The "independence pact"

[Sunnnyday]

I'm surprised no-one's started a thread on this, so here goes. The leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have signed a Joint Memorandum of Understanding and have called on the UK Government to start preparing for constitutional change.
Listening to the BBC on this, there is currently no majority in favour of splitting from the UK in any of the devolved nations, though Scotland is closer to it than the other two. It's a matter of those who are currently in government being in favour, rather than their populations being in favour. So is this no more than a publicity stunt?
And should any referendum on such a huge issue, which, regardless of your viewpoint, will cause enormous contention, upheaval and disruption over many years, be on a majority vote basis? Have we learnt anything from Brexit?
I'm also confused as to why the leaders of Scotland and Wales are apparently confident that their countries would be swiftly welcomed into the EU, and how they would manage a hard border with England.

Who said I was happy? I voted for the Bute House Agreement which was AFTER the election. There was no power sharing when I cast my vote. I wanted an SNP majority. Both parties asked their members and we said yes.

However, Humza ended it and didn't ask us. Was I happy with that? No. Until I witnessed the reaction from Patrick and Lorna. Then I, and many other SNP thought "fook them" .The tail was wagging the dog.

I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm more concerned that Scottish people voted Reform on the list. Reform!

BUT, it was their choice. Same as the people in Glasgow region who voted Green on the list and got that MSP.

It's democracy.

I don't agree with the choices many people make in elections, but I respect their right to make them.

Disagree with the no voters in 2014, but they had the right to make that decision.

And btw, SNP are a broadchurch party, but more left leaning now than in the past. The SGP are left wing. Labour are meant to be. Lib Dems mainly are. There are pieces of legislation that have gone through the SP that most parties (Tories the exception) voted for. Stopping using violence as a parenting tool. GRA. There is a lot of collaboration in the SP. You should be proud of that. All voices heard.

I don't buy it. At that stage Manivannan was almost certainly already involved with the Greens, and they no doubt saw their opportunity to introduce the legislation that would allow them to have him as a candidate - to make up one of the two trans MSPs in parliament (both Green).

As far as democracy goes, a democracy which enables one pie-in-the-sky (tell people what they want to hear) policy to dominate politics to the extent that the governing party can fuck up absolutely everything it touches, but still keeps on getting re-elected, for 19 years, is not a healthy democracy. Brexit was very similar. If people voted based on the government's performance in running the country, we wouldn't have such weak opposition parties. And the SNP might well be an opposition party.

So another example of "the facts don't fit with my preconceived ideas, so I'm just going to deny the facts".

Funny, I've just spent a while in another thread pointing out how commonly this occurs with MN'ers who are opposed to Scots Indi, or the SNP, or who have an obvious and overwhelming obsession with one particular former First Minister, and here we are...

Oh, and FWIW, the person you are happily pontificating about isn't Trans.

Fine, he identifies as queer and non-binary.

Talking about preconceived ideas and facts - what do you consider that, once independent, Scotland would need to do to achieve membership of the EU? And
how would you propose that Scotland deal with the issue of the border with England, assuming that England was at that time still outside of the EU as it is now?
If Scotland was not able to obtain membership of the EU, or it took many years (say 10+), how do you think Scotland would get by?
During that period, how would Scotland safeguard its national security in the face of cyber and possibly also physical attacks from other countries? The way things are going, there's a high chance of that happening, especially as Scotland would be very weak, with no real allies.
How would Scotland propose to support the many people who will lose their jobs because of AI?
"Analysis by the Scottish government published in August 2025 found that Scotland’s notional government deficit stood at 11.6% of GDP in 2024/25.11 That meant that public spending per person in Scotland was around £4,700 higher than tax revenue per person." How do you propose to bring that down? What will you cut, at a time when many will be losing their jobs to AI?
There are plenty of other things to worry about, but maybe we can move on to some of those later.

If you believe that legislation, introduced when they had someone they liked (he was non binary, bright and presentable, fgs) was introduced at exactly the right moment to allow him to stand for parliament, and that was entirely coincidental, then you're extremely naive.

FFS 🤣

"Exactly the right moment".

So what then? The Smith Commission, back in the aftermath of the Indi ref, had Q Manivannan in mind when they made their recommendations in the 2016 Scotland Act, the SG had Q Manivannan in mind when they first drafted the original bill in August 2019?

You are clearly not a serious poster, and at best, an ideologically driven antagonist who ignores absolutely anything which contradicts your own utterly ridiculous prejudices, so this is the last I'm going to bother interacting with you.

I've noticed that you declare that you're not going to interact with other people on a thread when they say things you can't answer. The foreigners being allowed to become MSPs point was just one clause in a larger piece of legislation, and we don't know when that clause was inserted in the draft legislation, which was finalised in 2025 and came into force in 2026. Manivannan stood for the Scottish Parliament in 2026.

How about all these questions I asked you upthread, which you have failed to address? If you don't address them, I can only conclude it's because you can't, and have probably never worried yourself about the actual real-life consequences of Scotland becoming independent:

Talking about preconceived ideas and facts - what do you consider that, once independent, Scotland would need to do to achieve membership of the EU? And
how would you propose that Scotland deal with the issue of the border with England, assuming that England was at that time still outside of the EU as it is now?
If Scotland was not able to obtain membership of the EU, or it took many years (say 10+), how do you think Scotland would get by?
During that period, how would Scotland safeguard its national security in the face of cyber and possibly also physical attacks from other countries? The way things are going, there's a high chance of that happening, especially as Scotland would be very weak, with no real allies.
How would Scotland propose to support the many people who will lose their jobs because of AI?
"Analysis by the Scottish government published in August 2025 found that Scotland’s notional government deficit stood at 11.6% of GDP in 2024/25.11 That meant that public spending per person in Scotland was around £4,700 higher than tax revenue per person." How do you propose to bring that down? What will you cut, at a time when many will be losing their jobs to AI?

Who voted him in?

I assume the people who voted him in just ticked Green on the voting paper without giving a second's thought to exactly who they were voting for, and certainly not to the consequences of allowing foreign citizens to represent us in Parliament and potentially to become ministers, governing Scotland.

Oh, and @XDownwiththissortofthingX , upthread you told me off for saying that Manivannan was "trans". However, this is what he said on being elected - so maybe you should apologise to both of us -

“My name is Dr Q Manivannan, I am a transgender Tamil immigrant, my pronouns are they/them."

The list candidates were all published.

Yes, it's very concerning how people vote for things without actually doing any research or really putting any thought into it, isn't it?

On that point, perhaps you could help @XDownwiththissortofthingX with answering all, or even just some, of the basic questions I've now asked twice on how an independent Scotland outside both the UK and the EU would cope?

Nope. None of us can be arsed.

You don't have a clue, do you? Neither of you. We're talking about Scotland's future - what will happen to your children, if you have any, in a hugely complex and dangerous world in which an independent Scotland would be a tiny fish with few resources and no allies - and you simply don't give a toss.

I have two. That both voted Yes and will again.

A few posters seem to have the opinion that being part of a bigger union is not necessary, that smaller nations like Iceland get by OK.

And Scotland? A smaller nation within a bigger union?

I was recently berated by the Scottish daughter of a Scottish friend who told me that England invading Scotland hundreds of years ago " really wasn't very nice".

I agreed with her but explained,( bless her, she's in her 30s and has a responsible job) that I didn't do it.

I am not Scottish and do not live in Scotland but I'm fed up of the England bashing so I would vote for Scottish independence.

They don’t give a shit about Scotland future. They’re just anti English bigots. There’s literally no other explanation for supporting something as insane as Indy.

Scotland does very well out of being in the Union. It’s gets 18% of its budget directly from the profits of the city of London.

@Murley That is the exact problem with the UK: it is, and I quote "the single most hypercentralised G7 economy". Unquote.

London & the SE supports ALL of the UK.

Why? Because they get the investment. Think Marshall Plan post WWII.

@Murley As an analogy, think of the movies Hunger Games: London is the Capitol (sic). Taking from "the Districts".

The Barnett formula, to be blunt is the price Westminster must pay for this increasingly loveless marriage. Westminster is paying for "love & loyalty" & on any month only 50% +/- 5% of Scots appreciate that.

Why do you think everything is about you? You’re not the only country in the union.

I'm guessing that they've looked into the reality of independence exactly as deeply as you have.

Far deeper than you anyway. Both had great educations. As you say, you didn't.