Scotland's Sturgeon warns of catastrophic 'no deal' Brexit

[Get Real]

On 5/15/2018 at 5:10 AM, webfact said:

Prime Minister Theresa May's failure to come up with a coherent Brexit stance means the United Kingdom is at greater risk of spiralling towards a "no deal" Brexit with catastrophic consequences, Scotland's leader said.

Can´t they just for once come up with some news, that isn´t something that everyone must be aware of by now?

Like this: "Theresa May on right track. Brexit: Here we sum up the deal that once again made UK a United Kingdom". As we all know, that will never happen!

[sanuk711]

2 hours ago, Cherjam said:

location london, please indulge me with your knowledge of Devolution and Scottish politics.

Location should have been altered some time back----although it has little to do with anyone's views

 

I dont quite understand .cherjam, you actually really want to re-air the stupidity of the Darien expedition, where the whole wealth of Scotland sailed off in  ships to a occupy a country already claimed by the Spanish. Sending Scotland broke & into the arms of the B.O.England.

 

I would want to keep quite about it ----think up the usual story where its never your fault...etc  etc..

And lighten up---I like listening  to Frankie Boyle jokes. & I have nothing against Nicola Sturgeon ---I mean you  gotta hand it to her,  She's always clean shaven

 

 

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, sanuk711 said:

Location should have been altered some time back----although it has little to do with anyone's views

 

I dont quite understand .cherjam, you actually really want to re-air the stupidity of the Darien expedition, where the whole wealth of Scotland sailed off in  ships to a occupy a country already claimed by the Spanish. Sending Scotland broke & into the arms of the B.O.England.

 

I would want to keep quite about it ----think up the usual story where its never your fault...etc  etc..

And lighten up---I like listening  to Frankie Boyle jokes. & I have nothing against Nicola Sturgeon ---I mean you  gotta hand it to her,  She's always clean shaven

 

 

There is a certain irony about one who talks of stupidity whilst being blissfully unaware of their own ignorance of the subject which they think gives their position strength.

Sadly, there are many who think they know about Darien and spout off about it at the drop of a hat; you should try to do some reading rather rely on 3rd or even 4th hand repetition.

 

But let's put that to one side. Even if your understanding of Darien was not spectacularly wrong, why would events from more than 300 years ago have any bearing on today?

[RuamRudy]

This is not how I would have preferred Scottish independence to come about, but I would still take it:

English voters would rather sacrifice Scotland than Gibraltar for Brexit

 

"Pollsters from Panelbase asked people south of the Border for their views on a scenario in which the price of leaving the EU would be for the UK to be without Scotland or Northern Ireland or Gibraltar.

...

Some 37% said losing Gibraltar would not be worth the price for Brexit, while 35% said losing Scotland would not be worth it. In terms of losing Northern Ireland just 31% said it was not a price worth paying for Brexit."

 

I wonder how Scottish unionists must feel when they realise that 65% of their English friends see the accomplishment of Brexit being more important than maintaining the integrity of the UK.

 

I imagine that, if wasn't for the billion pound bung cushioning the blow, the DUP would be livid that the English see NI as being even less important to them.

[Davmaac]

On 15/05/2018 at 8:59 AM, Baerboxer said:

"My party does not propose or support using the euro, so the options the commission has been looking at: sterling in a currency union, sterling outwith a currency union, or a process that would lead to a distinctive Scottish currency over time," she said.

 

Sterling - not your decision sweetie. That would be one for the British government. 

 

Euro - not your decision sweetie. That would be the EU - and you'd me very very lucky to meet their criteria. Although I do believe there is a requirement that any new applicants agree to adopt the Euro at the earliest opportunity.

 

Still suffering her delusions of grandeur, stating the "bleedin'obvious" and then claiming she'll make all sorts of decision way above her level of glorified council leader.

 

But she needs to appear relevant. Because she actually isn't very.

Don't need the UK government''s permission to use sterling, what part of sterling outside a currency union didn't you understand? Lol

[Davmaac]

On 16/05/2018 at 10:58 AM, Sir Dude said:

Firstly, she is a general hate figure and for good reason...rather like Suthep or Thaksin is here.

 

Secondly, sure, if the Scots want to bail then 'See ya'...as they will learn the valuable lesson again which prompted them to join the union in the first place  all those centuries ago, which is you can't afford it and you would have to grovel to someone else who would attach more strings to it than Westminster does. Maybe they could sell themselves to China...seems to be par-for-the-course these days for many countries. The North Sea oil thing doesn't cut it...and the rest of the union would cut the Scots off. The SNP can't even balance their books now with the help of Westminster and their own tax raising powers...good luck with that if you leave. But if they want to be nationalistic then go ahead, fine with me...never works though these days.

 

However, each to their own opinion.

If as you say Scotland is such a liability, why are the Westminster government so very very desperate to keep Scotland within the UK?

Just wondering, perhaps you could explain?

[Davmaac]

Just now, Davmaac said:

If as you say Scotland is such a liability, why are the Westminster government so very very desperate to keep Scotland within the UK?

Just wondering, perhaps you could explain?

Also if Sturgeon is such a "hate figure" could you explain how her hated party managed to have more MP''s in the Scottish parliament than all other parties combined?

[Davmaac]

On 16/05/2018 at 1:37 PM, RuamRudy said:

But that's more of a cheap dig than a reasoned answer.  If that's the best you have then I guess we have nothing to worry about.

He doesn't like difficult questions, best not to upset him

[The Renegade]

On ‎15‎/‎05‎/‎2018 at 10:10 AM, webfact said:

Scotland's Sturgeon warns of catastrophic 'no deal' Brexit

Sturgeon would be better focusing on Scotland.

 

Quote

The Scottish Government has been accused of deepening the GP crisis – as prospective doctors are turned away from a leading university because of the SNP’s cap on student places to maintain free tuition.

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/holyrood/1008906/aberdeen-university-forced-to-turn-down-medical-students-because-of-snp-policy/

 

Quote

Scottish teachers are leaving their profession thanks to pupils’ bad behaviour being “swept under the carpet” amid “constant pressure” to cut the number of exclusions, a conference has heard.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/18/scottish-school-teachers-quitting-pupils-bad-behaviour-swept/

 

Not too many decades ago, Scotland had an education system that was the envy of the UK and across the World.

[RickBradford]

6 hours ago, Davmaac said:

If as you say Scotland is such a liability, why are the Westminster government so very very desperate to keep Scotland within the UK?

Just wondering, perhaps you could explain?

Obviously, no Westminster politician, least of all the PM, wants to be known as "the person who broke up the United Kingdom".

 

Moreover, the PM has a duty to the Queen to maintain the United Kingdom, although how that works constitutionally I'm not sure.

 

If someone wanted to become PM while openly supporting Scottish independence, I doubt they'd get very far. Hence the furore about Jeremy Corbyn's alleged private support for Scottish independence.

 

It has very little to do with economics, so whether Scotland is a liability, or is just posing as one, is of minor importance.

[RuamRudy]

56 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Sturgeon would be better focusing on Scotland.

She is focused on Scotland - and the fact that the utter foolishness of Brexit is predicted to hit Scotland harder than most other parts of the UK.

 

Given that the vast majority of Scots have clearly stated that they want nothing to do with this wanton stupidity, she has an obligation to lead them in that fight. More power to her elbow.

 

What has education got to do with Brexit? The whole of the UK education system is struggling - yet another disaster thrust upon us, like the idiocy of Brexit, by a corrupt and inept Tory party.

[The Renegade]

12 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

The whole of the UK education system is struggling - yet another disaster thrust upon us, like the idiocy of Brexit, by a corrupt and inept Tory party.

Got it.

 

It is all the Tories fault - Forgetting that Education has been a devolved matter for Scotland since 1998.

[RuamRudy]

7 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Got it.

 

It is all the Tories fault - Forgetting that Education has been a devolved matter for Scotland since 1998.

Not forgetting it at all - but the Scottish budget is capped by Westminster. If we had full control of all our income and expenditure, we would not need to priortitise. But the Scottish Government has many challenges to address which are the result of Tory imposed, wholly unnecessary austerity. And, as we know, the fruit from the magic money tree rarely falls outside Panama or wherever else the Tory front benches choose to hide their wealth.

 

But again - this has nothing to do with the topic at hand and is merely a deflection from the FM following the mandate handed to her at 3 elections since 2014 - challenge any attempt to drag Scotland from the EU against its will.

Edited May 19, 2018 by RuamRudy

[Davmaac]

On 5/19/2018 at 2:42 AM, RickBradford said:

Obviously, no Westminster politician, least of all the PM, wants to be known as "the person who broke up the United Kingdom".

 

Moreover, the PM has a duty to the Queen to maintain the United Kingdom, although how that works constitutionally I'm not sure.

 

If someone wanted to become PM while openly supporting Scottish independence, I doubt they'd get very far. Hence the furore about Jeremy Corbyn's alleged private support for Scottish independence.

 

It has very little to do with economics, so whether Scotland is a liability, or is just posing as one, is of minor importance.

So you can't answer the question, didn't think you would be able to ?

[nausea]

Bored. Just get on with it for Christ's sake so we all know where we stand.

[Cherjam]

I personally would love to drop the baggage ( the cecils )  that holds us back, but like what has already been said. Why does westminster want to keep the Scots?

[RickBradford]

^^^

And like what has already been explained, Westminster has a constitutional responsibility to maintain the structure of the United Kingdom. It is the Prime Minister's duty, on behalf of the sovereign.

 

Plus, no politician wants to be known as "the person who broke up the United Kingdom" just as no European commissar wants to be known as "the person who oversaw the break-up of the EU".

 

The economic argument, if there is one, is of minor importance.

[RuamRudy]

2 hours ago, RickBradford said:

^^^

And like what has already been explained, Westminster has a constitutional responsibility to maintain the structure of the United Kingdom. It is the Prime Minister's duty, on behalf of the sovereign.

 

Plus, no politician wants to be known as "the person who broke up the United Kingdom" just as no European commissar wants to be known as "the person who oversaw the break-up of the EU".

 

The economic argument, if there is one, is of minor importance.

 

Can you point out where this 'constitutional responsibility' is codified? I cannot find reference to it via Google.

 

[RickBradford]

The UK constitution is not "codified" into a single document, but is an accumulation of various statutes, conventions, judicial decisions and treaties, going all the way back to Magna Carta in 1215.

 

Didn't Google mention that?

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

The UK constitution is not "codified" into a single document, but is an accumulation of various statutes, conventions, judicial decisions and treaties, going all the way back to Magna Carta in 1215.

 

Didn't Google mention that?

Google didn't mention what you wrote, but Wikipedia did. What it did not mention, however, was a specific obligation on Westminster to maintain the integrity of the UK. The UK as we know it has existed for less than 100 years so it is not as if there is some sacrisanct law dating back to the act of union which implores parliament to keep the UK holy and intact. In fact, how could the 2014 referendum have come about if such an obligation existed?

 

So I think you are half right - while the UK is not something immutable under law, I agree that no PM would want to be the one who lost Scotland. I think this also might have something to do with it:

Gross national income statistics for Scotland: a net outflow of Scottish income?

 

 

[evadgib]

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/scotland-voted-decisively-in-2014-to-remain-part-of-the-uk

[The Renegade]

Andrew Wilson, Ex RBS economist was commissioned to produce a new report for an Independent Scotland. 

 

Quote

An independent Scotland would face a tough ten years before its finances were under control and a quarter of a century before it could begin to match the successes of the world’s most prosperous small nations.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/growth-commission-independent-nation-would-face-crunch-zl53z7dvs

 

As an Ex RBS Economist, I think we can take his timeline with a massive dose of salt.

[RuamRudy]

57 minutes ago, evadgib said:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/scotland-voted-decisively-in-2014-to-remain-part-of-the-uk

 

In 2015 and 2017 the SNP won commanding majorities at Westminster under a manifesto pledge to demand a second independence referendum in the event of a material change in the UK's relationship to the EU, contrary to the wishes of the Scottish people. The Scottish Parliament, in which the SNP does not have a majority, has voted in favour of the same. It is called democracy.

[bert bloggs]

When the hole is deep enough that you have dug shorty ,its time to stop digging , to most Scots your irrelevant .

[RuamRudy]

It's all kicking off now. Yesterday the leader of the SNP in Westminster was thrown out of the chamber when he objected to being incorrectly overruled by the speaker, which prompted a walk-out of all SNP MPs in support, and an increase in SNP membership of over 3,000 people in 24 hours.

 

Today, Murray Foote, former editor of the Daily Record, unionist and chief architect of the last minute deal to Scots which helped swing indyref1 in favour of No, declared that he no longer supports the union and sees the only viable option for Scotland to prosper is to break away from the UK. 

 

Man behind vow for new Scots powers supports independence

"The former newspaper editor who masterminded a promise of extra powers for Holyrood in the days before the independence referendum has said Scotland should quit the UK."

[evadgib]

Having watched PMQs yesterday I am of the opinion that:

a) The speaker handled the situation fairly

b  ) No one was 'thrown out' & 

c) SNP seemed to have orchestrated the affair for political gain knowing full well a global audience was watching.

 

As for your 3000 new members signing up to the SNP; I frankly don't believe this happened but even if it did the figure will have been dwarfed by the numbers signing up in the same period across the board in order to watch the world cup.

Edited June 14, 2018 by evadgib

[RuamRudy]

3 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Having watched PMQs yesterday i am of the opinion that:

a) The speaker handled the situation fairly

b  ) No one was 'thrown out' & 

c) SNP seemed to have orchestrated the affair for political gain knowing full well a global audience was watching.

 

As for your 3000 new members signing up to the SNP; I frankly don't believe this happened but even if it did the figure will have been dwarfed by the numbers signing up in the same period to watch their fellow British countrymen exit the world cup.

Your opinion upon the speaker's performance puts you firmly in the WRONG column, I am afraid. The speaker showed, initially, a lack of understanding of the rules, then he showed incompetence in how he handled himself, then he showed bias when he rejected the guidance he was given and stood his (WRONG) ground and ejected Iain Blackford from the house.

 

But of course it was a tactic of the SNP to highlight the total contempt that Westminster has shown the people of Scotland and the Scottish Parliament. I think a total of 3 minutes was afforded to debate the effect of Brexit on the devolution settlement - once again, the Scottish people were lied to by the SoS for Scotland and the Westminster government.

 

As for whether you believe or otherwise the additional 3,000 members, I am not sure why you feel that your scepticism is important in the debate. 

 

Signing up? Where do we sign up? There is no British team in the World Cup.

[evadgib]

25 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Your opinion upon the speaker's performance puts you firmly in the WRONG column, I am afraid. The speaker showed, initially, a lack of understanding of the rules, then he showed incompetence in how he handled himself, then he showed bias when he rejected the guidance he was given and stood his (WRONG) ground and ejected Iain Blackford from the house.

 

But of course it was a tactic of the SNP to highlight the total contempt that Westminster has shown the people of Scotland and the Scottish Parliament. I think a total of 3 minutes was afforded to debate the effect of Brexit on the devolution settlement - once again, the Scottish people were lied to by the SoS for Scotland and the Westminster government.

 

As for whether you believe or otherwise the additional 3,000 members, I am not sure why you feel that your scepticism is important in the debate. 

 

Signing up? Where do we sign up? There is no British team in the World Cup.

The Speaker observed that several SNP members had been due to ask questions yesterday but had shot themselves in the foot by following the tantrum; and a Scottish MP (Tory?) was also pretty scathing over the mob-handed way in which they had conducted themselves.

 

I couldn't help noting they were bleating about 'this parliament' yet made no mention of the fact that the majority in that parliament do not have a parliament of their own!

 

 

Edited June 14, 2018 by evadgib

[nontabury]

On 5/16/2018 at 1:22 PM, RuamRudy said:

Why would it flounder? What is unique to the Scots that makes them incapable of managing their own affairs?

 

Good question. And this is the lady who will deal with it.

 

 

[Cherjam]

The Disunited Kingdom was exposed yesterday as a Dictatorship and the Speaker of the house was exposed as a man who doesn't know the rules of parliament and can be clearly seen getting rushed advice from the clerks and panicking into his response..... What a shot in the arm for the Indies and by that I don't mean the SNP, I state this as it appears that in England the cecils seem to confuse SNP with MSP, there are many Scots that support Independence that are not SNP