Is Scottish independence a 'good or bad' thing? Watch

Poll: Should Scotland be an independent country?
YES (299)
32.12%
NO (632)
67.88%
This discussion is closed.
Psyk
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#4821
Report 5 years ago
#4821
(Original post by Smack)
What about in relation to the overall turnout? If, say, Yes gets 50% + 1 vote, but the turnout is poor so in reality far less than half of the population actually voted Yes, would the result be considered valid?
In this case, yes. There's no minimum turnout requirement. It's 50% of people who vote, not 50% of potential voters.
0
Blue Meltwater
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4822
Report 5 years ago
#4822
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
That criteria was addressed with the devolution referendum in 79. The SNP has been grief whoring about it ever since, however this referendum doesn't have any rules about voter turnout which is rather worrying to me.

There's much been said by the cyberNat community about the SNPs success in the last elections and that was only a 50% turnout.

Basically the SNP got in with 25% of the available vote.


For significant constitutional events like this, I'd have been happier with a minimum turnout set out, or compulsory voting introduced even if one of the options was 'don't care.'

This situation explains why the SNP are stuck at the polls for their yes vote.

They got 50% of the vote from a 50% turnout and are stick at 30% support for seperation.

I'm going to say that the average SNP supporter is very likely to vote. That explains why current situation.
Though in fairness, 50% turnout isn't much lower from the 60% we tend to see at Westminster. You could argue both institutions are deprived of legitimacy due to the poor turnouts - less than 22% of the electorate voted for Labour in 2005, for instance, who then went on to form a government with a greater majority than the SNP currently have.

I disagree with the principle of having a minimum turnout since I don't think it's fair that if a certain number of people can't be bothered to vote they'd effectively count as No votes. That said, I think I would feel uncomfortable going ahead with independence if only something like 25% of the electorate did actually vote for it, which is why I do really hope we can get as high a turnout as possible.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4823
Report 5 years ago
#4823
(Original post by Blue Meltwater)
Though in fairness, 50% turnout isn't much lower from the 60% we tend to see at Westminster. You could argue both institutions are deprived of legitimacy due to the poor turnouts - less than 22% of the electorate voted for Labour in 2010, for instance, who then went on to form a majority government.

I disagree with the principle of having a minimum turnout since I don't think it's fair that if a certain number of people can't be bothered to vote they'd effectively count as No votes. That said, I think I would feel uncomfortable going ahead with independence if only something like 25% of the electorate did actually vote for it, which is why I do really hope we can get as high a turnout as possible.
For a rather significant and permanent change, I'd rather not 25.1% of the population deciding that future.
0
Blue Meltwater
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4824
Report 5 years ago
#4824
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
For a rather significant and permanent change, I'd rather not 25.1% of the population deciding that future.
So would I. But what if you were to get a rerun of the 1979 referendum, where the voters were to vote in favour of independence but it were to be denied because of the turnout? That would just drag the entire affair out even further and create even more bitterness. I don't really have an answer to the dilemma other than praying for high turnout - the only solution I can see which would remove either problem is compulsory voting, though that comes with its own whole share of ethical problems.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4825
Report 5 years ago
#4825
(Original post by Blue Meltwater)
So would I. But what if you were to get a rerun of the 1979 referendum, where the voters were to vote in favour of independence but it were to be denied because of the turnout? That would just drag the entire affair out even further and create even more bitterness. I don't really have an answer to the dilemma other than praying for high turnout - the only solution I can see which would remove either problem is compulsory voting, though that comes with its own whole share of ethical problems.
That situation won't arise.

From a personal perspective though. If 50% of the electorate can't be arsed to vote, then I don't see how any of the groupings for the two potential outcomes can claim the moral high ground.

It's about just or this referendum though. I'd prefer everybody to be forced to vote in any election even if its just to spoil their ballot.

That way that would stop triumphalist politicians claiming any high ground when somebody can point out X voted for you, but 100 - X didn't.

Did you get a chance to read those links on defence?
0
Left Hand Drive
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#4826
Report 5 years ago
#4826
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
I'm saying that the flawed accountancy methodology that the SNP use is pants. The UK buys equipment in from abroad in some areas so theoretically nowhere in the UK gets more money spent on it than it pays in.

Scotland doesn't have an aircraft industry so no matter what we do we'll never get anything that gets spent on anything that flies that can ever be attributed to Scotland. Neither do we build things like tanks.

With your warped logic you appear to promising an organic defence industry that builds, operates and maintains everything by ourselves.......which we know that the YeSNP campaign has been telling porkies to us about.

What method do the SNP use?
0
Left Hand Drive
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#4827
Report 5 years ago
#4827
What Scotland be like if don't vote yes can we afford to risk that?
1
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4828
Report 5 years ago
#4828
(Original post by Left Hand Drive)
What method do the SNP use?
Their own one that they're developing.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/St...e/Economy/SNAP

plus the GOvernment and Expenditure Revenue Scotland (GERS)

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/...bate-1-2857358
0
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4829
Report 5 years ago
#4829
(Original post by Left Hand Drive)
What Scotland be like if don't vote yes can we afford to risk that?
Yep, considering we'll be far more prosperous, outward-looking, financially stable, able to make decisions on the international stage, liberal, tolerant and fun than under the alternative.

That'll no doubt annoy all you neo-Calvinists in the nationalist movement who like everything to be mildly ****, the world to be controlled by lecturing elder-of-the-kirk types and that everyone should be broadly dependent on the state.

But we're going to be in the United Kingdom. An amazing country with a wonderful history and a bright future. I, for one, am looking forward.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4830
Report 5 years ago
#4830
(Original post by Left Hand Drive)
What Scotland be like if don't vote yes can we afford to risk that?
Can we afford the risk of voting yes? All of the evidence points to we can't. That's not withstanding the desire of many to remain in the UK.

There's a significant amount of grief whoring about the existing state of affairs. We are in a significantly stronger position now than many of our European friends.

The issue that many seem to forget is that pretty much everything that impacts on society is already devolved. Healthcare and education being the two main issues.
0
Midlander
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4831
Report 5 years ago
#4831
I am extremely tempted to go to Sturgeon's talk in St Andrews on Monday and directly ask her why her government has a bigoted stance on tuition fees in an independent Scotland.


Posted from TSR Mobile
1
cowsforsale
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#4832
Report 5 years ago
#4832
(Original post by Left Hand Drive)
What Scotland be like if don't vote yes can we afford to risk that?
****ed.

Thatcher made ‘secret cuts’ to Scottish budget

Can't see this happening in the event of a No vote :rolleyes:
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4833
Report 5 years ago
#4833
(Original post by cowsforsale)
****ed.

Thatcher made ‘secret cuts’ to Scottish budget


Can't see this happening in the event of a No vote :rolleyes:
You may want to actually read the article you've quoted. It doesn't actually say that secret cuts were made.

However if your left quoting selectively released papers from before you were born as a reason. You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel.

It may have missed you by, but cries of 'Maggie' tend to beast by a vocal minority who actually think most of us care about what a politician thought about doing 30 years ago will actually impact on today.

The SNP have promised me a positive campaign. All they've managed so far is bluster, bull **** and now trying to stir up some anti Tory bile that only gets the blood up of the extreme left wingers who are already in the SNP now.

theybe now recently been trying to say that we'll somehow be punished if we vote no.

Who's been getting called project fear again?
0
cowsforsale
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#4834
Report 5 years ago
#4834
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
You may want to actually read the article you've quoted. It doesn't actually say that secret cuts were made.

However if your left quoting selectively released papers from before you were born as a reason. You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel.
You're free to draw your own conclusions from that articles, whilst the rest of us come to another. I merely copied the headline.

Mrs Thatcher rejected this level of cuts, but in a memo her Private Secretary Andrew Turnbull said she felt "it would be better... to trim Scottish programmes as and when opportunity arose rather than through a very conspicuous exercise".
Tories secretly wanted to cut millions from Scottish budget

BBC Scotland's Westminster correspondent Tim Reid reports on how George Younger's refusal to accede to bigger cuts disappointed Mrs Thatcher and sparked a cabinet row.
Link

I guess you disagree with those too?

It may have missed you by, but cries of 'Maggie' tend to beast by a vocal minority who actually think most of us care about what a politician thought about doing 30 years ago will actually impact on today.
Yawn
.
The SNP have promised me a positive campaign.
They promised you?
As opposed to Better Together? Go on then, what is the vision for Scotland in the even of a No vote? What is the vision for the rUK in the event of a No Vote?

I supposed you'd call this positive then?




All they've managed so far is bluster, bull **** and now trying to stir up some anti Tory bile that only gets the blood up of the extreme left wingers who are already in the SNP now.
Go on then, was this SNP who broke the news?
0
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4835
Report 5 years ago
#4835
(Original post by cowsforsale)
.
Your whole argument is based on being indignant that a central government should want to bring spending (higher under the Barnett formula in Scotland for entirely political reasons) into line with that in England. How does this square with Scotland being the poor relation? And with Scotland currently having a bad deal?
0
Midlander
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4836
Report 5 years ago
#4836
(Original post by cowsforsale)
You're free to draw your own conclusions from that articles, whilst the rest of us come to another. I merely copied the headline.



Tories secretly wanted to cut millions from Scottish budget



Link

I guess you disagree with those too?



Yawn
.


They promised you?
As opposed to Better Together? Go on then, what is the vision for Scotland in the even of a No vote? What is the vision for the rUK in the event of a No Vote?

I supposed you'd call this positive then?






Go on then, was this SNP who broke the news?
Your friend Choo Choo failed to answer the question so I will put it to you:

What do you think of the SNP proposal to discriminate against RUK students in an independent Scotland in defiance of EU law? How does it make Scotland a fairer society to do this?

Also, the Scottish Tories have three times as many MSPs as the Lib Dems. I thought Scotland was full of socially aware Good Samaritans and all the evil Tories lived 'doon sooth'?


Posted from TSR Mobile
1
Choo.choo
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#4837
Report 5 years ago
#4837
(Original post by Good bloke)
Your whole argument is based on being indignant that a central government should want to bring spending (higher under the Barnett formula in Scotland for entirely political reasons) into line with that in England. How does this square with Scotland being the poor relation? And with Scotland currently having a bad deal?
Spending is higher north of the border because of protection of the NHS and so on from devolved powers in the Scottish parliament. South of the border, the UK government are privatising everything. So yes, I agree with you that spending is higher for a reason. Independence will protect Scotland from the outrageous actions of the UK Government.
0
Choo.choo
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#4838
Report 5 years ago
#4838
(Original post by Midlander)
I am extremely tempted to go to Sturgeon's talk in St Andrews on Monday and directly ask her why her government has a bigoted stance on tuition fees in an independent Scotland.


Posted from TSR Mobile
It will be free for people "who live and work" in Scotland. I don't see how that is discriminatory. The people "who live and work" in Scotland are only getting a vote in the referendum. Is that discriminatory too?
0
Choo.choo
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#4839
Report 5 years ago
#4839
Sorry, I meant to say "protection from privatisation" in my post.
0
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4840
Report 5 years ago
#4840
(Original post by Choo.choo)
Spending is higher north of the border because of protection of the NHS and so on from devolved powers in the Scottish parliament. South of the border, the UK government are privatising everything. So yes, I agree with you that spending is higher for a reason. Independence will protect Scotland from the outrageous actions of the UK Government.
I'm sorry, but that's utter nonsense.

The Scottish Government's spending is set by the UK Government. It is given a block grant. That the Scottish Government chooses to spend this in certain ways is irrelevant to the overall quantum of spending.

As for the NHS - I think you've managed to find a rather poor one to go on there. The UK Government is increasing NHS spending above inflation projections for every year of this parliament. Spending is going up. This resorts in Barnett consequentials, giving even more money to the Scottish Government - which they had to be shamed into spending on health.

(Original post by Choo.choo)
It will be free for people "who live and work" in Scotland. I don't see how that is discriminatory. The people "who live and work" in Scotland are only getting a vote in the referendum. Is that discriminatory too?
It's got nothing to do with "work", it's residency based alone. It will also apply to everyone resident in any other EU country - aside, it seems, from England, Wales and Northern Ireland. That's why it's discriminatory. Absurdly so, in fact.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (115)
66.47%
No I haven't decided yet (35)
20.23%
Yes but I might change my mind (23)
13.29%

Watched Threads

View All