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

Rinoa

Nicola Sturgeon has the same problem as David Cameron had.

She needs the referendum to fix her party, not fix the country.

No coincidence she chose her party conference (Not Hollyrood) to announce it.

.string.

kabayiri wrote: »

A so called 'hard Brexit' depends on the negotiating stance taken by the EU, just as much the UK.

And the EU are not likely to reveal their position until Article 50 is initiated. Also, the EU are used to negotiating behind closed doors.

The public may be feeding off scraps as to how things are progressing.

Actually, I think the UK has an advantage as far as negotiation stance is concerned. The EU's is fairly predictable,being bound by its own status quo. The trick will be to place them in an area which is not scripted.

That is one reason (in my opinion of course) that the UK Government wants to approach the negotiation from the stance of being a valuable market for the EU rather than being in the market already and trying to hang onto scraps.

One trouble, as I understand it, is that full membership of the market would prevent us from joining in other trade deals.Tell me if I'm wrong on thatlease sbriefedomebody. People movement is probably malleable along the lines of agree I g free movement of those who have a job, and maybe even the legal status of the European Court if it applies only to goods imported to the European territories. As for paying money, that would be worth it as long as it is representative of the cost of running the market and not ancillary things like the Euro, armies and euro frills.

The trouble with debating these things now is that the EU will know where to look to see us coming.

Personally, I think that the leaders of all UK parties should be briefed to avoid such problems, but the trouble with that is that the SNP and Green parties particularly cannot be trusted to work in good faith for the benefit of the UK.

Conrad

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It'll be framed as Scotland v's the Tories.

Ah the classic myopia of the Remainer apostles with their halve baked notion of compassion and openness. Must be nice up their on your pious sanctimony perch looking down at the plebs.


Here's one of many harmful EU effects;


http://www.cmo.nl/epa-uk/pdf/source_2_eu_tomatoes_compete_with_ghanian_tomatoes.pdf








Since the European tomato production is more efficient than the Ghanaian, European tomatoes are cheaper, and locally produced tomatoes lose to foreign competition. Ghanaian tomatoes end up rotting away, a situation not without consequences for the Ghanaian tomato producers.


The same thing has happened to poultry farmers in Ghana. Dutch poultry famers export chicken meat – head, feet, and wings; the expensive fillets stay in Europe – and they are cheaper than local producers. These companies go bankrupt. Quite reprehensible; and moreover, detrimental to development, as it seems.




However, if you take a closer look at the matter, the picture changes. European farmers are allowed to export products to Ghana, as long as export subsidies are not involved. They cannot be blamed for this. In order to exclude their tomatoes from its markets, Ghana could raise a tariff wall to make the price differences between European and locally produced tomatoes disappear.


This is permitted within the WTO context. In 2004, within the WTO, the European Union successfully proposed tariffs of a maximum of 75% for particular sectors of the local food production, such as tomatoes and rice, in order to protect these essential components of the local production and industry.


However, Ghana also has the IMF and the World Bank to deal with. Ghana receives support from these international financial institutions. In exchange for this, Ghana has to open its markets to international trade. And what has been decided within the WTO context is absolutely impermissible according to the ultraliberal globalization vision of the IMF and the World Bank. According to this vision, in the case of agricultural products such as tomatoes, tariff walls should not exceed 25%, too low to stop the European tomato. The IMF and the World Bank threaten to impose sanctions if Ghana should raise its tariff walls. Therefore, Ghana has decided ‘voluntarily’ not to raise its tariff walls.

.string.

Rinoa wrote: »

Nicola Sturgeon has the same problem as David Cameron had.

She needs the referendum to fix her party, not fix the country.

No coincidence she chose her party conference (Not Hollyrood) to announce it.

Yes, it's just the SNP overegging their own obsession: a one-trick pony of a party.

Boringly predictable.

Thrugelmir

Rinoa wrote: »

Nicola Sturgeon has the same problem as David Cameron had.

She needs the referendum to fix her party, not fix the country.

No coincidence she chose her party conference (Not Hollyrood) to announce it.

Wonder how long the wolves will be satisfied with bare bones though. today's announcement means very little. Other than reaffirming the obvious.

As others have said. This is getting boringly tedious and repetitive.

TrickyTree83

mayonnaise wrote: »

8bn would be a small price to pay to secede from a blatant xenophobic country obsessed with blue passports, where EU nationals need to be named and shamed and are considered negotiation cards and Polish blokes are being kicked to death on the streets.
You can't put a price on basic human decency.

£8bn a small price to pay? Reality says not.

Xenophobic country? 17m xenophobes is it?

I wouldn't guarantee anything before negotiations take place, good on them for not pandering to the liberal left hysterical virtue signalling!

17m people want to go round kicking EU nationals to death? What about letting Latvian murderers kill little girls? Why don't you get all hysterical about that?

Change the record, you're boring, everyone knows this is hysterical virtue signalling crap.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

Fixed that for you

I'm not sure you have cross-party support for an imminent referendum.

The SNP + Scottish Greens is all that's required.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

The refusal will be open ended.


It's hardly news anyway, thanks to your good self we've known for ages.

But it is still the one-track SNP giving itself airs; the political equivalent of laghing at one's own jokes


Robertson was on Politics today; he couldn't answer the simple question.

What is the economic case for Independence?

Nor could he even say what would trigger a referendum (we are honoured here because you have told us many times it is when Article 50 is triggered, although lately you've been more coy).

Robertson was pretty good on Daily Politics I thought. Just goes to show what different perspectives get you.

As for May refusing one, that's possibly the point. There is now immediate pressure on her to either come right out and say she'll block one, or else admit she can't. Both/either would make for very interesting reactions in Scotland and rUK.

No one's going to tell you the date of any proposed referendum. It's called 'keeping options open and as wide as possible'.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP + Scottish Greens is all that's required.

speaking for all the people of scotland

Shakethedisease

Rinoa wrote: »

Nicola Sturgeon has the same problem as David Cameron had.

She needs the referendum to fix her party, not fix the country.

No coincidence she chose her party conference (Not Hollyrood) to announce it.

Haha no. She needs one or even the prospect of one hanging over Theresa's May's head to ensure Scotland stays in the EU one way or another. It was always going to be announced at their conference.

Motion tomorrow link Article 50 directly with another referendum.