Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

What overnight ?.

Yes, overnight.

The moment of achieving indy we were out one second later.

EU law, the EU politicians, and the EU scholars were very clear on this point.

elantan

Generali wrote: »

Britain has a highly diverse economy and so is far less reliant on oil than Scotland. That's one of many very good reasons for Scotland to stay in the Union. I'm surprised you haven't picked that up yet.

This oil is a bonus for an economy of over a trillion pounds of GDP per year not a vital component of Government revenues.

ahhh but you cant afford it.... your too wee to handle it... your no smart enough to be able to be in control of it ... well we gotta try cause WM kept trying that with us and some people believed it ...

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

elantan wrote: »

how will Wm handle the volatility the obviously us Scots cant,

Oil revenues are 1% of UK GDP but 15% of Scottish GDP.

The new oil under England makes up a similar %.

It's of little relevance to the UK as a whole. Just as Scottish oil is.

elantan

aye little relevance and yet were to believe it is the be all and end all ... never was oil as cursed as it is in Scotland ... well till now that is

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Drivel.

The EU were very clear on this point.

Scotland was out until we applied and were accepted for membership by all 27 nations. Which simply wouldn't have happened easily if at all.

The SNP trump the EU when it comes to running the EU. You should know that by now. :rotfl:

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

elantan wrote: »

ahhh but you cant afford it.... your too wee to handle it... your no smart enough to be able to be in control of it ... well we gotta try cause WM kept trying that with us and some people believed it ...

Och away...

Reality is Scotland paid in more than it took out for a very brief couple of oil boom decades in the 300 years plus of union..... now the oil is declining rapidly it's our turn for payback.

They are subsidising us now, have been for years, and will be for as long as we stay in the union and milk them for it.

Only a complete blithering idiot would turn down a multi-billion pound a year handout from westminster.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

elantan wrote: »

aye little relevance and yet were to believe it is the be all and end all ... never was oil as cursed as it is in Scotland ... well till now that is

I can't help the fact that some in the indy camp are economically illiterate.

If you don't understand the difference between having volatile oil revenues constitute 1% and 15% of GDP that's entirely not my problem.

Thankfully, the electorate did and voted no.

elantan

Or someone that likes the idea of governing themselves

elantan

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I can't help the fact that some in the indy camp are economically illiterate.

If you don't understand the difference between having volatile oil revenues constitute 1% and 15% of GDP that's entirely not my problem.

Thankfully, the electorate did and voted no.

He he he he is yer blood pressure up ? i'm in wind up mode tonight been working hard all day

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

The main point on the FFA thing, Shakey, is that as the case for FFA is damaged it also damages Sturgeon's case for negotiating more out of the Devolution arrangement. Having a clearly daft alternative means that her opposite numbers know that she is not taking her own supposedly point of view seriously, and that is an elementary mistake in negotiation. So I hope she keeps harping on about FFA, and keeps shooting herself in the foot.

Mind you, the Devolution settlement has already been discussed with the parties in Scotland, as according to the Vow. The Vow did not envisage a cosy one-on-one with the SNP alone; to do such would be to insult the Scottish referendum outcome.

The case can't be damaged, because 45% of the Scottish electorate voted for full independence just 7 short months ago. FFA or moves towards it is the consolation prize. And we accept that it's also going to be a hard slog getting anywhere with that within the Uk. That's fine. The supporters of the other political parties in Scotland are free to divide their votes up to whomever represents their views best also regarding FFA or not. No-one is insulting the referendum outcome by simply voting for a party that reflects one's views best. What's the problem with that ?

However, I do see that the newspapers and the other parties are starting to reform BetterTogether in terms of FFA, and suddenly the newspapers are full of all the old arguments again. Some of us are at max saturation levels up here with all of that, and have no wish to re-run it all.