yourguitarhero
Where’s this idea that the Scotches need to ask permission to leave the UK?
Indeed. A Sec30 order is an agreement on how a referendum should be conducted, not permission.
seosamh
It’s kinda the law, despite SNP rhetoric
Which law would that be?
Where’s this idea that the Scotches need to ask permission to leave the UK?
Keep up this kind of chat. Does the indy movement wonders
seosamh
It’s kinda the law, despite SNP rhetoric
Which law would that be?
The law of the united kingdom. acts of union 1707, treaty of union, aw that patter, specifically.
Scotland’s best chance of voting for independence (gut feeling), would probably be to give the whole of the UK a vote.
Haha! Honestly a great idea, my boss can’t see Andy Murray without frothing at the mouth. This election has just shown me how out of touch I am with most of England, huge swathes are racist, we’d set you free for sure(can I come join). They used to blame blacks, then Asians and currently polish (broad term for Eastern European’s) once brexit is done they’ll blame Scottish until your gone then the Welsh will get blamed.
Nearly kicked out my Tory 23% swing to Lib Dem.
epicyclo
Indeed. A Sec30 order is an agreement on how a referendum should be conducted, not permission.
The Scottish government can hold referendums until the coos come home, without the section 30, Westminster will just ignore them though, and it's unlikely the Unionist vote would even engage with them.
See the nonsense Catalan votes for a hint of how that'll play out.
I would hold off rushing up here just yet.
What do you think they plan on doing, as I honestly think Nicola Sturgeon is everything you’d wanting an MP.
The milngavie liberals must be greetin in their quinoa this morning.
Good to see ian blackford sailing home, there was talk of tactics between certain parties to get him out, a sign of how well he speaks in Westminster.
seosamh
The law of the united kingdom. acts of union 1707, treaty of union, aw that patter, specifically.
Treaties are dissolvable unilaterally, as the UK govt is about to demonstrate.
It's always been the case that the dominant country in such a relationship makes it "illegal" for the subordinate to get independence, and there's no doubt Scotland's relationship with England is subordinate even though that was not supposed to be the case in the Treaty.
Scots Law under the Treaty of Union is not inferior to English law. Then there's the Claim of Right, not to mention the UN Declaration regarding independence.
It's going to be interesting times for sure. I'm pretty sure we'll see a Sec30 refused, and then this will all end up in the courts.
and then this will all end up in the courts.
It won't. Boris'll have abolished the courts by then.
Glasgow points weren’t far off the mark to be fair.
Actually you don't need to live in a high crime scheme to be within 20 minutes of Glasgow airport.
That said If I was starting from scratch I'd seriously consider the rainfall pattern when deciding where to live.
molgrips
Subscriber
Not sure where I’d like to live in Scotland tbh. Glasgow’s busy and messy, Edinburgh’s nice but the biking’s rubbish, and everywhere else is too far from an airport for me to travel for work, I think. Maybe Stirling but the local biking doesn’t look great.
Ehhhh?
Have you ever been to Edinburgh or Stirling?
epicyclo
Subscriber
seosamhThe law of the united kingdom. acts of union 1707, treaty of union, aw that patter, specifically.
Treaties are dissolvable unilaterally, as the UK govt is about to demonstrate.
It’s always been the case that the dominant country in such a relationship makes it “illegal” for the subordinate to get independence, and there’s no doubt Scotland’s relationship with England is subordinate even though that was not supposed to be the case in the Treaty.
Scots Law under the Treaty of Union is not inferior to English law. Then there’s the Claim of Right, not to mention the UN Declaration regarding independence.
It’s going to be interesting times for sure. I’m pretty sure we’ll see a Sec30 refused, and then this will all end up in the courts.
A waste of time, be as well joining Sinn Fein and crack on with a bit of abstentionism as well...
That the two Kingdoms of (fn. 1) Scotland and England, shall, upon the first Day of May next ensuing the Date hereof, and for ever after, be united into one Kingdom by the Name of Great-Britain
The treaty wasn't 2 unions deciding to be in partnership, it was the creation of 1 union. Not 2 parliaments agreeing to rule by consensus, both gave supreme authority to westminster.
There is only 1 route to independence, and that's forcing the democratic point through Westminster.
There is only 1 route to independence, and that’s forcing the democratic point through Westminster.
I think if you are going to limit yourself to a single route to independence then you might as well give up now.
This is a game of chess. You're not going to do well if your opponent has a full board and you've decided to only play with a king and a bishop.
I think if this election has proved nothing else it's that Boris Johnson is a competent enough player to absolutely smash Corbyn. Hopefully Sturgeon will play better.
The democratic mandate is a lot stronger a route than tenuous legal arguments trying to dissolve the treaty of union.
I'm not disagreeing. But if the plan is to ask for a Section 30 order and then do absolutely nothing until we get it then we're in for a long wait.
sturgeon speaking the now, going to publish their plans next week.
Which she's had plenty time to work on now, 2 biggest issues last time IMO were currency and getting booted out if Europe.
Only one of them to think about now really.
Edinburgh’s nice but the biking’s rubbish
Yep, Pentland (accessible from city centre on traffic free routes in 20mins) is terrible. And who has even heard of the Tweed Valley (Peebles 30mins from Edinburgh). There is absolutely no road riding in East Lothian and Edinburgh certainly doesn't have bike friendly buses with direct route to Glentress.
Idiot.
Nobeerinthefridge
Member
Which she’s had plenty time to work on now, 2 biggest issues last time IMO were currency and getting booted out if Europe.Only one of them to think about now really.
I think the current deficit is probably the biggest concern tbh, long as GERS can be pointed at and say how can you afford this and that, that'll put a lot of the floating voters off.
I don't think just saying, we'll that's the financial situation under the uk that causes the deficit, cuts it. They'll need to be more convincing than that on Scotlands future finances.
Agreed Joe.
Well it's good news for a lot of the Scottish financial services industry, owners of SMEs, the landowners and anyone with real wealth will be doing the planning for moving their cash out of the SNPs reach ASAP
Random question (which I've asked before and didn't really get a conclusive answer beyond "it's complicated") and apologies if this has been done before but I've not read the previous 97 pages:
if Scotland were to gain independence from the UK, how would that affect their membership status of the EU
a) if they were to do it before brexit
b) if they were to do it after brexit
?
If they leave whilst we're still in the EU, would their membership automatically carry through or would they default to dropping out by dint of their membership being via the UK? I'm assuming the latter? Or would there need to be a separate negotiation with the EU to decide what happens?
If they leave afterwards, presumably there's nothing to prevent them from immediately petitioning to join?
f Scotland were to gain independence from the UK, how would that affect their membership status of the EU
Nobody really knows but, and this is the crucial bit, we'd find out exactly how and how much it costs before we press the button to make it actually happen.
I believe the simple answer was that we would be outside the EU. Before Brexit, the rest of UK would be the successor state and remain in the EU. Scotland would be a new state and outside the EU.
I seem to remember that there were some challenges to this but I've not heard anything definitive saying otherwise.
After Brexit, I guess we'll just have to apply to join.
's what I figured. Thank you.
UK will have left before any referendum can be called.
An independence vote is in the context of a UK in the withdrawal agreement period, the UK-EU free trade negotiation will have to decide whether Scotland should be represented in the talks the day after the vote if yes. Alternatively they carry on regardless due to the relevant legislation not having been passed yet.
Scotland could be left high and dry with no EU membership, having to negotiate either EU membership (hello euro currency) or free trade agreement at the same time as haggling with rUK.
having to negotiate either EU membership (hello euro currency)
Disproved many times. We don't have to join the Euro
Disproved many times. We don’t have to join the Euro
You won't be using the pound.
You won’t be using the pound.
You sound very sure of that despite there being absolutely nothing stopping iScotland continuing to use the pound.
Scotland could be left high and dry with no EU membership, having to negotiate either EU membership (hello euro currency) or free trade agreement at the same time as haggling with rUK.
Not strictly true, while the rules say that, there isn't any mechanism to force it. Which leaves a lot of countries "in the process of joining the euro" and Sweeden pretty much refusing.
But then the alternative is the pound, which is fine, lots of countries use another currency. But leaves Scotland tied to to rUK's central bank. Yes BoS can 'print' money, but that's not quite the same as setting interest rates, buying government bonds, etc.
I suspect any attempt to either keep the pound, would put the Scottish government in trouble financially, and even if a Scottish pound was created and pegged against sterling, you would end up in a situation like the pound was in under the ERM.
big_n_daft
Scotland could be left high and dry with no EU membership, having to negotiate either EU membership (hello euro currency) or free trade agreement at the same time as haggling with rUK.
As this Brexit election has shown, pushing fear of the unknown doesn't work on a committed population.
Try something else...
You sound very sure of that despite there being absolutely nothing stopping iScotland continuing to use the pound.
Like Zimbabwe using the dollar?
Like Zimbabwe using the dollar?
Erm, no. The RTGS dollar is only used in Zimbabwe.
Ah, I see what you are trying to do. You are cleverly trying to suggest that only unstable countries use other countries currencies and you heard they use dollars in Zimbabwe. It's a good attempt but your execution leaves something to be desired.
I think what you were trying to do was pick a country like Panama, much derided during the 2014 referendum, which uses the US Dollar.
Interestingly Panama has the seventh most stable banks in the world and is generally thriving compared to its Latin American neighbours.
Would you like to try again?
big_n_daft
Member
UK will have left before any referendum can be called.An independence vote is in the context of a UK in the withdrawal agreement period, the UK-EU free trade negotiation will have to decide whether Scotland should be represented in the talks the day after the vote if yes. Alternatively they carry on regardless due to the relevant legislation not having been passed yet.
Scotland could be left high and dry with no EU membership, having to negotiate either EU membership (hello euro currency) or free trade agreement at the same time as haggling with rUK.
As well doing it all at the same time I guess anyhow, it's all change, so what's a wee bit more....
UK will have left before any referendum can be called.
If the UK actually ever leaves.
big_n_daft
Well it’s good news for a lot of the Scottish financial services industry, owners of SMEs, the landowners and anyone with real wealth will be doing the planning for moving their cash out of the SNPs reach ASAP
And how terrible would that be?
Business abhors a vacuum so they would quickly be replaced. Only the new businesses would be paying tax and contributing to the economy instead of being parasites like those we lost.
Well given that 55% of folk who voted in Scotland voted for parties explicitly opposed to a second independence referendum then it's hard to see how the SNP can claim a clear mandate for having one.
However the issue isn't going to go away anytime soon, so my suggestion would be a compromise. At the moment we don't know how Brexit is going to pan out (and by "don't know" I mean we aren't sure if it will be quite bad or extremely bad!) so why not say yes, we will have a second referendum, but we have it in, say, three years time once the Brexit waters have calmed down a little.
That way we know a bit more about where we stand, and from an SNP point of view, if they really want "the Scottish people to choose" then surely they also want the Scottish people to have a clearer view of what the options are.
If the vote is then to leave the UK I'd be happy to accept it. And if the vote is to remain then we can put the issue to sleep for, as was said the last time, a generation.
kennyp
Subscriber
Well given that 55% of folk who voted in Scotland voted for parties explicitly opposed to a second independence referendum then it’s hard to see how the SNP can claim a clear mandate for having one.
Same as how Boris can claim a clear mandate for Brexit on 45% voting for brexit parties.
It's how democracy works.
Well given that 55% of folk who voted in Scotland voted for parties explicitly opposed to a second independence referendum then it’s hard to see how the SNP can claim a clear mandate for having one.
I don't disagree but by that same logic only 45% of people voted for Brexit supporting parties in this election. I know, two wrongs don't make a right but....
We are not going to get a Section 30 order at the first time of asking, if we ever get it. Beginning the process now means that it may be forthcoming in three years time depending on how clever Sturgeon can box.
Same as how Boris can claim a clear mandate for Brexit on 45% voting for brexit parties.
I don’t disagree but by that same logic only 45% of people voted for Brexit supporting parties in this election. I know, two wrongs don’t make a right but….
Actually I 100% agree with you both. What both examples show is the absurdity of our first past the post voting system. A great way of judging a horse race, but not for deciding political policy.
Actually I 100% agree with you both. What both examples show is the absurdity of our first past the post voting system. A great way of judging a horse race, but not for deciding political policy.
If only there was a way we could rid ourselves of this archaic voting system and all the other 'still coming to terms with losing the Empire' baggage that goes along with it... 😉
It's actually going to be quite funny watching both the SNP and Tories desperately wanting to say, 'Only 45% of the country voted for you so it's not a mandate' but not being able to.
I'm ginger and like whiskey can I come with you please.
The EU isn't going to accept a new country which is using a third party currency
And how terrible would that be?
Business abhors a vacuum so they would quickly be replaced. Only the new businesses would be paying tax and contributing to the economy instead of being parasites like those we lost.
Except you will lose many good tax paying businesses, and their replacement may be more tax "efficient"
Your current parasites tend to be Scottish, just some will become residents of somewhere else for tax reasons if you get a "yes" vote
As this Brexit election has shown, pushing fear of the unknown doesn’t work on a committed population.
Try something else…
I don't need to try anything, I don't have a vote and won't influence those who do. Just pointing out the logic.
As many other people point out if the SNP really want independence they just need to push for a "all UK" vote on the issue
And how terrible would that be?
Business abhors a vacuum so they would quickly be replaced. Only the new businesses would be paying tax and contributing to the economy instead of being parasites like those we lost.
Same way Starbucks simultaneously manages to exist on your high street and offshore all it's profits. The point being made (not that I entirely agree with it, but at least attack the point being made, not the one you want to) was that the higher the tax rate the more people are inclined to move their money elsewhere. You cannot simultaneously be for the free movement of goods and services (and money) and against companies 'based' in Luxembourg or Holland exploiting that for their tax advantage. George Orwell referred to that as doublethink.
The underlying problem lies somewhere between countries being independently able to set their own tax rules (kinda what Scotland is asking for?) and wanting to be a part of the EU (which relies of the aforementioned single market, also what Scotland is asking for).
It's having your cake, and eating it.
See also:
"Scotland has vast natural resources (i.e. those ones north east of Abberdeen)" and "we want to be carbon neutral"
Scotland is welcome to come up with it's own answers to those problems, but it can't just pretend that every option is simultaneously possible.
