Scotland Indyref 2

I am including english folk like mself. NOt all immigrants are brown

I am including english folk like mself. NOt all immigrants are brown

I was aware of that, I'm an immigrant and paper white, but I still think you are way off the mark. Do you mean 50% when you say 50%?

Yup. Ok it looks like its more like 60% native 40% immigrants. 20% of the population of Edinburgh of permanent residents excluding students is English plus at least another 15% non UK migrants plus ll the students

Immigrants welcome is just political rhetoric from Sturgeon, an attempt to create a wedge / point of differentiation with Westminster/The English

Scotland did not vote Remain because it lives immigrants.

It voted Remain as it wants Brussels to control Westminster
It voted Remain as UK outside the EU is terminal for Independence

Look at the divisions in Glasgow between Catholics and Protestants, the notion that Scotland is somehow more tolerant amd welcoming than the rest of the UK is nonsense.

I thought you were talking about Scotland though.

tjagain: have you ever been to scotland? Edinburgh is almost half immigrants!

jambalaya

Look at the divisions in Glasgow between Catholics and Protestants, the notion that Scotland is somehow more tolerant amd welcoming than the rest of the UK is nonsense.

I agree. Scotland prides itself on its racial tolerance and looks down sneerily/superiorly on England, which it claims is less tolerant. But, Scotland does not have the immigration issues that England has, to the same extent.

TJ Scotland is going to get zero "Bank of England" assets. Financial services are going to leave Scotland as it will not have the regulatory rescources to support what it already has never mind attract more. (Also look at Luxembourg and Ireland as model required to attract offshore/non-domestic finance). Scotland's FS industry is primarily serving the UK, its seeking to divorce itself from its largest customer base (90% I recall).

An English bloke living in Edinburgh is an immigrant ?

Stretching the definition somewhat.

One of the difficulties I have is understanding the antipathy towards migrants.

Maybe this is because I lived for 30 years in Australia and saw the contribution of migrants to the economy.

One thing to remember about migrants is that they are the people with get up and go attitudes - as evidenced by migration. The sort of people who are going to make a positive contribution.

From what I can see anti-migrant feeling and racial hatreds in Oz are now being whipped up by the same non-dom media ownership as here. Which is ironic because everyone in Oz who is not of Aboriginal extraction is a migrant or of migrant origin.

We don't have a foreign migrant problem IMO. We do have a problem with foreign ownership of our media - they are brainwashing and destroying our country.

the notion that Scotland is somehow more tolerant amd welcoming than the rest of the UK is nonsense.

jambalaya - Member

TJ Scotland is going to get zero "Bank of England" assets.

really? Thats the nuclear option from Westminster and would cost them dear

jambalaya - Member
...Look at the divisions in Glasgow between Catholics and Protestants, the notion that Scotland is somehow more tolerant amd welcoming than the rest of the UK is nonsense.

You're right there. It's those bloody immigrant Irish and their sectarian hatreds causing all the problems. But I think their religion is really fitba related because we don't see them packing out the churches on Sunday.

But it's different in the Highlands, we're very tolerant.

Why, some of my best friends are sassenachs who don't even make the effort to learn Gaelic, and worse still, run bikes with derailleurs....

Ruth Davidson on Marr this morning. Spot on as usual.

"Where are SNP on currency, a central bank, the European Union. The SNP are not Scotland the as yet another poll shows the Scots do not want another Referendum."

allthepies - Member

An English bloke living in Edinburgh is an immigrant ?

Stretching the definition somewhat.

I have moved from one country to another to get work. Thats the definition of an economic migrant is it not?

Its a mischievous point tho I agree. I made it to make folk think about immigration and population flows in a wider sense

Funny how Davidson has changed her tune on this 100%.

TJ not if you havent left the United Kingdom it doesn't. That's one country.

Also economic migrant is generally applied to someone who is leaving an area of economic depravity for work (or benefits) in a wealtheir country. I worked in New York and Singapore. I was not an economic migrant. I was taking up a different opportunity and cultural experience via a work visa. Inwas closer to being a tax exile in Singapore than an economic migrant

Errmmm- the UK is not one country. If you work from false premises you get false answers. You also get migration within countries anyway

jambalaya - Member
Ruth Davidson on Marr this morning. Spot on as usual.

"Where are SNP on currency, a central bank, the European Union. The SNP are not Scotland the as yet another poll shows the Scots do not want another Referendum."

That BS again. They hope if they say it often enough people will believe it.

One poll we don't see is the survey the SNP sponsored earlier this year which had queries on several issues.

I'm pretty sure that if that was negative they would be singing a different song.

Some good visual evidence would be to look at the attendance of the SNP, Labour, and Tory conferences in Scotland. Guess which one had a huge hall packed.

TJ not if you havent left the United Kingdom it doesn't. That's one country.

According to the Uk's description of itself in the UN, it consists of 2 countries, England and Scotland, a principality, Wales, and a province, Northern Ireland.

I invite you to tell the most rabid Glasgow Unionist and anti-independence supporter that Scotland isn't a country. Pre-arrange the ambulance. 🙂

The lovely Ruth is irrelevant, like a sort of Dugdale-lite.

tjagain:

Its a mischievous point tho I agree. I made it to make folk think about immigration and population flows in a wider sense

I am finding this whole discussion confusing, it is not helped when people make incorrect statements, as fact, to encourage others to think. It just gives the impression that you are either trying to deceive or incapable of clear thought. (sorry if that sounds harsh)

No worries gauss

My pouint was realy in answer to someone who was saying Scotland does not attract immigrants - when if you include people like me in a wider definition of migrants then its not true.

Immigrants welcome is just political rhetoric from Sturgeon,

an attempt to create a wedge / point of differentiation with Westminster/The English

It voted Remain as it wants Brussels to control Westminster

It voted Remain as UK outside the EU is terminal for Independence

Intersting article from the mirror - remember this is a paper that oppose the SNP on everthing

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/stop-hatred-towards-scots-after-10047185

The other difference apart from the fact that the right wing get under 25% of the vote here is that Scotland is outward looking and internationalist in its viewpoint.

Latest poll for Scotland shows very clearly the politicl differnce

constituency vote %
Con 24
Lab14
SNP 51
Lib Dem 6
Green 4
UKIP 1

Regional list
con 24
Lab 14
Lib dem 6
SNP 40
Green 12
RISE 1
UKIP 2

Its always tough tto work out which is correct the facts or jamby

tjagain:

My pouint (sic)was realy in answer to someone who was saying Scotland does not attract immigrants - when if you include people like me in a wider definition of migrants then its not true.

Seosamh77 said:

Back in reality all it means is that UK immigration policy doesn't work for scotland, so they should have the power devolved, if not, it's a plus for the independence side..

this also confuses me. If iScotland opens its borders to large scale immigration and a large number of Brexit voters voted motivated by reducing immigration; won't rUK be forced to put up border control with passport checks between England and Scotland? (isn't that what has recently happpened between Denmark and Sweden?)

[i]Appearing on Radio 5Live's Pienaar's Politics' this morning, Mr Salmond insisted the SNP had not gone back on their pledge not to hold another one so soon.

He said: "The phrase was not once in a lifetime, it was the opportunity of a lifetime, I said it on the Andrew Marr show, it’s just one of these collective myths that evolve."[/i]

😆

gauss1777 - Member

Seosamh77 said:

Back in reality all it means is that UK immigration policy doesn't work for scotland, so they should have the power devolved, if not, it's a plus for the independence side..
this also confuses me. If iScotland opens its borders to large scale immigration and a large number of Brexit voters voted motivated by reducing immigration; won't rUK be forced to put up border control with passport checks between England and Scotland? (isn't that what has recently happpened between Denmark and Sweden?)

tbh it's all a nonsensical train of argument. immigration is englands problem, trying to make it some sort of central tenet of the scottish independence discussion is just trying to win points and muddy the waters.

It's not really all that important a question. In answering those questions, I was just following the extremely simple logic used by others to come to equally silly conclusions.

I invite you to tell the most rabid Glasgow Unionist and anti-independence supporter that Scotland isn't a country. Pre-arrange the ambulance.

Doesn't even need to be a staunch indy supporter

Stand up in the middle of any glasgow pub and announce that Scotland isn't a country

If you manage to make it to the door before you're dead I'll jump in and give you hauners

Stand up in the middle of any glasgow pub and announce that Scotland isn't a country
If you manage to make it to the door before you're dead I'll jump in and give you hauners

You could expect pretty much the same result by saying that Rangers/Celtic were the best football club - doesn't make it anything other than naked prejudice and tribalism rather than a measure of correctness though.

Do you know you can always tell someones allegiance (however slight) by the order they put celtic and rangers in! 😆

seosamh:

tbh it's all a nonsensical train of argument. immigration is englands problem, trying to make it some sort of central tenet of the scottish independence discussion is just trying to win points and muddy the waters.

It's not really all that important a question.

I hear what you are saying, but I am trying to picture what iScotland would actually look like. If a border between Scotland and England would exist, would seem to make a big difference to me. I went from Copenhagen to Malmo in the Summer, a journey that many commute, it was taking an extra half an hour.

The massive upheaval and uncertainty are one of the main reasons I voted remain and will again. Along with my belief that we have far more in common than different. Those that want independence have a very rosy picture of what an iScotland would be like; appear blinkered to any difficulties (although I guess that goes both ways).

I was told, "the oil, the oil, the oil" before the last referendum, "we're just propping up rUK. To which I was unsure if this was true, why it was an issue. One minute Scotland is a country of the left, looking out for the less fortunate, next it wants to cut itself off from rUK as it felt it had more wealth. Nobody mentions the oil any more. They do mention fishing though, it seems with little regard to sustainability. The majority of the arguments for independence appear very cherry picked and often contradictory.

i used to have a rangers rug on the way into my house here in england it served solely as a catholic detector 😉

Folk walked in saw I liked footie catholics had to comment though

I also used to play footie in the celtic away kit [ it was £2 per shirt] and glad to have to not deal with this sectarianism as anything but banter.

The border questions wouldn't really happen, neither britain or ireland are in the Schengen area, passports are needed at the ports of Ireland and the uk, within that there is the common travel area.

I don't see this changing under any circumstances. Only real problem would come is if Scotland or Ireland opted for Schengen, which isn't going to happen. Arrangements would stay the same. England might force more stringent controls at the borders of the common travel area, but that's about it.

tjagain - Member

Its a mischievous point tho I agree.

No, it's bullshit.

Your nationality is British.
You live in Britain.

I note you've started using "migrant" instead of "immigrant" as the definitions are subtly different...

Not all immigrants are brown

Well aware of this, what with my family being made up of actual immigrants, that is foreigners from a foreign country.

Errmmm- the UK is not one country.

Best get thee to wiki and do us all a favour by editing the glaring errors...

wiki -
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, commonly known as the United Kingdom (UK) or Britain,[note 8] is a sovereign country

While you're changing history, best give the treaties of union a quick photoshop, they don't really help your point of view either.

seosamh77 - Member

Do you know you can always tell someones allegiance (however slight) by the order they put celtic and rangers in!

Hmm, Celtic then Rangers.
Some Polish Catholic heritage... 😆

guass - regarding contradictory arguments, you are going to get that, the iS movement isn't one movement politically, there lots of varying opinions. The ultimate make up of scotland will be decided by the people of scotland. Many people can project their visions of that, but none will be correct until it is realised and the people vote for a government. So yes you will get contradictory arguments for an iS, unavoidable, you just need to decide whether you think some arguments are in the majority. (Personally I reckon in the event of an iS, the majority of the arguments that people get worked up about won't really feature, they'll get solved fairly easily, and a whole new set of problems will probably surface that not many think of. I've never pretended that an iS will be a rosy and fluffy, there will be issues, both positive and negative.)

seosamh77:

The border questions wouldn't really happen, neither britain or ireland are in the Schengen area, passports are needed at the ports of Ireland and the uk, within that there is the common travel area.

I don't see this changing under any circumstances. Only real problem would come is if Scotland or Ireland opted for Schengen, which isn't going to happen. Arrangements would stay the same. England might force more stringent controls at the borders of the common travel area, but that's about it.

It would appear you know more about this than I do, I had to look up Schengen. However, I am still unclear, could explain more?
Is Scotland going to 'open its borders more or not? - certainly N Sturgeon made a big show of how she would welcome (?) all refugees. I don't have a problem with this, but surely those who voted for Brexit do?
Would not opting for Shenzhen be a condition of joining the EU?
"Wouldn't really happen" sounds like shorthand for will happen??

I can only see a strict border being implemented, there will be a lot of bad blood and I would not expect any goodwill from rUK if independence goes ahead. [actually I would think that Scotland's best chance of gaining a yes for independence would be giving England a vote, especially if they saw this thread].

you're listening to unionist propaganda. Sense will prevail, which is the continuation of the common travel area.

gauss1777 - Member
for independence would be giving England a vote,

seosamh77:

you're listening to unionist propaganda. Sense will prevail, which is the continuation of the common travel area.

I'm trying to listen to everyone, I tend to trust no one, but the independence side appear to be the worst for 'blind faith' with no substantiation. When did sense ever prevail? Who's 'sense' anyway?

seosamh77: "gauss1777 - Member
for independence would be giving England a vote,
more fear mongering. England would vote for the union."

You may be right, but how are you so certain? My daughter who is Scottish now lives and works in Manchester, nobody she works beside has ever been to Scotland. It is easy for me to imagine people South of the border being convinced to vote for Scottish independence. One thing we have learned is that referenda are very crude and easily manipulated.

There's been no borders in the common travel area since 1949 when it was introduced. No-one is going to put up hard borders with in it these days.

You should read a bit of history, there's been free travel on these islands for millenia, it's not going to change.

Here's some relevancy for you...

1923 agreement[edit]
The Irish Free State seceded from the United Kingdom in 1922 at a time when systematic passport and immigration controls were becoming standard at international frontiers. Although the British had imposed entry controls in the past – notably during the French Revolution[4] – the imposition of such controls in the 20th century dated from the Aliens Act 1905, before which there was a system of registration for arriving foreigners.[5]

Before the creation of the Irish Free State, British immigration law applied in Ireland as part of the United Kingdom. With the imminent prospect of Irish independence in 1922, the British Home Office was disinclined to impose passport and immigration controls between the Irish Free State and Northern Ireland, which would have meant patrolling a porous and meandering 499 km (310 mi) long[6][7] land border. If, however, the pre-1922 situation were to be continued, the Irish immigration authorities would have to continue to enforce British immigration policy after independence. The Irish Department for Home Affairs was found to be receptive to continuing with the status quo and an informal agreement to this effect was reached in February 1923: each side would enforce the other's immigration decisions and the Irish authorities would be provided with a copy of Britain's suspect-codex (or 'Black Book') of any personae non gratae in the United Kingdom.[8]

The agreement was provided for in UK law by deeming the Irish Free State to be part of the United Kingdom for the purposes of immigration law.[9] It was fully implemented in 1925 when legislation passed in both countries provided for the recognition of the other's landing conditions for foreigners.[10] This may be considered to have been the high point of the CTA – although it was not called that at the time – as it almost amounted to a common immigration area. A foreigner who had been admitted to one state could, unless his or her admission had been conditional upon not entering the other state, travel to the other with only minimal bureaucratic requirements.

The CTA was suspended on the outbreak of war in 1939, and travel restrictions were introduced between the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.[11] This meant that travel restrictions even applied to people travelling within the UK if they were travelling from Northern Ireland to elsewhere in the UK.

conclusion, mibbe if britain goes to war with europe they'll put up a border, otherwise it's just fantasy.

more fear mongering. England would vote for the union