
Absolutely. Which is clearly why it was such a brilliant idea to follow it with a Brexit referendum, the fallout from which will probably divide people for decades.
The tricks and lies told last time aren't going to work again. I think the tide has turned in favour of independence.
What gives you that impression?
The tricks and lies told last time didn't work last time. The No side were the truthful ones, at least where the economy was concerned. And at the time, the UK was remaining in the EU - it took a rash promise and a General Election victory to put Brexit on the table.
Still, it's indisputable that had the referenda been held the other way around then Scotland would have voted to break the Union unless the EU told them they wouldn't automatically remain a member.
Whether Scotland could have automatic membership or not, doubtless the EU would be much more flexible and supportive if it was seeking to join as a result of Brexit rather than of leaving an existing EU member country.
Just to echo your point, Nicola and the SNP still can't admit they mislead the public when they projected North Sea oil would produce £30 billion less than their false projections. Which was based on nothing more than assumptions and exaggerations.
While the idea of a independent Scotland appeal to some, they still have to answer the practicalities of sustaining a country like currency, infrastructure, economics, trade, EU membership. There still nothing definitive that I have seen from the SNP to guarantee their plan (or lack of) is nothing but cheap talk. The same old questions and topics remain unaddressed to support how things would be much better. So again what is the difference this time around when both the last referendum and the recent elections have told Nicola/SNP that most don't want to be independent unless something substantial can alleviate concerns.
I would disagree with that. A lot of why it's come up again is because it's the SNP's conference this week and they have been stirring the pot in the weeks running up to it. When that vile witch Sturgeon started harping on about it again after the Brexit vote plenty of people were saying don't you dare use our vote to remain as a excuse for another independance referendum. The majority of the people don't want it. The SNP and it's fanatics want it and if by some miracle they ever get their way Scotland will be a much less attractive place to live. The indyref vote brought out the very worst in people with all the bile and hatred that we went through and to be frank I never want to experience that ever again.
Hatred and bile?
I never once experienced it during the run up to the vote, either you have a particularly cruel environment or it's engineered to make it appear worse than it was. Certainly there are no serious problems like what Brexit will create in the social landscape of this poorly island, 1 dead MP so far.
It seems odd that a significant number of those in Scotland and Wales want independence whilst those in Northern Ireland are determined at all costs to remain part of the UK.
They should be reunited with the Republic of Ireland - against the will of a minority if needs be.
Thats mainly because Northern Ireland knows its an economic basket-case and has little to no chance of standing on it own two feet, although I'm not too sure about Wales on that front either to be honest.
I know that it would be tough getting an independent Scotland going but you only have to look at other similarly sized advanced economies to know that there really is no reason why in the long run it couldn't prosper on its own (and thats without the addition oil....).....
I think you mean their manifesto? To be fair I doubt there's many if any people who vote SNP that aren't pro-independence.
In this case a vote for the SNP definitely means a vote in favour of independence.
To be fair the polling numbers for holding a vote and support for independence aren't the same thing - opinion polls suggest that a good 60-65% of people want another vote but not necessarily immediately.....
The Yes/No question again differs - on a straight vote tomorrow polling suggests its gone back to around the 55-45 split that was reflected in the vote in 2014, however if you ask the question "Would you vote for Independence in the event of Brexit" its sitting at 50/50, its actually higher for Yes than no in recent polls if based on a Hard Brexit/No Deal Situation (still margin of error territory though).
Believing its "stupid" to equate a vote for the SNP for support for a potential Indy Ref 2 (even though that was clearly called out in their manifesto), is nuts - do you believe its stupid to assume that a vote for the Tories was a vote for a Hard Brexit? (As Theresa May set out before the 2017 GE) - or that a. vote for Labour was a vote for Corbynite economic policies?
Independence is the SNP's raison d'etre.
Single issue party, that will capitulate Scotland back into clan warfare as they have nothing else in common apart from "hating the English"
Enjoy the future my Ginger friends and please stop drinking so much, we know its bad but hey you have independence and really expensive/late tram system. (oh and a few UK Navel bases for income)
Literally screaming and frothing about something that barely affects you, must be difficult.
It is possible to love the Union and desire it's continued existence and think that Scottish seat MP's should not hold certain cabinet positions. This is because the unequal nature of devolution means that Scottish seat MP's get to vote on matters affecting other parts of the UK that are devolved to the Scottish Parliament and thus do not affect their constituencies. This effect is magnified ever further to suggest a Scottish seat MP become cabinet minister for a devolved portfolio.The New Labour devolution process was one the worst pieces of constitutional vandalism from a Government that specialised in constitutional vandalism. Scotland is far from the largest UK region, in terms of population or GDP yet has an unprecedented degree of devolvement. Why doesn't Mercia or Yorkshire or Wales or Northern Ireland deserve equal powers.
Personally I would like a proper and equal devolution settlement with the English regions and the constituent countries treated equally.
For reference the UK region sizes as of a couple of years ago.
South East --8,634,750 --13.64%--£249Bn
London --8,173,941 --12.91%--£378Bn
North West --7,052,177 --11.14%--£157Bn
East of England --5,846,965 --9.23%--£146Bn
West Midlands --5,601,847 --8.85%--£120Bn
Scotland --5,373,000 -- 8.49%--£127Bn
South West --5,288,935 --8.35%--£126Bn
Yorkshire -- 5,283,733 --8.34%--£110Bn
and the Humber
East Midlands --4,533,222 --7.16%--£98Bn
Wales --3,063,456 --4.84%--£56Bn
North East --2,596,886 --4.10%--£50Bn
Northern Ireland --1,870,451 --2.95%--£34Bn
edit: sorry about the gash formatting of the "table"
Ahh but that's the English paradox there, you also don't seem to want federalisation either, so what will it be?
Separate names with a comma.