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

mrginge

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Anyone care to comment/challenge Hamish's take re EU membership?

Since anyone else's views are dismissed I thought some of you may take it more seriously as he can be seen as unbiased, certainly pro Union.

My opinion has been stated previously.

There is no way on this earth that the EU will involve itself in a domestic issue while trying to negotiate with the Government of the same country.

They will not make a make a commitment to allow Scotland to stay in the EU without an understanding of what Scotland will actually look like.

They will not get agreement from their members on this.

They will not want to waste their time and effort on this while trying to resolve their own internal position on Brexit.

They will not endorse an illegal referendum.

However much certain people want to imagine that the sole motivation of the EU is to shaft the UK, the reality is that the EU want (and need) to resolve the issues that are in front of them, not start opening massive cans of worms that would do more damage to their project.

.string.

There are a number of reasons why it is doubtful (I think it vanishingly small) that Scotland could join the EU quickly, let alone before Brexit happens. It is the latter scenario that is being peddled by the SNP.

There is a wide gap in outcome between the two routes; and a large difference in timescale. The first is, apparently, an instantaneous trouble free transition, the other is a period of economic isolation which could last several years.

But in my view, the only feasible route to EU Membership is by leaving the UK and joining the EU as a fully proved sovereign state. Unfortunately for Natland, it is not a pleasant prospect.

There are three apparent "Actors": Scotland, the UK and the EU. There are also other Actors, for example those Member States that have declared opposition to Scotland joining the EU while it is part of the UK. As far as I am aware no-one in a position of authority in the EU has said otherwise.

The most important actors in all of this are the Scottish people themselves, namely those who call themselves Scots, who would make the initial choice of separation from the Union.

Then there is the UK, which is established in law and has rights and obligations under that law, including that of agreeing dissolution of the Union with Scotland, including a Referendum on it.

Then there is the EU, consisting of 27 (+1) States, each with their own viewpoint.

The SNP is, in my view, so wrapped up in its own indy navel that it barely considers what is good for Scotland, let alone what is good for the UK or the EU. It looses sight (or, I reckon, hides likely reactions from the other actors).

The pretext of Brexit being a justified reason for another Referendum can be argued either way, but assuming that a referendum happens anyway for a moment, it is by no means certain that a Yes vote would result if it were held after article 50 is invoked. Accompanying an Article 50 declaration there will probably be some form of statement by the UK Government (not too detailed I expect in order to maintain negotiation room) that will probably include propositions tailored to attract Scottish Voters and will certainly not be predicting the dastardly future which the SNP claim Brexit to be. Strike 1 for the Union, not the SNP. The opening salvos in this are already arriving (set for Article 50 on January 1st?).

The Brexit negotiations will certainly result in fishing being repatriated to the UK and this will resonate with many in Scotland as I understand the mood. That, for example, will contrast with the SNP approach of aiming for the status quo where fishing control is usurped by the EU. Who is fighting Scotland's corner there? Not the SNP.

Also, and this is with you in mind, Hamish, and I'd like your reaction to this please, protection of the financial services will be a major issue designed to protect London and other UK financial Centres, including those in Scotland. It is becoming clear that Brexit will have a mixed effect on UK financial services. The matter of "Pasporting" has been mitigated to some extent by the Equivalence of financial regulation, which is well up to speed in the UK. Some losses, some gains, others the same. In a separated Scotland, however, in or out of the EU, I don't see the Scottish financial services surviving as it is now. The European Centres will want to "eat it" as will those based in the UK and the latter process would start well before independence as was clear last time around. Much of the Scottish services have a UK customer base I understand.

So in addition to fishing there's another sector that will loose out on separation.. Then there is ship building, and other military-based spending from the UK. Agriculture will probably survive if it's cheap enough, at least for a while until "Buy British" acquires a different meaning.

The second main actor, the UK, is not going to be best pleased if an SNP Referendum is held at the onset of Brexit negotiations and I would be astonished if May does not scupper it in some way. Certainly by denying a sanctioned (legal) Referendum but also in stating an Advisory Consultation to be premature, not constitutional and not in the best interests of Scotland or the UK. She might even state that she will offer a referendum, if there is a clear wish for it (copying the SNP's weasel words, when Brexit conditions are known. That would certainly cut across SNP machinations.

But regardless of what the SNP do about their pet Referendum I'm as sure as I can be that Brexit negotiations will continue under the basis of the UK remaining as it is. Best for the UK, best for Scotland.

The matter of legality of the referendum has been dismissed as inconsequential in this thread but it is not. It would effectively prevent any other country, let alone 27 of them, from agreeing anything of substance with an SNP government and would place the SNP in a very disadvantageous position should negotiations with the rUK ever be attempted on the basis of an illegal, disputed, referendum.

The other main actor, the EU, may or may not be sympathetic to Scotland joining the EU eventually, but it is difficult to see them wanting a country to join that:

o. Does not legally exist, and may not ever materialise as a sovereign State
o. Has incomplete governmental infrastructure, cannot defend itself, has no currency and no pedigree as a functioning democracy etc.
o. Has shown itself disrespectful of constitutional arrangements, notably those of the UK
o. Has expenditure far exceeding its income
o. Has no plan (Austerity !) to balance the books
o. Has no currency of its own and no Central Bank of substance
o. Relies on subsidies and would be a drain on the EU (otherwise in that capacity as Germany)
o. Is at loggerheads with an EU major trading partner


Has not been confirmed as being compliant to the multitude of requirements of a New EU Member

All those things can be solved in time, but not until Scotland has separated and gone through the pain of decaying to its SNP-imposed level of existence. In other words, no time soon.

kabayiri

mrginge wrote: »

...
However much certain people want to imagine that the sole motivation of the EU is to shaft the UK, the reality is that the EU want (and need) to resolve the issues that are in front of them, not start opening massive cans of worms that would do more damage to their project.

Agreed

The EU want an early closure to the Brexit issue. The Scottish issue could easily become an additional complexity nobody needs.

German banks; an ailing Euro; Brexit; porous European borders; the Hungarian migrant referendum....I think Juncker and his mates have quite enough on their plates right now.

TrickyTree83

It seems the prevailing feeling is that independence either has to wait or won't happen at all.

Perhaps this is why the polls reflect this position to remain in the UK. Pragmatism wins over emotion? That's usually the case these days.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

There are a number of reasons why it is doubtful (I think it vanishingly small) that Scotland could join the EU quickly, let alone before Brexit happens. It is the latter scenario that is being peddled by the SNP.

There is a wide gap in outcome between the two routes; and a large difference in timescale. The first is, apparently, an instantaneous trouble free transition, the other is a period of economic isolation which could last several years.

But in my view, the only feasible route to EU Membership is by leaving the UK and joining the EU as a fully proved sovereign state. Unfortunately for Natland, it is not a pleasant prospect.

It's an absolutely ridiculous waste of time and resources punting Scotland out of the EU only to readmit her. I doubt the EU will bother. If the unlikely prospect of Scotland being out of the EU becomes apparent, then there's always EFTA.

There are three apparent "Actors": Scotland, the UK and the EU. There are also other Actors, for example those Member States that have declared opposition to Scotland joining the EU while it is part of the UK. As far as I am aware no-one in a position of authority in the EU has said otherwise.

The most important actors in all of this are the Scottish people themselves, namely those who call themselves Scots, who would make the initial choice of separation from the Union.

Then there is the UK, which is established in law and has rights and obligations under that law, including that of agreeing dissolution of the Union with Scotland, including a Referendum on it.

Then there is the EU, consisting of 27 (+1) States, each with their own viewpoint.

The SNP is, in my view, so wrapped up in its own indy navel that it barely considers what is good for Scotland, let alone what is good for the UK or the EU. It looses sight (or, I reckon, hides likely reactions from the other actors).

The SNP has been for independence since it's conception. And has been pro-EU for decades. Is a little hopeful of all 'UK actors' to think that any Brexit vote would change any of that. If you accept that the SNP hasn't changed policies whatsoever and was voted into Holyrood on the basis of them just a few weeks before the Brexit vote.. then you must then admit that it's the Brexit vote itself which has brought about change.

SNP policy choices have stayed completely static. Everything else has changed.

The pretext of Brexit being a justified reason for another Referendum can be argued either way, but assuming that a referendum happens anyway for a moment, it is by no means certain that a Yes vote would result if it were held after article 50 is invoked. Accompanying an Article 50 declaration there will probably be some form of statement by the UK Government (not too detailed I expect in order to maintain negotiation room) that will probably include propositions tailored to attract Scottish Voters and will certainly not be predicting the dastardly future which the SNP claim Brexit to be. Strike 1 for the Union, not the SNP. The opening salvos in this are already arriving (set for Article 50 on January 1st?).

The Brexit negotiations will certainly result in fishing being repatriated to the UK and this will resonate with many in Scotland as I understand the mood. That, for example, will contrast with the SNP approach of aiming for the status quo where fishing control is usurped by the EU. Who is fighting Scotland's corner there? Not the SNP.

Also, and this is with you in mind, Hamish, and I'd like your reaction to this please, protection of the financial services will be a major issue designed to protect London and other UK financial Centres, including those in Scotland. It is becoming clear that Brexit will have a mixed effect on UK financial services. The matter of "Pasporting" has been mitigated to some extent by the Equivalence of financial regulation, which is well up to speed in the UK. Some losses, some gains, others the same. In a separated Scotland, however, in or out of the EU, I don't see the Scottish financial services surviving as it is now. The European Centres will want to "eat it" as will those based in the UK and the latter process would start well before independence as was clear last time around. Much of the Scottish services have a UK customer base I understand.

So in addition to fishing there's another sector that will loose out on separation.. Then there is ship building, and other military-based spending from the UK. Agriculture will probably survive if it's cheap enough, at least for a while until "Buy British" acquires a different meaning.

The second main actor, the UK, is not going to be best pleased if an SNP Referendum is held at the onset of Brexit negotiations and I would be astonished if May does not scupper it in some way. Certainly by denying a sanctioned (legal) Referendum but also in stating an Advisory Consultation to be premature, not constitutional and not in the best interests of Scotland or the UK. She might even state that she will offer a referendum, if there is a clear wish for it (copying the SNP's weasel words, when Brexit conditions are known. That would certainly cut across SNP machinations.

But regardless of what the SNP do about their pet Referendum I'm as sure as I can be that Brexit negotiations will continue under the basis of the UK remaining as it is. Best for the UK, best for Scotland.

The matter of legality of the referendum has been dismissed as inconsequential in this thread but it is not. It would effectively prevent any other country, let alone 27 of them, from agreeing anything of substance with an SNP government and would place the SNP in a very disadvantageous position should negotiations with the rUK ever be attempted on the basis of an illegal, disputed, referendum.

The other main actor, the EU, may or may not be sympathetic to Scotland joining the EU eventually, but it is difficult to see them wanting a country to join that:

o. Does not legally exist, and may not ever materialise as a sovereign State
o. Has incomplete governmental infrastructure, cannot defend itself, has no currency and no pedigree as a functioning democracy etc.
o. Has shown itself disrespectful of constitutional arrangements, notably those of the UK
o. Has expenditure far exceeding its income
o. Has no plan (Austerity !) to balance the books
o. Has no currency of its own and no Central Bank of substance
o. Relies on subsidies and would be a drain on the EU (otherwise in that capacity as Germany)
o. Is at loggerheads with an EU major trading partner


Has not been confirmed as being compliant to the multitude of requirements of a New EU Member

All those things can be solved in time, but not until Scotland has separated and gone through the pain of decaying to its SNP-imposed level of existence. In other words, no time soon.

There's a little more in the way of complications than what you've just put forward I'm afraid. Legal positioning vis a vis the UK Governments reasoning for no parliamentary vote on leaving the EU was published ( after it was ordered to ) today.

Faisal Islam 5h5 hours ago Government lawyer says it's "unarguable" that triggering Article 50 breaches the Act of Union with Scotland, as courts have no jurisdiction

Faisal Islam Effecting Brexit might also need to see some votes passed in Scottish parliament - this could lead to a total mess. Sure there's a plan.

In short, I wouldn't worry about the SNP having to navel gaze for the moment. It's the UK Govt that has some real constitutional choppy waters ahead in the very near future.

Oh and it there won't be any SNP 'imposed' anything at all. The voters will decide, not the SNP.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

It seems the prevailing feeling is that independence either has to wait or won't happen at all.

Perhaps this is why the polls reflect this position to remain in the UK. Pragmatism wins over emotion? That's usually the case these days.

No, the prevailing feeling is that like it or not, if there's no deal whereby Scotland stays in the single market among other EU related things as part of the UK. Then there will be another referendum.

It's in the newspapers daily, mainly from the other parties moaning it has to be said. But that's the overwhelming feeling up here either for or against. Polling independence wise is all over the place at the moment beyond the headlines. Which incidentally are often misreported.

..because it appears that the wrong numbers were originally reported. The definitive results are now available within the Panelbase datasets, and for my money the most important finding is on whether a second independence referendum should be held in the near future...

Want another independence referendum within three years : 53%

Do not want another independence referendum in the next few years : 47%

The Panelbase poll helpfully demonstrates just how sensitive respondents are to the specifics of the question asked, because only 32% say they want a referendum while Brexit negotiations are ongoing, but a further 21% want a referendum in two or three years when negotiations have been completed - bringing us to a grand total of 53%.

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/apologies-for-taking-several-days-to.html

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It's an absolutely ridiculous waste of time and resources punting Scotland out of the EU only to readmit her. I doubt the EU will bother. If the unlikely prospect of Scotland being out of the EU becomes apparent, then there's always EFTA.

The SNP has been for independence since it's conception. And has been pro-EU for decades. Is a little hopeful of all 'UK actors' to think that any Brexit vote would change any of that. If you accept that the SNP hasn't changed policies whatsoever and was voted into Holyrood on the basis of them just a few weeks before the Brexit vote.. then you must then admit that it's the Brexit vote itself which has brought about change.

SNP policy choices have stayed completely static. Everything else has changed.

There's a little more in the way of complications than what you've just put forward I'm afraid. Legal positioning vis a vis the UK Governments reasoning for no parliamentary vote on leaving the EU was published ( after it was ordered to ) today.

In short, I wouldn't worry about the SNP having to navel gaze for the moment. It's the UK Govt that has some real constitutional choppy waters ahead in the very near future.

Oh and it there won't be any SNP 'imposed' anything at all. The voters will decide, not the SNP.

It's very arguable that faisal islam does not know what he is talking about. Is that the best you can do? Do you have another straw?' A straw poll perhaps?

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It's an absolutely ridiculous waste of time and resources punting Scotland out of the EU only to readmit her. I doubt the EU will bother.

Your lack of understanding of the wider world never ceases to amaze me.

TrickyTree83

I've come to learn the following:

If it supports independence or at the least doesn't support the union then it's an undisputed fact. Wings Over Scotland and their amateur turned professional economic advisors taught me as much.

ruggedtoast

Proud Scots will not be cowed by the Tories' ham fisted bullying.

The 'Conservative' party and it's wrinkled rump of bigots and xenophobes is about to preside over the dissolution of the united kingdom.