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

Shakethedisease

antrobus wrote: »

Oh double dear.:rotfl:

You posted the following quote



What the bleep has the Act of Union of 1707 got to with a "self-description lodged at the UN since 1945"?

Please provide a source for your 'quote'. You don't want people thinking that you are making things up:)

Now you are making things up. I have never said that Scotland was not a country.

In 2014 the Scottish government agreed that it needed the authority of the UK government to hold a referendum. See the Edinburgh Agreemnet. Signed by a certain N Sturgeon. So it's the SNP who are legally stuffed.:)

The UK has a very simple constitution reaaly, Parliament is sovereign. Or Crown in Parliament if you want to be really picky. The constitution is a reserved matter under the Scotland Act 1998; i.e. Holyrood has naff all authority to fiddle with the constition.

Someone in Scotland might well decide to 'hold a vote' on any issue they fancy. The UK Parliament can simply ignore it and carry on as normal.

I know I've told you this before, so you really should know it by now.

The constitution IS a reserved matter I agree. But holding a referendum/vote or Scottish General Election isn't. In 2011-2014 Salmond would've held a referendum anyway if the Edinburgh agreement hadn't been forthcoming. I remember debating it here, and Salmond laughing a lot in 2011 at the thought of Cameron trying to stop Holyrood organising one. Salmond still says the same now ( note date below ).

Alex Salmond Says If David Cameron Had Tried To Stop IndyRef, He Would've Held An Unofficial Referendum Anyway

28 October 2017, 11:27

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/alex-salmond/alex-salmond-david-cameron-unofficial-referendum/

Catalan's are being told they cannot vote due to the Spanish constitution. Scotland CAN vote because the UK doesn't really have one, plus 2014 sets the precedent. Scotland is part of the UK in 2017 willingly. The question now is what happens if or when that changes.. say due to crashing out of the EU on WTO rules or something equally damaging ?

Do you think if there's a huge clamour at some point in Scotland to man the Single Market/Status quo lifeboat by holding a vote that Sturgeon is just going to ignore it ? Or that she'll let May stop her organising one ? The SNP have been wise taking their foot of the indy gas for a while, it's letting the Tories take the spotlight instead.

And yes the UK parliament might ignore a vote. The problem however for a UK parliament occurs when the Scottish electorate don't after voting Yes.

Shakethedisease

Nearly forgot.

UK self description as lodged at the UN by the UK Govt. I don't have the 1945 one to hand, but assume that Scotland and England would be as below listed as 'countries' minus the devolution part.

Catalonia is a region and a part of Spain. Scotland is a country which is part of the UK voluntarily via a Treaty signed in 1707. Scotland isn't part of England nor a region of the UK.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The problem Spain has is that the grassroots support for independence won't just disappear and is probably now becoming stronger.

Will France be dragged into the mire as well. The Basque region also encompasses south west France. Tradition and culture live on.

Arklight

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Nearly forgot.

UK self description as lodged at the UN by the UK Govt. I don't have the 1945 one to hand, but assume that Scotland and England would be as below listed as 'countries' minus the devolution part.

Catalonia is a region and a part of Spain. Scotland is a country which is part of the UK voluntarily via a Treaty signed in 1707. Scotland isn't part of England nor a region of the UK.

What's the mood like up there Shakey? Is there an appetite for indy? Is there a swagger in the air?

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The constitution IS a reserved matter I agree. But holding a referendum/vote or Scottish General Election isn't. ...

As I've said before, holding a 'referendum' isn't the issue. Anyone can hold a 'referendum' if they are prepared to pay for it. Holding a legal referendum is the issue.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

..

In 2011-2014 Salmond would've held a referendum anyway if the Edinburgh agreement hadn't been forthcoming. I remember debating it here, and Salmond laughing a lot in 2011 at the thought of Cameron trying to stop Holyrood organising one. Salmond still says the same now ( note date below ). .

So what? I can't help it if a politician spouts b0ll0x.:)

Shakethedisease wrote: »

..
Catalan's are being told they cannot vote due to the Spanish constitution. Scotland CAN vote because the UK doesn't really have one, plus 2014 sets the precedent. Scotland is part of the UK in 2017 willingly. The question now is what happens if or when that changes.. say due to crashing out of the EU on WTO rules or something equally damaging ? .

Parliament is Sovereign.

The precedent set in 2014 was that a s30 order is required.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

..
Do you think if there's a huge clamour at some point in Scotland to man the Single Market/Status quo lifeboat by holding a vote that Sturgeon is just going to ignore it ? Or that she'll let May stop her organising one ? The SNP have been wise taking their foot of the indy gas for a while, it's letting the Tories take the spotlight instead....

And yes the UK parliament might ignore a vote. The problem however for a UK parliament occurs when the Scottish electorate don't after voting Yes.[/QUOTE]

Why? What's gonna happen?

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Nearly forgot.

UK self description as lodged at the UN by the UK Govt. I don't have the 1945 one to hand, but assume that Scotland and England would be as below listed as 'countries' minus the devolution part.

You don't have it to hand? That's because it doesn't exist. It's a made up piece of nonsense. Ditto your so-called 'quote'.

This is not the first time you've been caught posting made up pieces of nonsense, now is it?:)


The nearest thing that the UN have to a list of countries is the UN/LOCODE Code List by Country aka
United Nations Code for Trade and Transport Locations; see http://www.unece.org/cefact/locode/service/location

Apparently, Greenland is a country, Gibraltar is a country, Jersey is a country. Even the Pitcairn Islands is a flippin country, with a population of 50 or so. Scotland is not on the list. So according to the UN Scotland is not a country.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Catalonia is a region and a part of Spain. Scotland is a country which is part of the UK voluntarily via a Treaty signed in 1707. Scotland isn't part of England nor a region of the UK.

But the real point would be; what piece of land is or isn't a 'country' is irrelevant. You can call anything you like a country.

Being a country (or not) means nothing.

P.S. If I were you, I would not go into a bar in Barcelona, and say that Catalonia is only a region and not a country. You might get a good kicking.:rotfl:

Arklight

antrobus wrote: »

You don't have it to hand? That's because it doesn't exist. It's a made up piece of nonsense. Ditto your so-called 'quote'.

This is not the first time you've been caught posting made up pieces of nonsense, now is it?:)


The nearest thing that the UN have to a list of countries is the UN/LOCODE Code List by Country aka
United Nations Code for Trade and Transport Locations; see http://www.unece.org/cefact/locode/service/location

Apparently, Greenland is a country, Gibraltar is a country, Jersey is a country. Even the Pitcairn Islands is a flippin country, with a population of 50 or so. Scotland is not on the list. So according to the UN Scotland is not a country.




But the real point would be; what piece of land is or isn't a 'country' is irrelevant. You can call anything you like a country.

Being a country (or not) means nothing.

P.S. If I were you, I would not go into a bar in Barcelona, and say that Catalonia is only a region and not a country. You might get a good kicking.:rotfl:

Doughty Scots will not be swayed by nonsense telling them they aren't a country. They yearn for the taste of freedom their ancestors enjoyed.

antrobus

Arklight wrote: »

Doughty Scots will not be swayed by nonsense telling them they aren't a country. They yearn for the taste of freedom their ancestors enjoyed.

No one here, as far as I can see, is saying that Scotland isn't a country. Least of all me.:)

What I am saying is that the Shakey Thing's belief that being a 'country' means something is sadly misplaced.

P.S. I'm quite happy for the Scots to taste the freedom their ancestors enjoyed in paying their own flippin bills.

Shakethedisease

antrobus wrote: »

No one here, as far as I can see, is saying that Scotland isn't a country. Least of all me.:)

What I am saying is that the Shakey Thing's belief that being a 'country' means something is sadly misplaced.

It does in the context of discussing Catalonia sweetie, as compared with Scotland. Which is what we were doing.

Catalonia is a region and part of Spain. Scotland is a country. This means legally the same situation does not apply in the UK about Scottish independence. I am unsure why you veered off onto some kind of weird tangent.. but if you look back at where I entered the convo, it was to point out differences between Catalonia and Scotland and I've stuck with that topic in my last few posts. I have no idea what context you're currently stuck in.

Catalonia has the right imo to determine her own future. And I do not agree with how Spain is dealing with things now. I find it abhorrent. That being said, and as I indicated when I joined the conversation.. Catalonia is a region of Spain seeking to secede and become a country. Scotland on the other hand is already country seeking the dissolution of a Treaty with another country. The situations are massively different, and the UK won't be sending in the police force any time soon ( Police Scotland are nothing to do with Westminster in any case ).

As for the rest of your complete nonsense about legal referendums. Any Scottish one be just as immediately "legally binding" as the Brexit one was.. in other words nothing legal actually happens until there's a vote ( months or much ) later on in Westminster. But May will refuse to countenance one whatever happens. The risk of a Yes vote is too much of a gamble. Sturgeon will have to find a way to hold an acceptable vote to the Scots electorate.

Most likely this will be via a Scottish General election with the SNP and the Greens sticking a 'we will open negotiations asap with the UK Govt regarding independence' clause in their manifestos along with negotiations to remain in the Single Market. Possibly a timescale and an implicit pledge that SNP MP's will no longer attend Westminster after x date or y has been negotiated. Something along those lines.

The important thing is the Scottish electorate and what the majority who live and work there wish once Brexit consequences become much clearer. Should a Yes vote occur then Westminster ignoring it isn't really going to be a viable option going forward. The Scottish Parliament will just issue some sort of Scottish Law statement announcing the Treaty of Union has been dissolved and that's the end of the matter. What really can you do about it by then ?

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It does in the context of discussing Catalonia sweetie, as compared with Scotland. Which is what we were doing. ..

No it doesn't. Whether or not you believe Scotland is a nation, or a country, or a region inhabited by a strange race of Buckfast drinking kilt wearers, is irrelevant.

It's the legal status of the Holyrood Parliament that matters. It has no power to change the constitution. End of.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

...
The Scottish Parliament will just issue some sort of Scottish Law statement announcing the Treaty of Union has been dissolved and that's the end of the matter. What really can you do about it by then ?..

Stop sending any more money to Holyrood, Freeze access to the UK banking system. Blockade the M6 and all routes north, and wait for famine to set in.

The possibilities are endless.:)

Although a simple repeal of the Scotland Act and the imposition of direct rule might be simpler. After all, "The most fundamental rule of UK constitution is parliament is sovereign and can make or unmake any law it chooses."

P.S. The Articles of Union are what granted "full Freedom and Intercourse of Trade and Navigation, to and from
any Port or Place within the said United Kingdom". So now your UDI Scotland has no free trade with anybody.:rotfl: