Printable View
Would never happen. The monarchy would not override a decision made by the Scottish parliament and backed by the Supreme court.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith_M
It's just a formality, similar to that Monarch needing to agree to the appointment of the PM. It is archaic but in reality it would never actually happen.
There was a fuss kicked up a few years ago when the Queen used this to hide some of her income from the public.Quote:
Originally Posted by Since90+2
I'm surprised it's even been mentioned as it simply wouldn't happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
Apparently in the early 70s.Quote:
Originally Posted by Since90+2
Sorry, I was meaning the crown not agreeing to Scottish independence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
You missed out the laugh emojiQuote:
Originally Posted by whiskyhibby
This really was a sad story with someone clearly put in a role they were not competent for and couldnt resist the temptation and tried to hide it behind her own incompetence. I cant help but think a little bit of honesty much earlier and a jail term could have been avoided
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-61994020
Point is she wasn’t honest, just a common thief who believed she could do what she liked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Berwickhibby
Competent or not, she stole money. End of story.
I've got no time for criminals, regardless of the colour of their scarf.
Agree with the above but I really wish we didn’t use custodial sentences for non-violent offences like this. I would have rather doubled her sentence but made her serve it at home rather this.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not much of a deterrent. If she would be made to stay at home then you'd have to assume the state would be covering her bills and food expenses, otherwise she'd become homeless and would no longer be under house arrest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I would allow her to work and also to attend an education programme. Otherwise she has to be at home.Quote:
Originally Posted by Since90+2
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We jail far to many people in this country. Jail should be a last resort and for those who are a threat to society. Jailing McGarry has served no purpose, the taxpayer picks up the bill and I doubt she will be rehilabnated any more in jail that outside. She has suffered a spectacular fall from grace and now we’ve put her in jail for the sake of it. She clearly can help in the community and her skill set would have served Scotland better by sentencing her to a community pay back order.
I agree with you, she could have been tagged and got on with her life and saved the prison service, and therefore us, a small fortune.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
As an aside by my fag packet calculation the torys will be due, between them, something like one and a half million years in the pokey for the money they've dubiously removed from the public purse over the last couple of years!
And working in a job where she pays tax. It would still be a massive restriction of liberty, not being able to leave home in the evenings or weekends but it’s a lot better than locking her up 23 hours a day. It’s not just the cost of the prison service but also the cost for the nhs dealing with all the mental health issues that stem from that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's hardly a deterrent. Being able to work freely, socialise during the day and have people visit in the evenings and weekends.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
People stealing significant amounts of money from the public purse, and never admitting guilt, need to be punished harsher than that.
What skilll set? Based on what was presented during the trial she was hopelessly ill-equipped to be an MP, let alone made responsible for large sums of other people's money. It seems likely her mother and aunt's relatively high-profile roles within the SNP gave her something of a leg-up, but judging by what sounds like her uneven, often chaotic personal life those closest to her might be reflecting on whether it was wise to encourage her in that direction. In that respect I have some sympathy for her, seemingly unable to face up to the fact she just wasn't coping.Quote:
Originally Posted by lucky
I don't really get the argument that her sentence could have been more lenient though. A custodial sentence was surely always on the cards and there needs to be a strong deterrent when it comes to these sort of crimes. I imagine anyone tempted to indulge in embezzlement would be more likely to do so if they knew that the worst they'd face was a tag. Not saying that isn't a significant and humiliating restriction on your liberty, but compared to the horror going to prison it's hugely less alarming prospect.
The fact that prison is a horror isn’t a good reason to send someone there.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
I’m all for it in cases where violence is involved or for someone who is a persistent offender.
I never really get the whole deterrence argument. Most people who commit crimes don’t think they will ever be caught. State with the death penalty in America have higher homicide rates.
Sending people to jail instead of using home detention only creates losers. It’s bad for society as a whole.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If she had held her hand up and acknowledged her wrongdoing I don’t think she would have had a custodial sentence. However I think she denied this throughout and still does. I get what Otrvsay about the custodial,sentence, but in the face of the evidence she surely had to come clean.
I agree she deserves the max. For me though, I would prefer if she did 4 year home detention than 2 years in jail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How about a compromise? 3 years' detention in a new home in Rwanda?! I'm sure Pritti Patel will be working on something like this at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
I agree with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
What a waste though.
Is that really the case? There are obviously crimes where the level of pre-planning and ingenuity involved is with a view to never being caught, but I'd suggest an enormous number of crimes are not pre-meditated - particularly crimes which are a result of impromptu violence - and the chances of getting away with it are therefore greatly reduced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Going not guilty might have tipped the balance there. If you take it trial then lose, the judge will come down hard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Yes but when you have people acting irrationally in the heat of the moment then the deterrent isn’t a big factor. Which is why people still kill people in America when they have the deaths sentence.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Zero remorse and let’s not kid ourselves on here, she knew exactly what she was doing and by all accounts a very intelligent person.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Blatant lying for me and deserves everything she gets!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reading back and I forgot she originally pled guilty and then tried to withdraw her plea and then refused to accept her guilyQuote:
Originally Posted by Aldo
I think she was just a bit disorganised in general and also financially. It probably started not as embezzlement but to solve a cash flow issue and then grew from there. Plenty people saw the signs as well but left it too long.
Quiet sad r3ally as she could still have bee. An MP on a decent salary and no financial issues
Yip. She used her position to gain financial gain using public monies to fund holidays, nights out and pay her bills.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
She is now subjected to proceeds of crime so but of a double whammy.
Zero sympathy from me!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Think she was more than just a bit disorganised. The Herald did a feature about her last week and she appears to have had a very loose relationship with the truth long before she became an MP. Numerous jobs, work experiences and qualifications on her CV were either only partially true or simply made up. The vetting process within the SNP for selecting its candidates does not seem to have been very rigorous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Her husband is a Tory, probably learned it all from him :stirrer:Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Which made her a tartan Tory :greengrin:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Can't really argue with that :hilariousQuote:
Originally Posted by Berwickhibby
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...itics-62054475
Sturgeon lying through her teeth here. She will be gutted Johnson has gone ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Boris Johnson being the PM did help the argument for independence.
Rees Mogg being the next PM would probably convince even more people to vote Yes
:greengrin
The ‘quoted’ part indicates that she says there will be overwhelming and widespread relief that he’s gone. There is nothing untrue about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Boris being PM certainly did her no favours in terms of credibility as FM.
Whilst a solid working relationship with the PM would arguably lessen any case for independence, if she's wanting to look competent in the day job and gain trust when it comes to having people believe in her being able to lead into independence (and possibly beyond) then it might help her not to have to have to co-operate publicly with an absolute buffoon.
Demography moves the numbers more than who the PM is. 8 years has seen it move to 50/50. Another couple should do the trick.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nah labour in power undoubtedly is worse for Independence there is still a huge number of labour voters in Scotland. They might give a labour leader another chance, but could say f this if tories win again. Tory voters are probably a lost cause regardless of the winnerQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Depends on what shade of Labour it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
If they're bedecked in Union jacks, refusing to support workers and all about sending the foreigners back in order to get their Red Wall voters back then I'd be surprised if they'd tempt anyone in Scotland back.
If they in any way resemble what many of us consider to be a Labour party then it might be a different story.
My post was in jest but that maybe wasn’t clear.
I still think sturgeon needs a new strategy. Currently her strategy appeals to those who are already persuaded. To really turn the dial she needs to appeal to those who are either undecided or soft no voters. She could start by being more competent in the powers she has rather than being not as bad as the tories which is a low bar.
The next move by the tories will be interesting to see what direction we go in. Ideally they make another bad choice and get booted out next time and we then have a chance to change the way Britain is run.
I suspect though that will not be the case and the independence debate will drag on for a long time to come.
The fact is hundreds of thousands of Scots are loyal labour voters as every election shows. I think they are probably the most important demographic if yes is to win. Almost all snp and tory voters will vote either side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
There will be a number of they labour voters who would give labour a chance even if it is starmers brand of awful
Really? The Labour Party in power and invading other countries is what got the SNP into power in the first place. What about Scotland’s recent voting pattern screams we are just waiting for Labour?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's what I said as well, she does nothing to convince No voters. Unlike Alex Salmond who I keep hearing got it from 28% to 45%. The No side are far more entrenched in their views as well and unlikely to change while Yes voters are a bit more fickle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
I am also not convinced it's actually 50/50 as well, reckon it's about the same as 2014 if you did average of all polls. Does such a thing exist?
It's not about the majority they are already yes or no and are pretty irrelevant. Like presidents focus on the swing states, snp should focus on the hundreds of thousands that will vote Labour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
There could be a tipping point where some SNP voters get sick of being told vote for us and we will deliver Independence, and then nothing happening. Maybe not many but a few % points could make a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I thought we were told the snp are just the best(only) vehicle to get independence and once that’s achieved they will disappear and be replaced by the old parties.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I have read that type of thing regularly but agree it’s nonsense. Too many people have gone all in snp and anti labour who are just red tories
I'm not convinced there are that many soft voters out there to be won over. Folk who demand that a case be put forward one way or the other are only really wanting to pick holes in it from their own position of having made up their mind rather than to ponder the merits of it and actually consider moving position.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Demographics will be a factor, and they are not on the side of the union, as folk reach voting age and others die.
That takes time though and there is a feeling that the independence thing of the last decade or so has been a bit of a movement that might have a shelf life. Folk might get fatigued, disinterested, distracted or young folk might just opt to give up and move away rather than change anything.
That's why I think NS is in a bit of a spot - to push on with a degree of urgency and risk killing the whole thing off or play the long game and risk folk losing interest.
The SCOTTISH Labour Party WILL ALWAYS, ALWAYS, as is historically been proven, TIME & TIME again,Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
put the needs of the UK LABOUR PARTY above all else no matter what they may say, I give you.... IAN MURRAY..cOUGH..CouGH.....cHoKE... BOAK.
ONE NATION TORYISM by any other name!! TORY LIGHT, TORY RED, WOKE ESCOAIA, POR DIOS DESPIERTA!
:thumbsup::wink::agree::greengrin:giruy2:
Attachment 26008
It's no coincidence the biggest jumps in the last 30 years, went against independence when Labour got in and for when the tories.
It's wishful thinking to think it won't make any difference
Not that much I imagine because one thing we can be sure of is that the next leader of the conservative party will be a conservative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
I just posted a lengthier reply to this point on the independence thread. I think that there are plenty of people entrenched in their decision no matter what get said or done but it’s the sizeable number who would be willing to vote yes if they got a proper plan, and liked what they saw, that will sway it. Fail to convince them and the status quo will seem like the safer bet. If I get answers to all the big questions I’ll make an informed decision to the best of my ability. Fail to outline a plan and I won’t go in on blind faith.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
STARMER IS TORY LIGHT ENOUGH FOR 'EM TO STOMACH, they are desperate for the HMS GOODSHIPALLISBARYDADSARMYGOODLIFEUK! :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
I personally think that 2014 changed things in a way that makes those long term graphs of limited value.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I personally think those 2014 demographics are going southward, in a negative sense,... Hope I am seriously NEGATITVELY out of touch, won't be the first time! :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Demographics may play a role, but perhaps in a way nobody expects. This was from last year.
"The latest Panelbase survey for The Sunday Times puts backing for Scottish independence among younger voters in this group at 62 per cent — well above the 48 per cent for Scots voters as a whole. Remarkably this halves to 31 per cent when they are asked how they would vote if they were sure their household would be £1,000 a year worse off under independence."
I bet it halves again if you say that to will kill them if they vote yes.[emoji849]Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What’s remarkable about it? Give anyone an option of being sure that a negative thing will happen and chances are they’ll not be for it. I wonder why that scenario was put in front of them and then quoted.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
I.e most of them don’t expect to be £1,000 worse off under independence.
You’re not seriously suggesting that younger voters are going to be a bad thing for the Indy cause?
I don't think it's particular wild to suggest in the short term we would be worse off after Indy when you think of all that it entails. There was a report from LSE saying Brexit has made us all worse off to the tune of about £500, shared on here and no questions asked, the same LSE are saying Independence would be worse by 2 or 3 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-ne...er-than-Brexit
Let me guess though the Brexit report is above reproach and this report is flawed or wrong.
Did it have an effect if their household was £1000 better off?Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Just for balance likes. 😁
What if the debate is about a short term hit while the independence vision is achieved (like re-joining the EU) v a short term hit post Brexit while, well who knows we never hear anything put forward in terms of a vision for the short, mid or long term of the union. Maybe this is it, this is the vision for the future that we see now.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
It was the report in the paper that said it was remarkable not me. We were talking about people being entrenched and not many being swayed, I was pointing out that the reliance on younger people may not be the sure thing it's made out to be, that's all.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
I am sure it would go up, but there is no evidence to suggest that would happen. I don't think there is a single credible piece of analysis anywhere that's suggests after Independence we would be better off. But feel free to present some?Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
On the phone just now. I'll post a couple of links for you in the morning.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Please don't let it be Believe in Scotland or Business for Scotland or whatever they are called!Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
You say you're on the phone but you're really away for the last pack of lurpak 😉Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
You are just odd. Can't you put me on ignore, your silly little jokes are tiresome. Can't you just stick to the topics on the thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
Demographics do play a part, the over 55s are the only age demographic that actually favour the union, the UK as we know it is on borrowed time, may not be any time soon but it's comingQuote:
Originally Posted by James310
Why not?Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
All the ones you're posting are forecasts.
Far better to listen fron C**** based in GODS COUNTRY.plc....Wherever that may be... South o' thi Border... I'd Imagine! :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by James310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
:thumbsup::agree::greengrin LOL!
So it was, so you think a pro Indy and SNP front is going to be impartial? Here is a bit from their website.Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
"We are dedicated supporters of Scottish independence as a means to deliver our goals, setting Scotland on a more inclusive, greener, confident, more equal and economically successful path."
Its the equivalent of me posting the Daily Express or Scotland in Union links, would you accept them as non biased and take then seriously? Not in a million years.
They're giving an alternative view on how we run our country.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
I thought you'd at least take time to read it first.
So that was it then, nothing else?Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
Scotland will obviously be worse off initially. The pound will also tank and we will be tied to it, so things will certainly start worse than they are now. But I believe we will be better in the long run, especially in Europe
They're all forecasts, and Im willing to accept that it will be difficult to start with, but, forecasts are telling us that the UK is in for a dire decade as it is. That's after 12 years of austerity.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
The only area which your government has succeeded in is the rise of food banks.
We can do better than that.
If I posted a link from the These Islands website you would put some laughing emoji's and say is that from dog food salesman Kevin Hauge.Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
Yet you want people to take seriously Business for Scotland a pro Indy and SNP front which was set up by one man who actually lost tens of thousands of pounds in a failed business as an alternative view?
You would and have in the past immediately dismissed These Islands articles and analysis even although it's not actually on forecasts but actual facts, but expect to post articles from Scotland for Business articles and Gordon MacIntyre Kemp as credible sources.
I can post some links for you from These Islands for an alternative view and all that?
I know it was the article that used “remarkable”.. I was questioning the use of the word, hence the rest of my post.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
I did think given you posted it that maybe you agreed there was something remarkable, or at least quite relevant, though.
Ok, I just thought it was interesting that's all.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
Apologies if I’ve missed something but wasn’t MY’s little gag just a harmless one relating to the Lurpack chat on the brexit thread, and nothing to do with you?Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Of course if you don’t like any of his posts full stop, you can stick him on ignore.. but the other way round isn’t going to stop you seeing ones that weren’t aimed at you. Again, if I’ve missed something then ignore that and please accept my apologies.
Given the title of this thread, I’d suggest things are already way off topic before someone makes a harmless wee one-liner 😁
While I doubt the validity of quantitative economic predictions, is there any credible forecast that says Brexit isn't going to mean an even greater relative decline for the UK compared with the EU average?Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
There may be some difficulty initially with independence, but Scotland can escape the UK's fate and would more likely than not converge economically with well-off EU nations.
I think pretty much all the analysis shows Brexit is and was a terrible mistake from a financial and economic perspective. That's what happens when you stick up barrier with your biggest trading partners.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tubs
When there is no credible analysis that shows Independence wouldn't be a similar mistake that should worry people, but like the Brexiteers the analysis is largely dismissed and it's Project Fear or expert A is biased etc.
As for the EU then I think we already talked about that, with the deficit in Scotland it's very likely signing up to the excessive debt procedure, which is massive austerity.
But like Brexit for some the hit might be worth it to get rid of Brussels/Westminster.
Oh James.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
When did you become the arbiter of what's posted on the forum? I didn't know the rules had changed.
You've no idea what I'd post unless you've some mystic powers. Get the numbers on the lottery tonight.
I'll leave it there. You obviously have a block when it comes to alternative views on how Scotland could prosper.
Putting independence to one side, it would be good to constructively look into the bit in bold given it’s happening in the here and now. What’s our way forward from the position we’re in today? What can be done to make the best out of Brexit? Is there a slightly different path Holyrood could take to Westminster that might be a better fit for Scotland in making the best of Brexit than the path Westminster takes?Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
I had no idea no but looks like I was right, but happy to look at anything else you have that isn'tQuote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
from a pro Indy SNP front for an alternative view.
But probably best we leave there though as you suggest.
I have some stuff down the shops that might help you. 🤣
The rUK are only our largest trading partner because of the way our economy is built just now, with everything focussed on the south of England. If you look at Ireland, only 11% of their trade is with the UK. They trade more with the US than with the UK.Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Most importantly, they trade more than Scotland full stop. They are leaving us standing.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...3af795925.webp
So yes, there may be a period of transition but then it looks like we are in for a long period of decline with Brexit anyway.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ireland do, however, import more from the UK than any other country. I think the land border is more of a consideration on the 'mainland' as well as England is so much bigger than NI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
It's totally ridiculous that after posting a similar warning only yesterday I am having to do this again. However it seems the gentle approach simply isn't working with some posters.
To be clear any posts hounding other posters, attempting to mock or goad them when they aren't actively engaged in a conversation and repeatedly aiming the same jibes at them over and over again is not acceptable. It's even worse when there is a pack mentality to these actions. whether it is coordinated or not is neither here nor there, multiple posters engaging in a pile on is akin to bullying and has never and will never be acceptable on here.
If debates can't be carried out in a civil manner then threads will be closed. We are primarily a football forum yet a disproportionate amount of admin time is spent monitoring and policing this non football forum, often dealing with posters who rarely use the site for it's primary purpose of discussing Hibs and football.
To repeat what was said yesterday. Anyone engaging in any of the behaviours describe above will get no more friendly warnings on threads. The infraction system will be used and nothing, up to and including bans, is off the table. We are all adults here so try and act like it.
Thank you.
Simple: Scottish Independence > RejoinQuote:
Originally Posted by The Modfather
This is the same mistake that Starmer is making. We need to acknowledge that Brexit was a howlingly stupid mistake, built on lies and bigotry. There is no "best" Brexit, only rejoin.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Modfather
This is possibly a discussion for that other thread.
If you mean under the present devolved arrangements, then no there isn't. Or at least, there isn't without Westminster (and depending on what it is, the EU) agreeing to it. The UK Internal Market bill has been passed specifically to stop Scotland being able to do anything different under its current devolved powers.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Modfather
I agree. But I'm not so sure the EU, having been through the rupture, will accept the UK back quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
There is a fundamental difference between Brexit and Indy from a trade perspective and it's pretty juvenile to draw a reductive comparison between them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Brexit cuts the UK off from its local integrated market into an isolated position, albeit with potential to pursue hypothetical trade deals with a number of geographically far off markets we currently have no alignment with.
Indy cuts Scotland off from its local integrated market but offers immediate re-entry to a much larger local market that we currently have perfect alignment with.
Yes, the transition will be painful but there is a large tangible reward available as shown by the performance of similar sized neighbouring northern european countries.
Yes, under the devolved powers. It’s easy to pick holes in independence but offer nothing in return as to the way forward if it’s not independence. Is it simply a straight choice between an as yet to be defined vision of independence or accept the here and now post Brexit landscape is what is we would be saying no to independence for.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Well, take a N Ireland scenario. The EU doesn't like that arrangement because it threatens the integrity of the single market (the UK->NI->RoI route is a potential backdoor for non-EU standards compliant stuff) but they are willing to put up with it because of EU member state Ireland's position re peace and all-Ireland trade. The UK doesn't like it ostensibly because the Unionists are kicking up a racket but a cynic might say they also want to close off the direct comparison which is showing the NI ecomony thriving vs GB!Quote:
Originally Posted by The Modfather
To get such a scenario for devolved Scotland requires massive amounts of goodwill, political capital and focus from both the UK and EU. I think we can safely call it a "long shot". :rolleyes:
You're right it's maybe better on the other thread but just wanted to say I listened to the excellent 'Oh God What Now' podcast yesterday (formerly Remaniacs) and they explained pretty clearly why Starmer can't just make Labour a 'Rejoin' party immediately.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
He needs to win the red wall seats back first it's that simple. Once in power then the process of convincing the electorate of EU benefits can start again.
The other thing I don't think we understand is how much of the trade counted between Scotland And UK is final mile distribution as opposed to produce directly from that country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I'm not entirely sure, but wouldn't be surprised, if a lot of what are termed exports from Scotland to UK are things that are for onward distribution out-with the UK and vice versa.
I can't say I have ever seen the country of origin noted in relation to this, although I may be wrong.
That's a good point. Goods, such as whisky, going to EU will pass through England without duty being paid until exported and will count as a rUK export.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
On the flip side for example wine imported into the UK from France by a distributor in England and then sold on to businesses in Scotland, does that count towards trade from UK to Scotland.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
In that instance it's trade that is forced via that route because of the lack of ports in Scotland rather than a need to do that trade with UK.
Interesting that Forth Ports own Tilbury Dock on the Thames.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Some interesting figures here.
https://www.forthports.co.uk/forth-ports-group/
Rosyth and grangemouth have huge potential for direct export and import with EU.
Thanks for the reply. Last post from me on this subject in this thread. I understand why Labour is taking this approach, I just wish politicians could show more honesty. This "tell them something they want to hear and then explain later why they can't have it" is duplicitous. Politicians should explain to the electorate why they can't get what they think they want, and why they are wrong to think they want it in the first place. Otherwise we treat the electorate as infants, keeping the truth from them to avoid upsetting them.Quote:
Originally Posted by BroxburnHibee
By that time the negatives of Brexit will have already done that for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by BroxburnHibee