People opposed to Scottish independence celebrate the final results of a historic referendum Friday, September 19, in Edinburgh. A majority of voters -- 55% to 45% -- rejected the possibility of Scotland breaking away from the United Kingdom and becoming an independent nation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HIDE CAPTION

 

Scotland votes

 

<<

<

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

>

>>

 

Editor's note: Robin Oakley was political editor and columnist for The Times newspaper in London from 1986 to 1992, the BBC's political editor from 1992 to 2000, and CNN's European Political Editor between 2000 and 2008.

London (CNN) -- David Cameron has had the narrowest of political escapes. Success for the "Better Together" campaign has saved him from catastrophe: he will not, after all, live on in history as the Prime Minister on whose watch the Scottish nation chose to leave the United Kingdom. But serious questions will now be asked in his party and in the country about his future.

Cameron will also face an almighty battle in Parliament to deliver the consolation prize of greatly enhanced powers for the Scottish Parliament, the so-called "Devo Max" package, which he was forced to concede in the panicky latter stages of the No campaign.

On Friday morning, the tired but relieved-looking Premier told reporters at 10 Downing Street that it would have broken his heart to see Scotland leave the UK.

"The people of Scotland have spoken," Cameron said. "They have kept our country of four nations together, and like millions of other people, I am delighted."

 

Cameron 'delighted' with Scotland vote

 

British media: Scotland votes no

 

First Minister of Scotland concedes

 

Scotland and England's rocky relationship

Cameron called on the country to move forward with a "balanced settlement, fair to the people of Scotland -- and importantly, to everyone in England, Wales and Northern Ireland as well."

But although Scottish voters ultimately rejected independence by a margin of 55% to 45%, this story is far from over for Cameron.

READ: Scotland decides: The final count

Did Gordon Brown save it?

Cameron and his party were not the only ones to blame for a referendum campaign that so nearly led to the break-up of the United Kingdom. But he is being widely blamed for a variety of tactical and strategic errors. Many members of Parliament (MPs) will say that he and the "Better Together" campaign were only rescued by the campaigning fervor and passion of the former Labour Party leader and Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Cameron had sought to detach the questions of Scottish independence and his own future. Warning the Scots that what they were walking into was not a trial separation but a final break, he pleaded with them not to throw away the union in a protest vote just because they disliked him and his party. (Of the 59 Scottish seats in the Westminster Parliament only one is held by a Conservative MP).

QUIZ: How Scottish are you?

Insisting on the finality of a constitutional divorce was probably his best card. But in emphasizing that the question on the ballot paper was not his future but the future of the union, Cameron was also acknowledging that he is held to blame by many for boosting the nationalist vote.

Where Cameron went wrong

He is blamed firstly for the terms he agreed on the staging of the referendum. Critics lambast Cameron now for giving Scottish National Party leader Alex Salmond two years to build momentum for his cause, and for opening the vote to 16 year olds. They blame him for agreeing to a ballot paper question which meant that the supporters of independence were the ones campaigning for a "Yes" while their opponents were bound to look negative in seeking a "No."

They blame him for agreeing to let one vote decide the issue: when a Labour government in the 1970s agreed to a referendum on setting up a Scottish Parliament it insisted that 40% of those voting must approve the change. There was a majority for the Parliament but the 40% margin was not achieved and the Scots had to wait another 20 years for their own Parliament.

Above all, the critics insist Cameron was wrong to exclude from the ballot paper the compromise option of the so-called "Devo Max" — a huge extension in the tax-raising and spending powers of the Scottish Parliament. This devolution of power from London to Edinburgh appealed to many as an achievable compromise which would have taken the steam out of the separatist case. But Cameron overruled such advice, only to find that he and the other Westminster party leaders were forced to concede Devo Max anyway — win or lose the vote — as the campaign threatened to run away from them.

Even during the lead-up to the vote, when many Conservative MPs kept quiet for fear of making things worse for the Better Together campaign, some were warning that the concessions on Devo Max wrung from Cameron by Gordon Brown might not be deliverable.

What comes next?

Conservative MPs are already vociferously demanding that any concessions to the Scottish Parliament must be balanced by greater powers for the English regions -- namely, by reducing the number of Scottish MPs in the Westminster Parliament and by ending the process whereby Scottish MPs at Westminster can vote on English-only matters while English MPs have no say in matters delegated to the Scottish Parliament.

As a moderate and pragmatic politician, Cameron has had an uneasy tenure already over a right-leaning party growing ever more Euro-skeptic as it faces the rise of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP). The further difficulties he will face in pushing through legislation to honor his commitments to the Scots will do nothing to add to his authority.

But Cameron will breathe a sigh of relief at a partial reprieve: had he seen the Scots depart from the UK he might well have faced a rebellion in his party which could have gone as far as the tabling of a vote of no confidence in his leadership -- a process which requires 15% of his MPs (46 of them) to sign up to the proposition.

For the moment at least he soldiers on. But there is further trouble looming. Opinion polls indicate that next month his party will lose its first Parliament seat to UKIP in a by-election caused by the defection of former Tory MP Douglas Carswell.

什麼蘇格蘭的“否”票是指卡梅倫
由羅賓·奧克利，美國有線電視新聞網
2014年9月19日 - 更新1049 GMT（1849 HKT）
人們反對蘇格蘭獨立慶祝歷史性公投的最終結果星期五，9月19日，在愛丁堡。 大多數選民 - 55％至45％ - 拒絕蘇格蘭從英國脫離，成為一個獨立國家的可能性。 人們反對蘇格蘭獨立慶祝歷史性公投的最終結果星期五，9月19日，在愛丁堡。大多數選民 - 55％至45％ - 拒絕蘇格蘭從英國脫離，成為一個獨立國家的可能性。
隱藏字幕
蘇格蘭投票
<<
<
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
>
>>
新聞提要
蘇格蘭票“不”的公投是否脫離英國
最終民調顯示狹窄比賽經過多年的競選任何一方
“是”的投票失敗節省了英國首相的慘敗
奧克利：卡梅倫會呼吸了一口氣，在部分死緩
編者按：羅賓·奧克利是政治編輯和專欄作家泰晤士報倫敦1986至1992年，BBC的政治編輯1992年至2000年，以及2000年至2008年CNN的歐洲政治編輯。
倫敦（CNN） -戴維·卡梅倫已最窄的政治逃逸。成功的為“樂樂不如眾樂樂”的活動已經保存了他從災難：他不會，畢竟生活在歷史上作為首相在其觀看蘇格蘭國家選擇了離開英國。但是，嚴重的問題，現在被要求在他的黨和他的未來的國家。
卡梅隆也將面臨一個全能的爭奪戰在議會提供的蘇格蘭議會，即所謂的“泥盆最大”包，他被迫在沒有運動的恐慌後期讓步大大增強力量的安慰獎。
上週五上午，累了，但放心，看著總理告訴記者，在唐寧街10號，它會打破他的心臟，看看蘇格蘭離開英國。
“蘇格蘭的人都發話了，”卡梅倫說。“他們使我們的四個國家的國家團結起來，並像數以百萬計的其他人，我很高興。”
卡梅隆很高興“與蘇格蘭票 英媒：蘇格蘭無票 蘇格蘭首席大臣承認 蘇格蘭和英格蘭的岩石關係
卡梅倫呼籲國家推進“平衡結算，公平蘇格蘭的人 - 重要的是，每個人都在英格蘭，威爾士和北愛爾蘭，以及”
但是，儘管蘇格蘭選民最終拒絕獨立性的55％的保證金至45％，這個故事還遠遠沒有結束的卡梅倫。
閱讀：蘇格蘭決定：最後的計數
難道布朗保存呢？
卡梅隆和他的黨是不是唯一的指責公投運動，所以幾乎導致分手的英國。但他被廣泛指責為各種戰術和戰略錯誤。國會（國會議員）的許多成員會說，他和“樂樂不如眾樂樂”的活動僅是由前工黨領袖，首相戈登·布朗的競選熱情和激情獲救。
卡梅倫曾試圖分離的蘇格蘭獨立，自己的未來的問題。警告蘇格蘭人說什麼他們走進不是一個審判分，但最終的突破，他與他們懇求不要扔掉，工會的抗議票，只是因為他們不喜歡他和他的政黨。（59個蘇格蘭席位中的威斯敏斯特議會中，只有一個是由保守黨國會議員舉行）。
提問：如何蘇格蘭是你嗎？
堅持憲法離婚的終局很可能是他最好的名片。但強調在選票上的問題不是他的未來，但工會的未來，卡梅倫也承認，他正是許多責怪提高國民投票。
卡梅倫在哪裡出了錯
他首先指責他同意了公投的舉辦條件。評論家揍卡梅倫現在給蘇格蘭民族黨領袖亞歷克斯·薩爾蒙德兩年造聲勢為自己的事業，並開放投票至16歲的年輕人。他們指責他同意選票問題，這意味著獨立的支持者是那些競選“是”，而他們的對手都必定要尋找負尋求一個“不”
他們指責他同意讓一票決定這一問題：當工黨政府在1970年代同意公投成立蘇格蘭議會也堅持認為，這些投票的40％必須審批的變化。有一大部分的議會，但沒有達到40％的保證金和蘇格蘭人不得不等待20年為自己的議會。
總之，批評卡梅倫堅持是錯的，從選票排除所謂的“泥盆最大”的妥協方案 - 一個巨大的延伸，在蘇格蘭議會的稅收提高和支出的權力。功率從倫敦到愛丁堡的這下放呼籲多為一個可實現的妥協方案將採取蒸出來的分裂情況。不過，卡梅倫否決了這樣的建議，才發現他和其他威斯敏斯特黨的領導人被迫承認泥盆最大反正 - 贏或輸的票 - 為競選威脅要逃避他們。
即使在引入了表決的時候，許多保守黨議員噤若寒蟬，生怕讓事情變得更糟的樂樂不如眾樂樂運動，有些人警告說，上泥盆最大的讓步，卡梅隆用擰幹的戈登·布朗可能無法交付。
下一步是什麼？
保守黨國會議員已經在叫囂著要求任何讓步蘇格蘭議會必須通過更大的權力，以英語地區進行平衡 - 即通過減少威斯敏斯特議會蘇格蘭國會議員的數量和結束過程，由此蘇格蘭國會議員在威斯敏斯特可以投票在英語有關的事項，而英文名議員在下放給蘇格蘭議會事務沒有發言權。
作為一個穩健務實的政治家，卡梅隆有過不安的任期已超過右翼政黨成長越來越懷疑歐洲，因為它面對的英國獨立黨（UKIP）的崛起。進一步的困難，他將面臨通過立法推動，以紀念他的承諾，蘇格蘭人不會做任何事情，以增加他的權威。
不過，卡梅倫會呼吸了一口氣，在部分死緩：如果他看到蘇格蘭人偏離英國，他很可能面臨在他的黨的叛亂可能已經盡可能的不信任他的領導的一票將出台 - 一個過程，需要他的國會議員（其中46）的15％，註冊的命題。
就目前而言，至少他的士兵。但進一步的問題迫在眉睫。民意調查顯示，下個月他的黨就會喪失它的第一個議會席位UKIP引起的前保守黨國會議員道格拉斯·卡斯韋爾叛逃補選。