Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2017 20:01:50 GMT
Mar 28, 2017 17:22:57 GMT @davygallagher said:
Well, it's as we knew but nice to have it official - The vote on backing Nicola Sturgeon's motion for a Section 30 order, the legal mechanism used to transfer the powers to Holyrood for a referendum (preferably between autumn 2018 and spring 2019) passes 69 votes to 59. Scotland's government AND its elected parliament are now officially asking the Prime Minister for the order. The First Minister has given Theresa May till April after the Easter recess to answer the Parliament's call.Neither Scotland nor the rest of Britain know what kind of Brexit deal we will get, and whilst the political reasons for Independence grow ever stronger, the economic case has got weaker and weaker i.m.o, whose to say what kind of shape the EU and UK will be in, in a decade? Is it it really worth trying to split a 310 year old union at such a volatile time on the off chance she wins a second referendum? (I think it will probably be a yes vote second time round anyway, Cameron's desisicon to note let EU nationals and 16 year olds to vote in the Brexit referendum was a fatal mistake i.m.o)
I'm wondering what would have happened if Brexit went the other way, and Scotland was the only country in the union to vote Leave, would the SNP be pushing so hard for a second referendum if the electorate had rejected the safety net of the EU?
In 2014 when all 3 unionist parties scaremongered with "EU membership depended entirely on a No vote" Scotland voted No...and loses EU membership anyway. That's a material change any way you cut it and - as we've mentioned - was in the SNP Manifesto explicitly as the sort of change that can trigger another referendum. That they were elected on. There should be no surprise here that a party are elected by the people and want to enact what the people have asked them to - it's perhaps a novel idea for politicians to do what they say they will but hey.
We do know support for Independence is behind...but it was 15 points behind when the last referendum was called in 2013 yet ending up losing only by 5. With that kind of swing while the campaign is on, only a fool would back polls this tight. Especially in an era when the polls have been hugely wrong about the 2015 General Election, Brexit and Trump all within 18 months. The last Indy campaign was launched with polls consistently in the low 30s favouring Indy - this time its in the 40s consistently with a "don't know" that could swing it either way. Whichever way you cut it, that's a better place to start from than in 2013. Even if you do use polls as the barometer, the last Ipsos Mori one had Yes with a 1% lead while last week's Panelbase gave a No vote the lead so it really isn't cut and dry. Even Professor John Curtice, polling royalty, was on the BBC earlier suggesting that Brexit has pushed Independence from "possible but not for a while" into "possibly very soon" territory.
I think the rather crucial point is missed that if we wait, there's no guarantee - zero - of another Independence favouring majority being returned in the next Scottish elections. If that happens and there's a Unionist majority even if the SNP win the most seats there's not going to be another referendum. Unless one is already agreed beforehand. Sturgeon can't wait until 2021 because she won't win a parliamentary vote without a majority. It's rather obvious electoral maths. She has to make the hay while the sun shines and make the case while she has that pro-Indy majority. I'm not sure there's any other logical thing to do.