To think that the new SNP leader just pledged to ignore the will of the majority of Scottish people?

[RudeBarbandCustard]

Forgive me if I'm being naive - I may well be.

But Nicola Sturgeon pledging to continue to fight for Scottish independence is essentially a pledge to fight against the majority of the Scottish people's democratically expressed wishes?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-30011423

I mean, it couldn't be clearer. The majority of Scottish people voted No. So she's essentially saying "Hey, majority of Scotland - I'm going to ignore what you voted for in a democratic process, and fight for the opposite!".

It smacks of arrogance, and a complete disregard for what people voted for!

I may be missing something though, but it's intriguing and bugging me so I'd be interested to hear what others think.

does it really not bother people that a no vote was no longer a straightforward no vote

Firstly, who are 'people'? Secondly, the No vote meant different things to different people as we've already discussed - and for many, their No vote was an emotional, rather than a political, decision.

And the rUK will go back to never hearing about Scottish politics!

Quite possibly. I imagine you don't see much of Welsh politics up in Scotland either

But this referendum rocked the whole UK. It had implications for all of us. I didn't want to see Scotland go, simply because it would have left Wales a very small fish in a big English pond. I wanted the Scots to stay with us, and I'm glad that you have.

trixymalixy I suspect (and hope) any future referendum will require a certain percentage to be accepted. I am still furious that it was allowed to go ahead with one vote over 50% being able to carry it through when it's such a massively important life changing vote.

I don't think it will. I think you have a situation in Scotland where the SNP is bullying (for want of a better word) a large population into its wishes by exerting political pressure. And it can do that because we don't have a written constitution (or constitutional court to protect it).

In Scotland, we now have a unicameral chamber which can basically pass whatever legislation on devolved matters it likes, because it is only ever reviewed by those who pass that legislation.

If you look at the way the European Commission reacted to Hungary's constitutional amendments recently (basically told them it would be fined if it didn't remove them, which it did (mainly)) and the lack of comment on what is happening in Scotland, there is a huge difference.

I hope some of the above explains why I would rather read formal sources, rather than the opinions of what in many cases are quite uninformed individuals on sites like Wings.

As far as I remember there were extra powers promised long before "the vow", correct me if I'm wrong. I thought the vow just put a timetable on it?

"Firstly, who are 'people'?"

Just people...in general.

I think it should be a huge huge issue that people who were happy with the amount of devolution were effectively denied that option.

As in, nobody has any clue how many voters wanted more powers - but that's what is happening anyway.

It just doesn't sit right with me at all.

Rita It seemed like the logical step after 15 years of devolution but a step people obviously weren't ready for.

Sorry to nit-pick, but it did nothing of the kind. One did not follow the other. You are simply trying to push your views onto others, and I find that dishonest.

Its this usual SNP claptrap of thinking they know better than anyone who doesn't "believe" in the cause. If only they would read the "correct" sources, then they would learn the error of their ways!

Groupthink.

Chelsy, is it not the UK government that sets the conditions for an independence referendum. Certainly a (legally binding) referendum cannot go ahead without their agreement.

Your argument seems a bit odd - it's like saying that a political party, when voted out, should say 'Oooh, ok, seems you don't want what we represent after all. We'll disband immediately!'

SNP has independence as part of its platform. Those that agree will vote SNP.

More powers are coming - but to what extent no-one really knows. Unfortunately we have an SNP Govt who will push for the maximum number of additional powers as compensation for not having won the referendum, whilst pushing for another - so the No voters will not really get much more of a say in how much power is devolved until such time as we can elect another party to govern.

Hope that makes sense - DD is yacking and I'm having difficulty listening to her and typing coherently!

Trixymalix Chelsy, is it not the UK government that sets the conditions for an independence referendum. Certainly a (legally binding) referendum cannot go ahead without their agreement.

Absolutely. But can you imagine the UK Government making up a requirement that there be a 65% majority in favour of independence? There would be uproar in Scotland. That's what I mean by political bullying. You are just "not allowed" to say certain things or do certain things in Scotland right now, not because of the rule of law, but because of political and social pressure.

And there is something lacking in the UK - theres a lack of debate on constitutional issues that you do have in other countries. We need a written constitution, in one place, that citizens can rely on. We also need to get away from this British (and Scottish) trait of having very strong laws giving rights, which people simply cannot rely upon and enforce. In other words, we need a constitutional court.

I actually felt really alienated by the Referendum; I received hate mail and personal abuse of a very offensive kind, because I work and am qualified in the field and I thought I had some kind of moral duty to make some comments on social media to redress the balance of wrong and misleading information often given out. I mean that it spilled over into real life. I cannot believe how abusive and intolerant some people are.

I certainly didn't get the impression that I would be in any way welcome in an independent Scotland. I'm not actually against independence per se. I just think the lessons of history tell us things about the way the current lot are trying to go about it.

"More powers are coming - but to what extent no-one really knows. Unfortunately we have an SNP Govt who will push for the maximum number of additional powers as compensation for not having won the referendum, whilst pushing for another - so the No voters will not really get much more of a say in how much power is devolved until such time as we can elect another party to govern."

That's pretty much my issue though...what we're getting isn't what was on the ballot.

It hasn't been voted for at all in fact.

It could be anything from a couple of token powers devolved right through to huge changes...without anyone voting on it.

It really bothers me.

But that works both ways - the SNP didn't have a clear answers to many of the big questions, which is certainly why many of us voted No. Had the vote gone the other way we would have been going down an unknown path as well.

Until such time as we have a very clear understanding of what will happen in an independent Scotland versus the current state of play, forcing yet another referendum in the hope of getting the vote that the SNP wants is to be avoided at all costs.

I think the government and politicos in Westminster had a real wake up call at the referendum, that's why they mobilised late (and rather ineffectually)

If (and I hope never) there is another referendum, I would like to think they would negotiate a bar for the amount of votes required and that a well thought out and worthwhile Devo Max option would be included. These were glaring omissions last time round.

In the meantime, the SNP need to get on with the running of this country to the best of their ability without the distraction of constantly having their eye on the independence ball.

Tabulaharasa I agree with you. The Vow didn't do ANYONE any favours.

Wee Ecks stooge is using the European Union standard election technique of "Keep having elections till we get the right result" Ploy ......Ask the Irish they had a dose of it ..........

I also think 'the vow' was a terrible idea - I honestly don't think it influenced people's votes though. If anything it quite possibly tipped undecideds towards a yes.

PP on both sides have said that binary vote with a 50% plus one majority to win was a terrible idea, I think this is something most people would agree on.

Another thing - I know a lot of pro indepenence supporters say 'it's not about the SNP' but, rightly or wrongly, people saw Alex Salmond as being at the head of the campaign. I think that influenced voters as well.

It'll be very interesting, despite my very mixed personal feelings about the independence issue to see what Nicola Sturgeon makes of the job, whatever happens.

I do think, if the SNP (and other pro-independence political parties) are serious about taking the independence agenda forward, they need to take on board who voted no and why they voted no.

That is true - Alex Salmond (as someone said upthread) is a marmite politician, and I think he turned a lot of voters off. Whether NS can redress things I'm not sure - I think that coming into the role and posturing about another referendum hasn't done her any favours at all. I would have liked to have seen a commitment from her to healing wounds (which the referendum opened and deepened, despite protestations to the contrary), and to moving forward as a united country which has made its decision - but I suspect she feels as if she's got big boots to fill, and is out to stamp her mark on the party, esp amongst its activists.

He is indeed. Here's an interesting poll from the 'What Scotland Thinks' website. The question asked is: Does the thought of Alex Salmond being first Prime Minister of an independent Scotland make you more or less likely to vote Yes?

Obviously this was prior to the referendum. Very telling, I think.

Very telling - although it's also interesting that for so many it made no difference. I wonder how that no difference vote was broken down - does anyone know?

I tell you what, this thread has reminded me while we will HAVE to move if there's another referendum: otherwise perfectly sane people telling me to read Wings wee blue book. Like it's the font of all impartial knowledge and wisdom. And that merely by perusing its pages, my carefully thought through political beliefs and ideals would melt, like so much snaw off of a dyke.

this is a really interesting article about optimism which i wish I'd seen before the vote.

This is just a guess, but I think the 'no difference' people may be folk who would have voted yes anyway - ie fundamentally pro independence.

Lonny - doesn't the person who runs Wings over Scotland live in Bath? I must confess I've never looked at it.

Excellent article Lonny - that summed/sums up my feelings, experiences and beliefs perfectly.

I suspect you're right flip