Brexit - what will happen next

[SHODAN]

The public did not vote for hard Brexit. They voted for Brexit. A parlimentary debate will allow us to get a Brexit that isn't exactly what our reactionary hard-right Prime Mister wants.

[pontius pilate]

The public did not vote for hard Brexit. They voted for Brexit. A parlimentary debate will allow us to get a Brexit that isn't exactly what our reactionary hard-right Prime Mister wants.

Whats the difference? The public voted to leave the European union that's what the government is surely settig out to do. There is no such thing as a soft or hard brexit. We cannot and should not be allowed to cherry pick what we want to keep and discard the rest. The decision was made by the electorate to leave and that is that no amount of debating of posturing will change that.

[SHODAN]

Whats the difference? The public voted to leave the European union that's what the government is surely settig out to do. There is no such thing as a soft or hard brexit. We cannot and should not be allowed to cherry pick what we want to keep and discard the rest. The decision was made by the electorate to leave and that is that no amount of debating of posturing will change that.

What does leaving the European Union actually mean though? We can leave and still stay in the single market/freedom of movement area. The decision was made by the electorate to leave the EU, not the single market. These are things that can and will directly influence the livelihoods of people in this country and it's only fair that they are discussed.

[pontius pilate]

What does leaving the European Union actually mean though? We can leave and still stay in the single market/freedom of movement area. The decision was made by the electorate to leave the EU, not the single market. These are things that can and will directly influence the livelihoods of people in this country and it's only fair that they are discussed.

And that's the thing IMO people voted to leave mainly because of the single market/freedom of movement now correct me if I'm wrong in pretty sure it was made clear during the so called debates that leaving the e.u would impact the single market/freedom of movement. I don't see how people working and livin here paying taxes would be forced to leave and I've yet to see or hear anybody else state otherwise.

[SHODAN]

And that's the thing IMO people voted to leave mainly because of the single market/freedom of movement now correct me if I'm wrong in pretty sure it was made clear during the so called debates that leaving the e.u would impact the single market/freedom of movement. I don't see how people working and livin here paying taxes would be forced to leave and I've yet to see or hear anybody else state otherwise.

I understand your argument but the debates stressed it would impact it but wouldn't guarantee that it would be removed. That's what this debate is for. You can't make the assumption that people voted to leave to leave the single market/freedom of movement area - it wasn't on the question. People may not be forced to leave but a lot of people rely on one of either of these two things to maintain a standard of living here - skilled immigrants in the UK and expats abroad for one. They may not be asked to leave but a right wing government could certainly make it hard for them (denying access to the NHS etc).

I'm aware some would agree with this but it's not the kind of country I want to live in and I bet a number of "liberal Leavers" wouldn't want it either - the Prime Minister has a mandate for Brexit only, not to do whatever she wants with it.

[grunt]

And that's the thing IMO people voted to leave mainly because of the single market/freedom of movement ...I thought people voted to leave so that £350m a week would go to the NHS?

[pontius pilate]

I thought people voted to leave so that £350m a week would go to the NHS?

Who in their right mind believed that statement.


In fact don't bother I probably know the answer already

[CropleyWasGod]

Who in their right mind believed that statement.


In fact don't bother I probably know the answer already
I don't know the answer, but I'm guessing that most of the Leave voters believed it. Does that mean that they weren't in their right mind?



Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

And that's the thing IMO people voted to leave mainly because of the single market/freedom of movement now correct me if I'm wrong in pretty sure it was made clear during the so called debates that leaving the e.u would impact the single market/freedom of movement. I don't see how people working and livin here paying taxes would be forced to leave and I've yet to see or hear anybody else state otherwise.


Maybe not forced to leave, but made to feel unwelcome

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-37106914

[grunt]

Who in their right mind believed that statement.


In fact don't bother I probably know the answer alreadyDo you deny that this was a major part of the Leave propaganda? When the three main Leave campaigners stood on stage in the Brexit debates and repeated this phrase time after time, are you saying that those who believed it were misled?

[pontius pilate]

Do you deny that this was a major part of the Leave propaganda? When the three main Leave campaigners stood on stage in the Brexit debates and repeated this phrase time after time, are you saying that those who believed it were misled?


I'm not denying anything at all and yes they were misled. What I have learnt though is the decision may not suit everyone but being in a democracy means we do have to accept the message has quite clearly sent out to the powers that be. I honestly believe that if the threat of indy ref 2 wasn't there it would have been a larger number in Scotland voting to leave as well. Jonathon Pie runs out brexit nicely in his YouTube video and also trump winning. The guy might be a puss take but he hits the nail on the head with the two videos

[grunt]

I'm not denying anything at all and yes they were misled. What I have learnt though is the decision may not suit everyone but being in a democracy means we do have to accept the message has quite clearly sent out to the powers that be. We live in a parliamentary democracy. That's a somewhat different thing. We elect MPs to act on our behalf.

[pontius pilate]

We live in a parliamentary democracy. That's a somewhat different thing. We elect MPs to act on our behalf.

Actually it's because we have a monarch as a head of state unlike the US and France where the president is head of state both democracies elect the people to act on thier behalf so un fact are both democracies. Never worry we could be living in a autocratic society or indeed be ruled by a dictatorship or some zealous religious cult where we don't enjoy the freedoms we do. Fact of the matter is the people voted to leave the e.u full stop. The people knew what they were voting for and I find it patronising for others to think otherwise. People are not stupid yes some maybe voted through other reasons but like we have saw here and in the US the silent majority stay silent untill the vote. Jonathon Pie touches on this and trump really well on his YouTube videos. People stay silent because if they raise concerns they get called a xenophobia a racist a bigot a homphobe the list goes on. We wonder why things have turned the way they have that's why

[pontius pilate]

Strange thing the story of a European army was a fear story thought up by the leave side so said the remain players yet on the news tonight it is on the cards

[Moulin Yarns]

Strange thing the story of a European army was a fear story thought up by the leave side so said the remain players yet on the news tonight it is on the cards

Nowt on the BBC website. Where are you seeing it?

[RyeSloan]

Strange thing the story of a European army was a fear story thought up by the leave side so said the remain players yet on the news tonight it is on the cards

A EU army has been mooted for sometime so I'm unsure why anyone would call it a fear story.

The U.K. was always dead against it so I'm hardly surprised if the plan has been reinvigorated after Brexit.

Whether it's a good idea or not it's just another example of the direction the EU wants to go..more power to the centre.

[Hibrandenburg]

A EU army has been mooted for sometime so I'm unsure why anyone would call it a fear story.

The U.K. was always dead against it so I'm hardly surprised if the plan has been reinvigorated after Brexit.

Whether it's a good idea or not it's just another example of the direction the EU wants to go..more power to the centre.

With Trump blowing off about American allies having to pay their fair share for defence, it wouldn't surprise me that European countries are considering alternative ways of defending Europe.

[pontius pilate]

Nowt on the BBC website. Where are you seeing it?

Reported last night on bbc news at 10

[pontius pilate]

A EU army has been mooted for sometime so I'm unsure why anyone would call it a fear story.

The U.K. was always dead against it so I'm hardly surprised if the plan has been reinvigorated after Brexit.

Whether it's a good idea or not it's just another example of the direction the EU wants to go..more power to the centre.

Your quite right it has been mooted for some time. When we were based on Colchester between 96-2000 it was being mooted then. The point I was making is that due on the ref it was brought up and it was quickly dismissed as a fear story. I know that if britain had decided to remain we would have a vetoe anyway. It is being sounded out but the costs I reckon would be too much. Which then leads into what would Scotland have to do if it gained indy and wanted to remain part of the e.u

[Pretty Boy]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37983948

That's reassuring. I do love a well thought out plan.

[PeeJay]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37983948

That's reassuring. I do love a well thought out plan.

Then again, maybe they should just ask the "man-in-the-street" whose "voice" - having now been heard - surely knows what to do, unlike all them "elites" what are stumped for direction? :greengrin

[grunt]

Then again, maybe they should just ask the "man-in-the-street" whose "voice" - having now been heard - surely knows what to do, unlike all them "elites" what are stumped for direction? :greengrinYou'd get the same response as those in the BBCQT audience in Hartlepool, who shouted "just leave!".

[JimBHibees]

Then again, maybe they should just ask the "man-in-the-street" whose "voice" - having now been heard - surely knows what to do, unlike all them "elites" what are stumped for direction? :greengrin

Farage and Johnston should be forced to deal with it.

[Moulin Yarns]

Scottish Passports :wink:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brexit-scottish-passport-plan-suggested-to-holyrood-1-4287678

[steakbake]

Does Jackie Bailie know the difference between the EU and the single market? What happened to LD, Con and Lab pledge to keep scotland in the single market?

The yellows and blues voted against it and the reds abstained. Quite extraordinary oppositionalism.

[ronaldo7]

Does Jackie Bailie know the difference between the EU and the single market? What happened to LD, Con and Lab pledge to keep scotland in the single market?

The yellows and blues voted against it and the reds abstained. Quite extraordinary oppositionalism.


17637

I had hoped that Kezia would have held her position for a little while longer. This is what she said only a few weeks ago.

[Glory Lurker]

Labour's abstention today is depressing, but hardly surprising. They don't know what they stand for.

No surprise, of course, at the Tories - let's face it, most of the ones who campaigned for Remain probably didn't mind that much when they lost.

The Lib Dems? A pro-EU party, as they have claimed for decades. That'll be the same as they were a pro-PR party (but failed to get what they wanted on to the ballot paper when they were in power, let alone get what they wanted), pro-education (English tuition fees), pro federalist (fighting against the concept tooth and nail since IndyRef). They are the least trustworthy of the bunch. At least you can rely on Labour to be useless and the Tories to be selfish. Neither gives any suggestion that they'll be anything else. The Lib Dems somehow still con folk that they aren't just a bunch of Tories who can't quite bring themselves to have the courage of their convictions.

[Hibbyradge]

Does Jackie Bailie know the difference between the EU and the single market? What happened to LD, Con and Lab pledge to keep scotland in the single market?

The yellows and blues voted against it and the reds abstained. Quite extraordinary oppositionalism.

What have I missed?

I can't find anything like that.

[Hibbyradge]

One possible answer to my original question is "Nothing much".

Supreme court judge hints at legal hitch that could seriously delay Brexit process

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/supreme-court-judges-views-on-article-50-legislation-anger-leave-campaigners?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

[Peevemor]

One possible answer to my original question is "Nothing much".

Supreme court judge hints at legal hitch that could seriously delay Brexit process

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/supreme-court-judges-views-on-article-50-legislation-anger-leave-campaigners?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

So a supreme court judge sets out the issues to be decided, without expressing any personal opinions, and gets pelters for it? The world's full of dicks.

[One Day Soon]

What have I missed?

I can't find anything like that.


You missed a bucket of SNP faux-outrage that other parties didn't back their motion on Europe.

In other news the SNP are quite happy to take Scotland out of the UK single market with which Scotland does vastly more business than it does with the EU.

[ronaldo7]

What have I missed?

I can't find anything like that.

https://t.co/jH7d1A0Xpm

This just about covers it.

[Colr]

One possible answer to my original question is "Nothing much".

Supreme court judge hints at legal hitch that could seriously delay Brexit process

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/supreme-court-judges-views-on-article-50-legislation-anger-leave-campaigners?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Although I didn't vote leave, I really can't agree with the people trying to stop the negotiations. It's anti-democratic.

The leave campaign won and they now need to given the space and support to negotiate a deal.

If its a good deal, They'll have proved themselves and I will be happy for them to go ahead and leave. If its a bad deal and they **** up the negotiations or can't deliver what they said they could, at that point, we say, stop.

[grunt]

It's anti-democratic.We live in a parliamentary democracy. The referendum was a daft ill-conceived idea, the campaign was fought using lies on both sides, the decision was made on insufficient evidence and the majority was not, in my view, large enough to decide a major strategic constitutional change of direction. Look at yesterday's Rangers AGM; in order to change their rules about share ownership, they require a 75% majority. There's no way that a major constitutional change such as ceasing membership of the EU should have been allowed to be subject to a simple majority. I support any and all attempts to obstruct this stupid decision, which will (again, IMO) negatively impact the lives of our children and their children.

There. I've said it. Sorry if I've upset anyone.


If its a good deal, They'll have proved themselves and I will be happy for them to go ahead and leave. If its a bad deal and they **** up the negotiations or can't deliver what they said they could, at that point, we say, stop.The ability of our elected Parliament to say "stop" is what the Supreme Court case is all about.

[Hibby Bairn]

If the referendum was held again tomorrow, on the back of the heavy dose of realism from the past 6 months, I would think 70% would vote remain.

[PeeJay]

We live in a parliamentary democracy. The referendum was a daft ill-conceived idea, the campaign was fought using lies on both sides, the decision was made on insufficient evidence and the majority was not, in my view, large enough to decide a major strategic constitutional change of direction. Look at yesterday's Rangers AGM; in order to change their rules about share ownership, they require a 75% majority. There's no way that a major constitutional change such as ceasing membership of the EU should have been allowed to be subject to a simple majority. I support any and all attempts to obstruct this stupid decision, which will (again, IMO) negatively impact the lives of our children and their children.

There. I've said it. Sorry if I've upset anyone.

The ability of our elected Parliament to say "stop" is what the Supreme Court case is all about.

Good post - think you are spot on with this and I'm astonished that it is hardly mentioned anywhere on here or elswhere. PIty you had to back it up with mention of "them" though :greengrin

[#FromTheCapital]

We live in a parliamentary democracy. The referendum was a daft ill-conceived idea, the campaign was fought using lies on both sides, the decision was made on insufficient evidence and the majority was not, in my view, large enough to decide a major strategic constitutional change of direction. Look at yesterday's Rangers AGM; in order to change their rules about share ownership, they require a 75% majority. There's no way that a major constitutional change such as ceasing membership of the EU should have been allowed to be subject to a simple majority. I support any and all attempts to obstruct this stupid decision, which will (again, IMO) negatively impact the lives of our children and their children

I wonder how many on here would apply the same logic to the Scottish independence debate? 😁

[Hibrandenburg]

http://anewdomain.net/2015/08/24/why-are-americans-so-stupid-and-proud-of-it-ted-rall-analysis/

Ok,, this article is about the US election but it's a decent read and many of the points regarding the electorate are relevant here.

[Colr]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/26/boost-uk-us-trade-deal-emerges-paul-ryan-backs-new-agreement/

Interesting. Can see Farage trying to push for this and get credit.

It might be a big convincer.

[grunt]

Good post - think you are spot on with this and I'm astonished that it is hardly mentioned anywhere on here or elswhere. PIty you had to back it up with mention of "them" though :greengrinThank you. Sorry about my lapse. It won't happen again.

[beensaidbefore]

If the referendum was held again tomorrow, on the back of the heavy dose of realism from the past 6 months, I would think 70% would vote remain.

Due to the lack of information available On What it means for us. We are going to leave, as thats what we voted for. Same as the indeoendence vote, within 6 months of that vote the resukt would have different, but we are stuck with what we voted for. If everyone pulls together we coukd do it no problem, but we both know there is far too much point scorinG for that to happen.

[beensaidbefore]

We live in a parliamentary democracy. The referendum was a daft ill-conceived idea, the campaign was fought using lies on both sides, the decision was made on insufficient evidence and the majority was not, in my view, large enough to decide a major strategic constitutional change of direction. Look at yesterday's Rangers AGM; in order to change their rules about share ownership, they require a 75% majority. There's no way that a major constitutional change such as ceasing membership of the EU should have been allowed to be subject to a simple majority. I support any and all attempts to obstruct this stupid decision, which will (again, IMO) negatively impact the lives of our children and their children.

There. I've said it. Sorry if I've upset anyone.

The ability of our elected Parliament to say "stop" is what the Supreme Court case is all about.


What are the fears for your children/next generation?

[grunt]

What are the fears for your children/next generation?

Well in the first instance, it will be more difficult to move around Europe. So if my kids wanted to take time off and travel, they may well need visas, border controls at every stage. So it may well just be logistically more difficult to get around Europe than it is now and has been in the recent past. Sterling is of course worth 80% of its value prior to the referendum. So travel is also more expensive.

Going forward I think the UK will be poorer because of the added tariffs and bureaucracy involved in exporting goods to Europe. So this latter point - the next generation issue - is that I think we'll be poorer than we would otherwise have been.

We've shot ourselves. Not in the foot, but in the head. The phrase I used on 24 June was "monumentally stupid". And I've seen nothing to date to amend that viewpoint.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

Well in the first instance, it will be more difficult to move around Europe. So if my kids wanted to take time off and travel, they may well need visas, border controls at every stage. So it may well just be logistically more difficult to get around Europe than it is now and has been in the recent past. Sterling is of course worth 80% of its value prior to the referendum. So travel is also more expensive.

Going forward I think the UK will be poorer because of the added tariffs and bureaucracy involved in exporting goods to Europe. So this latter point - the next generation issue - is that I think we'll be poorer than we would otherwise have been.

We've shot ourselves. Not in the foot, but in the head. The phrase I used on 24 June was "monumentally stupid". And I've seen nothing to date to amend that viewpoint.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I bet you point but the economic path of a country really shouldn't be based on how easy your kids can travel around Europe.

A bit of a crude analysis I grant you but as you say sterling is 80% of the value so whack on 20% tariffs and our exports are still cheaper than they were before!

[Hibbyradge]

I bet you point but the economic path of a country really shouldn't be based on how easy your kids can travel around Europe.

A bit of a crude analysis I grant you but as you say sterling is 80% of the value so whack on 20% tariffs and our exports are still cheaper than they were before!

That must be super for foreigners and a few exporters, but it's the only benefit I can see. It's a lot less good for everyone else in this country who will see prices rise domestically and abroad.

Have there been any positive economic forecasts or analysis at all or are we still fed up of experts?

[ronaldo7]

The First Minister gets a very warm welcome in Ireland as all parties speak up for Scottish Independence.:aok:

https://t.co/vfxBTlzqMl

Irish Foreign Minister pledges to help Scotland in Brexit talks.

https://t.co/3d3uXWAoVW

[beensaidbefore]

Well in the first instance, it will be more difficult to move around Europe. So if my kids wanted to take time off and travel, they may well need visas, border controls at every stage. So it may well just be logistically more difficult to get around Europe than it is now and has been in the recent past. Sterling is of course worth 80% of its value prior to the referendum. So travel is also more expensive.

Going forward I think the UK will be poorer because of the added tariffs and bureaucracy involved in exporting goods to Europe. So this latter point - the next generation issue - is that I think we'll be poorer than we would otherwise have been.

We've shot ourselves. Not in the foot, but in the head. The phrase I used on 24 June was "monumentally stupid". And I've seen nothing to date to amend that viewpoint.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Those are pretty fair concerns. I hope we can dust ourselves down and work together to avoid what you have described. Having lived within a foreign country and applied to live on a more permanent basis I can see the pros and cons of us leaving. Ultimately, greater control over our borders should give us greater control over who comes and goes. Being able to pick and choose to suit our changing need should help alleviate some of the financial burden I hope.

[cabbageandribs1875]

quite an honour for oor nicola to address the senate, the senate were also honoured :agree:

[ronaldo7]

They've not got a clue.

https://t.co/7IC8sXiS5o

[ronaldo7]

Scotlands place in Europe.

The link starts about 16 minutes in.:greengrin

https://t.co/P1fWvJoFeV

[ronaldo7]

It's good to see the progressive voices coming forward in support of the paper released by the Scottish Government yesterday.

Universities Scotland

https://t.co/wcBX1CblLT

STUC

https://t.co/hdNWbiLtCN

NUS Scotland

https://t.co/SzDScABSlL

BMA Scotland

https://t.co/serMJdWK8n

[Moulin Yarns]

It's good to see the progressive voices coming forward in support of the paper released by the Scottish Government yesterday.

Universities Scotland

https://t.co/wcBX1CblLT

Not far enough for some though

https://greens.scot/news/greens-react-to-european-options-paper

[ronaldo7]

Not far enough for some though

https://greens.scot/news/greens-react-to-european-options-paper

It's a compromise position, and if...IF rejected by the UK gov out of hand, it's off to Indref2 we go.

It's also nice to see Malcolm Chisolm come out in support of the paper.:greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

It's good to see the progressive voices coming forward in support of the paper released by the Scottish Government yesterday.

Universities Scotland

https://t.co/wcBX1CblLT

STUC

https://t.co/hdNWbiLtCN

NUS Scotland

https://t.co/SzDScABSlL

BMA Scotland

https://t.co/serMJdWK8n


Ive not read it, so dont know whats in it.

But seriously, organised political students and two trade unions, in what way is that progressive?

[stoneyburn hibs]

Ive not read it, so dont know whats in it.

But seriously, organised political students and two trade unions, in what way is that progressive?

The only UK Brexit plan, I'd say it's progressive.

[steakbake]

It's a compromise position, and if...IF rejected by the UK gov out of hand, it's off to Indref2 we go.

It's also nice to see Malcolm Chisolm come out in support of the paper.:greengrin

Malcolm Chisholm is a good guy. Thing is that he's a very small minority within Labour. Even if it was the best plan in the world, the opposition would shoot it down.

They'd gladly see us out of Europe or any associated agreements for the sake of oppositionalism. If the SNP are for it, they are against it. If the SNP are against it, they are for it. It's the pattern. Labour would far quicker side with the Tories than agree with any principle they might share with the SNP.

Its an almost Pavlovian response. People moan about divided societies and divisive politicians. How about the ones that simply can't put differences aside? Or the ones that might agree with a proposition but cannot bring themselves to support it if their opposition are the ones who suggest it?

[Bristolhibby]

Malcolm Chisholm is a good guy. Thing is that he's a very small minority within Labour. Even if it was the best plan in the world, the opposition would shoot it down.

They'd gladly see us out of Europe or any associated agreements for the sake of oppositionalism. If the SNP are for it, they are against it. If the SNP are against it, they are for it. It's the pattern. Labour would far quicker side with the Tories than agree with any principle they might share with the SNP.

Its an almost Pavlovian response. People moan about divided societies and divisive politicians. How about the ones that simply can't put differences aside? Or the ones that might agree with a proposition but cannot bring themselves to support it if their opposition are the ones who suggest it?

The SNP should campaign on an anti Independence ticket, just for ****s and giggles. That would really *** with Labour.

J

[SunshineOnLeith]

Ive not read it, so dont know whats in it.

But seriously, organised political students and two trade unions, in what way is that progressive?

Universities Scotland is neither a students' group, nor a trade union.

[ronaldo7]

Universities Scotland is neither a students' group, nor a trade union.

I was going to link many more who've liked the plan, but if he can't read 4, it's not worth it.

I wonder how Teresa is getting on with her plan.:aok:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Universities Scotland is neither a students' group, nor a trade union.

Yeah, true.

But their members do rely on the government for most of their funding.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I was going to link many more who've liked the plan, but if he can't read 4, it's not worth it.

I wonder how Teresa is getting on with her plan.:aok:

I think its to the SGs credit that they have come out with a plan, but it is really not likely to ever happen.

It may be possible technically, but practically it is nigh on impossible.

And i believe the uk govt will treat it with platitides piblically but not give it a second glance.

If that leads to the SG calling a 2nd ref on indy, so be it - but there are lots of hurdles to that happening, never mind it being won. I really dont think the SG want a sdcond ref, and thr UK govt know that.

All just my take on it though. And im not saying one is right and one is wrong per se.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I was going to link many more who've liked the plan, but if he can't read 4, it's not worth it.

I wonder how Teresa is getting on with her plan.:aok:

Also i heard that Spain have already waved their veto around with regards 'the plan'.

Also i meant i hadnt read the SG report, not the links you posted, sorry if i sounded dismissive that was not intentional.

[SunshineOnLeith]

7.43pm: The SG report may be possible technically, but practically it is nigh on impossible.

7.45pm: I haven't read the SG report.

Brilliant.

[Moulin Yarns]

Yeah, true.

But their members do rely on the government for most of their funding.

So do pensioners, are you going to say they are a political organisation? :greengrin

[steakbake]

Yeah, true.

But their members do rely on the government for most of their funding.

Not so. Government funding makes up part of their budget, but international research funding, international student fees and direct income from spin off companies and products is a sizeable if not the majority.

Unis were generally neutral in the indyref but weren't in this one: millions and millions of pounds in international research and collaboration money was at stake.

[#FromTheCapital]

7.43pm: The SG report may be possible technically, but practically it is nigh on impossible.

7.45pm: I haven't read the SG report.

Brilliant.

You really don't need to read the entire report to come to that conclusion.

[ronaldo7]

Also i heard that Spain have already waved their veto around with regards 'the plan'.

Also i meant i hadnt read the SG report, not the links you posted, sorry if i sounded dismissive that was not intentional.

No probs.

Take a look at this link from Lesley Riddoch, you may see yourself in here somewhere.:wink:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/lesley-riddoch-let-faroes-be-our-inspiration-1-4325634

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

7.43pm: The SG report may be possible technically, but practically it is nigh on impossible.

7.45pm: I haven't read the SG report.

Brilliant.

I do know whats in it, and i also know a fair bit about sone of the options that have been explored.

[ronaldo7]

What's not to like?

https://t.co/S8yb6ffBsZ

[Just Alf]

What's not to like?

https://t.co/S8yb6ffBsZ
Looks like it works on a number of levels to be fair.

(Holding my hands up tho, I'm biased)



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Looks like it works on a number of levels to be fair.

(Holding my hands up tho, I'm biased)



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk


Which would mean it would appeal to a broad spectrum of voters right.:wink:

[Just Alf]

Which would mean it would appeal to a broad spectrum of voters right.:wink:

You would think so :agree:

[Colr]

You would think so :agree:

Will we be able to have badger sporrans again or badger shaving brushes?

[Moulin Yarns]

Will we be able to have badger sporrans again or badger shaving brushes?

No no and thrice NO.

[Colr]

No no and thrice NO.

Sassanach jessie!!!

[ronaldo7]

Former No campaigner will move to Yes when the time comes.:greengrin

https://t.co/4yvAXlhGl7

[RyeSloan]

Former No campaigner will move to Yes when the time comes.:greengrin

https://t.co/4yvAXlhGl7

That's some sensationalist rant if ever I have read one!

Not to worry though he's only going to support the last redoubt once a pre agreement from the EU (that an EU over due reform of course) and after the tricky questions of the reality of oil prices and a currency have been 'revisited' [emoji23]

[Hibrandenburg]

UK ambassador to the EU steps down because he doesn't want to have to handle the mess.

[ronaldo7]

UK ambassador to the EU steps down because he doesn't want to have to handle the mess.

Resignation letter to staff.

Dear All,
Happy New Year! I hope that you have all had/are still having, a great break, and that you will come back refreshed and ready for an exciting year ahead.
I am writing to you all on the first day back to tell you that I am today resigning as Permanent Representative.
As most of you will know, I started here in November 2013. My four-year tour is therefore due to end in October – although in practice if we had been doing the Presidency my time here would have been extended by a few months. As we look ahead to the likely timetable for the next few years, and with the invocation of Article 50 coming up shortly, it is obvious that it will be best if the top team in situ at the time that Article 50 is invoked remains there till the end of the process and can also see through the negotiations for any new deal between the UK and the EU27.
It would obviously make no sense for my role to change hands later this year.
I have therefore decided to step down now, having done everything that I could in the last 6 months to contribute my experience, expertise and address book to get the new team at political and official level under way. This will permit a new appointee to be in place by the time Article 50 is invoked.
Importantly, it will also enable that person to play a role in the appointment of Shan’s replacement as DPR. I know from experience – both my own hugely positive experience of working in partnership with Shan, and from seeing past, less happy, examples – how imperative it is that the PR and DPR operate as a team, if UKREP is to function as well as I believe it has done over the last few years.
I want to put on record how grateful I am to Shan for the great working relationship we have had. She will be hugely missed in UKREP, and by many others here in Brussels, but she will be a tremendous asset to the Welsh Government.
From my soundings before Christmas, I am optimistic that there will be a very good field of candidates for the DPR role. But it is right these two roles now get considered and filled alongside each other, and for my successor to play the leading role in making the DPR appointment. I shall therefore stand aside from the process at this point.
I know that this news will add, temporarily, to the uncertainty that I know, from our many discussions in the autumn, you are all feeling about the role of UKREP in the coming months and years of negotiations over “Brexit.” I am sorry about that, but I hope that it will help produce earlier and greater clarity on the role that UKREP should play.
My own view remains as it has always been. We do not yet know what the Government will set as negotiating objectives for the UK’s relationship with the EU after exit. There is much we will not know until later this year about the political shape of the EU itself, and who the political protagonists in any negotiation with the UK will be.
But in any negotiation which addresses the new relationship, the technical expertise, the detailed knowledge of positions on the other side of the table – and the reasons for them, and the divisions amongst them – and the negotiating experience and savvy that the people in this building bring, make it essential for all parts of UKREP to be centrally involved in the negotiations if the UK is to achieve the best possible outcomes.
Serious multilateral negotiating experience is in short supply in Whitehall, and that is not the case in the Commission or in the Council. The Government will only achieve the best for the country if it harnesses the best experience we have – a large proportion of which is concentrated in UKREP – and negotiates resolutely. Senior Ministers, who will decide on our positions, issue by issue, also need from you detailed, unvarnished – even where this is uncomfortable - and nuanced understanding of the views, interests and incentives of the other 27.
The structure of the UK’s negotiating team and the allocation of roles and responsibilities to support that team, needs rapid resolution. The working methods which enable the team in London and Brussels to function seamlessly need also to be strengthened.
The great strength of the UK system – at least as it has been perceived by all others in the EU – has always been its unique combination of policy depth, expertise and coherence, message co-ordination and discipline, and the ability to negotiate with skill and determination. UKREP has always been key to all of that. We shall need it more than ever in the years ahead.
As I have argued consistently at every level since June, many opportunities for the UK in the future will derive from the mere fact of having left and being free to take a different path. But others will depend entirely on the precise shape of deals we can negotiate in the years ahead. Contrary to the beliefs of some, free trade does not just happen when it is not thwarted by authorities: increasing market access to other markets and consumer choice in our own, depends on the deals, multilateral, plurilateral and bilateral that we strike, and the terms that we agree. I shall advise my successor to continue to make these points.
Meanwhile, I would urge you all to stick with it, to keep on working at intensifying your links with opposite numbers in DEXEU and line Ministries and to keep on contributing your expertise to the policy-making process as negotiating objectives get drawn up. The famed UKREP combination of immense creativity with realism ground in negotiating experience, is needed more than ever right now.
On a personal level, leaving UKREP will be a tremendous wrench. I have had the great good fortune, and the immense privilege, in my civil service career, to have held some really interesting and challenging roles: to have served 4 successive UK Prime Ministers very closely; to have been EU, G20 and G8 Sherpa; to have chaired a G8 Presidency and to have taken part in some of the most fraught, and fascinating, EU negotiations of the last 25 years – in areas from tax, to the MFF to the renegotiation.
Of all of these posts, I have enjoyed being the Permanent Representative more than any other I have ever held. That is, overwhelmingly, because of all of you and what you all make UKREP: a supremely professional place, with a fantastic co-operative culture, which brings together talented people whether locally employed or UK-based and uniquely brings together people from the home civil service with those from the Foreign Office. UKREP sets itself demanding standards, but people also take the time to support each other which also helps make it an amazingly fun and stimulating place to work. I am grateful for everything you have all done over the last few years to make this such a fantastic operation.
For my part, I hope that in my day-to-day dealings with you I have demonstrated the values which I have always espoused as a public servant. I hope you will continue to challenge ill-founded arguments and muddled thinking and that you will never be afraid to speak the truth to those in power. I hope that you will support each other in those difficult moments where you have to deliver messages that are disagreeable to those who need to hear them. I hope that you will continue to be interested in the views of others, even where you disagree with them, and in understanding why others act and think in the way that they do. I hope that you will always provide the best advice and counsel you can to the politicians that our people have elected, and be proud of the essential role we play in the service of a great democracy.

The bit in bold is interesting. I wonder if anyone will listen though.

[Mr Grieves]

Can any Labour supporters tell me Scottish Labour's current position on brexit?

I read the 'Act of Union' press release, were they mention the Scottish tories are pushing for hard brexit, and the SNP are hoping for a hard brexit, but they've not made their position clear.

[Hibrandenburg]

Resignation letter to staff.

Dear All,
Happy New Year! I hope that you have all had/are still having, a great break, and that you will come back refreshed and ready for an exciting year ahead.
I am writing to you all on the first day back to tell you that I am today resigning as Permanent Representative.
As most of you will know, I started here in November 2013. My four-year tour is therefore due to end in October – although in practice if we had been doing the Presidency my time here would have been extended by a few months. As we look ahead to the likely timetable for the next few years, and with the invocation of Article 50 coming up shortly, it is obvious that it will be best if the top team in situ at the time that Article 50 is invoked remains there till the end of the process and can also see through the negotiations for any new deal between the UK and the EU27.
It would obviously make no sense for my role to change hands later this year.
I have therefore decided to step down now, having done everything that I could in the last 6 months to contribute my experience, expertise and address book to get the new team at political and official level under way. This will permit a new appointee to be in place by the time Article 50 is invoked.
Importantly, it will also enable that person to play a role in the appointment of Shan’s replacement as DPR. I know from experience – both my own hugely positive experience of working in partnership with Shan, and from seeing past, less happy, examples – how imperative it is that the PR and DPR operate as a team, if UKREP is to function as well as I believe it has done over the last few years.
I want to put on record how grateful I am to Shan for the great working relationship we have had. She will be hugely missed in UKREP, and by many others here in Brussels, but she will be a tremendous asset to the Welsh Government.
From my soundings before Christmas, I am optimistic that there will be a very good field of candidates for the DPR role. But it is right these two roles now get considered and filled alongside each other, and for my successor to play the leading role in making the DPR appointment. I shall therefore stand aside from the process at this point.
I know that this news will add, temporarily, to the uncertainty that I know, from our many discussions in the autumn, you are all feeling about the role of UKREP in the coming months and years of negotiations over “Brexit.” I am sorry about that, but I hope that it will help produce earlier and greater clarity on the role that UKREP should play.
My own view remains as it has always been. We do not yet know what the Government will set as negotiating objectives for the UK’s relationship with the EU after exit. There is much we will not know until later this year about the political shape of the EU itself, and who the political protagonists in any negotiation with the UK will be.
But in any negotiation which addresses the new relationship, the technical expertise, the detailed knowledge of positions on the other side of the table – and the reasons for them, and the divisions amongst them – and the negotiating experience and savvy that the people in this building bring, make it essential for all parts of UKREP to be centrally involved in the negotiations if the UK is to achieve the best possible outcomes.
Serious multilateral negotiating experience is in short supply in Whitehall, and that is not the case in the Commission or in the Council. The Government will only achieve the best for the country if it harnesses the best experience we have – a large proportion of which is concentrated in UKREP – and negotiates resolutely. Senior Ministers, who will decide on our positions, issue by issue, also need from you detailed, unvarnished – even where this is uncomfortable - and nuanced understanding of the views, interests and incentives of the other 27.
The structure of the UK’s negotiating team and the allocation of roles and responsibilities to support that team, needs rapid resolution. The working methods which enable the team in London and Brussels to function seamlessly need also to be strengthened.
The great strength of the UK system – at least as it has been perceived by all others in the EU – has always been its unique combination of policy depth, expertise and coherence, message co-ordination and discipline, and the ability to negotiate with skill and determination. UKREP has always been key to all of that. We shall need it more than ever in the years ahead.
As I have argued consistently at every level since June, many opportunities for the UK in the future will derive from the mere fact of having left and being free to take a different path. But others will depend entirely on the precise shape of deals we can negotiate in the years ahead. Contrary to the beliefs of some, free trade does not just happen when it is not thwarted by authorities: increasing market access to other markets and consumer choice in our own, depends on the deals, multilateral, plurilateral and bilateral that we strike, and the terms that we agree. I shall advise my successor to continue to make these points.
Meanwhile, I would urge you all to stick with it, to keep on working at intensifying your links with opposite numbers in DEXEU and line Ministries and to keep on contributing your expertise to the policy-making process as negotiating objectives get drawn up. The famed UKREP combination of immense creativity with realism ground in negotiating experience, is needed more than ever right now.
On a personal level, leaving UKREP will be a tremendous wrench. I have had the great good fortune, and the immense privilege, in my civil service career, to have held some really interesting and challenging roles: to have served 4 successive UK Prime Ministers very closely; to have been EU, G20 and G8 Sherpa; to have chaired a G8 Presidency and to have taken part in some of the most fraught, and fascinating, EU negotiations of the last 25 years – in areas from tax, to the MFF to the renegotiation.
Of all of these posts, I have enjoyed being the Permanent Representative more than any other I have ever held. That is, overwhelmingly, because of all of you and what you all make UKREP: a supremely professional place, with a fantastic co-operative culture, which brings together talented people whether locally employed or UK-based and uniquely brings together people from the home civil service with those from the Foreign Office. UKREP sets itself demanding standards, but people also take the time to support each other which also helps make it an amazingly fun and stimulating place to work. I am grateful for everything you have all done over the last few years to make this such a fantastic operation.
For my part, I hope that in my day-to-day dealings with you I have demonstrated the values which I have always espoused as a public servant. I hope you will continue to challenge ill-founded arguments and muddled thinking and that you will never be afraid to speak the truth to those in power. I hope that you will support each other in those difficult moments where you have to deliver messages that are disagreeable to those who need to hear them. I hope that you will continue to be interested in the views of others, even where you disagree with them, and in understanding why others act and think in the way that they do. I hope that you will always provide the best advice and counsel you can to the politicians that our people have elected, and be proud of the essential role we play in the service of a great democracy.

The bit in bold is interesting. I wonder if anyone will listen though.

.

[ronaldo7]

Theresa May is continuing to push the £ lower, or is it the big bad media? Every time she decides to speak the costs of my holidays goes up.

https://t.co/ROa6iYVUWw

[Colr]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/381753.stm

I guess duty free might be back. Good news for chain smokers

[Mr Grieves]

https://www.welt.de/english-news/article161182946/Philip-Hammond-issues-threat-to-EU-partners.html

Magic. I'll be happy to work longer hours for lower pay, less employment protection and fewer holidays - as long as we keep those damn immigrants out of the country! :rolleyes:

[Colr]

https://www.welt.de/english-news/article161182946/Philip-Hammond-issues-threat-to-EU-partners.html

Magic. I'll be happy to work longer hours for lower pay, less employment protection and fewer holidays - as long as we keep those damn immigrants out of the country! :rolleyes:

Have a read of Brittania Unchained if you want to see what the Tories are about on this. Priti Patel want to see workers conditions in the U.K. Match those in India so we can compete!

And against this Labour cannot muster a position. It beggars belief.

[Pretty Boy]

From the excerpts from Mays speech that have made the press this morning I think the answer to 'what will happen next?' is 'no one has a ****ing scooby including the government.'

[Moulin Yarns]

From the excerpts from Mays speech that have made the press this morning I think the answer to 'what will happen next?' is 'no one has a ****ing scooby including the government.'

All or nothing!!


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-38635035

[RyeSloan]

https://www.welt.de/english-news/article161182946/Philip-Hammond-issues-threat-to-EU-partners.html

Magic. I'll be happy to work longer hours for lower pay, less employment protection and fewer holidays - as long as we keep those damn immigrants out of the country! :rolleyes:

Where in the interview does he say that?

[Betty Boop]

We will no longer be in the single market or customs union.

[Lendo]

https://www.welt.de/english-news/article161182946/Philip-Hammond-issues-threat-to-EU-partners.html

Magic. I'll be happy to work longer hours for lower pay, less employment protection and fewer holidays - as long as we keep those damn immigrants out of the country! :rolleyes:

this

[Mr Grieves]

Where in the interview does he say that?

It's an opinion based on what he has said.

Threats of moving from a european style economy and doing anything to stay competitive means tax cuts for big business and deregulation.I really hope I'm wrong.

[GlesgaeHibby]

The speech today surely means Scotland is headed for independence?

When faced with the choice of becoming an independent outward looking nation, or sticking with the UK and endless Tory rule as Labour are a total basket case just now, who on earth would think the status quo is the better option?

[steakbake]

The speech today surely means Scotland is headed for independence?

When faced with the choice of becoming an independent outward looking nation, or sticking with the UK and endless Tory rule as Labour are a total basket case just now, who on earth would think the status quo is the better option?

There are many on both sides who would vote for their preference, come what may.

I am not sure how much it will change people's views - much of that won't be known till later on.

[AndyM_1875]

I found that speech deeply worrying.

May is playing a risky strategy. The EU have no need to even listen to her after A50.
Any one of the 27 countries plus the various devolved regions of member states can kill any deal with post Brexit UK.
Further to that the Brexit vote was certainly not overwhelming and whilst she has the right to leave the EU there was no mandate to leave either the EEA or EFTA. If that was to be the destination then it should have been defined or on the ballot paper. Her threat of making the UK a tax haven is ludicrous.

A second Scottish Independence referendum is now a certainty in 2018.

[SHODAN]

I was more than happy (despite voting Yes) to settle the independence debate for a generation after the 2014 vote, but the increasing steps we're taking toward the Tory wet dream of a tax haven has done it for me. Scotland really needs a vote on whether or not we want this or not.

[RyeSloan]

It's an opinion based on what he has said.

Threats of moving from a european style economy and doing anything to stay competitive means tax cuts for big business and deregulation.I really hope I'm wrong.

Cool so he didn't say anything of the sort and you have just put forward your opinion of what he said might mean. I think we can safely say that it could therefore be interpreted completely differently by someone who thinks European style working practices and tax regimes of somewhere like France is not a model that you would wish on anybody..

[RyeSloan]

I found that speech deeply worrying.

May is playing a risky strategy. The EU have no need to even listen to her after A50.
Any one of the 27 countries plus the various devolved regions of member states can kill any deal with post Brexit UK.
Further to that the Brexit vote was certainly not overwhelming and whilst she has the right to leave the EU there was no mandate to leave either the EEA or EFTA. If that was to be the destination then it should have been defined or on the ballot paper. Her threat of making the UK a tax haven is ludicrous.

A second Scottish Independence referendum is now a certainty in 2018.

I'm pretty sure most people didn't know the finer details of the EEA or EFTA and voted leave with the intention of a clean break.

I agree though that the EU is incapable of agreeing a 'deal' with the UK...it's pretty incapable at the best of times and certainly won't be putting their people's or their nations economic interests in front of their political ones!

We should simply look to move to WTO rules and be done with it...no 'deal' or cherry picking required. Simples.

[grunt]

We should simply look to move to WTO rules and be done with it...no 'deal' or cherry picking required. Simples.
Even the LEAVE campaigners thought that would be disastrous.

http://leavehq.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=128

"One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government would allow it."

[RyeSloan]

Even the LEAVE campaigners thought that would be disastrous.

http://leavehq.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=128

"One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government would allow it."

Yeah fair point...I didn't I suppose want to get into MRA's and the like as it could be argued that as the UK is currently in the EU and will adopt all the current EU regs etc into U.K. Law on leaving the EU so such 'alignment' issues should not be a huge hurdle. Effectively the U.K. Could be grandfathered into any relevant MRA or other similar agreement.

I accept that would rely on a pragmatic and sensible approach being taken by all sides which of course is not very likely!

[hibsbollah]

I found that speech deeply worrying.

May is playing a risky strategy. The EU have no need to even listen to her after A50.
Any one of the 27 countries plus the various devolved regions of member states can kill any deal with post Brexit UK.
Further to that the Brexit vote was certainly not overwhelming and whilst she has the right to leave the EU there was no mandate to leave either the EEA or EFTA. If that was to be the destination then it should have been defined or on the ballot paper. Her threat of making the UK a tax haven is ludicrous.

A second Scottish Independence referendum is now a certainty in 2018.

Shes said theres going to be a vote at Westminster on the eventual Brexit deal. This gives me some comfort that MPs will vote against it if its damaging and we get some sort of reprieve. There was no guarantee she was going to do that.

The rest of the speech was pure fantasy. 'we will not accept a punitive deal from the EU'. I doubt we'll have much of a choice:giruy2:.

[Peevemor]

Shes said theres going to be a vote at Westminster on the eventual Brexit deal. This gives me some comfort that MPs will vote against it if its damaging and we get some sort of reprieve. There was no guarantee she was going to do that.

The rest of the speech was pure fantasy. 'we will not accept a punitive deal from the EU'. I doubt we'll have much of a choice:giruy2:.

Will labour vote against? Will labour even vote?

[SHODAN]

Will labour vote against? Will labour even vote?

It'll be another Labstain job.

[grunt]

Shes said theres going to be a vote at Westminster on the eventual Brexit deal. This gives me some comfort that MPs will vote against it if its damaging and we get some sort of reprieve. There was no guarantee she was going to do that.Parliament won't vote against it. It will be presented as a fait accompli - there will be no option given, no time for them to do anything. It will be, "accept this or explain to your constituents why you caused us to exit EU with no agreement". The whole thing is a Tory stitch up.

[Mr Grieves]

Cool so he didn't say anything of the sort and you have just put forward your opinion of what he said might mean. I think we can safely say that it could therefore be interpreted completely differently by someone who thinks European style working practices and tax regimes of somewhere like France is not a model that you would wish on anybody..

Go on, give us your interpretation...

[steakbake]

Parliament won't vote against it. It will be presented as a fait accompli - there will be no option given, no time for them to do anything. It will be, "accept this or explain to your constituents why you caused us to exit EU with no agreement". The whole thing is a Tory stitch up.

It seems clear the choice will be:

Accept whatever deal they got to leave the EU

or

Leave the EU without a deal and fall back on WTO rules.

It's a pretty monstrous situation.

[hibsbollah]

Will labour vote against? Will labour even vote?

I suppose that depends on the nature of the deal. Or lack of one. If there's no deal and the WTO rules mean punitive tariffs, I would hope Labour would have the balls to say 'we are voting against this agreement (or nonagreement) on the basis that it's a bad deal'. The Brexiters can stamp their feet all they like. But that requires party unity of course :faf:

[Hibrandenburg]

You know how far right the UK's political spectrum has slipped when the government start using this guffy's rhetoric.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-theresa-may-brexit-speech-ukip-phrases-and-words-eu-deal-objectives-hard-a7531516.html

[ronaldo7]

David Davis today said,

"David Davis has said Brexit will still go ahead even if MPs voted against an EU withdrawal deal.
The Brexit Secretary said any vote would not change the fact the UK was leaving the bloc, as a result of last summer's referendum.
Mr Davis also told MPs some unskilled migration was likely to continue after Brexit, adding Parliament would now have the power to set the UK's policy".

Looks like it will be WTO rules then, and we're paying through the nose.

[RyeSloan]

Go on, give us your interpretation...

I don't think it needs interpreted his direct quote was as follows:

And most of us who had voted Remain would like the U.K. to remain a recognizably European-style economy with European-style taxation systems, European-style regulation systems etcetera. I personally hope we will be able to remain in the mainstream of European economic and social thinking. But if we are forced to be something different, then we will have to become something different.

Seems pretty clear to me that he said nothing like what you stated.

And anyway I'm relatively sanguine about moving away from some European norms of required...this portrayal that any change to economic and social thinking away from the EU view is somehow automatically a terrible thing is not one I subscribe to.

[steakbake]

I don't think it needs interpreted his direct quote was as follows:

And most of us who had voted Remain would like the U.K. to remain a recognizably European-style economy with European-style taxation systems, European-style regulation systems etcetera. I personally hope we will be able to remain in the mainstream of European economic and social thinking. But if we are forced to be something different, then we will have to become something different.

Seems pretty clear to me that he said nothing like what you stated.

And anyway I'm relatively sanguine about moving away from some European norms of required...this portrayal that any change to economic and social thinking away from the EU view is somehow automatically a terrible thing is not one I subscribe to.

I take your point - absolutely.

However, I have absolutely no trust that the Conservative right, who are receiving plaudits from the likes of Nigel Farage, will deliver that at all.

They are the ones who will control the exit process - Labour have all but abrogated responsibility to counter it.

What if they fail to deliver a system which is capable of being a European style model with the adaptations you mention?

[Sylar]

I feel thoroughly flattened by today's speech and the 'detail' contained therein.

But I can't bring myself to get excited by the prospect of IndyRef2 either - my concerns the last time around haven't been allayed, and there's no guarantee an independent Scotland will waltz back into Europe (Spain will NEVER vote for it). We're not the leeches many 'Better Together' campaigners painted us as, but we do take a sizeable amount more from central UK funding than other parts of the UK.

As someone who works in HE, the loss of EU funding is a pretty disastrous looming consequence of Brexit (without accepting freedom of movement, you pay a hefty amount to access limited parts of EU funding), but losing out on RCUK funding would be unequivocally worse for Scottish Universities (HE funding post-Indy was one answer the SNP never gave me a solid level of comfort from - merely that it would be negotiated after the fact - the same uncertain rhetoric that the Conservatives now peddle about Europe).

It would need to be a highly detailed accountancy-style breakdown that illustrates how an independent Scotland would operate with financial security, maintaining a similar standard of living before I'd change my mind for IndyRef2, no matter how much I utterly, utterly detest this Tory government. Emotionally, I'm in support of the idea, but pragmatically, I'd need to see evidence it could work.

So much uncertainty, so little comfort.

[steakbake]

I feel thoroughly flattened by today's speech and the 'detail' contained therein.

But I can't bring myself to get excited by the prospect of IndyRef2 either - my concerns the last time around haven't been allayed, and there's no guarantee an independent Scotland will waltz back into Europe (Spain will NEVER vote for it). We're not the leeches many 'Better Together' campaigners painted us as, but we do take a sizeable amount more from central UK funding than other parts of the UK.

As someone who works in HE, the loss of EU funding is a pretty disastrous looming consequence of Brexit (without accepting freedom of movement, you pay a hefty amount to access limited parts of EU funding), but losing out on RCUK funding would be unequivocally worse for Scottish Universities (HE funding post-Indy was one answer the SNP never gave me a solid level of comfort from - merely that it would be negotiated after the fact - the same uncertain rhetoric that the Conservatives now peddle about Europe).

It would need to be a highly detailed accountancy-style breakdown that illustrates how an independent Scotland would operate with financial security, maintaining a similar standard of living before I'd change my mind for IndyRef2, no matter how much I utterly, utterly detest this Tory government. Emotionally, I'm in support of the idea, but pragmatically, I'd need to see evidence it could work.

So much uncertainty, so little comfort.

Today was thoroughly depressing. As a Yes voter, I accept that there would have been a lot of work to do had we won. But I feel it would have been fighting in the right direction. It certainly wouldn't have been plain sailing but as it has turned out, neither is staying in the U.K.

A hopeless opposition at WM, a rampant right wing version of the Tories in power - unassailable in many respects and not just out of the EU, but the single market and indeed, the ECHR it would appear is also the plan. I've little time for the LibDems but Farron is right when he called it a theft of democracy.

I suppose it's now coming down to what kind of country you wish to live in. What sort of place do you want to leave behind for the next generation. None of these things will assure your standard of living or the price of goods in the shops etc but it will involve a choice, hard work and participation.

We live in strange times, but I think to expect a detailed blueprint of what you'll get out of it is asking way more than any proposition will be able to give you.

When you vote, it's about endorsing a direction and a process not about guaranteeing a particular outcome.

I've got all those things to lose like you do but ultimately, any vote or decision you take is uncertain and uncomfortable.

[stoneyburn hibs]

Typical arrogant Tory speech. Do they actually think that the rest of Europe will bow to their demands? Don't know what they are leading us into but they will find out that Britain is not as significant in Europe as they think it is.

[HappyAsHellas]

Britain is very significant in Europe and if the EU wants to play tough they have to get 27 countries to agree to it. When was the last time the EU came up with a quick solution to anything? Having said this I am still trying to work out what the hell I want as I voted to leave the EU but still want independence for Scotland. Does this mean I'll have to start my own party?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I understand why people are deflated, but only if they are still actively hoping against hope that somehow this process isnt happening. I think everyone needs to accept that it is.

And of course some people want it to fail, for their own reasons.

I feel quite heartened by it, as someone who voted remain. She has set out a clearish course, she has set out some negotiation points (thats all anything is at the moment) and she has offered some hopefully reassuring words to european partner countries.

Our FM is startinh to look a little pathetic, as the only card she has she doesnt want to play. I think she has overplayed her hand from the outset on this.

Brexit is happening, and so it is in all of our interests to make it work. Including most european countries (bit obviously not the eu institutions). The question will be how much economic pain will countries accept to protect the european institutions?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Typical arrogant Tory speech. Do they actually think that the rest of Europe will bow to their demands? Don't know what they are leading us into but they will find out that Britain is not as significant in Europe as they think it is.

So would you begin a negotiation offering to give everything away?

Its all posturing, some of which will obviously be conceded at the negotiations.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Today was thoroughly depressing. As a Yes voter, I accept that there would have been a lot of work to do had we won. But I feel it would have been fighting in the right direction. It certainly wouldn't have been plain sailing but as it has turned out, neither is staying in the U.K.

A hopeless opposition at WM, a rampant right wing version of the Tories in power - unassailable in many respects and not just out of the EU, but the single market and indeed, the ECHR it would appear is also the plan. I've little time for the LibDems but Farron is right when he called it a theft of democracy.

I suppose it's now coming down to what kind of country you wish to live in. What sort of place do you want to leave behind for the next generation. None of these things will assure your standard of living or the price of goods in the shops etc but it will involve a choice, hard work and participation.

We live in strange times, but I think to expect a detailed blueprint of what you'll get out of it is asking way more than any proposition will be able to give you.

When you vote, it's about endorsing a direction and a process not about guaranteeing a particular outcome.

I've got all those things to lose like you do but ultimately, any vote or decision you take is uncertain and uncomfortable.

The latter half of your post is really good. I think to vote indy / brexit you were voting for a principle, as you say.

[JeMeSouviens]

I understand why people are deflated, but only if they are still actively hoping against hope that somehow this process isnt happening. I think everyone needs to accept that it is.

And of course some people want it to fail, for their own reasons.

I feel quite heartened by it, as someone who voted remain. She has set out a clearish course, she has set out some negotiation points (thats all anything is at the moment) and she has offered some hopefully reassuring words to european partner countries.

Our FM is startinh to look a little pathetic, as the only card she has she doesnt want to play. I think she has overplayed her hand from the outset on this.

Brexit is happening, and so it is in all of our interests to make it work. Including most european countries (bit obviously not the eu institutions). The question will be how much economic pain will countries accept to protect the european institutions?

I admire your optimism/delusion* but I can't say I remotely share it. On the highlighted bit, I think that's rubbish. If you ignore the spun headlines and read what NS has actually been saying it's clear and consistent. The Scot Gov has 3 options in descending order of priority, the first 2 of which would see them shelving Indyref2 for the foreseeable.

1. UK in EEA - now ruled out
2. rUK out, Scotland in EEA - this requires the UK gov to advance this as a negotiating position and even if they did so, would require big effort and goodwill on all sides. While not technically ruled out yet, it looks very unlikely that May will give this any shrift but while the ball is in the UK gov court this remains Scot gov's priority. When it's ruled out we move to:
3. Indyref2

I think everybody pretty much knows we're at 3, but NS is giving TM a chance to compromise and head it off at the pass if she wants.


* delete to taste.

[ronaldo7]

After Mrs May laid out her 12 commandments (No white paper) yesterday, the banks seem to be getting their ducks in order. I think she will try and get separate deals for sectors of the country, Banks, Automotive, etc, and the fishermen, and Farmers will be thrown under the bus to compensate.

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/821660014150565889

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2017/01/18/jp-morgan-warns-theresa-mays-brexit-threat-very-dangerous-disruptive-and-damaging-to-uk-jobs-and-services_n_14241948.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

With Boris in the Foreign office, and making speeches in India, what could possibly go wrong. Insulting the French President is the way to keep friends and influence.

Boris Johnson has accused the EU of considering Nazi-style “punishment beatings” on Britain in revenge for Brexit.
The Foreign Secretary appeared to liken French president Francois Hollande to a Second World War German general, in the fallout from Theresa May’s plan for leaving the EU.

Speaking in India, Mr Johnson said: “If Mr Hollande wants to administer punishment beatings to anybody who seeks to escape [the EU], in the manner of some world war two movie, I don’t think that is the way forward, and it’s not in the interests of our friends and partners.

The Foreign Secretary also appeared to point to a possible benefit of falling back on World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules – despite the fears of most of British business.
Pointing out that Britain is an enormous market for German cars, Mr Johnson said: “These things cut both ways.
“You can put a ten per cent tariff on 820,000 cars, Mercs. That’s a lot of money for the Exchequer.

[JeMeSouviens]

After Mrs May laid out her 12 commandments (No white paper) yesterday, the banks seem to be getting their ducks in order. I think she will try and get separate deals for sectors of the country, Banks, Automotive, etc, and the fishermen, and Farmers will be thrown under the bus to compensate.

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/821660014150565889

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2017/01/18/jp-morgan-warns-theresa-mays-brexit-threat-very-dangerous-disruptive-and-damaging-to-uk-jobs-and-services_n_14241948.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

With Boris in the Foreign office, and making speeches in India, what could possibly go wrong. Insulting the French President is the way to keep friends and influence.

Boris Johnson has accused the EU of considering Nazi-style “punishment beatings” on Britain in revenge for Brexit.
The Foreign Secretary appeared to liken French president Francois Hollande to a Second World War German general, in the fallout from Theresa May’s plan for leaving the EU.

Speaking in India, Mr Johnson said: “If Mr Hollande wants to administer punishment beatings to anybody who seeks to escape [the EU], in the manner of some world war two movie, I don’t think that is the way forward, and it’s not in the interests of our friends and partners.

The Foreign Secretary also appeared to point to a possible benefit of falling back on World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules – despite the fears of most of British business.
Pointing out that Britain is an enormous market for German cars, Mr Johnson said: “These things cut both ways.
“You can put a ten per cent tariff on 820,000 cars, Mercs. That’s a lot of money for the Exchequer.

Thousands of highly paid financial sector jobs dependent on the EU market looking for a home.

Presumably we will dither about and miss this opportunity (just like North Sea oil :rolleyes:), but a sizeable opportunity is there. Scotland could yet rescue something from this ****** big mess.

[Moulin Yarns]

After Mrs May laid out her 12 commandments (No white paper) yesterday, the banks seem to be getting their ducks in order. I think she will try and get separate deals for sectors of the country, Banks, Automotive, etc, and the fishermen, and Farmers will be thrown under the bus to compensate.

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/821660014150565889

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2017/01/18/jp-morgan-warns-theresa-mays-brexit-threat-very-dangerous-disruptive-and-damaging-to-uk-jobs-and-services_n_14241948.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

With Boris in the Foreign office, and making speeches in India, what could possibly go wrong. Insulting the French President is the way to keep friends and influence.

Boris Johnson has accused the EU of considering Nazi-style “punishment beatings” on Britain in revenge for Brexit.
The Foreign Secretary appeared to liken French president Francois Hollande to a Second World War German general, in the fallout from Theresa May’s plan for leaving the EU.

Speaking in India, Mr Johnson said: “If Mr Hollande wants to administer punishment beatings to anybody who seeks to escape [the EU], in the manner of some world war two movie, I don’t think that is the way forward, and it’s not in the interests of our friends and partners.

The Foreign Secretary also appeared to point to a possible benefit of falling back on World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules – despite the fears of most of British business.
Pointing out that Britain is an enormous market for German cars, Mr Johnson said: “These things cut both ways.
“You can put a ten per cent tariff on 820,000 cars, Mercs. That’s a lot of money for the Exchequer.

The same fishermen who currently get HUGE benefit from the EU but who largely voted to leave because they think they can prevent other countries from fishing UK waters!!

[AndyM_1875]

I admire your optimism/delusion* but I can't say I remotely share it. On the highlighted bit, I think that's rubbish. If you ignore the spun headlines and read what NS has actually been saying it's clear and consistent. The Scot Gov has 3 options in descending order of priority, the first 2 of which would see them shelving Indyref2 for the foreseeable.

1. UK in EEA - now ruled out
2. rUK out, Scotland in EEA - this requires the UK gov to advance this as a negotiating position and even if they did so, would require big effort and goodwill on all sides. While not technically ruled out yet, it looks very unlikely that May will give this any shrift but while the ball is in the UK gov court this remains Scot gov's priority. When it's ruled out we move to:
3. Indyref2

I think everybody pretty much knows we're at 3, but NS is giving TM a chance to compromise and head it off at the pass if she wants.


* delete to taste.

She's ruled out a referendum in 2017 which may have been a miscalculation but nothing prevents her going as early as possible next year.
I'd go in the dead of winter quite deliberately, January 25, 2018 anyone?

[Moulin Yarns]

She's ruled out a referendum in 2017 which may have been a miscalculation but nothing prevents her going as early as possible next year.
I'd go in the dead of winter quite deliberately, January 25, 2018 anyone?

Sleekit :wink:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I admire your optimism/delusion* but I can't say I remotely share it. On the highlighted bit, I think that's rubbish. If you ignore the spun headlines and read what NS has actually been saying it's clear and consistent. The Scot Gov has 3 options in descending order of priority, the first 2 of which would see them shelving Indyref2 for the foreseeable.

1. UK in EEA - now ruled out
2. rUK out, Scotland in EEA - this requires the UK gov to advance this as a negotiating position and even if they did so, would require big effort and goodwill on all sides. While not technically ruled out yet, it looks very unlikely that May will give this any shrift but while the ball is in the UK gov court this remains Scot gov's priority. When it's ruled out we move to:
3. Indyref2

I think everybody pretty much knows we're at 3, but NS is giving TM a chance to compromise and head it off at the pass if she wants.


* delete to taste.


Fait enough mate, we will all have different takes on it. I think her language has become notablu less strident around a ref, because i dont think she wants one. The UK govt, by accident or design, are calling her bluff.

All just opinions though.

[JeMeSouviens]

Fait enough mate, we will all have different takes on it. I think her language has become notablu less strident around a ref, because i dont think she wants one. The UK govt, by accident or design, are calling her bluff.

All just opinions though.

Strident will not win over soft No voters. Indyref2 has to be framed as the last resort.

tbh, I think we are well down the UK gov's priorities.

As my favourite Unionist commentator, Alex Massie says ...


And then there was this statement of eye-popping twaddle: ‘It’s why we will put the preservation of our precious Union at the heart of everything we do.’ No you won’t and what’s more, Prime Minister, you know you won’t. English Tories have made their feelings plain: the EU is a bigger deal to them than the Union. That too is their choice and one which, once made, we will all have to live with.

It doesn’t necessarily mean independence and the break-up of Britain is inevitable. Indeed, as we’ve discussed before, a hard Brexit makes independence a still harder business even if it might also now be a more psychologically attractive proposition. But it does mean that the people who saved the United Kingdom just two years ago are now some of the loneliest voters in Britain

[Smartie]

She's ruled out a referendum in 2017 which may have been a miscalculation but nothing prevents her going as early as possible next year.
I'd go in the dead of winter quite deliberately, January 25, 2018 anyone?

:faf:

I've never thought about it that way before. Politics is a dirty business right enough.

Who ever would have thought that Scotland could be delivered her Independence via our weather? A chill in the air, a few slippy pavements, just enough to keep a few more "No" voters at home, eh?

I wonder how much the SNP have spent on great political masterminds to forward their case for Independence when this effective little number has been there waiting all along?

[lord bunberry]

:faf:

I've never thought about it that way before. Politics is a dirty business right enough.

Who ever would have thought that Scotland could be delivered her Independence via our weather? A chill in the air, a few slippy pavements, just enough to keep a few more "No" voters at home, eh?

I wonder how much the SNP have spent on great political masterminds to forward their case for Independence when this effective little number has been there waiting all along?
I thought it had more to do with the fact that the 25th is Burns night.

[ronaldo7]

The same fishermen who currently get HUGE benefit from the EU but who largely voted to leave because they think they can prevent other countries from fishing UK waters!!

:agree: The same guys that Ted Heath took to the cleaners in 1973.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Strident will not win over soft No voters. Indyref2 has to be framed as the last resort.

tbh, I think we are well down the UK gov's priorities.

As my favourite Unionist commentator, Alex Massie says ...

Im a big fan of alex massie too.

Agree about being strident, but i think they also know that arguing that leaving one union is so bad and disruptive, we should also leave another, more important union is probably not either. Hence her backing away from it.

[Glory Lurker]

Thousands of highly paid financial sector jobs dependent on the EU market looking for a home.

Presumably we will dither about and miss this opportunity (just like North Sea oil :rolleyes:), but a sizeable opportunity is there. Scotland could yet rescue something from this ****** big mess.


You know our sense of timing, we always wait too long... :boo hoo:

[xyz23jc]

:faf:

I've never thought about it that way before. Politics is a dirty business right enough.

Who ever would have thought that Scotland could be delivered her Independence via our weather? A chill in the air, a few slippy pavements, just enough to keep a few more "No" voters at home, eh?

I wonder how much the SNP have spent on great political masterminds to forward their case for Independence when this effective little number has been there waiting all along?

:greengrin I salute your indefatigability, sir!

[AndyM_1875]

I thought it had more to do with the fact that the 25th is Burns night.

Partly that bit mainly because a vote in the dead of winter (freezing cold, pishing rain maybe even snow and ice) would limit the number of 65+ voters.

[northstandhibby]

Apologies if I'm repeating any posts on this thread.

My main concern among many regarding 'Brexit' is the loss of access to the ECHR. I have no faith that the Supreme Court will protect many vulnerable folks basic human rights to the same extent as the ECHR when appellants appeal decisions made by an inferior court of law.

I fear we will become ever more powerless as citizens because of this.

Glory Glory

[RyeSloan]

Apologies if I'm repeating any posts on this thread.

My main concern among many regarding 'Brexit' is the loss of access to the ECHR. I have no faith that the Supreme Court will protect many vulnerable folks basic human rights to the same extent as the ECHR when appellants appeal decisions made by an inferior court of law.

I fear we will become ever more powerless as citizens because of this.

Glory Glory

I genuinely don't have any idea as to why that would be the case...what makes you think that? Is it just a hunch as you see he Supreme Court as part of the establishment or is there specific reasons or how they work that suggests this is likely?

[northstandhibby]

I genuinely don't have any idea as to why that would be the case...what makes you think that? Is it just a hunch as you see he Supreme Court as part of the establishment or is there specific reasons or how they work that suggests this is likely?


The ECHR is a specific court of law specifically set up with ensuring EU citizens human rights are being adhered to albeit some countries have opt outs from particular aspects of european articles.

The ECHR has a track record of being unafraid of holding countries to account for not adhering to the articles they have adopted. As a consequence of a hard brexit we have now been informed by May that the UK will no longer be under their jurisdiction and I assume the supreme court will be the final court of appeal whereby one could apply to the ECHR over and above when an individual or group felt their human rights in accordance with the articles were not being adhered to.

It will as far as I'm aware be up to the UK government the tories to set out a new statutory framework for human rights and incorporate them into UK wide law once we have left the EU and its courts of justice.

I would assume Scots law would also adopt the tories new framework as they would not wish to have such conflicting areas of law.

Therefore with us no longer able to appeal to the ECHR with its more liberal approach to citizens rights and human rights and a bunch of right wing tories in charge of setting up a new framework I would argue as citizens we will be considerably dis-empowered.

Glory Glory

[marinello59]

The ECHR is a specific court of law specifically set up with ensuring EU citizens human rights are being adhered to albeit some countries have opt outs from particular aspects of european articles.

The ECHR has a track record of being unafraid of holding countries to account for not adhering to the articles they have adopted. As a consequence of a hard brexit we have now been informed by May that the UK will no longer be under their jurisdiction and I assume the supreme court will be the final court of appeal whereby one could apply to the ECHR over and above when an individual or group felt their human rights in accordance with the articles were not being adhered to.

It will as far as I'm aware be up to the UK government the tories to set out a new statutory framework for human rights and incorporate them into UK wide law once we have left the EU and its courts of justice.

I would assume Scots law would also adopt the tories new framework as they would not wish to have such conflicting areas of law.

Therefore with us no longer able to appeal to the ECHR with its more liberal approach to citizens rights and human rights and a bunch of right wing tories in charge of setting up a new framework I would argue as citizens we will be considerably dis-empowered.

Glory Glory

I thought the ECHR wasn't an EU body. So this is a separate issue from Brexit. Or I might be havering. :greengrin

[RyeSloan]

I thought the ECHR wasn't an EU body. So this is a separate issue from Brexit. Or I might be havering. :greengrin

No it's separate.

[northstandhibby]

I thought the ECHR wasn't an EU body. So this is a separate issue from Brexit. Or I might be havering. :greengrin

Brexit will still mean a repeal of the Human Rights Act 1998 and will be replaced by a British bill of rights instead of which has been a previous commitment by the tories, irrespective of it being separate from the EU. I should have included that. We will no longer be able to appeal to the ECHR if/when it is replaced by the British bill of rights. I am of course speculating as it is still in the formative stages but the tories are extremely serious in regards to a British bill of rights replacing the ECHR articles. Especially now we know there is to be a hard brexit. The tory eurosceptics are firmly in charge of their party and are in effect without an opposition.

Glory Glory

[Kavinho]

Brexit will still mean a repeal of the Human Rights Act 1998 and will be replaced by a British bill of rights instead of which has been a previous commitment by the tories, irrespective of it being separate from the EU. I should have included that. We will no longer be able to appeal to the ECHR if/when it is replaced by the British bill of rights. I am of course speculating as it is still in the formative stages but the tories are extremely serious in regards to a British bill of rights replacing the ECHR articles. Especially now we know there is to be a hard brexit. The tory europhiles are firmly in charge of their party and are in effect without an opposition.

Glory Glory

The danger lies within what is being proposed in a British Bill of Rights.

[northstandhibby]

The danger lies within what is being proposed in a British Bill of Rights.

Absolutely 100%.

Bet the more gullible ones in the likes of Newcastle and Sunderland who fell for the xenophobic racist ukip lies will regret it once it becomes ever clearer what the tories brexit consequences are.

It will actually hurt the poorest places the hardest as public services and benefits etcetera etcetera are stripped to the bone by an extreme bunch of right wing tories and the EU grants that support hardship in deprived areas have ended for good in the UK.

Glory Glory

[Hibrandenburg]

Absolutely 100%.

Bet the more gullible ones in the likes of Newcastle and Sunderland who fell for the xenophobic racist ukip lies will regret it once it becomes ever clearer what the tories brexit consequences are.

It will actually hurt the poorest places the hardest as public services and benefits etcetera etcetera are stripped to the bone by an extreme bunch of right wing tories and the EU grants that support hardship in deprived areas have ended for good in the UK.

Glory Glory

You'll still get some Tory selling this ***** as roses though and some will buy it.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Absolutely 100%.

Bet the more gullible ones in the likes of Newcastle and Sunderland who fell for the xenophobic racist ukip lies will regret it once it becomes ever clearer what the tories brexit consequences are.

It will actually hurt the poorest places the hardest as public services and benefits etcetera etcetera are stripped to the bone by an extreme bunch of right wing tories and the EU grants that support hardship in deprived areas have ended for good in the UK.

Glory Glory


So why not argue the counter point, and work to help make the parliament and government reflect your views.

The point is that such a bill of rights would be subject to far more direct scrutiny than the ECHR, and that a new government could appeal or amend it.

Yourebgetting worked up about something, about which nobody lnows any detail.

What if a UK BoR was better than the ECHR?

[northstandhibby]

So why not argue the counter point, and work to help make the parliament and government reflect your views.

The point is that such a bill of rights would be subject to far more direct scrutiny than the ECHR, and that a new government could appeal or amend it.

Yourebgetting worked up about something, about which nobody lnows any detail.

What if a UK BoR was better than the ECHR?

I merely believe the Convention's human rights are well set out, easily understood and are very well established. The international European Court of Human Rights provides a level of accountability against sovereign states and/or authorities that fail to provide the rights and protection for individuals and groups whose human and/or civil rights may have been abused. Being enabled to appeal to the ECHR if you feel your'e rights have been abused and the UK courts are indifferent to it then surely it is a right not to be given up lightly.

Especially when the ones who have mainly driven brexit are far right tories. When did the tories ever give anyone the impression they gave a damn about folks human and/or civil rights?

However it may come to pass the SNP will get their wish as if another indie vote was taken anytime soon I could not see the Scots folk remaining in the UK with the far right tories in charge and we would apply to join the EU.

Glory Glory

[beensaidbefore]

Absolutely 100%.

Bet the more gullible ones in the likes of Newcastle and Sunderland who fell for the xenophobic racist ukip lies will regret it once it becomes ever clearer what the tories brexit consequences are.

It will actually hurt the poorest places the hardest as public services and benefits etcetera etcetera are stripped to the bone by an extreme bunch of right wing tories and the EU grants that support hardship in deprived areas have ended for good in the UK.

Glory Glory

Gullible? Do you live in these areas and experience life as they do? Bit of a sweeping generalisation is it not?

[beensaidbefore]

So why not argue the counter point, and work to help make the parliament and government reflect your views.

The point is that such a bill of rights would be subject to far more direct scrutiny than the ECHR, and that a new government could appeal or amend it.

Yourebgetting worked up about something, about which nobody lnows any detail.

What if a UK BoR was better than the ECHR?

It definitely won't be. You've been told on here so that's it done and dusted... Only racists and women haters voted for brexit. 😂

[Moulin Yarns]

Supreme Court ruling 8-3 majority that an act of parliament needed to trigger article 50.

But not needed to consult devolved parliaments

[northstandhibby]

Supreme Court ruling 8-3 majority that an act of parliament needed to trigger article 50.

But not needed to consult devolved parliaments

The right decision. Parliament should of course have the final say.

Now its time for Labour and the other sensible politicians to take a stand against the right wing little englanders. Make a case for remaining in the EU. Even if it means taking criticism. They could always argue for a new vote as they would win it as folks have began to realise they were fooled by the likes of gove and johnson.

It is the right thing to do.

Glory Glory

[makaveli1875]

The right decision. Parliament should of course have the final say.

Now its time for Labour and the other sensible politicians to take a stand against the right wing little englanders. Make a case for remaining in the EU. Even if it means taking criticism. They could always argue for a new vote as they would win it as folks have began to realise they were fooled by the likes of gove and johnson.

It is the right thing to do.

Glory Glory

im not sure if your aware but it wasnt just english people that voted to leave , a lot of welsh and scots voted to leave too . corbyn has alredy said he wont vote against article 50 , he must be a narrow minded racist right wing little englander at heart too by your logic

[northstandhibby]

im not sure if your aware but it wasnt just english people that voted to leave , a lot of welsh and scots voted to leave too . corbyn has alredy said he wont vote against article 50 , he must be a narrow minded racist right wing little englander at heart too by your logic

I've never said Jeremy Corbyn is anything of the sort. Don't remember Jeremy or Labour arguing to leave the EU. Additionally I have never stated it was 'only just english people' that voted to leave.

Every politician that does not agree with the concept of leaving the EU should now vote with their minds and vociferously make a case for voting against article 50 to be invoked.

It is a matter of doing whats right for the country and remaining in the single market as full members and the other benefits of being members of the EU brings is of course the right thing for the country.

Glory Glory

[makaveli1875]

the right thing to do is accept that the majority voted to leave the EU , the single market and everything else that goes with EU membership , whether you think the majority of brits are stupid , racist , right wing little englanders or not

[northstandhibby]

the right thing to do is accept that the majority voted to leave the EU , the single market and everything else that goes with EU membership , whether you think the majority of brits are stupid , racist , right wing little englanders or not

Once again you have fabricated what I have said. I have never said I think the majority of brits are stupid, racist or right wing little englanders and as you appear to deliberately doing so I will refrain from now on replying to any points you make.

Glory Glory

[makaveli1875]

The right decision. Parliament should of course have the final say.

Now its time for Labour and the other sensible politicians to take a stand against the right wing little englanders. Make a case for remaining in the EU. Even if it means taking criticism. They could always argue for a new vote as they would win it as folks have began to realise they were fooled by the likes of gove and johnson.

It is the right thing to do.

Glory Glory


Once again you have fabricated what I have said. I have never said I think the majority of brits are stupid, racist or right wing little englanders and as you appear to deliberately doing so I will refrain from now on replying to any points you make.

Glory Glory

of course you never :rolleyes:

[The Green Goblin]

the right thing to do is accept that the majority voted to leave the EU , the single market and everything else that goes with EU membership , whether you think the majority of brits are stupid , racist , right wing little englanders or not

The 28% of the UK population (obviously not including the 16/17 year olds whose futures would be directly affected by the result) who voted Leave did so in an advisory referendum which carried no legal weight or subsequent parliamentary obligation whatsoever. None. That the Tories then began treating it as such without recourse to a parliamentary vote on the details of Brexit was something they had no right to do.

[grunt]

the right thing to do is accept that the majority voted to leave the EU , the single market and everything else that goes with EU membership , whether you think the majority of brits are stupid , racist , right wing little englanders or notThe question on the paper just asked whether the UK should remain or leave the EU. It didn't say anything about the single market or "everything else that goes with EU membership".

[RyeSloan]

The 28% of the UK population (obviously not including the 16/17 year olds whose futures would be directly affected by the result) who voted Leave did so in an advisory referendum which carried no legal weight or subsequent parliamentary obligation whatsoever. None. That the Tories then began treating it as such without recourse to a parliamentary vote on the details of Brexit was something they had no right to do.

Correct. But the right thing to do for parliament is to accept the people's vote and allow the government to invoke article 50.

[RyeSloan]

The right decision. Parliament should of course have the final say.

Now its time for Labour and the other sensible politicians to take a stand against the right wing little englanders. Make a case for remaining in the EU. Even if it means taking criticism. They could always argue for a new vote as they would win it as folks have began to realise they were fooled by the likes of gove and johnson.

It is the right thing to do.

Glory Glory

What a load of guff.

So the only sensible politicians are those that oppose Brexit?

Brexit is the result of right wing little engenders?

The case for remaining in the EU was made during the referendum. That case was not strong enough to carry the vote. Get over it.

Your repeated indications and accusations regarding those that voted for Brexit says much more about you and your intolerance of other people's views than it does about anyone that voted.

[Hibrandenburg]

the right thing to do is accept that the majority voted to leave the EU , the single market and everything else that goes with EU membership , whether you think the majority of brits are stupid , racist , right wing little englanders or not

No they didn't.

52% of passengers on a bus decided the driver should drive them to the beach. The driver has decided to take the shortest route (over the cliff). Now all those 48% that voted against the beach and a good many of the 52% who voted for it are screaming in panick.

[The Green Goblin]

Correct. But the right thing to do for parliament is to accept the people's vote and allow the government to invoke article 50.

They certainly had a responsibility to factor it in to the debate, but beyond that, there was nothing legally or constitutionally binding about the referendum at all. The "right thing" here was therefore nothing more than the decision taken by those who happened to be in power, based upon their own party point of view.

[beensaidbefore]

The question on the paper just asked whether the UK should remain or leave the EU. It didn't say anything about the single market or "everything else that goes with EU membership".


Exactly. Voters aren't as thick as some like to make out.

[beensaidbefore]

No they didn't.

52% of passengers on a bus decided the driver should drive them to the beach. The driver has decided to take the shortest route (over the cliff). Now all those 48% that voted against the beach and a good many of the 52% who voted for it are screaming in panick.


What's over the cliff that has everyone so worried?

[RyeSloan]

No they didn't.

52% of passengers on a bus decided the driver should drive them to the beach. The driver has decided to take the shortest route (over the cliff). Now all those 48% that voted against the beach and a good many of the 52% who voted for it are screaming in panick.

To most voters the single market and the EU are one in the same...to suggest that they voted to leave the EU without knowing that meant leaving the single market is rather fanciful, about as fanciful as your analogy.

The only people I hear screaming in panic are those that still haven't come to terms with the result with calls on parliament to ignore the reform result to demands for a referendum on the terms of the withdrawal and anything in between.

[CapitalGreen]

Exactly. Voters aren't as thick as some like to make out.


What's over the cliff that has everyone so worried?

lol

[ErinGoBraghHFC]

Brexit will be the beginning of the end for the Union, in my opinion. This will all start in Northern Ireland as there's very little to absolutely no way to avoid angering either the Republicans or Loyalists without angering the anti-immigration UKIP/Tory supporters. Hard border between Norn Iron and the Republic and there will be riots from the Republicans. Hard border in mainland ports instead but none between Republic and North and there'll be riots from Loyalists as they will see this as a threat to their "Britishness". Either way, Northern Ireland could be plunged back into the 1970s and the SNP will win the next independence referendum, they won't hold it until they know they will win.

[Hibrandenburg]

What's over the cliff that has everyone so worried?

A rock and a hard place.

[beensaidbefore]

A rock and a hard place.

Lol, we will have to disagree, but I do like your wit😁

I am confident that we will manage. We do need everyone to be committed to the cause though an pull together which will be the difficult thing, especially when there will be too many opportunities for our childish politicians to point score. Lots of good ideas will be dismissed or poopooed simply cos it was the wrong side that came up with it. That will be the single biggest stumbling block imo.

[Hibrandenburg]

To most voters the single market and the EU are one in the same...to suggest that they voted to leave the EU without knowing that meant leaving the single market is rather fanciful, about as fanciful as your analogy.

The only people I hear screaming in panic are those that still haven't come to terms with the result with calls on parliament to ignore the reform result to demands for a referendum on the terms of the withdrawal and anything in between.

But exactly what brexit meant wasn't clarified before the referendum. At least now that it will be put to parliament our politicians can be held to account by their constituents on how they vote.

[beensaidbefore]

Brexit will be the beginning of the end for the Union, in my opinion. This will all start in Northern Ireland as there's very little to absolutely no way to avoid angering either the Republicans or Loyalists without angering the anti-immigration UKIP/Tory supporters. Hard border between Norn Iron and the Republic and there will be riots from the Republicans. Hard border in mainland ports instead but none between Republic and North and there'll be riots from Loyalists as they will see this as a threat to their "Britishness". Either way, Northern Ireland could be plunged back into the 1970s and the SNP will win the next independence referendum, they won't hold it until they know they will win.

I hope the snp gets an effing grip and stops the threats. I think we would lose again and it would need to be put to bed for a long while. Let's wait and see what brexit means first ffs. I was yes, but would vote no as the uncertainty bout what brexit means I might be more taken with what's on offer. I am not alone in changing from yes to no, at least amongst some I have spoken with. Let's give it 5 years and take stock then. Who knows it may enhance our bargaining position, plus who knows what will happen in other countries i.e France, Netherlands to see the outcome of their elections.

[Hibrandenburg]

Brexit will be the beginning of the end for the Union, in my opinion. This will all start in Northern Ireland as there's very little to absolutely no way to avoid angering either the Republicans or Loyalists without angering the anti-immigration UKIP/Tory supporters. Hard border between Norn Iron and the Republic and there will be riots from the Republicans. Hard border in mainland ports instead but none between Republic and North and there'll be riots from Loyalists as they will see this as a threat to their "Britishness". Either way, Northern Ireland could be plunged back into the 1970s and the SNP will win the next independence referendum, they won't hold it until they know they will win.

If there's a hard border between NI and the UK then there'll be a lot of questions to be answered as to why Scotland couldn't be given the same deal. It's an utter mess that pretty much guarantees the break up of the UK or worse.

[ronaldo7]

A rock and a hard place.

:tee hee:

[ErinGoBraghHFC]

I hope the snp gets an effing grip and stops the threats. I think we would lose again and it would need to be put to bed for a long while. Let's wait and see what brexit means first ffs. I was yes, but would vote no as the uncertainty bout what brexit means I might be more taken with what's on offer. I am not alone in changing from yes to no, at least amongst some I have spoken with. Let's give it 5 years and take stock then. Who knows it may enhance our bargaining position, plus who knows what will happen in other countries i.e France, Netherlands to see the outcome of their elections. No arguments on that they need to give it time for the dust to settle, not a big fan of the EU but the fact 68% of Scots voted to remain gives the SNP a big advantage to campaign for an independence in the not so distant future, I'd always vote for independence personally unless any significant changes in circumstances were to arise ie oil etc. Can't understand the people on either side that would support the Union or independence blindly:confused:

[RyeSloan]

But exactly what brexit meant wasn't clarified before the referendum. At least now that it will be put to parliament our politicians can be held to account by their constituents on how they vote.

The vote was to leave the EU. Article 50 is invoked to leave the EU.

Only those who wish to remain in the EU at any cost (including ignoring the result of a U.K. wide referendum) would argue that should not now happen due to a parliamentary vote.

[Hibrandenburg]

The vote was to leave the EU. Article 50 is invoked to leave the EU.

Only those who wish to remain in the EU at any cost (including ignoring the result of a U.K. wide referendum) would argue that should not now happen due to a parliamentary vote.

You make a lot of assumptions for a lot of people. The referendum was advisory and as the supreme court ruled today that advice was intended for parliament to decide and not intended to allow the tory party to do as they please.

[Slavers]

I think it was the correct decision today to allow Parliament to vote on the triggering of article 50. I have no doubt that the will of the people will be carried out and we will leave the EU. Giving the MP's a vote will give the result of the referendum the respect it deserves.

I know a couple of Yes voters who will now vote No if the SNP go ahead with their threat of indyref2. They understand it was a UK wide vote on the UK's membership of the EU.

Scotland needs an indyref 2 like a hole in it's budget which is exactly what it would give. The union between Scotland and the rest of the UK is far more important to the scottish people and i think the SNP are going to learn this the hard way, again.

But Sturgeon brought this on herself by over playing her hand. She should have shown respect to the result of the EU referendum and solidarity with the rest of the UK and no went out her way to make threats.

Interesting times for sure.

[RyeSloan]

You make a lot of assumptions for a lot of people. The referendum was advisory and as the supreme court ruled today that advice was intended for parliament to decide and not intended to allow the tory party to do as they please.

Oh please...This has nothing to do with the Tory party but all to do with the enacting of the result of a UK wide referendum.

And anyway the court didn't rule that parliament 'can decide' but that parliamentary authority was required for the government to invoke article 50.

On what rational basis can parliament (the same one that authorised the vote in the first place) not provide that authority?

[northstandhibby]

You make a lot of assumptions for a lot of people. The referendum was advisory and as the supreme court ruled today that advice was intended for parliament to decide and not intended to allow the tory party to do as they please.

You will know as well as I do that politics is all about maneuvering, strategy and deals struck behind the scenes as well as the grubbier side which includes machiavellian type posturing and lobbying.

For me today was a turning point in brexit. I believe there is now a way to achieve a 'soft' brexit. Article 50 will be activated however before then there will be huge opposition to a 'hard' brexit.

Today's ruling paves the way for the opposition to demand a 'Norway style' relationship with the EU. This will grant us access to the single market through the EEA agreement (European Economic Area) and will leave us as part of the Schengen Agreement which will allow access for workers across the EU to come to the UK without restrictions.

Part of this deal would also and very importantly include us retaining access to the ECHR and the articles of the Human Rights Act 1998.

I believe this was always going to be the outcome. Personally I am absolutely delighted the opposition will now be enabled to argue the case in parliament that a 'soft' brexit is the only outcome they will accept and it is non-negotiable.

I strongly predict the ruling today has given the opposition to a 'hard' brexit the 'nuts' to coin a poker hand term.

Glory Glory

[grunt]

You will know as well as I do that politics is all about maneuvering, strategy and deals struck behind the scenes as well as the grubbier side which includes machiavellian type posturing and lobbying.

For me today was a turning point in brexit. I believe there is now a way to achieve a 'soft' brexit. Article 50 will be activated however before then there will be huge opposition to a 'hard' brexit.

Today's ruling paves the way for the opposition to demand a 'Norway style' relationship with the EU. This will grant us access to the single market through the EEA agreement (European Economic Area) and will leave us as part of the Schengen Agreement which will allow access for workers across the EU to come to the UK without restrictions.

Part of this deal would also and very importantly include us retaining access to the ECHR and the articles of the Human Rights Act 1998.

I believe this was always going to be the outcome. Personally I am absolutely delighted the opposition will now be enabled to argue the case in parliament that a 'soft' brexit is the only outcome they will accept and it is non-negotiable.

I strongly predict the ruling today has given the opposition to a 'hard' brexit the 'nuts' to coin a poker hand term.

Glory Glory

Interesting post, I hadn't considered this.
Your suggestion would also offer a way out for Sturgeon and Scotland.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[northstandhibby]

Interesting post, I hadn't considered this.
Your suggestion would also offer a way out for Sturgeon and Scotland.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I actually meant to include a paragraph on that very topic which is exactly what you have stated. It will indeed solve that particular notion.

Glory Glory

[steakbake]

Interesting post, I hadn't considered this.
Your suggestion would also offer a way out for Sturgeon and Scotland.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

We are not in Schengen.

[grunt]

We are not in Schengen.
Ok fair enough, but the gist of the post was about finding a way through to a softer Brexit, and in particular staying in the single market, which is one of Sturgeon's aims.
Ok so, Schengen.

[northstandhibby]

We are not in Schengen.

Fair comment.

However the point is if the UK agrees to a Norway style soft brexit with free access to the worlds biggest single market it would have to agree to be part of the Schengen Agreement whereby allowing free movement for EU workers and vice versa for UK citizens.

Glory Glory

[steakbake]

Ok fair enough, but the gist of the post was about finding a way through to a softer Brexit, and in particular staying in the single market, which is one of Sturgeon's aims.
Ok so, Schengen.

I just don't see it happening that way.

Parliament will vote on A50, it will be enacted.

I her speech, May has offered a vote and specifically it is to vote for the agreement and go with that, or vote against any agreement. Either way, we are out the EU either on a deal of some sort of completely out and operating WTO rules.

We are not going to get a Norway situation because expressly, May's stated intention is to take us out of the common market.

We will have a different relationship with Europe and there won't be freedom of movement. She was clear on that in the terms she set out.

She also wants to take us out of the ECHR, althought it has nothing to do with the EU.

She's not about to pull us out of the EU, primarily leading with her immigration concerns the swiftly put us into Schengen - ie, the singe European immigration area.

There will be no soft Brexit if she gets her way.

[northstandhibby]

I just don't see it happening that way.

Parliament will vote on A50, it will be enacted.

I her speech, May has offered a vote and specifically it is to vote for the agreement and go with that, or vote against any agreement. Either way, we are out the EU.

We are not going to get a Norway situation because expressly, May's stated intention is to take us out of the common market.

We will have a different relationship with Europe and there won't be freedom of movement. She was clear on that in the terms she set out.

She also wants to take us out of the ECHR, althought it has nothing to do with the EU.

Unfortunately for May she will now have an opposition to contend with whom will be able to demand a soft brexit in order for Article 50 to be activated. Jeremy Corbyn could actually do very well out of this if he plays his cards right and a soft brexit is achieved.

Glory Glory

[RyeSloan]

Unfortunately for May she will now have an opposition to contend with whom will be able to demand a soft brexit in order for Article 50 to be activated. Jeremy Corbyn could actually do very well out of this if he plays his cards right and a soft brexit is achieved.

Glory Glory

Jeremy Corbyn:

"I’ve made it very clear the Labour party accepts and respects the decision of the British people. We will not block article 50.”

[steakbake]

Jeremy Corbyn:

"I’ve made it very clear the Labour party accepts and respects the decision of the British people. We will not block article 50.”

Exactly this. I am sorry to insist that Corbyn and Labour will not be altering the course towards a soft Brexit. They may win the odd amendment or two if they can find favour with others in the Commons to produce a majority, should that go to a vote. However, we are not about to find the best parts of EU/single market membership being rescued by Labour.

The jig is up and we are on the way out of the EU, single market, ECJ, probably the customs union in large parts and I'd safely bet in 2020, we will be on our way out of the ECHR and the European Convention.

[northstandhibby]

Jeremy Corbyn:

"I’ve made it very clear the Labour party accepts and respects the decision of the British people. We will not block article 50.”

The Brexiteers did not vote for a hard brexit. It was never made clear it would entail exiting the worlds biggest trading market. The ruling now paves the way for the opposition to demand a soft Norway style brexit. The opposition have every right to stand up against the hard brexit that will be detrimental and demand amendments that would include remaining in the single market. Today's ruling was a game changer. Jeremy is a politician and is allowed to change his viewpoint if it is in the wider countries interests. He could appear to be a politician of substance if he plays his cards right.

Why are you against a soft Norway style brexit? What's your view?

Glory Glory

[steakbake]

The Brexiteers did not vote for a hard brexit. The ruling now paves the way for the opposition to demand a soft Norway style brexit. They have every right to stand up against the hard brexit that will be detrimental and demand amendments. Today's ruling was a game changer.

Why are you against a soft Norway style brexit? What's your view?

Glory Glory

I'm afraid they did. That's exactly the point. They voted for whatever type of Brexit the UK government deemed fit and May has made her stance pretty clear.

You can certainly find ample evidence of key Brexiteers saying it would be madness to leave the single market etc. But that is not what they are going to get.

If we are looking for a Brexit which will meaningfully secure workers rights, environmental protections and a range of other safeguards and not turn us into some kind of Atlantic sweatshop, then Labour had better step up to the plate and pretty damn soon. But that will be after the fact, once we are on the way out.

Everything has changed.

[Ryan69]

The right decision. Parliament should of course have the final say.

Now its time for Labour and the other sensible politicians to take a stand against the right wing little englanders. Make a case for remaining in the EU. Even if it means taking criticism. They could always argue for a new vote as they would win it as folks have began to realise they were fooled by the likes of gove and johnson.

It is the right thing to do.

Glory Glory

Correct me if im wrong but...the people voted too leave!

These imbeciles are paid to represent us...so why do they have final say? They are paid to represent what the people want after all.

Why was there not 2 votes on independance? Thats the law afterall!

[northstandhibby]

I'm afraid they did. That's exactly the point. They voted for whatever type of Brexit the UK government deemed fit and May has made her stance pretty clear.

You can certainly find ample evidence of key Brexiteers saying it would be madness to leave the single market etc. But that is not what they are going to get.

If we are looking for a Brexit which will meaningfully secure workers rights, environmental protections and a range of other safeguards and not turn us into some kind of Atlantic sweatshop, then Labour had better step up to the plate and pretty damn soon. But that will be after the fact, once we are on the way out.

Everything has changed.

The ruling today removed May from the equation. It is now up to parliament to decide what type of brexit will be acceptable in a vote. There will be an extraordinary amount of deals being done behind the scenes and I strongly predict a soft brexit will be achieved.

It is in the countries interests and the ruling today allowed the opposition to head off a hard brexit.

Glory Glory

[RyeSloan]

The Brexiteers did not vote for a hard brexit. The ruling now paves the way for the opposition to demand a soft Norway style brexit. They have every right to stand up against the hard brexit that will be detrimental and demand amendments. Today's ruling was a game changer.

Why are you against a soft Norway style brexit? What's your view?

Glory Glory

I would politely suggest that today's verdict paves the way for nothing more than parliament to authorise article 50 to be invoked and changes nothing in terms of parliament demanding anything.

My view is that despite what some say the vote was pretty clear...leave the EU. Doing so then basically rejoining under another guise would be quite clearly a significant sleight of hand.

My personal opinion of soft or hard or total or partial or not is neither here nor there in making that judgement, it's just rather bleedin' obvious.

But since you asked ;-) I'm relatively relaxed about the whole thing. Would have been happy to stay in but can see plenty reasons not to and as the vote was not to we should just crack on and get it done.

The 'Norway' option is not a real option in my mind...it's far too similar to being in the EU and to be honest looks a poor choice compared to being just in or just out. I know why it's being proposed but largely it's being proposed by those that really just wanted to stay in the EU.

Finally I'm pretty convinced the EU is stuffed anyway and the economic and financial stresses tearing it apart will surface in political upheaval and ultimately its demise. From the crushed Greeks to the skint Italians to the grumpy Dutch to the 44% unemployed youth in Spain to the Germans desperately trying to stop Deutsche Bank from bringing down the whole house of cards there is plenty of evidence to show all is not well.

[northstandhibby]

I would politely suggest that today's verdict paves the way for nothing more than parliament to authorise article 50 to be invoked and changes nothing in terms of parliament demanding anything.

My view is that despite what some say the vote was pretty clear...leave the EU. Doing so then basically rejoining under another guise would be quite clearly a significant sleight of hand.

My personal opinion of soft or hard or total or partial or not is neither here nor there in making that judgement, it's just rather bleedin' obvious.

But since you asked ;-) I'm relatively relaxed about the whole thing. Would have been happy to stay in but can see plenty reasons not to and as the vote was not to we should just crack on and get it done.

The 'Norway' option is not a real option in my mind...it's far too similar to being in the EU and to be honest looks a poor choice compared to being just in or just out. I know why it's being proposed but largely it's being proposed by those that really just wanted to stay in the EU.

Finally I'm pretty convinced the EU is stuffed anyway and the economic and financial stresses tearing it apart will surface in political upheaval and ultimately its demise. From the crushed Greeks to the skint Italians to the grumpy Dutch to the 44% unemployed youth in Spain to the Germans desperately trying to stop Deutsche Bank from bringing down the whole house of cards there is plenty of evidence to show all is not well.

I don't believe for a second the EU is 'stuffed'. It is becoming ever more synchronised and a force for good in the world with well established human rights and a free market that is the biggest in the world.

Of course it has its problems but they are overcome by finding common good solutions.

It has served us very well for many years and it is the mostly little englanders ukip and the tories who are hell bent on removing us not for the common good but for their own racist xenophobic nasty little means.

I predict a soft brexit and today paved the way for it by enabling the opposition to stand up and take on these nasty self serving extreme right wingers.

Glory Glory

[Hibrandenburg]

Oh please...This has nothing to do with the Tory party but all to do with the enacting of the result of a UK wide referendum.

And anyway the court didn't rule that parliament 'can decide' but that parliamentary authority was required for the government to invoke article 50.

On what rational basis can parliament (the same one that authorised the vote in the first place) not provide that authority?

Correct, as of today it has nothing to do with the tory party anymore. They thought they could hijack the referendum result to push their own agenda but that was buggered by today's supreme court decision. To think that brexit is still a done deal is flawed. The vote now goes down to MP's who will be held to account by their constituents and that's a compleyely different prospect to a highest vote count wins.

[RyeSloan]

Correct, as of today it has nothing to do with the tory party anymore. They thought they could hijack the referendum result to push their own agenda but that was buggered by today's supreme court decision. To think that brexit is still a done deal is flawed. The vote now goes down to MP's who will be held to account by their constituents and that's a compleyely different prospect to a highest vote count wins.

Well we will need to agree to disagree on that...

Labour have already said they will have a three line whip to pass the bill and I fully expect a rather vanilla piece of legislation to be passed allowing the government to invoke article 50.

Good thing is we will find out one way or the other relatively quickly and I'm sure you'll happily remind me of this conversation if I'm wrong [emoji6][emoji23]

[Hibrandenburg]

Well we will need to agree to disagree on that...

Labour have already said they will have a three line whip to pass the bill and I fully expect a rather vanilla piece of legislation to be passed allowing the government to invoke article 50.

Good thing is we will find out one way or the other relatively quickly and I'm sure you'll happily remind me of this conversation if I'm wrong [emoji6][emoji23]

Fair doodies! No matter what way it pans out it's been an interesting ride. :greengrin

[RyeSloan]

I don't believe for a second the EU is 'stuffed'. It is becoming ever more synchronised and a force for good in the world with well established human rights and a free market that is the biggest in the world.

Of course it has its problems but they are overcome by finding common good solutions.

It has served us very well for many years and it is the mostly little englanders ukip and the tories who are hell bent on removing us not for the common good but for their own racist xenophobic nasty little means.

I predict a soft brexit and today paved the way for it by enabling the opposition to stand up and take on these nasty self serving extreme right wingers.

Glory Glory

Ah the old little englanders / extreme right wingers argument, often repeated but still not very accurate.

I'm not denying the EU has done some good but I don't share your rather benevolent view of it. The euro zone in particular is fundamentally flawed and at some point the political capital required to hold plan together will be too great.

Already in Italy the 3 main opposition parties support leaving the Euro, not surprising when you consider their economy hasn't grown for a decade, ask them how much they see the EU as a force for good. And while you are at it stop by in Greece and check out what the euro did for them.

On the way back you can speak to Mario in the ECB about his time at Goldman's cooking the books to let Greece in and how many Euro's he has had to print supporting the euro zone since. You can finish up by asking how he thinks negative interest rates policy is coming along.

The list goes on and on and on. No doubt a common market and open co-operation across Europe on many other areas should be seen as a good thing it's just there is now a lot of people that see the cost of that in how it's delivered through the EU and the Euro in particular as just too high...you really don't need to be a little englander or a member of the extreme right to come to that conclusion.

[northstandhibby]

Ah the old little englanders / extreme right wingers argument, often repeated but still not very accurate.

I'm not denying the EU has done some good but I don't share your rather benevolent view of it. The euro zone in particular is fundamentally flawed and at some point the political capital required to hold plan together will be too great.

Already in Italy the 3 main opposition parties support leaving the Euro, not surprising when you consider their economy hasn't grown for a decade, ask them how much they see the EU as a force for good. And while you are at it stop by in Greece and check out what the euro did for them.

On the way back you can speak to Mario in the ECB about his time at Goldman's cooking the books to let Greece in and how many Euro's he has had to print supporting the euro zone since. You can finish up by asking how he thinks negative interest rates policy is coming along.

The list goes on and on and on. No doubt a common market and open co-operation across Europe on many other areas should be seen as a good thing it's just there is now a lot of people that see the cost of that in how it's delivered through the EU and the Euro in particular as just too high...you really don't need to be a little englander or a member of the extreme right to come to that conclusion.

There is an irony in your hatred of the Euro that is linked with the ridiculous idea to leave the biggest market in the world. There is no doubt and there are many people who agree with me is that if there was god forbid a hard exit another Scottish indie vote will surely follow and the SNP would win as the Scottish folk who like me voted to remain with our European neighbours will find the idea of being ruled by a little englander tory pary far too repulsive and will vote to leave the UK.

We would then apply to join the EU as a sovereign nation to be full members and adopt the Euro.

That would happen no doubt about it.

Delicious irony no?

Glory Glory

[RyeSloan]

There is an irony in your hatred of the Euro that is linked with the ridiculous idea to leave the biggest market in the world. There is no doubt and there are many people who agree with me is that if there was god forbid a hard exit another Scottish indie vote will surely follow and the SNP would win as the Scottish folk who like me voted to remain with our European neighbours will find the idea of being ruled by a little englander tory pary far too repulsive and will vote to leave the UK.

We would then apply to join the EU as a sovereign nation to be full members and adopt the Euro.

That would happen no doubt about it.

Delicious irony no?

Glory Glory

If you say so...

[northstandhibby]

If you say so...

Its called the flip side of the coin. The Brexiteers certainly weren't informed the consequences were very probably the break up of the Uk.

It's 'one' of the reasons I predict a way would be found to row back on a hard exit and a Norway style exit type agreement will be agreed upon. A type of political fudge that will suffice for now.

Glory Glory

[speedy_gonzales]

There is an irony in your hatred of the Euro that is linked with the ridiculous idea to leave the biggest market in the world. There is no doubt and there are many people who agree with me is that if there was god forbid a hard exit another Scottish indie vote will surely follow and the SNP would win as the Scottish folk who like me voted to remain with our European neighbours will find the idea of being ruled by a little englander tory pary far too repulsive and will vote to leave the UK.

We would then apply to join the EU as a sovereign nation to be full members and adopt the Euro.

That would happen no doubt about it.

Delicious irony no?

Glory Glory

After what we've went through the last few years I wouldn't bet on it, pollsters have been wrong too many times and unfortunately (or fortunately) just because you think that's how everyone thinks, doesn't make it an actual general consensus.

[northstandhibby]

After what we've went through the last few years I wouldn't bet on it, pollsters have been wrong too many times and unfortunately (or fortunately) just because you think that's how everyone thinks, doesn't make it an actual general consensus.

I don't get the impression Nicola Sturgeon is not serious at telling us another indy is very likely if there is a hard brexit. I think they are extremely serious in regards to it.

The indie vote was very close when it was a Labour government on the No side. I merely surmise when it is the tories telling the Scottish folk to say No and with them having not long dragged us out of the EU against our wishes with a hard exit, the SNP would win another indie vote probably quite easily.

Glory Glory

[ronaldo7]

Exactly this. I am sorry to insist that Corbyn and Labour will not be altering the course towards a soft Brexit. They may win the odd amendment or two if they can find favour with others in the Commons to produce a majority, should that go to a vote. However, we are not about to find the best parts of EU/single market membership being rescued by Labour.

The jig is up and we are on the way out of the EU, single market, ECJ, probably the customs union in large parts and I'd safely bet in 2020, we will be on our way out of the ECHR and the European Convention.


This is where I'm at, the Uk gov refused to accept any of the 72 amendment's to the Scotland bill, and we wont get any accepted here either.

On the subject of the Scotland bill, the much vaunted embedding of the Sewel convention in the Scotland act has now found to be meaningless. That's what happens when you try do business with the UK GOV.

Roll on Indy2...It's coming.

[The Green Goblin]

You will know as well as I do that politics is all about maneuvering, strategy and deals struck behind the scenes as well as the grubbier side which includes machiavellian type posturing and lobbying.

For me today was a turning point in brexit. I believe there is now a way to achieve a 'soft' brexit. Article 50 will be activated however before then there will be huge opposition to a 'hard' brexit.

Today's ruling paves the way for the opposition to demand a 'Norway style' relationship with the EU. This will grant us access to the single market through the EEA agreement (European Economic Area) and will leave us as part of the Schengen Agreement which will allow access for workers across the EU to come to the UK without restrictions.

Part of this deal would also and very importantly include us retaining access to the ECHR and the articles of the Human Rights Act 1998.

I believe this was always going to be the outcome. Personally I am absolutely delighted the opposition will now be enabled to argue the case in parliament that a 'soft' brexit is the only outcome they will accept and it is non-negotiable.

I strongly predict the ruling today has given the opposition to a 'hard' brexit the 'nuts' to coin a poker hand term.

Glory Glory

I hope for the same thing, but the bit in bold might be the flaw in that plan. Where will that meaningful opposition come from? Certainly not from Corbyn´s Labour, who seem quite happy to trundle along in the Tories´wake...

[marinello59]

I hope for the same thing, but the bit in bold might be the flaw in that plan. Where will that meaningful opposition come from? Certainly not from Corbyn´s Labour, who seem quite happy to trundle along in the Tories´wake...

The main opposition to this will come from the SNP.

[northstandhibby]

I hope for the same thing, but the bit in bold might be the flaw in that plan. Where will that meaningful opposition come from? Certainly not from Corbyn´s Labour, who seem quite happy to trundle along in the Tories´wake...

Correct. Labour's apathy to making a case for the EU prior to the vote was one of the main reasons the extreme right won it. If Jeremy has not yet realised that this is his chance to form a coalition of opposition that would include left of center tories against a hard brexit then he is not worthy of being a politician.

He will step up on this one and it will provide him the opportunity to appear statesmanlike and position himself as a dealmaker/breaker and demand the tories protect the UK's best interests which are of course remaining in the single market with a Norway style looser arrangement within the EU.

If he doesn't he is in political terms 'dead in the water'.

We already know the SNP are ready to vote down the bill when put to the vote and if Corbyn was to step up then the left have the 'nuts' hand as there a number of left of center tories who would join with them or abstain.

If parliament was to vote down Article 50 it would severely damage the tories and a general election would follow soon enough with Corbyn and the left arguing the tories plan of taking the UK out with a hard brexit as disastrous and would have wrecked the economy and other potential very serious detrimental consequences such as the break up of the UK.

I'm certain if Jeremy has not yet grasped this opportunity to wind the extreme right of center tories necks in there will be plenty explaining it to him and the pressure will revert back to the tories to ensure ground is given to enable the vote to enact article 50 gets through.

A negotiated soft brexit consensus would be best for the UK and go a long way to healing the divisions that have emerged from the brexit vote.

It is in the interests of both main parties to reach a harmonious deal in the best interests of the wider UK.

There is all to play for.

Glory Glory

[JeMeSouviens]

Correct. Labour's apathy to making a case for the EU prior to the vote was one of the main reasons the extreme right won it. If Jeremy has not yet realised that this is his chance to form a coalition of opposition that would include left of center tories against a hard brexit then he is not worthy of being a politician.

He will step up on this one and it will provide him the opportunity to appear statesmanlike and position himself as a dealmaker/breaker and demand the tories protect the UK's best interests which are of course remaining in the single market with a Norway style looser arrangement within the EU.

If he doesn't he is in political terms 'dead in the water'.

We already know the SNP are ready to vote down the bill when put to the vote and if Corbyn was to step up then the left have the 'nuts' hand as there a number of left of center tories who would join with them or abstain.

If parliament was to vote down Article 50 it would severely damage the tories and a general election would follow soon enough with Corbyn and the left arguing the tories plan of taking the UK out with a hard brexit as disastrous and would have wrecked the economy and other potential very serious detrimental consequences such as the break up of the UK.

I'm certain if Jeremy has not yet grasped this opportunity to wind the extreme right of center tories necks in there will be plenty explaining it to him and the pressure will revert back to the tories to ensure ground is given to enable the vote to enact article 50 gets through.

A negotiated soft brexit consensus would be best for the UK and go a long way to healing the divisions that have emerged from the brexit vote.

It is in the interests of both main parties to reach a harmonious deal in the best interests of the wider UK.

There is all to play for.

Glory Glory

A "Norway option" has already been specifically ruled out by both the Tory and Labour leaderships. tbh, I think Corbyn and May were both public remainers but secret Brexiteers.

Indyref2 is coming, Sturgeon is just waiting for formal rejection of the Scottish government's "Scotland's Place in Europe" paper by May. It's all but de facto ruled out already.

Whether we'll win is, imo, too close to call.

For me, the political case is even stronger than last time, the economic case (at least in the next decade) is considerably weaker.

The choice is a somewhat predictable, managed (terminal?) decline vs a hard, painful shock followed by a chance to rebuild. Whether 50%+1 can be persuaded to take the latter is very debatable but I fully support giving them the option.

[northstandhibby]

A "Norway option" has already been specifically ruled out by both the Tory and Labour leaderships. tbh, I think Corbyn and May were both public remainers but secret Brexiteers.

Indyref2 is coming, Sturgeon is just waiting for formal rejection of the Scottish government's "Scotland's Place in Europe" paper by May. It's all but de facto ruled out already.

Whether we'll win is, imo, too close to call.

For me, the political case is even stronger than last time, the economic case (at least in the next decade) is considerably weaker.

The choice is a somewhat predictable, managed (terminal?) decline vs a hard, painful shock followed by a chance to rebuild. Whether 50%+1 can be persuaded to take the latter is very debatable but I fully support giving them the option.

There's every chance they will row back from ruling out anything now. Its exactly the type of situation you outline that will alter their mindsets.

Albeit I disagree with you on the too close to call aspect in the event of a hard brexit as the UK outside of the EU is a game-changer and with a rabid right wing tory party in charge it would significantly sway the undecided and additionally harden the SNP's arguments.

I would expect a Yes vote to win by a decisive margin in the event of the UK leaving the EU by way of a hard brexit and the prospect of a rabid right wing extremist tory party in charge that will be hitting the poorest and the vulnerable the hardest with swingeing cuts.

Glory Glory

[Slavers]

Is there a difference between Right Wing Politics, Far Right Politics & Extreme Right Politics?

I always assumed right wing politics were what the conservatives were into and far right was more BNP and Neo Nazi politics.

But I have heard anyone who is for Brexit being called far right & extreme right. Is the just emotional language or is there a criteria for each category of ring wing politics?

[CropleyWasGod]

Is there a difference between Right Wing Politics, Far Right Politics & Extreme Right Politics?

I always assumed right wing politics were what the conservatives were into and far right was more BNP and Neo Nazi politics.

But I have heard anyone who is for Brexit being called far right & extreme right. Is the just emotional language or is there a criteria for each category of ring wing politics?

There's also the Brexit voters who voted that way as a collective F-you to the Government. I suppose they could be labelled the GitItUpYe-Right. :cb

[RyeSloan]

Is there a difference between Right Wing Politics, Far Right Politics & Extreme Right Politics?

I always assumed right wing politics were what the conservatives were into and far right was more BNP and Neo Nazi politics.

But I have heard anyone who is for Brexit being called far right & extreme right. Is the just emotional language or is there a criteria for each category of ring wing politics?

You forgot the rabid right as well...[emoji23]

[northstandhibby]

You forgot the rabid right as well...[emoji23]

:agree:

Glory Glory

[JeMeSouviens]

Is there a difference between Right Wing Politics, Far Right Politics & Extreme Right Politics?

I always assumed right wing politics were what the conservatives were into and far right was more BNP and Neo Nazi politics.

But I have heard anyone who is for Brexit being called far right & extreme right. Is the just emotional language or is there a criteria for each category of ring wing politics?

Ooh, I love a sweeping generalisation! :greengrin

I'll go for:

centre right - accepts the UK consensus of the last 30 years or so. Would be at home in NewLab or Cameroon style wet Tories. Would prefer no Brexit but happy enough to go along with it.
hard right - wants to cut workers' rights, deregulate business, socially usually authoritarian but would change things via parliament. Would be at home in today's Tories having previously flirted with UKIP. Loves Brexit.
far right - as above with extra racism and might just do away with parliament if got the chance. ****ing loves Brexit.
extreme right - fondles guns.

How did I do? :wink:

[lord bunberry]

I don't get the impression Nicola Sturgeon is not serious at telling us another indy is very likely if there is a hard brexit. I think they are extremely serious in regards to it.

The indie vote was very close when it was a Labour government on the No side. I merely surmise when it is the tories telling the Scottish folk to say No and with them having not long dragged us out of the EU against our wishes with a hard exit, the SNP would win another indie vote probably quite easily.

Glory Glory
There wasn't a labour government during the independence referendum.

[northstandhibby]

There wasn't a labour government during the independence referendum.

Fair comment. i should have made it clearer I was referring to Brown and Darling who took overall charge of the No campaign and it was effectively Labour that orchestrated it with their big Scottish hitters. They don't have them anyone of the same calibre now that would resonate with the Scottish folks.

Glory Glory

[HiBremian]

For those trying to understand Brexiteers motives. Just been to my dentist in Darlo. He told me his gran voted Brexit cos she didn't want a "muslim queen".

Just saying......

Sent from my LENNY3 using Tapatalk

[steakbake]

I think what was a remarkable turn of events in the indyref was the fact that a backbench, opposition Labour MP was responsible for "the vow" on the basis of no mandate whatsoever to do so.

ProUnion contributors may disagree but we can pinpoint that famous yougov poll which gave Yes a slender lead, as being the exact moment that various captains of industry were called into Downing Street and who one by one, appeared on unquestioning media sources to threaten withdrawal of their companies, price hikes and all round economic punishment if the vote went the wrong way.

This time out, a starting point of around 45ish for Yes, some more solidified views and some discrediting of many of the things we were told may tip the balance to Yes.

I think the attempt to avoid a new vote hasn't worked. All you need to do is read the twitter feeds and interviews of unionist politicians to realise that these are the starter pistol of a new campaign.

Labour have variously promised federalism, a new Act of Union etc but I sense they would remain implacably unionist and not promising these things if there wasn't at least a strong element within the party who see things differently now. As I see it, the only chance we will ever see of another Labour Scottish Government or executive is as one of an iscotland.

Economically: the refrain was about "security and stability" - two words that BT must have picked up from focus groups because it was parroted frequently. Where is the economic stability now that we are looking at leaving the single market and EU?

Who knows how it will end up but I think - as I always have done - that a proposition like independence or indeed Brexit can never be fought or won on the basis of what you will definitely get at the end of it. I've seen various people on here saying they'd vote yes only if their exact same income level will be maintained or if the railways will be nationalised or some other wish list. The only chance of that - a chance, not a certainty - is by the kind of government you vote in and the policies they promote.

Indyref2 may see better worked out answers from the Yes side on some matters, but fundamentally, it will be a question of what kind of country we should aspire to be.

[northstandhibby]

I think what was a remarkable turn of events in the indyref was the fact that a backbench, opposition Labour MP was responsible for "the vow" on the basis of no mandate whatsoever to do so.

ProUnion contributors may disagree but we can pinpoint that famous yougov poll which gave Yes a slender lead, as being the exact moment that various captains of industry were called into Downing Street and who one by one, appeared on unquestioning media sources to threaten withdrawal of their companies, price hikes and all round economic punishment if the vote went the wrong way.

This time out, a starting point of around 45ish for Yes, some more solidified views and some discrediting of many of the things we were told may tip the balance to Yes.

I think the attempt to avoid a new vote hasn't worked. All you need to do is read the twitter feeds and interviews of unionist politicians to realise that these are the starter pistol of a new campaign.

Labour have variously promised federalism, a new Act of Union etc but I sense they would remain implacably unionist and not promising these things if there wasn't at least a strong element within the party who see things differently now. As I see it, the only chance we will ever see of another Labour Scottish Government or executive is as one of an iscotland.

Economically: the refrain was about "security and stability" - two words that BT must have picked up from focus groups because it was parroted frequently. Where is the economic stability now that we are looking at leaving the single market and EU?

Who knows how it will end up but I think - as I always have done - that a proposition like independence or indeed Brexit can never be fought or won on the basis of what you will definitely get at the end of it. I've seen various people on here saying they'd vote yes only if their exact same income level will be maintained or if the railways will be nationalised or some other wish list. The only chance of that - a chance, not a certainty - is by the kind of government you vote in and the policies they promote.

Indyref2 may see better worked out answers from the Yes side on some matters, but fundamentally, it will be a question of what kind of country we should aspire to be.

Good points well made.

If there is an indy ref 2 which is looking increasingly likely if the hard brexit is the outcome then I would strongly suggest the SNP does not 'fudge' any of the key issues if they purport to winning the key arguments.

If the intention is after winning indy ref 2 to join the EU as a sovereign nation then they must be honest and state Scotland will be adopting the Euro. The currency issue was a major 'fudge' last time out and Eck seemed unconvincing. It will be non-negotiable for Scotland to join the Euro if applying to join the EU.

They must make their case honestly and candidly if they are serious of gaining independence.

You're correct in the No side using deliberate key buzz words consistently over and over again but this time around it would be unlikely they would be able to state 'security and stability' as there will continue to be a great degree of instability and uncertainty for a long time after they have left the EU with a hard brexit.

The Daily Record was instrumental last time around however folk have woken up to the type of propaganda used when 'the vow' was used by them and Brown. Brown is no longer relevant and it would be folly to use a yesterdays man to front a new No campaign.

Additionally and crucially the SNP would be of a starting point of around 45% and if the momentum of the previous campaign was to be repeated the only outcome would be a huge Yes majority of anything north of 60%.

Westminster would only have themselves to blame when it allowed the extreme right wing eurosceptic tories and ukippers with an apathetic Labour party to exit the EU with a hard brexit.

Glory Glory

[ronaldo7]

I think what was a remarkable turn of events in the indyref was the fact that a backbench, opposition Labour MP was responsible for "the vow" on the basis of no mandate whatsoever to do so.

ProUnion contributors may disagree but we can pinpoint that famous yougov poll which gave Yes a slender lead, as being the exact moment that various captains of industry were called into Downing Street and who one by one, appeared on unquestioning media sources to threaten withdrawal of their companies, price hikes and all round economic punishment if the vote went the wrong way.

This time out, a starting point of around 45ish for Yes, some more solidified views and some discrediting of many of the things we were told may tip the balance to Yes.

I think the attempt to avoid a new vote hasn't worked. All you need to do is read the twitter feeds and interviews of unionist politicians to realise that these are the starter pistol of a new campaign.

Labour have variously promised federalism, a new Act of Union etc but I sense they would remain implacably unionist and not promising these things if there wasn't at least a strong element within the party who see things differently now. As I see it, the only chance we will ever see of another Labour Scottish Government or executive is as one of an iscotland.

Economically: the refrain was about "security and stability" - two words that BT must have picked up from focus groups because it was parroted frequently. Where is the economic stability now that we are looking at leaving the single market and EU?

Who knows how it will end up but I think - as I always have done - that a proposition like independence or indeed Brexit can never be fought or won on the basis of what you will definitely get at the end of it. I've seen various people on here saying they'd vote yes only if their exact same income level will be maintained or if the railways will be nationalised or some other wish list. The only chance of that - a chance, not a certainty - is by the kind of government you vote in and the policies they promote.

Indyref2 may see better worked out answers from the Yes side on some matters, but fundamentally, it will be a question of what kind of country we should aspire to be.


Where have all these Captains gone to. I can't for the life of me wonder why they've not been all over the news/papers, threatening the loss of jobs, and increases in costs to their businesses if we leave the EU. :wink:

[marinello59]

Where have all these Captains gone to. I can't for the life of me wonder why they've not been all over the news/papers, threatening the loss of jobs, and increases in costs to their businesses if we leave the EU. :wink:

You see what you want to see. There has been plenty of coverage given to business leaders warning of the consequences of a hard Brexit.

[steakbake]

You see what you want to see. There has been plenty of coverage given to business leaders warning of the consequences of a hard Brexit.

I was going to say... they were around but arguably less choreographed this time out.

[marinello59]

I was going to say... they were around but arguably less choreographed this time out.

Possibly. :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

You see what you want to see. There has been plenty of coverage given to business leaders warning of the consequences of a hard Brexit.

We've not been swamped with companies going through the door of Number 10, and the threats of Alien invasions though.

No comparison really.:wink:

I know the snoopers charter was introduced recently, but how do you know what I've seen:greengrin

[AndyM_1875]

If the intention is after winning indy ref 2 to join the EU as a sovereign nation then they must be honest and state Scotland will be adopting the Euro. The currency issue was a major 'fudge' last time out and Eck seemed unconvincing. It will be non-negotiable for Scotland to join the Euro if applying to join the EU.

They must make their case honestly and candidly if they are serious of gaining independence.


Re the currency that's not quite the case.
Croatia (population 4.1m) 013 as it's 28th member state and cheerfully uses the Kuna as it's currency. There have been noises about adopting the Euro but somehow it always seems to get kicked into touch.
Neither is there any great appetite to adopt the Euro in Sweden (population 10m)

Scotland post Indy can quite happily run it's own currency (Scots Pound?) and make overtures about adopting the Euro at some vague future point.

[Moulin Yarns]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-38756138


Euro or new currency?

[steakbake]

This, this and a thousand times this, Andy.

Rips my knitting to see people claiming that you must adopt the Euro or join Schengen, or speak German or whatever is claimed. Neither is the case.

On the trade issue: if Scotland is in the EU and the EU has a deal with rUK (which let's be honest, will be negotiated with the EU in a stronger position) then trade will continue with the rUK and not suddenly disappear as we're being told.

53% of imports to the UK come from the EU. Ours would join them. I imagine they'll be needing electricity, gas, oil and the rest of it?

[JeMeSouviens]

Re the currency that's not quite the case.
Croatia (population 4.1m) 013 as it's 28th member state and cheerfully uses the Kuna as it's currency. There have been noises about adopting the Euro but somehow it always seems to get kicked into touch.
Neither is there any great appetite to adopt the Euro in Sweden (population 10m)

Scotland post Indy can quite happily run it's own currency (Scots Pound?) and make overtures about adopting the Euro at some vague future point.

Spot on :agree:

Sweden has no specific opt out and has been theoretically committed to joining the Euro for over 20 years!

[northstandhibby]

Re the currency that's not quite the case.
Croatia (population 4.1m) 013 as it's 28th member state and cheerfully uses the Kuna as it's currency. There have been noises about adopting the Euro but somehow it always seems to get kicked into touch.
Neither is there any great appetite to adopt the Euro in Sweden (population 10m)

Scotland post Indy can quite happily run it's own currency (Scots Pound?) and make overtures about adopting the Euro at some vague future point.

Scotland would be in no position to bargain with the EU if seeking to become full member as a sovereign nation and any talk of a 'scottish pound' is a deliberate red herring because post winning a second referendum the 'scottish pound' debate would very soon become an adoption of the Euro. No doubt about it.

The EU would simply state adoption of the Euro is a prerequisite of joining the EU as it is becoming ever more synchronised and closer ties.

It's simply a red herring to appease any UK unionists to win them over pre indy 2 vote.

I'd be disappointed if they deny their intention is to join the EU and become full members with warts and all so to speak as its a dishonest position from them but then I suppose they are politicians after all.

Glory Glory

[JeMeSouviens]

Scotland would be in no position to bargain with the EU if seeking to become full member as a sovereign nation and any talk of a 'scottish pound' is a deliberate red herring because post wining a second referendum the 'scottish pound' debate would very soon become an adoption of the Euro. No doubt about it.

The EU would simply state adoption of the Euro is a prerequisite of joining the EU as it is becoming ever more synchronised and closer ties.

It's simply a red herring to appease any UK unionists to win them over pre indy 2 vote.

Glory Glory

Sorry but you're talking grade A *****.

Scotland could be treated as a continuity state when rUK leaves and thus inherit the UK's opt out from the Euro but even if not, as a new member committed to joining the Euro, we would actually be forbidden from joining the Euro until we had had our own currency for 2 years. And even after that 2 years we can't join the Euro until we have met the convergence criteria, one of which is joining the exchange rate mechanism, ERM2. Choose not to join ERM2, *can't* join the Euro.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurozone#Historical_eurozone_enlargements_and_exch ange-rate_regimes_for_EU_members

Currently 2 EU members have opt outs from the Euro: UK and Denmark.
A further 7 EU members are committed by treaty to join at an unspecified future date but choose to stay outside: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Sweden.

"Scotland must join the Euro" is false.

[northstandhibby]

Sorry but you're talking grade A *****.

Scotland could be treated as a continuity state when rUK leaves and thus inherit the UK's opt out from the Euro but even if not, as a new member committed to joining the Euro, we would actually be forbidden from joining the Euro until we had had our own currency for 2 years. And even after that 2 years we can't join the Euro until we have met the convergence criteria, one of which is joining the exchange rate mechanism, ERM2. Choose not to join ERM2, *can't* join the Euro.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurozone#Historical_eurozone_enlargements_and_exch ange-rate_regimes_for_EU_members

Currently 2 EU members have opt outs from the Euro: UK and Denmark.
A further 7 EU members are committed by treaty to join at an unspecified future date but choose to stay outside: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Sweden.

"Scotland must join the Euro" is false.

Nobody was saying 'Scotland must join the Euro' the day after winning the indy ref 2 vote. Merely stating the fact that joining the Euro would be an expected prerequisite of joining the EU for new members such as ourselves would be.

The point I was also alluding to was the likes of Patrick Harvie should be outlining that fact and that any short-term currency would be expected to be just that and the Euro is a pre requisite commitment.

They should be entirely upfront with the public and spell out exactly what independence would mean and that their intention would be be to apply to join the EU which would mean a prerequisite of joining the Euro even if it was just a 'commitment' at that stage.

We would join the Euro at the first opportunity we could, no doubt about it. The SNP are europhiles which is no bad thing in my book.

You merely strengthen my point.

Glory Glory

[Moulin Yarns]

Nobody was saying 'Scotland must join the Euro' the day after winning the indy ref 2 vote. Merely stating the fact that joining the Euro would be an expected prerequisite of joining the EU for new members such as ourselves would be.

The point I was also alluding to was the likes of Patrick Harvie should be outlining that fact and that any short-term currency would be expected to be just that and the Euro is a pre requisite commitment.

They should be entirely upfront with the public and spell out exactly what independence would mean and that their intention would be be to apply to join the EU which would mean a prerequisite of joining the Euro even if it was just a 'commitment' at that stage.

We would join the Euro at the first opportunity we could, no doubt about it. The SNP are europhiles which is no bad thing in my book.

You merely strengthen my point.

Glory Glory

The Euro might not be around by then


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38749884


If the Trump administration has its way
:greengrin

[northstandhibby]

The Euro might not be around by then


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38749884


If the Trump administration has its way
:greengrin

It would certainly appear the far right Trump administration and the far right here is attempting to undermine the EU and its core values of decency, common good and human rights.

God help us all if they get their wish.

Glory Glory

[AndyM_1875]

Scotland would be in no position to bargain with the EU if seeking to become full member as a sovereign nation and any talk of a 'scottish pound' is a deliberate red herring because post winning a second referendum the 'scottish pound' debate would very soon become an adoption of the Euro. No doubt about it.

The EU would simply state adoption of the Euro is a prerequisite of joining the EU as it is becoming ever more synchronised and closer ties.

It's simply a red herring to appease any UK unionists to win them over pre indy 2 vote.

I'd be disappointed if they deny their intention is to join the EU and become full members with warts and all so to speak as its a dishonest position from them but then I suppose they are politicians after all.

Glory Glory

No sorry. You can trade electronically in Croatia, Denmark and Sweden using Euros, as in fact many businesses do already in the UK. These countries are full members of the EU.
Other nations are members of the Customs Union/EFTA and run their own currencies such as Norway.

But there is no pressure on any of these countries to adopt the Euro. It's a 'maybe further down the line we might or we might not' issue.

And the EU is unlikely to put much in the way of pressure on an Indy Scotland joining, especially with the UK (probably by then the rUK) leaving as technically by the time we apply to take our place, Brexit won't be complete so we're not technically leaving anyway.

[CropleyWasGod]

Nobody was saying 'Scotland must join the Euro' the day after winning the indy ref 2 vote. Merely stating the fact that joining the Euro would be an expected prerequisite of joining the EU for new members such as ourselves would be.

The point I was also alluding to was the likes of Patrick Harvie should be outlining that fact and that any short-term currency would be expected to be just that and the Euro is a pre requisite commitment.

They should be entirely upfront with the public and spell out exactly what independence would mean and that their intention would be be to apply to join the EU which would mean a prerequisite of joining the Euro even if it was just a 'commitment' at that stage.

We would join the Euro at the first opportunity we could, no doubt about it. The SNP are europhiles which is no bad thing in my book.

You merely strengthen my point.

Glory Glory

Why would there need to be a "short-term currency"? As was said at length during the last debate, we are entitled to use the £ sterling if we want, with or without a currency union with rUK.

[RyeSloan]

It would certainly appear the far right Trump administration and the far right here is attempting to undermine the EU and its core values of decency, common good and human rights.

God help us all if they get their wish.

Glory Glory

Concerns on the structural weakness of the Euro concept are far from a right wing exclusive club.

It doesn't take much effort to understand some of the structural flaws the Euro has and the effects it has had.

But then again I suppose you will call even the likes of Jospeh Stiglitz right wing [emoji23]

[Moulin Yarns]

Why would there need to be a "short-term currency"? As was said at length during the last debate, we are entitled to use the £ sterling if we want, with or without a currency union with rUK.

And see how far that got us! Nobody on the Yes side could agree. New currency makes some sense if it can be agreed. Only the SNP were adamant in using the £ sterling.

[northstandhibby]

Why would there need to be a "short-term currency"? As was said at length during the last debate, we are entitled to use the £ sterling if we want, with or without a currency union with rUK.

Why would you continue using a currency that the new sovereign state of Scotland would have no controlling levers over or be politically aligned with?

Surely you would a agree a country should either have its own currency or at the very least be politically aligned with one as we will be with the EU once we are accepted as a new sovereign state and accepted its jurisdiction and prerequisites.

It would make sense to have a clean break and then adopt the Euro as we would be seeking to join with the EU and then adopt the Euro. In for a penny in for a pound or should that be a scottish penny and pound or a euro?

:greengrin

Glory Glory

[CropleyWasGod]

Why would you continue using a currency that the new sovereign state of Scotland would have no controlling levers over or be politically aligned with?

Surely you would a agree a country should either have its own currency or at least be politically aligned with one.

It would make sense to have a clean break and then adopt the Euro as we would be seeking to join with it and then adopt the Euro. In for a penny in for a pound or should that be a scottish penny and pound or a euro?


:greengrin

Glory Glory

I was asking you the question "why would there need to be a short-term currency?"

In your scenario, that would mean 3 different currencies in a short period of time. Not a vote-winner, IMO :greengrin

[northstandhibby]

I was asking you the question "why would there need to be a short-term currency?"

In your scenario, that would mean 3 different currencies in a short period of time. Not a vote-winner, IMO :greengrin

Can't please everybody. Sometimes not anybody but hey ho.

:greengrin

Glory Glory

[Sylar]

Corbyn imposing a 3 line whip on backing Article 50.

What's the point of an opposition that doesn't oppose anything?!

[Pretty Boy]

Corbyn imposing a 3 line whip on backing Article 50.

What's the point of an opposition that doesn't oppose anything?!

Maybe his MPs will take his attitude towards the 3 line whip.

[Slavers]

The UK is the fastest growing economy in the western world today. Surely credit must go to someone but who? The working people who do a great job for their employers.

But I hear that it's a broken Britain but if Britain is broken despite being the fastest growing economy. What does it say for the rest of the EU?

[bigwheel]

The UK is the fastest growing economy in the western world today. Surely credit must go to someone but who? The working people who do a great job for their employers.

But I hear that it's a broken Britain but if Britain is broken despite being the fastest growing economy. What does it say for the rest of the EU?

Brexit hasn't happened yet , there is no relationship can be drawn about the future based on current performance. All estimates of any credence suggest an impact of around 60bn - 100bn - about 3% of GDP

[Slavers]

Brexit hasn't happened yet , there is no relationship can be drawn about the future based on current performance. All estimates of any credence suggest an impact of around 60bn - 100bn - about 3% of GDP

OK I can accept that but many before the vote predicted instant decline in the economy that never happened.

But my other point is was what does it say about the state of the economies in the rest of the western world primarily the EU. Considering we buy far more from the EU than we sell to it then surely a sensible agreement can be reached between the UK & EU in regards to trade. Seems to me that the UK is in a fairly strong position for a future trade deal.

Why do some hold the EU up so high and seem determined to talk down the UK when In fact compared to the EU the UK is performing better?

[bigwheel]

OK I can accept that but many before the vote predicted instant decline in the economy that never happened.

But my other point is was what does it say about the state of the economies in the rest of the western world primarily the EU. Considering we buy far more from the EU than we sell to it then surely a sensible agreement can be reached between the UK & EU in regards to trade. Seems to me that the UK is in a fairly strong position for a future trade deal.

Why do some hold the EU up so high and seem determined to talk down the UK when In fact compared to the EU the UK is performing better?

well, we have seen a major depreciation in the value of the pound...and starting to see a period of heightened inflation. the full consequences remain unknown as the economic impact will be determined by the negotiated exit...e.g. what access do we have to free trade in europe post brexit? and vice versa...

[Slavers]

well, we have seen a major depreciation in the value of the pound...and starting to see a period of heightened inflation. the full consequences remain unknown as the economic impact will be determined by the negotiated exit...e.g. what access do we have to free trade in europe post brexit? and vice versa...

I fear the EU will put politics before what's better for the economy of the EU and the UK. I mean I have read they would rather punish the UK with a bad trade deal in order to stop other nations from wanting to leave. Surely that is in no one's interests and I'm not sure how true that position actually is but I have read some people in the UK agreeing with this stance. Why? It's not good for anyone except a political project and the politicians.

I can't help but think that part of the reason Nicola Sturgeon is so in favour of the EU more so than the UK even though Scotland does 4 times the level of trade with the UK than it does the EU. Is because she had her heart set on one of those very lucrative EU jobs that was taken away from her with the brexit vote. In my opinion the UK is far more important to Scotland than the EU and all the economic figures back this up.

The UK our closest friends and largest trading partner is performing better than the EU but Nicola Sturgeon wants to take us out the UK to try and apply to another union who we trade less with and doesnt perform as good as the UK.

That I think when it comes to indyref2 will be the argument that looses the SNP another independence referendum.

[lord bunberry]

The UK is the fastest growing economy in the western world today. Surely credit must go to someone but who? The working people who do a great job for their employers.

But I hear that it's a broken Britain but if Britain is broken despite being the fastest growing economy. What does it say for the rest of the EU?
We may have the fastest growing economy, but for most people things are as bad as ever. Since the economic crash I would say that things have stayed the same for a huge percentage of the population. Employment is high, but its high because of lots of poorly paid and part time jobs. The working poor are now outnumbering the unemployed. The country is in so much debt its hard to imagine it will ever be able to repay it. Credit must go to the people of this country for being so resilient, but I wouldn't give politicians any credit. Brexit could disastrous if not handled properly or if the EU decide to make an example of us.

[CropleyWasGod]

I fear the EU will put politics before what's better for the economy of the EU and the UK. I mean I have read they would rather punish the UK with a bad trade deal in order to stop other nations from wanting to leave. Surely that is in no one's interests and I'm not sure how true that position actually is but I have read some people in the UK agreeing with this stance. Why? It's not good for anyone except a political project and the politicians.

I can't help but think that part of the reason Nicola Sturgeon is so in favour of the EU more so than the UK even though Scotland does 4 times the level of trade with the UK than it does the EU. Is because she had her heart set on one of those very lucrative EU jobs that was taken away from her with the brexit vote. In my opinion the UK is far more important to Scotland than the EU and all the economic figures back this up.

The UK our closest friends and largest trading partner is performing better than the EU but Nicola Sturgeon wants to take us out the UK to try and apply to another union who we trade less with and doesnt perform as good as the UK.

That I think when it comes to indyref2 will be the argument that looses the SNP another independence referendum.
In essence, are you assuming that Scotland wouldn't trade with rUk if it were in the EU?

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Slavers]

In essence, are you assuming that Scotland wouldn't trade with rUk if it were in the EU?

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

I'm sure we would trade with rUK but on what terms I'm not sure. Also would it not mean the EU would have final say on the trade deal between Scotland and rUk.

The argument for leaving the UK seems to be at odds with the argument for staying within the EU seeing it is the rUK that is Scotlands largest trading partner by 4 times compared with the EU.

A lot of uncertainty but I think staying in the UK gives us stability I accept the EU referendum result has wobbled that a bit but the independence from the UK given our close relationship with it would create far more instability at a time when we should stick together it order to make the best results out of brexit.

[Slavers]

Just another wee tuppence worth.

Nicola Sturgeon says dragging Scotland out the EU against its will and will call an independence referendum to protect its interests. I feel that is wrong and she only sees it from her SNP stand point.

I mean roughly 1.5m voted to remain in the EU but a massive number of 1m voted to leave the EU in Scotland. Stating the obvious that's a lot of Scots bothered to turn out to vote leave. Take into account over 60% of Scots in Edinburgh voted to No to independence then I think she he has some way to go to get a Yes vote win in indyref2.

I think it would leave Scotland a bitterley divided nation and could even im a worse case scenario lead to the break up of parts of Scotland. Would Nicola Sturgeon deny the boarder regions there democratic right to remain in the UK or Edinburgh for that matter?

[CropleyWasGod]

Just another wee tuppence worth.

Nicola Sturgeon says dragging Scotland out the EU against its will and will call an independence referendum to protect its interests. I feel that is wrong and she only sees it from her SNP stand point.

I mean roughly 1.5m voted to remain in the EU but a massive number of 1m voted to leave the EU in Scotland. Stating the obvious that's a lot of Scots bothered to turn out to vote leave. Take into account over 60% of Scots in Edinburgh voted to No to independence then I think she he has some way to go to get a Yes vote win in indyref2.

I think it would leave Scotland a bitterley divided nation and could even im a worse case scenario lead to the break up of parts of Scotland. Would Nicola Sturgeon deny the boarder regions there democratic right to remain in the UK or Edinburgh for that matter?
Am I reading you right here?

Because a minority of Scots, 1m as you say, voted to leave the EU, NS should side with them? Is it not her job to reflect the wishes of her electorate?

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Slavers]

Am I reading you right here?

Because a minority of Scots, 1m as you say, voted to leave the EU, NS should side with them? Is it not her job to reflect the wishes of her electorate?

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

No I'm saying that using the 1.5m who voted to remain as a trigger for indyref2 I think is wrong because she is ignoring the over 2m who voted No in the UK referendum.

[ronaldo7]

Just another wee tuppence worth.

Nicola Sturgeon says dragging Scotland out the EU against its will and will call an independence referendum to protect its interests. I feel that is wrong and she only sees it from her SNP stand point.

I mean roughly 1.5m voted to remain in the EU but a massive number of 1m voted to leave the EU in Scotland. Stating the obvious that's a lot of Scots bothered to turn out to vote leave. Take into account over 60% of Scots in Edinburgh voted to No to independence then I think she he has some way to go to get a Yes vote win in indyref2.

I think it would leave Scotland a bitterley divided nation and could even im a worse case scenario lead to the break up of parts of Scotland. Would Nicola Sturgeon deny the boarder regions there democratic right to remain in the UK or Edinburgh for that matter?

I see where you're coming from...

Indyref 1.. You'll be out of the EU...It'll be a disaster.

Indyref2.. You'll be in the EU...It'll be a disaster.

Why would the RUK not want to trade with Scotland after Indy? They currently sell more to us than we do to them. Was that not the argument during the EU ref regarding german cars etc?