Err. They don't need Scotland's 'consent'. They can effing do it anyway.

but this will be the starting pistol for the SNP to call another referendum for independence ...

They do actually need some sort of agreement from Scotland as human rights laws wrt to the HRA are in part or in full (trying to read the legislation makes my head hurt) devolved powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Westminster cannot impose changes on human rights law in Scotland without the agreement of the Scottish parliament (and I think you can probably guess how likely they are to get that at the moment). On this occasion I'm in full agreement with Mr StevenRogers, any attempt by Westminster to impose changes without the consent of the Scottish parliament gives the SNP a clear reason to go for another referendum

Fair enough because the Scots do have separate legal jurisdiction.However even if all the SNP MPs - in fact all the opposition MPs in total - voted against it, they could still chuck the HRA out in Eng, Wales and NI.

And changing the laws, no matter how onerous, do not give anybody a mandate for anything (this is partly why I disagree with the proposed EU referendum). We got the government we all voted for and they can change laws for the next five years if they can get parliament to vote the changes through. Them's the rules. Youdon't have to like it but you can't just ignore the rules. The SNP need the agreement of Westminster to kick off another referendum, and that's something they're definitely not going to get any time soon. They can complain about it all they like, but the bare fact is that until we've had a few bi-elections that reduce the government majority a bit, they've got no actual power at all in terms of getting a new referendum. And, politically, saying they want one and then not getting it is worse than saying nothing.

Scotland (while part of the UK) has to abide by British law not only in regard to criminal cases but also national decisions made by Westminster but has a jurisdiction on civil law via their sheriff courts, that’s the only real difference

if the HRA is removed from "British" law it will be removed from all of the UK, including Scotland regardless
aka. kick starting a new Scottish referendum. (which wouldn’t take much) if not this it would be something else.

1998 HRA was enshrined within British law but it has done nothing that was not done before under British law
in fact the only benefactors seem to be the villains not the law abiding ...

Err.. it does nothing of the sort. There's a large chunk of Scottish people who want another referendum but they've wanted that since 10 minutes after the result of the last referendum was announced. There's a lump who don't want a referendum again ever and there's a lump who don't give a toss. But a lot of Scots know how much damage was done to Quebec due to the 'neverendum' and they're not daft enough to make the same mistake. It'll make a lot of Scots grumble, but then that's happened before (poll tax etc) and did that ever change anything? No.

There is nothing in British law (including the acts covering the devolution of Scotland, Wales & NI) that allow for an automatic progression of a referendum on full independence in any of the member nations. If the UK dumping the HRA was going to automatically trigger a new Scottish independence referendum, the SNP would be voting in favour of doing so! The only way the SNP can get a referendum process started is if, like last time, they can get the Westminster government to agree the principles on which one will be staged and when it will be staged. And right now Nicola Sturgeon has absolutely no way to guarantee any of that. So she's not even talking about it, because she's a wily sort who isn't going to make herself a prisoner to fortune. Instead she's doing everything she can to pin Cameron down to keep the promises he made last time round, because that's her best option to get the best deal for Scotland and she can't she's got a perfect scapegoat to blame - the nasty Tory didn't keep their word! More financial independence, more devolved government. 'Devo light' as it were.

There will not be another independence referendum for.. well I'd say at least the next two parliaments. Not for this one, and probably not in the next one even if labour win, which is a BIG if. Regardless of whatever else happens in Westminster.

in may of next year there is the Scottish national elections by all reasonable accounts the SNP will sweep the board
that would mean a majority SNP at their national level and after the results of the general election of 56 seats out of 59 available seats going to the SNP anybody who thinks another referendum will not be triggered at any stage for any reason will just have to wait and see, i know where my money is placed

as of neverendom the SNP only have to win a referendum the once and that’s it. they will use any excuse to hold one and use the election results of their national and general elections as a mandate bypassing any interference from Westminster and any imposed changes (HRA for example) that Westminster would like to enforce

whether we like it or not, depending on your point of view, the union is broken. its a matter of what can be salvaged ...

Well, 'at any stage' is a very obvious getout. There may well be another one eventually. But I don't think we'll see another one for a decade at least.


The Quebecois have stopped asking for a referendum because 'the neverendum' was wrecking the local economy. They' 'only had to win one once'. They kept trying and not doing and it kept causing more and more harm. Eventually, even the most ardent nationalist figured out it was doing them more damage than the rest of Canada and it made much more sense to stop shouting and start talking.


They don't get to hold one. They don't even get to decide what one's about. They have no autonomy in the matter at all. One happens if and only if the Westminster government agrees to it. What leverage do they have against a majority Tory government? They will get a referendum if it's in the Tory's interests to give them one. They can moan and whine and stamp their feet, it will make no difference at all. Not one jot. The Torys gave the SNP a referendum last time because to them it was a no-lose situation. Now the SNP have decimated Labour in Scotland anyway and pretty much guaranteed a Tory westminster government for the foreseeable future, exactly what incentive do the Torys have to do Nicola Sturgeon that much of a favour?


A mandate to do what? Ask the Torys nicely if they can have one? because that's all they can actually do.


'Interference'? hahahahaha.


I don't disagree on that point, but the fact is most of what you're saying is barely connected with the actual reality.