Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scotland starts renewed case for independence

gov.scot

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 745 posts

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#271

Post by [deleted] »

brigandish wrote: post #110
Semaphor wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a third of those voting for independence also want(ed) independence from the EU Do you have a source for that? I only heard of the opposite, but that was mainly Reddit and HN where Europeans are usually pretty pro-EU.

No, because if I search for the polls that show it I only get results for this news! Sorry. There were a few polls that showed it at the time of both referendums, the BBC definitely covered it. If I find one in amongst the sea of bad search results I'll post it. It shouldn't be a surprise logically, as the cases can be seen as similar, but the media prefer the simple black and white cases so we're a rarely spoken of…

[deleted]

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#272

Post by patrickk »

refurb wrote: post #168
Jochim wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're also the Tory party of criminalising dissent, corruption, Russian influence, and offshoring refugees. The fact that homosexuality isn't as controversial as it once was doesn't preclude their authoritarian nature.

Are they pulling that “it’s zee Russians!” in the UK too? Seems to be a very popular bogeyman all over the Western world.

Seeing as London has been corrupted by Russian money, numerous Russians have been murdered/attempted to be murdered by the Russian state in the UK, and the current PM is the former mayor of London, it’s more than valid to discuss Russian influence in the UK.

Further reading: https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2022/mar/21/butler-to-the-...

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#273

Post by throwaway0191 »

mantas wrote: post #225
SilverBirch wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excuse me, but literally today is the first day that the government starting flying asylum seekers to Rwanda[1], and yesterday they published legislation with the intention of breaking international law[2]. They've also recently curtailed rights to legal protest[3]. The Prime Minister has a history of law breaking including illegally shutting down our parliament[4]. This government only got their majority when UKIP c…

Denmark's left-wing government is planning to send away asylum seekers too. It's interesting times when protecting borders from illegal immigration is seen as „far right“. It's not „far right“ rising, it's some people pushing Overton window extremely to the left. https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/denmark-talks-with-rwan...

[flagged]

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#274

Post by jagged-chisel »

brigandish wrote: post #150
slightwinder wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Democratic votes need the consent of the loser, not I didn't get my way so let's have another vote. That's only true till the situation changes. If the reason for your vote disappeared, then it's legit to reevaluate your vote. > a third of those voting for independence also want(ed) independence from the EU Which means two third, the majority, voted for the EU? Seems like a legit reason for a new vote.

Anyone can claim the situation has changed, every year. Life does not go backwards. I'm still not clear why that means "once in a generation" becomes "as soon as I can get what I want". > > a third of those voting for independence also want(ed) independence from the EU > Which means two third, the majority, voted for the EU? Seems like a legit reason for a new vote. Has that figure changed dramatically? Even if it ha…

Am I missing that a mention of "once in a generation" is suddenly such a binding statement that the speaker can't go back on it?

"What are the odds?" 'Once in a generation, I should think'

"Things went badly, let's try again" 'Can't! Once in a generation!'

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#275

Post by messe »

synu wrote: post #238
mnw21cam wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason for the "once in a generation" promise is that it is widely recognised that holding regular referenda on non-reversible decisions biases in favour of the non-reversible option. Let's imagine for example that genuinely 55% of the population want to remain part of the UK, and so remaining should win given a completely fair and accurate measure of the population's mood. However, every measurement varies for a…

Does the UK really run these kind of referendum based on a simple 50% majority? That seems like a recipe for chaos (if true).

All referenda in the UK are advisory, and non-binding. Parliament doesn't technically have to abide by their decisions at all, but it would be damaging politically not to do so.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#276

Post by k_sze »

cstross wrote: post #17
afavour wrote: post #2

As a Brit that didn’t want Scotland to be independent last time around: good luck to them. Brexit has shown very clearly that Scotland wants to chart a different path to England and IMO they should be allowed to do it. …just be generous to English folks seeking asylum from Tory rule, yeah?

For non-UK people: There are four nations in the UK (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland). But England has roughly 90% of the population of the UK. So what England votes for in an all-nations referendum, the rest of the UK gets. England voted for Brexit by a narrow-ish majority. But Scotland voted against Brexit by a huge margin -- 62/38, or approximately 3:2. Ironically, the year before the Brexit referendum…

During the Brexit debacle, I joked with my Scottish ex-boss that, one day, Scotland will leave the UK, rejoin the EU, and then reabsorb the UK. And then the UK will be renamed United Kingdom of Scotland instead of United Kingdom of Great Britain. He laughed.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#277

Post by netsharc »

happy_path wrote: post #101
eyko wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scotland can be independent _and_ be in the same economic market (ignoring UK and Spain willing to veto Scotland reentering EU out of spite / own political motives).

Spain will only veto Scotland if the independence is not agreed between the UK and Scotland (in the same spirit of Spain's opinion of Kosovo independence). Spain parliament is against unilateral declarations of independence.

> Spain parliament is against unilateral declarations of independence.

For background, it's because the Spanish government is afraid that recognizing independence movements legitimizes the Catalonian independence movement in their own country.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#278

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

SilverBirch wrote: post #128
carnitine wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d say post-Brexit England has drifted away from the far right. The whole EDL/Britain First/UKIP sentiment has only waned massively since then. The ruling government has not come close to far right at any point.

Excuse me, but literally today is the first day that the government starting flying asylum seekers to Rwanda[1], and yesterday they published legislation with the intention of breaking international law[2]. They've also recently curtailed rights to legal protest[3]. The Prime Minister has a history of law breaking including illegally shutting down our parliament[4]. This government only got their majority when UKIP c…

> I’d say post-Brexit England has drifted away from the far right.

> By any reasonable definition England is currently governed by the far right.

These can both be true, IMHO you're talking about different things - 1) the position of the electorate and 2) the position of the government.

And the growing gap between them.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#279

Post by mschuster91 »

iso1631 wrote: post #222
sideshowb wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the fact that Scotland owns the oil fields answer the economic problem, at least while everyone still wants oil? (not rhetorical, I haven't seen the numbers & I presume that's what TFA and its sequels aim to address, among other things).

Since the 2014 referendum upto 2021, total oil revenue has been about £5b, that's £700m a year Pre-covid, Scottish public spending was about £15b a year more than tax revenue. I believe the SNP position is that historical revenues should be taken into account for historic debt, but Scotland still has to convince the world to lend it a hell of a lot of money every year to pay for those services, even if they took all…

> but Scotland still has to convince the world to lend it a hell of a lot of money every year to pay for those services, even if they took all the North Sea old revenue (which seems an odd thing for a government with Green backing to be relying on)

The revenues from oil are going to be somewhat predictably stable for the next ten to fifteen years, there is simply too much infrastructure in Europe that relies on burning or otherwise using fossil-origin oil and gas. Banks and other investors can make an investment backed by this expected income.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#280

Post by dubeye »

swarnie wrote: post #259
dubeye wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I very much doubt many scottish voters will pay too much attention to the economics. Are constitutional referendums ever really about economics? Brexit certainly wasn't

Some really basic questions will need to be answered. 1) What currecny are you using? 2) Where is your central bank? 3) What debt will you be departing with? 4) What cuts will be required when you can no longer take 32bn a year via the Barnett formula? Just simple, fundamental things really.

They need to be answered at some point, but not necessarily before the referendum. Not saying it's a best way to do it, but it's the most likely way.

Brexit for example, was a referendum on a very broad question, the specifics were worked out afterwards.

But most likely there will be a transition period, where monetary sovereignty is sacrificed in the short term, to allow central bank to be set up and votes held on various questions including some you list.

Post reply on HN