Let's All Laugh at the Royalist Nats and Greens

[Dawson Park Boy]

As this thread is becoming tedious might I suggest that I am happy to wager  £100 that there will NOT be a referendum by the end of 2023.
If there is one,  I will pay the money to a charity of choice as named by the separatists on here.

 

[Albus Bulbasaur]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

Before retiring with that link with a stiff glass of brandy and a spliff, is there any legal reason that the SG can't commission a poll that covers the whole population of voting age, rather than a small sample. on any subject it chooses?

Despite what you think about myself I think you're generally reasonable. Didn't take you as a stoner though!

I think the past 2 or 3 pages have been typical forum semantic pedantic arguments but I feel safe in saying that myself and Duries argument has been adequately addressed by Ad Lib who seems to be very knowledgeable on the subject. Our fundamental argument is a big talking point and it's a bit weird to see it brushed off and dismissed as some hyper technical argument. It always strikes me as amusing when pseudo intellectuals act as if the person they're speaking to is beyond reasonable comprehension. When generally they're making a poor worded yet coherent argument. 

I'd welcome a proper referendum at this point. 

[BFTD]

DPB on the hunt for people even denser than he pretends to be!

[Albus Bulbasaur]

17 minutes ago, BFTD said:

DPB on the hunt for people even denser than he pretends to be!

I probably disagree with 80% of his opinions but I don't understand why instead of addressing his arguments people feel the need to resort to primary school level petty personal attacks. If you think he's so detestable just ignore him. This type of stuff is puerile and pointless. 

[lichtgilphead]

Well, considering that he's offering a bet on something that isn't going  to happen anyway, he's not really risking much.

At this time, the snp intend to introduce legislation to have a referendum. This bill will be introduced before the end of 2023. The referendum itself will be a a later date.

A more appropriate bet would be on whether the snp will introduce an Indyref bill at Holyrood before 31/12/2023. If they do, I win, if not DPB wins.

If the snp don't introduce the bill, I'll save the money in subs anyway

If DPB offers this fair bet,, 'll be happy to take it up, and unlike The_Welcher, I'll pay up if I lose.

 

 

Edited April 29, 2022 by lichtgilphead
clatity over dates

[git-intae-thum]

Lol.....no shit Sherlock that UK gov and it's supreme court lackies will hold that a second referendum is illegal without Westminster consent.

[Dan Steele]

We're now in the position of the once independent Electoral Commission being under government control. A government led by someone who unlawfully prorogued Parliament and has shown himself to be a liar throughout Partygate. I wonder how this will affect the SNP mandate for a second referendum, something that (regardless of those who are terrified at the possibility) polls show there is still an appetite for in Scotland. Will the government opt for the 'muscular approach'@Duries Air Freshener thought worked so well in Spain to clamp down on the democratic process; a continual shout of No; or maybe just lie and say there's no appetite? 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

The unionists are playing a very dangerous game - if you block off any legal route to an IndyRef2 then it would be no surprise that illegal action might be taken instead.

[Albus Bulbasaur]

11 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

The unionists are playing a very dangerous game - if you block off any legal route to an IndyRef2 then it would be no surprise that illegal action might be taken instead.

What illegal action would any Unionist be worried about?

[Mark Connolly]

7 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

What illegal action would any Unionist be worried about?

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Conservative Manifesto 2022

[Albus Bulbasaur]

3 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Conservative Manifesto 2022

Being a Unionist isn't exclusive to Conservatives thankfully. 

Do you have any idea what illegal action the other poster was referring to? 

[Mark Connolly]

2 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

Being a Unionist isn't exclusive to Conservatives thankfully. 

Do you have any idea what illegal action the other poster was referring to? 

No, I just saw the opportunity for a joke and took it.

[Albus Bulbasaur]

2 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:

No, I just saw the opportunity for a joke and took it.

CONS +5

[Duries Air Freshener]

47 minutes ago, The Skelpit Lug said:

We're now in the position of the once independent Electoral Commission being under government control. A government led by someone who unlawfully prorogued Parliament and has shown himself to be a liar throughout Partygate. I wonder how this will affect the SNP mandate for a second referendum, something that (regardless of those who are terrified at the possibility) polls show there is still an appetite for in Scotland. Will the government opt for the 'muscular approach'@Duries Air Freshener thought worked so well in Spain to clamp down on the democratic process; a continual shout of No; or maybe just lie and say there's no appetite? 

I don’t see how matters to do with the Electoral Commission would affect the ‘SNP mandate’, especially when it doesn’t even exist.

The notion that refusing a 2nd referendum on an already settled issue is somehow undemocratic is ridiculous.

The people of Scotland do not want Independence - time to drop this pish.

Edited April 30, 2022 by Duries Air Freshener

[Dan Steele]

7 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

I don’t see how matters to do with the Electoral Commission would affect the ‘SNP mandate’,

[williemillersmoustache]

I see someone dug up the permanently seething and hyper partisan ramblings of the angry walnut. 

Please, fetch balustrade lanyard,, Jum Murphy, Eddie Izzard, the solero girl and that entirely un qualified dog food salesman who thinks Scotland is just too stupid to have money. Might as well get the whole band back together, there's a referendum next year. 

[WhiteRoseKillie]

17 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

As this thread is becoming tedious might I suggest that I am happy to wager  £100 that there will NOT be a referendum by the end of 2023.
If there is one,  I will pay the money to a charity of choice as named by the separatists on here.

 

What the fúck would a charity do with imaginary money?

[Antlion]

18 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

As this thread is becoming tedious might I suggest that I am happy to wager  £100 that there will NOT be a referendum by the end of 2023.
If there is one,  I will pay the money to a charity of choice as named by the separatists on here.

 

I’m sure your fellow separatists will be happy to pay up - directly from their Brexit dividends.

[Kenneth840]

On 26/04/2022 at 12:24, Zern said:

I'm trying to be charitable here. If your objection to the SNP is that they promise something "outwith their power" it seems that you have very few options when it comes to political parties in Scotland. Almost by definition the local chairmen of the branches of Con/Lab/Lib Dem have no power to deliver on anything they promise, only the power to lobby within theior own party on behalf of Scotland. The SNP and Greens at least have control over their ambitions.

They certainly are, at present, unable to deliver another Edinburgh Agreement. That arrangement requires co-operation from the UK government.

However. It is far from clear that Scotland lacks the power to hold a referendum. The case for is pretty good, relying on existing UK legislation. Referendums are not a reserved matter. Voting is something wholly devolved to Holyrood. With the referendum act in 2020 they have already established that this is their preferred route. Holding an advisory referendum to poll opinion on independence.

The legislation will be clear that there is no legal obligation incurred by such a border poll. The intent is to clarify support or lack thereof.

So what is the point then.  If UK government won't recognise the Yes result, then why bother.  It only becomes an expensive glorified opinion poll. 

On 26/04/2022 at 13:23, Zern said:

Referendums, under UK law are advisory. ie not legally binding.

As above. What is the point of Indy ref 2 then.

On 28/04/2022 at 19:09, Zern said:

Voting rights within Scotland is wholly devolved. That power to poll the electorate is with Holyrood as evidenced by every election since the parliament's inception.

Westminster ultimately has the power to change that, but they have not. Nor are there plans to. Inaction in this case equals consent. Legislation has already been passed by SNP/Greens and not been challenged by Westminster. Age of voting is a good example of this. This is legal. By your definition.

A border poll would be the same.

The Tory's don't appear all that minded to legislate on this matter and it very much seems that for a majority of their voter base and MPs this is not a high priority.

The constitution is reserved, but only because the people of Scotland accept that as fact.  Scotland has a constitution which predates the Treaty of Union.  Our Scottish MPs and MSPs are choosing Westminster parliament sovereignty over Scottish popular sovereignty.  

On 28/04/2022 at 19:49, Zern said:

On this matter the Scotland Act is quite clear, devolved powers sit with Holyrood. They pass legislation on the back of those powers; the ranked choice vote in council elections being another example of how that occurs. This becomes UK law, but localised to Scotland. Now we also have the referendums act of 2020., a change that pertains to Scotland and is now UK legislation.

There could be an unlikely scenario where a desperate Mr Johnson whips his current lot of MPs to create a specific piece of legislation banning referendums in Scotland only, this happening after it has passed through Holyrood.

In that case there would be no referendum held. The legislation would be effectively annulled.

Don't see that happening though.

What is the plan if a UK general election is called in 2023?  What will Scotland do when it cant hold a referendum if that happens, as per Referendums (Scotland) Act 2020?

On 28/04/2022 at 21:29, Zern said:

Not going to happen and if it does we'll legislate against it?

So why didn't that occur to the Referendums (Scotland) Act 2020?

It does give the power to declare a referendum to the parliament, on any subject being drug policy, defence or even independence. Contrary to what you've been saying @Duries Air Freshener

The Uk supreme court will always side with the union. 

21 hours ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

 

Not at all.

My inability to cite legislation doesn't change my opinion.  I don't go through documents with a fine toothed comb.  You haven't provided anything that contradicts what I'm saying though.  The Referendums Act not mentioning a section 30 doesn't mean they don't need to ask for one.

Sturgeon kens it

Racist Humza kens it

You ken it

I ken it

Barrhead Boy kens it

Peter A Bell kens it

Patsy Kensit

I do watch/listen to Nat podcasts though, and they DO think they need the approval of Boris, unless they fight in the courts and win.  No doubt you'll ask me for proof of this too, but I'm not about to trawl through them.

Again, why did Sturgeon not just have one when you were riding sky high in the polls?  If the Referendums (Scotland) Act was so powerful then you could be sitting pretty with an Independent Scotland by now. 

You are wrong here.  Neither Peter Bell or Barrhead Boy are advocating a section 30 because if we do this correctly, we don't need one. 

Edited April 30, 2022 by Kenneth840

[Benjamin_Nevis]

Amazing. The genital inspector returns and a racist, misogynistic bigot wants to make a wager he'll never honour [emoji23]