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

Shakethedisease

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I personally think we're heading for EEA/EFTA with another ref or election on EU membership should Scotland vote for independence once the dust settles.

Maybe I spoke too soon. The Herald and the Daily Record have have pieces reporting this today.

SCOTLAND and Northern Ireland could both remain in the EU pending an independence referendum, according to papers published by a European Parliament committee..

..The Scottish Parliament is also expected to vote for a second independence referendum on Tuesday, despite the Prime Minister ruling out such a vote before Brexit. However, the European Parliament’s constitutional affairs committee published research saying there was enough "constitutional flexibility" for Scotland and Northern Ireland to remain in the EU ahead of independence referendums being held.
The European Parliament committee-commissioned report pointed out that Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man had separate arrangements with the EU. The territories, which are British dependencies, are not in the EU, but have access to the Customs Union.

However, the research commissioned by the committee suggested this meant there was scope for Scotland and Northern Ireland to remain in the EU ahead of an independence referendum in the two countries.

In his report, 'Detoxifying the UK's Exit from the EU', political scientist Brendan O'Leary said there was "merit" in such an approach, but that it would be resisted by Westminster.
It said: "An exponent of constitutional flexibility argues that given the status of these dependencies, separate arrangements can also be made for other parts of the UK when England and Wales leave the EU.
"Northern Ireland and Scotland could remain within the EU, at least pending the resolution of their UK status via a border poll (Northern Ireland) or an independence referendum (Scotland).

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15182289.Scotland_could_remain_in_EU_after_Brexit_says_report__as_May_prepares_to_trigger_Article_50/

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/scotland-could-remain-europe-until-10099754

elantan

beecher2 wrote: »

That's a very simplistic interpretation, if you don't mind me saying so. You are not taking into consideration so many other factors, including the fact that people are more likely to vote when they feel their vote will make a difference. In Scotland, people took it for granted that Remain would win.

Have a look here

http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2017/03/4648/6

We were also only 6/ 7 weeks after our own general election ... Cameron was asked to put the date back
But he refused

LHW99

high ranking Tories 400 miles away deem acceptable.

Apart from anything else, the distance from Edinburgh to Brussels is 470 miles, and from Inverness to Brussels around 570 miles.

Why would that make the EU mandarins more relevant to / appreciative of Scotland than UK politicians?

elantan

How much control over Scotland does WM have ? Is it still roughly 85% ? Or maybe a bit less now ?

The EU would have what 10% max say over Scotland if we went indy ? 75% of a difference ... that's no bad

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

LHW99 wrote: »

Why would that make the EU mandarins more relevant to / appreciative of Scotland than UK politicians?

As a region of the UK the Scots have zero control over their immigration policy, zero control over their border policy, zero control over their trade policy, zero control over their VAT and Corporate tax policy, and next to zero control over National Insurance and the vast majority of income taxation.

Even as a fully signed up member of the EU they'd have infinitely more control and sovereignty over their own affairs than they do today as a region of the UK.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

In every single way that Scots are democratically represented within the UK. Their wishes are being dismissed as of no consequence. This is not sustainable within a union setting and cannot continue. It's easy for you throw your hands up and blame Sturgeon, or put everything down the the SNP I can see that.

Dismiss Sturgeon and the SNP if you wish. But what you don't get to do is just dismiss or delegitimise ordinary average Scots and 10's of thousands like me in the process. We made our wishes clear in 2015, May 2016 and June 2016. It'll be time soon to reconcile them all with Sept 2014 through the ballot box.

Only the PM is a bit afraid to do that for some reason.

So you want it spelt out.
In every single way that Scots are democratically represented within the UK. Their wishes are being dismissed as of no consequence.
Taking the Scottish MPs as an example; their vote is heard and included with the rest of the votes on the basis of 1 vote per MP. That is the way democracy works. Not being on the winning side is not the same as being ignored.
The SNP clearly claim that SNP votes should overrule every other vote which is just ridiculous and your remark is drivel.
This is not sustainable within a union setting and cannot continue.
Were that the case no Union, including parish councils of any type which relied on democratic voting would be sustainable. Yours is a rather silly comment and is drivel.
It's easy for you throw your hands up and blame Sturgeon, or put everything down the the SNP I can see that.
As I’ve explained before I try to use the SNP rather than making it always personal, a difficult thing to remember sometimes. This is especially relevant in exchange with SNP Party Members having a mind-set of see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil. Sturgeon being a mouthpiece of the SNP gets the flack but yes it is easy to criticise her.

Dismiss Sturgeon and the SNP if you wish. But what you don't get to do is just dismiss or delegitimise ordinary average Scots and 10's of thousands like me in the process.
“Dismiss ordinary Sots” – there it is again, equating criticism with dismissiveness and further equating criticism of the SNP with dismissiveness towards the Scottish people. Another example of drivel.

We made our wishes clear in 2015, May 2016 and June 2016. It'll be time soon to reconcile them all with Sept 2014 through the ballot box.
No it is not clear, if it was there would be no reason to have another referendum, and neither did the SNP make their intentions clear, the SNP Manifesto was a con in the fine-print done to attract No voters. The SNP can wait for a referendum, now is not the time.

.string.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

As a region of the UK the Scots have zero control over their immigration policy, zero control over their border policy, zero control over their trade policy, zero control over their VAT and Corporate tax policy, and next to zero control over National Insurance and the vast majority of income taxation.

Even as a fully signed up member of the EU they'd have infinitely more control and sovereignty over their own affairs than they do today as a region of the UK.

In the EU one has zero control over immigration policy within the EU, No control over trade deals, especially those arranged by the UK external to the EU, and the signs are there that tax policy is becoming usurped by the EU, possibly even direct EU taxation. As for National Insurance - yes at least at the start they would have the ability to increase spending to unaffordable European levels, especially after the word "Harmonisation" starts to be applied to European Health Care.

Scotland would be truly subsumed and you know it Hamish.

Incidentally when are you going to reply to the queries about your claim that £1 to the EU brings in £10?

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Maybe I spoke too soon. The Herald and the Daily Record have have pieces reporting this today.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15182289.Scotland_could_remain_in_EU_after_Brexit_says_report__as_May_prepares_to_trigger_Article_50/

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/scotland-could-remain-europe-until-10099754

Nice story.
Do you honestly think through all the ramifications of the more sensationalist links you give us?
I didn't bother reading it, but are you and your link suggesting that the UK Govt. would contemplate two of its constituent nations being allowed to remain in the EU while TM negotiates Brexit or indeed leaves the EU?
I know your grasping at straws but what parallel universe do you inhabit Shakey?

elantan

The rumour mill has it May is popping up tomorow to give us a new wee vow ... exciting stuff

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Maybe I spoke too soon. The Herald and the Daily Record have have pieces reporting this today.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15182289.Scotland_could_remain_in_EU_after_Brexit_says_report__as_May_prepares_to_trigger_Article_50/

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/scotland-could-remain-europe-until-10099754

A little bit of Fake News there Shakey? Please give a link to the origin of it (not the newspaper). I did find this Blog , by Brendan O'Leary, an Irish American living in America (he has the two passports).

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2016/06/27/de-toxifying-the-uks-eu-exit-process-a-multi-national-compromise-is-possible/

What is the original report he refers to --- is it this one?

Brexit and the European Union: General Institutional and Legal Considerations
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL_STU(2017)571404

The latter is an interesting report but I didn't find anything there to confirm O'Leary's speculations. Maybe I missed it. No doubt you can enlighten me with another link.