Independence in Scotland & Northern Ireland

[antrin]

53 minutes ago, Rascal said:

Verging on OCD.

Don’t you have an allotment to look after?

Too muddy and wet from recent rains to dig.  Still a lot of spuds to come up .  Pink Fir Apples, our regular waxy, knobbly lovelies…. . Had some last night.

…and likely again tonight, frying the unconsumed leftovers.

 

Not OCD… work/life related.  I write code, have done for scores of years.  In the days when access/time on computers was scant, you ensured any test runs you got were not compromised by typing/hole punching mistakes.  You get your eye in…

Also I also worked as script editor since the 90s.  Practise.

 

(see what I did, there?   )

Edited September 10, 2022 by antrin

[antrin]

21 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

Anyhoo, on to the new king's impact on the future of the monarchy.  I firmly believe he will stick his weel-heeled size nines directly into constitutional issues like the NI protocol and Scottish independence, thereby hastening the end or at least severely reducing the role of the monarchy.

One can but hope!  

 

[Rascal]

Interesting reply to Farage.

 

[Callum Gilhooley]

3 hours ago, Rascal said:

Interesting reply to Farage.

 

Farage is a C-unt .  
 

He could well be the C-unts  c-unt  , he makes Boris the c-unt  Johnson look like a trainee c-unt  😡

He has one of those faces which just screams “Look at me , I’m a C U N T” 😡

[Rascal]

ITV had a constitutional expert on as part of their coverage of the change over of Monarchs. He made an interesting point. It may be , he said, the last time that there is a proclamation in Northern Ireland . His reasoning was that the Secretary of State for NI is under a legal duty to call a unification referendum if it is clear that a majority there wish this . At last count, a few years ago, it was split 50/50.

[pod]

On 9/10/2022 at 11:53 AM, beyond our ken said:

I don't understand why the footie is cancelled when other sports are allowed to continue.  It seems a random selection of events that will impact the proletariat the most has been made to remind us of our place.

Football supporters can't be trusted to be respectful. 

[faraway saint]

32 minutes ago, pod said:

Football supporters can't be trusted to be respectful. 

You only have to read this forum for proof of that. 😉

[StanleySaint]

53 minutes ago, Rascal said:

ITV had a constitutional expert on as part of their coverage of the change over of Monarchs. He made an interesting point. It may be , he said, the last time that there is a proclamation in Northern Ireland . His reasoning was that the Secretary of State for NI is under a legal duty to call a unification referendum if it is clear that a majority there wish this . At last count, a few years ago, it was split 50/50.

Didn't cover that aspect of the constitution when I was studying Constitutional History in the mid 80's but of course it could have been introduced since then, don't know why you are hung up on what happens in NI unless of course it is for Shull's benefit, if it is their legal duty to have the referendum then they need to hold it but as their is no corresponding legal requirement relating to Scotland then it is another piece of whitabootery!!

[stlucifer]

25 minutes ago, StanleySaint said:

Didn't cover that aspect of the constitution when I was studying Constitutional History in the mid 80's but of course it could have been introduced since then, don't know why you are hung up on what happens in NI unless of course it is for Shull's benefit, if it is their legal duty to have the referendum then they need to hold it but as their is no corresponding legal requirement relating to Scotland then it is another piece of whitabootery!!

There is no corresponding legal requirement but it would most certainly set a precedent that would be difficult to ignore.

[StanleySaint]

14 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

There is no corresponding legal requirement but it would most certainly set a precedent that would be difficult to ignore.

On the contrary, as it is a legal requirement it isn't a precedent in constitutional terms because it was already enshrined in whatever legislative matter it came up in. Now if UK Gov were to grant Scotland the opportunity to hold an independence referendum, that wou!d create a precedence to do the same for say Wales or indeed NI if the other circumstances under which it were allowed in NI didn't preclude that. However, I do agree that it would result in a strong case for suggesting that Scotland and indeed Wales should have the same opportunity. This is both the benefit and curse of a conventional rather than written constitution, we don't have the overtly political issues the US Supreme Court has for example but we have to contend with a greater degree of uncertainty.

[Rascal]

39 minutes ago, StanleySaint said:

Didn't cover that aspect of the constitution when I was studying Constitutional History in the mid 80's but of course it could have been introduced since then, don't know why you are hung up on what happens in NI unless of course it is for Shull's benefit, if it is their legal duty to have the referendum then they need to hold it but as their is no corresponding legal requirement relating to Scotland then it is another piece of whitabootery!!

Hung up on it? Not at all but is one of the most interesting issues covered on TV since the death of the Queen. A consequence of the Good Friday Agreement I believe.
 

Further to that would be the absence of comment on Charles promising to safeguard the Protestant Succession and with it the Established Churches - COE and COS. This despite his stated desire to be the leader of all faiths.

As a Scot, I think it’s sensible to view events within the context of the United Kingdom and consider how these might impact on opinion here whilst accepting that others might differ.

[StanleySaint]

The reason I mentioned NI was this isn't the first time you've implied that there may be some correlation between what happens there and what happens in Scotland, there simply isn't, as I said in my reply to St Lucifer it may give additional strength to any case for a Scottish referendum but it by no means places the UK Gov under any particular obligation.

[Rascal]

57 minutes ago, StanleySaint said:

The reason I mentioned NI was this isn't the first time you've implied that there may be some correlation between what happens there and what happens in Scotland, there simply isn't, as I said in my reply to St Lucifer it may give additional strength to any case for a Scottish referendum but it by no means places the UK Gov under any particular obligation.

Your argument is sound in that there is no direct legal correlation but that wasn’t my point. The point is that the UK government have undertaken to act on independence/reunification in NI if it is clear that this is the Will of the people. Accepting that principle I would argue that other parts of the UK would expect to be treated similarly. 

 

[stlucifer]

2 hours ago, StanleySaint said:

On the contrary, as it is a legal requirement it isn't a precedent in constitutional terms because it was already enshrined in whatever legislative matter it came up in. Now if UK Gov were to grant Scotland the opportunity to hold an independence referendum, that wou!d create a precedence to do the same for say Wales or indeed NI if the other circumstances under which it were allowed in NI didn't preclude that. However, I do agree that it would result in a strong case for suggesting that Scotland and indeed Wales should have the same opportunity. This is both the benefit and curse of a conventional rather than written constitution, we don't have the overtly political issues the US Supreme Court has for example but we have to contend with a greater degree of uncertainty.

not "on the contrary" at all. Far removed from such.

A precedent is an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances.

Edited September 11, 2022 by stlucifer

[beyond our ken]

6 hours ago, StanleySaint said:

Didn't cover that aspect of the constitution when I was studying Constitutional History in the mid 80's but of course it could have been introduced since then, don't know why you are hung up on what happens in NI unless of course it is for Shull's benefit, if it is their legal duty to have the referendum then they need to hold it but as their is no corresponding legal requirement relating to Scotland then it is another piece of whitabootery!!

Good Friday ring a bell?

[StanleySaint]

11 hours ago, stlucifer said:

not "on the contrary" at all. Far removed from such.

A precedent is an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances.

Thanks, I know the definition of the word, as I said I don't disagree with the point that it would strengthen a case but in constitutional terms the inclusion of a clause in an act relating to one part of the UK does not automatically make it relevant to the rest of the UK. It could however be used as a legal precedent in future legislation regarding that part of the UK. But I repeat I do agree that if it were the case that it happens then the pressure to include it for all parts of the UK would be strengthened. 

[StanleySaint]

8 hours ago, beyond our ken said:

Good Friday ring a bell?

Yes it does, but as it was signed over 10 years after I graduated it didn't form part of the course thanks.

[rabuddies]

On 9/11/2022 at 1:52 PM, Rascal said:

At last count, a few years ago, it was split 50/50.

Thats the problem with the UK.  In each of the three devolved Nations it is about a 50/50 split.  To my mind that is not the clear will of the people.  This ountry has a poor history of creating countries where the population is split 50/50, be it ethnic, religious or political.

[Rascal]

3 hours ago, rabuddies said:

Thats the problem with the UK.  In each of the three devolved Nations it is about a 50/50 split.  To my mind that is not the clear will of the people.  This ountry has a poor history of creating countries where the population is split 50/50, be it ethnic, religious or political.

I take your point but the path over the last 25 years or so has been towards an actual majority in Scotland and more so in NI. Wales appears to be more joined at the hip to England and their Independence Party is less well supported. Whether these trends will continue, I don’t know. Democracy is an unwieldy tool. 

[Slarti]

Democracy is an unwieldy tool. 

Democracy is shull???

[portmahomack saint]

4 hours ago, rabuddies said:

Thats the problem with the UK.  In each of the three devolved Nations it is about a 50/50 split.  To my mind that is not the clear will of the people.  This ountry has a poor history of creating countries where the population is split 50/50, be it ethnic, religious or political.

Divide and conquer mate been in use for thousands of years still works a treat to this day,  it creates division among the people who are to busy fighting and blaming each other that they can't see the real problem the ones implementing the strategy.... The Ruling Elite 

[Slarti]

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/supreme-court-independence-date-set-28505198

Wednesday morning.

[beyond our ken]

If the bench rules that Holyrood has the power to hold a referrendum then I hope that the first stop on the line after that will be discussions on a federalised UK rather than the current selective devolved arrangement or full independence.  If there is a vote this year then I see this resulting in a substantial YES rather than a landslide and I think Westminster would panic in advance of that.  

[shull]

 

[waldorf34]

On 9/12/2022 at 6:44 PM, rabuddies said:

Thats the problem with the UK.  In each of the three devolved Nations it is about a 50/50 split.  To my mind that is not the clear will of the people.  This ountry has a poor history of creating countries where the population is split 50/50, be it ethnic, religious or political.

But the Tories rule the UK with less than50%