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

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

No that's not true, I care for one.

But that does not mean that I buy into this bleating by Sturgeon and her Westminster Collective that there is some sort of Democratic shortfall and Scotland being dragged out of the EU against its will.

I snipped your quote so this post isn't too long but I think you're going to have to stop referring to this situation in terms of the SNP, and start referring instead to 'the Scottish Parliament'.

Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Greens backed her motion asking for a mandate for talks with the UK Government, other devolved administrations, EU institutions and member states, which passed by 92 votes to 0 with the Tories abstaining after their attempt to amend it failed.

http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/scotlands-voice-will-be-heard-in-europe-nicola-sturgeon-says-1136407051

Perhaps the news that has been missed, is that the Scottish Parliament has just voted in essence to enact it's own foreign policy, regardless of Westminster. It's going to be very hard to put that one back in the box in future too in my view.

Anyway, we'll all have to wait and see how it all pans out.

There is no "no big obstacle" to an independent Scotland joining the EU before Brexit, former Prime Minister of Belgium Guy Verhofstadt has said.

The former prime minister was asked could an independent Scotland successfully join the European Union before the United Kingdom formally leaves the organisation.
Verhofstadt answered: "I think this possibility has to exist, yeah. Because if Scotland decides to leave the UK, to be an independent state, and they decide to be part of the European Union I think there is no big obstacle to do that.

http://stv.tv/news/politics/1358976-no-big-obstacle-to-independent-scotland-joining-eu/


But I'm still not really sure anyone at all will step up in Westminster and trigger Article 50 anyway. So is all just speculation at the moment.

.string.

Generali wrote: »

I'm an equity analyst living in Sydney and we Brits are a laughing stock.

I had someone stop me in the street as I left the ferry on the way home this evening and ask me !!!!!! was going on.

Yes it's not nice to wake up and realise that so many were gullible idiots.

Still the die has been cast. I've little doubt that we will do our best to make the best out of the result.

I watched the debate in the European Parliament (or part of it) this morning and was struck by the simmering hostility towards the UK as a result of Brexit. One exception was Marine Le Pen who clearly wished that France would do the same. An intriguing thought that, a traded alliance between Denmark, The Netherlands and France and others. It makes one wonder if encouraging EU desertions would now be in our national interest. Only a thought though - I haven't thought that through.

Farage was given stick, and called all manner of names which he thoroughly deserved. But he did make one telling point (also made by another speaker) that the EU had tricked their populations into "ever closer union". That's true taking into account that few people read the small print of the treaties. Troubling times ahead for the EU with Brexit seeding discontent. I'm sorry about that but have to admit that belligerence from the EU in the Brexit negotiations could change that.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I snipped your quote so this post isn't too long but I think you're going to have to stop referring to this situation in terms of the SNP, and start referring instead to 'the Scottish Parliament'.

http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/scotlands-voice-will-be-heard-in-europe-nicola-sturgeon-says-1136407051

Perhaps the news that has been missed, is that the Scottish Parliament has just voted in essence to enact it's own foreign policy, regardless of Westminster. It's going to be very hard to put that one back in the box in future too in my view.

Anyway, we'll all have to wait and see how it all pans out.

http://stv.tv/news/politics/1358976-no-big-obstacle-to-independent-scotland-joining-eu/


But I'm still not really sure anyone at all will step up in Westminster and trigger Article 50 anyway. So is all just speculation at the moment.

obviously there is no obstacle for an INDEPENDENT scotland applying to join the EU and following the usual processes.

Good to see scotland has so much english money they can afford to waste it on a 'foreign policy'

.string.

Yes, posts can get too long if everything is copied.

At the moment it's just the SNP and they will probably win the vote in the Scottish Parliament on the motion they propose (Conservatives abstaining?).

But the point I made is still valid.

Scotland have a foreign policy? It has been evident that was the plan ever since Salmond was given his job. A bit vainglorious however.

No, much as I would like there was a legal and moral way of changing the outcome of the Referendum, I doubt it. That's maybe the SNP way but not mine.

No I think that the approach given by Cameron is sound - first get our ducks in a row, assemble a negotiating team, including all home nations representatives (if they want to be part of the team that is) and work out a strategy. The hit the ground running rather than fumbling through a first stage of the Negotiations with a hostile EU Commission. A delay till late November probably be the right time for kicking things off, allow for people to cool down etc. Parallel "negotiations" should be declared invalid and blocked in my view. They would not be in the national interests of the UK.

Thrugelmir

.string. wrote: »

No that's not true, I care for one.

.

Maybe so. But the world relentlessly moves on. As with Brexit. What untold damage is the SNP position inflicting on the Scotish economy. A small decision here and there add up. Time waits for no one.

.string.

According to this report
Brussels chiefs REFUSE to see Sturgeon in blow to Scotland's bid to stay in EU

But Scotland at large need not worry about that because we will together get the best possible deal for the UK as a whole.

Tromking

Our constitutional dogs breakfast may very well unwittingly serve up a constitutional crisis over Brexit in the coming weeks. It is clear that the current set up is not fit for purpose if a small regional parliament thinks it can scupper the will of the overarching parliament. If the Union is to prevail it needs to adopt a federal system where each constituent nation spends what it earns and there are clear lines of demarcation when it comes to its individual parliaments areas of responsibility.

.string.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Maybe so. But the world relentlessly moves on. As with Brexit. What untold damage is the SNP position inflicting on the Scotish economy. A small decision here and there add up. Time waits for no one.

Yes, they are not, in my view and others, doing what is best for Scotland.

A central point of what I've been on about the last few posts is that the National Interest of the UK and England if we want to get parochial, is to not let these SNP posturings get in the way of making progress on Brexit and obtaining a good result. I would be very surprised if the Conservative Government allows the SNP the freedom it desires to get in the way and damage the progress of those negotiations. That would include blocking separate "negotiations", even contacts if they can be stopped, and certainly not agreeing to another Scottish Indy Referendum to muddy the waters.

There is some heavy-duty negotiations to be done without pandering to Sturgeon's incessant moaning.

.string.

Tromking wrote: »

Our constitutional dogs breakfast may very well unwittingly serve up a constitutional crisis over Brexit in the coming weeks. It is clear that the current set up is not fit for purpose if a small regional parliament thinks it can scupper the will of the overarching parliament. If the Union is to prevail it needs to adopt a federal system where each constituent nation spends what it earns and there are clear lines of demarcation when it comes to its individual parliaments areas of responsibility.

Don't mind federal at all, liking the Canadian example with Provincial and Federal taxes separated. The trouble is, though, the disparate sizes of the constituent parts of the UK. Those who like fully devolved regions would not agree with me, but that is one thing I would never vote for, feeling it a complete waste of money to have yet another layer of self-important politicians.

The late Labour Party's idea (or was it the late LibDem Party?) of a constitutional conference was not a bad idea I thought, but we're busy at the moment aren't we!

Tromking

.string. wrote: »

Don't mind federal at all, liking the Canadian example with Provincial and Federal taxes separated. The trouble is, though, the disparate sizes of the constituent parts of the UK. Those who like fully devolved regions would not agree with me, but that is one thing I would never vote for, feeling it a complete waste of money to have yet another layer of self-important politicians.

Depends on the size of the layers IMO.
A 500 seat English parliament with a 100 seat federal one doesn't add to the payroll too much. I've never quite got the England is too big for one parliament argument.