Could be wrong, but don't Wales and Scotland and Northern Ireland have fishermen too?
The rest of the fishing fleets didn't sell theirs. The war over fish was to take back control of something sold by the English to the foreigners who had obviously stolen them.
No it wasn't. That misunderstanding has been corrected repeatedly.
English quotas owned by Europeans are still English quotas. That is not what was being fought over.
Yes, though about as English as Manchester City FC just badge engineering.
That's actually a very good analogy. Man City are still listed as an English club.
When it comes to quota changes any English quotas owned by Europeans are protected by this deal as part of the English quotas, even if they're no more English owned than Man City.
What we are seeing now is a reduction in French, Dutch etc headlined quotas - your PSG, Ajax etc are affected.
Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.
As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.
Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.
Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.
As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.
Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.
Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.
Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
You can fly from Remain voting London and Newcastle to the continent, that does not mean they have a land border with the EU.
Scotland will be treated exactly the same as the rest of GB as Scots confirmed they were happy with when they voted 55% to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 vote
And 62% of Scots voted to stay in the EU.
70% of Oxford residents voted to stay in the EU, so what? Nobody is arguing for special circumstances for Oxford.
Scots voted to stay in the UK in 2014 and will do what the rest of the UK does.
Because Oxford isn't a country.
It is part of the same sovereign country as Scotland, the UK, that Scots voted to stay part of in the once in a generation 2014 vote
To argue that Scotland being dragged out of the EU after 62% voted to remain has no relevance to the "once in a generation" nature of the independence referendum convinces nobody.
Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?
Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...
Interviewer-Why is that?
Caller-Well we had to follow their rules.. . Interviewer-What's your business?
Caller- I run a Golf Course...
Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?
Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day
Interviewer-Was that all?
Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....
The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
And this is the black hole that Boris's victory will fall into. People have No Idea what the EU is or what it does. "Brexit" is whatever their own particular gripe is, whether that is too many muslims, "sovrinty" ("whatever that is") or in his case the bloody EU forcing him to be a decent human being and making his facility accessible to paying customers.
When these issues don't magically resolve, when Tory ministers are sent on to explain that its UK legislation or that not being allowed to live in your holiday home is a good thing or that we didn't need Nissan anyway, these people are going to have a fit.
And then vote for Farage.
I'm not sure how many will vote Farage, certainly after May, one last protest. What would be the point? Sure, there are plenty of issues on which the Tories will disappoint people, people who may not want to vote Labour or LD, but to vote Farage they would need to sell domestic solutions. Are people going to flock to Farage in an attempt to get the Tories to reopen the trade deal or something? Previously there was a purpose in it beyond simply electing UKIP or Brexit MEPs, it pressured the Tories and (to a lesser extent) Labour on Brexit and the WA and the trade deal.
What would voting for them now offer people, other than the support in itself?
Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?
He should feel ashamed.
Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.
The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.
Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
I think it was @Casino_Royale that made the point on the aggressive fishing waters stance in no deal concentrating minds in the EU.
Those tough stances have ensured the EU compromised and did a deal realising the UK would force the no deal to mean no deal on both sides of it. They knew with May and Robbins they'd still get preferential access to the UK without needing to give anything in return in the no deal scenario.
"The EU caved on big points because we made them truly fear No Deal" -
This will be a key part of the Johnson spin on the deal over the next few days and weeks. Let's see how it holds up.
It looks as though third country status for agriculture has made it into the deal. That's a massive climbdown, the EU were absolutely adamant that the UK would have to sign up to dynamic alignment for agricultural standards for that, we haven't done the latter but we have the former.
The EU has in many areas made concessions, and I'm sure in many areas the UK has too. I think this could be the start of a much healthier UK/EU relationship. We don't hold up their integration project and they don't impose stupid laws and regulations on us.
From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.
From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?
Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).
Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.
In twelve months time,
Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"
Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.
Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.
This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.
No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.
True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
imho it will be a catastrophic political error by Starmer to vote for this deal.
He must be free to say 'look how crap it all is' in a year or two's time.
But if Labour votes for the deal it will only be because the alternative (no deal) is even worse. Down the line, Starmer will still be able to say "look how crap it all is"; yes, we voted for it, but we had no choice given the alternative would have been even crapper. The deal won't be pinned on Labour, however it turns out. Not when the Tories have a majority of 80.
Worth bearing in mind that this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade. On average, economists think it will subtract about 4% from UK GDP in the long run, relative to single market membership. If they are right this cost is far greater than the net payments we made as an EU member. Still, it is better than no deal, and for that at least we should be thankful.
Well, no it really isn’t, and I say that as a Remainer. The EU wasn’t just about trade, or it’s unlikely we’d ever have left it. It also had major sociopolitical ramifications that were, to put it mildly, not universally popular.
This deal *is* designed to make trade easier than it would be in a clean break. So from that point of view it might fairly be compared to the free trade deals in the former Soviet Union, or Greenland’s arrangements with Denmark after 1985, which in itself sees your point fail.
If you are arguing that UK-EU trade won't be harder on Jan 1st after this deal takes effect than on Dec 31st under existing rules then you are demonstrably wrong. Of course it is better than no deal, which is why I said precisely that.
Yes, but my point is that you are making a totally false statement. Your implication is we have negotiated a trade deal to make trade harder. We haven’t. We left a political system, rightly or wrongly, and negotiated a trade deal to free up trade in this new political situation rather than trade on WTO terms. Which actually happens very frequently. So whatever your private views on leave or remain, it is you who is ‘demonstrably wrong’ in your claim that ‘this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade.‘
It is common in analysing trade deals to compare what has been negotiated with what went before, rather than with some hypothetical third scenario. Since I have repeatedly said that the deal is better than this hypothetical third scenario I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Yes it is better than no deal, but much much worse than our prior arrangements.
Yes, but our prior arrangements were not a trade deal, and shouldn’t therefore be compared on a like for like basis.
That is pure sophistry. I thought this was meant to be a serious debate.
No, it’s a statement of fact. That is definitely part of a serious debate, although regrettably your previous statement was an example of hyperbole, both for the reasons I have stated and because as has been pointed out elsewhere even had your statement been correctly premised there are other examples of trade deals becoming more restrictive.
Ultimately, such statements are a big part of the reason why we lost the argument to Remain, because they undermine our credibility and cause people to stop listening to us.
You have a problem with that? Then stop making them. But don’t abuse me for pointing out that you are wrong.
I don't really understand the point you are trying to make. Let me restate mine. This is the first major trade deal between significant trading blocs that aims to put in place a trading environment more restrictive than that which preceded it. This really shouldn't be a controversial argument, in fact it is the most fundamental description of the situation we are in, I am hardly the only person making it. To argue that isn't the case because the EU single market isn't an FTA is sophistry.
Then let me put it to you in simple terms. You are wrong. Because countries separate all the time, and the EU is considered a country Sui Generis, and put in place more restrictive arrangements than they had before. Ukraine and Russia. Ireland and the UK. Australia and Papua New Guinea. The UK and New Zealand.
Your point would have validity if EU membership were just about trade, but it isn’t. So we leave our membership, over many matters, and negotiate a new relationship that is just about trade. It is nonsensical to suggest that this a more restrictive trade deal replacing a less restrictive one. You are comparing apples and scones.
I'll leave others to judge the relative merits of our arguments.
Okay. Ydoethur is correct and you are completely wrong. Judgement made. Happy now?
That has to be correct. The EU is about much more than trade. Whether the EU will ever go so far as to create a single state is open to question, but political integration goes hand in hand with economic integration. If one does not wish to be part of this process of political integration, it's fairly immaterial to be told that GDP in twenty years time will be a bit smaller than would otherwise have been the case.
A classic example of this choice is Irish Independence. People favoured political independence even knowing that the a break from the UK would have economic consequences.
To equate Brexit with genuine national independence movements disrespects the latter. The comparison is false and rather precious. But the point that Brexit, like such movements, is about "heart over head", about identity not money, is a good one.
From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.
From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?
Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).
Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.
In twelve months time,
Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"
Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.
Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.
This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.
No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.
True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
I throw names at everyone. Have openly described the leadership of Swinson as the "flight of Icarus".
I would take a Labour government led by Starmer in a heartbeat over this lot. But the problem is that Sir Keir (better?) just isn't very good. A brilliant lawyer, but a cardboard politician. He would do very well in a country like Italy that has had a succession of technocrat PMs, but he is struggling against Johnson despite Shagger being an abject liar, hypocrite and failure on his own terms.
Imho he is a vast improvement on Corbyn and Johnson. If Joe Biden can win so can he.
It feels like we're moving further and further from civilisation
That level of histrionics just feels very insincere. On balance, being in the EU was probably the best option in the end, but I don't believe anyone, however pro-EU, genuinely believes that inclusion within it is necessary for 'civilisation'. I doubt even Guy Verhofstadt would say such a thing.
Treating post Brexit like it is Mad Max land is exactly the sort of thing that allows people like Boris to sell things to those on the fence. You do his work for him very well.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
And I see he's been changing his wording and deleting, erm, inexactitudes about percentages of Scots voting etc. without using 'edit' to make it clear.
A lot of loose talk on here about who's won/lost or good/bad deal etc. We don't even now if there is a deal yet! And the full reality of it won't be clear for quite some time - unless you can speed read a 2000 page text overnight.
A lot of loose talk on here about who's won/lost or good/bad deal etc. We don't even now if there is a deal yet! And the full reality of it won't be clear for quite some time - unless you can speed read a 2000 page text overnight.
From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.
From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?
Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).
Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.
In twelve months time,
Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"
Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.
Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.
This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.
No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.
True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
I throw names at everyone. Have openly described the leadership of Swinson as the "flight of Icarus".
I would take a Labour government led by Starmer in a heartbeat over this lot. But the problem is that Sir Keir (better?) just isn't very good. A brilliant lawyer, but a cardboard politician. He would do very well in a country like Italy that has had a succession of technocrat PMs, but he is struggling against Johnson despite Shagger being an abject liar, hypocrite and failure on his own terms.
Imho he is a vast improvement on Corbyn and Johnson. If Joe Biden can win so can he.
That is true, but he is boring, and has picked a weak front bench. I suspect will gain enough seats to have a hung parliament, and be a capable negotiator, but out of his depth as PM.
Bozo and Jezza both sold bullshit, but did it with enthusiasm. In 2017 Corbynism wasn't toxic in the North.
I quite like dull politicians, but Starmer is spectacularly boring.
The bouncing of Boris into the pseudo-lockdown of November was disastrous.
Without it all the country would steadily have moved into tier 3 which means southern England (except Kent) would not have moved back into tier 2 in December.
A lot of loose talk on here about who's won/lost or good/bad deal etc. We don't even now if there is a deal yet! And the full reality of it won't be clear for quite some time - unless you can speed read a 2000 page text overnight.
That is not how this stuff works. It is first mover advantage. Proclaim a historic victory/defeat loudly and repeatedly as quickly as possible. Reading is for wimps and experts. Our leaders dont care if its a good deal or not, merely if enough of the public can be convinced its great/terrible to get us to vote for them at the next election.
A lot of loose talk on here about who's won/lost or good/bad deal etc. We don't even now if there is a deal yet! And the full reality of it won't be clear for quite some time - unless you can speed read a 2000 page text overnight.
Is the text even out yet ?
No. They are still playing spreadsheets of fish quotas apparently.
A lot of loose talk on here about who's won/lost or good/bad deal etc. We don't even now if there is a deal yet! And the full reality of it won't be clear for quite some time - unless you can speed read a 2000 page text overnight.
Is the text even out yet ?
No. They are still playing spreadsheets of fish quotas apparently.
I think this is his most famous one:
"Earlier on today, apparently, a woman rang the BBC and said she heard there was a hurricane on the way. Well, if you're watching, don't worry, there isn't!"
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Worth bearing in mind that this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade. On average, economists think it will subtract about 4% from UK GDP in the long run, relative to single market membership. If they are right this cost is far greater than the net payments we made as an EU member. Still, it is better than no deal, and for that at least we should be thankful.
Well, no it really isn’t, and I say that as a Remainer. The EU wasn’t just about trade, or it’s unlikely we’d ever have left it. It also had major sociopolitical ramifications that were, to put it mildly, not universally popular.
This deal *is* designed to make trade easier than it would be in a clean break. So from that point of view it might fairly be compared to the free trade deals in the former Soviet Union, or Greenland’s arrangements with Denmark after 1985, which in itself sees your point fail.
If you are arguing that UK-EU trade won't be harder on Jan 1st after this deal takes effect than on Dec 31st under existing rules then you are demonstrably wrong. Of course it is better than no deal, which is why I said precisely that.
Yes, but my point is that you are making a totally false statement. Your implication is we have negotiated a trade deal to make trade harder. We haven’t. We left a political system, rightly or wrongly, and negotiated a trade deal to free up trade in this new political situation rather than trade on WTO terms. Which actually happens very frequently. So whatever your private views on leave or remain, it is you who is ‘demonstrably wrong’ in your claim that ‘this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade.‘
It is common in analysing trade deals to compare what has been negotiated with what went before, rather than with some hypothetical third scenario. Since I have repeatedly said that the deal is better than this hypothetical third scenario I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Yes it is better than no deal, but much much worse than our prior arrangements.
Yes, but our prior arrangements were not a trade deal, and shouldn’t therefore be compared on a like for like basis.
That is pure sophistry. I thought this was meant to be a serious debate.
No, it’s a statement of fact. That is definitely part of a serious debate, although regrettably your previous statement was an example of hyperbole, both for the reasons I have stated and because as has been pointed out elsewhere even had your statement been correctly premised there are other examples of trade deals becoming more restrictive.
Ultimately, such statements are a big part of the reason why we lost the argument to Remain, because they undermine our credibility and cause people to stop listening to us.
You have a problem with that? Then stop making them. But don’t abuse me for pointing out that you are wrong.
I don't really understand the point you are trying to make. Let me restate mine. This is the first major trade deal between significant trading blocs that aims to put in place a trading environment more restrictive than that which preceded it. This really shouldn't be a controversial argument, in fact it is the most fundamental description of the situation we are in, I am hardly the only person making it. To argue that isn't the case because the EU single market isn't an FTA is sophistry.
Then let me put it to you in simple terms. You are wrong. Because countries separate all the time, and the EU is considered a country Sui Generis, and put in place more restrictive arrangements than they had before. Ukraine and Russia. Ireland and the UK. Australia and Papua New Guinea. The UK and New Zealand.
Your point would have validity if EU membership were just about trade, but it isn’t. So we leave our membership, over many matters, and negotiate a new relationship that is just about trade. It is nonsensical to suggest that this a more restrictive trade deal replacing a less restrictive one. You are comparing apples and scones.
I'll leave others to judge the relative merits of our arguments.
Okay. Ydoethur is correct and you are completely wrong. Judgement made. Happy now?
That has to be correct. The EU is about much more than trade. Whether the EU will ever go so far as to create a single state is open to question, but political integration goes hand in hand with economic integration. If one does not wish to be part of this process of political integration, it's fairly immaterial to be told that GDP in twenty years time will be a bit smaller than would otherwise have been the case.
A classic example of this choice is Irish Independence. People favoured political independence even knowing that the a break from the UK would have economic consequences.
To equate Brexit with genuine national independence movements disrespects the latter. The comparison is false and rather precious. But the point that Brexit, like such movements, is about "heart over head", about identity not money, is a good one.
It was the latter point. Brexit and Irish Independence were indeed not the same thing. Interestingly, though, there is an argument for saying Ireland did not become truly independent until 1979 (when de facto currency union stopped).
Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.
As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.
Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.
Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.
As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.
Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.
Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.
Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
You can fly from Remain voting London and Newcastle to the continent, that does not mean they have a land border with the EU.
Scotland will be treated exactly the same as the rest of GB as Scots confirmed they were happy with when they voted 55% to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 vote
And 62% of Scots voted to stay in the EU.
70% of Oxford residents voted to stay in the EU, so what? Nobody is arguing for special circumstances for Oxford.
Scots voted to stay in the UK in 2014 and will do what the rest of the UK does.
Because Oxford isn't a country.
It is part of the same sovereign country as Scotland, the UK, that Scots voted to stay part of in the once in a generation 2014 vote
To argue that Scotland being dragged out of the EU after 62% voted to remain has no relevance to the "once in a generation" nature of the independence referendum convinces nobody.
Wrong, the SNP got 45% last year after the Brexit vote, no change from the 45% who voted Yes in 2014.
Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?
Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...
Interviewer-Why is that?
Caller-Well we had to follow their rules.. . Interviewer-What's your business?
Caller- I run a Golf Course...
Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?
Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day
Interviewer-Was that all?
Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....
The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
Takes us back to the conversation yesterday about the tension between those who wish the UK was more like it was in the past, and those who quite like how it is now.
EU or not, a lot of the things that nostalgic Brexit supporters want aren't coming back.
What Many Bexiteers despaired about was the direction of travel. That has been stopped and reversed. And ain't coming back.
Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?
Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...
Interviewer-Why is that?
Caller-Well we had to follow their rules.. . Interviewer-What's your business?
Caller- I run a Golf Course...
Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?
Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day
Interviewer-Was that all?
Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....
The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
And this is the black hole that Boris's victory will fall into. People have No Idea what the EU is or what it does. "Brexit" is whatever their own particular gripe is, whether that is too many muslims, "sovrinty" ("whatever that is") or in his case the bloody EU forcing him to be a decent human being and making his facility accessible to paying customers.
When these issues don't magically resolve, when Tory ministers are sent on to explain that its UK legislation or that not being allowed to live in your holiday home is a good thing or that we didn't need Nissan anyway, these people are going to have a fit.
And then vote for Farage.
I'm not sure how many will vote Farage, certainly after May, one last protest. What would be the point? Sure, there are plenty of issues on which the Tories will disappoint people, people who may not want to vote Labour or LD, but to vote Farage they would need to sell domestic solutions. Are people going to flock to Farage in an attempt to get the Tories to reopen the trade deal or something? Previously there was a purpose in it beyond simply electing UKIP or Brexit MEPs, it pressured the Tories and (to a lesser extent) Labour on Brexit and the WA and the trade deal.
What would voting for them now offer people, other than the support in itself?
My scenario is this. People have woken up to a perception that Labour failed them over a long period. So they voted for Brexit and for the Tories. When Brexit quickly turns out to be a mirage and that the Tories are happy to shaft them and make profit in the process where else do they turn? To the extremes.
The Corbyn cult are correct in that hard left ideas will get more of an airing. Problem is that so will the hard right - and they have a friendlier face in the form of the Nigel. A New Party led by Farage promising a restoration of lost greatness could do rather well when reality sets in.
I noticed this comment from @Casino_Royale on a previous thread:
"You can reform the country in the direction you want to take it BUT the electorate *must* be convinced you love it first - and that means its history, its people (all of them), its mission and the potential for its future."
As a general point it is fine.
But.
Have the Tories always really loved "the people (all of them)"?
Not much love shown for working-class communities who saw many of them destroyed during the 1980's, not much love for the sense of place and solidarity and the bonds of family that meant so much to people living there. Not much love for the Irish, many of whom moved here and built much of Britain's infrastructure and were condescended to - and worse - by a party more intent on protecting those who were intent on mistreating Irish Catholics in their own country. Not much love shown for the Windrush generation and those who came after from all corners of the Empire they claim to love.
My objection to to those who claim the Tories are somehow inherently more patriotic than Labour is that too many have a somewhat limited view of how far that patriotism goes, too limited an understanding of the history of this country, too ungenerous a view of the many peoples who have made up Britain and its history.
And so the claim to "patriotism" does not come across as a genuine love for country and all its people in all its many aspects but a rather narrower partial and often ignorant view based on a cartoonish understanding of Britain and its history.
I often feel that my Irish-Italian family have a much better understanding of and admiration for the best of Britain but also a better understanding of the complexity of Britain's history than some of the shouty so-called "patriots" with their reductive view of Britain and xenophobic approach to anyone not sharing their views.
I do not include @Casino_Royale in this latter category, btw.
Anyway, it is a beautiful crisp sunny day here so I am off out.
I only note that the sheep are back surrounding my barn again and several of them have been using my car as a scratching post.
Later, no doubt, I will be able to watch "my" flocks by night.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?
Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...
Interviewer-Why is that?
Caller-Well we had to follow their rules.. . Interviewer-What's your business?
Caller- I run a Golf Course...
Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?
Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day
Interviewer-Was that all?
Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....
The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
Takes us back to the conversation yesterday about the tension between those who wish the UK was more like it was in the past, and those who quite like how it is now.
EU or not, a lot of the things that nostalgic Brexit supporters want aren't coming back.
What Many Bexiteers despaired about was the direction of travel. That has been stopped and reversed. And ain't coming back.
Result.
No the pendulum is swinging back already, via a deal that can be built on, until, we salami slice Brexit away to non-existence.
Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.
The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.
There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
Halfwit
As much as half?
I am in Christmas Jolly mode
Quite right, Malcy. I hope it is nice and sunny for you (bit muted here) and you have some decent food and wine in. Planning pheasant casserole with root veg tonight, remaining meat cold tomorrow with stovies and pickled beetroot (great favourite).
Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?
He should feel ashamed.
Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.
The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.
Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
I think it was @Casino_Royale that made the point on the aggressive fishing waters stance in no deal concentrating minds in the EU.
Those tough stances have ensured the EU compromised and did a deal realising the UK would force the no deal to mean no deal on both sides of it. They knew with May and Robbins they'd still get preferential access to the UK without needing to give anything in return in the no deal scenario.
"The EU caved on big points because we made them truly fear No Deal" -
This will be a key part of the Johnson spin on the deal over the next few days and weeks. Let's see how it holds up.
It looks as though third country status for agriculture has made it into the deal. That's a massive climbdown, the EU were absolutely adamant that the UK would have to sign up to dynamic alignment for agricultural standards for that, we haven't done the latter but we have the former.
The EU has in many areas made concessions, and I'm sure in many areas the UK has too. I think this could be the start of a much healthier UK/EU relationship. We don't hold up their integration project and they don't impose stupid laws and regulations on us.
Well regardless of how the deal was done - where I sense we are not at all on the same page - you seem happy enough with the outcome. So far I've yet to see a PB Leaver who isn't.
Where's all the proper headbangers? Don't we have any?
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?
He should feel ashamed.
Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.
The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.
Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
I think it was @Casino_Royale that made the point on the aggressive fishing waters stance in no deal concentrating minds in the EU.
Those tough stances have ensured the EU compromised and did a deal realising the UK would force the no deal to mean no deal on both sides of it. They knew with May and Robbins they'd still get preferential access to the UK without needing to give anything in return in the no deal scenario.
"The EU caved on big points because we made them truly fear No Deal" -
This will be a key part of the Johnson spin on the deal over the next few days and weeks. Let's see how it holds up.
It looks as though third country status for agriculture has made it into the deal. That's a massive climbdown, the EU were absolutely adamant that the UK would have to sign up to dynamic alignment for agricultural standards for that, we haven't done the latter but we have the former.
The EU has in many areas made concessions, and I'm sure in many areas the UK has too. I think this could be the start of a much healthier UK/EU relationship. We don't hold up their integration project and they don't impose stupid laws and regulations on us.
Well regardless of how the deal was done - where I sense we are not at all on the same page - you seem happy enough with the outcome. So far I've yet to see a PB Leaver who isn't.
Where's all the proper headbangers? Don't we have any?
I don't know that we don't. At the moment there is the regular row about generations - you'd think this was a family genealogical site sometimes - and some blue on blue action with someone being told something very indelicate.
I think kinabalu in particular has kept a cool head on likely outcomes. Accidental no deal I do think was possible, but time and again people allowed hatred of Boris to mean he wanted no deal, when it looks like he really didn't. The difficulties in agreeing come down to competence and calculation.
I must say, with hindsight, I am disappointed in kinabalu's analysis. Taking his logic that one step further, he should have been able to predict with equal confidence that the deal would not only be made, but made specifically on Christmas Eve. It fits the theatre perfectly.
- I was actually thinking New Year's Eve. Bong Bong ...
Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?
Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...
Interviewer-Why is that?
Caller-Well we had to follow their rules.. . Interviewer-What's your business?
Caller- I run a Golf Course...
Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?
Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day
Interviewer-Was that all?
Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....
The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
It's very odd because he has to allow for golf buggies anyway - so what's the problem? Hardly any adjustment needed, except maybe a ramp to the 19th hole.
The Brexit argument has been riddled through with misinformation (or lies if you prefer) from the off.
There were 2 old guys sitting behind us on the bus a couple of days ago saying that Greece had voted to leave the EU 3 times but had been forced to stay and that Germany was desperate to leave but the EU won't let them. How does anyone seriously argue with people if there is no common ground on the basic facts?
Still they say that in a democracy you get the government you deserve.
Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?
He should feel ashamed.
Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.
The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.
Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
I think it was @Casino_Royale that made the point on the aggressive fishing waters stance in no deal concentrating minds in the EU.
Those tough stances have ensured the EU compromised and did a deal realising the UK would force the no deal to mean no deal on both sides of it. They knew with May and Robbins they'd still get preferential access to the UK without needing to give anything in return in the no deal scenario.
"The EU caved on big points because we made them truly fear No Deal" -
This will be a key part of the Johnson spin on the deal over the next few days and weeks. Let's see how it holds up.
It looks as though third country status for agriculture has made it into the deal. That's a massive climbdown, the EU were absolutely adamant that the UK would have to sign up to dynamic alignment for agricultural standards for that, we haven't done the latter but we have the former.
The EU has in many areas made concessions, and I'm sure in many areas the UK has too. I think this could be the start of a much healthier UK/EU relationship. We don't hold up their integration project and they don't impose stupid laws and regulations on us.
Absolutely well said.
Mature neighbours is much better and healthier for everyone, not just us.
While EU politicians will of course say the "regret" Brexit I'm sure there's a significant element that will quietly do no such thing. Especially after today.
PS interesting to see that even Farage can't it seems be bothered to tee up a "betrayal" narrative today. Looks like everyone is tired of this and ready to move on, even the hardcore extremes.
Less than 1% of Scots work with seed potatoes and the government is still pushing for their inclusion anyway.
The Deal will be disastrous news for Sturgeon who was praying for No Deal to push for independence.
There is now the prospect the SNP will not even get a majority next year and when Boris refuses indyref2 the SNP will descend into civil war
Here was me thinking NoDeal was going to be the final nail in the Independence coffin what with the prospect of Razor Wire and Machine Gun posts from Berwick to Gretna.
Now a deal is the final nail.
Interesting. That's a lot of different nails.
At least they're changed so often that there's not the slightest chance of any of them getting rusty
There's only one nail that mattered to this former No voter: what was the role of the Scottish Government in the Brexit negotiations? No voice = no union worth defending
Retruning to the seed potatoes, remember that
(a) this messup hits the Nirish farmers even more - as they have been loudly saying for weeks/months and as was pointed out on PB a month or two back (no seed potatoes = empty fields which were supposed to grow spuds) (b) both the Scottish and Nirish farmers tend to be, erm, not the least supporters of the Union (c) who's representing the Nirish farmers in the negotiations at present? Clue: not the French (d) the sainted Mrs T woulkd have been shocked to see the party of business so carelessly wrecking a valuable trade, buit then it's now the "**** business" party (e) for HYUFD - the seed potatoes are needed to grow potatoes. I know it's a difficult concept, but it does affect the farming industry quite a lot.
The EU is not a big market for seed potatoes. Twice as many are sold to Egypt as the entire EU.
There is actually a local industry in NI anyway. Perhaps it could expand to fill any gaps in the market?
The arrangement may be a bit daft but the noise is totally out of proportion. It looks like more SNP grievance politics to be honest.
From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.
From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?
Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).
Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.
In twelve months time,
Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"
Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.
Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.
This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.
No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.
True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
I throw names at everyone. Have openly described the leadership of Swinson as the "flight of Icarus".
I would take a Labour government led by Starmer in a heartbeat over this lot. But the problem is that Sir Keir (better?) just isn't very good. A brilliant lawyer, but a cardboard politician. He would do very well in a country like Italy that has had a succession of technocrat PMs, but he is struggling against Johnson despite Shagger being an abject liar, hypocrite and failure on his own terms.
Imho he is a vast improvement on Corbyn and Johnson. If Joe Biden can win so can he.
That is true, but he is boring, and has picked a weak front bench. I suspect will gain enough seats to have a hung parliament, and be a capable negotiator, but out of his depth as PM.
Bozo and Jezza both sold bullshit, but did it with enthusiasm. In 2017 Corbynism wasn't toxic in the North.
I quite like dull politicians, but Starmer is spectacularly boring.
I disagree he looks competent and PM material in a way that Corbyn , Ed Milliband , and Kinnock did not. He also compares well to May and Major. At the moment does not have the common touch of Wilson, Smith and Blair. However seems a lot more friendlier than Brown.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.
As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.
Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.
Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
Mr. Carnyx, because one involves the absence of a land border and the other the imposition of one? Also, Northern Ireland and Scotland do have ever so slightly different political histories and present circumstances.
As an aside, the border down the Irish Sea is ****ing stupid. That was one thing May got right.
Undoubtedly different histories. Nevertheless, historical contingencies, and the demonstrated possibility of such a dual situation, are different things.
Scotland has no border with another EU nation and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in the once in a generation 2014 referendum.
Scotland has no greater right to special arrangements than Remain voting London, Winchester, Bath, St Albans, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge etc have
Scotland has lots of borders - with Ireland, Scandinavia, Netherlands, etc. etc. as shown by ferry and air routes.
Or are people and trade only allowerd to move on land?
Carnyx, you are trying to reason with a moron, give up.
From a Remainer point of view? Remain is not an option. It's either this Deal or No Deal.
From a Brexiteer point of view? There are Labour MPs who want to Brexit with No Deal? Who are they are? And how does No Deal help their constituents?
Because it appears to be a poor deal (unless one believes Guido).
Abstention allows the deal to go through without confirmation.
In twelve months time,
Starmer: "The trade deal has proven to be a failure, all the car manufacturers have moved to mainland Europe"
Johnson: " Well it's your fault, you supported the deal".
You're absolutely delusional if you think a deal will ever be Starmers fault. This is Boris's deal.
There is a trap though for Labour. The Brexit deal - once we get through the hubris to the detail - won't be the magic bullet it was sold as. The realities of a shit ton of red tape and increased costs and delays and lack of freedoms will impact onto people already sick of a lack of freedom and increased cost of living.
Let me give you an example. We appear to have dodged the (self-threatened) tariff on cars and car parts. So all we suffer now are the costs of reams of paperwork and lengthy transit through formerly open borders. If - as suggested by their COO - that is enough for Nissan to pull the plug then the workforce in the North East aren't going to just blame Boris. They will blame Labour for not protecting them from it.
This is Keith's conundrum. People need to be protected from something that they have falsely been promised will benefit them. If he protects them they will be outraged now. If he doesn't protect them they will be outraged later.
No-one ever blamed the Tories for the Iraq War.
True rochdale just has a downer on Labour by his childish name calling of sks. He needs to grow up.
I throw names at everyone. Have openly described the leadership of Swinson as the "flight of Icarus".
I would take a Labour government led by Starmer in a heartbeat over this lot. But the problem is that Sir Keir (better?) just isn't very good. A brilliant lawyer, but a cardboard politician. He would do very well in a country like Italy that has had a succession of technocrat PMs, but he is struggling against Johnson despite Shagger being an abject liar, hypocrite and failure on his own terms.
I remember when Remainers used to say it would take 7 years to negotiate a trade agreement, this one has been done in just 11 months.
So despite all the high drama was this perhaps ... The easiest trade deal in history?
Just bringing this back up, as the reporter on Channel 4 News outside Downing Street just now pretty much noted that while it wasn't the easiest trade deal in history, it was one of the fastest and one of the biggest in history. Although, I suppose part of the reason for that is because there is strong alignment already.
I think kinabalu in particular has kept a cool head on likely outcomes. Accidental no deal I do think was possible, but time and again people allowed hatred of Boris to mean he wanted no deal, when it looks like he really didn't. The difficulties in agreeing come down to competence and calculation.
Thanks, kle4.
The wild overestimation of the chances of No Deal came imo from 2 things which are in a sense the same thing. Remainers misread Johnson as being crazy enough to do it. Leavers misread him as being brave enough to do it.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
Is this is a private fight? If not I would point out that Lord Fowler, in todays Guardian is essentially suggesting that his packing of the House of Lords with, primarily, supporters suggests that Boris hasn't much of an attachment to democracy,
Edinburgh Coronavirus growth is deeply concerning.
I'd imagine the mutant strain is in Edinburgh and Glasgow by now and the rest of Europe too. It's going to be a tough few months.
The contrast between Glasgow and Edinburgh couldn't be starker
Edinburgh
Glasgow
In terms of absolute number Glasgow is worse but direction of travel is always the thing.
Yes, but look at how the fall in rates in Glasgow has halted, to me that looks like the new strain is taking off and replacing the old one, it rises as the old strain falls.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
Does he wonder what would have happened if he had actually negotiated with the EU instead of thinking it was 'too much of a faff' ?
He should feel ashamed.
Deep, deep, lifelong embarrassment I should think.
The EU just never believed he would walk away. Failure of Negotiating 1.01
And then May, Hammond and Robbins repeated that mistake.
Some here may belittle Boris as a clown but cometh the hour, cometh the man and he was exactly the kind of unpredictable leader that was needed.
I think it was @Casino_Royale that made the point on the aggressive fishing waters stance in no deal concentrating minds in the EU.
Those tough stances have ensured the EU compromised and did a deal realising the UK would force the no deal to mean no deal on both sides of it. They knew with May and Robbins they'd still get preferential access to the UK without needing to give anything in return in the no deal scenario.
"The EU caved on big points because we made them truly fear No Deal" -
This will be a key part of the Johnson spin on the deal over the next few days and weeks. Let's see how it holds up.
It looks as though third country status for agriculture has made it into the deal. That's a massive climbdown, the EU were absolutely adamant that the UK would have to sign up to dynamic alignment for agricultural standards for that, we haven't done the latter but we have the former.
The EU has in many areas made concessions, and I'm sure in many areas the UK has too. I think this could be the start of a much healthier UK/EU relationship. We don't hold up their integration project and they don't impose stupid laws and regulations on us.
Well regardless of how the deal was done - where I sense we are not at all on the same page - you seem happy enough with the outcome. So far I've yet to see a PB Leaver who isn't.
Where's all the proper headbangers? Don't we have any?
I don't know that we don't. At the moment there is the regular row about generations - you'd think this was a family genealogical site sometimes - and some blue on blue action with someone being told something very indelicate.
Be a touch disappointing if there's no Tory rebellion at all.
Redwood, surely, will not be sated on all matters piscine.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
I do respect the 2014 result which has been implemented and lasts until it gets reversed. No more and no less.
There is a Scottish election next year, if the Scottish voters decide they want to set aside the 2014 referendum and hold a new one then that is their choice in a democracy.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
Wrong on both counts.
The 2016 vote was Remain or Leave. Any form of Leave would have satisfied the democratic element of that vote.
The 2014 vote made no mention of whether or not it was a 'once in a generation' vote. That was just a political tactic to try and win the vote for one side or another. Just as with manifestos it had not legal or democratic standing.
Interviewer-So you're pleased we're finally leaving the EU. Why is that?
Caller-The EU never did anything for my business...
Interviewer-Why is that?
Caller-Well we had to follow their rules.. . Interviewer-What's your business?
Caller- I run a Golf Course...
Interviewer-How do their rules affect your running the golf course?
Caller-Well we had to let people in wheelchairs play golf all day
Interviewer-Was that all?
Caller-No we had to have ramps so they could get from one hole to the next....
The Equalities Act was UK legislation, and only requires "reasonable adjustment" so doubly wrong. Apart from that, a good call...
Takes us back to the conversation yesterday about the tension between those who wish the UK was more like it was in the past, and those who quite like how it is now.
EU or not, a lot of the things that nostalgic Brexit supporters want aren't coming back.
What Many Bexiteers despaired about was the direction of travel. That has been stopped and reversed. And ain't coming back.
Result.
No the pendulum is swinging back already, via a deal that can be built on, until, we salami slice Brexit away to non-existence.
I think kinabalu in particular has kept a cool head on likely outcomes. Accidental no deal I do think was possible, but time and again people allowed hatred of Boris to mean he wanted no deal, when it looks like he really didn't. The difficulties in agreeing come down to competence and calculation.
Thanks, kle4.
The wild overestimation of the chances of No Deal came imo from 2 things which are in a sense the same thing. Remainers misread Johnson as being crazy enough to do it. Leavers misread him as being brave enough to do it.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
Is this is a private fight? If not I would point out that Lord Fowler, in todays Guardian is essentially suggesting that his packing of the House of Lords with, primarily, supporters suggests that Boris hasn't much of an attachment to democracy,
Why?
The Commons is our only elected chamber. The Lord's duty is to respect that.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
I do respect the 2014 result which has been implemented and lasts until it gets reversed. No more and no less.
There is a Scottish election next year, if the Scottish voters decide they want to set aside the 2014 referendum and hold a new one then that is their choice in a democracy.
Under our constitution it is Westminster and Westminster alone that has to give legal approval for any indyref, what happens at Holyrood is merely a factor for Westminster to consider before that and the Deal achieved today reduces the likelihood of an SNP majority next year anyway
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
Wrong on both counts.
The 2016 vote was Remain or Leave. Any form of Leave would have satisfied the democratic element of that vote.
The 2014 vote made no mention of whether or not it was a 'once in a generation' vote. That was just a political tactic to try and win the vote for one side or another. Just as with manifestos it had not legal or democratic standing.
It is you who are showing scorn for democracy.
Even Salmond and Sturgeon said 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
The Tories won a majority last year to deliver Brexit with a Deal, we remain a parliamentary democracy not a direct democracy however much a non Tory libertarian like you might wish that
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
Is this is a private fight? If not I would point out that Lord Fowler, in todays Guardian is essentially suggesting that his packing of the House of Lords with, primarily, supporters suggests that Boris hasn't much of an attachment to democracy,
Why?
The Commons is our only elected chamber. The Lord's duty is to respect that.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
Wrong on both counts.
The 2016 vote was Remain or Leave. Any form of Leave would have satisfied the democratic element of that vote.
The 2014 vote made no mention of whether or not it was a 'once in a generation' vote. That was just a political tactic to try and win the vote for one side or another. Just as with manifestos it had not legal or democratic standing.
It is you who are showing scorn for democracy.
Even Salmond and Sturgeon said 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
The Tories won a majority last year to deliver Brexit with a Deal, we remain a parliamentary democracy not a direct democracy however much a non Tory libertarian like you might wish that
Now this is insane. We are supposed to respect a referendum vote on principle because we are a parliamentary democracy, several elections later?!
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
I do respect the 2014 result which has been implemented and lasts until it gets reversed. No more and no less.
There is a Scottish election next year, if the Scottish voters decide they want to set aside the 2014 referendum and hold a new one then that is their choice in a democracy.
Under our constitution it is Westminster and Westminster alone that has to give legal approval for any indyref, what happens at Holyrood is merely a factor in that and the Deal achieved today reduces the likelihood of an SNP majority next year anyway
Indeed and Westminster can and should respect the choice of the Scottish voters.
If there isn't a majority for a referendum next year then fair enough. That will be the Scottish voters choice. In that case there should not be a referendum because they won't have voted for one.
But if the Scots do give the SNP and other unambiguously pro referendum parties a majority then that is their choice.
Labour and the Tories can make the arguments against a referendum now and stand on that manifesto. But it is for the Scottish voters alone to decide who they elect. Not you, not me.
I think kinabalu in particular has kept a cool head on likely outcomes. Accidental no deal I do think was possible, but time and again people allowed hatred of Boris to mean he wanted no deal, when it looks like he really didn't. The difficulties in agreeing come down to competence and calculation.
Thanks, kle4.
The wild overestimation of the chances of No Deal came imo from 2 things which are in a sense the same thing. Remainers misread Johnson as being crazy enough to do it. Leavers misread him as being brave enough to do it.
Many congrats as I agree 100% with kle4
Hey, I'll start blushing soon.
So, BigG, do you think we will all be "moving on" now?
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
Wrong on both counts.
The 2016 vote was Remain or Leave. Any form of Leave would have satisfied the democratic element of that vote.
The 2014 vote made no mention of whether or not it was a 'once in a generation' vote. That was just a political tactic to try and win the vote for one side or another. Just as with manifestos it had not legal or democratic standing.
It is you who are showing scorn for democracy.
Even Salmond and Sturgeon said 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
The Tories won a majority last year to deliver Brexit with a Deal, we remain a parliamentary democracy not a direct democracy however much a non Tory libertarian like you might wish that
Now this is insane. We are supposed to respect a referendum vote on principle because we are a parliamentary democracy, several elections later?!
Precisely!
HYUFD wants to prioritise a nearly a decade old direct democracy vote over the Parliamentary election next year. Madness.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
Wrong on both counts.
The 2016 vote was Remain or Leave. Any form of Leave would have satisfied the democratic element of that vote.
The 2014 vote made no mention of whether or not it was a 'once in a generation' vote. That was just a political tactic to try and win the vote for one side or another. Just as with manifestos it had not legal or democratic standing.
It is you who are showing scorn for democracy.
Even Salmond and Sturgeon said 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
The Tories won a majority last year to deliver Brexit with a Deal, we remain a parliamentary democracy not a direct democracy however much a non Tory libertarian like you might wish that
Now this is insane. We are supposed to respect a referendum vote on principle because we are a parliamentary democracy, several elections later?!
Yes as we elected a Tory Party committed to respect the once in a generation 2014 vote last year with a majority of 80 at Westminster and Westminster remains the supreme power within the UK constutution.
As the Tory manifesto made clear once Corbyn was defeated so the chances of indyref2 were defeated with him for the rest of this Parliament 'And what is Jeremy Corbyn’s alternative? A new negotiation, and then a new referendum - and he still cannot tell us what side he would be on: in or out, Remain or Leave. It is a recipe for chaos - compounded by a second referendum on Scotland. This country has had enough of dither and delay, of defeatism and despair.
We don’t want to waste 2020 on two acrimonious referendums. We want next year to be a year of hope, of prosperity and growth.' (p3)
'We are opposed to a second independence referendum and stand with the majority of people in Scotland, who do not want to return to division and uncertainty. Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP promised that the 2014 referendum would be a ‘once in a generation’ vote and the result was decisive. We believe that outcome should be respected.' (p47) https://www.conservatives.com/our-plan
Worth bearing in mind that this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade. On average, economists think it will subtract about 4% from UK GDP in the long run, relative to single market membership. If they are right this cost is far greater than the net payments we made as an EU member. Still, it is better than no deal, and for that at least we should be thankful.
Well, no it really isn’t, and I say that as a Remainer. The EU wasn’t just about trade, or it’s unlikely we’d ever have left it. It also had major sociopolitical ramifications that were, to put it mildly, not universally popular.
This deal *is* designed to make trade easier than it would be in a clean break. So from that point of view it might fairly be compared to the free trade deals in the former Soviet Union, or Greenland’s arrangements with Denmark after 1985, which in itself sees your point fail.
If you are arguing that UK-EU trade won't be harder on Jan 1st after this deal takes effect than on Dec 31st under existing rules then you are demonstrably wrong. Of course it is better than no deal, which is why I said precisely that.
Yes, but my point is that you are making a totally false statement. Your implication is we have negotiated a trade deal to make trade harder. We haven’t. We left a political system, rightly or wrongly, and negotiated a trade deal to free up trade in this new political situation rather than trade on WTO terms. Which actually happens very frequently. So whatever your private views on leave or remain, it is you who is ‘demonstrably wrong’ in your claim that ‘this is the first trade deal in history designed to make it harder not easier to trade.‘
It is common in analysing trade deals to compare what has been negotiated with what went before, rather than with some hypothetical third scenario. Since I have repeatedly said that the deal is better than this hypothetical third scenario I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Yes it is better than no deal, but much much worse than our prior arrangements.
Yes, but our prior arrangements were not a trade deal, and shouldn’t therefore be compared on a like for like basis.
That is pure sophistry. I thought this was meant to be a serious debate.
No, it’s a statement of fact. That is definitely part of a serious debate, although regrettably your previous statement was an example of hyperbole, both for the reasons I have stated and because as has been pointed out elsewhere even had your statement been correctly premised there are other examples of trade deals becoming more restrictive.
Ultimately, such statements are a big part of the reason why we lost the argument to Remain, because they undermine our credibility and cause people to stop listening to us.
You have a problem with that? Then stop making them. But don’t abuse me for pointing out that you are wrong.
I don't really understand the point you are trying to make. Let me restate mine. This is the first major trade deal between significant trading blocs that aims to put in place a trading environment more restrictive than that which preceded it. This really shouldn't be a controversial argument, in fact it is the most fundamental description of the situation we are in, I am hardly the only person making it. To argue that isn't the case because the EU single market isn't an FTA is sophistry.
Then let me put it to you in simple terms. You are wrong. Because countries separate all the time, and the EU is considered a country Sui Generis, and put in place more restrictive arrangements than they had before. Ukraine and Russia. Ireland and the UK. Australia and Papua New Guinea. The UK and New Zealand.
Your point would have validity if EU membership were just about trade, but it isn’t. So we leave our membership, over many matters, and negotiate a new relationship that is just about trade. It is nonsensical to suggest that this a more restrictive trade deal replacing a less restrictive one. You are comparing apples and scones.
I'll leave others to judge the relative merits of our arguments.
Okay. Ydoethur is correct and you are completely wrong. Judgement made. Happy now?
That has to be correct. The EU is about much more than trade. Whether the EU will ever go so far as to create a single state is open to question, but political integration goes hand in hand with economic integration. If one does not wish to be part of this process of political integration, it's fairly immaterial to be told that GDP in twenty years time will be a bit smaller than would otherwise have been the case.
A classic example of this choice is Irish Independence. People favoured political independence even knowing that the a break from the UK would have economic consequences.
To equate Brexit with genuine national independence movements disrespects the latter. The comparison is false and rather precious. But the point that Brexit, like such movements, is about "heart over head", about identity not money, is a good one.
It was the latter point. Brexit and Irish Independence were indeed not the same thing. Interestingly, though, there is an argument for saying Ireland did not become truly independent until 1979 (when de facto currency union stopped).
"Independence" is indeed a highly subjective term. It is also value-laden. That's why the word should never feature in the wording of any referendum seeking a decision on political separation, and generally it has not [EDIT] featured in such referenda.
i.e. If a part of the UK, whose citizens are altready within a political system with a high degree of devolved political autonomy, decided to secede from the UK in order to rejoin the EU, would those citizens and their political system enjoy more independence or less? It is at the very least a matter of debate now that the UK is outside of the EU in a meaningful way.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
Is this is a private fight? If not I would point out that Lord Fowler, in todays Guardian is essentially suggesting that his packing of the House of Lords with, primarily, supporters suggests that Boris hasn't much of an attachment to democracy,
Why?
The Commons is our only elected chamber. The Lord's duty is to respect that.
Look at most of the people nominated.
I couldn't care less. It isn't our democratically elected chamber. Only that one matters democratically.
He could put a thousand into the Lord's and I wouldn't care. It isn't elected.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
Wrong on both counts.
The 2016 vote was Remain or Leave. Any form of Leave would have satisfied the democratic element of that vote.
The 2014 vote made no mention of whether or not it was a 'once in a generation' vote. That was just a political tactic to try and win the vote for one side or another. Just as with manifestos it had not legal or democratic standing.
It is you who are showing scorn for democracy.
Even Salmond and Sturgeon said 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
The Tories won a majority last year to deliver Brexit with a Deal, we remain a parliamentary democracy not a direct democracy however much a non Tory libertarian like you might wish that
Now this is insane. We are supposed to respect a referendum vote on principle because we are a parliamentary democracy, several elections later?!
Precisely!
HYUFD wants to prioritise a nearly a decade old direct democracy vote over the Parliamentary election next year. Madness.
Mr. Starry, you're a former No voter who thinks the SNP should've had an influence on the negotiations?
Foreign policy isn't and cannot be devolved.
Doesn't matter the Party in charge. If a country's government is completely excluded and it's voice unheard, despite an overwhelming vote from its electorate, then the political union cannot stand.
Scotland's sovereign government is Westminster and has been since 1707 as confirmed in the once in a generation 2014 vote.
Holyrood correctly is purely for domestic matters within Scotland
If you remember, the SNP manifesto said a once in a generation vote unless there is a material change in circumstances, which explicitly states Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of her people. The people then elected the SNP both to the Scottish and UK Parliament on this manifesto. Denying the stated will of the people will not subdue the desire for independence, but only increase the demand.
You are clearly a diehard Remainer for whom the only validity in the Union is within the EU.
Tough, even last year after the Brexit vote 55% of Scots still did not vote SNP. 2014 was a once in a generation referendum, end of conversation.
If it rained tomorrow the SNP would say that was a mandate for independence, I could not care less what the SNP think or their latest whinge
Because you have no interest in democracy. "What the SNP think" is what the Scottish people think. There was a majority vote for independence parties in the last Holyrood elections and it will be greater again next year.
Why not just be clear and admit that the people of Scotland have no right to their own thoughts and must stay under the yoke of England. Because thats what you are saying.
Rubbish, 55% of Scottish voters did not vote SNP at the 2019 general election, what the SNP think is not what most Scots think.
You are an embarrassment to the party and to democracy.
The SNP were duly elected.
No, unlike non Tory Nat appeasers like you I stick to the party line that 2014 was a 'once in a generation' vote.
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Except you don't stick to the once in a generation line you go beyond it with Franco denials of democracy that are your own stark bonkers ravings and not the party line. Saying that the SNP only got 45% of the vote isn't the party line. The Tory party respects First Past the Post.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I am a democrat. It is for the Scottish voters to determine how they vote.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
You have no respect for the democratic once in a generation 2014 No to independence vote.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
Wrong on both counts.
The 2016 vote was Remain or Leave. Any form of Leave would have satisfied the democratic element of that vote.
The 2014 vote made no mention of whether or not it was a 'once in a generation' vote. That was just a political tactic to try and win the vote for one side or another. Just as with manifestos it had not legal or democratic standing.
It is you who are showing scorn for democracy.
Even Salmond and Sturgeon said 2014 was a once in a generation vote.
The Tories won a majority last year to deliver Brexit with a Deal, we remain a parliamentary democracy not a direct democracy however much a non Tory libertarian like you might wish that
Now this is insane. We are supposed to respect a referendum vote on principle because we are a parliamentary democracy, several elections later?!
Yes as we elected a Tory Party committed to respect the once in a generation 2014 vote last year with a majority of 80 at Westminster and Westminster remains the supreme power within the UK constutution.
As the Tory manifesto made clear once Corbyn was defeated so the chances of indyref2 were defeated with him for the rest of this Parliament 'And what is Jeremy Corbyn’s alternative? A new negotiation, and then a new referendum - and he still cannot tell us what side he would be on: in or out, Remain or Leave. It is a recipe for chaos - compounded by a second referendum on Scotland. This country has had enough of dither and delay, of defeatism and despair.
We don’t want to waste 2020 on two acrimonious referendums. We want next year to be a year of hope, of prosperity and growth.' (p3)
'We are opposed to a second independence referendum and stand with the majority of people in Scotland, who do not want to return to division and uncertainty. Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP promised that the 2014 referendum would be a ‘once in a generation’ vote and the result was decisive. We believe that outcome should be respected.' (p47) https://www.conservatives.com/our-plan
In other words, "we will seek a majority in Englandf so we'll tell the Scots what to do,. and that is all we think we need".
I think kinabalu in particular has kept a cool head on likely outcomes. Accidental no deal I do think was possible, but time and again people allowed hatred of Boris to mean he wanted no deal, when it looks like he really didn't. The difficulties in agreeing come down to competence and calculation.
Thanks, kle4.
The wild overestimation of the chances of No Deal came imo from 2 things which are in a sense the same thing. Remainers misread Johnson as being crazy enough to do it. Leavers misread him as being brave enough to do it.
Many congrats as I agree 100% with kle4
Hey, I'll start blushing soon.
So, BigG, do you think we will all be "moving on" now?
Comments
When it comes to quota changes any English quotas owned by Europeans are protected by this deal as part of the English quotas, even if they're no more English owned than Man City.
What we are seeing now is a reduction in French, Dutch etc headlined quotas - your PSG, Ajax etc are affected.
https://twitter.com/UK_Together/status/506899714923843584?s=19
To argue that Scotland being dragged out of the EU after 62% voted to remain has no relevance to the "once in a generation" nature of the independence referendum convinces nobody.
What would voting for them now offer people, other than the support in itself?
The EU has in many areas made concessions, and I'm sure in many areas the UK has too. I think this could be the start of a much healthier UK/EU relationship. We don't hold up their integration project and they don't impose stupid laws and regulations on us.
"Alexa, play Robbie's* Christmas message."
I hate to think what it might say...something something, COVID is a hoax, vaccines are microchipped, Trump won the GE....
* Its Robbie Williams
https://onemocneni-aktualne.mzcr.cz/covid-19
If Joe Biden can win so can he.
Bozo and Jezza both sold bullshit, but did it with enthusiasm. In 2017 Corbynism wasn't toxic in the North.
I quite like dull politicians, but Starmer is spectacularly boring.
The bouncing of Boris into the pseudo-lockdown of November was disastrous.
Without it all the country would steadily have moved into tier 3 which means southern England (except Kent) would not have moved back into tier 2 in December.
https://www.witneyconservatives.com/news/david-cameron-donates-piglets-cogges-farm-0
"Earlier on today, apparently, a woman rang the BBC and said she heard there was a hurricane on the way. Well, if you're watching, don't worry, there isn't!"
What will they trade us for it?
You also had no problem pushing for No Deal despite no polling evidence to support it and the 2019 Tory manifesto commitment to a deal, thankfully Boris thought otherwise but some democrat you are
Result.
The Corbyn cult are correct in that hard left ideas will get more of an airing. Problem is that so will the hard right - and they have a friendlier face in the form of the Nigel. A New Party led by Farage promising a restoration of lost greatness could do rather well when reality sets in.
"You can reform the country in the direction you want to take it BUT the electorate *must* be convinced you love it first - and that means its history, its people (all of them), its mission and the potential for its future."
As a general point it is fine.
But.
Have the Tories always really loved "the people (all of them)"?
Not much love shown for working-class communities who saw many of them destroyed during the 1980's, not much love for the sense of place and solidarity and the bonds of family that meant so much to people living there. Not much love for the Irish, many of whom moved here and built much of Britain's infrastructure and were condescended to - and worse - by a party more intent on protecting those who were intent on mistreating Irish Catholics in their own country. Not much love shown for the Windrush generation and those who came after from all corners of the Empire they claim to love.
My objection to to those who claim the Tories are somehow inherently more patriotic than Labour is that too many have a somewhat limited view of how far that patriotism goes, too limited an understanding of the history of this country, too ungenerous a view of the many peoples who have made up Britain and its history.
And so the claim to "patriotism" does not come across as a genuine love for country and all its people in all its many aspects but a rather narrower partial and often ignorant view based on a cartoonish understanding of Britain and its history.
I often feel that my Irish-Italian family have a much better understanding of and admiration for the best of Britain but also a better understanding of the complexity of Britain's history than some of the shouty so-called "patriots" with their reductive view of Britain and xenophobic approach to anyone not sharing their views.
I do not include @Casino_Royale in this latter category, btw.
Anyway, it is a beautiful crisp sunny day here so I am off out.
I only note that the sheep are back surrounding my barn again and several of them have been using my car as a scratching post.
Later, no doubt, I will be able to watch "my" flocks by night.
I never pushed for No Deal, I always said I wanted a deal so long as it met our red lines which were in the manifesto. I was prepared to accept No Deal if no deal was agreeable that met the terms of the manifesto, but thankfully that isn't necessary.
Where's all the proper headbangers? Don't we have any?
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence-labour-will-passionately-oppose-indyref2-says-sir-keir-starmer-3074857
You are nothing more than a Nat appeaser, a mere tool for Sturgeon
I really hope you and your good lady enjoy better health for this Christmas and into 2021
We may not agree on independence but we both do want the very best for Scotland
There were 2 old guys sitting behind us on the bus a couple of days ago saying that Greece had voted to leave the EU 3 times but had been forced to stay and that Germany was desperate to leave but the EU won't let them. How does anyone seriously argue with people if there is no common ground on the basic facts?
Still they say that in a democracy you get the government you deserve.
Mature neighbours is much better and healthier for everyone, not just us.
While EU politicians will of course say the "regret" Brexit I'm sure there's a significant element that will quietly do no such thing. Especially after today.
PS interesting to see that even Farage can't it seems be bothered to tee up a "betrayal" narrative today. Looks like everyone is tired of this and ready to move on, even the hardcore extremes.
https://youtu.be/scdlOXMHX94
He also compares well to May and Major.
At the moment does not have the common touch of Wilson, Smith and Blair.
However seems a lot more friendlier than Brown.
If respecting the will of democracy makes me an appraiser then call me an appeaser. I'm not offended. I'm proud to believe in democracy.
Further details are available.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9082855/HALF-air-samples-taken-hallways-fifth-bathrooms-high-levels-coronavirus.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline
Edinburgh
Glasgow
In terms of absolute number Glasgow is worse but direction of travel is always the thing.
The wild overestimation of the chances of No Deal came imo from 2 things which are in a sense the same thing. Remainers misread Johnson as being crazy enough to do it. Leavers misread him as being brave enough to do it.
If not I would point out that Lord Fowler, in todays Guardian is essentially suggesting that his packing of the House of Lords with, primarily, supporters suggests that Boris hasn't much of an attachment to democracy,
And even when May had an agreement with the EU, it didn't end up going anywhere.
You were quite happy to impose No Deal without any democratic mandate for it from the winning 2019 Tory manifesto
Redwood, surely, will not be sated on all matters piscine.
There is a Scottish election next year, if the Scottish voters decide they want to set aside the 2014 referendum and hold a new one then that is their choice in a democracy.
The 2016 vote was Remain or Leave. Any form of Leave would have satisfied the democratic element of that vote.
The 2014 vote made no mention of whether or not it was a 'once in a generation' vote. That was just a political tactic to try and win the vote for one side or another. Just as with manifestos it had not legal or democratic standing.
It is you who are showing scorn for democracy.
The Commons is our only elected chamber. The Lord's duty is to respect that.
Their boredom level must be pretty high.
Annoying.
The Tories won a majority last year to deliver Brexit with a Deal, we remain a parliamentary democracy not a direct democracy however much a non Tory libertarian like you might wish that
https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1342073923647787008?s=20
https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1342074824701734918?s=20
On the third point that rather depends on what the UK does with its "freedom" - as we've seen on COVID it has some strengths - as well as weaknesses.
If there isn't a majority for a referendum next year then fair enough. That will be the Scottish voters choice. In that case there should not be a referendum because they won't have voted for one.
But if the Scots do give the SNP and other unambiguously pro referendum parties a majority then that is their choice.
Labour and the Tories can make the arguments against a referendum now and stand on that manifesto. But it is for the Scottish voters alone to decide who they elect. Not you, not me.
I respect whatever they choose - do you?
https://twitter.com/Haggisontoast/status/1342069890233102338?s=20
So, BigG, do you think we will all be "moving on" now?
And it's quite a contrast. SNP being the pro business party. Tories being the **** business party.
HYUFD wants to prioritise a nearly a decade old direct democracy vote over the Parliamentary election next year. Madness.
As the Tory manifesto made clear once Corbyn was defeated so the chances of indyref2 were defeated with him for the rest of this Parliament 'And what is Jeremy Corbyn’s alternative? A new negotiation, and then a new referendum - and he still cannot tell us what side he would be on: in or out, Remain or Leave.
It is a recipe for chaos - compounded by a second referendum on Scotland. This country has had enough of dither and delay, of defeatism and despair.
We don’t want to waste 2020 on two acrimonious referendums. We want next year to be a year of hope, of prosperity and growth.' (p3)
'We are opposed to a second independence referendum and stand with the majority of people in Scotland,
who do not want to return to division and uncertainty. Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP promised that the 2014
referendum would be a ‘once in a generation’ vote and the result was decisive. We believe that outcome
should be respected.' (p47)
https://www.conservatives.com/our-plan
i.e. If a part of the UK, whose citizens are altready within a political system with a high degree of devolved political autonomy, decided to secede from the UK in order to rejoin the EU, would those citizens and their political system enjoy more independence or less? It is at the very least a matter of debate now that the UK is outside of the EU in a meaningful way.
He could put a thousand into the Lord's and I wouldn't care. It isn't elected.
Can't you see what is wrong with that?
Not for the first time, the Fat Crofter has made a fool of himself.