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

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

A big majority in this GE helps May block something like this.

It's ironic that the SNP has helped weaken Labour and in so doing strengthen the hand of the Tories.

A big majority in England will help May block a second Scottish referendum ?

She's either 100% got the constitutional/legal power to do so or she doesn't. Whatever May ends up with in terms of majority in Westminster won't help her block anything from Holyrood. Why would it ? Could you explain ?

May can validly claim that dealing with Brexit and the aftermath takes priority. All the media attention is now firmly on the EU down here. Nobody really notices Nicola now.

It's already taken as read that the GE in England/Wales is all about Brexit. Even the council elections up here are about about indy refs.

Shakethedisease

antrobus wrote: »

Any size majority would do. Either Parliament approves a Section 30 order or it doesn't.

Not seeing your point. May already has a majority, a bigger one isn't going to make any difference.

May can come up with whatever explanation she likes. The answer (I predict) will still be no.

I agree.

As far as I can make out, this will make some people very cross and unhappy. Perhaps they will organise a protest march. Perhaps they will go to court, so that the Supreme Court can explain to them what the Scotland Act 1998 actually says. Perhaps they'll occupy the post office in Edinburgh. I don't know. This sort of thing happens from time to time.

Perhaps they'll go higher up the courts than the UK ones. Perhaps supported fully by the EU which will make some people very cross and unhappy and perhaps they will organise a protest march.

In any case, Brent Crude has fallen below $50 a barrel. Only a crazy mad person would want independence with Brent Crude at that price. It needs to be a $100 a barrel to make up that fiscal deficit. Hopes that there is a magic money tree in the Trossachs have been dashed, I understand.:)

Back to 2014 again. *bored*

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

North Sea is in decline. Tide is going out. Only a matter of time anyway.

North Sea Oil is the least of Scotland's worries if May leaves the EU without a deal and Scotland is still part of the UK.

Leaving after two years with no deal would mean regulatory chaos for Britain. We wouldn't know which authorities were in charge of regulating medicines, or agriculture, or air traffic, or any other area. Where we did know, we would not necessarily have the staff or the systems in place for them to function. We would have lines at the border where suddenly-installed customs checks were detaining lorries.

We would see a hard border in Ireland. We would at this stage probably not even have any tourist visa arrangements with Europe. Britain would try to trade on WTO rules, but would be forced to draw up hastily written assessments of tariff rate quotas in its schedules, opening the door to countless rounds of litigation from countries exporting to us. It would be utter chaos...

..But one thing we do know. Britain would be setting out in the world alone, cut off from its largest market and the free trade deals it enjoyed with third parties like South Korea and Canada through that market. It would be looking desperately for new trading partners, in countries which seem only passingly interested, like the US or India. And just as it was doing so, it would be getting embroiled in a vicious legal battle with the trading body it was until yesterday a member of, while fighting off countless trade disputes at the WTO. That's not a good look.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/05/03/brexit-this-is-what-having-no-leverage-looks-like

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

A big majority in England will help May block a second Scottish referendum ?

She's either 100% got the constitutional/legal power to do so or she doesn't. Whatever May ends up with in terms of majority in Westminster won't help her block anything from Holyrood. Why would it ? Could you explain ?

It's already taken as read that the GE in England/Wales is all about Brexit. Even the council elections up here are about about indy refs.

Probably one of the easier things to explain, I'll let parliament.scot do it for me.

http://www.parliament.scot/visitandlearn/Education/18642.aspx

In particular:



Where reserved matters include constitutional issues of which an independence referendum request by Holyrood is. Ergo - what Westminster says - goes.

If in the GE the vote is split as we've seen in the local council elections you can forget it in the time frame you and the SNP want to see. If it happens at all it will be at a time of Westminster's choosing and that yes/no from Westminster may come after a 2021 defeat for the SNP whereby a coalition could reverse the section 30 request anyway.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

North Sea Oil is the least of Scotland's worries if May leaves the EU without a deal and Scotland is still part of the UK.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/05/03/brexit-this-is-what-having-no-leverage-looks-like

Sorry but that is a load of sh*t. Even a cursory check by someone of below average intelligence can work that out.

It's totally defeatist nonsense that we hear from the remain camp continuously, absolutely continuously, to try to justify their apoplectic rage at being in the minority and not getting their own way.

I like my stats. I've looked into the stats before casting my vote in the EU ref and I've shared many of my findings since on the Brexit thread. The trading economics website will show you all you need to see regarding the UK's position in negotiations with the EU member states, not the EU - that's different, that's a bureaucratic mess, the member states with skin in the game will strike a different tone to that of the Junker's and Barnier's because it's in their interest to do so. The EU bureaucrats know this too.

No money into the EU budget from the UK.
More money required from the existing net contributors (France, Germany, Italy, etc...).
Less money for the net beneficiaries from the EU budget.

Bad Deal = Less trade from the UK during a fragile EU recovery will if it comes to pass push some of these net contributors into recession, i.e. lower GDP, i.e. less EU budget contributions, i.e. even less money in the pot to go around. It may also push the UK into recession, except the UK will have the ability to control every aspect of its existence and strike deals it needs to in order to weather the storm. The EU 27 will not be able to move as quickly and will suffer a longer and deeper cut across all 27 EU member states, either directly with those we trade with the most or indirectly via the EU budget.

Trading Economics - http://www.tradingeconomics.com/

And lets not forget, I've outlined it for you many times. Nicola is lying to you that a "car crash Brexit" as she puts it, known to the rational as WTO terms, means independence is the answer, ìt is the worst possible case scenario for independence. Nicola will effectively be asking for 500,000 people to vote to risk their jobs for the sake of 120,000 people's jobs and your dreams of "Alba".

It ain't gonna happen.

.string.

In that post of Shakey (the one about a no-deal result etc) you can see the sort of tactics the SNP hope to employ. Sturgeon has asked for a referendum at a time when (supposedly) a "deal" is presented to Parliament and a few weeks before Brexit itself. That's the nominal Brexit plan and one which might happen were there to be a successful and complete Brexit deal negotiated super-quickly and just needing rubber stamping.

Sturgeon claims that the time she wants was agreed with May, but it was not, as May has said. It's just the usual SNP porky spin. It's obvious really: In the most optimistic scenario Brexit is likely to go to the wire with last minute negotiations up to March 2019. But the EU has already said that the trade negotiations may go on for 3 years afterwards, so even March 2019 could be too early for the Scots to compare the two options and make an informed judgement.

But you can bet your bottom dollar that Sturgeon would call a Referendum as soon as possible at the beginning of her stated time slot. The case for Independence, and glorious accession to the EU paradise, would be made by a diet of doom- laden Brexit predictions, like the one in her post above, starting way before October 2018 and every real or rumoured set-back in the negotiations would be trumpeted to the exclusion of anything positive. All that would be done at a time when any positive Brexit outcomes would be obscured by the fog surrounding confidential talks and while the UK Government would be completely restrained from disclosing the positive results they would be working towards. Not a level playing field at all.

As a backdrop to that would be the disruptive effect having a separatist referendum at the same time as delicate negotiations. Unhelpful to say the least.

No wonder that May has stated that it is not the time to hold a referendum.

Not that the SNP care about any of this in their nationalistic tunnel of hate. Theirs is a hostile act and not in the UK's National Interest. It has to be nullified, for the sake of all Brits including, of course, the Scots. The SNP are not nice people.

Naturally May is not going to agree to Sturgeon's demand with its self-seeking timescale.

As has been stated the SNP know that full well and in fact are banking on a referendum being denied "against the will of the" SNP Government.

A good Tory majority will help on that with no cliff-hanger Parliament voting to worry about and as has been noted several times the popular vote will be important in indicating Scottish sentiment (assuming a good turnout). The SNP will keep on blathering about numbers of MPs. We can all see through that one.

What the SNP seem intent on doing is to take the UK Government to court on the basis of some fabricated charge, incrementally through the UK Court system and ultimately to the European Court if Justice; Shakey has said as much. Not a happy ending for them on that methinks as I've explained before.

Fortunately I do believe there are ways in which this SNP disrution can be thwarted, but I'll keep my powder dry on that.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

North Sea Oil is the least of Scotland's worries if May leaves the EU without a deal and Scotland is still part of the UK.

I'm citing it as a concern for the SNP leadership. As the longer the next referendum is deferred. The more apparent it will become to the electorate that the emperor has no clothes. Leaving without a deal may be better than being coerced into something bad.

Shaka_Zulu

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Holyrood however, won't accept that under any circumstances. Not when this GE is an election on the make up of the UK Govt and nothing to do with independence nor the wishes of the Scottish Parliament.

You know fine well this GE has everything to do with independence and virtually nothing else.

It has to be because that is all the SNP talk about. Remind me how many hours were spent on independence versus Education in Holyrood?

The SNP live and breath independence nothing else matters.

I will tell you once again that you plus charitably the greens need to get close to 50% of the popular vote in the general election to keep the dream alive.

For you Shakey to argue otherwise confirms that you guys are running scared. You know the game is over.

Shaka_Zulu

Shaka_Zulu

Or in special circumstances in places like East Dunbartonshire