The Scottish Government

In reply to Thomas Porter on the issue of nationality - I do not agree that nationality is a simple matter of bithplace. I have friends born in Germany and Cyprus due to the military careers of their parents who are in no real sense German or Cypriat. Three of my children were born in England because we were living and working there at the time. All three consider themselves to be Scots and it makes no sense to consider them as anything else. In the final analysis national identity is a combination of family and individual circumstance and sentiment. Much more clear is the matter of who gets to vote in an independence referendum. It can only be those currently resident in Scotland and appearing on the Scottish electoral register.

Ah beleive we should learn tae walk afore we run.Wendy Alexander wants tae rush it cos she kens when the tories boot the broon's oot oh number 10 the need fur mair power will be awe the mair apparant.

61. john - edinburgh

It all depends where you are born. If you are born in England then you are English.

If you were born in England tand owned a house in Scotland then you are a English person who happens to own a house in Scotland.

My family own apartments in Spain but I would not class myself as Spanish now since I was born and raised in Scotland all my life.

If I was in that position I would class myself as English who happens to be working in Scotland.

62. Dave Hawkey - Edinburgh

Also, the Unionists have not thought this through well.

Since develution we have seen a new wave of Nationalism. If we gain more powers then that is one more step towards Independance.

Does it really matter if we manage to gain more powers now?

Scotland will be running more Independantly and all the SNP need to do is to argue for Independance to gather the Nationalists vote in the next election and to further Scotlands powers.

Perhaps with more powers the SNP would gain more votes. Despite personal opinion and party loyalty the SNP has done well in Government for Year One and maybe with more powers they could encourage a wider vote from public.

Anyone thought of that?

I am concerned about the logic of the proposed three-option referendum. STV is a system whose design assumes that the options presented to voters are distinct, relating to each other in a variety of ways without being different positions on one continuum. When options have a natural order (as do the "status quo", "more power" and "independence" options), the result of STV is biased in favour of options in the middle. People who's first preference is at one end of the scale are overwhelmingly likely to choose the middle option as second (nobody is going to vote 1=status quo, 2=independence, 3=more powers). If the middle option is not eliminated at the first-votes stage, it will almost certainly win the second vote stage.

An STV vote with an ordered set of options is like playing with a loaded dice. The outcome will almost certainly be a vote for more powers. To make the referendum meaningful, a yes/no vote on independence should be offered. If gaining extra powers without full independence is thought to require a referendum, then this should be put as a separate question ("IF Scotland votes against independence, should the Scottish executive be granted more powers?").

If I may, let me add to item 60 which I submitted. I am thinking of the situation where an English person resident in Scotland is entitled to vote in a referendum but when the result of that referendum is for separation, finds themselves not a Scottish citizen. If you like, call it the Carlisle question.

I was about to say a Polish or any other person, but no. It is not a question of separation from Poland but from England. At the moment that any act of separation from England becomes law, does an English resident of Scotland become a citizen of another EU state only exercising a European right to reside and work here, or are they Scottish by definition? The British Constitution is a tangled skein. I suggest that at present we just have no idea how both sides of the Border will need to work to define just who is who.

A question that has been raised about who gets a vote (new immigrants, transplanted English etc-I am one of the latter - ) is important, because it raises the further question of who will be a Scottish citizen in the event of separation. Do all paying Scottish taxes (namely Council tax)on the referendum date have the vote? If not, what is the qualification for a vote? If not, then it would obviously be the intention that not all those paying Scottish taxes on any date of separation from England would have citizenship. And what would the qualification for citizenship be? Would not the arrangements have to contemplate dual citizenship? I have the impression that all this is a long way from being thought through

58. James Wilkie
I worked abroad for a few years, in Holland, Germany and Sweden. And in England! I kept my rented flat, then owned flat, then house in Scotland meanwhile. I also took a postal vote.

I'd suggest for all those working abroad, to check your eligibility for a postal vote. That would surely determine your right to vote in any referendum.

I agree - a referendum is binding. Referenda can be repeated, why not, and the result may change, but each one is binding during the time of its validity. Let no government stand in the way of the clearly expressed will of its people.

It is nonsense to suggest that a referendum result is not binding. The people, represented by a qualified and registered electorate, are the highest constitutional authority in the state. It is therefore impossible that their decision can be lawfully overruled by a subordinate authority like government or parliament. A referendum result is absolutely binding.

A referendum would have to be held on independence, if only because it is the most certain way of obtaining recognition by the international community. It would not be necessary for an extension of devolved powers, because that was foreseen in the original devolution legislation.

Nor would a referendum be obligatory for Scottish membership of the European Economic Area (EEA), because that is covered by the positive result of the 1975 Common Market referendum. Membership of the political European Union, on the other hand, would require a referendum, because that involves a transfer of sovereignty far above what was agreed in 1975, and it has never been tested since.

Finally, Scots like myself who are working abroad because there is no equivalent employment available at home should be entitled to a vote on their nation's future, especially if they have no other citizenship.

We all know that if anything happens there will be a referendum.

But what is more important is who will be allowed to vote.

There are Scots world wide.

I am 16 will I get a chance to voice my future?

What about the new immigrants? They have been in the country for a year will they get a say?

What about the English who moved up from Enland to live in Scotland?

Will they get a say...

"Sovereignty lies with the people" says the SNP - but the SNP do not and will not commit to accept the outcome of a Referendum. Until the SNP commit to acceptance of the will of the Scottish People, and commit to disband if the Referendum outcome favours the Union, then the National Conversation is meaningless, and it should cease.