• Zagorath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I’m watching the ITV feed on YouTube. Dunno what other people actually from the UK would recommend because I don’t really know the British media landscape.

    They’re currently discussing the issue of Scottish independence. I must say, I find it very frustrating, including from Nicola Sturgeon. As a complete outsider, it would seem to me the number 1 reason in favour of a second referendum is very simple: “you’ll not be allowed back into the EU if you secede from the UK” was a major campaign point during the first referendum. And then 2 years later England voted to leave the EU anyway. How is Sturgeon not bringing this up?

    • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.ukOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’m watching the ITV feed on YouTube. Dunno what other people actually from the UK would recommend because I don’t really know the British media landscape.

      ITV will be just fine. The Beeb’s coverage is usually pretty definitive.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 days ago

        Unfortunately BBC doesn’t seem to be live streamed on YouTube. Or if it does, it didn’t turn up in my search. I was choosing between ITV, Sky News (I know Sky in the UK isn’t quite the same as Sky here in Aus, but the stink of that name is very hard for me to shake off), something called “TalkTV”, and two separate feeds from “The Times and The Sunday Times”. Oh, and CNN, but that’s just silly.

    • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      They bring that up regularly, but it’s a false equivalence. At the time of the independence vote it was absolutely true to claim that voting No was true best way to stay in the EU. There was no expectation, none, from anyone that Brexit was on the way. So, at the time, if Europe was the issue then voting to stay in the UK was the logical choice to make.

      As for now - well, Swinney (and before him Sturgeon herself) was talking in terms of winning a majority of seats being a mandate for opening independence talks. That’s clearly nonsense, since a majority of seats is possible with a fairly small plurality of votes. And, it’s looking like it’s a moot point anyway, since the SNP seems to have taken a right good kicking this time round.

      So Sturgeon is probably not bringing this up tonight because she’d look ridiculous to do so given the (apparent) results in Scotland tonight. If this was a referendum on independence as she and Swinney have suggested, then the result would appear to be a solid No.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        According to the conversation tonight, not even a majority of seats, but a plurality.

        Anyway you’re absolutely right that given the tact that they had chosen it’s hard to read today’s projected result as anything other than a failure. But I was speaking more about when the conversation turned away from the direct outcome of today’s results and more towards the general longer-term future prospects for independence. I don’t recognise any of their other panellists (pic attached below), but the guy on Sturgeon’s left (camera right) and to a lesser extent the other panellists were making reference to the fact that the previous referendum failed and how no future government would ever allow another referendum (with the exception of if Labour relied on the SNP to form a minority government, which was thought possible a year ago). That’s when it would have seemed obvious to me for Sturgeon to point out the false promise that led to the result in 2014.