Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You're adamant that Scots shouldn't be allowed to know what options are open to them if rUK votes us out and Scotland doesn't want to go. David Cameron is talking of bringing any referendum forward from 2017.

I'm adamant about not wasting time on the hypothetical when more important issues are at stake, the emphasis is on if and how the UK's relationship with the EU can be improved. Besides the SNP has already asked and been rebuffed. Do your own pleading with the EU.

David Cameron is not talking about bringing the referendum forward; he is saying that if the negotiations with the EU can be completed before 2017 then it allows an earlier Referendum. Pay attention please.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote:

Can't you let the referendum go now string ? You won.. time to move on.

People should not forget what utter nonsense the Yes Conpaign was trying to sell to Scotland. Besides that, the SNP should actually accept the referendum result and work towards making the new Devolution Settlement work for both Scotland and the Union, which they quite clearly are not, in spite of their prior priomises to the contrary. While that goes on you can expect more of the same.

ruggedtoast

Generali wrote: »

Give it a go and we'll find out.

Look whats happened now!!

I am going to keep quiet or we'll end up in the Monseysavers Arms with a three word title.

.string.

A Question to our Scottish friends: what are the different regions of Scotland?

Noting the SNP theory that all constituent regions of the UK have to be unanimous in a "leave" vote in any EU referendum before that option is accepted, then it's entirely consistent that the same logic should apply to Scotland leaving the UK.

Shakey - jot that down in your must-do list for your neverendum.

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

...
whether you call it a region or a nation is completely immaterial.
...

Hmm, region? nation?

I think we need a new term, embodying a bit of both and obviously containing "S" for Scotland.

reSignation

..works for me

(and it seems to have worked for Salmond)

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

People should not forget what utter nonsense the Yes Conpaign was trying to sell to Scotland. Besides that, the SNP should actually accept the referendum result and work towards making the new Devolution Settlement work for both Scotland and the Union, which they quite clearly are not, in spite of their prior priomises to the contrary. While that goes on you can expect more of the same.

Hmm time for some deep breaths string I think. And anyway, you're soooo far behind the curve with what's happening right now, that I'm kind of getting a little bored of having to endlessly revisit 'basics' with you. Like what the SNP stand for, why the 'new devolution settlement' isn't what people in Scotland seem to want ( it doesn't go far enough ),...

And most of all.. that democracy at work means constantly inferring the SNP and it's voters are somehow not worthy of it. Somehow don't deserve the same level of respect one would afford to a Scottish Labour/Lib Dem or Tory voter... it's insulting a LOT of people.

That's sadly, how you come across. I'm more or less an intelligent person, an adult, and able to make up my own mind on what I feel is the best way to vote from my own perspective. And I enjoy the debate. But every so often the posts go from debating valid points and issues... to unsubstantiated rants, where 'brainwashing', 'sold a pup', 'selling nonsense to the public' 'idiotic' 'people should not forget' and all sorts of things are said that cross that line.

I do suggest you leave the referendum, White Papers and all it's issues to the side now. For it's the General Election in May that's now in front of us. And we've had some good, generally polite and respectful debate here speculating on possible, sometimes previously unthinkable issues ( Tory/Labour govt ? ).. and, well, what everyone wants to know. Who will get in, and by what means ! The SNP, whether you like it or not.. are probably going to feature heavily in the run-up to that election. It remains to be seen if they'll feature just as heavily afterwards.<--- And I'm not fooling myself on anything in regards to that. But all on all it's kind of the point of the thread.

Ps ruggedtoast.. sorry to see Fishface was removed as well.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

What options? This is rubbish. Scotland isn't a separate entity, it's a part of the UK regardless and whether you call it a region or a nation is completely immaterial. If the UK votes to leave the EU or indeed for anything else, all the parts of the country have to live with that decision.

That's the point I was making. Thank you.

Scotland doesn't get a separate voice on foreign affairs as it's a power reserved for Westminster and it's ludicrous to suggest otherwise. If it did there would be complete chaos.

And again. Thanks.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

A Question to our Scottish friends: what are the different regions of Scotland?

Noting the SNP theory that all constituent regions of the UK have to be unanimous in a "leave" vote in any EU referendum before that option is accepted, then it's entirely consistent that the same logic should apply to Scotland leaving the UK.

Shakey - jot that down in your must-do list for your neverendum.

I agree. As long as everyone in the EU gets a vote in the UK in/out one. But, if one does happen, and the rUK vote out, and Scotland in. Yes, it probably would pull the trigger on another Scottish referendum. And it would be held whatever Westminster said. Section 30 is a bit ambigious in legal terms. And then there is, more importantly, international law also to consider. I think it was just easier to do the section 30 last time so that everyone would be happy. This doesn't mean any future referendum would have to follow the same route. http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2012/01/12/adam-tomkins-the-scottish-parliament-and-the-independence-referendum/

( Adam Tomkins is a rabid unionist wheeled out on Scottish TV a lot ).

However, an EU referendum is looking unlikely at the present time. And an out vote ( after scaring people half to death on what happens after an out vote in rUK once big business/banks etc get involved).. also would be unlikely even if one was held in my own view.

Now, can you stop going on about Scottish referendum stuff now ? It's over, done and dusted.

skintmacflint

When the majority of Scottish people voted to keep the Union, it was with the knowledge of this EU referendum and the implications it could bring. They also accepted that sometimes Scotland ends up with government in Westminster not of the first choice of many Scots.

If SNP were so concerned about this why didn't they make a bigger deal out of it in their campaign. Instead of banging on about their usual suspects.

Seems to me that if the vote is to stay in the EU, will take about 3 weeks for SNP to come back with another excuse to keep their Neverendum.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Don't you think you might be a little under-informed then ? Since on the first page it says..

It was a document dealing with a possible post-Yes vote. Were you expecting Labour, Lib Dems and Tories to contribute ?

In your own opinion of course. Let's not get carried away thinking that everyone came to the same conclusions as you did. Nor dismissing it as something you feel a lot of Yes voters didn't bother 'even looking at'.

Nope wasn't the first page in the book I read. Nor was it in Salmonds foreword which told me all about his views, i.e. I believe, it is my belief etc. Followed by with a Yes vote , We i.e. SNP will then do this and that, and we will all walk off forever happy into the sunset etc.

Unless you mean the comment on the first page that if Scotland votes No, we will stay at a standstill, was supposed to highlight that this was an unbiased document.

By this time I was of the opinion it was an SNP document, and skipped straight into the sections on employment and social etc. by the time I'd read these sections I realised this book was as misleading as Salmonds photo in the foreword.

I honestly don't know anyone who voted Yes, who read that Paper, and I asked a number of people . A very good friend had tried an attempt at the Wee Blue book, but gave up on that as well. So only one had read that.

So don't try to convince me the majority of new rabid SNP supporters read it, you might have but you're in a minority.