Scottish independence: Nicola Sturgeon to seek second referendum - bbc

[Mark]

Och well Mark. We will have to agree to disagree. I remember posting my vote to the Highland Council in Inverness. X And my vote being verified by email.

Maybe the rules have changed.

MB

PS Mark, we lived in Paphos from 2005 until 2012.

Maggie, have followed your posts and respect your views, bur the 2014 referendum was skewed, if I was a servicemen based in Aldershot, as I was not resident in Scotland I did not have a vote, in my case my property was rented out, so as I was not resident in Scotland, I was denied a vote. Fact. The interpretation at the time was that people residing outside Scotland, were more likely to vote no. Please google it for the facts.

Mark.

[Maggie B]

Well Mark, our circumstances were different, although strangely similar in some ways It is too complicated to go into this evening as I am poopeknackered now but will explain more tomorrow.

I can though, without a doubt, understand your frustration.

Maggie B

[Jim B]

There is a strong whiff of hypocrisy about; love her or hate her Sturgeon (unlike May) was voted in to power by the people. The mandate for staying in the EU was 62% to 38% in Scotland and only 52% to 48% to leave in England so the people have spoken (in Scotland) as we keep getting rammed down our throats down in England.

We reap what we sow and what is happening now was only to be expected; the Scots do have minds of their own.

Jim

[smudger]

It appears Sturgeon is having to rethink her 'strategy' regarding rejoining the EU once the UK has left. Looks like she has seriously misjudged the Scottish population.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03 ... ord-level/

Perhaps she is losing the plot totally, now looking to join EFTA after a possible third referendum!!

[geoffreys]

It appears Sturgeon is having to rethink her 'strategy' regarding rejoining the EU once the UK has left. Looks like she has seriously misjudged the Scottish population.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03 ... ord-level/

Perhaps she is losing the plot totally, now looking to join EFTA after a possible third referendum!!

She is a trouble maker - neverendum!?
Geoff.

[Devil]

She is a trouble maker - neverendum!?
Geoff.

Most of the contributors to this thread are Scots. Those that aren't have no clue what it is all about. You may be right, although I hae ma doots. Have you read what it says in the Scotsman, the Glasgow Herald or, better, the Sunday Post (I'd like Oor Wullie's views!)? They may give a more balanced view than the Sassenach papers.

[Mark]

I wont get a vote, as I live outside Scotland, I have just signed a UK Gov petition to try and stop the referendum, it is approaching 100,000 signatures.

My only way of demonstrating my feelings.

[Pete G]

The only reason the crowns were united and the Union formed in the first place was to protect the Scots from bankruptcy, which is what friends do, although I appreciate many Scots feel the price for that assistance was way too high.

If the Scots now feel they are able to stand on their own two feet, in fact would be better off if they did, then I don't think England, as a friend, should put obstacles in their way.

As a matter of fact, the Scots in the last election returned to Parliament a massive majority of MPs for a party working towards independence. The Scots also have their own Parliament at Holyrood selected entirely by Scots to look after their specific interests, especially commissioned to deal with specific Scottish issues, at no small expense to the British taxpayer.

The members of the union are fully aware that a referendum now would only increase the level of division, bad feeling, and distraction across the whole union at a time when the UK has, frankly, bigger fish to fry.

May, it seems to me, could easily remove all that bad feeling [and expense] and all the diversion of political effort that this matter will take away from the difficult negotiations that are to come, by issuing a short [article 50 type] bill, recognising that Scottish Independence is indeed a wholly Scottish issue, and removing the need for a referendum by simply devolving the issue of whether to begin moves to independence entirely to Holyrood, with a promise of a three-line whip Government Support of whatever decision Holyrood make. The Scots could therefore make their own decision, in their own timetable, and free Westminster [and the Scottish representatives in Westminster] up for dealing with bigger political issues.

Seems to me that's what friends would do

[Jimgym]

She is a trouble maker - neverendum!?
Geoff.

Most of the contributors to this thread are Scots. Those that aren't have no clue what it is all about. You may be right, although I hae ma doots. Have you read what it says in the Scotsman, the Glasgow Herald or, better, the Sunday Post (I'd like Oor Wullie's views!)? They may give a more balanced view than the Sassenach papers.

Perhaps then those who, according to you know more about it could give their opinion on what currency Scotland would use in the event of independence? Also, what purpose is there in having another referendum on the strength of Britain leaving the EU when Scotland would have to apply to rejoin, something Sturgeon is apparently not now so keen on.According to the news articles that aren't Scottish and therefore may not know what they are on about.

[Mark]

My biggest concern is that 16 yr olds will, like last time have a vote.

I am aware that youngsters today are extremely bright, but does a 16 yr old possess the political nouse to make a considered vote?

They are succeptible to outside influences, and will in the main vote leave.

As I mentioned previously I will not have a vote, nor will the European citizens living in Scotland.

True democracy in action, not.

[Mark]

The U.K. Gov petition to try and stop the referendum nearing 130,000 signatures, over 40,000 signed up today alone!
The map on the government website shows distribution of signatures accross Scotland.

[surreyboy]

Interesting looking at this petition, the number seems to be rising at the rate of about one per second!

[Mark]

Have been trawling the Internet looking at Scottish newspapers, and was surprised to find that whilst the SNP are still immensely popular, Sturgeon is not as popular as she was. A great deal of the comments I have read from Scottish commentators suggest she is so obsessed with independence, core services have suffered. Educational standards have dropped etc, and she has taken her eye of the ball.
The overall opinion is that a further referendum was not wanted at this time and if it happened her unpopularity could affect the result.
She is felt to be a cult figure,in much the same way as Richard Branson is for Virgin, as was her predecessor Alex Salmond was in his days as leader of the SNP.
In addition were she to resign as leader (if she lost a referendum) no one with her persona is available to fill the vacancy.
The Popularity of the SNP could then wane.

[geoffreys]

Have been trawling the Internet looking at Scottish newspapers, and was surprised to find that whilst the SNP are still immensely popular, Sturgeon is not as popular as she was. A great deal of the comments I have read from Scottish commentators suggest she is so obsessed with independence, core services have suffered. Educational standards have dropped etc, and she has taken her eye of the ball.
The overall opinion is that a further referendum was not wanted at this time and if it happened her unpopularity could affect the result.
She is felt to be a cult figure,in much the same way as Richard Branson is for Virgin, as was her predecessor Alex Salmond was in his days as leader of the SNP.
In addition were she to resign as leader (if she lost a referendum) no one with her persona is available to fill the vacancy.
The Popularity of the SNP could then wane.

All the above is correct.
I would like to add the following comments:
1. The SNP is a minority govt in Scotland, they do not now have an overall majority in the Scottish parliament.
2. The Scottish economy depends on the rest of the UK to keep it going. Back in 2014 when she held the once in a generation
independence vote oil revenues were just over £11 billion, this year they will be just a few million. She would be well advised
to concentrate her efforts for the Scottish people on the economy, economic growth, welfare budget.

Geoff.

[Devil]

1. The SNP is a minority govt in Scotland, they do not now have an overall majority in the Scottish parliament.
2. The Scottish economy depends on the rest of the UK to keep it going. Back in 2014 when she held the once in a generation
independence vote oil revenues were just over £11 billion, this year they will be just a few million. She would be well advised
to concentrate her efforts for the Scottish people on the economy, economic growth, welfare budget.

The oracle has spoken! Yes, the oil production has dropped, although your 'few million' is still about £50 million. There is still plenty of oil and gas there and the reason the production has dropped is that the canny Scots are saving it for when the price goes up again. This is in stark contrast to Maggie Thatcher's selling it off as fast as she could at any price.

[Pete G]

scotland 20.JPG (87.61 KiB) Viewed 7549 times

[geoffreys]

1. The SNP is a minority govt in Scotland, they do not now have an overall majority in the Scottish parliament.
2. The Scottish economy depends on the rest of the UK to keep it going. Back in 2014 when she held the once in a generation
independence vote oil revenues were just over £11 billion, this year they will be just a few million. She would be well advised
to concentrate her efforts for the Scottish people on the economy, economic growth, welfare budget.

The oracle has spoken! Yes, the oil production has dropped, although your 'few million' is still about £50 million. There is still plenty of oil and gas there and the reason the production has dropped is that the canny Scots are saving it for when the price goes up again. This is in stark contrast to Maggie Thatcher's selling it off as fast as she could at any price.

Most unlikely that the price of oil will go up much in the foreseeable future. Two reasons for this:
1. Widespread use of shale gas/oil by the USA. No doubt other countries also very soon (UK?).
2. World-wide controls on climate change by limiting the burning of fossil fuels such as oil.
Oil price may hit $70 a barrel max next winter, but Scotland needs it back up to double that - in 2015 it was $140 a barrel.
I cannot see the EU either accepting them as a new member because their economy does not meet the joining criteria, and
also because they wouldn't want another lame-duck economy in the EU.
Geoff.

[kingfisher]

I wonder how much the "divorce bill" would be- it has been a rather long marriage! (Only joking- it wouldn't really be cricket, would it...)

[Devil]

2017-03-17_171302.png (68.01 KiB) Viewed 6459 times

Do you realise that to travel from Edinburgh to London or vice versa, the track has hardly changed since the Flying Scotsman broke the world speed record in 1936? Furthermore, there are no plans to start a high-speed service between the two capital cities. If the UK had copied the French and built TGV services between all the major cities 30-40 years ago, it would have a modern infrastructure and polluting and costly intercity flights would have disappeared.

I used to use the TGV from Lausanne to Paris: 3¾ hours city to city in comfort with a meal. Car: 5½ hours to Paris outskirts, 6½ hours to centre. Plane (when it ran) Lausanne to airport 1¼ hours, security/waiting time at airport 2 h , flying time to CdeG: ¾ h, baggage collection ½ h, taxi to Paris centre: 1 h, total 5 h. No brainer. Especially when the cost by TGV 1st class was about 1/3 that of flying.

[Mark]

2017-03-17_171302.png

Do you realise that to travel from Edinburgh to London or vice versa, the track has hardly changed since the Flying Scotsman broke the world speed record in 1936? Furthermore, there are no plans to start a high-speed service between the two capital cities. If the UK had copied the French and built TGV services between all the major cities 30-40 years ago, it would have a modern infrastructure and polluting and costly intercity flights would have disappeared.

I used to use the TGV from Lausanne to Paris: 3¾ hours city to city in comfort with a meal. Car: 5½ hours to Paris outskirts, 6½ hours to centre. Plane (when it ran) Lausanne to airport 1¼ hours, security/waiting time at airport 2 h , flying time to CdeG: ¾ h, baggage collection ½ h, taxi to Paris centre: 1 h, total 5 h. No brainer. Especially when the cost by TGV 1st class was about 1/3 that of flying.

Good point Devil, But...... After independence, rail travel will be slower, with northbound trains either being searched at the Scottish border, or passport control at destination.

Yes a flippant reply, but......who knows how border issues would be resolved? Maybe a wall, a fence or whatever.
How would you control thousands of Scots travelling south to buy there cheaper booze or groceries. ( Scotland will soon have minimum alcohol pricing) Maybe Sturgeon would impose duty at the border!

Again being flippant, but maybe not!!!!