Jump to content
sonyc

Independence?

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

 

She will argue - in my book quite rightly - that the Scottish people are being denied their democratic rights and freedoms as a sovereign nation free to choose.

 

 

The ruling makes clear that they are not a sovereign nation. They are part of the sovereign nation that is the UK.

They expressed that as their will in 2014

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ricardo said:

The ruling makes clear that they are not a sovereign nation. They are part of the sovereign nation that is the UK.

They expressed that as their will in 2014

The Scotland Act seemed pretty clear on this, more £ for the lawyers!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sonyc said:

It would be useful if there was a more constructive type of dialogue with Scotland. Johnson and Truss treated Scotland (it seemed) with far too little respect. It is an important part of the union after all and a good relationship in anything is far better than acrimony, conflict etc. And with that political move would come more trust at least. To provide a vote is one idea. It didn't solve the Tory's internal crisis though did it with Brexit and a divided union would be equally as disastrous.

And I understand how Westminster in particular is hated by the Scots and Welsh.

It is interesting to note that this formal legal ruling does anything but put to bed the increasingly apparent constitutional crisis that Scottish independence raises. The "supreme authority" of the UK parliament to legislate on this particular issue has been unambiguously upheld (and indeed accepted by the SNP), however, the debate will not disappear but simply now centre upon the political case for believing that democracy demands that Scottish people be given the constitutional right to vote on independence.

Herman and Yellow Fever are right to think that this judgement in important respects plays into Sturgeon's hands. She can play off the formal legal authority of the UK parliament against the constitutional custom and practice established through centuries of progression to greater democratic accountability. It will not be difficult for Sturgeon to persuade many of her fellow Scots that this is yet another example of the UK government using legal statute to thwart the democratic will of the Scottish people (Brexit being another example). Thus, you are absolutely right to suggest that this legal result demands that a more "constructive type of dialogue" with Scotland is engendered. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, horsefly said:

It is interesting to note that this formal legal ruling does anything but put to bed the increasingly apparent constitutional crisis that Scottish independence raises. The "supreme authority" of the UK parliament to legislate on this particular issue has been unambiguously upheld (and indeed accepted by the SNP), however, the debate will not disappear but simply now centre upon the political case for believing that democracy demands that Scottish people be given the constitutional right to vote on independence.

Herman and Yellow Fever are right to think that this judgement in important respects plays into Sturgeon's hands. She can play off the formal legal authority of the UK parliament against the constitutional custom and practice established through centuries of progression to greater democratic accountability. It will not be difficult for Sturgeon to persuade many of her fellow Scots that this is yet another example of the UK government using legal statute to thwart the democratic will of the Scottish people (Brexit being another example). Thus, you are absolutely right to suggest that this legal result demands that a more "constructive type of dialogue" with Scotland is engendered. 

There is a Scottish solution open and interestingly it links into other discussions I've seen on here.

Sturgeon can make a direct 'Humble Address' or similar to King Charles III (yes the third - of Scotland) to grant the referendum.

As a Scottish King I think he would be obliged so to do! Discuss.

Job done.

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

There is a Scottish solution open and interestingly it links into other discussions I've seen on here.

Sturgeon can make a direct 'Humble Address' or similar to King Charles III (yes the third - of Scotland) to grant the referendum.

As a Scottish King I think he would be obliged so to do! Discuss.

Job done.

Haha! One of those many quirks of our unwritten and extremely complex constitution. Just imagine the constitutional crisis that would cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Haha! One of those many quirks of our unwritten and extremely complex constitution. Just imagine the constitutional crisis that would cause.

What constitutional crisis? The Sovereign (by definition Ricardo) King Charles III of Scotland grants his Scottish subjects a democratic right to a referendum on Scottish independence. He will of course still remain King of Scotland whatever the choice

Perfectly legit.

Edited by Yellow Fever
You can just see Charles reprising his starring role as Braveheart!
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

What constitutional crisis? The Sovereign (by definition Ricardo) King Charles III of Scotland grant his Scottish subjects a democratic right to a referendum on independence. He will of course still remain King of Scotland whatever the choice

Perfectly legit.

Do you think he could be persuaded to grant a Norfolk independence vote at the same time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Do you think he could be persuaded to grant a Norfolk independence vote at the same time?

I recall a long time ago reading that Norfolk was about the only English county that could make a viable mini-state a la Luxembourg. Similar population, could feed itself, had energy (gas) and a strong capital/financial centre (Norwich).

I'll ask Charles next time I see him.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

There is a Scottish solution open and interestingly it links into other discussions I've seen on here.

Sturgeon can make a direct 'Humble Address' or similar to King Charles III (yes the third - of Scotland) to grant the referendum.

As a Scottish King I think he would be obliged so to do! Discuss.

Job done.

And the beauty of it is, if that's the case (which I doubt), they can make the same humble address every month or two for years on years until they get a right result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

I recall a long time ago reading that Norfolk was about the only English county that could make a viable mini-state a la Luxembourg. Similar population, could feed itself, had energy (gas) and a strong capital/financial centre (Norwich).

I'll ask Charles next time I see him.

The Binners would have to come through passport control at Diss.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ricardo said:

The Binners would have to come through passport control at Diss.

And we would need river patrols the length of the Waveney🙂

Edited by sonyc
Freedom for Tooting - er... Norfolk
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, ricardo said:

The Binners would have to come through passport control at Diss.

 

47 minutes ago, sonyc said:

And we would need river patrols the length of the Waveney🙂

They don't have enough points or play in a high enough league I'm afraid to be let in 😉

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ricardo said:

The Binners would have to come through passport control at Diss.

We would process their asylum claims in Rwanda 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People don’t like being told what they can and can’t do. Had they have been given their 2nd vote I suspect they would have got a no vote. However with them being told they can’t more and more frustration will build up against those in Westminster and the position Brexit has left the U.K. in and more and more will move to yes. I suspect the next GE will in Scotland simply be independent or not.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, horsefly said:

We would process their asylum claims in Rwanda 

Jaywick would be closer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sturgeon's other problem is she has become an increasingly marmite character (in much the same way Salmond did). The SNP will need a refresh and also get rid of windbags like Blackford before they can start to tip the current 50:50 balance their way. So nothing will really change while she's in charge.

Apples

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, ricardo said:

The Binners would have to come through passport control at Diss.

Best processing place would be Stoneham Magpie before they get to the border. Turn on the water cannon as the refugess ride up the A140 on their bicycles and mobility scooters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...