so it's a no to Indyref2

[HeraldicBlazoning]

And I'm quite glad. My mental health was shot to pieces by the first one.

No that's not my meaning @Jaffacakeorisitabiscuit - there have been multiple threads started by people in England over the last month who are not directly affected. Opinions & discussion are fine but I wouldn't be starting threads/venting about something that isn't my business.

I agree it's both our countries but the reality is this won't be settled until we have another vote. Being told 'you're not allowed' in this supposed union of equals isn't democratic. And before someone brings up 2014 there has been a material change and that is Brexit.

Of course you can be Scottish if you want independence - my best friend was yes and is now no. We talk about it civilly.

Well if Scotland did become independent it would impact RUK which is why people south of the border are interested.

On the contrary, the ruling today is proof that the UK is a UNITARY SOVEREIGN STATE like every other country in Europe!

International law has been very clear on this for some time now - there is NO democratic right to secession!

Self-determination in terms of independence is recognised in international law only under two conditions:

1. Colonialism
2. Oppression by the sovereign parent state

Scotland is very clearly NOT a colony as it is an INTEGRAL part of the UK. Its also definitely NOT oppressed by the UK Government or State.

You're blatantly wrong to claim there is no legal route available out of the UK too! There is - consent from the sovereign Government which is the UK. That's the SAME legal route available to any country in Europe as well, including Catalonia!

But international law is very clear that self-determination is balanced against the right of sovereign states to territorial integrity. In fact, territorial integrity takes precedence!

Sovereign states like the UK, Spain, USA, France, Germany, etc, are ENTITLED to protection in international law of their territorial integrity since they've all decentralised power to some extent. We call it devolution in the UK.

And devolution fulfills the only degree of self-determination Scotland is entitled to in international law!

This explains the UK Supreme Court ruling.

What's more is ALL of this is entirely legal AND democratic! There is no democratic right to secession. No other country in Europe allows secession. That's democratic.

The declining support for independence in Quebec and Catalonia shows the same CAN happen in Scotland. The UK must now follow the Canadian Government's Clarity Act. Entirely democratic too.

Secession is not a democratic right

"Currently, among the constitutional laws of the world, only two states carry the right of secession in their constitution: Ethiopia, and the Federation of Saint Kitts and Nevis."

• My Country, Europe

“In the Federal Republic of Germany, which is a nation-state based on the constituent power of the German people, states are not ‘masters of the constitution’.

Therefore there is no room under the constitution for individual states to attempt to secede. This violates the constitutional order.”

• Ruling from the Constitutional Court of the Federal Republic of Germany.

"The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation, the common and indivisible homeland of all Spaniards; it recognizes and guarantees the right to self-government of the nationalities and regions of which it is composed and the solidarity among them all."

• Section Two of the Spanish Constitution

"France shall be an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic."

• Article One of the French Constitution

"The Republic, one and indivisible, recognizes and promotes local autonomies; implements in those services which depend on the State the fullest measure of administrative decentralization; accords the principles and methods of its legislation to the requirements of autonomy and decentralization."

• Article Five of the Italian Constitution

"It is clear that international law does not specifically grant component parts of sovereign states the legal right to secede unilaterally from their "parent" state....

The various international documents that support the existence of a people's right to self-determination also contain parallel statements supportive of the conclusion that the exercise of such a right must be sufficiently limited to prevent threats to an existing state's territorial integrity or the stability of relations between sovereign states...

A state whose government represents the whole of the people or peoples resident within its territory, on a basis of equality and without discrimination, and respects the principles of self-determination in its own internal arrangements, is entitled to the protection under international law of its territorial integrity."

• Canadian Supreme Court ruling on the issue of secession

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

• United States of America Pledge Of Allegiance

"The answer is clear. If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, ‘one Nation, indivisible.’)”

• Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in 2006

“Article 52 of the Constitution is a unitarian structure, indivisible, indecomposable."

Dean of the Brazilian Supreme Court, Judge Celso de Mello

"WHEREAS the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth...."

• Preamble to the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia

The 'material change' has made little or no difference to the polls whatsoever. It's not a case of 'not being allowed' to have another referendum, it's the law.

What happens if we have another referendum and it's still no but by 54 to 46 this time? Do we have another referendum in 8 years? Then another? And another? When does it stop? If independence happens in 20 years, and in 30 years it becomes obvious if was a really stupid idea, do we then have another referendum to rejoin the UK? Or does it only work one way?

Scotland is in a mess. If the SNP had spent the last 8 years showing me what a brilliant place and independent Scotland could be, I'd maybe rethink, but all they've done is enact ridiculous legislation (named persons/GRA) being the 2 most obvious examples, spent copious time and money on this stuff, ignoring the advice from expert after expert that they're going down the wrong track, and tinkering round the edges of the really important things that would make a positive difference to the whole population.

Indeed. Saying that people from England, Wales and Northern Ireland have no right to an opinion on the matter (and let's face it, you really mean people from England) is pretty unfair, as it will impact the whole UK.

Perhaps it should be agreed now that another poll is possible to see if people want a indy ref in 2044.
That to me seems very reasonable and enough time to have fulfilled the agreement that both sides would HONOUR the results. Then once that result has come through - yes or no - another ref is set in 30 years time to give people the chance again to vote. Given that NS loves to keep voting she should be happy with this plan. A 30 year cycle.

@Jaffacakeorisitabiscuit first of all - I put little stock in the polls. As a voter I'm yet to be asked my.opinion and I know many previous no voters personally who are now yes. And I have friends who know more people like this and so on. I think the yes vote would definitely increase this time.

But I think it probably has to be higher than just over 50% like you describe. It has to be more of a majority.

On the GRA and named person I agree with you. But I see snp as the vehicle. no reason they should be the majority once their sole aim is achieved. The Tories in Westminster nor Labour under Starmer are not the sparkling alternative I want for my family.

It might have escaped your attention, but English, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs cannot vote on Scotland only issues. And vice versa.

Under devolution, Scottish only issues are decided and legislated upon at Holyrood. Welsh only issues in Cardiff Bay only. Northern Irish issues in Stormont only.

Westminster has RESERVED powers which includes the constitution as that's an issue for the UK as a whole.

As the Supreme Legislator, Westminster can legislate in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland if needed. But this is a last resort, especially if Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland abuse their legislative powers. The Supreme Court has ruled Holyrood was acting ultra vires = beyond the powers.

Your argument is on a shoogly peg here.....

I’m pleased to hear it and yes I’m Scottish born and bred. I wouldn’t trust Nicola to run a bath, women across the country should be very concerned with the way she’s going.

@DownNative And yet (and I speak as an independence voter) SNP MP Lisa Cameron was able to vote no Northern Ireland abortion rights which was outrageous imo: www.sundaypost.com/fp/i-voted-to-keep-abortion-illegal-after-losing-my-babies-but-my-partys-reaction-left-me-furious/

There is absolutely scope to vote on things that have got absolutely nothing to do with you when you're installed in Westminster.

As an independence voter, I am worried about this yes. But Labour, Greens and Lib Dems all support the GRA. So what hope is there!

Well said.

Oh look. The UN agrees with us @beachcitygirl. Are you going to tell the UN what you said below or consider that we have a point.

"Anyone outraged at the GRA is ignorant of what feminism is. 

It's that simple. Utter stupidity at its most glaringly obvious."

UN Special Rapporteur raises concerns about Scottish Gender reforms www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4683555-un-special-rapporteur-raises-concerns-about-scottish-gender-reforms

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-63730621
Was just going to share that story but@SirChenjins beat me to it.

DownNative - Thank you for your great and illuminating post .

Out of interest then - just how long are you prepared to keep voting in SNP just on the basis that you want independence? And just how much damage are you willing to watch them do to Scotland in the meantime? They already have many devolved powers in all the key areas and they are destroying Scotland with those powers because their focus is purely on Independence and passing ill thought out laws to appear progressive and as different to rUK as possible - end game also being independence. How is any of that more important than the horrendous drugs problem in Scotland (which is getting worse and worse under SNP leadership), Education - SNP spend far more per child on Education than rUK and yet their results are worse and declining further and further down the international standards, and there are many more examples. How bad are you willing to let things get to achieve Independence. And then what? You are going to be happy for the SNP and NS to walk away and leave another party to pick up the pieces and somehow turn things around? Would that be a party that never believed in Independence in the first place? Then St Nicola and all her fans will continue to blame someone else for it all being a mess!

Nothing quite like the SNP to get Mumsnet in a tizzy.

@Fandangoes SNP is not 'destroying' the country. This is patently false and we're clearly not going to agree.

I think yes voters who paint Scotland as a land of milk and honey as some say is not good - neither is pro union folks like yourself making out the country is some awful place to live. Both extremist views, not reflective of how the population here really feels and not conducive to having an actual useful conversation.

If you think they're so bad I wonder what your alternative dream party would be in today's climate.

@readsalotgirl63 pointing out spelling errors in someone dyslexic is vile & getting a warm glow from it is telling & not entirely unexpacted from yourself.

@DownNative hmm not quite. Due to reserved issues & the sheer volume of English mp's as opposed to scottish, Irish or welsh mp's - English priorities are prioritised & Issues that affect only scotland decided by the whole UK for example - oil & gas legislation.

For example HS2 - that only affects or helps a small portion of English people being paid for to the tune of £42.5 billion.

There are many such examples.

The Union can never be equal. For it to be so, there would have to be equal representation for each country. Numbers wise.

social care, education, health services, police service, drug issues, mental health care all getting worse and worse under SNP leadership - all of these things are devolved powers so cannot be blamed on Westminster. For me these are the most important things I care about so Yes, I believe the SNP are destroying Scotland. Can you tell me what they have improved whilst in power?

"The vitriol can be even worse in real life. I’m not sure why - I guess because it’s such an emotionally charged debate? Scottish people in general are v proud to be Scots so both sides care a lot about the outcome and the future of Scotland."

I agree with this. Some of the comments from people I've known a long time really took me by surprise. Politics became something that just wasn't discussed as it was so divisive. I lost respect for quite a few people I know, not because of their views, but the way they were expressed. A different view just wasn't, and for some will isn't tolerated.

Mari Wilson's song "Just what I always wanted" really is coming to mind with the majority of posters on this thread.

You got what you always wanted.

What do you mean? Is it meant to be pro SNP?