• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Now What?

Status
Not open for further replies.
gypsyjackson said:
I doubt it. Foreign policy is reserved. Seems like straw clutching to me.
Click to expand...

No it's nothing to do with foreign policy. It seems to be to do with the legal arrangements embedded in the devolved Parliaments. They are set up to adhere to EU law and leaving the EU would mean that they would have to change that but Westminster can't change it without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.

It seems to be a legal technicality rather than any devolved power but its certainly an amusing potentiality.
 
gypsyjackson said:
The UK is usually a net exporter of fresh milk, so it's possible that as a result of tariffs imposed by the EU more UK milk would be released to the market, which could have a temporary downward effect. Long term...well, supermarkets are really reluctant to increase the price of milk, so the scenario I see is an increase in the rate of consolidation of the supply side.
Click to expand...
She ain't rocket science
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
No it's nothing to do with foreign policy. It seems to be to do with the legal arrangements embedded in the devolved Parliaments. They are set up to adhere to EU law and leaving the EU would mean that they would have to change that but Westminster can't change it without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.

It seems to be a legal technicality rather than any devolved power but its certainly an amusing potentiality.
Click to expand...
OK - but I don't think Scotland could stop the repeal of the ECA as amended, even if all its MPs voted against, as it's a Westminster act.

In which case that seems like an even worse situation: the DAs may have to apply EU law despite not being part of it, until they sort it out. I'd like to see the legal parts in question.

Though there may be some sort of deal available by which the Scots refuse to amend their parliamentary rules, and the EU applies different rules for them as long as they continue to apply EU law. Add to that more freedom on spending and raising taxes...Utterly impractical, but maybe...
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Don't worry we're used to it by now;)




Depends what you mean. Like pretty much every country it would run at a deficit and would be reliant on someone lending them money.

The media stories of 'scrounging subsidy junkies in Scotland' are generally fabrications based on a particular reading of the data when, in fact, all things considered the reality for some time was that Scotland contributed more to the Uk than they received back.

In 2016 I think that's probably no longer the case because the oil price has tanked.

My concern is that Scotland is possibly about to repeat the same mistake England just did in voting on one issue based on another. If people in Scotland want to be independent then great, lets do it. If people in Scotland vote for independence because they are upset about the EU decision and want to kick England that's just piling more stupidity on the heap.

One hope perhaps is that the UK will be so busy with the EU question that we might be able to have a discussion about independence here without so much Westminster interference and downright lies from the media and establishment in London.

I'd love to see some real honest fact based discussion for a change on what is a very important decision. Won't hold my breath though.
Click to expand...

My guess is running an independent country is more expensive than being devolved. I am certain Scotland could function as an independent nation. There may be an unpleasant degree of austerity, historically public spending has been higher in Scotland than the rest of UK. Taxes will be higher and I am not certain the university sector will be viable as it currently is. Scotland will probably save money on not having much defence expenditure and may follow Ireland in being neutral rather than being in NATO.

The Northern Isles (and Scotland more generally) probably have more to gain by being out of the EU, exclusive economic rights to fishing out to 200 miles, the oil and gas. If Scotland went independent and into the EU, the Northern Isles might opt to stay out of the EU, even though oil prices are down it is still a lot of money for a small island. If they became crown dependencies then they would not have to worry about defence or foreign affairs too much as the remaining UK would do that for them. Could Faslane move to Scapa Flow?
 
Ambrosia said:
The referendum was never "hailed" as non binding and several large consequences have already hapened since the result.

The UK/EU deal thrashed out by Cameron pre vote, has been declared void. EU leaders are calling for the UK to get on with it immediately, financial markets around the world have taken a hit.

This vote result has implications for the EU. Britain is not alone in having a high % of citizens dissatisfied with the EU, so there is potential for the EU itself to break up.

With all of this going on there is no way in hell the EU will let the UK back out of what it sees as a certain commitment to exit without huge concessions. Too much damage has already been done. If you put up another referendum next month and the choice is to leave or go back to the EU, but, the UK must also accept the Euro as currency, must pay even more to the EU, etc <insert other 'punishments' here> there is no chance the Remain vote would win that referendum.

The petition is irrelevant. Unless a snap General Election is called (probably not going to happen either) and a party campaigns on a "return to the EU" manifesto, (the Lib Dems have stepped up to that plate) AND that party wins a workable majority in parliament the UK is going to exit the EU and in all likelyhood Scotland will exit the UK.

In theory the referendum is not binding, in practise it pretty much is.
Click to expand...

The split in the labour party seems based on their belief there will be an election within months. It seems both labour and conservative will have new leaders and then there will be a drive for a new election to select a government to carry out the negotiations on exit. UKIP will stand on complete separation, lib dems, on remaining in the EU, labour I guess on maximal EEA membership, Conservatives on ?

So whatever europe wants I guess Article 50 will not be activated until there has been a general election to select a government to negotiate the exit deal. I just hope the lib dems have been purged of paedophiles because I may have to vote for them.
 
Planigale said:
My guess is running an independent country is more expensive than being devolved. I am certain Scotland could function as an independent nation. There may be an unpleasant degree of austerity, historically public spending has been higher in Scotland than the rest of UK. Taxes will be higher and I am not certain the university sector will be viable as it currently is. Scotland will probably save money on not having much defence expenditure and may follow Ireland in being neutral rather than being in NATO.

The Northern Isles (and Scotland more generally) probably have more to gain by being out of the EU, exclusive economic rights to fishing out to 200 miles, the oil and gas. If Scotland went independent and into the EU, the Northern Isles might opt to stay out of the EU, even though oil prices are down it is still a lot of money for a small island. If they became crown dependencies then they would not have to worry about defence or foreign affairs too much as the remaining UK would do that for them. Could Faslane move to Scapa Flow?
Click to expand...

While public spending in Scotland has been higher historically, so has its total contribution to the Treasury (including O&G). No doubt being independent would see outgoing increased but equally so would revenue. It seems undeniable though that at a time of depressed oil prices the books would look tough right now.

There is no option for the Northern Isles to opt to stay with the UK. It's an English fantasy concocted to make a political point that doesn't quite add up.
 
Sunstealer said:
Petitions committee looking looking into this specific petition:

https://twitter.com/HoCpetitions/status/747024391960203264

Latest json file shows {"name":"Vatican City","code":"VA","signature_count":41902}. Official population of the Vatican City is around 840.
Click to expand...

So what? Out of over 3,185,000 votes, more than 3,061,000 are from the UK. Even discounting every single non-UK vote still leaves the vast majority as from the UK.

More to the point, at 14:34 the file was showing 3,061,029 UK signatures, of which 2,999,813 are resolved to specific MPs, and none of those figures seem abnormally high.
 
Last edited:
MikeG said:
Now Sturgeon thinks that Scotland can veto Brexit. BBC.

To be fair (and critical of the BBC), I can't see anything in the text which justifies the headline. Nor have I seen the actual interview.
Click to expand...
Oh dear that's out of the Alex Salmond "immensely hypocritical stupid bluff" playbook

Clearly that means it is fine with the SNP if "Westminster" were to veto an independence yes.
 
Information Analyst said:
So what? Out of over 3,185,000 votes, more than 3,061,000 are from the UK. Even discounting every single non-UK vote still leaves the vast majority as from the UK. More to the point, at 14:34 the file was showing 3,061,029 UK signatures, of which 2,999,813 are resolved to specific MPs, and none of those figures seem abnormally high.
Click to expand...

When I refreshed the petition page just now, the total dropped by about 20k. Looks like a clear-out is in progress.
 
Information Analyst said:
So what? Out of over 3,185,000 votes, more than 3,061,000 are from the UK. Even discounting every single non-UK vote still leaves the vast majority as from the UK.

More to the point, at 14:34 the file was showing 3,061,029 UK signatures, of which 2,999,813 are resolved to specific MPs, and none of those figures seem abnormally high.
Click to expand...
Keep digging. You are wrong as I've shown, but I suspect you'll have the JCB out by the end of the day.
 
Why is Nicola Sturgeon so dismissive of over one million Scots (38%) who voted to leave the EU?
 
Once things have calmed down a little, Germany may offer the UK some sort of EU-Lite deal, which the UK would then hold a second referendum over and most likely accept. It would be unacceptable to the UK unless it includes some form of emergency brake on migration. Of course, other EU countries might then also want a similar deal themselves - and if so, why not - would that necessarily be a bad thing?

Junker will have to go soon now. He's mismanaged things badly and his "colleagues" will soon be (metaphorically) knifing him in the back.
 
It may take 2 years from the appliance of article 50, but that does not mean economic effects take so long.

Apart from firms exiting the UK, as is being muted, there are other simple things that could be put into immediate effect by the now angry Europeans.

If buying departments in the EU when confronted by British sales reps would not speak English - this would make it very hard for the predominantly monoglot Brits to get access to such departments - UK exports would suffer. It is these small things that can hurt very quickly.

Other EU countries would be able to sell the products to each other (using English if they so choose) that the UK will no longer be able to access purely due to a language barrier.

A sort of 'Paris' phenomena. If anyone has been to Paris will know - If you don't speak the lingo, expect poorer treatment.
 
Last edited:
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Sorry but no you don't get to rebrand racism and xenophobia as something else just because you can point at other factors. At the risk of a Godwin there were economic and social drivers for the Nazis too, but that doesn't make their ideas less racist and bigoted. Of course there are other factors at play. Of course foreigners are being used as a target by politicians and people are being misled. But it has to be called out where we see it.
Click to expand...

But I didn't re-brand. I said the issue is more nuanced and complex, but it most certainly does include racism. Focusing on racism alone as a mistaken approach was the criticism made.

Of course there are other factors at play. Of course foreigners are being used as a target by politicians and people are being misled. But it has to be called out where we see it. We can't keep blaming poor Polish people for the problems in public services caused by the Tories. We can't keep equating refugees, asylum seekers, immigrants and Muslims as all the same thing. We can't keep encouraging the narrative that foreign people are coming here to take advantage of us...
Click to expand...

Nothing of the above was advocated by my post; you are preaching to the choir.

... and most of all we can't keep pretending that we are in a clash of civilizations when we aren't except for the clash between people who want this to become a clash of civilizations vs those of us who want to get along.
Click to expand...

I'll not push on this point in this thread, as it easily leads off topic. On topic, and related to earlier points, is the idea that leaving issues unaddressed, or poorly framed, is what creates the opening for the Trumps and Leavers. Most importantly, regardless of next election results anywhere, the foundational issues are not being addressed, making all such results a potential exacerbation thereof.

To rephrase:
-There is a global labor oversupply.
-This is ignored by left and right.
-Solutions proposed are therefore mistaken.
-Doomed to repeat Brexit and Trump-style demagoguery in many future elections until the real pebble in middle class shoes is properly identified.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
No it's nothing to do with foreign policy. It seems to be to do with the legal arrangements embedded in the devolved Parliaments. They are set up to adhere to EU law and leaving the EU would mean that they would have to change that but Westminster can't change it without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.

It seems to be a legal technicality rather than any devolved power but its certainly an amusing potentiality.
Click to expand...
I linked to a Constitution Unit analysis earlier in the thread; it's interesting, possibility especially in NI given the special arrangements in that Assembly.
 
ctamblyn said:
When I refreshed the petition page just now, the total dropped by about 20k. Looks like a clear-out is in progress.
Click to expand...

petition being investigated fir Fraud according to BBC. Votes will be removed if they appear to be fraudulent.

Man who started it says it was started when it looked like leave weren't going to win "with the intention of making it harder for 'remain' to further shackle us to the EU".

He say it has been hijacked by remain.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36634407
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom