Scottish Independence Referendum - 18 September 2014

[politicus]

Scotland is very different to Quebec. For a start, there's no language issue (and so no really obvious large 95%-No-voting demographic).

You got a Tory 97% No-voting demographic. You could considder them the Anglophones of Scotland (granted they are only 10%, not 20%).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It is interesting to me how much traction this is getting considering just how loyal Scotland has historically been to England.

This is a misunderstanding of the situation; Scotland was not an English possession but joined the Union as a comparatively equal partner ('comparatively' due to the vast population disparity). The old ideology of Scottish Unionism was effectively a form of Scottish Nationalism; by being united with England, Scotland could benefit from the growth of Empire (and indeed it did so disproportionately). Scotland retained (amongst other things) separate legal, administrative, religious and educational systems and also kept its monetary peculiarities.¹ Scottish interests would be protected at Westminster by a larger cohort of Scottish MPs than its population strictly deserved. Notably the Conservatives in Scotland were organised as a separate political party (the Scottish Unionists) until the 1960s. This system started breaking down in the postwar decades as the twin pillars of the Scottish economy (Empire & related sundries and heavy industry) began to crumble, while the political calculus was permanently changed by the discovery of North Sea Oil. The situation was changed further (if inadvertently) by the Thatcher government, which had a new and shocking lack of respect for Scottish interests.² This led to a crisis of confidence in the Union that has never really abated; devolution has not sated this - as was hoped by the Blair government - but probably made matters a good deal more civilised; Scotland and the rest of Britain have at least been spared the 1918 General Election in Ireland scenario.

<sub>1. It has its own banknotes which are printed by individual banks. In many respects Scotland feels like a palpably different country to England in a way that Wales - road signs aside - does not.

2. Or at least that was how most Scots saw things, and that's what's relevant here.</sub>

[Silent Hunter]

Scottish banknotes don't tend to be recognised in English shops, BTW.

[afleitch]

This led to a crisis of confidence in the Union that has never really abated; devolution has not sated this - as was hoped by the Blair government - but probably made matters a good deal more civilised; Scotland and the rest of Britain have at least been spared the 1918 General Election in Ireland scenario.

There's a crisis in Scottish party politics too. When Scottish Unionist dominance gave way to that of the Labour Party (not that Labour have actually expanded or at least until 2011, contracted in the geographical areas where it has been strong since the 30's) it was actually fairly seamless because strictly speaking there wasn't much between them. It was certainly less of a shock, though it's often forgotten, than the decline of the Liberals.

The problem today is a difficulity in determining what 'British' means in a political context. Labour were the party of devolution only in the sense they delivered it. Once they delivered it, there was a reluctance to do anything with it, even in comparison to the party in Wales under similar but more restrictive circumstances. Anything remotely 'radical' from 1999-2007 was thanks to the Liberal Democrats. The first sense something was wrong was the rise of the SSP even though it was a short lived experiment in vanity.

Now we have the SNP. On paper, they should be very easy to take down. They lack any coherent ideology or even consistency. You have the entire Scottish press at their necks to the extent the only cordial relationship they can manage is with the Scottish editions of the London press.

What the SNP does today, is provide a safety net for the Scottish electorate which allows them to wait for the inevitable sh-tstorm to kick off in the closing weeks and like fireworks going off at the factory, let their opposition burn out leaving the SNP blemish free. In the last days of the 2007 and 2011 campaigns Alex Salmond did something no other politician does; he dissappears. It's happening again, since the second debate some two weeks ago you've hardly seen a peep out of him. It gives his opponents the airtime and even sycophantic press after a while get bored of the narrative. So divisions are highlighted and so on. The close of the last two Scottish campaigns have seen politicians hang themselves by the rope he's left. It's possible it might be happening again.

[Hatman 🍁]

A slightly off-topic question for the Canadian posters:

What %age of Quebec voters support sovereignity now ?

It has fallen dramatically in recent years and now only about 30-35% would vote Yes in another referendum. The pro-independence Bloc Quebecois was annhilated in the last federal election going from 50 out of 75 Quebec seats in Ottawa to just 4...and then the PQ was crushed in the provincial election election this spring largely because people were afraid they would call another referendum. Its always risky to say "separatism is dead", but the conventional wisdom is that the whole Quebec independence movement is now on life support and is only a past time of an age cohort of baby boomers who associate with with their glory days in the 1970s.

Separatism was supposedly dead at certain points in the early 1990s as well.

One huge difference between the Scottish and Quebec referendums is the question wording. The Scottish wording is very direct, and makes independence clear. Quebec's question was very vague and convoluted.

Oh, I'm sure it wasn't too—

You must be logged in to read this quote.

wat

That's nothing compared to the text of the 1980 referendum question:

The Government of Quebec has made public its proposal to negotiate a new agreement with the rest of Canada, based on the equality of nations; this agreement would enable Quebec to acquire the exclusive power to make its laws, levy its taxes and establish relations abroad - in other words, sovereignty - and at the same time to maintain with Canada an economic association including a common currency; any change in political status resulting from these negotiations will only be implemented with popular approval through another referendum; on these terms, do you give the Government of Quebec the mandate to negotiate the proposed agreement between Quebec and Canada?

[afleitch]

For fun here are the polls for the 1997 Devolution Referendum

Yes/No/DK

19 Jun 72-22-6
22 Aug 72-22-6
7 Sep 60-25-15
10 Sep 63-25-12
11 Sep (Actual) 74.2-25.7

On tax varying powers it passed 63.5 to 36.5. The last poll had it 48-40-12

[Chancellor of the Duchy of Little Lever and Darcy Lever]

It is interesting to me how much traction this is getting considering just how loyal Scotland has historically been to England. Scotland has always contributed disproportionate troops in British wars, including the American Revolution.

As well as the factors already stated: at the time of the American Revolution, being in the British Army was the only way of legally wearing the traditional Highland dress.

Scottish banknotes don't tend to be recognised in English shops, BTW.

Depends where you are.  Places in England where lots of Scots go, like Carlisle or Blackpool, don't have a problem with Scottish notes.  You can get away with them at most places in Greater Manchester.  London and the south, on the other hand, doesn't like Scottish notes at all.

(Back in the mists of time, one reason why the twelve-sided brass 3d coin was introduced is that southerners didn't like the tiny silver 3d, although it was popular in Scotland.)

[politicus]

A slightly off-topic question for the Canadian posters:

What %age of Quebec voters support sovereignity now ?

It has fallen dramatically in recent years and now only about 30-35% would vote Yes in another referendum. The pro-independence Bloc Quebecois was annihilated in the last federal election going from 50 out of 75 Quebec seats in Ottawa to just 4...and then the PQ was crushed in the provincial election election this spring largely because people were afraid they would call another referendum. Its always risky to say "separatism is dead", but the conventional wisdom is that the whole Quebec independence movement is now on life support and is only a past time of an age cohort of baby boomers who associate with with their glory days in the 1970s.

Separatism was supposedly dead at certain points in the early 1990s as well.

One huge difference between the Scottish and Quebec referendums is the question wording. The Scottish wording is very direct, and makes independence clear. Quebec's question was very vague and convoluted.

Oh, I'm sure it wasn't too—

You must be logged in to read this quote.

wat

That's nothing compared to the text of the 1980 referendum question:

The Government of Quebec has made public its proposal to negotiate a new agreement with the rest of Canada, based on the equality of nations; this agreement would enable Quebec to acquire the exclusive power to make its laws, levy its taxes and establish relations abroad - in other words, sovereignty - and at the same time to maintain with Canada an economic association including a common currency; any change in political status resulting from these negotiations will only be implemented with popular approval through another referendum; on these terms, do you give the Government of Quebec the mandate to negotiate the proposed agreement between Quebec and Canada?

The 1980 text is longer, but it is a lot clearer what it is talking about. The 1995 text refers to so many things - and on different levels - that it is virtually impossible to figure out what it actually means - and it seems to be contradicting itself.

[Keystone Phil]

Scotland tie against the world champs in Germany!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It is interesting to me how much traction this is getting considering just how loyal Scotland has historically been to England.

This is a misunderstanding of the situation; Scotland was not an English possession but joined the Union as a comparatively equal partner ('comparatively' due to the vast population disparity). The old ideology of Scottish Unionism was effectively a form of Scottish Nationalism; by being united with England, Scotland could benefit from the growth of Empire (and indeed it did so disproportionately). Scotland retained (amongst other things) separate legal, administrative, religious and educational systems and also kept its monetary peculiarities.¹ Scottish interests would be protected at Westminster by a larger cohort of Scottish MPs than its population strictly deserved. Notably the Conservatives in Scotland were organised as a separate political party (the Scottish Unionists) until the 1960s. This system started breaking down in the postwar decades as the twin pillars of the Scottish economy (Empire & related sundries and heavy industry) began to crumble, while the political calculus was permanently changed by the discovery of North Sea Oil. The situation was changed further (if inadvertently) by the Thatcher government, which had a new and shocking lack of respect for Scottish interests.² This led to a crisis of confidence in the Union that has never really abated; devolution has not sated this - as was hoped by the Blair government - but probably made matters a good deal more civilised; Scotland and the rest of Britain have at least been spared the 1918 General Election in Ireland scenario.

<sub>1. It has its own banknotes which are printed by individual banks. In many respects Scotland feels like a palpably different country to England in a way that Wales - road signs aside - does not.

2. Or at least that was how most Scots saw things, and that's what's relevant here.</sub>

A lot of Scotland joining was because of their failure to establish the colony of Darien in Panama. They seemed to have picked a bad place; that area still doesn't have a road connecting North and South America.

[Harry Hayfield]

Scotland tie against the world champs in Germany!

That could make life a little interesting

[Cassius]

It also helped, that the Scottish Stuarts had ruled Britain one century long before 1704 (as the Welsh were proud of "their" Tudors). And Scotland was incredibly poor 300 years ago, immediately benefitting economically from the union. And that in the era of "the divine David [HUME]" England was intellectually a colony of his northern neighbours.

I don't think you can say that the Stuarts were especially 'popular' in Scotland; indeed, during the reign of Charles I in particular, they were (or he was) very unpopular (mind you, he alienated just about everybody in the Three Kingdoms, but nevermind...). Even the Scottish support that they received during the Jacobite uprisings (which did form the mainstay of them to be fair) was limited geographically (largely in the areas of Scotland where Catholicism was still predominant). Indeed, during the Rising of 1745, large numbers of Scottish troops fought against the Jacobites.

[ObserverIE]

Scotland is very different to Quebec. For a start, there's no language issue (and so no really obvious large 95%-No-voting demographic).

You got a Tory 97% No-voting demographic. You could considder them the Anglophones of Scotland (granted they are only 10%, not 20%).

A Scottish PQ analogue would be preoccupied with Catholic- and Celtic supporter-baiting and channeling the Church of Scotland's report on The Menace of the Irish Race to our Scottish Nationality. The SNP have made sure to avoid the paranoid stuff about McGill students taking over Francophone swimming pools that the Marois PQ were so fond of.

[afleitch]

It also helped, that the Scottish Stuarts had ruled Britain one century long before 1704 (as the Welsh were proud of "their" Tudors). And Scotland was incredibly poor 300 years ago, immediately benefitting economically from the union. And that in the era of "the divine David [HUME]" England was intellectually a colony of his northern neighbours.

I don't think you can say that the Stuarts were especially 'popular' in Scotland; indeed, during the reign of Charles I in particular, they were (or he was) very unpopular (mind you, he alienated just about everybody in the Three Kingdoms, but nevermind...). Even the Scottish support that they received during the Jacobite uprisings (which did form the mainstay of them to be fair) was limited geographically (largely in the areas of Scotland where Catholicism was still predominant). Indeed, during the Rising of 1745, large numbers of Scottish troops fought against the Jacobites.

Regardless of Stewart un-popularity, much of that became a moot point when the Commonwealth took the step of beheading Charles I without any discussion with Scotland of which he was also king. Again in 1701, the Act of Succession passed by the English Parlimant settled on whom should succeed Queen Anne, the eventual last Stewart monarch without consulting Scotland. We passed the Act of Security in response which was met by the Alien Act which threatened Scotland with restricted movement of people and trade unless we made steps towards a formal Act of Union. And so it was.

[ilikeverin]

Scottish banknotes don't tend to be recognised in English shops, BTW.

Depends where you are.  Places in England where lots of Scots go, like Carlisle or Blackpool, don't have a problem with Scottish notes.  You can get away with them at most places in Greater Manchester.  London and the south, on the other hand, doesn't like Scottish notes at all.

Well, if the "no" vote wins, you guys cut that out.  Very confusing for tourists.

[afleitch]

[Joe Republic]

What will be the future of the SNP in an independent Scotland?

[Thomas D]

Pffft...Drama queen.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Why would a boundary dispute of the Middle Ages be a problem today? I suppose it would be a bit of a bugger for the town's football club (who play in the Scottish system), mind.

What will be the future of the SNP in an independent Scotland?

They would attempt to become Fianna Fail Alba (more or less). Whether they'd be successful in that is impossible to tell.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Local news silliness.

[Famous Mortimer]

"No" will probably still win but just for poos and giggles, what do ya'll think the party system would look like in an independent Scotland?

[Јas]

I suppose it would be a bit of a bugger for the town's football club (who play in the Scottish system), mind.

Shouldn't be insurmountable though...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_association_football_clubs_playing_in_the_league_of_another_country

[afleitch]

What will be the future of the SNP in an independent Scotland?

They would attempt to become Fianna Fail Alba (more or less). Whether they'd be successful in that is impossible to tell.

The SNP will sweep all before it in 2016 but without Salmond at the helm (he'll find something else to do) Nicola Sturgeon will lead and become the first FM. It will have a dominant hand in shaping the country. It will probably win in 2021. You're probably right that they will try and be a Scottish 'Fianna Fail'. One party always dominates Scotland and it has shifted from the early 20th Century from Liberal to Unionist to Labour and potentially now to the SNP. If the party holds together it may dominate politics for a generation. The electoral system however might make it the largest party, but the other parties can challenge if they come together.

Labour will suffer in the short term. Lamont will go. The Holyrood wing and the Westminster wing hate each other and will jostle for influence (and seats) in the 2016 election. Might do worse than they did in 2011. After that point, I think they will pick up. However in order to challenge the SNP they might find themselves having to go into some sort of coalition with the Conservatives (think Fine Gael/Labour but reversed in strength) and smaller liberal/green parties. I used to think the SNP would take their place to Labour's right post independence but I think they might sit more socially 'left' initially.

The Liberal Democrats start at such a low point that they will rebrand. Might stumble on for a few elections but given that their vote moved en masse to the SNP in 2011 and probably won't come back, the party might fold.

The Conservatives will get over the result; Ruth Davidson will step aside for Murdo Fraser and position themselves into the biggest cheerleader for the free market and probably become a little more socially conservative. Might actually start to recover.

The Greens will have a good election in 2016 but will remain a hostage to the fortunes of the larger parties.

Tommy Sheridan will be back. We'd see how long he lasts.

[Tender Branson]

The September-surprise:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29108010

[Keystone Phil]

The September-surprise:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29108010

Yeah, this is actually insulting now. I hope there is massive backlash.