I think you may have a long wait.
Printable View
I don't like this move, I don't believe in Brexit and I believe in an independent Scotland but why should this be of direct relevance to anybody's opinion on independence?
Now that people can see they will shut Westminster to get their own way then people will now also know that they will happily close the Scottish Parliament as well if it suits them.
People in Scotland should be very wary about today’s developments.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Interesting take on the process, Theresa May's withdrawal agreement can be put back to parliament for a vote after the closure. This could be the best way to stop a no deal brexit.
Prorogation of Parliament - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament - Since no-one else has mentioned this - It means that the Withdrawal Agreement can return and be voted on again, thus offering MPs the opportunity to avoid No Deal https://t.co/6kHT74HU5O
Please sign and RT, #StopTheCoup and halt the #prorogation of Parliament!
https://t.co/DMfeiXM0zN
The Archbishop of Canterbury is in talks with MPs to chair a citizen’s assembly intended to stop a no-deal Brexit ...
😂😂😂😂 https://t.co/DtA6ffGb9Z
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation
He finally appeared...
BBC Andrew Kerr
@BBCandrewkerr
Alister Jack has now spoken on the steps of the Scotland Office - essentially saying this is a perfectly normal procedure. He says the affront to democracy is the SNP and other opposition parties trying to block Brexit.
C'mon Ruth, let's here your defense of this, given how anti Brexit and even more anti no-deal you were...
If they're serious about parliament suspension to ensure they get the hard brexit they want, then what's to stop them from suspending Holyrood whenever they feel like it?
This move will lead to the end of the UK, which many on here will celebrate. But if getting a deal to get out of EU is this hard how difficult will it to negotiate with the same people to get Scotland a deal to leave the rUK?
I never see the point of these petitions. So what if they are guaranteed to be debated in parliament once they pass a certain number of signatures? It won't change anything. All it proves, for the umpteenth time, is that those who voted remain are still hacked off at the prospect of leaving the EU and will take any chance to register that disapproval. We've already had one that got millions of signatures calling for Brexit to be stopped and which achieved nothing of any tangible significance.
Watching anti-Brexit parliamentary types on the lunchtime news just now was like watching a 'who's the most outraged' competition. I don't mind admitting part of me was thinking 'get it up ye'. Parliament has had more than three years to debate this and come up with a way forward and has failed utterly.
Where is your evidence for your first sentence?
I'm seeing to many folk saying they know what the SNP are doing, and how they don't want this and that.
Just look at their record at Westminster on this one issue. Clear and concise. Put it alongside the Tories.
I've just watched the FM on the BBC, I wouldn't call her mood full of glee.
More angry, sturgeon.
Actually, most of the things that would have been up for negotiation are pre-resolved one way or another. Breaking it down:
Trade - An iScotland would be in the EEA then EU, the trade relationship between rUK and Scotland will be that between rUK and the EU/EEA. Nothing to negotiate. Same for the border arrangements, although one side or the other might try and negotiate a common travel area similar to that the UK has with the RoI.
Assets - Oil/Gas is covered by international law. Nothing to negotiate. Ditto for division of other assets.
Ongoing monetary arrangements - The SNP have dropped monetary union and in a no-deal scenario it doesn't make any sense in the long term anyway. So it's sterlingisation for a transition period to a new Scottish currency.
Debt - Is as issued by the current UK state. Unless rUK wants to give up being the recognised "successor state" (spoiler alert - more chance of James310 swapping his Union Jack pants for Saltire ones) then it stays with rUK.
Trident - We have them over a barrel. iScotland saying shift your nukes out tomorrow morning would be a catastrophe for rUK. They either hand them back to the US and give up being a nuclear power or they have to negotiate a transition that allows them to use Faslane/Coulport until they have their own facility ready,
Other things we might have co-operated with them on - defence arrangements, shared embassy/consular services abroad etc I guess there is a deal to be done and not doing it makes the setup of iScotland harder/more expensive, but if it can't none of it is catastrophic in the way that failing to do a trade deal with the EU is for the UK. Also the EU will be infinitely more receptive and helpful to iScotland as soon as Brexit is done.
It's not an SNP bad agenda. In fact it's a good agenda for the SNP. As Fife Hibee (as pro independence a poster as you'll find) has explained earlier in the thread, they've long predicted a No Deal exit, but are making all the right noises about being angry about it so that they establish a moral high ground in the event of any future Scottish independence referendum.
They've tried this already by calling for another referendum almost as soon as the Brexit vote was delivered. That backfired badly on them so they've now hung their hat on a No Deal exit as being their most likely means of regaining the support they lost.
Quite how that plays with the not insignificant proportion of SNP members who voted for Brexit I don't know.
I'm for Scottish independence, but one of the things that the events of the last three years has shown is that dissolving a long-standing union is more complex and requires more time than the enthusiasts for the split like to beliieve.
Just as Michael Gove told us that getting a deal with the EU would be the easiest task in history so the SNP leaders assured us that the break up of the UK could be finalised in around eighteen months. As the links between Scotland and the rest of the UK are even closer and more historic than those between the UK and EU I do not now find that a credible position. At the time of the Brexit referendum I thought that it would be easier for Scotland to gain independence with the UK out of the EU. I now believe that without the common market and regulations provided by the EU it will actually be more difficult and risky in practice.
Actually the EU-UK negotiation didn't really take that long. The EU were very clear from the outset about what they would offer the UK (Michel Barnier's steps). The UK took years to come to anything like an opening position, although it was vague and changed every 10 minutes depending on which UK cabinet minister was speaking, Once they actually started negotiating it only took from summer 2017 to that Christmas for them to get the bones of a deal. A few more UK government u-turns later that morphed into an agreement which the UK side has so far failed to ratify.
The parameters of an ongoing iScotland-rUK relationship will mostly be set by iScotland staying in the EU's single market. The integration might be deeper but there is much less fluidity in the available outcomes and much less internal division among those trying to negotiate it.
Edit - for clarity I'm not trying to suggest that independence will be economically easy. There will be a large and painful hit especially in a no deal scenario. However, it's largely a non-negotiable hit. Even if you thought rUK might want to offer us a stellar deal like the Brexiters thought they were going to get from the EU, we already know EU rules would prevent it.
No deal makes indy much harder but much more necessary.
Apologies, what I meant to say was that the SNP don't really want to block a No Deal Brexit. They now see that as their best leverage to drum up support for a new independence referendum. In 2016 they were confident that the prospect of Brexit per se would be enough to see a huge surge in support for independence. That failed to materialise, but they'll be more confident a No Deal Brexit will tip the scales.
Britain is so confused the current contenders for "saving democracy" are the Queen, Sinn Fein or the Archbishop of Canterbury (or some combination of the above) https://t.co/3vem0gwc8S
Explaining prorogation to a European.
The Queen releases a swan from Balmoral Castle. It makes its way over around 500 miles to Windsor Castle. If it arrives, parliament is prorogued. However, if a member of parliament can kill it with a Dutchman's pike before it arrives, the UK becomes a republic.
I will give the Nicola Sturgeon answer, let's wait and see where we end up. We need more clarity, it's uncharted territory now etc.
Why doesn't she just ask for her S30 now, get refused and then tell us what her next move is? Or does she need to wait and see what happens as well?
Why else do you think he's doing it?
From the Beeb
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49495575Quote:
It's normal for new governments to shut down Parliament in order to hold a Queen's Speech.
The length of time varies - in 2016 Parliament was closed for four working days, while in 2014 it was closed for 13 days.
This year, Parliament would be suspended for 23 working days before the new Queen's speech on 14 October.
""The privy council held by the Queen at Balmoral has approved an order to prorogue or suspend parliament on a date between 9 and 12 September till 14 October.""
23 working days after a 5 week recess.
Why such a long close down?
Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
The idea that this is 'business as usual' is ludicrous. It's an affront to parliamentary democracy.
It's time for all the opposition leaders to cease posturing and find a compromise to provide a viable alternative to no deal.
Just think, if the 5 lib dems or 40 tories hadn't abstained on the Ken Clarke motion we might not have been in this debacle of Conservativism. Let's blame the snp for it.
Oooft, this tweet from Health Secretary Matt Hancock in June has aged very well:greengrin
Matt Hancock
@MattHancock
Proroguing Parliament undermines parliamentary democracy and risks a general election. I rule it out and call on all candidates to do the same
Can the speaker not stop Parliament being suspended ?
The Tories called the referendum.
The Tories explicitly stopped work on a plan if the result was Leave.
The Tories set the negotiating red lines.
The Tories negotiated the deal.
The Tories failed to deliver their own majority in parliament.
The Tories are now trying to No Deal.
Yep, defo the SNP's fault. :rolleyes:
I never realised so many people were hanging on my every word, that's about 10 posts about me now in the last 20 minutes. Quite astounding.
It's a fantastic move and a great idea from my hero Boris, I have always been a supporter of him on here and have always been in favour of a no deal Brexit. Who likes Unions anyway, let's separate and build walls from these other countries. We need to take back control and make our own decisions. It was all Nicola Sturgeons fault anyway, for everything.
Happy now? That's what you all wanted to hear isn't it?
The ERG ran a competition to discover the best way to leave the EU. The winning entry had a plan set out over ten years to disentangle all the institutions which had EU links and to work towards a new trade deal. ERG members know exactly what they in rushing this, economic melt-down = happy hedge funders.
I wouldn't recommend the book All the Galaxies by Philip Miller, set in a post Brexit, post failed 2nd independence referendum, where greater Glasgow is a separate country and there is a militia called the wardens in control.
I have seen the future and it's bleak.
The Pound taking a nosedive. Further falls predicted. This is only the start.
They can't. If such a cross-party compromise existed it would have been found by now but if anything tangible has been established over the last three and bit years it's that parliament is incapable of coming up with anything more viable than no deal. They're hopeless, the lot of them. Re-opening the 'debate' would achieve nothing.
Well I am either silenced, which 2 have said they want, or not. On the one hand I have someone pressing me for my opinions on today and then on the other I have a couple of others saying they wished I never said another word. Awfully confusing, flip flopping all over the place.
Flip flopping: making a completely opposite opinion.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/flip-flopper
I think you will find that those who are asking you for answers are not the ones that are wanting silence. But don't let that get in the way of your diametrically opposite views.
Even if that were to succeed, it wouldn't move the 'debate' on any further. It would likely just subject us to more stalemate.
All manner of cross-party initiatives have been put forward and failed. Parliament has proved time and again that it is unable to get a consensus on how to deliver Brexit, so from that perspective the government's move today will play out well with a lot of the electorate who have been crying out for some sort of decisive movement - even the remain voters interviewed on the lunchtime news (granted, the BBC must have had to gather the views of punters in a rush this morning) accepted that something has to give.
The whole shambles should have been a cross-party issue right from the start, but I'm not sure we wouldn't have arrived at the same sorry situation even if it had been. There are simply too many self-serving and conflicting agendas at play and when all's finally said and done it we'll probably all reflect that a no deal exit was the most likely conclusion all along.
Earlier I posted a tweet that suggests that having the parliamentary break will allow Theresa May's withdrawal agreement to be brought back to parliament for another vote, so close to the exit date, could actually gain enough votes.
At this moment in time I would be glad if that happened, even though I have been a remainer from day 1.
If you look back at the last few hours I have had people clambering for my opinion and those wanting me silenced.
Happy to move on, but if people still keep wanting to have a go I am happy to have a go back at them.
I didn't spot that. Is that genuinely feasible? I guess the deal remains on the table, even though it must have gathered a fair bit of dust by now.
I'd be glad of that too, but even at the 11th hour do you think our MPs would vote for it in sufficient numbers?
Davidson set to quit. Result.
I also thought that was shaping up as the most likely outcome, but I think Johnson has shifted the direction of travel and if I was betting on it I'd say no deal is very much on the cards now. Whatever anyone's personal opinion of the guy he's night and day compared to May when it comes to commanding an audience. Even in his brief exchanges in Parliament as PM thus far he has absolutely wiped the floor with Corbyn & co and this has been reflected in recent electoral polling.
That's a bigger boost to the SNP than Brexit if true. She worked wonders to put the Scottish Tories back on the map and they'll struggle to replace her with anyone half as effective I imagine.
I did feel her heart hasn't really been in it though since returning from maternity leave.
It would be glorious if all this nonsense saw her see the error in her ways and join the fight for independence.
I mean - if ever someone's personal work experiences showed exactly why Scotland needs to be independent, it is hers.
Nonsense about maternity leave.
She has returned to be repeatedly undermined and put in an impossible position by London overlords she totally disagrees with.
Good on her for leaving. I've welcomed someone putting a reasonable case for centre right politics forward, even if I totally disagree with her stance on independence.
I imagine she has also realised that with recent events the last election was as good as it will ever get for her and she is leaving before the bloodbath that will occur at the next GE when the SNP will go to 45+ seats at least.
Would it finally be Murdo Fraser time?
He was the champion of a separate Conservative party in Scotland, ironically independent of the Conservative party in the rUK.