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

Scottish Nationalists set for a majority

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by ThePirateHulk, May 6, 2011.

  1. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 1, 2007

    Posts: 20,213

    Do we know this for sure? Obviously it sounds like it should be this way but what is right and what actually happens tends to change a lot when large sums of money are involved. Has there been any precident set with regards to situations like this?
     
  2. Orcish-Horde

    Mobster

    Joined: Jun 17, 2004

    Posts: 3,692

    In a Scottish referendum what if there is a clear split in voting pattern. In which southern Scotland voted pro union and northern Scotland for Independence? Even result, what would be the view on partition?
     
  3. scorza

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 22, 2004

    Posts: 26,685

    Location: Deep England

    Unless there's a specific clause in those contracts on the issue of Scottish independence, there's no reason to automatically novate them.

    If Scotland gained independence today, why would oil revenue be treated any different to other UK government assets and liabilities? I would expect the default situation would be that Scotland would take on its share of UK government debt, take ownership of their share of UK government assets such as shares in RBS and Lloyds, I'd even say that Scotland would be entitled to a share in oil and gas revenue from English/Welsh/Norn Irish waters such as the Irish sea. So Scotland could actually gain from these arrangements.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2011
  4. Andy90

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Feb 5, 2008

    Posts: 2,207

    I see your claim on Northumbria and raise you the Welsh claim on most of England and Scotland.....

    [​IMG]

    The map shows Native British in Pink (i.e Celts)
    Picts and Scots in Green (looks like you get dibs on Ireland)
    English in blue.

    Making Historic claims on land is somewhat of a double edged sword :)
     
  5. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 19, 2004

    Posts: 17,441

    Location: Kiel, Germany

    I have no idea what your point is, then. It is simply not the case that either half the country did vote PC and Labour got in anyway or that half the country could. Labour got well over twice as many votes as PC. Now I'd prefer more proportional results but it's not that vastly imbalanced.
     
  6. Pinkribbonscars

    Hitman

    Joined: Dec 30, 2005

    Posts: 902

    Location: Calgary

    I think the Scottish should be allowed a referendum on independence. I don't think it would be beneficial for the UK or Scotland, we are stronger as one, but if that's what they want, so be it. Well done to the Scottish anyway for giving Labour a kick in the teeth, shame the rest of the UK didn't do the same.

    Biohazard, what currency would you propose to use in an independent Scotland? Presumably not the Euro or the Pound, so a new Scottish currency? But that would create a barrier to trade with the UK. Also, what would you do with the military? There are a lot of proud (and excellent) Scottish regiments, I don't think the Army or their members would be too happy have them given to Scotland, having sworn allegiance to the Queen, and of course there are RAF bases and the nuclear submarines, would they have to go too?
     
  7. ubersonic

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 26, 2009

    Posts: 20,670

    Ok ill try and simplify it, I never said that half the country had voted PC and labour had got in, just that that scenario was possible under the system we use (logistically not population based).

    North Wales contains 1/3 of the country's population and south Wales 2/3, north Wales has 1/4 of the assembly seats and south Wales has 3/4 of them, that is unfair. Yes labour has just got well over 2x the seat PC has but only because the constituency's are inappropriately allocated, they would still have beaten PC if it was set-up fairly however Labours total would have been lower and PC's/Torys higher (labour would have got less than double PC's seats under a fair system whereas they got nearly 3x under the current set-up)
     
  8. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    Yes, but not with oil.

    But industrial contracts, yes. Oil isn't anything super legally special by any stretch of the imagination.
     
  9. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    :D

    It was most definately tongue in cheek, but I like your retort :)
     
  10. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    You wouldn't need new ones, just inherit the old ones.

    Geography, I can't make this any more simple for you.


    Obviously.


    This is the last time I'm going to bother with you, but independence does not work like that.
     
  11. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    I have no idea.

    If such circumstances did surface I'd be pretty gob smacked if it was literally split equally on vote and especially so accute in geography.
     
  12. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,539

    Location: Plymouth

    careful with the natural rights model, it applies equally well to liabilities such as rbs as it does to benefits such as oil.

    a negotiated position is far more sensible.
     
  13. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 19, 2004

    Posts: 17,441

    Location: Kiel, Germany

    It would be unfair if true, but it's not. The seats are not perfectly allocated but the systematic bias you suggest isn't there.

    Labour got over twice the VOTES. This is a trivially easy fact to check! The setup isn't fair because it's a top up system not because the boundaries hammer PC.
     
  14. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    Why of course it does, anyone worth their salt isn't going to argue otherwise.

    Assets like RBS are going to make returns on taxpayers money regardless, so what is worse servicing the liability or the end profit on selling the asset?

    It will be negotiated, but you would be unlikely to get an SNP government agreeing to pseudo independence through somewhat irrelevant intertwining agreements (at that point) when they can simply have what they want; independence.
     
  15. ubersonic

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 26, 2009

    Posts: 20,670

    Er, the are 40 seats, of which 11 (~1/4) are in the north (where 1/3 of the population is) and 29 (~3/4) are in the south (where 2/3 of the population is), the top up regions consist of three regions in the south, one in the north, and one in both. So you see it is true, which as you argue makes it unfair, if the were more seats available in the north as the should be the would be more for PC to win.



    Yes they did, because its unfair, you say its not the boundries that hammer PC, look at this:

    [​IMG]

    Oh look at that, the areas where labour are popular are split up in a way so they have many seats and the areas where thery are unpopular are not, and you say its not the boundaries? if extra seats were created in the north those massive green blobs could have been multiple smaller ones (which Labour could have won I fully admit) Labour would still have won except it would have been a fairer election.

    and before you say the boundaries accurately represent the population spread, like I said above, they don't, they just vaguely represent it with a bias toward the south.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2011
  16. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 1, 2007

    Posts: 20,213

    I thought they were split up like that because of population density? The geographical areas with the most seats also tend to be the geographical areas with higher population density. Up at the top you have the urban sprawl that is Deeside and down at the bottom you have Swansea and Cardiff?
     
  17. scorza

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 22, 2004

    Posts: 26,685

    Location: Deep England

  18. ubersonic

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 26, 2009

    Posts: 20,670

    That's because they are both based on (the wiki one isn't drawn as accurately) the same map, that wiki one shows where the borders of the counties are which are pretty similar to the borders of the constituencys shown in the voting map. Seriously, a small county with the capital in it is going to have a higher people per KM count than a bigger country with snowdonia mountain park in it isn't it, it doesn't change the fact that south Wales has more seats per person than north Wales does.
     
  19. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 19, 2004

    Posts: 17,441

    Location: Kiel, Germany

    Yes, you're correct. Constituency size in population is similar across Wales.
     
  20. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 19, 2004

    Posts: 17,441

    Location: Kiel, Germany

    The North Wales region returns 13 members from 476000 voters. South Wales East elects 12 from 471000. SW Central 12 from 507000 and SW West 11 from 410000.

    The facts, I feel, speak for themselves.