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

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So just a quick word of advice here Shakey....

You now have an opportunity for either materially more devolution or potentially even full Indy, but, you're not going to get it based on the same old arguments and trying to cast doubt on the Scottish govts own figures.

There is a really significant fiscal black hole to fill.

Whether it's £8bn or £10bn or £6bn isn't really the point.

There is now a brief window of opportunity to poach truly massive levels of trade, investment, jobs and tax revenue away from the rest of the UK to fill it.

If we don't take it then mark my words Dublin, Paris and Frankfurt will.

The way we do so is to remain in the Single Market and adopt a business friendly tax regime, and then spend the next few years being the obvious choice for an English language speaking, business friendly, location that is within the single market..... As all the companies reliant on being within the single market pour North over the border.

Yes there will be short term pain - big cuts to Scottish government spending for a few years and/or until we have met the Eurozone deficit targets - but it can be done and should be done.

Now, the UK government may well scupper those plans by keeping Britain within the single market, and if so then Indy is off the table as we don't need it, but if they don't then this is really far and away the best bet for Indy or a more federal Indy-light Scotland you will ever get.

So if I were you I'd grab it with both hands, stop denying the sky is blue re the deficit, and take whatever cuts/austerity are needed in the short term (and they'll be huge, but your side in the Indy debate always said that wasn't a problem if there are also long term benefits).

The problem remains will the EU take Scotland? I have very serious doubts that it will for the simple reasons laid out during the Scottish referendum, chiefly that countries that have wantaway regions don't want to legitimise Scotland's wishes to quit the UK.

The best outcome for Scotland might be an independent future in the EU or it may not but I don't think that it's on offer so it's all moot really.

Rinoa

For the avoidance of doubt Downing Street have today confirmed Theresa May will make the decision on when we leave the EU.

So Nicola Sturgeon's 'veto' lasted around 48 hours.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3695418/Brexit-happening-like-not-Theresa-Nicola-Sturgeon-suggests-Scotland-veto-Britain-leaves-EU.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Generali wrote: »

The problem remains will the EU take Scotland? .

In 2014, as a breakaway state, with the UK retaining EU membership almost certainly not.

But in 2016 with England and Wales voting out of the EU and Scotland voting overwhelmingly to remain in, then the politics of it has changed quite dramatically.

Steve Peers, professor of law at the University of Essex says: "It's now much more plausible that other member states would agree to amend the Treaties to transfer the UK's membership of the UK to Scotland. The political context of the issue would now be different: unlike in 2014, facilitating Scottish EU membership would not be now seen as creating a kind of incentive for a member state to split up, given that the UK is leaving the EU anyway."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36619907

zagubov

Generali wrote: »

The problem remains will the EU take Scotland? .

I'm filing that next to "Would addicts take drugs?" or "Would dogs eat meat?"

TrickyTree83

zagubov wrote: »

I'm filing that next to "Would addicts take drugs?" or "Would dogs eat meat?"

Why?

As far as I'm aware no vote by the 27 member states has been taken.

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

In 2014, as a breakaway state, with the UK retaining EU membership almost certainly not.

But in 2016 with England and Wales voting out of the EU and Scotland voting overwhelmingly to remain in, then the politics of it has changed quite dramatically.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36619907

zagubov wrote: »

I'm filing that next to "Would addicts take drugs?" or "Would dogs eat meat?"

Didn't the EU leaders already tell Ms Sturgeon to go away shortly after the Leave vote?

This bloke is just coming up with an opinion and let's face opinions are just like bottoms: everyone has one and most of them stink

I'd be very surprised to see Scotland encouraged to vote for independence to get a place in Europe. Can you really see all 27 European leaders getting together to promise a place in the EU for Scotland should they vote to leave the UK? I honestly can't think of a possible way that could or would happen. It's nuts.

What mechanism do you both see being employed to agree that Scotland could become part of the EU and then that decision being communicated to Scottish voters? You'd need the unanimous support of EU leaders with no general elections that could overturn an EU Government in between the referendum being announced and held plus you'd need the support of the UK Government in holding said referendum, a UK Government that would be in the middle of probably the most complex negotiation process ever undertaken.

It just won't happen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL2DH-nKBeA

TrickyTree83

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

But in 2016 with England and Wales voting out of the EU and Scotland voting overwhelmingly to remain in

Again, nowehere on the ballot paper did it say "should Scotland leave or remain in the EU". It explicitly stated that it was a UK decision, not a Scottish, English, Welsh or Northern Irish decision.

Not only that, but Sturgeon has manipulated the EU referendum position to persue her own single issue political agenda as demonstrated by her pleading with fisherman of Lossiemouth 2 days before the EU referendum to vote to remain in the EU so they can secure a 2nd independence referendum.

The woman is vile, far from the paragon of virtue she's often held up as on these forums.

mrginge

I'm not sure how the two statements of -

The EU have the political time, will and incentive to manufacture some rules to allow iScotland to strike a deal into the single market.

And -

The EU do not have the time, will or incentive to manufacture some rules to allow the UK to strike a deal involving single market access and reduced free movement.

...are entirely compatible.

TrickyTree83

iScotland in the EU

- £15bn deficit in current running costs
- loss of Barnett funding (circa £24bn)
- more powers than devo max, overruled by EU regulation
- North Sea oil currently propped up by UK taxpayers will need to be paid for, or face job losses
- migration of UK jobs from Scotland
- loss of UK based contracts
- adoption of the Euro and exposure to bailout funds
- increased import costs (cost of living)
- EU membership fee
- adoption of the Schengen agreement of no internal borders
- further integration with EU members on defence, foreign policy and fiscal management to make the Euro work
- a hard border with the rest of the UK
- if no deal is reached between the UK and the EU then Scotland could be exposed to tariffs with its largest trading partner
- if businesses choose to leave the UK, out of all the [STRIKE]27[/STRIKE] 28 member states is Scotland really the #1 destination?
- reduced public spending, end of free HE tuition and prescriptions or higher taxes?

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So just a quick word of advice here Shakey....

You now have an opportunity for either materially more devolution or potentially even full Indy, but, you're not going to get it based on the same old arguments and trying to cast doubt on the Scottish govts own figures.

There is a really significant fiscal black hole to fill.

Whether it's £8bn or £10bn or £6bn isn't really the point.

There is now a brief window of opportunity to poach truly massive levels of trade, investment, jobs and tax revenue away from the rest of the UK to fill it.

If we don't take it then mark my words Dublin, Paris and Frankfurt will.

The way we do so is to remain in the Single Market and adopt a business friendly tax regime, and then spend the next few years being the obvious choice for an English language speaking, business friendly, location that is within the single market and already has virtually identical legal protections and business contract law as the rest of the UK.....

And then watch as all the companies reliant on being within the single market pour North over the border because it's frankly cheaper and easier than relocating to Ireland, France or Germany.

Yes there will be short term pain - big cuts to Scottish government spending for a few years and/or until we have met the Eurozone deficit targets - but it can be done and should be done.

Now, the UK government may well scupper those plans by keeping Britain within the single market, and if so then Indy is off the table as we don't need it, but if they don't then this is really far and away the best bet for Indy or a more federal Indy-light Scotland you will ever get.

So if I were you I'd grab it with both hands, stop denying the sky is blue re the deficit and fiscal black holes, and take whatever cuts/austerity are needed in the short term (and they'll be huge, but your side in the Indy debate always said that wasn't a problem if there are also long term benefits).

You didn't answer the question I politely asked of you. I asked what these 'unknown regions' were and if you knew much about them and why they are allocated as they are via HMRC.

Mabye you could shed some light. Perhaps indicate if in a hypothetical iScotland, there would be 'unknown regions' generating 37.3 billion. It seems a very strange way of reporting things in an official context to me.

And since my stance on independence has always been that sooner or later the politics would at some point overwhelm the economics, I am more than anyone aware that rerunning old 2014 arguments is a non-starter.

If and when Article 50 is invoked, the EU will more than likely come out with possible deals for Scotland, there will be a referendum very shortly afterwards. But nothing will or can happen until Mrs May presses the button ( if she ever does ).