Scottish independence would be worth a very sizeable amount of earnings for me too.
You werent convinced by the Scottish Government's paper on cross border schemes post independence?
Lawyers working on the divorce settlement for either side will have a wonderfully lucrative and long-lasting brief. It will take years to finalise. I bet there are firms already working on their pitches.
All those organisations that have operations on both sides of the border will need careful advice on every aspect of their operation. There must surely be a major opportunity for law firms with substantial offices in both Scotland and England.
Devomax would be OK, but it would be ginger beer rather than champagne.
I could be wrong but I don't think that many of the City firms have big offices in Scotland, they tend to advise from London. They will have expertise in various issues relating to constitutional, international and frontiers law though, as well as all the nuts and bolts stuff, litigation and arbitration. I am not sure that there are any Scottish firms that will be able to offer the same depth of expertise to the Scottish government. It may be that Edinburgh will have to appoint a few firms, many of them non-Scottish (most likely American).
Quite a number of English firms have bought up (sorry merged with) Scottish firms in recent years. They are so much larger that even the largest Scottish firms (such as McGrigors who "amalgamated" with Pinsent Masons or Golds who were taken over by Irwin Mitchell) are relatively small bites. There are quite a number of financially straitened partners of Edinburgh firms that are hanging off retirement in the hope of being bought out.
Whether this has been done in anticipation of Scottish independence I can't say but it seems unlikely. Just natural predation.
Just rapacious sharks eating other smaller sharks.
Out of interest, what do you think would happen if those were the results in 2016? (I don't think they will be - IMO, the referendum next year will act as a major boost / drag for the SNP depending on how the result goes: it could easily be 50%+ if Yes, or sub-35 if No).
The figures as they stand would make the SNP largest but some way short of an overall majority. The Lib Dems could arrive in a taxi and the Greens too would be struggling, so a government would need the support or at least the tolerance of two of the three substantial groups. There don't look to be any particularly natural alliances there but srange as it sounds, an SNP supply-and-confidence agreement with the Tories seems least unlikely. Would the SNP members / MSPs wear that? I have no idea, but the other possibilities - a grand SNP-Lab coalition or some form of Con-Lab arrangement - seem even more unlikely, and an SNP-minority government would be unstable without some form of support if there's not a third, reasonably-sized, opposition group with which to negotiate.
David - "... an SNP supply-and-confidence agreement with the Tories seems least unlikely."
Strongly disagree there David.
If the SNP were the largest party within an NOC parliament then they would either form another Minority government (cf. 2007-11) or look towards the Greens, Inds, Lib Dems, Labour, probably in that order. I'm afraid that your own party would be the very, very last resort.
Same if LAB largest within NOC parliament. They would look to Grn, Inds, LD, SNP in that order. A Lab-Con coalition would be SLab's ultimate nightmare.
Funnily, I agree with most of that and it's what prompted my post. If it is as the current poll has it, then LD, Grn and Inds will be pretty much irrelevant and a government would be perm any two from SNP, Lab and Con (or any one with one other's tacit support). As a Lab-Con deal wouldn't pass muster with either party (as well as other reasons), that basically means the government would have to be SNP-led. Therefore, would it be a minority, a grand SNP-Lab coalition or an SNP-Tory deal?
For reasons I mentioned earlier, I don't think a minority government would fare as well in a third parliament as its first (especially having been a majority one in between). On the other hand, could a grand coalition be made to work? If not, the *only* deal on the table would be with the Tories. I agree that it wouldn't be very palatable to Salmond and party - and hence couldn't be a coalition - but on a supply-and-confidence basis? That's not so very different from 2007-11. As the Holmes quote goes, once you have eliminated the impossible ...
Owen Jones@OwenJones842m Big thanks to firefighters for helping to ensure we are protected from harm. In return, I stand behind them as they fight for fairness
On the Great Fire Extinguisher Debate: I agree with Nick (for once!)
In fact, harmonisation of product standards is one of the great successes of the EU. Surely even the most rabid Eurosceptics should accept that. What's more, even if we left the EU, there would be no difference: of course we'd conform to EU standards. It would be completely mad to have our own incompatible standards when there's a market of 300 million people next door.
On the Great Fire Extinguisher Debate: I agree with Nick (for once!)
In fact, harmonisation of product standards is one of the great successes of the EU. Surely even the most rabid Eurosceptics should accept that. What's more, even if we left the EU, there would be no difference: of course we'd conform to EU standards. It would be completely mad to have our own incompatible standards when there's a market of 300 million people next door.
On the Great Fire Extinguisher Debate: I agree with Nick (for once!)
In fact, harmonisation of product standards is one of the great successes of the EU. Surely even the most rabid Eurosceptics should accept that. What's more, even if we left the EU, there would be no difference: of course we'd conform to EU standards. It would be completely mad to have our own incompatible standards when there's a market of 300 million people next door.
If we left the EU we'd still conform, you say? So we might as well leave then as we'd use the same standards and save on the club subscription fee.
And, since we're talking about the start of the Great War: I'm half-way through Max Hastings' 'Catastrophe: Europe goes to war 1914'. It's an excellent book, albeit very focused on the specifics of 1914 and especially the weeks after the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. It's particularly good on the Serbian and Austro-Hungarian ramifications.
The speed of the various mobilisations was stunning. "In 312 hours, 11,000 trains carried 119,754 officers, 2.1 million men and 600,000 horses across Germany to concentration areas on the frontiers of France, Belgium and Luxembourg".
If Britain left it's far from certain what impact that would have upon Euroland itself and our relationship with the EU/eurozone. The foreign eunuchs in Brussels would be down several billion pounds a year, which would surely have a dramatic impact on spending programmes, and there would be an almost total overlap between countries that have or want the euro and are members of the EU.
Anyway, a referendum's contingent on the Conservatives winning an outright majority, which seems to be amongst the least likely credible results of the next election.
On the Great Fire Extinguisher Debate: I agree with Nick (for once!)
In fact, harmonisation of product standards is one of the great successes of the EU. Surely even the most rabid Eurosceptics should accept that. What's more, even if we left the EU, there would be no difference: of course we'd conform to EU standards. It would be completely mad to have our own incompatible standards when there's a market of 300 million people next door.
If we left the EU we'd still conform, you say? So we might as well leave then as we'd use the same standards and save on the club subscription fee.
But we'd have no share in the decision making process.
No share of the cost either, and we could withdraw from the ECHR and not have the unaccountable foreigners trying to tell us we must give votes to prisoners.
And, since we're talking about the start of the Great War: I'm half-way through Max Hastings' 'Catastrophe: Europe goes to war 1914'. It's an excellent book, albeit very focused on the specifics of 1914 and especially the weeks after the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. It's particularly good on the Serbian and Austro-Hungarian ramifications.
The speed of the various mobilisations was stunning. "In 312 hours, 11,000 trains carried 119,754 officers, 2.1 million men and 600,000 horses across Germany to concentration areas on the frontiers of France, Belgium and Luxembourg".
Agree Richard. Probably the most enjoyable non fiction book I have read this year. Highly recommended for those who got book vouchers for Christmas.
It would be completely mad to have our own incompatible standards when there's a market of 300 million people next door.
Yes, can't wait until we abandon 13A plugs...
Reminds me of a line from a German in a Len Deighton novel He said "Britain was a nation of electrical genuises who had a dozen kinds of plug none of which worked efficiently".
It is not surprising we are so against the fire extinguisher regulation is it?
I think I might have started this by picking Nick up on a suggestion that the translation that he was involved in was "obviously good for business". I think the consensus, despite a valiant response from Nick and surprise support from Richard is that the only business that it is good for is Nick Palmer translation services Inc.
And good luck to him. If I were to list all the various things I am useless at in my life and would want to be better at being good enough at a foreign langauage to translate technical documents would be pretty high up there.
It was also a fun discussion. Merry New year when it comes everyone.
Comments
For reasons I mentioned earlier, I don't think a minority government would fare as well in a third parliament as its first (especially having been a majority one in between). On the other hand, could a grand coalition be made to work? If not, the *only* deal on the table would be with the Tories. I agree that it wouldn't be very palatable to Salmond and party - and hence couldn't be a coalition - but on a supply-and-confidence basis? That's not so very different from 2007-11. As the Holmes quote goes, once you have eliminated the impossible ...
Owen Jones@OwenJones842m
Big thanks to firefighters for helping to ensure we are protected from harm. In return, I stand behind them as they fight for fairness
In fact, harmonisation of product standards is one of the great successes of the EU. Surely even the most rabid Eurosceptics should accept that. What's more, even if we left the EU, there would be no difference: of course we'd conform to EU standards. It would be completely mad to have our own incompatible standards when there's a market of 300 million people next door.
The speed of the various mobilisations was stunning. "In 312 hours, 11,000 trains carried 119,754 officers, 2.1 million men and 600,000 horses across Germany to concentration areas on the frontiers of France, Belgium and Luxembourg".
Anyway, a referendum's contingent on the Conservatives winning an outright majority, which seems to be amongst the least likely credible results of the next election.
Agree Richard. Probably the most enjoyable non fiction book I have read this year. Highly recommended for those who got book vouchers for Christmas.
It is not surprising we are so against the fire extinguisher regulation is it?
I think I might have started this by picking Nick up on a suggestion that the translation that he was involved in was "obviously good for business". I think the consensus, despite a valiant response from Nick and surprise support from Richard is that the only business that it is good for is Nick Palmer translation services Inc.
And good luck to him. If I were to list all the various things I am useless at in my life and would want to be better at being good enough at a foreign langauage to translate technical documents would be pretty high up there.
It was also a fun discussion. Merry New year when it comes everyone.