Am I Right To Be Feeling This Way?
Family Life2 mins ago
Boris Fears Democracy.......right Oh!
106 Answers
https:/
from the woman who wants to ignore the once in a generation referendum in 2014!
from the woman who wants to ignore the once in a generation referendum in 2014!
Answers
If she is going to hold a referendum she should be prepared to lay out for the Scottish population what it would mean if she was successful. For example how would she fund the Health Service, Police and emergency services. Where would the money come from for her to continue offer free prescription
15:31 Sun 24th Jan 2021
@17.02.Have you got cloth ears,jno.Sturgeon stated that the 2014 referendum would be once in a generation vote,Salmond said that it would be once in a lifetime vote.OK,though a generation down in slums like Coatbridge is about 14 years,that still means that the next referendum is due no sooner than 2028.Any illegal referendum Sturgeon tried to stage would be heavily boycotted and she would be left a laughing stock.Brexit,Covid,hasnt she got more things to worry about?
“ you cannot be more/less independent, you are or you are not”
Yes you can. We’ve had all this before with the naive view that “sovereignty” is absolute. It isn’t.
You can rant and rave all you like about Sturgeon, the logicality it otherwise of her position, whether you should hike another referendum etc etc but none of it addresses the reality that Scotland (and N Ireland) are less enthusiastic members of the UK than they’ve ever been.
Personally I’d like it to stay the way it is, but there’s possibly zero chance of that unless at least some effort is made to rectify that.
I don’t think the current PM is up to it but hopefully his successor whoever that may eventually be - is a bit better.
Yes you can. We’ve had all this before with the naive view that “sovereignty” is absolute. It isn’t.
You can rant and rave all you like about Sturgeon, the logicality it otherwise of her position, whether you should hike another referendum etc etc but none of it addresses the reality that Scotland (and N Ireland) are less enthusiastic members of the UK than they’ve ever been.
Personally I’d like it to stay the way it is, but there’s possibly zero chance of that unless at least some effort is made to rectify that.
I don’t think the current PM is up to it but hopefully his successor whoever that may eventually be - is a bit better.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Spungle - // Like some other "lovers of democracy", she didn't like the referendum result first time round, so is going to keep harping on for another. What part of "No" didn't she understand? //
To be fair to Ms Sturgeon - she feels that the circumstances under which the initial reforendum was held - with Scotland as part of the EU - have now changed, and she argues that Scotland is now not in the EU against the will of the majority of the population, and she feels that a new reforendum would clarify that fact.
She may or may not be correct in that assessment, but it has little to do with not 'understanding' the word 'No', and everything to do with wishing for an aclnowledgement that at that time, circumstances were funademntally different.
To be fair to Ms Sturgeon - she feels that the circumstances under which the initial reforendum was held - with Scotland as part of the EU - have now changed, and she argues that Scotland is now not in the EU against the will of the majority of the population, and she feels that a new reforendum would clarify that fact.
She may or may not be correct in that assessment, but it has little to do with not 'understanding' the word 'No', and everything to do with wishing for an aclnowledgement that at that time, circumstances were funademntally different.
jno
recent UK elections: 7 May 2015, 8 June 2017, 12 December 2019. Another one must be due any day now. So why exactly should the Scots have to wait decades rather than years? Different sort of democracy imposed north of the border maybe?
__________________________
Well I'm with Jno...although tbh I didn't know the Scots were barred from taking part in the May 2015, June 2017, December 2019 elections.
Shame on us.
recent UK elections: 7 May 2015, 8 June 2017, 12 December 2019. Another one must be due any day now. So why exactly should the Scots have to wait decades rather than years? Different sort of democracy imposed north of the border maybe?
__________________________
Well I'm with Jno...although tbh I didn't know the Scots were barred from taking part in the May 2015, June 2017, December 2019 elections.
Shame on us.
ich: "You aren’t seriously suggesting that the current PM will be in situ until 2029 " - Yes, he'll win in 2024, leaders tend to go when they lose or retire he'll probably retire around 2030 after wiping the floor in 2029 with whoever replaces Captain Hindsight after they lose in 2024. Perhaps you could outline a scenario where he wont be there in 2029.
Asking the electorate a question is being democratic. When governments lose support and are forced to set new elections early that is a democratic move, not a refusal to respect that they were elected for the duration. The electorate has and will continue to develop and change its preferences and priorities, respecting that is being democratic. Refusing to acknowledge a changing national mood is undemocratic. Polls are indicators, they can be wrong and then the voting results will surprise but the vote will not be undemocratic, regardless of whether the vote was called after a long or short period.
The 2014 referendum was only slightly more decisive than the extremely close 2016 referendum. The Better Together campaigners worked extremely hard to persuade the vote toward them and for a time it was distinctly worrying for them that a Yes vote might end on top. One significant part of the argument against independence has gone in reverse and in Scotland other "promises" are seen as having been forgotten or dumped altogether. In the opening paragraph of the Better Together campaign, it was expressly stated that of course Scotland could make a go of independence - there was no insistence that it couldn't but that Scotland would be better off "together".....as often as not because of habit, respect for the past.
If Scots choose independence in another referendum then that will be because they want it. It will not matter to them if Westminster does not want it. Democracy is not being served if someone tells people that they can't choose what that entity does not approve of.
An independent Scotland would/will fund its own societal elements, just like any other sovereign country. Within the UK Scotland will never be significantly different from the rest - the only way to improve is to be manifestly different, independent. To have a better health service than at present it will only need to improve it to reach, say, 20th place in the world - at that it would be measurably better than the UK's today. If Scotland simply dumps the UK's ways and copies what other countries are doing then it will be set to similarly outperform the UK on pretty much every socio-economic measure.
Why not choose independence ? I am intrigued by how these discussions on AB are dominated by non-Scots who are against independence. I would be surprised if there were not at least a very large number of Scots clamouring for independence.
The 2014 referendum was only slightly more decisive than the extremely close 2016 referendum. The Better Together campaigners worked extremely hard to persuade the vote toward them and for a time it was distinctly worrying for them that a Yes vote might end on top. One significant part of the argument against independence has gone in reverse and in Scotland other "promises" are seen as having been forgotten or dumped altogether. In the opening paragraph of the Better Together campaign, it was expressly stated that of course Scotland could make a go of independence - there was no insistence that it couldn't but that Scotland would be better off "together".....as often as not because of habit, respect for the past.
If Scots choose independence in another referendum then that will be because they want it. It will not matter to them if Westminster does not want it. Democracy is not being served if someone tells people that they can't choose what that entity does not approve of.
An independent Scotland would/will fund its own societal elements, just like any other sovereign country. Within the UK Scotland will never be significantly different from the rest - the only way to improve is to be manifestly different, independent. To have a better health service than at present it will only need to improve it to reach, say, 20th place in the world - at that it would be measurably better than the UK's today. If Scotland simply dumps the UK's ways and copies what other countries are doing then it will be set to similarly outperform the UK on pretty much every socio-economic measure.
Why not choose independence ? I am intrigued by how these discussions on AB are dominated by non-Scots who are against independence. I would be surprised if there were not at least a very large number of Scots clamouring for independence.
karl: " If Scotland simply dumps the UK's ways and copies what other countries are doing then it will be set to similarly outperform the UK on pretty much every socio-economic measure. " - you're deluded me old china. perhaps you'd like to address the points made in the BA?
How would she fund, police, health, defence, education all the free stuff she gets from the hated England? Build a border?
How would she fund, police, health, defence, education all the free stuff she gets from the hated England? Build a border?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.