Could James Graham of the Quaequam blog have cracked the push for an independence referendum on the head with one simple quote:
Who is denying the Scots a vote on independence? Two thirds of them voted against independence in the last Scottish elections, where the issue was debated. Two thirds of them say they oppose it in opinion polls.
I wish I understood this pseudo-democratic argument that if people don't want something, it is undemocratic not to give it to them anyway.
Well said indeed. Not that the case will now be closed of course, not while Alex Salmond has that supposed one-way megaphone in the palm of his hand.
But is Alex once again just stoking a fire that didn't have any kindling to begin with?
Rosemary Butler Forelock-Tugger.
56 seconds ago
4 comments:
I dont see how he has possibly cracked it.
This quote implies that the people have already decided on whether we should have inde argumanet is nonsense.
In the 2005 UK election 35.3% of the voters voted Labour. They naturally were able to form the governemnt. Does that mean that they have no mandate to implement an element of their manifesto that the other parties didnt support? Of course not - they are the government, and are entitled to try to implement their manifesto (just as the SNP are trying to do). The difference is of course that the SNP dont have the parliamentary arithmetic to implement this.
Furthermore, James Graham and you Jeff should know that people vote in elections for a whole host of reasons. This is shown again through the Scottish Parliament where the Libdems got 16.2% of the vote. The polls show a large majority of Scottish people want more poweres to the Scottish Parliament. In the election the Libdems were the only party to truly advocate this (the tories said they were open to a discussion). On James's logic this would mean that more powers to the parliament in a fedaral situation had been rejected in some way. - the libdems position.
This is ridiculous - people vote for a varitey of reasons. Indeed indpendence or constitutional affairs have been shown to be fairly far down the reasons why people vote unless you are a firm nationalist or unionist.
Whilst I accept that opininon polls, show people may not favour independence, polls do show that people most definitely want a say in the matter.
In relation to James's final comment, whilst people may not want independence, that is not what the SNP is giving them - they are giving them the choice- a choice that they want to make.
Despite this, I do accept that the Libdmes (given that they did not want a independence referedum election pre-ection) are not part of the government, therefore are perfectly entitled to vote against having a referendum - indeed this is thier official party policy. Whilst, I feel this is mistaken, I do recognise they have every right to do so. This is democracy, and as MSP, they have every right to try and vote according to their mainfesto (whether it is wrong or not).
Indeed, whilst the criticism of the libdems for being undemocratic is misguided, to suggest the people of Scotland have already had some referndum on the issue is also incorrect.
Regards
Calum
Of course the SNP have a mandate to implement their manifesto. I didn't suggest otherwise. But a mandate only as far as the other parties will allow.
SNP want independence, they won the election, they produce the white paper, the other parties say no, end of story. At the next election, we can judge what we make of everyone's position and move on.
Holyrood can get on with wrangling with Westminster regarding which powers we can take up here and which can stay down South. They don't need our say so to do this. They just need to get on with it.
I should also say, a very, very poor showing by Tories, Labour and Lib Dems here has saved the SNP somewhat. Each of the three parties are in a state of limbo right now and need to sort themselves out with intelligent debate and new ideas.
Meanwhile, the SNP look good but digging a bit deeper I can't help but think it's all razzle and dazzle with little substance.
Incidentally, I totally agree that the election result itself is a poor barometer for the level of support for independence. Again, I don't think I suggested otherwise (well, maybe indirectly by backing that quote). Voters for the SNP may not wish independence (for example, me) and voters for unionists parties may well wish us to be independent. I agree entirely.
So, to highlight the lack of appetite for independence, I point you to two facts which I think shows a referendum would be one parliament sitting too early:
There was little appetite for a referendum during the campaign (voters ranking it second last in terms of issues they care about).
There is currently little appetite for independence (see the recent poll with only a third in favour).
There is insufficient evidence that a referendum on independence is worth the time, money and effort. It's quite clear the settled will is more powers from Westminster and that needs to be the real debate on the table.
I have to say, I agree with Calum Macleod,
Indeed, if we remember, than in the run up to the election there were several polls showing a clear majority of Scots favoured independence. A figure which no doubt fluctuates from time to time, and by the question asked.
If we want to be really pernickety, the absolutely most recent poll, in the Sunday Times, showed that a majority supported a (74%) referendum, most Scots think Scotland will be independent within the next 20 years and that a majority would happily consider voting for independence in the future, should that referendum come around.
How on earth do we know that the "settled will" of the people of Scotland is more powers? You say more powers is the settled will, but independence (debatably) is not wanted by the majority of the Scottish electorate. I'm a bit stuck on how you can extrapolate both conclusions (if you believe parliamentary arithmetic is no guide to such affairs - which you say you do) when no-one has been asked whether they want more powers, independence or indeed to retain the status quo?
Drilling down further can we really say "more powers" is really the settled will of the Scottish people, when during the election campaign the only party who fought on a platform on increasing powers to the Scottish Parliament was the SNP!! Labour were against it, the Conservatives paid lip service to the idea, then buried it (indicating that working within the current settlement was the priority); the LibDems are supposedly federalists (but how many folk in Scotland would know that?) They tended to avoid the issue in the campaign as well. So, effectively, unless you were a student of politics and knew these differences, then trying to extrapolate a common conclusion from them "that the settled will of the Scottish people is more powers" is akin to wrestling with jelly!
Having said all that though, I will contradict myself. I do believe it is in the SNPs (and those to support independence) interest to have a referendum later, rather than sooner, when the compelling case for independence can be built upon.
On that score the Unionist parties did not let us down.
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
酒店,
Post a Comment