Scotland Indyref 2

btw does anyone have a link to the EU treaties that deal with the break up of nations in relation to EU membership?

Sbob said it existed, but dissappeared when I asked for the link(probably just lost interest in the thread).

But I would like to read that if it exists? anyone have a link, or clues what to google?

outofbreath - Member
"I can't see any top officials saying much before an indy vote as they'd be seen to be interfering in internal UK politics."

Yeah, that'll be the reason.

yip, one that's been mentioned, many times.

[quote=scotroutes ]Some in the EU have suggested that Scotland could go into some sort of constitutional "holding pen" post Brexit and prior to its situation being resolved.

Linky? Would require completely new EU rules, if not new treaties and likely also to require unanimous approval of 27 parliaments. As you say, it appears somewhat unlikely that even if such a measure was approved it would be on the table before an indy vote, so you'd be asking people to vote for the remote chance of staying in.

[quote=tjagain ]no tpbiker - the plan was always to have continueing EU membership

Who's plan? NS might make claims about that, but there appears to be no evidence that it's a realistic claim. The timing appears to be more about political opportunity and the chance to grab power by threatening to weaken the hand of the Brexit negotiations than any realistic chance of that happening. But then I guess one of us is going to be buying the other a pint over it, which means we get to chat about it over beers 🙂

Aracer - as I said its not without its problems and its not certain but its the best way for and independent scotland to stay in the EU hence the need for the referendum before the UK leaves the EU

Have you got a less hand wavy suggestion on how it will be possible to get around the timescale issue? It all seems a bit "we'll fix it". If that's the best way, then I'm afraid you're stuffed, TM is going to be dragging you out kicking and screaming just like the rest of us 48%.

not been reading [ apologies if discussed] this but can scotland not just have the Uk continous membership?

I think the one thing we can all agree on is that the EU can do fudges like no other so anything is possible and it would seem pretty clear the EI would be happy with look the UK left but it split their country as an outcome to deter others

I doubt they would be that upset at rUK surrounded by the EU

I would not like to speculate on the outcome personally as its largely guesswork

Brexit is going to go one of two ways. The first is that all parties realise that in order to negotiate a deal properly it's going to take far longer than two years, probably closer to ten.

The second is a cliff edge at the end of the two years. I get the impression this is the Tories preferred option.

So, on one hand, we wait indefinitely as deadline after deadline passes and the UK enters a Brexit limbo hell with negotiations proceeding at their usual glacial pace. All this time we're told that we aren't allowed a referendum until the UK finalises the Brexit deal. As the years pass the UK slowly circles the drain as uncertainty becomes the norm and international companies drift off looking for solid ground.

On the other hand, if it's the cliff edge, we know exactly what our options are already. Option 1 we have continued membership in the single market in an independent Scotland. Option 2 we operate under WTO rules in the UK.

Anyone want to honestly tell me there's any chance of a proper deal being in place in March 2019?

All it needs is the political will in Scotland and in the EU. Personally I see no issues at all with it,

aracer- http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14591627.Brussels_considered__holding_pen__to_keep_Scotland_in_EU__insider_says/

As you say, God knows how it might work. We'd still be left with the Scottish electorate choosing between an uncertain membership and a definite departure.

It will also give the EU ammo over little engerland, if the Scott's are poised to leave the UK ASAP, the UK has less weight on the negotiation table when it comes to getting a good deal.

The EU might be inclined to 'fast track' Scottish membership, be it under existing terms or so kind of interim deal..

tjagain - Member
All it needs is the political will in Scotland and in the EU. Personally I see no issues at all with it

There is that too. Farage was suggesting May was prepared to keep the fisheries open to the EU.

[quote=BruceWee ]The second is a cliff edge at the end of the two years. I get the impression this is the Tories preferred option.

To be fair, THM is right about this - if we're going to do it, it's best to get it over with, because:

As the years pass the UK slowly circles the drain as uncertainty becomes the norm and international companies drift off looking for solid ground.

Even WTO is better than that (we've already apparently dismissed all the best options).

[quote=tjagain ]All it needs is the political will in Scotland and in the EU.

You're asking for a lot of political will from the parliament of every one of the 27 (it has to be a unanimous thing). Though reading the end of that article I'm not sure what the benefit is over leaving and reapplying - I suppose you get over the issue of your deficit being too large for EU rules on membership 😈

If the 27 remaining EU nations are happy to give Scotland membership (including EZ), let them come out and say so.

Maybe no one's asked them yet?

Or maybe the BBC has but it hasn't managed to get the right answer yet.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39293513

And we are off!

Can I just go off-topic for a moment and ask what's happening in Gibraltar? They voted overwhelmingly for Remain and I've not heard anything much since.

Party politics isn't really an indicator of what people want in relation to a constitutional question

Totally agree. However Nicola's justification for calling for a second referendum is that she has a mandate for it, and that that mandate came about as a result of the 2015 Scottish elections. Therefore she is the one using party politics to affect a constitutional question.

Now in some ways I do agree with her. Their election manifesto made quite clear what the policies were and she is quite entitled to say that they were elected fair and square so are entitled to carry out that pledge. However my counter argument is that the pro-independence vote went almost entirely to the SNP (who are essentially a single issue party) whereas the pro-union vote was split. Therefore you have the anomaly of an SNP dominated parliament at Holyrood voted in by an electorate that is not in favour of a second referendum. If any of that makes sense (I tend to ramble). (-:

Surely, in an age where political compromise is sadly lacking, it seems quite fair that the SNP call for another referendum, but that the UK government have a say in when is best to hold it.

aracer - Member
I suppose you get over the issue of your deficit being too large for EU rules on membership

scotroutes - Member
Can I just go off-topic for a moment and ask what's happening in Gibraltar? They voted overwhelmingly for Remain and I've not heard anything much since.

gives us an average of 48% v 52% in favour

As you admit yourself, the electorate is not in favour of another referendum. Admittedly it is very close, but in a situation like this the onus is on the side demanding change to prove that an appetite for change exists. Otherwise we continue with the status quo. Show me proof that this appetite exists and I will join in calls for a second referendum.

Now in some ways I do agree with her. Their election manifesto made quite clear what the policies were and she is quite entitled to say that they were elected fair and square so are entitled to carry out that pledge.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/03/ruth-davidson-next-pm-should-not-block-scottish-independence-ref/ ]At least Nicola can count on Ruth's backing[/url]

And how many pages since someone was singing her praises?

don't have a source for this, but another fine example of principled ruth! 😆

“You don’t get a referendum for free, you have to earn it. So if the Greens and the SNP – and the SSP or any of the other parties who’ve declared an interest in independence – get over the line and can make a coalition, make a majority, get the votes in the Parliament, then they’ll vote through a referendum, and that’s what democracy’s all about… it’s perfectly simple”

Ruth Davidson.

What will I be voting for, other than the headline of independence? We dont know what the uk economy will look like, so how can we possibly make a judgement that isnt based upon nationalism and uncertainty.

We have two options..

A - leaave now, Brexit may be a tremendous success ( I doubt this), we'll look a bit daft if it is and we've done a runner.

B- bide our time till after brexit, see if uk is in a mess then leave with no possibility of regrets. Or stay if the uk is flurishing and reep the benefits.

Can someone who is for a quick referendum tell me why waiting isnt the better option. Its a win win for us.

[quote=scotroutes ]Damned if she did, damned if she didn't. The predominantly unionist press would be bad-mouthing her if she'd not followed through on that commitment. One might suggest that the Holyrood vote is the very least she had to achieve to prevent that happening.

She's a politician, it comes with the territory. In any case it's a rod she made herself.

Ruth is indeed principled - if more politicians were like her and actually in the job for mostly the right reasons the world might be a better place. Given other sentiment on here, I'm hoping such thoughts might be possible whatever colour her rosette is.

tpbiker - Member
Can someone who is for a quick referendum tell me why waiting isnt the better option.

Can someone who is for a quick referendum tell me why waiting isnt the better option. Its a win win for us.

Brexit is going to cause chaos. Not for everyone, some people will only feel the effects indirectly. For others it will be a disaster. Families will be torn apart with deportations. People whose jobs rely on close ties with Europe will be out of work.

With a quick referendum solutions can be found even if the UK has left the EU. As mentioned above there's talk of holding pens but I'm sure there are other ways temporary solutions can be found.

If the other EU members know that we are on our way out of the UK then there's more chance of them making exceptions than if there's a chance we might leave several years in the future.

[quote=BruceWee ]Families will be torn apart with deportations. People whose jobs rely on close ties with Europe will be out of work.
With a quick referendum solutions can be found even if the UK has left the EU. As mentioned above there's talk of holding pens but I'm sure there are other ways temporary solutions can be found.For example, a post Indyref Scottish Government could immediately declare that EU citizens were welcome without fear of deportation, even if that was in advance of any other negotiations or settlements.

Davidsons issue is that she cannot stray too far from westminster policy even when she knows its damaging to Scotland. I suspect she would do well as the tory leader in iScotland a she would be free of london telling her what she can and can't say

“You don’t get a referendum for free, you have to earn it. So if the Greens and the SNP – and the SSP or any of the other parties who’ve declared an interest in independence – get over the line and can make a coalition, make a majority, get the votes in the Parliament, then they’ll vote through a referendum, and that’s what democracy’s all about… it’s perfectly simple”

Point of order however - to which parliament was she referring?

Some people here seem to forget that the Scottish Parliament and MSP's aren't responsible for the Issue of independence - Westminster and its elected MP's are

Holyrood

Personally I'm not for a quick ref(but will take the chance if it comes), so I'll leave that to others.

do you think you have more chance of winning it now or after brexit?

Of course it all depends on the outcome of us leaving the eu, but for what its worth i'd vote no just now as i did first time round, but be far more open to a yes if the uk economy goes down the pan.

I'm actually not massively against independence any more. what i'm against is sturgeon putting her personal agenda above all else.

[quote=ninfan ]

“You don’t get a referendum for free, you have to earn it. So if the Greens and the SNP – and the SSP or any of the other parties who’ve declared an interest in independence – get over the line and can make a coalition, make a majority, get the votes in the Parliament, then they’ll vote through a referendum, and that’s what democracy’s all about… it’s perfectly simple”

kennyp - Member

As you admit yourself, the electorate is not in favour of another referendum.

Was the electorate in favour of the last referendum? It came about because 36% of 66% of people voted for a party that promised it, but what proportion actually wanted it?

I have to say the hypocrisy about mandates really makes me laugh. Sturgeon has far more of a mandate than May has. Majority in holyrood, almost all of the MPs

Another thing to bear in mind is that any deal will have to be agreed by October 2018. That is the latest the main points of any deal can be agreed while still giving time for all governments to ratify the deal.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/06/eu-brexit-negotiator-michel-barnier-reiterate-no-cherry-picking/

So having a referendum just before or just after the March deadline would allow six months for the indy and unionist sides to make their cases.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/ian-dunt

An interesting read but I'm still not convinced that Nicola Sturgeon is holding all the aces. I think this "[i]Westminster are over-riding the democratic rights of the Scots[/i]" line is being over-played.

Does it really matter? Legal or not the Scott's could hold a 2nd referendum, and if it's to leave the UK, that is a big deal. Will of the people and all that.

It would really damage upper class England's strategy.

Tend to agree scotroutes - and the EFTA thing was a mistake as well.

Sturgeons is playing her hand well but she is hemmed in by timing and various pressures in different directions. I am not sure she really had any choice over making the call tho

I think this "Westminster are over-riding the democratic rights of the Scots" line is being over-played.

Well May was very clear to make sure she did not say no you cannot so I am not that sure

It makes it hard for the tories ...sorry the English....erm I mean the UK.... to refuse the "will of the scottish people"

Some interesting thoughts on looking beyond the GERS figures.

http://allofusfirst.org/tasks/render/file/?fileID=87DEEC95-C459-02D4-0248DDE75B7ADDB9

ninfan - Member
“You don’t get a referendum for free, you have to earn it. So if the Greens and the SNP – and the SSP or any of the other parties who’ve declared an interest in independence – get over the line and can make a coalition, make a majority, get the votes in the Parliament, then they’ll vote through a referendum, and that’s what democracy’s all about… it’s perfectly simple”
Point of order however - to which parliament was she referring?

Some people here seem to forget that the Scottish Parliament and MSP's aren't responsible for the Issue of independence - Westminster and its elected MP's are

Ruth "flippity floppy" Davidson clearly used to think the moral right lay with the scottish parliament, until london told her to change her mind...(There's nover been any SSP MPs only MSPs, so she's referring to holyrood.)

Brexit is going to cause chaos. Not for everyone, some people will only feel the effects indirectly. For others it will be a disaster. Families will be torn apart with deportations.

This is just insane thinking and never going to happen. The only people who will be deported are those who would have before Brexit.

tpbiker - Member
Personally I'm not for a quick ref(but will take the chance if it comes), so I'll leave that to others.
do you think you have more chance of winning it now or after brexit?

I think it's a certainty to happen in 10/15 years with a 60% majority(My preferred scenario.). at the moment, it's anyones guess, a massive gamble 50/50.

This is just insane thinking and never going to happen. The only people who will be deported are those who would have before Brexit.

Because...?

I think it's a certainty to happen in 10/15 years with a 60% majority(My preferred scenario.). at the moment, it's anyones guess. 50/50.

I might go with a longer timeframe than that but not by much really.

I just can't see anything that's going to pull England and Scotland together. A period of economic prosperity [i]might[/i] hold things together for a while, but eventually discontent over something or other will lead to a break.

I agree problem is england is more tory than scotland and that is not changing anytime soon so the pressure remains whatever happens re Brexit.

Its not just that - we are moving in different directions and England is holding Scotland back from going where it wants to

Because the UK voted out of the EU, it did not vote to deport foreign citizens currently legally living here.

However once we leave the EU they will all need passports and visas to live or right to remain here . Costs a lot and at current rates of managing applications it will take over a hundred years to process all the visas

Of course May could say " all EU citizens will have the right to remain and continue to get healthcare"

But she won't because she knows the 3 million are one of the few bargaining chips she has

"I just can't see anything that's going to pull England and Scotland together."

That's my take. Referendums are like Pringles, once you start you can't stop. All the Nationalists have to do is win one. The together people can win 999, and it still doesn't settle it. All the nats have to do is win the thousandth.

My question is, once it happens what happens when the inevitable impasse over value of assets happens? Scotland can't really refuse to leave, so is it down to courts or does Scotland just take the loss? A war?

Splitting the UK and Scotland is going to make Brexit look very, very simple.

[quote=tjagain ]But she won't because she knows the 3 million are one of the few bargaining chips she has

Not now maybe. But if it's a bargaining chip then presumably it's going to be played at some point and the end result will be the same.

out of breath - on the assets its simple. give us our fair share or we don't take any of the debt - the two numbers are of similar size

The debt would legally be the rUKs - this was all gone into last time. The rightwingers on here would call that a debt default but it isn't.

[quote=outofbreath ]All the nats have to do is win the thousandth.

Oh god, make it stop!

[quote=tjagain ]The rightwingers on here would call that a debt default but it isn't.

I wouldn't call it that. But the important issue isn't what we call it, it's what the markets think of it. I'll admit I'm still not sure exactly how that will go down, but you do have to remember that you'll be needing to borrow money without having a central bank.

I just can't see anything that's going to pull England and Scotland together. A period of economic prosperity might hold things together for a while, but eventually discontent over something or other will lead to a break.

What we all need is a nice patriotic war.

I believe in the fundamental right to self determination. Scotlands decision on their future should be respected, just as the Brexit vote should be.
I also believe that should scotland dissolve the union, it's dissolved and there should be referendums throughout and that the english, welsh and irish should get a choice about whether to form a new union (which it would be) or bin it altogether, shake hands and walk away.

Aracer - we will have a central bank - either the bank of england or we will have 9% of the value of the bank of england and its reserves to set one up.

~The markets I don't think would bother too much - the debt would legally be rUKs as was said last time. I think the markets would be much more interested in the situation going forward IE have the scottish government made a good case on the economy

"England is holding Scotland back from going where it wants to"

Scotland wants to follow in Greece's footsteps, and yes, England is preventing that.

That's why the EU is so important. Someone will need to bale Scotland out and it would be much better if it were the EU.

Getting the EU to agree to let Scotland into the Eurozone would remove most objections.

Wot aracer said re default.

Doesn't matter two shits what left or right commentators call it. It's the perception of risk those doing the lending that counts.

"Oh god, make it stop!"

It's true.

ECB will see us right just like they did Greece 😉

What we all need is a nice patriotic war.

Let's just hope no major world player puts an unpredictable egomaniac moron in charge.

"ECB will see us right just like they did Greece"

Well, there will be a punishment beating dished out, but basically they won't let you all starve, and it won't be the UK's problem.

"England is holding Scotland back from going where it wants to"
Remind me of the Indy referendum result?

outofbreath - Member
...Splitting the UK and Scotland is going to make Brexit look very, very simple.

The UK is very experienced at the separation of former colonies, possessions, dominions, and parts of itself. Eg, Ireland.

A bit of common sense and it will work, and need not take long.

aracer - Member
outofbreath » All the nats have to do is win the thousandth.
Oh god, make it stop!

As the proclaimed resident ultraScotNat let me assure you it will stop.

All you need to do is see sense and agree to rid yourself of the sweaty sock subsidy junkies and their useless oil.

Oh, and stop caring so much about our economic future, we'll work that bit out ourselves. 🙂

As the proclaimed resident ultraScotNat

😆

[quote=imnotverygood ]"England is holding Scotland back from going where it wants to"
Remind me of the Indy referendum result?

they voted to stay in the EU but England disagreed

You are welcome

dp

epicyclo - Member

As the proclaimed resident ultraScotNat

I was probably a little harsh on ye tbh, but i hope you can see my motives are well intended though! 😆

Oldnpastit Re the patriotic war. May I suggest re-invading Gibraltar for several reasons
1 There's a general westward movement of our recent wars, from Afghanistan, via Iraq to Libya. So it would fit nicely in line on the map.
2 It's not very big and might not fight much.
3 The name sounds foreign.
4 Them big monkeys are bastids
5 Mr Rahoy won't like it.

Bank of England NAV is £4 billion, Scottish share would be between £320 m and £360 m, which is peanuts. There is a misconception that banks have loads of money, especially Central ones. It is much more accurate, not perfect, to say they don't have any money, just access to it. That is how banking works.

Likewise Nation states can always walk away from their debts, as it is impossible to enforce them, therefore its your conduct that is important not your prospects.

All the Nationalists have to do is win one. The together people can win 999, and it still doesn't settle it. All the nats have to do is win the thousandth.

True in pure mathematical sense, but reality is people wouldn't put up for it and the nats would be voted out. Just looking at Facebook etc. would suggest there is already plenty of resentment with regards having a 2nd referendum so soon, a third or greater would be out of the question. So if there is a 2nd referendum then whatever the result it will stand for a long, long time.

The UK is very experienced at the separation of former colonies, possessions, dominions, and parts of itself. Eg, Ireland.

Scotland is not a colony - it is part of the union. But it is true we suppress the Scots, we make a few of them Prime Minister.

NS just playing political games . I doubt she genuinely wants a referendum .

Just putting more pressure on TM .

I think May gave Sturgeon the response she wanted today.

She's now able to cry 'westminster is ignoring the will of Scotland'

And so the referendum campaign begins....

Watching question time, principle of a 2nd ref is pretty much set in stone, even in the english psyche...

1-0 sturgeon..

[quote=tjagain ]Aracer - we will have a central bank - either the bank of england or we will have 9% of the value of the bank of england and its reserves to set one up.

Er, hang on. You're proposing to walk away from the debt [b]and[/b] to get 9% of the BoE value?

As I wrote before, if you walk away from the debt you don't have a central bank...

aracer - Member
you don't have a central bank...

Amazing how all these central banks exist if it's impossible to set one up..