Scottish Independence
And, Biggus, as with all "first past the post" votes, those percentages could be the result of, say 50% of those eligible casting a vote - in no way representative of the whole population (so 25.0001% could decide the fate of a nation) - before anyone gets all het up, this is only illustrative of the vagaries of the voting system.
Going back into recent history in 1979 there was a a referendum in Scotland on the 1978 Scotland Act. This act would have given Scotland much of the powers that it has now. The requirement then was that at least 40% of the TOTAL registered voters in Scotland had to agree to the Act to make it law. In the end around 60% of the voters voted and of those just over 51% voted for the Act. This did not met the 40% of the voting role requirement so Scottish self-rule went on the back burner for a decade.
The 40% rule meant that if you could not be bothered to vote then it was effectively a 'NO' vote; something a lot of people took advantage of. In theory if those people had got off their backsides and voted 'NO' then a majority in favour of the Act would not have been achieved.
Because of the way the then Labour government had organised it they lost the support of the few SNP MPs in Parliament and the Callaghan government fell; and was replaced by Maggie Thatcher.
The 40% rule meant that if you could not be bothered to vote then it was effectively a 'NO' vote; something a lot of people took advantage of. In theory if those people had got off their backsides and voted 'NO' then a majority in favour of the Act would not have been achieved.
Because of the way the then Labour government had organised it they lost the support of the few SNP MPs in Parliament and the Callaghan government fell; and was replaced by Maggie Thatcher.
UK Govt are going to be caught out if Scotland votes for Independence and they try and worm their way out of it or attempt qualification of it.
Can see many countries petitioning United Nations to get involved in ensuring that a fair vote occurs and that United Nations has monitors in place.......oh the ignominy of it as Scotland petitions UN to protect it.
I reckon that UK security services and their cohorts will be spending billions in trying to ensure there is a no vote and these guys will play it as normal.
Can see many countries petitioning United Nations to get involved in ensuring that a fair vote occurs and that United Nations has monitors in place.......oh the ignominy of it as Scotland petitions UN to protect it.
I reckon that UK security services and their cohorts will be spending billions in trying to ensure there is a no vote and these guys will play it as normal.
Could I suggest that what is going to give Herr Salmond a yes vote is complacency on the part of all those who believe the theory that only 38% of Scots want it!
That complacency will lead to a low turnout at the polls and the yes vote will win the day!! Especially if you allow 16 and 17 year olds to vote!!
That complacency will lead to a low turnout at the polls and the yes vote will win the day!! Especially if you allow 16 and 17 year olds to vote!!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Age: 32
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am totally opposed to a potential break up of the United Kingdom, I do however believe the Scottish should be able to decide their own future.
Although a referendum on Scottish independence is sought. I also believe a UK wide referendum should take place as both acts of Union would have to be amended. Scottish Independence would technically mean English Independence as well. Surely the English have a say in that?
The reason being is that everything from National Debt, Government assets, armed forces and resources would have to be divided and would have a great effect on all sides and that is only the top of the iceberg.
JMO
Although a referendum on Scottish independence is sought. I also believe a UK wide referendum should take place as both acts of Union would have to be amended. Scottish Independence would technically mean English Independence as well. Surely the English have a say in that?
The reason being is that everything from National Debt, Government assets, armed forces and resources would have to be divided and would have a great effect on all sides and that is only the top of the iceberg.
JMO
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Salmond's not daft.
There will be two papers:
Paper One.: Independence- yes or no?
Paper Two: Devolution max- yes or no?
There will be two papers:
Paper One.: Independence- yes or no?
Paper Two: Devolution max- yes or no?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FE21 - Totally concur - especially since the Union was forged by a Scottish King - Something that the the Hard-line "Patriots" Forget up here.
Regal union wasn't a new concept either. That claim belongs to Edward I; who almost succeeded.
Contrary to what you've apparently read in the Record, political union wasn't down to James, but to his great-granddaughter Anne, the last Stuart monarch, and she, unlike her continental-based Stuart cousins, didn't even bother to get her fat backside up the Great North Road to set foot in the Kingdom of Scotland; either side of 1707.
All that aside, I'll look forward to the current Queen taking the opportunity, when she addresses the UK Parliament in a few short weeks, to say how those in Scotland would be ill-served by voting for independence. Whilst respecting the individual, if not the institution, I'm afraid M'am that this particular Subject will likely disagree.
All that aside, I'll look forward to the current Queen taking the opportunity, when she addresses the UK Parliament in a few short weeks, to say how those in Scotland would be ill-served by voting for independence.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone's been taking their history lessons from the pages of the Daily Record.
Union of the Crowns - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ok its wiki but more informative than the Daily Social Diatribe
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rab-k, I would have thought it most unlikely that she would say any such thing, regardless (as usual when acting in a constitutional capacity) of her own opinions on the matter.
The problems of progress, the complexities of modern administration, the feeling that Metropolitan Government is too remote from the lives of ordinary men and women, these among other things have helped to revive an awareness of historic national identities in these Islands.
They provide the background for the continuing and keen discussion of proposals for devolution to Scotland and Wales within the United Kingdom. I number Kings and Queens of England and of Scotland, and Princes of Wales among my ancestors and so I can readily understand these aspirations.
But I cannot forget that I was crowned Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Perhaps this Jubilee is a time to remind ourselves of the benefits which union has conferred, at home and in our international dealings, on the inhabitants of all parts of this United Kingdom.
They provide the background for the continuing and keen discussion of proposals for devolution to Scotland and Wales within the United Kingdom. I number Kings and Queens of England and of Scotland, and Princes of Wales among my ancestors and so I can readily understand these aspirations.
But I cannot forget that I was crowned Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Perhaps this Jubilee is a time to remind ourselves of the benefits which union has conferred, at home and in our international dealings, on the inhabitants of all parts of this United Kingdom.
I thought it was the demise of the politcal union we were discussing, not the regal union. All that might change in that respect is that HMQ would be known here as Elizabeth, Queen of Scots. (A term already used by the then Sir David, now Lord, Steel to address Her Majesty, in person, at the 1999 opening of the Scottish Parliament).
None but a blockhead
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London, UK
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HMQ would probably be known as Elizabeth the Second and First, much as James was the Sixth and First. There are those who say she should have been anyway.
But what of the British coat of arms? And will the Scots keep their unicorn? And will we reinstate that verse with Marshal Wade to the National Anthem?
It's all very worrying. We should get some brand experts in from Hoxton.
But what of the British coat of arms? And will the Scots keep their unicorn? And will we reinstate that verse with Marshal Wade to the National Anthem?
It's all very worrying. We should get some brand experts in from Hoxton.
From the Wiki on the Sturgeon:
From this:
to this:
I expect Nicola will prove rather more adaptable; she's a clever political performer.
Through shifting priorities postwar, the Sturgeon was redesigned first into a target tug and then later as a prototype anti-submarine aircraft. The many modifications that resulted turned the promising design into a hapless and grotesque-looking hybrid.
to this:
I expect Nicola will prove rather more adaptable; she's a clever political performer.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hampshire physically; Perthshire and Pembrokeshire mentally.
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contrary to what you've apparently read in the Record, political union wasn't down to James, but to his great-granddaughter Anne, the last Stuart monarch, and she, unlike her continental-based Stuart cousins, didn't even bother to get her fat backside up the Great North Road to set foot in the Kingdom of Scotland; either side of 1707.