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

Shaka_Zulu

The Greens really are not the brightest are they?

Patrick Harvey's latest wheeze is to stand in the GE against the incumbent SNP MP Patrick Grady for the Glasgow North seat.

Go Patrick you split the indy vote..........what a fanny!!

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39828824

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

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

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.

Oh don't talk crap Tricky. If we went by what ever Westminster says goes, India and a host of other countries would still be under British constitutional control. You only get to keep the countries that still want to be there, not the ones that don't.

Scottish Tories, though, are fighting this election on an anti-politics ticket. Merely trying to convince the Scottish public once and for all that the Union offers the best future is considered insufficient; they don’t want anyone to have the choice at all. It’s the first time in the history of UK democratic politics that a party has fought an election solely on a desire to stop political engagement.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15269491.Kevin_McKenna__Independence_question_will_be_settled_within_four_years/

If Sturgeon has to go beyond UK courts to make sure she gets the question asked and Scottish based democracy served then she will.

When I say the GE vote will be split I mean in places like East Renfrewshire. Jim Murphy's old seat with a strong Tory lean but now SNP and and Labour in real contention as the previous MP before. The Tories there are quite angry that Blair McDougall has thrown his hat into the ring for obvious reasons. He was the BetterTogether chief. So you've got an SNP incumbent, a previous Blairite Labour MP.. and a strong Tory leaning vote at the same time. There is going to be a unionist vote split there ( McDougall is going all out on a no indy ref ticket like the Tories ) which could benefit the SNP again like it did in 2015.

The timing of any second vote will be after the Brexit negotiations are concluded. Sturgeon has lots of time to make it happen legally.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

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.

I read your posts immediately after the Brexit vote and I have a very good memory. You were adamant that Single Market membership/a Norway type arrangement would be the best route ahead for the UK. So was string.

You both seem to have had to keep revising your expectations down and down to the point where you're thinking that perhaps a no deal scenario would be just fabulous for the UK economy. And you still don't have the foggiest or vaguest idea of what you're going to end up with either.

You can't have looked into stats, because you have no stats for what happens if the UK ends up out of the EU and on WTO terms. And are now talking about a possible recession as if it's a positive thing for the UK to 'weather'. As well as the fantastical notion that the UK leaving the EU will affect the EU far more than it will the EU and the 27 other countries in it. Why ?

May is going to walk out. There's no way the English/Welsh electorate/media will tolerate any sort of EU exit bill no matter what it is. Nor what Barnier is putting forward in terms of a deal on EU citizens. You're going to fall at the first hurdle, and with a massive Tory majority in England/Wales you'll have all voted for it to happen this way too. Good luck weathering your recession with no trade deals with anyone.

Shakethedisease

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

The Greens really are not the brightest are they?

Patrick Harvey's latest wheeze is to stand in the GE against the incumbent SNP MP Patrick Grady for the Glasgow North seat.

Go Patrick you split the indy vote..........what a fanny!!

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39828824

You made me lol ! :rotfl: But this way Patrick makes it onto the TV debates. Rather than the usual Sturgeon ambush sessions we see with 3 other leaders going all out at her until it becomes unwatchable. And he gets pro indy attention and coverage for the Greens for the next 6 weeks. He'll likely come second in the seat behind the SNP like he did last year in the Scottish elections.

The SNP MP Partick Grady and Patrick Harvie both seem pretty relaxed about the whole thing today it has to be said.

Patrick Grady‏Verified account @GradySNP
The challenge is now on to remaining parties to find wee men with shaved heads and glasses called Patrick to stand in Glasgow North #ge17

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I read your posts immediately after the Brexit vote and I have a very good memory. You were adamant that Single Market membership/a Norway type arrangement would be the best route ahead for the UK. So was string.

You both seem to have had to keep revising your expectations down and down to the point where you're thinking that perhaps a no deal scenario would be just fabulous for the UK economy. And you still don't have the foggiest or vaguest idea of what you're going to end up with either.

You can't have looked into stats, because you have no stats for what happens if the UK ends up out of the EU and on WTO terms. And are now talking about a possible recession as if it's a positive thing for the UK to 'weather'. As well as the fantastical notion that the UK leaving the EU will affect the EU far more than it will the EU and the 27 other countries in it. Why ?

May is going to walk out. There's no way the English/Welsh electorate/media will tolerate any sort of EU exit bill no matter what it is. Nor what Barnier is putting forward in terms of a deal on EU citizens. You're going to fall at the first hurdle, and with a massive Tory majority in England/Wales you'll have all voted for it to happen this way too. Good luck weathering your recession with no trade deals with anyone.

I would have been happy with full single market access as well as our own trade deals. That would have been in my opinion the most advantageous position for the UK to be in. If that is not available because of the EU then looking at the statistics to which I've given you the source indicates how negotiations will eventually pan out. The EU top brass will want to pull the member states in a particular direction (talk of unity) but in the end individual interests will win out particularly across the major contributory nations in the EU. It's not so much as what is positive and what is not. We've clearly stated we want the best possible reciprocal access in terms if trade with the EU once we leave. If that does not happen then that is down to the EU.

They're going to continue to play hard ball, just like Wallonia and TTIP until someone tells them how it's going to be and why. The situation is not a good one for the EU despite their protestations to the contrary, look at who the net contributors are, look at the trading economics data and see where the UK ranks in terms of imports from those countries and it'll become clear very quickly just what is at stake for the EU. All 27 stand to lose s he'll of a lot, directly or by proxy.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I would have been happy with full single market access as well as our own trade deals. That would have been in my opinion the most advantageous position for the UK to be in. If that is not available because of the EU then looking at the statistics to which I've given you the source indicates how negotiations will eventually pan out. The EU top brass will want to pull the member states in a particular direction (talk of unity) but in the end individual interests will win out particularly across the major contributory nations in the EU.

There are no individual interests. Just the EU.

It's not so much as what is positive and what is not. We've clearly stated we want the best possible reciprocal access in terms if trade with the EU once we leave. If that does not happen then that is down to the EU.

They made it crystal clear from the start that no FOM means no Single Market. End of. The best possible reciprocal access now means you take what they give you as a third country.

They're going to continue to play hard ball, just like Wallonia and TTIP until someone tells them how it's going to be and why. The situation is not a good one for the EU despite their protestations to the contrary, look at who the net contributors are, look at the trading economics data and see where the UK ranks in terms of imports from those countries and it'll become clear very quickly just what is at stake for the EU. All 27 stand to lose s he'll of a lot, directly or by proxy.

They stand to lose the EU altogether if they give the UK an advantageous deal,or anything that even looks vaguely like one after the UK leaves. Again, this was known from the start and isn't hardball. It's survival. They'll take whatever hit necessary to ensure the EU remains intact. Why wouldn't they.

I know you're still hoping that this Brexit thing will work out and have gone all the way through from a really soft Brexit to now considering the hardest of Brexits and even no deal at all. But this GE IS going to vote into existence the real possibility of no deal at all backed with a huge Tory majority and a hysterical media whipping things up over exit bills, Gibraltar and EU citizens. And still no one really is quite sure why and for what purpose yet ?

.string.

A question to, or for, Scots; what role do local councils have in a referendum, would they be able to frustrate or even block an illegal referendum?

This possibility has been mentioned before and I wonder if it is a real possibility.

I know that the largest party in most councils is the SNP but there is this little problem they have of not having overall majorities.

In this one would take a leaf from the SNP handbook on "How to behave in Parliament".

No doubt the LibDems, Labour and the Tories would work together in that common cause.

Shaka_Zulu

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You made me lol ! :rotfl: But this way Patrick makes it onto the TV debates.

Shakey even you must think it's madness I really don't understand what he will achieve except possibly a bit of fame in his own lunchtime. Perhaps with Andrew Neil who will eviscerate him.

Your guy has to smile otherwise he looks churlish.

.string.

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I would have been happy with full single market access as well as our own trade deals. That would have been in my opinion the most advantageous position for the UK to be in. If that is not available because of the EU then looking at the statistics to which I've given you the source indicates how negotiations will eventually pan out. The EU top brass will want to pull the member states in a particular direction (talk of unity) but in the end individual interests will win out particularly across the major contributory nations in the EU. It's not so much as what is positive and what is not. We've clearly stated we want the best possible reciprocal access in terms if trade with the EU once we leave. If that does not happen then that is down to the EU.

They're going to continue to play hard ball, just like Wallonia and TTIP until someone tells them how it's going to be and why. The situation is not a good one for the EU despite their protestations to the contrary, look at who the net contributors are, look at the trading economics data and see where the UK ranks in terms of imports from those countries and it'll become clear very quickly just what is at stake for the EU. All 27 stand to lose s he'll of a lot, directly or by proxy.

Yes the single market plus free trade deals would be fine! Whatever deal we do get with access to that market is bound to contain some differences to give one or both sides a claim that it was in their interest.

There is, as Shakey gleefully writes, some possibility of an early breakdown, but I doubt if. A lot will depend on the exit payments and what they are for but also whether there is to be a transitional period but more than that, the little matter of being able to agree exit conditions in the light of the expected trade deal.

As you have mentioned, the cliff-edge on budgets will make them keen to reach an agreement. Their planning for expenditure over the next few years starting spring 2019 will be giving them headaches!

But I don't think a breakdown of the tasks is in the interests of either side. At the moment the UK has a national interest in the EU doing well but if trade with it is to be be reduced, so will the position of the UK as a competitor to the EU increase. Bring on the Bargain Basement!

I also agree that the wishes of individual countries will surface soon enough; it's the way of things. I noted that the "Guidelines" for the EU negotiation don't contain a single "shall", it's all "should".

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

There are no individual interests. Just the EU.

They made it crystal clear from the start that no FOM means no Single Market. End of. The best possible reciprocal access now means you take what they give you as a third country.

They stand to lose the EU altogether if they give the UK an advantageous deal,or anything that even looks vaguely like one after the UK leaves. Again, this was known from the start and isn't hardball. It's survival. They'll take whatever hit necessary to ensure the EU remains intact. Why wouldn't they.

I know you're still hoping that this Brexit thing will work out and have gone all the way through from a really soft Brexit to now considering the hardest of Brexits and even no deal at all. But this GE IS going to vote into existence the real possibility of no deal at all backed with a huge Tory majority and a hysterical media whipping things up over exit bills, Gibraltar and EU citizens. And still no one really is quite sure why and for what purpose yet ?

Well see that's the rub. If you look at the trading economics website as I suggested you will see that the disintegration of the EU is equally as possible if they give us a good or bad deal. The only difference is if the every day person has to suffer along with it because of a bureaucrats ideals. They have massive infighting right now, sanctions on Poland, forced relocation of migrants, threats to kick Hungary out, demands for more financial support in places like Italy and Greece, banks on the edge and terrorism on the rise along with right wing politics, oh and Turkey and Ukraine to deal with.

The EU is in a very precarious position. Talking tough is just that, talk. They will capitulate and come to a middle ground agreement. If only to put out one fire that threatens the entire project that is within their power to do so. Not encouraging other EU members due to the deal they give the UK will slip further and further down the priority list for the EU until it's no longer a consideration, they have bigger issues that require tough solutions.