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

ruggedtoast

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Explain how then!

Explain how they can hold a legally binding referendum without being allowed to do so?

Who do they have to ask in order to get a legally binding referendum?

What have those people said about the SNP and Scottish independence?

Explain how they will be able to unilaterally separate from the UK, without the UK's consent, a legal referendum or self-determination via the UN?

Don't just spout !!!!!!!!, explain how you arrived at such a ridiculous conclusion.

With an all or nothing gambit from the SNP organising their own referendum without electoral commission oversight and then announcing Scotland is dissolving the Act of Union.

The difference of opinion here is that you 'lot' assume that people just have to do what they're told no matter how unfair it is, as long as someone says that those are the rules.

Based on that assumption the UK would still be a nation of peasantry tugging their forelocks to the landed gentry and drowning women for witchery. Although actually I am not sure that much has really changed there.

Nevertheless it is looking very much like Scotland has had enough and is now going one way or another. Not because they don't like the government English people chose for them, but because it is now obvious that politically, a majority of the English are right wing jingoistic chalk to Scotland's socially democratic cheese.

kabayiri

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Explain how then!

Explain how they can hold a legally binding referendum without being allowed to do so?

Who do they have to ask in order to get a legally binding referendum?

What have those people said about the SNP and Scottish independence?

Explain how they will be able to unilaterally separate from the UK, without the UK's consent, a legal referendum or self-determination via the UN?

Don't just spout !!!!!!!!, explain how you arrived at such a ridiculous conclusion.

Let's assume they overcome all those hurdles.

How do they fit in a Scottish referendum (say 3 months notice beforehand); the 18 months to separate; before the 2 year Article 50 period is up?

The logistics don't really stack up.

May has a big enough challenge on her hands getting Brexit through in the time frame. She is hardly likely to derail things for the SNP.

TrickyTree83

ruggedtoast wrote: »

With an all or nothing gambit from the SNP organising their own referendum without electoral commission oversight and then announcing Scotland is dissolving the Act of Union.

'You lot' as you put it are following the legal process.

Hopefully you're aware that they're unable to dissolve the act of union themselves. They have no power in constitutional matters.

That would be akin to self-determination which would need to go through the UN.

What you speak of will not take place, it cannot. The SNP know as much.

Quite where you get this idea that people are able to do what they please, outside of the law and not experience any repercussions I don't know.

TrickyTree83

kabayiri wrote: »

Let's assume they overcome all those hurdles.

How do they fit in a Scottish referendum (say 3 months notice beforehand); the 18 months to separate; before the 2 year Article 50 period is up?

The logistics don't really stack up.

May has a big enough challenge on her hands getting Brexit through in the time frame. She is hardly likely to derail things for the SNP.

Just yet another reason why it won't happen before Brexit.

Therefore Scotland will be coming out of the EU with the rest of the UK, whether indy supporters like it or not.

ruggedtoast

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

'You lot' as you put it are following the legal process.

Hopefully you're aware that they're unable to dissolve the act of union themselves. They have no power in constitutional matters.

That would be akin to self-determination which would need to go through the UN.

What you speak of will not take place, it cannot. The SNP know as much.

Quite where you get this idea that people are able to do what they please, outside of the law and not experience any repercussions I don't know.

The repercussions are that in this particular staring contest an unpopular Tory government, hated by Scotland, and a large number of the English, Welsh and Northern Irish, would have to declare martial law in Edinburgh while they are simultaneously occupied with shooting themselves repeatedly in the foot with Article 50 to the adoring cheers of a bunch of racists.

Scotland is going, get used to it.

TrickyTree83

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The repercussions are that in this particular staring contest an unpopular Tory government, hated by Scotland, and a large number of the English, Welsh and Northern Irish, would have to declare martial law in Edinburgh while they are simultaneously occupied with shooting themselves repeatedly in the foot with Article 50 to the adoring cheers of a bunch of racists.

Scotland is going, get used to it.

Martial law? Wow.

Jokes. The whole idea of independence is a joke.

Sorry but its true. Scotland will be worse off in every aspect.

- To want to become independent only to give powers away straight away.

- Regain the fishing grounds only to bestow them right back to the EU.

- To want to risk 64% of your trade and safeguard 11%.

- In a hard brexit that will mean a hard border between Scotland and the rUK. Damaging businesses and families across the north of the country in particular on both sides of the border.

- Having a demographics problem in Scotland is NOT a reason to split from the UK, as when the Scottish economy tanks these people won't stay and battle to keep Scotland afloat. They'll skip across the border because their parents were British and go where the jobs are. Worsening the demographics.

- Scotland is running a deficit and currently survives because of the institutions of the UK who help fund and deal with the UK wide deficit, who will be the lender of last resort to an independent Scotland within 2 years?

- Scotland will have to take on its share of the national debt, you will not be starting with a clean slate, unless negotiations mean that you trade off a clean slate by trading away another asset or resource to the rUK. You will not have your cake and eat it, in exactly the same way the UK won't in negotiations with the EU.

And many more points I can't be bothered to list that have been listed time and time again. The whole thing is a sorry political joke. There's no tangible benefit to the people of Scotland in being independent under the current circumstances, which is why I was arguing the case with Shakey about waiting until the trade imbalance has been corrected and deficits no longer exist. Once the economic case makes sense, the rest either doesn't matter or also makes sense.

wotsthat

ruggedtoast wrote: »

With an all or nothing gambit from the SNP organising their own referendum without electoral commission oversight and then announcing Scotland is dissolving the Act of Union.

If the SNP thought they had a realistic chance of winning a referendum it would already be happening.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

If the Scottish want a referendum, the Conservatives (May) will need to be the ones to give it to them. If she doesn't want to, and she's come out with some strong stuff on the SNP, then you won't get it. You just won't. No amount of foot stamping or 'political will' in Holyrood is going to help you there. In particular when the UK is negotiating Brexit.

No. It's not Westminster's gift to give. Historically any area wishing independence is unlikely to have to ask or gain permission from the larger area it wishes independence from.

You're up against a PM that will retain the union and will effect Brexit.

The only thing you could do is hold an advisory, but as String pointed out this would not be binding on Westminster and would be illegal as a pretext for unilateral separation.

So you, the indy supporters on here and the SNP are beholden to Theresa May and the Conservative party, you will all dance to their tune before they dance to yours.

In that case perhaps Scotland and her representatives should simply ignore the result of the Brexit vote. Which was held only via an advisory referendum. Legal referenda in the UK are very rare things indeed, most are advisory. The Scottish government is legislating for one now and advisory ( EU referendum ) or deemed legal ( Scotland 2014 ) it will be held regardless of Westminster's or Theresa May's wishes.

You can honestly post 'all you can hold is an advisory' with a straight face after the advisory Brexit vote then ?

mayonnaise

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You can honestly post 'all you can hold is an advisory' with a straight face after the advisory Brexit vote then ?

Brilliant!

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

Let's assume they overcome all those hurdles.

How do they fit in a Scottish referendum (say 3 months notice beforehand); the 18 months to separate; before the 2 year Article 50 period is up?

The logistics don't really stack up.

May has a big enough challenge on her hands getting Brexit through in the time frame. She is hardly likely to derail things for the SNP.

They're preparing for it now. As far as Scotland is concerned the biggest priority will be to stay in the EU rather than be taken out, then have to go back in again in some form.

May's priorities aren't likely to be deferred to in this context as far as Scotland is concerned. Sturgeon's No1 is to remain in the EU and if that means holding a Scotland wide referendum in order to do so then she's already indicated several times already that it's 'highly likely' that she'll do just that.