Fair enough. So if the option was to leave the UK and join the EU but have to accept the Euro, land boarder etc etc would that be preferable to remaining in the UK which is either out of Europe or has sort of "associate" membership? Be interesting to hear what the pro Indy voters would accept in return for membership if given a stark choice from Brussels?
You're getting it a bit backwards here though, it's now up to the UK to put a case forward.
The immigration hysteria is not a good look.
Independent suggesting a "reverse Greenland" as s possibility.
It all gets a little complex, but effectively UK remains intact, E&W get to leave EU, but S&NI get to remain in EU.
Apparently the Greenland & Denmark situation is similar to that.
mogrim - Member
...Maybe Scotland on its own would be welcomed, but national governments will also weigh up "pour encoureger les autres" when deciding whether to admit or veto another country's entry.
Another way of looking at it. An entire country has strongly voted to preserve the EU citizenship of its people.
Are the EU going to stand by and allow 5 million EU citizens of that country to lose that citizenship against their will?
Scotland is in a union by treaty with England which has decided to leave the EU. Scotland is not a possession or territory of England, and is prepared to sever the treaty of union with England to preserve the EU citizenship.
Seems contrary to EU ideals.
[url= http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-scotland-germany-idUSKCN0ZC0QT ]Looks like some in Germany support Scotland [/url]
bencooper - MemberScotland is already in the EU
Only as part of the UK, you are not a member state.
we already meet the criteria
Do you?
Because there are a lot of criteria to fulfil, and as yet Scotland has not proved this, only the UK as a whole has. You are also financially much worse off than you were at the time of the indyref.
Fundamentally, if Scotland came to the EU fresh, would they refuse us membership? Of course not.
You simply don't know. They might only accept your membership if you joined the Euro. You know, that thing that has failed catastrophically.
All this was explained to you before the Scottish referendum, and nothing has changed since.
Hopefully the whole of the UK can move forward and build a new relationship with the EU that doesn't incite the underlying fears and racism that the Brexit campaign just has.
Hopefully.
Seems contrary to EU ideals.
And Scotland remaining a member is contrary to the law of EU treaties.
You're making the same mistakes as Mr Cooper; confusing Scotland, England and the whole of the UK.
Thm;tick...Zulu11;tick...Just need Jambalaya for "house" on a Scottish Indy thread bingo. Don't you have bigger fish to fry just now gentlemen?
You simply don't know. They might only accept your membership if you joined the Euro. You know, that thing that has failed catastrophically.
Agree to take the Euro hasn't stopped other countries from not adopting it. It gets brought up time and time again but if Scotland didn't want it there's plenty of way to not take it.
[img] 
[/img]
From the Wee Blue book.
I always laugh at claims the euro has failed. No it hasn't it an pretty stable currency, has been since it's inception.
Some eurozone countries have failed and aren't doing very well.
This [url= https://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/ ]chap[/url] has very good commentary (and economic facts) about indyref and brexit.
I agree with him that basically the economic argument for indy scotland never stood up even with oil, and is even weaker now (to make up for uk £9Bn annual contribution to scotland choose something like 14% tax increases, or 14% cuts in services .. austerity to an extent never seen outside Greece. Good luck selling that).
Theres no accounting for people voting against their own interests (see EU ref result) but hopefully people will have learned that emotional and protest votes can have real consequences.
Sometimes when "the experts" say we should be afraid, they're right.
Sturgeon/SNP clearly know this, based on the effort expended in preserving the barnett formula during post indyref discussions.
Their pragmatic but hypocritical unwillingness to live on only Scotlands own earnings shows that she knows the economic argument is weak, and she might lose.
I voted no to indy and no to leaving the EU, and even I had an initial "well FU then" reaction to the EU result, but looking at the facts (blessed blessed facts, oh how we've missed you!) says no independence for Scotland.
All of which of course doesn't mean we won't have the pleasure of another "joyous" festival of divisive nationalist flagwaving democracy.
Woop!
I agree with him that basically the economic argument for indy scotland never stood up even with oil, and is even weaker now (to make up for uk £9Bn annual contribution to scotland choose something like 14% tax increases, or 14% cuts in services .. austerity to an extent never seen outside Greece. Good luck selling that).
Serious question - What would the numbers be for the UK to break even?, cos I'm pretty sure it would make similar reading.
The 9bn transfer is essentially Scotlands share of the deficit. take away London in England every English region(we're now calling Wales an English region) is just as bad as Scotland, in most cases they are worse.
Now given that the UK has just voted to hamstring London and create a European competitor that is likely to seriously curtail London. Who's going to pay the UK deficit?
May well be in Scotlands interests to remain in the EU and promote the growth of the financial centres in Glasgow and Edinburgh to become competitors to London.
Tbh these are arguments for the future, I personally think talk of an Indy ref is a bit premature, and arguments regarding the financial case for and against, for the moment are all fairly speculative.
Going at all this with a slowly slowly approach is the correct way, and seeing if there's a way to keep both the EU and the UK firstly. As that is the clear democratic will of Scotland.
If that can't happen, we need to vote on it.
The basic point is that in Indyref1 the choice was between the status quo and a risk with independence. Now the choice is a risk on both sides - though if the Scotland/EU negotiations become clearer, then it may well turn into a choice between the status quo of being in the EU, and a risk leaving with the rest of the UK.
Top tip Mr Cooper: avoid using texts that write in slang if you want to be taken seriously.
nobeerinthefridge,
"Serious question - What would the numbers be for the UK to break even?, cos I'm pretty sure it would make similar reading."
Thats not the case.
From Chokkablog [url= https://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/the-price-of-independence.html ]above[/url]
The GERS figures show that Scotland’s total net fiscal deficit in 2014-15 was £14.9bn or 9.7% of GDP. Scotland’s deficit/GDP was bigger than any EU country in 2014. Only Greece and Ireland (at the peak of the financial crash) and more recently Slovenia have shown worse deficits over the last 14 years. In 2014-15 the UK as a whole ran a deficit of 4.9%; on a comparable basis Scotland’s deficit was twice as bad.
Wisdom from Shetland: 🙂
The solution to this constitutional clusterbuckle seems straightforward.
If England wishes to leave the EU, but the Scottish Parliament will not give its consent, then all England has to do is secede from the United Kingdom. No referendum is required: using English votes for English laws, Westminster just revokes the 1707 Act of Union. Simples!
Jonathan Wills
(Independent councillor for Lerwick South ward)
Sundside, Bressay
Everyone can be happy.
^^^ Hehe 🙂
Thm;tick...Zulu11;tick...Just need Jambalaya for "house" on a Scottish Indy thread bingo. Don't you have bigger fish to fry just now gentlemen?
You missed the fatuous comment from duckie out of the card. Careful you will miss the prize without the correct card.
We will leave the fried stuff to you boys. Lightly grilled is much better BTW with a touch of fresh lime.
While there may be a slightly stronger political case, the economic case is now much weaker. Plus after dealing with the chaos of Brexit, I would imagine limited appetite for negotiations with an indep Scotland.
bencooper
Every single indy supporter in indyref 1 in practical terms voted to leave both the UK and the EU (SNP wishful thinking aside thats what would have happened)
Rejoining the EU after a successful indyref 1 would have meant massive austerity just to economically qualify to apply to join.
That hasn't changed.
Until the UK gov activates article 50 its all a bit preliminary anyway.
By the way there was a poll since the result which says (from memory) 54 independence, 46 stay in the UK (excluding 9% undecided).
If independence can't hit overall 60% in favour (Sturgeons most likely target to willingly have indy 2) with a gut reaction on the day after a surprise "brexit" vote, do you really think it can sustain even that lead after the economic implications of leaving the UK as well as the EU become clear to the "don't knows" during the run up to the vote?
eat_the_pudding - Member
If independence can't hit overall 60% in favour (Sturgeons most likely target to willingly have indy 2) with a gut reaction on the day after a surprise "brexit" vote, do you really think it can sustain even that lead after the economic implications of leaving the UK as well as the EU become clear to the "don't knows" during the run up to the vote?
The last starting point was 30%. I think a starting point of 59% (Your memory fails you) is not bad. But you batter in spin that as a bad thing! 😆
Until the UK gov activates article 50 its all a bit preliminary anyway.
Planning ahead in case something happens is a good idea, though. The Scottish government did for Brexit, the Westminster government didn't. It's what competent governments do.
[quote=epicyclo ]Wisdom from Shetland:
The solution to this constitutional clusterbuckle seems straightforward.
If England wishes to leave the EU, but the Scottish Parliament will not give its consent
Or not as the case may be - because as I pointed out [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/there-must-be-a-general-election/page/3#post-7798127 ]here[/url] the consent of the Scottish parliament isn't needed for the UK to leave the EU. It might be needed for EU law to be removed from Scottish law, but that's not the same thing at all - and not really something which should bother Westminster at all as it's clearly a devolved issue. The UK (including Scotland) can leave the EU whilst EU law still applies in Scotland.
[quote=bencooper ]The Scottish government did for Brexit, the Westminster government didn't. It's what competent governments do.
Did they? In what way? I'm not disputing that there's been a massive lack of planning from the UK government, but ISTM Nicola is simply reacting to events - where is her big plan? Of course the Scottish government didn't strictly speaking need to have any plans for Brexit, as most of the immediate issues aren't devolved ones.
Hmm, so planning a charm offensive? Yet it seems GO has also been doing some planning - how do the plans compare?
Do you always have to take a contrary stand point to everything?aracer - Member
Hmm, so planning a charm offensive? Yet it seems GO has also been doing some planning - how do the plans compare?
It's pretty clear that no-one could have completely planned or can plan for the events to come.
Any chance of not letting this discussion take on the trolling nature of the last one?
There are questions that have no answers, have various answers etc.
From the political commentary I've heard so far I don't think the SNP will need to do any campaigning for independence this time around as everyone else is doing it for them. Given the chaos the Labour party are in it's even possible that Scottish Labour might decide to go on their own and support independence this time - in which case it would truly be game over for the union.
seosamh77 I stand corrected 🙂
But I stand by the premise that the reasons brexit was/is a mistake aren't unrelated to the reasons indy2 would be a bigger one.
My hope is that people will want more facts than grievances.
That may be too much to hope for. Scottish nationalism isn't as different from English nationalism as its PR might suggest.
Any chance of not letting this discussion take on the trolling nature of the last one?
Unlikely, it is a very emotive subject for a lot of people. Expect more childish made up names and belittling of any suggestion of an ability to self-govern.
Since you are here aracer,(and you are small beer in the scale of the aforementioned) I am not sure I made my trade question on the other thread clear enough...
Orange 5 owner needs roof bars for his A5 estate (no stereotype there)
Using the soft border, he drops the car off at Dumfries and avails himself of some of our fantastic trail centres. What is to stop him paying EU rate for aforementioned bars and avoiding any non-EU member state mark up?
[quote=duckman ]you are small beer in the scale of the aforementioned
thanks, I think
I am not sure I made my trade question on the other thread clear enough...
Orange 5 owner needs roof bars for his A5 estate (no stereotype there)
Using the soft border, he drops the car off at Dumfries and avails himself of some of our fantastic trail centres. What is to stop him paying EU rate for aforementioned bars and avoiding any non-EU member state mark up?
Ah, I thought you were talking large scale foreign trade. That would clearly be just the same as somebody going to France (or indeed the US) to buy their roof bars and subject to whatever duty free allowances the UK government allows on their punitive EU tariffs.
Bearing in mind how many threads we have on here about avoiding import duty, I can see a whole border industry springing up, like a colder, Presbyterian version of Tijuana.
Cameron just said that Scotland should stay in the UK and the EU.
David Cameron responds that getting the best deal for the UK outside the EU should include the best deal for Scotland. The PM says Scotland is in two single markets - the UK and EU - and ideally should remain in both.
MSP - Member
Cameron just said that Scotland should stay in the UK and the EU.
that was really odd
he just said we should abide by the referendum too?
eat_the_pudding - Member
seosamh77 I stand corrected
But I stand by the premise that the reasons brexit was/is a mistake aren't unrelated to the reasons indy2 would be a bigger one.My hope is that people will want more facts than grievances.
That may be too much to hope for. Scottish nationalism isn't as different from English nationalism as its PR might suggest.
The reasons have vastly changed tbh, and I doubt any of us can know about the ramifications for either.
So Scotland and the uk out of Europe, Scotland in the uk and europe, or an independent scotland in Europe, are all completely new propositions, and their circumstances are all vastly different now..
I don't think the previous referendum has a lot of baring on any scenario.
Cases need to be put forward for them all. Everything is up in the air, where it all falls, who knows. Beware people claiming certainties.
MSP - Member
Cameron just said that Scotland should stay in the UK and the EU.
2 single markets. That's a different thing.
Holy sheeyit!
Gibraltar wants in on the act too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36639770
We are living in crazy times.
If anything good comes out of this I would love it to be the tax pariah states IOM, Jersey, Gibraltar etc cut adrift
Hang on though; can a back bench MP not get the whip withdrawn for speaking out of turn like that? 8)
CMD? He's a back bench MP in the same way the UK is no longer a member of the EU.
[quote=MSP ]Cameron just said that Scotland should stay in the UK and the EU.
Sounds like a good first step in the plan...
Interesting for Edinburgh, not so good for London
