I heard that Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales leaders are planning to meet to break up UK. Is it really true? Anyone from UK here who can tell me what is actually happening there?

top 96 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 67 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (23 children)

It started with this article: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/09/13/irish-scots-and-welsh-leaders-meet-to-plot-break-up-uk/

Basically right now an independence referendum in Scotland can only be authorised by the Westminster (London) government. Whether Scotland wants one or not, thats how it is.

For the first time there are independence-supporting administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The first ministers of those countries will meet on Monday and agree a path forward, ultimately to make it harder for Westminster to say 'no' to future referendums.

This doesn't 'kick start the break up of the UK' - all it does is put pressure on Westminster not to block independence referendums when there's an appetite for them. The Prime Minister and his government can choose to ignore that. Nothing is changing.

The Telegraph and other right-leaning nonsense rags have latched onto this, exaggerating it because its red meat for their target audience. I think that's where the 'Russian interference' is, but I'm not a unionist and one of them might explain it better.

  • source
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (5 children)

    Yankee here. If you have the time, I'd like to know a little bit more on what's actually been happening over there. Honestly, with everything going on, it's been hard to keep up. It's been a lot of noise and very little information.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

    Sure, what would you like to know?

    It hasn't really changed since the 2014 referendum. For/against Scottish independence still hovers around 50:50, usually more on the pro-union side.

    Problem is all the dollars flowing across the Atlantic to right-wing causes. Ten years ago Scotland was predominantly left-leaning. The culture wars and brainwashing on social media have lead to a lot of people being preoccupied with things like trans women and immigrants. Immigration is a funny one - we aren't affected as bad with that as, say, the south of England. We actually need immigration to keep society functioning.

    Right-wing parties are now something like 30% and is predominantly for remaining in the union, but the lefty vote is split between pro-independence and unionist parties. The majority in Holyrood (the Scottish parliament) is mostly members of Independence supporting parties, but the overall popular vote is for the Union.

    Because independence support is not definitive the UK gov's position is 'no' to more referendums. As long as support for independence is split down the middle it'll keep going round in circles and continue to dominate Scottish politics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    What factors do you feel are the predominant drivers of independent sentiment on the left? I know Brexit and rejoining the EU are close to the top, but what makes the right want to stay with the union?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    Many factors but probably the biggest is the parade of Conservative governments since and including Margaret Thatcher.

    The Conservatives (or 'the Tories') have been wildly popular south of the border but not so much up here. Scotland was very much Tory country at one point but that changed with Thatcher. Her economic policies absolutely devastated many of the poorer parts of the UK but Glasgow and the west of the country were arguably the worst hit. Glasgow has come up a lot but the deprivation there compared to places like London is obscene. Until recently it was one of the poorest areas in Europe (its possible it still is).

    Thatcher was followed by Cameron (caused Brexit and 'austerity'), Johnson (Brexit mouthpiece, covid spending), and Truss (50 days in power and managed to crash the economy) amongst others.

    The way Westminster works is that every MP is supposed to have roughly a similar number of constituents. Because we have a smaller population than England we have far fewer MPs. So typically the SNP or Labour clears the board in Scotland, while the Tories take England. This leads to a feeling that the Tories are 'imposed' on Scotland as a consequence of the union. Thus, if we were independent we'd be rid of them.

    There's other factors, like sectarianism (protestant unionism vs separatist Catholics), wealthy (ie conservative) landowners, etc but the Tories is where most of it comes from.

    The right... farming and fishing. There is (or used to be) a feeling that the Tories looked after the farmers and fishermen. Thats largely been trashed since Brexit (both groups lost lots of European grant money). The wealthy landowners have always exercised their power via the Tories and the print media - they worry their land will be taken off them in an independent Scotland (highly likely). Then theres that old chestnut of foreign influence via social media, exacerbating the immigration debate. The right is predominantly Unionist, thus if you're right-leaning you're typically unionist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago (16 children)

    Telegraph is right leaning? Damn, idk that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (13 children)

    Pretty sure, yeah. Most of the UK papers are. The only one I know for sure is The Guardian. There's probably others.

    The Observer, The Independent and The National (Scottish), The i and The Scotsman are either neutral or lefty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    The only one I know for sure is The Guardian.

    Is there a "not" missing? The Guardian is left leaning except their transphobia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

    Hot take. The guardian is know for being excessively woke to most people. Even i find it a little much sometimes, and I'm a total pinko. Have you any examples of their transphobia? Not being a dick, i've just never, ever heard that before.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Here's an article somewhat amusingly from The Guardian on it
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/02/guardian-editorial-response-transgender-rights-uk

    Also this vice article includes lots of links to relevant guardian articles
    https://www.vice.com/en/article/guardian-trans-journalists/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    Thanks for sharing; I genuinely didn't know that was something they'd been criticised for. I'll read the linked articles when I get a chance, but this is certainly news to me.

    EDIT. Actually I may not read the articles. One is nearly 20 years old and the newest is over 5.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    I would debate the "most people" part, but I guess we move in different circles. As well as the links posted by toomanypancakes, hundreds of the Guardian's own staff signed a letter criticising its “pattern of publishing transphobic content”.

    It is notorious in the trans community for having some strongly transphobic regular columnists.

    If you do an online search for "guardian transphobia" you will find numerous media reports and trans people's reddit posts about it over the years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago (5 children)

    I only know BBC when it comes to British media and that feels lefty or neutral

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    The BBC barely feels neutral, has mostly leaned right over the past decade.

    The only major left-leaning non-tabloid one I can think of is the Guardian.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago*

    It means semi-serious. Basically, you have broadsheets that purport to push serious journalism and tabloid papers that are more sensationalist and low-brow. Tabloids in the UK include The Sun (hugely popular, Murdoch-owned, right-wing scandal rag) and the way less popular Mirror (a left-leaning paper that sort of emulates The Sun's style in an attempt to appeal to the masses).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Meh its okay but they're under pressure to give voice to racist bigots in the interest of 'balance'.

    You should listen to 5 live (one of their radio stations). You wouldn't believe what they let some people say live on air.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 48 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    It’s true. My uncle is the Prime Minister of Wales and he was in meetings with Billy Connolly, David Beckham and Liam Neeson all weekend.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    Well my uncle works for Nintendo and put the Metroid Justin Bailey cheat code in for me, his favorite nephew, Justin Bailey.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago (5 children)

    Really or are you just joking?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 1 month ago (10 children)

    not for a while. There are always calls for independence from groups there but Scotland had a vote to stayor leave a while back and they wanted to stay.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    Something they came to regret after brexit. I doubt the vote would be the same today.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago (8 children)

    I haven't looked at it recently but it was a close vote, like withing a couple percentage points.
    I doubt any of the current parties have the political capital to run the vote again in the near future.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    The Scottish wanted to do a new vote after the Brexit was voted in, but that was quickly shut down by the UK government.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    It was understood to be a once in a generation vote. People can’t just leave in a strop just because things change. That’s what things do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Sure, but "things change" sounds like something relatively minor, Brexit was a major history altering event.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    Which happens in the voyage of a country. It isn’t about convenience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago

    It isn’t about convenience.

    I could make the same argument for the Scottish trying to recast their "once in a generation" vote. Also, a generation is about twenty years, so for the sake of arguing you could expect another vote in 2034.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago

    A lot of it is a storm in a bottle. There are periodic discussions about it. It tends to be when the central government (based in London) gets to South East England centric.

    Right now the numbers wanting independence are higher than usual, but not into the realms of breaking away imminently. However, it's also worth noting that a lot of England is also pissed off with parliament for various reasons. We seem to have a similar capture issue to America (excessive willingness to please big business/money over the people from both sides).

    Basically it's a shot across the bows to the UK parliament to do their fucking jobs, not just line their own pockets.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago

    No, this is out of nowhere and it's basically just a formal request to the prime minister

    If it goes anywhere, it'll take some time

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 1 month ago (20 children)

    I support the removal of Northern Ireland from the UK so that it can be reunited into the Irish Republic.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (18 children)

    did you ask northern Ireland first?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 1 month ago (17 children)

    Did England fucking ask Northern Ireland first?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    "England"

    Jaysus lad learn your history.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Probably a Yank. They've never been too keen on history or geography... or maths... or any education, really.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (7 children)
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    The truth is that the British practiced colonizing Ireland before they took their show global. They even partitioned the Island. The British get horny for partitioning stuff. They partitioned India and Palestine too.

    British Patriotism requires amnesia. God damn the King.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Ireland was partitioned due to a referendum, so yes they were asked.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

    No such referendum occurred. British legislation came into effect without a public vote.

    Irish leaders were promised by British negotiators that there would be an "immediate and terrible war" in Ireland if they did not agree.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    A referendum was held in 1973, so I should have said partition continued due to a referendum.

    However even the opt-out of 1922 could be seen as the result of a public vote, as Sinn Féin campaigned the 1921 election focused almost solely on the issue of partition, and underperformed with 20% of the popular vote.

    Unionist and nationalist paramilitaries had been formed during the previous decade, and both had been generously armed by Germany during the war. Unionist paramilitaries had taken to marching through English cities en masse, promising England would face consequences if a united Ireland gained independence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    However even the opt-out of 1922 could be seen as the result of a public vote, as Sinn Féin campaigned the 1921 election focused almost solely on the issue of partition, and underperformed with 20% of the popular vote.

    Within the partitioned North, yes. The British settlers far outnumbered the Irish at that stage. It didnt' matter what way the Irish voted.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    They're planning to meet up to persuade the new prime minister (who is pro devolution generally) to do it in such a way as to allow the national assemblies to have more power, but it being a secret plot to break up the UK is a bit of rightwing hysteria and a massive over exaggeration.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Northern Ireland always saying something along those lines no one listens to them. The Welsh leader is new and is just mouthing off because it will make some headlines for him, SNP get the Scottish riled up, I don't know how much the average Scott really wants to leave the Union if anyone had a point they would but I tend to think that it's just the loud minority.

    Although personally I think we would all be better off if we just move the capital to literally anywhere other than London.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I think if there was another Scottish referendum now, Scotland would leave the UK. It was close last time, but brexit really fucked everything up and the UK's general behaviour ever since hasn't been exactly reassuring. I think the majority of Scots would rejoin the EU.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago

    Frankly I think the UK would like it if NI rejoined Ireland, it’d probably make things a lot simpler for everyone. There was a vote in the 70s and it was like 99% remain in the UK. The UK government has said that they’ll do a vote if it ever looked like the majority might want to rejoin but it’s not there right now. I know a few people from there and they agree with that.

    I understand that a party that wants to reunify got voted into power there for the first time ever but I don’t think it was on any promise to reunify if you know what I mean, but I think things are slowly heading in that direction.

    If the people of NI actually wanted to reunify I don’t know anyone in England who would have a problem with it, but the government won’t hand over any land if the majority of the people there want to remain part of the UK. Trump is just making his comments because he’s pissed that the UK wouldn’t help with the Epstein Wars.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (12 children)

    It’s not breaking but it’s certainly broken

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago (11 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (10 children)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago (9 children)

    I meant, are you talking from a right wing POV who think that Pakistani immigrants and grooming gangs are problem or from a left wing POV (idk honestly what are the concerns raised by the British left)?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (8 children)

    I’m not political. I say what I see. And what I see is crime rates sky high, year long nhs waiting times, etc. I don’t look at it from a political perspective — if I did, I’d be scathing both left and right corrupt fuckers in parliament. They’re all the same any way you slice it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    what happened to nhs? I am not Brit but a lot of people from my country do work there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    To be clear, the NHS is just one example of everything that I see is broken in the UK, I’m not singling it out for any particular reason.

    But to answer your question, lack of resources and funding (staff, equipment, money etc.) has led to basically staff shortages and what is widely considered to be inadequate healthcare. I’m not saying literally nobody gets good quality care, but a lot of people don’t and it’s not really acceptable, especially considering that some major surgery waiting lists can reach up to a year or more (in other words: if they need surgery then they will have to wait for it for a year or longer).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Crime and Healthcare are both political issues, irregardless to your, or anyone elses, allegiance or independance to or from any specific political group.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    Consider this: So 100’s of years ago, before parliament, when Kings ruled under the divine right and there was no politics as they are today (no elected government, no electorates splitting the vote, in fact no voting in the first place), did people not care about these issues?

    You’re correct that these issues are, in our modern world politicised (or have become so, rather), but they aren’t fundamentally a political issue. That’s why I don’t look at them through the lens of politics when I answer that question. My point is, its not impossible to separate the issue from the politics

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I think we may be using different definitions of politics. I'd argue that even under birthright rule there was plenty of political action, just that it was a club most people weren't empowered to have any say in.

    I think I get what you mean, though, and you'd be right in saying that these things have been polarised to an almost sporting team-like level, where you're expected to be on one diametrically opposed side or another. Really, it's just a shame that's all getting in the way of running things properly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (8 children)

    Ignore the comments here saying that this is Russian interference or that it came “out of nowhere”.

    Ireland has always wanted independence and has wanted to reunite since partition happened. The people in Ireland who identified as British opposed that and had the entire British state/terror services at their disposal. That has changed a lot and now even British settlers here are talking publicly and seriously about the potential (pros and cons) of reunification.

    The vast majority of Britons are ignorant and diseducated on this matter so be careful which comments you trust.

    It was never meant to last forever but the tide has been turning for some time now.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    I heard there has been a beef between English and Irish historically and I always wondered why Northern Ireland is not part of Ireland.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (4 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

    No poll shows “yes” leading.

    Polls done in Ireland consistently favour reunification.

    In the North, the majority of Irish (labelled "Catholic" in polls) support reunification. Overall, they don't have a majority yet due to those who identify as "British" or "neither". which is why a border poll has not yet happened, but it has been trending upwards since about 2015.

    We even have senior unionist politicians talking about it now and I see many protestants making videos online about becoming comfortable with the idea of reunification and even learning the language. Times are changing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Polls dane in Ireland consistently favour reunification.

    It would not be Ireland voting, it would be Northern Ireland.

    I am sure one day it will happen, but it is not imminent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Incorrect. Under the Good Friday Agreement, both the North and the the rest of Ireland must vote 'yes' to reunification by public referendum. This is one reason why Irish citizens are also polled on this issue.

    I agree that it is not imminent. It seems somewhere between likely and inevitable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    Sure, what I mean is that regardless of whether or not Ireland votes yes - Northern Ireland must also vote yes. And it won't happen until Northern Ireland specifically is ready.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›