Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote:

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.

The answer to that is No - not while the you/the SNP wave the subject around with every chance you/they get.

However, thank you for pointing out Adam Tomkins. His article on the Referendum issue does indeed show that there are arguments about the issue of a Referendum but note that a Referendum about dissolution of the Union is not a devolved matter. The final text of the Parliament Act which will deliver the new Devolution will no doubt make this crystal clear, probably agreeing the right of the Scottish Government to set up only a Referendum which deal with Scotland-only matters not affecting the Union.

--- Back to Adam Tomkins, checking up on who he is etc., I chanced on this set of notes:

Notes from North Britain
There are a number of section, the first is entitled
Reflections on 2014, posted in December last year, and looks at the aftermath of the Referendum. It is rather thoughtful and encapsulates most of how I and many others feel about the situation at this moment. I thoroughly recommend all read it.

I'll just quote one passage which highlights the major problem that I have with the SNP behaviour post Referendum.

Tomkins wrote:

Whereas the SNP participated fully (and constructively) in the Smith Commission deliberations, the moment Smith reported they sought to rubbish its achievements. This was a rare mis-step by the SNP and impressed nobody. Of course Smith does not go as far as the SNP want – what they want was rejected by the Scottish people in September – but to deny that the agreement constitutes a significant devolution of extensive further powers is just daft. Once Smith is delivered, in a Scotland Act to be enacted after the general election, Holyrood will be one of the most powerful sub-state legislatures anywhere in the world. Scotland will be more powerful in the UK than the states are in the US, more powerful in the UK than are the Australian states, and more powerful in the UK than are the Länder in Germany.

The following section (Scotland and Europe, posted on May 26, 2014) is highly relevant to our discussion here on Scottish Membership of the EU, but enough quoting for now.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

I agree that the SNP didn't ask officially : they simply and repeatedly claimed there was no need as they would 'remain' part of the EU as of right.

Maybe you should try rereading recent history.

The said they would be negotiating Scotland's position from within the EU ( as they would have been since Scotland would still be a member of the UK )... and that in their view, the EU wouldn't be kicking us out any time soon. 5 million Eu citizens.

Other's had different 'views'. And that's fine. We'll never know who was right and who was wrong. Here endth the history lesson.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote:

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. ….

Oh Shakey, Shakey, Shakey – how you do go on!

The SNP signed up to the Smith process and then rubbished it – all done in typically bad faith. Read that note by Adam Tomkins – the part entitled “Reflections on 2014” – it explains simply enough why the SNP is in such bad odour.

As for insulting people, read your own posts about Tories or Labour-Tories or Liberal-Tories or Westminster or anyone who is not a rabid SNP follower, to use your word (rabid).

What goes around comes around.

I agree you are a more or less and intelligent person, in fact I would cross out the less part, but there is no way you are now capable of making your own mind up. You are a member of a political party and all “your” opinions are conditioned by that fact. Don’t claim I didn’t warn you about that.

Several times you have had been fed “valid points” and several times you have chosen to ignore the issue and gone ranting off within your little Bubble of myopia, rubbishing anyone who happens not to share “your” opinion and deflecting the discussion while claiming superciliously that only you and your party know the truth and all others are somehow !!!!!! or not up to date with what is going on.

Get real – there are other opinions out here. That's why we have discussions.

NICHOLAS_2

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The said they would be negotiating Scotland's position from within the EU ( as they would have been since Scotland would still be a member of the UK )... and that in their view, the EU wouldn't be kicking us out any time soon. 5 million Eu citizens.

Other's had different 'views'. And that's fine. We'll never know who was right and who was wrong. Here endth the history lesson.

When the UK holds a referendum on the EU, forced, thankfully, by UKIP, the scottish people will vote on it, the English will, the Welsh and the Northern Irish. Scotland is not some special sector that gets to decide whether it remains in the EU while the rest of the UK leaves. What crack pipe have you been smoking? You've had your referendum and were out voted by half a million people, so it's time for indy worshippers to go back into their boxes.

If any scot thinks that they will see a referendum within their lifetime they are clutching at straws :rotfl: It took you 300 years to get this one.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

The answer to that is No - not while the you/the SNP wave the subject around with every chance you/they get.

However, thank you for pointing out Adam Tomkins. His article on the Referendum issue does indeed show that there are arguments about the issue of a Referendum but note that a Referendum about dissolution of the Union is not a devolved matter. The final text of the Parliament Act which will deliver the new Devolution will no doubt make this crystal clear, probably agreeing the right of the Scottish Government to set up only a Referendum which deal with Scotland-only matters not affecting the Union.

--- Back to Adam Tomkins, checking up on who he is etc., I chanced on this set of notes:

Notes from North Britain
There are a number of section, the first is entitled
Reflections on 2014, posted in December last year, and looks at the aftermath of the Referendum. It is rather thoughtful and encapsulates most of how I and many others feel about the situation at this moment. I thoroughly recommend all read it.

I'll just quote one passage which highlights the major problem that I have with the SNP behaviour post Referendum.

The following section (Scotland and Europe, posted on May 26, 2014) is highly relevant to our discussion here on Scottish Membership of the EU, but enough quoting for now.

It's not a devolved matter for Scotland you mean ? ( dissolving the Union ).. it is for Northern Ireland though. And if a referendum held, a Yes vote, and then Westminster refuses to recognise it.. then I guess a matter for international law in that case. But any referendum is a way off, unless there is an unlikely Out vote in an EU one in the UK. So I wouldn't get too hung up on it.

Whereas the SNP participated fully (and constructively) in the Smith Commission deliberations, the moment Smith reported they sought to rubbish its achievements. This was a rare mis-step by the SNP and impressed nobody. Of course Smith does not go as far as the SNP want –

I think Prof Tomkins seems to have missed the latest polls. He may have to revise the above. The SNP couldn't do anything else but participate in the Smith commission. If they hadn't they would have been viewed as not entering into things in good faith.... and of course, the fact they did.. but said the recommendations didn't go far enough. Means of course, that they stand accused by some of 'not accepting the recommedations in good faith'. Couldn't win with that one I suppose.

I am surprised you didn't comment on the piece in the Telegraph from Deutsche Bank, nor Generali... especially after several pages worth of posts regarding subsidies and Scotland not being able to afford FFA. I was expecting a full de-construction of their report. But never mind.

.string.

@Shakey - on the Referendum - the Union with Scotland dating back to whenever establishes the law - Northern Ireland is nothing to do with it. Do your homework.

Re the polls, I have to agree that SNP spin is effective. But it will soon be take it or leave it time.

I also agree that the EU has fostered the rise of the European sense of local government being more relevant than National Governments, especially since the European Government was invented. If Scotland did become Natland then the Scottish Government would find that too if it joined the EU and therefore the Euro. As for the economic aspect - I would also have to agree that Scotland has done well out of the Union what with all the subsidies and all.

.string.

Another thread title change - maybe its a game.

How about

Salmond and Sturgeon fish the English for more subsidies.

skintmacflint

Generali wrote: »

We went through that previously. Apparently Scotland gets a series of free picks of which European treaties she signs up to when she votes for independence in 2014.

Exactly. It's insulting huge numbers of Scottish people to listen to SNP these days. They are misrepresenting thousands of Scottish people , nationally and globally on a regular basis these days. Seem set on promoting us as the self centred , suspicious , surly neighbour. With a long list of gripes and an even bigger list of demands.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Please, try and be honest with yourself. When it came to the EU and the Scottish referendum.. the only thing that was splashed all over newspapers, tv another outlets, headline after headline... was that a Yes vote meant Scotland leaving the EU and the consequences of that. ( I disagreed but no shock there ).

Even here, where I frequently tried to push the fact that a No vote would mean uncertainty because there may be an in/out referendum to come wasn't taken very seriously. It was ALL about Scotland being 'kicked out'. Ask string, because he and I went back and forth many times on this issue.

The newspapers weren't interested in what the SNP had to say on EU membership.. only what Barroso and anyone official from Spain thought.

Let's not try and rewrite recent history here. It was 'Vote Yes and out of the EU you go'.... not 'Vote No, and mabye out of the EU you go'.

Sorry the only people trying to rewrite history here are SNP and many of their supporters still living in the dream bubble. Unfortunately including you it would appear.

And now we're back to that old chestnut, the press and TV bias. Lol. Next will be my age group are incapable of using the internet. Do admit to having problems with this IPad predictive test mind you.

Both Salmond and Sturgeon argued this very point on live TV debates, various meetings with business leaders, not to mention campaigners on my doorstep.

Fact still stands the info was widely out there, and a decision was taken regardless.

elantan

I would agree that a lot of the Yes voters are awfy good at giving No voters excuses .... Oh they were threatened with their pension, they didn't have access online, the media is biased etc

And in all cases I would say that's true ... But I believe at the end of the day the people voted for what they thought was right ... I disagreed with their choice but find the whole excuse making for the majority of voters rather sad