Are you on the fence over Scottish independence?

[Goodfellers]

I'm sure we can all agree, Nicola Sturgeons speech and latest update yesterday was high on rhetoric, but low on substance.

Robin McAlpine believes strongly in an independent Scotland but is no fan of the current SNP government.

This is his take on yesterday's announcement. If you're undecided about Scotland's financial future after independence (assuming it happens), it's worth reading.

https://robinmcalpine.org/this-paper-answers-nothing-this-government-has-no-answers/

The latest dismal paper in a series of dismal papers shows that this is a Scottish Government that has no vision for independence and no realistic grasp of what being an independent country means."

[Fulmar]

Here is another on the economic side which makes for serious consideration.

Scottish independence: Why the 'Economics of Independence' paper is a step backwards from the SNP's Growth Commission report (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/scottish-independence-why-the-economics-of-independence-paper-is-a-step-backwards-from-the-snp-s-growth-commission-report/ar-AA133XwY?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=92bc552f03ca4766c30ed19312f6ebda)

[The Horseman]

Aye…to both the above.
But when one identifies A Problem, one must also propose A Solution……or two or three..etc!

[Corky Smeek]

Has anyone in the wider Yes movement ever tried to assert that becoming independent is likely to be plain sailing with no problems to overcome? Not that I know of.

(Just) One of the things that drives me nuts is hypocrisy. If the SG had not come up with a plan for Indy but still asked people to trust them and vote Yes then the MSM would have had a field day. Now that the SG has provided the first part of their plan the MSM is still having a field day by trying to pick holes in it. In other words "damned if they do; damned if they don't".

But the hypocrisy really goes into overdrive when one considers Brexit. The MSM did not question the absence of any plan for the periods before, during and after we left the EU. That worked out really well because there was no plan to disect and so it was easy for Brexiteers to concentrate on what they saw as the negatives of being in the EU. This gave them ample opportunity to scare many people into voting Leave. Of course, the lies about £350m a week for the NHS lead to a few Leave votes too, I am sure.

So, the Leave side won in 2016, with the almost full backing of the MSM, despite not having the slightest idea of what they were asking people to vote for. Yet in IndyRef1 and now with IndyRef2 the SG has produced detailed plans; held news conferences; provided press releases and done TV/Radio interviews. Yet the MSM don't look beyond the opportunity to pick holes and inflate issues into major crises.

Fear and lies won IndyRef1 for the No side. Fear and lies won Brexit for the Leave side. And now that IndyRef2 is on the horizon fear and lies are being used again. Just for once it would be nice to hear something positive about Scotland in our MSM. Instead we are subjected to a continual barrage of us being "too wee, too poor and too stupid" to run our own affairs. Well, we are none of those things.

Too wee - 9 out of the 10 richest countries in the world have populations comparable with Scotland.

Too poor - we are one of the most energy and resource laden countries on the planet. Few countries are better placed than Scotland. Just look at Ireland (now the richest country in Europe by per capita GDP).

Too stupid - Scotland has one of the highest percentage graduate populations in the world. Many of our Universities are truly world class. And we have a reputation for innovation and invention that is second to none.

So instead of concentrating on problems and letting the MSM tell us they are all insurmountable why don't we concentrate on finding solutions. There is not a country on earth who, having gained independence, didn't face problems. An independent Scotland will undoubtedly face them too but with our heart and soul; our will, our resources and determination we will overcome them and become a very successful independent country.

Remember that an adventure always starts with a single step. Let that step be a Yes vote.

[Goodfellers]

Has anyone in the wider Yes movement ever tried to assert that becoming independent is likely to be plain sailing with no problems to overcome? Not that I know of.

(Just) One of the things that drives me nuts is hypocrisy. If the SG had not come up with a plan for Indy but still asked people to trust them and vote Yes then the MSM would have had a field day. Now that the SG has provided the first part of their plan the MSM is still having a field day by trying to pick holes in it. In other words "damned if they do; damned if they don't".

But the hypocrisy really goes into overdrive when one considers Brexit. The MSM did not question the absence of any plan for the periods before, during and after we left the EU. That worked out really well because there was no plan to disect and so it was easy for Brexiteers to concentrate on what they saw as the negatives of being in the EU. This gave them ample opportunity to scare many people into voting Leave. Of course, the lies about £350m a week for the NHS lead to a few Leave votes too, I am sure.

So, the Leave side won in 2016, with the almost full backing of the MSM, despite not having the slightest idea of what they were asking people to vote for. Yet in IndyRef1 and now with IndyRef2 the SG has produced detailed plans; held news conferences; provided press releases and done TV/Radio interviews. Yet the MSM don't look beyond the opportunity to pick holes and inflate issues into major crises.

Fear and lies won IndyRef1 for the No side. Fear and lies won Brexit for the Leave side. And now that IndyRef2 is on the horizon fear and lies are being used again. Just for once it would be nice to hear something positive about Scotland in our MSM. Instead we are subjected to a continual barrage of us being "too wee, too poor and too stupid" to run our own affairs. Well, we are none of those things.

Too wee - 9 out of the 10 richest countries in the world have populations comparable with Scotland.

Too poor - we are one of the most energy and resource laden countries on the planet. Few countries are better placed than Scotland. Just look at Ireland (now the richest country in Europe by per capita GDP).

Too stupid - Scotland has one of the highest percentage graduate populations in the world. Many of our Universities are truly world class. And we have a reputation for innovation and invention that is second to none.

So instead of concentrating on problems and letting the MSM tell us they are all insurmountable why don't we concentrate on finding solutions. There is not a country on earth who, having gained independence, didn't face problems. An independent Scotland will undoubtedly face them too but with our heart and soul; our will, our resources and determination we will overcome them and become a very successful independent country.

Remember that an adventure always starts with a single step. Let that step be a Yes vote.

Do you actually believe that the general population of Ireland are really that well off? Have you actually been there (and I don't mean Dublin). It is NOT a wealthy country. Try reading this https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/we-re-not-as-rich-as-we-have-been-told-to-think-we-are-1.4476247

The internet is full, and I mean full of SNP supporters shouting about giving twice as much to Westminster as we ever get back and that with independence the country will be able to raise the state pension to unheard of levels. If you don't see this, then I'm amazed.

It's Nicola Sturgeon and her governments job to prove to us it's in our interest to vote 'yes', but she is failing miserably. It's nothing to do with the press, she's managing it on her own.

I don't think either of the links provided by Fulmar or myself are msm, as I mentioned my source is very pro-independence and yet, he's ripped the SNP's case for indy to shreds.

[Corky Smeek]

Do you actually believe that the general population of Ireland are really that well off? Have you actually been there (and I don't mean Dublin). It is NOT a wealthy country. Try reading this https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/we-re-not-as-rich-as-we-have-been-told-to-think-we-are-1.4476247

The internet is full, and I mean full of SNP supporters shouting about giving twice as much to Westminster as we ever get back and that with independence the country will be able to raise the state pension to unheard of levels. If you don't see this, then I'm amazed.

It's Nicola Sturgeon and her governments job to prove to us it's in our interest to vote 'yes', but she is failing miserably. It's nothing to do with the press, she's managing it on her own.

I don't think either of the links provided by Fulmar or myself are msm, as I mentioned my source is very pro-independence and yet, he's ripped the SNP's case for indy to shreds.

Not everyone in Ireland is wealthy but neither is everyone in the UK. The fact remains that Irish per capita GDP far exceeds that of the UK. By your logic the UK is also not a wealthy country.

The internet is full, and I mean full, of anti-SNP supporters commenting about how much of a basket case Scotland is. If it is in such a parlous position then that is a pretty poor endorsement of the Union where Westminster still maintains control over roughly 85% of the Scottish economy.

If you don't believe the influence the press has then, I'm amazed. Think Tanks run by the ultra rich dictate to Government what policies to follow and the MSM willingly provide a forum in which these policies may be laid out to the public. See the video on the thread entitled: "What is the alternative to Scottish Independence".

I am fairly sure you are never going to vote Yes. Nothing NS could say would ever convince you, so to say she is "failing miserably" is only measuring her success against your liklihood of agreeing with her. On that basis she is never going to succeed.

Robin McAlpine has long been an adversary of NS. His writings have often been critical of her and this publication is just the latest in a long line. I think you have to read his article with that in mind. Lots of people disagree with NS and the SNP but still wish for independence; indeed I am often one of them. RMcA's vision on how to achieve and sustain an independent Scotland differs from that of the SNP but fundamentally both wish to see Scotland leave the Union. And critically, both believe an independent Scotland is perfectly viable. But, I do agree he is not really MSM.

Fulmar's source was The Scotsman. That is definitely the MSM.

[Fulmar]

I am sorry Corky but every source or person who does not agree with your view is classed by you as MSM or influenced by that and therefore dismissed and diminished by you as not valid. You do not see how utterly biased you are when others do see that. The views expressed in the link I posted are actually reasonable and mild, compared to those in that of the one posted by Goodfellers. It is not unreasonable to highlight the enormous 'down sides' of Independence or that the paper published falls very well short of what is required and say as you do, quite airily, 'oh well, no one pretends that there won't be problems'. People have to form a judgement on all things and not pretend that the 'downsides' are minimal and won't affect people's lives directly very much because they will and that's entirely obvious.

[Goodfellers]

What really frightens me, are the fact there are so many Scots out there who believe the hype. Let's take Corky's reference to Irelands GDP to try and shore up the independence argument. It has long been known the Irelands GDP figure is skewed because many large multinationals use Ireland to site head offices to take advantage of low taxes. The profits that these companies make are included in Ireland GDP but the profits are moved on, never benefiting Irelands population other than a handful of accountants and lawyers.

Ireland Central Bank governor has written a piece on why Irish GDP cannot be relied on https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbi/ecolet/1-el-21.html You need to download the article to read it, however, this article from another non msm source discusses the article https://www.politico.eu/article/ireland-gdp-growth-multinationals-misleading/ If it makes just one person stop quoting 'Ireland's GDP' then it was worth my time posting.

I think we can all accept that Brexit wasn't plain sailing, yet there are so many independence supporters who want to put us through worse! They love to moan about how bad Brexit has been but due to some sort of ideological blindness, they are able to brush under the carpet the fact that splitting from our biggest trading partner will be fine. They remind me of Boris and all his bluff over Northern Ireland. Just ignore the reality and tell everyone 'It'll be fine'. No, it won't.

As I said, it's the job of the SNP to convince us of the positives with hard facts, not just vague promises of what is on a wish list. The public have learnt from Brexit and this time we want proper facts before we commit.

Fulmar's link poses an interesting point, the SNP seem to think we won't have to adopt the Euro. Are they sure? If, in 10 years' time we decide to abandon Sterling and use a new Scottish currency, surely that breaks the EU's rules? That is the point at which we will most likely be forced to adopt the Euro and all that entails.

If the SNP abandon plans to join the EU, I think a few more undecideds may be swayed.

I agree with Corky when he says Scotland is blessed with plenty of renewable energy. Problem is, it's privately owned and unless you plan to nationalise it, how do you promise the public lower bills? Maybe the SNP plan to set up a utility company to buy the power and sell direct to Scots............Wait a minute, haven't the tried and failed at that already.

I think we need to have a GE, Labour is likely to win a hefty majority, let's see what they can offer Scotland before we go burning our bridges with the rest of the UK.

[Corky Smeek]

@ Fulmar and Goodfellers

I was going to reply to each of your posts individually but it seems pointless.

If after experiencing all the lies, corruption, sleaze, broken promises, U-turns, incompetence (on an industrial scale), ineptitude, inhumanity and (seemingly) deliberate nastiness of the current Tory government you still feel that is preferable to Scotland running it's own affairs then I genuinely feel sorry for you. In Scotland we have an opportunity to follow a different path; a path where the people who live here get to choose the direction of travel and not one chosen for us.

I understand that embracing change can be challenging, frightening even, but nothing was ever achieved by running away from challenges. Of course Scotland will face problems in the years after independence but so did every other country that won its freedom. How many Norwegians, Irish, Latvians etc etc look back and hanker for the days when they were ruled from afar. Pretty close to zero, I suspect.

Instead of coming on here and listing all the reasons why we shouldn't be independent why not explore the solutions to those problems. Every problem has a solution after all.

And as an afterthought I note that no-one has put forward any arguments in favour of the Union.

[Fulmar]

The Tories will be 'out' next election Corky. They are not there in perpetuity and don't they know it!

[Corky Smeek]

Well, Fulmar I'm afraid the prospect of a Labour government does nothing to lighten my mood. I have an equally long list of non-complimentary adjectives for them.

[Fulmar]

I'm sure you have but to me it seems to reinforce my point as Labour have not held office for a very long time so what are you blaming them for?

[Corky Smeek]

I'm sure you have but to me it seems to reinforce my point as Labour have not held office for a very long time so what are you blaming them for?


Oh, where do I start?

Just because they haven't been in office doesn't mean they don't have a job to do. They are currently HM's Oppostion and they have been completely ineffective in that role. Instead of holding the government to account they have either abstained on votes or u-turned on important matters just so they don't alienate voters. On the one hand they have been trying to woo disaffected Tory voters in the south of England whilst simultaneously trying to win back the "red wall" seats in the north of England. As a result they have been too frightened to be effective.

They joined with the Tories (and Lib Dems) in the Better Together campaign to fight against independence. During the IndyRef1 campaign I know for a fact that my then local Labour Party branch were sending people out around the houses to scare older folks by telling them that if scotland voted for Indy then their state pensions would stop immediately and that HMG would be claiming back any money paid for the period beyond the date of the vote. That is not heresay - I know the people who did that. I will never forgive the Labour Party for not supporting Indy; for siding with the Tories and for their tactics during IndyRef1. Despite the electoral losses they have suffered in Scotland they still do not back Indy.

They were the prime architects of "The Vow".

The Labour Party is supposed to represent ordinary working people. Despite this they have been going to great lengths to distance themselves from the current actions of some trades unions. Indeed they have even suspended members who have given public support to striking TUs.

In short they are just as untrustworthy as the Tories and only pay lip service to Scotland in an attempt to win votes. In reality they couldn't care less about Scotland as their treatment of the party's branch office up here shows. They took Scotland for granted for decades; gave nothing in return and they got what they deserved at the ballot box.

At least with the Tories you know they are going to be ba**ards. You expect it. It comes as a surprise to learn that Labour are ba**tards too.

PS:- I acknowledge my bias fully. Add to that a huge chip on my shoulder. But the fact is I am scunnered to my back teeth with the way Scotland gets treated and I will never give up fighting for Indy.

[Fulmar]

And of course, the SNP are so entirely truthful and trustworthy and never tell any porkies? Really?!
I have a little bit of knowledge about the one Scottish labour MP and he is not at all as you describe but one of the good guys- that's why he's been re-elected to serve as an MP many times- and neither are most of the others in my view.

[Corky Smeek]

Fulmar, I have said on many occasions that I am not in the SNP. I have a number of issues with the way they operate and I am most certainly not their apologist.

Also, I didn't say anything about individual Labour MPs. Rather it was the way that the party as a whole has conducted itself, particularly with respect to IndyRef 1. Many individual Labour MPs have my full respect but the party as a whole falls far short in that regard.

[Fulmar]

Well, you labelled them with the B word en masse! Another of your sweeping statements!

[Corky Smeek]

Fulmar, if you read your contributions, even just on this thread, you will see you are not averse to a sweeping statement or two yourself.

[Fulmar]

I'm not sure I'm in your league though really! But honestly, it doesn't matter anyway- I could not care either way. there are far more things to worry about and as you pointed out ages ago and where I totally agree with you, the things that are at the top of my worry list are climate change, famine already present due largely to that and the raised possibility of nuclear war. I'm not that bothered when or if or ever there is an Indyref 2 as as far as I'm concerned it pales into insignificance compared to the real threats facing human existence and that of other innocent species with whom we share the planet.

[Corky Smeek]

I'm not sure I'm in your league though really! But honestly, it doesn't matter anyway- I could not care either way. there are far more things to worry about and as you pointed out ages ago and where I totally agree with you, the things that are at the top of my worry list are climate change, famine already present due largely to that and the raised possibility of nuclear war. I'm not that bothered when or if or ever there is an Indyref 2 as as far as I'm concerned it pales into insignificance compared to the real threats facing human existence and that of other innocent species with whom we share the planet.

Yes, yes all the sweeping statements are from me. Oops, there I go again. Sorry.

Has it not occurred to you that all of the problems you have listed have been caused, directly or indirectly, by governments and that if we had a government with social responsibility at its core we might be able to do our bit to reduce the impact of some of these.

Sitting on the moral high ground somehow imagining that maintaining the status quo (basically a 2-party system within the UK) is going to do any good is naive. (Getting a wee bit sweeping there again. I'll try harder.). Has any UK government - Tory or Labour - done anything meaningful over the last 50 years to mitigate the impact of any of the things you list? No!.

So, hoping that people who have done nothing of any consequence are suddenly going to have some sort of Damascene conversion is not realistic. If you are placing your hopes on resolving, "the real threats facing human existence and that of other innocent species with whom we share the planet." on a Labour election win then you may be disappointed.

Within the constraints of budget and consitutional legality the Scottish Government have done far more to make a positive contribution to many of the things you mention than any Westminster government.

To sum up; you seem to be suggesting that the best way to fix the problems you list is to stick with the system that has done nothing about them for the past 50 years whilst rejecting a change that could make a real impact. Or is that too sweeping?

[Fulmar]

I already said I don't care about sweeping statements or if either I or you make them- please move on! I don't care about point scoring either.
No, actually what I am longing for- and I believe that so are very many others whom I have spoken to- is something far more radical but it won't happen. I would totally support it if all the best brains from all the political parties whatever their affiliation and indeed from science and industry or anywhere else, would properly come together at government level and work to find solutions to the problems we face. And I would not limit it to within this country either but make it much wider than that- inter-governmental and beyond. The problems faced are global so so should be the solutions.
As far as I can judge, all political parties are seeking what I call more of 'business as usual or same old same old' and it isn't going to be that in the future in my view at least. I mean the mantra of 'economic growth' for example which basically means, in the west at least, producing more 'stuff' that they want people to buy when the resources of the planet for producing 'stuff' are exhausted and have been for a long time- and the people don't need the stuff anyway. We all know that time is running out but we choose to ignore it as that is far more comfortable. We have all been persuaded (and I'm as guilty of it as anyone), that we all do need to keep on buying 'stuff' when actually, we mostly don't. The fact that we are all being forced now to cut down on energy use is good for the planet as were the lockdowns during Covid but goodness knows, I don't want people to be going cold and hungry- I want those people to be helped to not be so. We personally have cut way back on our energy use and that's good as we can just about afford to do it and I'm not complaining about it either. However, as I am getting muddled now it is best to stop. But I have faith in action at community level where I have seen real changes taking place so that at least gives a bit of hope- and I have great faith in young people too.

[Corky Smeek]

I'm not going to argue with the sentiments you have expressed there for I share most of them.

I want to live in a nuclear-free, ecologially and socially responsible world too. But, if we keep doing what we are doing we will keep getting what we've got. Westminster governments have repeatedly shown they are not fully committed to the better world you describe.

It really is time to call a halt to the nonsense and find a new way. I steadfastly believe that in Scotland we have an opportunity to make a difference if only we would grasp the nettle of independence. OK, we may not be able to change the world but if other countries see what we can do they may follow suit. Scotland has already impressed when it comes to matters ecological with many other groups and nations taking heed of what the SG is trying to achieve.

I am not suggesting that independence is a panacea for every ill but at least it means we won't be stuck with accepting the policies of a government we didn't vote for.

[Goodfellers]

If you accept democracy, you accept the results of every election. You don't try and break national results down into 'area' results, because it suits your view. There are many parts of England that never vote in a Tory but accept the result. What's so special about Scotland?

As for "accepting the policies of a government we didn't vote for", that could apply to a huge chunk of Scottish voters. More voted for Con/Lab/Lib Dem than voted for the SNP/Greens, yet we're forced to live with them governing us.

That's politics.

[Corky Smeek]

You don't try and break national results down into 'area' results, because it suits your view. There are many parts of England that never vote in a Tory but accept the result. What's so special about Scotland?


You have just put your finger on the problem. You describe Scotland as an area and put it on a par with parts of England.

What is so special about Scotland is that we are a country and are supposedly an equal partner in the Union. Yet how we vote makes no difference as we get the government the other "equal partner" votes for. Tell me that is democratic.

Oh, an PS - You don't get to talk only about "National" results because it suits your view.

[The Horseman]

Corky….
Population of Scotland…5.4 million.
Population of England…. 56 million…..

Do you see there is a ‘difference’!

[mi16]

Not even remotely near the fence.
We have had a vote on this less then 10 years ago and it was a fairly clear result.
We are now in the worst financial crisis we have seen, I cant see how breaking away at this point in time would be a good idea.
How about respecting the result of the democratic vote we have had already, instead of continually wanting to re run a vote until they get the result they crave.
Fingers crossed the courts tell the Fuhrer to bolt.

[Corky Smeek]

Corky….
Population of Scotland…5.4 million.
Population of England…. 56 million…..

Do you see there is a ‘difference’!

Oh yes, I see the difference. And Becasue of it Scotland has no say whatsoever.

Population of Malta - 441,543
Population of Germany - 83,783,942

Do you see the difference? Only this time Malta has a seat at the table and the power of veto.

Another big difference is that any member state can leave the EU if it so wishes whereas in the UK no member state can leave unless England wishes.

[The Horseman]

Oh yes, I see the difference. And Becasue of it Scotland has no say whatsoever.

Population of Malta - 441,543
Population of Germany - 83,783,942

Do you see the difference? Only this time Malta has a seat at the table and the power of veto.

Another big difference is that any member state can leave the EU if it so wishes whereas in the UK no member state can leave unless England wishes.


Yes I see it…But u live in Scotland! It has been ‘The Public’s Choice’!

[mi16]

Oh yes, I see the difference. And Becasue of it Scotland has no say whatsoever.

Population of Malta - 441,543
Population of Germany - 83,783,942

Do you see the difference? Only this time Malta has a seat at the table and the power of veto.

Another big difference is that any member state can leave the EU if it so wishes whereas in the UK no member state can leave unless England wishes.

The rest of the UK did not want Scotland to leave pre 2014, yet we were allowed the choice, we chose to remain.
And in remaining, we chose to continue with the democratic system of the UK.
But you know this, you just wont accept it.

[Corky Smeek]

The rest of the UK did not want Scotland to leave pre 2014, yet we were allowed the choice, we chose to remain.
And in remaining, we chose to continue with the democratic system of the UK.
But you know this, you just wont accept it.

And there we have it folks. I knew it would happen one day and that day has finally arrived.

"...yet we were allowed the choice.". ALLOWED.

That one word sums up the nature of the relationship between the countries in the UK. Scotland was allowed to have a vote. Wow.

The people of Scotland are sovereign and we don't need to be allowed. We will decide.

The Claim of Right from 1989 quite clearly states the following:-

We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.

[Goodfellers]

Good job The Bill of Rights has never had or claimed any legal force. So worthless.

I think Alex Salmond is going to try and pursue all sorts of ancient legal routes to try and get a vote. I wouldn't hold your breath.

We voted to remain in the UK,

We will vote again to remain in the UK, if, and it is a big if, the highest court in the UK 'allow' us, but that's not looking to promising, and with the news Boris might be making a comeback, getting the UK govt to agree to a vote isn't looking too good either!

Long live the union!

[mi16]

And there we have it folks. I knew it would happen one day and that day has finally arrived.

"...yet we were allowed the choice.". ALLOWED.

That one word sums up the nature of the relationship between the countries in the UK. Scotland was allowed to have a vote. Wow.

The people of Scotland are sovereign and we don't need to be allowed. We will decide.

The Claim of Right from 1989 quite clearly states the following:-

We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.

Oh shut up Corky you massive throbber, its a figure of speech, the sex pest requested a referendum and he was told that he could have one.
Why does it not just throw a referendum then?
Why is the Fuhrer wasting my money at the Supreme Court if it does not need the sanction from Westminster?

[Corky Smeek]

You go on and on about respecting democracy and yet you can barely conceal your glee because you think you have all the so-called legal angles covered to prevent democracy actually happening.

Just sit back for a couple of minutes and really think about what you have just said.

[Corky Smeek]

Oh shut up Corky you massive throbber, its a figure of speech, the sex pest requested a referendum and he was told that he could have one.
Why does it not just throw a referendum then?
Why is the Fuhrer wasting my money at the Supreme Court if it does not need the sanction from Westminster?

I'm preserving this just in case you are thinking of deleting it. I want everyone to see this.

[Goodfellers]

I'm preserving this just in case you are thinking of deleting it. I want everyone to see this.



Ps you almost always 'preserve' what others say....Quite sinister really, do you plan to hold us all to account at some time in the future?

[mi16]

You go on and on about respecting democracy and yet you can barely conceal your glee because you think you have all the so-called legal angles covered to prevent democracy actually happening.

Just sit back for a couple of minutes and really think about what you have just said.

What are you on about now Throbby McThrobberson?
We had a vote, the majority said they wanted to remain, it was sold to us all as a once in a generation thing. Yet here we are well under a decade later debating the next time (which we have been doing since 2016), when we vote to remain again, it will leave office and the next General will step up and continue to try and deliver the mission.

[Corky Smeek]

It seems like "fence sitters" might be more inclined to vote Yes if Scotland follows a social responsibilty agenda following independence. A recent Panelbase survey found that 61% of voters would choose Yes in such circumstances.

One thing is for sure: HMG has no social responsibility agenda. If you want to live in a fairer society then you won't find that by remaining in the Union.

Independence for a fairer Scotland.

[Goodfellers]

The latest Panelbase survey also shows a slight lead for the 'No' vote. This is despite everything that's going on in Westminster and the cost of living crisis. 'Fence sitters', in my opinion are more interested in their own financial position rather than social responsibility at this time.

Vote for stability, vote for Scotland within the UK.

https://www.nationalworld.com/politics/scottish-independence-referendum-2023-polls-year-indyref2-vote-3885712

35849

[Corky Smeek]

'Fence sitters', in my opinion are more interested in their own financial position rather than social responsibility at this time.


Any thoughts Fulmar?

[Fulmar]

I wasn't going to continue posting as I thought it was all going to turn nasty on here again! Random thoughts, that is all they are:
I don't think that there is an appetite for an Indyref 2 on Nicola Sturgeon's timescale as recent polls suggest otherwise but I don't think anyone who believes in democracy should be saying that it ought never to be held, ever again.
I do not think that an enormous change like that should be implemented unless there is a commanding yes vote. At present there is a fifty fifty spilt pretty much and all that will lead to is continuing and possibly worse division and I don't want to see that, personally. I can remember when referendum votes were supposed to only be taken notice of if there was a 2/3 majority for change.
I believe in being united with as many peoples and nations as possible and not being separated off. I certainly wanted to remain in Europe and think that Brexit has brought nothing but trouble. The people in England and Wales and N.I are the same as me- I don't want to feel that I've rejected them.
I think that if Labour get in next time round- and I believe that they will- then there will be so much change for the better.
I am not sure if I will vote even if there is an Indyref 2 because although I'll be affected by the outcome of independence, of course. But because I am older now, I am not going to be affected for as long as the young people who want it and will probably vote for it. The argument that it is the old who have brought about the mess the world is in (even though we did not understand that we were doing it at the time) has resonance with me.
But I can't bring myself to vote for what I see as yet more economic chaos and hardship for people (and I think that is what independence will bring)- even though I recognise the desire for it by so many and the ideological 'pull' behind it. But I am ideologically attracted to being united with people and not split off from them- as said above.
Is that fence sitting? I dunno.

[Corky Smeek]

For anyone who is sitting on the fence might I suggest you spend some time looking at Believe in Scotland (https://www.believeinscotland.org/) who present a vision for Scotland that you will never find in the Unionist press.

[The Horseman]

Corky…You have ‘selective reading syndrome’.
The Media I have read, listened to, and watched on TV…….all indicate that there is no will at this time for Separation! Now even less that 2014.

[Corky Smeek]

I can't be bothered re-stating the same arguments over and over again to you Horseman. I don't know where you get your information from but it is not giving you the full story.

The only thing I will do is re-post the relevant paragraph from the most recent British Social Attitudes survey.

35850

And before all the uber-Unionists on here pile on and try to dismiss this report please be aware that Prof. Sir John Curtis of Stratchclyde University is one of the editors. His credentials are exemplary. Indeed, he is commonly regarded as the foremost psephologist in the UK.

[mi16]

I can't be bothered re-stating the same arguments over and over again to you Horseman. I don't know where you get your information from but it is not giving you the full story.

The only thing I will do is re-post the relevant paragraph from the most recent British Social Attitudes survey.

35850

And before all the uber-Unionists on here pile on and try to dismiss this report please be aware that Prof. Sir John Curtis of Stratchclyde University is one of the editors. His credentials are exemplary. Indeed, he is commonly regarded as the foremost psephologist in the UK.

Sorry Throbs, I have checked and..................nope, not a single hoot is given, let alone 2

[Goodfellers]

Corky…You have ‘selective reading syndrome’.
The Media I have read, listened to, and watched on TV…….all indicate that there is no will at this time for Separation! Now even less that 2014.

I have to agree with you, Corky only posts the paragraphs that he agrees with and 'conveniently' 'ignores' the paragraphs that don't reflect his/her/their views. Early today Corky posted about a panelbase survey 'forgetting' to mention the section where it showed there is still more 'No' support than 'Yes' .I posted a link to the article which quoted Sir John Curtice as a contributor, then lo and behold, Corky posts another random picture (with no link to source) saying how wonderful Sir JC is. So you are spot on with your statement "Corky…You have ‘selective reading syndrome’

[The Horseman]

There are many Polls out there…So I wud say that the 52% is…Plus or Minus up to 2% to 5%.
That isn't enough… Poor odds!
Would you bet on that number! I doubt it.
And there is No Decision from The Supreme Court!

[Corky Smeek]

Just thought I'd warn you Fulmar. They are trying to turn it "nasty" again.

[Goodfellers]

Just thought I'd warn you Fulmar. They are trying to turn it "nasty" again.


Just play fair. Stop posting random %'s that you think might make undecided voters think there is more support for independence than there actually is. Your picture tries to imply a far higher % but if you posted a link to the actual article, it's about a particular set of people!

As for 'Uber' unionists, I prefer 'uber' realist! The SNP have had what, 15 yrs to show us what they can do and even longer to prepare papers to set out a vision of an independent Scotland. What they came up with any higher student could have written. It is woeful. Even you used to promise a vision of Utopia, but I think reality has kicked in and now were going to have to work hard and probably sacrifice certain things for independence. And, no, I'm not prepared to sacrifice anything. I already pay higher taxes than the rest of the citizens of the UK and quite frankly I can't see any improvement, so who in their right mind is going to vote for probably higher taxes and cuts to services just so Nicola Sturgeon can go down in history as the woman who gave Scotland it's Freeeedoommm!!

[Corky Smeek]

Just play fair. Stop posting random %'s that you think might make undecided voters think there is more support for independence than there actually is. Your picture tries to imply a far higher % but if you posted a link to the actual article, it's about a particular set of people!

As for 'Uber' unionists, I prefer 'uber' realist! The SNP have had what, 15 yrs to show us what they can do and even longer to prepare papers to set out a vision of an independent Scotland. What they came up with any higher student could have written. It is woeful. Even you used to promise a vision of Utopia, but I think reality has kicked in and now were going to have to work hard and probably sacrifice certain things for independence. And, no, I'm not prepared to sacrifice anything. I already pay higher taxes than the rest of the citizens of the UK and quite frankly I can't see any improvement, so who in their right mind is going to vote for probably higher taxes and cuts to services just so Nicola Sturgeon can go down in history as the woman who gave Scotland it's Freeeedoommm!!

Nah!. I'm not going to rise to the bait. Nae luck lads.

[Corky Smeek]

Scottish independence: Record level of support in annual survey.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/22483799.scottish-independence-record-level-support-annual-survey/

[The Horseman]

Scottish independence: Record level of support in annual survey.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/22483799.scottish-independence-record-level-support-annual-survey/

52%
Would u put all your money on a Bet with these Odds!?
Foolishness…..perhaps.

[Goodfellers]

52%
Would u put all your money on a Bet with these Odds!?
Foolishness…..perhaps.

Corky's actually had to trawl backwards to get that figure from September, earlier today Corky posted about the latest Panelbase survey (cleverly edited to show only what he/she/they wanted) where support for indy was only 47%.

What Corky needs to remember is that polls are basically a waste of time as its likely The Supreme Court will rule in Westminster's favour and a referendum can only be had when the UK government allow it. Rightly so, the UK government have a job to protect the majority of the population who want to remain in the union. IF, and only if, the SNP can regularly get 60%+ of all votes, then the UK government should be minded to look at indtref2.

[Corky Smeek]

Nope, still not rising to it.

[Corky Smeek]

A couple of quotes before bedtime:-


“It would be wrong to suggest that Scotland could not be another such successful, independent country.”.


David Cameron (former UK PM)


"If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy.".


David Davis (former Brexit Secretary)

[The Horseman]

Of course I agree with the above….very common comments! But you have a bunch of Politicians who are ‘Long in the tooth’ and they are getting nowhere…Just a waste of money…People will not forget the Shenanigans with Salmond. A lot of DIRT there!

And Einstein supposedly said……Doing the same thing, and getting the same result is Insanity!******************

This got messed up a bit………..





David Cameron (former UK PM)


"If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy.".


David Davis (former Brexit Secretary)[/QUOTE]

[Goodfellers]

A couple of quotes before bedtime:-


“It would be wrong to suggest that Scotland could not be another such successful, independent country.”.


David Cameron (former UK PM)


"If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy.".


David Davis (former Brexit Secretary)


We haven't changed our minds though, have we? All the opinion polls you refer to back up that fact. We are a democracy; it seems to be you that has trouble accepting that fact.

[Corky Smeek]

And Einstein supposedly said……Doing the same thing, and getting the same result is Insanity!******************

This got messed up a bit………..

Absolutely, couldn't agree more. You have hit the nail slap-bang, square on the head. I couldn't have put it better my self.

Let's stop doing the same thing. Let's stop trusting Westminster to act in Scotland's best interests and get out of this Union. To remain in the Union would indeed be insanity.

[Corky Smeek]

We haven't changed our minds though, have we? All the opinion polls you refer to back up that fact. We are a democracy; it seems to be you that has trouble accepting that fact.

But your side are too frightened to put it to the test. If you are so confident ask the people. That is democracy. We are entitled to change our minds.

[Goodfellers]

But your side are too frightened to put it to the test. If you are so confident ask the people. That is democracy. We are entitled to change our minds.

I'm not sure if you're aware, but referendums are expensive and take up government time, time and money that could be better spent.

Keep getting over 60% in the polls then maybe consider asking Westminster. You can't keep requesting referendums because of a handful of uber nationalists refusing to accept the will of the majority.

[Corky Smeek]

Three more interesting quotes about democracy:-


“There is no other treaty in the world that I’m aware of where a sovereign nation undertakes to join up, and can only leave when the other side says so.”

David Davis talking about UK leaving the EU (but seemingly unaware of the Treaty of Union 1707).


" A democracy fails to be a democracy if the public are not allowed to change their mind".

Ian Murray (Labour MP)


"The future of Scotland is obviously a matter for Scotland"

Keir Starmer (Leader of the Opposition)

[Corky Smeek]

I'm not sure if you're aware, but referendums are expensive and take up government time, time and money that could be better spent.

Keep getting over 60% in the polls then maybe consider asking Westminster. You can't keep requesting referendums because of a handful of uber nationalists refusing to accept the will of the majority.

Glad you brought that up. So here is a quote from Ruth Davidson, Baroness:-

“If the Greens and the SNP, and the SSP or any of the other parties who have declared an interest in independence, get over the line and can make a coalition, make a majority, get the votes in the Parliament, then they’ll vote through a referendum.

That’s what democracy is all about.”


Also it seems to have escaped your notice that by all current parliamentary conventions in the UK there is a mandate for IndyRef2.

[Goodfellers]

Glad you brought that up. So here is a quote from Ruth Davidson, Baroness:-

“If the Greens and the SNP, and the SSP or any of the other parties who have declared an interest in independence, get over the line and can make a coalition, make a majority, get the votes in the Parliament, then they’ll vote through a referendum.

That’s what democracy is all about.”


Also it seems to have escaped your notice that by all current parliamentary conventions in the UK there is a mandate for IndyRef2.

When was Ruth Davidson given the power to speak on behalf of the UK government? Her personal views are exactly that.

No matter how many seats the SNP/Greens get, all the time Unionist parties get more actual votes, voters understand a referendum would be a waste of time and money. You know it too, but because your dream is independence, you allow emotions to get the better of your intelligence.

[Goodfellers]

If we're chucking in random quotes, how about in Oct 2015 when the SNP said it wanted polls to show 60% support before they called for a referendum? https://www.scotsman.com/regions/snp-60-support-needed-next-independence-referendum-1492381

Or when your favourite pollster (Sir J C) said "“I think one of the things that’s forgotten about the referendum last year is that there had never previously been a period in which the opinion polls had consistently pointed to a majority in favour of yes,” he told the programme.“There really isn’t much point in the SNP holding a referendum until it’s clear that there is a majority - a sustained majority - in favour of doing so, because otherwise the serious risk is loss."


Or how about the most famous of them all, Alex Salmond saying " “once in a generation opportunity"

[Corky Smeek]

If we're chucking in random quotes, how about in Oct 2015 when the SNP said it wanted polls to show 60% support before they called for a referendum? https://www.scotsman.com/regions/snp-60-support-needed-next-independence-referendum-1492381

Or when your favourite pollster (Sir J C) said "“I think one of the things that’s forgotten about the referendum last year is that there had never previously been a period in which the opinion polls had consistently pointed to a majority in favour of yes,” he told the programme.“There really isn’t much point in the SNP holding a referendum until it’s clear that there is a majority - a sustained majority - in favour of doing so, because otherwise the serious risk is loss."


Or how about the most famous of them all, Alex Salmond saying " “once in a generation opportunity"




I thought you might try to deflect away from these uncomfortable quotes. There are a bit embarrassing for those concerned, aren't they? I take it you want to disassociate yourself from all of them.

Also, and to repeat the point made earlier, if you are so sure that "No" is ahead and that "Yes" has no chance of winning why are you so scared to test that hypothesis in a referendum? I think we all know the answer to that!

[Goodfellers]

I thought you might try to deflect away from these uncomfortable quotes. There are a bit embarrassing for those concerned, aren't they? I take it you want to disassociate yourself from all of them.

Also, and to repeat the point made earlier, if you are so sure that "No" is ahead and that "Yes" has no chance of winning why are you so scared to test that hypothesis in a referendum? I think we all know the answer to that!


Dealing with you is like banging your head against a brick wall!

Deflection is YOUR speciality. I responded and then gave other examples of what politicians say, and guess what, you didn't respond other than to deflect (yet again).

If you are the best example of a 'yes' supporter on this board then we (unionists) really have nothing to fear. You have no answers to anything.

Here's another little thought. You post quite frequently about the disaster that was Brexit, yet you use the very same arguments the 'leave' side used, yet you see no problem with that. Absolutely astounding!

Why not forget indy2 and concentrate on Brexit2? That would solve the biggest problem (excuse?) the SNP had and the only argument for indy2.

[Fulmar]

What is Brexit 2?

[Goodfellers]

What is Brexit 2?

There are groups https://therejoineuparty.com/news/ who would like the Brexit referendum to be held again. Brexit2 is my own title for it, as in indy2 Now we have sound information on what Brexit 'actually' is, seems like a good idea.

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-a-second-eu-referendum-were-held-today-how-would-you-vote/

There's also this Tory donor saying today, we need to completely re-look at the Brexit negotiation https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63371743

I'm fairly sure with the knowledge we have now the Brexit vote (re-run) would have an entirely different outcome. Which is why I quite liked John Major's suggestion of an informative indy2 poll, then 5 years of negotiations, then another vote that was legally binding. At least then you know what you're getting by voting 'yes'.

Another interesting link, assuming a Labour GE victory https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/every-bit-of-tory-chaos-makes-a-return-to-the-eu-more-likely/

[mi16]

There are groups https://therejoineuparty.com/news/ who would like the Brexit referendum to be held again. Brexit2 is my own title for it, as in indy2 Now we have sound information on what Brexit 'actually' is, seems like a good idea.

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-a-second-eu-referendum-were-held-today-how-would-you-vote/

There's also this Tory donor saying today, we need to completely re-look at the Brexit negotiation https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63371743

I'm fairly sure with the knowledge we have now the Brexit vote (re-run) would have an entirely different outcome. Which is why I quite liked John Major's suggestion of an informative indy2 poll, then 5 years of negotiations, then another vote that was legally binding. At least then you know what you're getting by voting 'yes'.

Another interesting link, assuming a Labour GE victory https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/every-bit-of-tory-chaos-makes-a-return-to-the-eu-more-likely/

I quite like that idea, same should have been done re 2014, if they had done I think they would have got it over the line.

[Corky Smeek]

So where do you draw the line?

Does every general election need a confirmative vote? What about local elections? By this logic we should all be entitled to have a trial run for every election there ever is. And to think that Goodfellers has the cheek to say that referenda cost money that would be better spent elsewhere. Now he thinks it is a good idea to have a referendum; 5 years of negotiations and then another referendum. How much would that all cost? What utter nonsense and what utter hypocrisy. No doubt the confirmative referendum would also have to have a 60% majority or some other restrictive caveat.

And he thinks he is a democrat. One rule for for his side and restrictive rules for his political opponents. If you think by altering the fundamental terms of the UK's democracy you can save this disintegrating Union, then you have another think coming? And it betrays the real characteristics of the Unionist side who are prepared to sacrifice democracy and employ every dirty trick in the book to win. Win at all costs - wasn't that the instruction given by David Cameron to the leaders of the "No" side when "Project Fear" was established.

[Fulmar]

I both heard and read Guy Hands on the BBC today. Pretty damning to say the least and that from a Tory supporter.

[Corky Smeek]

And to think if we had just voted "Yes" in 2014 we could have avoided all of this.

As James O'Brien said earlier today on his LBC show - the UK is the first country in history to have imposed sanctions upon itself.

[mi16]

So where do you draw the line?

Does every general election need a confirmative vote? What about local elections? By this logic we should all be entitled to have a trial run for every election there ever is. And to think that Goodfellers has the cheek to say that referenda cost money that would be better spent elsewhere. Now he thinks it is a good idea to have a referendum; 5 years of negotiations and then another referendum. How much would that all cost? What utter nonsense and what utter hypocrisy. No doubt the confirmative referendum would also have to have a 60% majority or some other restrictive caveat.

And he thinks he is a democrat. One rule for for his side and restrictive rules for his political opponents. If you think by altering the fundamental terms of the UK's democracy you can save this disintegrating Union, then you have another think coming? And it betrays the real characteristics of the Unionist side who are prepared to sacrifice democracy and employ every dirty trick in the book to win. Win at all costs - wasn't that the instruction given by David Cameron to the leaders of the "No" side when "Project Fear" was established.


Yeah you are right Throbs, lets just stick with the 2014 referendum result. :)

[Goodfellers]

So where do you draw the line?

Does every general election need a confirmative vote? What about local elections? By this logic we should all be entitled to have a trial run for every election there ever is. And to think that Goodfellers has the cheek to say that referenda cost money that would be better spent elsewhere. Now he thinks it is a good idea to have a referendum; 5 years of negotiations and then another referendum. How much would that all cost? What utter nonsense and what utter hypocrisy. No doubt the confirmative referendum would also have to have a 60% majority or some other restrictive caveat.

And he thinks he is a democrat. One rule for for his side and restrictive rules for his political opponents. If you think by altering the fundamental terms of the UK's democracy you can save this disintegrating Union, then you have another think coming? And it betrays the real characteristics of the Unionist side who are prepared to sacrifice democracy and employ every dirty trick in the book to win. Win at all costs - wasn't that the instruction given by David Cameron to the leaders of the "No" side when "Project Fear" was established.

Gosh, you are a bit of a drama queen!

There is a big difference between referendums and elections! ............Elections are what the SNP 'win', referendums are what they lose! :D

[Corky Smeek]

Gosh, you are a bit of a drama queen!

There is a big difference between referendums and elections! ............Elections are what the SNP 'win', referendums are what they lose! :D

And there you were demanding that I answer questions whilst all the time you fail to do what you demand of me. Sounds like you want it all your way. Changing democratic rules to ensure you win; demanding I answer your questions; refusing to answer mine. Says it all really.

[mi16]

Changing democratic rules to ensure you win

Pot / Kettle old Throbber
Its your lot who were changing the age of voting in an attempt to win the referendum.

[Corky Smeek]

If you are on the fence over the issue of independence then Pete Wishart's speech is worth a listen. He sums up exactly how I feel about the issue.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcsRX3Ge48A