Scottish independence referendum 2017?

[IceAgeComing]

Its interesting to see people I know who were ardent unionists in the last referendum now start to reconsider their opinion; its anecdotal but most of my pals who were no supporters seem to be now a little supportive of independence; including my Mum who's not exactly a traditional independence supporter.  People misunderstood how much small-c conservatism was a factor rather than principled opposition to independence, and now that the status quo doesn't really exist anymore that's causing lots of people to think again

The other question has to do with how another vote would be possible. With the SNP short of a majority in the Scottish Parliament, who do they rely on to force a vote? Is it the Scottish Greens that give them the votes to send it the people?

They're still a few seats short of a majority even with the Greens (there was a bit of a story on the Greens's policy on a second referendum before the May election; I think this chucks that out of the window), but I assume that the opposition parties wouldn't stand in the way if there was public demand for it which currently there is.  Besides I'm pretty sure the Lib Dems and Labour are both reconsidering their opposition to a second referendum at this point; and there might be more supporters of independence in both parties now.

The news that Scotland would have to apply for membership isn't exactly that shocking, the big barrier last time was Spain; and I'd argue that the conditions have changed enough to make everyone reconsider things. 

[IceAgeComing]

The banknotes printed in Scotland are... odd; basically they're printed by commercial banks but they have to keep the value of the notes that they are printing in the Bank of England; the BoE is still the Central Bank, its just that some of the notes have "Bank of Scotland" or "Clydesdale Bank" on them.  I think the only reason that we've held onto them is a mixture of tradition, a form of nationalism and the fact that its cheap advertising for the banks that print them.  There's also the fact that its something that's Scotland and NI only; and changing banknote laws in two small parts of the UK is never going to be a pressing government concern.  Certainly not a base for a whole new currency of its own though!

[IceAgeComing]

As I said, all new member states have to adopt the euro eventually. The exceptions given to UK & Denmark don't apply to new joiners.

Its one of those things that although technically you have to do it you can get around actually doing it; ERMII membership isn't mandatory and you need to join that before you adopt the Euro.  That's how Poland and the Czech Republic are getting around the Euro requirement, and no one seems to be moaning at them a whole lot...

[IceAgeComing]

Yeah, I'm sure the Brussels federalists would not pressure you in any way on that issue. Especially when they hold pretty much all the cards in the negotiations.

They don't seem to be pushing the Czechs that hard over it; and they've been in the EU for twelve years now.  Hell they've had a government that's supported adopting the Euro and have met all but two of the criteria (they've not met the "Compatibility of Legislation" one nor the "Be in the ERMII for two years" one, probably the easiest two to meet) but they continue to drag their feet.  The new policy from the government seems to be "if re-elected next year, we'll set a deadline of 2020 to agree a roadmap towards adopting the Euro" and rumblings about a non-binding referendum which to me suggests that they aren't confident that they'll be in the position to adopt the Euro possibly for another ten years - doesn't sound like something that a government with significant pressure from the EU would do.  In Poland the złoty is in the constitution so even if they wanted to adopt the Euro tomorrow they'd have to amend it, and that's something that's going to be very hard to do for a long time, if ever - provided that they elect a pro-European government again which you'd assume that they would at some point...

Hell, the Swedes have the position that I'd like to see any Scottish government adopt: stressing that ERM II membership is voluntary and that entering it (and thus starting the process of adopting the Euro) would be contingent on a referendum.  They're one of the countries that's technically been compelled to adopt the Euro since it was created but they haven't, don't want to and the EU have done nothing to force them.  To me that suggests that an independent Scotland would have no issue kicking the Euro can down the road until there's the political and popular will to adopt it - the currency union with the rest of the UK would have made EU membership a lot, lot more complicated but I don't think that's on the table anymore, plus it was always a dumb idea!

[IceAgeComing]

We don't even know whether the EU would be willing to accept an independent Scotland as a member do we?

Rajoy would be very keen on preventing that from happening.

The theory at this point seems to be to try to have a successful referendum vote happen before the Article 50 negotiations happen, so that Scotland retaining its UK membership would be part of an Article 50 deal which would allow Spain to vote against without blocking Scottish EU membership, which would be the best of both worlds.

[IceAgeComing]

Not hard to see Westminster use military force against Scotland if they issued an UDI.

FTFY

Generally modern Western European democracies have been very reluctant to use military force against their own citizens (unless involved in terrorism). In a scenario where a majority of Scots had voted for independence in a consultative referendum it would also be met with widespread international condemnation. The Swedes declined to use military force against Norway when it unilaterally seceded as far back as 1905, and I have a hard time seeing England do it against Scotland in this day and age (or Spain against Catalonia for that matter).

...but no voters wouldn't bother to vote in that case?  There's be no mandate for independence on an unofficial referendum that was 90% yes on a 50% turnout - and I say that as someone who'd campaign for it if and when a second referendum happens...

[IceAgeComing]

The constitutional situation is clear: a mandate for independence would be a 50%+1 vote in a referendum approved by both the Scottish Parliament and Westminster Parliament.  While theoretically other limits could be put on the vote it's unlikely IMO; the one other time they did that in 1979 didn't end well.

[IceAgeComing]

That wouldn't be a particularly great idea; since it would lead to Davidson being marginalised and she's much more popular (+1 for an English Tory is remarkable enough; *+17* with over 50% saying good is remarkable to any politician, never mind the leader of the Scottish Tories).  There's also the fact that in most issues Scotland is separate because of devolution either because of the fact that the Parliament has powers in those areas or because of the different perspective that people here can have because of devolution: which means that the Scottish party does need its own leader and its own voice even for reserved matters.

Blair and Brown governed as leaders of a "national" party, and that was one of the main issues that sank them before 2015 (Lamont's "branch office" comments swung the polls by a huge margin instantly to the point where a neck-and-neck Westminster race quickly turned into a 30 point SNP lead that Labour never improved their numbers from - Murphy was also linked to the London party very closely which might have been a factor in them not recovering, also that's probably more him being an unlikable man with no ability to actually lead a party; especially compared to Ruth Davidson who, as much as it pains me to say this, is a good leader who puts a human face on the Tories and that's something that they've not had in Scotland for a very, very long time; even before 1997), the Conservatives going down the same route really wouldn't help them in the long run: especially if they can't find a good replacement for Davidson when she eventually decides to stand down (I can't imagine that will be any time soon though).

The fact is that most Scots are small-n nationalists even if they don't support independence, and there'd be some level of resentment towards any perception of the London party interfering to any great extent with the Scottish party.  That's why I'm 99% sure that May's numbers will fall dramatically over the next couple of years: the typical complications of Brexit are added to here by the fact that the Scottish Government want lots of the powers currently held by the EU to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament post-Brexit (fishing is the most obvious one that comes to mind) and there's mixed attitudes towards that in the Tory party south of the border: the feeling seems to be that if they devolved more powers that might increase attitudes towards independence and if those powers don't shift then the SNP (and actually all of the non-Tory parties really, this one isn't an independence/unionist divide issue) will go down the "post-Brexit we were promised more powers, but all has happened is that powers have been moved from Brussels to London" route which would probably work really.