The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Scotland a successor state the same as rUK or Scotland a brand new state. Which one do you think is more likely string ?

Shakey, you really should read things properly and then you would not ask such questions.

[engage patience]

A state that has acquired a territory, or an entirely new state that comes into existence following a change of sovereignty, is called a ‘successor state'

i.e. - "Sucessor State" equates with "New State".

If Scotland were to break away from the UK it would be a Successor State and a New State. In spite of the word, the term "Successor" does not mean that all things are passed by right to the new state.

The rUK, however, would become the Continuator State. That is not my opinion, it is the opinion of professionals (Crawford and Boyle)who were tasked with answering that specific question.

Their opinion may be found here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/79408/Annex_A.pdf
where a lot of alternatives are discussed and advice given on the basis of precedent etc.

They state:

Most likely, the rUK would be considered the continuator of the UK for all international purposes and Scotland a new state

They won't both be continuator states nor will they both be successor states.

With regard to the rUK being the Continuator State; the conclusion was:

[FONT=&quot]All of these factors count in favour of the rUK being the continuator state of the UK: if Scotland became independent, the rUK would retain about 92% of the UK’s population, more than two-thirds of its territory, and its principal governmental institutions, since the UK Parliament, the UK Supreme Court and its government departments are located in London. The precedent of the separation of most of Ireland also indicates that the UK would survive another, comparable loss of territory, regardless of whether it changed its name (or flag) to acknowledge the loss of Scotland. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]...[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In our view, it can be expected that the weight of international opinion would favour recognising the rUK as the continuator.[/FONT]

It really is worth reading the links I give to grasp the nuances in the advice.

Now of course I know that the SNP, starting with Salmond's fanciful claims, wants it's adoring followers to believe that somehow Scotland and the rUK would enter separation with equal shared rights etc, but that aint going to happen. They have fostered other "opinions" and try to muddy the water with self-important foreign boondoggles, but such games are wasted effort.[/Patience]

You won't believe that of course, being mind-melded to the Collective.

chewmylegoff

elantan wrote: »

foaming at the mouth ... some people spend so long on things they hate like the idea of a country being independant ...I do wonder if they actually hate them

I don't hate the idea of independence, although I should think the fact that the majority of Scots clearly don't like the idea is more instructive than my opinion. I was merely making a sage prediction of how this thread will evolve over its inevitable duration of 10,000 posts. If you don't like my observation you are free not to use the internet.

Shakethedisease

chewmylegoff wrote: »

I don't hate the idea of independence, although I should think the fact that the majority of Scots clearly don't like the idea is more instructive than my opinion. I was merely making a sage prediction of how this thread will evolve over its inevitable duration of 10,000 posts. If you don't like my observation you are free not to use the internet.

Better to keep all it all in just one thread. Than multiple endless repetitive threads all over this board. Say about London house prices or the latest goings on in HPC though ? Which also incidentally, always end up the same way with the same people posting on them.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Better to keep all it all in just one thread. Than multiple endless repetitive threads all over this board. Say about London house prices or the latest goings on in HPC though ? Which also incidentally, always end up the same way with the same people posting on them.

Yes - one thread --- this one for a change of scene.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

There is a chance of exactly 0 that Scotland is the Successor State of the United Kingdom.

It's a joke right? You are not honestly proposing that 5 million people form the successor state upon quitting a country of 65 million.

I know you like to make this stuff as you go along (YouGov springs to mind) but c'mon. Don't embarrass yourself.

No I wasn't proposing anything. I was pointing out there are more than just the one possibilties regarding successor/continuator states etc. Why you said yourself that Scotland isn't obligated to take any debt. Only by negotiations. What you're proposing above is that Scotland leaves the UK, not as a successor state. But a brand new one. With no debt.

You're trying to have it both ways, which is impossible. String is touting the same tired old nonsense from one legal opinion as well. The Vienna convention isn't even ratified in the UK as you correctly stated. In actual fact no one knows where anyone would stand. So let's not pretend otherwise. Boyle and Crawford are only interpreting the law as they see it. Other experts differ. The only thing we do know is that Scotland absolutely does have the right to succession within international law. The rest is just legal arguments and theories put forward as to what happens afterwards.

It would/will, as it always was going to, come down to negotiations in the end. And since we were discussing this in the context of Scotland and debt. Lets just say, as you established yourself, that any debt Scotland takes or not, isn't written in stone.

While the experts' paper does not directly address the division of assets and liabilities, a 62-page report by the UK Government accompanying the analysis states that the division of liabilities and assets would have to be negotiated. It states: "There would be an expectation that an independent Scottish state would take on an equitable share of the UK's national debt.



"How an 'equitable share' would be calculated is open to question and would have to be negotiated."

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13091840.Independent_Scotland_would__inherit_share_of_UK_national_debt_/


Yougov ? I am sorry, but I wasn't the one trumpeting the latest SSAS report as in indication that support for unionism had 'soared'. When in fact it was showing a decline of 6% over the last two years. Have a word with yourself Mr Polling Expert.

Shakethedisease

Rinoa wrote: »

Nicola says Scottish rich folk will pay more income tax than English rich folk

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35864248

And the Scottish parties apart from the Tories are all frothing at the mouth due to the fact they didn't raise it to a more 'bold' and radical 50p rate. So they've probably got it just about right in that case.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

And the Scottish parties apart from the Tories are all frothing at the mouth due to the fact they didn't raise it to a more 'bold' and radical 50p rate. So they've probably got it just about right in that case.

Happy to screw the middle class but not the rich. Not very socialist. Where's the fairness?

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Happy to screw the middle class but not the rich. Not very socialist. Where's the fairness?

Not really.

It was weird watching the news tonight with Sarah Smith reporting that in Scotland higher rate taxpayers would be paying more than anywhere else in the UK ( gasp ). Then adding that all the other parties in Scotland thought that the move was 'too timid' ( another gasp).

Taking a step back from it all, it's like all the other Scottish parties apart from the Tories are starting act and frame things as if Scotland was heading for independence already. Westminster having no bearing on matters whatsoever. It's the SNP having to say 'hang on a minute'. Strange but true and probably a good thing as they'll have trouble going back to framing things once again in a UK context from now on. A predictable consequence given hardly any Westminster MP's and Scottish presence there for the other parties nowadays I suppose.

Backed up by the SSAS released figures tonight. Sorry Hamish and Generali. No Express headlines from this.

Most Scots back Holyrood ‘to make all decisions for Scotland’

Most Scots now believe that Holyrood should be responsible for all matters affecting Scotland, while support for independence is also on the rise.

Just over half (51 per cent) of all Scots agree with the statement “the Scottish Parliament should make all the decisions for Scotland”, according to the Scottish Social Attitudes survey 2015 – a ten-point increase on the figure in summer 2014, immediately before the independence referendum. It is also higher than at any time since ScotCen first asked the question in 2010.

Support for independence has also reached a 15-year high, the survey said, although at 39 per cent it is still six points lower than the Yes vote in the 2014 referendum.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/most-scots-back-holyrood-to-make-all-decisions-for-scotland-1-4079740

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Not really.

It was weird watching the news tonight with Sarah Smith reporting that in Scotland higher rate taxpayers would be paying more than anywhere else in the UK ( gasp ). Then adding that all the other parties in Scotland thought that the move was 'too timid' ( another gasp).

Taking a step back from it all, it's like all the other Scottish parties apart from the Tories are starting act and frame things as if Scotland was heading for independence already. Westminster having no bearing on matters whatsoever. It's the SNP having to say 'hang on a minute'. Strange but true and probably a good thing as they'll have trouble going back to framing things once again in a UK context from now on. A predictable consequence given hardly any Westminster MP's and Scottish presence there for the other parties nowadays I suppose.

Backed up by the SSAS released figures tonight. Sorry Hamish and Generali. No Express headlines from this.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/most-scots-back-holyrood-to-make-all-decisions-for-scotland-1-4079740

Nice try.

From the same survey:

• Independence 33%
• Devolution 50%
• No Parliament 7%

The survey doesn't list the don't knows. I suspect the final figure should be 17% instead. SNP run surveys eh? Ach.

As for answering the referendum question (still biased as more people will vote 'Yes' than 'No' than '1' or '2'):

• Yes 25%
• No 43%
• Meh 32%

Excluding Meh:

• Stomp off to glorious poverty 39%
• Remain in the mighty UK 61%

(The final point may not reflect the question accurately).

So what do we draw from the survey overall? Scottish people want to remain in the UK. Oh and when you look at the demographics, Scottish women really don't like the idea of independence at all. Barely a quarter are supporters.

elantan

http://stv.tv/news/politics/1347496-support-for-independence-at-15-year-high-study-finds/



Hmmm support for independence at a 15 year high ... and the Scottish government the most trusted in Europe

Must be a.... but you voted naw and there's still more that want to remain subjected ohhhh and SNP BAAADDDDDD story in there somewhere surely