Forum menu
jambalaya » animal welfare standards are widely ignored in Europe and the rules hugely abused.
To be fair that was exactly the argument from the local chicken farmer that I drink with.
He keeps ~15,000 free-range hens. They need a lot of looking after to do it all by the book which obviously costs money. He feels that he gets under-cut by imported eggs from countries in the EU that take a much less rigorous approach to enforcing the welfare rules.
No, it demonstrates the failure of EU competition policy
I could be wrong but I think the UK government put the privatisation policies int place, not the EU.
the UK nuclear industry as well as a big chunk of water, transport and telecomms infastructure is also owned by overseas investors I think.
Was just wondering how "taking Britain back" is going to work in regards to this vital backbone of the country which has been sold off.
the UK nuclear industry as well as a big chunk of water, transport and telecomms infastructure is also owned by overseas investors I think.
the Canadian Teachers pension Fund is a worry
[url= http://www.snappytv.com/tc/2367171/1207044 ]Boris at the French Embassy - Bastille Day Celebration[/url]
Seemed to me it was mostly applause including at the every closer union joke (In French) at the end. Journalists not sure whether it was Brits or French making the booing.
The thread that keeps on giving...
On farmers I think 100% of those I asked were fully remain.
I'm glad now the UK is free from oppression leave will now fix the weather to make sure the UK can grow oranges and olives where we want...
I'm coming to the conclusion that Theresa May is an evil genius.
Look at the whole cabinet. Now look at the jobs the leavers got.
Leadsom gets to tell farmers where their subsidies went.
Johnson, Fox and Davis get to try and put an acceptable UK position together in terms of trade (both inside and outside the EU), freedom of movement etc - and if the don't then they failed to deliver Brexit, not May's fault, she's not going to do that to the country. And the leavers have to suck it up because they couldn't deliver. If they do May gets to say she picked the right team.
And Patel gets international development - I suspect another sticky area, not so much for what those foreigners we need to develop say and do, but for what people round (say) Sunderland say about development starting at home (as they realise there isn't £350m a month never mind a week)
Of the leavers only Evans gets something achievable with Leader of the Lords - unless of course the lords don't fancy Brexit in which case...
Like I said - evil genius
"FWIW I work at an Institute dedicated to agricultural improvement. The facts surrounding food security in the UK and wider world are truly frightening."
No quarrel with that statement.
I'd have thought one of the best arguments for remaining in the EU (an EU that might include Ukraine one day) is access to food when the phosphates crisis kicks in.
@kelvin farmers and fisherman where pro-Leave quite substantially so I understand. Do you really think they don't fully understand the EU and its subsidies and trade barriers and thought about all of that before voting.
My friend is the MD of a rather large agricultural feed company. I think I can say with some authority that the farmers he's spoken to who voted out are now coming to the realisation that they haven't so much been turkeys voting for Christmas, as they have been turkeys voting to introduce Thanksgiving too.
So no, lots didn't fully understand. It's safe to say most had little comprehension.
So no, lots didn't fully understand. It's safe to say most had little comprehension
No need to restrict this to farmers!
Lots of people believed the lies they were told.
Great authority!!
Bank of England are suggesting yesterday that Brexit will have a significant impact on family finances. But I don't expect any comment on that from Jamby.Anyway, I have to keep reminding myself it is about taking back control,and chastise myself for having such a selfish mindset.
jambalaya - MemberI do love the Remainers attempts to twist stuff
Says the man who was still mentioning £350m last week.
Great authority!!
His company services a significant portion of the UK's livestock industry. He and his staff talk to many clients each day, most of whom are farmers. What's your source of more reliable information?
Oliver Letwin said UK has no trade negotiators at all in a radio 4 interview this morning.
I think we have 6 trade negotiators employed in the civil service the plan is to hire some in trouble is most of the UK based ones are already busy with corporate clients protecting their interests in the chaos. The predicted cost for the negotiations was being put at £240 million a week !
I think we have 6 trade negotiators employed in the civil service the plan is to hire some in trouble is most of the UK based ones are already busy with corporate clients protecting their interests in the chaos. The predicted cost for the negotiations was being put at £240 million a week !
That's why WTO + CCT strikes me as the only sane starting point.
If we left, which we won't IMHO.
But that only leaves £110 million a week from the mythical 350 !!!!
Could someone make a cost of Brexit page with a counter showing how much this is costing us in real time
Letwin said we had some but they all worl for the EU 😉
We need not worry look at the titan of probity we have in politics to steer us to a Jambywonderland post brexit where farmers well versed on International matters grow whatever they please .Please spare a though for poor jamby, the only person [s]in the[/s] from the uk who will be worse off.
[quote=Junkyard ]Letwin said we had some but they all worl for the EU
Well they'll all be looking for new jobs then, so that works out well.
As if trade negotiators are some mystical cabal of uniquely talented individuals. You just need commercial lawyers and regulatory experts, with which we are happily blessed. The government (we) will pay through the nose for these people though.
Pretty sure that expertise in the area of trade negotiations would be a reasonably useful skill set for a trade negotiator. I suspect its who everyone we will be negotiating will use, what we used wiht the EU and what we will need for the rest of the world
Why is it that folk so dislike expertise and think anyone could just give it a go?
[quote=Junkyard ]Why is it that folk so dislike expertise and think anyone could just give it a go?
Do keep up JY - we've had enough of it
JY not my point. There is nothing inherently unique about a trade deal that a commercial lawyer or negotiator couldn't handle. It's not like being a weaver, or a particle physicist.
My point is that 'lack of trade negotiators' isn't the issue. Typically stupid observation by that idiot Letwin though.
This amused me:
https://tompride.wordpress.com/2016/05/28/the-great-eu-debate-boris-johnson-vs-boris-johnson/
As if trade negotiators are some mystical cabal of uniquely talented individuals. You just need commercial lawyers and regulatory experts, with which we are happily blessed
Lawyers you say? Well those buggers can spin things out for years.
we are happily blessed with commercial and regulatory lawyers they are a) fxxk expensive b) based in the city doing eu centric work that will move in to the eu with the banks when we lose the banking passport c) tied up at the moment advising commercial clients.
So we will be at a significant disadvantage when what we can scrape together goes up against the EUs team that do this all the time are well versed in the EU regulations they will be seeking to tie us to and have the advantage of knowing they negotiate from a position of strength representing the worlds third largest economic block dealing with a lone state with minimal natural resources that is pressed for time on a two year guillotine.
JY not my point.
Yes it is as you went to say again that anyone could do it
There is nothing inherently unique about a trade deal that a commercial lawyer or negotiator couldn't handle.
I could do lots of things as well all of them less well than an actual expert.. like you and debates; you can join in but you dont do it well 😉
My point is that 'lack of trade negotiators' isn't the issue. Typically stupid observation by that idiot Letwin though
Your right the fact we dont have any expertise in the area where we are most in need and going to be focusing our external relations with the world is no way a hindrance to the achievement of that goal.
Facepalm etc
So when is the last day you can relocate to an EU Country - is it before or after Art 50 is triggered i.e. the expiry of the 2 years - we are EU citizens until then?
JY you are a right laugh...but your comprehension is awful. You also look for reasons to argue, on this matter (Brexit) suspect we are in violent agreement.
For clarity, my only point is that 'trade negotiator' is not a vocation or a profession, it is a subset of a certain type of legal/contractual professional service. Crankboys point is a valid one though, and perhaps the only silver lining for me personally out of this whole disaster.
[quote=mikewsmith ]The thread that keeps on giving...
On farmers I think 100% of those I asked were fully remain.
..............
Unfortunately not the case here in the UK.
but your comprehension is awful
[img] 
/revision/latest?cb=20121205194057[/img]
You also look for reasons to argue
I think you mean disagree
my only point is that 'trade negotiator' is not a vocation or a profession
Its is and its a specialism in the same way as surgeon is a specialism of medicine. And heart surgeon of surgeons and heart transplant surgeon of heart surgeon etc.
Yes lots of others coudl give it a go but they are not experts
http://study.com/articles/How_to_Become_an_International_Trade_Specialist_Career_Roadmap.html
Locating the necessary expertise will be critical to the UK’s success, after the country’s unexpected decision to leave the European Union.
we have weak enough hand as is without cobbling together a team of folk willing to give it a go because we dont need experts
You also look for reasons to argue
I think you mean disagree
😆
Negotiation is a skill and a profession. There are many many people used to and experienced in negotiating trade contracts. All this is done in anything from weeks to months (edit: although simpler arrangements). We have various frameworks from the current EU arrangements all the way to the WTO framework.
As for regret I don't know a single person who regrets voting Leave.
Turkeys's for Christmas is the analogy I used for Remainers, focused only on the short term (their next meal) and ignoring the future realities.
These experts we now need are going to get even more expensive in April, once Osbournes PAYE-only for contractors kicks in, and the big firms will then be financially raping the Govt.
I did no tmean that one as sarcasm.....i wished i had though 😳
For the panel's consideration: "Why Did People Vote Leave?" on The Briefing Room (Radio 4).Give it 5 minutes and try not to make yourself too hoarse!
Oh dear 🙁
Negotiation is a skill and a profession. There are many many people used to and experienced in negotiating trade contracts.
Hang on a minute lads, I've got a great idea...
[img] 
?1459283834[/img]
"jambalaya"
Who is this blinkered believer, and why do any of us waste our efforts trying to help him look into how things might actually work?
The effects of Brexit strike, jobs lost, holidays ruined
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36810558
The first "formal" backtracking?
@kelvin howdy my name is in my profile, we are having a discussion and its fair to say there are differences of opinion.
I listened tomthe R4 piece and have made some notes, however the small matter of a mi,itary coup in Turkey has my attention 😯 have many friends on hokiday in Kemer right now, hoping they can get home safely but all airports are shut
@kimbers thats just total cr@p budget holdiay companies are in big trouble as terrorism has decimated travel to Tunisia, Egypt and Turkey (friends there niw say its 25% full vs 100% normal) if you don't mind me saying you've lost rational judgement over the vote. Thats a failed ceo blaming whatever he can on his own companies demise
As for May she's made a genious move on Sturgeon, she said the union was imperitive (means no more referendums) and that Scotland would be fully involved in Brexit, ie we will keep you up to date with what the UK is doing.
Well that's not quite all that she's told Sturgeon is it? But then the whole truth would be awkward.
Truth is an awkward thing isn't it... From here on we should just stick to making stuff up and being selective.
You can say it, but considering some of the claims you've made about the referendum, it's not gonna count for much
You simply can't deny that thanks to the vote the pound buys >10? less Euros
Nor can you ignore that the likes of Easyjet and BA issuing profit warnings since the result.
Well actually im sure you can ignore it and just carry on
[img] 
[/img]
The pound / euro rate has been there before, the summer of 2013 was worse at £1 to €1.151 (currently €1.1947). Businesses went under then too
The administrator of Lowcost said, "Intense competition had caused the collapse, but also the increased terror threat...([url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36810558 ]source: BBC[/url])
An awful lot of bad news is coming out under cover of Brexit, which might contribute, but isn't the whole story
Some airports are offering 1:1 euro to sterling
(means no more referendums)
Not really up to Theresa, is it..
Some airports are offering 1:1 euro to sterling
If you are buying currency at the airport you'll get the shittest rate they can get away with,
indeed, still I don't think there's ever been parity anywhere before though, and means it could go lower...
(means no more referendums)
Not really up to Theresa, is it..
Scottish parliament can call for indyref2 but cant call indyref2. Surely permission has to be given by Westminster for it to happen
bad news is coming out under cover of Brexit, which might contribute, but isn't the whole story
Agreed, but to post the entire quote you copied from...
intense competition had caused the collapse but also the increased terror threat and the uncertainty before and after the recent referendum.
The group experienced significant market headwinds in the run up to the EU referendum as holidaymakers delayed decisions. This was compounded by the Leave vote itself and the subsequent fall in value of the pound
Scottish parliament can call for indyref2 but cant call indyref2. Surely permission has to be given by Westminster for it to happen
The Scots voted for being in the EU, the SNP are the largest party, have a mandate and have at their core a wish to become an independent country, and have said that if materially if the situation changed in the larger UK (which it undoubtedly has), they retained the right to ask for another Independence referendum. It would be very difficult if not impossible for Westminster to refuse.
An indyref2 wouldn't make any sense until the terms of Brexit are known. Otherwise people in Scotland would be voting on a mixture of lies, wild guesses and fanciful promises, which doesn't sound very democratic.
I voted to remain and still think it is crazy to come out. I agree with jam though that the demise of lowcostholidays is not down to brexi. Iit may have been the final nail in the coffin but they must have been in trouble before then. I booked a short break with them for September and stupidly paid on my debit card rather than credit card :(.
An indyref2 wouldn't make any sense until the terms of Brexit are known. Otherwise people in Scotland would be voting on a mixture of lies, wild guesses and fanciful promises, which doesn't sound very democratic.
That does sound familiar though....
retained the right to ask for another Independence referendum. It would be very difficult if not impossible for Westminster to refuse.
Unless it had been specifically voiced by both the leader of that party at the time, and it's current leader, that the referendum was a once in a generation, perhaps even once in q lifetime, opportunity.
In that case it becomes very easy, as the prime minister simply says:
[i]
“As far as I’m concerned, the Scottish people have had their vote, they voted in 2014 and a very clear message came through. Both the United Kingdom and the Scottish Government said they would abide by that,”[/i]
And that is the end of that.
More likely, someone in Westminster has had a quiet word with Holyrood and said "hang fire, we haven't invoked Article 50 yet. Just wait a while and you may not need that second referendum...."
But the Scots vote was based in part on securing the best way of Scotland remaining in the EU. The rug has now been pulled from under them and they are now perfectly justified in seeking and holding another referendum.
was based in part on
No, it wasn't
The question was "Should Scotland be an independent country?"
Not "should Scotland leave the UK in order to remain part of the EU in the unlikely event that the forthcoming UK wide referendum results in a vote to leave"
Nor was it "should Scotland remain in the EU after independence?" As everybody knew there was a possibility that might mot happen (indeed, one of the major arguments was whether they could gain automatic membership or have to apply, a question which was never settled)
Scotland voted to remain part of the UK, warts and all - no preconditions were made, no caveats were offered, no offers of another vote if things changed. A simple one time only deal, are you in, or are you out? They chose in.
Ninfan, you must have been on a different planet at the time as there was a huge amount of debate about EU membership and that would have impacted on how people voted in that referendum. If you voted to remain part of the UK to secure your place in the EU and that it not now going to happen then its reasonable to assume that you were misled, as Scots voted to remain, whether you now wish to remain part of the Union is something that can and should be revisited. The fact that you and your neo-con buddies don't like it doesn't make it less right.
If you voted to remain part of the UK to secure your place in the EU
[b]if[/b]
Do you have any evidence that anyone [i]actually[/i] voted on remaining in the EU as a primary motivation for voting no, or are you simply rationalising in hindsight.
You may note that the SNP only began talking about how An EU referendum out vote would definitely trigger another indyref [b]after[/b] they lost first time - beforehand salmond was openly warning that a vote to remain in the UK might result in Scotland being dragged out.
The fact that this warrning was openly discussed prior to the indyref means that every voter had the chance to factor the risk into their own decision last time, as such there is zero justification for another indyref, because everyone knew there was a chance that this would happen, it was one of many uncertainties at the time, but they still voted No.
Why are you frightened of a second idy referendum?
The question was "Should Scotland be an independent country?"Not "should Scotland leave the UK in order to remain part of the EU in the unlikely event that the forthcoming UK wide referendum results in a vote to leave"
Whilst it's true that EU membership wasn't a part of the question asked at the time, the vote was based around being part of a UK of which being a member of the EU was an intrinsic factor. Therefore the voting was based on a particular set of circumstances. IF the UK now leaves the EU, those particular circumstances have changed markedly.
Put it this way: You and your other half go to look at a car to buy, and you both agree to go for the nearly new car with features that appeal to the both of you. You then turn up in an old banger you paid well over the odds for and neither of you can afford: Surely, your other half has a right to be aggrieved about this and demand you either take the car back or he/she is out the door to hook up with your best friend who you fell out with over a bar bill.
Personally speaking, I don't want Scotland to leave the UK, but they certainly have the right to review the relationship, now that the English have significantly changed the economic and political environment, upon which the original vote was based.
ninfan: I have to call you on that too.
The matter of EU membership was a key issue during indyref and was debated extensively, with the No campaign claiming Scotland wouldn't qualify for entry into the EU as an independent nation, and the Yes campaign claiming that the UK would leave the EU and the only way to stay in was to split from them.
You only need to look at the EU ref voting to see how strongly Scotland feels about the matter.
Frightened? Bored more like.
Half costed? A few days ago, you leavers we're explaining how straightforward everything was. Trade deals? Pah. Anyway why doe we want to be tied to a sinking continent. And they need us more than we need them, remember? We have controooooooooollllllll.....
Oh wait a minute, it isn't that simple...
Not frightened
Just dismissive because it was all so predictable
We all know that if the SNP lost a [b]second[/b] indref, then within days the campaign for a [b]third[/b] indyref would begin in earnest, and so ad infinitum
So I think that salmond, sturgeon and the SNP should be held to the promises they gave last time
Scotland voted to remain part of the UK, warts and all - no preconditions were made, no caveats were offered, no offers of another vote if things changed. A simple one time only deal, are you in, or are you out? They chose in.
From the SNP 2016 manifesto:
We believe that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is clear and sustained evidence that independence has become the preferred option of a majority of the Scottish people – or if[b] there is a significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will[/b].
They stood on a promise in the 2016 Scottish parliament election - which they won, and have formed a government alongside the pro-indy Greens - to hold a second referendum, or at least to look at holding one, in the event of Brexit where Scotland voted to remain, which is what happened.
That's apart from the fact that during the run-up to the first indyref there was a lot of talk about Scotland being ejected from the EU in the event of leaving the UK, making their membership of the EU a big part of staying in the UK.
The SNP - and the greens - have a strong democratic and moral argument for holding a second referendum based on those two facts.
* NB - Despite being an English resident in Scotland, I don't really have a firm view on Scottish independence.
Do you have any evidence that anyone actually voted on remaining in the EU as a primary motivation for voting no, or are you simply rationalising in hindsight.
I don't have any figures to offer you, but anecdotally it was the prime motivation of those in my social circle that voted Yes.
Personally I would have voted No, if I had been eligible to vote, as I was unconvinced by the SNP's plan. But the EU issue was main argument that made me consider a Yes vote.
the vote was based around being part of a UK of which being a member of the EU was an intrinsic factor
As I have repeatedly pointed out, Brexit was a known risk factor before the indyref, to the extent that Salmond specifically used it as a campaign issue in favour of yes.
It was just one of the [b]many[/b] issues that were known to be uncertainties at the time, and factored into the voting, that resulted in a decision to stay in the UK. Warts and all.
Just imagine if the boot was on the other foot, and you had voted to leave the UK - would there have been a second referendum when the EU decided you couldn't automatically remain part of the EU (as claimed by the SNP) after all? I would happily bet my left bollock that there wouldn't be!
Frightened? Bored more like.
This. Salmond said it was a once in a lifetime chance, except if he lost. SNP had 2 years to make their arguments including scenarios including the UK leaving the EU which was discussed at length. The SNP as Cameronnsaid aren't really interested in using the powers they've been granted as if (when) they fail the Scottish people will see them for who they are. Its much easier to blame "Westminster" for everything.
@kimber currencies move around +/- 10% a lot. The travel company relocated to Spain in 2013 and the CAA advised people not to book with them as they where no longer ATOL protected.
To judge Brexit on the basis of what happens in the immediate aftermath is just plain daft. We will be much much better off in the future than if we'd stayed in. It's inconceivable to me the £ will be weaker than the euro in 2 or 3 years. The EU thought we'd not vote Leave so they offered nothing. A clear indication of their arrogance. People throughout Europe reject the project but countires will not grant a referendum, its anti-democratic.
No where else in the world has a trade zone which has morphed intoma political union project
We should never ever have signed the Maastrict treaty let alone Lisbon
You only need to look at the EU ref voting to see how confused Scotland is about the matter.
When will you stop whining? You have a significant devolved powers that you struggle to use already and the benefits of being part of a wider economic union (that works) that protects you against the fragility of the economic foundations. And instead of enjoying what you have, it's lets NOW argue for less independence, monetary, fiscal and political union with a European state that is out of/rarely in synch with our own economy's etc.
It's like watching spoilt little children.....I
Brexit was a known risk factor before the indyref, to the extent that Salmond specifically used it as a campaign issue in favour of yes.
So why are you also trying to pretend that no one based their vote on it then?
[url= http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence-ten-key-issues-1-3542039 ]Scottish Indepenence: 10 key issues (Edinburgh Evening News, Sept 2014)[/url]: Issue 3 - EU membership.
We all know that if the SNP lost a second indref, then within days the campaign for a third indyref would begin in earnest, and so ad infinitum
And what do you think UKIP would have done if they lost the EU ref? That's democracy for you.
@ ninfan,
Just because you keep on repeating it, doesn't make it true: the fact that Scotland so unanimously voted to stay in the EU gives clear indication that either the EU referendum was not a factor for indyref voters or, like many many Brexiters, no one actually thought it would realistically come to pass.
thm: I'm not sure if you are describing Scotland in the UK or the UK in the EU?
Could be either. 😀
Believe it or not, scots are not alone in having to deal with the folly of the Brexit vote. But the die has been cast. Time to get on with life and deal with the hand that has been played. No one afford to keep bleating on ad infinitum, especially with such an absurdly contradictory argument.
How about getting on with using the significant devolved powers that you have now? How about access of the less privileged to education and health services. At some point [b]the record not the rhetoric will come under scrutiny [/b]and you might as well address these issues while the attention is elsewhere and before it's too late!
Radio 4 Piece. Thanks for posting that it was very interesting, 27 minutes well spent. Made some notes on it last night but the Turkish Coup somewhat overtook posting them. Those listenig to just the first few minutes wouod have missed much (editor knows how to cut it together eh ? Rather obnoxious I thought to almost taunt the lady who was trying as best she could to explain her logic and she had a clear logic)
The academics / journalists analysis was very interesting and revealing. They did acknowledge that researchers got their pre Referendum analysis very wrong and that so e of their post Brexit comments bordered on obnoxious trivialising people's logic for voting Leave which was well thoughtout.
Warrington. 80/20 Leave. A classic Labour heartland overwhelmingly Leave, as the piece says Laboir is not communicating with these voters.
Immigration. Its been a major issue (top 3) for 10-15 years, academics admitted they coach politicans to say atuff like "yes we understand its a real issue for you" but people have seen they've actually done nothing. As such when it came to the referendum Remain had zero credibility on the issue
Researchers pre Brexit "key indicators" for how people would vote was proven to be rubbish (classic steriotyping). People wo voted Leave had the following values whuch I endorse 100%
Strong sense of community
Support rule of law and order
Voting Leave they believe is a heroic and patriotic act
Message of "Take Control" was very powerful
There was an element of wanting to "kick the South" in the North of the country who feel Remain was a London centered benefit (note to thise here who cinstanty whine about London you've helped ferment this attitude and result)
Very interesting discussion about how areas which receive eu grants still voted out. Reference to behavioiral studies "ultimatum game" - people will not accept "scraps" or payoffs/amount os mkney they think is unfair. They will reject money amd woukd rather take nothing than something they perceive to be unfair. This sums up the EU. Manynjere are bribed by getting back 55% of oir own money as so ehow that's a "result"
Kimber - sorry too late to edit after writing other mamoth post
Yes of course I acknowledge there is some short term pain and disruption. I wish we couod just get out immediateiy and get on with the job in hand of building the future. However thats not how its going to be. I voted Leave for a brighter future whuch I think more people will see very clearly in a few years time.
Voting Leave they believe is a heroic and patriotic act
Message of "Take Control" was very powerful
Hahahahhahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
What a load of crap.
There was an element of wanting to "kick the South" in the North of the country who feel Remain was a London centered benefit (note to thise here who cinstanty whine about London you've helped ferment this attitude and result)
Never has the phrase "cutting your nose of, to spite your face" rung so true as it does now.
Scottish Indepenence: 10 key issues (Edinburgh Evening News, Sept 2014): Issue 3 - EU membership
Thanks, you just proved my point:
[i]EUROPE
YES: The Scottish Government says Scotland will be able to agree terms for continuing membership before independence takes effect, allowing a smooth transition. It says there is no way Scotland can be forced to join the euro. [b]And it says staying in the UK carries the risk of Scotland being forced to leave the EU against its will if the Tories hold a referendum and the vote is to pull out.[/b]
NO: Better Together claim Scotland would face delays and hurdles in gaining membership of the EU as an independent country. It argues Scotland would lose many of the opt-outs which the UK has negotiated for itself and might have to sign up to the euro. And it warns that countries such as Spain and Belgium, which have their own independence-seeking areas, would not want to encourage new states.[/i]
So, once again, they knew that this might happen, they were warned, and they chose to stay party of the UK regardless.
As I challenged before - would there have been a second referendum if the better together predictions came true?
GrahamS - Member
thm: I'm not sure if you are describing Scotland in the UK or the UK in the EU?Could be either.
No it could not. THAT'S THE POINT.
Jambas, many are bribed!!! Don't you mean many are fooled into believing Brexit BS. The extent of the rapid backtracking and the pretence that delaying A50 is part of a tactic rather that a reflection of how piss poorly prepared we are for the chaos that you lot have caused.
Never has the phrase "cutting your nose of, to spite your face" rung so true as it does now.
I can't think of a more British characteristic.