Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) Yes, regurgitating devolution scare stories is a common theme of the no campaign. Today its vince cable telling us RBS would move it headquarters to London, recall similar from previous devolution campaign... Come to think of it, does RBS not have most of its business based in "the city" anyway Tell you what vince its currently a f**kin toxic business and uk plc owes 80 odd % of it - I dont think thats much of a threat to voters in Scottish referendum. It might actually sway a few dont knows into voting yes How could I forget Michelle Mone, threatened to leave if we vote yes, now spends most of her time in London anyway. Makes sense though as her (struggling) business is now registered there. How Scots would miss her financial input to our lives. Except she employs hardly anyone in the uk. The sub contractors running the sweat shops of Asia might miss her though? Ballantyne - another Scot who has left for london but thinks he knows whats best for us back here. Does he have a vote in the referendum? No, bit like bo diddley at BP then? Chairman of Royal Mail - was state owned and recently privatised. Hmm, might it be in his interest to toe the westminster line ahead of inevitable peerage? Does he have a vote though? Is this the best you can do? What about John Barrowman? Is anyone really surprised that the CBI favours what the westminster establishment want? They've been in each others pockets for years. There's an organisation called Business for Scotland which is the fastest growing business network in the country, currently over 1,200 members. Members are Pro Independence and don't want to be associated with the views of CBI. Strangely enough, not quoted by either dicko or lex... Oh and as for the unions, I'll let Lex explain the irony of the steelworkers and miners unions being against Scottish Independence ETA - forgot Ralph Soames, although I assume lex actually meant Rupert Soames, head dude at aggreko. Did you intentionally forget to add his brother is a Tory Lord and (ex?) MP? Edited February 6, 2014 by TPAFKATS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Yes, regurgitating devolution scare stories is a common theme of the no campaign. Today its vince cable telling us RBS would move it headquarters to London, recall similar from previous devolution campaign... Come to think of it, does RBS not have most of its business based in "the city" anyway Tell you what vince its currently a f**kin toxic business and uk plc owes 80 odd % of it - I dont think thats much of a threat to voters in Scottish referendum. It might actually sway a few dont knows into voting yes How could I forget Michelle Mone, threatened to leave if we vote yes, now spends most of her time in London anyway. Makes sense though as her (struggling) business is now registered there. How Scots would miss her financial input to our lives. Except she employs hardly anyone in the uk. The sub contractors running the sweat shops of Asia might miss her though? Ballantyne - another Scot who has left for london but thinks he knows whats best for us back here. Does he have a vote in the referendum? No, bit like bo diddley at BP then? Chairman of Royal Mail - was state owned and recently privatised. Hmm, might it be in his interest to toe the westminster line ahead of inevitable peerage? Does he have a vote though? Is this the best you can do? What about John Barrowman? Is anyone really surprised that the CBI favours what the westminster establishment want? They've been in each others pockets for years. There's an organisation called Business for Scotland which is the fastest growing business network in the country, currently over 1,200 members. Members are Pro Independence and don't want to be associated with the views of CBI. Strangely enough, not quoted by either dicko or lex... Oh and as for the unions, I'll let Lex explain the irony of the steelworkers and miners unions being against Scottish Independence Well there is a surprise......hello Nicola. I'd have never guessed it was you.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Bundy Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Well there is a surprise......hello Nicola. I'd have never guessed it was you.... The Right dishonourable Pie muncher from Wishaw spouting more Pish Yet again ? Variant C J D has this effect on the colostomy Bag of shit, That is, Stuart ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Indeed, although its not that far fetched esp when bearing in mind the reputation that our elected and indeed unelected members have with the populace. Speaking out in favour would mean losing the whip and being deselected ahead of 2015 westminster election. Shock, horror, probe! MP's putting self interest first! Never! I'm always banging on about whips ( no. not in the bedroom) but I can see why parties want them. My own opinion is that some non SNP MP's probably would quite like independence and some SNP MP's are shittin themselves in case they F**k up. The frailty of the human race. No party has ever got it all right and never will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 An in/out referendum is unlikely, and even if it does happen a British state would remain a major player in the European Markets. You do realise that , in the event of Scotland having to renegotiate its entry into Europe , that the rUK , would have to do the same as the treaty at the moment is with the UK not the rUK. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 You do realise that , in the event of Scotland having to renegotiate its entry into Europe , that the rUK , would have to do the same as the treaty at the moment is with the UK not the rUK. . Now you'd think commonsense would dictate that you are of course correct. You'd certainly expect many other EU nations such as France and Germany would love the opportunity to downgrade rUK's privileges and so forth. Unless there is a very specific clause which deals with a founding member splitting into two then I'd humbly suggest in a non-expert way that this will be a political stramash which will be solved by political means and then coded into some archaic and probably ludicrously expensive legal gobbledygook to deal with the situation if it arises again. The purests won't like this but practical reality will win the day IMO. EU members will, if they want, be able to deal with this without resorting to the courts and I'd pin my hat on that being the case but we'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zurich_allan Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 You do realise that , in the event of Scotland having to renegotiate its entry into Europe , that the rUK , would have to do the same as the treaty at the moment is with the UK not the rUK. . No it wouldn't. There would be a proportionate reduction of MEPs in the European Parliament, but there would be no alteration in the membership of what is left of the UK - there isn't even an argument over that I'm afraid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 No it wouldn't. There would be a proportionate reduction of MEPs in the European Parliament, but there would be no alteration in the membership of what is left of the UK - there isn't even an argument over that I'm afraid. Whilst , l don't think the treaty allows for exit (unfortunately ) , it is unlikely , that the Fourth Reich Europe would allow rUK to be a member based on the exact same terms that it enjoys suffers under at the moment. . there isn't even an argument over that, I'm afraid. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zurich_allan Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Whilst , l don't think the treaty allows for exit (unfortunately ) , it is unlikely , that the Fourth Reich Europe would allow rUK to be a member based on the exact same terms that it enjoys suffers under at the moment. . there isn't even an argument over that, I'm afraid. . I don't know why I'm even responding to nonsense like this. rUK is an internal term that we use, a technicality, and the EU (not the fourth reich because it isn't one party politics) would recognise what is left of the UK as the continuing State. And yes - the Treaty of Lisbon DOES allow for voluntary exit of a Member State in a specific clause, but there isn't a clause for involuntary expulsion of an existing State. Nonsense like the above quote helps absolutely nothing and nobody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 No it wouldn't. There would be a proportionate reduction of MEPs in the European Parliament, but there would be no alteration in the membership of what is left of the UK - there isn't even an argument over that I'm afraid. No argument? You cannot be serious! This is the Virtual West Bank. Some folk would argue that God didn't make little green apples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 I don't know why I'm even responding to nonsense like this. rUK is an internal term that we use, a technicality, and the EU (not the fourth reich because it isn't one party politics) would recognise what is left of the UK as the continuing State. And yes - the Treaty of Lisbon DOES allow for voluntary exit of a Member State in a specific clause, but there isn't a clause for involuntary expulsion of an existing State. Nonsense like the above quote helps absolutely nothing and nobody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 http://m.stv.tv/news/politics/262776-snp-pension-policies-dependent-on-negotiations-with-uk-and-eu/ Now the SNP are told they won't be able to deliver on pledges of a lower retirement age for Scots. In a Nicola style smear - does she have any credibility left? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 So when are the UK Government going to enter talks with the Scottish Government regarding such topics as the currency pre/post independence so that the uncertainties that folk have can be answered? Whilst , l don't think the treaty allows for exit (unfortunately ) , it is unlikely , that the Fourth Reich Europe would allow rUK to be a member based on the exact same terms that it enjoys suffers under at the moment. . there isn't even an argument over that, I'm afraid. . Bizarre. I've already shown there is precedent in this. Look at the Yugoslav States and what happened in terms of the succession state. There's nothing like a Nationalist for denying their Holocaust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Can you show me anywhere in that report that it said that they WON'T.be able to deliver. Ah OK is that your strategy these days Cockles? The experts are warning that the SNP are limited to what they can realistically promise. They basically write off the SNP's assurances to date as nothing more than fantasy and they pick apart the supposition by stating clearly that the SNP would only be able to deliver if negotiations on the EU and on Sterling go all the SNP way - when even the most ardent of Natsi's appear to accept that some concessions are going to have to be made. Now you are perfectly right in saying the accountants in that article haven't said they WON'T be able to deliver, but they have gone so far as to spell out that it's extremely unlikely that they are going to be able to deliver. Haggling over the words used won't change the meaning..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 So when are the UK Government going to enter talks with the Scottish Government regarding such topics as the currency pre/post independence so that the uncertainties that folk have can be answered? Did you miss the news last week? One of the Westminster Governments top Civil Servants come up to Scotland to meet with Alex Salmond, to make speeches and to do press conferences all discussing the talks he was having with Alex Salmond about an independent Scotland using Sterling. Alex Salmond claimed the talks were "useful" - the UK Civil Servant made it clear that if Scotland wanted to use Sterling it would have to give up some of it's sovereignty on topics like taxation and borrowing. I was sure you even commented on Mark Cairney's visit. I guess your dementia is affecting your ability in posting on this subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26047614 Not really an article about Independence but perhaps an explanation as to why our Nationalists might be so desperate to get EU membership. After all we all know the SNP don't like to hold mass murderers for the full term of their sentence preferring instead to keep the prison population under control by releasing them on "compassionate" grounds once they think they've sat on the naughty step playing their XBox for long enough. Just think how much easier that would be if only they could adopt a rule like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madball Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Ah OK is that your strategy these days Cockles? The experts are warning that the SNP are limited to what they can realistically promise. They basically write off the SNP's assurances to date as nothing more than fantasy and they pick apart the supposition by stating clearly that the SNP would only be able to deliver if negotiations on the EU and on Sterling go all the SNP way - when even the most ardent of Natsi's appear to accept that some concessions are going to have to be made. Now you are perfectly right in saying the accountants in that article haven't said they WON'T be able to deliver, but they have gone so far as to spell out that it's extremely unlikely that they are going to be able to deliver. Haggling over the words used won't change the meaning..... Is this not the case for the manifesto for pretty much all political parties on the lead up to the election... promise what they feel will appeal to their target voters, but it can be picked apart on costing and feasibility grounds by their opponents? Seems that both sides are at it as always. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Is this not the case for the manifesto for pretty much all political parties on the lead up to the election... promise what they feel will appeal to their target voters, but it can be picked apart on costing and feasibility grounds by their opponents? Seems that both sides are at it as always. This isn't an election though. If the Yes campaigners don't keep their promises there is no way back for the country. We'll be stuck with "independence" forever in what ever shape that takes whether it means being out on our own turning Barr's bottle tops into currency, or whether it means taking it up the arse from the Bank Of England, EU and from NATO depsite all the pre referendum pledges. As I've said over and over again we know where we are with the No campaign. There's no silly pledges. Vote No and Scotland will remain in the UK with a strong influence in Europe, three different kinds of Veto's to allow us to opt out of European legislation we don't like, control of our currency, our interest rates, and our economic policy, and we'll still have a devolved parliament in Edinburgh wasting tax payers money while they decide on important things like whether we should adopt the eagle as a national bird or not. We'll still have an NHS, even if it is shite, we'll still have welfare, free university places, free prescriptions etc, etc - we might even be able to enjoy the benefits of all that gas that's going to be fracked out the soil in England, and we'll still be a popular place for the kind of inward investment from business that has been lacking during the SNP's tenure in office as they get scared off by the uncertainty caused by the referendum. Oh and if we don't like it we can still campaign and vote for another referendum a bit futher down the road when and if someone comes up with a real plan for independence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Can you show me anywhere in that report that it said that they WON'T.be able to deliver.Of course he can't as it doesn't say that. I also don't see how a rep from an accounting organisation would necessarily be a pensions expert, but then again, dicko is having a meltdown today so mibees best to leave him to it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Can you show me anywhere in that report that it said that they WON'T.be able to deliver.Of course he can't as it doesn't say that. I also don't see how a rep from an accounting organisation would necessarily be a pensions expert, but then again, dicko is having a meltdown today so mibees best to leave him to it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 (edited) No i didn't, and i also know that Mark Carney isn't a Civil Servant. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25944901 Your wrong then The Governor of the Bank of England is the most senior position in the Bank of England. It is nominally a civil service post, but the appointment tends to be from within the Bank, with the incumbent grooming his or her successor. The Governor of the Bank of England is also Chairman of theMonetary Policy Committee, with a major role in guiding national economic and monetary policy, and is therefore one of the most important public officials in the United Kingdom. He's also paid by the Crown http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/annualreport/2012/remuneration2012.pdf Edited February 6, 2014 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Can you show me anywhere in that report that it said that they WON'T.be able to deliver.Of course he can't as it doesn't say that. I also don't see how a rep from an accounting organisation would necessarily be a pensions expert, but then again, dicko is having a meltdown today so mibees best to leave him to it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 Your wrong then The Governor of the Bank of England is the most senior position in the Bank of England. It is nominally a civil service post, but the appointment tends to be from within the Bank, with the incumbent grooming his or her successor. The Governor of the Bank of England is also Chairman of theMonetary Policy Committee, with a major role in guiding national economic and monetary policy, and is therefore one of the most important public officials in the United Kingdom. He's also paid by the Crown http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/annualreport/2012/remuneration2012.pdf If your going to copy and paste at least be upfront about it and state your source.You do know that Wikipedia, a bit like the Daily Mail, isn't always accurate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zurich_allan Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 This is a decade old, and some of the worst inaccurate and sensationalist journalism pertaining to the EU I've ever seen. I noted more than 20 inaccuracies in the first 10 minutes - that's pretty good going.... But then this has always been the problem with the media in the UK, they literally just don't understand the EU or associated issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zurich_allan Posted February 6, 2014 Report Share Posted February 6, 2014 ZA, i'm not sure of all the dates regarding Independence and the possible European in out referendum getting promised by the tories/ukip. If the UK voted for out, could Scotland stay in if it is still in the transition period of becoming independent. You may have already answered this (had a brief look back) and i don't know if I've worded it correctly but I think you'll get the jist of it. If the UK voted out, before Scotland had become fully independent, that could be a difficult issue, as I don't know for certain if Scots would be given a vote or not... if we were still part of the UK and had the option to vote, then we would be considered to have left the EU voluntarily, in which case we'd have to re-apply for Membership as a new Member. On the other hand, if we weren't given the vote for such a referendum, I'd imagine it would be because it's been decided or in the process of negotiations with what would happen to an independent Scotland and whether or not we would be negotiating from within the Union. If that's the case, I'd imagine that we might be able to continue to operate within the EU environment until our own decision was reached (or negotiations concluded etc.). Even if Scotland had to leave the EU, there would have to be a separation agreement drawn up between a combination of the EU Commission, EU Parliament and our own Government - and it's likely it would take up to two years for any full separation to occur - so it certainly wouldn't be an instant event. One thing that wouldn't be allowed is a sort of 'swap' - I suppose it the best way of putting it - i.e. UK out and Scotland in their place Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.