... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
1) Immigration 2) Norway probably not agreeing to it as they'd be swamped by our economic size ?
Politically those aren't such a problem for Sturgeon I guess.
Yes, exactly. Also the EEA option was effectively ruled out by the Leave campaign's emphasis on 'taking back control' in ways other than in immigration. Wee Scotland wouldn't be so worried about that sort of stuff.
If this is accurate, then it makes the proposed referendum even more ludicrous. If the SNP don't even want to be in the EU (necessarily), why then would leaving it be considered just cause for Referendum 2: Refer Harder?
If this is accurate, then it makes the proposed referendum even more ludicrous. If the SNP don't even want to be in the EU (necessarily), why then would leaving it be considered just cause for Referendum 2: Refer Harder?
This is not some mysterious out of the blue statement. It has been completely and totally consistent.
The faux outrage over this on here is completely hilarious.
The EEA as an interim staging post prior to full EU membership seems sensible to me. Sturgeon hasn't said the EEA is the permanent end game for Scotland, unless I've missed it.
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
The EEA option is probably rather a good one for Scotland. It would also be good for Ireland, but that's an even bigger political minefield...
Can you really see a scenario where we have tariff free trade with the EEA but not the EU? Anything's possible I suppose but it looks very unlikely to me. I do accept that if it did occur Scottish membership of the EEA would be more attractive than it otherwise looks.
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
I wonder what her fan club in Brussels will think, when despite fawning over them for the last 9 months, she is not going to stay in the EU
You're overinterpreting things. The red line is EEA membership. The means to achieve that is most likely EU membership, but that is not the only option.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the No side have lost the Europe weapon.
When Sturgeon said in June her aim was to retain Scottish Membership of the single market and got a Holyrood vote in favour of her taking any and all actions to explore continuing membership and then in December when she presented the Scottish governments official position to Theresa May and it was for Scottish Membership of the Single Market it is now completely outrageous and a complete u-turn for her to be suggesting that an independent Scotland would seek to be a member of the Single Market?
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
I wonder what her fan club in Brussels will think, when despite fawning over them for the last 9 months, she is not going to stay in the EU
You're overinterpreting things. The red line is EEA membership. The means to achieve that is most likely EU membership, but that is not the only option.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the Yes side have lost the Europe weapon.
You are missing the point - yesterday was all about a second referendum on membership of the EU. It is only now she is talking about EEA. No matter how you slice it she misled everyone yesterday
If this is accurate, then it makes the proposed referendum even more ludicrous. If the SNP don't even want to be in the EU (necessarily), why then would leaving it be considered just cause for Referendum 2: Refer Harder?
This is not some mysterious out of the blue statement. It has been completely and totally consistent.
The faux outrage over this on here is completely hilarious.
The EEA as an interim staging post prior to full EU membership seems sensible to me. Sturgeon hasn't said the EEA is the permanent end game for Scotland, unless I've missed it.
Tories have a working majority of 17. There is a simple solution to boost that, support Scottish independence. By my maths that would boost the Tory working majority to 74. That's before any boundary reforms or a potential Corbyn general election.
Why would the 'Conservative and Unionist Party' support the breakup of the Union?
If this is accurate, then it makes the proposed referendum even more ludicrous. If the SNP don't even want to be in the EU (necessarily), why then would leaving it be considered just cause for Referendum 2: Refer Harder?
This is not some mysterious out of the blue statement. It has been completely and totally consistent.
The faux outrage over this on here is completely hilarious.
Think of PB as the Muirfield clubhouse explaining/justifying/equivocating to each other why 'stuff' has happened.
Think of the SNP as a car with an insufferable fat chauvinist in the passenger seat bellowing unintelligible instructions at the flustered wee hen at the wheel.
It's better for the environment to buy local goods, to be honest. Especially food.
It depends. If you require inordinate amounts of fertalizer and growth lights to get certain crops growing locally then importing them from a far away country can easily be greener.
If this is accurate, then it makes the proposed referendum even more ludicrous. If the SNP don't even want to be in the EU (necessarily), why then would leaving it be considered just cause for Referendum 2: Refer Harder?
This is not some mysterious out of the blue statement. It has been completely and totally consistent.
The faux outrage over this on here is completely hilarious.
The justification given is the last SNP Holyrood manifesto which talked about Scotland leaving the EU against its will.
Setting aside the fact that Scotland didn't give (and wasn't asked) its opinion on whether Scotland should leave the EU, it's fairly clear that *if* that manifesto is used as justification for a second referendum, *then* the SNP *must* be proposing that an "independent" Scotland promptly applies for EU membership.
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
It's better for the environment to buy local goods, to be honest. Especially food.
It depends. If you require inordinate amounts of fertalizer and growth lights to get certain crops growing locally then importing them from a far away country can easily be greener.
Well that is true. I don't mean exotic fruit and vegetables, which are luxuries. I mean fruit, vegetables and animals that can be grown or reared here relatively naturally.
Can you really see a scenario where we have tariff free trade with the EEA but not the EU? Anything's possible I suppose but it looks very unlikely to me. I do accept that if it did occur Scottish membership of the EEA would be more attractive than it otherwise looks.
I think your question comes down to whether or not we come to a trade deal with the EU. I'd say that it's pretty much certain that we'll have tariff- and hassle-free trade with the EEA/EFTA countries, given that it's in both sides' interests and they haven't got the political baggage to worry about, nor a motive to give us a rough deal pour décourager les autres, nor do they have the institutional sclerosis of having to get unanimity of 27 countries and various tin-pot parliaments.
Can we have free trade with EEA countries whilst having our own free trade agreements with other countries? Wouldn't that result in goods being imported into the EU via proxy countries?
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
I wonder what her fan club in Brussels will think, when despite fawning over them for the last 9 months, she is not going to stay in the EU
You're overinterpreting things. The red line is EEA membership. The means to achieve that is most likely EU membership, but that is not the only option.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the Yes side have lost the Europe weapon.
You are missing the point - yesterday was all about a second referendum on membership of the EU. It is only now she is talking about EEA. No matter how you slice it she misled everyone yesterday
Are you kidding me. She talked about single market membership yesterday. I'm reading the transcript right now.
You are making words out of thin air.
" a choice of whether to follow the UK to a hard Brexit, or to become an independent country able to secure a real partnership of equals with the rest of the UK and our own relationship with Europe."
"Own relationship with Europe" does not equal "membership of the European Union"
Can you really see a scenario where we have tariff free trade with the EEA but not the EU? Anything's possible I suppose but it looks very unlikely to me. I do accept that if it did occur Scottish membership of the EEA would be more attractive than it otherwise looks.
I think your question comes down to whether or not we come to a trade deal with the EU. I'd say that it's pretty much certain that we'll have tariff- and hassle-free trade with the EEA/EFTA countries, given that it's in both sides' interests and they haven't got the political baggage to worry about, nor a motive to give us a rough deal pour décourager les autres, nor do they have the institutional sclerosis of having to get unanimity of 27 countries and various tin-pot parliaments.
Yes that's fair. Which brings me back to the point that I do expect us to have tariff free trade with the EU. There is just too much for both sides to lose for a different result.
Can we have free trade with EEA countries whilst having our own free trade agreements with other countries? Wouldn't that result in goods being imported into the EU via proxy countries?
No. There are systems to cover this. It is how the EFTA members of the EEA operate.
If this is accurate, then it makes the proposed referendum even more ludicrous. If the SNP don't even want to be in the EU (necessarily), why then would leaving it be considered just cause for Referendum 2: Refer Harder?
This is not some mysterious out of the blue statement. It has been completely and totally consistent.
The faux outrage over this on here is completely hilarious.
The justification given is the last SNP Holyrood manifesto which talked about Scotland leaving the EU against its will.
Setting aside the fact that Scotland didn't give (and wasn't asked) its opinion on whether Scotland should leave the EU, it's fairly clear that *if* that manifesto is used as justification for a second referendum, *then* the SNP *must* be proposing that an "independent" Scotland promptly applies for EU membership.
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
I wonder what her fan club in Brussels will think, when despite fawning over them for the last 9 months, she is not going to stay in the EU
You're overinterpreting things. The red line is EEA membership. The means to achieve that is most likely EU membership, but that is not the only option.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the Yes side have lost the Europe weapon.
You are missing the point - yesterday was all about a second referendum on membership of the EU. It is only now she is talking about EEA. No matter how you slice it she misled everyone yesterday
Are you kidding me. She talked about single market membership yesterday. I'm reading the transcript right now.
You are making words out of thin air.
" a choice of whether to follow the UK to a hard Brexit, or to become an independent country able to secure a real partnership of equals with the rest of the UK and our own relationship with Europe."
"Own relationship with Europe" does not equal "membership of the European Union"
tell that to the voters - nobody believes it and now the media have their breach in the argument
Can we have free trade with EEA countries whilst having our own free trade agreements with other countries? Wouldn't that result in goods being imported into the EU via proxy countries?
Yes, EEA members can and do have free trade agreements with other countries. The problem of good being sneaked into the EU that way is dealt with by the exporter from (say) Norway to the EU signing a declaration of origin. (The EEA countries are not in the EU customs union, so there are still some customs checks).
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
I wonder what her fan club in Brussels will think, when despite fawning over them for the last 9 months, she is not going to stay in the EU
You're overinterpreting things. The red line is EEA membership. The means to achieve that is most likely EU membership, but that is not the only option.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the Yes side have lost the Europe weapon.
You are missing the point - yesterday was all about a second referendum on membership of the EU. It is only now she is talking about EEA. No matter how you slice it she misled everyone yesterday
Are you kidding me. She talked about single market membership yesterday. I'm reading the transcript right now.
You are making words out of thin air.
" a choice of whether to follow the UK to a hard Brexit, or to become an independent country able to secure a real partnership of equals with the rest of the UK and our own relationship with Europe."
"Own relationship with Europe" does not equal "membership of the European Union"
tell that to the voters - nobody believes it and now the media have their breach in the argument
So you think voters are going to be appalled by the daming evidence of Sturgeon sticking to the same position for the last 9 months?
Tories have a working majority of 17. There is a simple solution to boost that, support Scottish independence. By my maths that would boost the Tory working majority to 74. That's before any boundary reforms or a potential Corbyn general election.
Why would the 'Conservative and Unionist Party' support the breakup of the Union?
Self-interest. As always.
May has made quite clear her commitment to the Union
If this is accurate, then it makes the proposed referendum even more ludicrous. If the SNP don't even want to be in the EU (necessarily), why then would leaving it be considered just cause for Referendum 2: Refer Harder?
This is not some mysterious out of the blue statement. It has been completely and totally consistent.
The faux outrage over this on here is completely hilarious.
Think of PB as the Muirfield clubhouse explaining/justifying/equivocating to each other why 'stuff' has happened.
Think of the SNP as a car with an insufferable fat chauvinist in the passenger seat bellowing unintelligible instructions at the flustered wee hen at the wheel.
A bit lumbering there Monica. You're obviously rattled.
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
The EEA option is probably rather a good one for Scotland. It would also be good for Ireland, but that's an even bigger political minefield...
EEA membership would be good for the UK as a whole. It is only the stupid hang up with immigration that makes it impractical. For Scotland it would be an excellent choice. It would however cause issues with the land border with England due to freedom of movement.
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
I wonder what her fan club in Brussels will think, when despite fawning over them for the last 9 months, she is not going to stay in the EU
You're overinterpreting things. The red line is EEA membership. The means to achieve that is most likely EU membership, but that is not the only option.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the Yes side have lost the Europe weapon.
You are missing the point - yesterday was all about a second referendum on membership of the EU. It is only now she is talking about EEA. No matter how you slice it she misled everyone yesterday
Are you kidding me. She talked about single market membership yesterday. I'm reading the transcript right now.
You are making words out of thin air.
" a choice of whether to follow the UK to a hard Brexit, or to become an independent country able to secure a real partnership of equals with the rest of the UK and our own relationship with Europe."
"Own relationship with Europe" does not equal "membership of the European Union"
tell that to the voters - nobody believes it and now the media have their breach in the argument
So you think voters are going to be appalled by the daming evidence of Sturgeon sticking to the same position for the last 9 months?
It's a view I suppose.
I think Sturgeon will be spending her time trying to convince a sceptical media she hasnt changed her position and looking weak and shifty as a result
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
I wonder what her fan club in Brussels will think, when despite fawning over them for the last 9 months, she is not going to stay in the EU
You're overinterpreting things. The red line is EEA membership. The means to achieve that is most likely EU membership, but that is not the only option.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the Yes side have lost the Europe weapon.
You are missing the point - yesterday was all about a second referendum on membership of the EU. It is only now she is talking about EEA. No matter how you slice it she misled everyone yesterday
Are you kidding me. She talked about single market membership yesterday. I'm reading the transcript right now.
You are making words out of thin air.
" a choice of whether to follow the UK to a hard Brexit, or to become an independent country able to secure a real partnership of equals with the rest of the UK and our own relationship with Europe."
"Own relationship with Europe" does not equal "membership of the European Union"
Everything Nicola has said and done, including her various visits to the EU, indicated full EU membership and she did not say EAA yesterday. Many will see it as misleading or even dishonest no matter how you try to defend her
"One option – in my view, the best option – is to become a full member of the EU as an independent country. Indeed, independence would resolve the fundamental cause of the position Scotland currently finds itself in: Westminster Governments that Scotland doesn’t vote for, imposing policies that a majority in Scotland does not support."
That was the option she set out yesterday. Today she is saying something materially different. (We will put to one side Scotland's completely insignificant say in determining the policies and legislation of the EU should it become a member on the very solid basis that at least they are not English, or something.)
I am at a loss to understand this confusion over Sturgeon's alleged change of heart on EU membership.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand. Everyone is missing the point (some posters wilfully) about the SNP and Sturgeon. Sturgeon does not care one way or another about single market access. She never has. She never will. Just as she doesn't care about the people of Scotland, never has and never will (which is incidentally why her government has such a poor track record on domestic issues, although the lack of any sort of opposition doesn't help). She has only the haziest idea of what 'being Scottish' actually means - for example, she doesn't seem to know that the southern half of Scotland, including Edinburgh, is ex-Saxon land.
What she really is is somebody who hates the English. That's it. That's all 90% of nationalists are - people with inferiority complexes who have convinced themselves that their problems and failures are the result of malicious influences outside their control and once they are removed everything will be perfect. Ireland is the classic example (and in its sixty years of poverty and stagnation a grim warning for anyone who uncritically believes Sturgeon or for that matter her fellow traveller in England, Nigel Farage). She doesn't care what happens to Scotland, or Europe, or anything, as long as she can hammer the English, the harder the better. If she hammers the Scots at the same time, she really won't care.
The EU vote is a merely pretext for what she has always intended to do since at least 2015 (although she was shy about saying it aloud, unlike Salmond). If it wasn't this, it would be something else. The hollowness of her claims may be seen quite simply in her desperation to hold the vote before any 'material changes' could possibly materialise. Therefore, she doesn't actually mind if she ends up in the EU, the EEA or even the CIS as long as she gets it in a way that hurts her neighbour.
This is what turned me off nationalism that once, in a burst of youthful idealism, I genuinely thought was about standing up for those on the country's periphery against the might and arrrogance of London's politicians. When I realised that there were people who actually hated me merely because my father spoke no Welsh, I abandoned them, first for the Liberal Democrats now for the life of a floating voter.
This does of course make her a very difficult opponent to beat - because like most narcissistic fanatics who are careless of the consequences of their actions, she will be quite happy to say anything in order to get her way. That could lead to a belief that an independent Scotland will be rich, free, prosperous and have free owls provided by Harry Potter. However, the pretext used should also give May the option of delaying things for five years by which time Sturgeon will have some awkward explaining to do about the collapse of the Scottish university system.
If this is accurate, then it makes the proposed referendum even more ludicrous. If the SNP don't even want to be in the EU (necessarily), why then would leaving it be considered just cause for Referendum 2: Refer Harder?
This is not some mysterious out of the blue statement. It has been completely and totally consistent.
The faux outrage over this on here is completely hilarious.
Think of PB as the Muirfield clubhouse explaining/justifying/equivocating to each other why 'stuff' has happened.
Think of the SNP as a car with an insufferable fat chauvinist in the passenger seat bellowing unintelligible instructions at the flustered wee hen at the wheel.
A bit lumbering there Monica. You're obviously rattled.
Nicola's made a monkey out of you. That must sting.
You think it's fanciful because you don't want to imagine rUK revisiting Brexit when faced with that scenario.
Nope. That is one thing I know won't happen. In fact the very best result for me would be for the Scottish independence result to move us to EFTA membership of the EEA. But that is unlikely in the extreme given the current emphasis on immigration controls.
When Sturgeon said in June her aim was to retain Scottish Membership of the single market and got a Holyrood vote in favour of her taking any and all actions to explore continuing membership and then in December when she presented the Scottish governments official position to Theresa May and it was for Scottish Membership of the Single Market it is now completely outrageous and a complete u-turn for her to be suggesting that an independent Scotland would seek to be a member of the Single Market?
Right oh.
Hardly a singular view either, especially in the the good old days when TRuthy wasn't born again.
'Scotland must retain access to the European single market to protect the economy, jobs and public services, Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson has told Europe Minister David Lidington'
EEA membership would be good for the UK as a whole. It is only the stupid hang up with immigration that makes it impractical. For Scotland it would be an excellent choice. It would however cause issues with the land border with England due to freedom of movement.
I don't think the freedom of movement issue across the border would be a big problem, as long as Scotland stays out of Schengen. Controlling immigration is not primarily about border checks, but the right to work and reside here. Any EU citizen who wanted to work here illegally could just fly to Luton or get the Eurostar to Ashford - they wouldn't need to go via Edinburgh.
So you think voters are going to be appalled by the daming evidence of Sturgeon sticking to the same position for the last 9 months?
It's a view I suppose.
"As things stand, Scotland faces the prospect of being taken out of the EU against our will.I regard that as democratically unacceptable."
"Secondly, I want to make it absolutely clear today that I intend to take all possible steps and explore all options to give effect to how people in Scotland voted - in other words, to secure our continuing place in the EU and in the single market in particular.
"And we said clearly that we do not want to leave the EU."
EEA membership would be good for the UK as a whole. It is only the stupid hang up with immigration that makes it impractical. For Scotland it would be an excellent choice. It would however cause issues with the land border with England due to freedom of movement.
I don't think the freedom of movement issue across the border would be a big problem, as long as Scotland stays out of Schengen. Controlling immigration is not primarily about border checks, but the right to work and reside here. Any EU citizen who wanted to work here illegally could just fly to Luton or get the Eurostar to Ashford - they wouldn't need to go via Edinburgh.
Joining the EEA might help the SNP in one way, but it leaves a big big currency question unresolved.
Yes and it rules out the Euro option. Which, on one view, seems to be the only one on the table other than using sterling with no say on monetary or interest rate policy or creating a new currency subject to the whims of the oil price. That was a killer the last time around.
EEA membership would be good for the UK as a whole. It is only the stupid hang up with immigration that makes it impractical. For Scotland it would be an excellent choice. It would however cause issues with the land border with England due to freedom of movement.
I don't think the freedom of movement issue across the border would be a big problem, as long as Scotland stays out of Schengen. Controlling immigration is not primarily about border checks, but the right to work and reside here. Any EU citizen who wanted to work here illegally could just fly to Luton or get the Eurostar to Ashford - they wouldn't need to go via Edinburgh.
Isn't Schengen a condition of EEA ?
Don't think so. We're not in Schengen and are in the EEA, and vice versa for Switzerland.
EEA membership would be good for the UK as a whole. It is only the stupid hang up with immigration that makes it impractical. For Scotland it would be an excellent choice. It would however cause issues with the land border with England due to freedom of movement.
I don't think the freedom of movement issue across the border would be a big problem, as long as Scotland stays out of Schengen. Controlling immigration is not primarily about border checks, but the right to work and reside here. Any EU citizen who wanted to work here illegally could just fly to Luton or get the Eurostar to Ashford - they wouldn't need to go via Edinburgh.
Isn't Schengen a condition of EEA ?
No. The UK is currently in the EEA but not Schengen.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
I wonder what her fan club in Brussels will think, when despite fawning over them for the last 9 months, she is not going to stay in the EU
You're overinterpreting things. The red line is EEA membership. The means to achieve that is most likely EU membership, but that is not the only option.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the Yes side have lost the Europe weapon.
You are missing the point - yesterday was all about a second referendum on membership of the EU. It is only now she is talking about EEA. No matter how you slice it she misled everyone yesterday
Are you kidding me. She talked about single market membership yesterday. I'm reading the transcript right now.
You are making words out of thin air.
" a choice of whether to follow the UK to a hard Brexit, or to become an independent country able to secure a real partnership of equals with the rest of the UK and our own relationship with Europe."
"Own relationship with Europe" does not equal "membership of the European Union"
tell that to the voters - nobody believes it and now the media have their breach in the argument
So you think voters are going to be appalled by the daming evidence of Sturgeon sticking to the same position for the last 9 months?
It's a view I suppose.
I think Sturgeon will be spending her time trying to convince a sceptical media she hasnt changed her position and looking weak and shifty as a result
Given that her position on single market membership being key has been well documented by the media over the last 9 months it seems like an easy sell.
Getting excited by an Iain Martin article criticising the SNP is like being shocked at a alcoholic drinking booze.
There are still countries following the same system even in the globalised economy of today. Panama is a good example. Since 1903 it has used the US dollar just in the way independent Scotland would again be using the pound. Panama is a prosperous country, as rich as EU members Croatia or Hungary. It can attract huge foreign investments: we saw an example the other day when the first Chinese super-freighter passed through the newly expanded Panama Canal.
The International Monetary Fund, no less, has given the Panamanian system its seal of approval: ‘By not having a central bank, Panama lacks both a traditional lender of last resort and a mechanism to mitigate systemic liquidity shortages. The authorities emphasised that these features had contributed to the strength and resilience of the system, which relies on banks holding high levels of liquidity beyond the prudential requirement of 30 per cent of short-term deposits.’ Panama is in fact ranked seventh in the world for the soundness of its banks. That, to put it mildly, is a bit better than Scotland.
Tories have a working majority of 17. There is a simple solution to boost that, support Scottish independence. By my maths that would boost the Tory working majority to 74. That's before any boundary reforms or a potential Corbyn general election.
Why would the 'Conservative and Unionist Party' support the breakup of the Union?
Self-interest. As always.
The commitment to the UK is in the party's DNA. No matter what the (considerable!) electoral advantage of supporting Scottish independence, they'd lose me and several thousand other members if they change their mind on this one.
Each side accusing the other of changing position etc etc. The worst is Salmond in the middle, the sanctamonius elephant seal waffling his way through it all.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
It does not have anything like the nationalistic pride of Scotland though if you put a Welsh rugby shirt on, they have. Wales is trending right and there is no possibility that it will seek independence. And I have lived in both Countries so I do have experience of the nationalism question in both
... If, as I expect, tariff free trade is ultimately agreed what on earth is the point? If it is not then EEA membership with trade barriers with rUK is a disaster. ...
Actually, the second of those isn't necessarily right. As an EEA member, Scotland could in principle join an EEA free-trade agreement with the UK even if the EU doesn't play ball with us - indeed, Norway and the other EEA states will already be giving this a very high priority:
The UK is Norway’s most important trading partner, and Norway is the UK’s most important supplier of oil and gas.
I wonder what her fan club in Brussels will think, when despite fawning over them for the last 9 months, she is not going to stay in the EU
You're overinterpreting things. The red line is EEA membership. The means to achieve that is most likely EU membership, but that is not the only option.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the Yes side have lost the Europe weapon.
You are missing the point - yesterday was all about a second referendum on membership of the EU. It is only now she is talking about EEA. No matter how you slice it she misled everyone yesterday
Are you kidding me. She talked about single market membership yesterday. I'm reading the transcript right now. an Union"
tell that to the voters - nobody believes it and now the media have their breach in the argument
So you think voters are going to be appalled by the daming evidence of Sturgeon sticking to the same position for the last 9 months?
It's a view I suppose.
I think Sturgeon will be spending her time trying to convince a sceptical media she hasnt changed her position and looking weak and shifty as a result
Given that her position on single market membership being key has been well documented by the media over the last 9 months it seems like an easy sell.
Getting excited by an Iain Martin article criticising the SNP is like being shocked at a alcoholic drinking booze.
the body of evidence says the SNP have stated they want to stay in the EU, they make the point about the remain vote repeatedly
believe what your party tells you, but no-one else does, this is a shift in position and it ill be taken to task
There are still countries following the same system even in the globalised economy of today. Panama is a good example. Since 1903 it has used the US dollar just in the way independent Scotland would again be using the pound. Panama is a prosperous country, as rich as EU members Croatia or Hungary. It can attract huge foreign investments: we saw an example the other day when the first Chinese super-freighter passed through the newly expanded Panama Canal.
The International Monetary Fund, no less, has given the Panamanian system its seal of approval: ‘By not having a central bank, Panama lacks both a traditional lender of last resort and a mechanism to mitigate systemic liquidity shortages. The authorities emphasised that these features had contributed to the strength and resilience of the system, which relies on banks holding high levels of liquidity beyond the prudential requirement of 30 per cent of short-term deposits.’ Panama is in fact ranked seventh in the world for the soundness of its banks. That, to put it mildly, is a bit better than Scotland.
Sterlingisation is an option but it is a long way from being cost free. It requires much higher reserves on the part of the government and the banking sector. It accepts that interest rates will in large part be fixed in the interests of another country, one that has a strong tendency towards housing booms which drive interest rates up. It makes borrowing more expensive and subject to liquidity. And it does not meet the criteria for EU membership (if this still matters after today).
Tories have a working majority of 17. There is a simple solution to boost that, support Scottish independence. By my maths that would boost the Tory working majority to 74. That's before any boundary reforms or a potential Corbyn general election.
Why would the 'Conservative and Unionist Party' support the breakup of the Union?
It doesn't. Doesn't change the fact that Scotland leaving would leave the Conservative and Unionist Party a great inheritance.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
It does not have anything like the nationalistic pride of Scotland though if you put a Welsh rugby shirt on, they have. Wales is trending right and there is no possibility that it will seek independence. And I have lived in both Countries so I do have experience of the nationalism question in both
Yet, c.1900 Welsh nationalism was a real force in the Liberal Party.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
It does not have anything like the nationalistic pride of Scotland though if you put a Welsh rugby shirt on, they have. Wales is trending right and there is no possibility that it will seek independence. And I have lived in both Countries so I do have experience of the nationalism question in both
My grandfasther was Welsh (he got me into supporting them in rugby...in the 90's, I forgave him after a bit) and he was never obvious about it, he left during the great depression and lived in England for 70 years. He loved Wales, but never thought it better than England and was right wing.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
Because the idea of an independent Wales as a going financial concern is a non-starter? It's Scotland without whisky or oil and with one quarter of the international tourist income. ("London accounts for 54% of all inbound visitor spend, the rest of England 34%, Scotland 8% and Wales 2%" https://www.visitbritain.org/visitor-economy-facts)
I think the shared legal system is important; the Act of Union looks a bit half-hearted because it preserves the Scottish legal system - greedy 18th century Edinburgh lawyers protecting their turf.
And there were 228 arson attacks in Wales starting in 1979 and going on through the eighties, aimed at English second homes, so there's been a fair bit of antagonism in the past.
It does not have anything like the nationalistic pride of Scotland though if you put a Welsh rugby shirt on, they have.
Certainly in a sporting context there seems to be more of a friendly rivalry between Wales and England, rather than some real animosity that is the case with Scotland and England. I find it interesting that the nationalism in the two nations has developed quite differently.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
This may come as a bit of a shock, but there's always the different countries tend to be different option.
the body of evidence says the SNP have stated they want to stay in the EU, they make the point about the remain vote repeatedly
believe what your party tells you, but no-one else does, this is a shift in position and it ill be taken to task
They don't want to promise what is not in their gift. I know that's a novel concept for a Brexiteer...
The Scottish Greens should be ashamed of themselves for associating with a bunch of anti-European fruit cakes like the Nats. I thought they were better than that.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
It does not have anything like the nationalistic pride of Scotland though if you put a Welsh rugby shirt on, they have. Wales is trending right and there is no possibility that it will seek independence. And I have lived in both Countries so I do have experience of the nationalism question in both
Yet, c.1900 Welsh nationalism was a real force in the Liberal Party.
To be fair I never met my great grandfather who no doubt would have been an expert on the subject
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
It does not have anything like the nationalistic pride of Scotland though if you put a Welsh rugby shirt on, they have. Wales is trending right and there is no possibility that it will seek independence. And I have lived in both Countries so I do have experience of the nationalism question in both
Yet, c.1900 Welsh nationalism was a real force in the Liberal Party.
And of course in the 60s and 70s many of the Welsh were much more antagonistic toward the English than Scots were (remember the very nasty arson attacks on houses owned by English people). Since then the Welsh seem to have become less anti-English, but Scots much more so.
There are still countries following the same system even in the globalised economy of today. Panama is a good example. Since 1903 it has used the US dollar just in the way independent Scotland would again be using the pound. Panama is a prosperous country, as rich as EU members Croatia or Hungary. It can attract huge foreign investments: we saw an example the other day when the first Chinese super-freighter passed through the newly expanded Panama Canal.
The International Monetary Fund, no less, has given the Panamanian system its seal of approval: ‘By not having a central bank, Panama lacks both a traditional lender of last resort and a mechanism to mitigate systemic liquidity shortages. The authorities emphasised that these features had contributed to the strength and resilience of the system, which relies on banks holding high levels of liquidity beyond the prudential requirement of 30 per cent of short-term deposits.’ Panama is in fact ranked seventh in the world for the soundness of its banks. That, to put it mildly, is a bit better than Scotland.
Sterlingisation is an option but it is a long way from being cost free. It requires much higher reserves on the part of the government and the banking sector. It accepts that interest rates will in large part be fixed in the interests of another country, one that has a strong tendency towards housing booms which drive interest rates up. It makes borrowing more expensive and subject to liquidity. And it does not meet the criteria for EU membership (if this still matters after today).
I don't think Scotland has anything to worry about with regard to interest rates going up any time soon.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
It does not have anything like the nationalistic pride of Scotland though if you put a Welsh rugby shirt on, they have. Wales is trending right and there is no possibility that it will seek independence. And I have lived in both Countries so I do have experience of the nationalism question in both
Yet, c.1900 Welsh nationalism was a real force in the Liberal Party.
To be fair I never met my great grandfather who no doubt would have been an expert on the subject
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
South Wales is basically an extension of England. North Wales Is different.
And there were 228 arson attacks in Wales starting in 1979 and going on through the eighties, aimed at English second homes, so there's been a fair bit of antagonism in the past.
That's kind of what I'm getting at. Welsh nationalism has become relatively content with the status quo since devolution, Scottish nationalism has become quite angry and devolution has if anything fanned the flames.
It does not have anything like the nationalistic pride of Scotland though if you put a Welsh rugby shirt on, they have.
Certainly in a sporting context there seems to be more of a friendly rivalry between Wales and England, rather than some real animosity that is the case with Scotland and England. I find it interesting that the nationalism in the two nations has developed quite differently.
I do not think my children or grandchildren would agree with you over the rivalry between Wales and England. There is abject dislike
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
There are several possible answers. One is that nobody seriously believes Wales could survive without help from England whereas Scotland clearly could (although it would be hard). Another is that in no part of Wales are you very far from England and that does alter the national dynamic - Bangor is far closer to Chester than to Cardiff. In Scotland by contrast almost all traffic to England is through Edinburgh and Glasgow. Another is that language has always been the key driver of Welshness - although there are many dialects, there are not four distinct languages as there were in Scotland. Languages do not require independent countries to survive. A further point is that Wales was unambiguously conquered - a very long time ago, at that - whereas Scots have always convinced themselves, not entirely accurately, that they were a fully sovereign state swindled out of their rights by the Darien scheme and English bribes. Yet a further point is that 'Wales' was only a united country three times in the past - 1055-1063, 1257-1277, and 1404-1409. At all other times it has been a loose agglomeration of petty lordships mostly held by the English. Scotland was a recognised if hardly a united kingdom for 800 years before 1707.
But don't assume the Welsh are not antagonistic towards England. Some of them can be really quite unpleasant when they put their minds to it, and I say that as a Welshman.
It does not have anything like the nationalistic pride of Scotland though if you put a Welsh rugby shirt on, they have.
Certainly in a sporting context there seems to be more of a friendly rivalry between Wales and England, rather than some real animosity that is the case with Scotland and England. I find it interesting that the nationalism in the two nations has developed quite differently.
Ask Sam Warburton about the friendly rivalry between Wales and England in rugby!
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
South Wales is basically an extension of England. North Wales Is different.
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand.
Good post.
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
South Wales is basically an extension of England. North Wales Is different.
And there were 228 arson attacks in Wales starting in 1979 and going on through the eighties, aimed at English second homes, so there's been a fair bit of antagonism in the past.
That's kind of what I'm getting at. Welsh nationalism has become relatively content with the status quo since devolution, Scottish nationalism has become quite angry and devolution has if anything fanned the flames.
I remember those arson attacks vividly but there were convictions and the problem seemed to melt away (sorry about the pun)
On the difference between Wales and Scotland, it's worth mentioning that in the 2011 Census something like 80% of the adult population of Scotland was born in Scotland. The equivalent figure in Wales is 70%.
the body of evidence says the SNP have stated they want to stay in the EU, they make the point about the remain vote repeatedly
believe what your party tells you, but no-one else does, this is a shift in position and it ill be taken to task
You do get the Iain Martin article was written about Monday's press conference. Not some magical event that has happened today?
So for you to seize on it as some dramatic shift from Monday to Today is weird.
Looks a very smart move to me. EEA membership allows Scotland to remain in two single markets, so it kills one of the big arguments the No side has.
Unfortunately that is not true. Were Scotland in the EEA and the rest of the rUK outside then Scotland could not be in a single market with the rUK. The best it could have would be a free trade agreement with the rUK but that would still require differentiation of all goods entering Scotland from the rUK as they would not automatically be able to be traded within the rest of the EEA outside of Scotland. A single market arrangement would be impractical.
Comments
1) Immigration
2) Norway probably not agreeing to it as they'd be swamped by our economic size ?
Politically those aren't such a problem for Sturgeon I guess.
They got burned last time with talk of being vetoed by Spain and so don't want to risk the campaign in that way. Brexit provides a good context since the No side have lost the Europe weapon.
When Sturgeon said in June her aim was to retain Scottish Membership of the single market and got a Holyrood vote in favour of her taking any and all actions to explore continuing membership and then in December when she presented the Scottish governments official position to Theresa May and it was for Scottish Membership of the Single Market it is now completely outrageous and a complete u-turn for her to be suggesting that an independent Scotland would seek to be a member of the Single Market?
Right oh.
were back to free money with your unicorn
the SNP arguments havent improved with time
Setting aside the fact that Scotland didn't give (and wasn't asked) its opinion on whether Scotland should leave the EU, it's fairly clear that *if* that manifesto is used as justification for a second referendum, *then* the SNP *must* be proposing that an "independent" Scotland promptly applies for EU membership.
yeah like everyone bought a copy and read it
it's fking Cameronism - bring your lawyer and read the sub clauses
You are making words out of thin air.
" a choice of whether to follow the UK to a hard Brexit, or to become an independent country able to secure a real partnership of equals with the rest of the UK and our own relationship with Europe."
"Own relationship with Europe" does not equal "membership of the European Union"
http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2016/12/9234/downloads#res512073
It's a view I suppose.
"One option – in my view, the best option – is to become a full member of the EU as an
independent country. Indeed, independence would resolve the fundamental cause of
the position Scotland currently finds itself in: Westminster Governments that Scotland
doesn’t vote for, imposing policies that a majority in Scotland does not support."
That was the option she set out yesterday. Today she is saying something materially different. (We will put to one side Scotland's completely insignificant say in determining the policies and legislation of the EU should it become a member on the very solid basis that at least they are not English, or something.)
I used to be a member of Plaid Cymru saw what is going on now with Sturgeon at first hand. Everyone is missing the point (some posters wilfully) about the SNP and Sturgeon. Sturgeon does not care one way or another about single market access. She never has. She never will. Just as she doesn't care about the people of Scotland, never has and never will (which is incidentally why her government has such a poor track record on domestic issues, although the lack of any sort of opposition doesn't help). She has only the haziest idea of what 'being Scottish' actually means - for example, she doesn't seem to know that the southern half of Scotland, including Edinburgh, is ex-Saxon land.
What she really is is somebody who hates the English. That's it. That's all 90% of nationalists are - people with inferiority complexes who have convinced themselves that their problems and failures are the result of malicious influences outside their control and once they are removed everything will be perfect. Ireland is the classic example (and in its sixty years of poverty and stagnation a grim warning for anyone who uncritically believes Sturgeon or for that matter her fellow traveller in England, Nigel Farage). She doesn't care what happens to Scotland, or Europe, or anything, as long as she can hammer the English, the harder the better. If she hammers the Scots at the same time, she really won't care.
The EU vote is a merely pretext for what she has always intended to do since at least 2015 (although she was shy about saying it aloud, unlike Salmond). If it wasn't this, it would be something else. The hollowness of her claims may be seen quite simply in her desperation to hold the vote before any 'material changes' could possibly materialise. Therefore, she doesn't actually mind if she ends up in the EU, the EEA or even the CIS as long as she gets it in a way that hurts her neighbour.
This is what turned me off nationalism that once, in a burst of youthful idealism, I genuinely thought was about standing up for those on the country's periphery against the might and arrrogance of London's politicians. When I realised that there were people who actually hated me merely because my father spoke no Welsh, I abandoned them, first for the Liberal Democrats now for the life of a floating voter.
This does of course make her a very difficult opponent to beat - because like most narcissistic fanatics who are careless of the consequences of their actions, she will be quite happy to say anything in order to get her way. That could lead to a belief that an independent Scotland will be rich, free, prosperous and have free owls provided by Harry Potter. However, the pretext used should also give May the option of delaying things for five years by which time Sturgeon will have some awkward explaining to do about the collapse of the Scottish university system.
I wonder which way she'll vote on the Brexit deal?
'Scotland must retain access to the European single market to protect the economy, jobs and public services, Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson has told Europe Minister David Lidington'
http://tinyurl.com/hmt962q
"Secondly, I want to make it absolutely clear today that I intend to take all possible steps and explore all options to give effect to how people in Scotland voted - in other words, to secure our continuing place in the EU and in the single market in particular.
"And we said clearly that we do not want to leave the EU."
https://www.snp.org/statement_on_euref_result_and_it_s_implications_for_scotland
I have a serious question. Why does Wales, with at least as much nationalistic pride as Scotland, seem less antagonistic towards England? Is it simply that England and Wales have more common history, or is there something fundamentally different between Welsh nationalism and Scottish nationalism?
so looks like that's going well
Getting excited by an Iain Martin article criticising the SNP is like being shocked at a alcoholic drinking booze.
http://tinyurl.com/henyjw5
There are still countries following the same system even in the globalised economy of today. Panama is a good example. Since 1903 it has used the US dollar just in the way independent Scotland would again be using the pound. Panama is a prosperous country, as rich as EU members Croatia or Hungary. It can attract huge foreign investments: we saw an example the other day when the first Chinese super-freighter passed through the newly expanded Panama Canal.
The International Monetary Fund, no less, has given the Panamanian system its seal of approval: ‘By not having a central bank, Panama lacks both a traditional lender of last resort and a mechanism to mitigate systemic liquidity shortages. The authorities emphasised that these features had contributed to the strength and resilience of the system, which relies on banks holding high levels of liquidity beyond the prudential requirement of 30 per cent of short-term deposits.’ Panama is in fact ranked seventh in the world for the soundness of its banks. That, to put it mildly, is a bit better than Scotland.
believe what your party tells you, but no-one else does, this is a shift in position and it ill be taken to task
I think the shared legal system is important; the Act of Union looks a bit half-hearted because it preserves the Scottish legal system - greedy 18th century Edinburgh lawyers protecting their turf.
And there were 228 arson attacks in Wales starting in 1979 and going on through the eighties, aimed at English second homes, so there's been a fair bit of antagonism in the past.
Been slumming it in The Toon this week, like!
A tale of two similiar sized Midland cities.
Coventry City 0 - Southend United 2
Leicester City 1 - Seville 0
So for you to seize on it as some dramatic shift from Monday to Today is weird.
given the last referendum I think making unfillable promises is the least of their concerns
pass the pixie dust old chap
I'm sure he would.
But don't assume the Welsh are not antagonistic towards England. Some of them can be really quite unpleasant when they put their minds to it, and I say that as a Welshman.
start there
that's what Sturgeon will be doing