Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org

Red Justice · Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:10 pm Post subject:

You are not very realistic are you Dave Coull?

Is anyone advocating a delay in any referendum on this forum??

A referendum requires some preparation and takes time and money to organise. Are you or Determination able to organise one? Referendum Now - Yes or No?

I don't think anyone is advocating a delay in a referendum but some of us live in the real world.

It is now likely the only opportunity for a referendum will come from the SNP's bill through Holyrood around or after 2010. I am not a great enthusiast for parliamentarianism but I think any prospect of a referendum will likely have to be passed through the stages or business of the Scottish Parliament.

The SNP has just recently presented it's proposed legislation for the Scottish Parly and they are the ones with access to the corridors of power.

And who are the some who have openly stated "I fear we might loose"?

My comments were applicable about concerns at the present time for a straight yes or no referendum. My logic is support for Scottish independence cannot be taken for granted at the moment. And my support for a multi-option referendum is because I believe that under an STV system of voting firstly the status quo option would likely fall. Leaving a straight fight for more powers or independence. Then if people know that constitutional change is going to happen they will not fear it. They could take cold feet over a straight yes or no referendum that would also have the heavy weight of the Unionist media scaremongering the Scots against voting for independence.

A referendum takes some organisation and time to make happen which makes your slogan doubtful.

Actually the timing for the SNP referendum bill and arguments for independence by 2010 is not bad. The closer we get to a general election the more it will sink into the minds of the Scottish people about the prospect of more years of Tory rule under a Westminster system and remaining part of Britain. I am sure that this does not escape the awareness and knowledge of SNP's leader Big Eck.

_________________
“For socialists, independence is not about the colour or type of flag flying on our public buildings. It is about creating a better society. It is about putting people before profit"
Tommy Sheridan
http://scottishsocfree.blogspot.com

carol · Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 4:21 pm Post subject:

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 2809

Red Justice asked "Is anyone advocating a delay in any referendum on this forum??"

Good question, to which I, for one, would certainly appreciate a straight answer.

I was certainly under the impression that both yourself and Carol have indicated that you thought an "early" referendum might not be politically advantageous. And, from my point of view, anybody who is in favour of a referendum, but is not in favour of this referendum being organised as quickly as possible, is, by definition, in favour of a "delayed" referendum. But since the statements from both of you are a bit ambiguous, it's hard to pin down whether or not anybody on this forum is actually advocating a delay. I for one would certainly appreciate this being cleared up.

"A referendum requires some preparation and takes time and money to organise"

Regarding money, if I remember correctly, didn't Brian Soutar of Stagecoach at one point fund a private referendum on not supporting gay marriage or something like that? But even when there is a millionaire prepared to fund a private referendum (which would definitely NOT be true in this case), any such referendum is sure to be dismissed as automatically biased. And you need a properly maintained electoral register to be able to check whether or not people are actually citizens who are entitled to vote. So, in practice, only the government can organise a referendum. And of course this takes a bit of time. A BIT of time. It takes a few months. It does not take years.

"I am not a great enthusiast for parliamentarianism but I think any prospect of a referendum will likely have to be passed through the stages of business of the Scottish Parliament."

It takes just a couple of months to get a referendum bill through a parliament where there is the will to do so. Donald Dewar and Tony Blair proved that with the bill for a referendum on setting up a Scottish Parliament. Admittedly, the SNP is in a minority, but they could say that the Labour MSPs had wanted them to bring it on. They have a perfect reason for altering their previous timetable, the new situation created by the global economic crisis and the disastrous handling of that (so far as Scotland is concerned) by the British government.

"A referendum takes some organisation and time to make happen which makes your slogan doubtful"

As I have said many, many, many times before, it's just a slogan. A way of expressing rather complex ideas, in a greatly simplified form, in as few words as possible. Of course we can't literally have a referendum "now". Now is seventeen minutes past seven in the evening on Sunday the 21st of September. By the time I finish typing this, "now" will already be past. The meaning of the slogan is "without needless delay". And yes, I do think some folk are in favour of delay, although it can be rather difficult to get them to come straight out and argue for this without ambiguity.

Red Justice · Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:51 pm Post subject:

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 2809

Carol wrote "I questioned your slogan"

It's not "my" slogan. It is simply "a" slogan.

The reasoning behind it has been explained many, many, many times before, but, since you ask, here it is again.

It was originally devised as a slogan to put on a poster. Since the poster was intended to feature in photographs, the lettering had to be large enough to be clearly readable in these photographs. That meant using very few words. And using very few words inevitably meant making things very, very simple. You could say it meant over-simplification. But ALL slogans are over-simplifications. That is what a slogan IS.

It takes just a couple of months to get a referendum bill through a parliament where there is the will to do so. Donald Dewar and Tony Blair proved that with the bill for a referendum on setting up a Scottish Parliament. You might say there is no majority for a referendum bill in the Scottish Parliament, but we can't actually know that until somebody actually puts a bill forward. Quite a few Labour MSPs have made "bring it on" noises. Well then, the SNP government could say that the Labour MSPs had wanted them to bring it on. They have a perfect reason for altering their previous timetable, the new situation created by the global economic crisis and the disastrous handling of that (so far as Scotland is concerned) by the British government. Then there would have to be a period of campaigning by both sides before the actual referendum. But we are still talking about a matter of months, not years. Of course we can't literally have a referendum "now". Now is twenty minutes to ten in the evening on Sunday the 21st of September. By the time I finish typing this, "now" will already be past. The meaning of the slogan is, of course, "referendum without needless delay", but that would have been to many words to fit on a poster and still have it clearly readable from several yards away. In more than one sense, "referendum without needless delay" is just not as snappy a slogan.

"I questioned your slogan and it's origins"

I think I did previously explain the origins of that slogan. But here it is again anyway. There was a Determination meeting at which it was agreed that, even though there were very few of us, there were some actions which didn't actually need a lot of people. Since it could be a LONG time between meetings, the actual timing , venue, and details of such actions could be arranged at very short notice, by phone or by e-mail, and didn't necessarily need a meeting beforehand (although the lessons to be learned from an action should be discussed afterwards).

(Note that yesterday's activity at the Dundee University Freshers Fair is a good example of just such an action organised at very short notice.)

The use of posters for a possible future small action was discussed, and what should be on the posters. I think it was Kenny who came up with the idea of spreading the message over three posters held by three different people. I think it may have been Sheena who came up with the "referendum now" bit, although I'm not really sure about that, it may have been Raymond. I know it wasn't me, although of course I did agree.

"is Determination still part of the wider campaign for a referendum?"

Carol, have you stopped putting arsenic poison in your husband's tea?

You probably think that question doesn't deserve an answer.

Same here.

Now can we please try to discuss the real issues? You can begin with discussing whether or not you are in favour of holding a referendum on independence without needless delay (recognising that Donald Dewar and Tony Blair managed to organise a referendum within a few months).

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 2809

Red Justice wrote "I am willing to be straight about the matter of a referendum and any delay but in my case their could be some ambiguity".

An honest acknowledgment that there can be some ambiguity. That is far better than NOT acknowledging this. There are some questions on which my own views can be a bit ambiguous. But not on this question. On this one my views are pretty straightforward.

"I am happy to wait until 2010 but I also do not object to a referendum sooner"

Personally, I wouldn't exactly say I'm "happy" to wait until 2010. I think it would be far better to hold a referendum sooner, and I will continue to advocate this. But if we don't get a referendum sooner, well then, better late than never.

"My view is I am happy to either have an earlier referendum or one as set out in the SNP timetable sometime around or after 2010 . I do not hold fixed views about a delay in a referendum."

Fair enough. I think holding a referendum as soon as possible would be both more honest and more likely to inspire confidence. I think such a referendum could be won decisively for independence. But I acknowledge that folk can have honestly-held different views on this.

"I do see advantages in allowing the current economic crisis at home and abroad to continue and the possibility of us getting more close to a general election and Tory victory, and for a Tory government to rule us in Scotland which the Scottish people would likely quickly reject. if given a choice they would then promptly vote for independence."

That is the "it has to get worse before it can get better" scenario. I am not convinced by this. Besides, I think, if we had a referendum now, the effects of not having control of our own destinies in the present economic crisis are already bad enough to persuade many wavering voters to back independence. But I acknowledge that folk can have honestly-held different views on this.

RJ writes "Carol as Secretary of Indy First will have to speak for herself or that organisation".

A straightforward answer on the question of whether delay is favoured or not would be welcome, whether it is purely personal or on behalf of a group.

I have consistently advocated a referendum "now", that is, without needless delay, for around four years. When some of us were discussing forming a campaign for a referendum (what became Independence First) everybody involved was, at that time, in favour of holding a referendum without needless delay. Oh, sure, we knew it would take time to campaign for this, and we knew it would take a few months to actually organise a referendum, but none of those involved were, at that time, actually in favour of DELAYING a referendum. Demanding a referendum "now" was in effect the unanimously agreed, default position.

Last year a group of us quit IF, but, as far as I was concerned, it was still the case that holding a referendum without needless delay was the agreed position.

Like I say, I have consistently stuck to that. It seems fairly obvious to me that some others have not. And yet it can be very difficult to get folk to acknowledge that they have changed their position, and to argue openly in favour of their changed position. I accept that you have now done so, RJ, but some others have not.

Red Justice · Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 7:21 pm Post subject:

I know this is only one latest poll which was a YouGov poll in the Sunday Times but interesting.

http://www.snp.org/node/14230

How would you vote in a referendum on scottish independence?

For: 34%

Against: 50%

Under a Conservative Government Scenario:

For: 50%

Against: 41%

YouGov/Sunday Times
_________________
“For socialists, independence is not about the colour or type of flag flying on our public buildings. It is about creating a better society. It is about putting people before profit"
Tommy Sheridan
http://scottishsocfree.blogspot.com

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 2809

Since this was a YouGov poll for the Sunday Times, I looked up the YouGov website to find out about their polling methods.

So far as I can make out from the You Gov website, their polling methods are totally unreliable.

It appears from their website that their polling is done on the internet. How do they select their sample? They don't. The sample selects itself. It's people who have subscribed to the YouGov website. So far as I can make out, there isn't even any way of checking that the people polled are in Scotland. They could be in Australia.

While this particular "poll" seems particularly dodgy, I am sceptical of opinion polling on the independence issue in general. Street polls can also be unreliable, because they depend on which people on the street the "researchers" approach, and which people on the street they don't. There is obvious scope for bias there.

In general I think polls tend to underestimate support for independence.

But having said all that, I also think the act of actually CALLING a referendum would increase support for independence. Just the act of doing so would make independence seem more "real". It would also send out a confident message, the complete opposite of the "No, please, please, not yet" message being given out by some at present.

I think the act of calling a referendum would result in an immediate boost in support for independence.

And then we would have the campaign. There would be sure to be at least six weeks between calling the referendum and actually holding it. Since I believe the independence message is a positive one, I think support for independence will increase during the campaign.

For all of these reasons, I feel confident of the result of an independence referendum.

Those who claim that they are "campaigning" for a referendum, but add the (possibly unspoken) proviso "please, not yet, the opinion polls don't look good" are giving out exactly the wrong message. For if the trumpet sound an uncertain note, who shall prepare himself for battle?

carol · Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:30 am Post subject:

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 2809

I wrote that saying you want a referendum but adding the (possibly unspoken) proviso "please, not yet, the opinion polls don't look good" is giving out exactly the wrong message. For if the trumpet sound an uncertain note, who shall prepare himself for battle?

Carol says "I'm sure you will Dave", but then goes on to ask a couple of questions which suggest she isn't sure at all.

So I'll tell you what, Carol, I'll offer you a fair deal. You answer the questions which YOU have been ignoring, then I'll answer yours.

To remind you once again, here are the previous questions which you have ignored.

Under the topic heading "Independence or the Union? A discussion forum", a heading chosen by you and a thread initiated by you, you advertised an event in Glasgow on Saturday 13th September. After that event, I asked for some details of how it went. "Not a full report, just a wee bit about some of the speakers, what they said, what questions they were asked, and what things came up in the discussion afterwards?"

Ten days later, we're still waiting.

On this thread about "Campaign for a Referendum!", I wrote, in response to RJ, "I was certainly under the impression that both yourself and Carol have indicated that you thought an 'early' referendum might not be politically advantageous. And, from my point of view, anybody who is in favour of a referendum, but is not in favour of this referendum being organised as quickly as possible, is, by definition, in favour of a DELAYED referendum. But since the statements from both of you are a bit ambiguous, it's hard to pin down whether or not anybody on this forum is actually advocating a delay. I for one would certainly appreciate this being cleared up."

RJ has since then cleared things up so far as he is concerned. But so far as yourself is concerned, we're still waiting.

carol · Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:08 am Post subject:

my personal views on a referendum is nothing to do you with you. The report on the event again is nothing to do with you.
If you were so keen to find out, you would've been there. You weren't and no apologies were tendered by you either.

You literally force feed through this forum a 'referendum now' down our bloody throats, repeating it over and over again. Yet what do you do about bringing about a referendum now sweet f all. You're not even aware what support is out there for a referendum now. Other than sit behind a keyboard force feeding your opinion on others, (belittling those who don't see your point of view), you have done nothing to generate interest, ie debates, meetings or rallies.

most laughable thing is that you've done nothing to generate interest for your 'referendum now' yet you jump on the SIC bandwagon which the petitions is clearly part of a longer process feeding into Alex Salmond's timetable.

You want a referendum now get of your arse and get active, and let others campaign in whatever way they wish.

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 2809

Carol wanted me to answer some questions. But she has herself been ignoring earlier questions put to her. So I made a perfectly genuine offer, "answer the questions which YOU have been ignoring, then I'll give full and frank answers to your questions".

In response, The Secretary of Independence First, the Campaign for a Referendum on Independence for Scotland, writes "my personal views on a referendum is nothing to do you with you".

This is really funny....................

I now look forward to the day when Gordon Brown responds to a question during prime minister's question time in parliament by telling an opposition MP "My personal views on what the Labour Government should be doing are nothing to do with you"!!!!!!! Very Happy

"The report on the event again is nothing to do with you"

Nothing to do with anybody else on this forum, either. This is just a place to use for free advertising of IF events, not a place where you can expect to actually read a report on how they went. What a cheeky idea!!!!!!!!!! Laughing

"If you were so keen to find out, you would've been there".

Well I did say "I figured it might have been interesting to hear what Fiona Watson and Patrick Harvie had to say, but Glasgow is a very long way to travel just for that, and anyway, I had promised to take my disabled older sister shopping in Montrose", that was in a post over a week ago.

"what do you do about bringing about a referendum now sweet f all"

Tut tut, Carol, that is not only manifestly untrue, it is also abusive.

"get of your arse"

Sweet f all? Get off your arse? If I had used language like that, my mother would have skelped me. But you have my genuine sympathy, Carol. I'm sorry you didn't have the benefit of a proper upbringing.

carol · Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 7:06 am Post subject:

Dave Coull now starts ridiculing me, one of your signs of failure. Also go back to earlier in the thread, it's evident who was avoiding questions.

How anyone can take you seriously beats me. You make a spectacle of yourself continuously.

As for the slogan being inspirational, not with your name tagged on to it

Anyway i'm out of here, got my health to think about rather than arguing with someone like you, you're not worth it.

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 2809

Carol wrote "go back to earlier in the thread, it's evident who was avoiding questions".

I think you have been avoiding questions, Carol, not just in this thread but in others, for instance, in the "Independence or the Union? A discussion forum" one started by yourself. Yet , while deliberately avoiding questions yourself, you have expected me to answer questions from you. So I offered you a perfectly reasonable deal. You make at least a start on answering the questions which you had previously avoided, and I would answer yours. That was a perfectly genuine offer, and I was quite prepared to be quite painfully open about my own shortcomings in answering your questions. You chose to indignantly reject this perfectly genuine offer.

"Dave Coull now starts ridiculing me"

Carol, the Secretary of Independence First, the Campaign for a Referendum on Independence for Scotland, telling anybody "my views on a referendum are nothing to do with you" IS ridiculous. I couldn't make it any more ridiculous even if I tried.

"As for the slogan being inspirational, not with your name tagged on to it"

It doesn't have my name tagged on to it, and it wasn't me who came up with it in the first place.

It's just a slogan. It's just a way of trying to communicate a quite complex message in as few words as possible. Okay, an over-simplification. All slogans are over-simplifications. That is what a slogan is. But the ideas which this one seeks to express are right. Doubts and hesitations and "please, please, please, let's wait a few years, we don't want democracy yet, because we're scared of democracy, we're scared we might lose" are hardly the kind of thing to inspire confidence amongst the people of Scotland.

Besides, as has been pointed out, the circumstances have changed. Look at what has happened within the past week, with Gordon Broon waiving the rules against monopoly mergers, and virtually pushing Lloyds TSB into taking over the Bank of Scotland, a move which is likely to result in a lot of job losses and inconvenience for customers. And the global economic crisis is getting worse, and being ruled from London in this crisis can make it even worse for Scotland. Alex Salmond and co could perfectly reasonably say, well, we had planned for 2010, but the disastrous policies of the British government in mishandling the crisis, so far as Scotland is concerned, have created a new situation, and, the longer we delay, the worse the effects of being governed from London in the present global economic crisis are likely to be, and we know Labour MSPs have been keen for us to "bring it on", so that is exactly what we intend to do. I am certain that such decisiveness and confidence would be rewarded with a clear majority for independence.

Scotland86 · Gaining a Reputation Joined: 12 Dec 2008 Posts: 249

Sorry to be rude but there was too much to read at 4.30am but what i did notice about as far as i read was talk of a multi option referendum.

This i must admit i am totally against, the more options you give the more it can confuse people or leave gaps open for anti referendum supporters to disregard the results etc.

What i would like to see is a simple. "Should Scotland be an independent country" with the answers clearly stating "yes" or "no"

Aventinian · Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:53 am Post subject:

Scotland86 · Gaining a Reputation Joined: 12 Dec 2008 Posts: 249

No but it has been proven that the more options you add the more people become unaware of what exactly they are voting for.

Aventinian · Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:05 am Post subject:

Scotland86 · Gaining a Reputation Joined: 12 Dec 2008 Posts: 249

how can YES or NO not be what you want? its the 2 extremes its guarenteed to cover what people want. your just throwing silly comments about in an attempt to act like you have a point worth hearing

Aventinian · Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:21 am Post subject: