Free Scotland

Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

"Should Scotland have the right to decide its own future?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Not sure

Results are only viewable after voting.
Brew_DD2 said:
In essence, yes. But you see, as a member of the EU you do still get to govern your own country, contrary to some of the nonsense spouted during the EU referendum.
Click to expand...
What you have clarified, for me at least, is that the SNP definition of self-governance does not match my own personal viewpoint - if a sovereign nation state accedes some power to a supranational authority then by definition it has lost self-governance, at least in part.

Now that may be perfectly acceptable to the SNP as a definition, I am sure there must be a different term applied to this type of governance - part self governance maybe? And the assumption is that those that support the SNP viewpoint also accept part rule by the EU (assuming that's where they are headed) and they don't accept part rule by the English as is now the case.

I am stating the bleeding obvious here now, aren't I, thanks for clarifying.

I would be interested in why the Scots don't think the UK Gov doesn't represent them, however I must also say that I think UK Gov no longer represents anyone in the UK any longer (if ever they did), UK Gov appears to have morphed, or is in the process of morphing, into a beast that is unrecognisable from any previous administration.
 
Stan's Brew said:
I am sure there must be a different term applied to this type of governance - part self governance maybe
Click to expand...

Call it what you want. I'm sure the likes of Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Estonia, Latvia etc. won't lose any sleep over what you decide to call their relationship to each other.
 
A party that is campaigning for such a change in it's country's position (either home rule or full independence) will campaign for decades and rarely desist.
The Irish Parliamentary Party campaigned for home rule from the 1870s till 1914.
Sinn Fein have campaigned for reunification from the late 1960s till now.
The Indian National Congress campaigned for Indian independence from 1885 to 1945.

I really can't see the SNP quitting until they achieve their goal of full independence.
 
Stan's Brew said:
I would be interested in why the Scots don't think the UK Gov doesn't represent them, however I must also say that I think UK Gov no longer represents anyone in the UK any longer (if ever they did), UK Gov appears to have morphed, or is in the process of morphing, into a beast that is unrecognisable from any previous administration
Click to expand...

I refer you to one of my previous posts. Pro-independence parties take up 80% of seats at Westminster with zero chance of governing.

As a contrast, the Conservatives represent 10% of the MPs that Scotland has returned.

England votes Conservative. Nowhere else.
 
Brew_DD2 said:
Some people think Scotland should govern itself, some don't.
Click to expand...

How can those wanting independence decide that going it alone is best for Scotland as @devexwarrior said earlier in the thread there are a lot of things that are going to change if they get their way.

I were a Scot I'd keep quiet and carry on letting someone else pay for Defence, Universities, Health etc but then I'm not Scottish
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Be careful what you wish for, lest it come true! The origin of this saying is Aesop's Fables, the world's best known collection of morality tales:tinhat:
 
Chippy_Tea said:
How can leavers decide that going it alone is best for Scotland as @devexwarrior said earlier in the thread there are a lot of things that are going to change if they get their way.
Click to expand...
Wot??? What leavers? Those who want to leave the Union, or Brexiters? If the former, then who else, apart from the stayer, of course? I thought the whole question was about who should decide what's best for Scotland.
Well of course things will change if the "leavers" get their way. there wouldn't be a lot of point otherwise. The question they have to answer is whether those changes are more in keeping with what the Scottish people want or not. And only they can answer that question.

I've just been giving the Act of Union 1707 a quick staring at and the whole thing appears to be a treaty to maintain protestantism and, from the Scottish POV, Presbytarianism in the face of some undeclared threat from Catholicism. This Act, with it's ammendments is still on force as far as I can see. Are we really so staunchly anti-Catholic that we have to legislate for it. I would have thought the greater threat today was from Hinduism.
 
Chippy_Tea said:
How can leavers decide that going it alone is best for Scotland as @devexwarrior said earlier in the thread there are a lot of things that are going to change if they get their way.
Click to expand...

That's if you accept the premise that Scotland doesn't/can't pay its way.

It's down to the government of the day to decide which policies to continue, and how to go about funding them. As it stands, the Scottish Government can make policy as it seems fit, but has to see how much the UK government is spending before it can implement in any meaningful way.

A topical example, is that the SG may wish to offer nurses a 10%, but unless the UK government increases spending, it's not something that is in the gift of the SG, despite health bring a devolved matter.

It's governing with one hand tied behind your back.
 
Last edited:
Stan's Brew said:
What you have clarified, for me at least, is that the SNP definition of self-governance does not match my own personal viewpoint - if a sovereign nation state accedes some power to a supranational authority then by definition it has lost self-governance, at least in part.
Click to expand...
It hasn't lost self-governance, it has laid aside a little of its Sovereignty. Most people do this, when we live in societies we agree to abide by certain norms or subscribe to the rule of law which limits what we are allowed to do. There's nothing wrong with belting down a road at 90mph even if it is marked 30 mph. It's just that we agree not to do so because it is in everbody's interest. Similarly with countries, we agree to treat each other's diplomats with respect and grant them some immunity from local laws, many of us join organisations like NATO which puts obligations on us which wouldn't be there otherwise, whenever we make an international treaty we lay aside a little bit of our sovereign rights, as do the other parties, to acquire the benefits of that treaty. The point is that countries can compromise and put aside part of their sovereignty to achieve greater benefits. They can also rescind those compromises. Members of the EU do this in the interests of trade, peace and unity. The UK has shown that this can be rescinded. No less so for Scotland.
 
Brew_DD2 said:
In essence, yes. But you see, as a member of the EU you do still get to govern your own country, contrary to some of the nonsense spouted during the EU referendum.

No hatred here. I grew up in England and certainly have no hatred of the English. It's a recognition that Westminster does not represent Scotland as it should.

And coming back to the question, of course there should be no impediment to asking the question of self-determination.
Click to expand...
Westminster doesn't really represent any, or at least many, of us. I'm at a loss to understand why they're still there at all.
 
An Ankoù said:
Westminster doesn't really represent any, or at least many, of us. I'm at a loss to understand why they're still there at all.
Click to expand...

I completely agree, but they are the MPs that have been voted in. An argument for fptp, but that's for another day/thread.
 
An Ankoù said:
Wot??? What leavers? Those who want to leave the Union, or Brexiters? If the former, then who else, apart from the stayer, of course? I thought the whole question was about who should decide what's best for Scotland.
Click to expand...
I edited my post to say -
How can those wanting independence decide that going it alone is best for Scotland as @devexwarrior said earlier in the thread there are a lot of things that are going to change if they get their way.

Well of course things will change if the "leavers" get their way. there wouldn't be a lot of point otherwise. The question they have to answer is whether those changes are more in keeping with what the Scottish people want or not. And only they can answer that question.
Click to expand...

So how are you going to pay for Defence, Universities, Health etc as Devexwarrier posted, are you going to blindly vote to be independent and hope they can sort it later or have all these details already been discussed so the move will be quick and painless.
 
Chippy_Tea said:
I edited my post to say -
How can those wanting independence decide that going it alone is best for Scotland as @devexwarrior said earlier in the thread there are a lot of things that are going to change if they get their way.
So how are you going to pay for Defence, Universities, Health etc as Devexwarrier posted, are you going to blindly vote to be independent and hope they can sort it later or has all these details already been discussed so the move will be quick and painless.
Click to expand...

Very much depends on what finances look like. It's not altogether clear what Scotland's tax takes will be once you figure in exports that currently leave from England, and oil and gas etc. The natural extension of this question is, "Can the UK government meet its current financial commitments should Scotland leave?"

Presumably if there is still a shortfall, taxes would increase (a power that the Scottish government doesn't currently have, other than income tax).

None of these discussions really answer the OP's question of "Should Scotland have the power to ask its population to decide on its future, and if not, where does that leave a union of equals and consent?"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chippy_Tea said:
So how are you going to pay for Defence, Universities, Health etc as Devexwarrier posted, are you going to blindly vote to be independent and hope they can sort it later or have all these details already been discussed so the move will be quick and painless.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to vote, blindly or otherwise. It's not my choice. My concern is to understand the status of Scotland as a country or otherwise and the extent of its democratic freedoms. I trust that he people of Scotland, if they have the choice, will make the choice that is right for them. It didn't get the impression that Devexwarrior had a real stake in the matter so I confess, I wasn't particularly swayed by what he had to say.
 
Brew_DD2 said:
None of these discussions really answer the OP's question of "Should Scotland have the power to ask its population to decide on its future, and if not, where does that leave a union of equals and consent?"
Click to expand...

I think the topic went off topic early on page 2 when Brexit was brought into the conversation it was never going to stay on topic.
 
Chippy_Tea said:
I edited my post to say -
How can those wanting independence decide that going it alone is best for Scotland as @devexwarrior said earlier in the thread there are a lot of things that are going to change if they get their way.



So how are you going to pay for Defence, Universities, Health etc as Devexwarrier posted, are you going to blindly vote to be independent and hope they can sort it later or have all these details already been discussed so the move will be quick and painless.
Click to expand...
How do other comparably sized/populated countries manage? Particularly those who don't have the resources that Scotland has?

Why is Scotland uniquely set up as a small country that cannot possibly function on its own?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top