UKC

If the result is NO to Scottish independence is there an official time delay until another referendum can be held or can there be a vote every X years until the vote is YES?

In reply to Indy:

I don't think there's anything specific.

I suspect it would be 20 years +..

A NO vote would almost certainly lead to some sort of devo-max, and there would need to be time to set that up and see how it works.

In reply to Indy:

If the SNP get elected by the people of Scotland on the basis of holding another independence referendum then there should be one.

With the UK potentially voting to leave the EU there's an excellent chance that a NO vote would just lead to another referendum a few years later.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:



Does there?

An excellent chance?

The chance of a Tory Government is lets say 50-50… then you seem to have a lot of faith that Cameron will go through with a vote when he didn't last time.

But aren't Labour currently favourites for the win?

It'll be interesting to see how EU-sceptic the new cabinet is. The tories are split on the EU with UKIP, then within the Tories themselves and if they stay Eurosceptic they could lose more support and MP's ensuring a labour win..


And then you assume the euro-sceptics would win.. which I know the polls suggest that but only one side has been campaigning so far. When that changes and big business talks we'll see.

where is this evidence of 'devo max' with a No vote?

the latest i heard was that the Tories and the English labour MP's want to give scotland nothing so thus we have not actually been told anything other than a few things we could possibly get.

A No is mandate for Scotland's affairs to continue being run from westminster, if they were seriously going to give Scotgov more powers why have they not attempted to do so? or even agree'd on a single thing it will get? while there is potential for a yes vote they are doing nothing, why would they do anything after a No vote with no mandate?

the house of lords actually removed powers on renewable energy obligations swithout any notice to holyrood back in December.

In reply to punj:

All parties have committed to further devolution and its constantly happened.. there was just no vote on it but I think that was the aim, is devo-max actually fully defined anyway? I thought it was a bit of a fluffy term..

In reply to Indy:
I do not believe there is any formal agreement about a time delay after the referendum before another one can be called.

Both sides however have used terms like "once in a generation" to describe the event. If the current referendum fails, then permission from Westminster would be required to hold another one. As many people both sides of the border would view it as a waste of ~£15m of public funds, and unlikely to produce a different outcome, that permission might not be forthcoming.

The official scottish government view (for now at least):
http://www.scotreferendum.com/questions/if-scotland-votes-no-will-there-be-...

In reply to Jack B:
I think that makes sense, for all involved, if a no.. work towards further devolution then look at it again in 20 years time..

Aren't the aussies doing that with regards to ditching the queen?

In reply to IainRUK:
2 Scottish Parliament established, May 1999
2.1 Opening of new Scottish Parliament building (2004)
2.2 Powers over Scottish railways transferred (2005)
2.3 Scottish Executive becomes Scottish Government (2007)
2.4 Calman Commission (2007)
2.5 Powers transferred over planning and nature conservation matters at sea (2008)
2.6 Referendum Bill 2010

When you look at the history… there was constant devolution until the referendum bill, once that happened there is no point in discussing further devolution until the vote is held.

In reply to IainRUK:


There isn't any reason to have a fixed delay because people wouldn't vote for a party promising an independence referendum a few years after one was held unless something very significant had changed - such as the UK voting to leave the EU.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/07/britain-eu-referendum

I like this article..

I think devo max, but also an english parliament for english matters, is the future.. if a matter is devolved then its devolved both ways..

No more Scottish MP's voting on english only matters… thats simple enough to arrange, just monitor votes.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Sorry i didn't mean 20 as in exact years.. more the next generation.. so 20-25 years from now..

Strange term as whats the mean age now? late 20's.. so the next generation is probably longer than we used to think it was.

In reply to IainRUK:


If the result is close and nothing changes or something dramatic like the UK choosing to leave the EU happens Scotland isn't going to wait 20 years before voting in another SNP government with a mandate for a referendum.

In reply to Indy:

Don't get it wrong, it's a once in a lifetime referendum, at least Cameron made that clear.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


Do you think Scotland would be given a mandate for a referendum if it was clear that a yes vote would be likely ? I doubt it.

In reply to RomTheBear:


I'm not sure.. I think there was a reasonable chance.

Had Salmond built a more defined road map, entering the euro etc, I think he'd have stood a chance.

I don't think London could ignore the request for a referendum once the SNP were voted in on that mandate whether a yes vote was probable or not..

But once a vote is held and millions have been spent the decision needs respecting. If the UK did leave Europe I think we'd see another one soon enough, but otherwise I suspect it will be when we are all old men..

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

I agree. I for one would want to another vote for an independent Scotland if there was a chance that Westminster politicians were going to successfully withdraw us, because the political landscape would be different, and the meaning of the question would be different, and because it seems to me to be capable of far more economic damage to both parties than Scottish independence, which even Farage has admitted.

In reply to RomTheBear:


If the Scottish people vote in the SNP on the basis of a manifesto which says they will hold a referendum then there is a mandate for a referendum.

In this situation I doubt the UK could reasonably respond by saying 'not for 20 years', particularly if there was a major constitutional change at the UK level such as leaving the EU.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

I think they could, unless a big change occurs, but millions have been spent.. no new vote should happen to allow other change to happen..

they've not set a time anyway, but i think the snp would lose support unless they could make a strong case why a new referendum was needed to overcome this one.. its been what? 10-15 million to hold this one.

if say the uk left the eu, or no further devolution occurred then yeah, but all parties are committed to it and when you look at the time line further devolution occurred all the time until the referendum was launched, then it stopped.. understandably..

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:



But there is absolutely no real legal right for Scotland to have a valid Indy referendum whenever they like. You need to have an UK government somehow willing to offer that. For example if Labour hadn't won in 1997 we simply wouldn't have a scottish parliament today.

In reply to RomTheBear:


There's no legal right but in practical terms Westminster could delay it by a few years or even say it would negotiate independence without a referendum if an SNP government was elected with that mandate but saying not for 20 years is not going to work.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

It will be once a generation.. noone will say X years but it will be as close as any guess.. that's the sort of time frame for sure..

In reply to IainRUK:









you missed out the Scotland Act, which so many have - 2012 - transfers greater income tax powers to Scottish Parliament.

For what its' worth, I think the answer to the original question depends on how close the result is. If its 51.5%-49.5%, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the SNP held a 2nd referendum before the parliamentary term was out - maybe in May 2016, the day of the next Scottish elections. If it's 65-35, then realistically it's all put to bed for at least a couple of election cycles.

As for the 'once in a generation' thing, I tend to be cynical about those comments and file them in 'they would say that, wouldn't they'.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

What "practical terms" ? Another referendum would happen only if a UK government allows it. As simple as that. You need a favourable political consensus in Westminster for this to happen and historically it hasn't happened very often...