When will indyref2 happen?

[Albus Bulbasaur]

2 minutes ago, Stellaboz said:

So fucking what? Should Scotland be kept against it's will then, if she votes to leave the UK? 

Nah sorry boys and girls, some sheep farmers in LLwaneystalllewyln and a couple of gammons in Derby want you to stay, so f**k you. 

Obviously not, what a ridiculous position, who the f**k would make that argument? Let's have a referendum and ignore the results....

[harry94]

7 minutes ago, renton said:

Such a process would allow the UK government a period of grace to properly address the issues that triggered the original Yes vote

Or go the other way and give them the freedom to be as vindictive as possible to 'up the ante' before the 'real' vote.

Confirmatory referendums only really work if everyone acts in good faith.

Edited June 15, 2022 by harry94

[renton]

1 minute ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

I do broadly agree but from the posts made since your response it's clear not many people on here feel the same for whatever reason that is. 

My one condition is that the question has to be "Should Scotland Remain in the UK" - seeth levels alone make it a fun position.

I don't disagree with those posts. If you stand on a policy of having a referendum, and you win - you have a mandate for that policy. Regardless of how often it is brought up.

It's more that I think the public generally would not have the stomach for a third go in a short time period and thus the SNP or other Indy parties would end up leaving the referendum concept off of their manifestos for a good while.

[Albus Bulbasaur]

1 minute ago, GTG_03 said:

They are also free to leave the union anytime they want. The way things are going I can see northern Ireland leaving before us.

Of course they are, equally I think it would be unfair on Scotland, Northern Ireland and England if Wales had referendums every 4 years. 

[renton]

2 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

Have fun telling that to people from those countries. 

Here, this wee diddy Scottish administration can potentially f**k up you and your children's lives for generations and generations every 4 years...

Doesn't wash imo. 

As opposed to telling the people of Scotland that despite their democratically expressed wishes, these other people can f**k up you and your children's lives for generations?

 

[Albus Bulbasaur]

1 minute ago, renton said:

I don't disagree with those posts. If you stand on a policy of having a referendum, and you win - you have a mandate for that policy. Regardless of how often it is brought up.

It's more that I think the public generally would not have the stomach for a third go in a short time period and thus the SNP or other Indy parties would end up leaving the referendum concept off of their manifestos for a good while.

Yeah I agree regarding the public but on your first part you can believe what you want, the fact of the matter is Scottish election results don't mean we have referendums every 4 years presently even if you find this unfair, I doubt Westminster would change on this stance. Unless of course they win a legal argument over this then that changes. 

[Zern]

Just now, Albus Bulbasaur said:

Of course they are, equally I think it would be unfair on Scotland, Northern Ireland and England if Wales had referendums every 4 years. 

Northern Ireland is restricted to one every 7 years.

The opposition could always run in Scotland on platform to codify and legislate these things, unfortunately the SNP got there first.

[renton]

3 minutes ago, harry94 said:

Or go the other way and give them the freedom to be as vindictive as possible to 'up the ante' before the 'real' vote.

Confirmatory referendums only really work if everyone acts in good faith.

They could do, but they'd only be confirming the result of that second vote then.

 

[Albus Bulbasaur]

1 minute ago, renton said:

As opposed to telling the people of Scotland that despite their democratically expressed wishes, these other people can f**k up you and your children's lives for generations?

 

Remaining in the UK? 

It's fairly simple, not one part of the UK should be able to unilaterally negatively impact the others. Comparing this to our current set up with Holyrood is disingenuous. 

[Albus Bulbasaur]

You guys are like vultures on a corpse here, I'm a mobile poster and already have 10 replies I can't get to and I've got stuff to do so will leave it there for a wee while still. 

[harry94]

2 minutes ago, renton said:

They could do, but they'd only be confirming the result of that second vote then.

 

It also de-escalates the stake of the first vote so people swithering would be much more likely to go yes given there's pretty much nothing at stake at that point.

[renton]

26 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

Remaining in the UK? 

It's fairly simple, not one part of the UK should be able to unilaterally negatively impact the others. Comparing this to our current set up with Holyrood is disingenuous. 

Yeah, why not. Imagine if Scotland votes NO, but then England, N.Ireland and Wales have a vote to kick us out.

Or if that's too theoretical, how about a more practical example where England and Wales vote to remove Scotland and N.Ireland from the EU?

Edited June 15, 2022 by renton

[renton]

Just now, harry94 said:

It also de-escalates the stake of the first vote so people swithering would be much more likely to go yes given there's pretty much nothing at stake at that point.

Aye, in the short term. I think it would act like a canary in the mine for the UK side. Maybe it would generate a frustrating sequence of Yes then No votes every 5 yerars, but it'd be up to the Yes side to build on that momentum and crucially, they'd at least be always guarenteed a shot at it under my proposed system.

[btb]

6 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

Remaining in the UK? 

It's fairly simple, not one part of the UK should be able to unilaterally negatively impact the others. Comparing this to our current set up with Holyrood is disingenuous. 

Wasn't the case in 2014, won't be the case if&when NI has a referendum, my point remains that a IndyRef2 would be granted if the Unionist parties felt confident about winning.

If you win IndyRef2 then the issue is off the table probably for ever - any childishness comes from your side continuous attempts to avoid the argument.

Edited June 15, 2022 by btb

[Dons_1988]

20 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

In fairness Mhairi Hunter is right up there with the brexity ranty people. 

Why not just commit to a Scottish Currency we would get support from the imf/eu etc to put in place our central bank and tbh im fine with going to the Euro when conditions are met. Join the Eu. 

I have to confess I’m not an economist and haven’t done the required reading to opine on currency options. Let’s hope there’s plenty of detail in the papers to come. 

The two broad points they need to address is 1) independence isn’t a gross act of self harm similar to brexit and 2) it’s all well and good comparing ourselves to other countries but what is it about independence that helps us achieve that and why can’t it be achieved in the uk? 

[Zern]

1 minute ago, btb said:

Wasn't the case in 2014, won't be the case if&when NI has a referendum, my point remains that a IndyRef2 would be granted if the Unionist parties felt confident about winning.

If you win IndyRef2 then the issue is off the table probably for ever.

There is always the option for a "rejoin the UK" political party to campaign, win electoral support, and put another referendum to the people.

[Jeff Venom]

There is always the option for a "rejoin the UK" political party to campaign, win electoral support, and put another referendum to the people.

That sounds a bit too much like democracy for me.

[welshbairn]

14 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

I'm a mobile poster

[Zern]

2 minutes ago, Jeff Venom said:

4 minutes ago, Zern said:

There is always the option for a "rejoin the UK" political party to campaign, win electoral support, and put another referendum to the people.

That sounds a bit too much like democracy for me.

Old fashioned i know.

I do find the prospect of a Tory/Labour merge, in order to present a united front post independence, thoroughly appealing.

I cannot conceive of a more dysfunctional political movement.

[Duries Air Freshener]

1 hour ago, btb said:

Wasn't the case in 2014, won't be the case if&when NI has a referendum, my point remains that a IndyRef2 would be granted if the Unionist parties felt confident about winning.

If you win IndyRef2 then the issue is off the table probably for ever - any childishness comes from your side continuous attempts to avoid the argument.

There will be no referendum in NI any time soon.  The conditions as per the GFA for one to take place are nowhere near to having been met.

Slugger, who in my humble opinion is a very balanced and reasonable source, lays it out here.