I agree with much of this.
Scottish Politics
- Thread starter Cheesy
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
I assume the SNP would expect their currency medium to long term to be the Euro and that leads to all manner of ramifications. It'll be a shit storm of course.
Your point about a referendum is a good and I guess the counter response would be that when you're country's vote is outweighed 10 to 1 by another country then that's what every referendum and general election is akin to.
It'll be different but I can't see how it'd be easier. The whole thing is, and will be, a political and logistical nightmare.
Nationalism? Why would Kosovo or any others like Uyghurs want to be independent?
I suppose this is where the third option was always more attractive to me; Devo Max. The complete devolution of powers with the except of foreign affairs, from what I remember. The West Lothian question was obviously a problem though because Devo Max meant that Scottish politicians could still vote on decisions that no longer affected them, but you'd hope that rules could be put in place to block Scottish MPs from being able to cast votes on subjects related to purely just England, Wales and/or NI.
Keeps the union going, moves the UK into more of a federal system. Filled with a million different issues like the alternatives but still viable in my small minded opinion.
Keeps the union going, moves the UK into more of a federal system. Filled with a million different issues like the alternatives but still viable in my small minded opinion.
If you elect to join a country with a population bigger than yours then you risk being a minority within it, yes. If that is a major problem for you then electing to join an organization a 100 times bigger could lead to problems further down the road too.
For the euro issues I'd read hobbers post, which sums it up.
Scotland voted SNP knowing they would push for independence, all the problems with that process rest with the SNP to resolve and the Scottish people to pay for it. Its not my, the rest of the UK's or England's problem.
Hasn't every country basically been fecked for ages after leaving the UK/British Empire, America aside?
Thing is, how many would prefer it didn't happen?
Thing is, how many would prefer it didn't happen?
Just out of interest, how far is Scotland from "Devo Max" now?
From the Independent because I'm lazy
Currently, Scotland create its own laws regarding: agriculture, forestry and fisheries, education and training, environment, health and social services, housing, law and order (including the licensing of air weapons), local government, sport and the arts, tourism and economic development, and many aspects of transport.
Meanwhile, Westminster retained the powers to decide upon: benefits and social security, immigration, defence, foreign policy, employment, broadcasting, trade and industry, nuclear energy, oil, coal, gas and electricity, consumer rights, data protection, and the Constitution.
would be interesting to see how this would poll
suspect a in / out type question is more likey than a 3 way question on a referendum
Also suspect the SNP talks of rejoining the EU wouldnt be an optuion under such a scenario
gut feel it might carry enough votes to pass if it was on the ballot but the SNP wont want it on the ballott and the uk Government does not even want a ballott - but if they have to have one i suspect they would want a clear in / out as in the brexit referedum (because as we all know brexit means brexit ... why confuse people with things like customs unions and single markets )
That was already addressed, I believe...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_votes_for_English_laws
Ah, yes you're right Hari. We smash faces in this thread too?
The EU does not control the Government or policies of its member states in a reasonably comparable way to UK government and Scotland but, of course, joining large federalised political blocks comes with issues. As for electing to join, the Union of the crowns is a complicated matter and one that very much was not considering voting blocks in a representative parliament. It was, and is, however a Union not a surrogacy.
There are clearly complicated challenges regarding the EU and other aspects of independence.Only a fool would deny it.
It's a strange world where the most reasonable solutions to complex problems get ignored.
Do boreworms have a face?
If thats the case, then the debt is also the sole property of the remaining nations. Something that sticks in the craw of many a unionist.
I think it'd likely win but a three way vote would split the non Unionist vote and therefore it'll never happen. Oh for a World where such nuance actually worked.
anything you can smash can have a face if you just believe *insert Mel Gibson face paint photo here*Secretly, everyone is reading the D&D thread and just waiting for an opportunity to slot a reference in.
(I know I am)
(can't think of a reference for this post)
(but I can add a third line with parentheses)
Rightly so. A compromise would need to be reached and I fear it would not be an amicable negotiation.
Edit: Also much hostility would be stoked by our political Thunderdome
Take an INT check then.Secretly, everyone is reading the D&D thread and just waiting for an opportunity to slot a reference in.
(I know I am)
(can't think of a reference for this post)
(but I can add a third line with parentheses)
I think it depends how you constructed the ballott (is it 3 options winner takes all, or single transferable vote... how many options are on the ballot? - one round of voting or seperate final round for the top two options) - but as I say i think the UK government and the SNP both probably favour a clear in / out full independence binary vote if there is going to be a vote.
Caf forget that deep down tooktook loudmouth Scotsman who knows bugger all.Secretly, everyone is reading the D&D thread and just waiting for an opportunity to slot a reference in.
(I know I am)
(can't think of a reference for this post)
(but I can add a third line with parentheses)
I think @Reiver and @Cheimoon mentioned the federal system. That's something I could genuinely see working well across the UK. Not just Scotland but in the North of England, Midlands, Wales, Northern Ireland etc. People like me aren't against the union, far from it. It's something to be proud of but only if it suits everyone, and it clearly doesn't. Too many in the country (UK) feel ignored by a centralised government that moves further and further away from the cultural and social identities that make up the nation.
For example, we're stuck with whatever immigration laws Westminster pass and it looks like we're becoming more and more isolationist. I think polling shows that Scotland supports more immigration, and it makes sense. There's obviously patches where you get racist loons waving their saltires about but for the most part, at least in my area, communities aren't sectioned off by nationality. You're either a gid cnut or a plain old cnut, regardless of where your family is from.
Last edited:
If Scotland went the UDI route then it could, but they would still need their own currency and Spain is never letting Scotland into the EU after that move. Even Sturgeon ruled it out as an option because its a terrible idea.
Like I say Scotland has voted for this, its their problem they hold no cards at all that I can see.
I'm sure you're quite right.
We hold very few cards indeed which is why, despite Scotland not voting for it, we're left lumbered with feudal lordship and an oligarchy , Satan incarnate as a home secretary, a PG Wodehouse character as PM, a media that is slowly morphing into your Neighbourhood watch member racist Aunt and fecking Brexit. But, hey, we are, as you point out, close to powerless so perhaps eventually we'll learn our lesson and shut the feck up lest like a torrent rush we are crushed once more.
Better together offered a 'handshake and a wink' kind of DEVOMAX back before the referendum. "The Vow" was born in order to get yes voters to go the other way. After they got their no vote, "The Vow" died very quickly when the unionist parties butchered the Smith commission. Theres a big list of things that we were promised, but most of them turned to shit by the end of 2015. So I think, if they really were to offer something that would keep the no votes no, it would have to be put on paper and written into law first. ie "look what you will be walking away from" rather than "if you stay, you can have this...".
Not sure how thats a reply to what I said. It could...what? Its fairly simple, if the assertion is that everything belongs to the UK. Then EVERYTHING belongs to the UK. Which includes the debt. But if Scotland is to take on its share of the debt, then its only right that it takes its share of the assets that we built up together as well.
I still think the SNP are going about this all wrong... they should start engaging with the rest of the Uk electorate and try to get a UK wide vote on "do you want the money grabbing scots kicked out of the union"... they would walk the independence vote
I like your thinking. Put SNP candidates in English constituencies with the promise that they can have a vote like the one you suggest. Smash the elections and have an SNP majority across the entire UK. And then wee Nicky starts pulling out the copper wire in Westminster and runs away whilst everyone gets sold into slavery to work at Trump's golf course. It's a brilliant plan and I'm glad you suggested it.
It's a deal as long as England keeps Nicky Campbell and Jim White.
As much as there is clear and vocal support for this, I just don't see how the SNP will be able to give proper guidance and answers to the Scottish public on what's going to happen with their economy, the potential lengthy period of austerity, and other critical infrastructure and services - let alone national security - that's tide up with being a part of the UK.
Yes, you could argue that the UK did something similar with Brexit, but - even as a remainer - I can see that the self-determination of key infrastructure, services and currency was already in place here. Brexit is like opting out of a club that was giving you the best membership deal possible. Scottish independence would be like opting out of the club in order to start a new one that has absolutely zero accreditation.
What also bemuses me is that the SNP are arguing for even more progressive climate policies and stances than what's coming out of Westminster - which is actually v ambitious/being acted upon in contrast to most similar countries. You'd think that utilising their massive oil reserves would be a good temporary means of smoothing out the process, but they're wanting to dissolve that industry even faster! Again, super glad that these industries are changing and progressing, but how can Scotland potentially start their own currency - and have it valued as being competitive with both the pound and euro - whilst not relying on their most essential export (... after whisky)??
I just think, bar those who are so ideologically driven as to enter the abyss in order to break away from Westminster, there are unavoidable short-term negative impacts that will sway people into backing a united Britain. Especially if the UK experiences the economic bounce that has been forecast, and we don't enter another serious Covid wave.
Yes, you could argue that the UK did something similar with Brexit, but - even as a remainer - I can see that the self-determination of key infrastructure, services and currency was already in place here. Brexit is like opting out of a club that was giving you the best membership deal possible. Scottish independence would be like opting out of the club in order to start a new one that has absolutely zero accreditation.
What also bemuses me is that the SNP are arguing for even more progressive climate policies and stances than what's coming out of Westminster - which is actually v ambitious/being acted upon in contrast to most similar countries. You'd think that utilising their massive oil reserves would be a good temporary means of smoothing out the process, but they're wanting to dissolve that industry even faster! Again, super glad that these industries are changing and progressing, but how can Scotland potentially start their own currency - and have it valued as being competitive with both the pound and euro - whilst not relying on their most essential export (... after whisky)??
I just think, bar those who are so ideologically driven as to enter the abyss in order to break away from Westminster, there are unavoidable short-term negative impacts that will sway people into backing a united Britain. Especially if the UK experiences the economic bounce that has been forecast, and we don't enter another serious Covid wave.
I don't think that was me, but it's an interesting avenue, basically your Devo Max. Because of devolution, though, you actually already have a federal system for all intents and purposes. So the question is just how power is divided between the federal and regional governments - basically just asking if devolution should be developed further.
As you say though, you would likely need to split up England into several regions for this to serve its purpose - which might be even harder than anything else proposed so far in here. If that doesn't happen, though, it won't be fair to those regions that Scotland, NI, and Wales are getting more power while they are similarly being underserved by Westminster; plus England would be such a dominant factor in the confederation, that it would ultimately continue to be frustrating in similar ways as now.
Now I see - you shouldn't call talk about Scotland leaving England, you should talk about England finally dumping those impoverished, whiny haggis-eaters from the north! It's not Scoxit, it's Sco-feck-off! (Admittedly, Scoxit sounds better.)
INT = 0.
Now what!
I've never seen someone slowly descend from an educated response into complete madness as they added more quotes. Impressive!Your view or Scotland's view of what is fair isn't the only view though is it? Your fairly simple stance for example was not one the EU took during Brexit negotiations.
Scotland's view would only be the final say under a UDI.
If Sturgeon rules out UDI which she has then its Westminster's view of what is and isn't fair that is going to count. I'm not saying they are going to take down every school brick by brick and transport them to England but this quaint idea that you leave and decide your share of the furniture, which you take with you, won't happen. Assets the rest of the UK would need to pay to replace falls in the we are not paying for Scottish independence category.
How much is it to build a new nuclear submarine base for example?
All I am outlining is the horrendous mess of unspecified details the SNP are now responsible for clearing up and the eye watering potential costs they have exposed Scotland to and it will be Scotland that pays for it.
The rest of the UK didn't vote for this we will not be left in anyway holding the bag for it.
I did think writing a few fairly coherent (hopefully) paragraphs and then concluding with INT = 0 is a little contradictory.
This is a really good point. It's all well and good for us to say "get them out of Scotland" but they've also resulted in a lot of local jobs for the surrounding areas that have also benefitted from the base on top of the costs to build that you mention.
As Scotland would own most of the UK's current fishing waters at least they could start selling their fish again.
Interesting would be the customs border between Berwick and Gretna. Even more customs officers to recruit!
Smuggling immigrants through the Kielder Forest. Priti Patel on patrol.
Interesting would be the customs border between Berwick and Gretna. Even more customs officers to recruit!
Smuggling immigrants through the Kielder Forest. Priti Patel on patrol.