I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
This is poppycock, sorry.
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
Norway benefits from the level playing field of the single market despite having very little influence and no political representation.
She hates Scotland , she is an emigrant and has some real hatred of her country of birth, must have been real bad given the venom against anything Scottish.
I haven't seen any evidence that she hates Scotland. Not supporting the SNP doesn't equate to hating Scotland.
Do you really want a labour government or even coalition and at the same time want Scotland's independence
I support Scotland staying in the UK, I just don't see how Indy Ref 2 can be turned down if the SNP win again
Genuine question. Why do you want scotland to stay. I don't mind if they stay or go personally. However I am curious why you want them to stay or anyone else for that matter. It largely seems to consist of "well we have been together 300 years"
As a general principle I'm opposed to creating borders between people. So I voted to Remain in the EU and would vote to Remain in the UK.
Good fences make good neighbours....its an aphorism with a lot of truth. By all means advocate no fences but dont be surprised when your neighbours do things you find offensive
Putting my pedantic hat on, there's pretty much no fence between the US and Canada, and they seem to get on much better than most countries with really serious border security.
Is there any empirical evidence that countries with good border security have better relations with their neighbours than those who don't?
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
This is poppycock, sorry.
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
Norway benefits from the level playing field of the single market despite having very little influence and no political representation.
Do you really want a labour government or even coalition and at the same time want Scotland's independence
I support Scotland staying in the UK, I just don't see how Indy Ref 2 can be turned down if the SNP win again
Genuine question. Why do you want scotland to stay. I don't mind if they stay or go personally. However I am curious why you want them to stay or anyone else for that matter. It largely seems to consist of "well we have been together 300 years"
As a general principle I'm opposed to creating borders between people. So I voted to Remain in the EU and would vote to Remain in the UK.
Good fences make good neighbours....its an aphorism with a lot of truth. By all means advocate no fences but dont be surprised when your neighbours do things you find offensive
Sure, but one of the things that Brexit has driven home to me is how much I dislike borders. So I'm prepared to put up with a lot to do without them. Including being joined in a Union with a country that voted for Johnson as Prime Minister.
I accept the rough with the smooth.
I can see the appeal of the alternative. I expect that if I was still in Scotland at the time of the vote that it would be the first time my wife and I would [knowingly] vote on opposite sides.
But, well, I was at an impressionable age when the Berlin Wall came down. My grandmother was reliant on the kindness of strangers to see her safely across borders as a refugee before the war. "Workers of the World Unite" not "Workers divide yourselves and compete against each other".
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent set of rules applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of the Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of being an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
You do realise most of your pluses involve the eu giving scotland immediate entry and even as someone that supports scottish independence I dont expect eu entry to take less that 10 to 15 years
I expect EU entry to take less time to negotiate than the exit itself.
I expect the Scottish Government would start simultaneous negotiations for independence from the UK and membership of the EU and they would transition seemlessly from one to the other.
The Spanish would probably roll over and allow an independent Scotland to enter the EU if independence became a reality, but they'd shoot themselves in the foot if they allowed a separating region to negotiate entry at the same time as independence. It would be a gift to Catalonian separatists.
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Trading 60% of your Trade for 16% is not a downside?
Installing a customs and immigration border where there hasn't been one for over 300 years is not a downside?
Sure, but at least independence does have an economic upside (EU Single Market). Brexit has no economic upside at all to offset the significant downsides. Brexit has other (IMO more important) downsides as well - in particular what we are talking about: the demise of Great Britain.
If it's lost, it was lost in 2014 (and before) - Brexit wasn't a thing then.
It's a salutatory lesson about referenda: even if Remain had won, say, 54/46 in 2016 we can now be certain that wouldn't have been the end of the matter.
In fact, it's most likely Brexit would have rumbled on with growing support for a re-run several years later.
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
This is poppycock, sorry.
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
Scotland doesn't have formal representation in the UK. It doesn't have a vote. Any decision that isn't devolved to Holyrood is taken by the UK government alone in its interest. This is different from EU member states who have a formal vote and in practice a near veto on decisions made. If Scotland leaves the UK then obviously its informal influence on the affairs of what remains of the old United Kingdom also goes. However that influence isn't massive right now because of the difference in size of Scotland compared with England.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
The only trade deal that Boris Johnson can agree with the European Union is a flimsy one. It will be a rickety bridge to the continent, much looser than the old one but still tethered in ways that Brexit ideologues hate. That doesn’t mean the prime minister won’t sign. He has a record of doing substandard deals and pretending they are great. Tory hardliners have a record of going along with the charade.....
.....It is easy to map the path on which Britain stumbles into a winter of economic discontent, with Tories pounding a nationalist drum to distract an angry public.
But that is not Johnson’s first choice. The flimsy treaty brandished in triumph, the rickety bridge – there lies the attractive path to a lazy man who cares above all about tomorrow’s headlines and the optics of success. That doesn’t guarantee there will be a deal. But if there isn’t one, it will be an accident of inattention, not the fruition of some cunning plan.
Do you really want a labour government or even coalition and at the same time want Scotland's independence
I support Scotland staying in the UK, I just don't see how Indy Ref 2 can be turned down if the SNP win again
Genuine question. Why do you want scotland to stay. I don't mind if they stay or go personally. However I am curious why you want them to stay or anyone else for that matter. It largely seems to consist of "well we have been together 300 years"
As a general principle I'm opposed to creating borders between people. So I voted to Remain in the EU and would vote to Remain in the UK.
Good fences make good neighbours....its an aphorism with a lot of truth. By all means advocate no fences but dont be surprised when your neighbours do things you find offensive
Sure, but one of the things that Brexit has driven home to me is how much I dislike borders. So I'm prepared to put up with a lot to do without them. Including being joined in a Union with a country that voted for Johnson as Prime Minister.
I accept the rough with the smooth.
I can see the appeal of the alternative. I expect that if I was still in Scotland at the time of the vote that it would be the first time my wife and I would [knowingly] vote on opposite sides.
But, well, I was at an impressionable age when the Berlin Wall came down. My grandmother was reliant on the kindness of strangers to see her safely across borders as a refugee before the war. "Workers of the World Unite" not "Workers divide yourselves and compete against each other".
I'll vote against a border.
We can make the border between England and Scotland as seamless as the border between Belgium and the Netherlands.
Do you really want a labour government or even coalition and at the same time want Scotland's independence
I support Scotland staying in the UK, I just don't see how Indy Ref 2 can be turned down if the SNP win again
Genuine question. Why do you want scotland to stay. I don't mind if they stay or go personally. However I am curious why you want them to stay or anyone else for that matter. It largely seems to consist of "well we have been together 300 years"
As a general principle I'm opposed to creating borders between people. So I voted to Remain in the EU and would vote to Remain in the UK.
Good fences make good neighbours....its an aphorism with a lot of truth. By all means advocate no fences but dont be surprised when your neighbours do things you find offensive
Sure, but one of the things that Brexit has driven home to me is how much I dislike borders. So I'm prepared to put up with a lot to do without them. Including being joined in a Union with a country that voted for Johnson as Prime Minister.
I accept the rough with the smooth.
I can see the appeal of the alternative. I expect that if I was still in Scotland at the time of the vote that it would be the first time my wife and I would [knowingly] vote on opposite sides.
But, well, I was at an impressionable age when the Berlin Wall came down. My grandmother was reliant on the kindness of strangers to see her safely across borders as a refugee before the war. "Workers of the World Unite" not "Workers divide yourselves and compete against each other".
I'll vote against a border.
We can make the border between England and Scotland as seamless as the border between Belgium and the Netherlands.
Do you really want a labour government or even coalition and at the same time want Scotland's independence
I support Scotland staying in the UK, I just don't see how Indy Ref 2 can be turned down if the SNP win again
Genuine question. Why do you want scotland to stay. I don't mind if they stay or go personally. However I am curious why you want them to stay or anyone else for that matter. It largely seems to consist of "well we have been together 300 years"
As a general principle I'm opposed to creating borders between people. So I voted to Remain in the EU and would vote to Remain in the UK.
Good fences make good neighbours....its an aphorism with a lot of truth. By all means advocate no fences but dont be surprised when your neighbours do things you find offensive
Sure, but one of the things that Brexit has driven home to me is how much I dislike borders. So I'm prepared to put up with a lot to do without them. Including being joined in a Union with a country that voted for Johnson as Prime Minister.
I accept the rough with the smooth.
I can see the appeal of the alternative. I expect that if I was still in Scotland at the time of the vote that it would be the first time my wife and I would [knowingly] vote on opposite sides.
But, well, I was at an impressionable age when the Berlin Wall came down. My grandmother was reliant on the kindness of strangers to see her safely across borders as a refugee before the war. "Workers of the World Unite" not "Workers divide yourselves and compete against each other".
I'll vote against a border.
We can make the border between England and Scotland as seamless as the border between Belgium and the Netherlands.
Not if Brussels has anything to say about it.
Has Brussels said England can't be in the single market?
They can then use the anger and grievance to stoke up support for Indyref2 to 60%+ so they win it hands down when it's eventually granted, possibly with civil disobedience along the way.
Best way forward would be to agree (and pass) a Brexit deal, come up with a new federal plan for the UK, chunk Boris as PM and hold a snap vote in the Autumn of next year.
Still might not work (50:50 Scotland stays, at best) but it's the best hope.
Another GE? God please no
Sorry, a snap indyref (not another GE).
This quite left wing Scottish writer & commentator largely agrees with you, but doubts BJ and his crew have the imagination to go for it.
Why do you think I can't stand BJ, and want him gone asap?
Do you really want a labour government or even coalition and at the same time want Scotland's independence
I support Scotland staying in the UK, I just don't see how Indy Ref 2 can be turned down if the SNP win again
Genuine question. Why do you want scotland to stay. I don't mind if they stay or go personally. However I am curious why you want them to stay or anyone else for that matter. It largely seems to consist of "well we have been together 300 years"
As a general principle I'm opposed to creating borders between people. So I voted to Remain in the EU and would vote to Remain in the UK.
Good fences make good neighbours....its an aphorism with a lot of truth. By all means advocate no fences but dont be surprised when your neighbours do things you find offensive
Sure, but one of the things that Brexit has driven home to me is how much I dislike borders. So I'm prepared to put up with a lot to do without them. Including being joined in a Union with a country that voted for Johnson as Prime Minister.
I accept the rough with the smooth.
I can see the appeal of the alternative. I expect that if I was still in Scotland at the time of the vote that it would be the first time my wife and I would [knowingly] vote on opposite sides.
But, well, I was at an impressionable age when the Berlin Wall came down. My grandmother was reliant on the kindness of strangers to see her safely across borders as a refugee before the war. "Workers of the World Unite" not "Workers divide yourselves and compete against each other".
I'll vote against a border.
We can make the border between England and Scotland as seamless as the border between Belgium and the Netherlands.
Do you really want a labour government or even coalition and at the same time want Scotland's independence
I support Scotland staying in the UK, I just don't see how Indy Ref 2 can be turned down if the SNP win again
Genuine question. Why do you want scotland to stay. I don't mind if they stay or go personally. However I am curious why you want them to stay or anyone else for that matter. It largely seems to consist of "well we have been together 300 years"
As a general principle I'm opposed to creating borders between people. So I voted to Remain in the EU and would vote to Remain in the UK.
Good fences make good neighbours....its an aphorism with a lot of truth. By all means advocate no fences but dont be surprised when your neighbours do things you find offensive
Putting my pedantic hat on, there's pretty much no fence between the US and Canada, and they seem to get on much better than most countries with really serious border security.
Is there any empirical evidence that countries with good border security have better relations with their neighbours than those who don't?
There may be no physical fence but border security is still tight many have been arrested by border police for inadvertently wandering over
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
This is poppycock, sorry.
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
Scotland doesn't have formal representation in the UK. It doesn't have a vote. Any decision that isn't devolved to Holyrood is taken by the UK government alone in its interest. This is different from EU member states who have a formal vote and in practice a near veto on decisions made. If Scotland leaves the UK then obviously its informal influence on the affairs of what remains of the old United Kingdom also goes. However that influence isn't massive right now because of the difference in size of Scotland compared with England.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
Scotland does have formal representation in the UK, and it does have votes. Just as England does too.
You repeating this (along with most of the rest of your previous post, without addressing the points in my response) doesn't make it true.
Do you really want a labour government or even coalition and at the same time want Scotland's independence
I support Scotland staying in the UK, I just don't see how Indy Ref 2 can be turned down if the SNP win again
Genuine question. Why do you want scotland to stay. I don't mind if they stay or go personally. However I am curious why you want them to stay or anyone else for that matter. It largely seems to consist of "well we have been together 300 years"
As a general principle I'm opposed to creating borders between people. So I voted to Remain in the EU and would vote to Remain in the UK.
Good fences make good neighbours....its an aphorism with a lot of truth. By all means advocate no fences but dont be surprised when your neighbours do things you find offensive
Sure, but one of the things that Brexit has driven home to me is how much I dislike borders. So I'm prepared to put up with a lot to do without them. Including being joined in a Union with a country that voted for Johnson as Prime Minister.
I accept the rough with the smooth.
I can see the appeal of the alternative. I expect that if I was still in Scotland at the time of the vote that it would be the first time my wife and I would [knowingly] vote on opposite sides.
But, well, I was at an impressionable age when the Berlin Wall came down. My grandmother was reliant on the kindness of strangers to see her safely across borders as a refugee before the war. "Workers of the World Unite" not "Workers divide yourselves and compete against each other".
I'll vote against a border.
We can make the border between England and Scotland as seamless as the border between Belgium and the Netherlands.
All things are possible, God willing, but some things are, alas, unlikely.
Unionist: The SNP are rushing into an ill thought out second indy ref. Also Unionist: This has been going on for years now, yawn.
It has been going on for my lifetime of 76 years
You could hardly miss it being a child and teenager living in Berwick on Tweed in the 1950s
But its return to Scotland is not yet on the agenda. Though there was a voodoo poll in 2013-14 by the local newspaper which gave results for a plebiscite on reunion which you might not like.
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent set of rules applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of the Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of being an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
You do realise most of your pluses involve the eu giving scotland immediate entry and even as someone that supports scottish independence I dont expect eu entry to take less that 10 to 15 years
I expect EU entry to take less time to negotiate than the exit itself.
I expect the Scottish Government would start simultaneous negotiations for independence from the UK and membership of the EU and they would transition seemlessly from one to the other.
The Spanish would probably roll over and allow an independent Scotland to enter the EU if independence became a reality, but they'd shoot themselves in the foot if they allowed a separating region to negotiate entry at the same time as independence. It would be a gift to Catalonian separatists.
Even when they are independent.
There is an argument put forth that the eu doesnt want to make it look to easy to leave the eu hence tough on uk
The corollorary is
States within the eu with an independence movement dont want to make it look easy to secede then rejoin the eu
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Trading 60% of your Trade for 16% is not a downside?
Installing a customs and immigration border where there hasn't been one for over 300 years is not a downside?
Sure, but at least independence does have an economic upside (EU Single Market). Brexit has no economic upside at all to offset the significant downsides. Brexit has other (IMO more important) downsides as well - in particular what we are talking about: the demise of Great Britain.
If it's lost, it was lost in 2014 (and before) - Brexit wasn't a thing then.
It's a salutatory lesson about referenda: even if Remain had won, say, 54/46 in 2016 we can now be certain that wouldn't have been the end of the matter.
In fact, it's most likely Brexit would have rumbled on with growing support for a re-run several years later.
Maybe. Nevertheless No won by a significant margin in 2014. It wasn't, as Nationalists sometimes claim, No but Yes. It was an emphatic vote for the Union. What has changed since Brexit and particularly since Johnson came to power is that the emphatic No has become an emphatic Yes in opinion polling. We can come up with a counterfactual that Brexit and the Johnson government don't need to be like this and the trend towards independence doesn't happen.
Personally I don't buy it. Brexit is like what it is because that is what Brexit is. Johnson is in power and acting the way he does because Brexit is driving him to do that.
Even the 50+ is just 'projected'! In reality - the thing we live in - they have 48 MPs today, and presume they can dictate terms to the governing party with an overall majority in Parliament and 7.5x their seat total. Er, no, that's not how numbers work.
That is how empires work, yes.
It is not how government with the consent of the governed works.
I don't. I respect democracy and the outcome of the 2014 referendum which both sides agreed to respect.
No Parliament can bind its successors. If the Scots vote for a new referendum they should have it.
If that one gets a No vote, then that will settle it again. Until the next time the Scots vote for a new referendum.
If the Scots don't want a referendum, they shouldn't vote for a party pledging one. Quite simple really.
If the Scottish Parliament voted to give everyone in Scotland £10,000 would you agree to that?
Constitutional matters are not within the remit of the Scottish Parliament. There need to be sufficient MPs in Westminster persuaded of the merits of the case. Quite simple really.
Desperation setting in for the colonial types, you will be joining HYFUD with the tanks being deployed next or sending gunboats to shell Edinburgh, teach the natives a lesson.
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
This is poppycock, sorry.
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
She hates Scotland , she is an emigrant and has some real hatred of her country of birth, must have been real bad given the venom against anything Scottish.
I haven't seen any evidence that she hates Scotland. Not supporting the SNP doesn't equate to hating Scotland.
Can you point me to ONE positive thing she has ever posted about Scotland.
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
This is poppycock, sorry.
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
Scotland doesn't have formal representation in the UK. It doesn't have a vote. Any decision that isn't devolved to Holyrood is taken by the UK government alone in its interest. This is different from EU member states who have a formal vote and in practice a near veto on decisions made. If Scotland leaves the UK then obviously its informal influence on the affairs of what remains of the old United Kingdom also goes. However that influence isn't massive right now because of the difference in size of Scotland compared with England.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
Scotland does have formal representation in the UK, and it does have votes. Just as England does too.
You repeating this (along with most of the rest of your previous post, without addressing the points in my response) doesn't make it true.
Yes just that England has 10x as many so it is same as having NO votes, get a grip on reality and stop thinking we are thick.
I can see the appeal of the alternative. I expect that if I was still in Scotland at the time of the vote that it would be the first time my wife and I would [knowingly] vote on opposite sides.
But, well, I was at an impressionable age when the Berlin Wall came down. My grandmother was reliant on the kindness of strangers to see her safely across borders as a refugee before the war. "Workers of the World Unite" not "Workers divide yourselves and compete against each other".
I'll vote against a border.
Fine sentiments, and ultimately ones I agree with.
You'll have a LONG wait for good governance in the UK though.
Comments
Is there any empirical evidence that countries with good border security have better relations with their neighbours than those who don't?
I accept the rough with the smooth.
I can see the appeal of the alternative. I expect that if I was still in Scotland at the time of the vote that it would be the first time my wife and I would [knowingly] vote on opposite sides.
But, well, I was at an impressionable age when the Berlin Wall came down. My grandmother was reliant on the kindness of strangers to see her safely across borders as a refugee before the war. "Workers of the World Unite" not "Workers divide yourselves and compete against each other".
I'll vote against a border.
It's a salutatory lesson about referenda: even if Remain had won, say, 54/46 in 2016 we can now be certain that wouldn't have been the end of the matter.
In fact, it's most likely Brexit would have rumbled on with growing support for a re-run several years later.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
The only trade deal that Boris Johnson can agree with the European Union is a flimsy one. It will be a rickety bridge to the continent, much looser than the old one but still tethered in ways that Brexit ideologues hate. That doesn’t mean the prime minister won’t sign. He has a record of doing substandard deals and pretending they are great. Tory hardliners have a record of going along with the charade.....
.....It is easy to map the path on which Britain stumbles into a winter of economic discontent, with Tories pounding a nationalist drum to distract an angry public.
But that is not Johnson’s first choice. The flimsy treaty brandished in triumph, the rickety bridge – there lies the attractive path to a lazy man who cares above all about tomorrow’s headlines and the optics of success. That doesn’t guarantee there will be a deal. But if there isn’t one, it will be an accident of inattention, not the fruition of some cunning plan.
and NEW THREAD
You repeating this (along with most of the rest of your previous post, without addressing the points in my response) doesn't make it true.
There is an argument put forth that the eu doesnt want to make it look to easy to leave the eu hence tough on uk
The corollorary is
States within the eu with an independence movement dont want to make it look easy to secede then rejoin the eu
Personally I don't buy it. Brexit is like what it is because that is what Brexit is. Johnson is in power and acting the way he does because Brexit is driving him to do that.
It is not how government with the consent of the governed works.
You'll have a LONG wait for good governance in the UK though.