Scottish Independence Referendum - 2014

[patrick1]

Quick ?, do you think the Olympics has had any influence on this at all?  Is the Union Jack or more feelings of "Britishness" gaining any traction among some?

[bore]

Quick ?, do you think the Olympics has had any influence on this at all?  Is the Union Jack or more feelings of "Britishness" gaining any traction among some?

It's kind of late, but I've only just seen the relevant poll: http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/scottish-independence-rivals-quick-off-blocks-to-claim-olympic-gains-1-2464425

Basically it will have no effect whatsoever, especially because the referendum is another 2 years away, by which time everyone will have forgotten about the olympics. But I think it does show that even if Scotland won the world cup, or Britain swept every medal at the athletic world championships there would be little effect on the vote, because sport doesn''t really matter when it comes to politics in the UK.

[afleitch]

Quick ?, do you think the Olympics has had any influence on this at all?  Is the Union Jack or more feelings of "Britishness" gaining any traction among some?

It's kind of late, but I've only just seen the relevant poll: http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/scottish-independence-rivals-quick-off-blocks-to-claim-olympic-gains-1-2464425

Basically it will have no effect whatsoever, especially because the referendum is another 2 years away, by which time everyone will have forgotten about the olympics. But I think it does show that even if Scotland won the world cup, or Britain swept every medal at the athletic world championships there would be little effect on the vote, because sport doesn''t really matter when it comes to politics in the UK.

This. Though it is worth noting that the vote will be held shortly after the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow so it would be interesting then to compare and contrast.

[Јas]

The Orange Order (NI) want to vote; and Salmond concedes the devo-max option.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2012/0926/1224324424243.html

[Leftbehind]

Not much of a concession! The only winnable option for his party, and it's certainly a win (more control, but without having to fart around with the ins and outs of the implications of independence) and I've no doubt they'll get it. Even if they didn't, the SNP aren't going anywhere whilst the main three unionist parties try and outdo each other in who can offer the most repelling platform (it's absolutely stunning to see Lamont's "solution" to Labour's fortunes).

[afleitch]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-19942638

The deal is struck. Let the shouting begin.

[bore]

Well, that seems okay.

[Kuu ülevaade olulisematest]

Would a 50% vote be sufficient for independence?

[Vasall des Midas]

Would a 50% vote be sufficient for independence?

You know, I've been trying to find the answer to that. What they actually agreed is...

The governments have agreed that the referendum should:

:: have a clear legal base;

:: be legislated for by the Scottish Parliament:

:: be conducted so as to command the confidence of parliaments, government and people; and

:: deliver a fair test and decisive expression of the views of people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect.

The governments have agreed to promote an Order in Council under Section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998 (...)

It will then be for the Scottish Government to promote legislation in the Scottish Parliament for a referendum on independence. (...) The referendum legislation will set out:

:: the date of the referendum;

:: the franchise;

:: the wording of the question;

:: rules on campaign financing; and

:: other rules for the conduct of the referendum.

So in principle, that would be up to the Scottish Parliament to decide. Though the language in points three and four of the first list makes me wonder whether there's some unwritten part of the agreement on that issue.

[Leftbehind]

Interesting that there's no devo-max option; I felt sure there would be. Can't help but think the nationalists have no chance on a straight independence question.

[countydurhamboy]

The last poll I saw had support for independence at 27% I think even for Salmond this is a bridge to far... However you wonder what effect Glasgow's Commonwealth Games might have as Scotland competes separately.

[Hnv1]

What are Rangers supporters going to do with all the union jacks in Ibrox now?

Now this referendum is very vauge, what sort of independence are we talking about? Will the queen still be the de jure head of state as in canada? Is a 50.01% sufficient for independence? What of British military installations (nuclear submarines port) and other British government/royal assests in Scotland? And other numerous questions. As a Scottish friend of mind told me "we don't know what we're voting for and no cares to explain"

[Gary J]

A yes vote for independence, would give the Scottish government a mandate to negotiate the terms for disunion. I would have thought the financial terms would be as contentious as those negotiated at the time of the Treaty of Union.

[doktorb]

And what would the remaining United Kingdom be called afterwards, that's what I want to know.

[You kip if you want to...]

And what would the remaining United Kingdom be called afterwards, that's what I want to know.

The United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

[Vasall des Midas]

"United Kingdom of South Britain and Northeast Ulster".

[politicus]

And what would the remaining United Kingdom be called afterwards, that's what I want to know.

The United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

Not logical. Wales is a principality and Ulster is only an earldom.
Since the territory of England and Wales is (almost) identical to the Roman province of Britannia they could just call it Britannia (the six Ulster counties would be too small a part of the new state to matter much).

[DC Al Fine]

Great Britain works fine.

[Leftbehind]

Alongside a united Ireland, presumably.

[bore]

If Scotland does get independence, then historical titles will be the last thing on the rest of the UK's mind. I'd assume Westminster will be trying desperately to preserve some sort of continuity, so I expect them to plump for the United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland. For the same reason I don't think we'll be seeing any changes to the flag.

[doktorb]

[Vasall des Midas]

And what would the remaining United Kingdom be called afterwards, that's what I want to know.

The United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

Not logical. Wales is a principality and Ulster is only an earldom.
Since the territory of England and Wales is (almost) identical to the Roman province of Britannia they could just call it Britannia (the six Ulster counties would be too small a part of the new state to matter much).

They would be a larger part of the new state than the current one.

In all seriousness, the name would almost certainly not be changed. Though I guess they should drop the "Great".

[politicus]

And what would the remaining United Kingdom be called afterwards, that's what I want to know.

The United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland?

Not logical. Wales is a principality and Ulster is only an earldom.
Since the territory of England and Wales is (almost) identical to the Roman province of Britannia they could just call it Britannia (the six Ulster counties would be too small a part of the new state to matter much).

They would be a larger part of the new state than the current one.

In all seriousness, the name would almost certainly not be changed. Though I guess they should drop the "Great".

Thats obviously true. By small I meant insignificant. A UK without Scotland would essentially be "Greater England" and in that sense NI would be even more insignificant/irrelevant than it is today.

[afleitch]

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-oil-benefit-overstated-says-danny-alexander-1-2720955

'THE financial benefit of oil to an independent Scotland is being overstated, according to a senior UK Government minister.

Relying on a comparatively good annual figure to show that oil could make people £500 richer is “misleading”, Chief Treasury Secretary Danny Alexander said.

Taking an average over the 12 years of devolution wipes that figure out - but would leave Scots just £1 out of pocket each year instead, he said.'

---

Yes, you heard it. A whole £1 a year worse off. May as well not hold the vote now

[ingemann]

Am I the only one seeing a degree of genius in this whole vote, by putting the vote in 2014 they ensure the government in London will play nice to Scotland, and not attempt to limit the local autonomy. So even if they lose they will have gotten several years of peace from Loondon, and the crisis may be less bad in 2014, so the risk that London will cut inn Scottish autonomy or budgets afterward will be a lot smaller.