1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Poll: Scottish independence vote

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Biohazard, Sep 23, 2013.

?

Scottish independence, yes or no?

  1. I'm Scottish and in favour of independence

    137 vote(s)
    10.9%
  2. I'm Scottish and against independence

    167 vote(s)
    13.3%
  3. I'm from another part of UK and in favour of Scottish independence

    273 vote(s)
    21.7%
  4. I'm from another part of UK and against Scottish independence

    682 vote(s)
    54.2%
  1. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    There are polls showing an overwhelming majority both north and south of the border wants to see them debate the issue.

    Frankly, if Cameron doesn't he really doesn't have much "fibre" in him at all, and Scotland would do well to rid itself of a government that treats it with such contempt.

    And anyway, as things stand it looks like Cameron could very well be PM again irrespective of the loss of Scottish votes at Westminster or not.

    It's up to Scotland if it wants to accept future governments it didn't vote for more than Evil Salmond's dastardly plan.
     
  2. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    Oh yes, the gloves are off when that slovenly behemoth of a 'mons meg' battle cannon gets rolled out.

    Gordon Brown preaching on his sugar pedastel about pensions;



    Lets hope we see more of him and Better Together - United with Labour engagement soon.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2014
  3. Weaver

    Hitman

    Joined: Jul 9, 2008

    Posts: 722

    Location: It's Grimm up Norf

    Actually both of you are correct and at the same time incorrect. This is actually an area where the NO campaign is really all over the place. The UK Home Office recently stated in their paper on the subject that those who are UK citizens and or eligible to be UK citizens can hold onto their UK citizenship and passports provided their second country allows dual nationality. (that's EU Citizenship no matter which way you cut it)

    Which more or less puts to bed that the people in Scotland would leave the EU in any shape or form. There is a whole raft of provisions in EU law in order to stop this kind of thing happening as its in place to stop countries getting rid of difficult citizens. You can find the necessary information here.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/scotland-analysis-borders-and-citizenship


    ------
     
  4. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    Yeah, and then the home secretary threatened to rip passports from people in the advent of Scottish independence and deny dual citizenship (UK).

    Another 'naw ye canny'.
     
  5. Weaver

    Hitman

    Joined: Jul 9, 2008

    Posts: 722

    Location: It's Grimm up Norf

    Yes I know unfortunately Ms May was a bit kack handed with that rebuttal. Of course it would also affect ALL EU citizens domiciled in Scotland too even workers from the rest of the UK it doesnt just make a mockery of article 15 of the UDHR it takes it sets fire to it and then dances all over it.

    ------
     
  6. Weaver

    Hitman

    Joined: Jul 9, 2008

    Posts: 722

    Location: It's Grimm up Norf

  7. Castiel

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 26, 2010

    Posts: 63,651

    The question remains whether an iScottish Citizen is also a UK Citizen however after secession...as my subsequent post to that quoted clarifies. The only rule for EU Citizenship is that they are a citizen of an EU Member State. EU Citizenship is not independent of National Citizenship.

    Perhaps you can clarify where there is an automatic entitlement for Scottish citizens of an independent Scotland to have dual nationality with the rUK? Are you suggesting that in the advent of an independent Scotland that the Scottish people will retain their rUK nationality automatically? So they will be UK citizens? You are aware I assume that the EU leave these specifics to individual member countries...Spain for example, you retain Spanish citizenship (in the case of dual nationality) but they must reside in Spain to have the rights and privileges of Spanish citizenship, this includes being an EU Citizen (while residing outside of Spain, all such privileges are suspended, including EU Citizenship)...also not all British Citizens (those holding British citizenship in the crown dependencies for example) are EU citizens, not to mention British Nationality Law which is extremely complex particularly in areas surrounding the independence of former territories, so it's not as straight forward as it appears.

    Not does it necessarily impact on article 15 of the UDHR either, as no one will be denied a nationality, they will (by democratic will of the people) be Nationals of an independent Scottish State.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2014
  8. Weaver

    Hitman

    Joined: Jul 9, 2008

    Posts: 722

    Location: It's Grimm up Norf

    The answer to your question is YES they will as it says, straight from the horses mouth if you will, in the paper I posted. I'm not even going to start on the bureaucracy or logistics of removing peoples passports, that you seem to be suggesting, besides that's 5.3mil passports that will need to be rescinded within 18 months with a massive backlog in emigration/asylum applications already existing. Maybe you should have a look at Mr Joyce, that pro-unionist nutter (literally), blog on it.

    EDIT: Its lemon entry dear Watson. Thats what it says in the paper... I didn't say it myself the Home office did... If UK citizenship and passport is the primary citizenship and passport at the moment then having a Scottish passport would be secondary. And heres were the FM has been double cute he says his party are all for it .. YOU CAN BE BRITISH AND SCOTTISH!

    It was Ms May who was infringing on article 15 with her statement Casteil you know what I was saying with that so lets stop playing silly.

    ------
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2014
  9. Castiel

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 26, 2010

    Posts: 63,651

    Hmm, I think that Mr Joyce needs to consider just how independence would impact on British Nationality Law and all the history and complexity within that.

    As for removing people's passports, surely people would simply surrender one for another depending upon their nationality and (depending on how the rUK and iScottish nationality laws apply) whether they wish to be or are eligible for dual nationality....and again, dual nationality is no guarantee of EU Citizenship. And what it says in that paper you posted is this:

    As it states, and has been my position...it cannot be guaranteed, which somewhat different from YES...and this is straight from the horses mouth, so to speak.

    I doubt Ms May was stating that she was going to strip UK citizens of their passports or nationality either. That sounds more like another politically motivated misrepresentation. Article 15 would on,y apply if Ms May was suggesting leaving people Stateless, which I doubt she was and if she was she's been poorly advised to say the least.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2014
  10. q974739

    Hitman

    Joined: Feb 4, 2009

    Posts: 617

    Where as I, and I believe several others here, see that someone (usually you) Biohazard have posted 2, 3 full scale articles. Then ignore it.

    We are here to debate with people - not everything written by every pro-independence person on the internet, being posted into the thread several articles at a time.

    From our point of view, we can't debate with an article. The author isn't here. If we think it's wrong (and those few times I've looked at them in detail, they have been wrong) then all you can do is try to defend the author.

    So make your own points. Talking of, would you care to post a rebuttal of the free-trade problems that scotland would appear to suffer from, in the case of independence? I posted about them a page or four ago, but you appear to have ignored them.

    Thanks :)
     
  11. Raumarik

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 14, 2003

    Posts: 13,720

    Just had a chat with people in my office, today we're mostly "YES" people, although a few were NO yesterday, find it amazing how hit and miss many people are about the referendum. Perhaps it's simply down to the level of guff coming from both sides with no clear debate of any real value going on publicly, lots of people outside the country sticking their oar in who frankly seem biased anyway (Barroso being the latest one).

    I'm not sure, family ties also seem to play a big part in this, myself and a co-worker have a lot of english relatives and as she puts it, a YES vote seems a bit like slapping them in the face.

    Then again she's got a YES sticker on her car lol.
     
  12. Metalface Mark

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 26, 2005

    Posts: 15,017

    Location: Paisley

    Why keep stating things as fact that have no basis in fact? Stop doing it please.
     
  13. Weaver

    Hitman

    Joined: Jul 9, 2008

    Posts: 722

    Location: It's Grimm up Norf

    Mr Joyce has already concerned himself with the relevant information and talks about it from an informed position. Incidentally he's an ex serving 'British Major' and a pro-unionist MP with a seat in the house of commons I'm pretty sure he knows all about how it all works regardless of whether he had to resign from the Labour party or not.

    I've heard of the phrase 'oh that person has selective hearing' but selective reasoning is pushing the boat out even by your standards. I'll do my best to explain it for the hard of thinking here.

    It says in the Home Office document that everyone who is within the UK and outside the UK who is eligible will be a UK citizens and can hold a UK passport (Granted there are people in the UK illegally and also those still awaiting immigration/asylum applications). However ANY person who is eligible will be a UK citizen with a UK passport. There is nothing else that needs to be argued at the moment the matter is closed.

    YES haven’t said anything about it since their mandate is to offer debate on the merits of voting YES. However The FM and his SNP SG have said it will not be compulsory to hold a Scottish passport. A person can chose to keep the UK passport or take up a Scottish passport or keep BOTH! So if the SNP win the first election in an iScotland then they will not insist on ONLY having a Scottish passport. A classic example of this in practice at the moment would be Cherie Blair who travels on an Irish passport.

    Is that clear enough for you?

    I'm starting to believe that there is some sort of ailment or mental block that affects pro-unionist commentators when discussing anything RE: independence or is it just because Alex Salmond Scottish FM said something about it once that has the pro-unionists all bent out of shape trying their damnedest to prove him wrong?

    It, like Ms May, just looks ridiculous.


    ------
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2014
  14. Castiel

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 26, 2010

    Posts: 63,651

    It is a shame then that the very source you gave as authoritative doesn't support that position then.
     
  15. mark2410

    Hitman

    Joined: Aug 2, 2004

    Posts: 908

    why is it nationalist arguments always seem to devolve to personally abusing those who disagree with them and their assertions that the rest of the world will behave in the way they want it to?
     
  16. Macro

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 9, 2006

    Posts: 5,689

    Because their arguments have very little real world credibility otherwise?
     
  17. CircleFaust

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 1, 2003

    Posts: 3,356

    initially I thought YES would a bad idea but I'm not so sure now
    i can't vote being in N.I

    but to get it right in my own head; all four nations are represented in Westminster. we have devolved governments but that only goes so far when it comes to big decisions.
    if the cabinet want to do something in Scotland and SNP oppose it will happen anyway? this is because even though they are most represented in Scotland they will never have enough votes in Westminster? (I'm not a big politics person :p)
    but on the upside of being part of that means you get to use money from all the UK tax payers?
     
  18. grumpysculler

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Nov 23, 2009

    Posts: 1,195

    Because if they actually got into debating the pros and cons of independence, people would realise the risks involved and be scared away from Yes.

    So they pretend that there are no risks, everyone else in the world will sign up to their fairy tale plan and therefore independence has only positive consequences.

    If they pitched their case as "with independence, we will gain X, lose Y and put Z at risk but this trade is worth it because ABC" we could have a real debate and get somewhere. But Yes don't want that and anyone who highlights Y and Z is bullying, bluffing and anti-Scotland.



    Some of the no campaigners don't help, particularly on the EU. The debate still seems to focus on whether or not Scotland will be an EU member. Really, that isn't in doubt, but the mechanism timescale and terms are all rather unknown. Scotland going for treaty modifications will open up so many cans of worms, the basic issue of Scotland's membership will get lost in the noise. If Scotland doesn't go for treaty modifications then there is no chance of any opt-outs.

    I don't see that there is any reason why the dominant EU states will agree all the opt-outs that Scotland currently enjoys as part of the UK. I expect that there will be some sort of stalemate between competing agendas (Catalonia, the rebate, CAP, the list is endless...)
     
  19. grumpysculler

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Nov 23, 2009

    Posts: 1,195

    If it is a reserved power, then yes. (e.g. defence, welfare)

    It it is a devolved power then no. (e.g. education, health)
     
  20. matt100

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 31, 2004

    Posts: 11,536

    Location: Salisbury

    Quite a lot more nuanced than that to be honest.

    Yes Westminster can impose its will on the devolved areas on matters that aren't devolved, but not on matters that are. Even so something wildly unpopular in a devolved area would be fairly unlikely to pass parliament unchanged in any way, particularly with how parliament is made up currently with a coalition because the theory at least is everyone needs to pay more attention to the needs of everyone because they can't just barge a bill through with their own majority.

    Yes I suppose broadly speaking Scotland gets to use UK tax payers money but not for whatever it feels like. Some of it is spent on them on their behalf, I guess things like national infrastructure stuff, defence etc etc.

    So its not an either or.. bigger issues are things like currency, borders, debt, financial stability etc etc which are currently being sort of debated (actually seems more like automatic gainsaying on both parts).

    My personal view is Scotland would be better off part of the UK but then I'm also fairly sure the UK would be relatively unchanged without Scotland and I also think we'd reach a new normal pretty quickly.

    That said, as I think I said earlier, this all just seems very much like a vanity project for a guy wanting independence several hundred years after it would have made any difference.