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

Hintza

Well Nicola's "I'm with her" line makes her look an even bigger fanny than before!

.string.

Is there any truth in the rumour that Nigel Farage will be appointed Trump's Ambassador to the European Union?

kabayiri

.string. wrote: »

Is there any truth in the rumour that Nigel Farage will be appointed Trump's Ambassador to the European Union?

I was going to say Farage doesn't really have that much baggage in the USA...

...and then, I remembered his coverage on programs like The Daily Show. Hmm, perhaps not!

.string.

Well at least

BRITAIN will secure a free trade deal with the United States when it leaves the European Union after Donald Trump was elected as the American president today.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/730328/donald-trump-usa-president-brexit-trade-deal-britain

Hintza

Great comment nicked from BBC comments:-

The SNP must be bricking it! Idiot Sturgeon's big mouth has her in hot water again!! What was it she wanted again, oh yes, Trump banned from entering the UK. Oh and she stripped him of his role as special business advisor to the Scottish government. And now he's the president of the USA. Hopefully Sturgeon will now resign in the "best interests of Scotland". Good riddance.

wotsthat

Didn't Sturgeon write she 'fervently hoped' Trump would lose?

Politically naive thing to say for someone who is trying to be seen as a player on a world stage.

mrginge

Hintza wrote: »

Great comment nicked from BBC comments:-

The SNP must be bricking it! Idiot Sturgeon's big mouth has her in hot water again!! What was it she wanted again, oh yes, Trump banned from entering the UK. Oh and she stripped him of his role as special business advisor to the Scottish government. And now he's the president of the USA. Hopefully Sturgeon will now resign in the "best interests of Scotland". Good riddance.

You've forgotten that on the international stage, Nicola sturgeon has more political influence than the president of the USA.

:rotfl:

.string.

wotsthat wrote: »

Didn't Sturgeon write she 'fervently hoped' Trump would lose?

Politically naive thing to say for someone who is trying to be seen as a player on a world stage.

This may be what you are referring to:
https://en-gb.facebook.com/NicolaSturgeonSNP/posts/1242259985815915

wotsthat

Sturgeon..

While this is not the outcome I hoped for, it is the verdict of the American people and we must respect it. I congratulate president-elect Trump on winning the election.

Just who is advising her?!

.string.

Seems serious remarks are called for - I wish.

Re the business about "everyone"; this was sparked by the use of the word in:

Shakey wrote:

Jim Murphy went and stood in crowded shopping centers on a crate with a PA system then shouted at passers by whether they wanted to hear him or not.

We can see from the results of the GE 2015 what everyone thought about him.

Well no - everyone could possibly be stretched to mean a very large proportion although it really means what it says which is without exception. But not if it is used to indicate the result of a marginal preference and certainly not included in a spun comment that has nothing to do with the discussion in hand.


So serious? No I can't, I'm afraid, take comments like the quote posted above seriously.


However to get serious, and returning to the matter of A50 "authorisation" from Parliament. I don't myself have a problem with that as a principle although I do think that Parliament should obey the wishes expressed by the EU Referendum. The issue/problem is more about the event being used to insert conditions on Brexit. By long standing convention, Treaties are historically negotiated by the Government of the day and not by Parliament. To do otherwise is to make a mess of the whole process. At the moment I don't see the High Court ruling changing that.


We will see if the Supreme Court changes anything but in any event the process adopted must be lawful.


I think I mentioned before that I would expect a simple formulation by the Government, paraphrased as "The results of the xxxx Referendum are accepted and the Government is authorised to proceed on that basis without delay and with the purpose of obtaining the best outcome for the United Kingdom".

As the saying goes; no IFS, no BUTS.

I see the matter of loss of "Rights" as being a side matter, a consequence of the votes rather than an open matter as far as the EU is concerned.

It was, I'm sure, appreciated by those that voted that any rights which are there purely as a result of the UK being a member of the EU would be lost. The population voted for Brexit well aware of that and have agreed it. The Bill which is starting regarding transfer of EU Laws into UK Laws ensures the continuation of Rights over which we can retain control (eg so-called Worker's rights) and which Parliament can improve or modify as it sees fit.

It is a Side show, important, but not relevant to the essential nature of Brexit now the decision has been made.