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

Arklight

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

How is it a poor analogy, you understood the point being made despite coming up with some tripe that employment legislation is somehow now equivalent to the reserved powers.

Westminster is the boss, they can say yes, they can say no, they can say not now, they can do whatever the hell they want to constitutionally whether you or Holyrood like it or not.

Proud Scots will revolt.

TrickyTree83

Arklight wrote: »

Proud Scots will revolt.

That it would be, pride built on a foundation of lies.

No logic, no facts, no reasoning.

Are you too going to say Scots should vote to save 120,000 jobs by putting 500,000 at risk? Can we chalk you up as yet another alternative genius?

IveSeenTheLight

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

How is it a poor analogy, you understood the point being made despite coming up with some tripe that employment legislation is somehow now equivalent to the reserved powers.

Westminster is the boss, they can say yes, they can say no, they can say not now, they can do whatever the hell they want to constitutionally whether you or Holyrood like it or not.

Its poor because you have likened to employment law, in which the employer cannot indefinitely say no to the leave.

Incidentally, its your tripe

mollycat

Arklight wrote: »

Proud Scots will revolt.

No they won't.

Some misguided, ill informed, selfish and dogmatic Scot's will complain, and quite happily process it through the grudge factory.

Most Scot's will be delighted

No one will revolt.

IveSeenTheLight

.string. wrote: »

For clarity, the 2014 referendum agreement stipulated that it was for 1 (one) referendum before the end of 2014.

Sturgeon's request to May for another referendum lncluded a cyncal bid for a completely open-ended date.

Hmmmm, are you making things up now?

I don't recall any clarity in the Edinburgh agreement (2012) that stipulated that it was for "1 (one) referendum", although granted that the timeline was to be concluded by the end of 2014.

The single part you are referring to was that it would be a single question


Both governments agreed that the referendum should:

1. have a clear legal base
2. be legislated for by the Scottish Parliament
3. be conducted so as to command the confidence of parliaments, government and people
4. deliver a fair test and decisive expression of the views of people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect

It could therefore be argued that the precedent is set and that should a categorical "no" be given by Westminster, a right if appeal could be escalated through the European courts

TrickyTree83

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Its poor because you have likened to employment law, in which the employer cannot indefinitely say no to the leave.

Incidentally, its your tripe

No, I didn't liken it to employment law, just a specific scenario where one person has the power to grant what the other requests. The person with the power can choose to say yes or no. Same with the section 30.

TrickyTree83

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Hmmmm, are you making things up now?

I don't recall any clarity in the Edinburgh agreement (2012) that stipulated that it was for "1 (one) referendum", although granted that the timeline was to be concluded by the end of 2014.

The single part you are referring to was that it would be a single question


Both governments agreed that the referendum should:

1. have a clear legal base
2. be legislated for by the Scottish Parliament
3. be conducted so as to command the confidence of parliaments, government and people
4. deliver a fair test and decisive expression of the views of people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect

It could therefore be argued that the precedent is set and that should a categorical "no" be given by Westminster, a right if appeal could be escalated through the European courts

The ECJ has no power over UK constitutional arrangements.

That is in no EU treaty anywhere, ever.

.string.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Hmmmm, are you making things up now?

I don't recall any clarity in the Edinburgh agreement (2012) that stipulated that it was for "1 (one) referendum", although granted that the timeline was to be concluded by the end of 2014.

The single part you are referring to was that it would be a single question


Both governments agreed that the referendum should:

1. have a clear legal base
2. be legislated for by the Scottish Parliament
3. be conducted so as to command the confidence of parliaments, government and people
4. deliver a fair test and decisive expression of the views of people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect

It could therefore be argued that the precedent is set and that should a categorical "no" be given by Westminster, a right if appeal could be escalated through the European courts

I suggest you check whether a and the are singular or plural.

For those who want to re-read for themselves:

AGREEMENT

between the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government on a referendum on independence for Scotland

The United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government have agreed to work together to ensure that a referendum on Scottish independence can take place.

The governments are agreed that the referendum should: • have a clear legal base; • be legislated for by the Scottish Parliament; • be conducted so as to command the confidence of parliaments, governments and people; and • deliver a fair test and a decisive expression of the views of people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect.

The governments have agreed to promote an Order in Council under Section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998 in the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments to allow a single-question referendum on Scottish independence to be held before the end of 2014. The Order will put it beyond doubt that the Scottish Parliament can legislate for that referendum.

It will then be for the Scottish Government to promote legislation in the Scottish Parliament for a referendum on independence. The governments are agreed that the referendum should meet the highest standards of fairness, transparency and propriety, informed by consultation and independent expert advice. The referendum legislation will set out:
• the date of the referendum;
• the franchise;
• the wording of the question;
• rules on campaign financing;
and
• other rules for the conduct of the referendum.

The details of the agreement between the governments are set out in the following memorandum and draft Order, which form part of this agreement.

_____________________________ The Rt. Hon. David Cameron MP Prime Minister

_____________________________ The Rt. Hon. Michael Moore MP Secretary of State for Scotland

_____________________________ The Rt. Hon. Alex Salmond MSP First Minister of Scotland

_____________________________ Nicola Sturgeon MSP Deputy First Minister of Scotland

Edinburgh, 15 October 2012

Shaka_Zulu

I hope the official result will be out soon but I have crunched the numbers for two city councils. (Results are subject to my fat fingers being correct)

Dundee as the SNP heartland could only gather a SNP popular vote of 18289 out of 43625. Giving the SNP a 42% share.

Aberdeen 22140 out of 70609 = 31%

My betting is other areas will show similar results to Aberdeen give or take 5%.

I wonder what that tells us about the chance of indyref2 even taking place?

I can see Nicola standing up to announce "now is not the time"

.string.

Oh, by the way, I thought I should quote what Sturgeon says about an open ended referendum she writes,in her letter to May on Section 30,

As I have said previously, if the timetable you have set out changes, we will require to consider the implications for the timing of a referendum.

Sneaky isn't it! She wants to bank an agreement for a Referendum at any time, years into the future. Roll on the next Scottish Parliament Election.