Jump to content

When will indyref2 happen?


Colkitto

Indyref2  

816 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

On 30/08/2019 at 17:29, Detective Jimmy McNulty said:

A generation is 5 years, as this was the length of time it took Sir Reginald Generation, after which it is named, to come up with the concept back in 1879.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Goomba said:

It’s been obvious from the start that no 2nd referendum will take place for the following reasons:

-Scots don’t want one.

-2014 was supposed to be once in a generation.

-There’s been no sustainable evidence of support for the breakup of the country.

-The Tories always run on the promise of not holding one, and they are the party of government.

-The devolved administration does not have the power to dictate a referendum.

The latest revelation is only the latest piece of evidence in a long list of obvious indicators as to the SNP’s apathy towards holding another referendum they know they wouldn’t win.

As a Yoon, my gut feeling is that the SNP are a safe pair of hands for the Union.  I can only hope Nats continue to choose them over Alba.

Sevco Scotland ( name approval request to......the The Rangers plc.....est. 2012...... approved.)

You let a great Scottish team die.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Arch Stanton said:

There is no legal definition of "a generation". 

Roon ye.

Do you take the Dundee generation of 12/13 years or the average Scottish generation of about 31 years?

You could take the shortest legal generation as 16 years and 9 months.

 

Edit: Just saw this pish come up on my twitter feed so obviously the time has come. 😃

 

 

Facilitate a further Scottish Independence referendum - Petitions (parliament.uk)

image.png.01fd2f6fa8fe162060ebec6e65be8095.png

 

Did laugh at this.

image.png.a77036d07a3f808e36a9da13ece4c899.png

Edited by Suspect Device
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/03/2022 at 18:36, lichtgilphead said:

Oh dear! We appear to have another Yoon poster that states his own opinions as if they were facts.

Let's go through this misinformation line by line

-Scots don’t want one.

A majority of Scots voters (not "Scots") want a referendum within the next 5 years. The smallest poll majority in 2021 was 3% and the largest 10% Polling details

-2014 was supposed to be once in a generation.

That phrase doesn't appear in the Edinburgh Agreement. Anyway, a political generation is defined as 7 years in the Good Friday Agreement. Why should a generation be defined differently in different parts of the UK?

-There’s been no sustainable evidence of support for the breakup of the country.

The most recent polling (December 2021) suggests that yes & no are tied. when don't knows are excluded. The largest lead held by either side since the last Holyrood election was 9% for yes and only 6% for no      Link - scroll down to first table

-The Tories always run on the promise of not holding one, and they are the party of government.

The Tories are the party of Government in the UK, not Scotland.

If the Union is a union of equals, the decision whether to leave is a matter fot the voters in the area that wants to leave. Allowing rUK MP's to decide the status of any specific part of the UK smacks of colonialism, rather tha a union of equals

-The devolved administration does not have the power to dictate a referendum.

This has not been tested in court. It's only an opinion.

Thanks for responding with coherent points.  You buck the trend.

The majority of Scots voters choosing to favour a referendum within 5 years when answering opinion polls is undoubtedly true.  This is a far cry from what Sturgeon was claiming though, which would be to have one next year?  Although if you're ITK then you won't be surprised at the latest media priming for this to be kicked into the grass along with previous red herrings.  It's a shame Wings Over Bath isn't around to highlight this sort of thing anymore.  Opinion polls can't tell the level of apathy, and my gut feeling is that not that many people just are even bothered anymore.. they'd still click or answer 'Yes to a referendum' if asked the question directly though.  Even the All Under Five Banners marches get hardly any people now, although they didn't get many to begin with when you look at the actual numbers.

Like I say, there's been no sustained evidence of a lead advocating a split.  Not sure if your reply was a counter or not, but it doesn't contradict this, so what I say is hardly misinformation.

The Tories are indeed the party of government of the UK, and guess what?  We are in the UK.  My fellow constituents and I are able to elect an MP for our area, same as everyone else across the country from Dover to Dundee, Lerwick to Londonderry and Barry to Brig'ton.  Together, we elect the government.  Despite Salmond's cheeky renaming of the Scottish Executive several years back, there is actually no Scottish Government in the true sense.  There is merely a devolved administration which has been given the ability to rule on certain issues.  Power devolved is power retained.

The Union is indeed a Union of equals, however the decision on whether to leave is a matter for the the government, not just the people of the potential breakaway area who, as it happens, have already chosen to stay.  Every constituency having as much say as any other ensures that we are indeed a Union of equals.

The devolved administration absolutely does not have the power to dictate a referendum as such powers have never been devolved to it (thank f**k).

I feel sorry for Nats within the echo chamber who get wrapped up in the conspiratorial blogs, facebook pages etc.  Many of you genuinely appear to believe that the UK means nothing, and that those who who believe differently are trolls who don't matter.  I sense many of you see us as 'the other', and that isn't healthy.  Many also think that it's your right to have the country broken up.. like a default setting or something.  It's actually not.

Edited by Goomba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Goomba said:

 

I feel sorry for Nats within the echo chamber who get wrapped up in the conspiratorial blogs, facebook pages etc.  Many of you genuinely appear to believe that the UK means nothing, that those who think it does are trolls and don't matter.  I sense you see us as 'the other', and that isn't healthy.  Many think that it's your right to have the country broken up.. like a default setting or something.  It's actually not.

Further broken up. The UK started breaking up in 1920s. As for the BiB - irony, surely? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Goomba said:

-Scots don’t want one.

The majority of Scots voters choosing to favour a referendum within 5 years when answering opinion polls is undoubtedly true.  This is a far cry from what Sturgeon was claiming though, which would be to have one next year? 

These are two totally different concepts. I can only answer what you actually type. As I said above, your original quote was misinformation

-2014 was supposed to be once in a generation.

I note that you didn't bother to respond to my rebuttal. In the absence of a response, I make that two pieces of misinformation and counting

13 hours ago, Goomba said:

-There’s been no sustainable evidence of support for the breakup of the country.

Like I say, there's been no sustained evidence of a lead advocating a split.  Not sure if your reply was a counter or not, but it doesn't contradict this, so what I say is hardly misinformation.

The problem is that you didn't actually say "there is no sustainable evidence of a lead" You said "There's been no sustainable evidence of support"

Support for indepedence was at around 33% in early 2014. It then rose to 45% at the first indyref. Since then, Yes has led by as much as 13%  (Oct 2020) and No has led by as much as 8% (May 2021). Obviously, I'm excluding Scotland in Union's attempts to game the system with their ridiculous biased remain/leave question.

The last couple of polls (see previous link) have shown Yes & No to be level.. Since the beginning of the pandemic, Yes has led in the polls on 35 occasions, No has led on 30 occasions and there has been a tie on 8 occasions. 

Please attempt to use more precise terminology in future. There is plenty of evidence that "breakup of the country" is  currently supported by a figure somewhere between 46% and 56.5% of Scottish voters (excluding Don't Knows) . This figure has been sustained for a full 2 years.

Conclusion - reframing your original statement does not change the misinformation originally provided. That's 3 out of 3 bits of misinformation so far!

14 hours ago, Goomba said:

-The Tories always run on the promise of not holding one, and they are the party of government.

The Tories are indeed the party of government of the UK, and guess what?  We are in the UK.  My fellow constituents and I are able to elect an MP for our area, same as everyone else across the country from Dover to Dundee, Lerwick to Londonderry and Barry to Brig'ton.  Together, we elect the government.  Despite Salmond's cheeky renaming of the Scottish Executive several years back, there is actually no Scottish Government in the true sense.  There is merely a devolved administration which has been given the ability to rule on certain issues.  Power devolved is power retained.

The Union is indeed a Union of equals, however the decision on whether to leave is a matter for the the government, not just the people of the potential breakaway area who, as it happens, have already chosen to stay.  Every constituency having as much say as any other ensures that we are indeed a Union of equals.

Whilst I would agree that power devolved is power retained, I don't support devolution. The only reason that the Westminster Government allowed the limited devolution that Scotland currently has was "to kill nationalism stone dead" (George Robertson - Secretary of State for Scotland - 1995). How's that going?

However, your view that "people of the potential breakaway area" should have no say in any future decision relating to Scottish independence is in clear breach of the United Nations support for the right to self-determination. Indeed, many leaders of the Tory party have reaffirmed this principle, even though they haven't been consistent in their views.

According to Margaret Thatcher, Scotland only had to elect a majority of SNP MP's to gain independence. That happened, so the goalposts were moved, and we were told that it had to be confirmed through a referendum.

David Cameron agreed to the referendum, and was quoted as saying: "You might want to think 'well why are we having this referendum, why take the risk?' I think it is the right thing to do for this reason. The Scottish people elected in 2011 a Scottish National party government in Edinburgh with Alex Salmond at its head. One of their policies was to have a referendum on the future of Scotland being a part of the UK.

"I felt, as the prime minister of the UK, I had a choice. I could either say to them 'well you can't have your referendum, it is for us to decide whether you should have one.' I think that would have led to an almighty and disastrous battle between the Westminster parliament and the UK government and the Scottish government and the Scottish first minister. So I did what I thought was the right thing, which was to say 'you voted for a party that wants independence, you should have a referendum that is legal, that is decisive and that is fair.'"

So, to recap, the Tories have not always run on the promise of not holding a referendum. This has been a recent development, which breaches the UK's treaty obligations and the UN charter. 

Misleading count? Four out of four.

And finally

14 hours ago, Goomba said:

-The devolved administration does not have the power to dictate a referendum.

The devolved administration absolutely does not have the power to dictate a referendum as such powers have never been devolved to it (thank f**k).

How about some evidence to back up your bald statements?

Here's one view:

1) If a power isn't reserved to the UK government, it is within the competence of the Scottish Parliament

2) Referenda are not listed within the reserved matters. Accordingly, it may be within the power of the Scottish Parliament to introduce a bill

3) There are a majority of current Scottish MSP's that would support an Independence Referendum Act, so it would be likely tthat the bill would pass and become an Act

4) However, as part of the bill's procedural route, the Presiding Officer has to state whether or not he considers the bill to be within the powers of the Scottish Parliament. This view is not definitive, though. Legislative competence is a complex issue, and can ultimately be determined only by a court

5) As the judiciary have not had this final say, no-one can be certain as to whether the Scottsih Government can pass such a bill

Accordingly, that's the Yoon Grand Slam. Five misleading statements out of five attempts. A fantastic acheivement for such a novice poster who has definitely not suddenly appeared after a banhammer. Let me congratulate you, sirrah!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about some evidence to back up your bald statements?
Here's one view:
1) If a power isn't reserved to the UK government, it is within the competence of the Scottish Parliament
2) Referenda are not listed within the reserved matters. Accordingly, it may be within the power of the Scottish Parliament to introduce a bill
3) There are a majority of current Scottish MSP's that would support an Independence Referendum Act, so it would be likely tthat the bill would pass and become an Act
4) However, as part of the bill's procedural route, the Presiding Officer has to state whether or not he considers the bill to be within the powers of the Scottish Parliament. This view is not definitive, though. Legislative competence is a complex issue, and can ultimately be determined only by a court
5) As the judiciary have not had this final say, no-one can be certain as to whether the Scottsih Government can pass such a bill
Accordingly, that's the Yoon Grand Slam. Five misleading statements out of five attempts. A fantastic acheivement for such a novice poster who has definitely not suddenly appeared after a banhammer. Let me congratulate you, sirrah!
 
 
I think we can say that this is a telt of the top order.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defence, security and energy will be the issues which dominate politics over the next few years now, as a new Iron Curtain comes down.

Worst possible situation for a 2nd Ref, as defence would be the biggest question now, bigger even than currency, economics, rejoining the EU, pensions, etc.

This solidifies a No vote, and pushes the undecided towards having to remain part of a common defence area with the UK. If a Ref were held later this year, or next, I reckon the result would be around 60-40% No. Who would have thought that Putin would be the one to knock a 2nd Ref on the head.

The SNP's only bet now is to push for FFA and devolve everything apart from defence and foreign policy.

Edited by Jedi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's certainly an interesting idea that when given a choice we'd opt to trust the defence of our people to the arseholes whose most recent martial exploits amounted to expending an incredible number of lives and vast quantities of treasure on plunging large parts of the Middle East into perpetual internecine warfare and achieving absolutely nothing at all in Afghanistan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true. Not saying that I am a 'fan' of a UK Defence force, more thinking in terms of what general public perception will be. When the world becomes a more dangerous place, it is much more difficult to sell the idea of going alone (with several years until potential EU membership).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a 'what if'. If Scotland was independent today, and had assumed control of defence, with a small force. presumably similar in number to Ireland (an army which doesn't get involved around the world on the whole), would you be in favour of Scotland contributing arms to Ukraine?

I would like to think that an Independent Scotland would be much more welcoming of Ukrainian refugees than the UK has been (and am sure it would be).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Here's a 'what if'. If Scotland was independent today, and had assumed control of defence, with a small force. presumably similar in number to Ireland (an army which doesn't get involved around the world on the whole), would you be in favour of Scotland contributing arms to Ukraine?

I would like to think that an Independent Scotland would be much more welcoming of Ukrainian refugees than the UK has been (and am sure it would be).

Sure but money works as well as or instead of arms. Except for particular needs like the Polish MIg 29s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...