Brexit?

[Gorgiewave]

Arguably it is, via it's UK membership (albeit that would appear to be on a clock).

 

Perhaps in any upcoming indy ref (as I posted previously I think it is a big IF) then there will be, one would imagine, greater clarity from the EU, given there is no rUK to upset?

 

No, it isn't. Membership of the EU is open to states. The UK is the Member State. Neither people nor regions are Member States.

[Boris]

No, it isn't. Membership of the EU is open to states. The UK is the Member State. Neither people nor regions are Member States.

 

If a member state divides, who is to say which of the new parts does or doesn't have the status?

[The Comedian]

The SNP now greeting about uncertainty is raising a smile. The hypocrisy that many predicted is head spinning. I've never really understood how view's on two unions could spin on a dime depending on which parliament it involved. Why does taking charge of your own affairs stop at the English Channel then go into reverse at Calais?

 

The SNP position is actually pushing me towards voting No in any future Referendum. They need to accept at present we rejected Independence to remain one United Kingdom, the UK then voted to leave the EU. There's nothing else to say to this. Both decisions should be respected. It's the lack of acceptance which is the most divisive element IMO.

 

I agree our own Independence is actually less likely now. Seeing the EU breest sailing off into the distance, we'll suckle tighter onto the one remaining. 

 

I'd actually back PM May rightly reject another Indy Ref. That matter has been put to bed and so has our position on the EU. It's time to make the best of it as one UK.

[Boris]

The SNP now greeting about uncertainty is raising a smile. The hypocrisy that many predicted is head spinning. I've never really understood how view's on two unions could spin on a dime depending on which parliament it involved. Why does taking charge of your own affairs stop at the English Channel then go into reverse at Calais?

 

The SNP position is actually pushing me towards voting No in any future Referendum. They need to accept at present we rejected Independence to remain one United Kingdom, the UK then voted to leave the EU. There's nothing else to say to this. Both decisions should be respected. It's the lack of acceptance which is the most divisive element IMO.

 

I agree our own Independence is actually less likely now. Seeing the EU breest sailing off into the distance, we'll suckle tighter onto the one remaining. 

 

I'd actually back PM May rightly reject another Indy Ref. That matter has been put to bed and so has our position on the EU. It's time to make the best of it as one UK.

 

But this is where the UK fails.  Sheer numbers means that as it stands one part of that union dominates.  If the home nations are to be equals, then federalism is the solution.

 

As long as the biggest makes the decisions, then seperatist feeling will continue.

[The Comedian]

But this is where the UK fails.  Sheer numbers means that as it stands one part of that union dominates.  If the home nations are to be equals, then federalism is the solution.

 

As long as the biggest makes the decisions, then seperatist feeling will continue.

 

Very true however the Scottish people knew that and still rejected Independence. We are as a majority happy with being dictated to. 

[Boris]

Very true however the Scottish people knew that and still rejected Independence. We are as a majority happy with being dictated to. 

 

Perhaps.  Although I think the goalposts have moved since September 2014.

[Ibrahim Tall]

Very true however the Scottish people knew that and still rejected Independence. We are as a majority happy with being dictated to.

 

Some, pretty debatable you can call it a majority though. The key 'points' at the end which swayed many people though were that firstly 'remaining' preserved Scotland's EU status and was the best chance of doing so in the future, this argument is now for the other side as the only possibility of remaining in the EU is via an independent Scotland being seen as a successor state or gaining permission to join. Even if there is a possibility of Spain etc using a veto there is still a greater chance than of the UK re-joining.

Secondly that everyone was financially safer remaining and retaining GBP, with the economy set to contract and Sterling bombing added to expectation of atleast a decade of uncertainty while new trade deals etc are put in place, that again isn't really a solid argument.

 

If even as little as 10% of remain were no longer swayed by those arguments and voted differently the result would have been very different.

[The Comedian]

Perhaps. Although I think the goalposts have moved since September 2014.

Things change in politics. Bullshit is spouted. What exactly were folk expecting? We voted to be marginalised. It's unfortunate but there you go.

[Cade]

If a member state divides, who is to say which of the new parts does or doesn't have the status?

This is the key point. Scotland may be able to inherit the UK's former membership as a Successor State.

Everything is up in the air right now though.

[Gorgiewave]

If a member state divides, who is to say which of the new parts does or doesn't have the status?

 

International law decides. This is well-established. Do you know any good books on international law?

[Gorgiewave]

The SNP now greeting about uncertainty is raising a smile. The hypocrisy that many predicted is head spinning. I've never really understood how view's on two unions could spin on a dime depending on which parliament it involved. Why does taking charge of your own affairs stop at the English Channel then go into reverse at Calais?

 

The SNP position is actually pushing me towards voting No in any future Referendum. They need to accept at present we rejected Independence to remain one United Kingdom, the UK then voted to leave the EU. There's nothing else to say to this. Both decisions should be respected. It's the lack of acceptance which is the most divisive element IMO.

 

I agree our own Independence is actually less likely now. Seeing the EU breest sailing off into the distance, we'll suckle tighter onto the one remaining. 

 

I'd actually back PM May rightly reject another Indy Ref. That matter has been put to bed and so has our position on the EU. It's time to make the best of it as one UK.

 

[Gorgiewave]

Some, pretty debatable you can call it a majority though. The key 'points' at the end which swayed many people though were that firstly 'remaining' preserved Scotland's EU status and was the best chance of doing so in the future, this argument is now for the other side as the only possibility of remaining in the EU is via an independent Scotland being seen as a successor state or gaining permission to join. Even if there is a possibility of Spain etc using a veto there is still a greater chance than of the UK re-joining.

Secondly that everyone was financially safer remaining and retaining GBP, with the economy set to contract and Sterling bombing added to expectation of atleast a decade of uncertainty while new trade deals etc are put in place, that again isn't really a solid argument.

 

If even as little as 10% of remain were no longer swayed by those arguments and voted differently the result would have been very different.

 

The currency was never clarified, the deficit would have been unmanageable, there would be no means of getting into the EU without a central bank. None of this was explained the first time and it hasn't been explained this time. Also, why is more "powers" the thing but having Brussels decide is fine?

[Boris]

International law decides. This is well-established. Do you know any good books on international law?

 

I know many books on international law, however I am not a lwayer or student of law so while the words could be read, they would unfortunately make little sense to me.

[Boris]

The currency was never clarified, the deficit would have been unmanageable, there would be no means of getting into the EU without a central bank. None of this was explained the first time and it hasn't been explained this time. Also, why is more "powers" the thing but having Brussels decide is fine?

 

*sigh*

 

Having Brussels "decide" isn't really what happens though is it?  

 

So throughout the process the UK has (had) a say.

[Gorgiewave]

I know many books on international law, however I am not a lwayer or student of law so while the words could be read, they would unfortunately make little sense to me.

Come on, now, ducky, that's not the Scots way. Get them down off your shelves, get them read and tell auntie kickback the verdict.

[Ibrahim Tall]

The currency was never clarified, the deficit would have been unmanageable, there would be no means of getting into the EU without a central bank. None of this was explained the first time and it hasn't been explained this time. Also, why is more "powers" the thing but having Brussels decide is fine?

Hasn't been explained this time? They've basically only announced that their 'might' be a referendum, it's far too early to say that. I agree it was ridiculous that clear answer wasn't given previously and was probably the main reason 'yes' lost, but that doesn't mean the same mistake will be repeated.

 

The latter point I couldn't answer as 'more powers' isn't the reason I did or would vote yes.

[Boris]

Come on, now, ducky, that's not the Scots way. Get them down off your shelves, get them read and tell auntie kickback the verdict.

 

Ach, I did google it and it would suggest that "learned" opinion would be that Soctland would be treated as a successor state i.e. a new country.

 

http://europeanlawblog.eu/?p=1551

 

That said, legal things being what they are, they do come heavily caveated so "it recognizes that this is an area where ad hoc negotiations and political cooperation, rather than international law, may prove determinative" (from same source)

[jake]

*sigh*

 

Having Brussels "decide" isn't really what happens though is it?

 

So throughout the process the UK has (had) a say.

 

Im wondering how many meps would Scotland have in an European parliament.

I then wonder what the relative ratios would be with what we have in westminster.

My guess is less or at best the same.

Thats what i cant fathom is why independence from westminster should be followed up by joining a union under worse circumstances.

[jake]

The currency was never clarified, the deficit would have been unmanageable, there would be no means of getting into the EU without a central bank. None of this was explained the first time and it hasn't been explained this time. Also, why is more "powers" the thing but having Brussels decide is fine?

 

The SNP could have took on the problem of currency.

In fact the Adam Smith institute came up with a solution.

It was based on a nations real wealth.

It would not have been able to sustain the current levels of public spending.

 

But thats not to say the economy couldnt thrive.

I think those such as me who want independence have to be real and see that Scotland would have to embrace radical free market economic policies.

High educated and high wage economy is fine if you have accumulated wealth.

But we would be starting with a massive deficit.

 

Historically Scots were at the forefront of free enterprise.

We have become subsidy junkies because economic policy is dictated for the south of England.

Just like the EU is set up to benefit German finances.

[Francis Albert]

If a member state divides, who is to say which of the new parts does or doesn't have the status?

It's pretty obvious. The part that decides to divide doesn't have the status. If both parts agree to separate there would be an issue but I've not seen anyone suggest anyone other than the Scots should have a say.

[Francis Albert]

Im wondering how many meps would Scotland have in an European parliament.

I then wonder what the relative ratios would be with what we have in westminster.

My guess is less or at best the same.

Thats what i cant fathom is why independence from westminster should be followed up by joining a union under worse circumstances.

It would be between  1 and 2% in the EU parliament compared to about 10% in Westminster.

 

In practice given Germany's economic power we'd be swapping English rule, with the real possibility of influencing England, for German rule, with no influence at all.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Can anyone tell why wee nippy thinks that securing Scotland's place in the EU at the expense of the Union with rUK is so advantageous to the economy?

[deesidejambo]

Can anyone tell why wee nippy thinks that securing Scotland's place in the EU at the expense of the Union with rUK is so advantageous to the economy?

Given that our largest trading partner by far is England I await the answer.

[Francis Albert]

It's pretty obvious. The part that decides to divide doesn't have the status. If both parts agree to separate there would be an issue but I've not seen anyone suggest anyone other than the Scots should have a say.

Having said that I think the best chance for Scottish independence is to seek a UK-wide vote. The level of hostility I experienced in England towards  Scotland  (a lot of it would be categorised as "hate crime" these days) during the last Indy Ref would I think suggest a UK wide vote would see Scotland's independence assured.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Given that our largest trading partner by far is England I await the answer.

 

Indeed according to wee nippy's own government figures 16% of our exports are to the "hallowed" single market but 64% are to the rest of the UK. Leaving the UK would have a detrimental effect on the Scottish economy 4 times greater than Brexit. Her own government figures yet she whines on about that economic security can only be achieved by remaining in the EU. She is clearly telling lies. 

[Trapper John McIntyre]

Indeed according to wee nippy's own government figures 16% of our exports are to the "hallowed" single market but 64% are to the rest of the UK. Leaving the UK would have a detrimental effect on the Scottish economy 4 times greater than Brexit. Her own government figures yet she whines on about that economic security can only be achieved by remaining in the EU. She is clearly telling lies. 

 

The deluded 45% don't want to listen to the truth. They're believers.

 

What an embarrassment Scotland is.

[jake]

The deluded 45% don't want to listen to the truth. They're believers.

 

What an embarrassment Scotland is.

 

Steady .

 

How is Scotland an embarrassment?

 

Its a country that has punched well above its weight.

And just because a sizeable proportion of us want independence does not equate with embarrassment.

 

Give me an example of this.

[Yoda]

The deluded 45% don't want to listen to the truth. They're believers.

 

What an embarrassment Scotland is.

Agreed.  Watched the SNP conference this week and noted that there is no debate or discussion.  Everybody agrees 100% with whatever Wee Nip says.

 

In any normally functioning political party or pressure group, you'd expect to get some level of disagreement. 

 

It's the same level of non-questioning, blind loyalty you see in North Korea.  They're like members of a cult.

[jambo lodge]

Excellent interview on ITV News today when Sturgeon was confronted about the large Scottish deficit ( worse than Greece ) and her nonsense about the right of Scotland to remain in the single market. She doesn't like being confronted with economic facts and suggested to the interviewer that " we leave that to one side for the moment" About time interviewers were asking her the hard questions.

[Trapper John McIntyre]

Agreed.  Watched the SNP conference this week and noted that there is no debate or discussion.  Everybody agrees 100% with whatever Wee Nip says.

 

In any normally functioning political party or pressure group, you'd expect to get some level of disagreement. 

 

It's the same level of non-questioning, blind loyalty you see in North Korea.  They're like members of a cult.

[Trapper John McIntyre]

Agreed.  Watched the SNP conference this week and noted that there is no debate or discussion.  Everybody agrees 100% with whatever Wee Nip says.

 

In any normally functioning political party or pressure group, you'd expect to get some level of disagreement. 

 

It's the same level of non-questioning, blind loyalty you see in North Korea.  They're like members of a cult.

 

The last few days at their 'conference' resembled a Nuremberg rally. Utterly embarassing.

 

The triumph of the will over economic reality. All cheering the Leader's every ridiculous utterance and ludicrous 'don't push us too far' fascist shite. All they are missing are the midnight torch parades.

 

Never thought I'd see such things in Scotland.

[Boof]

Indeed according to wee nippy's own government figures 16% of our exports are to the "hallowed" single market but 64% are to the rest of the UK. Leaving the UK would have a detrimental effect on the Scottish economy 4 times greater than Brexit. Her own government figures yet she whines on about that economic security can only be achieved by remaining in the EU. She is clearly telling lies. 

 

Are you suggesting that an independent Scotland would suddenly stop exporting to rUK? Why would that happen?

[Sraman]

Does the rUK currently get the 64% of our exports at EU rates or, as we are part of one member state, do they get them at mates rates?

[Space Mackerel]

Can anyone tell why wee nippy thinks that securing Scotland's place in the EU at the expense of the Union with rUK is so advantageous to the economy?

I like Greggs Steak bakes and they are based in Newcastle. I for one am swithering if independence is the best route.

I dunno if the the 10 minute check at the hard border means they are going to be stone cold, rather than luke warm as they appear to be now. :-/

[AlphonseCapone]

No. I think what I am seeing is my world torn apart and have borders erected where there were none before in the name of nationalism. I have no time for

Yet you apparently voted yes, thus almost contributing to the thing causing you such consternation.

 

You often argue against yourself.

[AlphonseCapone]

Can anyone tell why wee nippy thinks that securing Scotland's place in the EU at the expense of the Union with rUK is so advantageous to the economy?

That's a good question.

 

The wee nippy patter is honking though.

[aussieh]

Indeed according to wee nippy's own government figures 16% of our exports are to the "hallowed" single market but 64% are to the rest of the UK. Leaving the UK would have a detrimental effect on the Scottish economy 4 times greater than Brexit. Her own government figures yet she whines on about that economic security can only be achieved by remaining in the EU. She is clearly telling lies.

I think you forget all the trade deals through the EU. But don't worry England will get a good deal for us.

[JamboX2]

Yet you apparently voted yes, thus almost contributing to the thing causing you such consternation.

 

You often argue against yourself.

You're 100% right. I think watching the Brexit debate reshaped the arguments used up to 2014.

 

Because they're the same. Why should we minimise rather than integrate with our nearest and dearest.

[aussieh]

You're 100% right. I think watching the Brexit debate reshaped the arguments used up to 2014.

 

Because they're the same. Why should we minimise rather than integrate with our nearest and dearest.

Diluted Scottishness is the reason we're ruled.

[Seymour M Hersh]

That's a good question.

 

The wee nippy patter is honking though.

 

Not as honking as her patter. 

[Seymour M Hersh]

Are you suggesting that an independent Scotland would suddenly stop exporting to rUK? Why would that happen?

 

They may stop or reduce the amount they import. 

[AlphonseCapone]

You're 100% right. I think watching the Brexit debate reshaped the arguments used up to 2014.

 

Because they're the same. Why should we minimise rather than integrate with our nearest and dearest.

Fair enough.

 

Doing a bit of soul searching myself.

[AlphonseCapone]

Not as honking as her patter.

Tremendous point.

 

Why does no one raise this at FMQs?

[Guest]

Fair enough.

 

Doing a bit of soul searching myself.

In relation to independence? If so what's triggered this as you've always been a very staunch supporter of independence.

[Sarah O]

I was a massive NO in 2014.

 

Would vote for independence now.

 

[jambo lodge]

Classic xenophobia by Alex Salmond yesterday talking sneeringly about little Englanders.

[jack D and coke]

Classic xenophobia by Alex Salmond yesterday talking sneeringly about little Englanders.

I used to like Salmond but he's an absolute arsehole now. Stuff like that really makes me cringe, it makes the whole party come across really snidey.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pablo]

I used to like Salmond but he's an absolute arsehole now. Stuff like that really makes me cringe, it makes the whole party come across really snidey.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's hardly just Salmond though.......It's like how if you scratch the surface of even the most well heeled Rangers fan, you uncover an Orangeman bigot......I've never encountered a Nationalist who doesn't have anti English tendencies to varying degrees. Most will deny it obviously.

[Sarah O]

It's hardly just Salmond though.......It's like how if you scratch the surface of even the most well heeled Rangers fan, you uncover an Orangeman bigot......I've never encountered a Nationalist who doesn't have anti English tendencies to varying degrees. Most will deny it obviously.

[jake]

It would be between 1 and 2% in the EU parliament compared to about 10% in Westminster.

 

In practice given Germany's economic power we'd be swapping English rule, with the real possibility of influencing England, for German rule, with no influence at all.

 

Any yes / remain posters want to address this .