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

Enterprise_1701C

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

What mandate does it give TM?
The Conservative already hold a majority government.

She kicked the can down the road 9 months waiting to trigger article 50 and effectively has kicked the can further down the road by another 14 months with the GE.

How can she have meaningful discussions on Brexit when there is a risk that the shape of the government could be different from where it currently is.

Yes Labour is in turmoil, but there is an assumption that they'll get a greater return than they currently have.

Giving Scotland their Indy Ref 2 should also in your thought process clarify the situation as oppose to leave it as an uncertainty.
It would not have impacted the negotiations on Brexit as the UK continue to negotiate in alignment with the Conservative wishes and bears no consideration on the devolved parliaments anyway.

I would love to know where you come up with the 14 months.

There would be no meaningful Brexit talks before the GE anyway, too much going on elsewhere, it basically is in the gap where there is French and German elections, the Easter recess etc etc.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Before moving on to your questions on what I think is a good deal and whether I'm confident it will happen or not, I feel given you're still asking "What if it's a bad or terrible deal?" indicates to me you've not fully understood what I wrote.

If it's a bad deal the UK will need to deal with it as best we can. That doesn't mean it's suddenly OK to put 500,000 Scottish jobs on the line when only 120,000 Scottish jobs are on the line with a bad deal.

Please tell me you follow this? Perhaps someone else will be better at explaining this.

Because if the UK get a very bad deal, then the UK economy is going to tank badly anyway. Apart from London/SE ( skewing the 'average' figures for England as a whole ) everywhere else is going to be hit hard. Scotland might not want to be handcuffed to a sinking UK economy AND isolated from the rest of the EU AND with the Tories in charge of it all. Holyrood would likely end up a shell of a place with little say or powers in it's own nations future. Barnett ( cut substantially ) and EU funding ( gone, and not replaced ). Trade and jobs, gone.

Should all off the above come to pass it's important that the options of leaving a sinking UK economy, rejoining the EU/Single Market and having a party or parties who's sole job is to concentrate on Scotland's best interests be there to take over the reigns. Scottish voters didn't vote for any of the above.

You're being too simplistic. I do know what you're getting at but there's a mix of both economic factors and political factors in play. Brexit and independence are both going to be shocks to the system. For some people it will come down to what they feel will give them the best long term future once the dust settles. Lesser of two evils etc.

But the options have to be there. May imo foolishly over the last 9 months has shut most of them down on her own without even the courtesy of consideration. Sturgeon very carefully offered up alternatives to independence one by one. But the SNP's proposals and all the other devolved parliaments concerns were ignored. This cannot continue and May will reap the rewards from that.

The last option for Scotland is to get out of the UK altogether if it all goes pear shaped. Take the hit rather than stay in a Union which apparently doesn't give two hoots about it, and even less about NI.

Do you really think you'll get a good deal ? What are you hoping for ?

Rinoa

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

What mandate does it give TM?
The Conservative already hold a majority government.

She kicked the can down the road 9 months waiting to trigger article 50 and effectively has kicked the can further down the road by another 14 months with the GE.

Among others, your beloved Nicola has stated that, because TM isn't 'elected', she has no mandate. A GE will rectify that. By the time the interesting part of the Brexit negotiations are happening we'll be 18 months from the planned 2020 GE. There would be a temptation for the EU to prevaricate hoping for a different UK govt. - they can't do that now.

Although the conservatives have a majority it is somewhat slender. A more substantial majority will prevent conservative factions making mischief.

IveSeenTheLight

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

I would love to know where you come up with the 14 months.

Where did I come up with 14 months?

now (April 2017) to General Election (June 2018)

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

There would be no meaningful Brexit talks before the GE anyway, too much going on elsewhere, it basically is in the gap where there is French and German elections, the Easter recess etc etc.

Why then did TM procrastinate and not trigger article 50 9 months ago?

IveSeenTheLight

Rinoa wrote: »

Among others, your beloved Nicola has stated that, because TM isn't 'elected', she has no mandate. A GE will rectify that.

Yes I agree, but (in my opinion) it should have been triggered as a snap GE as soon as Cameron stepped down.

Cameron stood down 1 year after the General election as he did not want to see through the mandate he put forward and with will of the electorate.

Again in my opinion, it was actually a cowardly thing to do.

He should have manned up and represented our country as the electorate voted for.

Too many politicians seem to do walking away instead of representing the electorates clear voice.

Rinoa wrote: »

By the time the interesting part of the Brexit negotiations are happening we'll be 18 months from the planned 2020 GE. There would be a temptation for the EU to prevaricate hoping for a different UK govt. - they can't do that now.

Again questions, why wasn't article 50 triggered 9 months ago or indeed another GE to seek approval from the electorate as to who leads our country.

Rinoa wrote: »

Although the conservatives have a majority it is somewhat slender. A more substantial majority will prevent conservative factions making mischief.

True, if it turns out.
What if circumstances do not turn out as most expect and TM is in a weaker position?
She'll resign and walk away saying the electorate did not provide the mandate she needed to fulfill successful negotiations.

this is a cleverly constructed ploy to maximise the Conservative strength, else give an easy out option for TM

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

She kicked the can down the road 9 months waiting to trigger article 50 and effectively has kicked the can further down the road by another 14 months with the GE.

Perhaps take the time to understand the workings behind the bigger picture. The reasons behind the timing are well documented. The GE likewise is in response to the situation as it currently stands. Rather than simply make the facts fit your agenda. Seek some enlightenment. You may actually learn something in the process.

IveSeenTheLight

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Perhaps take the time to understand the workings behind the bigger picture. The reasons behind the timing are well documented. The GE likewise is in response to the situation as it currently stands. Rather than simply make the facts fit your agenda. Seek some enlightenment. You may actually learn something in the process.

Now now Thrugs, lets not start down that route.

I understand whats been communicated, I just think there is a (not so) hidden agenda to suit the Conservative position

Shaka_Zulu

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

As for the MSP's at Westminster, from what limited time I have seen PMQ, they hold the government to account far more than the traditional opposition parties do

I don't think you will find many MSPs at Westminster!

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Where did I come up with 14 months?

now (April 2017) to General Election (June 2018)

As far as I am aware the GE is June 2017!

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

We know what the reasons are for saying No to a referendum. However, and Tricky and I have been over this many times already, is that there may be other routes for a legal referendum to happen without a Section 30. ..

No there isn't. The Scotland Act 1998 is quite clear.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

..It's completely untested legal ground... so far.

As I have said before, you can always ask the Supreme Court.:)

Enterprise_1701C

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Where did I come up with 14 months?

now (April 2017) to General Election (June 2018)

That would hardly be a snap general election would it? It is just over 6 weeks from now. June 2017.