Vocal Voices

All day it has been reporting on, and giving prominence to, Sturgeon's claim that Soft Brexit could delay her delay hre demands for Indyref2. It lead up to all this with another report on Indyref2 yesterday.

Not once, not anywhere, in its reporting did it make clear that Sturgeon could hold Ingyrefsindefinite every Thursday until the cows come home and they would not be worth the paper the ballots were printed on unless the UK parliament signed one of them off.

Sturgeon needs permission from the UK in Westminster and there is no constitutional obligation for the UK government to allow it to happen, so she can go blow. It certainly will not allow it if she demands to lay down the terms and type of Brexit the UK negotiates.

What is Sturgeon playing at?

When we get finally get out of the E.U., I think we should kick Scotland out of the U.K.
They are a pain in the neck - at least Sturgeon is.

AliasAggers wrote:What is Sturgeon playing at?

Local Scottish politics. Nothing more and nothing less.

Remember she lost her majority in the Scottish Government at the last Scottish elections and she needs to play all the cards she has.

There's no point in analysing this from a UK perspective because 90% of the people in the UK would not understand what her issues are or what she is trying to achieve.

Nicola sturgeon is never off the BBC. They treat her words like they are holy writ.

I think she's in a more difficult position than she has been. She lost Indyref1 and the polls say that she'd lost Indyref2 as well (though the polls have been wrong on just about everything for a few years now).

But she can't say "OK then we'll just forget it", because independence is the SNP's reason for being. But she's putting herself behind the 8 ball. She can't give up on independence but the more she keeps on about it the dafter she looks. The SNP lost - they'd lose again. So all this "If we have a soft Brexit I'll give up on Indyref2" - it doesn't matter. Sturgeon has no cards to play, much as the BBC might like to pretend otherwise.

Reality in Scotland is this.

38% of the voters in Scotland voted to leave the EU. Of that 38%, a proportion voted Yes to indyref. Today they would vote No. For once the polls are fairly right. With the No voters who won't switch and the EU referendum Leave voters, the No's have it and nothing Sturgeon can do will change that in the short term.

All Sturgeon can hope to do is use another Indyref as a possible lever to get a better deal for Scotland than would have been possible without her interference.

But with May slowly doling out the news, sip by sip, that the UK will go Hard Brexit first, followed by an attempt to negotiate some form of market access after that; Sturgeon is going to find that harder and harder to achieve.

The BBC is giving her as much platform as they can because they want to influence the decision away from a clean break. The BBC will be as unsatisfied as Sturgeon when we trigger A50.

Tough.

People need to just stop listening to the background noise and wait till March. But they won't because they have become so used to having this background noise that they can't stop listening to it no matter how much rubbish it's talking.

Suff wrote:People need to just stop listening to the background noise and wait till March.

Maybe so, but it is easier said than done due to the avalanche and frequency of information dedicated to it.

Yesteday May gave an interview with Sky and the media has determined that she implied Hard Brexit - it is the major talking point. Today step forward the "I" with the line that if that is the case then Sturgeon will hold Indyref2 and trigger the break-up of the UK.

It is easy to see what is going on. There are elements who want anything but a hard Brexit. They have not been able to persuade the numbers they hoped for with the economic argument, so a different tack is needed. Now they want to tug at out heart strings thinking that the break-up of the UK is agaist what we all stand for: "Oh look, if we get hard Brexit Nicola will hold a ref and Scotland will go, we must not let that happen".

They have it wrong on two fronts. Firstly, Nicola cannot have a meaningful referendum unless the UK allows it, but they do not tell the masses that. Secondly, with the mood we are in regarding Nocola's and the SNP's attitudes, her taking Scotland out of the UK would cause few tears in the rest of the country.

Workingman wrote:Secondly, with the mood we are in regarding Nocola's and the SNP's attitudes, her taking Scotland out of the UK would cause few tears in the rest of the country.

This is a point predominantly English media and press always seem to get wrong anyway. The attitude in England, amongst those who voted to leave; is "to hell with them, if they want to leave just get on with it".

However those English leave voters might want to remember that the, approximately, 1.3M scots who voted to Leave, gave those English voters their legitimacy. Because if Scotland had seceded in the Indyref, the English vote would not have been enough to cause Cameron to resign or May to say "Brexit means Brexit".

Sturgeon will use this for all she is worth, even though it was her own citizens who, essentially, gave Brexit the legitimacy it has today.

Both the BBC and Sturgeon might want to take a step back and think about threats.

First May might be willing to say, "well get on with it and get lost"
Second, Sturgeon simply can't win it. So it's a Paper Tiger. That 38% will ensure they come out to vote and they will vote NO. Add to that those remain voters who don't want to leave the UK and become just a small part of the EU, who will also vote NO and she's sunk.NO would only need 13% of them to make the vote and I doubt that would be difficult.

However many want to leave the UK, a good chunk of them don't really want to then jump straight into the EU on bad terms. Whilst they might have felt they could control and shape Salmond, they are absolutely certain that Sturgeon won't be swayed.

It's why I totally ignore the BBC and any predominantly English media when they start prattling on about "Sturgeon say". They have no clue what is going on up there so they should just shut up and let Sturgeon prattle on to the Scots press.

The reason they aren't is because they think they have something to gain from grandstanding her in the Brexit debate.

Hence being totally turned off and ignoring them. Knowledge gives perspective and perspective leads to derision and dismissal...

As for the UK having to confer legitimacy on a referendum? Yes and No. The UK has interfered in many countries who had votes which were deemed non legitimate. Pots and kettles...

Not only is it a definite "Yes", the UK government could also repeal the 1998 Scotland Act and dissolve the Scottish Parliament. That would leave Nicola Sturgeon, MSP as plain old Ms Nicola Sturgeon.

It is unlikely to happen unless a party had a substantial majority because the Scots, Welsh, NI and other MPs would vote it down in case it also happened to them, but it does exist.

True, they could as was done to the NI assembly. But with the latest Scotland act I think that the opportunity to be able to do that is significantly watered down. One thing to devolve a parliament and let them vote on a few things (1998 Scotland Act), another thing altogether to undo the 2016 Act devolving significantly more power and accountability to Scotland.

Although the Tories do have an overall Scottish majority and only One Single MP there. Labour and the Lib Dems also. So there would be no big impact in not trying to fight the vote.

It would be funny for that jumped up bunch of wannabees in Holyrood to be shut down. That would amuse me no end. But it would enact a pretty damning reaction from the Scots. Not that this would harm the Tories any time soon. Probably the opposite.

Sturgeon is doing a fine balancing act. We shall see how that goes. I wonder if she has worked out that the "Great Repeal Act", could be used against her????