Scotland's leader tells Johnson: we want an independence referendum

[vogie]

Just now, watcharacters said:

 

And wasn't there a Brexit vote as well??

 

Yes and your point?

[overherebc]

What have wee Nicky and Upton station got in common?

They're both two stops short of Barking.

Edited July 30, 2019 by overherebc

[RuamRudy]

 

 

 

 

Excellent,really excellent post.  Undoubtedly the Scots will state oil and fish as their proposed benefactors....big BUT here,  Shetland have long opposed a tie up with Scotland if it gets independence and as most of the resources lie closest to Shetland...I would say the (English) Royal Navy  has a duty to protect,just as in the Gulf

 

Despite the excitement I feel at the prospect of Scotland soon slipping the yoke of the union, the depressing aspect of it will be the months of ill educated comments about Shetland, Spanish vetoes etc.

 

In the Orkney and Shetland constituency the SNP came second in both the 2015 and 2017 general elections and in the 2016 Scottish Parliament election they achieved similar in both the Orkney and the Shetland wards, beaten in all occasions by the lib dems.

 

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

 

[Rookiescot]

10 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Despite the excitement I feel at the prospect of Scotland soon slipping the yoke of the union, the depressing aspect of it will be the months of ill educated comments about Shetland, Spanish vetoes etc.

 

In the Orkney and Shetland constituency the SNP came second in both the 2015 and 2017 general elections and in the 2016 Scottish Parliament election they achieved similar in both the Orkney and the Shetland wards, beaten in all occasions by the lib dems.

 

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

The ill educated comments never went away.

[zorrow424]

10 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Despite the excitement I feel at the prospect of Scotland soon slipping the yoke of the union, the depressing aspect of it will be the months of ill educated comments about Shetland, Spanish vetoes etc.

 

In the Orkney and Shetland constituency the SNP came second in both the 2015 and 2017 general elections and in the 2016 Scottish Parliament election they achieved similar in both the Orkney and the Shetland wards, beaten in all occasions by the lib dems.

 

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

Were not voting for independence,who to govern them...go to scenario of Scottish independence,that tells different story  it is you who is ill educated  go read the subject matter,if you can

scot ind.htm

[lungbing]

10 hours ago, vogie said:

Would you like it on a weekly basis or monthly?

Only until he wins, then there will be no more after that.

[brokenbone]

i think she is right, scotland shouldnt have to leave eu just because england does, they need a referendum which nation they want to be part of

[vogie]

29 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

i think she is right, scotland shouldnt have to leave eu just because england does, they need a referendum which nation they want to be part of

Should Sunderland leave, but not Newcastle?

[RuamRudy]

Should Sunderland leave, but not Newcastle?

Do either of your examples have centuries of history as independent countries? Do they have their own legal system, parliament, church, institutions of state? Would they be viable as independent city states?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[vogie]

5 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Do either of your examples have centuries of history as independent countries? Do they have their own legal system, parliament, church, institutions of state? Would they be viable as independent city states?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Don't try and over think this RR, you might miss the point I was making.

But having said that, if you get independence will you have your own legal systems etc, of course not, you would have the EUs.

It could be said that the SNP are not Scottish nationalists, but are indeed EU nationalists.

Remember you are not talking for all of Scotland.

Edited July 30, 2019 by vogie

[brokenbone]

12 minutes ago, vogie said:

Don't try and over think this RR, you might miss the point I was making.

what was your point then ?

[NightSky]

On 7/25/2019 at 9:38 PM, HeyHeyHey said:

They would say "we voted NO you elitist bi..."

 

 

 

...isn't Mel an American?

 

????

 

 

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

what was your point then ?

Sorry, you must have just missed my edited reply. That might make it clearer.

[beautifulthailand99]

12 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

The ill educated comments never went away.

One thing the Scots ain't is stupid I wish I could say the same for many of my countrymen. 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2019 by beautifulthailand99

[johnnybangkok]

6 hours ago, vogie said:

Don't try and over think this RR, you might miss the point I was making.

But having said that, if you get independence will you have your own legal systems etc, of course not, you would have the EUs.

It could be said that the SNP are not Scottish nationalists, but are indeed EU nationalists.

Remember you are not talking for all of Scotland.

Firstly Scotland already has it's own legal system that is separate and different from England - http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/the-differences-between-the-english-and-scottish-law/

Secondly, this idea that EU law will overtake Scottish law (or indeed British law) does not hold water as in the UK, we also have the idea of parliamentary sovereignty, which holds that Parliament is the highest source of authority to make laws without restriction. Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. However what the Brexit brigade love quoting is The European Communities Act, passed by Parliament in 1972, which accepted the supremacy of EU law. However this does not stop Parliamentary sovereignty, it is very possible for Parliament to contradict EU laws

[aright]

4 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

Firstly Scotland already has it's own legal system that is separate and different from England - http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/the-differences-between-the-english-and-scottish-law/

Secondly, this idea that EU law will overtake Scottish law (or indeed British law) does not hold water as in the UK, we also have the idea of parliamentary sovereignty, which holds that Parliament is the highest source of authority to make laws without restriction. Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. However what the Brexit brigade love quoting is The European Communities Act, passed by Parliament in 1972, which accepted the supremacy of EU law. However this does not stop Parliamentary sovereignty, it is very possible for Parliament to contradict EU laws

What Remainers like to do is incorrectly quote the ECA. 

The ECA states that in the event of conflict EU Law overrides national law. 

Where the interpretation of EU law is in doubt, the 1972 Act requires UK courts to refer judgment to the European Court of Justice...…...and we can all guess the outcome to that one

It is not legally possible for Parliament to contradict EU Law but if they were to do so for whatever reason the reasonable question to ask is......

What's the point in being in a club where you can ignore the rules and pick and mix the laws you want to adopt or discard. Better to be independent to prevent such conflict.

[johnnybangkok]

46 minutes ago, aright said:

What Remainers like to do is incorrectly quote the ECA. 

The ECA states that in the event of conflict EU Law overrides national law. 

Where the interpretation of EU law is in doubt, the 1972 Act requires UK courts to refer judgment to the European Court of Justice...…...and we can all guess the outcome to that one

It is not legally possible for Parliament to contradict EU Law but if they were to do so for whatever reason the reasonable question to ask is......

What's the point in being in a club where you can ignore the rules and pick and mix the laws you want to adopt or discard. Better to be independent to prevent such conflict.

I'm glad that you can 'guess the outcome to that one' as the realities of how this actually plays out is vastly different to what most Brexiters would have you believe.

'Since 2003 the European Commission has opened over 750 complaints against the UK for failing to follow or apply EU law. The UK resolved 668 of these complaints before even reaching the court through negotiation and informal dispute resolution (so the vast majority of cases don't even get to court). In the end, the Commission decided to refer only 83 of these cases to the European Court. The UK won around a quarter of the cases against it: the highest success rate of any country that joined the EU before 2004 and the third-highest success rate of any country in the EU now. 

Environmental issues are those most likely to see the UK end up at the European Court, the paper reveals, because such cases are often costly to resolve. For example, the UK has repeatedly been taken to court for failing to implement a 1991 directive on the management of urban waste water because water treatment plants are expensive to provide'.   

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/news/latest/new-analysis-shows-uk-rarely-taken-european-court

What I said about the UK Parliaments ability to contradict EU laws still stands as it theoretically possible for it to do so BUT since the UK became a member of the EU it has set EU law as precedent which of course requires adherence to its laws. However, I would suggest that this is much more to do with the fact that the vast majority of EU law is sensible and there to protect the populace rather than business or those with a bigger bank balance than anything else. 

We can argue semantics about this all day but the point of the scaremongering from Brexiters about 'losing control to crazy EU laws' does not bear out when you take the realities of the situations that have come around over the last 16 years. There has simply been no where near the amounts of disputes happening as the Brexit camp would have you believe and scare stories about 'wrong shaped bananas' and 'water doesn't stop dehydration' are just simply that; scare stories trying to convince a gullible populace that the EU is just a bunch of crazy, overpaid (might have a point there) bureaucrats.   

 

[aright]

46 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

I'm glad that you can 'guess the outcome to that one' as the realities of how this actually plays out is vastly different to what most Brexiters would have you believe.

'Since 2003 the European Commission has opened over 750 complaints against the UK for failing to follow or apply EU law. The UK resolved 668 of these complaints before even reaching the court through negotiation and informal dispute resolution (so the vast majority of cases don't even get to court). In the end, the Commission decided to refer only 83 of these cases to the European Court. The UK won around a quarter of the cases against it: the highest success rate of any country that joined the EU before 2004 and the third-highest success rate of any country in the EU now. 

Environmental issues are those most likely to see the UK end up at the European Court, the paper reveals, because such cases are often costly to resolve. For example, the UK has repeatedly been taken to court for failing to implement a 1991 directive on the management of urban waste water because water treatment plants are expensive to provide'.   

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/news/latest/new-analysis-shows-uk-rarely-taken-european-court

What I said about the UK Parliaments ability to contradict EU laws still stands as it theoretically possible for it to do so BUT since the UK became a member of the EU it has set EU law as precedent which of course requires adherence to its laws. However, I would suggest that this is much more to do with the fact that the vast majority of EU law is sensible and there to protect the populace rather than business or those with a bigger bank balance than anything else. 

We can argue semantics about this all day but the point of the scaremongering from Brexiters about 'losing control to crazy EU laws' does not bear out when you take the realities of the situations that have come around over the last 16 years. There has simply been no where near the amounts of disputes happening as the Brexit camp would have you believe and scare stories about 'wrong shaped bananas' and 'water doesn't stop dehydration' are just simply that; scare stories trying to convince a gullible populace that the EU is just a bunch of crazy, overpaid (might have a point there) bureaucrats.   

 

Have you considered one of the reasons we want to leave the EU is because we don't want to be subject to EU law. Sovereignty was a key issue in the referendum We are grown up and would prefer our laws be made and democratically enacted through our elected representatives in Westminster, not enacted by the EU Commission and rubber stamped by MEP's in Brussels.

However like so many Remainers you shy away from the difficult questions.

To repeat

What's the point in being in a club where you can ignore the rules and pick and mix the laws you want to adopt or discard?

Can I add a further question to your statement "What I said about the UK Parliaments ability to contradict EU laws still stands as it theoretically possible for it to do so"

Question.   Since EU law overrides UK law.....How? 

[RuamRudy]

Have you considered one of the reasons we want to leave the EU is because we don't want to be subject to EU law. Sovereignty was a key issue in the referendum We are grown up and would prefer our laws be made and democratically enacted through our elected representatives in Westminster, not enacted by the EU Commission and rubber stamped by MEP's in Brussels.
However like so many Remainers you shy away from the difficult questions.
To repeat
What's the point in being in a club where you can ignore the rules and pick and mix the laws you want to adopt or discard?
Can I add a further question to your statement "What I said about the UK Parliaments ability to contradict EU laws still stands as it theoretically possible for it to do so"
Question.   Since EU law overrides UK law.....How? 

When you say 'we want to leave the EU' I presume you are referring to England and Wales, because Scotland didn't want to leave on 2015, and it is even more strongly in favour of the EU now - 73% if I recall the last poll correctly.

So (the collective you)r mantra was not only overwhelmingly rejected during the EU referendum, the subsequent charm offensive has failed to even convince those previously won over to keep the faith.

Can I suggest that trying to tell us that independence in the EU is a bad idea (we simply don't agree with you), why not try to explain why remaining in the UK is a good thing?

This is actually a question that has been posed many times but I have never seen a convincing answer - maybe you can buck the trend and explain what is so good about the union and why should Scotland remain in it?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[baboon]

2 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

When you say 'we want to leave the EU' I presume you are referring to England and Wales, because Scotland didn't want to leave on 2015, and it is even more strongly in favour of the EU now - 73% if I recall the last poll correctly.

So (the collective you)r mantra was not only overwhelmingly rejected during the EU referendum, the subsequent charm offensive has failed to even convince those previously won over to keep the faith.

Can I suggest that trying to tell us that independence in the EU is a bad idea (we simply don't agree with you), why not try to explain why remaining in the UK is a good thing?

This is actually a question that has been posed many times but I have never seen a convincing answer - maybe you can buck the trend and explain what is so good about the union and why should Scotland remain in it?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

We have previously crossed swords over Scottish Independence. 

Today were I a Scot, I would be wanting the hell out of the UK and this Brexit madness. A place gone mad and getting worse by the day.

[aright]

2 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

When you say 'we want to leave the EU' I presume you are referring to England and Wales, because Scotland didn't want to leave on 2015, and it is even more strongly in favour of the EU now - 73% if I recall the last poll correctly.

So (the collective you)r mantra was not only overwhelmingly rejected during the EU referendum, the subsequent charm offensive has failed to even convince those previously won over to keep the faith.

Can I suggest that trying to tell us that independence in the EU is a bad idea (we simply don't agree with you), why not try to explain why remaining in the UK is a good thing?

This is actually a question that has been posed many times but I have never seen a convincing answer - maybe you can buck the trend and explain what is so good about the union and why should Scotland remain in it?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

When I say we want to leave the EU I refer to the UK…….As I recall it was a UK wide referendum not an us vs them bun fight. As a result claiming Scotland voted to stay in, is as relevant as saying Wales or Great Yarmouth voted to leave . You can of course exercise your right to apply to be in the EU, along with Serbia,, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo, when you are an independent nation. You will be in good financial company.

To me, staying in an independent, democratic, sovereign UK is better than staying in a Union which is unaccountable, undemocratic, lacks a plausible immigration policy and shows general dissatisfaction as evidenced by escalating votes for right wing parties, has created a currency which benefits only one country, has high unemployment and corruption etc...…..I have written many posts on this

In short it's better to stay in an independent democratic, sovereign country because in the EU I can see the writing on the wall.

 

Perhaps You can now give us your reasons for staying in the EU.

 

 

[Peasandmash]

I not surprised to see Scotland's leader is in a skirt. I am surprised to see Scotland's leader is a female.

[johnnybangkok]

On 7/31/2019 at 5:21 PM, aright said:

Have you considered one of the reasons we want to leave the EU is because we don't want to be subject to EU law. Sovereignty was a key issue in the referendum We are grown up and would prefer our laws be made and democratically enacted through our elected representatives in Westminster, not enacted by the EU Commission and rubber stamped by MEP's in Brussels.

However like so many Remainers you shy away from the difficult questions.

To repeat

What's the point in being in a club where you can ignore the rules and pick and mix the laws you want to adopt or discard?

Can I add a further question to your statement "What I said about the UK Parliaments ability to contradict EU laws still stands as it theoretically possible for it to do so"

Question.   Since EU law overrides UK law.....How? 

EU Law only overrides UK law in as much as Parliament has chosen it to do so. As a sovereign nation, Parliament holds absolute sway over any law enacted in the UK.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty.

As I said before, it's semantics but worth noting that we chose EU law as the overriding law when we got more closely involved with Europe.

[vogie]

37 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

EU Law only overrides UK law in as much as Parliament has chosen it to do so. As a sovereign nation, Parliament holds absolute sway over any law enacted in the UK.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty.

As I said before, it's semantics but worth noting that we chose EU law as the overriding law when we got more closely involved with Europe.

When you say "we" I hope you mean the SNP and not the Scots who wish to remain within the UK.

[aright]

50 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

EU Law only overrides UK law in as much as Parliament has chosen it to do so. As a sovereign nation, Parliament holds absolute sway over any law enacted in the UK.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty.

As I said before, it's semantics but worth noting that we chose EU law as the overriding law when we got more closely involved with Europe.

"It has become increasingly clear that we can guarantee that future far better if we leave the European Union.  If a government cannot keep its promises because of its membership of an unelected, unaccountable outside organisation, the connection between the people and their laws is broken. The whole basis of our democracy is undermined.

 In the EU, the unelected European Commission creates laws for us and our parliament can only rubber-stamp them. The whole system is overseen by the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) in Luxembourg, which has ultimate jurisdiction over our parliament and law courts."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/22/the-eus-court-is-picking-apart-our-laws/

Edited August 2, 2019 by aright

[cleopatra2]

22 minutes ago, aright said:

"It has become increasingly clear that we can guarantee that future far better if we leave the European Union.  If a government cannot keep its promises because of its membership of an unelected, unaccountable outside organisation, the connection between the people and their laws is broken. The whole basis of our democracy is undermined.

 In the EU, the unelected European Commission creates laws for us and our parliament can only rubber-stamp them. The whole system is overseen by the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) in Luxembourg, which has ultimate jurisdiction over our parliament and law courts."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/22/the-eus-court-is-picking-apart-our-laws/

You need to understand how the system works

If to allow a UK court to reach a decision it is required to intepret EU law . The UK court will request a preliminary hearing. 

The ECJ before giving such a hearing will determine if the question is relevant. If not the question is returned unanswered .

The ECJ will give it prdliminary result to the question asked back to the UK court.

The UK court in making its determination will consider the response from the ECJ.

[aright]

5 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

You need to understand how the system works

If to allow a UK court to reach a decision it is required to intepret EU law . The UK court will request a preliminary hearing. 

The ECJ before giving such a hearing will determine if the question is relevant. If not the question is returned unanswered .

The ECJ will give it prdliminary result to the question asked back to the UK court.

The UK court in making its determination will consider the response from the ECJ.

That's the whole point isn't it...………….

"The whole system is overseen by the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) in Luxembourg, which has ultimate jurisdiction over our parliament and law courts."

Governance by unelected people in Luxembourg and Brussels may be something you find acceptable perhaps appealing. I share no such feelings.

That's one of the reasons I voted leave.

[cleopatra2]

3 minutes ago, aright said:

That's the whole point isn't it...………….

"The whole system is overseen by the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) in Luxembourg, which has ultimate jurisdiction over our parliament and law courts."

Governance by unelected people in Luxembourg and Brussels may be something you find acceptable perhaps appealing. I share no such feelings.

That's one of the reasons I voted leave.

Are you saying that the ECJ can overide the judgement of the UK supreme court.

 

[aright]

8 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

Are you saying that the ECJ can overide the judgement of the UK supreme court.

 

I am not a lawyer but if memory serves with the exception of human rights issues yes as does the links I have provided. The water is a little muddy but at best I think it runs parallel with the UK Supreme Court...….I don't want that either. I want our laws enacted and voted in by our elected representatives in Westminster and for the UK Supreme Court to be "supreme"

"Research by the Vote Leave referendum campaign group found that the UK has been defeated in 101 out of 131 legal actions taken to the European Court of Justice over the last 40 years. 

Rulings against the UK Government included prolonging a ban on world-wide export of British beef and scrapping a cut in beer duty. 

The failure rate of 77.1 per cent for Britain in the Luxembourg-based court was last night being seen as fresh evidence of the urgent need for country to quit the EU." 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/648899/Britain-loses-most-cases-taken-to-European-Court-EU-referendum-Vote-Leave-Gove

 

[johnnybangkok]

15 minutes ago, aright said:

I am not a lawyer but if memory serves with the exception of human rights issues yes as does the links I have provided. The water is a little muddy but at best I think it runs parallel with the UK Supreme Court...….I don't want that either. I want our laws enacted and voted in by our elected representatives in Westminster and for the UK Supreme Court to be "supreme"

"Research by the Vote Leave referendum campaign group found that the UK has been defeated in 101 out of 131 legal actions taken to the European Court of Justice over the last 40 years. 

Rulings against the UK Government included prolonging a ban on world-wide export of British beef and scrapping a cut in beer duty. 

The failure rate of 77.1 per cent for Britain in the Luxembourg-based court was last night being seen as fresh evidence of the urgent need for country to quit the EU." 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/648899/Britain-loses-most-cases-taken-to-European-Court-EU-referendum-Vote-Leave-Gove

 

Please don’t quote the Express or the Vote Leave campaign when trying to back up your statements. They are hardly neutral. 

I already showed you this in previous post that showed the U.K. did very well in its cases with most of them being thrown out before they got to Europe and when they did go to the ECJ they won more than any other country. They lost mostly in environmental cases. My figures where from government stats NOT partisan sources.