No PM is really going to want to agree to one. It's going to take a lot of pressuring and strong SNP showings in both parliaments to get to a stage where a PM considers it.
this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2025
44 points (92.3% liked)
UK Politics
3902 readers
108 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes, understandable, but he could have not answered too
The most annoying thing politicians do is not answering the question.
Why would there be one anytime soon?
I dunno, maybe people in Scotland keep electing pro indy majorities or some other antidemocratic guff. Holyrood is going to the polls next year
load more comments
(6 replies)
Brexit invalidated the results because many voted for the sole purpose of staying in the EU, public support is now at a majority, and Reform getting in would raise support significantly.
refusal to grant a referendum while also striking down any devolved laws they don't like? that's not a union that's colonisation.
That’s a bold word to use, considering Scotland got started on colonialism before England did, and the Scotch were the most vigorously committed members of the colonial service and military.
Didnae say we weren't. Wouldn't use that word to describe us today. Unlike Starmer
Why do Scot’s say didnae but not wouldnae?
As ye wudnae sae didnae tae yer ma, did ye?
Yo no hablo Scots, señor.
Scotch is a bold word to use when trying to take the moral high ground, you xenophobe.
Can you provide a source for your claim of being the most vigorously committed members or are you just talking out your arse?
The first English overseas expansion occurred as early as 1169, when the Norman invasion of Ireland began to establish English possessions in Ireland, with thousands of English and Welsh settlers arriving in Ireland.[3] As a result of this the Lordship of Ireland was claimed for centuries by the English monarch
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_overseas_possessions
Scotland's colonialism began in the 1600s, quite a bit later than the 1100s...
Chaps like Henry Dundas (literally put upon a pedestal, and former head of the EIC) made a vast amount of wealth that was used to build Scottish cities, found its banks and institutions. Scotland was obsessed with education, and what the educated did was they got work administering colonial affairs. And of course, the very enthusiastic colonisation of Ireland.
So literally nothing that the English and Welsh didn't also do. We were all bastards.
Olap's mention of Starmer being a colonialist is because he is outright denying the chance of a democratic process, regardless of what the Scottish electorate desire, like a colonialist would do. Not to mention his support for Israel, a true modern colonial power.
Maybe think next time before you go running to defend an antidemocratic genocide supporter and keep your bigotry to yourself.
Not to mention his support for Israel,
What support?
We stopped weapons sales and condemned them, have called for a two-state solution, and their leader is calling Starmer an anti-Semite.
That is a very recent change, his stance until just a few weeks ago has been very pro-Israel. Even now, his stance is the weakest form of condemnation possible, from an ex human rights lawyer, for what is an atrocity on par with the likes of the holocaust and holodomor.
This documentary gives more information about Starmer's faction in Labour's weaponisation of "antisemitism":
Other related information:
https://www.thenational.scot/news/25214288.keir-starmer-confronted-uk-claim-no-genocide-gaza/
I presume therefore as such a passionate advocate for democracy that, if Scotland became independent, you would support a decennial referendum on joining the UK? Or is only the “right” result worthy of being deemed a democratic process?
Scotch is a drink.
Well, if anyone would know, it’s you.
Why not just call my mum names while you're at it.
Was she also named after a chain of off-licences?
Was that before the union?
non-brit here. i watched a season of Bakeoff where one of the contestants mentioned being a unionist while making a patriotic cake or something like that. from the outside it is utterly fucking weird to have someone's political stance be "Everything Is Fine Like This, You Are Actually Happy Where You Are, Do Not Consider Leaving"
What is it that you find strange exactly?
view more: next ›