Scotland post-Brexit - what happens next?

[najaB]

However, my view is that this is rather unfair. This is a constitutional question, not something merely about local living conditions. UK citizens who had partaken in Freedom of Movement and moved into the EU were effectively disenfranchised about something which directly affected them and their security. Scots moving to England are in the same position

Natually, this is a question that most directly affects those currently residing in Scotland. But I share your view that Scots not currently in Scotland should have a voice too.

Since UK referenda are non-binding, perhaps an idea is to extend registration to those who are not resident in Scotland, but who would be eligible to vote in a UK general election, but count their votes separately (e.g. same question, different colour ballot paper). That would let them have a voice while still allowing the Government to know exactly what the current residents want (avoiding what some would see as the 'spoiler' effect of the overseas vote).

 

[RT4038]

UK citizens living in Europe were only disenfranchised from the Brexit referendum if it had been more than 15 years since they had left. (I.e. the same rules as General Elections). Whereas the Scottish Independence referendum only looked at residence at the time.

I stand corrected https://www.parliament.uk/business/...-referendum/background-uk-eu-referendum-2016/

The same rules should apply to Scots who have lived in England/Wales/NI for less than 15 years. Not quite sure how this would be determined?

 

[takno]

Natually, this is a question that most directly affects those currently residing in Scotland. But I share your view that Scots not currently in Scotland should have a voice too.

Since UK referenda are non-binding, perhaps an idea is to extend registration to those who are not resident in Scotland, but who would be eligible to vote in a UK general election, but count their votes separately (e.g. same question, different colour ballot paper). That would let them have a voice while still allowing the Government to know exactly what the current residents want (avoiding what some would see as the 'spoiler' effect of the overseas vote).

Certainly it would be interesting to understand their opinions, and also the opinions of people of Scottish descent living in EEA countries, since they would potentially be significantly affected by the vote. I'm not sure you can run this is a non-binding referendum though - you need absolutely clear rules on what constitutes a sufficient vote to trigger change, and what that change looks like.

Personally I think a 2/3rds vote share and >50% of qualified voters from Scottish residents should be the threshold. Where you could include diaspora votes is in setting a threshold where another vote in say 5-10 years would be justified against genuinely ruling it out for 30 years.

 

[najaB]

Personally I think a 2/3rds vote share and >50% of qualified voters from Scottish residents should be the threshold.

I don't know if ⅔ is a realistic threshold, I'd actually suggest that greater than 50% with non-votes counting as "No" might be a better way to go.

That way a Yes vote would truly repreent the majority opinion, and we wouldn't have the situation that we have so often where the winning side represents a majority of votes cast, but a minority of the electorate.

I'd count all residents of voting age (be that 18 or 16), and those non-residents who apply to vote.