EU Referendum, another TV appearance

Last Wednesday, I was asked again to speak to a CBC journalist, on the EU referendum, I did so, but in the end, they didn't use so much of what I said. I'm okay with this, as last week, this was not something I had much to say on. I mean I had my reasons for voting the way I did, but they were pretty uninteresting I thought.

The report can still be seen here.

So I gave this interview, then we went off down to New York for a long weekend (but that's for another post) so didn't have time to post this here. I was also asked to do an early morning thing somewhere for the morning after, but since we were in NY, I declined.  I also figured, that'd, pretty much be the ed of it, as I thought the British people too conservative to change, so figured it may be close, but in the end, nothing would change. Ok, so maybe I was wrong in that assumption. Maybe a little.

It seems that, yes indeed as I suggested, there was a difference in how Scotland and England voted, and that is having huge repercussions. It may be too close to the actual event to make a diagnosis or  dissection of what happened (although this article probably nails it pretty close), this is something we will be debating for years, but we are certainly living in interesting times!

I will leave you with one more link, to a friend of mine who voted leave, and not for the reasons that we are hearing from the UKIP side of the debate.  I think it is important to read this post on his reasoning, so that we can move forward in this mew world order.

The only thing I would like to add, is that as a scientist, if I ever tried to publish 49.1% and 51.9% as a significant result, I would be given my head to play with!

Differences between the Scottish and English in terms of the EU Referendum, An Ex-Pat's Perspective

I'm not one for using this space as a link-dump, but I think this is the best place for me to post this link, as I'm steering away from talking bout the EU referendum on other social media sites, for various reasons, some previously mentioned.

One point that keeps coming up is how Scotland (and Northern Ireland, maybe not so much Wales, but certainly Gibraltar) may vote differently than England in this upcoming referendum. I read this article on the differences between Scotland and England in terms of how they are approaching the EU referendum, and I think the article hits many points squarely on the head.

I think the first point is particularly on point:

For most Scots, being Scottish and British is, to use an old analogy, a bit like Russian dolls. One can sit comfortably inside the other, without any conflict. That means it’s easy enough to add another one – European – on top...

English people essentially see the two as synonymous, as two sides of the same coin, with Englishness facing in and Britishness facing out. Adding the ‘European’ identity to that feels like an imposition. 

I see this attitude even here. The Ex-Pat community may not be the best reflection of British society, but English and British being synonyms is a very common attitude amongst certain (but not all) of the English Ex-Pats I know. As much as I don't necessarily identify as British a lot of the time, that does rankle. Those who have a stronger regional identity, either Scots, (Norn) Irish or otherwise tend to be able to slot these identities together more smoothly. They are more capable to live with multifaceted national identities. How this affects adding Canadian identity to those who take the route of citizenship is something I haven't really looked at, but would be interesting to think about.

In a related point, the interview for ICI Radio-Canada I mentioned in my last post contained only the viewpoints of Scots in Montreal. Some of these Scots certainly consider themselves more British than maybe I do, but the journalist was having a hard time tracking down other viewpoints. She was pointed towards the facebook group for Brits in the city, but she was refused access, as she wasn't British. As a curator of other facebook groups, I certainly see the logic in this decision, but I do also see the irony in the outcome. She also had difficulty finding people to talk from a leave perspective, but I think that is not such a great shock in the Ex-Pat community, a we all may have a more global perspective than those who have not lived abroad (I generalise, of course).

L'heure du Monde

I thought that my last post would be pretty much all I had to say on the EU-Referendum. I vote, we move on with life. However, I was slightly mistaken.

Turns out all the media attention that the IndyRef got over here, and the fact I was willing to go on record to talk about it means there are some journalists out there who have our details. To that end I was contacted my a rather desperate CBC journalist, looking for Brits who were willing to talk to her about the referendum. I did say to her that I don't think I had anything much to say of interest in the matter, but she convinced me to talk. She came over one evening and spoke to K and I, and the resulting interview can be heard here. Click on the link in red just under the story to hear our part of the show.

Still not sure I have much of interest or depth to say on the matter, but it's nice to be asked!

EU Referendum

I have a vote in the upcoming EU referendum in the UK, but this vote leaves me with a dilemma. During the IndyRef, I may have wanted to vote, but I understood there were reasons why I should not. Mostly because I had chosen to leave the country, and this meant I didn't have the right to decide what people who were resident there should do. This reasoning goes hand in hand with the fact that non-UK citizens who were resident in Scotland at the time got to vote. What is  also different is that EU citizens resident in the UK won't necessarily get to vote either:

British, Irish and Commonwealth citizens who live in the UK, along with Britons who have lived abroad for less than 15 years, are eligible to vote.

Commonwealth migrants from 54 states - including ­Australia, Canada, India, Pakistan and Nigeria - can join the electoral roll as long are they are residents in the UK.
Unlike the general election, Commonwealth citizens in Gibraltar are also eligible to vote in the EU referendum.

Citizens from other European countries - apart from Ireland, Malta and Cyprus - will not get a vote on whether the UK remains part of the EU.Malta and Cyprus are both Commonwealth countries. Source.

That Canadians resident in the UK get to vote where French or German residents in the UK do not, I find to be off. There may be cynics out there who suggest this is all to the good for getting the result that those in power want, but since those in power (i.e. the Tory party), are split on the matter, I,m not sure that's quite right. I would be interested to know if there was any precedence for Commonwealth citizens having the right to vote in these kinds of thing, or if it was just a way to include Gibraltar, Malta and Cyprus, who the vote does directly affect.

This time round, I do get to vote. However, the same reasoning that I accepted the last referendum should surely stand, to do otherwise would be hypocritical, no? However, I balance this with the fact that in all my adult life, I have never failed to vote when I am allowed to. I did miss one general election in the UK that I could have voted in after I moved here, as I wasn't sure of the rules, and didn't get my postal vote sorted in time, but that is the only exception, and I now have my postal vote registered.

What is furthering my dilemma, is that I am not entirely sure I want to vote for either option. Let me be straight, I think the UK should stay in the EU. This is not a change in my position from the IndyRef either, as I thought then the best option for Scotland was to remain in the EU after independence, so I am not flip-flopping. What I mean is that I don't know that I want my vote to count as a vote for either side of the internal Tory party debate that is the root of this referendum. I don't want David Cameron to stand up at the end of the vote and say "all these people who voted stay think I'm right!" That is certainly not the case. I am also not saying the EU is politically perfect, but I don't think you can improve things in the EU by stepping back and leaving all the good parts aside.

The last point that crossed my mind was that if the UK votes to leave, but the majority of people living in Scotland vote to stay, it could be taken by some as impetus for Scotland to gain her independence. This has already been mooted in some circles as enough of a reason for another IndyRef. I think this is a bit of a stretch, but obviously I wouldn't say no if it happened. However, the difference between the Scottish (or Welsh) votes and the rUK votes would have to be significant which I don't think it will be, and my vote would be counted in Edinburgh. So if I voted to leave, it would be a vote to leave registered in Scotland, so would indeed count against the reason for voting to leave! So, no, that won't work!


This video by Caitlin Moran nicely sums up what I was thinking on this subject, even points I hadn't realised I was thinking, and is much more concise.

Fuck David Cameron. I will vote, but I'd rather be playing swing-ball!