wrecker - un-named Whitehall "sources" & Spanish "officials", or a direct statement from the Spanish Foreign Minister. I'll let you decide how much weight to assign to each report.
Chat Forum
Salmond on Newsnight
-
Posted 4 months ago #
-
If Cameron is willing to change the law so that any Scots referendum is legally binding,
he does not make laws parliament oes and it is debatable as to whether scotland can do this without the UK's say so. Perosnally I think it would be impossobe for them to ignore the vote irrespective of the legality...are they really going to ignore a vote for devolution by just saying no you dont have the right to ask so the answer is irreleavnt? Just cant see it personally.
then it is theoretically possible to change the rules so that English MP's can vote to ask their electorate a question - or is there a block to this?
Apparently scotland would need to decide this and select the question
Posted 4 months ago # -
Hmmmm, newsnetscotland or the independent. Choices, choices
Posted 4 months ago # -
As this will effect the rest of the Union as well as Scotland, why can't we all have a vote, considering the potential risks and implications? And if not, perhaps England/Wales can have an unofficial referendum, and if the answer is no, Westminster has to take this into account in negotiations?
Posted 4 months ago # -
Go back and start reading the thread from the top
Posted 4 months ago # -
And start reading about WW2 and the English Navy? No thanks
Posted 4 months ago # -
Posted 4 months ago # -
And start reading about WW2 and the English Navy? No thanks
Please do go back and read again.. maybe then the pedantic and completely incorrect drivel can stop.
I said 'historically' and 'primarily the English navy' has protected this islands coastal waters. For your information, history didn't start with Mel Gibson. The English navy had existed in various forms for at least 800 years before the union between England and scotland resulting in the renaming to the royal navy.
THAT is what I meant, and that is what I wrote.
Posted 4 months ago # -
elzorillo - Member
They didn't do a very good job in 1066.
I said 'historically' and 'primarily the English navy' has protected this islands coastal waters. The English navy had existed in various forms for at least 800 years before the union between England and scotland resulting in the renaming to the royal navy.Posted 4 months ago # -
Junkyard - Member
...it is debatable as to whether scotland can do this without the UK's say so. Perosnally I think it would be impossobe for them to ignore the vote irrespective of the legality...are they really going to ignore a vote for devolution by just saying no you dont have the right to ask so the answer is irreleavnt? Just cant see it personally.OK JY - take that idea to its logical conclusion (and outside the current debate) and where does that leave you? Not a pleasant place I would think.
Druidh - good for you for remaining impartial. More interesting that way!!
Posted 4 months ago # -
elzorillo - Member
For your information, history didn't start with Mel Gibson.Fantastic - now we get to talk about the Brits being the people (well one of the peoples) who inhabited these islands before the English arrived.
Technically correct - but not helpful in any constructive debate. Oh wait a minute "constructive debate"...
People have a right of self-determination, whether I support the union or not.
And can the "you'll never survive without us" brigade try to sound a little less like jilted lovers - it's not helping your case (a case that I don't necessarily disagree with). At the moment you mainly sound angry that your being rejected.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Out of curiosity, as a non-eu foreign national, permanently resident in the UK, how would this potentially affect my right to come live and work in Scotland?
I would imagine the scenario would be that if you lived in Scotland, your visa would be converted to a Scottish one in a few months (again - nothing unusual in this - been through it myself with other countries), or if you lived in England, it would remain as a "British" one.Posted 4 months ago # -
Out of curiosity, as a non-eu foreign national, permanently resident in the UK, how would this potentially affect my right to come live and work in Scotland?
You will be put to hard labour then ask to kiss the tail of the fish ...
Proclaim Scotland as the greatest land on earth and Scots are better than you or the land where you were born.
Whisky is your holy water ...
Posted 4 months ago # -
this might be a problem for rUK depending on what level of border control was put in place post-independence.
There would have to be a common visa area - it would be impossible to police (for both sides) otherwise anyway.Posted 4 months ago # -
I was thinking of problems arising from Schengen if Scotland was in the Schengen area and rUK not. All new entrants to the EU are obliged to sign up for Schengen, so either Scotland is not a "new" entrant and it doesn't apply, Scotland gets an exemption, or England has to put up some form of border control
Posted 4 months ago # -
When did this rUK thing start???
Posted 4 months ago # -
Or England joins Schengen
Posted 4 months ago # -
Duckman:
Free from the burden of ScotlandEngland would apparantly be a land of high-speed rail links and honey,according to Zokes
Erm? When did I say this? Or are we inventing things again
(who would appear to be in OZ)
I do. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything though, or are any Scots south of the border automatically English by nationality? Though funnily enough, they won't be allowed to vote in the referendum:
Posted 4 months ago # -
All new entrants to the EU are obliged to sign up for Schengen
You presume Scotland will be allowed to join the EU!
Posted 4 months ago # -
How big does a thread have to be before it develops an echo like that?
Posted 4 months ago # -
Posted 4 months ago #
-
Or England joins Schengen
Not sure England has that choice, but the UK minus Scotland might have a view.
Posted 4 months ago # -
fair point rio
Posted 4 months ago # -
Please have a large pinch of salt to hand but this is interesting.
In an attempt to ramp up the pressure on the Scots, Unionists have claimed that Scotland's entry could be blocked by a veto from a single member state. However this was dismissed by lawyers for the EU who said an independent Scotland could be treated as one of two successor states, and that a separate seat for Edinburgh would require only a simple majority vote. No single EU member would have a veto.
Posted 4 months ago # -
The unnamed (and possibly fictitious) "EU lawyers" are wrong. There would not be a successor state as the UK would remain as a state; even if E&W&NI were a successor state, there is no problem about it retaining its membership of international organisations without re-applying. There are tons of precedents for this in international law in the last thirty years alone.
E&W&NI could easily join Schengen if it wanted. Ireland would join Schengen too - they only didn't join to preserve the common travel area with NI and GB.
Incidentally, part of the arrangements for Irish independence included the common travel area and the provision that UK citizens could vote in Irish elections and vice versa. There's no reason why a similar arrangement couldn't be established after Scottish independence too.
Frankly, all of these issues are distractions from the core question of whether it's a good idea or not. None of them is unprecedented and all of them are practically addressable if the political will is there.
Posted 4 months ago # -
The Germans remained members of the EC after they greatly changed their borders with the unification of East & West.
I really don't see how it wouldn't be the same if a country reduced it's borders and part of it went a separate wayPosted 4 months ago # -
both would have to renegotiate the terms of their entry into the EU.
That would be fantastic for rUK. I dearly hope it's correct.
Posted 4 months ago # -
konabunny - Member
The unnamed (and possibly fictitious) "EU lawyers" are wrong. There would not be a successor state as the UK would remain as a state;
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, to give it its full name, would no longer exist.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Saw the interview and Alex came off looking OK on it. Paxman looked like a tetchy caracature of himself.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I fail to see how Scotland would benefit from independence. For a start, we would have only one main political party who actually wanted independence, so what happens if SNP lose their majority at the first election after independence? Either the opposition parties execute a humiliating climb down for the sake of governing the country sensibly (hah!) or they execute a humiliating plea to join the Union again. Either way it would be an embarrassment to be called a Scot (current views on the chain-smoking deep-fried-everything violent stereotype notwithstanding).
Posted 4 months ago # -
The good news is that the majority of Scots also fail to see how Scotland would benefit from Independence. The double good news is that Alex Salmond is one of them. So whilst he's rattling the sabre for Scottish interests it's all good - indeed this is what he should be doing.
CmD just needs to insist on a starkly-worded plebiscite along the lines of 'Do you want Scotland to leave the union of Great Britain yes or no' and that'll be that - binned. Alex gets carried out on his shield and gets to save face.
What we don't want is a biscuit-arsed third option on the ballot that gives some vague sort of mandate that can be dragged on for the next 20 years.Posted 4 months ago # -
You mean you dont want the people to have all the options on the table..Can you run this democracy idea past me again?
Posted 4 months ago # -
The new statesman has a couple of interesting articles today on both AS and more interestingly on "the question".
Posted 4 months ago # -
You mean you dont want the people to have all the options on the table..Can you run this democracy idea past me again?
Well I suppose then that you could put 101 questions on the ballot
Do you want Devo-micro?
Do you want to return to a feudal system
Do you want to close our borders with England
etc.
etc.Posted 4 months ago # -
haven't trawled the thread but has anyone mentioned the High Speed Rail link yet? How can the SNP campign for the UK government to build it all the way north of the border when the main beneficiary would be Scotland. Surely it would be up to the Scottish government to fund it?
Posted 4 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
