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

cogito

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Nicola Sturgeon offered to take a second referendum off the table had the UK government worked towards a soft Brexit.

How do you define a soft Brexit? I'm curious because every time a soft Brexit is mentioned is seems to involve remaining in the single market with all that entails and would actually mean remaining in the EU without being a member.

.string.

wotsthat wrote: »

Seems easy to understand. I think there are plenty of sticks that can be used to beat the SNP with. Fund raising within the rules isn't one of them.

I would go along with that, but taking into account the use of the funds in a legal manner according "to the rules". In the context of this thread I cite the use of public money to fund the "White Paper" which was effectively an SNP Manifesto.
See here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11488869/Independence-White-Paper-failed-to-meet-civil-service-standards.html

wotsthat

cogito wrote: »

Well, actually, if I were a Scot being given the chance to vote in a referendum, I think that I would like to know exactly what I was voting for. The Scots rejected independence in 2014 and I'm quite sure that a big part of what swung it was that the SNP were totally incoherent about what currency they would use should they win the vote.

You didn't know exactly what you were voting for when you voted for Brexit other than it meant leaving the EU. Why can't the same logic be applied - Scots may not know exactly what they're voting for by voting for independence other than leaving the Union.

cogito wrote: »

Salmond insisted that they could continue to use Sterling - 'it's our currency too' - when it was perfectly obvious that the only way of doing this was to remain subject to the Bank of England which wasn't independence at all. Wiser heads than me have set out the multitude of reasons why continued use of any currency but a Scottish 'pound' was not possible, one of the main ones being that no applicant country could join the EU without its own central bank.

Independence is leaving the Union. Plenty of countries you'd probably consider independent use currencies controlled by other countries.

cogito wrote: »

If the SNP do not present a coherent plan for how it will manage the economy on attaining independence, it deserves to fail again. Such a plan would have to say how Scotland would balance its books given that it doesn't at present and how it would cover any borrowing requirement given that it does not have a credit rating and has relied on financial support from its neighbour to the south since Barnett was 'temporarily' introduced by Harold Wilson's government.

Well I'd agree although I'd point out that some seem to think it's a poor tactic to say what you want when a negotiation is required to get it.

wotsthat

.string. wrote: »

I would go along with that, but taking into account the use of the funds in a legal manner according "to the rules". In the context of this thread I cite the use of public money to fund the "White Paper" which was effectively an SNP Manifesto.
See here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11488869/Independence-White-Paper-failed-to-meet-civil-service-standards.html

Yes, the rules should be policed and, if broken, there should be redress.

Enterprise_1701C

cogito wrote: »

How do you define a soft Brexit? I'm curious because every time a soft Brexit is mentioned is seems to involve remaining in the single market with all that entails and would actually mean remaining in the EU without being a member.

That is precisely what sturgeon wants, effectively she is saying if we stay in the eu she would shelve the referendum.

Basically it is a case of she wants the rest of the UK to do what Scotland want or she will throw her toys out of the pram. A bit like someone losing at football so picking up the ball and going off with it.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

.string. wrote: »

I would go along with that,

Fair enough, I will accept that I am treading the wrong path and move on.



It would however be good to see some of the more devout pro-SNP advocates in here do the same, even occasionally.

wotsthat

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

That is precisely what sturgeon wants, effectively she is saying if we stay in the eu she would shelve the referendum.

Basically it is a case of she wants the rest of the UK to do what Scotland want or she will throw her toys out of the pram. A bit like someone losing at football so picking up the ball and going off with it.

What she's effectively saying is that she'd like Scotland to be independent because of X. Today X is Brexit, tomorrow X might Scottish farmers shackled by British Summer Time. The only thing of certainty is that the SNP will have an X - it's their reason to be.

Currencies and the like are fun to discuss but irrelevant really.

cogito

wotsthat wrote: »

You didn't know exactly what you were voting for when you voted for Brexit other than it meant leaving the EU. Why can't the same logic be applied - Scots may not know exactly what they're voting for by voting for independence other than leaving the Union.

Independence is leaving the Union. Plenty of countries you'd probably consider independent use currencies controlled by other countries.

Well I'd agree although I'd point out that some seem to think it's a poor tactic to say what you want when a negotiation is required to get it.

Personally, I believe I did know what I was voting for in the referendum despite the lies told by both sides but mainly by the Remain campaign. If Scots vote for independence without it being spelt out exactly what it would do to their pockets, they are not as canny as they are made out to be.

There are of course a few countries which use currencies which are not their own but in the main, they are economic basket cases whose citizens do not trust their own currency. A possible exception is Montenegro which used the Deutschmark when Yugoslavia fell apart and migrated to the euro when the DM ceased to exist. Even so, it has had to create its own central bank as a requirement of its application to join the EU.

But on your final point, it comes back to trust. If the SNP won't produce a credible plan, why should anyone trust them? Except of course the diehard nationalists.

Enterprise_1701C

Of course, with some trying to compare Brexit with Scottish independence, they forget one thing. We as the UK have all the infrastructure we need as an independent country.

Can someone please point me to things like the Scottish Central Bank, the embassies, army, air force, navy, border force, customs service, police and all the other things you need as an independent country.

That is without asking about the currency again, and how you are going to avoid the euro if you were ever allowed into the eu (you can't avoid it).

TrickyTree83

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Of course, with some trying to compare Brexit with Scottish independence, they forget one thing. We as the UK have all the infrastructure we need as an independent country.

Can someone please point me to things like the Scottish Central Bank, the embassies, army, air force, navy, border force, customs service, police and all the other things you need as an independent country.

That is without asking about the currency again, and how you are going to avoid the euro if you were ever allowed into the eu (you can't avoid it).

Don't be so bloody stupid!

It's all about faith, that was established a couple of pages back. It's like a religion.