Independence Without A Referendum

[ShedTA]

The only logical reason for mentioning this is that you think it should have necessitated 50% of eligible voters to say Yes. 50% of eligible voters did not say No, either.

Either that or your capacity for logic is impaired.

its because 38 is smaller than 45. simple thinking.

[Marky]

so what would be the question?

Don't be obtuse. You know what I mean.

If voters vote for SNP in full knowledge that they intend to declare independence, then they are is essence voting for independence.

So it has the same effect as a referendum.

[EddardStark]

The only logical reason for mentioning this is that you think it should have necessitated 50% of eligible voters to say Yes. 50% of eligible voters did not say No, either.

Either that or your capacity for logic is impaired.

only in the context of Salmond punting the idea that 38% represents the will of the people.

[Menschlich]

Don't be obtuse. You know what I mean.

If voters vote for SNP in full knowledge that they intend to declare independence, then they are is essence voting for independence.

So it has the same effect as a referendum.

It is completely different. Holyrood has no legal power to declare independence. The Edinburgh Agreement meant that the outcome of the referendum would have given it that power if a yes vote had occured.

[thorbotnic]

There's no reason why the Scottish Parliament couldn't pass an act tomorrow declaring independence. It wouldn't have any effect without Westminster recognising it, though.

Edit: Menschlich beat me to it.

Edited September 22, 2014 by thorbotnic

[EddardStark]

I believe Catalonia is threatening to do that very thing if the results of their referendum are not accepted by Madrid.

[Parklife]

I believe Catalonia is threatening to do that very thing if the results of their referendum are not accepted by Madrid.

Rightly so.

Our case is entirely different from theirs tough, unfortunately. A referendum in Catalonia would be such an easy victory that it's almost pointless having one. They are a proud people with confidence and belief in themselves. Scotland is a nation who is 55% made up of shitebags and the selfish.

[UPROAR]

I think we should have a referendum on a Claim of Right. This would enshrine in law the right of the Scottish People as sovereign. Something the majority of current Scottish politicians have already signed up to in principle.

When passed the government would then undertake negotiations to retain all fiscal and legal matters in Scotland except Defence, Foreign Policy and Currency. By stating they would never leave the UK without a referendum they would win a huge majority.

Independence would be a formality some years in the future...

[Pool Q]

It's a technicality, but under the Edinburgh Agreement and relevant Orders in Council, after a Yes vote the power to grant independence to Scotland remained with Westminster until the independence negotiations were completed and necessary (Westminster) legislation passed. That is, of course, in effect a veto.

I'm also uncomfortable with what Salmond said, doubt he would have come out with that were he staying on as FM. The precedent of a referendum has been set, people can see there is a process in place that gives them all a direct say on the issue. it would seem sensible to adhere to that next time around.

[EvilScotsman]

only in the context of Salmond punting the idea that 38% represents the will of the people.

As opposed to whatever percentage of the eligible voters voted 'No' being the 'will of the people'?

If you're going to argue that 38% is not, then neither is 46% or whatever.

[Auld_Reekie]

It's a technicality, but under the Edinburgh Agreement and relevant Orders in Council, after a Yes vote the power to grant independence to Scotland remained with Westminster until the independence negotiations were completed and necessary (Westminster) legislation passed. That is, of course, in effect a veto.

I'm also uncomfortable with what Salmond said, doubt he would have come out with that were he staying on as FM. The precedent of a referendum has been set, people can see there is a process in place that gives them all a direct say on the issue. it would seem sensible to adhere to that next time around.

Yep. UDI is ridiculous. If we do this, we arent cutting corners. I want a referendum and I want to win it so there can be no arguments about it. We'll be back.

[Marky]

It is completely different. Holyrood has no legal power to declare independence. The Edinburgh Agreement meant that the outcome of the referendum would have given it that power if a yes vote had occured.

Hence the reason I said in my first post....maybe I'm being a bit to simplistic.

Thanks for pointing that out in simple English instead of being a sarcastic trolling twat like some others (well one other)..

[EddardStark]

Hence the reason I said in my first post....maybe I'm being a bit to simplistic.

Thanks for pointing that out in simple English instead of being a sarcastic trolling twat like some others (well one other)..

you know where the ignore button is.If you don't Rossy has a tutorial on another thread.Dedicated to me. Edited September 22, 2014 by EddardStark

[Toepoke]

Am I right in thinking that back in the 70s when the SNP were in the ascendancy it was accepted that an SNP majority of Scottish MPs was a mandate for independence?

Clearly things have changed now with devolution etc.

[wwta2007.com]

An overall majority in a parliamentary election was always part of the SNPs mantra. There are 59 Scottish MPs in Westminster. Until recently it was 72. As devolution has increased our say on foreign affairs, defence and other non-devolved matters has decreased. Another reason for self-government.

If the SNP GE 2015 campaign seeks a mandate for independence based on taking 30 of those seats then what's to stop them ? And/or taking 50.1 % of votes cast.

I don't see a 83% turnout in Scotland on a UK general election. Accordingly, if our 1.6 million hold together until next May then we have a fair old chance of taking those 30 seats.

[MacWalka]

UDI is a destructive idea IMO. If it makes it into an SNP manifesto then I will not vote for them regardless of any other policies or how much I want to send a message to Westminster.

[Rossy]

There's a real danger in running next years election on the mandate of 'independence if we get more than 50% of the votes cast'.

It simply wouldn't work. It's too soon after the referendum, and all it would do would motivate the Cringers to come out again.....we'd simply have a re-run of the referendum with the same lies, scare-stories, attacks by Westminster, media bias etc etc.

An inevitable defeat would set the SNP back years.

As much as some won't like it, this is now a long (maybe middle term) game....evolution, not revolution. The first task for the SNP is to become the channel for the hurt and frustration that everyone feels, the second task is to harness it and keep it bubbling below the surface.

The 3rd task is to destroy Labour and the Tories at the polls next year, and then again in the Scottish elections of 2016.

And then we can begin to look again at things.

[wwta2007.com]

Is a democratic majority based on a mandate for self-determination UDI ?

[wwta2007.com]

I guess if Nicola is elected as SNP leader/FM in November she'll have her own ideas on how the Party plays GE 2015 & Embra 2016. There'll be a lot of Lessons Learned from the Referendum campaign to be considered. We all want a winning Plan.

[Jie Bie]

The next election should be fought on the basis of the SNP negotiating for devo max within the UK.

I think that would be a vote winner for the SNP. If we get a decent number of MP's and the UK parliament refuses to play ball with them then the people of Scotland will be pissed, and vote SNP again in 2016.

At that point if Westminster still refuses home rule / devo max a fair number of the 55% will be regretting their choice of vote, and we might start to see calls for a re-run in 2020...

[Marky]

you know where the ignore button is.If you don't Rossy has a tutorial on another thread.Dedicated to me.

What made you think I was talking about you?

I don't do ignoring people. I do regularly question why you are even here though (if it's not just to annoy people).

[runningtings]

The next election should be fought on the basis of the SNP negotiating for devo max within the UK.

I think that would be a vote winner for the SNP. If we get a decent number of MP's and the UK parliament refuses to play ball with them then the people of Scotland will be pissed, and vote SNP again in 2016.

At that point if Westminster still refuses home rule / devo max a fair number of the 55% will be regretting their choice of vote, and we might start to see calls for a re-run in 2020...

Spot on, my thoughts exactly and I think Nicola will do this too.

[giblet]

Spot on, my thoughts exactly and I think Nicola will do this too.

Spot on, but can see quite a few saying thats a sell out.

[thorbotnic]

Is a democratic majority based on a mandate for self-determination UDI ?

How democratic, though? Currently Labour get far more than 50% of Scottish Westminster seats on less than 50% of the vote; the SNP didn't receive a majority of votes in the last Holyrood election, but still got a majority of seats. Representative politics in all but the purest proportional systems tends to turn pluralities into majorities, in order to make government more effective - but a referendum is different. That's why they're used, for clarity of position on an important constitutional point.

[MacWalka]

Spot on, my thoughts exactly and I think Nicola will do this too.

My thoughts too. It's almost pointless to campaign for independence in a Westminster context for now, however the SNP can be an absolute pain in the governments arse and pester for FFA/DevoMax/Home Rule/whatever you want to call it.

I think failure to move on and obtain a new approach for now will lose more votes.