The most interesting election in history
Today’s Sunday Herald has a rather low-key piece (it’s just the 7th-placed story in their “Referendum News” section) on the ramifications for a Yes vote of the 2015 UK general election. It comes the day after several papers carried vitriolic attacks from Unionist politicians on the SNP’s Angus Robertson for suggesting that the UK government ought to consider delaying the vote for a year to enable independence negotiations to be completed.
“This is yet another brazen stunt by the SNP to drive a wedge with Westminster”, raged the Scottish Conservatives’ Jackson Carlaw. “It is highly presumptuous of Angus Robertson, a man with clear delusions of grandeur, to be talking about postponing the next general election”, he continued, while Labour’s shadow Scottish Secretary Margaret Curran bleated about an extra year of Tories.
But it’s rationally almost impossible to make any other argument.
This is a subject, of course, that Wings Over Scotland raised more than a year ago. A UK general election in the middle of independence negotiations creates a situation so crazy and complex that going ahead with it would be little short of irresponsible, reckless madness. Let’s see why.
Very few sane analysts, and fewer still of the general public, currently believe Labour can win a UK majority under Ed Miliband. But let’s imagine a scenario where Labour does indeed scrape a wafer-thin majority of 10 or 20 MPs, propped up by 40 or so from Scotland (as Angus Robertson appears to state in the Telegraph piece that the SNP wouldn’t stand in 2015).
The party would then find itself in the position of negotiating itself out of power. If it completed the independence negotiations, its Scottish MPs would then have to resign in May 2016, making the Tories the biggest party at Westminster overnight. Labour’s position would become untenable. It would have to either call another election and cross its fingers, or stagger on as a lame-duck government unable to get its legislation through Parliament.
(We can’t say at this point whether it would be possible for it to survive any vote of confidence through a coalition with the Lib Dems. Nick Clegg’s party currently trail UKIP in most polls, and it’s rather difficult to see Nigel Farage being willing to do a deal that would keep Ed Miliband in office.)
So what would Labour do? Put dozens of its own MPs out of a job (with nowhere else to go) and meekly submit to another, more difficult, election after less than a year in power? Attempt to reverse the result of the independence referendum? Keep all its Scottish MPs in Westminster even though their constituencies no longer existed, saying “Look, you elected them knowing this might happen, they’re staying”?
(After all, we don’t know of any mechanism for ejecting MPs on such grounds, because there’s no precedent for it, and Labour was perfectly happy to have its Scottish MPs vote on English-only matters the last time it was in power – most infamously to force through university tuition fees – no matter how loudly English voters complained about the West Lothian Question.)
All of those scenarios, it seems fair to say, would be messy.
Of course, voters would be aware of this potential scenario when they went to the polls in 2015. The SNP might feel under pressure to stand after all, knowing that giving Labour a walkover in Scottish seats might risk their life’s work. The 20%+ of Labour voters in Scotland who back independence might be wary of the same potential consequences. Voters in England who want rid of the “subsidy junkie” Scots might vote tactically to Labour’s detriment. Could Labour afford to take that risk?
A Yes vote next year, then, is a nightmare for UK Labour in all sorts of ways. But worst of all from their point of view, the power to delay the 2015 election lies in the hands of the Conservatives, who stand to gain the most from the scenario.
David Cameron, who signed the Edinburgh Agreement, would be able to take the moral high ground and say “Look, my hands are tied”. Ed Miliband didn’t sign it and had no part in it, and would have to make a difficult decision – not exactly his strong suit.
The voters of the UK would be faced with a stark choice: elect Labour, knowing that to do so could very well create unimaginable constitutional chaos whichever way Miliband jumped, or stick with Cameron for continuity and stability, knowing they wouldn’t have to have another election for five years.
Labour are caught over a barrel. It’s no wonder they want you to vote No.
Let labour embarrass themselves, there has been a clear and very good reason put forward for postponing the election by a year in the event of a YES vote.
And it seems that labour and chaos go hand in hand
Jackson Carlaw: ‘It is highly presumptuous of Angus Robertson’, translates as Angus Robertson doesn’t have the Scottish Unionists’ inferiority complex/cringe.
A simpler solution for Westminster is simply to not run the general election in Scotland. It would be a bill with but a few lines in it and would be passed easily. More entertaining is what they will do with the House of Lords.
An intersting scenario indeed.
“No Act of Parliament can be unconstitutional, for the law of the land knows not the word or the idea.”
Sovereignty of Parliament is what we have… not a true constitution of covenants. This of course is part of the problem. Parliament can do what ever it pleases, will of the people be damned. This is how they wish to be governed. So let them be!
We will have plenty of work to keep us busy and our noses will no longer belong at the boots of the Houses on the Thames.
If Scotland wins the Yes vote and negotiations for independence have already been underway for a year I don’t think Labour could suddenly reverse that but letting Labour have a free run in any election bothers me.
The odd scenario of MP’s being voted in for a Parliament they will be leaving in a year’s time has come about because the major political and constitutional events are being played out outside the London political and media bubble and therefore outside the Establishment’s frame of reference. It’s happening in Scotland therefore it’s not important and no time or effort should be wasted on it.
There is a very simple solution to all this. If Scotland has voted Yes then no MP’s stand in Scotland for the 2015 elections. Problem solved. The only reason Milliband would want Labour MP’s from Scotland for a year is that he would then be able to conduct the final independence negotiations with the Scots Government. He’d only want to do that if he thought he could gain kudos from the English electorate for striking a hard bargain with Scotland. I’d say that would put the Labour MP’s from Scotland in a sticky situation but I suspect they’d revel in it.
Lots of “what if…?”s, none of which can be answered until the previous one has been; I think that the first one won’t be answered until next year…..
O/T only slightly
Writing in the Sunday Times, arch Unionist Hugh Andrews of Birlinn publishers claims:
1. The Scottish government has recently announced its new supplier contracts for schools and libraries. These contracts are over £50m in value. The number of Scottish-owned suppliers to these contracts has been reduced to four — one publisher, and three others, two relatively small. Every other contracted supplier is English-based or owned. Do you think this is right?
2. In tendering for that contract, Scottish suppliers pressed for Scottish writing and Scottish books to be built into the supply requirements. We were informed that EU procurement directives prohibited such cultural support (though there are in fact EU derogations which allow for it). This meant that not only was Scottish literary culture not deemed suitable for support, it was specifically excluded. In other words the Scottish government made a point of removing any public sector requirement to support the literary culture of the country when purchasing books for our children and our libraries. Do you believe this to be right?
3. The Scottish government is directly responsible for a whole range of outlets that sell books: Visit Scotland, Historic Scotland, etc. Do you think it is right that, after some six years in power, the Scottish government has still not made support for Scottish culture and publishing a key priority for its dependent bodies?
Time someone answered these claims
Seriously hadn’t thought of this scenario at all. This does raise serious gorvernance issues for RUK.
I can hear bayonet’s being sharpened at Labour HQ. Corporal Davidson at the ready to head back north.
Not to mention that Angus made clear at the start of his comments that it was for Westminister to decide what to do….
Apart from the points raised in the article, there’s also the fact that a general election will require the (r)UK parties to write manifestos, but what kind of manifesto will Labour write? Will they include their Scottish members (who after all are fully integrated in the Labour party structure) when writing it, or will they exclude them? Will the manifesto include provisions about Labour’s independence negotiation position?
If the rUK parties cannot agree to postponing the election, I guess they could make a deal not to put up challengers in any seats, and then call a new general election in 2016. Alternatively, they could perhaps form a national unity government including all rUK parties.
The 2015 Election could be an advantage. More SNP MP’s, especially holding a balance of power could be an advantage.
Margit Curran’s comment shows how little regard the SLab MPs have for Scotland. A delay to the 2015 GE would mean an extra year of Tory/Libdem government, but only for the rUK, as we would be in the process of preparing for independence.
She and her SLab colleagues would have no legitimate part to play in the new Westminster government as they would be potentially voting on issues which affected the rUK, but not their own constituents, while preparing to leave altogether. This situation would rightly be unacceptable to rUK MPs.
However, even if the logic of the situation and the inbuilt advantage to the current Westminster government does lead to a delay, we can expect this to be treated with derision by all Unionist parties riht up until a Yes vote has actually taken place.
Will this be followed by a crunching of gears by the Tories as the post referendun dust settles? Time will tell, but the Tories are nothing if not pragmatists.
Hugh Andrews is talking tosh. It’s nonsense. Either UK based or no supplies at all as. Like the rest of the UK. If the product is not produced in Scotland as a result of the Union/UK gov. It could be developed and produced in Scotland in the future. Scottish based book producing companies tend to be smaller and specialist.
Well there is a solution. First point of order after a Yes vote would to agree that there will be no election to Westminster in 2015 in Scotland. No need to elect anyone we’ve effectively left. Solves the problem the UK parties could what they do best and campaign only in England, it is what they have done at every Westminster election.
I think after a Yes vote, pragmatism will prevail.
A negotiating team made up of all UK parties and legal advisors will be formed, and this team will handle all negotiations, no matter the result of the 2015 UK GE.
Salmond has already stated he will do the same in Scotland.
Unionist Hugh Andrews complaints can only be addressed with Independence. As a Unionist why is he complaining? That’s the way he likes/wants it.
The Labour Party delayed our 2011 Scottish General Election by 12 months so they could move the date of the UK GE to 2010 as they wanted to create a fixed five-year term for the Westminster Parliament. Furthuemore, they did this without seeking the permission or approval of the SG. But, in doing so, they set a clear precedent.
Linda, only broadcasting has a cultural exemption from what I understand of the directive.
The 2015 election has to go ahead, otherwise there will be no means to negotiate. Scotland will have withdraw from the UK political arena. John Swinney says Scotland will participate in the 2015 election. Getting rid of the ConDems gov is a priority for Scotland as well.
I’d been thinking of this scenario and how it would play out. And the conclusion I came to was ,who cares. If we win a YES vote we negotiate and plan for the date that has been identified. If we are still part of the UK at the time of a Westminster election then we should take part,if the British wish to speed things up then well and good.
What I would argue though is that the SNP should have no part in any coalitions at Westminster.
They sincerely believe Scotland will vote NO. Pre-planning the aftermath of a YES vote would be an admission by them that it IS a possibility. Westminster absolutely refuses to acknowledge this, at least in public, and won’t make contingency plans for Trident using the same “logic”. I’m uncertain about the SNP not contesting the General election. As long as Westminster has any influence on Scottish lives I would want them represented there.
The logical solution of course is to delay it, but Westminster and logic aren’t exactly bed fellows. As for Jackson Carlaw. His comments mirror Edwina Currie’s recent radio appearance where she stated that Cameron is far too important to debate with someone as lowly as the Scottish First Minister. Know your place and don’t have the impertinence to rise above it is the message again and again.
It’s quite simple vote YES 2014 and vote Conservative 2015 to ensure the YES in 2014 is respected.
Quite bizarre but that’s the way it is.
What’s the panic. There will be a gradual, ordered withdrawal. More like Devo Max at first until all the negotiations have been completed. As long as the Scottsh voters stand firm, there is nothing to worry about. This has been coming since 1928. A long time coming but coming right enough.
Has Westminster every considered Scotland’s needs or position? No. Voters in Scotland will vote for a Yes Party or not vote.
NEVER Vote Conservative in Scotland, Vote Unionist get shafted.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there are shrill voices from within the Westminster Establishment to actually put a halt to the entire referendum. With the publication of the White Paper the London bubble has now actually woken up to the fact that this is for real. It’s not a bunch of eccentric Jocks talking about pie in the sky stuff. If you take Cameron’s recent joining of hands across the water with the Spanish it’s actually starting to look a bit nasty. I can imagine all sorts of scenarios where a halt to proceedings can be acted out. I’m surprised that someone hasn’t pointed out the obvious counter to what Robertson is proposing, namely that the referendum is delayed.
Here’s a scenario : with Labour looking like no hopers for any election, and with no real counters to attract voters from the Tories, they do have their One Nation brand to play with. A mere extension of this, dished up with extra helpings of faux patriotism and you could have a recipe for Labour calling for the referendum to be scrapped. The press would love it.
So a Yes not only gets independence, we get to watch this play out too? Worth it on so many levels.
@Douglas Guy
Spot on Douglas. In fact how could they do anything else in the event of a YES vote?
IMHO on Sept19th 2014 in the event of a YES Vote I would expect ALL Scottish MPs to cross he house and sit beside the SNP MPs declaring their loyalty to Scotland and Angus as the rightful leader of ALL Scottish MPs in Westminster.
That is what should happen ,however even in spite of a democratic mandate many like Davidson , Murphy etc will be looking for a loophole.
Such treachery should be expected and a suitable punishment be forthcoming.
In the event of a Rump UK election in 2015 only SNP/Green and SSP members ,and Independents should be permitted to stand.
No GE for Westminster in 2015 in Scotland.
Or 2015 MPs from Scotland can attend Westminster and speak but not vote, Puerto Rico Senators in the USA?
Problem solved.
If Scotland votes YES in the referendum next year then Cameron will be in an interesting position, but given that the negotiations for Scottish independence would be the most important issue in the UK since the second world war, there would be a compelling democratic case for calling a general election right then I should imagine, especially given the contentious nature of any likely currency union.
With all the bleating we have seen about the issue in the last week, I find it incomprehensible that the english public would tolerate not being consulted on the Scottish question. Given the weakness inherent in Labour, I think Cameron would be confident enough to call a general election right away. If not there will certainly be a referendum before any currency union is negotiated. I know we can use the pound without a formal arrangement, but no-one seriously disputes that such an arrangement would be beneficial.
Shocking:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=227412690763813&set=a.105844019587348.11164.100004852509926&type=1&theater
I don’t think we need worry about Scottish MPs voting in Westminster.They have a track record of not voting on important issues so just let them carry on.
Voters ought to be clever enough to work out that SNP MPs returned from Scotland don’t and won’t turn up and vote on matters that only effect England, Wales and NI.
They’re also clever enough to work out that on important matters that DO relate to the whole UK, Unionist MPs will pair off and won’t turn up to vote.
What’s the fuss?
I must admit I laughed out loud when I read Margrit Curran’s remarks about the SNP wanting to impose another year of Tory government in Scotland. Is that seriously the best you could come up with, Margrit? Maybe it is, and maybe that’s why your party is staring into the abyss.
Would the fairest approach not be to let both UK and Scottish elections happen, then let the two governments negotiate the settlement? The date for independance has only been picked so the SNP would not need to have an election before the negotiation has it not?
Susan – what was the link to?
Rev, In the recent Westminster vote on the Bedroom Tax – umpteen Scottish MP’s paired with rUK opposition – so post the Referendum – after the GE Scots MP’s pair with an opposition member. That way reduction in influence of disappearing Scottish MP’s is democratically reflected in the remaining rUK Members. This way there is no reduction in party influence.
Doug, I was a link to a tweet by the dreadful Euan McColm where he asked, “Before you pull me from this rubble, how are you voting in the referendum?” I found this truly shocking! I hope his employers take note.
@gfaetheblock
You want to risk all our futures by potentially letting LabLibTory coalition negotiate our independence with LabTory?
Angus Robertson appears to state in the Telegraph piece that the SNP wouldn’t stand in 2015
If that’s the case, it’s interesting. Very interesting. As I’ve stated many times, my own personal opinion is that following the Yes vote next year, all Scottish MPs will withdraw from Westminster and Scotland will no longer vote in any UK general election. Any new laws passed at Westminster will no longer apply to a defacto independent Scotland. Instead, negotiating teams from both sides will finish up loose ends and implement what has already been agreed.
In that context, AR’s comments can be interpreted as ‘There will be no Scottish MPs at all standing in 2015 or any future UKGE’.
Ok, so delay the GE? Well, it would give a bit of time for Dave to push through the boundary changes. Without Scottish MPs, the Tories would now have a majority. With the boundary changes, they could well get another.
I could see Dave and AS shaking hands on such a deal; certainly the ‘no Scottish MPs any more if it’s a Yes’ part. Makes perfect sense. Certainly, as the Rev highlights, the concept of Scotland saying Yes then electing MPs is ridiculous if not insane.
People have said ‘Aye, but our MPs would be negotiating with Westminster and stuff.’ Erm, no chance. The Holyrood parliament would be Scotland’s one and only government following a yes vote. They were the ones that got the manifesto approval for a referendum and are to hold it. They are the parliament the represents the will of the Scottish electorate most representatively. They are the Scottish Government.
Even now Scots MPs are simply those Scots have elected to represent them for UK legislation. They are like MEPs, but for the UK. They in no way could be seen as a team elected to negotiate on behalf of Scotland.
Anyway, if Scotland does vote in another UKGE, the SNP would wipe out Labour and the Libs. Any fantasy that Labour have that a No would see the end of the SNP is simply that.
I’d envisage the following scenario:
Following a Yes vote, all those parties which plan to contest the 2015 general election split into Scottish and rUK parties.
The post 2015 government is only formed from rUK MPs, so to be the overall government Labour would need to win a majority outside Scotland.
Scottish MPs agree to take no part in votes of confidence or votes which don’t specifically affect Scotland’s last few months in the UK.
This is potentially a sore one for Labour to accept, but nobody within Labour can consider that it’s worthwhile claiming a majority based on Scottish seats for 10 months, so they’ve no real option.
Edited to say: [Mind you, ScottishSkier’s comment added at the same time as mine makes a lot of sense too.]
Surely the real issue is, how will the financial markets respond to Scottish independence in the event of a yes vote?
Clearly if there is a Yes Vote then there is an argument for postponing the UK election for at least 10 months to March 2016. However Scottish independence is not dependent upon it and if there is a change of Government in 2015 then the negotiations will continue as the bulk of them will be undertaken by the Civil Service anyway.
Interesting piece Rev, which asks more questions than it answers, and as far as I can see, just now its the press who are trying to create a havoc like feel. out of the situation.
O/T The Sunday (mince) Mail, sister paper of the Daily (drivel) Record, devotes a full page to attacking the SNP’s whitepaper, Brian Wilson,is the protagonist Wilson spends much of his time imagining how good Scotland could be if the SNP did this and that instead of aiming for independence, of course Wilson, completely misses the point.
Which is this, his this and that ideas CAN’T be done properly unless independence is obtained, I’m pretty sure Wilson already knows this, Wilson touches on the usual criteria of jobs and pensions being undermined after independence, when infact they’re constantly undermined just now in the UK.
Wilson doesn’t offer anything new or supportive to the BT’s camp, just another biased journalistic view from a well known unionist controlled gutter rag, that tries to portray itself as positive, when infact it, and its sister papers, are mere false positves.
The Sunday (Mince) Mail, in its opinion column, if you could honestly call it that, its more like a statement, than an opinion,it goes onto mention, in bold for the perusers just browsing,, Salmond , Sturgeon and face painting in the same sentence, and Well! have you finished it yet, followed by a comment with the word YAWN!, regarding the whitepaper. Not opinion, form the Sunday(Mince) Mail, more like opinionated
Even Magrit will not be standing in 2015 post-Yes as the troughers will all have worked out that the compensation for loss of office, wind-up costs, etc, will be a lot more valuable than being cut off at the knees on 26March 2016. Even the SNP candidates will be Z listers or retired. Who is going to give up a career or even a job for 10 months as a MP and no ermine for afters?
SNP go on “Protecting Scotland” and would have a landslide; even Labour got an extra 3.5% of the vote in 2010 under that banner and with the SNP crowing about how they went with the Tories in Better Together …. Wow!, you could have a C 0:L 9:ld 1:SNP 49 result
I’m all for Westminster throwing us out. According to their experts we would become stateless people and entitled to all the UN’s resources yo “put us back on our feet” and we’d have lost the debt. Let Westminster keep its 270 embassies to explain what they’d done to the rest of the world. It will need more than Ferrero Rocher to sweeten those talks!
And we’ll have another £4 bn to spend 🙂 but the £ will be worthless 🙁
I think the SNP are wrong on this issue, I have a suggestion.
The SNP should stand in the 2015 G.E. , after a YES victory in 2014 of course :P:.
Hope for a Labour narrow win in 2015. Yes I understand that this would cause complications to our negotiations but bear with me please.
After we become fully independent in 2016 we can then sit back and watch Westminster disintegrate into a quagmire of unintelligible bickering as Labour struggle to hold onto power with a then minority government caused by the withdrawal of the SNP M.P.’s. :P:
Westminster would become a laughing stock.
Are the good people of England,Wales and Northern Ireland prepared to stand back and blindly accept this, I don’t think so. I think it is only right and fair to the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland that they can have confidence in the result of the next G.E. result. To hold a G.E. in 2015 after a YES victory in 2014 can cause nothing but doubt over any result in 2015 and fear in the electorate that they will have to go back to the polls again in 2016!
Do I give a f**k about an institution (Westminster) which is 400 miles away and does not care a monkey’s about Scotland witness the poll tax, bedroom tax, nuclear weapons fat inflated salaries for the unionist tossers that are elected to the House of Corruption. This little ditty sums it up neatly for me roses are red violets are blue both Labour and the Tories don’t give a f**k about you
Apologies if this has already been posted..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25151837
I’m not keen on having no representation in Westminster between May 2015 and Independence Day the following March – anything could happen in those 10 months – military intervention for example.
As a point of principle, the Scottish people must have elected representatives in the seat of government right up until the moment of independence.
So the 2015 General Election must go ahead as usual, including SNP candidates and to hell with what happens after the day of independence, that’s purely a matter for Westminster to sort out by themselves.
Personally I’m looking forward to the moment of ‘expulsion’ from Westminster on March 24th 2016, half a dozen SNP MP’s with smiles on their faces looking forward to the journey home, northwards to start creating a new country – the unionist lot greetin’ their eyes out going along to the local westminster dole office and signing on with a bunch of OAP’s all dressed up in funny robes. I’m presuming they won’t be returning to Scotland after all the abuse they have given us.
E-bay’s going to do a grand trade in ermine.
The Scottish Gov will be negotiating with Westminster.A stronger SNP contingent will strengthen the Scottish gov negotiating position. The ConDems have to go as soon as possible. Getting riid the ConDems and having a stronger negotiating position is an added advantage.
The Scottish Gov should trust the Scottish electorate to do the right thing or take the consequences.
Wilson, Kay and other detractors are irrelevant. If they want to be used by the tax evading right wing Press, that is their decision. They will have to be accountable regarding their Scottish position. The tide is turning and they will become increasingly irrelevant along with the right wing tax evading Press. The UK no longer has a balanced, impartial Press. That notion was sold down the river by Thatcherism ignorance, extreme right laissez faire economic policies. The Press is not free,it is manipulated.
@ Albert herring.
I want a vote on the government that negotiates the separation deal, and I suspect that the people of rUK deserve this as well. This is too big an issue to risk through on 18 months and with no consultation with the people.
wish this place had the ability to reply or comment on posts of others as we find them, my comments will look out of place as the debate has moved on from the post which i wanted to comment on ?
the matter of holyrood and the choice of publishers ? i see this as being no different from scotland expecting a future “NEW” england government to allow its ships to be built on the clyde. it works both ways surely ? perhaps there is a case for thinking that in present circumstances holyrood should have favoured scottish publishers but there is also a case for getting best value for money spent, although the savings on an outlay of £50 million may or may not be a lot, the figures would need to be seen before an opinion could be voiced on this matter. the wording of the questions is another matter, reads to me as if they are implying that scots and scottish culture is in some way being affected by using english publishers. as if a professional publishing house was incapable of accomodating such work. yes i know there is the whole idea of a visitscotland booklet having “printed in england” on it being used as an example of some great betrayal of the people, if you are mad and have watched braveheart too many times. in an ideal world of course any such printing work should be kept in scotland, EU rules if there are any be damned. it does seem that member states circumvent such rules when it suits them, especially when it comes to granting contracts and handing out subsidies in the shipbuilding sector with particular regard to the fishing industry, much cheaper for a scottish family or concern to have a new boat built in places like denmark, poland or spain than to use a scottish yard, caused the closure of the yard here which had the highest reputation for boats under 90ft in the 70’s , 80’s and early 90’s until legislation imposed in several ways, not least of which were quotas and restrictions on fishing as pawns in successive westminster administrations negotiations in brussels. cost far more in jobs in all sectors than a scottish publisher not getting a holyrood contract, and that is only one example, i am sure many could relate to this in their own sector of work and industry. doesn’t make it right, but i suspect the accuser is just stirring the pot to make trouble. nobody said holyrood was perfect and i am sure our supportive stance at present will alter post independence once the common cause has been achieved
Doug, Susan, that tweet has been saved by another user.
https://twitter.com/JohnnyDundee/status/406805026355433473
@Jutland
A negotiating team made up of all UK parties and legal advisors will be formed, and this team will handle all negotiations, no matter the result of the 2015 UK GE
Exactly. Why would any of this matter if Ed Milliband was already in the negotiating team?
It’s also ignoring the fact that due to the Fixed Parliament Act of 2011 the UK can’t delay the Election longer than that. They can dissolve it prior to this, but it will automatically dissolve on 7 May 2015 no matter what the Scots do. And this was a Tory bill, they’re not going to pull apart one of their few historical triumphs in the middle of an Election season by quickly resetting Parliamentary Privilege before the very Parliament that limited it is up…
… especially when, as Wings has so often stated, the lack of Scots votes doesn’t effect the outcome of UK Elections. So why would Labour worry? Isn’t it supposed to be the case that you can vote Yes without any guilt for results down south?
What is more, current polling indicates a Labour Majority of 76 seats. That’s without coalition support. Less if the Scots go? Then the argument made previously is wrong. Unchanged? Then Labour are more likely to want to delay the negotiations on Independence instead, until they can take advantage of this. If they have the votes, which depending on how Europe shakes out for the Tories and if Cameron loses Scotland in 2014 they may have, I’d expect them to force a General Election via No Confidence Vote. The Tory Eurosceptic wing may very well support them in the hopes that they can force a harder right party member into the leadership whilst out of power; as they did with Iain Duncan Smith et all in the last Labour Parliament…
I’m sorry Stu, you’re simply wrong on this. Possibly not on the wider case for Independence, but it’s going to be chaotic and painful short term. And denying that it will makes Nationalists seem patronising and naive to those who would otherwise be your allies; this isn’t something you can argue about. The law of the land is there’s a General Election in the May following the Referendum. The rUK will dick you about until then. Preparing Scotland for that, and correctly apportioning blame, will have far more effect on persuading people to want to leave that ridiculous system than saying every thing’s coming up thistles if you vote Yes. It won’t. And that’s not why you should be doing it, because you’re going to be disappointed if you are.
Rev – is the logo on the Newsnet website a new thing? ; haven’t seen it before and it looks great in a prominent position.
Euan McColm the hack (not forgetting his unionist tendencies), is a vile wee piece of shit that will likely be consigned to the scrapheap post Sep 2014. Twitter comments on Glasgow crash victims removed like the schoolyard coward he is.
Think Scotland writer & Complete Shitbag / ‘Nastiness in social media campaigning’ ? What a stirring Tory blogsite hypocrite !
Only go to this meaningless Unionist Dogma, run ‘Scotland down at every turn’ blogsite if your tired of meaningful thought and lost the will to go on. It will be sure to finish you off.
http://www.thinkscotland.org/todays-thinking/articles.html?read_full=12321&article=www.thinkscotland.org
Labour, would never be able to run and independent Scotland, especially with Johann Lamont, she would be better at Edinburgh zoo keeping the pandas company
Morag / Doug / Susan
Whoa! Am I right in what I am thinking. Is Euan McColm actually talking about about the helicopter crash? I apologise now if I’m wrong, but the wording seems to hint of it.
If this is what we think this is, then this needs to be reported. That’s truly shocking! That is trolling on the very lowest level
All this talk will be irrelevant for we wont have independence until the yes campaign,the scottish government and others dont declare all out war against the bbc scotland and the allies in the msm.Because as i see it wether indy supporters choose to admit it or not,the leaders at the top are making a grave strategic mistake in allowing the unions most powerful weapon to go un faught,and un challenged its all yery well setting up stalls in high streets and chapping doors all that good will and hard work will be wasted because our political leaders lack courage to rebuke the media’s lies and distortions,In my humble opinion the white paper was a let down mainly because it lacks true vision and radacalism things that your average scot who sees their and country’s future going down the pan.So far ive never any real reasons to doubt A S and the rest,but it seems to me they cannot see the grave mistake the are making in not challenging the media and their lies,its not too late to remedy this but they DO need toremedy this asap.
Sorry Rev – 4.07pm post
Was referring to WoS logo on Newsnet Scotland site; is that new ?
JLT – Oh yes. But the tweet has now vanished. The link was to another twitter account where the tweeter had taken a screenshot in anticipation.
Goroz, I’m not seeing anything like that. Looks normal to me. I don’t think they even have a blogroll. They’re not really into links in general.
If Euan McColm and his ilk have their way Scotland will undergo worse than what happened under Thatcher. McColm’s tweet betrays what he really is a thoughtless, brainless, subservient idiot!
I have to say, reading the Sunday Herald today depressed me no end. First up was Iain MacWhirter who is usually good at demolishing the Unionist arguments and then like a thread over several pages we got the vox pop regurgitating the usual too wee, too poor as well as Salmond is a snake oil salesman.
I hope people like Stephen Nunn are onto this and have the measure of what is really happening on the ground. Certainly Iain MacWhirter feels that Blair Jenkins and co are far too docile and should follow the example of Labour in the early years of their restoration of public acceptability after the Thatcher years. That was when they had a special rebuttal unit that made sure that no charge or complaint against Labour was left unanswered for more than 24 hours.
Maybe I am just out of the loop, but the morale of the troops is everything in a grassroots campaign and the ‘Yes’ team are not doing enough in my opinion.
Hi Morag :
Have checked x2 its def there and looks great top left above Indy Q’s (Saltire advert)swithces every now and then with leslie riddoch book advert.
Check again – I haven’t seen it before and got a nice surprise when reading hack of Yes HQ story.
Ah, I see it now. I was getting the Blossom advert. I bought the book because of that advert, and have nearly finished it.
Wings plug looks great!
I’m not going to waste any further time on Euan McColm.
Quick aside: anyone seen this from a representative of the Red Paper Collective?
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/11/why-scottish-independence-isnt-progressive-choice
I must say that even though I despise the likes of Ian Duncan Smith, Michael Gove, and all the other Austerity Idealists, at least they are consistent with their disgusting ideology. What I find most infuriating is so-called “progressives” and “socialists” who actually further the argument that saving 5.4 million people from the devastation a government they didn’t vote for inflicts on them is somehow selfish – because people outside Scotland are suffering too. Therefore instead of making efforts that will *guarantee* freedom from the Tories, they insist on us staying put so that we *might* be able to make headway in 50 years time. It’s apparently selfish to let those people suffer just because another few million people in the rUK are suffering. All because of some ridiculous delusion that Change Is Coming and that the Tories will be out by 2015 – as if ANY of the major parties in Westminster offer the socialist revolution they crave.
Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Actually, it’s worse than that: they’re demanding that nobody gets on the lifeboats, because they need all the people they can to plug the massive gaping tear in the hull. “We can still save the Titanic! You’re just being selfish wanting to save yourselves instead of wasting more lives in a fruitless cause!”
Once again: people are dying of hypothermia in an energy-rich country. People in one of the world’s “largest economies” are relying on food banks. People with one of the most celebrated nationalised health services are dying of neglect in hospitals. Children in a first world country are being made HOMELESS and POOR. I will be DAMNED if I’m going to allow that to happen in the name of some ivory tower idealism that the Conservatives will be ousted in 2015, that UKIP’s growing popularity will somehow halt and regress, and that Labour/the Lib Dems will right all the wrongs which THEY THEMSELVES put in place.
God Almighty, but they vex me.
Surely the easiest answer is to have a UK election in October 2014? Then another one in mid 2015? That way Scotland and the UK get to elect the government that negotiates according to the terms in the Edinburgh Agreement?
Although I would agree that the obvious solution is simply to exclude Scotland from the 2015 rUK general election, or to delay it. I fear another problem may raise its head and that is that the rUK will simply ignore a yes result of the referendum. Despite the Edinburgh agreement, a change of party or even just a change of leader, would be enough of an excuse to ignore the expression of democratic will. Keep in mind that Westminster is not overly keen on Democracy in the first place and regards its own sovereignty to be above all other concerns. I sincerely hope that I am wrong, but? Time will tell I suppose, I just hope that a YES vote is huge.
Penman, would that not entail the unionist parties putting forward their own prospectus for an indy Scotland?
Don’t think that’ll happen anytime soon
I would expect the SNP to stand in every constituency in Scotland in 2015 & in the English ones across the border. Just for a bit of fun before we go.
PS: NNS email hacking (blackmail)
http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/8413-email-hacker-issued-threats-to-yes-scotland
@taranaich –
You read the wrong piece; as soon as you saw that pish ‘Red Paper Collective*’ alarm bells such as Lamont, Sarwar, Wilson, Curran, Reid & Davidson should have been going off in your head.
RPC* = Glasgow, Liverpool, Birmingham socialist we hate the SNP / ‘Scottish Labour Action’ pish by committee (Peoples front of Judeah; but not nearly as funny).
This is more like what you were looking for surely !
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/11/scottish-independence-white-paper-passed-political-test
The truth of the matter is that Alex Salmond just forgot about the General Election scheduled for May 2015 when he set his wholly unrealistic timetable for post referendum negotiations. And now Alex Salmond’s forgetfulness has been exposed the SNP are demanding that the General Election is postponed. Bonkers – completely barking mad. The SNP’s preposterous demand serves only to confirm that Alex Salmond is an incompetent and amateurish political clown who cannot be trusted with Scotland’s future. Just as well the outcome of the referendum is going to be an overwhelming “NO” to Alex Salmond’s Project Vanity.
Is there any good reason why you like to call people names? I remember when you decided that kids in Kelty and Cowdenbeath were “numpties” – were you talking down to us using words we would understand or were you being what you are – I won’d write it I’m not into name-calling. Just go away please and let us have sensible and rational exchanges without your stupidity!
The court jester has arrived.
Hey – even I know its troll time when I see OBE !
Always going to go down well here.
You know, I was just thinking, here’s Stu taking a day off and we haven’t had any trolls. What a shame.
I have been arguing for the last 18 months the situation is clear and is defined within the Treaty of Union the UK Parliament at Westminster can have no role in any negotiations over the end of the Union. Lord Cooper in McCormack vs the Lord Advocate in 1953 made this clear and stated alterations or changes to the Treaty of Union can only be negotiated between the two and only original signatories of the Treaty of Union – the sovereign parliaments of England and Scotland. This was legal and constitutional point conceded on the UK Parliament at Westminster’s behalf by the Lord Advocate.
Darling on Reporting Scotland on Tuesday last, when tripped up on his claims about sterling, admitted it would be part of the negotiations between the two independent parliaments.
My research suggests that the UK Union in legal and constitutional terms ends on the declaration of a Yes vote on the 19th September 2014 – realistically joint functions will continue for a period, as they require negotiations to tease them apart and ensure a fair split of assets and any debts. The date announced by the SNP is not ‘independence day’ it is the day the negotiations are completed.
Scotland’s Parliament has to be sovereign to enable the UK Union termination negotiations to take place. This sovereignty is regained on the 19th of September 2014 and the UK Parliament is no longer sovereign, only the parliaments of Scotland and England. It follows there will be no Scottish constituencies involved in elections to what will be the English sovereign parliament in 2015 because they have no legitimate role.
The SNP clearly understand this constitutional and legal point hence why they are quite sanguine about about the 2015 election after a ‘yes’ vote, just as they were around sections 5 & 30 of the Scotland Act which were supposed to stop this referendum stone dead according to ‘experts’ on the unwritten UK Constitution.
Her Maj will be so disappointed in John – him an OBE and all! Will he be back today?
The only clown is the one who has obe after his name!!!!
Scotland should save the rest of the UK. The rest of the UK saves itself. There is little austerity in London S/E. 4% unemployment, business as usual with a protected budget. The the further North, the austerity increases. The Barnett Fomula ensures increased authority over the border, and always has done. The only protection is the SNP Scottish gov.
An increased CAP payment from the EU intend for Scotland, which receives the lowest CAP payment in the EU as part of the UK. The payment and distributed to farmers in the rest of the UK. The UK Minister actually made a shameful statement about BT while trying to justify this action.
The UK wanted the CAP payments reduced. At the negotiation it was decided by the EU that Scotland should receive higher funding. The UK gov then uses the funding, to alleviate the CAP cut to the wealthier Conservatives farmers in the south. The rest of the UK is not experiencing the austerity cuts being undertaken in Scotland. The UK gov is still borrowing and spending more (pro rata) in the rest of the UK. £121Billion. Pro rata £12Billion more.
Don’t feed the troll
The Herald site is like groundhog day. Spoilt by a troughing pig.
WOW, this despicable tweet by Euan McColm is just gutter stuff and beyond belief, with respect this needs an article dedicated to it. If nothing else to bring shame on him from a high height. No wonder it has been deleted !
Absolutely terrible!
When OBE says the time teable is unrealistic it is because he knows that his side are the most nasty. vindictive sort known to mankind. They have no sense of decency and fair play. Every piece of petty obstructionism and revenge wil be brought out.
It took Czechoslovakia less than 4 months to sort things out, he is in effect saying that the poison of Westminster makes it less able than the Czechoslovak Govenrment
Must be a convert looking for a positive message on Scottish independence.You’re in luck if you are,you’ve come to a good, welcoming place.
“Better to have them pissing out the tent, than out the tent pissing in”.
So I reckon the SNP should contest every seat in the 2015 UK general election following a Yes vote in the referendum.
Procedural Quibbles1 :Surely following a Yes vote and the said UK election proportionate SNP MPs representation would reasonably be expected of UK MPs to be sitting on the UK side of the independence negotiating table “on behalf of the UK” – and facing their independence comrades in arms?
Procedural Quibble 2: Commonsense is that we Scots, having been members of the EU for 30 whatever years, and fully in compliance with the commonly declared interpretation of EU rules, would continue to to be so following independence. However various people are shoved onto the boards in the theatre of politics to cast doubt based around procedures. ” I come not to clarify but to cast doubt”
Morag: “I’d rather pay not to have adverts”, reminds me of the song “Only you can make the world seem bright…”.Or, at a BB display a mother observing that “they’re all oot o’step but oor Johnny”. I agree with you Morag!
Could the OBE Wan be David Cameron in disguise?
Apparently both like to pop up now and again say something negative and then run away and hide. Both obviously moral cowards that won’t stick around to defend their point of view.
Brave Sir Dave bravely ran away!
One issue I think is a serious one and that is the expected growth in Financial dealings in Scotland.
We must remember we are dealing with a wounded dinosaur, who’s Financial Companies may well wish us harm, especially should we take some business from them. They will be out to do us financial harm, just to show that they can. The same applies to the currency markets if we have to peg to Sterling.
It makes me think back to the Darrian project way back in time, they undermined us then, I suspect they will try and do it again. They have financial contacts and dealers across the globe, am I wrong in thinking that they could engineer support to make us suffer via currency issues? I hope I am wrong, but….
I think in the event of a Yes vote next year, the SNP has to stand for the 2015 election at Westminster. To not do so would be a major mistake in my opinion. I don’t trust Unionists to act rationally in the event of a narrow Yes vote. I do not have a clue why the SNP would even think about not standing in 2015. Even if they are only there to rubber stamp agreements and resigned en masse shortly afterwards, that would be good enough for me.
Les Wilson – surely you are not being serious. We are their best friends and we are all better together. They wouldn’t deliberately harm Scotland ,,,,,,,,,,??? They will try to do what bullies always do and, unfortunately, sometimes succeed. We must make sure they fail!!! By the way where is that other knight of the pen OBE?
Surely he is not a bullying coward too – and him an OBE!!!
@Gordoz: You read the wrong piece; as soon as you saw that pish ‘Red Paper Collective*’ alarm bells such as Lamont, Sarwar, Wilson, Curran, Reid & Davidson should have been going off in your head.
Oh they were. I haven’t read the full Red Paper, though I’ve read the PDF. Lamont alone was enough to render the entire thing suspect.
I would be entirely favourable to a Federal UK if Indy wasn’t on offer. But a Federal UK would be even MORE profound than Scottish independence. Why? Because Scottish independence will mean a radical change to the very way Scotland’s government functions – not Westminster’s. A Federal UK would mean, by its very definition, the complete dismantlement of the Westminster “democratic” system. No more House of Lords, no more First Past the Post, everything would be gone. What’s more, England as we know it would cease to exist – it would be split into North, North East, North West, East Midlands, West Midlands, East Anglia, South East, South West, and Greater London (or, if I had my way, Bryneich, Ebrauc, Rheged, Lindsey, Mierce, Estanglia, Cantia, Weseaxe, and Lundein – and Dumnonia for Cornwall).
So what do you think Westminster would be more likely to do: grant Scottish independence, or completely overhaul the shape of the country. Both will end the UK as we know it, but the latter will allow them to continue sapping all the money from the rUK to feed London.
That’s what the Federalists refuse to understand.
I meant to add in the last post, I hope people are not getting complacent about a Yes vote. We have a massive struggle in front of us just to achieve a Yes vote. It worries me that some people seem to think a Yes vote is a done deal. I reckon there is still a massive amount of work still to do.
Sorry for lowering the tone, but hasn’t there recently been a number of OBEs and MBEs convicted or charged with sex offences? Not a title I would crow about
@Les Wilson
They have financial contacts and dealers across the globe, am I wrong in thinking that they could engineer support
Think 16 September 1992, Black Wednesday, “Britain crashes out of the ERM.” They could engineer support for financial shenanigans but the flyboys would be using the upset to speculate in all directions and when you are as bankrupt as Britain you do not want people trashing your currency so I doubt they would. Britain is not as big as they, and we, think they are.
Slightly O/T
Not sure if anyone is aware of the latest pile of shit to emanate from that bitch Katie Hopkins
but she has tweeted a derogatory comment on the day that Scotland mourns the losses in Glasgow https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/406866559681167360
So there is now a petition to have her removed from current programming and interviews
https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/remove-katie-hopkins-from-all-programmes-and-interviews#share
Please sign and share
O/T, but if you want to know just how offensive conspiracy nuts can get, take a look at this lot.
http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=485&start=2340
Starts at the fourth post on the page.
@Taranaich –
‘What I find most infuriating is so-called “progressives” and “socialists” who actually further the argument that saving 5.4 million people from the devastation a government they didn’t vote for inflicts on them is somehow selfish – because people outside Scotland are suffering too.’
Agreed.
It’s not fair to name names, but there are always divisive, deluded ideologues on the ‘left’ who put their personal agendas before anything else, as if maintaining their allegiance to this or that ‘ism’ must always be the priority. It’s a particularly despicable form of snobbery which has more to do with intellectual willy-waving than any real concern with fellow citizens.
The only reason I’m in the SSP is because it’s a party that does stuff – it’s a party of protest, with plenty to protest about, and we want to see real change. It’s not about scoring debating points over who can quote Marx or Engels or anyone else. The SSP is progressive, modern, and has practical policies on small-business growth and fair taxation – we’re not ‘anti-business’: we’re ‘anti’ massive multinationals and rogue billionaires holding our governments and workforces to ransom and effectively thieving this nation of billions, year after year,in unpaid taxes. We’re against our own assets, eg Royal Mail, being handed over to speculators who make an instant killing without even having to expend whatever energy is required to get up off their big fat armchairs.
Uncomfortable a fact as it is, it needs to be faced – the SNP and Yes Scotland NEED the SSP, and have to stop pretending that we don’t exist. We speak for many who don’t want mere tinkering with the status-quo – we want significant, meaningful transformation in Scottish society, to try and undo some of the damage wreaked by neo-Liberalist madness. To that end, we should be allowed some representation in the many debates happening, be they on MSM or not – it is, quite frankly, disgraceful that Colin Fox has received such scant attention.
We in the SSP learned – the hard way – what can happen when egomaniacs forget who they represent, and put personal gratification before all else. I think I know who you’re referring to in your comment, and I’ll wager they do too – believe me mister, they won’t be allowed to wreck this movement. It happened before, and this party that so many of us truly love (and many of our hardest opponents admire, despite the obvious differences) was very nearly destroyed. It’s not going to happen again. No way.
John
You only said Alex Salmond four times. Are you feeling OK? There are some nasty bugs going around, you shouldn’t be on the interwebs if you are feeling peely wally.
O/T Bella Caledonia have less than 3 weeks left for their appeal. We all know how bad the MSM in Scotland is, and how biased they are against independence. Lets back Bella and others. They are trying to raise £40,000, and are currently at just over £5000. Along with Wings, National Collective and Newsnet, they are one of the mainstays of the pro-independence alternative media. Here is the link:
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/backing-bella
I have a question. :P:
What does OBE stand for?
Does it stand for the grand Order of Bulshite Enterprises by any chance? 😆
We’ve done all that. Maybe someone can find the thread and link to it….
Edinburgh is a world wide financial centre and always has been. Aberdeen Asset Management based there is now the biggest managed fund in Europe. Where financial funds are based has little significance within the world aconomy. Scotland has better economic governance than the rest of the UK. The books are more balanced. This should help investors when they decided where to invest. They are interested in investing where there is a stable economy/giv and a good return to their investment. Scots financiers have a good reputation world wide. The Scottish connections with ex-pats and world wide diasporia means Scotland as finance centre has little to fear.
IR has a marketing section,within the US gov because of the Irish diasporia, which promotes trade/deal etc with the IR.
Who Katie Hopkins? It the person who plays Gayle in Corrie? It ugly.
@MadJock 5:09
The issue you address has been one of concern to me recently.
The Scotland analysis paper is unequivocal in it’s dismissal of the Treaty.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/79408/Annex_A.pdf
See Paragraph 40
This has serious ramifications for Scotland,in particular it would remove our protection under international law.
I also thought that paper was a bit of an eye-opener at the time and was surprised that it was not openly challenged by the SG and its legal team at the time. I am no lawyer but it is built on the theory that when nations join together then they can never spit apart – they become one nation thereafter in public international law. I think that is a bit bazaar and would only be true if all people identified themselves as belonging to that new ‘nation’. A test I for one will certainly fail. Scotland is a well recognized ancient nation – as to some extent is Wales.
The real test is how the international states choose to recognize us. And that will be how the parties agree to separate or if there is a dispute about this they will probably side with Scotland and recognize us in the way they want us to.
This paper is a ploy – but a dangerous trap for Scotland if we vote NO. Then indeed we will no longer collectively see ourselves as a nation in public international law. There may be no way back legally and it could spell the end of Scots Law.
I found this :
“Nations evolve historically as stable, long-lasting communities of people, sharing a common language and territory, and the common culture and history that arise from that. On this basis develop the solidarities, mutual interests and mutual identification that distinguish a people from its neighbours. Some nations are ancient, some young, some in process of being formed. Like all human groups – for example the family, clan, tribe – they are fuzzy at the edges. No neat definition will encompass all cases. The empirical test is to ask people themselves. If they have passed beyond the stage of kinship society where the political unit is the clan or tribe, people will invariably know what nation they belong to. That is the political and democratic test too. If enough people in a nation wish to establish their own independent State, they should have it. ”
http://spectrezine.org/europe/Coughlan.htm
Katie Hopkins needs a good slap with a smelly trout…just another jumped up middle england housewife who has ideas well above her station and intelligence.
I know many wonderful english ladies, this sorry example gives them all a bad name, and takes lack of taste to new lows.
M4rkyboy
First of all the UK Government are providing an opinion. Its an opinion based on, at best what the UK Government want it to be in order to belittle and minimise the actual Treaty of Union
What it ignores is the fact that the Treaty was the result of negotiations and not a lead into negotiations . The opinion piece, which it is tries to state that as the respective acts were altered (were they altered?), then the treaty should be ignored. Which is interesting, when you consider all present day Treaty’s from the likes of the EU, which are negotiated upon, then agreed (with fanfare) then are formalised by a subsequent act of parliament, which usually have addendums and addition added. But does that mean the original Treaty’s position is reduced? No its not
This opinion piece by the UK Government should not be accepted, other than an opinion that is bias and should not be accepted as some kind of legal document. It is only the Westminster unionists trying to safeguard the status of the entity known as ‘the United Kingdom’
Morag says:
1 December, 2013 at 6:16 pm
O/T, but if you want to know just how offensive conspiracy nuts can get, take a look at this lot.
Yep and not very intelligent ones either……they ask where a building under constructions is as it appears to vanish in the 2nd photo !!!
Sadly for them, one was taken from the Mirror site clearly on Saturday morning…..the other is from Google maps on an unspecified date but clearly taken on a bright summers day…..
Clearly you stumbled upon the Crap Conspiracy Club….who no doubt are a CIA/Mossad front set up to discredit other conspiracy theory nuts with their pish theories…….or at least that’s what they want you to think 😉
In the event the of a YES vote, no matter how slim, I can see no way that Scotland will take part in the 2015 Westminster elections. In 2014 the Tories will just have been seen to lose Britain and will instantly redouble their focus on the 2015 Westminster elections. The polls may be tight or they may not, however, there is no way that the Tory party are going to allow the possibility of losing in 2015 to 40 odd Scottish Labour MPs that are being temporarily sent down until 2016. It simply is not in their political interests to risk loss of power for even a year, (although if allowed would most likely end up an entire term of office as I will explain).
Likewise, it is not in the interests of the SNP Scottish Government to risk an electoral reversal of the referendum result (or rather what would be claimed as a reversal by Labour, The BBC and the entire British Press) in the event of another 40 Labour MPs being returned to Westminster in 2015.
This would be a very unwelcome powerbase from which SLab would cause political trouble. If indeed they were the majority holding Labour in power down in Westminster, they and Labour would be in complete power during half the supposed negotiating period between Holyrood and Westminster, prior to our 2016 Independent elections!
You really think the SNP beleive those Scottish Labour MPs and their Labour Government would, in good faith, negotiate away their own Westminster electoral majority and hand power over to the Tories, as they watch their 40 odd Scottish MPs resign and head north to their dole appointments? It simply would not happen and Salmond et al know it!
So, that just leaves it in the interests of Labour, for the reasons already outlined above. Unfortunately for them, they are not in power and worse, have no real influence over the decision making at either Westminster or Holyrood. They will be stitched up and ignored. That’s politics (and the importance of power)!
In the event of any YES vote in 2014, the political kaleidoscope will have settled and everyone will once again see very clearly the pattern of where their short term, ruthless, electoral necessities/advantages lie and act accordingly.
One very productive negotiating year with the Tory/LibDem Government, NATO, The EU and UN producing interim understandings, along with an interim agreement not to send any MPs to Westminster for that remaining single year, and I think we will be officially Independent, by mutual agreement, just before the Westminster (and first rUK) General Elections of 2015.
All further negotiations will be carried out over the following years by the two newly sovereign states. Same with our relationships with all those other important international bodies.
That’s how I see it anyway. Not as an optimist but as a political cynic that sees political parties only real interests as being power, and the patronage and treasure it bestows.
The Act of Union guarantees the right for Scotland to have a separate education and legal system for ever. That influenced the Cooper decision in 1953 and contributed to the right for a Scottish gov to hold a Rederendum. Westminster could not challenge it even through the London Court. A Labour/Unionist? lawyer argued at the time that Scotland could be prevented from holding a Referendum through the Supreme London Court of Appeal establshed by Blair. That did not happen.
Might not endear ourselves to rUK if we are going and might annoy them during the negotiations, but is it not about time, after all those years, the Monster Raving Loony Party got somewhere between 1 and 59 MPs?
Gives then a chance to show what their policies are, and would mean UK gov would be elected by voters from rUK whatever its rosette colour and distance along the right axis they are.
# Morag says:
1 December, 2013 at 6:16 pm
O/T, but if you want to know just how offensive conspiracy nuts can get, take a look at this lot.
http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=485&start=2340
Starts at the fourth post on the page.
The same term occurs here. Its from 2010..
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2010/01/05084033
“”That is exactly why Ministers activated the Scottish Government’s Resilience operation before Christmas, and it is delivering help where it is needed. As a result, we have been able to ensure that Fife is receiving 250 tonnes of additional salt and grit supplies today, on top of the 50 tonnes extra to deal with the immediate situation on Sunday.”
Rev sorry about the formatting, don’t know what happened as the spacing was in there, honest! Then too late to fix. Sorry everyone.
Katie Hopkin came to prominence in ‘The Apprentice’?. Another ignorant, arrogant, arch right wing reactionary Conservative, of little significance in the real world. Over stepped the mark and at the end of tolerance.
The SNP and the Greens should be fielding candidates as never before in 2015. Scotland needs people in parliament to remind Dave & co that until the day of independence the UK government is still legally bound to act in our best interests as much as any other citizens.
Scotland also needs people with an ear to the ground there, alert for last-minute wee changes to UK constitutional changes and other wee sleekit legal amendments that might be used to “disappear” some assets before a the day of independece itself.
And we sorely need to get shot of the biggest bums on the gravy-train: Davidson, Sarwar, Curran (not forgetting Carmichael!) who, if Adam Ingram is any guide, might be trying to undermine the result of a YES vote.
@Edward
Katie Hopkins Petition signed.
With 9,061 signatures only 939 needed. Go on lets get shot of the obnoxious cow.
So there is now a petition to have her removed from current programming and interviews
https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/remove-katie-hopkins-from-all-programmes-and-interviews#share
Please sign and share
Oh please don’t…… it will only give her more publicity which is EXACTLY what the trolling bint wants….
It will be spun as ‘Katie targeted by Cyber Nats from daring to EXPRESS an opinion’….cue puff pieces in the press, endless TV & Radio interviews, probably a book deal as well as a martyr of free speech……………she’d absolutely fucking love it.
We all know (and indeed have video evidence) that she is an ill informed ignoramus mutton dressed as kebab vacuous publicity whore….
Can’t we just leave it at that and ignore the odious buffoon ??
M4rkyboy
Just reading further in the UK Government, it has a mistake in it as it refers to the ‘1707 agreement’ that is wrong as the agreement was in 1706. It was the ratification acts of union in each parliament in 1707. So they seem to be getting confused between the Treaty in 1706 and the Acts in 1707
‘The requirement that a treaty be ‘governed by international law’ is a little difficult to apply to the 1707 agreement, because the parties to it ceased to exist on May 1 ‘
Then again further along the same passage ‘The entire purpose of the complex negotiations of 1707 was to enact a legal agreement between the two independent states of England and Scotland… As the parties ceased to exist in May 1707’
It’s the reference to the Act as having Primacy that is the issue.It removes the International aspect of it and elevates Westminster to Judge,Jury and executioner when in actual fact they lack the Legal competence to assume Jurisprudence over what should be a matter under International law.It was this that allowed them to Annex Ireland and i fear that they have their eyes on Orkney and Shetland which without the protection of International law we would be powerless to stop them awarding Independence to the territory of their choosing.
M4rkyboy
‘ negotiations ended on 22 July 1706, the acts had to be ratified by both Parliaments’
Detail can be seen on the wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Union
It would be an interesting situation. There’s definitely the worry that a majority of unionist MP’s up here in 2015 would be trumpeted by the media as a reversal of a Yes result in the referendum.
As we’d be in the negotiating phase I’d be inclined to think that we should have nothing to do with the election and just let our neighbours get on with it. Whatever they want we get after all.
I understand that the Acts were the domestic execution of the Treaty in both parliaments.But i dont think this is convenient for Westminster considering they are claiming sole ownership of the legal personality.
‘…that Great Britain was the continuator of England rather than a new state’
I am just a cook btw.Min wage in a pub.Standard grade education.I am getting to grips with it piece by piece.It would be nice to see some case law examples but i wouldnt have the foggiest where to find a resource like this.
M4rkyboy / art1001 says:
FFS waken up! If the British Nationalists say Black the actual position is most definitely White and the bit in between is Unionist Propaganda. When the fcuk are people going to waken up and CHALLENGE the bullshit instead of recycling the state propaganda.
Part 1 – Exec Summary – Point 1 &2 are TOTAL nonsense – therefore, pretty much all else that follows is predicated on the rUK propaganda (which at least 1/2 the Scottish supporters of Independence still lap up like puppy P1’s.
For instance – The International Court of Justice deals with territorial integrity.
Try “The Scottish Parliament, adjourned on the 25th day of March 1707, is hereby reconvened.”
Winnie Ewing opening address at the first session of the Scottish Parliament in 12th May 1999.
In Law – any prohibition by the British Nationalists regarding Scotland’s declared wish for independence of the UK will be crushed by the The International Court of Justice. And any first year International Law student will tell you that!
Therefore, please explain how our friends in the East manage statehood to EU Membership in :- http://www.haguejusticeportal.net/index.php?id=11906
That’s right – 2008 fledgling Declaration of Independence – no parliament or means of EU membership compliance – but hay-ho – 7 years later looks like agreement on Kosovo’s full EU membership is due spring 2014.
Meanwhile, back in Paragraph 40 of some UK Unionist propaganda prohibition by the British Nationalists awaits Scotland!!!
As said, FFS waken up.
STOP recycling and discussing unionist propaganda to others.
Simply CHALLENGE IT!!
Chill man,i am trying to challenge it.
ie watch what document that is being consulted. It could be a Unionist broadsheet. A common mistake.
Lawyers become millionaires challenging it. Leave it to them. Same your worries for more immediate concerns. : – )
‘Save your worries’ : – )
Just caught a SNP / Yes party political broadcast on channel 4. Good stuff I hope that they repeat it.
I would imagine there would be a strong argument for the Conservatives to call a general election in 2014 should Scotland vote YES, in order to achieve a mandate from RUK to discuss negotiations with Scotland as they move towards Independence.
After all, it would be the biggest constitutional change in these islands for a couple of centuries and voters would would accept the need for such a response.
You can also see that this would be very beneficial for David Cameron if as I would expect, he deals with a YES vote in a respectful and statesman-like way in the immediate period after the vote. Being the one who negotiated the Edinburgh agreement with Alex Salmond in the first place, it would make sense that such a “statesman-like” politician be allowed to continue the negotiations to their logical conclusion. That will obviously strengthen the Conservatives’ position immensely in preparation for such an election and further torpedo the already weak Labour Party case.
If there is a RUK General Election in 2014, I do not think that the SNP or Scotland itself should be involved in such an unique election and that it should only involve England, Wales and Northern Ireland. There would then be a hiatus of 18 months before the first Independent Scotland Elections in 2016: this would allow the SNP government enough time to negotiate with the new RUK government. The only question is what would happen with the administration of “RUK policies” in Scotland during this particular period i.e welfare/defence. Maybe the SNP should argue that at least parts of these policies need to be fast-tracked to Scotland, along with the corresponding budgets.
Meaning, simply challenge it at source!
Needed any supporting data to better inform oneself??
Then start reading the Rev’s back catalogue – pretty much every British Nationalist argument (ever!!) is wasted therein.
ayemachrihanish
I think I already stated not to accept the opinion piece by the uk government in a less confrontational manner 😉
M4rkyboy
We are all the same here, all in the same team, it doesn’t matter what anyone does, we all contribute in our own way and use each of our combined experiences.
Me, I’m in shipping and logistics (Standard grade education also), but I can espouse on trade as that is my field of knowledge
For sources, its really available on the internet, well most of it is. Start by reading up on the Treaty itself, start with the Wiki page on it, it has various references. Then the same on the respective acts (Act of Union Scotland, Act of Union England). Then for comparison check the wiki page on Czechoslovakia and the velvet divorce see how they did it. Belgium was another country formed by union (which currently Flanders wants to split)
Remember we are all in the same position as we all seek the ending of the United Kingdom 🙂
Here’s how ‘seriously’ Cameron et al took ‘The Edinburgh Agreement’ –
Look at the framed map behind them – Yellow =SNP. Red =Labour. Blue =Tory/LibDem:
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2012/10/15/1350304565294/20e7559f-1f69-4449-a0fd-4ba873831d32-460.jpeg
The mighty British State allowed such a photo-shoot to happen, with that hanging on the wall right between the main players? No wonder Salmond’s smiling.
They don’t care. At all. At all. At all.
And that’s why they’ll lose.
Lesley Riddoch’s piece in the Sunday Post;
http://ift.tt/1c5kBFU
@ Cymru Rydd – Call an election in 2014? I love your style but surely the timescale before the end of the year is a NO NO.
Can’t believe you take this complete political non entity Angus Robertson remotely seriously?
Britain is going to the polls for the next UK General Election around the half way point in May 2015, that’s a given, it is what parties have been planning for at Westminster.
Due to the introduction of five-year fixed term parliaments at Westminster, May 2015 is now set in law. To change this date would require legislation to allow it to be moved, that means white paper and no one is going down that road.
55 million voters in the rest of the UK will not stand for it either, not to accommodate the nasty nats.
FAO Rev and Morag:
Who said this:
‘We await publication with baited breath.’
Allen Bisset has posted an article on NNS. Road map for the Union.
http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-opinion/8412-road-map-for-the-union-a-modest-proposal
I have mentioned before regarding labour in Scotland post Yes. If labour are a Westminster (ruk) party and not registered as a Scottish party in an independent Scotland, does that mean that they will be excluded from Scottish politics? Does anybody know?
@ braco 7:23
I think that makes sense, looks like the most probable outcome to me.
Negotiations don’t take long if both sides want to get it done ASAP.
Most of the time in negotiations is politicians doing the dance for their constituencies, (while the civil servants figure out stuff in the background).
Then they lock themselves in a hotel for 2 or 3 days and work through the night to get the paperwork signed.
Got to believe there’s already a team in Whitehall in a cellar somewhere working away on just this scenario so that its all ready to go when the time comes. The fact that the Scottish negotiation position is already spelt out in the White paper makes it even easier to get all the ducks in a row ahead of time – despite what Project Fear say at the moment most of the issues have a common win-win position that is obvious to both sides.
It is in rUKs interests for Scotland to be in NATO, in the EU, in a Sterling zone and to do deals to send funds south to keep rUK entities (DVLA etc) solvent on a shared-service basis.
theycan’tbeserious
They probably will have to register. But they will try and do it quietly lest the truth leaks out after all these years.
But under Scottish ‘public law’ they won’t be allowed to use the Scottish pound or join the EU.
Sorry for going O/T here but Munguin has a wee piece about a debate held in a school in Glasgow.
http://www.munguinsrepublic.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/yes-wins-st-andrews-day-debate.html
Nice to see the “debater of the year” turn out for this one, didn’t change the overall result though! 😆
I’ve believed for the last twenty years that Labour’s resistance to independence would crush them out of existence in Scotland. OK, there might be an element of wishful thinking in there, and yet that seems to be the story that is unfolding. Labour as an institution has been hollowed out, most visibly in Scotland, where its representatives are creatures from a sci-fi nightmare, avatars of a distant empire, incapable of reason or even the will to reason.
I don’t know what *should* happen after a Yes vote, but I’m cheerily confident that New Labour in Scotland will strap itself over the mouth of a cannon and light the powder, if so commanded by the Mother Ship in London. They really are that silly, and we should encourage them.
The scenario I imagine emerging after a Yes vote is this:
Negotiations get bogged down (deliberately) by the Westminster mob, and we enter the 2015 UK General Election with it effectively becoming a second referendum. The SNP and the handful of ConLabLD candidates of good faith and/or democratic principle versus the Westminster troughers.
It then becomes a repeat of the 1918 Coupon Election, with the vast majority, if not all, of Scottish seats won by the referendum winning side.
Westminster is fundamentally not a democratic institiution. You have to drag it, kicking and screaming, to every tiny stage of reform. We still have hereditary peers in the House of Lords, in the 21st century, FFS!
My point is – that there is way too much conversation about what some pap British Nationalises state propaganda “might” mean.
Why not work on the basis of….
Never, ever, underestimate the high deviousness and low cunning of the British state…
Talk “only” about ways to expose the unionist dishonestly…
We have no time for what if”s about hypothetical what if’s..
No one has a problem with a question relating to – this report is bollocks – not sure where? But where do I find the information to debunk it?
But nosense like “what will this weapon grade propoganda mean for the Orkney Islands?”
Wise up – that’s precisely WHY IT WAS WRITEN to cast doubt.
As soon as you start talking about the content of the propaganda it takes on a relevance which it WHOLLY dose not deserve.
As said, Never, ever, underestimate the high deviousness and low cunning of the British state…
Then act accordingly…
@muttley79: I meant to add in the last post, I hope people are not getting complacent about a Yes vote. We have a massive struggle in front of us just to achieve a Yes vote. It worries me that some people seem to think a Yes vote is a done deal. I reckon there is still a massive amount of work still to do.
I don’t think of it as complacency: more like assurance. We’ll win this because I’ve seen the incredible work done already, and know that this massive struggle is not beyond our reach. We’re not going to win because it’s a “done deal,” so much as we’re going to win because we’re up to that challenge.
@ianbrotherhood: Uncomfortable a fact as it is, it needs to be faced – the SNP and Yes Scotland NEED the SSP, and have to stop pretending that we don’t exist.
Totally. I look forward to an independent Scotland because I see a real possibility that the SSP and Greens will do well – if Scottish Labour & Lib Dems disintegrate/move south, perhaps the triumverate of an Indy Scotland would be Greens, SSP and SNP rather than Tories, Labour & LibDems? (or the SNP successors, should they break up after Indy).
@ayemashrihanish 1 December 2913 9.00pm
Agree
So say most of us
Ah get what yer saying Machrihanish.My first instinct is to rebut.I would like to dismiss outright what you correctly call the state propaganda but in the absence of Scottish sovereignty i have a sinking feeling we are at their mercy-especially considering the acquiescence of the Unionist parties to the Westminster position and their utter inability to raise any sort of challenge and stick up for Scotland.
Fife Council leader Councillor Alex Rowley has been selected to contest the Cowdenbeath constituency following the death of Labour MSP Helen Eadie.
Who else, it’s his turn and it’s as good as it gets in Fife for Labour , I was born there in . . ‘well never you mind!’.
Labour cannot ‘reverse’ the referendum if they gain power in 2015. They can make life difficult, but they can’t reverse the result. Aside from a slew of high brow Un treaties that the UK is signatory too, the EU and it’s many bodies simply would not stand for it.
The EU referendum bill passed through parliament the other day. As far as Brussels is concerned, the UK leaving the EU family is a very real and present danger. Should Miliband attempt to drag a pro EU nation out of the EU against it’s will, and act against a legally binding referendum, the full force of Europe would be felt by Westminster I’m sure.
Scotland has sovereignty. That’s the point. It’s enshrined in Scottish Law. Scottish Law/Education which under the terms of the Act of Union is separate forever. Sovereignty forever under the Law of Scotland. English Law/Education system is different from Scotland.
iScotland is good for labour! DOH! It’s official
http://archive.is/7cS9h
Independence is good for Scotland then.
Glad to hear of another YES win in open debates. Doubly good when JoLa was on the receiving end and on home turf.
I (almost) give up!
“but in the absence of Scottish sovereignty”
Don’t you get it? The above idea has been planted in your somewhat – responsive – skull!
Scottish Sovereignty dose NOT need someone else to approve it – it ONLY require ‘you’ to take hold of it. Like just vote – yes!! It is that simple.
Our respective forefathers (i persume – well mine for sure) gave their lives so that you and I could simply put a tick in a box.
Every…. And I mean EVERY former Colonian State utterly understands the sentiment of – Never, ever, underestimate the high deviousness and low cunning of the British state…
Why?
Meet the future UK Prime Minister if we vote NO.
http://bellacaledonia.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/article-2182965-1453ad23000005dc-394_634x792.jpg
Vronsky at 8..55
With youallthe way. If the Labour Party reach the referendum still opposing independence it willl finish them off. It is on life support (the media) at the moment. I rather wonder if Euan McColm’s tastless tweet was aimed at Jim Murphy. He is not short of enemies I am given to understand
It interesting that the Sunday Herald is repeating the Mail on Sunday poll http://archive.is/mde91 which naturally is being great credence by Better Together on Facebook.
However in the real world the support that the pool claims for Better Together, is not materialising in fact, my own ‘little polling exercise’ is showing an increase in support for YES, which is the reason why we have a sustained attack by the unionists on all quarters on independence. The banging of heads against the wall , must be giving Better Together a very large headache
It interesting that the Sunday Herald is repeating the Mail on Sunday poll
Not a poll; market research company not registered with the BPC. Don’t submit methodology or results for open scrutiny. Not worth paying really any attention to as a result.
Incidentally, trend is No down 3% in as many months to DK with Yes steady. That might be of relevance, but otherwise, nothing of interest.
Great piece on Bella Caledonia by Mike Small regarding the Union seen through the eyes of some prominent unionists.
“A Union of Poverty” by Mike Small.
http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/11/30/a-union-of-poverty/
‘Journalists’ in the MSM are tasked by their masters with one simple proposition between now and 18 September 2014. Stop self-determination (the natural state of affairs the world over) becoming natural in the minds of the Scottish electorate.
No more, no less. That’s it. Will they succeed?
It’s up to us to stop them.
Ivan McKee,
that’s a very good point. I have often worried about publishing such an exhaustive 650 pg White Paper as an effective referendum weapon. But, to consider it as a post referendum tool, it makes a lot more sense.
Just like the way that the SNP put out the ‘unofficial’ YES/NO question long before agreement on an actual referendum question was settled, and by doing so, managed to fix permanently in the mind of both sides that YES would obviously be the natural ground for the Independence response, no matter the final question.
Result: Vote YES for Independence! Brilliant. (imagine vote NO for Independence!)
The white paper sets out honestly our position. It also, more importantly, chooses the landscape the arguments will be played out on. Our position is set in the most easily defended, but also most easily converted to offense, position available within that chosen landscape. It is now being slowly assimilated, by both sides, as the ‘natural’ reality of the political argument.
If true (and I think it will take 3 or 4 months from now to be certain), then there are some incredibly confident (in the outcome of a YES vote) folk at the very top of the SNP. They are thinking very strategically about beyond a YES.
The key though, is the YES, and it’s not our job to get beyond that fight, no matter how tempting it is too dream and plot (re my last long, badly formatted post! wink). It’s letterboxes for me, and then letterboxes followed by letterboxes.
Love Business for Scotland by the way min! Much appreciated, so thanks.
O/t, maybe, just a random question. Who are Scotland’s leaders?
And that way earlier post should read ‘Colonial State’
On the wider issue of upcoming elections and referenda…,
I only just found this, but some of you might know of it already…
…A thoughtful perspective (June 2013) on the “The future of Scotland: international implications and comparisons” by Sir John Holmes (Diplomat 1973-2007,including adviser to Major and Blair,Ambassador Paris, and UN USG for humanitarian affairs).
See http://www.ditchley.co.uk/conferences/past-programme/2010-2019/2013/the-future-of-scotland
Topics discussed were:
– Scotland’s international position after independence
– The currency
– Scotland and the EU
– Scotland and NATO
– An independent Scotland’s foreign policy
– The impact of an independent Scotland on the rest of the UK
– The wider international impact of Scottish independence
– Is “separatism” a growing global phenomenon?
– Future calendar (including brief comment on UK in/out EU referendum)
The perspective is Sir John Holmes’s summary of a 3-day “Future of Scotland” high-level conference that included representatives from Belgium (2 representatives), Canada (5), Czech Republic (1), France (1), Germany (1), Ireland (1), Italy (1), Spain (3), Scotland (3, namely, Lt Col Stuart Crawford, James Maxwell, Stephen Noon), UK (19, including Michael Moore, Prof John Curtis) , USA (2).
Note which non-UK countries with more than one representative!
The summary is Sir John’s “personal impressions” and he states that we “..tried to avoid talking about the merits of Scottish independence, and largely succeeded, despite some strong views around the table”.
I found it very helpful and informative – I hope this is useful to others also.
Following a successful Yes vote the 3 main party MSPs would all have to resign from their parties as they would be working for a foreign government. They will have to find new names as I am in no doubt the 3 main parties will insist their parties with Scottish stuck in front of it is their property.
We will then be left with the scenario that we will have to decide whether they can be trusted to work for Scotland and themselves without their Westminster masters pulling the strings?
TrainingDay what kind of country is it though that is unable to debate issues, or discuss issues, only try to influence opinion through fear ?
What kind of country is it ,where the media only question one side of the debate?
Radical Independence address.
http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/in-brief/8417-despair-has-a-name-its-name-is-no-hope-has-a-name-its-name-is-yes
This is probably covered in the White Paper itself, pages 51-53, with Westminster co-operation – co-operation which is almost certainly in its interests. Scotland Act amendment to give Holyrood complete control of reserved powers passed by 30th March 2015 (dissolution of Westminster for the General Election). Scottish Government able to use these powers to prepare for Independence 24th March 2016. Especially these two paragraphs:
“Soon after a Yes vote in the referendum, the Westminster and Scottish Parliaments will need to pass legislation to give the Scottish Parliament powers to: declare independent statehood for Scotland in the name of the sovereign people of Scotland; amend the Scotland Act 1998; and extend the powers of the
Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government into all policy areas currently reserved to Westminster, in order to make preparations for independence. With the transfer of the appropriate legislative competences, the Scottish Parliament will be in a position to make the necessary preparations for Scotland to become independent.”
Just too late to edit. There would be no Westminster election in Scotland in 2015. The 2015 elections would then constitutionally and democratically (and financially – it costs to campaign and run an election), for the rUK, whose status as the Continuing state would probably have had to be agreed by Scotland – subject therefore to a conclusion of the main negotiating points for the “secession / separation / dissolution”.
The rUK would then have Clarity for its 2015 General Election, as would the parties.
Too quick. Scotland would of course be a full Successor State.
dadsarmy,
Is that not just simply full independence by 2015 then? That’s exactly how I would envisage it, but why all this 24th of March 2016 stuff, other than it being suited to our current (but recently changed by Westminster) Holyrood electoral cycle?
Don’t get me wrong, if that’s the official White Paper plan, then as long as we don’t participate in the 2015 Westminster Election after a YES vote, then I am really very satisfied.
Thanks for the quotes and the clarity (my copy is still in the post so it’s much appreciated).
Gordoz says
“Hey – even I know its troll time when I see OBE !”
No biggie, its like a dog turd floating down the gutter in the rain,
you wrinkle your nose then its gone down the drain with all the other effluent.
btw did an “Alex Salmond is” count on you last defecation OBE Wan Kinobe and you only managed four!
getting tired?
Gordoz says
“Hey – even I know its troll time when I see OBE !”
No biggie, its like a dog turd floating down the gutter in the rain,
you wrinkle your nose then its gone down the drain with all the other effluent.
btw did an “Alex Salmond is” count on you last defecation OBE Wan Kinobe and you only managed four!
getting tired?
or have you run out of chalk/walls/steam?
I’m seeing double 🙂 🙂
Jeez
There’s two of them!
Braco says
” but why all this 24th of March 2016 stuff, ”
Everybody leave the independence date alone,
that’s my 60th birthday an you aint spoiling it yhear
btw its the date the union began in 1707
yea I know I didn’t know that nether.
We could have blue and red markers in the voting booth.
Just use the blue one with an X if you want to vote Yes to Independence, and the red one with a + in the No box if you want to………
OK, In’m off to work.
My take would be for no Scots constituencies to return any MPs to Westminster at the 2015 GE and for all sitting MSPs to hold voting rights at Westminster for the interim period.
I can’t see any politician/party spending much time, effort or money campaigning for what would be about 1 year in office – especially so if they have any ambition to take part in the Scottish GE the following year.
Also can’t see there being much interest in the UK GE by the Scottish electorate for much the same reason – would anyone like to hazard a guess on turnout?.
I think all Scottish MPs would just call the game a bogey.