rockingrobin

12 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I read that but the article says he is sympathetic that doesn't say it would be accepted. It is all about leaving the EU that's it. Go and ask Spain and other EU countries if they agree. They have spoken already and the answer was no or join the back of the queue.

There is no queue, otherwise everybody is awaiting Turkey

The veto argument is pure scaremongering myth busted by the example of Kosovo

4 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Obviously you have not been reading or listening to what the rest of the EU have said. The way you are talking we might as well have Yorkshire and Lancashire going for independence. Why not Grimsby?

 

Now joking aside and being realistic, Scotland if they want independence should wait like everyone is saying, except Sturgeon and her one policy party. Thankfully there are some level headed Scots around. Jumping on the Brexit bandwagon like NS has shows her desperation. I look forward to seeing her political career go down the toilet.

The former Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt, now the European parliament’s chief Brexit negotiator, implied he was sympathetic to giving Scotland automatic membership. “It’s wrong that Scotland might be taken out of EU, when it voted to stay,” he tweeted after the referendum.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/10/independent-scotland-would-have-to-apply-for-eu-membership

11 hours ago, emilymat said:

I'm no fan of Nicola Sturgeon, but watched her news conference. No-one can really argue there has been no 'substantial' change in the political landscape since 2014, which is the SNP manifesto argument as justification for a second referendum. Personally, I believe a second independence referendum will be lost by the SNP. 

 

However I welcomed NS's tweet today, which endorses something I have been arguing for some time. NS says she was elected by a substantial vote as Scotland's first minister, whereas Teresa May has not been  elected by anyone!    Very true, and I object to TM acting as some British Joan of Arc able to deliver us into the promised land - something she actually does not herself believe.  She yearns to call a snap election if she could, but she knows she can't under the fixed term parliament rules, introduced by her predecessor in the coalition government. 

With regards to an early general election, the government could put forward a bill to amend the fixed term act

38 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 A desire to REMAIN in the union. That's the first of many obstacles. As has been pointed out to you, by many people, Scotland would have to apply as a new applicant,with all the strings that would attach,I.e MUST  join the EURO, MUST agree to become part of the Schengen area. Strangely,the SNP have not trumpeted the advantage of these and others requirements. I wonder why.

That is not accurate, sure there are some deficits, but the simplest option would be to join EFTA.

Personally I dont see the EU acting irrationally , basically expelling an independent Scotland , taking into consideration the people of Scotland have EU rights and EU citizens have rights in Scotland.

As the treaties themselves dont deal with such a situation there is room to maneuver. Since a country who wishes to leave is given 2 years to negotiate, it would seem only logical that a similar scenario will be applied. 

21 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Can you please add to that list, a couple of the remoaners on this thread. 

No person has the right to dictate to another persons conscience 

15 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

To put those two graphs into perspective, the UK exports about £14bn of vehicles to the whole of the EU. Germany alone exports about £20bn of vehicles to the UK.

In the course of 8 months we have gone from the UK will get a good deal , the EU needs the UK to a no deal is better than a bad deal. Even N.Lawson saying a bad is probable.

Negotiations havent started 

10 minutes ago, whatawonderfulday said:

And some of us did not listen to him at the time, nor Tony Benn,  because their were so many counter arguments.  ( A lesson learned by me that has served me well since)  to listen to all sides rather than the one you want to hear.  Enoch was a perceptive man. Previously his "rivers of blood" speech was taken literally and scorned upon.  Of course now, look how near the truth he was concerning the immigrant issues throughout Europe, one of the main reasons I suspect for those voting for BREXIT

.

Of course you have the right to oppose  EU membership and I respect that.However forgive me for saying that you cant really complain about what the EU as become if you chose to exercise a democratic right to remain uninformed when given the opportunity

1 minute ago, whatawonderfulday said:

Correct but it was not the EU then. It was the EC commonly referred to as the common market. I for one voted to remain in the common market during the referendum . I think many of us would never have done so had we understood that the intent by the French and Germans was to turn it into the EU and a federalised Europe. As a trading idea it was great but anything else was bound to end up with major stability issues

As Enoch Powell acknowledged in 1975 on referendum night , the public had been clearly told what the consequences of staying in entailed.

3 minutes ago, whatawonderfulday said:

Actually the UK never joined the EU.  They joined, after a referendum, the Common Market.   Had it stayed that way I think there would be unity to this day  but unfortunately the unelected become the mace bearers and led it ( the common market) down a road to what they hoped would become a federal Europe.  Morphing on the way to the EU .  Actually it will be interesting to see the outcome of the other European elections as for sure, whilst they may convince themselves the UK leaving is not the end of the EU, another member state doing so would be the death knell as the Euro potentially could become a junk currency very soon after. Still they could always offer Turkey "instant" membership to prop it up.

The UK joined in 1973, the referendum 1975

15 minutes ago, whatawonderfulday said:

Really then you must know more then this professor,

 

Professor Neil Walker, an expert on constitutional theory and holder of the regius chair of public law at the University of Edinburgh, believes it is extremely unlikely a third way could be found to allow Scotland to accomodate both its place in the UK and the EU.“If you put the question in black and white - can Scotland remain a member of the EU, at the same time as being part of the UK, while the rest of the UK leaves the EU? The answer has to be plainly no,” he said.“The member state is the UK. If the UK is leaving, and Scotland remains part of the UK, it’s improbable, bordering on inconceivable, that Scotland can remain in the Europpean Union.”

Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/could-scotland-legally-remain-a-member-of-the-eu-post-brexit-1-4191495

 

Look at what he said

The member state is the UK. If the UK is leaving, and Scotland remains part of the UK, it’s improbable, bordering on inconceivable, that Scotland can remain in the Europpean Union.”

Scotland remaining part of UK. 

The referendum is to become independent prior to UKs departure of EU

33 minutes ago, whatawonderfulday said:

It is the UK that has EU membership, not Scotland. Shortly the UK will be advising the EU that it intends to leave. Assuming Scotland is permitted another independence vote , and the vote goes the way SNP would like, then Scotland shall have to apply for membership of the EU.  Assuming the remaining 27 countries of the EU approve Scotland joining, then this process will still take some years until Scotland has totally devolved from the UK. In that interim period they will neither have the support of England nor that of the EU.

 

You can forget England buying expensive offshore oil, its cheaper from elsewhere. Same goes for gas which England can buy from overseas via the interconnector.

 

If Scotland votes for independence it will be a bit like turkeys voting for Xmas.  Mind you Nicola Sturgeon does show similar traits IMO

Slightly incorrect, under the EU  fundamental treaties, the EU is obliged to start negotiations with the aim  of accession. It is very probable and almost a certainty that transitional agreement will be  put in place to maintain their membership 

3 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

They should be legally obliged to wait because nobody knows what will happen as a result of Brexit and it may conceivably turn out to be to Scotland's advantage.

 

What if they vote now for independence, then Brexit proves highly beneficial to the UK? Then Scotland will want back in again. It's ridiculous. Just wait.

To wait would risk EU membership

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

This 'frozen' lark can and will be challenged again post brexit if HMG fail to include the rest of the world in any deal favouring Brits currently living in the EU. In the unlikely event that they too become 'frozen' (I can't see HMG getting away with that!) we (consortium etc) can sit on our arrses for two decades while they commence legal proceedings; reversing their attitude towards our plight to date.

 

I realize of course that not everyone has two decades to spare but TBH I believe it'll be sorted during the divorce, and that HMG will try to do it without Sun readers ('MY' taxes?) noticing.

Assuming post Brexit any uprating to UK  pensioners in the EU is achieved by an agreement, I fail to see how such a legal challenge has merit.

In reality the challenge would be to deny the UKs sovereign ability to make independent agreements with other sovereign states. It would be saying that because the UK has made an agreement with the EU,  then it is forced to replicate it worldwide irrespective  of its wishes.

6 hours ago, Richard W said:

I'm baffled by this calculation.  Surely a British citizen living in another EU country who has achieved permanent residence will retain permanent residence - retaining EU citizenship is not a requirement of the free movement directive (2004/38/EC), and the directive will remain in force in the EU after the UK leaves.  In most countries, they will also have rights as 'long term residents', a part of the EU system that the UK opted out of.

 

Permanent residents in the UK will have uncertain status because the status depends on EU law, whose consequences will suddenly be of uncertain validity.

 

Those who are definitely at risk are those who have not acquired permanent residence.

This position  appears supported by Ven Gend Loos case

Independently of the legislation of Member States, Community law not only imposes obligations on individuals but is also intended to confer upon them rights which become part of their legal heritage. These rights arise not only where they are expressly granted by the Treaty but also by reason of obligations which the Treaty imposes in a clearly defined way upon individuals as well as upon the Member States and upon the institutions of the Community

41 minutes ago, i claudius said:

You think Traitors like Blair and Idiots like Brown care? they just live out their lives in their luxuary homes ,far away from the chaos they caused .

but dont worry the "snowflakes" and the right on PC brigade will just blame us "baby boomers" for it .

Nothing preventing anybody setting up a petition to ask the government to hold a referendum on the issue of unfreezing oversees pension payments

9 minutes ago, jollyhangmon said:

Maybe, if based on  mutuality ... 

Principle of law to provide legal certainty.

Termination of treaties only release you from future obligations not ones in the past

58 minutes ago, Allstars said:

 

Because as I understand it it was a right they gained when they joined the EU, so why it should be protected post Brexit.

 

You can't have one rule for some and another rule for others.

 

And The Guest already posted the solution.

Respect of acquired rights.  

53 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

Hard to believe that her diving "buddy" just upped and left the country. Surely he must have been the first one to notice her disappearance !

6 minutes ago, steven100 said:

yeah .....  somethings not right about him leaving quickly ....

Or the management of the hostel. 

1 hour ago, ChrisY1 said:

DNA testing completed overnight and give a negative result for the missing person.

Quite impossible for testing to be fractionally completed in this time frame....but for the RTP, they did it and of course, now, there is no body, and probably in their pin brains, no further criminal investigation needed...for now!

The dna results reported in the Nation at 18:30 yesterday (10th March)

18 hours ago, goldenbrwn1 said:

She will get her personal ambition granted. But I doubt very much until after the UK has left the EU. Once the negotiations have finished , the people of Scotland will have a better idea of where the UK stands after Brexit and therefore be able to make a much more informed decision instead of just listening to and going by what both sides think will happen.   My family will be voting to remain in the UK no matter what happens after Brexit, like 90% of Scots I know. They can actually see through that beady eyed nut truck.  Glasgow will be the only place that may vote leave overall but we all know what that's about....

 

 

Scottish independence will have to take place before UK exit to ensure a smooth transition in maintaining EU membership, probably through Art 48 

23 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Am I correct in thinking you are a supporter of Scottish seperation. And if so,one of the arguments put forward by the  SNP, was that Briexit was a fundamental change from what they voted for in the referendum of 2014, even though everyone was aware that a Briexit referendum was on the cards.Yet the British people as a whole,voted in 1973 to join the EEC, not the EU, and they certainly were not given the opportunity to vote on the Mastricht and Lisbon so called treaties.

 Is't it about time you and the rest of the Remoaners,realise that the British people have,as a whole voted to leave this undemocratic and corrupt so called Union.

 

 

 

Then I assume you support a referendum on the final UK / EU negotiated agreement  

35 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

What was found is body pieces, not body decomposition.

DNA results in already, a negative and not human flesh found.

49 minutes ago, webfact said:

Suspected human flesh pieces and diver’s mask tested for DNA

 

 

KOH TA: -- Divers searching for the missing Russian free diver have found two pieces of what were believed to be human flesh, a diver’s mask and a green tank top under the sea about 400 metres from the coast of Ao Chaloke Ban Gao on Koh Tao.

 

All the items salvaged from the seabed at about 4-5 metres deep were on Friday flown in a police helicopter from Koh Tao to the Forensic Institute of the Police General Hospital for DNA tests to determine whether the DNA specimen match with that of the missing Russian woman.

 

The Koh Tao inquiry police officers in charge of the case were also flown in the same helicopter to meet with Pol Maj-Gen Apichart Boonsrirote, commander of Surat Thani provincial police.

 

Informed police source said that result of the tests would be available within a week.

 

Despite the finding of the items, Pol Lt-Col Chokechai Sutthimek, superintendent of Koh Tao police, said that the search would continue with two teams of divers being assigned to scour the sea off Aao Chaloke Ban Gao.

 

He said police would not rule out any possibilities of disappearance, including murder.

 

Full story: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/suspected-human-flesh-pieces-divers-mask-tested-dna/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2017-03-10

Where did the reference dna sample of the missing tourist come from

According to BLQS website database the police lab  17025 accreditation as expired 

20 hours ago, rockingrobin said:

The poll was conducted by BMG research, who have in the past been featured by Sunday Express

http://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/scots-opposed-second-referendum/

6 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Does that somehow give it any more credibility? I think not.

Your opinion about the poll is based upon who commissioned it rather than the evidence it presented

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

As soon as I read the poll was commissioned by the independent newspaper, all credibility went out the window.

 

It was an online poll which makes it even more dubious. The independent is really sinking low to grab headlines on a poll it has done itself.

The poll was conducted by BMG research, who have in the past been featured by Sunday Express

http://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/scots-opposed-second-referendum/