What Happens If?

[anotheoldgit]

Hypothetically, if the vote for an independent Scotland doesn't go the way that Salmond wants, will it create a Ukraine situation where some wish to remain loyal to Russia, or even an Ireland situation where some want to remain loyal to the UK but others do not?

[boxtops]

I don't think so - if the vote is no, the status quo will remain. They'll just do another referendum in five years time.

[SirOracle]

No chance AOG. We are a civilised population in Scotland and will accept the decision gentlemen that we are. :-)

[Jomlett]

Salmond, who said he would declare victory even if he won by just one vote, suggested that another referendum could not be held in this political generation if voters rejected independence. He indicated a timeframe of 18 years but suggested that Scotland would eventually achieve independence as he described no voters as "deferred yesses"!

[Obiter]

"... as he described no voters as "deferred yesses"!

That is brilliant. Talk about spin, Salmond could teach Mandelson a thing or two.

[Obiter]

That reminds of the original debate about whether we should join the EEC. When the question of loss of sovereignty was raised the spin was, "We are not losing our sovereignty, we are merely pooling it"!

[ichkeria]

You shouldn't keep attempting to drag Ukraine into this - there is no comparison, and precious little with the Ireland situation either.

After the referendum is over what is more likely to be the case is that a lot of people south of the border will complain about the extra powers promised to Scotland - and they'll want some of that too.

[VHG]

Surely even if the vote is No then if the number of votes for Yes is very high (over 40% say) then it will force the UK government to give more power to Scotland, even if they remain part of the UK.

So it will mean Scotland get the best of both worlds, still being part of the UK, but also getting more say in how their country is run.

This must be better than a total split, for everyone.

[Zacs-Master]

I dint see that it would 'force' a Uk government to do anything. Especially a Conservative (OK, OK, Con / LibDem) one with only 1 Scottish MP.

[Quizmonster]

When this all started, Salmond actually wanted to have a second, "devo-max", question on the ballot-paper, but Cameron vetoed that, as best I recall. Now it seems that is almost exactly what all the main Westminster parties are proposing in exchange for a 'No' from Scotland!
Thus, if the 'noes' win, Salmond will have, in effect, run rings round all of them and he - or a successor - will still be free to call for another real independence vote in the future. It's wonderful!

[Zacs-Master]

'Wonderful' isn't an adjective I would associate with AS in this universe, or any other.

[SirOracle]

Spot on Quizmonster.

[Old_Geezer]

I was of the belief that the result of any referendum wasn't binding on a government anyway, so no one is forced to do anything. Although in practice ignoring the will of a portion of the country would have consequences. However the ability of the present government to roll and offer concessions to a group in the hope they will agree to vote one way, shows amazing weakness.

[ichkeria]

I don't think there will be another referendum after this one - not for a long, long time anyway.
However, Salmond cannot really lose: as QM indicates, he will get what he possibly really wanted in the first place, the devomax option, or near enough. Some say he doesn't really want independence anyway. Just as UKIP is the party which benefits most from Britain being in the EU at the moment, so the SNP gain their impetus from Scotland not actually being independent :-)

[Obiter]

Let us not forget the tale of the Pied Piper of Hamelin. When he went to get the promised reward the corporation (Westminster?) reneged, with devastating results.

[ichkeria]

...there is certainly no shortage of pipers :-)

I still think the problems are more likely to occur further south, if anywhere

[Obiter]

Actually I agree with your previous post. Just as the raison d'être of UKIP is our membership of the EU so is the raison d'être of the SNP their membership of the UK.

[Quizmonster]

ZM, I didn't say Alex Salmond himself was wonderful. What I did say was wonderful is the fact that Scotland has virtually got the alternative - devo-max - he wanted, anyway. In addition, he or some future First Minister can still put full independence to the vote later. Win-win for him, as it were.
I'll refrain from saying what it is for Cameron, especially given that I fully agree with Ichkeria that the desire for greater regional 'devolution' will very probably have been encouraged within England itself...perhaps even in Wales and NI, too!