Jump to content
Pat's Guide to Glasgow West End
harper

Scottish Independence ...

Recommended Posts

Oh, that clever Mr. Cameron being a bit silly? Ach, heaven forfend. The very thought! biggrin.gif As if! It is because, of course, we are all going to be feeling happily and easily fooled in the "afterglow" of Great Events. So that's us tellt then.

http://www.independe...ar-6286985.html

Unwise though it may be to make predictions, I think those events will not give me any glow at all, and I doubt I'll be alone in that. I don't recall feeling especially glowing the last time the queen had some kind of jubilee, and the London Oversized Expensive Sports Day will not cause me much joy and warm feeling. Indeed, even most London residents, having to put up with the whole thing (whereas the rest of us only have to put up with subsidising it) will be a bit cheesed off with the whole thing, I am sure.

Nope, "call-me-Dave" has called it wrong, I think. But I think it's good, 'cos I wanted a wee bit of a relaxing laugh today. Ta much, Daftie Davie. biggrin.gif

I haven't heard of anyone anticipating a glow, hence no chance of an afterglow. Not unless there's a rake of Scottish medals.

There might be more action with the Referendum issue - certainly plenty of sabre rattling going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see what the problem is here. Westminster are extending constitutional powers to effectively give the referendum legal status over advisory status and seeking to resolve the question for the population of Scotland as a whole. All this hooha about the date is nonsense. Alex Salmond changed his mind about holding the referendum in his last term of office. There is absolutely nothing to stop him entering into discussion about changing the date. That is not an honest response.

There is much said about the 38% of the voting population who currently support the SNP in their pledge for independence but very little regard for the views of the rest of the Scottish population How about an advisory referendum on bringing forward the date for a binding referendum? That would be real democracy, IMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see what the problem is here. Westminster are extending constitutional powers to effectively give the referendum legal status over advisory status and seeking to resolve the question for the population of Scotland as a whole. All this hooha about the date is nonsense. Alex Salmond changed his mind about holding the referendum in his last term of office. There is absolutely nothing to stop him entering into discussion about changing the date. That is not an honest response.

There is much said about the 38% of the voting population who currently support the SNP in their pledge for independence but very little regard for the views of the rest of the Scottish population How about an advisory referendum on bringing forward the date for a binding referendum? That would be real democracy, IMV.

Little regard for the views of the rest of the Scottish population??? How do you make that out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be very little balanced debate about independence. A significant number of Scottish voters remain unconvinced about independence and this view is not considered by Scotland's First Minister for obvious reasons. If the SNP mantra of "The People of Scotland Decide" then let them and at a time of their choosing and if people want to have their say now, then so be it, for or against.

In many way, the issue of independence needs to rise above party politics because whatever is decided, it will be the legacy of future Scottish Governments to come. As Scotland's First Minister, Alex Salmond has a responsibility to lead the whole of Scotland on this issue (including the people who don't agree with him) and for the first time he has been offered the statutory powers to do this in a legally binding way. It is really not for the First Minister to dismiss this without due consideration. At the end of his last term in office, Alex Salmond decided not to hold the referendum. The SNP membership was not consulted on that decision so the NC's statements about dates and promises is just complete nonsense. And seriously, can Scotland's First Minister really say "Let the People of Scotland Decide" while at the same time delaying that decision to build momentum for a YES vote? hmm dry.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be very little balanced debate about independence. A significant number of Scottish voters remain unconvinced about independence and this view is not considered by Scotland's First Minister for obvious reasons. If the SNP mantra of "The People of Scotland Decide" then let them and at a time of their choosing and if people want to have their say now, then so be it, for or against.

In many way, the issue of independence needs to rise above party politics because whatever is decided, it will be the legacy of future Scottish Governments to come. As Scotland's First Minister, Alex Salmond has a responsibility to lead the whole of Scotland on this issue (including the people who don't agree with him) and for the first time he has been offered the statutory powers to do this in a legally binding way. It is really not for the First Minister to dismiss this without due consideration. At the end of his last term in office, Alex Salmond decided not to hold the referendum. The SNP membership was not consulted on that decision so the NC's statements about dates and promises is just complete nonsense. And seriously, can Scotland's First Minister really say "Let the People of Scotland Decide" while at the same time delaying that decision to build momentum for a YES vote? hmm dry.gif

When have the people of Scotland said they wanted to have a referendum now? The only people forcing a referendum now are the Unionist parties. The SNP manifesto clearly set out that it would hold a referendum in the second half of the Parliament. That manifesto along with the pro union manifestos of the Labour/Tory and Liberal Dems were put to the people of Scotland last May and the people of Scotland voted overwhelmingly in favour of the SNP. Deal with it! Its arrogance beyond belief and shows remarkable disdain for the voters in Scotland to now have those same Unionist parties telling the SNP Government when they will hold that referendum.

Why shouldn't the SNP Government pick an opportune time? We all know Cameron wants to go for a referendum when he thinks he will get a pro Britain post Olympic feel in the country. Most Scottish unionists want a referendum quickly because several more years of the SNP Government will continue to roll back the 40 years of lies told to the people of Scotland by successive Unionist Governments.

Perfidious Albion was found out (FOI is a bitch), I have no doubt it will continue to raise its ugly head over the next two and a half years. But please do us a favour; stop dressing up unionist self interest as some form of democratic morality, that high horse has been spotted for sham it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the unionists want to deny 16 and 17 years olds any say in determining the future of Scotland .......................yet, so many of them were signing petitions to have the right to vote extended to 16 and 17 year olds for the UK parliament

http://www.votesat16.org/about/supportive-politicians/

Beware perfidious Albion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The future of Scotland belongs to the people of Scotland, Sam and not just the SNP supporters. Surely, you can see, there is a real conflict between the role of the First Minister preciding over a referendum to canvas all views, while at the same time setting that agenda to secure the most favourable outcome on one side? Whether or not the First Minister agrees with proposals that are being put forward by the UK Government, he has a responsibility to consider them and not dismiss them out of hand. That is his job:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The future of Scotland belongs to the people of Scotland, Sam and not just the SNP supporters. Surely, you can see, there is a real conflict between the role of the First Minister preciding over a referendum to canvas all views, while at the same time setting that agenda to secure the most favourable outcome on one side? Whether or not the First Minister agrees with proposals that are being put forward by the UK Government, he has a responsibility to consider them and not dismiss them out of hand. That is his job:)

I see real conflict allowing Westminster any say; Westminster is the one with previous for gerrymandering and lying. Every UK prime minister chooses the time of the next election within the timeframe of the parliament, why is that normal and yet the SNP sticking to their manifesto pledge is somehow wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because: as well as being the leader of the SNP, Alex Salmond, as First Minister, also represents all the people of Scotland, not just the ones who elected him and not just the ones that are pro independence. If (all) the people of Scotland are truly to decide then the referendum cannot be set according to one particular bias and you yourself have previously posted that the timing of the referendum was set to maximise support for a YES vote. This would have been an issue for the referendum regardless of what Westminster had to say.

To answer your question, *putting on my imaginary First Wumin' hat*, given the monumental importance of this decision for Scotland's future, I would have taken the proposal back to session for consideration before rejecting it completely out of hand. The prospect of an advisory referendum that is may then dragged through the mire of legal challenge is just too awful to contemplate. *takes off First Wumin' hat* It's an opinion, Sam. People are allowed to have opinions that are different, even within the party membership of the SNP. :P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Sean Connery have a vote?

I do hope The First Minister uses him in the campaign.

No he does not. Unless the rules are changed to include non doms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because: as well as being the leader of the SNP, Alex Salmond, as First Minister, also represents all the people of Scotland, not just the ones who elected him and not just the ones that are pro independence. If (all) the people of Scotland are truly to decide then the referendum cannot be set according to one particular bias and you yourself have previously posted that the timing of the referendum was set to maximise support for a YES vote. This would have been an issue for the referendum regardless of what Westminster had to say.

To answer your question, *putting on my imaginary First Wumin' hat*, given the monumental importance of this decision for Scotland's future, I would have taken the proposal back to session for consideration before rejecting it completely out of hand. The prospect of an advisory referendum that is may then dragged through the mire of legal challenge is just too awful to contemplate. *takes off First Wumin' hat* It's an opinion, Sam. People are allowed to have opinions that are different, even within the party membership of the SNP. :P.

What bias? Other than timing what bias?

This threat of 'legal challenge' is unionist smoke and mirrors. Lets invent a problem and offer a solution to that problem that gets us control of the referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FM of Scotland has a duty to precide over a referendum that is fair to all Scottish voters. " Controlling the timing" of the referendum in order to maximise support for a favourable outcome is bias enough. It's not just the process, Sam. It's the perception of the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harper that is nonsense.

You semm to think only the arrival of the UK Government can ensure a true and fair referendum. Utter tosh. We already hear the unionists muttering about minimum thresholds. Turn your scorn where it is deserved, at those with a history of cheating the people of Scotland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any such thing, Sam. I said, regardless of Westminster, there is a conflict of interest in controlling the timing of the referendum to maximise an outcome in favour of a YES vote. And I am not going to say it again:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any such thing, Sam. I said, regardless of Westminster, there is a conflict of interest in controlling the timing of the referendum to maximise an outcome in favour of a YES vote. And I am not going to say it again:)

Any politician worth his/her salt will attempt to control things for what they see as the most favourable outcome Harper. I think that some people may become indifferent to the issue if it drags on too long. At the moment I think that Cameron has played into our First Minister's hands but has he tied himself to 2014?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are right on both counts, tig, but setting a date to optimise the chances of a preferred outcome can hardly be called democratic.

Personally, it disappoints me when the SNP resorts to this kinda of knockabout politics. The issue is too important to the future of Scotland and the rest of the UK and a politician of Alex Salmond's stature just doesn't need to resort to that.

I think coverage of the issue has been pretty shocking, none less than Hardeep Singh's appearance on Andrew Neil's show last night. We had whisky, haggis, bagpipes and a quote from Burns - everything but a coherent explanation of why he thought that Scotland would be better off as an independent country. I don't know what was worse; the way the programme trivialised the issue (shame on you Andrew Neil for allowing it) or that fact that Singh agreed to do it. It was beyond naff, IMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are right on both counts, tig, but setting a date to optimise the chances of a preferred outcome can hardly be called democratic.

Personally, it disappoints me when the SNP resorts to this kinda of knockabout politics. The issue is too important to the future of Scotland and the rest of the UK and a politician of Alex Salmond's stature just doesn't need to resort to that.

I think coverage of the issue has been pretty shocking, none less than Hardeep Singh's appearance on Andrew Neil's show last night. We had whisky, haggis, bagpipes and a quote from Burns - everything but a coherent explanation of why he thought that Scotland would be better off as an independent country. I don't know what was worse; the way the programme trivialised the issue (shame on you Andrew Neil for allowing it) or that fact that Singh agreed to do it. It was beyond naff, IMV.

I didn't see it but I can't abide all the fervour and Scots wha hae stuff. Maybe because I'm part Irish - like every second Glaswegian. :lol: Naff it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to move from opinion to facts. Set out the case and let the people of Scotland decide. At the rate this is moving, I might even be back in time to vote. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think clearly set out facts on both sides is long overdue. This, "aye it will, naw it wulnae - because we say so" approach is getting boring. Let's see the information set our clearly by both sides. Let's work within the legal and constitutional framework and let the people of Scotland decide. What's wrong with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think clearly set out facts on both sides is long overdue. This, "aye it will, naw it wulnae - because we say so" approach is getting boring. Let's see the information set our clearly by both sides. Let's work within the legal and constitutional framework and let the people of Scotland decide. What's wrong with that?

In theory, nothing. In reality, this will be dirty. Beware perfidious Albion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...