Advisory referendums*: ‘Politicians should feel obliged to implement the result anyway’

‘Our’ MSM are clear. We can have a second independence referendum as long as its presented as only advisory and then, they think, the result can be ignored, just like……the Brexit referendum with its narrow 52/48 result?

Well no. As we are all painfully aware, that one was interpreted in Westminster as the will of the people and was implemented.

Back in 2016, the respected Full Fact, had a look and on the question of whether the EU referendum was “advisory” only and concluded:

The referendum wasn’t legally binding, but there’s plenty of scope for argument about whether politicians should feel obliged to implement the result anyway.

You can read the whole argument here:

* I know it should be/used to be ‘referenda’ like ‘fora’ and ‘hippopotami’ (ignorami?) but I’m giving up on being the crusty old pedant.


8 thoughts on “Advisory referendums*: ‘Politicians should feel obliged to implement the result anyway’

  1. We all knew what will happen with this scenario.

    Vote Yes, it was only advisory and now is not the time.

    Vote No – it’s the settled will of the Scottish people, you will have to wait a generation for Indyref 3.

    That’;s how London will look at it.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Lets just say this all trawls out and results in a Advisory referendum
      Then impossible for the No
      Side to boycott
      Then large turnout
      Then result
      Yes 60%+
      No 40% –
      The dam is well and truly bust
      Westminster try repairing the impossible as the water
      Explodes outwards
      And that is the exact game
      NS is playing at
      If The Supreme court ruling we have NO democratic right to determine and chose our future as Scot,s
      Is also a dam buster
      What is baffling Westminster now is that the coin is now tossed up in the air.Nicola tossed it
      and it is double headed
      What does Westminster call ?
      Heads we win, Tails they lose
      Simple as that, The only reason a Question exits
      Is to remain till answered
      In full,clear and simply
      If not answered simply pose and pose and pose till
      The simple answer comes out YES or NO
      TINA .There is no alternative


  2. Westminster could by-pass a referendum, and release the decade-long polling they have been funding (with our money) in secret, and for which an FoI request has been granted.

    We can imagine the information gathered was not suited to their British nationalist agenda, so they have sat on it.

    They were ordered to release the data some time ago, but this being Westminster they just ignore it.

    A does our colonial media, which may find their own FoI requests being stymied by the same legalistic quagmire in future.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. The No vote in 2014 was only advisory but they still accepted and implemented the result. The Yes vote/s for devolution and the reconvening of the Scottish Parliament were accepted and implemented.
    Let’s not forget what a Yes vote actually means either through a referendum or a by a plebiscite GE, it’s the removal of consent. The Queen has already through her biographer stated that she will accept a Yes vote, Westminster needs to ” think very carefully ” before it crosses that line.


  4. This “legality” argument over Indyref was created under SoSS Moore and furiously challenged by SG’s lawyers at the time.
    The S30 solution purportedly gave the referendum immunity from legal challenge in Court, entirely reliant on HMG’s interpretation.

    Increasingly arrogant politicos and the media branded such a referendum as “illegal” – That lie was repeated ad nauseum, the reality is nobody actually knew what the legal position was.

    NO referendum is legally binding in the UK, neither Indyref nor Brexit were, and I struggle to see how HMG can convince the SC otherwise.
    The LA’s referral essentially calls HMG’s bluff, and irrespective of the SC decision, HMG is in a lose/lose situation and UK democracy is hung out to dry.

    The media will be trying to cover their backsides pending the SC decision
    – If Indyref2 is legally available to SG, how do they explain 8 years of lying about it ?
    – If Indyref2 is NOT legally available to SG, how do they explain lying about “Union of equal Nations” for the last 8 years ?

    Liked by 3 people

  5. I agree with all the points being made here and have no doubt that a Yes vote would be presented as “unofficial” and “not binding on anyone” so that it can be ignored.
    However, the reality is that in Scotland it wouldnt be treated that way, particularly if the outcome was “decisive” – for instance 55% (or more) Yes – if its good enough for No, surely fine for Yes?
    There are though two implications of this.
    First that such an outcome should be achieved on the basis of as a high turnout as possible. One strategy for the Union would be to advise their supporters to abstain, so that a 55% Yes vote could be treated as no more than a statistical fact. Linked to this, can you imagine the media attention to this vote being similar to the attention paid in 2014? No neither can I. So another strategy is to smother the vote with inattention.
    It is therefore up to us to create the sort of level of engagement and even ‘excitement’ that there was in 2014. Remember Buchanan Street the Saturday before the vote, heaving from one end to the other with Yes supporters. In some regards this was a problem in that I think many Yes supporters were seduced by this level of public engagement to think we were going to win, when the fact was that the Unionist side was at home watching the telly!.
    The other implication is a legal one. The Scottish Government case has to put as much distance between the vote and the Union as possible. It is therefore, I think likely that the UK govt case – probably put with more subtlety than this – is going to include that if the vote goes ahead it could create more political pressure on WM to end the Union, which I think is the point that has been made repeatedly above, so reeling the vote back to the Union with the possibility of the Supreme Court finding against the Scottish Government.


  6. Brexit 17million. Most of them have changed their mind. Electorate 45million. Lies and deceit. Breaking International Law.

    2014 IndyRef 200,000 votes swung it. Most of them have changed their mind. Lies and deceit. The Vow.


  7. The naivety. Johnston thinks he will be coming back. Beyond foolish. Instead the Tories will be voted out. Truss for PM what a catastrophe, of any of them.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.