When will indyref2 happen?

[oneteaminglasgow]

3 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

It would have to go more Corbyn than Starmer, so Dugdale and McLeish would be the wrong fit come to think of it.

Isn’t that kind of what the SSP is?

[Academically Deficient]

A right-wing pro independence party? The belief in market economics as the solution to life's problems surely doesn't have to depend on British (or any) nationalism. Quite the opposite I'd have thought.

[welshbairn]

I'm a bit worried how long SNP support holds up without a referendum in the next year or so. There are already solid independence supporters on here talking about drawing a cock and balls on their constituency ballot. I think another mainstream independence party alongside the Greens wouldn't be a bad thing. I don't think the SSP can recover from the Sheridan shambles and the confusion in the public mind (mine anyway) with Rise.

Edited December 18, 2020 by welshbairn

[welshbairn]

24 minutes ago, Academically Deficient said:

A right-wing pro independence party? The belief in market economics as the solution to life's problems surely doesn't have to depend on British (or any) nationalism. Quite the opposite I'd have thought.

The combination of "right wing" and "nationalism" doesn't bring a great vibe, I think that should wait till after independence is won and we can put the "N" word to bed. Might be possible if it sells itself as a centrist pro business party and doesn't drone on about immigration I suppose, like the one Carles Puigdemont led in Catalonia until it merged with others.

Edited December 18, 2020 by welshbairn

[Wee-Bey]

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

The combination of "right wing" and "nationalism" doesn't bring a great vibe, I think that should wait till after independence is won and we can put the "N" word to bed.

Neoliberal ?

[welshbairn]

2 minutes ago, Henderson to deliver ..... said:

Neoliberal ?

I was thinking "Nationalism" but that too hopefully.

[NotThePars]

I'm not so sure. I think there would be room for a Labour for Independence Party in the mix, bit like the range of independence parties in Catalonia with divergent ideologies but united on the immediate aim. Especially if the wait for a referendum drags out much longer.

There is, or was, a Labour for a second referendum group that has like 50 members. I think Rory Scothorne has a lot of worthwhile things to say but him, Ewan Gibbs, and maybe Matt Kerr aren’t going to change the party’s intransigence on this.

A right-wing pro independence party? The belief in market economics as the solution to life's problems surely doesn't have to depend on British (or any) nationalism. Quite the opposite I'd have thought.

The SNP send enough signals to these types to stay on board. There’s a gap in the market for right wing culture war types but we’ll see how the ISP gets on in May.

[oneteaminglasgow]

27 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

The combination of "right wing" and "nationalism" doesn't bring a great vibe, I think that should wait till after independence is won and we can put the "N" word to bed. Might be possible if it sells itself as a centrist pro business party and doesn't drone on about immigration I suppose, like the one Carles Puigdemont led in Catalonia until it merged with others.

Genuinely, I think all the Tories have to do is change their name post Indy and they’ll do alright saying the same shite they say now.

Probably a worrying amount of people who would be right up for cracking down on “scroungers and asylum seekers” but who can’t get past the word Tory. Same shite coming from the “Democratic Alliance” or something and they’ll be all over it.

[Academically Deficient]

30 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

The combination of "right wing" and "nationalism" doesn't bring a great vibe, I think that should wait till after independence is won and we can put the "N" word to bed. Might be possible if it sells itself as a centrist pro business party and doesn't drone on about immigration I suppose, like the one Carles Puigdemont led in Catalonia until it merged with others.

Aye, that's what I meant - just didn't express it very well.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Dugdale and McLeish will never come out for independence. Their career paths now rest on 'rising above' politics in order to keep getting public purse jobs leading the inquiry into the declining success of the national tiddlywinks team or whatever.

 

 

The Scottish Tiddlywinks Association disbanded in the late 1990s as I assume you well know

 

So devolution came at a cost

[Wee-Bey]

Only by pooling and sharing our tiddlywinks wealth and knowledge can we improve peoples lives across these islands.

[Guest Jedi]

Federalism makes more sense to me when you are part of an island, geographically.

When it comes to defence for example, why have separate armed forces and intelligence communities for Scotland and England? If either country was attacked surely a UK wide defence coverage would be easier to administer.Likewise for foreign policy..easier to share embassies,and make decisions about International aid as an island.

Economically, as the SNPs proposal is to share a currency anyway, again if there was a Parliament of the Isles in place of the House of Lords, decisions over the value of the currency, how it operates on International markets etc makes more sense when Scotland has a voice on a shared Council,rather than being Independent, but with no say in currency management and having to accept Bank of England policy.As the Bank of England remains Scotland's lender of last resort,again having a voice in a shared Council is easier.

I would only accept all of the above in place of Independence if Scotland had full fiscal control of taxation,welfare etc though.

If it's a choice between Independence or status quo obviously I would continue to support Independece but as said prefer 'proper' Federalism. 

Edited December 18, 2020 by Jedi

[renton]

9 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Federalism makes more sense to me when you are part of an island, geographically.

When it comes to defence for example, why have separate armed forces and intelligence communities for Scotland and England? If either country was attacked surely a UK wide defence coverage would be easier to administer.Likewise for foreign policy..easier to share embassies,and make decisions about International aid as an island.

Economically, as the SNPs proposal is to share a currency anyway, again if there was a Parliament of the Isles in place of the House of Lords, decisions over the value of the currency, how it operates on International markets etc makes more sense when Scotland has a voice on a shared Council,rather than being Independent, but with no say in currency management and having to accept Bank of England policy.As the Bank of England remains Scotland's lender of last resort,again having a voice in a shared Council is easier.

I would only accept all of the above in place of Independence if Scotland had full fiscal control of taxation,welfare etc though.

If it's a choice between Independence or status quo obviously I would continue to support Independece but as said prefer 'proper' Federalism. 

It doesn't work demographically though. That will always be the sticking point. Besides that, defence pooling can be done through NATO, doesn't need a political union for that. International aid is surely a product of economics, nothing to do with geography.

 

[Wee-Bey]

Proper equal federalism would require salami slicing England into about 15 different parts and that's just never going to happen, neither is having a country of 1.5 or 3 or 5 million telling one of 55 million what to do.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Federalism makes more sense to me when you are part of an island, geographically.
When it comes to defence for example, why have separate armed forces and intelligence communities for Scotland and England? If either country was attacked surely a UK wide defence coverage would be easier to administer.Likewise for foreign policy..easier to share embassies,and make decisions about International aid as an island.
Economically, as the SNPs proposal is to share a currency anyway, again if there was a Parliament of the Isles in place of the House of Lords, decisions over the value of the currency, how it operates on International markets etc makes more sense when Scotland has a voice on a shared Council,rather than being Independent, but with no say in currency management and having to accept Bank of England policy.As the Bank of England remains Scotland's lender of last resort,again having a voice in a shared Council is easier.
I would only accept all of the above in place of Independence if Scotland had full fiscal control of taxation,welfare etc though.
If it's a choice between Independence or status quo obviously I would continue to support Independece but as said prefer 'proper' Federalism. 

Federalism is dead - it was killed as soon as there was a massive No vote to a Regional Assembly in the North East of England.

[DublinMagyar]

Federalism makes more sense to me when you are part of an island, geographically.
When it comes to defence for example, why have separate armed forces and intelligence communities for Scotland and England? If either country was attacked surely a UK wide defence coverage would be easier to administer.Likewise for foreign policy..easier to share embassies,and make decisions about International aid as an island.
Economically, as the SNPs proposal is to share a currency anyway, again if there was a Parliament of the Isles in place of the House of Lords, decisions over the value of the currency, how it operates on International markets etc makes more sense when Scotland has a voice on a shared Council,rather than being Independent, but with no say in currency management and having to accept Bank of England policy.As the Bank of England remains Scotland's lender of last resort,again having a voice in a shared Council is easier.
I would only accept all of the above in place of Independence if Scotland had full fiscal control of taxation,welfare etc though.
If it's a choice between Independence or status quo obviously I would continue to support Independece but as said prefer 'proper' Federalism. 

There's a song by the Kooks.....

[Guest Jedi]

The last referendum on English North East Assemblies was the best part of 20 years ago though...That did kill wider devolution at the time, but not necessarily for good.

Not sure about it needing to slice England up into North East, South West etc...why could there not be simply an English parliament, taking decisions on purely English affairs? I know that EVEL was an attempt to do that, but, with the SNP being the third biggest party at Westminster, not sure that its viewed that way by public opinion down south.

Germany has Landers of differing sizes as well, but manages to operate a Federal government. Canada...again differing regional sizes.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

The last referendum on English North East Assemblies was the best part of 20 years ago though...That did kill wider devolution at the time, but not necessarily for good.
Not sure about it needing to slice England up into North East, South West etc...why could there not be simply an English parliament, taking decisions on purely English affairs? I know that EVEL was an attempt to do that, but, with the SNP being the third biggest party at Westminster, not sure that its viewed that way by public opinion down south.
Germany has Landers of differing sizes as well, but manages to operate a Federal government. Canada...again differing regional sizes.

The problem is the UK has one nation that is disproportionately bigger than the others - can you really see a federal government where the 3 Celtic nations can veto England?

I can't.

Any federal solution has to salami England to work.

I know it was 20 years ago but I still don't see any real enthusiasm for regional government in England.

[invergowrie arab]

8 minutes ago, Jedi said:

The last referendum on English North East Assemblies was the best part of 20 years ago though...That did kill wider devolution at the time, but not necessarily for good.

Not sure about it needing to slice England up into North East, South West etc...why could there not be simply an English parliament, taking decisions on purely English affairs? I know that EVEL was an attempt to do that, but, with the SNP being the third biggest party at Westminster, not sure that its viewed that way by public opinion down south.

Germany has Landers of differing sizes as well, but manages to operate a Federal government. Canada...again differing regional sizes.

Ontario has 38% of the Canadian population, Nord-Rhein Westfalen 20% of Germany

 England is 85% of UK.

 

[Guest Jedi]

Some of the reasons given for Brexit were the feelings in parts of England which felt 'distant' from London. They saw the vote as an opportunity to register dissatisfaction with the disparity between their own local situation and decisions being taken to mostly benefit London and the South East at Westminster. Of course there were various other causes...immigration, 30 years of the right wing media disparaging the EU, lack of understanding of the economic fallout, the lies told by the Leave campaign etc.

However, surely a conversation which sought to address the issue of moving decision making closer to the North East, North West, Midlands etc could have some merit. Whilst I would still prefer an English parliament at the centre it may be that England could be divided up more into regions.