ronmcd wrote:The Economist:

If a Scottish vote in 2018 would be unfair, then the original Brexit vote was unfair

Every argument Theresa May uses against the EU can be turned against her by Nicola Sturgeon

http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwo ... /te/bl/ed/

mrjonno wrote:

ronmcd wrote:The Economist:

If a Scottish vote in 2018 would be unfair, then the original Brexit vote was unfair

Every argument Theresa May uses against the EU can be turned against her by Nicola Sturgeon

http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwo ... /te/bl/ed/

Will come down to the media,

The BBC will be accused of being biased both sides , ie it will be reasonable neutral

Where will the papers stand especially the tabloid ones.

The Scottish Sun supported the SNP didnt it, bit hard for it to campaign for no for independence, Mirror independence?

Does anyone read the Daily Mail north of the border?

Byron wrote:

fisherman wrote:

“I will return to this parliament after the Easter recess to set out the steps that the Scottish government will take to protect the will of parliament,” Ms Sturgeon said.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/holyrood-set-to-back-sturgeon-in-referendum-ballot-bdghmf9nb

I'm a little skeptical that in the short term, she can find some way to alter May's non-commitment to a referendum. What seems to be missing is any grass roots public out cry, without which seems to contain the issue within the formal political arena, and for the moment at least makes it manageable for May.

How would you measure this "outcry"? Protests, polling? May hasn't given her response to the formal s.30 request yet, just chanted her vacuous mantra. We'll see what happens when she does,

Byron wrote:Regardless, democracy isn't mobocracy: now the Holyrood motion's passed, Bute House doubtless has its own plans. The motion opening with, and Sturgeon referring to, Scottish popular sovereignty may well point to what they are.

fisherman wrote:

I think the described pressure that can be applied on our leaders would be unfairly described as a mobocracy, as it seems to me that that can be a normal functioning process of democratic expression.

I am interested in how Sturgeon expresses that Scottish popular sovereignty and to see how that plays out, for Scotland is still divided on where sovereignty does actually lie, true?

ronmcd wrote:But then scottish labour seem to have no wish to save themselves from oblivion, so who knows ...

ronmcd wrote:

fisherman wrote:

I think the described pressure that can be applied on our leaders would be unfairly described as a mobocracy, as it seems to me that that can be a normal functioning process of democratic expression.

I am interested in how Sturgeon expresses that Scottish popular sovereignty and to see how that plays out, for Scotland is still divided on where sovereignty does actually lie, true?

I personally suspect that there will be rising disquiet in Scotland amongst voters both previously yes and no to the direction we are heading with brexit. How might that disquiet manifest itself? I wonder if the political parties especially the libs and labour in Scotland might recognise it, within their own ranks, and pushed by civil Scotland, and make it clear the situation of waiting until after UK has left is untenable.

fisherman wrote:

ronmcd wrote:

fisherman wrote:

I think the described pressure that can be applied on our leaders would be unfairly described as a mobocracy, as it seems to me that that can be a normal functioning process of democratic expression.

I am interested in how Sturgeon expresses that Scottish popular sovereignty and to see how that plays out, for Scotland is still divided on where sovereignty does actually lie, true?

I personally suspect that there will be rising disquiet in Scotland amongst voters both previously yes and no to the direction we are heading with brexit. How might that disquiet manifest itself? I wonder if the political parties especially the libs and labour in Scotland might recognise it, within their own ranks, and pushed by civil Scotland, and make it clear the situation of waiting until after UK has left is untenable.

If the WTO extremists are seen to lose, and a negotiated trade agreement prevails, then May is selling it as a win and will make for an interesting argument.

Nicola Sturgeon

There are days that are seen by history as truly defining. They shape the eras that fall on either side of them and come to be judged as the pivot points on which history then turns, for good or ill. Today, 29 March, threatens to become one of those days. I say threatens because I cannot pretend that I believe the triggering of article 50 by the prime minister is anything other than a sad day in the history of Britain, and the European continent as a whole.

I believe in the independence of nations – Scotland included. But I believe just as strongly in the interdependence of nations – the need for countries to work together to tackle challenges and seize opportunities that few can do alone. That is why an independent Scotland would always seek to work closely with others, across the British Isles and beyond. So it is the fact that 29 March marks the point at which the UK starts to turn its back on almost half a century of close cooperation with its partners on the European mainland that makes it so dispiriting.

[...]

Similarly, there has been no serious attempt to engage with compromise proposals that would keep Scotland – which voted decisively to remain in Europe – inside the single market. The result is that we must now ensure that people in Scotland are given a choice between the hard Brexit deal now being negotiated, and independence.

Scotland’s place in Europe was a central issue in the 2014 independence referendum. It was asserted by many in the “no” campaign that only a vote against independence would ensure Scotland’s continued place in the EU. How desperately hollow those claims now ring today.

The Scottish government was re-elected last year on a manifesto pledge that said: “The Scottish parliament should have the right to hold another referendum … if there is a significant and material change in the circumstance that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will.”

That manifesto was endorsed by the largest constituency share of the vote of any party in the history of devolution. The election also returned a pro-independence majority to the Scottish parliament. Together with the result of the EU referendum, that gives the Scottish government a cast-iron democratic mandate for an independence referendum.

[...]

That choice when it comes – as it will – will be between an outward-looking vision of an independent Scotland taking its place in Europe and the wider world on the one hand, and on the other a inward-looking Britain that has, almost inexplicably, decided to retreat into post-imperial isolation.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... are_btn_tw

ronmcd wrote:The Economist:

If a Scottish vote in 2018 would be unfair, then the original Brexit vote was unfair

Every argument Theresa May uses against the EU can be turned against her by Nicola Sturgeon

http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwo ... /te/bl/ed/

ronmcd wrote:The Economist:

If a Scottish vote in 2018 would be unfair, then the original Brexit vote was unfair

Every argument Theresa May uses against the EU can be turned against her by Nicola Sturgeon

http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwo ... /te/bl/ed/

Of course all these arguments, rather like chess, are a matter of logic. In the real world, Mrs May can win the game by refusing to play and denying the Scots their referendum. That may succeed in the short term but in the long term, such an exercise of power seems likely to drive the union even further apart

OlivierK wrote:

ronmcd wrote:The Economist:

If a Scottish vote in 2018 would be unfair, then the original Brexit vote was unfair

Every argument Theresa May uses against the EU can be turned against her by Nicola Sturgeon

http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwo ... /te/bl/ed/

It's bizarre that journalists are just starting to grasp this, and that many still haven't.

I'm assuming that when she took the position that a Scottish referendum before the terms of Brexit were agreed and publicly understood would be irresponsible and wrong, that those covering the event were so shocked by her gargantuan hypocrisy that they decided she surely must have meant, or even said, something completely different.

OlivierK wrote:

ronmcd wrote:The Economist:

If a Scottish vote in 2018 would be unfair, then the original Brexit vote was unfair

Every argument Theresa May uses against the EU can be turned against her by Nicola Sturgeon

http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwo ... /te/bl/ed/

It's bizarre that journalists are just starting to grasp this, and that many still haven't.

I'm assuming that when she took the position that a Scottish referendum before the terms of Brexit were agreed and publicly understood would be irresponsible and wrong, that those covering the event were so shocked by her gargantuan hypocrisy that they decided she surely must have meant, or even said, something completely different.

Byron wrote:Fisherman, yes, those are all sensible ways to measure popular attitudes, but by far the best is a referendum, which is why the Scottish government and now Holyrood have chosen to hold one. You don't need a further mandate: a majority vote in the parliament is all that's necessary.

fisherman wrote:I agree that now decided, a referendum will be held, but I was driving at how May might or might not be compelled to come round to Sturgeon's time table for a referendum, speculation suggests "now is not the time" could mean a long delay.

With popular sovereignty versus Parliamentary sovereignty; is it enough for it to be a political concept or does it also requires that the people of Scotland believe in it and understand the distinction as well? If the people or not versed in the nuance of it, does it pose a risk for Sturgeon to claim it and expect to carry support?

Daft question poorly phrased I suspect?