NPR

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:20 pm

Slick wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:58 am I'm not sure it would come as a surprise to many if Salmonds ego pulls down the whole independence surge

Seems he might not get a chance unless Swinney widens the scope of this enquiry, I can't see him doing that personally.

Why would he, Nicola's deny and deflect policy seems to be doing fine.

A question for both our rabid nats and Uber unionists - how do you feel about Scotland being referred to as a region of the U.K.?

I ask because I’ve been doing quite a bit of work with UKG recently and that is their way of describing Scotland. It was rubbing me up the wrong way anyway but yesterday they asked if I could ask a Scottish Minister to join a meeting and when I asked if they could provide a briefing paper to forward with the request their reply was “none of the other regions have asked for this”. I snapped back that Scotland was not a region and had its own Parliament and Ministers within SG, so could they send one. Didn’t seem to go down that well, but I can’t find any official documents about the phrasing.

Edit: I should be more explicit, this is in the context of other regions being London, South East England, North West England etc

I think its needlessly undiplomatic and simply incorrect to refer to Scotland as a region.

When making comparisons its apparently more useful to compare regions of England with Scotland, Wales ETC so I can see how perhaps the nations have become shorthanded into being 'regions' in this context.

A good example is CV deaths per 100,000 which I have being getting into on the other thread.

A raw comparison between the UK nations is


Wales 156.8
England 134.6
Scotland 122.4
Northern Ireland 96.6



But breaking England with its 56 million population into similar sized chunks (well actually mostly still larger in pop terms) is more useful and changes the perspective quite a lot.




South West 77.4
Northern Ireland 96.6
East of England 113.5
South East 110.5
London 120.7
Scotland 122.4
East Midlands 143.6
West Midlands 151.6
Wales 156.8
Yorkshire and The Humber 164
North East 180.8
North West 185.2

For me it doesn't bring an 'emotional' response because
a) I find the lack of provinces/state lines in England enough of a befuddlement
b) I strongly associate the word as a geographic Vs geopolitical term

Hard for me to get excited for use of the word in British politics context, as little seems to get followed through in these "regional divides" agendas.

The UK is made up of four constituent countries, plus crown dependencies such as Isle of Man, Guernsey etc.

There are regions within each country. The incorrect use of "region" in this case is just like the lazy synonymous/interchangeable use of England/UK.

tc27 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 9:01 am I think its needlessly undiplomatic and simply incorrect to refer to Scotland as a region.

When making comparisons its apparently more useful to compare regions of England with Scotland, Wales ETC so I can see how perhaps the nations have become shorthanded into being 'regions' in this context.

A good example is CV deaths per 100,000 which I have being getting into on the other thread.

...

A recent poll found that 74% of Scots think Sturgeon has handled the crisis well, whilst 64% feel Johnson has handled it badly. This is more than just raw numbers, it's about how the voters can relate to and can trust the FM or PM.

Like it or not, the upcoming elections in Scotland will be as much about this as any other issue.

tc27, I agree with that, I don’t think there is any malice in it but a bit of thought around it would see that it is needlessly provocative and agree with tichtheid just a bit lazy.

TheNatalShark, interesting points, for some reason it does get an emotional response from me.

I suppose it would depend on the context. Comparing Scotland with those geographical areas for size/population doesn't bother me although it's not the right term imo. Perhaps if I was subjected to it more it would

I think there are some in government who do deliberately use it to try and needle. It does annoy me, but I now have my colleagues down south well trained to talk about 'the regions and nations of the UK'

Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I work for a UK company and it has been split into North - including Northern England and Scotland, South, East West and London S/E regions for decades. Many other companies do the same thing so it doesn't surprise me that other do it too

westport wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 5:18 pm Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I work for a UK company and it has been split into North - including Northern England and Scotland, South, East West and London S/E regions for decades. Many other companies do the same thing so it doesn't surprise me that other do it too

I think there is quite a big difference between a private company setting up sales regions, or whatever, and the U.K. government using the terminology.

FFS.

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:27 pm

westport wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 5:18 pm Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I work for a UK company and it has been split into North - including Northern England and Scotland, South, East West and London S/E regions for decades. Many other companies do the same thing so it doesn't surprise me that other do it too

I think there is quite a big difference between a private company setting up sales regions, or whatever, and the U.K. government using the terminology.

FFS.

I don't. Some of us are not as insular as others.

westport wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:37 pm

Slick wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:27 pm

westport wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 5:18 pm Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I work for a UK company and it has been split into North - including Northern England and Scotland, South, East West and London S/E regions for decades. Many other companies do the same thing so it doesn't surprise me that other do it too

I think there is quite a big difference between a private company setting up sales regions, or whatever, and the U.K. government using the terminology.

FFS.

I don't. Some of us are not as insular as others.

OK

The Salmond/Sturgeon show has not really got much attention on this thread but I wonder if this is about to get a bit more serious.

The SG is doing its upmost to filibuster or outright obstruct the enquiry with the latest development being (I am surprised they think they can get away with this):



Which drew this response from a Angus MacNeil (its very rare for a SNP MSP/MP to criticise the party leadership in public).

tc27 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 10:48 am The Salmond/Sturgeon show has not really got much attention on this thread but I wonder if this is about to get a bit more serious.

The SG is doing its upmost to filibuster or outright obstruct the enquiry with the latest development being (I am surprised they think they can get away with this):



Which drew this response from a Angus MacNeil (its very rare for a SNP MSP/MP to criticise the party leadership in public).

It might fuck with the SNP a bit but it won't have much effect on the road to independence. The mistake so many in the media make is thinking that this is somehow solely to do with the personalities involved, they seem to think that the independence movement is personality driven. It's really not.

Biffer,

I disagree I think a lot of the support for the SNP and indeed recently independence hangs on the perceived credibility of Sturgeon (particularly compared to Johnson). Any development that could see her tarnished or even forced from office is relevant to this.

Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 10:51 am

tc27 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 10:48 am The Salmond/Sturgeon show has not really got much attention on this thread but I wonder if this is about to get a bit more serious.

The SG is doing its upmost to filibuster or outright obstruct the enquiry with the latest development being (I am surprised they think they can get away with this):



Which drew this response from a Angus MacNeil (its very rare for a SNP MSP/MP to criticise the party leadership in public).

It might fuck with the SNP a bit but it won't have much effect on the road to independence. The mistake so many in the media make is thinking that this is somehow solely to do with the personalities involved, they seem to think that the independence movement is personality driven. It's really not.

Not completely, no. But having a very popular FM helps, as having very unpopular PMs helps.

I know Unionists see this as a real crack in the SNP wall, and it might be. But with ordinary voters? Even if it was shown beyond doubt that Sturgeon did some really shady things, my guess would be that many new converts to independence wouldn't shift allegiance over it. It's well documented that women were less likely to vote Yes in 2014 and according to the polls, that sex difference has now disappeared - perhaps a lot of women who went from No to Yes actually think it would be perfectly justifiable to try and frame a male dinosaur with iffy sexual morals?

Perhaps this is the beginning of the end, and Scotland's Quebec moment has passed, to borrow a phrase from Fintan O'Toole in yesterday's Irish Times. But I personally think this shift is something more solid and resilient than a cause that depends on what its leader happens to do.

I think this might be interesting reading in this context - results from focus groups targeting 'Indy curious' voters:



https://www.these-islands.co.uk/publica ... eport.aspx

In Nicola We Trust

A very consistent theme throughout these discussions is reflected in the last set of quotes above – these voters showed near blind-faith in the fact that somebody somewhere must have worked out a way round all of these issues. Strikingly, this was often expressed as absolute faith in Nicola Sturgeon personally.

Nicola Sturgeon obviously thinks these things can be overcome / I’m sure Nicola must have other reasons, she’d just not telling us at the moment / if Sturgeon knows these figures, there must be a plan / there must be a reason, there must be a plan hidden away / there must be a reason why people think it’s a good idea / intelligent people like Nicola Sturgeon must have looked at all these things / people have looked into it, they must have worked out what to do

While this faith in Sturgeon might be seen as a positive for the independence movement, it also exposes a major weakness: support for independence is precariously balanced on the shoulders of one politician. What would happen if, through becoming better informed, these voters decided that their faith had been misplaced and/or their trust betrayed? How stable would support for independence remain were Sturgeon no longer to be First Minister?

Incidentally this chimes with the responses I get on here when I mention the issues of currency, EU accession, fiscal transfers ETC.

Not for nothing:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/190 ... nd-affair/

The rolling on of this suggests to me the best HMG strategy with regards to a second referendum is to string it along as long as they can, see if the SNP will start fighting themselves and people get bored of wanging on about independence (Quebec style).

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 11:27 am The rolling on of this suggests to me the best HMG strategy with regards to a second referendum is to string it along as long as they can, see if the SNP will start fighting themselves and people get bored of wanging on about independence (Quebec style).

That's what HMG are trying to do I think, but it is a double edged sword in that if it doesn't work, a yes vote in the future would be nailed on.

Just seen All Under One Banner promoting a new protest:

we will call a Protest outside the new U.K. Govt Colonial building at Edinburgh This massive “Overlordship” initiative will soon be occupied by 3000 staff over 7 floors of office space with 10 Govt departments within. This is one of several targeted protests that are coming

Morons

I see a few SNP MSP’s coming out against this as well now

tc27 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 11:03 am I think this might be interesting reading in this context - results from focus groups targeting 'Indy curious' voters:



https://www.these-islands.co.uk/publica ... eport.aspx

In Nicola We Trust

A very consistent theme throughout these discussions is reflected in the last set of quotes above – these voters showed near blind-faith in the fact that somebody somewhere must have worked out a way round all of these issues. Strikingly, this was often expressed as absolute faith in Nicola Sturgeon personally.

Nicola Sturgeon obviously thinks these things can be overcome / I’m sure Nicola must have other reasons, she’d just not telling us at the moment / if Sturgeon knows these figures, there must be a plan / there must be a reason, there must be a plan hidden away / there must be a reason why people think it’s a good idea / intelligent people like Nicola Sturgeon must have looked at all these things / people have looked into it, they must have worked out what to do

While this faith in Sturgeon might be seen as a positive for the independence movement, it also exposes a major weakness: support for independence is precariously balanced on the shoulders of one politician. What would happen if, through becoming better informed, these voters decided that their faith had been misplaced and/or their trust betrayed? How stable would support for independence remain were Sturgeon no longer to be First Minister?

Incidentally this chimes with the responses I get on here when I mention the issues of currency, EU accession, fiscal transfers ETC.

You see this in their latest party political advert. It is nothing but emotional Braveheart, "time for change" bollocks with no substance whatsoever. Their sole tactic seems to be that we are only doing shit because the English won't let us do better.

I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt for a few more weeks over the vaccine, but considering their obvious motivation to do it better than HMG it seems incredible that they are still unable to do so. It's astonishing that the BMA are now suggesting that it would be better and quicker for GP surgeries themselves to source vaccines directly. What the fuck is going on.

Blackmac wrote: ↑Fri Jan 22, 2021 10:01 am I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt for a few more weeks over the vaccine, but considering their obvious motivation to do it better than HMG it seems incredible that they are still unable to do so. It's astonishing that the BMA are now suggesting that it would be better and quicker for GP surgeries themselves to source vaccines directly. What the fuck is going on.

I completely agree: this race is decided at the finish line, not before. Hence, I'll reserve my judgement on the SNP performance until we're at the terminus.

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Fri Jan 22, 2021 10:28 am

Blackmac wrote: ↑Fri Jan 22, 2021 10:01 am I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt for a few more weeks over the vaccine, but considering their obvious motivation to do it better than HMG it seems incredible that they are still unable to do so. It's astonishing that the BMA are now suggesting that it would be better and quicker for GP surgeries themselves to source vaccines directly. What the fuck is going on.

I completely agree: this race is decided at the finish line, not before. Hence, I'll reserve my judgement on the SNP performance until we're at the terminus.

They're actually bang on the projection that was in the plan that was published and then taken down. That plan had a significant acceleration in numbers next week. So let's see if that carries through.

The European Commission has held talks with SNP ministers about allowing Scottish students access to the Erasmus student exchange scheme ditched by the UK after Brexit.

Mariya Gabriel, the commissioner for education in Brussels, virtually met with Richard Lochhead, Scotland’s higher education minister, to discuss potential collaboration on the scheme.

The meeting can be revealed as 123 MEPs wrote to Ms Gabriel and Ursula von der Leyen, the commission president, asking if there was a way to extend Erasmus to Scotland and Wales.

Signatories include David McAllister, an ally of the German chancellor Angela Merkel, and Radek Sikorski, who was a foreign minister in Donald Tusk’s cabinet between 2007 and 2014. The letter was drawn up by Terry Reintke, the German Green MEP, who studied in Edinburgh in “one of the most formative periods in my life” under the exchange project.

The UK will replace Erasmus with a UK-only programme named after the mathematician Alan Turing. Boris Johnson has said that the scheme will expand the number of British students who have the opportunity to study abroad from the 15,000 who travelled under Erasmus.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/talk ... -nbbdlbxjh

Scotland getting a visit from the blonde slug later this week
That should put 5 points on the pro-independence numbers!

BORIS Johnson is set to visit Scotland this week as he launches an all-out bid to save the Union of the United Kingdom.
He is expected to use the trip to make an impassioned plea for Scots to reject narrow separatism, and hail the benefits of being in the UK.
His rescue mission comes after Nicola Sturgeon dramatically threatened to hold a wildcat independence referendum without his permission.

SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Jan 25, 2021 1:15 pm Scotland getting a visit from the blonde slug later this week
That should put 5 points on the pro-independence numbers!

BORIS Johnson is set to visit Scotland this week as he launches an all-out bid to save the Union of the United Kingdom.
He is expected to use the trip to make an impassioned plea for Scots to reject narrow separatism, and hail the benefits of being in the UK.
His rescue mission comes after Nicola Sturgeon dramatically threatened to hold a wildcat independence referendum without his permission.

They just won't learn.

In the end it doesn't matter , the right to hold a referendum reserved to Westminster

When the request comes after the next elections to Holyrood , and assuming that the SNP/Greens get a majority , Boris just refuses - not the right time / once in a generation etc

Play the long game , hope the SNP implode .

Dogbert wrote: ↑Mon Jan 25, 2021 1:50 pm In the end it doesn't matter , the right to hold a referendum reserved to Westminster

When the request comes after the next elections to Holyrood , and assuming that the SNP/Greens get a majority , Boris just refuses - not the right time / once in a generation etc

Play the long game , hope the SNP implode .

I think that position will just not be tenable anymore IF the election indeed returns a pro-Indy majority. Constitutionally allowable, perhaps, but not tenable.

It will perhaps depend on careful wording of the SNP and Green manifestoes. Btu if they say that a vote for them is a vote for another independence referendum, to be initiated ASAP after the election (and something along those lines looks highly likely), it could be the legal argument that makes it too dangerous for the UKGov to deny S30 or challenge a referendum in court. The UKGov risk assessment would possibly be:

If we deny S30, get challenged in court and lose, the Indy movement will milk that for all it's worth in the referendum campaign as clear evidence the UKGov doesn't care one bit about what Scottish people want, and it'd be almost impossible to overturn the Yes lead in the polls.

If we allow another referendum, we undermine precisely that argument and then all we need to do is convince ~10% of Scots that independence is economically still a daft idea.

They might then just opt for #2 - but a lot will depend on the legal advice re court cases challenging S30 denial.

Legally there no chance HMG will lose in court if the SG tries to make it an 2014 style official/binding vote..ultra vires is ultra vires. FWIW I know there's a group in Scotland ready to challenge any bill on this basis in court as a private venture so HMG wont even have to get involved in squashing it (the SNP has being trying to draw them out with the Continuity Bill but the decision as made to keep the power dry).

Secondly an amendment to the Scotland Act would also settle the issue if necessary (Parliamentary sovereignty and all that).

What I suspect will happen is the bill introduced will be very carefully worded to make sure its not seen as an attempt to make the referendum binding or give it any legal standing - rather it will become some kind advisory vote - this may survive a legal challenge but will probably still be widely boycotted wont be endorsed by the Electoral Commission and LA's may well decline to take part.

Politically the logic for saying no is pretty clear - if you agree to a binding vote and lose then you are responsible for the most infamous political moment in this islands history. If you say no it may boost support for nationalists but its just as likely to see the SNP tear itself apart in factionalism. Remove the thin veneer of respectability and its really just the tartan UKIP underneath. Cant see the 'yes curious' segment of middle Scotland being to interested in supporting whatever emerges if Sturgeon is deposed.

tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 25, 2021 3:06 pm Legally there no chance HMG will lose in court if the SG tries to make it an 2014 style official/binding vote..ultra vires is ultra vires. FWIW I know there's a group in Scotland ready to challenge any bill on this basis in court as a private venture so HMG wont even have to get involved in squashing it (the SNP has being trying to draw them out with the Continuity Bill but the decision as made to keep the power dry).

Secondly an amendment to the Scotland Act would also settle the issue if necessary (Parliamentary sovereignty and all that).

What I suspect will happen is the bill introduced will be very carefully worded to make sure its not seen as an attempt to make the referendum binding or give it any legal standing - rather it will become some kind advisory vote - this may survive a legal challenge but will probably still be widely boycotted wont be endorsed by the Electoral Commission and LA's may well decline to take part.

So much for the Union of Equals, eh?

Politically the logic for saying no is pretty clear - if you agree to a binding vote and lose then you are responsible for the most infamous political moment in this islands history. If you say no it may boost support for nationalists but its just as likely to see the SNP tear itself apart in factionalism. Remove the thin veneer of respectability and its really just the tartan UKIP underneath. Cant see the 'yes curious' segment of middle Scotland being to interested in supporting whatever emerges if Sturgeon is deposed.

This misreading of the SNP and the current situation isn't new, and in many ways it helps the SNP's and the Indy movement's cause - if you don't understand your opponent you aren't going to beat them.

The Tories have been struggling to fill a taxi in Scotland for decades, Labour are joining them simply because they just don't "get it", rolling out Gordon Brown shows this, personally I have no animosity towards him, but others don't share that point of view.

There was an article in the Sunday Times this past weekend outlining what the UK Government's approach to the Indy movement will be in the coming months, it was all hardball - I immediately thought, "Well that's the vote won".

They just don't get it.

edit - oh and another thought which I forgot to add, UKIP were successful, very successful, they went from being the embarrassment at the back of the hall at the Tory party conference, handing out home-printed leaflets, to leading huge constitutional change, the biggest for nearly fifty years.

I just can't see a Johnson government under any circumstances agreeing to a new vote. I also think the pressures on the SNP will make them go ahead with something non-binding which will be disasterous for them in the long run and get really ugly for Scotland.

I am not looking forward to the next few years.

Slick wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 8:48 am I just can't see a Johnson government under any circumstances agreeing to a new vote. I also think the pressures on the SNP will make them go ahead with something non-binding which will be disasterous for them in the long run and get really ugly for Scotland.

I am not looking forward to the next few years.

I know and understand why the independence debate gets many people quite emotional but my single biggest fear is Scotland being stuck in limbo for a long time.

We have had the last independence vote which is very divisive, Brexit (divisive), COVID which will have a long term impact and no UK country has handled it "well", Brexit again (full effects unknown) and now the prospect of another divisive referendum.

Big D wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:15 am

Slick wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 8:48 am I just can't see a Johnson government under any circumstances agreeing to a new vote. I also think the pressures on the SNP will make them go ahead with something non-binding which will be disasterous for them in the long run and get really ugly for Scotland.

I am not looking forward to the next few years.

I know and understand why the independence debate gets many people quite emotional but my single biggest fear is Scotland being stuck in limbo for a long time.

We have had the last independence vote which is very divisive, Brexit (divisive), COVID which will have a long term impact and no UK country has handled it "well", Brexit again (full effects unknown) and now the prospect of another divisive referendum.

But to me that's why it needs to be parked for a decade. It won't happen, but for the SNP to say we are looking at a referendum in 2031 and in the meantime we are going to work across governments to get Scotland in the best position we can for it, would be great. Get the country into a strong position so that the indy precipice doesn't look quite so daunting, have a proper masterplan we can all buy into. As I've said before, I don't think there are many people who are idiologically opposed to Independence but it does seem like madness currently.

Slick wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:22 am

Big D wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:15 am

Slick wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 8:48 am I just can't see a Johnson government under any circumstances agreeing to a new vote. I also think the pressures on the SNP will make them go ahead with something non-binding which will be disasterous for them in the long run and get really ugly for Scotland.

I am not looking forward to the next few years.

I know and understand why the independence debate gets many people quite emotional but my single biggest fear is Scotland being stuck in limbo for a long time.

We have had the last independence vote which is very divisive, Brexit (divisive), COVID which will have a long term impact and no UK country has handled it "well", Brexit again (full effects unknown) and now the prospect of another divisive referendum.

But to me that's why it needs to be parked for a decade. It won't happen, but for the SNP to say we are looking at a referendum in 2031 and in the meantime we are going to work across governments to get Scotland in the best position we can for it, would be great. Get the country into a strong position so that the indy precipice doesn't look quite so daunting, have a proper masterplan we can all buy into. As I've said before, I don't think there are many people who are idiologically opposed to Independence but it does seem like madness currently.

But what damage will be done in those 10 years? Can we afford to remain in the UK for another decade?

Just yesterday Boris Johnson came out saying how unfortunate it is 100,000 have died of Covid but that they 'did all they could', which is demonstrable bullshit. Meanwhile it is clear they are equally inept at dealing with the Brexit they themselves forced upon us all. It is clear that the current Tories are really, really bad at governing. Or worse. The only reason the UK Government isn't widely seen as institutionally corrupt is that most Britons still believe corruption only really happens in countries full of people with questionable skin tones. Meanwhile dodgy PPE contracts handed out to clueless Tory pals and donors with no expertise in the area are directly responsible for killing hundreds of NHS staff over the last year.

I'd much prefer to force the issue now rather than aim for some undisclosed and unlikely consensus a decade from now when everyone will happily set sail on the good ship Republica Caledonia. Out, now.

If the SNP came out with 2031 as a date for a referendum then they could legitimately say that the "once in a generation argument" doesn't hold any more, others will say that seventeen years isn't a generation, but it's getting close.

...though I have to say I'm more with clydecloggie on this