Sounds strange, that the word "supermajority" is used in the context of the UK. As I understand, in UK a party which has a majority in the parliament, can change any law as it wishes. In some countries, like my native Finland, a supermajority of 2/3 of the MPs is required to make changes to the constitution. Normally such change to the constitution should also be confirmed after another general election, so that people can have their say, but a supermajority of 5/6 of the MPs can decide, that the change is urgent, so it will enter in force immediately. You don't have such rules in the UK, so it is strange to speak about "supermajority". It seems to me here from outside, that the term is used by the Conservatives just to make the voters worried, and to vote for them just in case.
This is correct, but the importance of such a large majority is that it can help to combat party infighting. In labour's case, there is a sizeable left-wing contingent that may eventually decide to stop towing the party lines. The larger the majority, the more MP's would need to have this opinion. This is a bigger issue for labour than it was in the early years of the recent tory majority (2019-2021) because there was a lot less infighting for the tories back then than there is now, whilst labour still has a considerable chunk of the party with different opinions from the leadership. Hope that clears it up😊
@@JackGJack7that’s why Stammer has been cracking down on Corbynites are the left of the party. By doing this now he can ensure that when he gets into office, the majority are going to be moderate left, so he needs less internal diplomacy.
Yes, it’s another bit of lazy American language creeping over the Atlantic. It’s a Tory trick to scare people, because that is all they have. Once a party has say a 30 seat majority, they have all they need. We don’t have filibusters.
It’s a new buzzword ( media always love them) borrowed from the US where it actually has meaning. In a UK parliamentary context it’s absolute BS because Starmer would be just as powerful with an 80 seat majority as he would with 300. This is a scare ploy so that as many individual Tory skins as possible can be saved (though the betting scandal still unravelling may well put the mockers on that)
It's used in the U.S. to mean enough votes to break a filibuster in the Senate or to override a presidential veto. Of course neither has relevance to Westminster.
No such thing as a supermajority in the UK. Just embarrassingly big for the party on the way out. An effectively opposition is needed, but the swivel-eyed loons in the Conservatives is not that.
Not really sure that’s accurate. If a party has a bigger majority, then leadership usually has an easier time getting their ideas through, compared to a small majority where a few nay sayers in your own party can halt any action by choosing to reject leadership.
It must be remembered that 38% of Labour voters support Scottish independence. It’s not all about the SNP, and never has been. Libdem voters, Tories, Alba and Greens all have independence supporting voters.
It's worth noting that in UK politics, there is no such thing as a supermajority. A 200 seat majority doesn’t give you anything an 80 seat majority doesn't; there is technically no difference between a 300 seat majority and a single seat majority. Now obviously in practive there are differences; having a larger majority grants the government more security and authority but again, that’s it. Keir Starmer won't have any more power than Boris Johnson or Liz Truss or Rishi Sunak did. It's hard to appreciate given how poorly they made use of their majority in recent years, but if the party was more disciplined and united, they would have been effectively elected dictators, as Starmer will be.
I disagree somewhat although I favor a very large majority for Labour. I would define a super-majority as any majority of 100 or more seats. If a party has that amount it would take more than 80 rebel members of that party to disrupt any legislation that the party wished to pass. Since the usual number of rebels in any party -left or right - is about 30-40 members the ruling party not only does not have to worry about the opposition but it also does not have to worry about upsetting its own somewhat more ideological MPs.
@@gregorybiestek3431It's just that in most other countries "supermajorities" are an actual defined thing, that's required to change things like the constitution. So it's much less of a deal in the UK than in most places.
One possibility you have not considered - Labour win big and the SNP lose, support for the SNP and support for independence are not the same thing, as the polls show independence support remains roughly where it has been since the referendum. It is possible, therefore, Scottish Labour will get a lot of new, younger members who have voted Labour at this election but still believe independence is best for the future. Scottish Labours positions on big topics are often decided at Conference, by the party members not the leadership. It is for this reasons Scottish Labour holds positions, such as no renewal of Trident, that is in stark opposition to Westminster Labours plans to renew Trident. Scottish Labour in the future could find themselves the largest party in Scotland again, but eventually being forced, as on Trident, to adopt a stance opposite of English Labour, one that favours independence (there was at the last referendum already a small but existent 'labour for independence' movement) if enough Labour members in Scotland want it.
It could be possible that enough members of the labour department try to raise their voice in favour but quite difficult to see how English labour would allow them to retain that position, party structures for such parties are rarely you know permissive of policies that defy their main political base, Labour is a centralist party a state party and I very much doubt they allow their "departments" as much freedom regarding policies such as independence. These kind of subsidiaries be it conservative or labour just seem firmly under the control of the English, same with Welsh Labour, voters would be naive they can change these organisations from within, if that process goes forward though and Scottish Labour changes its stand on independence the next step is clear they need to break off from English Labour as the Scottish Greens did. Ruling Scotland for England for Westminster? That's unacceptable.
So in 10 years, support for independence hasn't increased at all. There is no point in having a second referendum if it will fail. "2 no votes would really cement the issue as settled and there wont be a 3rd referendum in our lifetime. Its hard to make a case for independence right now. the only thing that would increase support for independence would be if the Labour government failed, so we would need to wait and see what happens. the SNP cannot afford to wait, they need to campaign for independence NOW to prop up their ailing party regardless of whether it is good for the country or not or if they have a legal avenue to do so. They know they wont return enough MSPs at the next scottish parliamentary election to claim to have a mandate and may not even be in government at all
@@spiderbootsy its had a few times went over the 50% mark problume is the scottish unionist partys and suport of unionisum as fallen over all but indy vote has not meaning peaple have not changed there view on the matter but the oder gen is dieing off and well polling shows young peaple are not changeing there view on this matter
@@spiderbootsy The SNP having a lot of MP's is an historic anomaly that only came about in very special circumstances unlikely to be repeated again all at once. Them even making double figures in MP's is a major improvement over their historic numbers, as sending them to Westminster is not the most useful thing - they have been there in numbers and Westminster has continued to ignore and drive legislation over Scotland anyway. It's the Scottish parliament they need to win, and win well to make any independence case. So long as there is at least 50% of the population who want it, it will remain inevitably a live political topic. As to legal avenues, well that is of more concern to me, we appear to be in a voluntary union with no way to opt out, and if there even is an exit our rulers will not tell us where the exit door is even located. If you have to ask permission to be free it is quite possible you were never free to begin with. I do not believe Scotland is politically free, or ever will be under Westminster.
The word Supermajority is often used in the US, where it is needed to overcome filibustering. It can also be used in countries that need a 2/3 majority for constitutional changes (like Belgium, and also Finland, as I just learned from a comment here). The word is meaningless, spoken from a political-scientific viewpoint, in the context of the British parliamentary system.
Honestly, if the SNP do well in the popular vote, but Labour slips ahead a load in seats, that could still cause resentment for the UK political system.
@@vardekpetrovic9716I fundamentally disagree. I have had zero representation for my vote since I was of voting age because my area votes strongly for the Tories. The same is true of Tory voters in strong Labour areas. And true of other parties in virtually every other seat. The first past the post only system is broken. I think the MMPR system balances local representatives with fairly representing the portion of the vote a party receives. Alternative vote, whilst not my preferred voting system, at least would have been fairer than FPTP, and probably would have stopped the Conservatives becoming the hard Brexit party.
Scottish Independence is an idea that will return if Scotland is taken for granted and not given additional devolution powers or made to feel part of the Union with the next generation. We won’t have a country if we don’t fight for it and we came really close to losing it with 14 years of Tory rule.
@@Gericho572exactly. Lots of scots seem to think Westminster is in control when it’s in fact the SNP who have ruined Scottish education, NHS, etc etc. the idea that more control would lead to better outcomes is just nonsense.
What number of mps equals a supermajority in parliament? I’m a tad thick, I assumed a majority was invited to form the governing party and had the power to form laws. Now I hear there’s a new villain in west minister, labour super majority.
@@_Ali. No number equals that, because it's just not a thing. You only need 50% of votes to pass things in parliament, so, theoretically, at long as you have 1 extra seat you can pass anything unopposed. In reality, there are occasionally dissenters, defectors or you can lose MPs due to various reasons, which means that the larger your majority the more safety you have. But you're rarely going to have more than a handful of rebels vote against their own party's legislation.
@@Zikar yes I know, it was kind of rhetorical. An 80 seat Tory majority was a non issue, but apparently a 100 seat labour majority means democracy itself has imploded and you won’t have anyone holding them to account. And dumb people believe it because the media keep repeating it. Theoretically any government is a “supermajority” because they can push through any piece of legislation.
This video makes the wild assumption that a Labour government would be: 1. Good for Scotland. 2. Popular in Scotland. Don't get it twisted. Labour are not popular in Scotland. In fact it's the opposite. It's apathy for the Tories and to a lesser extend the SNP that have let to their gains. Despite the SNP falling in the polls, Independence polling hasn't shifted futher towards Pro-UK at all.
@Minimmalmythicist Yeah. I firmly believe that the thing that will sway a lot of those Don't Knows and Soft Unionists to the independence cause is the inevitable nothing that Labour are gonna be with their huge majority that they are probably gonna get. Labour are promising nothing but more of the same, and I think because people don't particularly care about them in Scotland mixed with the fact that they're gonna win anyway, it wouldn't shock me if a lot of them just didn't bother voting. My prediction is SNP wins 30-35 seats.
@@mfzbtravis Rather most of indies will swing to unionists why you decide that people would want to risk their homes and future for the prospect to create a new state is beyond me
The only thing which will "kill" independence is the government spending a single penny outside of London and the Home Counties. Labour has run the Welsh Assembly/Senedd for the past 25 years and yet polling for Welsh independence just hit 37% in a country where you can't even take a train from north to south without crossing into England. Undermining the legal authority of the devolved government without quantifiably improving the life of England's Subjects will only lead to direct action.
As you pointed out Independence is regularly polling aboe 40% and for an extended period was above 50%, simply ignoring these people won't make the issue go away. Labour needs to make the case for greater devoloution across the UK, including Regonal Assemblies in England, provided it isn't just a series of expensive talking shops.
I completely agree with you! My first 100k took a long time and wasn't that special to be honest with you. Once I hit 300K that is the game changer in my opinion. At this point my money is basically making me a pretty good yearly salary. When I go to sleep at night I know my money is making decent money with the help of my FA
Nice. People often underestimate financial advisors' importance. Over 50 years of data reveal that those who work with advisors typically earn more than those who go it alone. I've been fortunate to work with one for 13 years, resulting in a $1 million portfolio, largely from early investments in AI and other growth stocks.
No. The independence movement isn’t just the SNP, it’s a broad cross-society movement. The Yes campaign was never just an SNP party machine, it represents all pro-indy ‘Scots’ (people who live and can vote here). Labour can kick the proverbial constitutional rugby ball down field but the sovereignty of the Scotland to determine its future within the UK lies with the people. That’s acknowledged in the Scotland Act and it was enshrined in the 1989 Convention (which Labour campaigned for and subscribed to). Labour’s Donald Dewar is famously called ‘the father of the nation’. For now, most of us accept that independence is on the back burner - rightly so. But it’s undemocratic to put arbitrary limits on the people’s right to choose. In 2014 it was no, in 2024, who knows.
Also Starmer is nowhere near left wing enough for most Scots, particularly in the working class central belt. I don’t feel I can trust him not to undermine devolution. At the same time, Westminster elections hardly matter here. It just underscores how unfair the political demography of the UK is. Even all of Scotland voted one way en masse, we do not have enough seats to really sway things. The union is not equal, at least democratically. This is not unique to Scotland, Wales faces similarly marginalising boundaries. That’s why many voted SNP, including a chunk of former No Voters. To represent Scottish interests in a centre left fashion. But most UK outlets, seemingly including yours, won’t talk about the fact that England determines the result - no matter what Wales, Scotland or N.I. do. Yet, the Labour party is so blinded by historical hatred of the ‘Tartan Tories’ - they cannae see we’re mostly allies on policy. I’m looking forward to the Tories going out, we’re counting on you England.
@@Cab00se90 Scotland deeply desires to be a country where no on ever has to work We want everything to be free from the state Which will be paid for by taxing the rich
@@Cab00se90 Yup. Speaking as someone from England, Westminister fundamentally doesnt respect Scotland as a distinct country. As such, they make arguments focused on the equality of power per vote per person, not in terms of balancing power between the established states within the union
the snp are the only pro Scottish independence party in Westminster and no other party would advocate for an independence referendum while absolutely support for independence and support for the snp are separate a blow to snp popularity does make independence less likely
Talking rubbish, all the SNP does is prey on people like you who want independence so that they could have comfortable seats in Westminster. I feel sorry for the Scottish people who so easily fell into the Tories and SNP's electioneering trap.
I don't understand. What's the difference between a supermajority and a majority? I know it is used to refer to more Labour MPs, but wouldn't that mean that there will be more infighting within the party? Also, doesn't the majority already have the power to change whatever laws they wish?
In the UK specifically, there is no difference. It's a marketing trick by the Tories to scare voters away from Labour. In some countries, some laws require 67% (2/3) vote share in the parliament to pass, hence the term "super majority" as apposed to a simple majority (1/2).
It doesn't mean much in the UK except that the party does not have to worry much about rebellious MP. The term is taken over from other countries where such a large majority allows them to conduct e.g. constitutional changes without opposition support.
At 6:27 you said the Survation poll had the SNP at 37 and Labour at 14 however on screen it shows the SNP at 34 and Labour at 17. Easy mistake, great video otherwise.
@@sn4831 not unbiased but trying to be unbiased by repeating whatever each side says as if it was a fact. An expert opinion is not equal to what somebody with a political agenda tells you, pretending they're equal is not unbiased.
there is no such thing as a super majority. IF you have a majority in the house it simply requires a small amount of buffer to ensure 100% of your legistlation goes through
Scottish Independence is still Alive it's just Independence is not the Forefront Focus right now So many of them Voting Labour Now. But they Would Still Vote for Independence as evidenced by the Recent Polls Indyref2 is still Close
@@jonasmejerpedersen4847 As a fellow dane and SF voter, I am dissappointed by your lack of knowledge, scottish independence is very much realistic and we would benefit from it as they would likely look to us and the other nordic countries for support and would, with their oil and other natural ressources, strengthen the nordics in the EU parliament if Scotland decided to rejoin the EU
SNP used the independence debate to turn Scotland into an SNP independence vs Tory Unionist electoral battleground, favorable terms for the two parties to keep Labour out, make the SNP look popular and keep the westminster MP money coming in while keeping the Tories in to rally against. What a wonderful bit of hoodwinking it was from the SNP and Tories, so good that Murdoch ran front pages in England and Scotland endorsing the two parties. I dont feel angry towards the Scottish people, I feel sorry for how they have been decieved by these two parties on the emotive subject of independence.
Politics is a question of cycles. The SNP is on the backfoot, they will fall back and will not be able to push independence for a few years. But Labour is hitting the apex of its upward swing. And what goes up will inevitably come down. In government, Labour will own failures and scandals and at some point blaming the previous government won't work anymore. When Labour falls, the SNP seems to be best placed in Scotland to stage a comeback. Independence won't be dead, but it will be delayed.
@@RichardFraser-y9t Simple really, if a party achieves a majority of 200-300, It can basically do whatever It wants. But if the majority is only 50-100, there's a possibility that if a rowdy group (SCG or ERG) rebels, a bill could be killed or passed against the government's wishes.
God help us if Labour get in! Higher taxes. Higher illegal immigration. Higher crime. Less public services. Less green spaces. Higher national debt. Lower defenses. Anything good about the Labour Party? I can’t think of anything. Vote Reform UK and let’s make a real change to all this corruption and lies. Think before you vote as you may not get another chance to save what’s left about our country. Unless you’re planning on leaving the UK for good? Reform need your support. Thank you!
I think the idea of devolution and "super mayors" is a good one to make sure that local issues are being heard. I live in Canada were we have a Federal, Provincial, Regional Municipalities / Counties (depending on where you live) and then Municipal levels of government. I was extremely baffled when I went to the UK and found out England doesn't have it's own government and the other nations had relatively new governments. Having multiple levels of government doesn't completely remove federal resentment by any means but it does allow for more local issues heard by people who care and have the time to act on it. As an outsider, I think the UK really does need that devolution to stay united.
Scottish independence is dead in the water irrespective of politics. How are they going to pay for everything without Englands' support? Military infrastructure and shipbuilding would most likely move, killing those areas, oil is on the decline and even now they score bottom on so many metrics. Are the EU going to want another financial drain on their hands for the sake of some additional fishing access??????
@@craigevans6156 For the same reason we keep hold of Northern Ireland, despite all the troubles. Because we're a United Kingdom and secondly-in case your little brain has forgotten- the Scottish people actually decided they would prefer to stay British.
2 things; SNP vote share doesn’t directly correspond with the Indy vote. Current polling is around 50% and not 40% as you said for Indy. Also we all know Starmer is going to make an arse of it so I’d be thinking forward to the 2026 HR elections.
@@thinfourth I’d give it a couple of years, maybe you’ll have a change in attitude. Don’t think Starmer is going to do much better than the tories and managing the decline of the UK.
A hung Parliament with the SNP holding the balance of power would have boosted the SNP, one can overstate the Iimpact of a Conservative Givernment on public opinion. The SNP moved from a 20% party to running Scotland under the last Labour Government. In reality the issue is politically dead, polls suggest that in theory just under half support it, but in the same polls it is not considered important, often not making the too ten issues. People support a referendum, but not now, a some ever shifting time in the future. Its a combination of the SNP incompetence in Government, their inability to provide convincing answers on the practicalities and the extra difficulties created by Brexit, particularly if Scotland wished to join the EU.
Leon Brittan said in the 80s that if the SNP got a majority of Scottish seats in two consecutive elections, that would be time to negotiate Independence. Admittedly, I don't think Thatcher OK'd that statement. But 37 for the SNP would still give the SNP a majority of Scottish seats, for the 4th General election in a row. At some point either Westminster has to allow a referendum now that a No vote no longer "guarantees" Scotland stays in the EU, or the idea that Scotland is in a voluntary Union becomes a sham. Ireland voted for Home Rule in every election for decades before they took up arms. If Westminster continues to block a second (post Brexit) referendum regardless of how many times the SNP wins, aren't they basically telling the Scots they need to take up arms like Ireland did? You seem to be forgetting that the big jump in vote share for the SNP (in 2007) where they first came to power in Scotland - was when Labour were in charge in Westminster.
With how much Russian money and influence made its way into Scottish independence movements (no nato, no sub bases etc), I really hope Scotland has a second look at the whole thing and who backed it.
Erm.....no, if you want a real answer.....labour will never make any ground in Scotland while they continue their anti Scottish self determination stance, and the SNP do not exist in Scotland just because how bad the tories are, that is so wrong in many ways.
The issue is Westminister fundamentally doesnt respect Scotland as a distinct country. As such, they make arguments focused on the equality of power per vote per person, not in terms of balancing power between the established states within the union
The only people who can kill Scottish indpendnce are Scottish voters. They voted against indeendence ten years ago, and there is no evidence that the Scottish people have changed their minds despite Brexit. What is truly bizarre is that the SNP keeps trying to hold another referendum, despite the fact they will almost certainly lose. If they lost two referendums, that would definitely kill the question for the foreseeable future (see Quebec). A more canny stratategy for the SNP would be to wait until 2034, that's twenty years, and so fits the criterion of "once in a generation", and also demographic change would be enough to make winning much more likely. In many ways, the Westminster government is doing the cause of Scttish indepence a favour by denying a referendum now. The SNP's idea that them winning the majority of seats, even if they do not win the majority of votes, is somehow a mandate for independence is undemocratic, and just emphasises the fact that they cannot persuade the majority of Scots to vote for independece, so it has to resort to ignoring the wishes of most voters.
@@DarklordZagarnalike in 1978 Labour rebels voted down a referendum on Scottish devolution They were only placated the next year by introducing a turn out requirement 😊
"Angela Rayner: Every part of Britain will take fair share of migrants" Party deputy leader insists all authorities must house successful asylum seekers who will be eligible for places in new 1.5m social housing" The Telegraph 26/6/24
In a Westminster system, does it really matter how big the majority is? I mean the parties seemingly have so much control over MPs, as shown by how rare it is for MPs to vote against their party. So what can an opposition do when there can't be a divided government and legistors live in fear of "the removal of the whip"?
The tories are under investigation by the police for possibly betting on this election. Reform have had to suspend members who were going to stand for being openly racist. Labour have just had their own court cases. Lib Dems seem like the only one who haven’t been in trouble recently and I don’t even know what they stand for anymore. Don’t try and make out one party are crooks when they all are
Uhh huh, awfully convenient isn't it just? In truth I wouldn't believe there was any financial scandal, lest Scotland were independent and there weren't certain actors wishing for the death of the indy movement.
Overall no. Support for Indy is still stable compared to the decline of the SNP. Many Labour voters support independence but vote Labour for more anti-Tory than pro-UK. Nonetheless, the 2014 referendum was given based on the more democratic Scottish Parliament results not seats to some less representative parliament in London. If Labour manage to keep momentum in 2026 and kick the SNP out of the Scottish Government then that is more likely going to impact independence more than the upcoming election. Labour have two years to prove their support to Scotland if they win come July 4th. If the SNP maintain the Scottish Government the issue isn’t going away, nor will it ever go away until support for independence drops below ~30% and especially among the youth, which overwhelmingly isn’t the case.
I would say it was the Scottish vote to remain that killed the independence movement, but I suppose nowadays the idea is to keep going until we get the result we want?
Scots voted yes in 2014, it was those from england living in Scotland that pushed the vote to a no. We voted to be an independent country whether you want to acknowledge it or not, the BBC even has a voter demographics article that proves this.
@@thevis5465 Scotland isn't an ethnostate. Following this logic is dangerously close to claiming that only one ethnicity should have the right to vote. Those English people living in Scotland may have been resident there for longer than you've been alive, and almost all of them would stay resident if Scotland voted to leave. To not give those people a vote would be the textbook definition of discrimination.
A party with a majority of MPs in parliament be it 1 or 600 is exactly the same, () there is no such thing in UK politics as a supermajority - it's a meaningless term in the UK The SNP will not be getting more MPs and are likely to get less - this will kill the current independence campaign for the time being not anything happening in the rest of the UK
I'm a Scottish green party member but I'm voting SNP because they only party that can represent Scotland in westminster I'd love to be able to vote green but FPTP makes that impossible. I don't want labour in Scotland I want an SNP green coalition in Holyrood as they can hold the UK government to account and have ambition in their policies Scottish labour will just be UK labour lap dog
I would love it too but really Hamza's shadow and how the SNP under his direction teared apart the Bute House agreement doesn't inspire much trust to voters, Can Jon steer the SNP in a different direction in one where they are actually willing to collaborate with the Scottish Greens once again? Will the Scottish Greens trust the SNP politically again so soon? Will the Scottish Greens be able to get part of the SNP's voting base in the next Scottish elections and change the board a bit, giving them more negotiation power? Certainly if the Scottish Greens are reassured that the SNP won't make a U turn regarding their policies and Jon's promises of embracing the "moderate left party" image over the infighting with more conservative members can be the key for a new coalition, the ball is on the SNP's roof they need to respect their coalition partners and make decisions together as a government for at least most of the time. Absolutely agree though that getting into Westminster is only possible for a bigger party as a of now so the SNP is the only nationalist party that is up for it, Scottish Labour smells rotten the same Welsh Labour dies they are a protest option for Independence voters(due to corruption/embezzlement scandal and infighting) but I doubt they will ever be happy with their choice, Starmer's devolution plan might be well received by the regions and specially the Isles(thinking about Orkney and Shetland perhaps the Hebrides too) if they imply offering better services for the local communities all kinds of decentralisations are appreciated but if their scheme is to weaken Holyrood and it's influence then it is bound to fail, independence goes beyond devolution as you know it is the desire to make the most out of their country which means at the end of the day rising as a new state.
Please do a video on sudan. The UAE proxy war for recourses, thats killed thousands and thousands of people, should get similar coverage to the palestinian conflict.
Second time you guys have posted something like this... but the answer is no.. Labour and kier won't hault the want for independence.. infact he is already making our case stronger by rejecting scotland in multiple different areas..
I live in Scotland, I think independence is the way forward. Than I remember who's in power. And immediately realise the SNP would drive Scotland into hell with their stupid ass policies. Ironically, a right-wing independence party may sweep.
If we get Scottish independence and have to build a wall between Scotland and England can we please get Italian workers to build it that would just be too funny.
4:47 the biggest evidence that independence is needed. Scotland should not have to beg england for permission. That's not a "union of equals." Free people don't beg for permission.
@@thomicrisler9855 Sometimes, but not for this one. In this particular case, wrong doesn't become right just by lots of people being wrong. Scary, I know.
Here are some performance metrics for the SNP: 1. Free uni tuition 2. High health funding 3. Baby boxes 4. 1,140 hours of free child care 5. 13 new benefits under social security 6. Scottish child payment, counteracting 2 child benefit cap 7. Free prescriptions 8. 228,000 affordable homes delivered 9. Free bus travel for over 65 and under 22 10. Lowest student debt in the UK 11. Free school meals for pupils between P1 and P5 12. More GPs per person than anywhere else in the UK and at better pay too 13. Nationalised rail 14. Best performing A&E in the UK 15. Free dental care to under 26s On and on the list goes. IDL what you mean "cleaning up their image"‽
I remember the bettertogethers campaign slogan The only way to protect your EU memebership is to vote for the union, couple years later after rejecting independence Scotland gets ripped out of the EU against our will whilst our farming and fishing sectors are used like pawns daily, wElCoMe tO tHe uNiOn 😂 🏴
I’m not British but feel like people saying there’s no “super majority” miss the point”. If you have a narrow majority then a handful of dissenting mp can derail your agenda, like what Teresa May experienced in brexit negotiations. If you have 500 seats then you can get your way even if 100 of your MPs disagree
Not being British you should realise that the word 'supermajority' was never used before in British politics, not for any of Thatcher's or Blair's and not for Johnson's in '19 (not the 'other' big majority in what 1924 or something) . It was brought into this campaign by the Tories, simply to scare people who are deserting them in droves.
@@freddytang2128 That seems undecided from what I understand. Party discipline tends to break down with larger majorities (case in point, the Tory gov't since 2019), so some think it's easier with a somewhat smaller majority. The coalition from '10 to '15 held fine, for example, despite having only 362 seats between two parties - a majority of less than 40.
Is it a surprise when in the same breath you're told "you're too small, too poor and too stupid to manage independence, but also vitally important and necessary for the cohesion of the UK" that many of us in Scotland feel like we're being lied to? Westminster has a marketing problem north of the border that it simply is too arrogant to address, namely that any potential "beneficial policy" is laced with genuine harm and malice. That's not unique to Scotland though, it applies universally to everywhere outside of London. Actions speak louder than words after all, and Westminster offers many many words and a lot of clownery to distract from how many of the nation's people it's killed through cruelty and negligence. If the SNP were as bad as the reactionary crowd claim, then surely England must be a paradise compared where the right actions were taken, right? RIGHT? Yeah, i didn't think so. That's not to say the SNP are squeaky clean either, but their dubious actions compared to Westminster are what Mercury is to the Sun - Westminster has a lot more to answer for, and leaves a LOT more to be desired, particularly after this conservative negligence spree of the last decade+. Scots, much like the rest of folks subject to Westminster whims are happy to meet people half way if we feel like we're being listened to, treated with dignity and respect. When that consistently doesn't happen from UK parties, that's how you get SNP domination at the polls. It's not like it's rocket science. Now, if Labour was to properly listen, offer genuine solutions to the nation's many crippling, systemic issues, you'd get heads turning in Scotland. Indy support =/= SNP support, and until there is proof that the UK represents prosperity for it's people, that 50% indy support isn't going away.
A liver won't do well outside of the body but the body still needs it. It's actually like the anti Brexit argument. The UK was important for the EU but would do poorly outside of it. The UK will be worse off without like the EU is worse off without the UK.
@@mnm1273 The UK in general feels like an appendage to London. That'd be something i'd love to see tackled, be it through investment and diversification, federalisation or some other means (assuming indy is off the table). There's no reason why the rest of England and the devolved nations can't find their own industry, specialise in various new things and climb their way out from the lot they've been given, and there's absolutely no reason why the UK couldn't be a prosperous place as a whole, not just one small enclave. I find it wild that as a nation that we kind of don't do anything, just MLMs with no tangible home made product to sell. It feels like we took a look at the Avon business as a service model and just said "sure, that'll do" and then never aspired for better. I'd like to see incentives that pull money out of London. I'd like to see home grown industry flourish. ... I'd also like to see poo being properly dealt with rather than ending up in the rivers, so, priorities first i suppose. Perhaps act like the rich nation we claim to be first.
@@runawaywolf2570 Scotland has a parliament. You're seeing what happens when Scotland rules itself. If anything, it'll be worse because they won't be subsidized by Westminster.
Scottish independence campaigns are almost a rubber stamp of the Brexit ones. You can always get people on your side claiming the big bad in Westminster/Brussels doesn't have it's priorities straight and tug on the nationalists' heart strings. I'm not saying there are no issues but the main reason is just political posturing and manipulation someone can get in power - they aren't interested in actually doing well for the countries.
You know, you would think that with how problematic brexit was people would be less inclined to leave a union especially one older and stronger than the EU. Like independence sounds nice but the practical issue that’s arise out of it make ill advised. The defense issues that would come from it alone would be catastrophic for Scotland and the UK
There is no such thing as a supermajority, without defining the meaning, which is not a thing in the UK. You only need a majority of about 40-50 to cover by-elections and rebels in the party (whichever one). Does this mean that the Tories had a supermajority in the 1980's and under Alexander Boris Johnson? Whatever the majority we need to consign the Tories to the dustbin of history
I'm a proud Scot, but Scotland contributes only about 8.5% to the GDP of the UK, and the European Union won't let us back in, even though we voted to remain. It's not feasible, and especially not with the halfwits of the SNP ruling the roost. The NHS, cost of living, and the many problems faced by ordinary working people come first before the fantasy of independence.
No way. Scottish Indy is on its way whatever happens and so is reunification of Ireland. And Wales given the vhoice of remaing limbered with Rngland or going indy.
Scottish independence is something the UK has to grant. It's not something that Scotland can unilaterally decide to have. It is not "on its way whatever happens". The UK is not going to let Scotland vote again.
Independence for Scotland isn't just a soundbite, election issue for Scottish voters. It's the answer to most of the problems faced by most of the people in Scotland, voters or not, election or not. Political commentators don't understand that. Independence is normal. Look at Norway, Iceland, Ireland. If Scotland was oil-less and arid do you think Westminster would have bothered fighting to keep it?
@@Ceiteach.O.Duibhir When video came out there were like 10 different porn bots with like 3 comments, whole comment section was basically them advertising
Honesly if the SNP win 30 or more seats it will be a huge win! Yes it will mean a loss of like 13 seats but it will still mean they won the majority of scottish seats. 20 or around that is terrible and 15 would be an absolutely disastrous night for the SNP.
06:29 you mentioned SNP being on 37 on the survation infographic when in fact it shows it as 34. Just a little correction I noticed when watching this video hope it helps loving the content
@@samuelmelton8353by that logic shouldn’t everyone in Britain just vote Tory and criticise it? The whole point of a vote is to change parties when the one in charge doesn’t work for you. The SNP isn’t some utopian party that everyone should vote it’s just another party
@@fireironthesecond2909 I'm assuming Scottish people generally support what the SNP stand for, and many support independence. I think the Tories have just been the default party for many English people. They vote Tory because it's not Labour. They don't really know about thei philosophy or care about their policies, but they will swing away if they aren't perceived to be doing well. I think the Tories are different to the SNP
@@samuelmelton8353 well judging by the referendum on it less than half support independence Also I can confirm that many people do vote for the parties in Britain due to ideology not tactical voting, this election is the exception where nobody has any policies so it’s all tactical voting
@@fireironthesecond2909 The referendum wasn't lost by a huge margin, and I'm sure I've heard of points where pro independence sentiment has risen above 50% since. It doesn't matter in any case - I'm speaking of those that do support independence but have since turned away from the SNP. I'm not talking about tactical voting. I'm talking about the sizeable chunk of middle Englanders who don't have any particular interest in politics or political theory, they just vote for Tories out of habit and because 'they are not Labour'. I know, because i am surrounded by them.
I think what the UK needs is something akin to the Austro-Hungarian compromise. Both Scotland and the rest of Britain are independent countries on paper, but still have the same head of state, armed forces, a shared prime minister, shared currency, foreign policy and infrastructure and the possibility of dual citizenship. Easier said than done, of course.
And who wants to interact with Hungary , looking at their attitude to NATO. So scotlanwould want all the uk,s protection and opt out of helping other countries in NATO. hilarious when you consider how many of our armed forces are scottish. I live in scotland and the only SNP voters seem to live in a twilight land of Disney and Peter pan, one guy I met also was a flat earth believer. Almost as bad as Niger farage believing the west provoked Putin. I wish everyone considering voting for him would remember how he was one of the 1st to suck up and PRAISE trump just before he became president.
Sorry but the labour party in Scotland is the unionist party it is a moderate Conservative party. With the likes of Dr broon and the delightfully awful Mr Murray. They will be very divisive and just increase support for independence. The standard of Scottish Labour mps is extremely poor anyway. Either ex union reps or the west of Scotland mafia. Labour may win more than 12 seats in Scotland. However it's move to the right in England and the ingrained biggotries of broon and Murray will be a boon very quickly. For the Scottish Parliament elections in 2026 if broon or Murray allow this institution to survive or take most of its power away.
Scottish independence is dead anyway. The Scottish public literally voted against breaking away from the UK right when the SNP were at their peak popularity with Alex Salmond. That has now disappeared due at least a generation.
No. Never, the desire for Scottish independence is greater than the SNP. 51% of Scots want a referendum, but 36% support the SNP. A uk labour government will be good, but they will lose one day and the Tories will come back. Unionists say we had a vote. Yes, 10 YEARS AGO. Are we not allowed to change our mind? If that is the case, then why have elections, because people change their point of view and select a different party to vote for. Its called democracy, and Scots should be given the chance to vote!
you people said yourself it was once in a lifetime vote, and we aren't required to have a vote whenever you guys feel like having one most people still don't want independence, and even less people want a vote, we have regular elections because if a party does badly you can change that, you can't revert independence so it's pointless you keep whining about it
@@brazzn I am not whining. I am making a point and asking a question. What Labour should do is agree to the referendum and then campaign against it. Thats democracy, but they say "No, you cannot have a referendum." Is that democratic?
People's eyes are open, the renewable energy future is bright and perhaps this time Westminster won't get to take all the profits and pump it into the south of England like they did with the oil revenue.
People are voting for 'not Tories' in England and 'not SNP' In Scotland. Both are sooooo unpopular that this poor, poor labour party will wipe the floor with them.
We don’t want nor require English Mayors the fundamental outcome is still the same we get pocket money lower funding and give all our resources to Westminster which may i point out is illegal as all resources are Scottish not UK
Until you realise that the Labour supermajority is not about love for Labour - it's about hatred for the Tories. Starmer's incoming government could get very unpopular very quickly, simply by virtue of being incumbents in the 2020s. If that does happen, the SNP will indeed have an unpopular Westminster government to run against - at least in 2029.
Sounds strange, that the word "supermajority" is used in the context of the UK. As I understand, in UK a party which has a majority in the parliament, can change any law as it wishes. In some countries, like my native Finland, a supermajority of 2/3 of the MPs is required to make changes to the constitution. Normally such change to the constitution should also be confirmed after another general election, so that people can have their say, but a supermajority of 5/6 of the MPs can decide, that the change is urgent, so it will enter in force immediately. You don't have such rules in the UK, so it is strange to speak about "supermajority". It seems to me here from outside, that the term is used by the Conservatives just to make the voters worried, and to vote for them just in case.
This is correct, but the importance of such a large majority is that it can help to combat party infighting. In labour's case, there is a sizeable left-wing contingent that may eventually decide to stop towing the party lines. The larger the majority, the more MP's would need to have this opinion. This is a bigger issue for labour than it was in the early years of the recent tory majority (2019-2021) because there was a lot less infighting for the tories back then than there is now, whilst labour still has a considerable chunk of the party with different opinions from the leadership. Hope that clears it up😊
@@JackGJack7that’s why Stammer has been cracking down on Corbynites are the left of the party.
By doing this now he can ensure that when he gets into office, the majority are going to be moderate left, so he needs less internal diplomacy.
@@JackGJack7^^^This
It almost completely kills party infighting, and centralises support behind the PM, making dissent much harder
Yes, it’s another bit of lazy American language creeping over the Atlantic. It’s a Tory trick to scare people, because that is all they have. Once a party has say a 30 seat majority, they have all they need. We don’t have filibusters.
It’s a new buzzword ( media always love them) borrowed from the US where it actually has meaning. In a UK parliamentary context it’s absolute BS because Starmer would be just as powerful with an 80 seat majority as he would with 300. This is a scare ploy so that as many individual Tory skins as possible can be saved (though the betting scandal still unravelling may well put the mockers on that)
The term supermajority is Tory campaign language.
A supermajority has no relevance in UK politics. Any majority can do the exact same things.
Well, not quite. A slim majority can sometimes risk rebels and abstainers scuppering stuff if the other parties all vote together.
Naive take
It's used in the U.S. to mean enough votes to break a filibuster in the Senate or to override a presidential veto. Of course neither has relevance to Westminster.
A supermajority means Labour can do whatever they want, with nobody to tell them otherwise.
@@Stjorn Gonna be so lit tbh
No such thing as a supermajority in the UK. Just embarrassingly big for the party on the way out. An effectively opposition is needed, but the swivel-eyed loons in the Conservatives is not that.
“Swivel-eyed loons” is the best descriptor for the conservatives I have ever heard 😂😂😂
@@TrainmasterGT I can't take credit for it; my previous descriptor is unrepeatale in decent company. Acquired it from another YTer: ADifferentBias
every single TLDR video is just a Labour fanboi video
@@mattj5391 idk, their video on the Lib Dems seemed really positive!
Not really sure that’s accurate. If a party has a bigger majority, then leadership usually has an easier time getting their ideas through, compared to a small majority where a few nay sayers in your own party can halt any action by choosing to reject leadership.
The SNP killed independence
Is that why support for independence keeps rising then?
@@crunch1757 Is it rising? Really? Repeated polling shows support for independence has stayed constant or slightly declined. The cause has flatlined.
@@crunch1757it wouldn't be as high without the conservatives
@@crunch1757it has remained at around 40% for half a decade
We would be independent right now if the 55% didn't sell out.
It must be remembered that 38% of Labour voters support Scottish independence. It’s not all about the SNP, and never has been. Libdem voters, Tories, Alba and Greens all have independence supporting voters.
The SNP do not want independence, they simply want to swap 11% of their votes in Westminster for 1% in the EU.
No they support Scotland having another referendum on independence. There is a difference.
@@FriendlyFreeSounds wow, that’s a new one on me. Never heard of that before. Scotland is split 50-50 for independence or for the union with England.
@@gordonmackenzie451250-50? Wasn't the last ref way more close
Not now @@forgetful9845
It's worth noting that in UK politics, there is no such thing as a supermajority. A 200 seat majority doesn’t give you anything an 80 seat majority doesn't; there is technically no difference between a 300 seat majority and a single seat majority.
Now obviously in practive there are differences; having a larger majority grants the government more security and authority but again, that’s it. Keir Starmer won't have any more power than Boris Johnson or Liz Truss or Rishi Sunak did. It's hard to appreciate given how poorly they made use of their majority in recent years, but if the party was more disciplined and united, they would have been effectively elected dictators, as Starmer will be.
I disagree somewhat although I favor a very large majority for Labour. I would define a super-majority as any majority of 100 or more seats. If a party has that amount it would take more than 80 rebel members of that party to disrupt any legislation that the party wished to pass. Since the usual number of rebels in any party -left or right - is about 30-40 members the ruling party not only does not have to worry about the opposition but it also does not have to worry about upsetting its own somewhat more ideological MPs.
@@gregorybiestek3431It's just that in most other countries "supermajorities" are an actual defined thing, that's required to change things like the constitution. So it's much less of a deal in the UK than in most places.
One possibility you have not considered - Labour win big and the SNP lose, support for the SNP and support for independence are not the same thing, as the polls show independence support remains roughly where it has been since the referendum. It is possible, therefore, Scottish Labour will get a lot of new, younger members who have voted Labour at this election but still believe independence is best for the future. Scottish Labours positions on big topics are often decided at Conference, by the party members not the leadership. It is for this reasons Scottish Labour holds positions, such as no renewal of Trident, that is in stark opposition to Westminster Labours plans to renew Trident. Scottish Labour in the future could find themselves the largest party in Scotland again, but eventually being forced, as on Trident, to adopt a stance opposite of English Labour, one that favours independence (there was at the last referendum already a small but existent 'labour for independence' movement) if enough Labour members in Scotland want it.
It could be possible that enough members of the labour department try to raise their voice in favour but quite difficult to see how English labour would allow them to retain that position, party structures for such parties are rarely you know permissive of policies that defy their main political base, Labour is a centralist party a state party and I very much doubt they allow their "departments" as much freedom regarding policies such as independence.
These kind of subsidiaries be it conservative or labour just seem firmly under the control of the English, same with Welsh Labour, voters would be naive they can change these organisations from within, if that process goes forward though and Scottish Labour changes its stand on independence the next step is clear they need to break off from English Labour as the Scottish Greens did.
Ruling Scotland for England for Westminster? That's unacceptable.
So in 10 years, support for independence hasn't increased at all. There is no point in having a second referendum if it will fail. "2 no votes would really cement the issue as settled and there wont be a 3rd referendum in our lifetime. Its hard to make a case for independence right now. the only thing that would increase support for independence would be if the Labour government failed, so we would need to wait and see what happens. the SNP cannot afford to wait, they need to campaign for independence NOW to prop up their ailing party regardless of whether it is good for the country or not or if they have a legal avenue to do so. They know they wont return enough MSPs at the next scottish parliamentary election to claim to have a mandate and may not even be in government at all
@@spiderbootsy its had a few times went over the 50% mark problume is the scottish unionist partys and suport of unionisum as fallen over all but indy vote has not meaning peaple have not changed there view on the matter but the oder gen is dieing off and well polling shows young peaple are not changeing there view on this matter
@@schotscarface18ssf75support for independence is now at 45%. Never going to happen which is great.
@@spiderbootsy The SNP having a lot of MP's is an historic anomaly that only came about in very special circumstances unlikely to be repeated again all at once. Them even making double figures in MP's is a major improvement over their historic numbers, as sending them to Westminster is not the most useful thing - they have been there in numbers and Westminster has continued to ignore and drive legislation over Scotland anyway. It's the Scottish parliament they need to win, and win well to make any independence case. So long as there is at least 50% of the population who want it, it will remain inevitably a live political topic.
As to legal avenues, well that is of more concern to me, we appear to be in a voluntary union with no way to opt out, and if there even is an exit our rulers will not tell us where the exit door is even located. If you have to ask permission to be free it is quite possible you were never free to begin with. I do not believe Scotland is politically free, or ever will be under Westminster.
Scottish independence died in 2014.
The word Supermajority is often used in the US, where it is needed to overcome filibustering. It can also be used in countries that need a 2/3 majority for constitutional changes (like Belgium, and also Finland, as I just learned from a comment here). The word is meaningless, spoken from a political-scientific viewpoint, in the context of the British parliamentary system.
Honestly, if the SNP do well in the popular vote, but Labour slips ahead a load in seats, that could still cause resentment for the UK political system.
No one cares. Scottish Independence is fundamentally wrong.
@@vardekpetrovic9716I fundamentally disagree. I have had zero representation for my vote since I was of voting age because my area votes strongly for the Tories. The same is true of Tory voters in strong Labour areas. And true of other parties in virtually every other seat. The first past the post only system is broken.
I think the MMPR system balances local representatives with fairly representing the portion of the vote a party receives. Alternative vote, whilst not my preferred voting system, at least would have been fairer than FPTP, and probably would have stopped the Conservatives becoming the hard Brexit party.
Resentment is ever-present, from those whose party didn't win.
@@AnthonyAfrikaanswhy is it wrong to reclaim our sovereignty? Did you vote for brexshit?
@@AnthonyAfrikaans Apartheid apologist says what?
Alot of people I know are pro independence but aren't voting SNP in this election. The party has messed up in the last few years
Aye....right....faced withe choice of red Tories? They'll still vote SNP!
An understatement. And it could be added have divided Scotland more than at any time since 1745.
@@Gerzzo I'm one of them! Still not 100% who I'll be voting for but can garuntee it won't be the SNP again!
First time I haven't voted for them
bollox .
@@duncan2172 then you're a unionist...how sad.
Scottish Independence is an idea that will return if Scotland is taken for granted and not given additional devolution powers or made to feel part of the Union with the next generation. We won’t have a country if we don’t fight for it and we came really close to losing it with 14 years of Tory rule.
It was only saved through broken promises, we were told that we'd be blocked out of the EU if we tried to join after leaving
Spot on, and I say that as a Yes voter, the best way to head this off is to offer further devolution.
@@Cab00se90no more devolution where English party's can shut it down at anytime
@@Gericho572exactly. Lots of scots seem to think Westminster is in control when it’s in fact the SNP who have ruined Scottish education, NHS, etc etc. the idea that more control would lead to better outcomes is just nonsense.
@@Gericho572 well the colonizer still keeps 70% of all Scottish laws and taxes and plunders our vast resources
Supermajority? Another example of the 'Hillbillyfication' of UK politics?
What number of mps equals a supermajority in parliament? I’m a tad thick, I assumed a majority was invited to form the governing party and had the power to form laws.
Now I hear there’s a new villain in west minister, labour super majority.
@@_Ali. No number equals that, because it's just not a thing.
You only need 50% of votes to pass things in parliament, so, theoretically, at long as you have 1 extra seat you can pass anything unopposed.
In reality, there are occasionally dissenters, defectors or you can lose MPs due to various reasons, which means that the larger your majority the more safety you have.
But you're rarely going to have more than a handful of rebels vote against their own party's legislation.
@@Zikar yes I know, it was kind of rhetorical. An 80 seat Tory majority was a non issue, but apparently a 100 seat labour majority means democracy itself has imploded and you won’t have anyone holding them to account. And dumb people believe it because the media keep repeating it. Theoretically any government is a “supermajority” because they can push through any piece of legislation.
This video makes the wild assumption that a Labour government would be:
1. Good for Scotland.
2. Popular in Scotland.
Don't get it twisted. Labour are not popular in Scotland. In fact it's the opposite. It's apathy for the Tories and to a lesser extend the SNP that have let to their gains.
Despite the SNP falling in the polls, Independence polling hasn't shifted futher towards Pro-UK at all.
The left always assumes they're liked/likeable.
@Minimmalmythicist Yeah. I firmly believe that the thing that will sway a lot of those Don't Knows and Soft Unionists to the independence cause is the inevitable nothing that Labour are gonna be with their huge majority that they are probably gonna get.
Labour are promising nothing but more of the same, and I think because people don't particularly care about them in Scotland mixed with the fact that they're gonna win anyway, it wouldn't shock me if a lot of them just didn't bother voting.
My prediction is SNP wins 30-35 seats.
Tldr is biased against Scottish independence
That’s about the same in England tbh- nobody really likes Labour we just really hate the Tories.
@@mfzbtravis Rather most of indies will swing to unionists why you decide that people would want to risk their homes and future for the prospect to create a new state is beyond me
The only thing which will "kill" independence is the government spending a single penny outside of London and the Home Counties. Labour has run the Welsh Assembly/Senedd for the past 25 years and yet polling for Welsh independence just hit 37% in a country where you can't even take a train from north to south without crossing into England. Undermining the legal authority of the devolved government without quantifiably improving the life of England's Subjects will only lead to direct action.
I think the only thing that will kill the independence movement is independence
Both Brexit and Scottish independence are settled after this election.
@@aleph8888 Support for independence is around 50% and voter turnout in Scotland dipped below 50%
As you pointed out Independence is regularly polling aboe 40% and for an extended period was above 50%, simply ignoring these people won't make the issue go away. Labour needs to make the case for greater devoloution across the UK, including Regonal Assemblies in England, provided it isn't just a series of expensive talking shops.
Thing is the polls have been like this since the 1990s
There’s no such thing as a UK “supermajority”, let’s stop saying it
Great video, The first $100,000 invested was amazing. But when you hit $300,000 it’s like smashing the glass ceiling! I cried.
I completely agree with you! My first 100k took a long time and wasn't that special to be honest with you. Once I hit 300K that is the game changer in my opinion. At this point my money is basically making me a pretty good yearly salary. When I go to sleep at night I know my money is making decent money with the help of my FA
Nice. People often underestimate financial advisors' importance. Over 50 years of data reveal that those who work with advisors typically earn more than those who go it alone. I've been fortunate to work with one for 13 years, resulting in a $1 million portfolio, largely from early investments in AI and other growth stocks.
I've been considering but haven't been proactive. Can you recommend your advisor? Could really use some assistance.
Angela Lynn Schilling is the licensed advisor I use. Just research the name. You’d find necessary details to work with to set up an appointment.
I looked up her name online and found her page. I emailed and made an appointment to talk with her. Thanks for the tip
No. The independence movement isn’t just the SNP, it’s a broad cross-society movement. The Yes campaign was never just an SNP party machine, it represents all pro-indy ‘Scots’ (people who live and can vote here).
Labour can kick the proverbial constitutional rugby ball down field but the sovereignty of the Scotland to determine its future within the UK lies with the people. That’s acknowledged in the Scotland Act and it was enshrined in the 1989 Convention (which Labour campaigned for and subscribed to). Labour’s Donald Dewar is famously called ‘the father of the nation’.
For now, most of us accept that independence is on the back burner - rightly so. But it’s undemocratic to put arbitrary limits on the people’s right to choose. In 2014 it was no, in 2024, who knows.
Also Starmer is nowhere near left wing enough for most Scots, particularly in the working class central belt. I don’t feel I can trust him not to undermine devolution.
At the same time, Westminster elections hardly matter here. It just underscores how unfair the political demography of the UK is. Even all of Scotland voted one way en masse, we do not have enough seats to really sway things. The union is not equal, at least democratically. This is not unique to Scotland, Wales faces similarly marginalising boundaries. That’s why many voted SNP, including a chunk of former No Voters. To represent Scottish interests in a centre left fashion. But most UK outlets, seemingly including yours, won’t talk about the fact that England determines the result - no matter what Wales, Scotland or N.I. do.
Yet, the Labour party is so blinded by historical hatred of the ‘Tartan Tories’ - they cannae see we’re mostly allies on policy. I’m looking forward to the Tories going out, we’re counting on you England.
@@Cab00se90 Scotland deeply desires to be a country where no on ever has to work
We want everything to be free from the state
Which will be paid for by taxing the rich
@@Cab00se90 Yup. Speaking as someone from England, Westminister fundamentally doesnt respect Scotland as a distinct country.
As such, they make arguments focused on the equality of power per vote per person, not in terms of balancing power between the established states within the union
the snp are the only pro Scottish independence party in Westminster and no other party would advocate for an independence referendum
while absolutely support for independence and support for the snp are separate a blow to snp popularity does make independence less likely
Talking rubbish, all the SNP does is prey on people like you who want independence so that they could have comfortable seats in Westminster. I feel sorry for the Scottish people who so easily fell into the Tories and SNP's electioneering trap.
SNP’s not perfect but idk why anyone in their right mind would vote Starmer’s Tory Lite party when they have the option of the SNP
I don't understand. What's the difference between a supermajority and a majority? I know it is used to refer to more Labour MPs, but wouldn't that mean that there will be more infighting within the party? Also, doesn't the majority already have the power to change whatever laws they wish?
It means infighting has less power
Majority is like 25 to 50% and supermajority is like 60 to 80% supermajority mean party can act like similar to one party
In the UK specifically, there is no difference. It's a marketing trick by the Tories to scare voters away from Labour. In some countries, some laws require 67% (2/3) vote share in the parliament to pass, hence the term "super majority" as apposed to a simple majority (1/2).
It doesn't mean much in the UK except that the party does not have to worry much about rebellious MP. The term is taken over from other countries where such a large majority allows them to conduct e.g. constitutional changes without opposition support.
I think you’ll find Scottish independence died when they voted against it in the 2014 referendum
At 6:27 you said the Survation poll had the SNP at 37 and Labour at 14 however on screen it shows the SNP at 34 and Labour at 17.
Easy mistake, great video otherwise.
No one cares. This is a video made by uni students who left uni years ago but still have the mindset of uni students.
Can you expand on that? I think they're one of the few decent unbiased sources.
Certainly beats awful biased tripe like the Newsagents or LBC
@@sn4831 not unbiased but trying to be unbiased by repeating whatever each side says as if it was a fact.
An expert opinion is not equal to what somebody with a political agenda tells you, pretending they're equal is not unbiased.
there is no such thing as a super majority. IF you have a majority in the house it simply requires a small amount of buffer to ensure 100% of your legistlation goes through
It does however affect seat allocation on parliamentary select committees.
Scottish Independence is still Alive it's just Independence is not the Forefront Focus right now So many of them Voting Labour Now. But they Would Still Vote for Independence as evidenced by the Recent Polls Indyref2 is still Close
major cope
I fail to understand the logic of your comment 😂@@jonasmejerpedersen4847
@@jonasmejerpedersen4847 it has consistently been at 50% support since 2014 mate
VOTE SNP
@@jonasmejerpedersen4847 As a fellow dane and SF voter, I am dissappointed by your lack of knowledge, scottish independence is very much realistic and we would benefit from it as they would likely look to us and the other nordic countries for support and would, with their oil and other natural ressources, strengthen the nordics in the EU parliament if Scotland decided to rejoin the EU
SNP used the independence debate to turn Scotland into an SNP independence vs Tory Unionist electoral battleground, favorable terms for the two parties to keep Labour out, make the SNP look popular and keep the westminster MP money coming in while keeping the Tories in to rally against. What a wonderful bit of hoodwinking it was from the SNP and Tories, so good that Murdoch ran front pages in England and Scotland endorsing the two parties. I dont feel angry towards the Scottish people, I feel sorry for how they have been decieved by these two parties on the emotive subject of independence.
Politics is a question of cycles. The SNP is on the backfoot, they will fall back and will not be able to push independence for a few years. But Labour is hitting the apex of its upward swing. And what goes up will inevitably come down. In government, Labour will own failures and scandals and at some point blaming the previous government won't work anymore. When Labour falls, the SNP seems to be best placed in Scotland to stage a comeback. Independence won't be dead, but it will be delayed.
Define supermajority in the UK. Tories have had one for the last 5 years.
Labour on above 500 seats. Landslide is 100+ majority.
I was thinking exactly the same thing.
@@TheApollotd what can you do with a majority of 200 or 300 vs a majority of 100 or even 50?
@@RichardFraser-y9t You can expect less resistance in passing legislation the larger your parliamentary majority.
@@RichardFraser-y9t Simple really, if a party achieves a majority of 200-300, It can basically do whatever It wants. But if the majority is only 50-100, there's a possibility that if a rowdy group (SCG or ERG) rebels, a bill could be killed or passed against the government's wishes.
God help us if Labour get in! Higher taxes. Higher illegal immigration. Higher crime. Less public services. Less green spaces. Higher national debt. Lower defenses. Anything good about the Labour Party? I can’t think of anything. Vote Reform UK and let’s make a real change to all this corruption and lies. Think before you vote as you may not get another chance to save what’s left about our country. Unless you’re planning on leaving the UK for good? Reform need your support. Thank you!
@jonahwhale9047 How's the money laundering and trafficking going in Ukraine?
An overwhelming vote for Reform UK, would make for a better opposition!
Thumbnail has Scottish misspelt
Good.
I think the idea of devolution and "super mayors" is a good one to make sure that local issues are being heard. I live in Canada were we have a Federal, Provincial, Regional Municipalities / Counties (depending on where you live) and then Municipal levels of government. I was extremely baffled when I went to the UK and found out England doesn't have it's own government and the other nations had relatively new governments. Having multiple levels of government doesn't completely remove federal resentment by any means but it does allow for more local issues heard by people who care and have the time to act on it. As an outsider, I think the UK really does need that devolution to stay united.
FEWER votes and FEWER seats, not less.
Scottish independence is dead in the water irrespective of politics. How are they going to pay for everything without Englands' support? Military infrastructure and shipbuilding would most likely move, killing those areas, oil is on the decline and even now they score bottom on so many metrics. Are the EU going to want another financial drain on their hands for the sake of some additional fishing access??????
If that is the case, then why is England so keen to hold onto Scotland? 🏴🇪🇺🏴🇪🇺
@@craigevans6156 For the same reason we keep hold of Northern Ireland, despite all the troubles. Because we're a United Kingdom and secondly-in case your little brain has forgotten- the Scottish people actually decided they would prefer to stay British.
2 things; SNP vote share doesn’t directly correspond with the Indy vote. Current polling is around 50% and not 40% as you said for Indy.
Also we all know Starmer is going to make an arse of it so I’d be thinking forward to the 2026 HR elections.
Should YOON filth like myself start packing now?
@@thinfourth I’d give it a couple of years, maybe you’ll have a change in attitude. Don’t think Starmer is going to do much better than the tories and managing the decline of the UK.
A hung Parliament with the SNP holding the balance of power would have boosted the SNP, one can overstate the Iimpact of a Conservative Givernment on public opinion. The SNP moved from a 20% party to running Scotland under the last Labour Government. In reality the issue is politically dead, polls suggest that in theory just under half support it, but in the same polls it is not considered important, often not making the too ten issues. People support a referendum, but not now, a some ever shifting time in the future. Its a combination of the SNP incompetence in Government, their inability to provide convincing answers on the practicalities and the extra difficulties created by Brexit, particularly if Scotland wished to join the EU.
Leon Brittan said in the 80s that if the SNP got a majority of Scottish seats in two consecutive elections, that would be time to negotiate Independence. Admittedly, I don't think Thatcher OK'd that statement.
But 37 for the SNP would still give the SNP a majority of Scottish seats, for the 4th General election in a row. At some point either Westminster has to allow a referendum now that a No vote no longer "guarantees" Scotland stays in the EU, or the idea that Scotland is in a voluntary Union becomes a sham.
Ireland voted for Home Rule in every election for decades before they took up arms. If Westminster continues to block a second (post Brexit) referendum regardless of how many times the SNP wins, aren't they basically telling the Scots they need to take up arms like Ireland did?
You seem to be forgetting that the big jump in vote share for the SNP (in 2007) where they first came to power in Scotland - was when Labour were in charge in Westminster.
Yea, Thatcher could've done the decent thing and gave them a referendum. After all, it was because of the SNP and their whining, that we got Thatcher
You’re grasping at straws
With how much Russian money and influence made its way into Scottish independence movements (no nato, no sub bases etc), I really hope Scotland has a second look at the whole thing and who backed it.
yes putin did it, he is the Angra Mainyu, mf get your brain checked.
no, obviously not.
SNP will still moan.
Erm.....no, if you want a real answer.....labour will never make any ground in Scotland while they continue their anti Scottish self determination stance, and the SNP do not exist in Scotland just because how bad the tories are, that is so wrong in many ways.
This channel feels more like an American reporting than and Englishman with how out of touch it is
YEAH
We need to leave this stinking union NOW
No country has ever seen a negative effect from leaving a union
they're hardly anti Scottish are you having a laugh?
The issue is Westminister fundamentally doesnt respect Scotland as a distinct country.
As such, they make arguments focused on the equality of power per vote per person, not in terms of balancing power between the established states within the union
@@thinfourth Lad go have a shower and go outside
The only people who can kill Scottish indpendnce are Scottish voters. They voted against indeendence ten years ago, and there is no evidence that the Scottish people have changed their minds despite Brexit.
What is truly bizarre is that the SNP keeps trying to hold another referendum, despite the fact they will almost certainly lose. If they lost two referendums, that would definitely kill the question for the foreseeable future (see Quebec). A more canny stratategy for the SNP would be to wait until 2034, that's twenty years, and so fits the criterion of "once in a generation", and also demographic change would be enough to make winning much more likely.
In many ways, the Westminster government is doing the cause of Scttish indepence a favour by denying a referendum now.
The SNP's idea that them winning the majority of seats, even if they do not win the majority of votes, is somehow a mandate for independence is undemocratic, and just emphasises the fact that they cannot persuade the majority of Scots to vote for independece, so it has to resort to ignoring the wishes of most voters.
This
What’s the difference between a 80 seat majority and 180 seat? Majority you still have hundred percent of the power?
Less vulnerability to factions blocking the party agenda.
The former means you have to keep rebel elements of your own party on side
The later is a free hand to go wild
@@DarklordZagarnalike in 1978
Labour rebels voted down a referendum on Scottish devolution
They were only placated the next year by introducing a turn out requirement 😊
"Angela Rayner: Every part of Britain will take fair share of migrants"
Party deputy leader insists all authorities must house successful asylum seekers who will be eligible for places in new 1.5m social housing"
The Telegraph 26/6/24
Stop calling Labour "centre left" jfc. Our Overton window may be fucked but even then they're still on the right.
I’d say even the conservatives are pretty left. Not sure what you’re on about
@@stewarttaylor2419 holy shit man read a fkn book
In a Westminster system, does it really matter how big the majority is? I mean the parties seemingly have so much control over MPs, as shown by how rare it is for MPs to vote against their party. So what can an opposition do when there can't be a divided government and legistors live in fear of "the removal of the whip"?
The SNP are under investigation by the police for their finances.
Maybe they should get some lawyers rather than a independence referendum
The tories are under investigation by the police for possibly betting on this election.
Reform have had to suspend members who were going to stand for being openly racist.
Labour have just had their own court cases.
Lib Dems seem like the only one who haven’t been in trouble recently and I don’t even know what they stand for anymore.
Don’t try and make out one party are crooks when they all are
Uhh huh, awfully convenient isn't it just?
In truth I wouldn't believe there was any financial scandal, lest Scotland were independent and there weren't certain actors wishing for the death of the indy movement.
Overall no. Support for Indy is still stable compared to the decline of the SNP. Many Labour voters support independence but vote Labour for more anti-Tory than pro-UK.
Nonetheless, the 2014 referendum was given based on the more democratic Scottish Parliament results not seats to some less representative parliament in London. If Labour manage to keep momentum in 2026 and kick the SNP out of the Scottish Government then that is more likely going to impact independence more than the upcoming election. Labour have two years to prove their support to Scotland if they win come July 4th. If the SNP maintain the Scottish Government the issue isn’t going away, nor will it ever go away until support for independence drops below ~30% and especially among the youth, which overwhelmingly isn’t the case.
I would say it was the Scottish vote to remain that killed the independence movement, but I suppose nowadays the idea is to keep going until we get the result we want?
especially when the reasons to remain drastically decreased after a narrow win.
Scots voted yes in 2014, it was those from england living in Scotland that pushed the vote to a no. We voted to be an independent country whether you want to acknowledge it or not, the BBC even has a voter demographics article that proves this.
@@thevis5465 Why would Scots in England not be permitted a say in the potential break up of their country?
If that idea made any sense we wouldn't have any elections.
@@thevis5465
Scotland isn't an ethnostate. Following this logic is dangerously close to claiming that only one ethnicity should have the right to vote. Those English people living in Scotland may have been resident there for longer than you've been alive, and almost all of them would stay resident if Scotland voted to leave. To not give those people a vote would be the textbook definition of discrimination.
A party with a majority of MPs in parliament be it 1 or 600 is exactly the same, () there is no such thing in UK politics as a supermajority - it's a meaningless term in the UK
The SNP will not be getting more MPs and are likely to get less - this will kill the current independence campaign for the time being not anything happening in the rest of the UK
I'm a Scottish green party member but I'm voting SNP because they only party that can represent Scotland in westminster I'd love to be able to vote green but FPTP makes that impossible.
I don't want labour in Scotland I want an SNP green coalition in Holyrood as they can hold the UK government to account and have ambition in their policies
Scottish labour will just be UK labour lap dog
I would love it too but really Hamza's shadow and how the SNP under his direction teared apart the Bute House agreement doesn't inspire much trust to voters, Can Jon steer the SNP in a different direction in one where they are actually willing to collaborate with the Scottish Greens once again? Will the Scottish Greens trust the SNP politically again so soon? Will the Scottish Greens be able to get part of the SNP's voting base in the next Scottish elections and change the board a bit, giving them more negotiation power?
Certainly if the Scottish Greens are reassured that the SNP won't make a U turn regarding their policies and Jon's promises of embracing the "moderate left party" image over the infighting with more conservative members can be the key for a new coalition, the ball is on the SNP's roof they need to respect their coalition partners and make decisions together as a government for at least most of the time.
Absolutely agree though that getting into Westminster is only possible for a bigger party as a of now so the SNP is the only nationalist party that is up for it, Scottish Labour smells rotten the same Welsh Labour dies they are a protest option for Independence voters(due to corruption/embezzlement scandal and infighting) but I doubt they will ever be happy with their choice, Starmer's devolution plan might be well received by the regions and specially the Isles(thinking about Orkney and Shetland perhaps the Hebrides too) if they imply offering better services for the local communities all kinds of decentralisations are appreciated but if their scheme is to weaken Holyrood and it's influence then it is bound to fail, independence goes beyond devolution as you know it is the desire to make the most out of their country which means at the end of the day rising as a new state.
Nicola sturgeon sorry Labour has my vote
No, just postponed.
Please do a video on sudan.
The UAE proxy war for recourses, thats killed thousands and thousands of people, should get similar coverage to the palestinian conflict.
"Scotish" ?! (thumbnail)
It's not a TLDR video if it doesn't include a typo somewhere 😆
I thought it was an error to print Sco'ish with any t's at all!
Why is Labour dramatically sinking in the polls? Are some people who wanted to vote for labour more attracted to Nigel Farage and Reform?
every single TLDR video is just an exercise in licking the arse if the Labour Party
Second time you guys have posted something like this... but the answer is no.. Labour and kier won't hault the want for independence.. infact he is already making our case stronger by rejecting scotland in multiple different areas..
Aye they are clueless.
The SNP did that
I live in Scotland, I think independence is the way forward.
Than I remember who's in power. And immediately realise the SNP would drive Scotland into hell with their stupid ass policies.
Ironically, a right-wing independence party may sweep.
What ever happened to the Presbyterian lady who ran against Yousaf? She was conservative and received a fair amount of the vote.
@@knightshade2654 kate forbes, now deputy first minister
@@orinscrivello1976 Thank you. That SNP leadership election was nutty to watch as an American.
So Alba? Or people will choose the more left leaning Greens?
@@quiquemarquez3211
No Alba is a spin-off of the SNP.
If we get Scottish independence and have to build a wall between Scotland and England can we please get Italian workers to build it that would just be too funny.
At least they got a nice camper out of it.
4:47 the biggest evidence that independence is needed. Scotland should not have to beg england for permission. That's not a "union of equals."
Free people don't beg for permission.
"Less votes," "less seats." Bad English: the word is FEWER.
It's almost like language changes over time. 😱 Scary, I know.
who cares
@@thomicrisler9855 Sometimes, but not for this one. In this particular case, wrong doesn't become right just by lots of people being wrong. Scary, I know.
@@tigrafale4610 Anyone who wants TLDR to flourish and be taken seriously as adults should care. I know I do.
Stannis Baratheon would be proud mate.
The bad economy around the world makes the scottish feel more comfortable under the UK umbrella
SNP should look at cleaning up their image and conducting a serious review of their performance before considering independence.
it was a conspiracy by the Westminster to undermine the independence movement
They’ve not been perfect but independence isn’t just the purview of the SNP.
Lmao 37 billion on englands failed track and trace system where is that investigation
The English establishment love to put down scots and Scotland and lie all the time to rob Scotland of our vast resources
Here are some performance metrics for the SNP:
1. Free uni tuition
2. High health funding
3. Baby boxes
4. 1,140 hours of free child care
5. 13 new benefits under social security
6. Scottish child payment, counteracting 2 child benefit cap
7. Free prescriptions
8. 228,000 affordable homes delivered
9. Free bus travel for over 65 and under 22
10. Lowest student debt in the UK
11. Free school meals for pupils between P1 and P5
12. More GPs per person than anywhere else in the UK and at better pay too
13. Nationalised rail
14. Best performing A&E in the UK
15. Free dental care to under 26s
On and on the list goes. IDL what you mean "cleaning up their image"‽
I remember the bettertogethers campaign slogan
The only way to protect your EU memebership is to vote for the union, couple years later after rejecting independence Scotland gets ripped out of the EU against our will whilst our farming and fishing sectors are used like pawns daily, wElCoMe tO tHe uNiOn 😂 🏴
@jonahwhale9047
You’re making stuff up
I’m not British but feel like people saying there’s no “super majority” miss the point”. If you have a narrow majority then a handful of dissenting mp can derail your agenda, like what Teresa May experienced in brexit negotiations. If you have 500 seats then you can get your way even if 100 of your MPs disagree
Not being British you should realise that the word 'supermajority' was never used before in British politics, not for any of Thatcher's or Blair's and not for Johnson's in '19 (not the 'other' big majority in what 1924 or something) . It was brought into this campaign by the Tories, simply to scare people who are deserting them in droves.
@@MarcelVolkerperhaps because it’s in recent years that people realized the difficulty of governing with a slim majority?
@@freddytang2128 That seems undecided from what I understand. Party discipline tends to break down with larger majorities (case in point, the Tory gov't since 2019), so some think it's easier with a somewhat smaller majority. The coalition from '10 to '15 held fine, for example, despite having only 362 seats between two parties - a majority of less than 40.
It appears to me that Scottish independence has been damaged mostly by the SNP
Just like Scotland itself, should be renamed to the SNDP, Scottish National Disgrace Party.
Is it a surprise when in the same breath you're told "you're too small, too poor and too stupid to manage independence, but also vitally important and necessary for the cohesion of the UK" that many of us in Scotland feel like we're being lied to?
Westminster has a marketing problem north of the border that it simply is too arrogant to address, namely that any potential "beneficial policy" is laced with genuine harm and malice. That's not unique to Scotland though, it applies universally to everywhere outside of London. Actions speak louder than words after all, and Westminster offers many many words and a lot of clownery to distract from how many of the nation's people it's killed through cruelty and negligence.
If the SNP were as bad as the reactionary crowd claim, then surely England must be a paradise compared where the right actions were taken, right? RIGHT? Yeah, i didn't think so.
That's not to say the SNP are squeaky clean either, but their dubious actions compared to Westminster are what Mercury is to the Sun - Westminster has a lot more to answer for, and leaves a LOT more to be desired, particularly after this conservative negligence spree of the last decade+.
Scots, much like the rest of folks subject to Westminster whims are happy to meet people half way if we feel like we're being listened to, treated with dignity and respect. When that consistently doesn't happen from UK parties, that's how you get SNP domination at the polls. It's not like it's rocket science.
Now, if Labour was to properly listen, offer genuine solutions to the nation's many crippling, systemic issues, you'd get heads turning in Scotland. Indy support =/= SNP support, and until there is proof that the UK represents prosperity for it's people, that 50% indy support isn't going away.
A liver won't do well outside of the body but the body still needs it.
It's actually like the anti Brexit argument. The UK was important for the EU but would do poorly outside of it.
The UK will be worse off without like the EU is worse off without the UK.
@@mnm1273 The UK in general feels like an appendage to London. That'd be something i'd love to see tackled, be it through investment and diversification, federalisation or some other means (assuming indy is off the table).
There's no reason why the rest of England and the devolved nations can't find their own industry, specialise in various new things and climb their way out from the lot they've been given, and there's absolutely no reason why the UK couldn't be a prosperous place as a whole, not just one small enclave.
I find it wild that as a nation that we kind of don't do anything, just MLMs with no tangible home made product to sell. It feels like we took a look at the Avon business as a service model and just said "sure, that'll do" and then never aspired for better.
I'd like to see incentives that pull money out of London. I'd like to see home grown industry flourish.
... I'd also like to see poo being properly dealt with rather than ending up in the rivers, so, priorities first i suppose. Perhaps act like the rich nation we claim to be first.
@@runawaywolf2570 Scotland has a parliament. You're seeing what happens when Scotland rules itself. If anything, it'll be worse because they won't be subsidized by Westminster.
Except we aren’t told that. It’s always been the pro-independence side that’s wheeled out the “too poor, too small, too stupid” line.
Scottish independence campaigns are almost a rubber stamp of the Brexit ones. You can always get people on your side claiming the big bad in Westminster/Brussels doesn't have it's priorities straight and tug on the nationalists' heart strings.
I'm not saying there are no issues but the main reason is just political posturing and manipulation someone can get in power - they aren't interested in actually doing well for the countries.
You know, you would think that with how problematic brexit was people would be less inclined to leave a union especially one older and stronger than the EU. Like independence sounds nice but the practical issue that’s arise out of it make ill advised. The defense issues that would come from it alone would be catastrophic for Scotland and the UK
EU for economy, NATO for NatSec, I think Scotland can manage if it has the will.
There is no such thing as a supermajority, without defining the meaning, which is not a thing in the UK. You only need a majority of about 40-50 to cover by-elections and rebels in the party (whichever one). Does this mean that the Tories had a supermajority in the 1980's and under Alexander Boris Johnson? Whatever the majority we need to consign the Tories to the dustbin of history
Thank you for taking the time to talk about Scotland, it’s all too often that Scotland is ignored in elections
I would say not necessarily
7:36 the irony that the SNP has been the most centralising government in decades. 😅
I'm a proud Scot, but Scotland contributes only about 8.5% to the GDP of the UK, and the European Union won't let us back in, even though we voted to remain. It's not feasible, and especially not with the halfwits of the SNP ruling the roost. The NHS, cost of living, and the many problems faced by ordinary working people come first before the fantasy of independence.
Labour Scotland must win
No way. Scottish Indy is on its way whatever happens and so is reunification of Ireland.
And Wales given the vhoice of remaing limbered with Rngland or going indy.
Scottish independence is something the UK has to grant. It's not something that Scotland can unilaterally decide to have. It is not "on its way whatever happens". The UK is not going to let Scotland vote again.
Yeah... dream on, kid.😂
Independence for Scotland isn't just a soundbite, election issue for Scottish voters. It's the answer to most of the problems faced by most of the people in Scotland, voters or not, election or not. Political commentators don't understand that. Independence is normal. Look at Norway, Iceland, Ireland. If Scotland was oil-less and arid do you think Westminster would have bothered fighting to keep it?
These bots
Which?
Who you
@@Ceiteach.O.Duibhir When video came out there were like 10 different porn bots with like 3 comments, whole comment section was basically them advertising
@@ImloyaltoScotlandonly🤡🤡🤡
@@kingmasterfilip2965...emm
Wtf😂😂😂
Labour NO NO NO NO NO - I love my country too much. O flower of Scotland...🏴☑️❤️
Honesly if the SNP win 30 or more seats it will be a huge win! Yes it will mean a loss of like 13 seats but it will still mean they won the majority of scottish seats. 20 or around that is terrible and 15 would be an absolutely disastrous night for the SNP.
06:29 you mentioned SNP being on 37 on the survation infographic when in fact it shows it as 34. Just a little correction I noticed when watching this video hope it helps loving the content
I'll always support Scotland's right to vote for independence.
They'll never get it with Labour though.
Labour are just Tories. Two cheeks, same arse.
To be fair, to predict that Boris Johnson and Teresa May would fail spectacularly wasn't that hard of a prediction.
every single TLDR video is just an exercise in licking the arse if the Labour Party
What are you even on? Literally every interview or debate I've seen with an SNP politician has the media bringing this exact thing up lmao???
You forgot a third problem for the SNP; their reputation is in tatters.
A lot of it sounds like nonsense. Scottish people could just get begind the party and criticise it rather than abandoning it.
@@samuelmelton8353by that logic shouldn’t everyone in Britain just vote Tory and criticise it?
The whole point of a vote is to change parties when the one in charge doesn’t work for you. The SNP isn’t some utopian party that everyone should vote it’s just another party
@@fireironthesecond2909 I'm assuming Scottish people generally support what the SNP stand for, and many support independence.
I think the Tories have just been the default party for many English people. They vote Tory because it's not Labour. They don't really know about thei philosophy or care about their policies, but they will swing away if they aren't perceived to be doing well.
I think the Tories are different to the SNP
@@samuelmelton8353 well judging by the referendum on it less than half support independence
Also I can confirm that many people do vote for the parties in Britain due to ideology not tactical voting, this election is the exception where nobody has any policies so it’s all tactical voting
@@fireironthesecond2909
The referendum wasn't lost by a huge margin, and I'm sure I've heard of points where pro independence sentiment has risen above 50% since.
It doesn't matter in any case - I'm speaking of those that do support independence but have since turned away from the SNP.
I'm not talking about tactical voting. I'm talking about the sizeable chunk of middle Englanders who don't have any particular interest in politics or political theory, they just vote for Tories out of habit and because 'they are not Labour'. I know, because i am surrounded by them.
I think what the UK needs is something akin to the Austro-Hungarian compromise. Both Scotland and the rest of Britain are independent countries on paper, but still have the same head of state, armed forces, a shared prime minister, shared currency, foreign policy and infrastructure and the possibility of dual citizenship. Easier said than done, of course.
And who wants to interact with Hungary , looking at their attitude to NATO. So scotlanwould want all the uk,s protection and opt out of helping other countries in NATO. hilarious when you consider how many of our armed forces are scottish. I live in scotland and the only SNP voters seem to live in a twilight land of Disney and Peter pan, one guy I met also was a flat earth believer. Almost as bad as Niger farage believing the west provoked Putin. I wish everyone considering voting for him would remember how he was one of the 1st to suck up and PRAISE trump just before he became president.
It’s already dead, killed by the SNP ironically
I never noticed David Cameron’s book in the background
Sorry but the labour party in Scotland is the unionist party it is a moderate Conservative party. With the likes of Dr broon and the delightfully awful Mr Murray. They will be very divisive and just increase support for independence. The standard of Scottish Labour mps is extremely poor anyway. Either ex union reps or the west of Scotland mafia. Labour may win more than 12 seats in Scotland. However it's move to the right in England and the ingrained biggotries of broon and Murray will be a boon very quickly. For the Scottish Parliament elections in 2026 if broon or Murray allow this institution to survive or take most of its power away.
Not to mention the fact that on the council level Labour in some instances would rather support the Tories than the SNP. Some party of of the people
Scottish independence is dead anyway. The Scottish public literally voted against breaking away from the UK right when the SNP were at their peak popularity with Alex Salmond. That has now disappeared due at least a generation.
No. Never, the desire for Scottish independence is greater than the SNP. 51% of Scots want a referendum, but 36% support the SNP.
A uk labour government will be good, but they will lose one day and the Tories will come back.
Unionists say we had a vote. Yes, 10 YEARS AGO. Are we not allowed to change our mind? If that is the case, then why have elections, because people change their point of view and select a different party to vote for.
Its called democracy, and Scots should be given the chance to vote!
you people said yourself it was once in a lifetime vote, and we aren't required to have a vote whenever you guys feel like having one
most people still don't want independence, and even less people want a vote, we have regular elections because if a party does badly you can change that, you can't revert independence so it's pointless you keep whining about it
@@brazzn
I am not whining. I am making a point and asking a question.
What Labour should do is agree to the referendum and then campaign against it. Thats democracy, but they say "No, you cannot have a referendum."
Is that democratic?
The polls don’t agree with you mate
The fact that you think changing political leaders and partition is the reason why you don't get a vote. 😂
As a Scot the shenanigans the SNP have been involved in have done more damage to independence than any opposition party could ever do.
I do hope so!!!
I think Scotland need to open their eyes and realise they get the best deal of the 4 nations and are insulated from most of the problems.
People's eyes are open, the renewable energy future is bright and perhaps this time Westminster won't get to take all the profits and pump it into the south of England like they did with the oil revenue.
People are voting for 'not Tories' in England and 'not SNP' In Scotland.
Both are sooooo unpopular that this poor, poor labour party will wipe the floor with them.
We don’t want nor require English Mayors the fundamental outcome is still the same we get pocket money lower funding and give all our resources to Westminster which may i point out is illegal as all resources are Scottish not UK
Scotland can check out any time it likes but can never leave.. at least the eu lets countries leave..the uk as Englands establishment doesn't
The EU isn’t a state. EU members, as a whole, don’t even allow the opportunity for referendum.
The EU isn’t a country; it’s a trade bloc
The UK is a country; very big difference
International law says it’s the UK’s decision as a sovereign state
Until you realise that the Labour supermajority is not about love for Labour - it's about hatred for the Tories. Starmer's incoming government could get very unpopular very quickly, simply by virtue of being incumbents in the 2020s. If that does happen, the SNP will indeed have an unpopular Westminster government to run against - at least in 2029.
went into the comments expecting alot of jingoistic toxicity, glad to see all of the levelheaded support for independance!