Westminster's attention heads north again

Nigel Percival Snodgrass

Oh dear, The English do seem to be in a bit of a strop. Oh my ! All their former girlfriends are leaving them. India, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Canada and now Scotland. What ever next ? At least the Falkland islands have not walked out on you and are there to keep you company.

Jeremy

1.

In my view, the Scots will vote for their own interest, which means a 'Yes' to either the Union or 'devo-max', depending upon which they're offered. I do not think they will vote for independence, and I do not think they should be offered 'devo-max' without sacrificing a good deal of their influence over England, and such moneys and advantages as they may receive by it.

Jeremy

2.

James Forsyth:

"Quite what the coalition will do if Salmond goes ahead with his own referendum on devo max remains to be seen. I suspect that Salmond's ideal result would be the surpeme court in London stopping a Scottish referendum. This would allow him to fan the flames of nationalism..."

I really do not think that Westminster should be too afraid of Mr Salmond's tub thumping and flame-fanning. In that last regard, he is already a pyromaniac and I cannot see that changing, whatever the case.

Jeremy

3.

My understanding is that only Westminster has the constitutional right to authorise a legal and binding referendum. I dare say that Mr Salmond knows this, too. Therefore he knows that any attempt by him to organise a referendum would be illegal and should, I think, be treated as such. Besides which, the fairness and honesty of any referendum organised by Mr Salmond would not be overseen by the Electoral Commission, and I dare say that it might well include the sight of unknowing infants in their swaddling clothes being carried to the booths by nationalistic parents in order to have their vote cast for them. Mr Salmond does not strike me as being a particularly scrupulous individual.

This absurd pantomime really ought to be avoided if it possibly can be. And if that means banning it, then ban it

daniel maris

Jeremy -

How old are you? Legality has very little to do with this sort of situation. There's nothing that the UK government can do to stop the Scots government hodling a referendum in Scotland. It may not have legal force within the UK but it will have moral force.

WetherspoonThree

No, you are absolutely right James.

Before any referendum takes place, the Scots should be aware that all the bribes we currently pay, all the special measures, the gerrymandering - all designed to secure continued support for Westminster and the monarchy but at significant cost and disadvantage to the rest of the Union . All will be removed, whether or not the Scots decide to vote for independence. Wouldn't that be honest thing to do?

Fergus Pickering

I think the Scots should go their own way. They would lose that ridiculous chip they have on their shoulder and the English and the Scots could speak civilly to one another. They surely cannot prefer to consort with unscrupulous foreigners whose languages they do not understand and who will have the tartan shirts of their backs. Look at what happened to Ireland.

ratzo

Moore faces a greater problem if he decides to put it to the Supreme Court because the government will lose (according to the most recent & authoritative legal opinion), and their attempt to halt in through legal process will significantly increase support for the yes vote, possibly to the extent of an outright win. So, a fatal mishandling of the entire issue beckons - which is why they're caving in to Salmond while pretending not to.

three lawyers four opinions

Herald reports today leading academic constitutional lawyers, 6 in number, at Edinburgh and Glasgow Universities stating Scottish Parliament has powers to hold a referendum on independance, as consulatative. Ditto for devo max I would think.

More brain firepower there than Jim "I cannae get the better of Salmond in the Parly" Wallace.

daniel maris

Fergus,

The sooner Scotland becomes independent, the more likely it is we can have an Atlantic Isles Union, with a rotating presidency. There is so much cross migration in these isles that we do indeed have plenty in common.

Kittler

Wullie Hague came out with an quote "In Europe but not governed by Europe"
Perhaps, "In Britain but not governed by Britain" could be agreeable to the majority.
Cameron could commence repatriation of powers to Edinburgh and any function retained at Westminster can agreed and contributed to on an annual basis.

ButcombeMan

Danile Maris

How old are YOU? Tactically you seem to understand nothing.

You say: "It ( A Salmond organised illegal referendum) may not have legal force within the UK but it will have moral force".

You are wrong. In the event that Salmond organises an illegal referendum, he may indeed whip up the "Braveheart" lower class uneducated vote, but the danger for him is that the educated Scots ignore such a call and ignore his pantomime.

A seriously low turnout in such an event would damage him and damage his cause.

Despite his wild rhetoric, Salmond is plainly much sharper than you.

He will not go for an illegal referendum because of the high risk of a low turnout. He might also not fancy the risk that some grand Scottish lawyer takes it upon himself to take action against Salmond for misusing public funds.

mac

I'm sure David Cameron will be sent home to think again.

Innocent Bystander

Following the SNP Landslide..... Michael Moore, the Secretary of State for Scotland announced on 9 May 2011,"The UK government will not move to block a referendum on Scottish independence... "The decision on when and if to have a referendum... is a matter for the new Scottish Parliament".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-13330641

So what happened to change that Michael?

John

This Union is a marriage. A national marriage.The other partner to the marriage, England,is now getting seriously cheesed off with being married to a longstanding greedy grump who is getting worse.

If the grump really wants to play divorce courts then two can play at that game. No need to wait for the miserable sod.

No reason why England can't have a similar referendum on the same matter on 9nth September 2013.

macumazan

Since we are talking about the deliberate destruction of the nation, created with the agreement of Scotland and England/Wales in the Act of Union, why not just hang him for treason?

Heartless Curmudgeon

North, South, East, West, . . . (although it seems the East is fairly quiet at the moment).

However, I feel 'it' drawing nearer and nearer : The Third Way, courtesy of the H2B and his pathetic band of incompetent place persons.

What, you may ask IS the Third Way? We never knew first time round, and we certainly won't this.

Nigel Percival Snodgrass

Alex Salmond, the Prime Minister of Scotland in waiting, has graciously decided to give an audience to here today, gone tomorrow politician David Cameron. Alex will have him jumping through hoops. Jolly good show, what ? Pip pip and all that !!

Mirtha Tidville

Or simply let the English take part in the referendum. Phrase the question how you want but at the end we would be rid of them....job done

Drayner

There is no chance of anything other than a yes no question on this referendum. And it's one that Salmond is going to lose and he knows this full well, hence his scrambling around trying to agitate for the devo max question to get support (by others)

He could of course hold his own referendum as long as he is willing to fund it like Strathclyde Regional Council did when they held an impromptu referendum with a deeply biased question on privatising the water supply.

Salmond has no mandate for anything other than asking a question about independence. He has no business asking anything about devolution unless he put it into his manifesto(which he didn't). We will now have two and a half years of this utter nonsense and we will have to listen to lots of nat cyber trollers sprinkling their love and happiness all around before they get rejected by the electorate on the only thing that actually matters to them.

Its going to be a poor debate by the look of it. Not sure what will happen after the referendum gives the SNP an answer they dont want to hear. And I'm not really sure I care either.

itsyourself

I suggest the other contributors read the articles by Alex Massie. They may learn something before making fools of themselves again. The referendum will go ahead and things will change. How much change depends on how foolish Cameron continues to be.

Framer

Cameron seems already to have bent the knee to the LibDems and Michael Moore on a referendum in 2014. That equals two and a half years of campaigning and uncertainty.

If the question is now for the PM to decide let him follow the Northern Ireland border poll example in 1973 of two unconditional options - either stay in the UK or leave. ["Do you want Northern Ireland to remain part of the United Kingdom?"] End of story. A Salmond referendum like the 1918 election in Ireland is the worst of all worlds, a result without legal authority which simply led to war.

John

A further thought. If England does have a referendum on independence from Scotland on
9/09/2013, Mr Salmond won't have to bother with his.

Siôn Jones

Drayner - I would remind you that your beloved Cameron and his Tory Junta have NO MANDATE for anything, but it doesn't stop then setting out to destroy all social provision that has been established in the UK since the war, and created a sort of democratic consensus that the unionists are now appealing to as a reason for retaining the union. So for you to accuse Salmond of lacking a mandate is somewhat myopic, to say the least.

Scotland are net contributors to the UK treasury, and no matter how many ill informed unionists bray to the contrary, this message is getting through to the Scottish electorate. All your English colonialist certainties are already broken and useless, it is just that you don't realise it yet.

Heartless Curmudgeon

That piccy . . . . I'm sure it's of a comedy duo from an old black and white film . . . Laurel and Hardy?

['Now look what you've made do']

Stuart McLean

The ignorance of the comments about the actual situation in Scotland is in a strange way comforting. the main stream media can no longer control the flow of information although it's lies and obfuscation of the facts continues apace. The truth is out there so all the misinformation shall come back to bite them and shall lead to the inevitable independence of this country.

Drayner

Sion, Salmond has NO mandate for anything other than a straight independence question. All your drivel and whataboutery isn't going to alter the fact that HE cannot be seen to be the one calling for devo max, it would leave the SNP in a ludicrous position. You know as do I, that Salmond absolutely needs the devolution question to be asked because he knows fine a straight independence question will come back with an answer he, and you, don't want.

Scots are many things, but they are quite conservative (small c) and the leap to straight independence is a massive one and its one that in spite of fundamentalist nationalists claiming otherwise, is not really capturing the imagination. Its difficult to see the nationalists coming from behind here to win the argument and win the day. Particularly when the bulk of the Scots aren't even listening yet as they simply dont care. Its two and a half years away and yet we are already at the stage when any utterance by anybody not wholly convinced that the SNP have all the answers gets rounded on and attacked. Or worse...branded a UNIONIST!!!!!!! omg lolzzz

There has never been a time in all my forty odd years when independence has ever been the favoured option. That isnt going to change in the next two and a half years especially with the tiresome attack dog campaign and mock outrage at the least wee thing by the cyber nat trolls.

three lawyers four opinions

Gosh, and to think a mere 6 months ago the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties had spent two decades opposing any referendum on Scottish independance with any question at any time.

Now they want to run one.

Drayner

oh my gosh there was never a party claiming it wanted be independent from the UK in a position to do anything about before. If the SNP want to go ahead and have a referendum then they can do it. There's not a lot of chance of them being allowed to rig it to suit themselves all the same. The stance they have taken now is in order to ruffle the UK government as possible and to make it look like the SNP are being denied whatever it is that they want. From being denied the chance to rig the question. From being denied the chance to have questions about devolution, from questions about allowing kids the vote etc etc. Its dull stuff that the Scottish population wont be listening to but it will play out well with the confirmed nats who will then claim as much mock outrage as they possibly can.

Two and a half more years of this utter drivel until we get the chance to give fat Alex a good slapping.

JR MacClure

So Drayner, when both the Labour Party and the LibDems CLAIMED to support the vote for 16 and 17 year olds, they were lying. Or is it only in the Scottish Independence referendum that "giving kids the vote" would be a matter of such horror? And perhaps you can explain how "Do you want Scotland to be an independent country?" is such a "rigged question". Funny, looks pretty straightforward to me but I suspect that is exactly what you object to. You're right about one thing. Someone is spouting drivel and it isn't "fat Alex". He's already given you lot several good slappings and I expect to see him give you several more before this is all over.