SNP & Brexit????

Jamba – westminster does not have to agree to any sort of referendum in Scottish independence. If they refuse all it does is make it harder to hold one ( but not impossible) and give the SNP an open goal

If this where true you would have held them in the past, again and again. The SNP wouldn’t even discuss it they’d just get on with it.

As I have said elsewhere the EU is heading South financially and at an increasing pace. It’s my view membership will look a very unattractive proposition. As for Junker’s remarks, not anything I’d rely on if I where you.

Not at all Jamba – look at the Canada situation – repeated referenda turn folk off. They have one more chance and they know it.

Well, Joe, enjoy the austerity required first and then the subservience to F’furt later – loads to blame then!!. Honestly are the English REALLY that bad?!?

devolved power for significantly less

Which applies to the UK leaving the EU, what exactly are they planing on doing with this new found power? Lowering corporation tax seems to be about it, well I guess you can also add the other thing on the wishlist, which seems to be hoping America imposes Btip as quickly as possible, doing what? handing more power to corporations…

I’m starting to see a theme here…

teamhurtmore – Member
Well, Joe, enjoy the austerity required first and then the subservience to F’furt later – loads to blame then!!. Honestly are the English REALLY that bad?!?

The English aren’t bad at all, let’s not go down that route, it’s nothing to do with, however much you try to paint it, the English being bad.

But we are talking subservience to Washington or Brussels here. I’m with Brussels myself. (Even at that I don’t think we need immediate entry either, even if we don’t get to be the successor state.)

teamhurtmore – Member
Ok Cody, but you will swap a relatively high (people can debate how high) levels of devolved power for significantly less.

No, we won’t….so at present, we’re all bound by EU law anyway, which heavily affects domestic policy (a key plank of the Brexit argument). That being the case, and what we have up here is what flows down from Westminster to us via that route, we don’t really stand to lose. Not much of significance anyway. And the gains are worth it.

On top of that policy will be set to suit economies with whom Scotland is not synchronised. There is nothing logical in those two positions.

Logic seems to be in short supply just about everywhere these days, I’m afraid. It seems to work for the rest of the EU, so why not Scotland?

Joe – I am/was a remainer, especially since we had such an awesome deal. Access to the SM, (the benefits of FoM) without the nonsense of the €. So we had max autonomy over the levers of power combined with minimum costs (financial and otherwise). I approach Scotland in the same way – how do you get the most benefit, with the lowest costs and risks. What you have now is FAR, FAR superior to becoming part of the Euro Zone with ALL THAT THIS IMPLIES

NS knows this, hence what is happening now is just sh!t-stirring – although as I said earlier, today’s paper was at least largely factually correct.

Lowering corporation tax seems to be about it,

Remind me what wee eck’s views on this were pre-indi vote?

Let it be on the other issue – having some else to blame, that’s the trend you should be spotting.

What you have now is FAR, FAR superior to becoming part of the Euro Zone with ALL THAT THIS IMPLIES

You’re missing a step- its not about what we have now, its what we’ll have post-Brexit.

But we are talking subservience to Washington or Brussels here.

C’mon be sensible

Logic seems to be in short supply just about everywhere these days, I’m afraid. It seems to work for the rest of the EU, so why not Scotland?

C’mon be sensible – the € has delivered catastrophic results for peripheral (hint) states. It has been a total disaster for two reasons (1) the EA does not qualify for a single currency and (2) if it did it requires full monetary, fiscal and political union – for no other reason that to recycle the surpluses generated in the core.

The nats ignored many inconvenient truths last time, but they are taking it to an all time high by thinking that the EU and EZ membership is a solution. That is folly in the extreme. No one would fall for such idiocy. Hang on a moment…

You’re missing a step- its not about what we have now, its what we’ll have post-Brexit.

Yes, Brexit is bllx for all of us, you included. But two wrongs don’t make a right. That is just adding fuel to the fire. The only benefit would be to have more scapegoats for domestic shortcomings – which must obviously be appealing for the SNP. Like Joe, others will tire of simply blaming the English.

teamhurtmore – Member
But we are talking subservience to Washington or Brussels here.
C’mon be sensible

How do you see britains “trade deal” with america playing out? What’s their hand there, other than to bend over and take what’s offered? particularly if they bite their nose off in regards to the EU free market.

So how does independence in Europe mean less control than we have now? Does westminster do nothing? No – all those powers that at the moment are reserved for westminster would come to holyrood. Nothing extra would go to the EU

Oh flip – thats a reply to a quoted THM post – seosamh77 you see my point? What do any of those quoted posts bring to the debate apart from being intended to irritate people

teamhurtmore – Member
blaming the English.

behave yersel, you’re better than that.

Yes, Brexit is bllx for all of us, you included. But two wrongs don’t make a right. That is just adding fuel to the fire. The only benefit would be to have more scapegoats for domestic shortcomings – which must obviously be appealing for the SNP. Like Joe, others will tire of simply blaming the English.

I know, big yin, I know…..its not going to end well. That much is obvious.

You can see, though, why the attraction of getting away from all of this mince is going to get very appealing, though? Say: everything suddenly costs 20% more (a very crude example, not real world) and at the same time, suddenly ‘loyalty’ becomes something more real than just the vague concept that’s trotted out at the regular events of pomp and circumstance. You’d think….is this how it was meant to turn out? Is it how I want it to turn out?

As said above, I was anti for a long, long time, but the apparent slide to the right for UKIP appeasement and the spectre of EU-loss changed my mind. I’m sad, very sad tbh, to say that I was right- and I’m not often right. But its all very definitely coming to pass.

So how does independence in Europe mean less control than we have now?

Joe, you see what gets missed with blockers!! At least, TJ is not accusing people of coming on here despite being ignorant of the facts. 😉 Love LWers ability to ignore the economic destruction of the young and middle and lower classes in peripheral states. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Cody – I think Brexhsit is a very bad idea. However, we will get through it despite the unnecessary costs, uncertainty and time wasted. Making rash decisions in the heat of the moment is rarely a good idea and this is all that Sturgeon is doing right now, either that or simply mischief making. My money is on the latter as she is not stupid – notice how she doesn’t want a second vote!!

teamhurtmore – Member
What you have now

Well that’s the crux here, what is that? I see no plan at all.

Remind me what wee eck’s views on this were pre-indi vote?

You know I’m not an SNP supporter, so I’m not beholden to wee ecks views. The SNP are at their zenith, outwith the constitutional question, scotlands politics will belong in a land of coalitions and compromise.

You might not be, but dont pretend that cutting corporation tax was only a one-sided idea

By what you have now, I mean the balance between the obvious benefits of being part of a successful union with high and increasing levels of devolved power and lower risk. Some can see a good thing when its in front of their noses!

I don’t, the SNP are clearly a right wing party in sheeps clothing, imo.

As we’ve seen over the past few years or so, politics does actually change pretty fast at times.

Chancers is a better description IMO

teamhurtmore – Member
By what you have now, I mean the balance between the obvious benefits of being part of a successful union with high and increasing levels of devolved power. Some can see a good thing when its in front of their noses!

Aye, but we also look on in amazment as to why the obvious solution that will benefit all is completely ignored. ie exploring options of allowing Scotland to remain in the EU and the UK at the same time, it’s complex yes, but it’s a solution that could keep all happy. We look at the reaction to that and the utter refusal to even consider it and wonder, wtf…

teamhurtmore – Member
Chancers is a better description IMO

No great argument from me there. Never have had! 😉

well the paper was light on that bit – good luck.

to stop wondering, just recall what membership of the EU involves – its not the unique situation that the UK has enjoyed up until now

teamhurtmore – Member
well the paper was light on that bit – good luck.

I’ve not actually read the paper tbh(I will), but I get the jist just from what has been happening over the last few months. And with the UK governments blanket refusal it would seem folly to put effort into that route.

It sets out the situation well and is factually correct. But unsurprisingly it gets lost in terms of setting out the “how” bit. Why? Because it doesn’t work. Note how membership of the Euro never gets mentioned or conditions of entry – all the tricky stuff. Keep it nice and high level and hope people forget the tough questions – worked for the Brexshiteers so cant blame her.

to stop wondering, just recall what membership of the EU involves – its not the unique situation that the UK has enjoyed up until now

Conditions for membership

The EU operates comprehensive approval procedures that ensure new members are admitted only when they can demonstrate they will be able to play their part fully as members, namely by:

complying with all the EU’s standards and rules
having the consent of the EU institutions and EU member states
having the consent of their citizens – as expressed through approval in their national parliament or by referendum.
Membership criteria – Who can join?

The Treaty on the European Union states that any European country may apply for membership if it respects the democratic values of the EU and is committed to promoting them.

The first step is for the country to meet the key criteria for accession. These were mainly defined at the European Council in Copenhagen in 1993 and are hence referred to as ‘Copenhagen criteria’. Countries wishing to join need to have:

stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
The EU also needs to be able to integrate new members.

In the case of the countries of the Western Balkans additional conditions for membership, were set out in the so-called ‘Stabilisation and Association process’, mostly relating to regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations.

What is negotiated?

The conditions and timing of the candidate’s adoption, implementation and enforcement of all current EU rules (the “acquis”).

These rules are divided into 35 different policy fields (chapters), such as transport, energy, environment, etc., each of which is negotiated separately.

Other issues discussed:

financial arrangements – such as how much the new member is likely to pay into and receive from the EU budget (in the form of transfers)
transitional arrangements – sometimes certain rules are phased in gradually, to give the new member or existing members time to adapt.
Oversight by the EU institutions

Throughout the negotiations, the Commission monitors the candidate’s progress in applying EU legislation and meeting its other commitments, including any benchmark requirements.

This gives the candidate additional guidance as it assumes the responsibilities of membership, as well as an assurance to current members that the candidate is meeting the conditions for joining.

The Commission also keeps the EU Council and European Parliament informed throughout the process, through regular reports, strategy papersSearch for available translations of the preceding link••• , and clarifications on conditions for further progress.

I’m only looking at that from a laymans view, but it doesn’t seem like it’s insurmountable.

I will give you 5 and then point out the key stumbling block. Its all there in black and white.

Spain? If not, you’ll need to spell it out.

4 think goals of independence – on the phone to someone in hospital now!

Jambalaya

just a small subset of the country

Again with this sneering crap. Let’s just clarify this once and for all

Scotland IS a country despite what you think

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/geography/beginner-s-guide/administrative/the-countries-of-the-uk/index.html

Your sneering little Englander approach is blatant trolling at best and down right ignorance at worst

Doesn’t one of the 35 policy fields includes holding budget deficit of 3% of GDP or less?

the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.

Ah the yoyo?

that’s just politics

The euro area includes those EU Member States that have adopted the single currency. But the euro area is not static – under the Treaty, all EU Member States have to join the euro area once the necessary conditions are fulfilled, except Denmark and the United Kingdom which have negotiated an ‘opt-out’ clause that allows them to remain outside the euro area.
Sweden is also expected to join the euro area in the future, but has not yet qualified.

well just take the swedish approach and fiddle with the requirements as not to qualify.

ninfan – Member
Doesn’t one of the 35 policy fields includes holding budget deficit of 3% of GDP or less?

lets see the link for those would ye?

Tres bien – well spotted

Bon chance

But first step is to ignore the first referendum and the wishes of the majority of Scots – chicken and egg and all that.

Either way, bloody barking decision!! 😉

Details, ninfan, details – you just do a technical default. Simples.

we’re getting into that discussion about democracy again… ie how long should a vote make people beholden to a particularly result.

well the answer to that is easy, till they change their mind. (It’s a fundamental tenet of democracy imo.)

yes, democracy, damned inconvenient isnt it!?!

teamhurtmore – Member

Details, ninfan, details – you just do a technical default. Simples.
Or we just legalise weed, and cream in all the profit from the English tourists venturing up the the road! 😆

The road out of deficit just requires a little imagination, it is not set in stone.

teamhurtmore – Member
yes, democracy, damned inconvenient isnt it!?!

Perfectly happy to follow whatever result. Won’t stop me campaigning to change that result however. Absolutely nothing undemocratic about that.

You may have a point if I was phoning up my Irish cousins asking for the location for the Semtex and armalite stores that were never handed in, but I’m not! 😆 (Joke for any spooks reading! 😆 )

Actually, we had better stop all this, we dont want anyone feeling left out!

Xmas drink with son and his GF now. A bientot

I’ll take that as conceding defeat!

Enjoy! 😉

Spanish PM says no special Brexit deal for Scotland (pesky Catalonian thing it seems, who knew 😉 )

http://www.politico.eu/article/spain-rejects-nicola-sturgeons-scottish-brexit-plan/