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

TrickyTree83

elantan wrote: »

The country of Dumfries and Galloway ... the country of Orkney ... sounds an interesting prospect ... shame they are not eh

I've gave my reasons do keep up

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Outside of the UK Scotland isn't a country. Your football and rugby teams are afforded that status. Exactly the same as England and Wales.

So no. If they want to have a vote to leave Scotland you should let them. Clearly according to you nationalists geography and law mean nothing when concerned with your perception of Scotland, so why should they matter with respect to Dumfries and Galloway and the Northern Isles? Answer - they shouldn't (to nationalists at least).

I know this is sticking in your craw, I love that the boot could well be on the other foot, and you'll be trying to convince these regions that they have to/need to stay a part of Scotland. I don't see what the Northern Isles would have to gain from remaining part of Scotland. I can see why Dumfries and Galloway might, but then we could just continue Barnett for Dumfries and Galloway, I'm sure they'd be happy with that.

Shaka_Zulu

elantan wrote: »

Fascinating how so many here like Tricky and shaka zulu are just so desperate to keep Scotland ... let's get autonomy for the UK ... but oh no don't you Scots start thinking about it

The hypocrisy gives me hic cups from laughing so much

What are you talking about?

You carry on laughing because you won't be laughing for long.

The people of Scotland are sick to death of this shenanigans.

Can anyone tell me how much this pipe dream is costing us? Money that could be better spent on the whole of Scotland not just on the SNP vanity project

islandannie

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Why should the Northern Isles pay for the luxuries of the nationalist socialists in Scotland? If Scotland votes Yes in a future referendum they have my backing to separate their teat from the vice like grip of the Scottish welfare state.

I wish I could thank you more than once.

sss555s

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Dumfries and Galloway have made their position clear too.

sss555s wrote: »

Do you have a link for that?

These articles are from 14th and 15th of September 2016 and both are quoting the same story of tory councilors trying to drum up support to keep D&G part of the UK (surprise surprise)...

A GROUP of breakaway Tory councillors have been accused of a “nonsensical stunt” after demanding the right to hold a referendum on the future of Dumfries and Galloway if Scotland votes to become independent.

That is hardly D&G making their opinion clear. You may find things very different on the next vote for independence as D&G is a farming community and they voted to "stay" in the EU the last time and will most likely vote for the best chance to be in the EU with the next vote too.

Outed for spreading BS again Tricky

Shaka_Zulu

This made me laugh:-



They say truth hurts. We have a political party dominating Scotland that is only interested in one issue, its only issue, and it's an issue it's already failed to persuade people on, but can not quite because it's the only reason it exists!

TrickyTree83

sss555s wrote: »

These articles are from 14th and 15th of September 2016 and both are quoting the same story of tory councilors trying to drum up support to keep D&G part of the UK (surprise surprise)...



That is hardly D&G making their opinion clear. You may find things very different on the next vote for independence as D&G is a farming community and they voted to "stay" in the EU the last time and will most likely vote for the best chance to be in the EU with the next vote too.

Outed for spreading BS again Tricky

I don't spread BS.

Calls for secession for Dumfries and Galloway were made were they not?

Unlike your understanding of Scotland's trade statistics and your quaint village analogy , that's an example of spreading BS.

Oh, remember you wanted to export wind power too, help shore up those Scottish finances? This too is BS.

Any time you want to get into the ring and talk facts, I'm here.

Shaka_Zulu

TrickyTree83

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/holyrood-s-indyref2-vote-rejected-by-westminster-1-4405727

My word...

The online poll they're running is interesting, 5000+ respondents.

I imagine the masses outside Holyrood in that video were unable to reply to the poll, perhaps that might swing it in their favour?

TrickyTree83

Looks like the Greens in Holyrood have become the Lib Dem's of 2010 today.

Their timeline is on fire with people angry at what they did today.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

I have argued some pages back that an advisory referendum, were it to be challenged in court, would either be illegal because it's intent fell into the area of a Reserved Matter and thus outside of the competence of the Scottish Parliament, or it was judged not to be impinging on a Reserved Matter and thus was inconsequential and thus ineffective.

I presume you are familiar with this A second Scottish independence referendum without a s.30 Order? A legal question that demands a political answer, prepared by Stephen Tierney, an adviser to the SNP?

In that piece much the same observation is made - see the section entitled "The plausible case for the legality of a consultative referendum".

The observation is made that the situation is murkey and needs political will to resolve it. I doubt if that will exists particularly in the current context. But a court case does not seem to me to be one the SNP would win in a way of value to them. Whether it is legislation or not is beside the point, it is it's intent and/or potential consequence. So if the SNP were to win the case on the sense that they could hold their "consultation" the result would, by definition, not be a credible tool for their cause.

The point is also made that if there is controversy about a referendum it's legitimacy/credibility will suffer, if anyone turns up to vote on it that is. That part of the blog is worth reading also see "A failure of politics: bad for the Supreme Court, bad for citizens". See, for example, the last paragraph.


In the debate on the Scottish Parliament, it was pointed out time and time again, that the SNP had not taken the people with them. It's a salient point.

Yes I'm familiar with him.



However May has already conceded the principle by saying 'Now is not the time'. She hasn't said the Scottish Govt doesn't have the right to call one. As indeed did Cameron in 2011 by agreeing that Scots did have the right to vote on their own constitutional future. The only item in question now is actually the timing and whether May can use Brexit as political cover for delaying a fully legal referendum happening.

I expect the Scottish Govt will go through the courts to clarify matters. There has to be a way for Scots voters to express their democratic wishes re the union. If not a referendum then what ? Either May comes out with a definite No it's not happening at all. Or else all we're really debating is actually the timing of the vote itself. Sturgeon's mandate is for the current Scottish parliament sitting, not in 5 or 6 years time.

May is going to be under considerable pressure now to clarify the UK's constitutional arrangements. But understand that there IS a difference between a Catalan type referendum. And a fully legal referendum taking place in Scotland without a Section 30.

A referendum bill passed in the absence of a section 30 order would be certain to be challenged in court. It might or might not survive. If it did survive, it would not be a 'Catalan-style referendum'; it would be legally valid

But for now we're only talking timing.