Sturgeon was told by the Supreme Court that Scotland could not have a veto on leaving the EU.
So she just tries to create her own one anyway. Don't think it's going to work, just makes everything harder for everyone.
Pity she can't focus on Scotland's Health, Education, and Employment. Those are the bits she's supposed to be responsible for.
Which is why any referendum in Scotland will be pushed past the next Scottish Parliament elections. If the SNP want their referendum, they'll need a renewed mandate for it in the context of their work over the last decade at health, education, policing and the rest of what they're supposed to be doing in power.
FFS this is all avoidable if TMay softens her Brexit stance. Go for EEA-type status. Fuck Liam Fox. The UK is saved.
Saved for Farage! Hurrah!
In any case, surely the Government are putting forward a Hard Brexit (and putting it about that we are prepared for "no deal") precisely so that we can get a softer Brexit in negotiations.
Indeed.
Unlike the Poshos, Mrs May actually knows how to:
a) Whip the parly party b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
and looks well on course to
c) Win a proper majority by securing Tory/Lab marginals, none of this knifeedge rubbish achieved by becoming pseudo Lib Dems...
Lots of wishful thinking there. She hasn't even started (b) and (c) is years away.
Meanwhile, she risks (d) breaking up the country by pursuing Hard Brexit. That will be her legacy, if she loses indyref2.
May voted Remain, if the country breaks up it will be Leave voters who provided the SNP with the fuel they needed
more guff
Most Leave voters probably don't care. Don't they identify as English over British?
The Welsh ones probably don't.
I suspect most of them don't care much beyond the rugby.
I'd be very surprised if anyone with authority in Europe negotiated with the SNP without May's explicit approval. It would be rightly deemed a fundamentally hostile act.
We could always reciprocate by offering Catalonia a special deal.
FFS this is all avoidable if TMay softens her Brexit stance. Go for EEA-type status. Fuck Liam Fox. The UK is saved.
Saved for so that we can get a softer Brexit in negotiations.
Indeed. rity by securing Tory/Lab marginals, none of this knifeedge rubbish achieved by becoming pseudo Lib Dems...
Lots of wishful thinking there. She hasn't even started (b) and (c) is years away.
Meanwhile, she risks (d) breaking up the country by pursuing Hard Brexit. That will be her legacy, if she loses indyref2.
May voted Remain, if the country breaks up it will be Leave voters who provided the SNP with the fuel they needed
ecause Dave was scared that UKIP might let Ed Miliband win the 2015 general election.
If the S
The EU is a side issue compared to the continuing existence of the UK. Yep, if Sturgeon loses that is what she will be remembered for.
No it isn't, if anything Brexit would have led to Scexit
I am may find out soon enough.
Why? Scotland has less than a tenth of the population of the UK but the Uk over a tenth of the population of the EU and if England and Wales voted Leave it was in part because they felt they could make their own way in the world without either the EU or Scotland, for good or ill
Some of us quite like being British.
Also, some of us have lots of Scottish relatives in Scotland, and are genuinely concerned that iScotland would be an economic basket-case for a decade. The deficit is just huge. The currency, the bank, the rest of it. Nightmare.
The oil has gone. The economic argument for indy is now much worse than it was in 2014, and it was wobbly enough then. Scots would really suffer. And they are my relatives (and my fellow Brits).
I've no doubt that eventually Scotland would prosper, but they would endure pain, interim, which would make Brexit look like a mild headcold.
I really don't want that for them, and I don't want my country partitioned.
I don't either. But, if the price for maintaining the Union is that England and Wales must always elect centre-left Europhile governments, then I judge that price to be too high.
So Sturgeon REALLY wants the Scottish people to decide whether or not to leave the EU before the Scottish people know the final terms of the UK's departure from the EU? Because if we know anything about the EU, it is the terms to be offered by the EU won't be known until the very last possible moment. It is the way they operate.
What if May plays a blinder and gets a deal that is towards the better end of possible outcomes? The Scots are supposed to bet on their hand before the river card is seen. And before they have any idea what the EU would offer them.
I also think the Scots will peer over the edge - and pull back from independence. Sturgeon's position offers them the worst of all outcomes - an early vote before they know what they might get either way. And if the SNP loses, there won't be an IndyRef3 for decades.
May has no reason to play ball with anything earlier than the date the UK leaves the EU before deciding the timing of IndyRef2. What is Scotland going to do if she says bugger off - vote in a landslide SNP government? Ooooh, scared...
It takes two to tango. Scotland and England are drifting apart. And Scotland has every right to join the EU once it leaves the UK. It would no doubt be fast-tracked to membership and be given special status in advance of that.
No country has a right to join the EU. And iScotland joining the EU with rUK outside it is tantamount to shooting themselves in the head.
That's why 2021 is the likeliest time for a referendum. It suits May because it gives her a clear hand for the Brexit negotiation. It suits Sturgeon because it gives her four more years to build a case. And it suits the EU because it means an independent Scotland can be fast-tracked in as a member, without any worries about breaching protocols or upsetting the Spanish.
Build a case for independence or for Scottish membership of the EU when rUK will be outside both the single market and the currency union?
The SNP play to the juvenile mentality of "Don't you English tell us what to do". Which is such an ignorant attitude, given that Scottish national identity is rammed down people's throats in Scotland far more than English identity is in England. At the moment, most of the SNP's voters probably can't focus on the fact that a state can only belong to the EU if it accepts EU rules. They're so busy trying to break from "parental" England that they don't realise the alternative is going to work for "boss" EU. There isn't going to be a "Nicola's deal" for a tinpot little country like Scotland.
She'd have to accept full freedom of movement. Bulgarians and Romanians who want to get to the bright lights of London or Manchester will therefore flock to Scotland and try to go south. And RUK won't accept them.
She'd also have to accept customs tariffs. RUK would be further away from the EU than say Turkey is at the moment. The border would become a hard external EU border.
This is the worst possible outcome for Scotland. Vote SNP if you want it. The SNP is - inshallah - likely to get slaughtered in indyref2.
There will come a time when people just aren't so stupid, when they realise that if A is in a single market and customs union with B, and C isn't, then A cannot be in that relationship with C.
How about a referendum on whether or not Scotland should apply to join the EU? If it's that important, ask people. Have three options on the ballot:
1) Scotland should stay in Britain 2) Scotland should become an independent country and apply for EU membership 3) Scotland should become an independent country and not apply for EU membership
People should get it through their heads that Scotland may have the right to leave the parental home but it has no automatic right to join the EU.
It takes two to tango. Scotland and England are drifting apart. And Scotland has every right to join the EU once it leaves the UK. It would no doubt be fast-tracked to membership and be given special status in advance of that.
"no doubt" => "I don't have an argument for this but if I say it strongly enough hopefully no one will question it"
FFS this is all avoidable if TMay softens her Brexit stance. Go for EEA-type status. Fuck Liam Fox. The UK is saved.
Saved for so that we can get a softer Brexit in negotiations.
Indeed. rity by securing Tory/Lab marginals, none of this knifeedge rubbish achieved by becoming pseudo Lib Dems...
Lots of wishful thinking there. She hasn't even started (b) and (c) is years away.
Meanwhile, she risks (d) breaking up the country by pursuing Hard Brexit. That will be her legacy, if she loses indyref2.
May voted Remain, if the country breaks up it will be Leave voters who provided the SNP with the fuel they needed
ecause Dave was scared that UKIP might let Ed Miliband win the 2015 general election.
If the S
The EU is a side issue compared to the continuing existence of the UK. Yep, if Sturgeon loses that is what she will be remembered for.
No it isn't, if anything Brexit would have led to Scexit
I am may find out soon enough.
Why? Scotland has less than a tenth of the population of the UK but the Uk over a tenth of the population of the EU and if England and Wales voted Leave it was in part because they felt they could make their own way in the world without either the EU or Scotland, for good or ill
Some of us quite like being British.
Well, it's up to the Scots who quite like being British to put this to bed once and for all.
If that means Tories voting Labour and Labourites voting Tory in the 2020 and 2021 elections than that has to be it for the union.
They have to rid themselves of the SNP.
The SNP are destabilising Scotland and making it uninvestable through their inability to actually accept the outcome of a vote.
I'd be very surprised if anyone with authority in Europe negotiated with the SNP without May's explicit approval. It would be rightly deemed a fundamentally hostile act.
We could always reciprocate by offering Catalonia a special deal.
FFS this is all avoidable if TMay softens her Brexit stance. Go for EEA-type status. Fuck Liam Fox. The UK is saved.
Saved for Farage! Hurrah!
In any case, surely the Government are putting forward a Hard Brexit (and putting it about that we are prepared for "no deal") precisely so that we can get a softer Brexit in negotiations.
Indeed.
Unlike the Poshos, Mrs May actually knows how to:
a) Whip the parly party b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
and looks well on course to
c) Win a proper majority by securing Tory/Lab marginals, none of this knifeedge rubbish achieved by becoming pseudo Lib Dems...
Lots of wishful thinking there. She hasn't even started (b) and (c) is years away.
Meanwhile, she risks (d) breaking up the country by pursuing Hard Brexit. That will be her legacy, if she loses indyref2.
May voted Remain, if the country breaks up it will be Leave voters who provided the SNP with the fuel they needed
more guff
Most Leave voters probably don't care. Don't they identify as English over British?
I would imagine that the general mood about Scotland is mainly ambivalence but moves on to annoyance with Sturgeon and her blathering on and on and on and on....
Scotland's internal politics will become as irrelevant to us as those of the Irish republic.
Interestingly Ireland's Health system is significantly weaker than the UK NHS - which for all it's faults is broadly universal. Not so Eire.
Mind you, looking on the bright side, a Labour-led government without Scottish MPs to support it looks an agreeably remote prospect.
I suspect the end of the UK will bring about a level of soul-searching and reflection in England that we probably need and which, in any case, will be forced on us by the rest of the world. That will have an affect on domestic politics.
It would make it difficult to pretend that we are any longer a major power, presumably we will lose our UN security council seat and find it hard to justify Trident. Is that what Leavers envisaged?
I actually doubt that losing a few million Scots and a few hills and lakes would significantly weaken the rest of the UK economically/politically /militarily. People on here are doing the usual ott reactions spurred on by SeanT who's clearly started early today and SO who's glass is characteristically 3/4 empty!
LOL! Let's face it, most of us turn up here to see the OTT reactions (particluarly from Sean T)
I do think it's a bit much for Sean to heap all the blame on TM if Scotland does LEAVE though.
Fact is ALL of us who voted to LEAVE have to accept responsibility for whatever consequences follow through.
For my own part the buck stops with me, for good or ill...
I'm amazed that people from the South of England care whether Scotland is part of the same country as us or not. It's always been a foreign country as far as I'm concerned, they have their own culture and ways and what's more, of course they don't want to be governed by people they don't vote for.
Same goes for unionist kippers, a contorted logic needed there I think
We can still be friends, just as we can with all other countries.
That's why 2021 is the likeliest time for a referendum. It suits May because it gives her a clear hand for the Brexit negotiation. It suits Sturgeon because it gives her four more years to build a case. And it suits the EU because it means an independent Scotland can be fast-tracked in as a member, without any worries about breaching protocols or upsetting the Spanish.
Build a case for independence or for Scottish membership of the EU when rUK will be outside both the single market and the currency union?
The "Nicola's deal" for a tinpot little country like Scotland.
She'd have to accept full freedom of movement. Bulgarians and Romanians who want to get to the bright lights of London or Manchester will therefore flock to Scotland and try to go south. And RUK won't accept them.
She'd also have to accept customs tariffs. RUK would be further away from the EU than say Turkey is at the moment. The border would become a hard external EU border.
This is the worst possible outcome for Scotland. Vote SNP if you want it. The SNP is - inshallah - likely to get slaughtered in indyref2.
There will come a time when people just aren't so stupid, when they realise that if A is in a single market and customs union with B, and C isn't, then A cannot be in that relationship with C.
How about a referendum on whether or not Scotland should apply to join the EU? If it's that important, ask people. Have three options on the ballot:
1) Scotland should stay in Britain 2) Scotland should become an independent country and apply for EU membership 3) Scotland should become an independent country and not apply for EU membership
People should get it through their heads that Scotland may have the right to leave the parental home but it has no automatic right to join the EU.
It takes two to tango. Scotland and England are drifting apart. And Scotland has every right to join the EU once it leaves the UK. It would no doubt be fast-tracked to membership and be given special status in advance of that.
"no doubt" => "I don't have an argument for this but if I say it strongly enough hopefully no one will question it"
Wow - you got me there, I expressed an opinion. It's never happened on PB before :-D
My opinion is based on the verifiable fact that Scotland fulfils more of the EU membership criteria than any of the other countries currently hoping to join the EU.
PB Brexityoonery 1.0: If Sturgeon calls a referendum she'll lose it. PB Brexityoonery 2.0: Sturgeon is bluffing, she'll never call a referendum. PB Brexityoonery 2.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff. PB Brexityoonery 3.0: May will never allow Sturgeon to have a referendum. PB Brexityoonery 3.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff because May will never allow her to have a referendum.
It'll be fascinating to watch the operating systems evolve (sic).
... b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
Any evidence for that suggestion? Everything I have seen so far suggests the opposite.
First of all you wouldn't choose David Davies as your lead negotiator. Secondly Mrs May seems more interested in appeasing factions in her party than getting a good deal. Thirdly, she hasn't matched Team GB with the real negotiating talent that can be found on the EU side. Fourthly, she claims "No deal is better than a bad deal" when realistically there is no chance of a no deal. We can agree more or we can agree the minimum and if the minimum is her "no deal" option that would be the worst possible outcome And so on.
Demonstration of willingness to walk away is pretty basic. That is something she has done.
FFS this is all avoidable if TMay softens her Brexit stance. Go for EEA-type status. Fuck Liam Fox. The UK is saved.
Saved for so that we can get a softer Brexit in negotiations.
Indeed. rity by securing Tory/Lab marginals, none of this knifeedge rubbish achieved by becoming pseudo Lib Dems...
Lots of wishful thinking there. She hasn't even started (b) and (c) is years away.
Meanwhile, she risks (d) breaking up the country by pursuing Hard Brexit. That will be her legacy, if she loses indyref2.
May voted Remain, if the country breaks up it will be Leave voters who provided the SNP with the fuel they needed
ecause Dave was scared that UKIP might let Ed Miliband win the 2015 general election.
If the S
The EU is a side issue compared to the continuing existence of the UK. Yep, if Sturgeon loses that is what she will be remembered for.
No it isn't, if anything Brexit would have led to Scexit
I am may find out soon enough.
Why? Scotland has less than a tenth of the population of the UK but the Uk over a tenth of the population of the EU and if England and Wales voted Leave it was in part because they felt they could make their own way in the world without either the EU or Scotland, for good or ill
Some of us quite like being British.
Also, some of us have lots of Scottish relatives in Scotland, and are genuinely concerned that iScotland would be an economic basket-case for a decade. The deficit is just huge. The currency, the bank, the rest of it. Nightmare.
The oil has gone. The economic argument for indy is now much worse than it was in 2014, and it was wobbly enough then. Scots would really suffer. And they are my relatives (and my fellow Brits).
I've no doubt that eventually Scotland would prosper, but they would endure pain, interim, which would make Brexit look like a mild headcold.
I really don't want that for them, and I don't want my country partitioned.
Neither do I really and I voted Remain but I recognise most of my fellow countrymen, at least in England and Wales did not and if Scotland will not follow the rest of the country in Brexit then so be it, tough as it may be for both of us in the short term but especially for them
Thank you Mr Pit! I'll be in your part of the world again in a few weeks time, but down towards the Saudi border again so no chance of a get-together unfortunately.
Have a good day today, and a safe trip here. You're in O&G, or working on the nuclear station?
Well, it's up to the Scots who quite like being British to put this to bed once and for all.
If that means Tories voting Labour and Labourites voting Tory in the 2020 and 2021 elections than that has to be it for the union.
They have to rid themselves of the SNP.
The SNP are destabilising Scotland and making it uninvestable through their inability to actually accept the outcome of a vote.
I agree. But Holyrood elections aren't pure FPTP. They have an additional member system. So there is no need for Unionists to vote for their unpreferred party. What we need is for the Tories, Labour and LibDems to cooperate. I am left Labour, but I would be overjoyed to see a Unionist coalition under the leader of the party with the most seats, even if that's the Scottish Tories.
I'd be very surprised if anyone with authority in Europe negotiated with the SNP without May's explicit approval. It would be rightly deemed a fundamentally hostile act.
We could always reciprocate by offering Catalonia a special deal.
A homage, if you will.
Or Well if we're gonna start punning - maybe it could be seen as the 'road tae glasgie pier' while 'keeping the thistle aloft'
... b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
Any evidence for that suggestion? Everything I have seen so far suggests the opposite.
First of all you wouldn't choose David Davies as your lead negotiator. Secondly Mrs May seems more interested in appeasing factions in her party than getting a good deal. Thirdly, she hasn't matched Team GB with the real negotiating talent that can be found on the EU side. Fourthly, she claims "No deal is better than a bad deal" when realistically there is no chance of a no deal. We can agree more or we can agree the minimum and if the minimum is her "no deal" option that would be the worst possible outcome And so on.
Demonstration of willingness to walk away is pretty basic. That is something she has done.
And famously, David Cameron did not.
Talk of a hard Brexit being an acceptable consequence of EU negotiating intransigence is exactly the position you would expect from somebody who had read Carpet Haggling in the Bazaar 1.01....
FFS this is all avoidable if TMay softens her Brexit stance. Go for EEA-type status. Fuck Liam Fox. The UK is saved.
Saved for so that we can get a softer Brexit in negotiations.
Indeed. rity by securing Tory/Lab marginals, none of this knifeedge rubbish achieved by becoming pseudo Lib Dems...
Lots of wishful thinking there. She hasn't even started (b) and (c) is years away.
Meanwhile, she risks (d) breaking up the country by pursuing Hard Brexit. That will be her legacy, if she loses indyref2.
May voted Remain, if the country breaks up it will be Leave voters who provided the SNP with the fuel they needed
ecause Dave was scared that UKIP might let Ed Miliband win the 2015 general election.
If the S
The EU is a side issue compared to the continuing existence of the UK. Yep, if Sturgeon loses that is what she will be remembered for.
No it isn't, if anything Brexit would have led to Scexit
I am may find out soon enough.
Why? Scotland has less than a tenth of the population of the UK but the Uk over a tenth of the population of the EU and if England and Wales voted Leave it was in part because they felt they could make their own way in the world without either the EU or Scotland, for good or ill
Some of us quite like being British.
Also, some of us have lots of Scottish relatives in Scotland, and are genuinely concerned that iScotland would be an economic basket-case for a decade. The deficit is just huge. The currency, the bank, the rest of it. Nightmare.
The oil has gone. The economic argument for indy is now much worse than it was in 2014, and it was wobbly enough then. Scots would really suffer.And they are my relatives (and my fellow Brits).
I've no doubt that eventually Scotland would prosper, but they would endure pain, interim, which would make Brexit look like a mild headcold.
I really don't want that for them, and I don't want my country partitioned.
Theresa May should knock this on the head today. No referendum until the UK has left the EU (including any transition period).
If Sturgeon tries to call a consultative referendum, I would expect that the UK government could stop it via the courts, as it's clearly not within the powers devolved to Holyrood.
Wow - you got me there, I expressed an opinion. It's never happened on PB before :-D
My opinion is based on the verifiable fact that Scotland fulfils more of the EU membership criteria than any of the other countries currently hoping to join the EU.
Despite all the hysteria on here I truly believe that NOTHING will happen. The world will continue to turn, the Scots won't leave and Brexit will be negotiated. There will be a wailing and a gnashing of teeth but it's all sound and fury signifying nothing.
@AliBunkallSKY: NATO Secretary General @jensstoltenberg tells me that if Scotland leaves the UK it would also leave NATO, and would have to reapply to join.
NATO would lose their most important weapons of mass destruction - the haggis and the fried mars bar!
That's why 2021 is the likeliest time for a referendum. It suits May because it gives her a clear hand for the Brexit negotiation. It suits Sturgeon because it gives her four more years to build a case. And it suits the EU because it means an independent Scotland can be fast-tracked in as a member, without any worries about breaching protocols or upsetting the Spanish.
Build a case for independence or for Scottish membership of the EU when rUK will be outside both the single market and the currency union?
The SNP play to the juvenile mentality of "Don't you English tell us what to do". Which is such an ignorant attitude, given that Scottish national identity is rammed down people's throats in Scotland far more than English identity is in England. At the moment, most of the SNP's voters probably can't focus on the fact that a state can only belong to the EU if it accepts EU rules. They're so busy trying to break from "parental" England that they don't realise the alternative is going to work for "boss" EU. There isn't going to be a "Nicola's deal" for a tinpot little country like Scotland.
She'd have to accept full freedom of movement. Bulgarians and Romanians who want to get to the bright lights of London or Manchester will therefore flock to Scotland and try to go south. And RUK won't accept them.
She'd also have to accept customs tariffs. RUK would be further away from the EU than say Turkey is at the moment. The border would become a hard external EU border.
This is the worst possible outcome for Scotland. Vote SNP if you want it. The SNP is - inshallah - likely to get slaughtered in indyref2.
There will come a time when people just aren't so stupid, when they realise that if A is in a single market and customs union with B, and C isn't, then A cannot be in that relationship with C.
How about a referendum on whether or not Scotland should apply to join the EU? If it's that important, ask people. Have three options on the ballot:
1) Scotland should stay in Britain 2) Scotland should become an independent country and apply for EU membership 3) Scotland should become an independent country and not apply for EU membership
People should get it through their heads that Scotland may have the right to leave the parental home but it has no automatic right to join the EU.
Scotland and England are drifting apart.
Citation required.
Just because you keep writing something doesn't make it true.
That's why 2021 is the likeliest time for a referendum. It suits May because it gives her a clear hand for the Brexit negotiation. It suits Sturgeon because it gives her four more years to build a case. And it suits the EU because it means an independent Scotland can be fast-tracked in as a member, without any worries about breaching protocols or upsetting the Spanish.
Build a case for independence or for Scottish membership of the EU when rUK will be outside both the single market and the currency union?
The SNP play to the juvenile mentality of "Don't you English tell us what to do". Which is such an ignorant attitude, given that Scottish national identity is rammed down people's throats in Scotland far more than English identity is in England. At the moment, most of the SNP's voters probably can't focus on the fact that a state can only belong to the EU if it accepts EU rules. They're so busy trying to break from "parental" England that they don't realise the alternative is going to work for "boss" EU. There isn't going to be a "Nicola's deal" for a tinpot little country like Scotland.
She'd have to accept full freedom of movement. Bulgarians and Romanians who want to get to the bright lights of London or Manchester will therefore flock to Scotland and try to go south. And RUK won't accept them.
She'd also have to accept customs tariffs. RUK would be further away from the EU than say Turkey is at the moment. The border would become a hard external EU border.
This is the worst possible outcome for Scotland. Vote SNP if you want it. The SNP is - inshallah - likely to get slaughtered in indyref2.
There will come a time when people just aren't so stupid, when they realise that if A is in a single market and customs union with B, and C isn't, then A cannot be in that relationship with C.
How about a referendum on whether or not Scotland should apply to join the EU? If it's that important, ask people. Have three options on the ballot:
1) Scotland should stay in Britain 2) Scotland should become an independent country and apply for EU membership 3) Scotland should become an independent country and not apply for EU membership
People should get it through their heads that Scotland may have the right to leave the parental home but it has no automatic right to join the EU.
Scotland and England are drifting apart.
Citation required.
Just because you keep writing something doesn't make it true.
... b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
Any evidence for that suggestion? Everything I have seen so far suggests the opposite.
First of all you wouldn't choose David Davies as your lead negotiator. Secondly Mrs May seems more interested in appeasing factions in her party than getting a good deal. Thirdly, she hasn't matched Team GB with the real negotiating talent that can be found on the EU side. Fourthly, she claims "No deal is better than a bad deal" when realistically there is no chance of a no deal. We can agree more or we can agree the minimum and if the minimum is her "no deal" option that would be the worst possible outcome And so on.
Demonstration of willingness to walk away is pretty basic. That is something she has done.
Mind you, looking on the bright side, a Labour-led government without Scottish MPs to support it looks an agreeably remote prospect.
I suspect the end of the UK will bring about a level of soul-searching and reflection in England that we probably need and which, in any case, will be forced on us by the rest of the world. That will have an affect on domestic politics.
It would make it difficult to pretend that we are any longer a major power, presumably we will lose our UN security council seat and find it hard to justify Trident. Is that what Leavers envisaged?
I actually doubt that losing a few million Scots and a few hills and lakes would significantly weaken the rest of the UK economically/politically /militarily. People on here are doing the usual ott reactions spurred on by SeanT who's clearly started early today and SO who's glass is characteristically 3/4 empty!
LOL! Let's face it, most of us turn up here to see the OTT reactions (particluarly from Sean T)
I do think it's a bit much for Sean to heap all the blame on TM if Scotland does LEAVE though.
Fact is ALL of us who voted to LEAVE have to accept responsibility for whatever consequences follow through.
For my own part the buck stops with me, for good or ill...
FFS this is all avoidable if TMay softens her Brexit stance. Go for EEA-type status. Fuck Liam Fox. The UK is saved.
Saved for so that we can get a softer Brexit in negotiations.
Indeed. rity by securing Tory/Lab marginals, none of this knifeedge rubbish achieved by becoming pseudo Lib Dems...
Lots of wishful thinking there. She hasn't even started (b) and (c) is years away.
Meanwhile, she risks (d) breaking up the country by pursuing Hard Brexit. That will be her legacy, if she loses indyref2.
May voted Remain, if the country breaks up it will be Leave voters who provided the SNP with the fuel they needed
ecause Dave was scared that UKIP might let Ed Miliband win the 2015 general election.
If the S
The EU is a side issue compared to the continuing existence of the UK. Yep, if Sturgeon loses that is what she will be remembered for.
No it isn't, if anything Brexit would have led to Scexit
I am may find out soon enough.
Why? Scotlhe world without either the EU or Scotland, for good or ill
Some of us quite like being British.
ld.
I really don't want that for them, and I don't want my country partitioned.
I don't either. But, if the price for maintaining the Union is that England and Wales must always elect centre-left Europhile governments, then I judge that price to be too high.
Me too. I wanted Brexit, soft liberal Brexit at best, but any Brexit if that was the only choice. I voted Brexit knowing that iScotland was a real risk. Eyes wide open
But this is potentially the worst of all possible Brexits, it's just that continued EU membership was going to be even worse.
One of the issues that should keep Mr Glenn's hopes alive is that the Leave vote was pretty balkanised. Politically, I am not a happy bunny at present and do very much regret my decision to vote for Brexit. I may feel differently next year, of course (Hague wrote a good article in the Telegraph about this very issue).
PB Brexityoonery 1.0: If Sturgeon calls a referendum she'll lose it. PB Brexityoonery 2.0: Sturgeon is bluffing, she'll never call a referendum. PB Brexityoonery 2.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff. PB Brexityoonery 3.0: May will never allow Sturgeon to have a referendum. PB Brexityoonery 3.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff because May will never allow her to have a referendum.
It'll be fascinating to watch the operating systems evolve (sic).
Serious Q: do you actually believe TMay will agree to a vote before Brexit is concluded in 2019?
What would she [ May ] do if Sturgeon gives her a two-fingers salute ? Legally, doubtful, that is true. Practically, would England insist that the referendum did not happen ?
That's why 2021 is the likeliest time for a referendum. It suits May because it gives her a clear hand for the Brexit negotiation. It suits Sturgeon because it gives her four more years to build a case. And it suits the EU because it means an independent Scotland can be fast-tracked in as a member, without any worries about breaching protocols or upsetting the Spanish.
Build a case for independence or for Scottish membership of the EU when rUK will be outside both the single market and the currency union?
The SNP play to the juvenile mentality of "Don't you English tell us what to do". Which d. At the moment, most of the SNP's voters probably can't focus on the fact that a state can only belong to the EU if it accepts EU rules. They're so busy trying to break from "parental" England that they don't realise the alternative is going to work for "boss" EU. There isn't going to be a "Nicola's deal" for a tinpot little country like Scotland.
She'd have to accept full freedom of movement. Bulgarians and Romanians who want to get to the bright lights of London or Manchester will therefore flock to Scotland and try to go south. And RUK won't accept them.
She'd also have to accept customs tariffs. RUK would be further away from the EU than say Turkey is at the moment. The border would become a hard external EU border.
This is the worst possible outcome for Scotland. Vote SNP if you want it. The SNP is - inshallah - likely to get slaughtered in indyref2.
There will come a time when people just aren't so stupid, when they realise that if A is in a single market and customs union with B, and C isn't, then A cannot be in that relationship with C.
How about a referendum on whether or not Scotland should apply to join the EU? If it's that important, ask people. Have three options on the ballot:
1) Scotland should stay in Britain 2) Scotland should become an independent country and apply for EU membership 3) Scotland should become an independent country and not apply for EU membership
People should get it through their heads that Scotland may have the right to leave the parental home but it has no automatic right to join the EU.
Scotland and England are drifting apart.
Citation required.
Just because you keep writing something doesn't make it true.
... b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
Any evidence for that suggestion? Everything I have seen so far suggests the opposite.
First of all you wouldn't choose David Davies as your lead negotiator. Secondly Mrs May seems more interested in appeasing factions in her party than getting a good deal. Thirdly, she hasn't matched Team GB with the real negotiating talent that can be found on the EU side. Fourthly, she claims "No deal is better than a bad deal" when realistically there is no chance of a no deal. We can agree more or we can agree the minimum and if the minimum is her "no deal" option that would be the worst possible outcome And so on.
Demonstration of willingness to walk away is pretty basic. That is something she has done.
Pretending you would walk away to strike a hard bargain, when the other side absolutely has to agree to a set of international treaties with you doesn't count as smart negotiating tactics. It's the worst possible thing she can do. The more she agrees the better this deal will be, The skill is in making her meagre hand count for as much as possible with the other side. She simply doesn't understand the first thing about negotiation.
Theresa May should knock this on the head today. No referendum until the UK has left the EU (including any transition period).
If Sturgeon tries to call a consultative referendum, I would expect that the UK government could stop it via the courts, as it's clearly not within the powers devolved to Holyrood.
I really hope that doesn't happen. There are other forms of disobedience she could then try. Relations could deteriorate fast - they did between Russia and the Ukraine - and no decent person wants that.
What May could say is this.
1) It takes two to reach a deal (spell that out in baby language), and therefore she does not know what form the Britain-EU27 deal will take.
2) She is the PM of Britain and will try to reach the best deal for Scotland and every other part of Britain. She welcomes the Scottish Government's input.
3) If there is evidence that a substantial proportion of people in Scotland are unhappy with the deal and would rather Scotland become independent than remain in Britain under the terms of the deal, then she would accept at that time that a case exists for a further referendum in Scotland to decide whether or not Scotland should remain in Britain and, if it leaves, whether or not it should apply to join the EU and bring itself under EU rules.
4) Only someone with poo for brains would form the opinion that the deal between Britain and EU27 will be bad for Scotland and grounds for indyref2 until they know a) what the deal is, and b) what the alternatives are.
PB Brexityoonery 1.0: If Sturgeon calls a referendum she'll lose it. PB Brexityoonery 2.0: Sturgeon is bluffing, she'll never call a referendum. PB Brexityoonery 2.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff. PB Brexityoonery 3.0: May will never allow Sturgeon to have a referendum. PB Brexityoonery 3.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff because May will never allow her to have a referendum.
It'll be fascinating to watch the operating systems evolve (sic).
Serious Q: do you actually believe TMay will agree to a vote before Brexit is concluded in 2019?
What would she [ May ] do if Sturgeon gives her a two-fingers salute ? Legally, doubtful, that is true. Practically, would England insist that the referendum did not happen ?
That's an interesting question. What if Stugeon calls her own referendum, without Parliamentary approval, and councils/returning officers in parts of the country that favour the Union refuse to have anything to do with it?
That's why 2021 is the likeliest time for a referendum. It suits May because it gives her a clear hand for the Brexit negotiation. It suits Sturgeon because it gives her four more years to build a case. And it suits the EU because it means an independent Scotland can be fast-tracked in as a member, without any worries about breaching protocols or upsetting the Spanish.
Build a case for independence or for Scottish membership of the EU when rUK will be outside both the single market and the currency union?
At the moment, most of the SNP's voters probably can't focus on the fact that a state can only belong to the EU if it accepts EU rules. They're so busy trying to break from "parental" England that they don't realise the alternative is going to work for "boss" EU. There isn't going to be a "Nicola's deal" for a tinpot little country like Scotland.
She'd have to accept full freedom of movement. Bulgarians and Romanians who want to get to the bright lights of London or Manchester will therefore flock to Scotland and try to go south. And RUK won't accept them.
She'd also have to accept customs tariffs. RUK would be further away from the EU than say Turkey is at the moment. The border would become a hard external EU border.
This is the worst possible outcome for Scotland. Vote SNP if you want it. The SNP is - inshallah - likely to get slaughtered in indyref2.
There will come a time when people just aren't so stupid, when they realise that if A is in a single market and customs union with B, and C isn't, then A cannot be in that relationship with C.
How about a referendum on whether or not Scotland should apply to join the EU? If it's that important, ask people. Have three options on the ballot:
1) Scotland should stay in Britain 2) Scotland should become an independent country and apply for EU membership 3) Scotland should become an independent country and not apply for EU membership
People should get it through their heads that Scotland may have the right to leave the parental home but it has no automatic right to join the EU.
Scotland and England are drifting apart.
Citation required.
Just because you keep writing something doesn't make it true.
Despite all the hysteria on here I truly believe that NOTHING will happen. The world will continue to turn, the Scots won't leave and Brexit will be negotiated. There will be a wailing and a gnashing of teeth but it's all sound and fury signifying nothing.
Well it clearly doesn't signify nothing. If, as you say, the Scots vote NO, then Sturgeon will resign, Sindy will be off the agenda for a generation, and I expect the SNP will split, and we might, in time, see a massive recovery in Scottish Labour - the space will have to be filled - altering the balance of power in the UK once more.
So even a choice for the status quo will profoundly change the country.
Ah bollox. Too much fucking politics. This has been continuous for about three years now!
I'm going to switch off and do some bloody work. For a few weeks. Or months. Or forever.
Aww come on Sean. I love your posts, they brighten my day. Don't stop, how else could I enjoy your prose for free?
PB Brexityoonery 1.0: If Sturgeon calls a referendum she'll lose it. PB Brexityoonery 2.0: Sturgeon is bluffing, she'll never call a referendum. PB Brexityoonery 2.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff. PB Brexityoonery 3.0: May will never allow Sturgeon to have a referendum. PB Brexityoonery 3.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff because May will never allow her to have a referendum.
It'll be fascinating to watch the operating systems evolve (sic).
Serious Q: do you actually believe TMay will agree to a vote before Brexit is concluded in 2019?
Dunno, and I suspect Tessy may not know currently either. The trouble with the Brexit concluded line is that there's no guarantee it will be tied in a neat bow by March 2019. I think the very least Sturgeon would accept is a referendum guaranteed now for after March '19, but I may be completely wrong about that. Nicola could be going all in. I foresee skirmishing for a while yet.
Let her have the referendum on her terms and let's watch her lose. Hopefully the SNP will disband afterwards. Her UK vs EU referendum is not going be a winning proposition for Yes. The "Yes/Leavers" are not on board and haven't been since this has been the offer. There was a time when Sturgeon seemed to get it, but she has reverted back to type and it means she won't win.
... b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
Any evidence for that suggestion? Everything I have seen so far suggests the opposite.
First of all you wouldn't choose David Davies as your lead negotiator. Secondly Mrs May seems more interested in appeasing factions in her party than getting a good deal. Thirdly, she hasn't matched Team GB with the real negotiating talent that can be found on the EU side. Fourthly, she claims "No deal is better than a bad deal" when realistically there is no chance of a no deal. We can agree more or we can agree the minimum and if the minimum is her "no deal" option that would be the worst possible outcome And so on.
Demonstration of willingness to walk away is pretty basic. That is something she has done.
How?
No deal is better than a bad deal.
Have you been living in a vacuum for several months?
Wow - you got me there, I expressed an opinion. It's never happened on PB before :-D
My opinion is based on the verifiable fact that Scotland fulfils more of the EU membership criteria than any of the other countries currently hoping to join the EU.
To join the EU, Scotland would have to join the Euro and thereby still have their finances controlled by an (ever further away) capital.
Either the Ref will be based on Scotland being independent with its own currency, and therefore no fast-tracking to the EU.
Or talking about joining the Euro and throwing away all the benefits of independence will lose the vote for the SNP.
Given that Scotland's debt-to-GDP ratio would be, like the UK's, around 80-90%, and it'd be running a 10% deficit with oil as it is, the consequences of joining the Euro would be the least of its worries: it'd be unlikely to meet the convergence criteria this side of 2040 - and after the Greek experience, the EU (and in particular, its German funders) will be far less keen on fiddling the books.
Wow - you got me there, I expressed an opinion. It's never happened on PB before :-D
My opinion is based on the verifiable fact that Scotland fulfils more of the EU membership criteria than any of the other countries currently hoping to join the EU.
To join the EU, Scotland would have to join the Euro and thereby still have their finances controlled by an (ever further away) capital.
Either the Ref will be based on Scotland being independent with its own currency, and therefore no fast-tracking to the EU.
Or talking about joining the Euro and throwing away all the benefits of independence will lose the vote for the SNP.
Scotland would no doubt have to undertake to join the Euro as and when the time was right. Once inside the EU, Scotland would effectively make the decision as to when that would be.
"transitional arrangements – sometimes certain rules are phased in gradually, to give the new member or existing members time to adapt".
I would extremely surprised if it doesn't. Joining the EEA and EFTA would require agreement from Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and from the EU27 (actually EU28 until the UK actually leaves!). There might be a mechanism whereby the EU could use QMV and force any dissenters amongst the EU27 to amend the EEA Treaty against their will, but that must surely be politically very unlikely even if were legally possible.
What you have to remember is that Scotland is of almost no interest to the EU. It's tiny, it's remote and its public finances as an independent state would be dire. Why would our EU friends go out of their way to give it special treatment? They've got bigger fish to fry.
Yes that woudl eb why they are taking in all the Eastern Europen countries that are way way smaller than Scotland , they will have no interest in 30%+ of EU fishing interests right enough
Richard is displaying the usual English attitude that no one else is important other than the English.
... b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
Any evidence for that suggestion? Everything I have seen so far suggests the opposite.
First of all you wouldn't choose David Davies as your lead negotiator. Secondly Mrs May seems more interested in appeasing factions in her party than getting a good deal. Thirdly, she hasn't matched Team GB with the real negotiating talent that can be found on the EU side. Fourthly, she claims "No deal is better than a bad deal" when realistically there is no chance of a no deal. We can agree more or we can agree the minimum and if the minimum is her "no deal" option that would be the worst possible outcome And so on.
Demonstration of willingness to walk away is pretty basic. That is something she has done.
How?
No deal is better than a bad deal.
Have you been living in a vacuum for several months?
Mouthing platitudes is not demonstrating a willingness to walk away from negotiations.
I would extremely surprised if it doesn't. Joining the EEA and EFTA would require agreement from Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and from the EU27 (actually EU28 until the UK actually leaves!). There might be a mechanism whereby the EU could use QMV and force any dissenters amongst the EU27 to amend the EEA Treaty against their will, but that must surely be politically very unlikely even if were legally possible.
What you have to remember is that Scotland is of almost no interest to the EU. It's tiny, it's remote and its public finances as an independent state would be dire. Why would our EU friends go out of their way to give it special treatment? They've got bigger fish to fry.
What you have to remember is that Scotland is of almost no interest to the EU. ?
It is psychologically and politically very important. It will show that part of a country that left wants to re-join. Spain will be told to lump it.
Spain has a veto.
Germany has taxpayers who will not tolerate another Greece requiring bailouts.
... b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
Any evidence for that suggestion? Everything I have seen so far suggests the opposite.
First of all you wouldn't choose David Davies as your lead negotiator. Secondly Mrs May seems more interested in appeasing factions in her party than getting a good deal. Thirdly, she hasn't matched Team GB with the real negotiating talent that can be found on the EU side. Fourthly, she claims "No deal is better than a bad deal" when realistically there is no chance of a no deal. We can agree more or we can agree the minimum and if the minimum is her "no deal" option that would be the worst possible outcome And so on.
Demonstration of willingness to walk away is pretty basic. That is something she has done.
How?
No deal is better than a bad deal.
Have you been living in a vacuum for several months?
Mouthing platitudes is not demonstrating a willingness to walk away from negotiations.
Eeyore sticks his head in the sand again.
Just because you won't listen or see doesn't mean the demonstration hasn't been made.
"a deal between the British and Irish governments that would see London continue to pay the block grant to Northern Ireland on a declining basis over a number of years."
So the Conservative party lead the country to the break up of the UK and a disastrous hard Brexit. And it's the Labour Party who can't be trusted with government? If it wasn't so tragic it would be funny. See the end the Planet of the Apes? That's you that is. You maniacs.
Scotland would no doubt have to undertake to join the Euro as and when the time was right. Once inside the EU, Scotland would effectively make the decision as to when that would be.
"transitional arrangements – sometimes certain rules are phased in gradually, to give the new member or existing members time to adapt".
I wouldn't fancy negotiating this for EU27 with iScotland given that sterling would be under the monetary control of a third country which would have no responsibility either to EU27 or to iScotland.
... b) Conduct a negotiation with a basically hostile bloc
Any evidence for that suggestion? Everything I have seen so far suggests the opposite.
First of all you wouldn't choose David Davies as your lead negotiator. Secondly Mrs May seems more interested in appeasing factions in her party than getting a good deal. Thirdly, she hasn't matched Team GB with the real negotiating talent that can be found on the EU side. Fourthly, she claims "No deal is better than a bad deal" when realistically there is no chance of a no deal. We can agree more or we can agree the minimum and if the minimum is her "no deal" option that would be the worst possible outcome And so on.
Demonstration of willingness to walk away is pretty basic. That is something she has done.
How?
No deal is better than a bad deal.
Have you been living in a vacuum for several months?
Mouthing platitudes is not demonstrating a willingness to walk away from negotiations.
Eeyore sticks his head in the sand again.
Just because you won't listen or see doesn't mean the demonstration hasn't been made.
I did listen. The putative grand alliance with the Americans was blown out of the water within 24 hours; while the idea that the UK will inflict deliberate harm on itself in order to get the Europeans to do as we wish is one for the fairies, I am afraid.
Apparently 70% of people who say they are 'English' rather than 'British' would have voted 'Leave'... that's over 10m, so seems I was right all along @SouthamObserver, most Leavers see themselves as English not British, even when you include the Welsh, Scots and NI Leavers
Although to be fair even they would prefer the Scots to stay in the UK
So the Conservative party lead the country to the break up of the UK and a disastrous hard Brexit. And it's the Labour Party who can't be trusted with government? If it wasn't so tragic it would be funny. See the end the Planet of the Apes? That's you that is. You maniacs.
So the Conservative party lead the country to the break up of the UK and a disastrous hard Brexit. And it's the Labour Party who can't be trusted with government? If it wasn't so tragic it would be funny. See the end the Planet of the Apes? That's you that is. You maniacs.
How much of what happened these last seven years is a direct or indirect consequence of the financial crash, Labour's overspending beforehand an the legitimisation of the belief that the lifestyle that people were consuming before then was one that they were entitled to expect?
But HMG will simply refuse a vote before Brexit in 2019. It has to, otherwise it renders negotiations with the EU unfeasibly complex, chaotic, confusing, the EU would be negotiating with a member state that might easily cease to exist DURING the negotiations.
It's just a nonsense.
Even if May really wanted to allow an indyref2, she knows that she can't, in practicality (and Sturgeon knows this).
So it will have to be after Brexit in 2019. Sometime between 2019-2021 therefore seems likeliest.
A refusal will be a gift to the yes campaign. Ignoring Scotland on Brexit. Ignoring Scotland on self-determination. Acting directly against the democratic will of the people.
And then what? The SNP hold the referendum anyway, if its a yes we get UDI. How would Maybe stop them?
"Unfeasibly complex, chaotic, confusing" - sounds like negotiations for hard brexit. When the diplomats who have to do the actual negotiation say 2 years isn't just impossible its insane, thats when you know its popcorn time.
If hard brexit sinks the union, and sinks the economy, its the death of the Conservative Party. I hope she knows what she's doing - thought conservatives were supposed to be conservative, not risk the house radicals...
In the event of UDI, I would like to see westminster impose Direct Rule and revert to the pre-Devolution arrangements until common sense prevailed.
So the Conservative party lead the country to the break up of the UK and a disastrous hard Brexit. And it's the Labour Party who can't be trusted with government? If it wasn't so tragic it would be funny. See the end the Planet of the Apes? That's you that is. You maniacs.
"a deal between the British and Irish governments that would see London continue to pay the block grant to Northern Ireland on a declining basis over a number of years."
ROFL
even funnier
the south doesnt like Shinners, and isnt overly keen on the DUPers either but theyre going to hand the balance of power in the Dail to their mad relatives
on that basis I might move back, it can only be a hoot
So the Conservative party lead the country to the break up of the UK and a disastrous hard Brexit. And it's the Labour Party who can't be trusted with government? If it wasn't so tragic it would be funny. See the end the Planet of the Apes? That's you that is. You maniacs.
How much of what happened these last seven years is a direct or indirect consequence of the financial crash, Labour's overspending beforehand an the legitimisation of the belief that the lifestyle that people were consuming before then was one that they were entitled to expect?
And any more than that wouldn't be legal would it?
Don't see why It wouldn't be legal: the EU's representatives can chat with who they want. It is an organisation with a distinct political personality of its own - which is one of the bones of contention.
"a deal between the British and Irish governments that would see London continue to pay the block grant to Northern Ireland on a declining basis over a number of years."
LOL!
I can really see the British government going for that.
So the Conservative party lead the country to the break up of the UK and a disastrous hard Brexit. And it's the Labour Party who can't be trusted with government? If it wasn't so tragic it would be funny. See the end the Planet of the Apes? That's you that is. You maniacs.
How much of what happened these last seven years is a direct or indirect consequence of the financial crash, Labour's overspending beforehand an the legitimisation of the belief that the lifestyle that people were consuming before then was one that they were entitled to expect?
It all follows from the crash. Trump as well.
We should think ourselves lucky though because so far we haven't seen anything as disastrous as the last time there was a crash of this magnitude (1930's followed by WWII)
"a deal between the British and Irish governments that would see London continue to pay the block grant to Northern Ireland on a declining basis over a number of years."
LOL!
I can really see the British government going for that.
That's an interesting question. What if Stugeon calls her own referendum, without Parliamentary approval, and councils/returning officers in parts of the country that favour the Union refuse to have anything to do with it?
The referendum would be like the recent one in Catalonia. There would be a massive Yes vote but on a smaller turnout. Most potential No voters would see the referendum as illegitimate and won't turn out. It would be a stalemate. Nationalists would point to the massive margin in favour; the government would claim it was invalid. I don't expect a council level boycott although there may be legal issues to their involvement.
Comments
https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/841301283730554885
What if May plays a blinder and gets a deal that is towards the better end of possible outcomes? The Scots are supposed to bet on their hand before the river card is seen. And before they have any idea what the EU would offer them.
I also think the Scots will peer over the edge - and pull back from independence. Sturgeon's position offers them the worst of all outcomes - an early vote before they know what they might get either way. And if the SNP loses, there won't be an IndyRef3 for decades.
May has no reason to play ball with anything earlier than the date the UK leaves the EU before deciding the timing of IndyRef2. What is Scotland going to do if she says bugger off - vote in a landslide SNP government? Ooooh, scared...
"no doubt" => "I don't have an argument for this but if I say it strongly enough hopefully no one will question it"
If that means Tories voting Labour and Labourites voting Tory in the 2020 and 2021 elections than that has to be it for the union.
They have to rid themselves of the SNP.
The SNP are destabilising Scotland and making it uninvestable through their inability to actually accept the outcome of a vote.
I do think it's a bit much for Sean to heap all the blame on TM if Scotland does LEAVE though.
Fact is ALL of us who voted to LEAVE have to accept responsibility for whatever consequences follow through.
For my own part the buck stops with me, for good or ill...
Same goes for unionist kippers, a contorted logic needed there I think
We can still be friends, just as we can with all other countries.
My opinion is based on the verifiable fact that Scotland fulfils more of the EU membership criteria than any of the other countries currently hoping to join the EU.
https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/policy/conditions-membership_en
PB Brexityoonery 2.0: Sturgeon is bluffing, she'll never call a referendum.
PB Brexityoonery 2.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff.
PB Brexityoonery 3.0: May will never allow Sturgeon to have a referendum.
PB Brexityoonery 3.1: Sturgeon calling a referendum is a bluff because May will never allow her to have a referendum.
It'll be fascinating to watch the operating systems evolve (sic).
Court News
Russian whistle blower could have been murdered by a poison vegetable switched for sorrel in the soup he ate for lunch, a court heard.
Talk of a hard Brexit being an acceptable consequence of EU negotiating intransigence is exactly the position you would expect from somebody who had read Carpet Haggling in the Bazaar 1.01....
If Sturgeon tries to call a consultative referendum, I would expect that the UK government could stop it via the courts, as it's clearly not within the powers devolved to Holyrood.
To join the EU, Scotland would have to join the Euro and thereby still have their finances controlled by an (ever further away) capital.
Either the Ref will be based on Scotland being independent with its own currency, and therefore no fast-tracking to the EU.
Or talking about joining the Euro and throwing away all the benefits of independence will lose the vote for the SNP.
Just because you keep writing something doesn't make it true.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/11242539/Scotland-and-England-How-different-are-they-really.html
おやすみなさい。
https://order-order.com/2017/03/13/labour-gorton-favourite-israeli-government-are-like-nazis/
What May could say is this.
1) It takes two to reach a deal (spell that out in baby language), and therefore she does not know what form the Britain-EU27 deal will take.
2) She is the PM of Britain and will try to reach the best deal for Scotland and every other part of Britain. She welcomes the Scottish Government's input.
3) If there is evidence that a substantial proportion of people in Scotland are unhappy with the deal and would rather Scotland become independent than remain in Britain under the terms of the deal, then she would accept at that time that a case exists for a further referendum in Scotland to decide whether or not Scotland should remain in Britain and, if it leaves, whether or not it should apply to join the EU and bring itself under EU rules.
4) Only someone with poo for brains would form the opinion that the deal between Britain and EU27 will be bad for Scotland and grounds for indyref2 until they know a) what the deal is, and b) what the alternatives are.
Edinburgh and Glasgow are doing well if you look on the surface. Scratch underneath...
I foresee skirmishing for a while yet.
Let's go.
Have you been living in a vacuum for several months?
Channeling my inner Village People.
"transitional arrangements – sometimes certain rules are phased in gradually, to give the new member or existing members time to adapt".
https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/policy/conditions-membership_en
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/investing/article-4309000/SMALL-CAP-IDEAS-Cornish-Lithium-seeks-5m.html
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/841310360393068544
Germany has taxpayers who will not tolerate another Greece requiring bailouts.
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/841309743402631168
Just because you won't listen or see doesn't mean the demonstration hasn't been made.
Happy Birthday!
so FF want to stand on a platform of adopting one of Europes largest economic and poilitcal problems. ?
how are they going to pay for it
Leanne Wood, the leader of Plaid Cymru, has said that if Scotland votes for independence, Wales should have a vote on independence too.
"a deal between the British and Irish governments that would see London continue to pay the block grant to Northern Ireland on a declining basis over a number of years."
I don't think that is what we were expected to take away from today!
If it wasn't so tragic it would be funny.
See the end the Planet of the Apes?
That's you that is.
You maniacs.
Although to be fair even they would prefer the Scots to stay in the UK
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2358038/How-calling-English-British-means-likely-wary-EU.html
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/841270320220798977
even funnier
the south doesnt like Shinners, and isnt overly keen on the DUPers either but theyre going to hand the balance of power in the Dail to their mad relatives
on that basis I might move back, it can only be a hoot
Whether they'd be wise to is another matter.
I can really see the British government going for that.
Heart of stone etc.
Would be 75/25 for No.
We should think ourselves lucky though because so far we haven't seen anything as disastrous as the last time there was a crash of this magnitude (1930's followed by WWII)