CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!


(9 posts)

No tags yet.

  1. nobrakes

    I was mildly pro union last time round but not going to make the same mistake twice

    Posted 1 month ago #
  2. LaidBack

    Tories lost much of the business community with Brexit too.
    Indy Scotland will have problems like anywhere else but don't see border question getting much traction. All countries have a deficit but resources here will allow it to be financed.
    The Tories have now made borders a norm and next year tourists will apparently need visas to go on holiday in Europe.
    rUK business likes selling stuff in Scotland and we like selling stuff there. So deal to be done.
    Plus common travel area was always there in the British Isles (even in Irish Republic where that term is not used so much).
    Breaking international law also an incentive to get clear.

    Will BJ call a GE before Supreme Court make ruling? Should the forum revive an Indy thread or is it too stressful?

    Posted 1 month ago #
  3. Yodhrin

    Don't know that he needs to risk it tbh, indeed getting his backbenchers fired up to push new legislation explicitly forbidding referendums that aren't passed through Westminster or even going full Francoist and passing a Spain-style "the UK is indivisible and separatism is illegal" law could do wonders for shoring up his support. Labour will support it of course, or just abstain to duck responsibility.

    TBH I'm starting to think the "the SNP would prefer not to deal with indy now either" wingnuts are looking a little less nutty after this, because it's a total own-goal to go asking permission. The Scottish Parliament should simply have used its pro-indy majority to pass legislation and dare it to be challenged - it would of course, and probably by some astroturfed proxy rather than HMG itself, but there was always a chance Boris wouldn't be able to resist and gift us endless headlines. Using the UK elections to seek a mandate(...again) is also a risky endeavour - there'll be a mass tactical voting campaign by unionists, they might even make explicit deals so there's only one unionist candidate in each seat, and even if the SNP win it handily their opponents will (disingenuously, given Westminster's steadfast support for FPTP) question the legitimacy of it.

    Posted 1 month ago #
  4. Morningsider

    Largely smoke and mirrors. "Publishing" a Bill means nothing - it is simply words. Until it is introduced in the Scottish Parliament it has no status. This failure to formally introduce the Bill could allow the Supreme Court to rule that any decision on whether the proposals fall within the competence of the Scottish Parliament is premature.

    The referendum date is set out in the Bill - again, rendering that meaningless.

    The fall-back position if the Supreme Court rules that a decision is premature, or that the Bill is outwith the competence of the Scottish Parliament, is weak. Making independence the SNPs only issue at the next UK general election may give some leverage if there is to be a Labour-led, rainbow coalition UK Government. That is not exactly guaranteed.

    Posted 1 month ago #
  5. chdot

    “Should the forum revive an Indy thread”

    No, that’s a standalone.

    “or is it too stressful?”

    Some people will find it so.


    that the CCE IndyRef thread was very civil.

    It wasn’t as - nearly - 50/50 in terms of ‘sides’ as the actual result.

    Some people said that CCE was the ‘best place for information’ and also ‘much nicer than some parts of the Internet’…

    Since then, CCE suffered some damage when a small number of people started arguing/fighting about gender issues, very much against the long evolved ‘spirit’ of CCE.

    I got blamed for not intervening soon/enough and for deleting some posts, plus for muting someone who appeared to be deliberately making things worse.


    CCEers can decide for themselves to contribute to this thread or not or start another.

    This forum has only ever had two rules. Someone put a lot of thought into writing rules with more restrictions/guidance. But in the end I didn’t think it would have made things better/simpler to moderate - even the most detailed rules are ‘open to interpretation’ - perhaps more so than ‘simple’ ones.

    SO 2

    Keep it in reasonable, whatever that is.

    Posted 1 month ago #
  6. LaidBack

    Using the UK elections to seek a mandate(...again) is also a risky endeavour - there'll be a mass tactical voting campaign by unionists

    Imagine that will be factored in. Lab/Con/LibDem better together mark 2 :-)
    Just like Bxt, the NI Protocol, partygate it won't 'go away'!

    Posted 1 month ago #
  7. steveo

    FFS. Not sure I can go through all this again...

    Posted 1 month ago #
  8. SRD

    MiniSRD already been voxpopped by STV.

    Posted 1 month ago #
  9. chdot

    “Not sure I can go through all this again...“

    In abstract it will be entertaining.

    Could run a book on frequency of ‘now is not the time’ ‘what about the border’, what about the currency’.

    All valid questions, but probably not as important as those who ask them think they are.

    Likewise ‘but Scotland couldn’t afford its share of the debt’ - depends who gets to decide which bit of ‘debt’ (compared with share of assets) is appropriate.

    More important is climate change, resources - who owns/controls etc.

    Not sure SNP is up to dealing with those.

    ‘Wider Indy movement’?

    We’ll see…

    Posted 1 month ago #

RSS feed for this topic


You must log in to post.

Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin