Granny Danger Posted January 7, 2016 Author Share Posted January 7, 2016 What makes you think Cammy wants out? He ruled out running for a third term before the election but then went back on that when he got a majority. If he continues on as PM he could win a third election and go down as the longest serving prime minister of the modern era He will come under enormous pressure as a result of his declared position on EU 'negotiations'. He has nailed his colours to the mast and everyone knows he's not only going to lose but lose badly. The key demand regarding migrants' benefits is the most high profile issue and he will get humiliated on it. I think the pressure will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Maybe this is an uncomfortable question for all concerned, but given what has happened recently elsewhere it's a real possibility. What happens if at some point in the future a democratically elected Scottish Government, following a manifesto commitment that is endorsed in an election, want to hold another referendum on Independence and the UK government say no? I reckon the reason that the government of the day the last time around was so sanguine was that no one thought that 45% of those who voted would vote YES. I don't want to have a debate here about how likely a YES vote will be in the future, there's other threads devoted to that, but rather what the real practical implcations would be. Sure there will be cries of 'constitutional crisis' but what in real terms could we do and how strong would the will of Jock Public ( ) be to actually do anything? This is basically my thesis. The law says the Scottish Parliament can't legislate on anything that relates to the Union of the Kingdoms. All the devolution court cases point towards a reading of the Scotland Act that would compel the UK Supreme Court, or indeed the Court of Session, to strike down any referendum legislation in the absence of a s30 Order. They would grant an interdict against governmental expenditure, and any private citizen could bring a case against the Scottish Government assuming that the UK Government itself did not get the Advocate General to refer the legislation for pre-assent scrutiny. The UK Government, if they didn't want another referendum, could just refuse to grant a s30 Order. They might have reasons for it this time around that they didn't last time. For example they might argue that there was no political mandate for it, or that the interval between the last one and this was too close. Whatever the reasons, you couldn't compel them otherwise. See also how the Spanish government has repeatedly and successfully prevented Catalonia from holding a referendum. Its constitutional position is similar, with popular consultations requiring the consent of the national government even if they only operate within an autonomous region and are administered by the government of the autonomous region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 In all honesty, THEY wouldn't have much choice: A consultative referendum with a positive mandate would be more than enough to force the UK into recognising the plain fact that Scotland wants out. To try and hold onto it afte rthat would paint the rUK in a very bad light, damaging it internationally and hurting a lot of work that they want to try and do. A consultative referendum would still be illegal if it needed legislation to authorise expenditure and setting of referendum rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob the tank Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 I thought as the Scottish people are sovereign, the population could decide to call a referendum. Is this wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortar Bored Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 A consultative referendum would still be illegal if it needed legislation to authorise expenditure and setting of referendum rules. I'll pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 A consultative referendum would still be illegal if it needed legislation to authorise expenditure and setting of referendum rules. No doubt, but the political ramifications of ignoring, or stiking down any such attempt would be magnified over time. They MIGHT lose a referendum if they let one run, they'd DEFINITELY lose one down the line if they torpedoed an attempt to have one in the interim. All they'd be doing is saving up a pile of issues for later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 I thought as the Scottish people are sovereign, the population could decide to call a referendum. Is this wrong? They're not. Parliament is. Here to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 No doubt, but the political ramifications of ignoring, or stiking down any such attempt would be magnified over time. They MIGHT lose a referendum if they let one run, they'd DEFINITELY lose one down the line if they torpedoed an attempt to have one in the interim. All they'd be doing is saving up a pile of issues for later. Not necessarily. Look at how the Quebec nationalists have faded since their referendum and the Secession Reference and Clarity Act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Are you sure about that? Quite a lot of countries worldwide clearly desire independence and act independent but no one recognises them because the country they want to break away from said no. I'm thinking the likes of Catalunya and Northern Cyprus Again, it has to be looked at in terms of the historical precedent of that country. The UK prides itself on it's liberal democratic values, has previously allowed parts of it's territory to elope for one reason or another and would have serious issues being taken seriously on any number of international debates if it is seen to be holding breakaway nations to ransom. The relationship etween Sapin and Catalonia is far more tense than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRob72 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 I think that's the likely outcome but I wouldn't bet on it. I think the coming months will show just how tight this will be; it will probably be Cameron's swansong but he wants to go anyway - it's just the manner of his departure that will be interesting. Anyway leaving the EU is only one of the triggers though definitely the most immediate one. Yep, but Irrespective of Cameron's future, think people are more likely to listen to the arguments of Osborne, Sturgeon & Farron than Farage, IDS & Redwood. I've got be honest I'm not sure who's supporting what on the Labour benches? Agreed, a vote to leave across rUK and a vote to remain in Scotland would certainly add fuel to the fire, but it ain't gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 I've got be honest I'm not sure who's supporting what on the Labour benches? I don't even think Labour know. I doubt there's a political party anywhere else in the world in such disarray just now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Not necessarily. Look at how the Quebec nationalists have faded since their referendum and the Secession Reference and Clarity Act. At least some of the Quebec nationalist fade has come from other factors including some pretty uninspired leadership, a different - and alienating - model of nationalism and myriad other political and societal issues, the BQ did win outright elections in Quebec after the passing of that act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Am I the only one who thought this thread might be a bit more rapey than it in fact is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al666 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Maybe this is an uncomfortable question for all concerned, but given what has happened recently elsewhere it's a real possibility. What happens if at some point in the future a democratically elected Scottish Government, following a manifesto commitment that is endorsed in an election, want to hold another referendum on Independence and the UK government say no? I reckon the reason that the government of the day the last time around was so sanguine was that no one thought that 45% of those who voted would vote YES. I don't want to have a debate here about how likely a YES vote will be in the future, there's other threads devoted to that, but rather what the real practical implcations would be. Sure there will be cries of 'constitutional crisis' but what in real terms could we do and how strong would the will of Jock Public ( ) be to actually do anything? Granny, why not accept that yes got a gubbing, any future referendum will have it's terms set by Westminster, so you'll need a majority of the electorate, which the 37% you managed last time certainly was not. I also suspect that a fair number of forelock tugging yessers who were taken in by the white paper and wings over somerset will not be so easily fooled again. It's time you accepted that you were conned by the snp and move on with your life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colkitto Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 We would take to the steel once more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Granny, why not accept that yes got a gubbing, any future referendum will have it's terms set by Westminster, so you'll need a majority of the electorate, which the 37% you managed last time certainly was not. I also suspect that a fair number of forelock tugging yessers who were taken in by the white paper and wings over somerset will not be so easily fooled again. It's time you accepted that you were conned by the snp and move on with your life. Thick c**t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Granny, why not accept that yes got a gubbing, any future referendum will have it's terms set by Westminster, so you'll need a majority of the electorate, which the 37% you managed last time certainly was not. I also suspect that a fair number of forelock tugging yessers who were taken in by the white paper and wings over somerset will not be so easily fooled again. It's time you accepted that you were conned by the snp and move on with your life. ^^^ Isn't going to enjoy the journey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortar Bored Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 We would take to the steel once more! No steel in Scotland.:-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlion Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 ^^^ Isn't going to enjoy the journey. How can someone who has been led to believe his country should be a region of another country accuse anyone else of being conned? By his own logic less than 50% voted for regionalism, so he's in the minority too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortar Bored Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 How can someone who has been led to believe his country should be a region of another country accuse anyone else of being conned? By his own logic less than 50% voted for regionalism, so he's in the minority too. Led to believe- don't make it true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.