How many Scottish natiionalists will vote to leave Europe in a referendum?

[hibs0666]

The repatriation of powers is a central plank of Scottish nationalism.

There is an opportunity to further increase local power and decision-making if the UK votes to leave the EU.

Is it not therefore logical that nationalists should vote for independence from the EU as well as from Westminster?

[Moulin Yarns]

:blah:

[Jack]

The repatriation of powers is a central plank of Scottish nationalism.

There is an opportunity to further increase local power and decision-making if the UK votes to leave the EU.

Is it not therefore logical that nationalists should vote for independence from the EU as well as from Westminster?

How much power does the EU have?

Do we know what percentage of UK laws come from the EU?

[CropleyWasGod]

How much power does the EU have?

Do we know what percentage of UK laws come from the EU?

An EU candidate at the last election said that approximately 70% of laws that affect Scotland these days are made at EU level.

Not sure if I believe that number, but it's certainly substantial.

[lord bunberry]

The repatriation of powers is a central plank of Scottish nationalism.

There is an opportunity to further increase local power and decision-making if the UK votes to leave the EU.

Is it not therefore logical that nationalists should vote for independence from the EU as well as from Westminster?

An independent Scotland as an EU member would have an input into how the EU was run. Independence doesn't mean isolationism.

[Moulin Yarns]

An EU candidate at the last election said that approximately 70% of laws that affect Scotland these days are made at EU level.

Not sure if I believe that number, but it's certainly substantial.

My daily work requires me to refer to European legislation. In fact, I imagine everybody's daily life is touched by EU laws.

A simple question to ask is do you drive a car? if yes then there is a raft of EU law that is in play right there.

[PeeJay]

An EU candidate at the last election said that approximately 70% of laws that affect Scotland these days are made at EU level.

Not sure if I believe that number, but it's certainly substantial.

Is it? I'm sure according to some people and some "sources" it may well be perceived as being substantial at 70%+, but it seems it is probably no more than somewhere between 6 and 15% ... add to that the UK's practise of "opting out" of things ....

The two links below may at least cast some doubt on Farage and his UKIP claims that the UK has no say in anything anymore ... it's all much more complicated than some would have us believe though ... I certainly would not have put it as high as 70-80%, but these estimates also surprised me ...

http://www.euromove.org.uk/index.php?id=9479
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/briefing-papers/RP10-62/how-much-legislation-comes-from-europe

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

I'm sure I read that Scotland would be entitled to another referendum in the event of the UK leaving the EU.

[Jack]

I'm sure I read that Scotland would be entitled to another referendum in the event of the UK leaving the EU.

I think that's Northern Ireland.

[hibs0666]

An independent Scotland as an EU member would have an input into how the EU was run. Independence doesn't mean isolationism.

Scotland has considerable input into how the UK is run - what's the distinction to the EU situation?

I don't see any logical difference between separating from England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and the other EU states if the desired outcome is a power grab and re-enforcement of national identity.

[lord bunberry]

Scotland has considerable input into how the UK is run - what's the distinction to the EU situation?

I don't see any logical difference between separating from England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and the other EU states if the desired outcome is a power grab and re-enforcement of national identity.

Being a member of the EU can't really be compared to being a part of the UK

[hibs0666]

Being a member of the EU can't really be compared to being a part of the UK

For what reasons?

[Moulin Yarns]

For what reasons?

Scots are allowed to represent Scotland in the UK parliament, but categorically denied that right in Europe by the UK Government.

[marinello59]

Scots are allowed to represent Scotland in the UK parliament, but categorically denied that right in Europe by the UK Government.

Eh?
They can represent the UK can't they?

[PeeJay]

Scots are allowed to represent Scotland in the UK parliament, but categorically denied that right in Europe by the UK Government.

Are you sure? Ian Hudghton (SNP) Scottish MEP disagrees, I think: http://www.hudghtonmep.scot/

"On this site you will also find information about the rights and powers retained by EU Member States, and an overview of the work that I do as a Scottish National Party Member of the European Parliament, representing Scotland's interests in Europe."

[Jack]

My daily work requires me to refer to European legislation. In fact, I imagine everybody's daily life is touched by EU laws.

A simple question to ask is do you drive a car? if yes then there is a raft of EU law that is in play right there.

I think that's a good point to raise.

It could easily be argued that with a pan European car industry having minimum standards for the likes of safety makes good sense.

Which in turn begs a question around does it matter how much legislation comes from Europe if it's good legislation and/or if we weren't in Europe would we introduce similar legislation independently?

[hibs0666]

Scots are allowed to represent Scotland in the UK parliament, but categorically denied that right in Europe by the UK Government.

Eh, nah.

[Beefster]

Scots are allowed to represent Scotland in the UK parliament, but categorically denied that right in Europe by the UK Government.

You're on fire in the last couple of days.

[lord bunberry]

Eh?
They can represent the UK can't they?

But they can't represent Scotland. We are forced into a once size fits all situation at present

[hibs0666]

So what is the reason why nationalists wish to take joint decision-making away from England but not France, Germany, Greece or Portugal? I'm just not getting this at all.

[hibs0666]

But they can't represent Scotland. We are forced into a once size fits all situation at present

From his website...

David Martin is a Labour Member of the European Parliament, and one of the six MEPs representing Scotland in Brussels and Strasbourg.

[lord bunberry]

Eh, nah.

So Scottish officials can negotiate purely for the Scottish people or do they negotiate on behalf of the UK?

[lord bunberry]

From his website...

David Martin is a Labour Member of the European Parliament, and one of the six MEPs representing Scotland in Brussels and Strasbourg.

He is representing a Scottish constituency

[lord bunberry]

So what is the reason why nationalists wish to take joint decision-making away from England but not France, Germany, Greece or Portugal? I'm just not getting this at all.

I think you are getting it

[hibs0666]

So Scottish officials can negotiate purely for the Scottish people or do they negotiate on behalf of the UK?

I would hope they negotiate for the benefit of all.

[lord bunberry]

I would hope they negotiate for the benefit of all.

What happens when there's a conflict of interest?

[RyeSloan]

What happens when there's a conflict of interest?

What about when European interest is in conflict with a future iS? Say on fishing policy?


Anyway the OP was to explain the policy of separation and why it should relate to rUK and not the EU...it's a fair question I would say considering the EUs influence on the current UK is enough to provide a growing platform for the likes of UKIP.

[lord bunberry]

What about when European interest is in conflict with a future iS? Say on fishing policy?


Anyway the OP was to explain the policy of separation and why it should relate to rUK and not the EU...it's a fair question I would say considering the EUs influence on the current UK is enough to provide a growing platform for the likes of UKIP.

I don't know what you mean by European interest. An independent Scotland would be negotiating with other European countries, it's not going to be us v the rest of Europe.
The EU as it stands has far less influence on the important things in our lives than Westminster does. An independent Scotland could still be part of the EU and have a much bigger say on how our country is governed than is the case now.

[Peevemor]

So Scottish officials can negotiate purely for the Scottish people or do they negotiate on behalf of the UK?

It depends what their Party HQ tells them to do.

[Hibernia&Alba]

The repatriation of powers is a central plank of Scottish nationalism.

There is an opportunity to further increase local power and decision-making if the UK votes to leave the EU.

Is it not therefore logical that nationalists should vote for independence from the EU as well as from Westminster?

It's an interesting question that makes us explore the contradictions between national sovereignty and membership of a pan national organization such as the EU. However, I don't necessarily see the question as an unsolvable puzzle, for if an independent Scotland took a democratic decision via referendum to be part of the EU, then that in itself is a manifestation of independent decision making i.e. the exercise of national sovereignty. It's about who takes the decisions. Should Scotland take these decisions for itself or in conjunction with the other nations of the union?

[Sir David Gray]

Given how much power the European Union has over people's daily lives now, I cannot understand any Scottish nationalist wanting to leave the United Kingdom but is quite happy for Scotland to sign up as the newest member of the European Union.

Those in favour of Scottish independence continually put forward the argument that they want Scotland to leave the UK so that we can make decisions for ourselves as a sovereign state. The way I see it, that is simply not possible if Scotland continues to hold membership of the EU.

It's something I have thought for some time and I'm glad someone else has brought this up on here.

[JeMeSouviens]

So what is the reason why nationalists wish to take joint decision-making away from England but not France, Germany, Greece or Portugal? I'm just not getting this at all.

No you're not are you? All this playing the village idiot stirrer doesn't suit you.:wink:

[Moulin Yarns]

No you're not are you? All this playing the village idiot stirrer doesn't suit you.:wink:

Au contraire, it suits him perfectly well.

[hibs0666]

No you're not are you? All this playing the village idiot stirrer doesn't suit you.:wink:

I concur with the village idiot part - biggest word I know is margarine.

You're a clever guy and know what it is like to work in global context so please help me with this question.

Why do Scottish nationalists welcome with open arms a European economic and social union (in which Scotland's influence is miniscule and where there is massive cultural differences) whilst in the same breath reject a British economic and social union where Scotland's influence is significant and relatively minimal cultural differences exist?

[Hibernia&Alba]

I concur with the village idiot part - biggest word I know is margarine.

You're a clever guy and know what it is like to work in global context so please help me with this question.

Why do Scottish nationalists welcome with open arms a European economic and social union (in which Scotland's influence is miniscule and where there is massive cultural differences) whilst in the same breath reject a British economic and social union where Scotland's influence is significant and relatively minimal cultural differences exist?

Because the nation state still exists within the EU. So, if one believes Scotland to be a nation state in its own right, Scottish independence (perhaps sovereignty is a better word) is compatible with EU membership. We should also remember there are some who support independence who would happily see Scotland leave the EU and go the Norway route.

[#FromTheCapital]

This thread :top marks

[Moulin Yarns]

Scots are allowed to represent Scotland in the UK parliament, but categorically denied that right in Europe by the UK Government.


Eh?
They can represent the UK can't they?


Are you sure? Ian Hudghton (SNP) Scottish MEP disagrees, I think: http://www.hudghtonmep.scot/

"On this site you will also find information about the rights and powers retained by EU Member States, and an overview of the work that I do as a Scottish National Party Member of the European Parliament, representing Scotland's interests in Europe."


You're on fire in the last couple of days.

The evidence is compelling, don't you think?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29987193

[marinello59]

The evidence is compelling, don't you think?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29987193


So if an SNP minister says it's a snub that's compelling evidence? I'm not so sure that's true.

[Moulin Yarns]

So if an SNP minister says it's a snub that's compelling evidence? I'm not so sure that's true.

Who would you rather have negotiating on behalf of the UK, a miniater who's remit is fisheries or an unelected peer who's only experience of fish is the caviar and lobster of expensive London restaurants and the £1000 a day salmon fishing on a private higland estate?

The Government blocked the former and instead promoted the latter. That is true.

[Just Alf]

Who would you rather have negotiating on behalf of the UK, a miniater who's remit is fisheries or an unelected peer who's only experience of fish is the caviar and lobster of expensive London restaurants and the £1000 a day salmon fishing on a private higland estate?

The Government blocked the former and instead promoted the latter. That is true.

Remember this?

http://www.robedwards.com/2014/04/uk-environment-minister-breaches-agreement-with-scotland-on-gm.html

http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2014/apr/uk-gov-breaks-promises-eu-gm-crop-talks

[PeeJay]

The evidence is compelling, don't you think?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29987193

Well, I'm not convinced. What part of this quotation (from your link) did you not get - or what part have I misunderstood?

Mr Duncan added: "Mr Lochhead is part of the UK delegation attending the fisheries council today. Following that council meeting, he will be attending a meeting with the incoming fisheries commissioner Karmena Vella.
"Mr Lochhead is disingenuous to suggest that he has no real influence. It is Mr Lochhead's responsibility to ensure that the UK's final negotiating position is as Scottish as it can be, nobody else's."

Check the press releases below, seems to me the "Scottish " were not as under-represented as you are inferring and by all accounts a "fair deal" has been achieved - so much for your compelling evidence - and your Lochhead chappie was indeed involved. It's a delegation - i.e. a team sport rather than a one man show, and it wasn't just about Scottish fishermen even though they may make up the majority -

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-lobbies-for-fair-fisheries-deal-in-europe

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-secures-fair-fisheries-deal-in-europe

[Future17]

So if an SNP minister says it's a snub that's compelling evidence? I'm not so sure that's true.

Does it matter who said it in this context? If the facts are as presented, it's a good point to raise on this thread.

[Hibrandenburg]

Remember this?

http://www.robedwards.com/2014/04/uk-environment-minister-breaches-agreement-with-scotland-on-gm.html

http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2014/apr/uk-gov-breaks-promises-eu-gm-crop-talks

I was looking for that earlier, thanks.

It's a fine example of how Scotland takes a back seat to the UK's agenda.

[RyeSloan]

I don't know what you mean by European interest. An independent Scotland would be negotiating with other European countries, it's not going to be us v the rest of Europe. The EU as it stands has far less influence on the important things in our lives than Westminster does. An independent Scotland could still be part of the EU and have a much bigger say on how our country is governed than is the case now.

So in essence you support repatriation of some powers but happy to leave the rest in the most unaccountable function that is the EU?

You seem convinced that Scotland representing itself at the EU table would transform the relationship and therefore it's OK for the EU as a whole to have significant influence over an iS...I seriously doubt that is the case but even if it was how do you square giving the EU control over immigration and all the countless other areas of its influence while insisting on separation from Westminster?

The logical extension is to remove ourselves from the UK and EU and use our new found sovereignty to negotiate our own deals, just look at how Greece has had to go through years of pointless grind at the behest of the EU as an example of just how much being a member can influence national decisions.

I get the fact you can support an iS and an iS in the EU, I've just not seen any reasonable rationale for that position ;-)

[lord bunberry]

So in essence you support repatriation of some powers but happy to leave the rest in the most unaccountable function that is the EU?

You seem convinced that Scotland representing itself at the EU table would transform the relationship and therefore it's OK for the EU as a whole to have significant influence over an iS...I seriously doubt that is the case but even if it was how do you square giving the EU control over immigration and all the countless other areas of its influence while insisting on separation from Westminster?

The logical extension is to remove ourselves from the UK and EU and use our new found sovereignty to negotiate our own deals, just look at how Greece has had to go through years of pointless grind at the behest of the EU as an example of just how much being a member can influence national decisions.

I get the fact you can support an iS and an iS in the EU, I've just not seen any reasonable rationale for that position ;-)

The rationale for that position is that an independent Scotland would still have the benefits of EU membership but make all the decisions currently being made at Westminster ourselves for the benefit of ourselves

[Moulin Yarns]

I get the fact you can support an iS and an iS in the EU, I've just not seen any reasonable rationale for that position ;-)

Think of a manufacturer who is looking to sell as many units as possible, you have choice of easy access to a customer base of 65 million or 740 million.

Which is the better option?

That is the difference between trading in Europe or in a UK out of Europe.

[hibs0666]

Think of a manufacturer who is looking to sell as many units as possible, you have choice of easy access to a customer base of 65 million or 740 million.

Which is the better option?

That is the difference between trading in Europe or in a UK out of Europe.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a 65 million customer base with access to 740 million? Why would you prefer to be part of a 5 million customer base with access to 740 million?

[lord bunberry]

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a 65 million customer base with access to 740 million? Why would you prefer to be part of a 5 million customer base with access to 740 million?

I think you've missed the point. A UK out of Europe wouldn't have access to the 740 million.

[Moulin Yarns]

I think you've missed the point. A UK out of Europe wouldn't have access to the 740 million.

Thanks Bun. :greengrin

I've had enough of thes types of threads, all they seem to consist of is those that voted for the Union posing questions which are no longer relevant after the referendum to get a reaction from those who voted for Independence and we are going over old ground, which is making it more difficult to provide the detailed answers required with the passage of time.

There are more important things to be getting on with, working with Common Weal, engaging with like-minded people politically. There are elections on the horizon and the petty point scoring should have stopped by now.

I had never used the 'ignore' function until this week, even during the referendum threads, but there is somebody I found to be an intolerable bore and now choose wheter to read their posts.

[lord bunberry]

Thanks Bun. :greengrin

I've had enough of thes types of threads, all they seem to consist of is those that voted for the Union posing questions which are no longer relevant after the referendum to get a reaction from those who voted for Independence and we are going over old ground, which is making it more difficult to provide the detailed answers required with the passage of time.

There are more important things to be getting on with, working with Common Weal, engaging with like-minded people politically. There are elections on the horizon and the petty point scoring should have stopped by now.

I had never used the 'ignore' function until this week, even during the referendum threads, but there is somebody I found to be an intolerable bore and now choose wheter to read their posts.

Yeah totally agree

[RyeSloan]

Think of a manufacturer who is looking to sell as many units as possible, you have choice of easy access to a customer base of 65 million or 740 million. Which is the better option? That is the difference between trading in Europe or in a UK out of Europe.

But membership of the EU is massively more than just a common market.

But trade agreements seem topical just now and I see TTIP is getting a few peoples knickers in a twist...a trade agreement being settled at an EU level shows just how powerful the EU is over it's member countries.

[HiBremian]

Surely the answer to the OP is Federalism? The common aim for the majority of the EU, and that which shall be denied to Scotland by Westminster?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[One Day Soon]

Surely the answer to the OP is Federalism? The common aim for the majority of the EU, and that which shall be denied to Scotland by Westminster?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


How exactly can you be denied something you haven't asked for?

[HiBremian]

How exactly can you be denied something you haven't asked for?

The Greens and the SNP submissions to the Smith Commission were asking for this.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[hibs0666]

I think you've missed the point. A UK out of Europe wouldn't have access to the 740 million.

But the UK is in Europe and only a party of pub bores is advocating any change to that position.

[One Day Soon]

The Greens and the SNP submissions to the Smith Commission were asking for this.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Greens and the SNP are not Scotland. They're not even half of Scotland.

[hibs0666]

The Greens and the SNP submissions to the Smith Commission were asking for this.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The SNP and Greens signed up to the outcome of the Smith Commission.

[HiBremian]

The SNP and Greens signed up to the outcome of the Smith Commission.

The point is, a form of Federalism was "asked for". As for not being a majority in Scotland, who denied the devo-max option on the indyref ballot paper?

Have to agree with other posters that these debates are getting tiresome and petty. If people can't get their heads round the difference between federalism and unionism then it's time to move on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

But the UK is in Europe and only a party of pub bores is advocating any change to that position.

Your last post answered a hypothetical statement.
I also think its slightly more than a party of pub bores that want the UK to leave the EU, half the conservative party will be campaigning for it. Those pub bores may also find themselves in a coalition government next year.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

But the UK is in Europe and only a party of pub bores is advocating any change to that position.

Was that really necessary?

[lord bunberry]

How exactly can you be denied something you haven't asked for?

Gordon Brown did promise us near federalism.

[Moulin Yarns]

Was that really necessary?

It appears to be the level of debate some are capable of.

[hibs0666]

Was that really necessary?

You're right - comparing UKIP to a group of pub bores does a huge dis-service to pub bores. :wink:

[danhibees1875]

To be fair to the OP I can totally see where you're coming from. I've had the chat with other yes voters, it is a bit hypocritical. But no, I'd rather stay part of the EU. I feel it provides a valuable trade and immigration platform with little benefit from becoming intrinsically more British otherwise.

Will all no voters still feel we're better together? (I'll admit, that's rhetorical)

[SHODAN]

I feel more strongly about staying in the EU than independence. I have no desire to rekindle open xenophobia and discrimination of those born outside this country, something that horrible, nasty party are doing.

If the UK exits the EU and we vote No in a second independence referendum (which I expect will happen) then I'm emigrating. Sorry, not raising my kids in that environment.

[lord bunberry]

I feel more strongly about staying in the EU than independence. I have no desire to rekindle open xenophobia and discrimination of those born outside this country, something that horrible, nasty party are doing.

If the UK exits the EU and we vote No in a second independence referendum (which I expect will happen) then I'm emigrating. Sorry, not raising my kids in that environment.

What if we voted yes?

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

You're right - comparing UKIP to a group of pub bores does a huge dis-service to pub bores. :wink:

Good use of a smiley there. Oh how you must've chuckled.

I'm not convinced thats the party you were referring to though.

[hibs0666]

Good use of a smiley there. Oh how you must've chuckled.

I'm not convinced thats the party you were referring to though.

Which other party is supporting a withdrawal from Europe?

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

See LB's post from 1745 yesterday.

[--------]

The repatriation of powers is a central plank of Scottish nationalism.

There is an opportunity to further increase local power and decision-making if the UK votes to leave the EU.

Is it not therefore logical that nationalists should vote for independence from the EU as well as from Westminster?


Short answer - NO.

The EU's made up of a number of independent nation states bound by treaties to co-operate combine in specified areas of their national lives.

An independent Scotland could quite logically remain part of the EU on that basis, The present arrangement - that of being part of the UK which is a member of the EU, with Scotland's relationship with Europe largely dictated by the UK government in Westminster, would simply be replaced by a direct relationship between Holyrood and Brussels, with no interference from Westminster.

Scotland's relationship with Europe would be decided by the Scottish Government in Edinburgh, not the UK government in Westminster, which, simply because of the respective sizes of the constituent parts of the UK, is effectively an English government.

Equal status with all other nation-states within the EU, in other words. Scotland is not an English county.

I have a lot of friends in the SNP and in none of them do I detect the quasi-Fascist xenophobia of the UKIP crowd.

[Beefster]

Good use of a smiley there. Oh how you must've chuckled.

I'm not convinced thats the party you were referring to though.

In hibs0666's defence, I read it as either the Tories or UKIP first time so I suspect you're looking for something that isnt there.

[RyeSloan]

Short answer - NO. The EU's made up of a number of independent nation states bound by treaties to co-operate combine in specified areas of their national lives. An independent Scotland could quite logically remain part of the EU on that basis, The present arrangement - that of being part of the UK which is a member of the EU, with Scotland's relationship with Europe largely dictated by the UK government in Westminster, would simply be replaced by a direct relationship between Holyrood and Brussels, with no interference from Westminster. Scotland's relationship with Europe would be decided by the Scottish Government in Edinburgh, not the UK government in Westminster, which, simply because of the respective sizes of the constituent parts of the UK, is effectively an English government. Equal status with all other nation-states within the EU, in other words. Scotland is not an English county. I have a lot of friends in the SNP and in none of them do I detect the quasi-Fascist xenophobia of the UKIP crowd.

But none if that goes anyway to answering the OP. Scotland would represent itself, so what? Do you think that would alter current or future treaties in any meaningful way?

You have still ceded huge power and influence on a European level while at the same time saying the exact same must be reclaimed on a UK level.

Clearly I'll not get me head round this paradox anytime soon ;-)

[lord bunberry]

But none if that goes anyway to answering the OP. Scotland would represent itself, so what? Do you think that would alter current or future treaties in any meaningful way?

You have still ceded huge power and influence on a European level while at the same time saying the exact same must be reclaimed on a UK level.

Clearly I'll not get me head round this paradox anytime soon ;-)

Correct me if I'm picking you up wrong, but if you're suggesting that just because we're Scotland then we wouldn't have any influence. I'm sure treaties need to be ratified by all member countries, that in itself gives individual countries some power.

[Bristolhibby]

The rationale for that position is that an independent Scotland would still have the benefits of EU membership but make all the decisions currently being made at Westminster ourselves for the benefit of ourselves

This is the reason for me in a nutshell.

J

[RyeSloan]

Correct me if I'm picking you up wrong, but if you're suggesting that just because we're Scotland then we wouldn't have any influence. I'm sure treaties need to be ratified by all member countries, that in itself gives individual countries some power.

What I'm saying is that that the EU is primarily Germany's baby (esp the Eurozone) with France and a few others coming along behind. 5m Scots on its periphery is not going to move the monolith one bit I would suggest and never in any significant way....this concept that a Scotland freed of the UK at an EU level will then somehow be both more in line with the EU and at the same time be able to move the EU more to our benefit is a false one (in my opinion).

[lord bunberry]

What I'm saying is that that the EU is primarily Germany's baby (esp the Eurozone) with France and a few others coming along behind. 5m Scots on its periphery is not going to move the monolith one bit I would suggest and never in any significant way....this concept that a Scotland freed of the UK at an EU level will then somehow be both more in line with the EU and at the same time be able to move the EU more to our benefit is a false one (in my opinion).
There's going to be several issues that the larger countries like Germany won't have any interest in. I doubt they will care much about things like fishing and North sea oil and gas.

[RyeSloan]

There's going to be several issues that the larger countries like Germany won't have any interest in. I doubt they will care much about things like fishing and North sea oil and gas.

Maybe but then I'm sure you will find France and Spain have plenty to say on fishing....I wonder who would have the biggest say in that contest against an iS.

As for oil and Gas...very much at an EU level focus the current dependence on Russia for gas and the EU has (in its usual sloow way) been throwing a lot of time and money at developing gas networks so I would say they would have plenty if interest in this area. In fact the EU has just implemented a huge offshore oil and gas health and safety directive which I assume is costing the industry huge amounts of cash to understand which just goes to show how far the EU reaches into its member nations and forces them to comply to EU level directives.

[Moulin Yarns]

People should realise that the 6 MEPs that represent Scottish interest in Europe do not all agree on the issues but represent their political parties. There are various coalition groups. The centre right group includes tories, centre left has labour and there is a group that includes green and SNP and independent. It's not run anything like Westminster or Holyrood.

[Purple & Green]

Back to the question and I think there's possibly a surprising amount of scots who voted no to independence, but would have voted yes if it was a Switzerland style out of the eu independence on offer.

[lord bunberry]

Back to the question and I think there's possibly a surprising amount of scots who voted no to independence, but would have voted yes if it was a Switzerland style out of the eu independence on offer.

I wonder if a fair number of yes voters may have voted no to that though?

[Sir David Gray]

Back to the question and I think there's possibly a surprising amount of scots who voted no to independence, but would have voted yes if it was a Switzerland style out of the eu independence on offer.

I would have seriously considered it.

[SHODAN]

Back to the question and I think there's possibly a surprising amount of scots who voted no to independence, but would have voted yes if it was a Switzerland style out of the eu independence on offer.

I would have voted no to that.

[RIP]

Do we need a separate thread for those Scots who would like to stay in the EU but do not consider ourselves Nationalists?

[lord bunberry]

Do we need a separate thread for those Scots who would like to stay in the EU but do not consider ourselves Nationalists?

Start one if you think we do, it is a completely separate issue after all.

[JeMeSouviens]

I concur with the village idiot part - biggest word I know is margarine.

You're a clever guy and know what it is like to work in global context so please help me with this question.

Why do Scottish nationalists welcome with open arms a European economic and social union (in which Scotland's influence is miniscule and where there is massive cultural differences) whilst in the same breath reject a British economic and social union where Scotland's influence is significant and relatively minimal cultural differences exist?

Funnily enough in my last job I nominally reported to a guy in Reading. I can only guess at how painful life would've been if I'd had to route all my input to various decisions through him instead of getting directly involved with my colleagues around the world. :wink:

Individual Scots can have international influence through their positions in the UK. Scotland (as a currently non-existent country) has none. Wanting what I perceive as my country to have power over itself does not preclude it from entering into the global family.

[JeMeSouviens]

Back to the question and I think there's possibly a surprising amount of scots who voted no to independence, but would have voted yes if it was a Switzerland style out of the eu independence on offer.

Although Switzerland isn't an EU member and therefore not signed up to the various treaties, in practice it might as well be. In order to get access to the EU market, Switzerland had to sign up to a host of bilateral agreements with the EU, so it's part of Schengen, EU citizens are free to live and work there, etc. (Although a recent referendum proposition that seeks to limit immigration from the EU has given the Swiss government a major headache. They are duty bound to try and renegotiate with the EU, but the EU are currently saying talk to the hand, Swiss dudes.)

[judas]

I think you are getting it

The power of Europe over Scotland would not be as great as that from Westminster under current arrangements.

Scotland would have full tax raising powers, full control over defence and nuclear policy, education, welfare etc. Ofcourse some of this would be influenced by the EU framework. But it's the opposite way around at present. Scotland has limited power over policy set by Wm.

But there is undoubtedly some conflict and there is certainly an argument for an independent Scotland free of the EU too.

My concern about the EU is that becomes an super state, diluting and compromising the voice of the people over larger interests.

[Dinkydoo]

Presently we are sitting under a nested arrangement of influence whereby Scotland is greatly influenced by Westminster who in turn, is influenced by the EU. I'd rather that we take out the middle arrangement allowing Scotland to make decisions that are best for ourselves, rather than the UK as a whole - which is largely controlled by the biggest constituent state. I am happy with the benefit/limitation tradeoff that being part of the EU provides but I am not happy with the advantages and disadvantages that are incurred by being part of the UK.

[judas]

Presently we are sitting under a nested arrangement of influence whereby Scotland is greatly influenced by Westminster who in turn, is influenced by the EU. I'd rather that we take out the middle arrangement allowing Scotland to make decisions that are best for ourselves, rather than the UK as a whole - which is largely controlled by the biggest constituent state. I am happy with the benefit/limitation tradeoff that being part of the EU provides but I am not happy with the advantages and disadvantages that are incurred by being part of the UK.

Yes. You said it.

[lord bunberry]

Presently we are sitting under a nested arrangement of influence whereby Scotland is greatly influenced by Westminster who in turn, is influenced by the EU. I'd rather that we take out the middle arrangement allowing Scotland to make decisions that are best for ourselves, rather than the UK as a whole - which is largely controlled by the biggest constituent state. I am happy with the benefit/limitation tradeoff that being part of the EU provides but I am not happy with the advantages and disadvantages that are incurred by being part of the UK.

That's exactly it, right now Cameron is a middle man(mostly Middle England) why do we need or want him?

[ronaldo7]

The repatriation of powers is a central plank of Scottish nationalism.

There is an opportunity to further increase local power and decision-making if the UK votes to leave the EU.

Is it not therefore logical that nationalists should vote for independence from the EU as well as from Westminster?

Some of our elected representatives won't get the chance to vote if the Tories have their way and get the Franchise they want.

http://t.co/ouheSJWbxk

The Franchise for the independence ref seems so open and welcoming in comparison to what's being proposed by the Britnats.:greengrin

[SHODAN]

The further marginalisation of migrants by this country's establishment vindicates my decision to contact the Polish embassy this week for a passport. I want to make sure I'll still have free movement if we choose to leave the EU so I can get the **** out of here.

[Hibrandenburg]

The further marginalisation of migrants by this country's establishment vindicates my decision to contact the Polish embassy this week for a passport. I want to make sure I'll still have free movement if we choose to leave the EU so I can get the **** out of here.

Same with me, I'm a baw hair away from getting German citizenship. As a UK citizen living abroad I've been stripped of my rights and been made a democratic outcast with no voice.

[Beefster]

Same with me, I'm a baw hair away from getting German citizenship. As a UK citizen living abroad I've been stripped of my rights and been made a democratic outcast with no voice.

I thought that, during the Scottish referendum saga, you said you thought it was entirely right that citizens who don't live in the country don't get a say?

[Hibrandenburg]

I thought that, during the Scottish referendum saga, you said you thought it was entirely right that citizens who don't live in the country don't get a say?

Yes, on the independence question. The choice on whether Scotland should become an independent country should be made by those who live there, a GE is a completely different kettle of fish.

[steakbake]

I wonder how many people who voted to stay in the UK will vote to leave the EU?

It's a question of two nationalisms: the blood and soil one that the SNP are - wrongfully - accused of by their more rabid and irrational opponents and the blood and soil definitions drawn up and supported by a right wing government in Westminster for the EU vote.

Ironically, the indyref eligibility was people living and registered as eligible to vote in Scotland: including non-UK nationals. Many ex-pats - mostly No voters, some who I know have never even lived in Scotland or have not at least in several decades, bemoaned the fact that they couldn't vote from Corby or where ever they found themselves. They complained that "non-Scots" were going to get a vote and they (presumably "indigenous" Scots) weren't: who indeed were the nationalists in that argument?

[lucky]

I think it's only right the decision on whether the UK leaves the EU is taken by UK citizens.

[Geo_1875]

I think it's only right the decision on whether the UK leaves the EU is taken by UK citizens.

Do you also mean people who qualify and apply for UK citizenship? Or just people born and still living here?

[Speedy]

I wonder how many people who voted to stay in the UK will vote to leave the EU?

It's a question of two nationalisms: the blood and soil one that the SNP are - wrongfully - accused of by their more rabid and irrational opponents and the blood and soil definitions drawn up and supported by a right wing government in Westminster for the EU vote.

Ironically, the indyref eligibility was people living and registered as eligible to vote in Scotland: including non-UK nationals. Many ex-pats - mostly No voters, some who I know have never even lived in Scotland or have not at least in several decades, bemoaned the fact that they couldn't vote from Corby or where ever they found themselves. They complained that "non-Scots" were going to get a vote and they (presumably "indigenous" Scots) weren't: who indeed were the nationalists in that argument?

Scottish people living in the UK should have received a vote imo.

Would be a pain in the arse to administer which is why I would accept it not happening.

[lucky]

Do you also mean people who qualify and apply for UK citizenship? Or just people born and still living here?

I mean all UK citizens regardless of where they were born not other nationals living here. I would also extend the franchise to 16-17 year olds.

[Sir David Gray]

Apparently if the UK votes to leave the EU, Scotland would be getting forced out of it against our will. Well that's if you listen to Nicola Sturgeon anyway!

What exactly does she not grasp about Scotland rejecting independence last year?

We voted, as a nation, to stay within the UK and it is the UK that will be voting on the issue of EU membership.

The vote's got nothing at all to do with England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland as individual constituent countries within the UK. The result will be determined by the UK electorate as a whole and that's the way it should be.

[bigwheel]

Apparently if the UK votes to leave the EU, Scotland would be getting forced out of it against our will. Well that's if you listen to Nicola Sturgeon anyway!

What exactly does she not grasp about Scotland rejecting independence last year?

We voted, as a nation, to stay within the UK and it is the UK that will be voting on the issue of EU membership.

The vote's got nothing at all to do with England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland as individual constituent countries within the UK. The result will be determined by the UK electorate as a whole and that's the way it should be.


If the Scottish vote is dominantly in favour of staying within the EU, and the overall UK vote concludes to exit the EU. Then you have a situation where the Scottish people are being led to a change the majority don't support. Regardless of the validity of the vote, it's a position that would cause significant political unrest.

[steakbake]

Apparently if the UK votes to leave the EU, Scotland would be getting forced out of it against our will. Well that's if you listen to Nicola Sturgeon anyway!

What exactly does she not grasp about Scotland rejecting independence last year?

We voted, as a nation, to stay within the UK and it is the UK that will be voting on the issue of EU membership.

The vote's got nothing at all to do with England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland as individual constituent countries within the UK. The result will be determined by the UK electorate as a whole and that's the way it should be.

Strange - we were being told on the run up to indyref that we wouldn't get into the EU straightaway and hell would have to freeze over first. Now, if the others decide to leave and put us on the outside looking in - something we were told was not in Scotland's interests just 6 months ago - then we just have to put up with the apocalypse we were told it would cause? Better Together.

[speedy_gonzales]

Then you have a situation where the Scottish people are being led to a change the majority don't support.
A bit like Scotland voting for independence against the wishes of the majority of UK residents who did not want the union broken up, or perhaps the complete opposite of that in that Scotland voted to remain in the UK against the wishes of the rest of the nation according to certain strains of the media,,,,,folk can be fickle!

[lucky]

Scotland is not a member state of the EU but a country within a political and economic Union that is a member state. If the UK votes to leave then we all leave. If that triggers another referendum then so be it. We can then decide to leave the UK and use the legal advice Salmond got stating we remain members. Oh I just remembered he never got any legal advice and misled parliament and Scotland. I wonder if there will be campaign to demand resigns from any of the parliaments he sits in.

[Hibrandenburg]

If the Scottish vote is dominantly in favour of staying within the EU, and the overall UK vote concludes to exit the EU. Then you have a situation where the Scottish people are being led to a change the majority don't support. Regardless of the validity of the vote, it's a position that would cause significant political unrest.


Nothing new in that.

[(((Fergus)))]

Because the nation state still exists within the EU. So, if one believes Scotland to be a nation state in its own right, Scottish independence (perhaps sovereignty is a better word) is compatible with EU membership. We should also remember there are some who support independence who would happily see Scotland leave the EU and go the Norway route.

What is unique about Scotland that would make it a nation state in its own right in comparison with Northern Ireland, Wales and England?

There are obviously many nation states in Europe, such as those that could not live together in the former union of southern Slavs, but what "tribal" differences are there between the citizens of Scotland and those in the rest of the UK?

[steakbake]

What is unique about Scotland that would make it a nation state in its own right in comparison with Northern Ireland, Wales and England?

There are obviously many nation states in Europe, such as those that could not live together in the former union of southern Slavs, but what "tribal" differences are there between the citizens of Scotland and those in the rest of the UK?

....And we're back to the blood and soil nationalism commonly found amongst those against Scottish independence.

Is the concept of a 'civic nationalism' really too hard to grasp?

[liamh2202]

Apparently if the UK votes to leave the EU, Scotland would be getting forced out of it against our will. Well that's if you listen to Nicola Sturgeon anyway!

What exactly does she not grasp about Scotland rejecting independence last year?

We voted, as a nation, to stay within the UK and it is the UK that will be voting on the issue of EU membership.

The vote's got nothing at all to do with England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland as individual constituent countries within the UK. The result will be determined by the UK electorate as a whole and that's the way it should be.


Yup fed up posting this very thing... We voted to decide on matters as a UK... If East Lothian votes to leave the eu but 'scotland ' votes to stay then where does that leave East Lothian? Or can you only go down through the levels to where it suits??

[JeMeSouviens]

What is unique about Scotland that would make it a nation state in its own right in comparison with Northern Ireland, Wales and England?

There are obviously many nation states in Europe, such as those that could not live together in the former union of southern Slavs, but what "tribal" differences are there between the citizens of Scotland and those in the rest of the UK?

What "tribal" differences are there between Slovakia and the Czech Republic, Norway and Sweden, Spain and Portugal, Germany and Switzerland, etc etc etc?

You don't have to hate anyone or feel superior to anyone to want to run your own country. It's perfectly normal. Go and ask people in small countries around Europe if they'd like to be run by their larger neighbours. They think we're barking.

[JeMeSouviens]

Yup fed up posting this very thing... We voted to decide on matters as a UK... If East Lothian votes to leave the eu but 'scotland ' votes to stay then where does that leave East Lothian? Or can you only go down through the levels to where it suits??

As it happens I agree with you.

But ... we were sold a load of old ***** about a "family of nations" and Scotland being a proud country in its own right, blah, blah, blah. When push comes to shove it all evaporates and the truth stares us in the face: there is (currently) no such country as Scotland, just a region of the country called the UK.

[liamh2202]

As it happens I agree with you.

But ... we were sold a load of old ***** about a "family of nations" and Scotland being a proud country in its own right, blah, blah, blah. When push comes to shove it all evaporates and the truth stares us in the face: there is (currently) no such country as Scotland, just a region of the country called the UK.


Do you not think that people knew politically that is how it would be when they voted no last year?

[JeMeSouviens]

Do you not think that people knew politically that is how it would be when they voted no last year?

Mostly. But it only would've taken 1 in 11 No voters switching sides or 2 in 11 staying at home to swing the result. I think there is a smallish element of the population who have a predominantly Scottish identity but find just enough expression of that within the current structure ("national" sports teams, the pretendy parliament, the Church of Scotland etc) to not feel the need for a sovereign state.

[liamh2202]

Mostly. But it only would've taken 1 in 11 No voters switching sides or 2 in 11 staying at home to swing the result. I think there is a smallish element of the population who have a predominantly Scottish identity but find just enough expression of that within the current structure ("national" sports teams, the pretendy parliament, the Church of Scotland etc) to not feel the need for a sovereign state.


To be honest that is exactly how I feel at the minute.. I was open to the idea of independence,, although maybe swayed because I'm not in the forces but the argument just never swayed it for me

[Glory Lurker]

Scotland is not a member state of the EU but a country within a political and economic Union that is a member state. If the UK votes to leave then we all leave. If that triggers another referendum then so be it. We can then decide to leave the UK and use the legal advice Salmond got stating we remain members. Oh I just remembered he never got any legal advice and misled parliament and Scotland. I wonder if there will be campaign to demand resigns from any of the parliaments he sits in.

Nothing stopping anyone starting a campaign on the legal advice matter, although I think the fact that Salmond was cleared at the time does make me think it'd be a bit of a waste of time. I am surprised at the Better Together unity on Carmichael. Surely he's a political opponent of Labour and the Tories?

Oh, btw, wanted to say to for a while that you are probably the poster I agree most with on the Main Forum (along with ODS, as it happens) - do you bang your heid on something when you come in to the Holy Ground? :greengrin

[The_Todd]

Nothing stopping anyone starting a campaign on the legal advice matter, although I think the fact that Salmond was cleared at the time does make me think it'd be a bit of a waste of time. I am surprised at the Better Together unity on Carmichael. Surely he's a political opponent of Labour and the Tories?

Oh, btw, wanted to say to for a while that you are probably the poster I agree most with on the Main Forum (along with ODS, as it happens) - do you bang your heid on something when you come in to the Holy Ground? :greengrin

1 - Better Together isn't a thing anymore.
2 - What unity? Labour hasn't got itself involved as far as I know?

[Glory Lurker]

1 - Better Together isn't a thing anymore.
2 - What unity? Labour hasn't got itself involved as far as I know?

What I meant by that is that I'm seeing comments along the lines of "Salmond lied...." On FB and Twitter from commentators and punters across the Unionist range. It seems to be a familiar bête noire.

Oh, and trust me, Better Together will always be a thing!:na na:

[Moulin Yarns]

1 - Better Together isn't a thing anymore.
2 - What unity? Labour hasn't got itself involved as far as I know?

I beg to differ. Better together is very much alive, they just changed their cover.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d0e0ef42-e118-11e4-8b1a-00144feab7de.html#axzz3bPSbsGeW

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11445684/New-Unionist-tactical-voting-campaign-to-stop-SNP-surge.html

[The_Todd]

I beg to differ. Better together is very much alive, they just changed their cover.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d0e0ef42-e118-11e4-8b1a-00144feab7de.html#axzz3bPSbsGeW

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11445684/New-Unionist-tactical-voting-campaign-to-stop-SNP-surge.html

That's just a bunch of oddballs.

[ronaldo7]

That's just a bunch of oddballs.

They used to say that of the SNP in days gone by:greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

That's just a bunch of oddballs.

Yeah like better together.

They campaigned hard here with Labour activists busssed into Perth to get a conservative vote

[The_Todd]

Yeah like better together.

They campaigned hard here with Labour activists busssed into Perth to get a conservative vote

Then they've broken Labour party rules to do so, so as I say it'll be oddballs on the fringes, a rule which means they invalidate their party membership.

[--------]

Then they've broken Labour party rules to do so, so as I say it'll be oddballs on the fringes, a rule which means they invalidate their party membership.


Well I for one won't be holding my breath waiting for them to be expelled.


Nationalism isn't isolationism. I would like to see Scotland an autonomous member of the European Community, Holyrood directly interacting with Brussels without Westminster getting between us.

I would also argue that if Cameron holds this referendum and wins, that constitutes a major change in the constitution of the UK, and Scotland would be fully entitled to hold another referendum on membership of the UK, especially if the Scottish vote was to stay in, but we were over-ruled by the vote from England.

[marinello59]

Well I for one won't be holding my breath waiting for them to be expelled.


Nationalism isn't isolationism. I would like to see Scotland an autonomous member of the European Community, Holyrood directly interacting with Brussels without Westminster getting between us.

I would also argue that if Cameron holds this referendum and wins, that constitutes a major change in the constitution of the UK, and Scotland would be fully entitled to hold another referendum on membership of the UK, especially if the Scottish vote was to stay in, but we were over-ruled by the vote from England.

If Cameron holds this vote and wins we will have voted to remain in the EU. Won't we?

[RyeSloan]

If Cameron holds this vote and wins we will have voted to remain in the EU. Won't we?

Ach why let the facts get in the way of such things?

[(((Fergus)))]

....And we're back to the blood and soil nationalism commonly found amongst those against Scottish independence.

Is the concept of a 'civic nationalism' really too hard to grasp?

Yes, what is it?

[(((Fergus)))]

What "tribal" differences are there between Slovakia and the Czech Republic, Norway and Sweden, Spain and Portugal, Germany and Switzerland, etc etc etc?

You don't have to hate anyone or feel superior to anyone to want to run your own country. It's perfectly normal. Go and ask people in small countries around Europe if they'd like to be run by their larger neighbours. They think we're barking.

There are linguistic differences between all of those pairs, religious differences between Czechs and Slovaks. Switzerland is not a nation state in that sense.

I'm not suggesting anyone should hate or feel superior, I just want to know what is the basis for defining Scotland as a country and, if it is "ours", who are "we"? What differentiates us from the English, Welsh and (Northern) Irish?

Not saying there's nothing; just want to see a list.

[JeMeSouviens]

There are linguistic differences between all of those pairs, religious differences between Czechs and Slovaks. Switzerland is not a nation state in that sense.

I'm not suggesting anyone should hate or feel superior, I just want to know what is the basis for defining Scotland as a country and, if it is "ours", who are "we"? What differentiates us from the English, Welsh and (Northern) Irish?

Not saying there's nothing; just want to see a list.

The basis for defining Scotland as a country is the same as for any other country: that that is the belief of the people that live there. Ethnicity, language etc may be historical reasons for bringing that situation about but not necessarily. Switzerland unquestionably *is* a nation state because the people who live there want it to be, notwithstanding their internal linguistic and religious differences.

[Just Alf]

Well I for one won't be holding my breath waiting for them to be expelled.


Nationalism isn't isolationism. I would like to see Scotland an autonomous member of the European Community, Holyrood directly interacting with Brussels without Westminster getting between us.

I would also argue that if Cameron holds this referendum and wins, that constitutes a major change in the constitution of the UK, and Scotland would be fully entitled to hold another referendum on membership of the UK, especially if the Scottish vote was to stay in, but we were over-ruled by the vote from England.

You got the Cameron bit the wrong way round, but I get what you mean :aok:

Cameron's own argument regarding English vote for English laws specifically implys that if the UK as a whole voted to leave and any one country voted the opposite then that country should be allowed a veto.... I await with baited breath how he'll work that one out.


Edit. I should add in the light of him saying at one point that Scotland shouldn't get a veto.

[Berwickhibby]

Nationalism isn't isolationism. I would like to see Scotland an autonomous member of the European Community, Holyrood directly interacting with Brussels without Westminster getting between us.

I would also argue that if Cameron holds this referendum and wins, that constitutes a major change in the constitution of the UK, and Scotland would be fully entitled to hold another referendum on membership of the UK, especially if the Scottish vote was to stay in, but we were over-ruled by the vote from England.[/QUOTE]

Once again banging on about another referendum....... We held one, the majority voted NO time to move on and should it be a vote to leave the European Union I for one will not be upset when you consider how much money the UK contributes.

[Just Alf]

Once again banging on about another referendum....... We held one, the majority voted NO time to move on and should it be a vote to leave the European Union I for one will not be upset when you consider how much money the UK contributes.

So from that, do you think Cameron is wrong to pursue an English veto at Westminster? (in terms of English votes for English laws a Westminster when impacted by a whole UK vote ..... And as an aside, I do believe England should have a devolved Parliament )

[Andy74]

I tend not to follow politics very closely. however, did the Conservatives not back the No referendum vote because they believe that as neighbouring 'countries' we are better and stronger as part of a union and that sharing a union and currency with neighbours and majot trading partners is a good thing.

In what way does their stance change towards the EU, why are we not better together in that?

[marinello59]

I tend not to follow politics very closely. however, did the Conservatives not back the No referendum vote because they believe that as neighbouring 'countries' we are better and stronger as part of a union and that sharing a union and currency with neighbours and majot trading partners is a good thing.

In what way does their stance change towards the EU, why are we not better together in that?

The Tories will be campaigning for the vote to stay in the EU.

[ronaldo7]

The Tories will be campaigning for the vote to stay in the EU.

Some of them will:wink:

[Keith_M]

I tend not to follow politics very closely. however, did the Conservatives not back the No referendum vote because they believe that as neighbouring 'countries' we are better and stronger as part of a union and that sharing a union and currency with neighbours and majot trading partners is a good thing.

In what way does their stance change towards the EU, why are we not better together in that?


Andy, I think Cameron and others in charge of the Tories don't really want to leave the EU. My feeling all along has been that they proposed the EU Referendum as a way to 'steal UKIP's thunder'. It seemed to work, as they managed to get themselves elected.


There are plenty others, though, that have a Jingositic attitude to being English/British and don't feel that the UK should be 'told' what to do by Johnny Foreigner.

That just plays in to the hands of the parts of Big Business that can't wait to remove any awkward restrictions to various Working Practices and the behaviour of the Finance Industry.

[Beefster]

I think Cameron and others in charge of the Tories don't really want to leave the EU.

Cameron will be campaigning to stay in the EU. So he really doesn't want to leave.

[marinello59]

Some of them will:wink:

And some Labour and SNP members would prefer us to leave is well.
All of the major parties will be working to secure a Yes vote. The SNP standing shoulder to shoulder with David Cameron, who'd have thought it. :greengrin

[Hibrandenburg]

And some Labour and SNP members would prefer us to leave is well.
All of the major parties will be working to secure a Yes vote. The SNP standing shoulder to shoulder with David Cameron, who'd have thought it. :greengrin

I'd be surprised if the SNP would back the UK coming out of Europe, Scotland wanting to stay in Europe but being forced out by the UK would be leverage for another referendum.

[ronaldo7]

And some Labour and SNP members would prefer us to leave is well.
All of the major parties will be working to secure a Yes vote. The SNP standing shoulder to shoulder with David Cameron, who'd have thought it. :greengrin

Not sure we'll be putting much money into this one, save our sheckles for other battles.:thumbsup:

[lucky]

Nothing stopping anyone starting a campaign on the legal advice matter, although I think the fact that Salmond was cleared at the time does make me think it'd be a bit of a waste of time. I am surprised at the Better Together unity on Carmichael. Surely he's a political opponent of Labour and the Tories?

Oh, btw, wanted to say to for a while that you are probably the poster I agree most with on the Main Forum (along with ODS, as it happens) - do you bang your heid on something when you come in to the Holy Ground? :greengrin

Hibs unite us all but politics is a decisive subject. I stop posting on the Holy Ground for a while. It's hard swimming against the tide constantly. I'm old school Labour but like many dismayed at the charlatans that have infutrated the party and are killing it. Today Blatter reminded me of Jim Murphy with his refusal to accept the inevitable

[marinello59]

I'd be surprised if the SNP would back the UK coming out of Europe, Scotland wanting to stay in Europe but being forced out by the UK would be leverage for another referendum.

I didn't say the SNP would back that, I said some members would. I also said all the major parties including the SNP would back staying in.
The UK will vote to stay in.

[marinello59]

Not sure we'll be putting much money into this one, save our sheckles for other battles.:thumbsup:

Surely the SNP would campaign on an issue as important as this to them, otherwise what is the point.

[ronaldo7]

Surely the SNP would claim on an issue as important as this to them, otherwise what is the point.

Just don't think it will be as high focus as the parliamentary elections. I'm sure we'll be out there asking for a yes vote but not in the numbers who will be out in force next year.

I fully expect a yes vote on this one, however if Cameron comes back empty handed from Europe in the next few weeks, then the sceptics in his party will go into overdrive.

It might even get Nigel back on our screens again. The Beeb love him.

[marinello59]

Just don't think it will be as high focus as the parliamentary elections. I'm sure we'll be out there asking for a yes vote but not in the numbers who will be out in force next year.

I fully expect a yes vote on this one, however if Cameron comes back empty handed from Europe in the next few weeks, then the sceptics in his party will go into overdrive.

It might even get Nigel back on our screens again. The Beeb love him.

We're only having this referendum because Cameron wants to neutralise UKIP. Hopefully it is the last stand for Farage. I agree, the UK will vote yes. What a waste of time and money, all because we have a weak PM.

[Sir David Gray]

If the Scottish vote is dominantly in favour of staying within the EU, and the overall UK vote concludes to exit the EU. Then you have a situation where the Scottish people are being led to a change the majority don't support. Regardless of the validity of the vote, it's a position that would cause significant political unrest.

How localised do you want to make the vote?

If in England there is the situation where the majority votes to leave the EU but the people of Manchester and Newcastle vote to stay in, should the people in those cities be asking to have their own vote?

Scotland would not be getting forced out of the EU against its will. Scotland had the opportunity to leave the UK eight months ago and it was rejected. It's always been the case that if England votes one way and Scotland votes the other way, then there's not much contest. England has a population of over 50 million people and Scotland's population is 5 million. The people of Scotland have always known that and yet we voted pretty convincingly to remain as part of the United Kingdom.

Whether Nicola Sturgeon, or anyone else for that matter, likes it or not, Scotland is not a member of the EU, the UK is and it's the UK electorate that will decide on its collective membership of the European Union.

[Hibrandenburg]

I didn't say the SNP would back that, I said some members would. I also said all the major parties including the SNP would back staying in.
The UK will vote to stay in.

And I'm not saying they won't, I'm saying I'd be surprised :greengrin

[marinello59]

And I'm not saying they won't, I'm saying I'd be surprised :greengrin

You'd be surprised if some SNP members wanted to leave the EU? Surely the brainwashing programme is not that far advanced? :greengrin

[Hibrandenburg]

You'd be surprised if some SNP members wanted to leave the EU? Surely the brainwashing programme is not that far advanced? :greengrin

Think you'll find it's not our brains that are being polluted :greengrin

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/fartgate-new-snp-mp-patricia-5782645

[Moulin Yarns]

How localised do you want to make the vote?

If in England there is the situation where the majority votes to leave the EU but the people of Manchester and Newcastle vote to stay in, should the people in those cities be asking to have their own vote?

Scotland would not be getting forced out of the EU against its will. Scotland had the opportunity to leave the UK eight months ago and it was rejected. It's always been the case that if England votes one way and Scotland votes the other way, then there's not much contest. England has a population of over 50 million people and Scotland's population is 5 million. The people of Scotland have always known that and yet we voted pretty convincingly to remain as part of the United Kingdom.

Whether Nicola Sturgeon, or anyone else for that matter, likes it or not, Scotland is not a member of the EU, the UK is and it's the UK electorate that will decide on its collective membership of the European Union.


This keeps being mentioned, yet at the General Election seats with large majorities that required swings of over 10% were considered safe seats. In the Referendum it would have required a swing of only 5.3% and that would not have been considered a safe seat.

Many areas of the Central Belt of Scotland such as Glasgow and Edinburgh were seen as safe seats until the 2015 election, where the Scottish National Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party) took all but one Labour seat in Scotland, Edinburgh South.

[RyeSloan]

This keeps being mentioned, yet at the General Election seats with large majorities that required swings of over 10% were considered safe seats. In the Referendum it would have required a swing of only 5.3% and that would not have been considered a safe seat. Many areas of the Central Belt of Scotland such as Glasgow and Edinburgh were seen as safe seats until the 2015 election, where the Scottish National Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party) took all but one Labour seat in Scotland, Edinburgh South.

Aww come on. How many areas of Scotland voted Yes? 2? In general and as a whole Scotland voted to stay in the UK. Sure a swing of x percent would have changed the vote by y but that's a pretty strange argument.

Let's face it..the EU vote should and is a UK vote..the total vote of the UK should count whether the UK stays in or out. I'm not sure any credible argument can be put forward otherwise.

[lucky]

This keeps being mentioned, yet at the General Election seats with large majorities that required swings of over 10% were considered safe seats. In the Referendum it would have required a swing of only 5.3% and that would not have been considered a safe seat.

Many areas of the Central Belt of Scotland such as Glasgow and Edinburgh were seen as safe seats until the 2015 election, where the Scottish National Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party) took all but one Labour seat in Scotland, Edinburgh South.

Clearly most Yes voters voted SNP but the No vote was split giving the SNP an advantage but add to list of Milliband & Murphy as two unpopular leaders of the Labour Party some Labour No voters switched to the SNP. Another referendum is inevitable but the outcome is not. Latest polls still have No in front. But the UK is changing and will end up with a federal system with our representatives being elected under a PR system

[One Day Soon]

Well I for one won't be holding my breath waiting for them to be expelled.


Nationalism isn't isolationism. I would like to see Scotland an autonomous member of the European Community, Holyrood directly interacting with Brussels without Westminster getting between us.

I would also argue that if Cameron holds this referendum and wins, that constitutes a major change in the constitution of the UK, and Scotland would be fully entitled to hold another referendum on membership of the UK, especially if the Scottish vote was to stay in, but we were over-ruled by the vote from England.


You could argue it but you'd be wrong.

[One Day Soon]

The Tories will be campaigning for the vote to stay in the EU.

Alongside Salmond who wants to preserve that Union, despite the hypocrisy of him having criticised Labour for campaigning with Tories and Lib/Dems to preserve the home Union. Two-faced weltery form the Nats really.

[RyeSloan]

Alongside Salmond who wants to preserve that Union, despite the hypocrisy of him having criticised Labour for campaigning with Tories and Lib/Dems to preserve the home Union. Two-faced weltery form the Nats really.

Weltery...that's brilliant!!

[Keith_M]

Hibs unite us all but politics is a decisive subject. I stop posting on the Holy Ground for a while. It's hard swimming against the tide constantly. I'm old school Labour but like many dismayed at the charlatans that have infutrated the party and are killing it. Today Blatter reminded me of Jim Murphy with his refusal to accept the inevitable


Lucky, you might be surprised to learn that there are plenty of SNP Voters that would be happy if Labour in Scotland were to get their act together and started fighting for the things they traditionally represented. I've spoken to a few and read comments online to that effect.

Their two biggest problems have been taking the Scottish Vote for granted and being subject to whatever views currently prevail in the UK Labour Leadership.

I was really disgusted with the way that Scottish Labour would oppose the SNP on principal in Holyrood, rather than voting for what they felt was best for the people of Scotland. What's wrong with working together where you share the same views?

[Sir David Gray]

This keeps being mentioned, yet at the General Election seats with large majorities that required swings of over 10% were considered safe seats. In the Referendum it would have required a swing of only 5.3% and that would not have been considered a safe seat.

Many areas of the Central Belt of Scotland such as Glasgow and Edinburgh were seen as safe seats until the 2015 election, where the Scottish National Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party) took all but one Labour seat in Scotland, Edinburgh South.

The final margin of 55%-45% was bigger than any margin that any of the opinion polls, leading up to polling day, were suggesting.

In fact, a couple of opinion polls were even predicting a "Yes" vote.

The "Yes" campaign did not expect to only get 45% of the vote.

[ronaldo7]

The final margin of 55%-45% was bigger than any margin that any of the opinion polls, leading up to polling day, were suggesting.

In fact, a couple of opinion polls were even predicting a "Yes" vote.

The "Yes" campaign did not expect to only get 45% of the vote.

You're right, we only expected approx. 30-35% of the vote, and that was at the top end of our estimations. To get 45% was immense.:aok:

[ronaldo7]

Alongside Salmond who wants to preserve that Union, despite the hypocrisy of him having criticised Labour for campaigning with Tories and Lib/Dems to preserve the home Union. Two-faced weltery form the Nats really.

Wonderful.

The only weltery in recent times has been of the pink labour hue. Whilst you continue to focus your target on the "Nats", the tories reign in your numbers.

And if you're looking for anyone to be standing tall with shoulders back with the Tories, look no further than your own back yard.

You really are dredging the bottom of the barrel talking about two faces of the Nats, given Labour's recent history, although it's not unsurprising.

The SNP will pay their own cash for the upcoming referendum and not have to rely on the Tories to supply it.

[Golden Bear]

Westminster oot, Brussels in, makes total sense I suppose.

[Sir David Gray]

You're right, we only expected approx. 30-35% of the vote, and that was at the top end of our estimations. To get 45% was immense.:aok:

That certainly wasn't the impression that Alex Salmond and the rest of the "Yes" campaign was giving in the days before the vote.

They fully expected to win.

[ronaldo7]

That certainly wasn't the impression that Alex Salmond and the rest of the "Yes" campaign was giving in the days before the vote.

They fully expected to win.

How many days before the vote?

Prior to the Vow, or after?

[ronaldo7]

Westminster oot, Holyrood in, makes total sense I suppose.

:aok:

[Golden Bear]

:aok:

Falsifying information is what it's aboot these days .

[lord bunberry]

Alongside Salmond who wants to preserve that Union, despite the hypocrisy of him having criticised Labour for campaigning with Tories and Lib/Dems to preserve the home Union. Two-faced weltery form the Nats really.
The SNP will not be campaigning with the Tories, they won't be joining any "better in" group and they certainly won't be hugging and high fiving the Tories on referendum night. You're starting to come across as very bitter.

[Sir David Gray]

How many days before the vote?

Prior to the Vow, or after?

Less than a week before, according to this article.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/alex-salmond-confident-that-scotland-will-vote-for-independence-next-week-9728923.html

[ronaldo7]

Falsifying information is what it's aboot these days .

:aok:

[ronaldo7]

Less than a week before, according to this article.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/alex-salmond-confident-that-scotland-will-vote-for-independence-next-week-9728923.html

We lost the ref, and are over it. Some others don't seem to be able to it seems.:wink:

[Keith_M]

Every time I see the thread title, it translates in my head to...


"How many Scottish Nationalists...

....does it take to change a Light Bulb?"



Is it really just me?

:greengrin

[lucky]

Lucky, you might be surprised to learn that there are plenty of SNP Voters that would be happy if Labour in Scotland were to get their act together and started fighting for the things they traditionally represented. I've spoken to a few and read comments online to that effect.

Their two biggest problems have been taking the Scottish Vote for granted and being subject to whatever views currently prevail in the UK Labour Leadership.

I was really disgusted with the way that Scottish Labour would oppose the SNP on principal in Holyrood, rather than voting for what they felt was best for the people of Scotland. What's wrong with working together where you share the same views?

Scotland needs a strong Labour Party. The present situation of a near one party state is not good for democracy. I agree Scottish Labour has to be mature in the way it conducts itself in Holyrood. If they agree with a policy/law then vote for it. But at the same time the SNP have to look to a more consensus politics. There have been several motions which the SNP have deliberately added a line about independence which has stopped Labour voting for it. It could be argued that's clever politics or just political point scoring

[Keith_M]

Scotland needs a strong Labour Party. The present situation of a near one party state is not good for democracy. I agree Scottish Labour has to be mature in the way it conducts itself in Holyrood. If they agree with a policy/law then vote for it. But at the same time the SNP have to look to a more consensus politics. There have been several motions which the SNP have deliberately added a line about independence which has stopped Labour voting for it. It could be argued that's clever politics or just political point scoring


:aok:

[Keith_M]

Every time I see the thread title, it translates in my head to...

"How many Scottish Nationalists...

....does it take to change a Light Bulb?"

Is it really just me?


I've just been informed by a Labour supporting 'friend' that the answer to the question is....



Two. One to remove the Light Bulb and the other to hand it to the Tories.


:greengrin

[One Day Soon]

Wonderful.

The only weltery in recent times has been of the pink labour hue. Whilst you continue to focus your target on the "Nats", the tories reign in your numbers.

My 'targets' are the people running our country - the Tories running the UK for the last 4 years and the SNP running Scotland for the last 8.

And if you're looking for anyone to be standing tall with shoulders back with the Tories, look no further than your own back yard.

You really are dredging the bottom of the barrel talking about two faces of the Nats, given Labour's recent history, although it's not unsurprising.

Salmond pilloried Labour for campaigning with the Tories and Lib Dems to save the home Union - he's entitled to his opinion and he's either right or wrong about that. Now he's announced he will work with the Tories to save the European Union and somehow that's completely different. So it's ok for the SNP to work with the Tories when Salmond and Sturgeon say it is, but not for anyone else to do it. That is hypocritical. Deflect by criticising Labour or anyone all you like but you haven't explained away the shameless two-faced truth of what the SNP are doing.

The SNP will pay their own cash for the upcoming referendum and not have to rely on the Tories to supply it.

The SNP had to punt over £800,000 into the Yes campaign at the end of the Referendum and just after it because Yes didn't have enough money to pay its own bills. So its ok for the SNP to put money into the Yes campaign but its not ok for the Tories to put money into the Better Together campaign? That seems a bit hypocritical, no?

The SNP used vast amounts of cash from multi-millionaires like Brian Souter, from the lottery winners and a number of other very wealthy donors to pay for its campaigns. If you have the likes of Souter and Rupert Murdoch backing you as the SNP do then fair enough you use that backing as you see fit. Don't pretend the SNP is some kind of cash machine though, all the political parties are bought and paid for by their external financial backers including the SNP with its huge membership.

The problem with the SNP position here is that it looks like what it is, telling others to 'do as I say not as I do'.

[One Day Soon]

That certainly wasn't the impression that Alex Salmond and the rest of the "Yes" campaign was giving in the days before the vote.

They fully expected to win.


Salmond's reaction and the effect on him were shown by the pictures at the time.

The advice he was getting from their slick Canadian polling advisors/strategists said that if their numbers were as good as their own and the public opinion polls were telling them, then they would win. They believed this all the way into polling day which is why even when the first declarations were made they weren't accepting the likely outcome. His shock at the outcome probably accounts for the abrupt resignation and the petulance that went with it all.

The claims to be 'over' the result aren't really borne out by the reality. Moving the goalposts on a second Referendum from it being 'Once in a generation' to whenever a convenient pretext for another one can be found doesn't sound like either being over it or accepting the democratic will of the Scottish people.

[One Day Soon]

I've just been informed by a Labour supporting 'friend' that the answer to the question is....



Two. One to remove the Light Bulb and the other to hand it to the Tories.


:greengrin

It should be five really.

One to remove the lighbulb, one to stop Salmond from claiming its the world's biggest lightbulb, one to tweet a photo-op of Sturgeon with the light bulb, one to explain to Labour what a light bulb is and then one to hand the light bulb to the Tories.

[Moulin Yarns]

The final margin of 55%-45% was bigger than any margin that any of the opinion polls, leading up to polling day, were suggesting.

In fact, a couple of opinion polls were even predicting a "Yes" vote.

The "Yes" campaign did not expect to only get 45% of the vote.


Where did I mention opinion polls?

I am talking about actual swings, like the the overturning of a 2010 23,009 majority, in a Labour 'safe seat' that saw SNP gain a majority of 9974 in 2015. If my maths is right a 70% swing.

The referendum result only required a 5.3% swing to go the other way.

[Moulin Yarns]

The SNP had to punt over £800,000 into the Yes campaign at the end of the Referendum and just after it because Yes didn't have enough money to pay its own bills. So its ok for the SNP to put money into the Yes campaign but its not ok for the Tories to put money into the Better Together campaign? That seems a bit hypocritical, no?

The SNP used vast amounts of cash from multi-millionaires like Brian Souter, from the lottery winners and a number of other very wealthy donors to pay for its campaigns. If you have the likes of Souter and Rupert Murdoch backing you as the SNP do then fair enough you use that backing as you see fit. Don't pretend the SNP is some kind of cash machine though, all the political parties are bought and paid for by their external financial backers including the SNP with its huge membership.

The problem with the SNP position here is that it looks like what it is, telling others to 'do as I say not as I do'.


How much has Rupert Murdoch paid into the SNP? Serious question.

Always take Wiki with a pinch of salt, but....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch#Political_activities_in_United_King dom

Thatcher, Blair, Cameron, but no mention of any influence on the SNP.

[One Day Soon]

How much has Rupert Murdoch paid into the SNP? Serious question.

Always take Wiki with a pinch of salt, but....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch#Political_activities_in_United_King dom

Thatcher, Blair, Cameron, but no mention of any influence on the SNP.


I think Wiki is good for 'in the general territory' briefing but I'd never trust it on detail or fact.

I'm not aware that Murdoch has given any money to the SNP. Souter backs with money - or has done - and Murdoch backs with the support of the Sun etc.

[Moulin Yarns]

I think Wiki is good for 'in the general territory' briefing but I'd never trust it on detail or fact.

I'm not aware that Murdoch has given any money to the SNP. Souter backs with money - or has done - and Murdoch backs with the support of the Sun etc.


All the rest of your post was about cash support, so fair to assume you meant Murdoch had given financial support.

Murdoch backs a winner, rather than supports a party. You saw this with the different versions of the Sun at the GE, pro-SNP in Scotland, anti-SNP in the rest of the UK, so to claim he 'supports' the SNP is stretching it a bit.

[One Day Soon]

All the rest of your post was about cash support, so fair to assume you meant Murdoch had given financial support.

Murdoch backs a winner, rather than supports a party. You saw this with the different versions of the Sun at the GE, pro-SNP in Scotland, anti-SNP in the rest of the UK, so to claim he 'supports' the SNP is stretching it a bit.


No my post was about the hypocrisy of Salmond and the SNP now campaigning with the Tories to keep the UK in the European Union, having pilloried Labour for doing the same on the home Union.

[hibsbollah]

No my post was about the hypocrisy of Salmond and the SNP now campaigning with the Tories to keep the UK in the European Union, having pilloried Labour for doing the same on the home Union.

I noticed you havent been on in a while. Bearing in mind your distrust of the 'left' of the Labour Party (i think you have previously described yourself as a Blairite), I was wanting to ask 1. Who you will be supporting in the UK Labour leadership election 2. What policies you think Labour should focus on in the post election aftermath?

I would imagine that, since all the candidates (Kendall, Scouse boy particularly), Yvette Cooper less so) are taking the line that 'We Lost Because We Weren't Rightwing Enough, So Lets Talk About Aspiration All The Time', you are relatively happy that the left wing of the party is now purged from power?

[Moulin Yarns]

The SNP had to punt over £800,000 into the Yes campaign at the end of the Referendum and just after it because Yes didn't have enough money to pay its own bills. So its ok for the SNP to put money into the Yes campaign but its not ok for the Tories to put money into the Better Together campaign? That seems a bit hypocritical, no?

The SNP used vast amounts of cash from multi-millionaires like Brian Souter, from the lottery winners and a number of other very wealthy donors to pay for its campaigns. If you have the likes of Souter and Rupert Murdoch backing you as the SNP do then fair enough you use that backing as you see fit. Don't pretend the SNP is some kind of cash machine though, all the political parties are bought and paid for by their external financial backers including the SNP with its huge membership.

The problem with the SNP position here is that it looks like what it is, telling others to 'do as I say not as I do'.


No my post was about the hypocrisy of Salmond and the SNP now campaigning with the Tories to keep the UK in the European Union, having pilloried Labour for doing the same on the home Union.


Now you are confusing me, Nowhere in you post does it mention the SNP campaigning with the Tories :confused: it is all about funding of the SNP (apart from Murdoch who keeps his cash firmly in his pocket)

As I understand it, the SNP will not be part of any joint 'Better together' style EU referendum campaign. They will campaign on their own to keep the UK in the EU. What Labour and Tories do is up to them.

[One Day Soon]

I noticed you havent been on in a while. Bearing in mind your distrust of the 'left' of the Labour Party (i think you have previously described yourself as a Blairite), I was wanting to ask 1. Who you will be supporting in the UK Labour leadership election 2. What policies you think Labour should focus on in the post election aftermath?

I would imagine that, since all the candidates (Kendall, Scouse boy particularly), Yvette Cooper less so) are taking the line that 'We Lost Because We Weren't Rightwing Enough, So Lets Talk About Aspiration All The Time', you are relatively happy that the left wing of the party is now purged from power?


I've been on, just not posting much. Otherwise preoccupied.

1. I'm finding it hard to care much what the Labour Party does next at the moment.

2. I don't distrust the left of the Labour Party, I don't distrust the right of the Labour Party. I distrust all of it. It appears too stupid to save itself or the people who depend upon it.

3. The policies that Labour may choose to focus on in the election aftermath are irrelevant. Four years of a Tory majority government is what we are getting next.

4. I couldn't care less what line the leadership contenders are taking and I don't know who is running. Except that Ed Miliband appears to be standing again under the name of Andy Burnham.

5. If the left wing of the party is now purged from power it would appear to have done that to itself. It isn't obvious that anyone else has done it to them.

6. I'd suggest they choose a leader capable of creating a coalition of the centre and the left. So, whoever will deliver a party that is left enough to make a difference and centre enough to win.

7. I think Miliband was an unmitigated disaster. That election was lost the moment he won the leadership.

8. Mostly I have just had enough of the UK Miliband pretendy politics that people weren't buying and the Scottish Syriza politics that amounts to the square root of eff all except the product of perhaps the most superb spin machine in modern political history.


I know you're a fan of Balls and I'm sorry he lost. While I would never put him down as a leader I do think he brought some colour to politics.

What's your diagnosis and remedy?

And breathe....

[One Day Soon]

Now you are confusing me, Nowhere in you post does it mention the SNP campaigning with the Tories :confused: it is all about funding of the SNP (apart from Murdoch who keeps his cash firmly in his pocket)

As I understand it, the SNP will not be part of any joint 'Better together' style EU referendum campaign. They will campaign on their own to keep the UK in the EU. What Labour and Tories do is up to them.


Not trying to confuse.

It does mention SNP + Tory campaigning, in the two bold paragraphs above those you have quoted from the same post if you go back and look at it.

What every party does is up to themselves. However Salmond's hypocrisy is to decry Labour joining the Tories and Lib Dems to campaign for the home Union in one Referendum and then to announce that he will campaign with the Tories in the referendum on EU membership.

The organisation, the campaigning tactics, the funding and all the rest of that is just semantic pi5h in my view. Its either ok or not ok to campiagn with the Tories in referendums. The SNP are trying to have it both ways here.

[Moulin Yarns]

Not trying to confuse.

It does mention SNP + Tory campaigning, in the two bold paragraphs above those you have quoted from the same post if you go back and look at it.

What every party does is up to themselves. However Salmond's hypocrisy is to decry Labour joining the Tories and Lib Dems to campaign for the home Union in one Referendum and then to announce that he will campaign with the Tories in the referendum on EU membership.

The organisation, the campaigning tactics, the funding and all the rest of that is just semantic pi5h in my view. Its either ok or not ok to campiagn with the Tories in referendums. The SNP are trying to have it both ways here.

You talk about funding the YES and BT campaigns. absolutely nothing at all about the EU referendum.

http://www.hibs.net/images/hibsnet/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by One Day Soon http://www.hibs.net/images/hibsnet/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?p=4388039#post4388039)
The SNP had to punt over £800,000 into the Yes campaign at the end of the Referendum and just after it because Yes didn't have enough money to pay its own bills. So its ok for the SNP to put money into the Yes campaign but its not ok for the Tories to put money into the Better Together campaign? That seems a bit hypocritical, no?

The SNP used vast amounts of cash from multi-millionaires like Brian Souter, from the lottery winners and a number of other very wealthy donors to pay for its campaigns. If you have the likes of Souter and Rupert Murdoch backing you as the SNP do then fair enough you use that backing as you see fit. Don't pretend the SNP is some kind of cash machine though, all the political parties are bought and paid for by their external financial backers including the SNP with its huge membership.

The problem with the SNP position here is that it looks like what it is, telling others to 'do as I say not as I do'.

[One Day Soon]

You talk about funding the YES and BT campaigns. absolutely nothing at all about the EU referendum.

http://www.hibs.net/images/hibsnet/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by One Day Soon http://www.hibs.net/images/hibsnet/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?p=4388039#post4388039)
The SNP had to punt over £800,000 into the Yes campaign at the end of the Referendum and just after it because Yes didn't have enough money to pay its own bills. So its ok for the SNP to put money into the Yes campaign but its not ok for the Tories to put money into the Better Together campaign? That seems a bit hypocritical, no?

The SNP used vast amounts of cash from multi-millionaires like Brian Souter, from the lottery winners and a number of other very wealthy donors to pay for its campaigns. If you have the likes of Souter and Rupert Murdoch backing you as the SNP do then fair enough you use that backing as you see fit. Don't pretend the SNP is some kind of cash machine though, all the political parties are bought and paid for by their external financial backers including the SNP with its huge membership.

The problem with the SNP position here is that it looks like what it is, telling others to 'do as I say not as I do'.


Below is the full post, including the two paras I am referring to - underlined for clarity:

"Wonderful.

The only weltery in recent times has been of the pink labour hue. Whilst you continue to focus your target on the "Nats", the tories reign in your numbers.

My 'targets' are the people running our country - the Tories running the UK for the last 4 years and the SNP running Scotland for the last 8.

And if you're looking for anyone to be standing tall with shoulders back with the Tories, look no further than your own back yard.

You really are dredging the bottom of the barrel talking about two faces of the Nats, given Labour's recent history, although it's not unsurprising.

Salmond pilloried Labour for campaigning with the Tories and Lib Dems to save the home Union - he's entitled to his opinion and he's either right or wrong about that. Now he's announced he will work with the Tories to save the European Union and somehow that's completely different. So it's ok for the SNP to work with the Tories when Salmond and Sturgeon say it is, but not for anyone else to do it. That is hypocritical. Deflect by criticising Labour or anyone all you like but you haven't explained away the shameless two-faced truth of what the SNP are doing.


The SNP will pay their own cash for the upcoming referendum and not have to rely on the Tories to supply it.

The SNP had to punt over £800,000 into the Yes campaign at the end of the Referendum and just after it because Yes didn't have enough money to pay its own bills. So its ok for the SNP to put money into the Yes campaign but its not ok for the Tories to put money into the Better Together campaign? That seems a bit hypocritical, no?

The SNP used vast amounts of cash from multi-millionaires like Brian Souter, from the lottery winners and a number of other very wealthy donors to pay for its campaigns. If you have the likes of Souter and Rupert Murdoch backing you as the SNP do then fair enough you use that backing as you see fit. Don't pretend the SNP is some kind of cash machine though, all the political parties are bought and paid for by their external financial backers including the SNP with its huge membership.

The problem with the SNP position here is that it looks like what it is, telling others to 'do as I say not as I do'. "

[ronaldo7]

The SNP had to punt over £800,000 into the Yes campaign at the end of the Referendum and just after it because Yes didn't have enough money to pay its own bills. So its ok for the SNP to put money into the Yes campaign but its not ok for the Tories to put money into the Better Together campaign? That seems a bit hypocritical, no?

The SNP used vast amounts of cash from multi-millionaires like Brian Souter, from the lottery winners and a number of other very wealthy donors to pay for its campaigns. If you have the likes of Souter and Rupert Murdoch backing you as the SNP do then fair enough you use that backing as you see fit. Don't pretend the SNP is some kind of cash machine though, all the political parties are bought and paid for by their external financial backers including the SNP with its huge membership.

The problem with the SNP position here is that it looks like what it is, telling others to 'do as I say not as I do'.

The day the SNP stand on stalls all over the country with the people they're supposed to be fighting against is the day they'll die, just like Labour.

Whilst the SNP membership grows, and Labour's disintegrates, Big Len will have to dig deep to keep the right wing Labour party in the shadows.

[One Day Soon]

The day the SNP stand on stalls all over the country with the people they're supposed to be fighting against is the day they'll die, just like Labour.

Whilst the SNP membership grows, and Labour's disintegrates, Big Len will have to dig deep to keep the right wing Labour party in the shadows.


So its ok for the SNP to campaign with the Tories to keep the UK in the EU as long as they don't do street stalls with them? Laughable hypocrisy.

[Hibrandenburg]

So its ok for the SNP to campaign with the Tories to keep the UK in the EU as long as they don't do street stalls with them? Laughable hypocrisy.

You do realise there's a difference between going out on the campaign trail together with someone and campaigning for the same thing as someone because you agree with them? I don't think you'll see the SNP and Tories having a hug-in afterward.

[ronaldo7]

So its ok for the SNP to campaign with the Tories to keep the UK in the EU as long as they don't do street stalls with them? Laughable hypocrisy.

The SNP will be campaigning on their own, to keep Scotland in the Eu. I believe the Tories, Labour, Lib dems, and many more parties will be campaigning for a yes vote in the next Ref, I'm just not sure where Labour will be getting their money this time.:wink:

Maybe you can swallow standing alongside your supposed enemies, but we won't be, and all your spin re "Campaigning" doesn't wash. It's more see through than the Rangers defence.


Front page of tomorrow's National says it all really.:wink:
14955

14970

[hibsbollah]

I've been on, just not posting much. Otherwise preoccupied.

1. I'm finding it hard to care much what the Labour Party does next at the moment.

2. I don't distrust the left of the Labour Party, I don't distrust the right of the Labour Party. I distrust all of it. It appears too stupid to save itself or the people who depend upon it.

3. The policies that Labour may choose to focus on in the election aftermath are irrelevant. Four years of a Tory majority government is what we are getting next.

4. I couldn't care less what line the leadership contenders are taking and I don't know who is running. Except that Ed Miliband appears to be standing again under the name of Andy Burnham.

5. If the left wing of the party is now purged from power it would appear to have done that to itself. It isn't obvious that anyone else has done it to them.

6. I'd suggest they choose a leader capable of creating a coalition of the centre and the left. So, whoever will deliver a party that is left enough to make a difference and centre enough to win.

7. I think Miliband was an unmitigated disaster. That election was lost the moment he won the leadership.

8. Mostly I have just had enough of the UK Miliband pretendy politics that people weren't buying and the Scottish Syriza politics that amounts to the square root of eff all except the product of perhaps the most superb spin machine in modern political history.


I know you're a fan of Balls and I'm sorry he lost. While I would never put him down as a leader I do think he brought some colour to politics.

What's your diagnosis and remedy?

And breathe....

I'm not sure how much I care about The Labour Party anymore. Like a disloyal old girlfriend who has changed beyond recognition but I still kind of hold a flame for her despite her being a bit of a nightmare as she's aged.


Im interested in how the commonly accepted narrative as to why Labour lost so badly was the ludicrous analysis that Ed was somehow 'too Red' for Britain, when in fact the manifesto was bland, lily livered and lacking anything about wealth redistribution or creating a more balanced economy. The English were offered no left wing options on Election Day, Hence hundreds of thousands of traditional Labour voters stayed at home or went to UKIP. The SNP skillfully reinvented itself as anti austerity centre left and swept the board. That's not the only story of course, but it's one that hasn't been offered (except by Owen Jones in the Guardian, who is being demonized by the right as some kind of loony lefty, when in fact he's promoting old fashioned social democracy with a balanced economy. John smith would have approved. But these days, that's tantamount to Marxist Leninism).

these days, politics is so much about presentation. So you need a leader and a team who can deliver a message. No idea who he/she might be. I like Yvette. Ed B could make the tea and do the housework as First Lady. Whatever.. I don't care who does it, as long as they look good on TV. But policies to bring back a sense of real values could include;

1. Reconnect with your core vote.
2. Start with the 50% tax rate and mansion tax. Balance public spending cuts with progressive taxation.
3. Re nationalise the post office and part nationalise the railways along the Amtrak model.
4. Stimulate the low wage economy with a FDR style New Deal of public works.
5. Referendum on devolved English regional assemblies.
6. 4 year fully funded apprenticeship programmes following the German model.
7. Universal preschool provision.
8. Scrap Trident. It doesn't need to be a SNP only policy. It actually makes sense both strategically and fiscally.

Not exhaustive obviously. But it would be a start.

[judas]

So in essence you support repatriation of some powers but happy to leave the rest in the most unaccountable function that is the EU?

You seem convinced that Scotland representing itself at the EU table would transform the relationship and therefore it's OK for the EU as a whole to have significant influence over an iS...I seriously doubt that is the case but even if it was how do you square giving the EU control over immigration and all the countless other areas of its influence while insisting on separation from Westminster?

The logical extension is to remove ourselves from the UK and EU and use our new found sovereignty to negotiate our own deals, just look at how Greece has had to go through years of pointless grind at the behest of the EU as an example of just how much being a member can influence national decisions.

I get the fact you can support an iS and an iS in the EU, I've just not seen any reasonable rationale for that position ;-)

I agree with this.

I voted Yes, but I would rather Scotland did a Norway, Iceland etc.