tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post6388244488411824545..comments2024-03-29T10:08:59.956+00:00Comments on SCOT goes POP!: A few thoughts on the forthcoming Quebec electionJames Kellyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01516007141763230886noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-65101244237291608682012-09-03T10:36:59.406+01:002012-09-03T10:36:59.406+01:00I imagine that a NO vote would not stop the SNP fr...<br />I imagine that a NO vote would not stop the SNP from existing. (I'm not certain about a YES vote either, given the current size of the party, and the lack of similar visions on topics other than constitution to be found in other parties.) <br /><br />What a No vote would say is that, at present, there is insufficient support for independence, for whatever reason.<br /><br />But every year the demographic changes; people die, people become eligible to vote, so the situation is fluid, and I'm not sure if it is right that we should be held to the decisions of people long after they are dead. <br /><br />Of course, I too can see that we cannot have a referendum every few years, even every 4 or 5 years when there is a Scottish general election, but I rather think that "a generation", normally taken to mean 25 years as I understand it, would be too long, if signs from the public in the form of voting tendencies, opinion polls, etc, indicated an increase in interest in independence.<br /><br />We cannot say that because the SNP won what, by Scottish electoral system standards, was a massive victory on a manifesto that included an independence referendum, that that necessarily means that the majority of Scots want independence: we would not be able to say that in the future, either. People could have been (and could be) voting in favour of any number of other commitments in a manifesto.<br /><br />But I think that if there was a demonstrable support for independence in 10 years’ time, it might be reasonable to re-test public opinion officially.<br /><br />After all a referendum is only a test of people's opinions. It may seem like a big deal to us, but other countries use them frequently (Switzerland obviously, but the USA too, has a series of referenda, local, state and federal, at most elections). <br /><br />It is real democracy in action. <br /><br />Of course, it's not cheap, but it's not nearly as expensive, or destructive, as going to war, and we manage to do that with monotonous regularity.<br /><br />Of course I believe that 2014 will prove successful for the Yes campaign, but one should be prepared for all eventualities, don’t you think? .<br /><br />Bonnes vacances, James, et bonne rentrée. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-11893063344309307702012-09-03T07:46:10.122+01:002012-09-03T07:46:10.122+01:00Hi Caron, I'm on holiday at the moment, using ...Hi Caron, I'm on holiday at the moment, using my mobile, so it'll be hard to give a very full answer to your question! But "underlying threat"? I can't see how the belief that a No vote would NOT abolish one part of tbe democraticprocess for all time is a "threat". On the contrary, the idea that future generations should be stripped of the right to decide their own constitutional structures is the real threat.<br /><br />But clearly constitutional referendums can't be held every five minutes, or even every five years. Alex Salmond has said this referendum will settle matters for a generation, and I think that's right.<br /><br />Thanks for including this post in the roundup.James Kellynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-58082108907816901592012-09-02T18:41:01.481+01:002012-09-02T18:41:01.481+01:00This is interesting. Firstly because of the underl...This is interesting. Firstly because of the underlying threat that even a comprehensive no vote for independence won't stop the SNP - the neverendum will be a reality:-). How often do you think it's appropriate to keep asking the people if they want independence?<br /><br />Going back to the Quebec elections,as you say, the idea that candidates should be French speaking is so bad and illiberal. If someone stood in the Western Isles who couldn't speak Gaelic, nobody would vote for them - and that's how it should be in Quebec, I would have thought.<br /><br />You can't call yourself a democracy and then start putting barriers in the way of people being candidates.<br /><br />This is a good piece - I've put it in this week's Scottish Roundup. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04988201531739344840noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-79685277559107453512012-08-30T04:12:49.602+01:002012-08-30T04:12:49.602+01:00And of course even in the bilingual Western Isles,...And of course even in the bilingual Western Isles, it would be more or less unthinkable to have an MP or MSP who couldn't speak Gaelic fluently.James Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01516007141763230886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-90636220821536853942012-08-29T23:46:27.988+01:002012-08-29T23:46:27.988+01:00It is amazing. Of course there is a perception tha...It is amazing. Of course there is a perception that people in the province are bilingual, as for example are many Western Islanders in Scotland, but in fact outside of Montréal, a genuinely bilingual city, and Québec City, partly bilingual, the rest of small town Québec is pretty exclusively French speaking. (Interestingly, for me at any rate, a French which includes many words and expressions from the native Canadian languages.)<br /><br />I have many friends in Québec most of whom either speak no English, or very little, certainly not enough to deal with political business.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com