The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

Tromking

baldelectrician wrote: »

So, you agree the Scottish Parliament should have a referendum to allow Scots to decide on their future.

No, Holyrood should stick to the competencies it has control over. Too many Nats view it as a Parliament of an independent Scotland in waiting.
The Scottish Parliament only exists as part of the current constitutional settlement of our Union.

Herzlos

Tromking wrote: »

No, Holyrood should stick to the competencies it has control over. Too many Nats view it as a Parliament of an independent Scotland in waiting.

It is

loadsacash wrote: »

She has that anyway with a "Right to Remain"

She obviously feels that having a British Passport is worth the money

Or she doesn't trust the UK Government not to pull another Windrush?

tatartan

Tromking wrote: »

The Scottish Parliament only exists as part of the current constitutional settlement of our Union.

You use the phrase "our union". Out of curiosity, what exactly does the independence movement need to do to be "allowed" to ask the scottish people if they want to remain part of it and is that even a union? Surely a member of any union can decide to leave at any time? The UK didn't need permission to legally hold a referendum to leave the EU, so why in your view, should Scotland require it to vote to leave the UK. If the UK voted to remain, should it have been tied to the UK for a muddy amount of time open to interpretation by the EU, should the EU have the option of denying that hypothetical referendum?

In my eyes that is no union, only in name. The scottish people are sovereign under scots law. By hook or by crook we will have our say, and no man or woman, especially a tory, toff and resident outwith Scotland will get away with saying otherwise. Boris is damaging the union every day he denies a vote. The polls will show this in the coming months just wait and see.

I really can't see how democrats can defend this stance? The go to argument is to reference the 2014 referendum, but if you were actually in Scotland and part of the debate, you would know that the No campaign (to stay in the UK) relied heavily on the "vote no to stay in the eu" argument. How can anyone deny that has now been proven to be a pure lie. Not to mention the vow and promise of devo max.

tatartan

Tromking wrote: »

Too many Nats view it as a Parliament of an independent Scotland in waiting.
The Scottish Parliament only exists as part of the current constitutional settlement of our Union.

And don't you forget it! Why would a nationalist view it as anything else? strange statement to make. Should I view it as a parliament that will cease to exist and another will form when independence comes?

I also take a dislike to the choice of including the word "current". The scottish parliament should not be going anywhere even if against all my expectations that we should vote to remain in the UK after a second referendum. I'm curious, do you see the scottish parliament is something that could be closed? There will NEVER be a mandate for that from Scotland.

elantan

The_Rainmaker wrote: »

Really.

You still can not show a mandate.

16-17 year olds bought by your flawed nationalist curriculum for excellence, that is failing our children.

Another Rookie error ... SNP won 2016 2017 2019 ... they have more than enough of a mandate

seriously your lacking now ... go get educated come back when u know better

zagubov

Moe_The_Bartender wrote: »

Presumably she also has a Polish passport so has FoM already.

Are Poles now allowed to hold dual nationality? So she won't be foregoing the right to settle in the other EU countries including Poland?

The_Rainmaker

baldelectrician wrote: »

By omission you seem to forget that giving 16-17 year olds the vote is also Labour, Green and Lib Dem policy.

Are they moving the goal posts to help the SNP as well?

Lol...................are you serious?

What is the Inkatha Freedom Party's view on the subject? That must be equally valid........mais non?

The_Rainmaker

elantan wrote: »

Another Rookie error ... SNP won 2016 2017 2019 ... they have more than enough of a mandate

seriously your lacking now ... go get educated come back when u know better

Fortunately my education was completed before the Nats managed to screw the education system up.

I don't know what your excuse is.

You have no mandate because you can not show you have over 50% of the vote. Go for it in the Scottish Elections and get over 50% I will concede that you may just have scraped a mandate.

Until that time stop talking kak!

mollycat

elantan wrote: »

Another Rookie error ... SNP won 2016 2017 2019 ... they have more than enough of a mandate

seriously your lacking now ... go get educated come back when u know better

Priceless

Against some stiff competition, wins the prize for most ironic post of the entire thread!! :rotfl:

Shakethedisease

abz88 wrote: »

Given its the second proposed Indy vote in a short space of time and they lost the first vote, yes, they are being asked to show they have a greater mandate than last time round which is fair enough given the costs involved in running a referendum and the divisions it caused last time round. "even if the [STRIKE]SNP/Greens and other indy[/STRIKE] Pro-Union parties get over 50%, [STRIKE]or even just the SNP.[/STRIKE]. the mandate will simply be ignored. I think we all know that."

You've forgotten who puts the SNP where they are. When you say 'they' you mean the Scottish electorate, not the SNP. If the SNP disappeared tomorrow there would still be half the country wanting out of the union. Democracy will always find a way.

If there was to be some kind of time limits to the next referendum then the Scottish electorate should've been told at the time. They weren't. You're moving the goalposts for Scottish voters and confusing political parties with electorates who don't always vote for the SNP in elections yet still wish independence. ( See Scottish Labour voters ). The SNP while standing for independence aren't the problem for the union. It's the Scottish voters across all parties who want it. They've deemed the mandate, not Boris.