Independence Referendum: Take Ii

[Auld_Reekie]

So, it's almost impossible to imagine that there will not be a second referendum - it's just a question of when, not if. While the Yes campaign was the single most exciting and inspiring political campaign in my lifetime, I think we have to admit there were some fundamental problems that led to defeat.

My biggest concern between now and then, is what we do about currency. I still think trying to force currency union was the right thing to do and I still believe it to be the least worst option for the early days of an independent Scotland, but we cannot go into #indyref2 with the same game plan. I have to admit to being genuinely concerned about the prospects of Scotland's financial services industry should we need to float a new Scottish currency; what does that mean for our banks, our pension companies, etc? While a lot of the concerns raised by Better Together and certain institutions were clearly intended to manipulate the electorate, I don't believe they were entirely groundless.

IMO, serious analysis needs to be done on the realities of a new Scottish currency and pegging it to the pound. It needs to be credible and needs done now - Im not sure it's good enough to leave it until whenever the next referendum campaign is as it's unlikely we'll see another 2/3 year campaign as we did this time. The alternatives to a currency union need time to be debated and the electorate need time to be comfortable with the idea.

What do you think were the single biggest issues that prevented us from a solid Yes vote? Currency? EU? Media? The White Paper? The SNP? What is the biggest thing you want us to differently next time?

[Squirrelhumper]

I can't see anything but a Yes vote now.

[phart]

I agree on currency and have been saying for literally years. The feedback i got is lets get independence and then we can worry about money. However the media might be the single biggest problem in society right now.

[Jie Bie]

If Salmond had been able to provide a convincing answer to the currency question Yes would have won, of that I have no doubt. Think back to the Better Together Slogan - Your Pound, Your Pay, Your Pension.

Even if Cameron gets back in with a majority Tory government I still reckon we'd lose if we were to go for a re-run in September 2015 (not that it will happen) because there are too many people who might like the idea of independence, but aren't convinced it will actually work.

[Auld_Reekie]

If Salmond had been able to provide a convincing answer to the currency question Yes would have won, of that I have no doubt. Think back to the Better Together Slogan - Your Pound, Your Pay, Your Pension.

Even if Cameron gets back in with a majority Tory government I still reckon we'd lose if we were to go for a re-run in September 2015 (not that it will happen) because there are too many people who might like the idea of independence, but aren't convinced it will actually work.

The worst thing we can do is go too early. I don't want another referendum for a couple of years. I'd far rather we spent the time getting some fundamental stuff sorted first, and while I still think monetary union is the best for the short term, it's clear now that having no Plan B was a huge political weakness. Even I flinched at the scale of the currency questions we couldn't answer. The UK has shown it's strongest hand so all we need now is a better hand and it's up to us to find it. Need to work on it now.

[Parklife]

However the media might be the single biggest problem in society right now.

Yup. The media set the narrative and made folk worried about currency/markets etc, when in reality, i think without the constant media scaremongering, most folk would've had a pretty pragmatic view of it.

[kumnio]

The biggest issues for me were.

Complicit media, theres little that can be done here.

Died in the wool Unionists, again, theres little that can be done.

People unwilling to look at anything, again, theres little that can be done.

I take positivity from three things.

Independence is no longer 'new' so people may be willing to be swayed a bit more next time.

Old people, many will be gone, sorry if that sounds harsh, but its true.

The failed 2014 referendum will be a good barometer of what went right, what didnt, and what needs changed.

We simply must win the next referendum, timing is paramount. I still believe its coming, I just hope we dont have to wait too long.

[the_burger]

Yup. The media set the narrative and made folk worried about currency/markets etc, when in reality, i think without the constant media scaremongering, most folk would've had a pretty pragmatic view of it.

Yes. And I think that explains to a large extent why Yes has been in front in most polls since the referendum

[Bristolhibby]

Just throwing this out here, but would a Tory lead coalition not have a positive effect on the likely hood of independence?

J

[aaid]

Currency - in my mind its actually the only downside of Independence from where we currently stand and it's actually hard to argue that on that single point that Independence would be a benefit. At least during some short to mid term transitional period until such time as the economy of an independent Scotland settled down. It's no surprise that Better Together concentrated on this and Yes Scotland were on the back foot as far as this was concerned through the whole campaign.

However, if countries having different currencies was such an insurmountable problem then there wouldn't be the hundreds of different currencies that exist in the world today.

That said, had the vote gone the other way an "in principle" currency union would have been announced on September 19th, I'm completely convinced of that.

How to change that, I think you need to accept that it is not an ideal situation and talk about what all the other options are, what the benefits and downsides of each options would be. It needs to be considered as part of the "costs" of Independence and a price worth paying.

[aaid]

Just throwing this out here, but would a Tory lead coalition not have a positive effect on the likely hood of independence?

J

Depends on what that looks like, I don't think it necessarily follows that that would be the case.

Tory/UKIP, in out referendum on EU followed by BRExit - it would depend on how Scotland voted in that referendum, I'm not convinced its a much of a slam dunk as people think that Scotland would vote No.

Tory/Lib Dem, would pretty much depend on what powers are transferred to Holyrood and whether they are perceived to have delivered "the vow".

Tory/Labour grand alliance, if that's to keep the SNP out, then you can light the blue touchpaper.

[Scunnered]

The second referendum will be walked, for the simple reason that the SNP, arguably the only party capable of delivering the referendum won't push for one until public opinion is consistently at 65% in favour.

It's just a question of what it will take to put public opinion there... EU exit is the most plausible one for the moment.

[Clyde1998]

I think this has to be one of the best explanations, I've seen, of why we would have been fine, currency wise.

[Clyde1998]

The second referendum will be walked, for the simple reason that the SNP, arguably the only party capable of delivering the referendum won't push for one until public opinion is consistently at 65% in favour.

It's just a question of what it will take to put public opinion there... EU exit is the most plausible one for the moment.

I think that's a slight worry for me. It has to get to 65% before it happens again - I have my doubts that it would ever get there (unless something drastic happens - such as an EU referendum going against the way Scotland voted).

[Auld_Reekie]

As Scunnered said, we won't be having another until public polling shows a clear lead for Yes. I'm not convinced we'll wait for anything as high as 65%, but 55%-60% is fertile ground for a second go. The question is how we shift opinion there and keeping it there. I doubt public opinion will stay there if we had to re-run some of the currency debate again.

[Scunnered]

As Scunnered said, we won't be having another until public polling shows a clear lead for Yes. I'm not convinced we'll wait for anything as high as 65%, but 55%-60% is fertile ground for a second go. The question is how we shift opinion there and keeping it there. I doubt public opinion will stay there if we had to re-run some of the currency debate again.

Yep 55-60% is the figure I personally reckon they'll be looking for. Cove Sheep agrees so he'll make it so!

[perthTam]

Re currency - is there anything that can learnt from the euro introduction?

[Rossy]

Despite the media bias, the lies, Project Fear and all the rest, there were fundamental weaknesses in the Yes campaign.

Currency was the biggest example, but the whole economic case seemed badly thought out.

I would also suggest that allowing the No campaign to be on the front foot from the beginning, the passivity of the Yes campaign, and a desperation to grab the moral high ground by always playing the 'good guy' were weaknesses of varying degrees.

These are mistakes that need to be put right before the next referendum.

[giblet]

Second time around, most of the scare stories from before will no longer have the "shock and awe" factor that the No side in tandem with the complicit media tried to do in the last few weeks of the referendum.

Interestingly looking at comparables with Quebec, the second vote there produced a 10% swing to the Yes side, with No winning (only just) by a 0.5% margin. That kind of swing will see us home although I agree the SNP wont go for a referendum unless polls are showing consistently 60% plus for the YES side. This was a gap though of 15 years between the votes.

A Conservative majority parliament with a large SNP block will be good for the YES side in terms of speed of next referendum. Only problem will be getting UK government agreement for one. What will have to happen is another SNP majority at Holyrood, a groundswell of opinion withing Tory ranks to "get rid of the Scots" from parliament along and potentially an EU vote where Scotland votes to stay in and the rest of the UK, particularly England votes to come out. Expecting to see some foul play involved there with the Tories trying to make it impossible for votes to be counted per Country.

[Colkitto]

Although I voted Yes and was convinced we would win right up to polling day, subconsciously I believed there would be an Indyref2.

It's a case of when not if and it's all about getting the timing right. Ironically, a good showing in May's election could delay an Indyref2.

If the SNP are kingmakers at Westminster they should demand the moon for putting Milliband into power at No.10.

Real powers and funds for Holyrood would almost certainly rule out a referendum in the 2016 Holyrood parly term. Although the upside of that would be the incredible amount of seethe in England fuelled by the right wing English press.

A Tory win in May with lots more austerity to come and an EU referendum should be the trigger to have Indyref2 in 2018/19.

Whatever happens in May the Labour party must be routed and hopefully wiped out. Then the SNP wouldn't just be a political party it would be a movement for independence.

Independence is inevitable now, it's just getting the timing right to pull the trigger and put the Union out of it's misery

[Armchair Bob]

Personally I didn't give a about currency, am surprised it seems to have been a deal breaker for so many. Provided the fundamentals are good, and they are for Scotland, the currency would just follow on as a natural consequence.

What scenarios would bring another referendum and a Yes vote?

1. Having the media on side.

2. A major collapse in value of the GB£.

3. A UK government attempting to abolish the Scottish parliament.

4. The English getting scunnered with 'the tail wagging the dog' and telling us to get tae.

5. The SNP getting to see MI5 or the treasury's books as part of a deal, and discovering incontrovertible evidence of deliberate UK government deception or manipulation towards Scotland. (Unlikely - but would change the game.)

[Clyde1998]

Interestingly looking at comparables with Quebec, the second vote there produced a 10% swing to the Yes side, with No winning (only just) by a 0.5% margin. That kind of swing will see us home although I agree the SNP wont go for a referendum unless polls are showing consistently 60% plus for the YES side. This was a gap though of 15 years between the votes.

The background to the 1995 Quebec referendum is interesting:

In response to the referendum result, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau declared that he would seek to "patriate" the Canadian Constitution and to bring about what would eventually become the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. During tense negotiations in November 1981, an agreement was reached between Trudeau and nine of the ten premiers by Trudeau, but not Lévesque. The Constitution Act of 1982 was enacted without the Quebec National Assembly's approval.

After the retirement of Trudeau and defeat of the Liberals in 1984, new Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Quebec Liberal premier Robert Bourassa sought a series of Constitutional amendments designed to address Quebec's concerns, known as the Meech Lake Accord, with unanimous agreement amongst the provincial premiers. The Accord fell apart in dramatic fashion in the summer of 1990, prompting outrage in Quebec and a surge in support for sovereignty. While the Accord was collapsing, Lucien Bouchard, a cabinet minister in Mulroney's government, led a coalition of Liberal and Progressive Conservative members of parliament from Quebec to form a new federal party devoted to Quebec sovereignty, the Bloc Québécois.

Following these events, Bourassa proclaimed that a referendum would occur in 1992, with either sovereignty or a new Constitutional agreement as the subject. This prompted a national referendum on the Charlottetown Accord in 1992, which failed in Quebec and English Canada.

In the 1993 federal election, as the Liberals returned to power with a majority government under Jean Chrétien, who had been Minister of Justice during the 1980-81 constitutional discussions. The Bloc Québécois won 54 seats, and prophetically, 49.3% of Quebec's vote. The result made the Bloc the second largest party in the House of Commons, giving it the role of Official Opposition and allowing Bouchard to be able to confront Chrétien in Question Period on a daily basis.

In Quebec, the 1994 provincial election brought the sovereigntist Parti Québécois back to power, led by Jacques Parizeau. The party's platform promised to hold a referendum on sovereignty during his term in office as premier. While the PQ won a majority government, their popular vote total (44.75%) was considered disappointing.

So in short... we need a major constitutional collapse to force a second referendum (which would be leaving the EU against Scotland's will - in our case), the SNP to hold a majority of seats at Westminster and a pro-independence majority at Holyrood - before even thinking out another referendum.

Incidentally, this referendum was predicted, early on, to have a yes vote below 40% - and they ended on nearly 50%.

[Clyde1998]

Personally I didn't give a badger about currency, am surprised it seems to have been a deal breaker for so many. Provided the fundamentals are good, and they are for Scotland, the currency would just follow on as a natural consequence.

What scenarios would bring another referendum and a Yes vote?

1. Having the media on side.

2. A major collapse in value of the GB£.

3. A UK government attempting to abolish the Scottish parliament.

4. The English getting scunnered with 'the tail wagging the dog' and telling us to get tae.

5. The SNP getting to see MI5 or the treasury's books as part of a deal, and discovering incontrovertible evidence of deliberate UK government deception or manipulation towards Scotland. (Unlikely - but would change the game.)

Number 5 could happen if the SNP are in a collation deal with Labour - because they would be in the Government - and would be able to see internal documents.

[Wine bibber]

Woops... gremlins jump back into proper thread :

The deluge of propaganda can have a lasting effect on our short term memories as well as long term.Currency was not considered a huge vote winning issue.We have to remember Salmond won both debates .His strategy on the first on currency was to expose Darling and Labour's association with the Tories."You Jocks cant .have what is already yours".I noticed a huge surge on the streets of Edinburgh for YES when campaigning after the first debate.And like Scunnered i was convinced we were going to hit 60%.Eck gave a detailed summary of plans B D E and F in the second debate whilst also exposing other inadequacies.Darling's statement about Scotland "not being able to have any financial services industry" was the biggest lost opportunity to discredit the "No"side of the whole campaign IMO.In the melee i was one of the few people who seemed to notice.

After months of thought i have come to the conclusion we lost for several reasons.We seem to have been colonised by the back door and not just the 500,000 white settlers from South of the border.Nearly 80 per cent per cent of whom voted no. The last 300 years has seen an assault on our own culture through the invasion and erosion of our own institutions and values.So much so that many of our own inhabitants have become Scotaphobes by default ,dulled by the airbrushing of our nations history and its replacement from 1707 .Our own year zero.They see their own country as a region and inferior to the much grander institutions of their much larger neighbour. You can actually feel the fear of our own resident private schoolboy as he types ,terrified that his part of being resident in a "normal Northern European country" will mean disaster on a biblical scale.But after the inevitable independence we must convince him his mud hut will still be of a higher quality then his neighbour.

The campaign also exposed us to the massive differences in our society and forced us to look ourselves as Rabbie would have wanted.It became a contest of rich and poor.Borne out by 80% plus votes for Yes in the poorest areas and vice versa in the private schools.The campaign became not just our human right to govern but a better and fairer society for all Scots and not just to gain what other countries took for granted.The problem is many of our own population do not want to to be equal with their fellow countrymen.They want to stay above the pack and they will generate or believe any lie or myth that enables them to do so. We just assumed everyone YES or NO was fighting for what they wanted their equality to be,but on different sides.We were wrong.

Even some yes voters made the decision purely in financial terms, not even considering the moral argument or a tribute to the hundreds of thousands of their ancestors who died a brutal death at the hands of the invader over centuries .We're quite happy to aplogise for our role in the African slave trade but what schoolchild knows of the fate our our own kind after the second Dunbar.

So ,next time we must concentrate not just on equality and social justice and the distribution of resources ,we must concentrate also on the aspiration of individual wealth.But above all we have to take control our our media and ensure we are never subjected to the level of propaganda that we endure .A propaganda that causes uniquely our own countrymen to deny their own birthright.Above all we must celebrate our own history as a country for 700 years.We must all understand rich or poor .left or right .North or South that we are Scottish not British.This especially to our own white settlers .They and their ancestors must become proud Scots too

[Rossy]

The fluctuating price of oil will be used as a hammer by the nay-sayers next time round...on a daily basis... to beat down the Yes campaign.

The high heid yins of the Yes campaign MUST have a robust, clear, black and white, media friendly, cast iron, consistent rebuttal prepared from the off.

If they don't, it'll be game over before we even get going.