Let's All Laugh at the Royalist Nats and Greens

[Zern]

28 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

I vote in every election I’m entitled to vote in, Zern.

That's good. I am very similar. Every possible way to engage is seized. Scotland has very healthy levels of turnout when it comes to the vote. When we have a referendum in 2023 i hope you continue to support the principle of democratic engagement.

[Duries Air Freshener]

2 minutes ago, Zern said:

That's good. I am very similar. Every possible way to engage is seized. Scotland has very healthy levels of turnout when it comes to the vote. When we have a referendum in 2023 i hope you continue to support the principle of democratic engagement.

If it takes place, which it won’t, then I’ll be sure to vote

[Zern]

22 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

If it takes place, which it won’t, then I’ll be sure to vote

That is the kind of spirit that should be encouraged.

I have heard some say that they would view another referendum as being somehow invalid, or illegitimate, and they would boycott a vote. That sounds counter-productive to me. The majority of people abstaining due to that advice would be those opposed to the motion and it would only skew the results in favour of the independence supporters.

Best to fully engage and be represented.

[GAD]

Not a lot of laughing going on here really is there, especially from the Tories? A lot of seething and aggression, not a lot of fun. Very Rangers.

[Duries Air Freshener]

24 minutes ago, Zern said:

That is the kind of spirit that should be encouraged.

I have heard some say that they would view another referendum as being somehow invalid, or illegitimate, and they would boycott a vote. That sounds counter-productive to me. The majority of people abstaining due to that advice would be those opposed to the motion and it would only skew the results in favour of the independence supporters.

Best to fully engage and be represented.

Absolutely.

Must clarify though, I’ll only take part in a legal referendum, not an illegal one.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

16 hours ago, sophia said:

my 

me 

my 

I 

my 

I 

I've deleted the superfluous verbiage in order to demonstrate where I fear there may be something at issue.

 

 

 

I'd add one other little edit - He continues to type "team" instead of "teams". Easy mistake to make in the wee sma' hours, I suppose.

[Zern]

1 minute ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

Absolutely.

Must clarify though, I’ll only take part in a legal referendum, not an illegal one.

I don't even know what an illegal referendum would look like.

For those unclear on the distinction would you care to explain the difference?

[WhiteRoseKillie]

2 minutes ago, Zern said:

I don't even know what an illegal referendum would look like.

For those unclear on the distinction would you care to explain the difference?

The currant position is "I agree = legal. I don't agree - illegitimate/illegal/spurious"

HTH

[Duries Air Freshener]

18 minutes ago, Zern said:

I don't even know what an illegal referendum would look like.

For those unclear on the distinction would you care to explain the difference?

Absolutely, a legal one would be one sanctioned by the government.

An illegal one is anything else.

[Zern]

11 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

Absolutely, a legal one would be one sanctioned by the government.

An illegal one is anything else.

Not sure that clarifies anything. How does legislation pass without government approval?

Governments propose legislation, almost by definition it approves of such and invites a vote. It can lose, but at no point does it not support the motion.

This is why i had such difficulty imagining what you mean by illegal.

I am trying to think of a situation where a government proposes legislation it doesn't support and is passed through overwhelming support of opposition and rebel politicians, but even then it would be difficult to regard that scenario as being "illegal", undesireable perhaps, embarassing for a sitting government yes.

But not illegal.

[Duries Air Freshener]

10 minutes ago, Zern said:

Not sure that clarifies anything. How does legislation pass without government approval?

Governments propose legislation, almost by definition it approves of such and invites a vote. It can lose, but at no point does it not support the motion.

This is why i had such difficulty imagining what you mean by illegal.

I am trying to think of a situation where a government proposes legislation it doesn't support and is passed through overwhelming support of opposition and rebel politicians, but even then it would be difficult to regard that scenario as being "illegal", undesireable perhaps, embarassing for a sitting government yes.

But not illegal.

It would certainly have to have government approval to be legal.

I wouldn’t vote in anything else.

[Zern]

22 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

It would certainly have to have government approval to be legal.

I wouldn’t vote in anything else.

In that case is not all legislation legal? The government's role is govern the process of legislation. All passing legislation come with tacit approval of government in that process.

Lets take another example. UK Government submits legislation to the House of Lords. The House of Lords amends the legislation and passes back to the Commons. Is that illegal by your metric? Has the House Lords done something illegal in amending the legislation?

I guess i am having difficult in seeing why you would use the term legal/illegal here when it would not seem to apply.

If it helps, i have it on good authority that Scottish SNP/Green Government very much approves of the proposed referendum legislation. All nice an legal, according to your definition, so far.

 

[Duries Air Freshener]

51 minutes ago, Zern said:

In that case is not all legislation legal? The government's role is govern the process of legislation. All passing legislation come with tacit approval of government in that process.

Lets take another example. UK Government submits legislation to the House of Lords. The House of Lords amends the legislation and passes back to the Commons. Is that illegal by your metric? Has the House Lords done something illegal in amending the legislation?

I guess i am having difficult in seeing why you would use the term legal/illegal here when it would not seem to apply.

If it helps, i have it on good authority that Scottish SNP/Green Government very much approves of the proposed referendum legislation. All nice an legal, according to your definition, so far.

 

If legislation is passed then It’s legal.

No, the Lords amending something is not illegal

I’m specifying between legal and illegal because it’d be pointless to vote in an illegal one.

The ‘result’ of an illegal referendum would just be ignored by everyone other than the Scotch Natters, who’d be dancing about George Square as if they’d won the lottery.  The rest of the world, however, would be staring at their televisions, shaking their heads and wondering to themselves; ‘What is wrong with these people?!’

As for your last paragraph.. thankfully it’s not up to the Greens and SNP to decide referenda.  It’s up to the MPs we elect to the House of Commons up and down the country.  We have a Tory majority in there, and they have a clear mandate to say NO TO INDYREF 2.

[Zern]

20 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

If legislation is passed then It’s legal.

No, the Lords amending something is not illegal

I’m specifying between legal and illegal because it’d be pointless to vote in an illegal one.

You say legislation passing dictates the legality. Anything passed is legal, that makes sense to me. But then it unclear how legislation can be passed yet be considered illegal?

How do you vote in an illegal referendum when it fails to pass?

Quote

The ‘result’ of an illegal referendum would just be ignored by everyone other than the Scotch Natters, who’d be dancing about George Square as if they’d won the lottery.  The rest of the world, however, would be staring at their televisions, shaking their heads and wondering to themselves; ‘What is wrong with these people?!’

Cool story bro.

 

Quote

As for your last paragraph.. thankfully it’s not up to the Greens and SNP to decide referenda.  It’s up to the MPs we elect to the House of Commons up and down the country.  We have a Tory majority in there, and they have a clear mandate to say NO TO INDYREF 2.

Of course. The SNP/Greens don't decide, they do however get to propose the legislation and if passed that would qualify as legal. The voters will decide.

[Duries Air Freshener]

5 minutes ago, Zern said:

You say legislation passing dictates the legality. Anything passed is legal, that makes sense to me. But then it unclear how legislation can be passed yet be considered illegal?

How do you vote in an illegal referendum when it fails to pass?

Cool story bro.

 

Of course. The SNP/Greens don't decide, they do however get to propose the legislation and if passed that would qualify as legal. The voters will decide.

I never said legislation could be passed and be considered illegal.

I wouldn’t be voting in an illegal referendum.

I also don’t agree that the SNP and Greens passing legislation would make it legal to hold another referendum.  That power lies with the MPs we elect to the House of Commons.

[welshbairn]

Is there any law that bars the Scottish Government holding a referendum on anything it likes? There might a question on whether it carries any constitutional weight with Westminster, but I haven't heard that merely holding one within Scotland is a reserved matter. @Ad Lib ? 

[Zern]

6 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

I never said legislation could be passed and be considered illegal.

I wouldn’t be voting in an illegal referendum.

I also don’t agree that the SNP and Greens passing legislation would make it legal to hold another referendum.  That power lies with the MPs we elect to the House of Commons.

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

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

A border poll would be the same.

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

[Zern]

23 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Is there any law that bars the Scottish Government holding a referendum on anything it likes? There might a question on whether it carries any constitutional weight with Westminster, but I haven't heard that merely holding one within Scotland is a reserved matter. @Ad Lib ? 

Afaik there is no barrier to what question may be put. So far we've had referendums in Scotland on whether to have a devolved parliament, independence and brexit.

[Duries Air Freshener]

20 minutes ago, Zern said:

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

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

A border poll would be the same.

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

Whether ‘Voting rights within Scotland’ is devolved or not, the power to allow partition referenda still lies with the MPs we elect to the House of Commons.

Edited April 28, 2022 by Duries Air Freshener

[Zern]

3 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

Whether ‘Voting rights within Scotland’ is devolved or not, the power to allow a referendum on partition still lies with the MPs we elect to the House of Commons.

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

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

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

Don't see that happening though.