Brexit?

[Space Mackerel]

Still none then.

 

Just some more people who would love to see the break up of the UK

I don't love to see the break up the UK, in fact, as an ex employee of HM Forces it would make me feel a tad sad. But life moves on, the world doesn't sit still, it might be the best thing for all involved. The marriage isn't working out, time to forge new avenues

[deesidejambo]

I don't love to see the break up the UK, in fact, as an ex employee of HM Forces it would make me feel a tad sad. But life moves on, the world doesn't sit still, it might be the best thing for all involved. The marriage isn't working out, time to forge new avenues

Hows the polls looking on that one?    Sunk.

 

And of course you will say the polls keep getting it wrong.   That is true due to the silent majority effect on Brexit, the US election, and Indy.  So the current 39% Yes estimate is actually lower once you factor that real effect in.

 

But keep shouting.

[JamboX2]

He's the CHIEF negotiator for the Brexit talks. Maggie May and Dickhead Davies are going to be dug food after

For Scottish independence to be a roaring success we should hope for the best terms for the UK. Not the worst. You speak of the UK in derogatory terms but an Independent Scotland will require a strong, viable and mutually supportive neighbour to our south to be successful.

 

In effect Brexit or No-Brexit we need to see the UK doing well. For one, a majority of trade is with the UK not Europe.

[Space Mackerel]

For Scottish independence to be a roaring success we should hope for the best terms for the UK. Not the worst. You speak of the UK in derogatory terms but an Independent Scotland will require a strong, viable and mutually supportive neighbour to our south to be successful.

In effect Brexit or No-Brexit we need to see the UK doing well. For one, a majority of trade is with the UK not Europe.

I don't wish any I'll will on my English friends and colleagues. I just despise Torys.

[Space Mackerel]

Memo about leaks.....is leaked

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/04/government-memo-brexit-leaks-leaked-cabinet-secretary?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Facebook

 

What a bunch of utter clowns are in No 10.

[Francis Albert]

I don't wish any I'll will on my English friends and colleagues. I just despise Torys.

I can hear the Nicola Sturgeon pronunciation of "Tories" as I read that post

 

I assume you despise Scottish "Tories" as well, if not more, than English "Tories".

 

As a life long, 45 years and counting, Labour voter and one time party member I just find that "despise all Tories" stuff infantile. There have been good "Tories" and bad "Tories", good Labourites and bad Labourites. Heaven knows there may just may have been the odd bag egg Nationalist.

[aussieh]

I don't wish any I'll will on my English friends and colleagues. I just despise Torys.

Picture the scene if the SNP/Scotland stop brexit. Still want us?

[aussieh]

Hows the polls looking on that one? Sunk.

 

And of course you will say the polls keep getting it wrong. That is true due to the silent majority effect on Brexit, the US election, and Indy. So the current 39% Yes estimate is actually lower once you factor that real effect in.

 

But keep shouting.

What like? Yes voters who said they'd vote no because of Brexit. Aye like that's gonnae happen when it comes down to indyref2.

 

Brexit hasn't happened yet.

Special conditions for Sunderland, N Ireland, London and the South East, but Scotland can go and take a feck to itself, is that what you're saying, Dee?. The UK at any cost, is that right, Dee? Feck Scotland, well its been like that for over 300 years of English Parliament oppression. It'll take more than 40 years to break imposed trade slavery on Scotland. We should strike our own deals, but they'd just be sabotaged as usual.

[deesidejambo]

What like? Yes voters who said they'd vote no because of Brexit. Aye like that's gonnae happen when it comes down to indyref2.

 

Brexit hasn't happened yet.

Special conditions for Sunderland, N Ireland, London and the South East, but Scotland can go and take a feck to itself, is that what you're saying, Dee?. The UK at any cost, is that right, Dee? Feck Scotland, well its been like that for over 300 years of English Parliament oppression. It'll take more than 40 years to break imposed trade slavery on Scotland. We should strike our own deals, but they'd just be sabotaged as usual.

You can rant all you want but the support for Indy is waning. With Brexit you would want the support for Indy to increase, but it has dropped because the SNP are not focussed on what they are paid for, and instead pop over to Dublin to get Republican support to further split our Country.

 

I wonder if Nippy will forget to wear her headscarf today.

[Boris]

You can rant all you want but the support for Indy is waning. With Brexit you would want the support for Indy to increase, but it has dropped because the SNP are not focussed on what they are paid for, and instead pop over to Dublin to get Republican support to further split our Country.

 

I wonder if Nippy will forget to wear her headscarf today.

 

It's not really waning, it's not really increased either, it's pretty much status quo.

 

If, as you assert, that it is dropping due to lack of SNP focus, how do you explain the voting intentions from the same poll, which put the SNP at c.50% of the vote?

[Dawnrazor]

It's not really waning, it's not really increased either, it's pretty much status quo.

 

If, as you assert, that it is dropping due to lack of SNP focus, how do you explain the voting intentions from the same poll, which put the SNP at c.50% of the vote?

Like has already been stated, I don't think ALL Snp voters want independence but see them as a better bet than labour and find the Tories as still toxic, there's not much option other than the snp, sad state really.

[Boris]

Like has already been stated, I don't think ALL Snp voters want independence but see them as a better bet than labour and find the Tories as still toxic, there's not much option other than the snp, sad state really.

 

Totally agree with you.  As has no doubt been mentioned, some seem to conflate independence with the SNP, whereas the polls and voting statistics obviously dispel this myth.

[pcw1874]

Totally agree with you.  As has no doubt been mentioned, some seem to conflate independence with the SNP, whereas the polls and voting statistics obviously dispel this myth.

The self-inflicted meltdown of Labour, especially in Scotland, has made them a political irrelevance, hence the reason the SNP draw support from all stripes. I find it a source of much dismay there isn't an effective opposition provided by Labour here or at Westminster.

[Boris]

The self-inflicted meltdown of Labour, especially in Scotland, has made them a political irrelevance, hence the reason the SNP draw support from all stripes. I find it a source of much dismay there isn't an effective opposition provided by Labour here or at Westminster.

 

I agree.  Labour seems to be unsure of what it stands for anymore and, despite being the Govt that introduced devolution, it doesn't seem to really understand it, in Scotland at least.

[Dawnrazor]

I agree.  Labour seems to be unsure of what it stands for anymore and, despite being the Govt that introduced devolution, it doesn't seem to really understand it, in Scotland at least.

I watched Diane Abbot on TV the other day, she, imo, personifies the problem Labour face, a deluded London based politician, blinkered to anything outside the m25 and totally dismissive of anything that her "right on" friends agree with, Labour are heading towards being a London left wing party.

[Cade]

...Meanwhile, outside the Supreme Court......

 

 

:rofl:

[Daydream Believer]

I don't understand much about court proceedings but watching the live updates today, it doesn't look like the government are particularly making any new arguments.

 

I'm intrigued to see what happens if the appeal fails. The feeling seems to be that a quick vote takes place and article 50 gets triggered. I'm sure that that will be the ultimate outcome but it makes me wonder why the government would bother with the appeal.

[Cade]

I don't understand much about court proceedings but watching the live updates today, it doesn't look like the government are particularly making any new arguments.

 

I'm intrigued to see what happens if the appeal fails. The feeling seems to be that a quick vote takes place and article 50 gets triggered. I'm sure that that will be the ultimate outcome but it makes me wonder why the government would bother with the appeal.

It's a test case as to whether a sitting government can effectively ignore parliamentary democracy and use the royal perogative for whatever it wants to do.

 

*overturning the result of the english civil war

[Francis Albert]

It's a test case as to whether a sitting government can effectively ignore parliamentary democracy and use the royal perogative for whatever it wants to do.

 

*overturning the result of the english civil war

That hasn't stopped the royal prerogative being used a helluva lot in the past when there wasn't even any specific mandate from the electorate.

 

I don't think those who originally took this to the courts are acting out of any high moral or constitutional principle.

 

They are hoping to block or make more difficult the implementation of the outcome of the referendum.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

It's a test case as to whether a sitting government can effectively ignore parliamentary democracy and use the royal perogative for whatever it wants to do.

 

*overturning the result of the english civil war

 

As was mentioned today in court, Governments have used the Royal Prerogative on several occasions in the past, and Parliament didn't raise any objections about it.

 

What has to be remembered is that the EU Referendum bill has already been debated by Parliament and because the remainers believed they would win easily, no amendments or such were introduced, hence why there were no parameters set, such as X % turnout, or X % margin of win/lose, if such had been set, then the remainers would in all probability have won, as the bar would have been set so high for Brexit to ever happen.

Parliament have had a chance to prevent this current situation from happening, but choose to do nothing.

[Space Mackerel]

...Meanwhile, outside the Supreme Court......

 

 

:rofl:

Is that I8's mates burd he's been eyeing up recently?

[Jambo-Jimbo]

That hasn't stopped the royal prerogative being used a helluva lot in the past when there wasn't even any specific mandate from the electorate.

 

I don't think those who originally took this to the courts are acting out of any high moral or constitutional principle.

 

They are hoping to block or make more difficult the implementation of the outcome of the referendum.

 

Farron, Clegg, Soubry and Tina Miller and everybody else all knew that a vote to leave the EU would mean that the UK would trigger article 50 the day after the result was known, Cameron said this on numerous occasions, so where were these peoples objections during the campaign? nothing, silence, not a word from them.  If Cameron hadn't ran for the hills the UK would have triggered article 50 already and all this current upheaval would probably not be happening.

 

Labour & the Lib Dems have both said over the week-end that if Parliament gets to debate this again, then they will try and get an amendment after amendment after amendment, thus effectively kicking the whole Brexit process into the long grass. 

Remember these MP's are supposed to be upholding the fundamental principles of democracy, they are elected by the people to represent the people in parliament, I think some of them have forgotten that.

[IMac]

As was mentioned today in court, Governments have used the Royal Prerogative on several occasions in the past, and Parliament didn't raise any objections about it.

 

What has to be remembered is that the EU Referendum bill has already been debated by Parliament and because the remainers believed they would win easily, no amendments or such were introduced, hence why there were no parameters set, such as X % turnout, or X % margin of win/lose, if such had been set, then the remainers would in all probability have won, as the bar would have been set so high for Brexit to ever happen.

Parliament have had a chance to prevent this current situation from happening, but choose to do nothing.

It was advisory!

[Jambo-Jimbo]

It was advisory!

 

Then I hope this time it becomes law, and then the whole country can just get on with things and move on.

[JamboX2]

It's a test case as to whether a sitting government can effectively ignore parliamentary democracy and use the royal perogative for whatever it wants to do.

 

*overturning the result of the english civil war

On your point below you'd be wrong. The appeal is to consider whether the Parliament has to be consulted on such matters. The prerogative powers exist. The result of the English Civil War (Bill of Right in England and in Scotland the Claim of Right) set out that Parliament is Sovereign. The perogative powers were to be used by The Crown in Parliament (her majesty's government). In effect, Parliamentary Sovereignty is the power of the Crown in Parliament, including the perogative.

[Daydream Believer]

 

Labour & the Lib Dems have both said over the week-end that if Parliament gets to debate this again, then they will try and get an amendment after amendment after amendment, thus effectively kicking the whole Brexit process into the long grass. 

 

Where have you heard this?

 

Everything I've heard says that Labour won't interfere.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Where have you heard this?

 

Everything I've heard says that Labour won't interfere.

 

Here is one article about it.

 

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/news/81436/theresa-may-labour-and-lib-dems-not-backing-team-uk

 

 

 

[IMac]

Here is one article about it.

 

https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/news/81436/theresa-may-labour-and-lib-dems-not-backing-team-uk

What is that site? No wonder you are so ill informed.

[Francis Albert]

Where have you heard this?

 

Everything I've heard says that Labour won't interfere.

Given their ability to shoot themselves in the foot, despite having very little foot left by way of a target, you could be right.

[aussieh]

I watched Diane Abbot on TV the other day, she, imo, personifies the problem Labour face, a deluded London based politician, blinkered to anything outside the m25 and totally dismissive of anything that her "right on" friends agree with, Labour are heading towards being a London left wing party.

She's a balloon, as soon as she speaks the games over.

[Francis Albert]

It was advisory!

Legally yes. Parliament will have to agree many things before it is enacted, irrespective of the outcome of the current Supreme Court ruling and can certainly block Brexit, or convert it to the post-referendum invention of "Soft" Brexit which is Remain in all but name.

 

But having voted 6 to 1 to let the people decide in a referendum, Parliament would be morally and democratically bankrupt if it now in effect ignored the referendum outcome.

[Cade]

From the Supreme Court today:

Lord Pannick (leading QC for the plaintiff) says that the Government rejected an amendment to the EU Referendum Act 2015 which would have made the result legally binding and not just advisory.
Who proposed that ammendment?
Alex Salmond.

 

[Space Mackerel]

From the Supreme Court today:

Lord Pannick (leading QC for the plaintiff) says that the Government rejected an amendment to the EU Referendum Act 2015 which would have made the result legally binding and not just advisory.

Who proposed that ammendment?

Alex Salmond.

 

Superb stuff from Big Eck!

[Space Mackerel]

[jake]

Superb stuff from Big Eck!

 

You do realise.......na never mind

[Space Mackerel]

You do realise.......na never mind

I dunno what's happened in the Courts today jakey, I've been out grafting today from 5.30 am till about 8pm.

 

[Cade]

After 5 months of the Government's plan being "Brexit means Brexit", the PM finally gave more details today.

She said:

"I?m interested in all these terms that have been identified ? hard Brexit, soft Brexit, black Brexit, white Brexit, grey Brexit ? and actually what we should be looking for is a red, white and blue Brexit."

 

That's it.
That's the glorious plan.

That's what the stupid auld bint has come up with in 5 months.

 

[JamboX2]

From the Supreme Court today:

Lord Pannick (leading QC for the plaintiff) says that the Government rejected an amendment to the EU Referendum Act 2015 which would have made the result legally binding and not just advisory.

Who proposed that ammendment?

Alex Salmond.

 

So the result to leave would presumably be binding on the Scottish government too?

[JamboX2]

Government forced to accept Labour amendment today and will reveal Brexit plan to parliament ahead of triggering article 50

[JamboX2]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-plans-theresa-may-government-to-reveal-before-article-50-vote-eu-uk-latest-a7459236.html

[Cade]

So the result to leave would presumably be binding on the Scottish government too?

Yes, the irony is that if they'd accepted Salmond's ammendment, we'd not be having this court case and Article 50 would have been automatic.

 

Their rejection of Salmond's plan has hamstrung their own plans.

 

Lucky for us.

[Space Mackerel]

After 5 months of the Government's plan being "Brexit means Brexit", the PM finally gave more details today.

She said:

"I?m interested in all these terms that have been identified ? hard Brexit, soft Brexit, black Brexit, white Brexit, grey Brexit ? and actually what we should be looking for is a red, white and blue Brexit."

 

That's it.

That's the glorious plan.

That's what the stupid auld bint has come up with in 5 months.

 

Leadership!

 

She's as clueless as the Brexiteers [emoji23][emoji23]

[JamboX2]

Yes, the irony is that if they'd accepted Salmond's ammendment, we'd not be having this court case and Article 50 would have been automatic.

 

Their rejection of Salmond's plan has hamstrung their own plans.

 

Lucky for us.

Yeah... I don't think you get it here. The case isn't about a legally binding result. Politically it is and no politicuan would go against a poll win like that. It's about the process of invoking article 50. That debate would still happen.

[Space Mackerel]

Yeah... I don't think you get it here. The case isn't about a legally binding result. Politically it is and no politicuan would go against a poll win like that. It's about the process of invoking article 50. That debate would still happen.

See if it was like 70 odds for Scottish Devolution then I can take that point on board.

 

The trouble is, it was 52/48 ish.

 

And that was based on lies and falsehoods which are evidently clear since minutes after the result was declared.

 

?350 million for NHS anyone?

[Francis Albert]

See if it was like 70 odds for Scottish Devolution then I can take that point on board.

 

The trouble is, it was 52/48 ish.

 

And that was based on lies and falsehoods which are evidently clear since minutes after the result was declared.

 

?350 million for NHS anyone?

But if you had waited a month or two you would have seen that the "lies" about an immediate threat of a recession and severe austerity budget in the wake of a Brexit vote were as misleading, only more quickly found out.

[Space Mackerel]

But if you had waited a month or two you would have seen that the "lies" about an immediate threat of a recession and severe austerity budget in the wake of a Brexit vote were as misleading, only more quickly found out.

Remind us all on here when we are leaving the EU?

Dates etc would be nice then I can tell an Italian supplier to me to impose the standard tariffs?

[Francis Albert]

After 5 months of the Government's plan being "Brexit means Brexit", the PM finally gave more details today.

She said:

"I?m interested in all these terms that have been identified ? hard Brexit, soft Brexit, black Brexit, white Brexit, grey Brexit ? and actually what we should be looking for is a red, white and blue Brexit."

 

That's it.

That's the glorious plan.

That's what the stupid auld bint has come up with in 5 months.

 

Meanwhile the EU Commission maintains the "there will be no cherry picking" line. Maybe we should just accept that as their position and not bother with any negotiation. Just leave, saying we won't be the first to Impose tariffs.

 

I mean they of course must be believed.

[JamboX2]

See if it was like 70 odds for Scottish Devolution then I can take that point on board.

 

The trouble is, it was 52/48 ish.

 

And that was based on lies and falsehoods which are evidently clear since minutes after the result was declared.

 

?350 million for NHS anyone?

Should Scotland be independent if we are promised an oil boom and the margin is 52/48?

[Francis Albert]

Remind us all on here when we are leaving the EU?

Dates etc would be nice then I can tell an Italian supplier to me to impose the standard tariffs?

The EU Commission rep said September 2018 today,

 

And what are the "standard tariffs"? I don't think the UK has suggested any tariffs yet, so what are the EU's/Italy's proposals?

 

Or is it only the UK that is obliged to set out its conditions in advance of the negotiation, that is if despite the EU Commission's assertion today that there will be no "cherry picking"  there will be any negotiation. 

[Space Mackerel]

Should Scotland be independent if we are promised an oil boom and the margin is 52/48?

I'll tell you what Scotland needs, independent borrowing rates away from South East property bubbles.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk