Brexit - what will happen next

[Hibbyradge]

Regards this poll, what bit of a 9% deficit, no oil revenue, added to legacy debt interest payments don't the Aye2 heather brains get? Or are they all high on wee Mhairi's staple diet of hooch, chips and kola cubes? Maybe the plan is to reforest Scotland with money trees to avoid Greece minus the sun? The sell is going to be no economic argument but who cares as there wasn't one anyway. Yon IMF an frau Merkel wull bail us oot, ken. Just dinnae get sick or expect a pension. The whole thing makes the iceberg that sank the Titanic look like a snowball.

Is there any need for such an insulting post? :bitchy:

[Moulin Yarns]

bananas? cream? I think we should split ... :wink:

For those of a certain age.

One banana two bananas three bananas more four bananas make a bunch and so do many more.

[Smartie]

Regards this poll, what bit of a 9% deficit, no oil revenue, added to legacy debt interest payments don't the Aye2 heather brains get? Or are they all high on wee Mhairi's staple diet of hooch, chips and kola cubes? Maybe the plan is to reforest Scotland with money trees to avoid Greece minus the sun? The sell is going to be no economic argument but who cares as there wasn't one anyway. Yon IMF an frau Merkel wull bail us oot, ken. Just dinnae get sick or expect a pension. The whole thing makes the iceberg that sank the Titanic look like a snowball.

This is a tragic post, displaying a mindset of a victim of domestic abuse who has been told so often that they are ugly, worthless and useless that they have no choice other than to believe it.

Scotland (either in or out of the UK or the EU) has so much going for it that it is frightening. It may not seem like it at times but we are truly, genuinely blessed and would do well to remember it from time to time. I would start a list of the resources, attributes and qualities that our soil, our seas and our people possess but I haven't got the time.

I will not, and never will accept that Scotland couldn't survive on its own. Whether it should or not is an entirely different matter.

A very positive case can be made for Scotland remaining within the UK. There may be a second Indyref coming, there may not. But I will never respond well to anyone who talks our country down in this manner.

[JeMeSouviens]

Regards this poll, what bit of a 9% deficit, no oil revenue, added to legacy debt interest payments don't the Aye2 heather brains get? Or are they all high on wee Mhairi's staple diet of hooch, chips and kola cubes? Maybe the plan is to reforest Scotland with money trees to avoid Greece minus the sun? The sell is going to be no economic argument but who cares as there wasn't one anyway. Yon IMF an frau Merkel wull bail us oot, ken. Just dinnae get sick or expect a pension. The whole thing makes the iceberg that sank the Titanic look like a snowball.

We can't all be as super clever and charming as you, you know. :rolleyes:

[ronaldo7]

Regards this poll, what bit of a 9% deficit, no oil revenue, added to legacy debt interest payments don't the Aye2 heather brains get? Or are they all high on wee Mhairi's staple diet of hooch, chips and kola cubes? Maybe the plan is to reforest Scotland with money trees to avoid Greece minus the sun? The sell is going to be no economic argument but who cares as there wasn't one anyway. Yon IMF an frau Merkel wull bail us oot, ken. Just dinnae get sick or expect a pension. The whole thing makes the iceberg that sank the Titanic look like a snowball.

18200 :aok:

[lord bunberry]

Regards this poll, what bit of a 9% deficit, no oil revenue, added to legacy debt interest payments don't the Aye2 heather brains get? Or are they all high on wee Mhairi's staple diet of hooch, chips and kola cubes? Maybe the plan is to reforest Scotland with money trees to avoid Greece minus the sun? The sell is going to be no economic argument but who cares as there wasn't one anyway. Yon IMF an frau Merkel wull bail us oot, ken. Just dinnae get sick or expect a pension. The whole thing makes the iceberg that sank the Titanic look like a snowball.
If you can't make a point without that sort of language maybe you shouldn't bother at all. Possibly one of the most insulting posts I've ever read on here.

[ronaldo7]

Another BT myth busted. But, but, but, what about the Spanish veto.

https://t.co/T45zVQcO2Q

[Glory Lurker]

Another BT myth busted. But, but, but, what about the Spanish veto.

https://t.co/T45zVQcO2Q

A poster on this thread, or maybe another, confidently asserted that we'd be vetoed out by Spain. I twice asked for a link to the proof. No response on that front. Facts, eh?

[johnbc70]

Another BT myth busted. But, but, but, what about the Spanish veto.

https://t.co/T45zVQcO2Q

A random Spanish MEP says so, must be true then. Hardly myth busting that one random MEP saying so is it?

I saw the Loch Ness monster last week, so it must exist. I busted that myth good.

[Hibrandenburg]

A random Spanish MEP says so, must be true then. Hardly myth busting that one random MEP saying so is it?

I saw the Loch Ness monster last week, so it must exist. I busted that myth good.

The fact is that Cameron had a wee whirlwind tour of EU countries who had their own separatist problems to drum up support for having Scotland kept outside the EU should we have voted for independence and all he managed was a few vague statements from a few bland politicians saying "it is so". These opinions are now written in stone in the Unionist book of facts. Truth is it was never set in stone but the game has changed since Brexit anyway. No longer can Unionist leaders expect to be humoured by EU politicians and if Sturgeon is clever she'll call a referendum where Westminster will have to fight a war on 2 fronts. Having to negotiate an exit from the EU and put the case for the union will not only throw up many contradictions that will provide independence parties with lots of ammunition but will also provide clarity on many unanswered half truths exaggerated by project fear in the last indy referendum. Bring it on.

[Glory Lurker]

This is my 1,707th post, so it only seems appropriate to say 'mon Nicola! :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

A random Spanish MEP says so, must be true then. Hardly myth busting that one random MEP saying so is it?

I saw the Loch Ness monster last week, so it must exist. I busted that myth good.

Ah kin smell yer fear. Did you listen to the link?

First line, A SENIOR MEP from the ruling party in Spain.

Hardly some random outgoing eurocrat is he.

[Mr Grieves]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-treasury-fears-leaked-document-article-50-theresa-may-eu-referendum-exclusive-a7624706.html

Just more scaremongering...

[grunt]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-treasury-fears-leaked-document-article-50-theresa-may-eu-referendum-exclusive-a7624706.html

Just more scaremongering...This is not new news. As I've posted before, even the LEAVE campaigners thought that relying on WTO rules 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."

[johnbc70]

Ah kin smell yer fear. Did you listen to the link?

First line, A SENIOR MEP from the ruling party in Spain.

Hardly some random outgoing eurocrat is he.

It's still one individual and it means nothing. Your coming across like it's a done deal because one member of the European parliament says it will be alright. Did you learn anything from the last vote, if you want to make people change their mind get hard facts, not the say so of some European MEP who in the scale of things is nobody.

Had you even heard of this guy before you found your link? Yes or No?

[ronaldo7]

It's still one individual and it means nothing. Your coming across like it's a done deal because one member of the European parliament says it will be alright. Did you learn anything from the last vote, if you want to make people change their mind get hard facts, not the say so of some European MEP who in the scale of things is nobody.

Had you even heard of this guy before you found your link? Yes or No?

No. Andrew Learmonth brought him to my attention. This was then broadcast on the National news. Should I have just let it pass after some of the posters on here were saying there would be a veto?

Rajoy was one individual which the Unionist took to their bosom when he said they would veto. Now that the tables have turned, it seems some don't want to listen to the views of the ruling party in Spain or their respected SENIOR MEP's

Nobody has said anything is a done deal, nothing will be a done deal until it's done:wink:

As for wanting to change peoples minds, they'll do that by themselves when they see what we're being offered by the Tories, post Brexit. Then again, they may just tell us that it will be all ok, and we shouldn't worry, as they've got it all covered. :rolleyes:

This fine young Lib dem has changed his mind after seeing all before him in the last couple of years.:aok:

https://t.co/arQkvlOwko

[northstandhibby]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-treasury-fears-leaked-document-article-50-theresa-may-eu-referendum-exclusive-a7624706.html

Just more scaremongering...

:hilarious

Aye lets all pretend folk are 'scaremongering' when stating leaving the most important trading bloc to the UK economy without free access to its market is going to be extremely harmful to UK businesses, jobs, infrastructure, spending on the NHS etc etc etc and not forgetting rampant inflation while the pound deflates to levels never seen for generations among many many other aspects of harm done by way of leaving with a hard brexit.

Truthful opinion rationally pointing to the real potential pitfalls of a hard brexit is glibly called 'scaremongering'. Why have rational debate when soundbites will suffice?

Dearie me.

glory glory

[Mr Grieves]

:hilarious

Aye lets all pretend folk are 'scaremongering' when stating leaving the most important trading bloc to the UK economy without free access to its market is going to be extremely harmful to UK businesses, jobs, infrastructure, spending on the NHS etc etc etc and not forgetting rampant inflation while the pound deflates to levels never seen for generations among many many other aspects of harm done by way of leaving with a hard brexit.

Truthful opinion rationally pointing to the real potential pitfalls of a hard brexit is glibly called 'scaremongering'. Why have rational debate when soundbites will suffice?

Dearie me.

glory glory

I agree ;)

[northstandhibby]

I agree ;)

I assumed you were being gently sarcastic.

:thumbsup:

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

Eu academics being told to prepare to leave the UK, after living and working here for over 20 years. This is the UK today.

https://t.co/xv6rAhnZzx

[northstandhibby]

Eu academics being told to prepare to leave the UK, after living and working here for over 20 years. This is the UK today.

https://t.co/xv6rAhnZzx Not a great surprise to read this after recent reports by senior politicians that the Tories are quietly planning to crash out of the planned negotiations with the EU within around 6-10 months after invoking Article 50 by way of claiming talks have broken down and the EU are impossible to deal with. This article you have provided gives credence to the senior politicians claims of prematurely crashing out of talks with EU negotiators in absence of a deal being struck and in absence of any agreed automatic residential legal rights to protect either EU or UK nationals residing within the jurisdictions prior to brexit. All the signs are pointing to the outcome of exiting out of the EU and its institutions in an abrupt, brash and imprudent manner. We can say goodbye to human rights, a free NHS for all and it will be a stripping to the bone of welfare benefits etc etc etc.

glory glory

[Moulin Yarns]

Shamelessly stolen from Jack on another thread http://www.hibs.net/images/smilies/thumbs%20up.gif

http://www.businessforscotland.com/independence-will-generate-a-109000000000-asset-windfall-for-scotland/

[ronaldo7]

Shamelessly stolen from Jack on another thread http://www.hibs.net/images/smilies/thumbs%20up.gif

http://www.businessforscotland.com/independence-will-generate-a-109000000000-asset-windfall-for-scotland/

Imagine 3 years worth of interest on that muckle lump sum.:wink:

[ronaldo7]

David Davis, the minister responsible for exiting the EU was answering questions today from Brexit select committee.

After telling the committee that a new impact assessment had not recently been carried if we leave the EU without a deal, he went on to mention this.

* Said it was “probably right” that holidaying Britons will lose EHIC cards, which provide free or subsidized healthcare across the EU, but added: “I have not looked at that one.”

* Admitted he did not know the implications of leaving with no deal on the transfer of personal data, which is crucial issue for the booming tech industry.

* Acknowledged UK producers of dairy and meat would face tariffs of up to 40 per cent under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules – “the numbers in agriculture are high”.

* Described the argument that the UK could walk away without paying a penny to the EU, if no deal is reached, as “interesting” – “a very good start in this exercise”.

* Said he expected Northern Ireland would end up with a “very light border, not a hard border” with the Republic.

* Said he “assumed” the ‘Open Skies’ agreement – which has slashed airfares across the EU - will be lost, although he would fight for a successor.

* Confirmed financial services firms are poised to lose ‘passporting rights’ to trade in the EU, saying: “I would expect that to be the case, that’s an area of uncertainty.”

When pushed about an economic assessment, he said this..."You don't need a piece of paper with numbers on it to have an economic assessment".

This it the guy who we're supposed to believe is completely across his brief.:rolleyes:

I wonder if they will ever get round to a plan B? Maybe they should just get started on Plan A, before it's too late.

18226

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/842161838741696513

[Just Alf]

David Davis, the minister responsible for exiting the EU was answering questions today from Brexit select committee.

After telling the committee that a new impact assessment had not recently been carried if we leave the EU without a deal, he went on to mention this.

* Said it was “probably right” that holidaying Britons will lose EHIC cards, which provide free or subsidized healthcare across the EU, but added: “I have not looked at that one.”

* Admitted he did not know the implications of leaving with no deal on the transfer of personal data, which is crucial issue for the booming tech industry.

* Acknowledged UK producers of dairy and meat would face tariffs of up to 40 per cent under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules – “the numbers in agriculture are high”.

* Described the argument that the UK could walk away without paying a penny to the EU, if no deal is reached, as “interesting” – “a very good start in this exercise”.

* Said he expected Northern Ireland would end up with a “very light border, not a hard border” with the Republic.

* Said he “assumed” the ‘Open Skies’ agreement – which has slashed airfares across the EU - will be lost, although he would fight for a successor.

* Confirmed financial services firms are poised to lose ‘passporting rights’ to trade in the EU, saying: “I would expect that to be the case, that’s an area of uncertainty.”

When pushed about an economic assessment, he said this..."You don't need a piece of paper with numbers on it to have an economic assessment".

This it the guy who we're supposed to believe is completely across his brief.:rolleyes:

I wonder if they will ever get round to a plan B? Maybe they should just get started on Plan A, before it's too late.
The bit about the UK walking away and not paying any liable EU costs is interesting... he IS part of the UK Government I take it? You you know, that same government that tried to threaten the Scottish Government with massive ongoing UK costs if we voted yes at the last referendum.

Good to know, despite the Scottish Government saying we would honour our commitments that they could, if they wanted, walk away not paying anything with UK gov approval this time around.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

The bit about the UK walking away and not paying any liable EU costs is interesting... he IS part of the UK Government I take it? You you know, that same government that tried to threaten the Scottish Government with massive ongoing UK costs if we voted yes at the last referendum.

Good to know, despite the Scottish Government saying we would honour our commitments that they could, if they wanted, walk away not paying anything with UK gov approval this time around.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

:agree: Part of Theresa's Trio. Him, Dr Fox, and Boris.

[Mr Grieves]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/17/brexit-important-keeping-uk-together-public-say-poll-telegraph/

The rise of English nationalism. It's pretty difficult to see the United Kingdom continuing in it's current form no matter what happens with Scotref.

[ronaldo7]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/17/brexit-important-keeping-uk-together-public-say-poll-telegraph/

The rise of English nationalism. It's pretty difficult to see the United Kingdom continuing in it's current form no matter what happens with Scotref.

Kind of clarifies what's been going on for a while.

[RyeSloan]

Imagine 3 years worth of interest on that muckle lump sum.:wink:

Fixed assets tend to depreciate rather than earn interest but I'm sure you know that already [emoji57]

[makaveli1875]

Imagine 3 years worth of interest on that muckle lump sum.:wink:

we might not inherit them after all

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/holyrood/1198332/independent-scotland-would-not-inherit-uk-military-assets-says-snp-defence-spokesman/

[Moulin Yarns]

we might not inherit them after all

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/holyrood/1198332/independent-scotland-would-not-inherit-uk-military-assets-says-snp-defence-spokesman/

In the case of defence assets, I'm sure we don't need all of them, we'll take a monetary equivalent instead, thanks :wink:

[makaveli1875]

In the case of defence assets, I'm sure we don't need all of them, we'll take a monetary equivalent instead, thanks :wink:

then how do we defend our selves with no military hardware ? will we polish up the claymores and fend off attacks with swords and spears

[Moulin Yarns]

then how do we defend our selves with no military hardware ? will we polish up the claymores and fend off attacks with swords and spears


In the case of defence assets, I'm sure we don't need all of them, we'll take a monetary equivalent instead, thanks :wink:


Better to read the post before jumping to conclusions. :agree:

[makaveli1875]

Better to read the post before jumping to conclusions. :agree:

i read the post , the poster was suggesting taking cash instead of military assets saying 'we dont need all of them'

so how does that work ?

we ask for a warplane , 2 tanks and some guns and take the rest in cash ?

[CropleyWasGod]

i read the post , the poster was suggesting taking cash instead of military assets saying 'we dont need all of them'

so how does that work ?

we ask for a warplane , 2 tanks and some guns and take the rest in cash ?
The monetary equivalent of the Trident missiles would suit many.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

i read the post , the poster was suggesting taking cash instead of military assets saying 'we dont need all of them'

so how does that work ?

we ask for a warplane , 2 tanks and some guns and take the rest in cash ?

This for a start. Who is gonna Nuke us?


The monetary equivalent of the Trident missiles would suit many.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

We could rent Faslane and Coulport out to the rUK military to store them if they want, as an iScot income source as well (employment opportunity and tax/NI benefit as well)

[ronaldo7]

i read the post , the poster was suggesting taking cash instead of military assets saying 'we dont need all of them'

so how does that work ?

we ask for a warplane , 2 tanks and some guns and take the rest in cash ?

Maybe we should look at how Iceland do it, and enlarge it a little. They seem to get by fine. Oh, they're in Nato too.

It's not as if we've got an abundance of military hardware floating around the north sea anyway.

[Colr]

Maybe we should look at how Iceland do it, and enlarge it a little. They seem to get by fine. Oh, they're in Nato too.

It's not as if we've got an abundance of military hardware floating around the north sea anyway.

You've got a short memory.

[northstandhibby]

Maybe we should look at how Iceland do it, and enlarge it a little. They seem to get by fine. Oh, they're in Nato too.

It's not as if we've got an abundance of military hardware floating around the north sea anyway.

A nations defenses actually matter to a lot of folk. Being part of the UK whether you like it or not actually provides Scotland with a far greater degree of security. The UK is taken seriously throughout the world as a force.

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

A nations defenses actually matter to a lot of folk. Being part of the UK whether you like it or not actually provides Scotland with a far greater degree of security. The UK is taken seriously throughout the world as a force.

glory glory

An Independent Scotland won't need as much as the Uk does. Although it would be nice to have a Royal Naval surface vessel based in Scotland.:aok:

[ronaldo7]

You've got a short memory.

Care to expand this a bit.

[speedy_gonzales]

We could rent Faslane and Coulport out to the rUK military to store them if they want, as an iScot income source as well (employment opportunity and tax/NI benefit as well)

I think this is a valid option, but there are many within the YES movement that don't want WMD's anywhere near our shores.

I also think to prostitute ourselves by taking cash for (nuclear) stash is a compromise too far perhaps?

[Hibrandenburg]

An Independent Scotland won't need as much as the Uk does. Although it would be nice to have a Royal Naval surface vessel based in Scotland.:aok:

Exactly, the UK attempts to exercise influence with its military, an independent Scotland wouldn't need that kind of posturing.

[speedy_gonzales]

Exactly, the UK attempts to exercise influence with its military, an independent Scotland would need that kind of posturing.
I presume you meant wouldn't?

[Glory Lurker]

I like Europe. Most of it has better summers than we do. We could learn from that.

[Hibrandenburg]

I presume you meant wouldn't?

Thanks for the correction. T2, 3 different sorts of beer, vodka shots and fingers like Bratwürste, I'm surprised my posts from last night make any sense at all.

[RyeSloan]

Thanks for the correction. T2, 3 different sorts of beer, vodka shots and fingers like Bratwürste, I'm surprised my posts from last night make any sense at all.

Who said they did? [emoji57][emoji38]

[Hibrandenburg]

Who said they did? [emoji57][emoji38]

Nobody is arguing with them, that's normally a good sign :wink:

[Stick]

Decided to have a look at the telegraph poll and it is quite clear that most people don't want a referendum. Then had a look at the actual ORB polling figures, not quite as clear cut. Having failed my o level statistics exam miserably, maybe I am wrong bit it looks to me that Scotland in fact answered yes to wanting independence. Happy to be corrected.
Haven't heard this poll being mentioned anywhere on media.

http://www.orb-international.com/article.php?s=orb-daily-telegraph-poll-march-2017

Sorry I don't know how to do that fancy link thingy.

[Stick]

Yea, it did it itself.

[ronaldo7]

Decided to have a look at the telegraph poll and it is quite clear that most people don't want a referendum. Then had a look at the actual ORB polling figures, not quite as clear cut. Having failed my o level statistics exam miserably, maybe I am wrong bit it looks to me that Scotland in fact answered yes to wanting independence. Happy to be corrected.
Haven't heard this poll being mentioned anywhere on media.

http://www.orb-international.com/article.php?s=orb-daily-telegraph-poll-march-2017

Sorry I don't know how to do that fancy link thingy.

No 16/17 yr olds either. :aok:

[steakbake]

Decided to have a look at the telegraph poll and it is quite clear that most people don't want a referendum. Then had a look at the actual ORB polling figures, not quite as clear cut. Having failed my o level statistics exam miserably, maybe I am wrong bit it looks to me that Scotland in fact answered yes to wanting independence. Happy to be corrected.
Haven't heard this poll being mentioned anywhere on media.

http://www.orb-international.com/article.php?s=orb-daily-telegraph-poll-march-2017

Sorry I don't know how to do that fancy link thingy.


Yes, you are correct. Right there in Q 1: do you support or oppose Scotland becoming an independent country. Scotland sub-sample, which is not many people but around 185 people overall or 175 with a weighted sample, stands at 58% support and 42% oppose.

[Smartie]

Is there anyone who would want independence who wouldn't want a referendum and is there anyone who doesn't want independence who thinks we should have one?

[danhibees1875]

Is there anyone who would want independence who wouldn't want a referendum and is there anyone who doesn't want independence who thinks we should have one?

I feel I may fall into the former of those categories. Although I'll admit to finding my conflicting opinions a bit confusing myself.

I think Scotland should be independent. However i struggle to see why we should have yet another referendum so soon. I'd be amazed if enough people had changed their opinions from N to Y (not even considering having to offset any Y to N) to make it worth while to go through a costly and resource draining (the government should be focusing on other issues) exercise for the next couple of years. Given the opposition to even holding a referendum this time compared to last i feel there will be a lot more negativity and anger in any debates - which obviously isn't the way anyone wants this to be carried out.

Also, if it does come out as a yes this time, unless it's rather decisive (~60%), i can only see there being calls for a third referendum not long after.

[grunt]

I feel I may fall into the former of those categories. Although I'll admit to finding my conflicting opinions a bit confusing myself.

I think Scotland should be independent. However i struggle to see why we should have yet another referendum so soon..Because if we don't have a referendum before Brexit, then Scotland will lose control of many of its assets during the negotiations. May and her English colleagues will use Scottish assets in exchange for concessions for London, and Scotland will lose out.

If we then have a referendum, we'll be outside of the EU, we'll have to negotiate our way back in and we won't have access to many of the assets and revenue streams that we will need post Brexit.

It really is a case of now or never.

[northstandhibby]

Because if we don't have a referendum before Brexit, then Scotland will lose control of many of its assets during the negotiations. May and her English colleagues will use Scottish assets in exchange for concessions for London, and Scotland will lose out.

If we then have a referendum, we'll be outside of the EU, we'll have to negotiate our way back in and we won't have access to many of the assets and revenue streams that we will need post Brexit.

It really is a case of now or never.

Possibly in the case of independence occurring similarly to brexit there would have to be a kind of Scottish great repeal bill that would revert all of these assets and revenue streams you refer to back into Scottish ownership and jurisdiction?

glory glory

[Moulin Yarns]

Under starters orders

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39325561

[ronaldo7]

Handy ready reckoner from the Irish. At least someone knows what they're doing:rolleyes:

https://t.co/qOuGDgMMgu

[greenlex]

Handy ready reckoner from the Irish. At least someone knows what they're doing:rolleyes:

https://t.co/qOuGDgMMgu
Be fair theyve had much longer than the UK Government to get their arse in gear since the brexit vote.............................................. ..................No wait...............

[ronaldo7]

You've always got to look at the small print they say.

This poll by comres for the Independent, on "Scottish" people split over the referendum before Brexit.

https://t.co/H6b6Hfx2Ei

This was as the bottom of the article.

ComRes interviewed 2,026 GB adults, including 185 in Scotland, online between 15 and 17 March 2017. Data were weighted to be representative of all adults. Data were also weighted by past vote recall. ComRes is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules

[heretoday]

Why don't we wait until after Brexit and see how things are? It might be OK for Scotland and there will be no desire for independence.

Having a referendum ASAP smacks of indecent haste on the part of the SNP who appear to want independence whether it's good for us or not.

[ronaldo7]

Why don't we wait until after Brexit and see how things are? It might be OK for Scotland and there will be no desire for independence.

Having a referendum ASAP smacks of indecent haste on the part of the SNP who appear to want independence whether it's good for us or not.

We've not asked for a Referendum ASAP, we've asked for one after the details of Brexit are known.

[Glory Lurker]

Why don't we wait until after Brexit and see how things are? It might be OK for Scotland and there will be no desire for independence.

Having a referendum ASAP smacks of indecent haste on the part of the SNP who appear to want independence whether it's good for us or not.

It might be okay in much the same way that Karen Gillan might ask me to go away with her this weekend.

[danhibees1875]

It might be okay in much the same way that Karen Gillan might ask me to go away with her this weekend.

I thought this was my weekend :confused:

Ah well, Falkirk game it is then.

[Glory Lurker]

I thought this was my weekend :confused:

Ah well, Falkirk game it is then.

Follow the logic - she's not going to be asking me, so you're still in the game!

[Mr Grieves]

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/kathy-sheridan-another-day-another-brexit-lie-exposed-1.3010095

Sums up where we are.

[Just Alf]

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/kathy-sheridan-another-day-another-brexit-lie-exposed-1.3010095

Sums up where we are.

Well worth the read. :aok:

[High-On-Hibs]

Tories have been involved in several major scandals lately, yet all the media focus is once again on the Labour Party.

[Moulin Yarns]

Something to keep us from working this afternoon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39327209

[Betty Boop]

Something to keep us from working this afternoon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39327209

I'd rather work.

[Hibbyradge]

UK-based airlines told to move to Europe after Brexit or lose major routes

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/22/uk-based-airlines-told-to-move-to-europe-after-brexit-or-lose-major-routes?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

[grunt]

BMW Mulls Moving Iconically British Mini Amid Brexit Talks

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-21/bmw-reviewing-u-k-plant-options-post-brexit-amid-trade-threats

[Hibrandenburg]

UK-based airlines told to move to Europe after Brexit or lose major routes

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/22/uk-based-airlines-told-to-move-to-europe-after-brexit-or-lose-major-routes?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

My employer is set to make an announcement directly after article 50 is triggered. It's not good news for the UK.

[xyz23jc]

My employer is set to make an announcement directly after article 50 is triggered. It's not good news for the UK.

On the plus side, we get to wave our Union Jacks and watch endless reruns of WW2 footage. Barry!:rolleyes::greengrin

[Bristolhibby]

My employer is set to make an announcement directly after article 50 is triggered. It's not good news for the UK.

Did anyone think Brexit would be good news for the UK?

Thank **** we will "Take back control".

J

[Bristolhibby]

On the plus side, we get to wave our Union Jacks and watch endless reruns of WW2 footage. Barry!:rolleyes::greengrin

Shamelessly stolen from the Daily Mash

THERESA May will trigger Article 50 by strapping a letter to a no-nonsense bulldog that will fly to Brussels in a Spitfire.

Trevor the bulldog will take off from Seething Airfield in Norfolk, one of the most important RAF bases during the Battle of Britain. Before being placed in the aircraft he will be stroked by Dame Vera Lynn and a member of the public who won a raffle at a lovely village fete.

Trevor will parachute out of the Spitfire as it passes over the European Commission headquarters, before waddling heroically into the building in search of commission president Jean-Claude Juncker.

Trevor has been trained to find Juncker by sniffing a napkin that Theresa May stole from the lunch table at the most recent EU summit.

He will bark at Juncker until the bureaucrat takes the letter from a specially made leather pouch.

Trevor will then urinate for a full 30 seconds on the incredibly plush carpet before being transported back to London in a 1958 Morris Minor Traveller and one of the little ships that took part in the Dunkirk evacuation.

A European Commission spokesman said: “If the animal does not have a valid Pet Passport it will be quarantined indefinitely.”

J

[ronaldo7]

Shamelessly stolen from the Daily Mash

THERESA May will trigger Article 50 by strapping a letter to a no-nonsense bulldog that will fly to Brussels in a Spitfire.

Trevor the bulldog will take off from Seething Airfield in Norfolk, one of the most important RAF bases during the Battle of Britain. Before being placed in the aircraft he will be stroked by Dame Vera Lynn and a member of the public who won a raffle at a lovely village fete.

Trevor will parachute out of the Spitfire as it passes over the European Commission headquarters, before waddling heroically into the building in search of commission president Jean-Claude Juncker.

Trevor has been trained to find Juncker by sniffing a napkin that Theresa May stole from the lunch table at the most recent EU summit.

He will bark at Juncker until the bureaucrat takes the letter from a specially made leather pouch.

Trevor will then urinate for a full 30 seconds on the incredibly plush carpet before being transported back to London in a 1958 Morris Minor Traveller and one of the little ships that took part in the Dunkirk evacuation.

A European Commission spokesman said: “If the animal does not have a valid Pet Passport it will be quarantined indefinitely.”

J

Very good.:tee hee:

[makaveli1875]

My employer is set to make an announcement directly after article 50 is triggered. It's not good news for the UK.

What if they announce its payrises for everyone , that would be good news naw

[HiBremian]

My employer is set to make an announcement directly after article 50 is triggered. It's not good news for the UK.

Wee word in his ear about contingency plans for the Scottish routes, perhaps? ;-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[steakbake]

Wee word in his ear about contingency plans for the Scottish routes, perhaps? ;-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

As much as I wish it, I fear we are stuck.

[HiBremian]

As much as I wish it, I fear we are stuck.

I fear you're right :-(


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Colr]

Here you go. This is what is about. This is why Boris is so keen. It's all ablut the upper classes shafting the working class again.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uk-millionaires-brexit-latest-richer-make-wealthy-better-off-eu-leave-a7644186.html

[Hibbyradge]

Here you go. This is what is about. This is why Boris is so keen. It's all ablut the upper classes shafting the working class again.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uk-millionaires-brexit-latest-richer-make-wealthy-better-off-eu-leave-a7644186.html

Was there really any doubt?

[ronaldo7]

It seems that as well as the Hedge fund office moving from London, Goldman Sachs are putting in place contingency plans to increase people in Europe and move some from London. In the hundreds this time. This is the first phase, whilst waiting to see what the outcome of the Brexit talks are.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39339836

[ronaldo7]

If only Theresa had the wherewithal we'd have taken a different path.

https://t.co/GvNgkXOJTJ

It did not have to be this way. Like others who favoured Remain, we have reiterated, ad nauseam, our acceptance of the referendum result. But whether you were for or against, what confronts us all now is drastically different from what was on the table last June. The hard Tory Brexit in prospect represents an epic act of self-harm. A more enlightened Conservative prime minister, better attuned to the “one nation” tradition of the party of Disraeli and Macmillan, less in thrall to Little Englanders, and less intimidated by the peculiarly vicious and Manichaean worldview of the Daily Mail, would have taken a more consensual approach. Yet despite her promises when she became prime minister, Theresa May has failed to heal the divisions caused by Brexit.

Far from reuniting a fractured kingdom, she has divided it further, perhaps fatally, as the SNP’s unsettling decision last week to push for a second Scottish independence referendum implies. As Lord Heseltine has suggested, a more imaginative, braver and more consistent leader could have used the referendum result to propel an immediate negotiation with the EU on much-needed reforms. If, at the end of that process, Britain’s demands remained unmet, the divorce could have proceeded or, if a deal were agreed, been put to a second vote. Instead, May, more sheep than shepherd, has feebly allowed herself to be driven ever further towards an extreme, inflexible, take-it-or-leave-it stance for which she has neither mandate nor credible grounds.

[RyeSloan]

If only Theresa had the wherewithal we'd have taken a different path.

https://t.co/GvNgkXOJTJ

It did not have to be this way. Like others who favoured Remain, we have reiterated, ad nauseam, our acceptance of the referendum result. But whether you were for or against, what confronts us all now is drastically different from what was on the table last June. The hard Tory Brexit in prospect represents an epic act of self-harm. A more enlightened Conservative prime minister, better attuned to the “one nation” tradition of the party of Disraeli and Macmillan, less in thrall to Little Englanders, and less intimidated by the peculiarly vicious and Manichaean worldview of the Daily Mail, would have taken a more consensual approach. Yet despite her promises when she became prime minister, Theresa May has failed to heal the divisions caused by Brexit.

Far from reuniting a fractured kingdom, she has divided it further, perhaps fatally, as the SNP’s unsettling decision last week to push for a second Scottish independence referendum implies. As Lord Heseltine has suggested, a more imaginative, braver and more consistent leader could have used the referendum result to propel an immediate negotiation with the EU on much-needed reforms. If, at the end of that process, Britain’s demands remained unmet, the divorce could have proceeded or, if a deal were agreed, been put to a second vote. Instead, May, more sheep than shepherd, has feebly allowed herself to be driven ever further towards an extreme, inflexible, take-it-or-leave-it stance for which she has neither mandate nor credible grounds.

That made me genuinely laugh..are people still banging on about this?

I particularly like the 'ultra hard Tory Brexit' line and the sage like statement of a 'historic error'...that was me thinking you needed the passage of time to tell what decisions were historically wrong.

Then there is the line about accepting the result (ad nauseam) swiftly followed by support for the suggestion that the vote should have been used to reform and then stay in the EU! Brilliant stuff.

Chuck in a few little englander comments, mix it with a daily mail reference and you start to understand the depth of their argument.

[ronaldo7]

That made me genuinely laugh..are people still banging on about this?

I particularly like the 'ultra hard Tory Brexit' line and the sage like statement of a 'historic error'...that was me thinking you needed the passage of time to tell what decisions were historically wrong.

Then there is the line about accepting the result (ad nauseam) swiftly followed by support for the suggestion that the vote should have been used to reform and then stay in the EU! Brilliant stuff.

Chuck in a few little englander comments, mix it with a daily mail reference and you start to understand the depth of their argument.

The BBC provided a 90 minute programme on it this evening. It'll go on for a while yet.:greengrin

[steakbake]

It seems that as well as the Hedge fund office moving from London, Goldman Sachs are putting in place contingency plans to increase people in Europe and move some from London. In the hundreds this time. This is the first phase, whilst waiting to see what the outcome of the Brexit talks are.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39339836

Now is not the time. They should hang around and see what the deal will be like when implemented.

[grunt]

Now is not the time. They should hang around and see what the deal will be like when implemented.

By which time it will be too late. Westminster will have sold or given away Scotlands assets in exchange for special treatment for the financial services in London.

Why do you think May is so keen to delay ScotRef?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

By which time it will be too late. Westminster will have sold or given away Scotlands assets in exchange for special treatment for the financial services in London.

Why do you think May is so keen to delay ScotRef?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Take me through this. I'm trying to get my head around it so that I can argue that point with others.

Make it simple, please. :greengrin

[grunt]

Take me through this. I'm trying to get my head around it so that I can argue that point with others.

Make it simple, please. :greengrin

First off, this is just me thinking; I haven't seen it discussed elsewhere. It stems from my disquiet about why are the Tories so concerned about there being a second referendum. You'd have thought they'd be pleased to see the back of us.

So during the brexit negotiations there will be some bartering. The really important thing for the Tories is keeping the financial centre in London, and the tax it delivers to the uk treasury. But there will also be other things they want.

So what would the Tories give to the EU in exchange for exceptional treatment for the City? It would be easy for them to give up something which further diminishes Scotland's economy, so perhaps additional tariffs on agriculture, or more obviously fishing rights. The London Government can easily give away things which don't directly impact their electorate.

Once given away in the EU negotiations, Scotland wouldn't have these assets available for independence. It's a bit like giving the wife's car away to your best mate before the divorce proceedings.

I'd love to see others putting this theory forward. It seems obvious to me that this is what is going on. But I've been wrong before. Many times.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Smartie]

First off, this is just me thinking; I haven't seen it discussed elsewhere. It stems from my disquiet about why are the Tories so concerned about there being a second referendum. You'd have thought they'd be pleased to see the back of us.

So during the brexit negotiations there will be some bartering. The really important thing for the Tories is keeping the financial centre in London, and the tax it delivers to the uk treasury. But there will also be other things they want.

So what would the Tories give to the EU in exchange for exceptional treatment for the City? It would be easy for them to give up something which further diminishes Scotland's economy, so perhaps additional tariffs on agriculture, or more obviously fishing rights. The London Government can easily give away things which don't directly impact their electorate.

Once given away in the EU negotiations, Scotland wouldn't have these assets available for independence. It's a bit like giving the wife's car away to your best mate before the divorce proceedings.

I'd love to see others putting this theory forward. It seems obvious to me that this is what is going on. But I've been wrong before. Many times.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

FWIW I tend to agree with you.

By trading off some of Scotland's assets in the Brexit negotiations she also weakens the case for Independence, if those assets were no longer to be Scotland's post-Brexit.

There is a stand-off between Sturgeon and May and both know exactly what they are doing.

Sturgeon spotted an opportunity, hence the timing of the mention of Indyref2, but I suspect May has got the better of her in this encounter.

[grunt]

FWIW I tend to agree with you.

By trading off some of Scotland's assets in the Brexit negotiations she also weakens the case for Independence, if those assets were no longer to be Scotland's post-Brexit.

There is a stand-off between Sturgeon and May and both know exactly what they are doing.

Sturgeon spotted an opportunity, hence the timing of the mention of Indyref2, but I suspect May has got the better of her in this encounter.

Thank you. You've reminded me that the counter argument also applies. If Scotland votes for Indy during the Brexit talks, the EU will see that the UK has less to negotiate with, weakening May's position.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

First off, this is just me thinking; I haven't seen it discussed elsewhere. It stems from my disquiet about why are the Tories so concerned about there being a second referendum. You'd have thought they'd be pleased to see the back of us.

So during the brexit negotiations there will be some bartering. The really important thing for the Tories is keeping the financial centre in London, and the tax it delivers to the uk treasury. But there will also be other things they want.

So what would the Tories give to the EU in exchange for exceptional treatment for the City? It would be easy for them to give up something which further diminishes Scotland's economy, so perhaps additional tariffs on agriculture, or more obviously fishing rights. The London Government can easily give away things which don't directly impact their electorate.

Once given away in the EU negotiations, Scotland wouldn't have these assets available for independence. It's a bit like giving the wife's car away to your best mate before the divorce proceedings.

I'd love to see others putting this theory forward. It seems obvious to me that this is what is going on. But I've been wrong before. Many times.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Thanks for that.

It's the use of the word "assets" that is confusing me. Which isn't difficult.

It's not the assets that are being traded away in your scenario, if I understand you correctly; it's the right to use them.The fishing waters would remain British or Scottish.

If tariffs are used by the UK in the short term .... an Independent Scotland would then just reverse them, no?



Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Thanks for that.

It's the use of the word "assets" that is confusing me. Which isn't difficult.

It's not the assets that are being traded away in your scenario, if I understand you correctly; it's the right to use them.The fishing waters would remain British or Scottish.

If tariffs are used by the UK in the short term .... an Independent Scotland would then just reverse them, no?



Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

The access to the fishing waters would remain a right for European fishermen, if there is any access to EFTA, similar to the Norwegian situation. Is my understanding.

[Just Alf]

Thanks for that.

It's the use of the word "assets" that is confusing me. Which isn't difficult.

It's not the assets that are being traded away in your scenario, if I understand you correctly; it's the right to use them.The fishing waters would remain British or Scottish.

If tariffs are used by the UK in the short term .... an Independent Scotland would then just reverse them, no?



Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
That's how I see it as well now that I actually think about it... the tariffs etc would all be agreed by the entity that is the UK, if Scotland was to leave the UK then any agreements relating to Scotland would no longer apply, they'd have to be renegotiated?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Smartie]

The access to the fishing waters would remain a right for European fishermen, if there is any access to EFTA, similar to the Norwegian situation. Is my understanding.

Then why were the fishermen of the North-East so in favour of Brexit?

[grunt]

Then why were the fishermen of the North-East so in favour of Brexit?

Why was anyone in favour of Brexit? :)

[Moulin Yarns]

Then why were the fishermen of the North-East so in favour of Brexit?

Because they were lied to!! They believed that we would "take back control" "Stop immigration" "spend £350million on the NHS"

[CropleyWasGod]

The access to the fishing waters would remain a right for European fishermen, if there is any access to EFTA, similar to the Norwegian situation. Is my understanding.

.. which would be the same if we were in the EU, yeah?

My point is that, the rUK wouldn't have any say on access to Scottish waters.

[Peevemor]

Then why were the fishermen of the North-East so in favour of Brexit?

My understanding is that the majority of fishermen blame the decline of the UK industry on the EU common fishing policy. Post Brexit, they think that they would regain exclusive rights to all UK waters without having to stick to EU maximum quotas.

In reality this won't happen, as Westminster are almost certain to trade part of these rights in the Brexit negotiations.

[Moulin Yarns]

.. which would be the same if we were in the EU, yeah?

My point is that, the rUK wouldn't have any say on access to Scottish waters.

Exactly. Dupe by the leave campaign without understanding the implications of the vote. Hook, line and sinker!!

Some links..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/30/british-fisherman-will-catch-hundreds-of-thousands-of-tonnes-mor/

Even though there is a ban on catching haddock due to over fishing

http://ukandeu.ac.uk/casting-into-the-future-of-uk-fisheries-after-brexit/

[RyeSloan]

Exactly. Dupe by the leave campaign without understanding the implications of the vote. Hook, line and sinker!!

Some links..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/30/british-fisherman-will-catch-hundreds-of-thousands-of-tonnes-mor/

Even though there is a ban on catching haddock due to over fishing

http://ukandeu.ac.uk/casting-into-the-future-of-uk-fisheries-after-brexit/

So these fishermen that voted for Brexit were simply duped as they had no understanding of their own industry or how the EU quota system impacted them?

[Moulin Yarns]

So these fishermen that voted for Brexit were simply duped as they had no understanding of their own industry or how the EU quota system impacted them?

We export the majority of what we catch ... and import the majority of what we eat.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/15/uk-fishermen-may-not-win-waters-back-after-brexit-eu-memo-reveals

https://secondreading.uk/science/troubled-waters-negotiating-fish-quotas-post-brexit/

It isn't just the fisheries of course, other things in play include the Haitats Directive, Marine Protection Zones, Conservation areas etc.

[Bristolhibby]

FWIW I tend to agree with you.

By trading off some of Scotland's assets in the Brexit negotiations she also weakens the case for Independence, if those assets were no longer to be Scotland's post-Brexit.

There is a stand-off between Sturgeon and May and both know exactly what they are doing.

Sturgeon spotted an opportunity, hence the timing of the mention of Indyref2, but I suspect May has got the better of her in this encounter.

Not correct. Whatever May agrees to sell of from Scotlands point of view, immediately becomes Scotlands business once Independence is declared.

For example, fishing rights are traded off to assist with City of London passporting rights.

Scotland looks at the deal and decides, Na, you are alright, that deal is terrible for Scotland and votes for independence.
It is then up to Scotland to decide what it does with her territorial waters, agriculture, banking, tech industries.

That could mean another bilateral deal with the EU, it could mean staying in the EU as the rUK leaves. But IT WILL BE SCOTLANDS DECISION. Not a Tory led Westminster. And that is the key for me.

It boils down to who you trust more to represent you. Wastminster dominated and controlled by a Right wing Tory party. Or the Govermnent of Scotland - Whatever that government will be as elected by the people of Scotland, for the people of Scotland.

J

[Moulin Yarns]

Not a good start, the day before the trigger of A50.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39417715

[RyeSloan]

We export the majority of what we catch ... and import the majority of what we eat.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/15/uk-fishermen-may-not-win-waters-back-after-brexit-eu-memo-reveals

https://secondreading.uk/science/troubled-waters-negotiating-fish-quotas-post-brexit/

It isn't just the fisheries of course, other things in play include the Haitats Directive, Marine Protection Zones, Conservation areas etc.

I'm well aware that there is complexities as I'm sure the fishermen that voted for Brexit were aware of such things....that is the EU after all, a tangled web especially around areas like fishing and agriculture.

But that's not the point. You stated people were duped hook line and sinker but the link you provided merely stated that Eustice said that Brexit "can be good [for UK fishermen]" and that he "hoped to get a better deal" and that the believed things would change fundamentally...seems a fair enough assessment so far does it not?

[Moulin Yarns]

So how does Scotland, Gibraltar and London think about the 'special arrangement' for Northern Ireland?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-northern-ireland-can-rejoin-eu-reunification-david-davis-stormont-a7653346.html

Could Scotland become a part of Norway, Vikings rule OK! :greengrin

[Slavers]

So how does Scotland, Gibraltar and London think about the 'special arrangement' for Northern Ireland?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-northern-ireland-can-rejoin-eu-reunification-david-davis-stormont-a7653346.html

Could Scotland become a part of Norway, Vikings rule OK! :greengrin

The short answer is No!

[Moulin Yarns]

Leaked EU response to the Article 50


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8ErgiMX0AANapm.jpg:large

[Colr]

The short answer is No!

Orkney could!

[Colr]

Interesting to think that Queen Elizabeth and her Brexitting generation were born into an empire that spanned one third of the planet and they may well have reduced it in their lifetimes to just England - on its own!

[Colr]

Corbyn reading his speech from notes. What an orator!!

[Moulin Yarns]

What she said

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8FLOnYXQAEixgI.jpg

[Moulin Yarns]

Don't worry, we are aiming for....

Empire 2.0
In an era which attempts to cough-up a new version of Empire, Adam Ramsay offers up an extensive reading list for anyone who wants to avoid the mythology that the British Empire wasn’t about: ‘cheerful engineers, kindly building railways for people in far off lands’. Here’s his list:

The Opium wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Opium_War); The Carnatic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnatic_Wars#Second_Carnatic_War_.281749.E2.80.93 1754.29) wars; The Anglo-Cherokee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Cherokee_War) war; Pontiac’s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac%27s_Rebellion)rebellion; The Anglo Mysore wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Mysore_Wars); The Anglo Maratha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Anglo-Maratha_War) wars; The American Revolutionary war; The Irish Rebellion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Rebellion_of_1798); The Kandyan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kandyan_Wars#First_Kandyan_War.2C_1803.E2.80.93180 5) wars; The Anglo-Turkish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Turkish_War_%281807-1809%29)war; The Xhosa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xhosa_Wars#4th_Xhosa_War.2C_1811-1812) wars; The Ga-Fante (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ga-Fante_War) war; The war of 1812 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812); The Anglo-Ashanti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Ashanti_wars)wars; The Anglo-Burmese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Anglo-Burmese_War) wars; Canada’s Rebellions of 1837 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellions_of_1837); The first, second and third Afghan wars; The Anglo Sikh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Anglo-Sikh_War) wars; The Flagstaff war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagstaff_War) in New Zealand – and in fact the New Zealand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_land_wars) wars in general; The Anglo-Persian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Persian_War) war; The Black war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_War); The Indian Rebellion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857); The First Taranaki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Taranaki_War) war; The invasion of Waikato (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Waikato); The Bhutan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhutan_War) war; The Klang war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klang_War); Titokowaru’s War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titokowaru%27s_War); The 1868 ‘Expedition’ to Abyssinia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1868_Expedition_to_Abyssinia); The Red River Rebellion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_River_Rebellion); The Anglo-Zulu War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zulu_War); The Sikkim Expedition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikkim_Expedition); The Anglo-Zanzibar War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zanzibar_War); The Boer War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War)s; The Anglo-Aro War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Aro_War); The British expedition to Tibet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_expedition_to_Tibet); The Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_intervention_in_the_Russian_Civil_War); the Irish War of Independence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_War_of_Independence); The 1920 conflict between British forces and the Dervish State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920_conflict_between_British_forces_and_the_Dervi sh_State); the Great Arab Revolt in Palestine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936%E2%80%931939_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine); The British–Zionist conflict (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British%E2%80%93Zionist_conflict); the Korean War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War); the Mau Mau Uprising (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mau_Mau_Uprising); the Cyprus emergency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EOKA); the Suez Crisis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis); the Border Campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Campaign_%28Irish_Republican_Army%29) against the IRA; the Falklands War. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War) (Just a few, then.)

[makaveli1875]

Don't worry, we are aiming for....

Empire 2.0
In an era which attempts to cough-up a new version of Empire, Adam Ramsay offers up an extensive reading list for anyone who wants to avoid the mythology that the British Empire wasn’t about: ‘cheerful engineers, kindly building railways for people in far off lands’. Here’s his list:

The Opium wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Opium_War); The Carnatic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnatic_Wars#Second_Carnatic_War_.281749.E2.80.93 1754.29) wars; The Anglo-Cherokee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Cherokee_War) war; Pontiac’s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac%27s_Rebellion)rebellion; The Anglo Mysore wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Mysore_Wars); The Anglo Maratha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Anglo-Maratha_War) wars; The American Revolutionary war; The Irish Rebellion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Rebellion_of_1798); The Kandyan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kandyan_Wars#First_Kandyan_War.2C_1803.E2.80.93180 5) wars; The Anglo-Turkish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Turkish_War_%281807-1809%29)war; The Xhosa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xhosa_Wars#4th_Xhosa_War.2C_1811-1812) wars; The Ga-Fante (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ga-Fante_War) war; The war of 1812 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812); The Anglo-Ashanti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Ashanti_wars)wars; The Anglo-Burmese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Anglo-Burmese_War) wars; Canada’s Rebellions of 1837 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebellions_of_1837); The first, second and third Afghan wars; The Anglo Sikh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Anglo-Sikh_War) wars; The Flagstaff war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagstaff_War) in New Zealand – and in fact the New Zealand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_land_wars) wars in general; The Anglo-Persian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Persian_War) war; The Black war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_War); The Indian Rebellion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857); The First Taranaki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Taranaki_War) war; The invasion of Waikato (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Waikato); The Bhutan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhutan_War) war; The Klang war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klang_War); Titokowaru’s War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titokowaru%27s_War); The 1868 ‘Expedition’ to Abyssinia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1868_Expedition_to_Abyssinia); The Red River Rebellion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_River_Rebellion); The Anglo-Zulu War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zulu_War); The Sikkim Expedition (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikkim_Expedition); The Anglo-Zanzibar War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zanzibar_War); The Boer War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War)s; The Anglo-Aro War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Aro_War); The British expedition to Tibet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_expedition_to_Tibet); The Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_intervention_in_the_Russian_Civil_War); the Irish War of Independence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_War_of_Independence); The 1920 conflict between British forces and the Dervish State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920_conflict_between_British_forces_and_the_Dervi sh_State); the Great Arab Revolt in Palestine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936%E2%80%931939_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine); The British–Zionist conflict (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British%E2%80%93Zionist_conflict); the Korean War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War); the Mau Mau Uprising (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mau_Mau_Uprising); the Cyprus emergency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EOKA); the Suez Crisis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis); the Border Campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Campaign_%28Irish_Republican_Army%29) against the IRA; the Falklands War. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falklands_War) (Just a few, then.)

cool story but whats any of that got to do with brexit ?

[HiBremian]

What she said

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8FLOnYXQAEixgI.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170330/2f632985b5f43b7ac8e5ef015e8ecf96.jpg

Tusk's reply.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170330/2f632985b5f43b7ac8e5ef015e8ecf96.jpg

Tusk's reply.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

BBC Question Time will obviously be discussing the indy question in their usual non biased way tonight. Good to see that they'll have all stakeholders involved in the discussion.

[Peevemor]

18302

[Slavers]

cool story but whats any of that got to do with brexit ?

And he also fails to mention the amazing contribution to WW1 and WW2 made by the troops of Great Britain! Tells you everything.

[Moulin Yarns]

And he also fails to mention the amazing contribution to WW1 and WW2 made by the troops of Great Britain! Tells you everything.

These were not in the name of "Empire" though. It was a result of those wars that the EU was formed.

19/9/1946 Winston Churchill calls for a "kind of United States of Europe" in a speech he gives at the University of Zurich

17/12/1946 The European Federalists Union is founded in Paris, France.

I could go on, but here is a link to the timeline

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/history/1946-1959/1947_en

[Bristolhibby]

BBC Question Time will obviously be discussing the indy question in their usual non biased way tonight. Good to see that they'll have all stakeholders involved in the discussion.

That well known bastion of Scot lovers of Carlisle.

J

[Slavers]

These were not in the name of "Empire" though. It was a result of those wars that the EU was formed.

19/9/1946 Winston Churchill calls for a "kind of United States of Europe" in a speech he gives at the University of Zurich

17/12/1946 The European Federalists Union is founded in Paris, France.

I could go on, but here is a link to the timeline

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/history/1946-1959/1947_en

Yes I see the EU empire has been a long time in the making. The British empire was similar to the EU as in it was run by unelected elites.

[Colr]

That well known bastion of Scot lovers of Carlisle.

J

Interetsing to see what the krypto-fascist Nuttall has to say in the matter. Will he agree with the self determination he is otherwise so keen on or spot the opportunity to sew further division.

[Moulin Yarns]

Spain secure 'Gibraltar' clause in EU negotiations


“After the United Kingdom leaves the Union, no agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without the agreement between the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom.”

[ronaldo7]

Spain secure 'Gibraltar' clause in EU negotiations

That'll be the Spanish veto then:greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Spain secure 'Gibraltar' clause in EU negotiations

Is that real, or am i having a whoosh moment?

[Hibrandenburg]

Is that real, or am i having a whoosh moment?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/31/outrage-spain-given-effective-veto-future-gibraltar-eu-plans/amp/

[Moulin Yarns]

Is that real, or am i having a whoosh moment?

Cause 22, (or should that be Catch 22)The deal breaker J




22. After the United Kingdom leaves the Union, no agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without the agreement between the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_03_17_eu_draft_guidelines.pdf (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_03_17_eu_draft_guidelines.pdf)

although clause 10 might be a problem with the current stateof the UK economy JItmeans the EU is serious about asking for a financial settlement from the UK.This is only the start of the negotiation of course, but it will be a tough nutto crack.

Clause 19 will be a blast. JTranslation: Don'tbe tempted to undercut the single market by trying to gain a competitiveadvantage at our expense. You won't get the deep and comprehensive free tradeagreement you want if that happens.


Then back to clause 1.

The European Council will continue to base itself on the principles set out in the statement of Heads of State or Government and of the Presidents of the European Council and the European Commission on 29 June 2016. It reiterates its wish to have the United Kingdom as a close partner in the future. It further reiterates that any agreement with the United Kingdom will have to be based on a balance of rights and obligations, and ensure a level-playing field. Preserving the integrity of the Single Market excludes participation based on a sector-by-sector approach. A non-member of the Union, that does not live up to the same obligations as a member, cannot have the same rights and enjoy the same benefits as a member. In this context, the European Council welcomes the recognition by the British Government that the four freedoms of the Single Market are indivisible and that there can be no "cherry picking".

No special deals for Finance sector, Car manufacturing, Fisheries........

OUCH!!!!

[steakbake]

That'll be the Spanish veto then:greengrin

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/31/future-of-gibraltar-at-stake-in-brexit-negotiations

....but but but the Spanish will veto you...

Looks like the Brexit ship of fools is about to hit the rocks.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Cause 22, (or should that be Catch 22)The deal breaker J






http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_03_17_eu_draft_guidelines.pdf (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_03_17_eu_draft_guidelines.pdf)

although clause 10 might be a problem with the current stateof the UK economy JItmeans the EU is serious about asking for a financial settlement from the UK.This is only the start of the negotiation of course, but it will be a tough nutto crack.

Clause 19 will be a blast. JTranslation: Don'tbe tempted to undercut the single market by trying to gain a competitiveadvantage at our expense. You won't get the deep and comprehensive free tradeagreement you want if that happens.


Then back to clause 1.

The European Council will continue to base itself on the principles set out in the statement of Heads of State or Government and of the Presidents of the European Council and the European Commission on 29 June 2016. It reiterates its wish to have the United Kingdom as a close partner in the future. It further reiterates that any agreement with the United Kingdom will have to be based on a balance of rights and obligations, and ensure a level-playing field. Preserving the integrity of the Single Market excludes participation based on a sector-by-sector approach. A non-member of the Union, that does not live up to the same obligations as a member, cannot have the same rights and enjoy the same benefits as a member. In this context, the European Council welcomes the recognition by the British Government that the four freedoms of the Single Market are indivisible and that there can be no "cherry picking".

No special deals for Finance sector, Car manufacturing, Fisheries........

OUCH!!!!



Thats incredible.

So Estonia or Germany are going to be expected to put their interests at risk for the sake of the spanish and couple of hindred year old argument over Gib?

If the UK were making such a move, loads on here would be criticising them.

Thats fairly aggressive i would say.

Could be interesting times ahead.

I hope it doesnt all spiral out of control, but an issue like this seems to me way off the remit of the EU.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/31/future-of-gibraltar-at-stake-in-brexit-negotiations

....but but but the Spanish will veto you...

Looks like the Brexit ship of fools is about to hit the rocks.

Will you be pleased if brexit is a disaster?

[Hibrandenburg]

Thats incredible.

So Estonia or Germany are going to be expected to put their interests at risk for the sake of the spanish and couple of hindred year old argument over Gib?

If the UK were making such a move, loads on here would be criticising them.

Thats fairly aggressive i would say.

Could be interesting times ahead.

I hope it doesnt all spiral out of control, but an issue like this seems to me way off the remit of the EU.

Why? The UK wants out of binding EU agreements therefore any agreements reached at EU level regarding Gibraltar will
also be null and void after Brexit. You can't cherry pick.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Why? The UK wants out of binding EU agreements therefore any agreements reached at EU level regarding Gibraltar will
also be null and void after Brexit. You can't cherry pick.

Sorry i think i misunderstood.

I thought it meant that gib would be excluded from any future deal, not that there was already an existing deal, so i take your point.

The way i read it was that the EU were effectively taking sides in that despute. My bad.

[steakbake]

Will you be pleased if brexit is a disaster?

I think it is an incredibly foolish decision, which has been grabbed onto by people with pretty extreme views which will take us to a result which will make us a far worse country for it.

I think for many of the previous years, our politicians have been weak, our media has been totally craven and "Europe" has been the scapegoat of many of our own country's failings.

For instance, to berate the freedom of movement, while also not using controls that we always had the power to use - and other EU countries have for years - then to see our Brexit politicians moan about open borders is just an example of how Leave sold a pup. We've had control - all along - but have done nothing to put it in place.

The 350mil for the NHS, the "we'll keep the single market" and now "no deal is better than a bad deal"... the list kind of goes on.

I won't really be pleased if Brexit is a disaster because it will affect me and people around me and I'm stuck on an island where I see a good number of people regressing to a backwards view of the world. I don't want to live in that kind of a country - I want my country back, to quote a phrase.

If Brexit is a disaster, then the electorate will no doubt have their say on that in the fullness of time.

If it is a success, then that will be a very pleasant and unexpected surprise.

Who I won't feel sorry for though, if it is a shambles, is the people who voted for it to happen. I will also enjoy moments seeing a British state which has a very inflated opinion of itself being punctured along the way.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I think it is an incredibly foolish decision, which has been grabbed onto by people with pretty extreme views which will take us to a result which will make us a far worse country for it.

I think for many of the previous years, our politicians have been weak, our media has been totally craven and "Europe" has been the scapegoat of many of our own country's failings.

For instance, to berate the freedom of movement, while also not using controls that we always had the power to use - and other EU countries have for years - then to see our Brexit politicians moan about open borders is just an example of how Leave sold a pup. We've had control - all along - but have done nothing to put it in place.

The 350mil for the NHS, the "we'll keep the single market" and now "no deal is better than a bad deal"... the list kind of goes on.

I won't really be pleased if Brexit is a disaster because it will affect me and people around me and I'm stuck on an island where I see a good number of people regressing to a backwards view of the world. I don't want to live in that kind of a country - I want my country back, to quote a phrase.

If Brexit is a disaster, then the electorate will no doubt have their say on that in the fullness of time.

If it is a success, then that will be a very pleasant and unexpected surprise.

Who I won't feel sorry for though, if it is a shambles, is the people who voted for it to happen. I will also enjoy moments seeing a British state which has a very inflated opinion of itself being punctured along the way.

Fair dos.

I just wonder at what, if any point, people have to put the referendum debate behind them and all try and make the best of it.

Mind you, if us scots are anything to go by, we wont stop debating the rights / wrongs of fhe ref!

For what its worth, i agree with you, and i do worry about the future.

But the EU are doing a good job of working to unite brits behind their govt.

Im still kinda hoping against hope for some kind of economic fudge.

[RyeSloan]

Fair dos.

I just wonder at what, if any point, people have to put the referendum debate behind them and all try and make the best of it.

Mind you, if us scots are anything to go by, we wont stop debating the rights / wrongs of fhe ref!

For what its worth, i agree with you, and i do worry about the future.

But the EU are doing a good job of working to unite brits behind their govt.

Im still kinda hoping against hope for some kind of economic fudge.

Well it depends if politics or economics wins the day.

Clearly a sensible compromise deal is in the interests of both parties but who knows.

Juncker claims he wants a deal that will make sure "the remaining member states will fall in love with each other again and renew their vows with the European Union" so he's all about the politics of it and to damn with the people. I don't think he will prevail though.

I honestly think this has the opportunity to be the biggest damp squib of all time...a deal will be struck that gives a large degree of continuity on most of the contentious issues and the only people left disappointed will be the doomsayers and the little englanders. The world will move on and businesses will adapt as they always do.

[Moulin Yarns]

Well it depends if politics or economics wins the day.

Clearly a sensible compromise deal is in the interests of both parties but who knows.

Juncker claims he wants a deal that will make sure "the remaining member states will fall in love with each other again and renew their vows with the European Union" so he's all about the politics of it and to damn with the people. I don't think he will prevail though.

I honestly think this has the opportunity to be the biggest damp squib of all time...a deal will be struck that gives a large degree of continuity on most of the contentious issues and the only people left disappointed will be the doomsayers and the little englanders. The world will move on and businesses will adapt as they always do.

Agreed this is the likely outcome. Similar to the status quo with similar trade and movement of people. And similar costs.

A bit like Norway with no say.

[RyeSloan]

Interesting piece on the roots of this thread....

https://bv.ms/2ofDeZ5

[ronaldo7]

A Brexit view from abroad, and Empire 2.0

https://t.co/EBZQ8MR8Lu

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Agreed this is the likely outcome. Similar to the status quo with similar trade and movement of people. And similar costs.

A bit like Norway with no say.

I suppose we will all have to train ourselves not to react to evey leak, announcement etc during negotiations - there will be all sorts of that going on.

Just have to wait for the final deal, and hope its not too bad.

[grunt]

I think it is an incredibly foolish decision, which has been grabbed onto by people with pretty extreme views which will take us to a result which will make us a far worse country for it.

I think for many of the previous years, our politicians have been weak, our media has been totally craven and "Europe" has been the scapegoat of many of our own country's failings.

For instance, to berate the freedom of movement, while also not using controls that we always had the power to use - and other EU countries have for years - then to see our Brexit politicians moan about open borders is just an example of how Leave sold a pup. We've had control - all along - but have done nothing to put it in place.

The 350mil for the NHS, the "we'll keep the single market" and now "no deal is better than a bad deal"... the list kind of goes on.

I won't really be pleased if Brexit is a disaster because it will affect me and people around me and I'm stuck on an island where I see a good number of people regressing to a backwards view of the world. I don't want to live in that kind of a country - I want my country back, to quote a phrase.

If Brexit is a disaster, then the electorate will no doubt have their say on that in the fullness of time.

If it is a success, then that will be a very pleasant and unexpected surprise.

Who I won't feel sorry for though, if it is a shambles, is the people who voted for it to happen. I will also enjoy moments seeing a British state which has a very inflated opinion of itself being punctured along the way.Thank you for posting this. I agree.

[grunt]

I just wonder at what, if any point, people have to put the referendum debate behind them and all try and make the best of it.For me, given how I feel right now, the answer to that is never. I think it's the wrong move for many, many reasons. I refuse to "get over it" as so many people say - I acknowledge you're not saying that. My take on making the best of it is to get independence for Scotland and Scotland back into the EU.

[makaveli1875]

For me, given how I feel right now, the answer to that is never. I think it's the wrong move for many, many reasons. I refuse to "get over it" as so many people say - I acknowledge you're not saying that. My take on making the best of it is to get independence for Scotland and Scotland back into the EU.

So what will you do if either scotlands electorate reject independence , or vote independence and dont get in the EU

will you spend the rest of your life refusing to get over it and being all bitter , or will you eventually accept it and move on ?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

For me, given how I feel right now, the answer to that is never. I think it's the wrong move for many, many reasons. I refuse to "get over it" as so many people say - I acknowledge you're not saying that. My take on making the best of it is to get independence for Scotland and Scotland back into the EU.

Fair enough mate.

But if i voted against indy in indyref2, but the indy side won anyway, id be very much of the view that the people have spoken, lets all get on and make it a success.

For all the reasons to want indy, for all the reasons to dislike the Union, we are where we are and wr need to make the best of it for all of our benefit, not least scotlands.

Then, if we do leave the UK wr leave on good terms, having beem the close friend we said we would be.

At the moment, if we were to leave the UK on bad terms, why wouldn't they be just as awkward with us as the EU are being with thr UK (a position many remainers seem to support them, bizarrely).

[grunt]

So what will you do if either scotlands electorate reject independence , or vote independence and dont get in the EU
will you spend the rest of your life refusing to get over it and being all bitter , or will you eventually accept it and move on ?
This is the sort of response which characterises the tone of discussion we find ourselves with post EU referendum. A slightly longer, slightly less angry, but undeniably still a variant of "get over it".

I don't know what I'll do, I hope that situation doesn't arise. One option might be to move to a country where there are less xenophobic angry people.

Edit to add a further thought. Your post made me think - am I bitter? I don't know, I'll need to think about it. I'm angry that the Leave vote won on the back of a campaign characterised by blatant lies and by scapegoating foreigners. It was a nasty campaign which successfully focused many peoples' attention on immigrants as being the cause of many of the country's problems, when I believe they are pretty much innocent. The cause of the country's ills should more reasonably directed at successive UK Governments who have failed to invest in supporting people in need. In my opinion.

So am I bitter? I'm not sure. I'm certainly angry, and disappointed in the lack of leadership shown by our MPs.

[grunt]

For all the reasons to want indy, for all the reasons to dislike the Union, we are where we are and wr need to make the best of it for all of our benefit, not least scotlands.

Then, if we do leave the UK wr leave on good terms, having beem the close friend we said we would be.I agree. I'd like for Scotland to leave the UK on good terms. Ms Sturgeon is always at pains to point out the SNP stance is not anti-English. Of course the English MPs and press have their own agenda and often ignore her words. It suits their narrative to paint the SNP as self interested nationalists.


Put simply. The Scottish Nationalism we see calling for independence is based on the wish to self govern in an all inclusive society. British Nationalism is the belief that British born citizens should have more rights than citizens from abroad.I concur with this.

[makaveli1875]

This is the sort of response which characterises the tone of discussion we find ourselves with post EU referendum. A slightly longer, slightly less angry, but undeniably still a variant of "get over it".

I don't know what I'll do, I hope that situation doesn't arise. One option might be to move to a country where there are less xenophobic angry people.

Its not a variant of anything . i was asking if you get the referendum you crave , and again the result doesnt go your way will you accept it and move on .
Can you name a country on Earth that does not have angry xenophobic people BTW ?

[grunt]

Its not a variant of anything . i was asking if you get the referendum you crave , and again the result doesnt go your way will you accept it and move on .
Can you name a country on Earth that does not have angry xenophobic people BTW ?Sorry, that was how I read it. My mistake. And no, I probably can't name such a country, but that wouldn't stop me looking!

[ronaldo7]

Sorry, that was how I read it. My mistake. And no, I probably can't name such a country, but that wouldn't stop me looking!

"You just can't beat the person who never gives up"...Babe Ruth

I applaud your indefatigability.:aok:

[Slavers]

Sorry, that was how I read it. My mistake. And no, I probably can't name such a country, but that wouldn't stop me looking!

Looking for a non existent country that does not have any xenophobic people in it?

Where is the sense in that?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

"You just can't beat the person who never gives up"...Babe Ruth

I applaud your indefatigability.:aok:

I remember George Galloway using that phrase to Saddam Hussein!

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Looking for a non existent country that does not have any xenophobic people in it?

Where is the sense in that?

Scotland doesnt do xenophobia. We are not like those horrible Sassenachs.

Its not like our own fitba club didnt face enormous hostility for being an 'immigrant' club, or that anti-irish, anti-catholic bigotry doesnt still exist in our society as a result of our last wave of mass immigration.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Labour and even the Lib Dems doing the right thing - well played them.

Im quite surprised by the lack of criticism for the EUs position on Gib on here. Fair enough call out the UK govt when it does something wrong, but apply the same standards to both sides?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/01/labour-brexit-protection-gibraltar-keir-starmer-eu

[ronaldo7]

Labour and even the Lib Dems doing the right thing - well played them.

Im quite surprised by the lack of criticism for the EUs position on Gib on here. Fair enough call out the UK govt when it does something wrong, but apply the same standards to both sides?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/01/labour-brexit-protection-gibraltar-keir-starmer-eu

I was surprised as many were at the inclusion of Gibraltar from the EU, and I was even more surprised that the UK government never mentioned the word Gibraltar once in their Article 50 letter.

Schoolgirl error.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I was surprised as many were at the inclusion of Gibraltar from the EU, and I was even more surprised that the UK government never mentioned the word Gibraltar once in their Article 50 letter.

Schoolgirl error.

Yeah mayne they should have thought about that!

But the EU intervening in a bilateral issue, at the same time as insisting no bilateral negotiations take place.

I probably is all a bit inevitable as many here have pointed out, but its a poor start to the whole thing.

I wouldnt be surprised if we sent warships there in the wake of this as a 'symbolic' act.

[ronaldo7]

Yeah mayne they should have thought about that!

But the EU intervening in a bilateral issue, at the same time as insisting no bilateral negotiations take place.

I probably is all a bit inevitable as many here have pointed out, but its a poor start to the whole thing.

I wouldnt be surprised if we sent warships there in the wake of this as a 'symbolic' act.

I'd be surprised if we have any fit for purpose.:greengrin

[northstandhibby]

Yeah mayne they should have thought about that!

But the EU intervening in a bilateral issue, at the same time as insisting no bilateral negotiations take place.

I probably is all a bit inevitable as many here have pointed out, but its a poor start to the whole thing.

I wouldnt be surprised if we sent warships there in the wake of this as a 'symbolic' act.

It is a poor start to the whole thing and I've posted on here before opining the leave vote was a disastrous action. However this illustrates how serious the EU is to protect its entity with gusto. The brexiteers were wrongful in stating the EU needed the UK more than and the EU will be strong in its position on a member state exiting the bloc.

A complex situation indeed unfortunately.

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

I see the Spanish Foreign Minister (someone else I'd never heard of before) has stepped front and centre in the Veto discussion.

The Spanish veto on Scottish Independence, that is. It now seems, they'll not be using it to block our EU aspirations at all, if we become Independent. Nice.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I see the Spanish Foreign Minister (someone else I'd never heard of before) has stepped front and centre in the Veto discussion.

The Spanish veto on Scottish Independence, that is. It now seems, they'll not be using it to block our EU aspirations at all, if we become Independent. Nice.

It was probably always quite a flimsy argument, but id say all sides can take it off the table now - thats unequivocal!

[ronaldo7]

OMG:shocked:

That escalated quickly. https://t.co/QJbPuTnlsC

[snooky]

I was surprised as many were at the inclusion of Gibraltar from the EU, and I was even more surprised that the UK government never mentioned the word Gibraltar once in their Article 50 letter.

Schoolgirl error.

Introspective, self-importance, parochial error?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

OMG:shocked:

That escalated quickly. https://t.co/QJbPuTnlsC

The Europeans really dont understand the British if they think gib is an issue we would give in on.

I wouldbt be surprised if we scuppered a whole deal over it.

Surely it is all just negotiation poisitions. I can't see 26 other countries allowing Spain to veto a deal they all agreed over a bilateral dispute between us and Spain.

[Hibrandenburg]

The Europeans really dont understand the British if they think gib is an issue we would give in on.

I wouldbt be surprised if we scuppered a whole deal over it.

Surely it is all just negotiation poisitions. I can't see 26 other countries allowing Spain to veto a deal they all agreed over a bilateral dispute between us and Spain.

Even discussing this in the media at this stage is nothing short of ****ing mental. Scotland needs to get out of this mad house ASAP.

[ronaldo7]

The Europeans really dont understand the British if they think gib is an issue we would give in on.

I wouldbt be surprised if we scuppered a whole deal over it.

Surely it is all just negotiation poisitions. I can't see 26 other countries allowing Spain to veto a deal they all agreed over a bilateral dispute between us and Spain.

It is, imo, however, things have changed since the article 50 letter was delivered. Each country now holds a veto. The power is now with them.

Blue passports, Imperial measures, and talks of war with Spain. What has Brexit released.

18313

This is an advertisement for one of our local bars. "British passport required". It's actually illegal.

[ronaldo7]

The Europeans really dont understand the British if they think gib is an issue we would give in on.

I wouldbt be surprised if we scuppered a whole deal over it.

Surely it is all just negotiation poisitions. I can't see 26 other countries allowing Spain to veto a deal they all agreed over a bilateral dispute between us and Spain.

This "British", you speak of. I'm sure many in Scotland don't understand them either.:aok:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

It is, imo, however, things have changed since the article 50 letter was delivered. Each country now holds a veto. The power is now with them.

Blue passports, Imperial measures, and talks of war with Spain. What has Brexit released.

18313

This is an advertisement for one of our local bars. "British passport required". It's actually illegal.

I get that all 27 now have a veto on any future trade deal (but not the exit agreement i think - is that QMV?)

But individual countries using this oppprtunity to try and grab, further their own interests is not supppsed to be what it is about.

In a funny sort of way, i suspect UK negotiators will be quite pleased. It lays bare the fragility of the 'all for one'EU stance.

I am sure the UK will be trying to divide to conquer, amd national interest will feature a lot more prominently than the Commission would like to admit.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

This "British", you speak of. I'm sure many in Scotland don't understand them either.:aok:

I get you are nationalist, and i respect that and understand your reasons.

But you are also British, for the time being at least, and i think it is a mistake to assume that most Scots dont feel a degree of affinity to the UK.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

It is, imo, however, things have changed since the article 50 letter was delivered. Each country now holds a veto. The power is now with them.

Blue passports, Imperial measures, and talks of war with Spain. What has Brexit released.

18313

This is an advertisement for one of our local bars. "British passport required". It's actually illegal.

Thats terrible, and also just stupid.

But eejits like that have always existed, and always will im afraid.

[Moulin Yarns]

I get you are nationalist, and i respect that and understand your reasons.

But you are also British, for the time being at least, and i think it is a mistake to assume that most Scots dont feel a degree of affinity to the UK.

I am British, I will always be a resident of the British Isles, There will always be a Britain. What I don't want to be is a citizen of this

(dis)United Kingdom

[Hibrandenburg]

I get that all 27 now have a veto on any future trade deal (but not the exit agreement i think - is that QMV?)

But individual countries using this oppprtunity to try and grab, further their own interests is not supppsed to be what it is about.

In a funny sort of way, i suspect UK negotiators will be quite pleased. It lays bare the fragility of the 'all for one'EU stance.

I am sure the UK will be trying to divide to conquer, amd national interest will feature a lot more prominently than the Commission would like to admit.

Absolutely hypocritical. On the one side it's OK for the UK to try and get the best deal by hook or by crook for its people but when the EU nations do the same it's opportunism. Both sides will try and get the best deal possible but the EU holds most of the cards so good luck with that.

[grunt]

... individual countries using this oppprtunity to try and grab, further their own interests is not supppsed to be what it is about.LOL. That's the very definition of Brexit!

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I am British, I will always be a resident of the British Isles, There will always be a Britain. What I don't want to be is a citizen of this

(dis)United Kingdom

Yeah of course, i get that.

I was just responding to Ronald inferring us scots dont understand 'the British', as if we arent included in that number.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Absolutely hypocritical. On the one side it's OK for the UK to try and get the best deal by hook or by crook for its people but when the EU nations do the same it's opportunism. Both sides will try and get the best deal possible but the EU holds most of the cards so good luck with that.

Who has said its ok, by hoor or by crook?

And the point here is surely that the negotiations arr about the EU amd the UKs exit / future relationship.

Gib should have been left out of that.

Negotiations on those issues are one thing, dragging in Spain's dubious and doomed to fail territorial ambitions is muddying the water IMO.

Even if what you say above is true, would it not also be hypocritical of you to condemn the UKs approach and not the EUs?

[Peevemor]

Who has said its ok, by hoor or by crook?

That's no way to speak of our beloved prime minister. :greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

LOL. That's the very definition of Brexit!

Ok, i dont agree but im going to leave this one alone.

I always thought Brexit was idiotic, but it has happened. People wanting their own country to get a bad deal are misplaced i would suggest, but obviously being able to say 'i told you so' is more important to some.

Also, what if indyref2 happens, and scotland again votes to stay part of the UK. Us Scots will be subject to the deal just the same as the rest of our British neighbours.

[grunt]

And the point here is surely that the negotiations arr about the EU amd the UKs exit / future relationship.Gib should have been left out of that.Gibraltar is a British Overseas Territory and therefore leaving the EU along with the rest of the UK and therefore the UK's exit is also Gibraltar's exit. You can't leave them out.

[grunt]

Also, what if indyref2 happens, and scotland again votes to stay part of the UK. Us Scots will be subject to the deal just the same as the rest of our British neighbours.A horror scenario for some. There will be many working to ensure this doesn't happen.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Gibraltar is a British Overseas Territory and therefore leaving the EU along with the rest of the UK and therefore the UK's exit is also Gibraltar's exit. You can't leave them out.

I agree.

But that is how i interpret what the EU are saying, is that you can leave it out unless Spain agrees.

Thats what i think is unreasonable. We seem to agree!

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

A horror scenario for some. There will be many working to ensure this doesn't happen.

Of course, amd its strong possibility.

Bit so is the converse.

[Moulin Yarns]

Of course, amd its strong possibility.

Bit so is the converse.

A bit like the shoe being on the other foot :wink:

[Moulin Yarns]

Perspective


Since the Brexit vote the pound has collapsed in value and not recovered (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/pound-sterling-latest-drop-15-per-cent-2017-deutsche-bank-city-london-brexit-eu-a7647571.html). Millions of Brits living abroad suffered an instant 15% devaluation of their money, but people in the UK are much more insulated from the fact they're 15% poorer than they were before because price inflation takes time to seep through. It only becomes glaringly obvious that we're all poorer when we go on holiday and notice the shockingly poor exchange rates.



The EEF manufacturing organisation has warned that hundreds of thousands of jobs could be lost (http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2017/03/theyre-not-gambling-with-their-own.html) if Theresa May follows through on her ludicrous threat to flounce away from the Brexit negotiating table with "no deal" (http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-tories-made-no-effort-to-establish.html).



The Office for National Statistics have calculated that a "no deal" scenario could damage the UK economy by 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP (http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit02.pdf), that's an astonishing £4,200 - £6,400 per UK household.



Dozens of major UK-based businesses (including swathes of the financial sector (https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-03-21/what-the-biggest-banks-are-planning-as-may-sets-brexit-timing)) have already announced that they're making plans to abandon Britain in order to keep themselves in the Single Market zone.



Record numbers of EU nurses have been quitting the NHS (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/18/nhs-eu-nurses-quit-record-numbers) which is already severely understaffed after years of ideologically driven Tory cuts (http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-tory-blueprint-for-wrecking-our.html).



Various sectors of the UK economy are warning of severe Brexit-related recruitment crises. The services (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/brexit-to-cause-60000-job-hospitality-recruitment-shortage-industry-warns-but-will-government-listen-a7659671.html) and agricultural (https://www.ft.com/content/7ceb876c-b58d-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d) sectors are particularly worried.



Scotland (http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2017/02/is-scottish-indyref-2-inevitable.html) is preparing to remove itself (and all of its oilfields and enormous renewable energy capacity) from the Brexit car crash.



The Australian foreign minister has said that Brexit represents a great opportunity for them to improve their trade relationship with Ireland (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ireland-can-benefit-from-brexit-says-australian-foreign-minister-1.2988051) because they remain in the Single Market, and Donald Trump's trade adviser Wilbur Ross has described Brexit as a "God-given opportunity" for the United States to take business away from the UK (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/donald-trump-s-trade-chief-brexit-god-given-right-eu-a7495906.html).

But screw all that stuff eh chaps. Our passports are going to be blue again, and that's the fundamentally important thing. Hooray for the magnificent benefits of Brexit!

About the blue passport, I still have my 1978 issued passport and it is BLACK

[grunt]

The Office for National Statistics have calculated that a "no deal" scenario could damage the UK economy by 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP (http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit02.pdf), that's an astonishing £4,200 - £6,400 per UK household.




On the question of "No Deal", Sir Paul Jenkins, the former Treasury Solicitor and head of the Government Legal Service, said this:


On whether no deal is better than a bad deal, he is emphatic: ‘No deal is absolutely catastrophic. No deal is at the end of two years you just fall out and you cease to be a party to every treaty including those with third countries.’


Provisions covering air travel are a useful example, he says: ‘If you fly to the States, you do so under the 2007 open skies agreement between the EU and the US. If we leave over the cliff edge with no deal, after two years and a day that treaty will cease to apply to the UK instantly. So they’ll be no legal basis for flying. Without a legal basis for flying, an airline would lose its insurance overnight’.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Perspective


Since the Brexit vote the pound has collapsed in value and not recovered (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/pound-sterling-latest-drop-15-per-cent-2017-deutsche-bank-city-london-brexit-eu-a7647571.html). Millions of Brits living abroad suffered an instant 15% devaluation of their money, but people in the UK are much more insulated from the fact they're 15% poorer than they were before because price inflation takes time to seep through. It only becomes glaringly obvious that we're all poorer when we go on holiday and notice the shockingly poor exchange rates.



The EEF manufacturing organisation has warned that hundreds of thousands of jobs could be lost (http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2017/03/theyre-not-gambling-with-their-own.html) if Theresa May follows through on her ludicrous threat to flounce away from the Brexit negotiating table with "no deal" (http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-tories-made-no-effort-to-establish.html).



The Office for National Statistics have calculated that a "no deal" scenario could damage the UK economy by 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP (http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit02.pdf), that's an astonishing £4,200 - £6,400 per UK household.



Dozens of major UK-based businesses (including swathes of the financial sector (https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-03-21/what-the-biggest-banks-are-planning-as-may-sets-brexit-timing)) have already announced that they're making plans to abandon Britain in order to keep themselves in the Single Market zone.



Record numbers of EU nurses have been quitting the NHS (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/18/nhs-eu-nurses-quit-record-numbers) which is already severely understaffed after years of ideologically driven Tory cuts (http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-tory-blueprint-for-wrecking-our.html).



Various sectors of the UK economy are warning of severe Brexit-related recruitment crises. The services (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/brexit-to-cause-60000-job-hospitality-recruitment-shortage-industry-warns-but-will-government-listen-a7659671.html) and agricultural (https://www.ft.com/content/7ceb876c-b58d-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d) sectors are particularly worried.



Scotland (http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2017/02/is-scottish-indyref-2-inevitable.html) is preparing to remove itself (and all of its oilfields and enormous renewable energy capacity) from the Brexit car crash.



The Australian foreign minister has said that Brexit represents a great opportunity for them to improve their trade relationship with Ireland (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ireland-can-benefit-from-brexit-says-australian-foreign-minister-1.2988051) because they remain in the Single Market, and Donald Trump's trade adviser Wilbur Ross has described Brexit as a "God-given opportunity" for the United States to take business away from the UK (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/donald-trump-s-trade-chief-brexit-god-given-right-eu-a7495906.html).

But screw all that stuff eh chaps. Our passports are going to be blue again, and that's the fundamentally important thing. Hooray for the magnificent benefits of Brexit!

About the blue passport, I still have my 1978 issued passport and it is BLACK

Do you never find it strange that the economic and political reality you subscribe to seems to match perfectly your world view and opinions? Does that not ring alarm bells with you?

Companies moving staff to Europe is not the same as 'abandoning' the UK. And would you agree such a scenario would be disastrous for the uk, and for Scotland?

[grunt]

Companies moving staff to Europe is not the same as 'abandoning' the UK. And would you agree such a scenario would be disastrous for the uk, and for Scotland?Yes I would agree. But it seems we're going ahead regardless.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Yes I would agree. But it seems we're going ahead regardless.

Indeed...

[Hibrandenburg]

Who has said its ok, by hoor or by crook?

And the point here is surely that the negotiations arr about the EU amd the UKs exit / future relationship.

Gib should have been left out of that.

Negotiations on those issues are one thing, dragging in Spain's dubious and doomed to fail territorial ambitions is muddying the water IMO.

Even if what you say above is true, would it not also be hypocritical of you to condemn the UKs approach and not the EUs?

Who has kicked off negotiations by threatening possible military repercussions if things don't go to their liking? Now if that's not crook then I don't know what is.

[PeeJay]

About the blue passport, I still have my 1978 issued passport and it is BLACK

It won't be "black" it is dark blue surely? ... unless you painted it black, that is? :greengrin

[marinello59]

Who has kicked off negotiations by threatening possible military repercussions if things don't go to their liking? Now if that's not crook then I don't know what is.

That's not what the Government is really guilty of. Their failure to mention Gibraltar in the letter has pushed them straight on the the back foot before things have really got going.
Their threat to withdraw cooperation on fighting terror if they don't get their own way was much worse than one of yesterday's men emerging from the shadows to make ill advised remarks.
They really have to do better from now on. It is in all of our interests that Westminster and the rest of Europe strike a deal that is good for both sides. That is true no matter what Scotland decides to do.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Who has kicked off negotiations by threatening possible military repercussions if things don't go to their liking? Now if that's not crook then I don't know what is.

So its not ok for UK (i agree by the way), but it is OK for the EU?

[Hibrandenburg]

That's not what the Government is really guilty of. Their failure to mention Gibraltar in the letter has pushed them straight on the the back foot before things have really got going.
Their threat to withdraw cooperation on fighting terror if they don't get their own way was much worse than one of yesterday's men emerging from the shadows to make ill advised remarks.
They really have to do better from now on. It is in all of our interests that Westminster and the rest of Europe strike a deal that is good for both sides. That is true no matter what Scotland decides to do.

It's a comedy of errors. My one big worry is that if the negotiations go tits up then Scottish voters might get caught up in some kind of siege mentality.

[Hibrandenburg]

So its not ok for UK (i agree by the way), but it is OK for the EU?

Where have the EU hinted at military intervention? :confused:

[Slavers]

Where have the EU hinted at military intervention? :confused:

Where have the UK Government hinted at military intervention?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Where have the EU hinted at military intervention? :confused:

Im asking if the EU backing spain in having a veto, and allowing it to eclude Gib from any agreement with the UK - in effect taking spains side in a bilateral territorial dispute - is right or wrong?

Why are you being so evasive?

[Hibrandenburg]

Where have the UK Government hinted at military intervention?

Lord Howard, former Home Secretary sits in the House of Lords which forms part of our parliament and is therefore part of the system that governs our country.

[Hibrandenburg]

Im asking if the EU backing spain in having a veto, and allowing it to eclude Gib from any agreement with the UK - in effect taking spains side in a bilateral territorial dispute - is right or wrong?

Why are you being so evasive?

There's a legal argument to be made that Gibraltar would automatically recede to Spain in the event of Scotland leaving the UK. I think Spain have justifiably a claim on Gibraltar in that case and are playing a blinder. Ultimately though, like Scotland after the brevity vote, Gibraltar should be given a referendum to decide what they want and all sides should then respect that.

Sabre rattling is a whole different kettle of fish.

[Slavers]

Lord Howard, former Home Secretary sits in the House of Lords which forms part of our parliament and is therefore part of the system that governs our country.

So no one from the elected UK government has hinted at military intervention?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Lord Howard, former Home Secretary sits in the House of Lords which forms part of our parliament and is therefore part of the system that governs our country.

So not the government?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

There's a legal argument to be made that Gibraltar would automatically recede to Spain in the event of Scotland leaving the UK. I think Spain have justifiably a claim on Gibraltar in that case and are playing a blinder. Ultimately though, like Scotland after the brevity vote, Gibraltar should be given a referendum to decide what they want and all sides should then respect that.

Sabre rattling is a whole different kettle of fish.

Yet again you evade the question and try to hide that in sone pseudo legalistic obfuscation.

[ronaldo7]

I get you are nationalist, and i respect that and understand your reasons.

But you are also British, for the time being at least, and i think it is a mistake to assume that most Scots dont feel a degree of affinity to the UK.

I wasn't actually speaking about myself, or Scots for that matter. I was thinking about how those Europeans who'd made their home in Scotland, and are now seeing all this blow up in their faces.

A feeling of WTF, sprung to my mind since May triggered A50, and everything emanating from dan saff.

What must they be thinking?

[Hibrandenburg]

So no one from the elected UK government has hinted at military intervention?

As far as anyone in the EU is concerned then it is and playing semantics isn't going to change that.

[Hibrandenburg]

So not the government?

See above and above.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

As far as anyone in the EU is concerned then it is and playing semantics isn't going to change that.

Im sure the Europeans can tell the difference between the government and other elecred officials (or unelected in this case).

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Im sure the Europeans can tell the difference between the government and other elecred officials (or unelected in this case).

I mean Nigel Farage is an MEP, bit im sure they know he doesnt speak for the EU Commission.

[marinello59]

As far as anyone in the EU is concerned then it is and playing semantics isn't going to change that.

Stop doing it then. :greengrin

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I wasn't actually speaking about myself, or Scots for that matter. I was thinking about how those Europeans who'd made their home in Scotland, and are now seeing all this blow up in their faces.

A feeling of WTF, sprung to my mind since May triggered A50, and everything emanating from dan saff.

What must they be thinking?

Fair enough mate.

I actually met with someone from western europe through work last week (you know, one of the 'good'european migrants) and sje laughed it off mostly, and was fairly sure it would be ok for her, but she did say she had nagging doubts at the back of her mind.

Im sure they will all be allowed to stay thougn, im fairly sure it was the commission who said no to early discussions on a reciprocal agreement on residents.

I doubt we want a few hundred thousand ageing pensioners coming back en masse!

[northstandhibby]

I mean Nigel Farage is an MEP, bit im sure they know he doesnt speak for the EU Commission.

If there was a thread for listing politicians for folks no 1 on the list for a square go as per the footballers one on the main thread he has to be most folks straight to the top numero uno no doubt. He is beyond parody.

glory glory

[RyeSloan]

An interesting (if quite long) piece by Nick Hubble on Brexit and 'free trade' agreements:

Britain is a trading nation. But Brexit puts that status at risk. Almost half our trade is with the EU. If we leave, the tariffs would cause a big problem, especially for Britain’s manufacturing and financial services sector.

Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage, Daniel Hannan and David Davis all campaigned for Brexit. That means the leaders of the Leave campaign are anti-trade isolationists who think free trade is a bad thing for the British economy.

In fact, former chancellor George Osborne said leaving the single market could be the "biggest act of protectionism" in British history. That makes the leaders of the Leave campaign downright protectionist.

But if you look at what Johnson, Farage, Hannan and Davis actually say and do, it’s all pro-trade. They’re all in favour of trade with the EU, and other countries.

Johnson said Britain would not be "pulling up the drawbridge" and argued against protectionism at a conference: "When goods and services no longer cross borders then troops and tanks do so instead."

Hannan has been campaigning for free trade agreements with countries all around the world. He also explains why being inside the EU restricts British trade instead of increasing it: “A study last year showed that leaving the EU’s tariff arrangements would save the average British family £933 a year. That extra spending power will boost the whole economy.”

Davis is worried the new trade deal with the EU will take a long time. But only because the EU wants to include its usual protectionist measures – the same ones that stop it making trade agreements with other countries.

So where does the narrative go wrong? How can pro-trade advocates be in favour of Brexit? It seems absurd. Brexit is bad for trade, so those who support it must be anti-trade. Instead, they argue in favour of trade.

The answer is simple. Brexit is good for trade. I’ll show you how in a moment. But the first thing to notice in all this is how twisted the argument is. Brexit backers are identified as anti-trade, despite being pro-trade.

Meanwhile, Remain campaigners are supposedly pro-trade, but want to stay inside a trading bloc that is really a protectionist club which uses trade wars for political motives.

The media’s framing of the issue is nonsensical. And this hasn’t resolved itself yet. It’s why younger generations are so mystified by what’s going on

Brexit could be just the beginning.


The truth about Brexit and trade

So what is the correct way to look at things when it comes to how Brexit will affect trade?

There are two parts to the equation: trade with the EU and trade with the rest of the world.

It’s obvious that leaving the EU could dramatically increase trade levels with the rest of the world. The EU is far more protectionist than the UK. It has to protect more industries and interest groups. It has high tariff levels with countries it doesn’t have a trade agreement with, and it is a thorny free trade agreement negotiator.

The UK is far more pro-trade. EU leaders are trying to put a stop to Britain’s trading future by demanding that Britain doesn’t enter any trade negotiations until it’s outside the EU. That’s pure vindictiveness. It exposes their will to punish Britain for political motives.

What about the other side of the equation – trade with the EU? It’s dependent on the deal we strike during negotiations.

Incidentally, without a deal we revert to World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules. But the WTO rules don’t dictate tariff levels, just maximum levels, and they require equal treatment of countries you don’t have a trade agreement with.

So if the UK leaves the EU without a trade deal, two things would happen. It would inherit other countries’ WTO rules for exports to those countries, and it would have to come up with its own trade rules for imports from other countries.

First of all, many of Britain’s trading partners have lower tariffs than the EU. The EU’s “average applied tariff” is 5.3, which is high among developed countries. The US is 3.5 and Australia and New Zealand are well below 3. Even *****lia and Peru have a lower level than the EU.

Here’s a WTO map of the world’s trading nations and their tariff levels:




Source: WTO

This exposes the EU as a protectionist bloc.

What about our own tariff rules? What would Britain implement to restrict imports? Edgar Miller explained in The Telegraph how things might look if the British get rid of tariffs altogether once they leave the EU:

So what happens if we remove tariffs against the EU (and the rest of the world), even if the EU (and the rest of the world) does not reciprocate? In summary, a standard world trade model shows unilaterally removing tariffs creates a long-term GDP gain of 4 per cent, a fall of 8 per cent in consumer prices, and an increase in Treasury revenue of more than 7 per cent, compared to the status quo.

It's unlikely we’ll be that pro-trade. Politicians pander to interest groups who need protection. But you get the idea. We’re stuck in a protectionist club. We need to get out to increase trade.

So why the media panic over leaving the EU without an agreement? When people say the WTO regime is bad for trade, they presume the UK and EU would have a trade war, up to the level of WTO limits. But that’s an assumption.

Either Britain is pro-trade or not. It can’t target the EU. And why favour the EU over others in the first place?

Remember, any EU tariffs on Britain have to be the same level as on other countries. So the EU’s ability to make life tough for the UK would mean sabotaging its trade with everyone else in the world. Even if Britain were a small trading partner for the EU, the EU would be shooting itself in the foot with the rest of the world.

"If you were to cut off your noses to spite your faces and to reject any idea of a sensible trade deal the consequences would be far worse for you than it would be for us," Farage told MEPs.

Deal or no deal?

But what are the options under a deal?

If free trade with the EU was good while we were part of the EU, it doesn’t become bad when we’re not. It doesn’t matter who benefits more. It’s clear both parties benefit from trade. And so imposing tariffs is bad.

It’s a false dichotomy to choose between “trade and the EU” versus “no trade and Brexit”. Britain is leaving. Free trade is in the interest of both Britain and the EU. Britain is pro-trade. What will the EU be?

What’s fascinating is that the EU is not acting in the best interest of its citizens if it rejects a trade deal. It is acting in the best interests of the EU – the EU’s survival.

The motivation for no deal comes only from the EU. It is to punish Britain at the expense of citizens in both places. And the motivation for punishing Britain is to discourage other countries from leaving. That doesn’t benefit citizens, it only benefits Brussels.

Hopefully EU voters will notice this and want to leave the EU even more.

The beatings will continue until morale improves

As I wrote this it all sounded suspiciously familiar. It’s straight out of Stieg Larsson’s famous The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo novels, which I’m reading now.

In the books a subsection of the Swedish secret police mistreat the main character in the name of national security. By end of the story, the extent to which they have to keep mistreating her in order to maintain secrecy becomes more and more absurd. Each cover-up necessitates another cover-up of even bigger proportions.

Here’s the key: the goal of the agents slowly moves from promoting national security to the survival of the secret group – their careers at first and their potential for jail time later. They’re not keeping Sweden safe, but covering up how they used to keep Sweden safe.

It’s fascinating to watch characters motivated by patriotism slowly become motivated by fear for their own careers in such a gradual progression that they don’t quite realise it. Even the objector inside the secret police can’t quite put into words where they went wrong. When did the survival of the group become more important than everything else?

This is a common part of human psychology. When people act in contradiction to their beliefs, they change their belief set to avoid the contradiction. They use a self-affirmation technique to avoid called cognitive dissonance, as an academic would put it. In this case, the survival of the secret group justifies more and more evil acts. What could be more important than survival, after all?

The EU is stuck in the same world. It began as a free trade zone. These days its arguing against free trade with Britain. And the EU politicians and officials are becoming more and more bizarre and extreme just to keep the EU going. They’re threatening to sabotage a trade deal with a country they’ve been trading with successfully for a long time, just to punish us for leaving. Even Gibraltar is included in the EU negotiation proposals to make things difficult. It’s like taking a hostage.

The question is how far EU politicians will go before the European population calls them out on the nonsense. Because the EU politicians won’t do it themselves.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Cheers for posting, an interesting read.

On the plus side i agree with the latter parts, amd its why i habe grown to dislike the EU more since Brexit. The naked self interest of relative non-entities like Junker putting the good of the EU ahead of

A) the concerns of one of its most important members, and
B) the benefits of its citizens

Its a strong point, amd also why i think people who say that the EU holds all the cards in negotiations are wrong. The UK can, and should be exploting the gaps in interest between member states

Where i dont agree is that it doesnt give enough attention to the finer points of trade agreements, i.e. the regulations etc that lie behind it all. I beliebe that these are often the most difficult bits (see TTIP fpr example).

But i suppose the difficulty of this should be ameliorated by the fact that our regulatory regimes are already aligned.

I have always wondered if the PM knows something we dont. Therr is just something not right about her approach so far, i wonder if the fine print of the WTO rules is their secret weapon?

I read somewhere else that in reverting to WTO rules, a statutory transitional period of tem years on existing terms applies, meaning our current EU terms would exist for ten years in the event of no deal. I dont know if that is true, bit would be very interesting.

[The Green Goblin]

Cheers for posting, an interesting read.

The cognitive dissonance could certainly apply to some on here...!

On the plus side i agree with the latter parts, amd its why i habe grown to dislike the EU more since Brexit. The naked self interest of relative non-entities like Junker putting the good of the EU ahead of

A) the concerns of one of its most important members, and
B) the benefits of its citizens

Its a strong point, amd also why i think people who say that the EU holds all the cards in negotiations are wrong. The UK can, and should be exploting the gaps in interest between member states

Where i dont agree is that it doesnt give enough attention to the finer points of trade agreements, i.e. the regulations etc that lie behind it all. I beliebe that these are often the most difficult bits (see TTIP fpr example).

But i suppose the difficulty of this should be ameliorated by the fact that our regulatory regimes are already aligned.

I have always wondered if the PM knows something we dont. Therr is just something not right about her approach so far, i wonder if the fine print of the WTO rules is their secret weapon?

I read somewhere else that in reverting to WTO rules, a statutory transitional period of tem years on existing terms applies, meaning our current EU terms would exist for ten years in the event of no deal. I dont know if that is true, bit would be very interesting.


The bit in bold undermines your own genuine attempts (judging by your previous posts) to keep the debate on here constructive and civil, regardless of point of view. Imho anyway.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

The bit in bold undermines your own genuine attempts (judging by your previous posts) to keep the debate on here constructive and civil, regardless of point of view. Imho anyway.

Fair point mate, that was a bit childish amd uncalled for.

I've edited and removed.

[grunt]

An interesting (if quite long) piece by Nick Hubble on Brexit and 'free trade' agreements: (snip)
Thanks for posting. Sadly, any Brexit analysis, no matter how long it is, is immediately suspect when it contains words like "simple" and "obvious". There is nothing simple or obvious about our relationship with the EU, and furthermore it's not all about trade. For trade to occur there needs to be agreements on standards, and on the legal basis which underpins the trade. Neither of these vital elements are addressed in the article.

On the question of no deal, I keep coming back to a blog post on the LeaveHQ site in the time before the referendum. It warned Leave campaigners to avoid discussing the fall back position of WTO terms because they are practically unworkable. The post - which, remember, was on one of the main Leave websites, concluded as below. I know I've posted it before but it bears repeating.


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 should allow it. The option should be rejected

And when your man starts using the Dragon Tattoo book as a guide for human behaviour, then, well, he's lost this particular member of his audience.

[grunt]

The EU reminds us about Euro clearing again.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/04/uk-jobs-merkel-juncker-euro-clearing-eu-manfred-weber-brexit?CMP=share_btn_tw

[ronaldo7]

The EU reminds us about Euro clearing again.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/04/uk-jobs-merkel-juncker-euro-clearing-eu-manfred-weber-brexit?CMP=share_btn_tw

Just getting their ducks in a row. :agree:

A top European Parliament ally of German Chancellor Angela Merkel said London’s financial-markets business tied to the euro must be pared back after Brexit, highlighting one of the possible red lines in the upcoming negotiations.
“When Great Britain is leaving the European Union, for us it’s not thinkable that, at the end, the whole euro business is still managed in London,” Manfred Weber, leader of the Christian Democrats in the 28-nation assembly, told reporters on Tuesday in Strasbourg, France. “The euro business should be managed on EU soil.”

https://t.co/yE86siUQbl

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Just getting their ducks in a row. :agree:

A top European Parliament ally of German Chancellor Angela Merkel said London’s financial-markets business tied to the euro must be pared back after Brexit, highlighting one of the possible red lines in the upcoming negotiations.
“When Great Britain is leaving the European Union, for us it’s not thinkable that, at the end, the whole euro business is still managed in London,” Manfred Weber, leader of the Christian Democrats in the 28-nation assembly, told reporters on Tuesday in Strasbourg, France. “The euro business should be managed on EU soil.”

https://t.co/yE86siUQbl

There is gonna be so much of this kind of stuff, it will be largely meaningless.

I suspect businesses etc will take very rational decisions based on what is best for them.

Which will probably be keeping a foot in both camps to see how things pan-out.

It would also be funny to see them start fighting over where in the EU, lots of good options, wonder if they will all agree?!

[grunt]

There is gonna be so much of this kind of stuff, it will be largely meaningless.
I suspect businesses etc will take very rational decisions based on what is best for them.

I agree, businesses will make rational decisions.
Many London based financial services companies are currently looking at moving parts of their operations out of London into the EU.
This is a loss of often highly paid jobs - and the consequent tax take - which is entirely down to the Brexit decision. There is simply no upside to this.

And it's far from meaningless.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Just getting their ducks in a row. :agree:

A top European Parliament ally of German Chancellor Angela Merkel said London’s financial-markets business tied to the euro must be pared back after Brexit, highlighting one of the possible red lines in the upcoming negotiations.
“When Great Britain is leaving the European Union, for us it’s not thinkable that, at the end, the whole euro business is still managed in London,” Manfred Weber, leader of the Christian Democrats in the 28-nation assembly, told reporters on Tuesday in Strasbourg, France. “The euro business should be managed on EU soil.”

https://t.co/yE86siUQbl

A question - if / when scotland becomes indy, and if it has own currency, would you think financial companies whose busieness will be mostly done in sterling would move to England? RBS, Lloyds, standard life etc?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I agree, businesses will make rational decisions.
Many London based financial services companies are currently looking at moving parts of their operations out of London into the EU.
This is a loss of often highly paid jobs - and the consequent tax take - which is entirely down to the Brexit decision. There is simply no upside to this.

And it's far from meaningless.

I didnt mean the issue is meaningless, i meant these sort of news pieces when X politician ssays something in the next few years.

[grunt]

I didnt mean the issue is meaningless, i meant these sort of news pieces when X politician ssays something in the next few years.
Ok. However in this case, I know that what this politician has said is being actively addressed in many of our financial services companies.

As for your other question, will companies involved in sterling move out of Scotland? They may do, but I would hope (and expect) that many more would move into Scotland in order to access the EU, if we can gain membership.

[ronaldo7]

A question - if / when scotland becomes indy, and if it has own currency, would you think financial companies whose busieness will be mostly done in sterling would move to England? RBS, Lloyds, standard life etc?

It's a possibility.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Ok. However in this case, I know that what this politician has said is being actively addressed in many of our financial services companies.

As for your other question, will companies involved in sterling move out of Scotland? They may do, but I would hope (and expect) that many more would move into Scotland in order to access the EU, if we can gain membership.

Fair point, in that circumstance i would hope so too.

I wasn't doubting you on fin svces by the way, they would be mad not to be.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

It's a possibility.

I suppose its one of many reasons currency will be so important...

[johnbc70]

It's a possibility.

Probably a reality. I remember at the last referendum I had a job interview and was told in no uncertain terms if Scotland voted for independence then the job was no longer being based in Edinburgh but would be filled down south where this organisation also had numerous offices.

[ronaldo7]

Probably a reality. I remember at the last referendum I had a job interview and was told in no uncertain terms if Scotland voted for independence then the job was no longer being based in Edinburgh but would be filled down south where this organisation also had numerous offices.

Tax offices in East Kilbride were told the same. Their jobs now being done in Croydon, after a No vote.

[ronaldo7]

Decent piece by Ian Dunt.

https://t.co/wrYtscdapH

[grunt]

Decent piece by Ian Dunt.

https://t.co/wrYtscdapHIndeed, I think he's good on Brexit.
Follow him on Twitter.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Tax offices in East Kilbride were told the same. Their jobs now being done in Croydon, after a No vote.

This is rhe problem though, with the neverendum.

It becomes dereliction of organisations not to start planning moves. For example , i would suggest tjat the MOD should be making plans for building warships elsewhere in England - they would be remiss not to.

Then at what point does it just become more prudent for them to move work. Likewise HMRC or whoever else. Once that genie is out the bottle...

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Probably a reality. I remember at the last referendum I had a job interview and was told in no uncertain terms if Scotland voted for independence then the job was no longer being based in Edinburgh but would be filled down south where this organisation also had numerous offices.

I spoke to some HBOS people at the time last time around and left me in no doubt.

Its probably the biggest factor in me sitting at no at the moment - that risk to the prosperity of Edinburgh / Lothians so that more money can be plowed into west central Scotland.

[ronaldo7]

I spoke to some HBOS people at the time last time around and left me in no doubt.

Its probably the biggest factor in me sitting at no at the moment - that risk to the prosperity of Edinburgh / Lothians so that more money can be plowed into west central Scotland.


This will be the pooling and sharing that was talked about eh.

I'm alright jack. We're awe Jock tamsons bairns eh.:aok:

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I spoke to some HBOS people at the time last time around and left me in no doubt.

Its probably the biggest factor in me sitting at no at the moment - that risk to the prosperity of Edinburgh / Lothians so that more money can be plowed into west central Scotland.


This will be the pooling and sharing that was talked about eh.

I'm alright jack. We're awe Jock tamsons bairns eh.:aok:

As far as the border, you mean...?

[ronaldo7]

As far as the border, you mean...?

I'll pool and share with our European cousins as an Independent Nation State, how about you.:wink:

[Hibrandenburg]

There is gonna be so much of this kind of stuff, it will be largely meaningless.

I suspect businesses etc will take very rational decisions based on what is best for them.

Which will probably be keeping a foot in both camps to see how things pan-out.

It would also be funny to see them start fighting over where in the EU, lots of good options, wonder if they will all agree?!

They'll decide by debating it in parliament and then having a vote. It's called democracy and it's completely alien to the tories.

[northstandhibby]

An interesting (if quite long) piece by Nick Hubble on Brexit and 'free trade' agreements:

Britain is a trading nation. But Brexit puts that status at risk. Almost half our trade is with the EU. If we leave, the tariffs would cause a big problem, especially for Britain’s manufacturing and financial services sector.

Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage, Daniel Hannan and David Davis all campaigned for Brexit. That means the leaders of the Leave campaign are anti-trade isolationists who think free trade is a bad thing for the British economy.

In fact, former chancellor George Osborne said leaving the single market could be the "biggest act of protectionism" in British history. That makes the leaders of the Leave campaign downright protectionist.

But if you look at what Johnson, Farage, Hannan and Davis actually say and do, it’s all pro-trade. They’re all in favour of trade with the EU, and other countries.

Johnson said Britain would not be "pulling up the drawbridge" and argued against protectionism at a conference: "When goods and services no longer cross borders then troops and tanks do so instead."

Hannan has been campaigning for free trade agreements with countries all around the world. He also explains why being inside the EU restricts British trade instead of increasing it: “A study last year showed that leaving the EU’s tariff arrangements would save the average British family £933 a year. That extra spending power will boost the whole economy.”

Davis is worried the new trade deal with the EU will take a long time. But only because the EU wants to include its usual protectionist measures – the same ones that stop it making trade agreements with other countries.

So where does the narrative go wrong? How can pro-trade advocates be in favour of Brexit? It seems absurd. Brexit is bad for trade, so those who support it must be anti-trade. Instead, they argue in favour of trade.

The answer is simple. Brexit is good for trade. I’ll show you how in a moment. But the first thing to notice in all this is how twisted the argument is. Brexit backers are identified as anti-trade, despite being pro-trade.

Meanwhile, Remain campaigners are supposedly pro-trade, but want to stay inside a trading bloc that is really a protectionist club which uses trade wars for political motives.

The media’s framing of the issue is nonsensical. And this hasn’t resolved itself yet. It’s why younger generations are so mystified by what’s going on

Brexit could be just the beginning.


The truth about Brexit and trade

So what is the correct way to look at things when it comes to how Brexit will affect trade?

There are two parts to the equation: trade with the EU and trade with the rest of the world.

It’s obvious that leaving the EU could dramatically increase trade levels with the rest of the world. The EU is far more protectionist than the UK. It has to protect more industries and interest groups. It has high tariff levels with countries it doesn’t have a trade agreement with, and it is a thorny free trade agreement negotiator.

The UK is far more pro-trade. EU leaders are trying to put a stop to Britain’s trading future by demanding that Britain doesn’t enter any trade negotiations until it’s outside the EU. That’s pure vindictiveness. It exposes their will to punish Britain for political motives.

What about the other side of the equation – trade with the EU? It’s dependent on the deal we strike during negotiations.

Incidentally, without a deal we revert to World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules. But the WTO rules don’t dictate tariff levels, just maximum levels, and they require equal treatment of countries you don’t have a trade agreement with.

So if the UK leaves the EU without a trade deal, two things would happen. It would inherit other countries’ WTO rules for exports to those countries, and it would have to come up with its own trade rules for imports from other countries.

First of all, many of Britain’s trading partners have lower tariffs than the EU. The EU’s “average applied tariff” is 5.3, which is high among developed countries. The US is 3.5 and Australia and New Zealand are well below 3. Even *****lia and Peru have a lower level than the EU.

Here’s a WTO map of the world’s trading nations and their tariff levels:




Source: WTO

This exposes the EU as a protectionist bloc.

What about our own tariff rules? What would Britain implement to restrict imports? Edgar Miller explained in The Telegraph how things might look if the British get rid of tariffs altogether once they leave the EU:

So what happens if we remove tariffs against the EU (and the rest of the world), even if the EU (and the rest of the world) does not reciprocate? In summary, a standard world trade model shows unilaterally removing tariffs creates a long-term GDP gain of 4 per cent, a fall of 8 per cent in consumer prices, and an increase in Treasury revenue of more than 7 per cent, compared to the status quo.

It's unlikely we’ll be that pro-trade. Politicians pander to interest groups who need protection. But you get the idea. We’re stuck in a protectionist club. We need to get out to increase trade.

So why the media panic over leaving the EU without an agreement? When people say the WTO regime is bad for trade, they presume the UK and EU would have a trade war, up to the level of WTO limits. But that’s an assumption.

Either Britain is pro-trade or not. It can’t target the EU. And why favour the EU over others in the first place?

Remember, any EU tariffs on Britain have to be the same level as on other countries. So the EU’s ability to make life tough for the UK would mean sabotaging its trade with everyone else in the world. Even if Britain were a small trading partner for the EU, the EU would be shooting itself in the foot with the rest of the world.

"If you were to cut off your noses to spite your faces and to reject any idea of a sensible trade deal the consequences would be far worse for you than it would be for us," Farage told MEPs.

Deal or no deal?

But what are the options under a deal?

If free trade with the EU was good while we were part of the EU, it doesn’t become bad when we’re not. It doesn’t matter who benefits more. It’s clear both parties benefit from trade. And so imposing tariffs is bad.

It’s a false dichotomy to choose between “trade and the EU” versus “no trade and Brexit”. Britain is leaving. Free trade is in the interest of both Britain and the EU. Britain is pro-trade. What will the EU be?

What’s fascinating is that the EU is not acting in the best interest of its citizens if it rejects a trade deal. It is acting in the best interests of the EU – the EU’s survival.

The motivation for no deal comes only from the EU. It is to punish Britain at the expense of citizens in both places. And the motivation for punishing Britain is to discourage other countries from leaving. That doesn’t benefit citizens, it only benefits Brussels.

Hopefully EU voters will notice this and want to leave the EU even more.

The beatings will continue until morale improves

As I wrote this it all sounded suspiciously familiar. It’s straight out of Stieg Larsson’s famous The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo novels, which I’m reading now.

In the books a subsection of the Swedish secret police mistreat the main character in the name of national security. By end of the story, the extent to which they have to keep mistreating her in order to maintain secrecy becomes more and more absurd. Each cover-up necessitates another cover-up of even bigger proportions.

Here’s the key: the goal of the agents slowly moves from promoting national security to the survival of the secret group – their careers at first and their potential for jail time later. They’re not keeping Sweden safe, but covering up how they used to keep Sweden safe.

It’s fascinating to watch characters motivated by patriotism slowly become motivated by fear for their own careers in such a gradual progression that they don’t quite realise it. Even the objector inside the secret police can’t quite put into words where they went wrong. When did the survival of the group become more important than everything else?

This is a common part of human psychology. When people act in contradiction to their beliefs, they change their belief set to avoid the contradiction. They use a self-affirmation technique to avoid called cognitive dissonance, as an academic would put it. In this case, the survival of the secret group justifies more and more evil acts. What could be more important than survival, after all?

The EU is stuck in the same world. It began as a free trade zone. These days its arguing against free trade with Britain. And the EU politicians and officials are becoming more and more bizarre and extreme just to keep the EU going. They’re threatening to sabotage a trade deal with a country they’ve been trading with successfully for a long time, just to punish us for leaving. Even Gibraltar is included in the EU negotiation proposals to make things difficult. It’s like taking a hostage.

The question is how far EU politicians will go before the European population calls them out on the nonsense. Because the EU politicians won’t do it themselves.

This piece has quite obviously been written by a brexiteer. Of course the EU will set out to protect itself and its members and be tough negotiators on trade deals, ensuring their rules will be complied with and there is ever more synchronisation across the EU. Most folk knew the EU was heading on a path of not simply just being a trading bloc but also becoming a politicised union. Its the biggest trading area in the world and will continue to forge forward despite brexit. Hopefully in the future the UK with a strong national Labour party and equally strong Scottish Labour party will be leading a campaign to re-join the EU.

glory glory

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I'll pool and share with our European cousins as an Independent Nation State, how about you.:wink:

I would have done!!

But ill stick with the Brits for the time being. Better the devil you know and all that.

Its a good discussion though, it shows that to one degree or another, we are all just arguing over which lines on a map are most important to us. Amd its generally a case of self-interest.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

They'll decide by debating it in parliament and then having a vote. It's called democracy and it's completely alien to the tories.

Completely alien to them?

If only, thats how we got into this whole mess...

Who will anyway? The EU? This is a bloc that still cant agree which country to have their parliament in!!

Plus its an issue where national interest trumps EU interest.

[ronaldo7]

I would have done!!

But ill stick with the Brits for the time being. Better the devil you know and all that.

Its a good discussion though, it shows that to one degree or another, we are all just arguing over which lines on a map are most important to us. Amd its generally a case of self-interest.

Your choice. :greengrin

Personally, I feel more of an affinity with someone in Berlin rather than Basildon, or someone from Grenoble rather than Great Yarmouth.

Choices eh.:aok:

[northstandhibby]

Your choice. :greengrin

Personally, I feel more of an affinity with someone in Berlin rather than Basildon, or someone from Grenoble rather than Great Yarmouth.

Choices eh.:aok:

The Welsh and Irish are our nearest neighbours too and I think being part of a devolved union with them and the English is a pretty good idea. We can still be a proud nation while being part of the UK.

glory glory

[ronaldo7]

The Welsh and Irish are our nearest neighbours too and I think being part of a devolved union with them and the English is a pretty good idea. We can still be a proud nation while being part of the UK.

glory glory

Someone from Dublin rather than Doncaster. :aok:

[northstandhibby]

Someone from Dublin rather than Doncaster. :aok:

Fair dos mate its your viewpoint and no-one can change that but you, for me I would rather stay within a union with our closest neighbours and work towards re-joining the EU and its institutions.

:aok:

glory glory

[RyeSloan]

This piece has quite obviously been written by a brexiteer. Of course the EU will set out to protect itself and its members and be tough negotiators on trade deals, ensuring their rules will be complied with and there is ever more synchronisation across the EU. Most folk knew the EU was heading on a path of not simply just being a trading bloc but also becoming a politicised union. Its the biggest trading area in the world and will continue to forge forward despite brexit. Hopefully in the future the UK with a strong national Labour party and equally strong Scottish Labour party will be leading a campaign to re-join the EU.

glory glory

Not sure what a Brexiteer is to be honest. Read to me like a rather sober view of what the EU's 'free trade' actually is.

As for the ever closer political union, well that's probably the key point isn't it. For the Euro and the EU to survive it has to continue down that path no matter how little it's actually desired by its members or its population.

[northstandhibby]

Not sure what a Brexiteer is to be honest. Read to me like a rather sober view of what the EU's 'free trade' actually is.

As for the ever closer political union, well that's probably the key point isn't it. For the Euro and the EU to survive it has to continue down that path no matter how little it's actually desired by its members or its population.

I was one of its population until the brexiteers like Farage, Johnson and Gove persuaded the UK to brexit and I was all for it and desired the EU and its institutions and if going independent I would expect the SNP or any future Scottish Government to re-join as soon as it possibly could.

glory glory

[RyeSloan]

Decent piece by Ian Dunt.

https://t.co/wrYtscdapH

Quite what Easter eggs have to do with anything I'm not sure but at least it gives him an excuse to mention Farage.

On his main points (assuming the Easter egg hunt wasn't the point of the article) he does seem to have forgotten that the two years timeline was an EU creation.

And I'll be dammed if equivalence was not one of the SNP's main arguments in their Scotland in Europe paper...

He's right in one aspect though, 2 years to agree anything with the EU is a rather impossible mission considering all the hoops and special interests it's has to negotiate within its self. It's possible that says more about the dysfunction of the EU's decision making process than anything else though.

[ronaldo7]

Quite what Easter eggs have to do with anything I'm not sure but at least it gives him an excuse to mention Farage.

On his main points (assuming the Easter egg hunt wasn't the point of the article) he does seem to have forgotten that the two years timeline was an EU creation.

And I'll be dammed if equivalence was not one of the SNP's main arguments in their Scotland in Europe paper...

He's right in one aspect though, 2 years to agree anything with the EU is a rather impossible mission considering all the hoops and special interests it's has to negotiate within its self. It's possible that says more about the dysfunction of the EU's decision making process than anything else though.

You've missed Theresas intervention on the Cadbury front then.

If I'm not mistaken, it was 2 years for Brexit, not the trade deal. 3rd country for that.

[grunt]

On his main points (assuming the Easter egg hunt wasn't the point of the article) he does seem to have forgotten that the two years timeline was an EU creation.


A two year timetable that the UK will have agreed to when we were members.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

You've missed Theresas intervention on the Cadbury front then.

If I'm not mistaken, it was 2 years for Brexit, not the trade deal. 3rd country for that.

No I didn't miss her intervention, just have no idea what it has to do with Brexit timelines.

[grunt]

No I didn't miss her intervention, just have no idea what it has to do with Brexit timelines.

Did you read the first two paragraphs of the article? Explains why he was comparing the fuss over the eggs with the lack of media coverage over May's climb down on the Brexit timetable.

I thought the point was pretty clearly stated myself.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

Your choice. :greengrin

Personally, I feel more of an affinity with someone in Berlin rather than Basildon, or someone from Grenoble rather than Great Yarmouth.

Choices eh.:aok:

How many people do you know from Grenoble? Why do they feel closer than the people you know from Great Yarmouth?

[RyeSloan]

A two year timetable that the UK will have agreed to when we were members.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Sure it was...so it was and is an EU timeline, surely that's not up for debate.

I get the point that May was somewhat daft to suggest that a full trade agreement would be agreed when the article in question merely mentions 'framework for future relationship' but let's be honest here there was never much thought put into anyone leaving as the EU couldn't (and still can't really!) countenance anyone leaving.

I find it a bit odd that people then start to pile into the British government for struggling to work out just what can be achieved in such an arbitrary timeline with the other side had no real idea as to how that would work either and of course are more than happy to play funny buggers to suit their own political (not economic) agenda.

I'm sure there is probably quite a pragmatic approach that could be taken that could resolve most issues relatively quickly but I doubt we will see much of that in the next 12 months at least. The EU loves to play brinkmanship so that is what we will have no matter what.

[grunt]

I find it a bit odd that people then start to pile into the British government for struggling to work out just what can be achieved in such an arbitrary timeline with the other side had no real idea as to how that would work either and of course are more than happy to play funny buggers to suit their own political (not economic) agenda.

I don't want to give the impression that I'm arguing for the sake of arguing. But you do keep saying things I disagree with! :)

I know nothing about how the EU works, but I would have laid good money on no trade deal being agreed within the 2 year timescale. The government is supposed to know this stuff, but they gaily went to press with their timetable. So why are they making objectives they (should) know they can't keep? What's going on here?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

How many people do you know from Grenoble? Why do they feel closer than the people you know from Great Yarmouth?

I dont know what has happened with that quote, but that was Ronaldo that said that, not me