When will indyref2 happen?

[sophia]

I'm not entirely sure as to why the referendum has to be run from Edinburgh.

If when there is a pro self governance vote in a few months time, whoever the prime minister is should grant a referendum and run it from London.

It would be gerrymandered and a scare storied shambles to beyond what most would regard as fair but a small margin vote for retaining London power would be inevitable.

[BFTD]

16 hours ago, Lex said:

Of course there is no chance BJ 

I was with you at this point.

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

23 minutes ago, Stinky Bone said:

I don't know you personally, I hope you are a lawyer or something and can correct me, but when I read the section 30 of the Scotland act is was all about suppressing Scotland. 

I don't know what you mean or what point you're making, it doesn't have much bearing on the short term viability or otherwise of what we were talking about.

[Ira Gaines]

Not knowing how to multi quote

[GordonS]

1 hour ago, Stinky Bone said:

I agree with most of your post with the exception of legalities.  Isn't law basically the will of the people, what is right or wrong? 

Good God, no. Law is almost entirely two things - whatever laws have been made by the legislature and executive down the years, and precedent established by previous court decisions at the same or higher level. That's it. Many of our laws come from a time when women couldn't vote, when only the rich could vote. Our entire constitution was created for a system in which only landed gentry could vote. Law has nothing to do with democracy or right and wrong.

Put it this way - in Moohan and others, Lady Hale said that parliament gave women the right to vote, so parliament could take it away.

Edited January 3, 2021 by GordonS

[Richie]

I reckon a referendum at the moment would fail, so arguably WM could agree to one and No would win.

Its one thing polling coming out with Yes in the lead, but its easy to answer stuff like that when there's nothing riding on it.

Until there are detailed proposals on currency, economic projections etc (and other things - much of which can't be answered pre-Independence) many people (inc soft Yessers) will be reticent. 

FFA is the middle ground, but there are obvious reasons why WM wouldn't put that on the table.

[git-intae-thum]

3 minutes ago, Richie said:

I reckon a referendum at the moment would fail, so arguably WM could agree to one and No would win.

Its one thing polling coming out with Yes in the lead, but its easy to answer stuff like that when there's nothing riding on it.

Until there are detailed proposals on currency, economic projections etc (and other things - much of which can't be answered pre-Independence) many people (inc soft Yessers) will be reticent. 

FFA is the middle ground, but there are obvious reasons why WM wouldn't put that on the table.

If the British nationalists had any confidence they would win they would be snapping Scotgovs hand off for the chance of a referendum. Win a 2nd time and it likely will be "41 years"  before the chance of another shot.

The fact they are running away from democracy, means they know they will lose. 

[git-intae-thum]

 This argument that there needs to be complete clarity on every issue surrounding independence is a lot of bollocks. Everyone knows that is not possible.

There is always risk, but I would have thought events since 2014 have proved beyond doubt that it was voting for union that has created the biggest risk to our national health and wealth.

Anyway...our electorate in 2014 were provided with a 600 page white paper that tried to answer as many questions as possible. 

Perhaps next time all we need is to borrow a big red bus. 

[Theroadlesstravelled]

1 hour ago, git-intae-thum said:

 This argument that there needs to be complete clarity on every issue surrounding independence is a lot of bollocks. Everyone knows that is not possible.

There is always risk, but I would have thought events since 2014 have proved beyond doubt that it was voting for union that has created the biggest risk to our national health and wealth.

Anyway...our electorate in 2014 were provided with a 600 page white paper that tried to answer as many questions as possible. 

Perhaps next time all we need is to borrow a big red bus. 

Make it red, white and blue to get the **** onside.

[San Starko Rover]

 This argument that there needs to be complete clarity on every issue surrounding independence is a lot of bollocks. Everyone knows that is not possible.
There is always risk, but I would have thought events since 2014 have proved beyond doubt that it was voting for union that has created the biggest risk to our national health and wealth.
Anyway...our electorate in 2014 were provided with a 600 page white paper that tried to answer as many questions as possible. 
Perhaps next time all we need is to borrow a big red bus. 

Probably be more effective to use the Gers figures and send it round England to whip the Gammons into a real frenzy. “Scotland costs England £xxx,xxx,xxx a month kick them out and fund the NHS” I’m actually surprised the SNP don’t use this tactic more as it would make it harder for WM to make claims of subsidies up here if the SNP was really pushing highlighting the claims to middle England.

Personally I think the SG are currently doing the right thing, push for seats and increase vote % then demand Indy Ref. If it’s refused as Boris says it will be then they need to explore every legal route possible while trying to gain some international sympathy.

Ultimately if this continues it will eventually at some point turn nasty starting with small scale civil disobedience then escalating from there. No one wants to see this happen but this will always be the final destination when you deny people the democratic route with a blanket Boris says you can’t have one till 2055.

[git-intae-thum]

14 minutes ago, San Starko Rover said:

 

Probably be more effective to use the Gers figures and send it round England to whip the Gammons into a real frenzy. “Scotland costs England £xxx,xxx,xxx a month kick them out and fund the NHS” I’m actually surprised the SNP don’t use this tactic more as it would make it harder for WM to make claims of subsidies up here if the SNP was really pushing highlighting the claims to middle England.

Personally I think the SG are currently doing the right thing, push for seats and increase vote % then demand Indy Ref. If it’s refused as Boris says it will be then they need to explore every legal route possible while trying to gain some international sympathy.

Ultimately if this continues it will eventually at some point turn nasty starting with small scale civil disobedience then escalating from there. No one wants to see this happen but this will always be the final destination when you deny people the democratic route with a blanket Boris says you can’t have one till 2055.

 

Yep....let them think that and pressurise the Tory fascists into casting us adrift.

Obviously anyone with half a brain can look a wee bit deeper at the statistics and see the headline deficit figures continue to be a load of shite. The gers figures in 2019 had us down as being responsible for 60% of the UK's net fiscal deficit.......thats right.....Scotland......the only part of the UK with a positive balance of trade and with only 8% of the population.......is supposedly responsible for over half the UK's overspend

And..... hard of thought britnat clowns continue to lap this shit up.

 

 

 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

Fighting for years through the courts for the right to a referendum, and eventually succeeding along with years of gathering international support, then returning a majority NO would be the most Scottish thing ever.

[GordonS]

13 hours ago, Stinky Bone said:

So would I be correct in saying then that it is a political and not legal point then? 

The argument about whether Scotland could be Independent without permission from a westminster government?

 

 

It's a political issue in the sense that there is no clear legal route to independence without the consent of the UK government. It's 50-50 whether a consultative referendum would be legal. That's a court case I'd like to watch.

[welshbairn]

Ruth Davidson's new pal the Rev Stu is fair going for it.

Quote

And let’s be clear: the only thing the Unionists fear is Sturgeon going in the next few weeks. If she clings on until the eve of the election and is then brought down, they’ll celebrate the near-certain avoidance of an SNP/indy majority, aided by the idiotic “both votes SNP” argument (ironically promoted by James Kelly) that ensures hundreds of thousands of pro-indy votes are wasted.

 

[SANTAN]

13 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

If the British nationalists had any confidence they would win they would be snapping Scotgovs hand off for the chance of a referendum. Win a 2nd time and it likely will be "41 years"  before the chance of another shot.

The fact they are running away from democracy, means they know they will lose. 

Ludicrous that anyone would believe that. Even if they're confident the risk reward isn't anywhere near worth it, why on earth would any Unionist think there wouldn't be agitation for 40 years or so when it's only been 6 years since the last one...

[SANTAN]

10 hours ago, San Starko Rover said:

 

Probably be more effective to use the Gers figures and send it round England to whip the Gammons into a real frenzy. “Scotland costs England £xxx,xxx,xxx a month kick them out and fund the NHS” I’m actually surprised the SNP don’t use this tactic more as it would make it harder for WM to make claims of subsidies up here if the SNP was really pushing highlighting the claims to middle England.

Personally I think the SG are currently doing the right thing, push for seats and increase vote % then demand Indy Ref. If it’s refused as Boris says it will be then they need to explore every legal route possible while trying to gain some international sympathy.

Ultimately if this continues it will eventually at some point turn nasty starting with small scale civil disobedience then escalating from there. No one wants to see this happen but this will always be the final destination when you deny people the democratic route with a blanket Boris says you can’t have one till 2055.

 

There'll be no civil disobedience minus some teenagers doing some graffiti or some of the older members of the forum waving their walking sticks at the clouds..

[Caledonian1]

35 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Ruth Davidson's new pal the Rev Stu is fair going for it.

 

I just find Wings so utterly depressing whenever I venture there now (very rarely indeed)

I thought he did a great job in 2014 and prior to the election in 2015.  Since than i noticed more and more articles about his pet subject GRA (think that's right)  Something that perhaps matters to a few people but his obsession was severely off-putting when I really wanted to read more about how we can achieve independence.  I also thought his court case v Kezia Dugdale was petty in the extreme and again a diversion from what he (was) good at.

 

I sometimes wonder if he is the plant....he is so anti Nicola Sturgeon and anti SNP these days it is beyond belief.  Here we are with 17 polls in favour of YES and what does he do, ramps up the anti-Nicola rhetoric.  Salmond is nae daft and I am sure the last thing he wants to do is set back the independence cause - I would love him to come out at the inquest and state that he does not believe Nicola had anything to do with his  sex assault charges. Maybe her husband did have something in for Salmond but that does not mean that Nicola too had anything to do with it.

[NotThePars]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

Ruth Davidson's new pal the Rev Stu is fair going for it.

 

Haha. Who's he advocating the second vote goes to? Can't imagine it's the Greens that destroyed any chance of indy for a generation!

[welshbairn]

2 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

Haha. Who's he advocating the second vote goes to? Can't imagine it's the Greens that destroyed any chance of indy for a generation!

Who knows? Something new emerging on the populist right perhaps?

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,wings-over-scotland-blogger-considering-new-political-party_10683.htm

 

 

[git-intae-thum]

2 hours ago, GordonS said:

It's a political issue in the sense that there is no clear legal route to independence without the consent of the UK government. It's 50-50 whether a consultative referendum would be legal. That's a court case I'd like to watch.

Indeed, it is a case where both sides would try and lead precedent from domestic law, international law and argue over wording of historic treaties.

Essentially it would come down to sovereignty.

No doubting appeals would lead it eventually to the  UK supreme court**. As far as Scotland is concerned, good luck on getting them to make the right decision.

*"the recent coming into existence of which of course is a direct breach of the treaty of union which guaranteed the independence and sanctity of Scots law**