Scottish Independence

Don't worry about it, she won't go for one for quite some time , and who knows what's going to happen in the next year or so.

Some of it was a reaction to the Labour factor I am sure

It took a lot of lobbying to get the last one, and a long lead-in time before it happened. She can't just say "We'll have another referendum next week"

No need to panic! If you are afraid that it might happen sometime soon, then the best thing to do is to get in your holiday at once. Then if it doesn't happen (most likely scenario) you can return for another holiday later!

Of course to avoid another referendum the Scots could always vote Labour!

It must seem a long time to wait for some, though - nearly five years?

Elegran - I hope you are right as I am heading up there fairly soon.
I prefer the 'United we stand, Divided we fall' scenario but would not be averse to a federation system. Just glad someone else will work out the rules of operation.

Scottish parliament election is in May 2016. Guess we'll find out then if the Corbyn effect has had any influence.

I do go to Scotland quite a lot but, I have to say that, if I didn't, the scenes on the news last night would put me off and Niclola Sturgeons threats of 'you're on borrowed time' are most unnerving. I assume she also means all of the people in Scotland who voted to stay in the Union .

Exactly! Hardly welcoming to the English tourist!!! I think her remarks were aimed at the Westminster government as well as Scottish union supporters? Maybe to the rest of the UK as well? who knows, but it wasn't friendly that's for sure!!

I think Nicola Sturgeons speech and using the 'You are on borrowed time' line showed both weakness and strength at the same time.

I can just see the furore if Cameron 'ever' said that to Scotland by the way.

Why weak ? Because she looked like she was rallying the troops, trying to mark her territory and probably knows Corbyn 'could' regain Labour votes in Scotland. She wouldn't like to be 'threatened' would she.

Why strength? Because it sends out a signal to the other 3 nations they are of no signifigance to Scotland . Scotland is now affirmed to leave the UK. Do as I say or we will have another referendum and we WILL win.

It must be so nice to be in the position of being able to speak for 'your nation' only . Nationalism is without doubt easier to defend , easier to get votes for than the Union. Unless ofcourse it is English Nationalism, that is not permitted it would appear.

The PM (of any colour) has to speak for the Union and will never be able to speak on a nationalist platform. Of course if the Union breaks down, sadly as I suspect in the future, then it will be Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland all fending for themselves won't it . Th e people will have spoken and the people will have to live with their choice for good and bad I suppose.

That's what worries me, POGS. There has always been strength in numbers and almost every Scot I spoke to before the referendum was not in favour of separation. Travelling around there was a lot of 'Yes' propaganda everywhere and very little from the other side. Some said that they were afraid to put up posters as the attitude of the other side was so threatening! We did not visit my brother and his family as they are all rabid nationalists so we thought that we would avoid any confrontation that could have been very damaging.

OMG, furore wouldn't be in it!! We'd simply never hear the end of such a wicked utterance!! Fine the other way round though!!! Hypocrisy comes to mind!!! I imagine that JC has put the cat among the proverbial pigeons north of the border which does raise a wry smile!! Now what? I wonder. I can't see a happy ending though if this beligerance continues.

At least I have some answers to my questions about 'The Corbyn effect' on Scotland on this thread. Thank you.

Another question: who paid for the last referendum, and, if there were to be another one before too long, who would pay next time? And if the Scottish people keep being asked in referenda until they give in and give 'the right answer' who keeps on paying?

Is is the UK taxpayer? If so, why can't we have a say as it will affect us too and we're paying for it?
Or does the cost come out of the budget allocated to the Scottish Parliament?

I don't know. Wherever it comes from the expense is indefensible!

when the money could be spent alleviating poverty.

Anti-austerity only when it suits then!

I know you're not keen on him rosequartz understatement but Rev Stu covered the funding issue a couple of days ago.

Perhaps the funding of the next and any subsequent referendums could be a question addressed to Nicola Sturgeon at some point?!! If the UK taxpayer is funding this exercise, then it's only right that the UK taxpayer has a vote?! Not sure that that is part of the plan though as I have the strangest feeling that Scotland would be sent on their way, with good riddance following along behind, which of course is not what Westminster wants.

Read my link, Nellie, funding explanation there.

The actual running of the referendum was paid for by the Scottish government.
fullfact.org/live/2014/sep/who_is_paying_for_the_scottish_referendum-35217

I think if this subject runs in and on, it hurts the image of Scotland.
It makes it sound as if half the population of scotland are antagonistic.

Which they are not.

There was a majority of 55 over 45 to remain as a part of the United Kingdom. Nicola Sturgeon hopes that she can increase the percentage who want leave, but that is what she wants not necessarily what she will get.

Even if half the population of Scotland say they would vote for independence, and that is by no means a certainty, most of that half would have no antagonism toward England at all. Their argument is for independence per se not for a declaration of war against our nearest neighbours and for many of us our nearest relations too.

There is a small minority who are vocal in their opposition. There is also a minority in England who are vocal in their condemnation of those Scots who voted to leave.

That does NOT mean that Scots visitors to England - myself on a visit to my daughter and English husband and family, for instance, or my other English son-in-law's visits to his mother and sister dahn sarf, are fraught with anxiety about how we will be received.

Edinburgh has been packed with tourists over the summer, many of them English. How many reports have you seen of xenophobic attacks?

Not one.

I can't understand where all this came from? It hasn't entered my head until reading this thread.

The belligerence is not focused on the English but against those of the silent majority of other Scots who want to remain part of the UK.

That's been my impression too, Jane10.

Yes that would be it at a guess.

Xenophobic? The Scots?

"A Scotsman walking through a field, sees a man drinking water from a pool with his hand.
The Scotsman man shouts ' Awa ye feel hoor thatâs full Oâ coos Sharn'
(Don't drink the water, it's full of cow s ** t.)
The man shouts back 'I'm English, Speak English, I don't understand you'.
The Scotsman man shouts back 'Use both hands, you'll get more in.' "