Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Let them have it. Their economy will collapse and they'll be begging to rejoin the UK. Maybe that will shut them up permanently. We all know the SNP will hold referendum after referendum until they eventually get that leave vote they want.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    This is usually where these discussions end up: threats of civil disorder. I, for one, do not think that's really a realistic prospect, nor one that we couldn't deal with. Quebec had a problem with nationalist terrorism and I think there's as much chance even if the UK Government was as amenable as it could be that the same result will happen when the SNP are on the down-swing, as inevitably they will be at some point.
    I really don't think our international standing, battered as it currently is, could withstand it if we start oppressing people for demanding their democratic rights. Believe me, I don't want Scotland to leave, and my anxiety about this is separate from my views about Brexit.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    I really don't think our international standing, battered as it currently is, could withstand it if we start oppressing people for demanding their democratic rights.
    Look, I'm sympathetic to the political case you're making - I want a UK by consent of everyone. But that doesn't really address that you cannot conceivably govern a state where the threat of secession is constantly being held above the head of the central government to extract concessions. Imagine if the UK Government was constantly threatening to disband the Scottish Parliament for making policy choices it didn't agree with - it would be a sham.

    The "neverendum" scenario is not so much a theory any more than a reality. It's not reasonable, it's not fair and it doesn't reflect the commitments and agreements the Scottish Government made before the 2014 referendum.

    To inject language about "rights" that quite simply don't exist into the mix isn't helpful. There is no "right" to any referendum, never mind a second one within two years of the first. I think that's a fairly straight point to make - the UK Government can grant a second referendum, but it should only ever do so when the conditions are fair and reasonable. That is its power of custodianship over the constitution, which David Cameron for example exercised to ensure that the Scottish Government agreed to oversight by the Electoral Commission in for the 2014 vote when they were trying to avoid it.

    In terms of international standing, there are plenty of internal nationalist uprisings across the world that are not dealt with fairly. The UK Government acting fairly would be the exception to that rule. Ultimately it's an internal issue for the UK and international law puts the right of states to maintain their territorial integrity and rule of law at its heart.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Look, I'm sympathetic to the political case you're making - I want a UK by consent of everyone. But that doesn't really address that you cannot conceivably govern a state where the threat of secession is constantly being held above the head of the central government to extract concessions. Imagine if the UK Government was constantly threatening to disband the Scottish Parliament for making policy choices it didn't agree with - it would be a sham.

    The "neverendum" scenario is not so much a theory any more than a reality. It's not reasonable, it's not fair and it doesn't reflect the commitments and agreements the Scottish Government made before the 2014 referendum.

    To inject language about "rights" that quite simply don't exist into the mix isn't helpful. There is no "right" to any referendum, never mind a second one within two years of the first. I think that's a fairly straight point to make - the UK Government can grant a second referendum, but it should only ever do so when the conditions are fair and reasonable. That is its power of custodianship over the constitution, which David Cameron for example exercised to ensure that the Scottish Government agreed to oversight by the Electoral Commission in for the 2014 vote when they were trying to avoid it.

    In terms of international standing, there are plenty of internal nationalist uprisings across the world that are not dealt with fairly. The UK Government acting fairly would be the exception to that rule. Ultimately it's an internal issue for the UK and international law puts the right of states to maintain their territorial integrity and rule of law at its heart.
    All this referendum stuff isn't going to happen anyway may is just paying lip service to it so she can say I tried for you.

    I still don't think they will do full fat brexit anyway they will go down the EEA route and that negates the issue of the single market


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sephiroth)
    Let them have it. Their economy will collapse and they'll be begging to rejoin the UK. Maybe that will shut them up permanently. We all know the SNP will hold referendum after referendum until they eventually get that leave vote they want.
    You must be joking... why would our economy collapse? Ridiculous
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    All this referendum stuff isn't going to happen anyway may is just paying lip service to it so she can say I tried for you.
    I'm inclined to agree, but realistically the SNP are going to continue to get political mileage out of it. The newspapers stick every silly switch of independence rhetoric from Sturgeon on the front page - it completely puts any scrutiny of their actual record in government on the back page and makes them relevant even when they're little more than a pointless sideshow.

    It's a perennial nuisance for anyone following Scottish politics. I admit, however, the only way to make it go away is for the opposition parties in Scotland to start beating the SNP in elections. Normal, electoral politics still holds the sway - and there's no shortcut.

    I still don't think they will do full fat brexit anyway they will go down the EEA route and that negates the issue of the single market
    I think there will be something closer to membership than being fully "out", but I think it's far too early to say what form that will take. The immigration and free movement issue is inevitably the biggest barrier here.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    In an ideal world, I would like to see a well devolved Scotland inside the UK. But I just can't see it happening. Staying in the UK is good for defence, influence and perhaps it's slightly better economically too. But we don't have enough control over our own country. Just a bit more devolution and I'd be a happy stay in the UK voter.L i b
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cbreef)
    In an ideal world, I would like to see a well devolved Scotland inside the UK. But I just can't see it happening.
    Well, that's rather what we have now. One of the most powerful sub-national parliaments in the world, within the UK.

    Staying in the UK is good for defence, influence and perhaps it's slightly better economically too.
    If by "slightly better economically" you mean "avoids recession-level slashing of public spending" then yes. The distinction however is far from slight. Scottish independence would hobble our economy, without even considering the element of capital flight, the reduced opportunities afforded by UK trade and investment support and so on.

    This was not even addressed in the first referendum. It was dismissed simply as "scaremongering". Well, I was informed - and I was genuinely terrified at the prospect.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cbreef)
    You must be joking... why would our economy collapse? Ridiculous
    Because we'd have the highest budget deficit in Europe, the end result of which would necessitate billions of pounds worth of public spending cuts. Extract that from the economy quickly and it deflates rapidly.

    Cause uncertainty over our currency and our financial services industry disappears.

    Remove UK guarantees over decommissioning and our North Sea industry, already having huge problems, collapses.

    Put up trade barriers with our biggest trading partner - the rest of the UK - and trade with it will decline steeply.

    Remove UK-wide renewables subsidies, which (to an enormous degree) disproportionately benefit Scotland, and our green energy businesses go elsewhere.

    Remove UK-wide research funding, which disproportionately goes to Scotland, and our higher education and innovation sectors are screwed.

    If you want to **** the Scottish economy up good and proper, Scottish independence would be the one step you'd take to achieve it. And the upside? An abandoned promise to reduce corporation tax and some wishful thinking about getting on OK. There's no credible answer to this - and I'm not being partisan on that point, it's an inherent weakness that's simply not been answered.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FredOrJohn)
    Being a middle class anglo-scot I can tell you that the liberal section of Scotland that was for staying in the UK has changed to prefering INDY within the EU.

    What has changed is that many Londoners now agree with them..

    If Scotland goes for a new kind of citizenship where anyone on this Island is eligible to be Scottish I think they will get the entire 48% of the Island as new citizens. That would really blow the Torys out of the water -

    More or less the entire population of the UK under 50 becomes Scottish!
    What absolute babble.

    What on Earth makes you think an independent Scotland will mean Scotland being in the EU.

    To get into the EU, Scotland needs:

    -A central bank, which it doesn't have
    -To accept the Euro, which it doesn't want
    -A deficit of no mre than 3% of GDP, something it will probably never have.

    Add to all that the fact both France and Spain have said they will block entry, and the chances of Scotland being in the EU are severely diminished.

    The 48% won't all be new arrivals as, surprisingly, some of that 48% already live there! I also fail to envisage a situation where say 13 million people up sticks to move to a Scotland which probably won't even be in the EU.

    I also can't see how if they did it would "blow the tories out of the water," as most peoplewho voted Remain are not Conservative voters - and according to you they will have all left!
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BenC1997)
    What absolute babble.

    What on Earth makes you think an independent Scotland will mean Scotland being in the EU.

    To get into the EU, Scotland needs:

    -A central bank, which it doesn't have
    -To accept the Euro, which it doesn't want
    -A deficit of no mre than 3% of GDP, something it will probably never have.

    Add to all that the fact both France and Spain have said they will block entry, and the chances of Scotland being in the EU are severely diminished.

    The 48% won't all be new arrivals as, surprisingly, some of that 48% already live there! I also fail to envisage a situation where say 13 million people up sticks to move to a Scotland which probably won't even be in the EU.

    I also can't see how if they did it would "blow the tories out of the water," as most peoplewho voted Remain are not Conservative voters - and according to you they will have all left!
    Why have France and Spain said they would block entry?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Because we'd have the highest budget deficit in Europe, the end result of which would necessitate billions of pounds worth of public spending cuts. Extract that from the economy quickly and it deflates rapidly.

    Cause uncertainty over our currency and our financial services industry disappears.

    Remove UK guarantees over decommissioning and our North Sea industry, already having huge problems, collapses.

    Put up trade barriers with our biggest trading partner - the rest of the UK - and trade with it will decline steeply.

    Remove UK-wide renewables subsidies, which (to an enormous degree) disproportionately benefit Scotland, and our green energy businesses go elsewhere.

    Remove UK-wide research funding, which disproportionately goes to Scotland, and our higher education and innovation sectors are screwed.

    If you want to **** the Scottish economy up good and proper, Scottish independence would be the one step you'd take to achieve it. And the upside? An abandoned promise to reduce corporation tax and some wishful thinking about getting on OK. There's no credible answer to this - and I'm not being partisan on that point, it's an inherent weakness that's simply not been answered.
    I'll give you a few of those, but why would we put up trade barriers with rUK? Industries aren't going to "disappear" either, sure they'll take a hit, but I can't see people abandoning investment in the North Sea for example over independence. Also, surely our budget deficit can't be any worse than say, Spain's/Greece's/Italy's?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    As a Chinese person, I am really confused that why British people can objectively comment on "independence referendum". In China, you can't even express even a bit of your opinion on "independence" of any provinces. If you do, the public will regard you as the "betrayer of China" and the Government may put you into the prison.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ShinLee)
    As a Chinese person, I am really confused that why British people can objectively comment on "independence referendum". In China, you can't even express even a bit of your opinion on "independence" of any provinces. If you do, the public will regard you as the "betrayer of China" and the Government may put you into the prison.
    Because we tend not to put people into prison for simply having an opinion.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sephiroth)
    Let them have it. Their economy will collapse and they'll be begging to rejoin the UK. Maybe that will shut them up permanently. We all know the SNP will hold referendum after referendum until they eventually get that leave vote they want.
    I agree. I am subbed to this guy he is spot on with it imo.

    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Look, I'm sympathetic to the political case you're making - I want a UK by consent of everyone. But that doesn't really address that you cannot conceivably govern a state where the threat of secession is constantly being held above the head of the central government to extract concessions. Imagine if the UK Government was constantly threatening to disband the Scottish Parliament for making policy choices it didn't agree with - it would be a sham.

    The "neverendum" scenario is not so much a theory any more than a reality. It's not reasonable, it's not fair and it doesn't reflect the commitments and agreements the Scottish Government made before the 2014 referendum.

    To inject language about "rights" that quite simply don't exist into the mix isn't helpful. There is no "right" to any referendum, never mind a second one within two years of the first. I think that's a fairly straight point to make - the UK Government can grant a second referendum, but it should only ever do so when the conditions are fair and reasonable. That is its power of custodianship over the constitution, which David Cameron for example exercised to ensure that the Scottish Government agreed to oversight by the Electoral Commission in for the 2014 vote when they were trying to avoid it.

    In terms of international standing, there are plenty of internal nationalist uprisings across the world that are not dealt with fairly. The UK Government acting fairly would be the exception to that rule. Ultimately it's an internal issue for the UK and international law puts the right of states to maintain their territorial integrity and rule of law at its heart.
    Normally I would agree with you L I B (and normally we are on the same page about a lot of things), but I think this one occasion is seriously not applicable. Membership of the EU goes into more than simply being one more policy in which Westminster differs from Holyrood. It strikes into feelings of identity, international relations, and liberal democracy as well. It's a whole different kettle of fish.

    I see elsewhere you have talked about Scotland's membership of the UK clearly being beneficial to Scotland, saving it from recession-level spending cuts and also right here talking about how referendums should not be lightly granted on the same issue repetitively. I would agree with you, but those who matter - the Scots, 45% of whom voted Yes in 2012 - are the ones who you need to persuade, not me. And the Brexit referendum has shown that no number of rational arguments about economic utility of the Union or the political naivety of separation can turn the opinion of the ignorant public.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cbreef)
    Why have France and Spain said they would block entry?
    It's due to their internal political instability.

    In Spain, the region of Catalonia wants to break away and join the EU, the same can be seen in France with thr Bretons.

    Therefore, to set an example for these two, France and Spain would block Scotland joining the EU to show that you can't just break away from one country and jump straight into the EU. If they let Scotland join, it will give more confidence to the Catalans and Bretons that they could/should declare independence.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Because we'd have the highest budget deficit in Europe, the end result of which would necessitate billions of pounds worth of public spending cuts. Extract that from the economy quickly and it deflates rapidly.

    Cause uncertainty over our currency and our financial services industry disappears.

    Remove UK guarantees over decommissioning and our North Sea industry, already having huge problems, collapses.

    Put up trade barriers with our biggest trading partner - the rest of the UK - and trade with it will decline steeply.

    Remove UK-wide renewables subsidies, which (to an enormous degree) disproportionately benefit Scotland, and our green energy businesses go elsewhere.

    Remove UK-wide research funding, which disproportionately goes to Scotland, and our higher education and innovation sectors are screwed.

    If you want to **** the Scottish economy up good and proper, Scottish independence would be the one step you'd take to achieve it. And the upside? An abandoned promise to reduce corporation tax and some wishful thinking about getting on OK. There's no credible answer to this - and I'm not being partisan on that point, it's an inherent weakness that's simply not been answered.
    Getting rid of Trident would save a few pennies.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Strictly speaking the SNP would require Westminster to approve the referendum and agree terms otherwise the end result would either be the UK ignoring the result or cutting them off on day 1.

    Realistically though, i don't think a referendum will be called in this parliament because i don't think the SNP believe they can keep momentum if they lose a second time and no polling surge has been seen. It's also worth saying that i do believe the No campaign did themselves damage by being so negative so if lessons are learnt then it's possible we could win bigger than before.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gladders)
    Because we tend not to put people into prison for simply having an opinion.
    Not only because of the fear to be imprisoned. Almost any Chinese people hate the word "independence", I think it's because China had formed a strong sense of unification since BC221 when Qin shihuang ruined all the nations and unified the mainland. But EU never gather together.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.