British PM anticipates call for Scottish independence referendum - report

[Grouse]

39 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Grouses - so enjoy the glorious 12th!

You'll get me shot!

[Laughing Gravy]

So Scotland gets independence which I am not against if that's what the majority want but sturgeon doesn't just want that she wants joining the EU, as it will have too. Again if that's what the Scots want good luck to them.

 

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/join-queue-for-eu-and-euro-top-official-tells-scotland-c89jc6smz

 

"Nicola Sturgeon’s hopes of an independent Scotland remaining in the EU have been dealt a blow after a top European official warned that it would have to reapply for membership and accept tough terms, including joining the euro.

 

“Even before the [independence] referendum, the president of the commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, had said there would be no further enlargements during his term of office,” she said. “So that takes you to 2020.

 

Mr Macdonald added: “As the SNP was repeatedly told during the referendum campaign, an independent Scotland would have to apply to join the EU like any other country. Alex Salmond tried to dismiss this, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Now it’s time for the SNP to be honest with voters. An independent Scotland would have to join the queue.”

[RuamRudy]

46 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

So Scotland gets independence which I am not against if that's what the majority want but sturgeon doesn't just want that she wants joining the EU, as it will have too. Again if that's what the Scots want good luck to them.

 

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/join-queue-for-eu-and-euro-top-official-tells-scotland-c89jc6smz

 

"Nicola Sturgeon’s hopes of an independent Scotland remaining in the EU have been dealt a blow after a top European official warned that it would have to reapply for membership and accept tough terms, including joining the euro.

 

“Even before the [independence] referendum, the president of the commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, had said there would be no further enlargements during his term of office,” she said. “So that takes you to 2020.

 

Mr Macdonald added: “As the SNP was repeatedly told during the referendum campaign, an independent Scotland would have to apply to join the EU like any other country. Alex Salmond tried to dismiss this, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Now it’s time for the SNP to be honest with voters. An independent Scotland would have to join the queue.”

 

Is like a conveyor belt, and that applicant countries can only be processed one at a time? Must those with existing applications be cleared before those coming behind can be processed, regardless of whether the new applicants meet entry criteria?

[jpinx]

6 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Is like a conveyor belt, and that applicant countries can only be processed one at a time? Must those with existing applications be cleared before those coming behind can be processed, regardless of whether the new applicants meet entry criteria?

I suppose they can process several at once, seeing as they will be at different stages and involve different EU staff, but the bottom line is that an independent Scotland would need the support of all the more powerful member countries.  Given the SNP's singular inability to make friends, that's going to be a major stumbling block.

[maxtwo]

I don't understand why they want to be alone.But part of the big dictator that is the EU.

[jpinx]

11 minutes ago, maxtwo said:

I don't understand why they want to be alone.But part of the big dictator that is the EU.

If your not a bred Scot - you'd not understand. 

[agudbuk]

If there is a referendum give the English a vote on whether the Scots should be allowed to stay in the union

Sent from my Grand using Tapatalk

[vogie]

On 08/02/2017 at 7:08 PM, Grouse said:

I wanted the UK to remain in tact at the time of the last referendum. Now, after the referendum and all that I think Scotland would be better off part of the EU

 

For info, my father was born in Banchory, so clearly a highland Scot. My mother was born in Co Durham. So I consider my self half Scottish. 

I am so glad we seem to be losing the Yorkshire side to you, many of us from Yorkshire will be truly relieved Jock.

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

I suppose they can process several at once, seeing as they will be at different stages and involve different EU staff, but the bottom line is that an independent Scotland would need the support of all the more powerful member countries.  Given the SNP's singular inability to make friends, that's going to be a major stumbling block.

OK, so we can agree that this back of the queue nonsense is exactly that - more BT unionist lies designed to scare people away from independence.

I am unsure about your comment about SNP being unpopular. I accept that down south they are as popular as a fish milkshake, but I get the impression that their internationalism is very warmly welcomed in Europe.

[jpinx]

8 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

OK, so we can agree that this back of the queue nonsense is exactly that - more BT unionist lies designed to scare people away from independence.

I am unsure about your comment about SNP being unpopular. I accept that down south they are as popular as a fish milkshake, but I get the impression that their internationalism is very warmly welcomed in Europe.

I base my comment on the reception by Junkers, Schultz and others.  All saying yes, you can join, if you pass the entrance exam all the way from square one as a new applicant -- in other words absolutely no concessions, and no credit for having been a "part-member" before.   I don't see tinkerbell travelling around her "EU friends" to keep them warm - only rhetoric and whining from the safety of Holyrood.....

Edited February 10, 2017 by jpinx

[Jip99]

9 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

OK, so we can agree that this back of the queue nonsense is exactly that - more BT unionist lies designed to scare people away from independence.

I am unsure about your comment about SNP being unpopular. I accept that down south they are as popular as a fish milkshake, but I get the impression that their internationalism is very warmly welcomed in Europe.

 

The SNP are a joke.

 

It is only the hatred for centralised government in London than causes them to kiss-ass to a bigger centralised government in Brussels.

 

 

If that is internationalism, you can have it. 

[Baerboxer]

On 2/9/2017 at 0:57 PM, Grouse said:

The point that I was trying to make is that the UK low tax, low benefit economy is out of line with European social democratic norms.

 

Lets take Denmark as an example. The Danes pay MUCH higher taxes, have MUCH better services and by all accounts are much happier ( we'll leave the issue of the Muslim migrant scourage on one side). I think the Scots would be happier with a similar set up rather than Westminster transatlantic, misery. I may be wrong.

 

Take Germany as an example. Like the UK a net contributor and both very large economies within the EU. My German friends used to pay a much higher percentage in tax than I did. But their services overall were better. The issue with that is that overtime those services can become less efficient and less effective and more people are benefiting from them whereas not all are paying as they did before. In Germany and Denmark, where I've worked in the past, friends are less happy than before and the comment that they don't get the same level of value and service as before. 

The UK went down the privatization road, claiming it to be the salvation of all things. As we've seen it's choking the NHS, produced profiteering in power supplies, water and encroaches on all essential services in ways that are not positive. A lot of that is down to pandering to the rich and allowing loose controls and de-regulations that they wanted as it allows them to make more money and avoid tax. All at the expense of Joe Public.

 

I don't doubt that the current government would love to turn the UK into a strictly capitalist country where workers can be hired and fired as deemed necessary; where HR laws can be ignored as required and where the gulf between the rich and workers is increased and where the pesky educated middle classes are eradicated. With the current ludicrous Labor Party and weak Trade Union movement in opposition and the silly SNP who only care about independence, that is likely what the UK electorate will get.

 

I think most British people would be happier with a socially fair society that worked rather than the American polarized model.

[RuamRudy]

7 minutes ago, jpinx said:

I base my comment on the reception by Junkers, Schultz and others.  All saying yes, you can join, if you pass the entrance exam all the way from square one as a new applicant -- in other words absolutely no concessions, and no credit for having been a "part-member" before.   I don't see tinkerbell travelling around her "EU friends" to keep them warm - only rhetoric and whining from the safety of Holyrood.....

I don't think anyone assumed that we would get an automatic bye based on our history; that history, however, would suggest that much of the requirements would either be met or attainable in a comfortable timeframe.

 

An interesting aside, showing the bias of newspapers on both sides of the debate: The National describes Jacqueline Minor's comments on Scottish entry criteria as "Independent Scotland Meets Criteria for EU Membership, says Top Official" whereas the Express says ".Sturgeon's independence dream in TATTERS as Brussles says 'join the queue'" (unnecessary capitalisation is the headline writer's).

[Baerboxer]

On 2/9/2017 at 1:09 PM, RuamRudy said:

 

Of course - people have high expectations of their governments so it is to be expected that they will shed some support as their term progresses. They are still showing impressive poll numbers for a party in their second term. Whether they can sustain that into a third term may never be clear... 

 

Always nice to put the positive spin and reduced numbers of support.

[Baerboxer]

2 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Is like a conveyor belt, and that applicant countries can only be processed one at a time? Must those with existing applications be cleared before those coming behind can be processed, regardless of whether the new applicants meet entry criteria?

 

Who knows how they decide or actually work. But one things for sure. All new applicants must adopt the Euro; must accept Schengen; must accept the dominance of EU law; and must meet the financial criteria set by the EU. They also must receive a vote of acceptance by every current member state.

 

So Salmond lied when he suggested otherwise; as did Sturgeon. They were desperate to try and link a vote for independence to mean automatic EU entry in a bid to win more voters over. What a surprise.

[RuamRudy]

9 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

I think most British people would be happier with a socially fair society that worked rather than the American polarized model.

 

Do you see any sign of a saviour of the masses, marching on Westminster, ready to retrieve what is left of the UK from the grasping hands of Tory party donors, because I cannot.

 

I should have added that no Scottish MPs have ever swung the balance of power in Westminster in my lifetime. Only the English decide upon who is in Downing St. The best we managed was to prevent a tory majority in 2010, but it still didn't prevent the rise of Cameron.

 

 

Edited February 10, 2017 by RuamRudy

[Baerboxer]

31 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

OK, so we can agree that this back of the queue nonsense is exactly that - more BT unionist lies designed to scare people away from independence.

I am unsure about your comment about SNP being unpopular. I accept that down south they are as popular as a fish milkshake, but I get the impression that their internationalism is very warmly welcomed in Europe.

 

As long as we can agree that Scotland and the SNP won't be given priority, extra special treatment, or be allowed to cherry pick what it can meet and accept as well.

 

The impression I get is that in the EU the SNP were treated professionally by several EU leaders who met them but made it clear they would not negotiate or speak with them regarding Brexit or EU membership as they only dealt with the UK. Tusk actually refused to meet Sturgeon as he deemed it inappropriate. There was one very anti British German socialist MEP, a strong federalist, who said he'd welcome Scotland. But he keeps referring to the UK as England and still seems to have a chip on his shoulder about events of last century.

[RuamRudy]

13 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Always nice to put the positive spin and reduced numbers of support.

 

Of course - that is politics and that is what all politicians do. But no matter how much cold water you pour on the SNP numbers, they are stll far more popular than Theresa, Jeremy or whoever is in charge of UKIP this week could ever hope to muster.

[Baerboxer]

6 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Do you see any sign of a saviour of the masses, marching on Westminster, ready to retrieve what is left of the UK from the grasping hands of Tory party donors, because I cannot.

 

I should have added that no Scottish MPs have ever swung the balance of power in Westminster in my lifetime. Only the English decide upon who is in Downing St. The best we managed was to prevent a tory majority in 2010, but it still didn't prevent the rise of Cameron.

 

 

 

No. I don't see any good political leaders in the UK; or in EU for that matter. Sadly Europe is heading backwards and those who fought in two world wars in the hope of a just fair society for all must be spinning in their graves.

 

Have a look at how many PM's, Chancellors and cabinet ministers have been Scottish or half Scottish since Victorian times. Then tell me that Scots don't influence things. Check on military Generals, Admirals and Air Marshals too. Scotland and Scots have always influenced and ensured their voice is heard. 

 

 

[RuamRudy]

Just now, Baerboxer said:

 

No. I don't see any good political leaders in the UK; or in EU for that matter. Sadly Europe is heading backwards and those who fought in two world wars in the hope of a just fair society for all must be spinning in their graves.

 

Have a look at how many PM's, Chancellors and cabinet ministers have been Scottish or half Scottish since Victorian times. Then tell me that Scots don't influence things. Check on military Generals, Admirals and Air Marshals too. Scotland and Scots have always influenced and ensured their voice is heard. 

 

 

 

But Scottish politicians in power are as venal, insecure and self motivated as the rest - they pander to those who elect their party to power. Do you focus your resources on a densely populated region that can influence your return to power, or a sparsely populated area that tugs at the heart strings but is likely to see you out of office at the next election? And, of course, I accept that this applies to Holyrood as much as Westminster, but Westminster has shown no sign of changing, whereas Holyrood appears (to me) to be more accountable.

[Baerboxer]

3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Of course - that is politics and that is what all politicians do. But no matter how much cold water you pour on the SNP numbers, they are stll far more popular than Theresa, Jeremy or whoever is in charge of UKIP this week could ever hope to muster.

 

If there was such a thing as a real English nationalist party, not some neo nazi racist bunch of football hooligans, then that party would probable be more popular than Theresa, Jeremy or the clowns at the UKIP too.

 

Or are you, possible correctly suggesting, that the lack of popularity of the main stream parties is what fuels the popularity of the SNP?

 

I was once asked to present several leaving staff with their "retirement" presents and gifts and make appropriate speeches. I worked for the group rather than that business but was officed on that site. I wondered why they asked me rather than their own GM or one of his team. The answer was "you are the least disliked of the senior managers based here". Sort of warm feeling Sturgeon probably has.

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, Baerboxer said:

 

If there was such a thing as a real English nationalist party, not some neo nazi racist bunch of football hooligans, then that party would probable be more popular than Theresa, Jeremy or the clowns at the UKIP too.

 

Or are you, possible correctly suggesting, that the lack of popularity of the main stream parties is what fuels the popularity of the SNP?

 

I was once asked to present several leaving staff with their "retirement" presents and gifts and make appropriate speeches. I worked for the group rather than that business but was officed on that site. I wondered why they asked me rather than their own GM or one of his team. The answer was "you are the least disliked of the senior managers based here". Sort of warm feeling Sturgeon probably has.

Of course - the utterly bewildering inability of SLab to reform into anything even closely resembling a cohesive entity is definitely fueling support for the SNP,, however I have made this point before, that I see the SNP as the vehicle to independence, but then I would expect many to hop off the bus at that point.

[Baerboxer]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

 

But Scottish politicians in power are as venal, insecure and self motivated as the rest - they pander to those who elect their party to power. Do you focus your resources on a densely populated region that can influence your return to power, or a sparsely populated area that tugs at the heart strings but is likely to see you out of office at the next election? And, of course, I accept that this applies to Holyrood as much as Westminster, but Westminster has shown no sign of changing, whereas Holyrood appears (to me) to be more accountable.

 

Strangely enough I see Holyrood as getting less accountable. Rather like some of the large metropolitan councils in the bigger English cities. Not sure about the Welsh assembly - been some, and still ongoing, scandals about high pay and bonuses which have dragged on years and suggests not. NI has it's current scandal.

 

Westminster is resistant to change. I once read the line that whoever wins the election, the establishment still governs! One thing Brexit showed was that thankfully we do still have an independent judiciary that won't allow the government to simply govern by decree. Heaven help if that changes. 

 

Scotland enjoys its own parliament, ok maybe it is a glorified council, with wide powers. It also enjoys 53 Westminster MPs who vote on non Scottish related matters. Yet elected Welsh, Irish and English MPs can't vote on devolved Scottish matters. 

 

If you want to be democratic, then all people in the Union have a right to vote on the future of the Union. And all people have a right to vote on matters that affect the whole of the union or on items that aren't regionally devolved. But why should one area vote on others devolved issues but not have others vote on theirs?

 

 

 

[7by7]

9 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Do you focus your resources on a densely populated region that can influence your return to power, or a sparsely populated area that tugs at the heart strings but is likely to see you out of office at the next election? And, of course, I accept that this applies to Holyrood as much as Westminster, but Westminster has shown no sign of changing, whereas Holyrood appears (to me) to be more accountable.

An example of how the then Tory/LibDem coalition 'ignored' a Scottish region where they had little or no political support.

 

£32 million of additional UK Government funding for superfast broadband in Scotland

Quote

The government has today announced that it is making available a further £32 million of funding to ensure that Scotland is on track with its plans to deliver superfast broadband.

This funding is in addition to £68.8 million that has already been allocated to Scotland for investment in its broadband network, taking the total to over £100 million.

 An example of Holyrood's support for the area is when they overturned a planning refusal in Salmond's own constituency so Salmond's then mate Trump (they fell out since) could build a golf course which not only had zero support locally but also severely damaged a site of special scientific interest.

[Baerboxer]

5 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Of course - the utterly bewildering inability of SLab to reform into anything even closely resembling a cohesive entity is definitely fueling support for the SNP,, however I have made this point before, that I see the SNP as the vehicle to independence, but then I would expect many to hop off the bus at that point.

 

I think that's where you'd have a real problem. I seriously doubt the SNP would give up power easily and given their tendency not to accept things they don't like wouldn't expect them to simply allow others, elected or not, to take over easily.

 

Be careful what you wish for. I really suspect the SNP would try, and don't ask me why its just a gut feel, to create a one party state or create a hierarchy that produces that result more covertly.

 

Let us assume Brexit happens, another Scottish referendum doesn't. The I dread to think what the result will be at the next General Election. I'd be in a worse position than the Americans last year. Who the hell to vote for?

 

 

[Baerboxer]

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

An example of how the then Tory/LibDem coalition 'ignored' a Scottish region where they had little or no political support.

 

£32 million of additional UK Government funding for superfast broadband in Scotland

 An example of Holyrood's support for the area is when they overturned a planning refusal in Salmond's own constituency so Salmond's then mate Trump (they fell out since) could build a golf course which not only had zero support locally but also severely damaged a site of special scientific interest.

 

The SNP have got used to being bought off. Extra powers devolved, large additional amounts of spending on Scottish projects.

 

Maybe that's what Sturgeon is after this time - more power and more UK money to spend.

 

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Strangely enough I see Holyrood as getting less accountable. Rather like some of the large metropolitan councils in the bigger English cities. Not sure about the Welsh assembly - been some, and still ongoing, scandals about high pay and bonuses which have dragged on years and suggests not. NI has it's current scandal.

 

Westminster is resistant to change. I once read the line that whoever wins the election, the establishment still governs! One thing Brexit showed was that thankfully we do still have an independent judiciary that won't allow the government to simply govern by decree. Heaven help if that changes. 

 

Scotland enjoys its own parliament, ok maybe it is a glorified council, with wide powers. It also enjoys 53 Westminster MPs who vote on non Scottish related matters. Yet elected Welsh, Irish and English MPs can't vote on devolved Scottish matters. 

 

If you want to be democratic, then all people in the Union have a right to vote on the future of the Union. And all people have a right to vote on matters that affect the whole of the union or on items that aren't regionally devolved. But why should one area vote on others devolved issues but not have others vote on theirs?

 

 

 

One thing to note about Holyrood is that it is a single chamber - they rely upon cross party committees for most of their oversight. I don't follow the machinations too closely, but it seems rare that mention of deadlock or stalemate arises.

 

Engilsh devolution, for me, is essential if IndyRef2 either fails to materialise or fails. It seems that there is an increasing desire for it within England although I am not sure whether Westminster would be willing.

 

But it is the very fact that there is not a devolved English parliament that means very few bills that go through the commons are purely English in impact - anything that affects spending in Westminster, for example, affects the devolved parliaments, hence what is often seen as their interference in 'English Only' matters.

[7by7]

11 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I have made this point before, that I see the SNP as the vehicle to independence, but then I would expect many to hop off the bus at that point.

 

1 minute ago, Baerboxer said:

Be careful what you wish for. I really suspect the SNP would try, and don't ask me why its just a gut feel, to create a one party state or create a hierarchy that produces that result more covertly.

 

Indeed.

 

The lessons of history have many examples of nationalist parties gaining power, and then refusing to give it up once their stated aims have been acheived!

[RuamRudy]

5 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

 

Indeed.

 

The lessons of history have many examples of nationalist parties gaining power, and then refusing to give it up once their stated aims have been acheived!

As unfounded smear attempts go, that is the most repulsive of the lot.

 

https://msu.edu/user/hillrr/161lec16.htm

 

[RuamRudy]

16 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

An example of how the then Tory/LibDem coalition 'ignored' a Scottish region where they had little or no political support.

 

£32 million of additional UK Government funding for superfast broadband in Scotland

 An example of Holyrood's support for the area is when they overturned a planning refusal in Salmond's own constituency so Salmond's then mate Trump (they fell out since) could build a golf course which not only had zero support locally but also severely damaged a site of special scientific interest.

Not the regions being ignored - they have the Barnett formula to demonstrate 'fairness' but they can gerrymander: HS2 and the London Olympics, for example, both funded from the National Infrastructure budget so not taken into account when allocating funds to regions.