Will Scotland leave the UK?

Please treat other members in a constructive and friendly manner: Our Community Guidelines.
  • They stayed with the UK because in 2014, nobody knew that Cameron was going to call an EU referendum. Again, many comments I have heard, seen and read since then from Scots say that had they known the English (and Brexit IS overwhelmingly an English thing) were going take them out of the EU, then there is little doubt that they would have voted for independence.

    I think they stayed in the Union because they know how much they financially depend on us

  • I don't agree at all. Like most activists the Scottish Indy Activists know how to make themselves look much bigger than they actually are. It is not unlike the Labour activists during our recent GE making all the noise, grabbing all the headlines, grabbing the MSM attention and dominating discussion on TV and especially online. It is unsurprising that anyone not paying close attention would conclude that the Scots want independence now even more than they did before. The reality however is somewhat different. In Scotland, to openly admit that you do not want independence is akin to saying that you vote Conservative, you won't just become an outcast, you are likely to be the victim of open hostility not just online but in real life which is somewhat worse. Therefore those that do not want Scotland to become an independent country are not likely to advertise the fact. They will simply do what they need to do at the ballet box if and when necessary i.e. vote to stay a part of the UK, they are the majority, they don't want indyref but it is too risky to oppose the activists within the SNP who do, it will be too costly on a personal level. So, you only tend to hear from those who favour independence because they control the public space of debate.


    Now for the logic. Using simple assumptions (because reasons for voting one way or the other are purely subjective) I think the following are reasonable things to assume.


    1. Anyone in Scotland who actually wants to be independent will have voted SNP - they are the only party advocating for it so there is nowhere else for an indy voter to go.

    2. Anyone who was absolutely against independence and it was their primary consideration when placing their vote would definitely not vote SNP. They would vote for anyone else because only the SNP are pro-indy.

    3. Anyone who liked the the idea of a strong Scottish voice in Westminster would vote SNP because voting in the GE is no indicator of voting intentions for an Indyref. Remember that the SNP are running a minority government in the Scottish Assembly so they are not quite as popular in their own land as you might think. Allowing the SNP to run riot in Westminster will be something that a lot of Scots would find most amusing and it sends a message to the other parties that they would rather have a Scottish interest party arguing for them in Westminster. That is the only logical conclusion.

    4. Just because you vote SNP in the GE doesn't mean that you want Independence (see 3 above for the rationale).

    5. The SNP have no logical reason to believe that a vote for them is a vote for independence, they can see the difference between voting numbers for the Scottish Assembly and the Westminster Parliament so it would be impossible to conclude they have any more support for independence now than they ever have.


    So given the logic of the situation why do the SNP continue to push for independence? Simple, it is why they exist, they are a one trick pony, they care about nothing else. If they get the powers to run Indyref2 life will become unbearable for many Scots as they will fall victim to the SNP bully squads that will intimidate and harass ordinary people and communities to get them to vote the right way. This happened in the 2014 indyref as well and is one of the key reasons why a lot of Scots are desperate that there should not be another referendum. The bullying and harassment didn't work last time so the SNP know that if they can make enough noise for another Indyref they cannot let the opportunity pass, so life in Scotland will become pretty unpleasant for some during the campaign, even more so than last time.


    The best way to combat the SNP is to actually make them run devolved Scottish powers competently, something they are quite visibly failing to do right now. Obviously they will blame the Westminster government for short funding them but this is simply a smoke screen for their own ineptitude. Scotland gets funded per capita at 17% higher than England so there is no excuse, things should be better overall but they are not and this is due to SNP policies. They have been in charge in Scotland since 2007 so they cannot blame anyone else. Eventually the Scottish people will vote them out and this whole independence argument will disappear with them. They are nearing the end of their shelf life, the Scots want to move on from this and only they have the power to do it. Running spoilers at Westminster is a neat prank but it ultimately works against them. They need someone serious to run Scotland and the SNP are not the answer.

    Celebrate it, Anticipate it, Yesterday's faded, Nothing can change it, Life's what you make it

  • Wow, you have just completely described Brexit, only you have replaced words like "Brexit" and "Tory Party" with "Independence" and "SNP". That has to be the most bare-faced juxtaposition of recent British politics that I've seen in a very long time.


    Let's deal with your items one by one (I've done this before with you)


    1. The treatment dealt to remainers during the Brexit campaign. Outright bullying by Brexiters: "Traitors"...... "Snowflakes"..... "Remoaners"...... Betrayers"..... Anyone who didn't toe the Brexit line has been vilified and castigated. And for what..? Daring to exercise their lawful and democratic right to oppose something they do not believe in.


    The Brexit campaign was the dodgiest, most bent campaign ever in this country. Riddled with lies, dishonesty, criminal activity and at the end of the day, was not even a binding vote. The judge in the case of prosecuting Leave.UK's illegal campaign expenditure said that if the vote had been a legally binding one, he would have had no hesitation in declaring it null and void. It only avoided that by being not lawfully binding, and yet it is treated as holy writ and to say otherwise has seen hate and animosity poured out on anyone who dared to say so.


    You argue that the SNP is the only pro independence party in Scotland. Wrong. The Scottish Greens also support another independence vote and although they finished fifth in the pecking order, they did poll more than twice as many votes as the Scottish Brexit Party.



    2. How can you say what anybody in Scotland would vote for..? That's just more of the hubris I referred to. It's nothing short of arrogance. Notwithstanding that though, I think you're stating the glaringly obvious. Yes, anybody who is pro-independence in Scotland would vote for a party that is called "The Scottish Nationalist Party".


    The clue is in the name.


    But did they do so..? Well, in Decembers general election the SNP won 45% of the popular vote and 85% of the seats. Contrast this with UK as a whole, only 43.6% of the popular vote was won by the Conservatives, 56.2% of the seats.


    So...........


    SNP 45% vote and 85% seats (46% of the popular vote for indyref2 if you add the Scottish Greens to the mandate)

    Tories: 43.6% vote and 56.2% seats


    Who has the bigger mandate for their cause...?


    And yet you (I suggest would) argue that the Conservatives have a mandate for Brexit but the SNP do not have a mandate for independence.


    3. The Scots know that they will be given short shrift at Westminster. They have watched Ian Blackfoot try manfully to put their argument at Westminster since 2015.... and very articulately and passionately I might say..... and been howled down by the yah-boo mob on the other side of the benches. I think the Scots know that their voice won't be heard there. As is being proved already with Johnson's lofty dismissal of their reasonable and just argument for a second indyref.


    The Scots voting for a voice in Westminster...? Don't make me laugh.



    4. You're suggesting that people who vote for the Scottish NATIONALIST Party are not voting for independence...? I disagree. They are voting for a party who the Tories leader in Scotland, Ruth Davidson, repeatedly said over and over and over until we became sick of hearing it that the SNP are a one issue party constantly going on and on about independence.


    Please read the link. The Institute for Government makes it quite clear that the SNP manifesto at the 2019 election stated that they were fighting the election on a second referendum ticket:


    https://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws…sto-2019-for-download.pdf


    snip:


    We have a clear mandate to deliver a new
    referendum on becoming an independent country,
    and we are making it clear at this election that next
    year we intend to offer the people of Scotland a
    choice over their future.


    and:


    The SNP believes Scotland should be an
    independent country in a new partnership of
    equals with the rest of the UK and our European
    neighbours.



    For you to argue that Scots who voted for the SNP were not voting for independence is blinkered beyond belief.


    For Scots, the general election was ALL ABOUT independence in the same way there that Brexit was here in England. The endlessly repeated mantra of "Get Brexit Done" ensured that people went to the polls with only one issue at the forefront of their minds. And so, I believe, it was in Scotland with independence.


    5. Again, you assume that the Scots were voting for a voice in Westminster when they knew that their voice there would not be heard. I think you and other Tories are fooling only yourselves with your desire to maintain a status quo that is now only held together by the intransigence and stubbornness of a con man who has been elected to an office he is not fit for.


    No matter how you try to wrap it up, your arguments amount to wishful thinking.


    You want England to retain Scotland as a territorial possession. You don't care for the Scottish people.


    The Tories were wiped out in Scotland and for you to suggest it had nothing at all to do with independence is pure hubris and distortion. The sort of snake-oil salesmanship of which our current Prime Minister is the master of and which has got him into the position he does not deserve and is not fit for.


    Right now it is easy for the Tories to be smug and boastful about their election victory. Go ahead and crow. It's your time.


    But it won't be forever.


    The Scots, I believe, will get another say, be it now, tomorrow or the day after. It will happen. We won't be governed by a narcissistic egomaniac forever.


    I think you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on this issue.


    But I think the Scots will have another say within the next six or seven years - if not sooner if a way can be found to apply the right amount of leverage - and when they do, try arguing with the result that transpires then.






    PS; Before anybody tries to deflect this onto a thread about Brexit and starts calling me a remoaner, I will say that I didn't vote in the 2016 referendum. I would have liked to have voted leave, but could not in all honesty do so because it was clear to me then that the campaign to leave was corrupt and based on lies. The NHS lie on the bus stood out like a sore thumb and the most cursory look beneath the surface of the campaign was enough to see that we were heading for a disaster of epic proportions. I abstained with severe doubts about what I had been inclined to vote for.

    Old Boy said: "Britain will have a trade deal with USA by the end of this year".

  • I've heard plenty of excuses for the reason Remainers lost the referendum, but that takes the biscuit! It's because of Brexiter bullying? haha. That really makes me doubt your reasoning and logical thought processes.


    People voting in referendums or elections have the privacy of the voting booth, as explained very well by AS in post #122. Bullying is likely to be counterproductive as it makes people vote the 'other way'.


    All voters (including Scots) can say what they like in polls and to their bullying friends, but it's the vote in the polling booth that counts. That's democracy!

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • Good Morning Jenny


    I have found out overnight that despite living in Cornwall you are Scottish Nationalist and a triggered one at that.


    It is genius to try to conflate what happened after the Brexit vote with what happened before the 2014 Indyref but I think most people will have spotted what you did there straight off. The SNP are a bunch of bully boys who cannot tolerate anyone thinking differently to them. Their current position in the Scottish Assembly as a minority government shows that the voting system will not help them, be it the proportional representation or first past the post, they do not have the numbers, pure and simple.


    You assert that everyone who voted SNP wants independence and you have no way of proving that, but even if you are right 46% is not enough. The qualified majority vote used in the Scottish Indyref required 60% so the numbers simply are not there. How does the SNP intend to turn another 14% in their favour? I would suggest they will try the same tactics as before and threaten and bully and intimidate people into voting for them. Behind the slightly amusing figure of Nicola they are a bunch of thugs with Antifa style squads that that do the dirty work at local level. The SNP are not your friend and they most definitely do not have yours or Scotland’s best interests at heart, just look at the mess they are making of the basic devolved powers that they already have.


    They do not have a mandate for another referendum the numbers have barely changed. I would contend that my logic argument in my earlier post is far from arrogance or hubris and is actually a fair assessment of the situation. You have no way to prove that every single Vote for the SNP in the recent GE can be translated into a vote for independence but it would also be fair to assume that if you didn’t vote for SNP that you are implying independence is not something you are interested in. In all probability the next Indyref should there ever be one would actually be a worse result for the SNP than before. This time around the Scots know what they are going to get and a lot of them are really scared just like I was about getting a Labour government in the last GE.


    I hear a lot of emotion in your written words and a lot of passionate feelings but you are wrong on this. Look at the logic.

    Celebrate it, Anticipate it, Yesterday's faded, Nothing can change it, Life's what you make it

  • When you have nothing to say best to play the victim card... If possible, the race card or the gender card.... But probably best to play the Joker Card.

    These same idiots walk away from any tiny face to face challenge. They themselves dont know why or what they stand for. If they had their way we would have to, by law, employ people suffering innumeracy as scorers in major Darts competitions. Poor little victims.

    Their main cop out is... "excuse me, I have a degree, I must be right"!!!

  • I've heard plenty of excuses for the reason Remainers lost the referendum, but that takes the biscuit! It's because of Brexiter bullying? haha. That really makes me doubt your reasoning and logical thought processes.

    The reason that people didn't vote Leave is because they are not racist

  • The reason that people didn't vote Leave is because they are not racist

    Name calling and trolling all in one. Stop calling people names and join the debate instead.

    Celebrate it, Anticipate it, Yesterday's faded, Nothing can change it, Life's what you make it

  • Name calling and trolling all in one. Stop calling people names and join the debate instead.

    A fact, not name calling

    I was common knowledge that UKIP who started the Brexit bandwagon rolling were racist, a bandwagon that rolled on and on

    To deny racism is the same as trying to deny that the campaign against Megan Markel is not racist

    British people are basically racist.It goes back as far as the 50s in my memory when notices were openly displayed on B&Bs such as "No Micks, No Coloureds"

  • Stop calling people names and join the debate instead.

    I won't be joining in, as I don't see the point in rerunning the arguments all over again. Leave won, Remain lost. We should now all pull together for the sake of the UK, and democracy.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • A fact, not name calling

    I was common knowledge that UKIP who started the Brexit bandwagon rolling were racist, a bandwagon that rolled on and on

    To deny racism is the same as trying to deny that the campaign against Megan Markel is not racist

    British people are basically racist.It goes back as far as the 50s in my memory when notices were openly displayed on B&Bs such as "No Micks, No Coloureds"


    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • I won't be joining in, as I don't see the point in rerunning the arguments all over again. Leave won, Remain lost. We should now all pull together for the sake of the UK, and democracy.

    No chance, the Country is bitterly divided and Remain supporters are not going to go away in a similarly way that the Eurosceptics kept plugging their view despite losing the argument in 1992

  • I have blocked b,luc. Becauseof his bigotry. But read the quote.

    It is shocking any adult capable of publishing comments on a forum will actually post shite and not know they are doing it. Facts are facts. He wont even say who he supports because that leaves him wide open to proven hipocrasy. It is all too common the leftie game players will never say what THEY fundimentally support and believe in. If you are truthful you don't mind stating your principled stance.

  • No chance, the Country is bitterly divided and Remain supporters are not going to go away in a similarly way that the Eurosceptics kept plugging their view despite losing the argument in 1992

    No problem. I will be happy to support another referendum in 40+ years time.


    ps. I think you erred and meant 1975, the date of the last EU/EEC referendum.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • That's the way to deal with yon Krankie. Send her away with a flea in her ear. ^^

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

  • A fact, not name calling

    I was common knowledge that UKIP who started the Brexit bandwagon rolling were racist, a bandwagon that rolled on and on

    To deny racism is the same as trying to deny that the campaign against Megan Markel is not racist

    British people are basically racist.It goes back as far as the 50s in my memory when notices were openly displayed on B&Bs such as "No Micks, No Coloureds"

    Wanting to control borders is not racist. The sign actually read "no dogs, no Irish, no blacks". Of course, we now know better, dogs are wonderful creatures :)

    White lives matter

  • ps. I think you erred and meant 1975, the date of the last EU/EEC referendum.

    No, I meant 1992 when John Major called a general election because of those Euro sceptic "bastards" (his words, not mine" ) Cash, Redwood, Bones and all the others

  • Wanting to control borders is not racist. The sign actually read "no dogs, no Irish, no blacks". Of course, we now know better, dogs are wonderful creatures :)

    Thanks for reminding me, I forgot the "dogs". BTW I actually saw a "No Micks"

    Of course they were racist, deniers just do nor want to admit it

    Look at the great Leaves hero, Boris "Piccanninies, "Water Melon Smiles", and "Letterboxes"

    I rest my case !

  • Thanks for reminding me, I forgot the "dogs". BTW I actually saw a "No Micks"

    Of course they were racist, deniers just do nor want to admit it

    Look at the great Leaves hero, Boris "Piccanninies, "Water Melon Smiles", and "Letterboxes"

    I rest my case !

    Blimey gov, a politically correct person, does racism actually bother you ?

    White lives matter

  • Blimey gov, a politically correct person, does racism actually bother you ?

    Not personally as I am a white UK born ans bred man

    I do feel sympathy though for those that are affected by racism

  • I've heard plenty of excuses for the reason Remainers lost the referendum, but that takes the biscuit! It's because of Brexiter bullying? haha. That really makes me doubt your reasoning and logical thought processes.


    People voting in referendums or elections have the privacy of the voting booth, as explained very well by AS in post #122. Bullying is likely to be counterproductive as it makes people vote the 'other way'.


    All voters (including Scots) can say what they like in polls and to their bullying friends, but it's the vote in the polling booth that counts. That's democracy!

    I didn't say that. False attribution is such a cheesy way to attempt to distort somebody's words.


    If you bother to read VA's post and see the paragraph I was referring to, you'd quickly see I was responding to his comment in kind.


    False attribution isn't clever, it isn't big and it invariably gets seen through.


    I don't quite know where you get your claim to be logical about what you say. Perhaps you're half Vulcan or something.


    If there is any logic to your argument it is that of a twisted, warped variety. Take a set of numbers, twist them, distort them, make them into something you want and then present it as unassailable truth.


    I can see why you are doing it. You want to deflect away from the very valid argument that the SNP have a larger vote share in Scotland than the Conservatives have in Britain and yet, the Scottish majority is dismissed as an argument while the Conservative Party is accepted as having a mandate for Brexit.


    Democracy is as democracy does, Forrest.


    As for Scotland..... I would rather the UK was not breaking up at all. I would very much like Scotland to remain a part of the UK, but it's not about what I want, it's about what the Scottish people want. After all, it's their country.


    But then, you don't see Scotland as a nation in its own right. What you see is an English possession.


    And if, as you argue, the Scottish people don't really want to leave the UK, then why not let them have their referendum and be done with it..? According to you, they'll lose and there can be no further argument. I think it's called "putting your money where your mouth is."


    And yes, your arguments are hubris because of the clearly excessive pride that oozes from the smug, self satisfied posts. A smugness borne of supporting a party with a majority in Westminster and a Prime Minister who complements your hard line right wing agenda.


    Everything is going your way at this time. And good luck to you for that. But I believe that tide will one day turn. When, I cannot say, but I believe it will. And events will wipe the smirk off a lot of people's faces when it does.


    I did say that you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on this and nothing since then has changed that view. All that has happened is that we have both had our say and that is fair enough. Long may it be so.


    Just as a final thought..... A friend of mine on my LGBT forum suggested that Scotland could, if thwarted too long, become the British Catalonia. Or another Rhodesia.... How long before they declare UDI..? How long before they hold an unofficial referendum just to prove their point..?


    And what strings might the EU attach to future trade talks if they decide to side with the Scots.....?


    Food for thought which I'm sure you'll treat with your customary dismissive disdain for anything that doesn't fit your far-right agenda.


    But such things can't be ruled out. Not yet.


    You can only push people so far.

    Old Boy said: "Britain will have a trade deal with USA by the end of this year".

  • If you don;t m

    1. The treatment dealt to remainers during the Brexit campaign. Outright bullying by Brexiters: "Traitors"...... "Snowflakes"..... "Remoaners"...... Betrayers"..... Anyone who didn't toe the Brexit line has been vilified and castigated. And for what..? Daring to exercise their lawful and democratic right to oppose something they do not believe in


    I didn't say that. False attribution is such a cheesy way to attempt to distort somebody's words.

    If you don't mean it, then don't say it! Stop changing your tune.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • I’m sorry I appear to have upset you, it really was not my intention at all. I admit that I am much happier with the current Tory government than I could ever be with Corbyn but I have voted Labour in the past, in fact I voted for Brown to try and stop that twerp Cameron getting in because I feared the damage that he and Gideon would do to the country and I was proved correct. Cameron was a totally incompetent asshole and his legacy will live on for a long time, we are living it now. I’m wounded that you think I’m far right, they are really scary people with skinheads and Doc Martins and green bomber jackets and I haven’t got any of those. I think far right people are actually very few and far between. I think the reality of the situation is the left has been slipping further and further to the left and that makes you think that people with traditional and very normal mainstream views have become far right because from where you are positioned everything is far to the right, so maybe it is you who is the extremist not me?


    You seem to be bothered by my powers of reasoning and state that they are smug because of the Tory majority, I’m not sure how you deduce this. My reasoning is sound and based not on specific over manipulation of the numbers as you have done but looked at the trends buried within the numbers. Your specific claim that the SNP have greater percentage of seats than the Tories do (within their respective nations) is numerically correct but does that equate to a mandate for Indyref 2? I don’t think so, some of the SNP seats were won by the narrowest margins, they got lucky in other words, the sort of luck that comes from SNP thugs persuading a few floating voters that their front teeth are a fair trade for a vote. So yes the SNP won a lot of seats under the FPTP system and still only secured 46% of the popular vote so that is not enough to win Indyref 2. What is so difficult to understand about that? To use your words, you said that for the Scots the last GE was ALL about independence so taking your assertion forward, if that was the case the SNP just lost Indyref 2 because it is not won or lost by the total number of seats won, it is about the total number of votes cast one way or the other and there were more votes cast against independence than for it, is that really so hard to absorb? So by no logical analysis is their a compelling or even slightly compelling case for another independence referendum.


    As for a declaration of UDI or an unauthorised referendum Nicola won’t go there, she saw what happened when the Catalonian leadership did that, he had to run off to Brussels for sanctuary but has since been returned as an international criminal now serving time. Nicola might be delusional and dangerous to the future of Scotland but she won’t put herself in jeopardy, she is way too smart for that.


    As for the EU stance on trade talks being coloured by the Scottish situation two things to note here. Firstly the Spanish are not keen on Scottish independence in case it triggers more trouble in Catalonia. Second the EU cannot take on any more basket case economies that do not comply with their financial criteria for acceptance into the EU. The Scottish economy will fall well short of the minimum requirements for entry. So u less Nicola has secured a special deal from the EU designed to be a big F**k You to the UK from the EU there is little prospect of Scottish issues having any leverage in trade talks, and don’t forget these trade talks are of as much importance to the EU as they are to the UK even though you believe that they are not.


    Finally I don’t see Scotland as a possession on England, I believe in the UK as a whole and the mutual wealth, health and success of all parts of the UK. I also believe that Scottish independence is a terrible idea for Scotland being pushed by a fanatic.

    Celebrate it, Anticipate it, Yesterday's faded, Nothing can change it, Life's what you make it

  • Your specific claim that the SNP have greater percentage of seats than the Tories do (within their respective nations) is numerically correct but does that equate to a mandate for Indyref 2? I don’t think so, some of the SNP seats were won by the narrowest margins, they got lucky in other words, the sort of luck that comes from SNP thugs persuading a few floating voters that their front teeth are a fair trade for a vote.

    Under that argument Johnson does not have a mandate for Brexit

  • Under that argument Johnson does not have a mandate for Brexit

    Keep up Bryan. Jenny was using the GE results as mandate for Indyref 2. In the Brexit referendum the result was 52% for Brexit and 48% for remaining. The Recent GE was an election for the UK government and not a Brexit referendum. The Scottish independence referendum of 2014 was 55% remain and 45% for independence. You cannot conflate one type of vote with another. Is this really so difficult for people of the left to grasp?

    Celebrate it, Anticipate it, Yesterday's faded, Nothing can change it, Life's what you make it

  • I referred to the majority of seats not being a being mandate for Indy 2

    Why does that not apply to Johnson and Brexit?

  • I referred to the majority of seats not being a being mandate for Indy 2

    Why does that not apply to Johnson and Brexit?

    Ok Bryan, here goes nice and slowly for you.


    A GE is a regular periodic democratic process to elect a new government. In the UK we use the First Past the Post method to return members of Parliament. There are 650 seats in Parliament one for each parliamentary constituency. The election is based upon the electorates consideration of each political parties manifesto. The manifesto contains a summary of how each party will run the country if elected. Running a country covers a wide range of complex issues so the electorate will need to decide who’s manifesto they like the most. Given the amount of issues covered in a manifesto it is unlikely that the electorate will like everything contained in any manifesto so they have to decide on balance which party they think offers the best solutions to the issues as they (the individual voters) see them. The party that wins the greatest number of seats gets the opportunity to form a government and if they have at least 326 seats they have a majority. The conservative party has a majority of 80 which gives them a strong mandate to implement their election manifesto.


    Are you with me so far?


    A referendum is quite different. It is a vote on a single issue that is of sufficient importance that the government decides to allow the electorate to decide the direction in which the government should move. Referendums are binary choices between two possibilities. The votes are taken in the same way as for a GE using ballot papers, ballot boxes and then the votes are taken away for counting. The counting process divides the ballot papers into two piles one for each choice on the ballot and the choice with the biggest vote count wins. However, there are no parliamentary seats up for grabs and the answer whichever way it goes doesn’t cause a change of government. The government then implements the decision in accordance with the ballot.


    So as you can see GE and referendum are quite different. No conclusion about issues that were not on the ballot paper can be inferred or implied because both ballots are for specific purposes which are clearly stated at the time of the ballot.


    I’m sure you know this already you old fox. You are just enjoying wasting my time.

    Celebrate it, Anticipate it, Yesterday's faded, Nothing can change it, Life's what you make it