I despair, I really do

[andrewducker]

Today's Scottish Metro has a wrap-around cover advertising the Scottish
Labour party.

Well, I say advertising the Labour party, it's mostly a "BE TERRIFIED OF
THE SNP!" advert.

Apparently the SNP, if elected, will spend all of their time distracted by
Independence, and completely forget to deal with the economy, crime, etc.

Speaking of which, Labour are also pushing a "KNIFE CRIME IS COMING TO GET
YOU!!!" campaign that's aimed firmly into Daily Mail territory, and
claiming that the SNP would do nothing about this (being, as they are, far
too distracted by Independence). This would be the SNP whose current
leadership of the Scottish government has had knife crime drop 30%, by
actually engaging with the problems that cause knife crime rather than just
slapping mandatory sentences on (I abhor mandatory sentences with a fiery
passion).

Frankly, if I was trying to decide whether to vote SNP or Labour then I'd
be voting SNP out of sheer annoyance at Labour's advertising campaign.

(Also, while I'm not a strong supporter of Independence, I do think that
there ought to be a referendum on it. It's been thirteen years since
devolution, we should treat the Scottish population like adults and let
them decide what they want. If they vote no then it puts the issue to bed
for a generation. If they vote yes then the country can move in that
direction. In either case it takes away a massive question/argument that
hangs over the Scottish political landscape.)

Comments

[cheekbones3]

The mandatory sentence policy destroyed any thoughts I had of voting for that lot. Idiotic reactionary populist nonsense. Can't believe that the SNP are looking more attractive than them, but certainly from working on the inside, they actually appear interested in evidence-based policy, something that the UK parties seem too utterly entrenched to seriously consider (except when it suits them).

Still, given my anti-independence thoughts, I couldn't vote for the SNP either.

[andrewducker]

I'm not pro-independence, but I am pro-referendum so that the issue can be put to bed for a generation.

[cheekbones3]

Aye, that's fair enough.

[bracknellexile.livejournal.com]

If there was a referendum, what would be the question? I've not seen recent polls but I recall a couple of polls a few years ago (although I don't have time to go hunting for a source) that produced markedly different results to:

"Do you think Scotland should be independent?"
"Do you think Scotland should move towards independence sometime in the future?"
"Do you think Scotland should be independent within the next decade?"

It was something like that anyway. I suspect the wording of any such referendum question will be loaded by whoever has the most clout to get the result they want.

[a-pawson.livejournal.com]

Surely anything other than "Do you want Scotland to become an independent country" would be pointless. A question like "Do you think Scotland should move towards independence sometime in the future?" would surely require a second referendum.

[andrewducker]

Absolutely. It should be a nice, simple, pointed question. Either the people want independence, or they don't.

[bracknellexile.livejournal.com]

The problem I have with them is they're all "fuzzy". Unless you qualify the timescale, then you could, for example, take your question and those unsure might be thinking, "Well, yes, I want Scottish independence when the economic conditions are right but it would be foolish now." and they vote Yes. The party in power then take a Yes result as a mandate for independence tomorrow.

[andrewducker]

So make it clear that it means _now_.

The Devolution question in 1997 didn't need to specify timescales for people to understand, nor did the Welsh one this year.

People can be pretty thick, but I think they know that the government isn't doing an opinion poll, they're asking whether something should be done.

[bracknellexile.livejournal.com]

Yup, that's fine. But yes, the _now_ needs to be clear.

I the point I was trying to make earlier (and possibly failing) was that Independence was a lot more palatable to some people if it wasn't right now and a fuzzy question is more likely to produce a Yes result from those people. That mandate could be abused.

I'll see if I can find the source for my original comment...

[skington.livejournal.com]

One possibility is for there to be multiple choices on a referendum, e.g. 1) Independence, 2) Greater devolution within the UK, and 3) No change. Obviously you'd need to use AV for this to be fair.

[bracknellexile.livejournal.com]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8125041.stm - not quite the one I was looking for but a start.

Ah, here's the full stats behind that article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/30_06_09_devolution_poll.pdf (pages 9-14 and 19-20)

[andrewducker]

Yeah - I do think that we need to have three options there, so that people can decide which one they really want (and, obviously, use AV to avoid vote splitting).

[anton-p-nym.livejournal.com]

Hasty post before I head out the door for work, but on the principle that Commonwealth nations can share precedents: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarity_Act

-- Steve is not a big fan of referenda on independance, himself, given his uncomfortable experience with a couple... but feels that if one's going to be done it should be done well.

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

Mandatory sentences make bad law.

In my view a lot of law on murder and culpable homicide is warped by the fact that murder carried a mandatory death sentence and folk thought it harsh to hang a man for a lucky (or unlucky) blow in a fight he hadn’t started.

[andrewducker]

Exactly. Circumstances vary, and treating each case as being the same is just silly. I don't object to guidelines, with judges having to justify themselves if they stray too far from them, but mandatory sentencing doesn't deal with the real world.

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

I would love a referendum on independence. I agree that the issue hangs over Scottish politics. It hangs over UK politics to an extent too.

I think you could easily frame the question so that it had some fixed timescale that was suffieciently distant that affairs could be wound up in good order. I’d opt for within four years of the close of the current Parliament which gives the Parliament following a full term to get our collective house in order.

I’d probably vote Yes. I will certainly vote Yes and begin to actively campaign for Independence if the electoral reform referendum delivers a No vote on Thursday.

One question. Who gets to vote in the referendum? Is it restricted to the Holyrood electorate (including EU citizens?). Does it follow the definition of Scottish Citizenship arrived at by the Constitutional Convention i.e. anyone living in Scotland at the time of Independence and any bone fide ex pats?

You won’t however get a referendum on Independence in the next four years because the Scottish Parliament lacks the legislative competence to have one and the man who controls the assembly that does competence is an English Conservative and Unionist politician.

[a-pawson.livejournal.com]

Presumably only people eligible to vote in Scotland would be allowed to vote. Start allowing ex-pats, or any other group who lay claim to be Scottish, and it would get far too complicated.

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

Well presumably...Aye...

...but then that excludes folk like my sister who were born in Scotland and intend to return to Scotland and for whom Scottish Indepedence would be a significant thing and who would be eligible to be citizens* of Scotland after independence.

It would also include, potentially, EU citizens who are not UK citizens.

* From memory this is anyone resident in Scotland at the time of Indepedence or anyone of Scottish descent (whatever that means) who elect to become Scottish citizens.

It strikes me as not straight forward.

[octopoid-horror.livejournal.com]

While I theoretically support independence, I've yet to hear a coherent statement from someone in power on what people actually mean by "full independence" in any way where it makes sense for Scotland to be an independent country. I seem to remember someone from the SNP saying that tourism and oil would be the foundation of an independent economy but that was about it. I've a feeling there've been some (with hindsight) hilariously misguided claims that enticing companies here like Ireland did would work too if economically separate from England.

Saying "I'm for independence" is often a statement of nationalist pride perhaps, rather than showing a real understanding of what independence could be. I presume there have, at some point, been awfully interesting studies done on how Scotland could be actually independent, it's maybe just that the SNP don't like to tell people about them.

I got a OMG THE SNP WILL WANT SCOTLAND TO BE INDPENDENT OMG! VOTE LABOUR flyer through the door. I can't help but think that if you're really in favour of independence, you'll probably vote SNP and if you're really against it, you won't. So basically the flyer is meaningless.

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

If Labour stick to negative campaigning, they deserve to lose in huge numbers.

that BS is the *other* major reason turnouts are so low.

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

I recall hearing a while ago that the Lord Chancellor had instructed all Judges *not* to use common sense in sentencing.

which was very comforting.

[undeadbydawn.livejournal.com]

"tourism and oil would be the foundation of an independent economy"

I can only hope this changes drastically over the next decade.
the renewables sector is starting to grow, and is a good thing.

[errolwi.livejournal.com]

I'm very annoyed that the NZ referendum on the electoral system will almost certainly be FPTP (for 'choose between these 4 options'), rather than the more appropriate AV.

[danieldwilliam.livejournal.com]

Scotland have a pretty well mixed economy.

Beyond oil and tourism there are lots of other things we are good to great at.

Renewables is a great shout for us. If offshore rewnewables take off they will be worth the same as the North Sea Oil industry but forever. They also ensure that we have ready access to realatively cheap, secure and abundent energy. This is something that will might be vital from the middle of the 21st century.

We’re also good at some specialist manufacturing beyond renewables. We have good bio-medical sciences, decent computer games and our agricultural industies are well run and we have fertile soil. All of these are good industries to be good at in the 21st Century.

There is also financial services. At the moment that doesn’t seem like such a gold mine. Part of any independence negotiations will have to be with the banks about severing the state guarantee for banks based in Scotland.

So we have plenty of good things going on in our country and I wish I heard politicians talking about Porter’s competitive diamond and specifically how the government could support indigenous industries that are doing well.

I think independence means making all decisions that are not made at the level of the EU wholey and soley within Scotland. I don’t see us being any different from Belgium or the Netherlands or Denmark once we are independent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_model