Second Scottish Independence Referendum Is Go

[Zaune]

The BBC

Nicola Sturgeon has confirmed she will ask for permission to hold a second referendum on Scottish independence.

Ms Sturgeon said she wanted a vote to be held between the autumn of 2018 and the spring of the following year.

The Scottish first minister said the move was needed to protect Scottish interests in the wake of the UK voting to leave the EU.

She said she would ask the Scottish Parliament next week to request a Section 30 order from Westminster.

The order would be needed to allow a fresh legally-binding referendum on independence to be held.

Prime Minister Theresa May has so far avoided saying whether or not she would grant permission for a vote to be held.

But Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson tweeted that Ms Sturgeon had "chosen the path of further division and uncertainty" and said her party would vote against the request for a Section 30 order.

Speaking at her official Bute House residence in Edinburgh, Ms Sturgeon said the people of Scotland must be offered a choice between a "hard Brexit" and becoming an independent country.

The Scottish government has published proposals which it says would allow Scotland to remain a member of the European single market even if the rest of the UK leaves, which Prime Minister Theresa May has said it will.
Analysis by Philip Sim, BBC Scotland political reporter

Game on. Next week Nicola Sturgeon will go to Holyrood seeking a Section 30 order for "indyref2".

This part, at least, should be pretty simple. There is a pro-independence majority at Holyrood; the Greens should back the SNP, so Holyrood should return a call for a second referendum.

Will the UK government give permission? Technically, they could say no. But politically, it might be very difficult for them to refuse outright.

The real battle here may not be over whether there is a referendum, but when.

Ms Sturgeon is clear she wants the vote to take place before Brexit is complete, in the spring of 2019.

The UK government may well argue it should take place after that, so there can be full focus on the tricky task of Brexit itself.

There remains a lot of detail to be hammered out before we get back on the campaign trail.

But the first minister said the UK government had not "moved even an inch in pursuit of compromise and agreement" since the Brexit vote, which saw Scotland vote by 62% to 38% to remain the EU while the UK as a whole voted to leave.

The EU Withdrawal Bill is expected to complete its final stages in the UK Parliament later on Monday, which would allow Mrs May to then trigger Article 50 - which formally starts the Brexit process - as early as Tuesday.

Ms Sturgeon said Scotland stood at a "hugely important crossroads", and insisted she would continue to attempt to reach a compromise with the UK government.

But she added: "I will take the steps necessary now to make sure that Scotland will have a choice at the end of this process.

"A choice of whether to follow the UK to a hard Brexit, or to become an independent country able to secure a real partnership of equals with the rest of the UK and our own relationship with Europe."

'Beyond doubt'

She continued: "The Scottish government's mandate for offering this choice is beyond doubt.

"So next week I will seek the approval of the Scottish Parliament to open discussions with the UK government on the details of a Section 30 order - the procedure that will enable the Scottish Parliament to legislate for an independence referendum."

Ms Sturgeon said it was "important that Scotland is able to exercise the right to choose our own future at a time when the options are clearer than they are now, but before it is too late to decide on our own path."

She said that the detailed arrangements for a referendum - including its timing - should be for the Scottish Parliament to decide.

But she said it was important to be "frank about the challenges we face and clear about the opportunities independence will give us to secure our relationship with Europe, build a stronger and more sustainable economy and create a fairer society."

Responding to Ms Sturgeon's announcement, Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale said Scotland is "already divided enough" and "we do not want to be divided again, but that is exactly what another independence referendum would do."

She added: "Two years ago, 85% of Scotland's voters took part in the independence referendum and the result was a clear vote to remain in the UK.

"With our country facing all of the uncertainty around the Tories' reckless plans for a hard Brexit, the last thing we need is even more uncertainty and division."

Well, that was inevitable, I suppose.

[Iroscato]

Oh well, the union was nice while it lasted, I guess. Cheerio Scotland.

[The Romulan Republic]

Pretty much a given Scotland will leave I suppose, thanks to the British Right, and Pig Fucker Cameron's failure to keep his country in the EU.

And thus the trend towards a less united world continues. Yet, as unfortunate as I would find the division of the British Isles, and as much as I generally oppose secession, I can't really hold it against the Scots here. They voted to remain in the expectation that they would be part of the EU, and its Britain that chose to withdraw from the EU, thus presenting the Scots with a choice between unity with Europe, and unity with Britain.

[Thanas]

I am not sure she will win that referendum.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, I suppose that would be for the best in the long-run, from an anti-nationalist, globalist perspective. But if the Scots choose to put unity with Europe over unity with Britain, best of luck to them.

[Crazedwraith]

Hmm. So she's got to win a vote in Scottish parliament and then ask May's permission. And then win the referendum Not sure this is a done deal as all that. Looks like the SNP don't have a majority in the Scottish parliament either from a quick google.

I wonder if May will/can afford to just say no to this? It would play well with her 'will of the people' brexit rhetoric if the Scots are in favour of it.

[Thanas]

I think Sturgeon committed a grave tactical error which easily leaves her open to personal attacks.

That is, she did not wait for May to completely stumble her way through the brexit talks. So this is not a choice between two clear-cut evils, but a choice between "independence to apply to go into Europe" and "brexit deal". Instead, it is a choice between independence and the murky, nebulous future which might turn out bad, but also turn out rather well for the UK. I think she should have waited to present two clear choices.

Furthermore not waiting leaves her open to the classic attack of "well we don't know what will happen in the brexit negotiations, so why the rush?". It makes her look like she is pursuing a pet project over the interests of the country.

So I do not like the move. I would generally prefer scottish independence if there is a vast majority supporting it but I don't like the timing.

[Kinyo]

It's not a given that it will happen. Just that Sturgeon is going to ask the Scottish parliament.

While it might get through there Westminster will still have the final say and I can already see it being shouted down as "you want another vote so you can get the result you want." or moved to a time where it's less likely to favour the SNP.

I have no doubt that it's going to be portrayed as toys being thrown out of the pram.

[Zaune]

I think Sturgeon committed a grave tactical error which easily leaves her open to personal attacks.

That is, she did not wait for May to completely stumble her way through the brexit talks. So this is not a choice between two clear-cut evils, but a choice between "independence to apply to go into Europe" and "brexit deal". Instead, it is a choice between independence and the murky, nebulous future which might turn out bad, but also turn out rather well for the UK. I think she should have waited to present two clear choices.

Furthermore not waiting leaves her open to the classic attack of "well we don't know what will happen in the brexit negotiations, so why the rush?". It makes her look like she is pursuing a pet project over the interests of the country.

So I do not like the move. I would generally prefer scottish independence if there is a vast majority supporting it but I don't like the timing.

On the other hand, any English person with the brains to realise Angela Merkel is not secretly plotting to reinstate the Third Reich (and yes, I have heard someone actually claim this and no, they were not taking the piss) does know what will happen in the Brexit negotiations, in broad strokes: The Tories are going to fuck it up royally and drop this country's economy down a hole we won't be climbing out of for a very long time, then blame everyone but themselves. The only thing really in doubt is whether it's a "mere" nasty recession followed by another long period as the sick man of Europe or if we end up with an outright humanitarian crisis.

Either way, the longer Scotland waits to file for divorce the more collateral damage they're going to be stuck with the bill for.

It's not a given that it will happen. Just that Sturgeon is going to ask the Scottish parliament.

While it might get through there Westminster will still have the final say and I can already see it being shouted down as "you want another vote so you can get the result you want." or moved to a time where it's less likely to favour the SNP.

I have no doubt that it's going to be portrayed as toys being thrown out of the pram.

If they outright refuse to hold the referendum at all because they're afraid they might not like the result, Brexit is going to be the least of our problems.

[Crazedwraith]

If they outright refuse to hold the referendum at all because they're afraid they might not like the result, Brexit is going to be the least of our problems.

Government response on Indyref2. (Picture on twitter so I can't C&P)

Sounds like they're building up a justification for not having vote to me.

[Zaune]

Bugger.

[Flagg]

I know enough Scots (off board) that I hope they win. All the Twat-Scots (trademarked and copyrighted) I know are against it. I know correlation not causality, but fuck it, its good enough for me.

[Darth Tanner]

Looks like the SNP don't have a majority in the Scottish parliament either from a quick google.

The SNP have a 4 seat majority, but in terms of number of votes the unionist parties have a majority over them.

"you want another vote so you can get the result you want."

Is not a bad argumnet... do we expect votes every 4 years until the SNP get their way?

I think I agree with Thanas, she would have a much better chance at carrying it off if she had waited a bit for Brexit negotiations to go south... or alternatively the EU could be hemorrhaging Greece out with all her bank debts going with her by that point so maybe she is taking a calculated risk. I wonder how much oil revenue will get played on this time round.

Polling is apparently against her, post Brexist the No vote has risen slightly but its still very close.

[Crazedwraith]

Looks like the SNP don't have a majority in the Scottish parliament either from a quick google.

The SNP have a 4 seat majority, but in terms of number of votes the unionist parties have a majority over them.

Here's the site I looked at it. Looks like 63 for SNP and 66 for all the others?

[Tribble]

Just like the refusal to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty lead to an in/out referendum on the EU, refusing Scotland a second independence referendum when they made it clear that EU membership was a requirement for them to remain in the UK will just make things much worse in the long run. I agree that it's poor timing on the SNP's part, unless their goal is some kind of last ditch effort at derailing Brexit before it starts. At the minimum they should have waited until Article 50 was actually invoked.

Edit: Also meant to add that Scotlan'd chances of rejoining the EU by itself are rather slim short-mid term. Just like how the EU doesn't want an independent UK to be successful lest it serves as an example for others, countries like Spain don't want an independent Scotland to be successful lest it fuel independence movement in their own countries.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Looks like the SNP don't have a majority in the Scottish parliament either from a quick google.

The SNP have a 4 seat majority, but in terms of number of votes the unionist parties have a majority over them.

Here's the site I looked at it. Looks like 63 for SNP and 66 for all the others?

Not to be picky but surely the SNP have a plurality not a majority? Heh.

Anyways, on the actual issue, yeah "you want another vote so you get the right result" sounds about right. I mean, if the government caved in and said ok fine, have another vote, you'd have a legal challenge from Brexit Remain voters in about ten minutes saying "you let them have another vote but not us, fuck you guys."

It's fairly simple really, either we say "one vote and thats it" on every issue or we allow repeated referendums for everything. The government can't mix and match without looking like massive hypocrites, and god knows the Tories don't need anything else to look bad over.

[The Romulan Republic]

Their is no principle of democracy that says that an issue cannot be revisited at any point in the future if public opinion or circumstances change. Indeed, that's the entire nature of elections- you periodically revisit your choice of leadership to see if the people are still satisfied.

And I'm particularly sympathetic in Scotland's case because, while I do not personally agree with Scottish independence, they voted to remain in Britain under the presumption that Britain would be a part of the EU, and shortly after they voted, Britain said "No, we're leaving the EU and making a huge change to the system you chose to be a part of." I think that they have reason to want to revisit the issue considering the massive change in circumstances since the last vote.

[Tribble]

Their is no principle of democracy that says that an issue cannot be revisited at any point in the future if public opinion or circumstances change. Indeed, that's the entire nature of elections- you periodically revisit your choice of leadership to see if the people are still satisfied.

And I'm particularly sympathetic in Scotland's case because, while I do not personally agree with Scottish independence, they voted to remain in Britain under the presumption that Britain would be a part of the EU, and shortly after they voted, Britain said "No, we're leaving the EU and making a huge change to the system you chose to be a part of." I think that they have reason to want to revisit the issue considering the massive change in circumstances since the last vote.

And to be fair, it's not as if this came out of the blue - the SNP repeatedly stated that if the Brexit referendum was held and the rest of the UK voted to leave and Scotland voted to stay they would push for another referendum. The question was only when, not if.

[Darth Tanner]

Looks like the SNP don't have a majority in the Scottish parliament either from a quick google.

The SNP have a 4 seat majority, but in terms of number of votes the unionist parties have a majority over them.

Here's the site I looked at it. Looks like 63 for SNP and 66 for all the others?

Sorry your quite right, I looked up the wrong election round.

[Juubi Karakuchi]

It has been put about that the Scottish Green Party will back the SNP on this , and that the Scottish Labour Party have not been specifically ordered to oppose it. I only have one link for this at the moment; http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/st ... indyref-2.

The Greens only have three seats, but this will apparently bring the pro-Independence faction up to 69; enough to win it. If some of the Labour MSPs also back it, they'll win convincingly.

Also, Brexit activation has been pushed back to next week (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 27676.html); apparently due to Sturgeon's announcement. Theresa May is not having a good month.

As for how this will turn out; it could go either way. My instincts tell me Scotland will vote Yes (to independence), albeit by a small margin; but my instincts has thus far proven less than accurate. The main point in Sturgeon's favour is that, although the oil prices are not what they might be, getting yanked out of the Common Market is not in Scotland's best interests either. That, and Theresa May's talk of reclaiming powers from Holyrood after Brexit.

It's rather sad to think about it, but Scotland really has no good options here; only risky and somewhat less risky. Scotland is unlikely to get full EU membership straight off the bat, but the EU is still in a position to be generous. Staying, meanwhile, risks getting dragged down into the Hard Brexit abyss. Sturgeon is doubtless betting on it all going horribly wrong, and from the looks of things it's a safe bet.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Their is no principle of democracy that says that an issue cannot be revisited at any point in the future if public opinion or circumstances change. Indeed, that's the entire nature of elections- you periodically revisit your choice of leadership to see if the people are still satisfied.

And I'm particularly sympathetic in Scotland's case because, while I do not personally agree with Scottish independence, they voted to remain in Britain under the presumption that Britain would be a part of the EU, and shortly after they voted, Britain said "No, we're leaving the EU and making a huge change to the system you chose to be a part of." I think that they have reason to want to revisit the issue considering the massive change in circumstances since the last vote.

And that's fine, but completely not my point, which was if you want to allow multiple referendums, you have to allow it for every issue or for none of them. If we allow a second Scottish vote, you can bet your ass you'd have people demanding a second Brexit vote before the press conference was over. Hell, there was that petition with something like 1.8 million names demanding a second Brexit vote, and that was without any sort of precedent.

[The Romulan Republic]

That is a fair point, and I imagine that its probably a big part of why the craven Conservative government seems to be leaning towards not allowing a vote- because if they do, they'll be under immense pressure to allow a redo of Brexit, and that would make their bigot vote sad.

[Simon_Jester]

Is not a bad argumnet... do we expect votes every 4 years until the SNP get their way?

It'd be a good argument under normal circumstances. However, in this case, the British government took Scotland's 'Remain' vote, and then immediately turned around and radically altered the relationship between Britain and the rest of Europe, in a way that Scots opposed by a wide majority.

It seems fairly likely that had the Scots known 'Leave' was going to win in the Brexit referendum, they would have voted 'Leave' themselves. That given a choice between 'Leave Britain, Remain EU' and 'Remain Britain, Leave EU," they'd have chosen the former and not the latter.

So the Scots have a good counter-argument here, which is "you set us up to vote for remaining in the UK, then turned around and changed the rules about the kind of nation we'd be remaining in, overriding our votes in the process."

[Bedlam]

I'd say the topic title is misleading as it stands. As other's have pointed out currently Sturgeon has said she will request a referendum at some point In the future and she has no power to force one.

In general the split of independence / union in the population has remained at about 50% which is not great given it means you're going to have almost half of your population against you what ever way things go, plus the last figure I saw showed only about 30% of Scottish people wanting another referendum.

To me the major issue is that there is no actual evidence at the moment that an independent Scotland would have any ability to be part of the EU in the short or even long term. I can easily see Sturgeon basing a campaign on become independent and you can be back in the EU and then getting told nope not happening, come back in a decade or so. Oddly enough I don't think she'd then offer another referendum based on the last vote not being based on reality.

Plus, from my point of view, I've lived in Scotland for about 10 years but wasn't born here, you can't have referendum to split every time a section of a larger community disagrees with the majority. If Scotland as a whole decides for independence but a certain section of it, say Edinburgh, has a majority voting for the union does that mean that get to stay?

[Eternal_Freedom]

Is not a bad argumnet... do we expect votes every 4 years until the SNP get their way?

It'd be a good argument under normal circumstances. However, in this case, the British government took Scotland's 'Remain' vote, and then immediately turned around and radically altered the relationship between Britain and the rest of Europe, in a way that Scots opposed by a wide majority.

It seems fairly likely that had the Scots known 'Leave' was going to win in the Brexit referendum, they would have voted 'Leave' themselves. That given a choice between 'Leave Britain, Remain EU' and 'Remain Britain, Leave EU," they'd have chosen the former and not the latter.

So the Scots have a good counter-argument here, which is "you set us up to vote for remaining in the UK, then turned around and changed the rules about the kind of nation we'd be remaining in, overriding our votes in the process."

I don't think you can say the government turned around and radically altered things, there was a referendum on the subject. So the government (fools though they be) can say they're following the majority vote. There's enough to blame this government for as-is without adding "it's the government's fault we're leaving the EU" as well.