Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

It does show the complete lack of support for independence when despite the bare-faced lies from the Yes campaign, a record oil price to prop up treasury revenues, a weak coalition Government (led by the reviled Tories) in London, the advantage of having the Yes answer on their side (worth a few percent of the vote alone) and a fairly charismatic leader, Yes didn't come anywhere near winning.

!!!!!!, even Michael Dukakis did better in 1988 than Yes did in 2014!

There is no chance that the UK Government will call a referendum in Scotland again for decades. It costs a fortune and wastes a huge amount of everyone's time. The SNP could try calling an illegal referendum although I have no idea how they'd pay for it.

You're absolutely correct that the UK Government won't call a referendum in Scotland for decades. That's because it will be the Scottish Government that will call it. Just like the last one was called by the Scottish Government and not the UK one.

Mistermeaner

Could I stand for election as the high sheriff of cheshire on a platform of free wellingtons for everyone over 5'4" and put a mandate in my own constitution to that effect.

When inevitably I am voted for by more than 50% of the people that bothered to vote can I then make David Cameron give me free wellies because I have a mandate from the people of cheshire?

Shakethedisease

Mistermeaner wrote: »

I hope he would say fine but you are paying for it and you can't have the pound and you are taking your share of the debt

Apart from the saying 'fine' part. The rest depends on the Yes vote and negotiations afterwards.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

That's the best one yet. Independence means taking control of everything. I assume you missed that ? Holyrood can only control what it has. Devolved powers don't have much in the way of control of an 'abundance of resources'...
.

actually scottish independence means a transfer of power from Westminster to Germany where Scotland will have less authority that currently.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

I agree sturgeon will demand a new referendum after scotland become a one party 'state' in May.

As quoted before, a one party state is a state in which only one party is allowed to stand for election. Not when the other parties are just crap.

-civil disobedience might work :
-cut the gas off to England (but wait until winter so as not to repeat the much admired Miners' error)
-lie down and block the HS2 track
-invite Putin for state visit to discuss single party processes
-print 'pounds' and flood the market
-occupy RBS and make it a scottish bank again

I'm sure there are many other ways you can force the matter

Of course the SNP could give greater legitimacy by demanding a UK wide referendum : bound to result in an independent scotland


only time now

Nah, nothing so dramatic. They'll simply call and arrange the referendum they are mandated to hold if the SNP return a majority in May. Like Cameron did with the EU one in the Conservative's manifesto. The big fuss and hand wringing about it all will be elsewhere, not Scotland.. apart from a rapidly diminishing group ( thank you Tory majority ! ) that don't want another one.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

actually scottish independence means a transfer of power from Westminster to Germany where Scotland will have less authority that currently.

Ooooh really ? I thought Scotland would be immediately out of the EU if there's a Yes vote... if it's not already after 2017 anyway. Somehow don't think the EU 'threats' will hold much water next time round. Do you ?

Mistermeaner

I think it would be fair for the Scottish people to know what independence means in advance of voting for it.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

there is indeed a link between english and scottish spending:

each scottish family get about 3,000 per annum more; sadly they spend it unwisely as is their right in a democratic system

Well at least you agree there's a link. Better tell string as he thinks I'm making it all up.

Mistermeaner

If the snp are going to stir up another shitstorm to get a referendum they should negotiate the full terms of what that means in advance - otherwise it is purely emotive and for the sake of it.

Shakethedisease

Mistermeaner wrote: »

I think it would be fair for the Scottish people to know what independence means in advance of voting for it.

BetterTogether spent three years on that already. No need for an extended repeat on loop ( border controls, out of the EU, the next Zimbabwe, no pound, debt up the ying yang, yadda, yadda). We know it all already.

Westminster will state what they see happening, the Pro-Indy side will state theirs. If it's a Yes, then negotiations begin. Same as last time.