“I’M SORRY, I regret it, I am with you this time” – former No voters yesterday declared they would mark their cross for an independent Scotland in a second indyref.
Speaking at Bute House yesterday, Nicola Sturgeon said many people who voted against independence in 2014 who were “reassessing their decision”. Her words rang true as Scots took to social media to reveal their changed or changing allegiances.
Author JK Rowling, who has previously been subject to harsh criticism and online abuse for her pro-UK stance, suggested Scottish independence was now inevitable, stating that David Cameron’s legacy would be “be breaking up two unions” in a series of tweets sparking speculation about her position.
Responding to the BBC’s James Cook, she said: “Staunch opponent implies I was pro-Union no matter what, which was never the case. Many No voters will think again now.”
Meanwhile, Harry Potter fan Hufflepuff Carol, from Glasgow, said: “I am so sorry for each and every time I spoke against Scottish nationalists. I am with you this time #indyref2.”
English-born businesswoman Caroline Castle, who has lived in Scotland with her family for seven years, told The National she was ready to vote Yes after rejecting Scottish independence first time around.
The 57-year-old said Brexit was the turning point, stating: “I voted Labour in General Elections in the past and I voted Tory at the last Scottish election, for Ruth Davidson. I voted No in the referendum but the situation we are facing changes that.
“The EU is the more important union. Leaving the EU will damage the UK’s economic prospects so much that if Scotland was able to get an independent membership it would bring investment not only in financial terms but also in people. We need people.”
CommonSpace editor Angela Haggerty revealed how her “staunch, No-supporting dad” was now a “don’t know” on Scottish independence, saying she was “stunned” by the change.
Meanwhile, social media user Eryn Stewart said: “I was [a] No voter in the Scottish independence referendum and I will hold my hands up and say that I am starting to regret it.”
Aberdeen man Martin Leng, 23, told The National he was “unable to justify remaining” in the UK after Scotland’s strong Remain vote failed to stop Brexit.
He said: “I’m pro-European and voted to Remain. I believe that the world needs fewer borders, not more. The potential instability of an independent Scottish economy, built on fluctuating oil prices and potentially outside the EU, was a risk I was not prepared to take.
“Thanks to yesterday’s result, the UK is set to withdraw from a peaceful union of peoples and plunge itself into economic uncertainty – exactly what I sought to avoid during the independence referendum. If maintaining that union involves Scotland leaving the UK, then so be it.”
He added: “I reach that conclusion with a heavy heart – I would ideally remain within both the UK and the EU. However, if I am to be forced to choose between the two, as now appears likely, I prefer to pursue friendly international co-operation over an ill-considered isolation Scotland has clearly rejected.”
Former No voter Jacqui Chisholm, from Eyemouth, said she would vote Yes if given another chance, stating: “In the run up to indyref there was a lot of things they scaremongered about, like the currency and border control. We have been part of the EU for all of my lifetime and I want to stay part of it.”
Graeme Moore, 30, who works in oil and gas, said “selfish” fears about house prices and jobs caused him to vote No in 2014, but said Brexit was “a game-changer”. He said: “I am definitely Yes now. What Scotland wanted was forced to one side behind what England wants.
“We were stuck under a barrel.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel