Is the Scottish referendum illegal?

I was listening to the news about Ukraine.  They were saying that Ukraine believes the upcoming referendum in the Crimea on secession is illegal, as the Ukraine constitution states that any referendum on secession must take place between all civilians in Ukrain, not just the part that wants to leave.

So I was wondering, that's pretty much the same situation as our Scottish referendum.  I've always thought that the rest of the UK should have a say in this, not just the Scots, as it affects us all.  I wonder what the British constitution says about this.

I've already said this.

We probably should, but as with any other referendum, they won't let us because they'd get a yes vote.

Since when did the English ever get to decide anything?

Even general elections - Labour only ever get in because of Scotland and Wales, and they have their own Parliament.

The English are quite often governed by people they have never voted in.

It's a perverse state of affairs Tess. Very perverse.

Bloody good point Tess, you are a dark horse.

Tess. wrote:I was listening to the news about Ukraine.  They were saying that Ukraine believes the upcoming referendum in the Crimea on secession is illegal, as the Ukraine constitution states that any referendum on secession must take place between all civilians in Ukrain, not just the part that wants to leave.

So I was wondering, that's pretty much the same situation as our Scottish referendum.  I've always thought that the rest of the UK should have a say in this, not just the Scots, as it affects us all.  I wonder what the British constitution says about this.

That would be a bit difficult Tess, as Britain doesn't have a written constitution.

Will it effect the price of shortbread?

Sassy wrote:

Tess. wrote:I was listening to the news about Ukraine.  They were saying that Ukraine believes the upcoming referendum in the Crimea on secession is illegal, as the Ukraine constitution states that any referendum on secession must take place between all civilians in Ukrain, not just the part that wants to leave.

So I was wondering, that's pretty much the same situation as our Scottish referendum.  I've always thought that the rest of the UK should have a say in this, not just the Scots, as it affects us all.  I wonder what the British constitution says about this.

That would be a bit difficult Tess, as Britain doesn't have a written constitution.

I know - but not having a written constitution doesn't necessarily mean that it's constitutional.

The Weakest Link: The UK government’s legal argument for a binding referendum on Scottish independence runs counter to international and constitutional law

http://www.consoc.org.uk/2012/01/the-weakest-link-the-uk-government%E2%80%99s-legal-argument-for-a-binding-referendum-on-scottish-independence-runs-counter-to-international-and-constitutional-law-by-matt-qvortrup/.

Well, as there is no lawyer disputing this on behalf of the government, it doesn't really matter. And as we have been telling Scotland what to do for years, it's just desserts really.

If it means no more stupid bagpipes which sound like a goat who's got his nuts stuck in a vice....  I'm all for telling Scotland to bugger off.  They can shove their we timorous beastie and Burns night as well.


However, Scotland cannot be independent and still have the perks associated with being in the UK.

Sassy wrote:Well, as there is no lawyer disputing this on behalf of the government, it doesn't really matter.   And as we have been telling Scotland what to do for years, it's just desserts really.

Well that's like saying that, if a man beats a woman every day but no-one's disputing his right to do so, that's acceptable - "it doesn't really matter". As for telling Scotland what to do for years, I'm not even getting into the arguments again about the benefits or not the Scots have over the English - their own Parliament for one, because we've been there, done that. Then again I would mention that the Scot who told the English what to do and fucked up their economy, gets a fat salary for being an MP yet never shows his face at the House, is a Scot.

Its nothing of the sort, because the Scots haven't done anything wrong. And the Ukraine's constitution was only ratified in 1996 because of it's independence from Russia.

So Sassy, what perks of being in the UK should Scotland loose?

Croissant wrote:So Sassy, what perks of being in the UK should Scotland loose?

Don't get ya. If it became independent it would take on a pro capita amount of the national debt and the national assets, keep what it legally owns and rule itself.

Tess. wrote:I was listening to the news about Ukraine.  They were saying that Ukraine believes the upcoming referendum in the Crimea on secession is illegal, as the Ukraine constitution states that any referendum on secession must take place between all civilians in Ukrain, not just the part that wants to leave.

So I was wondering, that's pretty much the same situation as our Scottish referendum.  I've always thought that the rest of the UK should have a say in this, not just the Scots, as it affects us all.  I wonder what the British constitution says about this.

..Tess, that's quite easy for you to say from a Republic of Ireland perspective , I'm sure if you were in with the rest of us and NI, you may see things quite differently.

Why should any other home nation have a say on SCOTTISH independence ?

Surely you do not believe in holding a country prisoner if they so desire freedom?

If say Wales were going to hold a referendum on Independence , it would be nine of a Scotland's business..

Unless Scots vote against independence , Scotland will be an independent nation , and nobody else has the right to try to stop that...other than Scots themselves.

Sassy wrote:

Croissant wrote:So Sassy, what perks of being in the UK should Scotland loose?

Don't get ya.   If it became independent it would take on a pro capita amount of the national debt and the national assets, keep what it legally owns and rule itself.

That is correct sassy ,i really think you should have been a politician, you sure as hell have the savvy required.

Joy Division wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Don't get ya.   If it became independent it would take on a pro capita amount of the national debt and the national assets, keep what it legally owns and rule itself.

That is  correct sassy ,i really think you should have been a politician, you sure as hell have the savvy required.

   

Too simplistic.

It will no longer have the pound.
It will have to apply to be in the EU.
UK students would no longer go to Scottish universities.
The armed services RAF and RN will relocate their bases.
Certain companies such as Standard Life will no longer want an office in Scotland.
The Queen will no longer hold any residences in Scotland.
The Union Jack will change to remove the St Andrews Cross.
Sporting events such as the British Open golf will no longer be played in Scotland; Carnoustie, St Andrews, Troon, Turnberry.
Then there are fishing areas to be worked ot.
Transport considerations for flying and trains...no longer in UK so passport required.

The list is endless.

I don't see that the rest of the UK should have a say in Scottish independence, but they should have a say in how much help Scotland gets financially.

Scotland shouldn't get any help....

Raggamuffin wrote:I don't see that the rest of the UK should have a say in Scottish independence, but they should have a say in how much help Scotland gets financially.

....what financial help?, an independent Scotland will be self sufficient.

Joy Division wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I don't see that the rest of the UK should have a say in Scottish independence, but they should have a say in how much help Scotland gets financially.

....what financial help?, an independent Scotland will be self sufficient.

Let's hope so.

Road tax.... they will have to introduce their own and the Royal Mail won't deliver there as part of a national service.

They will need their own benefits system and what about the hospitals and NHS???? They can't be a separate country and still have this.

Croissant wrote:Too simplistic.

It will no longer have the pound.
It will have to apply to be in the EU.
UK students would no longer go to Scottish universities.
The armed services RAF and RN will relocate their bases.
Certain companies such as Standard Life will no longer want an office in Scotland.
The Queen will no longer hold any residences in Scotland.
The Union Jack will change to remove the St Andrews Cross.
Sporting events such as the British Open golf will no longer be played in Scotland; Carnoustie, St Andrews, Troon, Turnberry.
Then there are fishing areas to be worked ot.
Transport considerations for flying and trains...no longer in UK so passport required.

The list is endless.

Don't you think all that has already been discussed? Of course UK students would still go to Scottish universities. They go because they are good universities.

Armed Forces, see http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldeconaf/152/15208.htm

So the flag will change, big deal.

The Scottish Government’s proposal is that the Queen remains Head of State in Scotland, in the same way as she is currently Head of State in independent nations such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

This would be the position for as long as the people of Scotland wished our country to remain a monarchy.

In future Scottish elections voters can elect a party or parties that wish Scotland to become a republic, just as today we could elect politicians to Westminster who want the UK to become a republic.

The British Open will just change it's name. After all, it plays there because St.Andrews is the best golf course.

The fishing and oil areas has already been worked out, Scottish waters are already known.

Yes, passport will be required, so what.

Croissant wrote:Road tax.... they will have to introduce their own and the Royal Mail won't deliver there as part of a  national service.

They will need their own benefits system and what about the hospitals and NHS????  They can't be a separate country and still have this.

And? They already do, and the Scots will have their part of the Royal Mail as part of their assets, the majority of it already is privatised.

Croissant wrote:Road tax.... they will have to introduce their own and the Royal Mail won't deliver there as part of a  national service.

They will need their own benefits system and what about the hospitals and NHS????  They can't be a separate country and still have this.

Well that's their problem isn't it? As long as they don't whinge about it and want the rest of the UK to help them out, it's up to them.

Tell me how the funding for universities will work in Scotland which currently has free tuition for overseas students but English students have to pay. They will loose that money. The rest I do not accept your points.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Joy Division wrote:



....what financial help?, an independent Scotland will be self sufficient.

Let's hope so.

Scotland already earns more per capita and pays more per capita in tax, and has done for 10 years.   So that really isn't a problem, is it. In fact, they have a surplus each year.

Sassy wrote:

Croissant wrote:Road tax.... they will have to introduce their own and the Royal Mail won't deliver there as part of a  national service.

They will need their own benefits system and what about the hospitals and NHS????  They can't be a separate country and still have this.

And?   They already do, and the Scots will have their part of the Royal Mail as part of their assets, the majority of it already is privatised.

How can they...it would be like Lithuania having a part.

Scotland is trying to be "a little bit pregnant" which we all know is impossible; you either are or are not.

Croissant wrote:Tell me how the funding for universities will work in Scotland which currently has free tuition for overseas students but English students have to pay.  They will loose that money.  The rest I do not accept your points.

They are facts, and in fact if English students are living in Scotland, they also get free tuition at the moment. Because that is the way Scotland chooses to use it's assets.

Croissant wrote:Scotland is trying to be "a little bit pregnant" which we all know is impossible; you either are or are not.

Nope, if it chooses to be, it will be independent, and we will be the losers, which is why Cameron etc are so desperate for it to stay. Scotland is in a much better financial position that the rest of the country when it's finances are taken separately. Of course there would be things to work out, they recognise that. Up to them if they want to take it on.

Sorry Sass, Scotland cannot negotiate itself out but still retain certain links and benefits. English people do not want to subsidize the Scots while they stick two fingers up at them.

Sassy wrote:

Croissant wrote:Scotland is trying to be "a little bit pregnant" which we all know is impossible; you either are or are not.

Nope, if it chooses to be, it will be independent, and we will be the losers, which is why Cameron etc are so desperate for it to stay.   Scotland is in a much better financial position that the rest of the country when it's finances are taken separately.   Of course there would be things to work out, they recognise that.   Up to them if they want to take it on.  

That's right Sassy, Scotland with its commodities / exports would be even higher up the rich list of countries ,your also bang on about the Queen still being head of state, as Salmond himself even said so.

Sorry Sass, many people disagree with you.


Right, off to lunch at a delightful restaurant where good food is served and socialists are shot.

Tara.

Croissant wrote:Sorry Sass, Scotland cannot negotiate itself out but still retain certain links and benefits.  English people do not want to subsidize the Scots while they stick two fingers up at them.

What are you talking about? How will we be subsidising them? At the moment, they give more in taxes than they receive. So what subsidising do you think will happen after an independence vote?

Croissant wrote:Sorry Sass, Scotland cannot negotiate itself out but still retain certain links and benefits.  English people do not want to subsidize the Scots while they stick two fingers up at them.

As Sassy says, Scotland will be a far richer country than any of the other home nations, so will look after itself , and I'm sure that will include welfare too.

Furthermore,Scotland will welcome Sassy with her Scots hubby with open arms of course.

Joy Division wrote:Furthermore,mascot and will welcome Sassy with her Scots hubby with open arms of course.

Well, if we get rid of this lot, we'll probably stay here, if we don't, we'll be seeing you lol

Oil giant Shell last night became the biggest corporate big name so far to warn against Scotland going it alone, joining the likes of Lloyds, Barclays and Standard Life in raising the alarm about the break up of the UK.
It comes as an EU directive warns Scottish registered RBS and Lloyds would have to be redesignated as English because they would have their headquarters in London and do most of their business south of the Border.

Banks and major financial institutions cannot be registered in a different country from their official headquarters.
While RBS and Lloyds are both registered in Edinburgh at present, that will have to change if Scotland becomes independent, potentially costing thousands of jobs.
The implications of the EU directive emerged as Lloyds, Britain's largest retail bank, warned yesterday that independence would send costs soaring for customers.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2574464/Dont-Shell-latest-major-UK-business-oppose-Scottish-independence.html#ixzz2vH3xdbS0
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

And today Alliiance Trust joins the planned exodus. After the EU s comments I doubt a Yes vote will happen.

I wonder if it would affect the result? I tend to think most Brits in both sides of the border would prefer Scotland and the rest of the UK to remain united.

Joy Division wrote:

Tess. wrote:I was listening to the news about Ukraine.  They were saying that Ukraine believes the upcoming referendum in the Crimea on secession is illegal, as the Ukraine constitution states that any referendum on secession must take place between all civilians in Ukrain, not just the part that wants to leave.

So I was wondering, that's pretty much the same situation as our Scottish referendum.  I've always thought that the rest of the UK should have a say in this, not just the Scots, as it affects us all.  I wonder what the British constitution says about this.

..Tess, that's quite easy for you to say from a Republic of Ireland perspective , I'm sure if you were in with the rest of us and NI, you  may see things quite differently.

Why should any other home nation have a say on SCOTTISH independence ?

Surely you do not believe in holding a country prisoner if they so desire freedom?

If say Wales were going to hold a referendum on Independence , it would be nine of a Scotland's business..

Unless Scots vote against independence , Scotland will be an independent nation , and nobody else has the right to try to stop that...other than Scots themselves.

What about if those in Scotland vote against independence when those in the rest of the UK would vote for Scottish Independence? Surely you dont believe a country should be stuck with anouther country if they desire to be rid of it?

Incidentally I am not saying that is the case - I am simply saying that such a scenario should be of equal weight.

Tess. wrote:I was listening to the news about Ukraine.  They were saying that Ukraine believes the upcoming referendum in the Crimea on secession is illegal, as the Ukraine constitution states that any referendum on secession must take place between all civilians in Ukrain, not just the part that wants to leave.

So I was wondering, that's pretty much the same situation as our Scottish referendum.  I've always thought that the rest of the UK should have a say in this, not just the Scots, as it affects us all.  I wonder what the British constitution says about this.

So what about the UK EU referendum then? Will that be illegal and should all the other 27 counties of the EU have a say on whether the UK should be in or out?

And also there is no 'British' Open Golf Championship. It's only called the 'Open Championship and it is run and administered by the Royal and Ancient in St. Andrews. It's their Open Golf Championship which they allow to be played anywhere within the UK and I doubt they would deny the rest of the UK to enjoy hosting such a spectacle.

sphinx wrote:

Joy Division wrote:

Tess. wrote:I was listening to the news about Ukraine.  They were saying that Ukraine believes the upcoming referendum in the Crimea on secession is illegal, as the Ukraine constitution states that any referendum on secession must take place between all civilians in Ukrain, not just the part that wants to leave.

So I was wondering, that's pretty much the same situation as our Scottish referendum.  I've always thought that the rest of the UK should have a say in this, not just the Scots, as it affects us all.  I wonder what the British constitution says about this.

..Tess, that's quite easy for you to say from a Republic of Ireland perspective , I'm sure if you were in with the rest of us and NI, you  may see things quite differently.

Why should any other home nation have a say on SCOTTISH independence ?

Surely you do not believe in holding a country prisoner if they so desire freedom?

If say Wales were going to hold a referendum on Independence , it would be nine of a Scotland's business..

Unless Scots vote against independence , Scotland will be an independent nation , and nobody else has the right to try to stop that...other than Scots themselves.

What about if those in Scotland vote against independence when those in the rest of the UK would vote for Scottish Independence?  Surely you dont believe a country should be stuck with anouther country if they desire to be rid of it?

Incidentally I am not saying that is the case - I am simply saying that such a scenario should be of equal weight.

Same applies with the EU referendum then?

gerber wrote:
Oil giant Shell last night became the biggest corporate big name so far to warn against Scotland going it alone, joining the likes of Lloyds, Barclays and Standard Life in raising the alarm about the break up of the UK.
It comes as an EU directive warns Scottish registered RBS and Lloyds would have to be redesignated as English because they would have their headquarters in London and do most of their business south of the Border.

Banks and major financial institutions cannot be registered in a different country from their official headquarters.
While RBS and Lloyds are both registered in Edinburgh at present, that will have to change if Scotland becomes independent, potentially costing thousands of jobs.
The implications of the EU directive emerged as Lloyds, Britain's largest retail bank, warned yesterday that independence would send costs soaring for customers.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2574464/Dont-Shell-latest-major-UK-business-oppose-Scottish-independence.html#ixzz2vH3xdbS0
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

And today Alliiance Trust joins the planned exodus.  After the EU s comments I doubt a Yes vote will happen.

Yeah , I saw that in the news about Shell Gerbs, scaremongering IMO, as an independent Scotland would no longer have it's oil,revenues going to the treasury in London.

Also read about the banks, not sure what is going to happen there.

Eilzel wrote:I wonder if it would affect the result? I tend to think most Brits in both sides of the border would prefer Scotland and the rest of the UK to remain united.

...at this given time Eilzel, that sounds about right regards to general opinion.

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:

What about if those in Scotland vote against independence when those in the rest of the UK would vote for Scottish Independence?  Surely you dont believe a country should be stuck with anouther country if they desire to be rid of it?

Incidentally I am not saying that is the case - I am simply saying that such a scenario should be of equal weight.

Same applies with the EU referendum then?

IF (and as you can see it is a really really big if)

It was a genuine referendum with a legal obligation to act on the result then yes it would.

I will remind you however that Cameron has already intimated that a result would not be legally binding and furthermore his promise is for a referendum on a renegotiated changed relationship with the EU and he is very very strenuously avoiding any sort of negotiation that would result in a changed relationship which means if (big but not as big as the first one) he is still in power in 2017 he will be able to side step holding one on the grounds that no change has been negotiated.

I will further suggest people look at the history of referendums within the EU - where a result that Brussels does not like or want simply results in a repeated referendum so they do get the result they want or going ahead and doing whatever it is anyway just calling it a different name.

Joy Division wrote:

gerber wrote:
Oil giant Shell last night became the biggest corporate big name so far to warn against Scotland going it alone, joining the likes of Lloyds, Barclays and Standard Life in raising the alarm about the break up of the UK.
It comes as an EU directive warns Scottish registered RBS and Lloyds would have to be redesignated as English because they would have their headquarters in London and do most of their business south of the Border.

Banks and major financial institutions cannot be registered in a different country from their official headquarters.
While RBS and Lloyds are both registered in Edinburgh at present, that will have to change if Scotland becomes independent, potentially costing thousands of jobs.
The implications of the EU directive emerged as Lloyds, Britain's largest retail bank, warned yesterday that independence would send costs soaring for customers.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2574464/Dont-Shell-latest-major-UK-business-oppose-Scottish-independence.html#ixzz2vH3xdbS0
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

And today Alliiance Trust joins the planned exodus.  After the EU s comments I doubt a Yes vote will happen.

Yeah , I saw that in the news about Shell Gerbs, scaremongering IMO, as an independent Scotland would no longer have it's oil,revenues going to the treasury in London.

Also read about the banks, not sure what is going to happen there.

And how do they get that oil out?  Do they own Shell?  Nope.  Shell is an Anglo-Dutch company. Plus, North Sea oil and gas isn't all from Scotland:

Sassy wrote:

Croissant wrote:Sorry Sass, Scotland cannot negotiate itself out but still retain certain links and benefits.  English people do not want to subsidize the Scots while they stick two fingers up at them.

What are you talking about?   How will we be subsidising them?   At the moment, they give more in taxes than they receive.   So what subsidising do you think will happen after an independence vote?

What are you talking about, I disagree with what you have put forward.

Joy Division wrote:Furthermore,mascot and will welcome Sassy with her Scots hubby with open arms of course.

Figures   

Sassy wrote:

Joy Division wrote:Furthermore,mascot and will welcome Sassy with her Scots hubby with open arms of course.

Well, if we get rid of this lot, we'll probably stay here, if we don't, we'll be seeing you lol

  

Tess. wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


Yeah , I saw that in the news about Shell Gerbs, scaremongering IMO, as an independent Scotland would no longer have it's oil,revenues going to the treasury in London.

Also read about the banks, not sure what is going to happen there.

And how do they get that oil out?  Do they own Shell?  Nope.  Shell is an Anglo-Dutch company.  Plus, North Sea oil and gas isn't all from Scotland:

With the oil in Scottish oil fields, Scotland will more than afford it's own resources for getting to the oil and it's own expertise, shell will be at the mercy of Scotland if they wish to extract oil from Scottish oil fields, Scotland will call the shots in its own oil fields.

And with scaremongering from the like of shell,it makes me want rid of them all the more. As well as the blackmailing from the three main parties over currency, Ive now swayed toward voting for yes to an independent a Scotland.

We will be a very rich country , free from nonsensical claims that we are subsidised from Westminster...that will do for me, if Scots do vote yes...