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

421–430 of 745 posts

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#421

Post by ben_w »

veltas wrote: post #163
aerique wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if Scottish "remain" voters hadn't turned out?

...no difference to the result, but big difference to the interpretation (as it would be for leavers not turning out). My point is just that Scotland isn't one person, there were plenty of leavers there.

This is why, despite my reaction to Brexit (plus some other things) being to move from the UK to Berlin, I never really bought into the idea of a second referendum — even when broken down to individual constituencies, most were evenly split and relatively few were decisive either way.

(I did put my name to a few of the relevant post referendum petitions, but as a way to signal my opinions — it was already clear to me that the government doesn’t really listen to any of the petitions).

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#422

Post by true_religion »

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…

The refugee crisis is a global issue, and it shouldn’t be left to any single country to shoulder the burden simply because it is the first port of a refugees arrival.

Rwanda is a country with a recent successful history of rehabilitating refugees, and the president reached out to offer a home to those who need it.

For geography alone, the UK would be a better destination for the flood of Ukrainian refugees coming in, where as African asylum seekers would be better served by a country close to home.

As a member of an ECOWAS county, I’m happy to see that once again counties on the African continent are handling their own refugee situation. Immediately post WW2, this was more common practice and it lead to deeper economic and social ties between the counties of my region.

Our stepping to perform a social good is in no way a support of right wing sentiment.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#423

Post by triceratops »

rayiner wrote: post #304
scott_w wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our Home Secretary has just instituted an illegal policy of deporting African and Asian refugees to Rwanda. Irrespective of the colour of her skin, her actions are those of the far right.

Her views on immigration are indistinguishable from those of most people in India or Bangladesh. They’d do the same thing if the shoe were on the other foot. And those are definitely not “far right” countries.

There's plenty who think India has drifted to the far-right in the past decade.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#424

Post by randomsearch »

Veen wrote: post #286
cstross wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> While since 2017, England has increasingly drifted towards the far right. I suppose it depends on your definition of “far,” but from an English perspective this seems like nonsense.

The Economist recently described English political views as "nasty". _The Economist_.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#425

Post by jenscow »

maratc wrote: post #360

> But the point is this: in an independent Scotland, crucial decision-making power will rest with the people who live here – not with Westminster governments that do not command the support of people in Scotland, and which pursue policies, for example, Brexit, that are deeply damaging to Scotland's interests. So, the Scots don't want that the people who make the decisions would be in Westminster — they want the peopl…

There are at least 2 factors you miss:

- The EU would have less of an influence than Westminster does. - The people of Scotland believe their desires are more aligned with those of other countries, than with England.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#426

Post by physicsguy »

manmal wrote: post #87
physicsguy wrote: post #46

With hard headed view, I struggle to see that an independent Scotland will be economically able to deal with large cuts to public sector spending that would almost certainly be required. Per capita spending is already higher in Scotland than in the rest of the UK. Scottish companies have debts denominated in pounds. There would almost certainly be capital flight to rUK. Large businesses may relocate. There is no plan…

Would it not be appealing for the English financial sector to move to Scotland if it’s part of the EU?

Scotland likely won't be part of the EU on an exit from the UK. If a country wanted to move to the EU, why move to a country that's just undergone an economic shock, and with new political divisions forming as competing visions of the future and huge uncertainty, rather than move to Ireland which is relatively stable politically and also has English as the working language, and a much larger existing financial sector?

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#427

Post by mschuster91 »

iso1631 wrote: post #367
mschuster91 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 burni…

They haven't been for the last 10 to 15 years. https://www.statista.com/statistics/350890/united-kingdom-uk...

Yes, but that was a time where cheap oil from Russia and Saudi-Arabia was plentiful. Scotland as an EU member however could be sold to the public as a better choice than a warmonger and a dictatorship.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#428

Post by brnt »

easytiger wrote: post #13
ivolimmen wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Dutch and EU citizen I fully understand their motivation. I also regretted to see England leave the EU.

Will you feel the same way when the EU seeks the end of veto powers (as is currently happening)? https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/european-parliament-a...

Hell yeah. Single member states fucking it up over local posturing is a huge defect in the current EU. Getting rid of the veto is a win for democracy. The EU is getting better every day.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#429

Post by dubeye »

ciphol wrote: post #307
dubeye wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about travel, it's about economic activity. HS2 will funnel economic activity from poorer regions into London. Great for London.

HS2 will give poorer regions access to London and vice versa. Sounds like a good thing for the poorer regions

It will encourage residents of poorer regions to travel to London, thus would likely disincentive economic investment in poorer regions.

It would be better for the poorer regions to invest the HS2 money in local infrastructure and services.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#430

Post by DonaldFisk »

Emma_Goldman wrote: post #165
Gordonjcp wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (1) Scotland is more left-wing than the rest of the UK and its secession would condemn the rest of the union to indefinite right-wing government. Scotland's voters cannot influence the vote in England, under any circumstances. If you want rid of the Tories, you have to teach England not to vote for the Tories.

I have no idea what you are talking about. In the UK general election citizens of all realms of the UK vote, meaning that Scotland being more left-wing has led to comparatively more left-wing UK governments than would be the case in its absence. So 'if you want rid of the Tories', Scotland is a great asset.

The union worked well as long as voters in Scotland and England voted similarly, but that hasn't been the case since the 1970s.

Scottish voters only rarely influence the outcome of elections to the Westminster parliament, because even thought they vote differently, they only make up about 10% of the GB population (Northern Ireland has different political parties). Almost always, whatever the English electorate votes for, Scotland gets, even when voters in Scotland vote differently.

In the few exceptions where England voted Tory but got Labour because of Scottish votes, how was that fair on England?

Post reply on HN