saintnextlifetime Posted June 23, 2017 Report Share Posted June 23, 2017 Yes, just thought I would pad it out a bit ....... The MODs are nice people and didn't vote Tory:whistle Most Mods are existentialist, voting Tory wouldn't enter into in the great scheme of things. .different story for the Grebos though. . I wouldn't go down that street though. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted June 23, 2017 Report Share Posted June 23, 2017 Totally agree. In addition, you could replace the words "Leave", "Brexit" and "the UK" with "Yes", "Independence" and "Scotland".... Can't let it go because Nicola has called for a second referendum! The SNP are a single issue party. The ONLY issue they are dealing with is trying to engineer a referendum! The SNP have pretended put it on the backburner because of the catastrophic losses they suffered in the GE as a result of calling for a second referendum! A GE which saw them receive a much smaller share of the vote in Scotland than the Tories did in the UK! A GE which them receive no bigger a share of the electorate than Thatcher did in Scotland in 1979! A GE which saw them receive less votes than Leave did in Scotland! [emoji38] It's Pavlovian, as soon as politics is mentioned it's like a dog whistle to prove he really is #thichasfcuk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insaintee Posted June 23, 2017 Report Share Posted June 23, 2017 (edited) The brexit negotiations should be easy. The UK should ask for all current conditions and treaties to be carried over and then after exit they should start to change what they don't like on an issue by issue basis. There is no Brexit means Brexit consensus and the idea that we voted to throw away everything ever touched by the EU is nonsense. The Environment, health and safety, Employment law, Data protection, The customs union, Cultural exchange, consumer protection, the list is endless. Edited June 23, 2017 by insaintee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted June 24, 2017 Report Share Posted June 24, 2017 (edited) 13 hours ago, insaintee said: The brexit negotiations should be easy. The UK should ask for all current conditions and treaties to be carried over and then after exit they should start to change what they don't like on an issue by issue basis. There is no Brexit means Brexit consensus and the idea that we voted to throw away everything ever touched by the EU is nonsense. The Environment, health and safety, Employment law, Data protection, The customs union, Cultural exchange, consumer protection, the list is endless. You surely dont expect the EU to agree to allow us to maintain our benefits whilst not being a member? Nothing is easy when human beings and egos are involved. Edited June 24, 2017 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted June 24, 2017 Report Share Posted June 24, 2017 17 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said: We know. We've all tried to have reasonable discussions with you. FFS. That was the very definition of an open goal. I ought to know better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted June 24, 2017 Report Share Posted June 24, 2017 On 6/23/2017 at 0:46 PM, Bud the Baker said: The SNP have put it on the backburner while we deal with current issues unlike you and your fellow unicyclists. Once we see what sort of clusterfuck emerges from the Brexit negotiations and what the EU might be willing to offer Scotland as a GIRFUY to May we'll re-assess the situation. Politics in the Twitter age is going to be far more fluid than it has been in the past and with 55-60% in a few opinion polls now constituting a mandate we'll see where are once these talks are completed. I would argue that the SNP put it on the backburner right from the off by saying the Scottish Parliament want the choice AFTER the "Brexit" negotiation outcome was known. After that it was the unionist parties that sought to use it as a battering ram against the SNP on a UK level. Their respective, (and I did say respective- not respectful as that certainly wouldn't describe them), MSP leaders chose to talk about this rather than expose the fact they had NOTHING positive for Scotland in their UK manifestos. Unfortunately many Scottish electors fell for the hype. It would be madness for NS or the SNP to take a referendum off the table. Not least because, as these EU negotiations continue, independence will suddenly look like one hell of a good deal to the many Scots whose minds were poisoned by the sh!te from the right while ideas from the left were bereft. What fantastic policies were heralded from either? NONE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted June 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, stlucifer said: I would argue that the SNP put it on the backburner right from the off by saying the Scottish Parliament want the choice AFTER the "Brexit" negotiation outcome was known. After that it was the unionist parties that sought to use it as a battering ram against the SNP on a UK level. Their respective, (and I did say respective- not respectful as that certainly wouldn't describe them), MSP leaders chose to talk about this rather than expose the fact they had NOTHING positive for Scotland in their UK manifestos. Unfortunately many Scottish electors fell for the hype. It would be madness for NS or the SNP to take a referendum off the table. Not least because, as these EU negotiations continue, independence will suddenly look like one hell of a good deal to the many Scots whose minds were poisoned by the sh!te from the right while ideas from the left were bereft. What fantastic policies were heralded from either? NONE. Technically you're right although after double checking it looks like I did remember correctly. If the policy was to wait until after the Brexit negotiation before deciding on whether to hold a second IndyRef then there was no need to push the vote through at Holyrood so early. For me it gave Unionist politicians and in particular RD, a brittle politician, an issue to switch to no matter the topic. I agree there's no going back now but the issue has to be parked for immediate future and NS has to be seen to be concentrating on the day job. It's been a setback but as I say the underlying problems with the Union are still there and if NS can display better government than TM at Westminster and that shouldn't be hard then perhaps we can get back on track. A tax raising anti-austerity strategy in her post-GE speech next which I think is due week would put pressure on Labour & KD to back "For the Many Not the Few" policies at Holyrood. ****************** I knew my memory wasn't that bad - even allowing for the fact that different things have been said at different times that's just revisionism Quote First Minister Nicola Sturgeon announces independence referendum will be between Autumn 2018 and Spring 2019 Ms Sturgeon says she will seek Scottish Parliament approval for a second independence referendum next week The franchise and question in the second independence referendum is for the Scottish Parliament to decide says the first minister http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39255256 Edited June 24, 2017 by Bud the Baker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insaintee Posted June 24, 2017 Report Share Posted June 24, 2017 1 hour ago, oaksoft said: You surely dont expect the EU to agree to allow us to maintain our benefits whilst not being a member? Nothing is easy when human beings and egos are involved. If we continue to pay yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted June 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted June 24, 2017 1 hour ago, insaintee said: If we continue to pay yes It's not just about financial contributions, it's about laws too and which court arbitrates on these laws UK or EU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted June 24, 2017 Report Share Posted June 24, 2017 2 hours ago, Bud the Baker said: Technically you're right although after double checking it looks like I did remember correctly. If the policy was to wait until after the Brexit negotiation before deciding on whether to hold a second IndyRef then there was no need to push the vote through at Holyrood so early. For me it gave Unionist politicians and in particular RD, a brittle politician, an issue to switch to no matter the topic. I agree there's no going back now but the issue has to be parked for immediate future and NS has to be seen to be concentrating on the day job. It's been a setback but as I say the underlying problems with the Union are still there and if NS can display better government than TM at Westminster and that shouldn't be hard then perhaps we can get back on track. A tax raising anti-austerity strategy in her post-GE speech next which I think is due week would put pressure on Labour & KD to back "For the Many Not the Few" policies at Holyrood. ****************** I knew my memory wasn't that bad - even allowing for the fact that different things have been said at different times that's just revisionism Your memory isn't fading but it does appear to be selective. The dates selected were taken from the timetable the tories themselves had suggested Brexit details would be known. the reason for the early debate and vote on the matter was to ensure the Scottish Government had ample time to fight for the right to hold it. IF they had waited until May had concluded the negotiations it would have been too late to organise the choice vote and Brexit would have been a fait accompli. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted June 26, 2017 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2017 On 24/06/2017 at 5:37 PM, stlucifer said: Your memory isn't fading but it does appear to be selective. The dates selected were taken from the timetable the tories themselves had suggested Brexit details would be known. the reason for the early debate and vote on the matter was to ensure the Scottish Government had ample time to fight for the right to hold it. IF they had waited until May had concluded the negotiations it would have been too late to organise the choice vote and Brexit would have been a fait accompli. The SNP (with a little help from their friends) hold the majority at Holyrood they could've waited till they saw how the Brexit talks were heading before they introduced the bill - it could've been passed anytime and the infrastructure to in place all that would have been required was a date. As for the talks finishing early - anyone who thought (thinks) that was likely should be sent straight back to P1 politics, this will go to the wire and I wouldn't be surprised if the clocks have to be stopped at 11:59 - bookmark it . It was a hasty decision by NS and even if your interpretation of what she intended is correct there is no way you can argue it was coherently presented in that manner. The only saving grace for NS is that post-GE TM is in as bad a position, in reality worse in that she will never be able to find apposition which suits all of her parliamentary support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted June 29, 2017 Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 On 6/26/2017 at 0:18 PM, Bud the Baker said: The SNP (with a little help from their friends) hold the majority at Holyrood they could've waited till they saw how the Brexit talks were heading before they introduced the bill - it could've been passed anytime and the infrastructure to in place all that would have been required was a date. As for the talks finishing early - anyone who thought (thinks) that was likely should be sent straight back to P1 politics, this will go to the wire and I wouldn't be surprised if the clocks have to be stopped at 11:59 - bookmark it . It was a hasty decision by NS and even if your interpretation of what she intended is correct there is no way you can argue it was coherently presented in that manner. The only saving grace for NS is that post-GE TM is in as bad a position, in reality worse in that she will never be able to find apposition which suits all of her parliamentary support. The SNP needed an Order in Council under Section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998 to be decreed before any vote could be arranged let alone a campaign being fought. They never thought May would backtrack on her open aversion to an election before the "Brexit", (Oh how I hate that term), terms were known. That is where it fell flat initially for the SNP. If May wasn't a lying bitch then the SNP couldn't have lost the seats. I do blame the SNP for a badly fought campaign as they allowed the unionist parties to gang up on ONE platform. They could have spent more time questioning the oppositions merits of their campaign rather than staying on the back foot. I reiterate. The only reason the call for a right to hold a vote on the final outcome became a problem was because May thought she could win a massive vote of confidence. The daftest part is it was the Scottish vote that kept the Tories in power. I bet a lot of those who voted tactically are feeling pretty damn stupid now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted June 29, 2017 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2017 18 minutes ago, stlucifer said: The SNP needed an Order in Council under Section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998 to be decreed before any vote could be arranged let alone a campaign being fought. They never thought May would backtrack on her open aversion to an election before the "Brexit", (Oh how I hate that term), terms were known. That is where it fell flat initially for the SNP. If May wasn't a lying bitch then the SNP couldn't have lost the seats. I do blame the SNP for a badly fought campaign as they allowed the unionist parties to gang up on ONE platform. They could have spent more time questioning the oppositions merits of their campaign rather than staying on the back foot. I reiterate. The only reason the call for a right to hold a vote on the final outcome became a problem was because May thought she could win a massive vote of confidence. The daftest part is it was the Scottish vote that kept the Tories in power. I bet a lot of those who voted tactically are feeling pretty damn stupid now. There's a lot of truth in what you say but I still think the decision was a bit premature while the status of whether the UK remains in the Single Market (the current fallback position) has yet to be resolved. Who knows perhaps the Holyrood decision was a factor in TM calling the recent election. On practical terms it was a distraction during the Council Elections which had already been scheduled. I agree the SNP campaign was mediocre with the focus on IndyRef2 and devolved issues but they made at least one significant own goal, when Joanna Cherry wrongly accused "foodbank nurse" of being married to a Tory Councillor as it turned what should have been an issue where the Tories are weak to one that could be dismissed by the Tories (+ their lapdogs) taking the Cybernat Bullies detour. The landscape has changed since March and as I've said previously the challenge is now on the SNP to show that they can manage better than the Tories - hopefully the DUP deal/bribe will take the shine off of the Unionist parties with RD's claim that the thirteen Tory MP's could provide Scotland with an "independent" influence on policy as the bluster* it was. As long as Scotland stays in the UK the Scottish Unionist Parties are nothing more than branch offices. * It's the way she tells 'em! Quote Ruth Davidson's Scottish Tory MPs Will Be Prepared To Defy Theresa May Sources close to the Scottish Conservative leader told BuzzFeed News she now has unprecedented influence over the prime minister. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insaintee Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 On 2017-6-24 at 1:49 PM, Slartibartfast said: We know. We've all tried to have reasonable discussions with you. Even God tried Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Even God tried:whistle What did He say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insaintee Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Just now, RickMcD said: What did He say? Shut the f**k up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 8 minutes ago, insaintee said: Shut the f**k up Naw a didnae! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 4 hours ago, Slartibartfast said: Why did none of the stories and pictures about the "foodbank nurse" going Xmas shopping in NY etc hit the MSM? The sun put it all out on their website, but I'll never know if they printed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 Why did none of the stories and pictures about the "foodbank nurse" going Xmas shopping in NY etc hit the MSM? Because we have a print media that is owned by a 3 or 4 billionaires who run their titles in their own self interest. That means no or little change, the SNP and Scottish Independence means big change (potentially). Add to this a compliant television media including a state broadcaster which unsurprisingly broadcasts in the state interest.In the case of Pacific Quay, this has only gotten worse since the 2014 referendum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Slartibartfast said: Stop pretending to be me. Just trying to take your throne Dad. Edited June 30, 2017 by stlucifer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted June 30, 2017 Report Share Posted June 30, 2017 38 minutes ago, Slartibartfast said: If I was your dad, you'd be banned from the internet. If you were my dad I'd ban myself from everything in case someone found out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted November 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2017 Um, well, these aren't going too well for us with the government now prepared to pay more cash to the EU in order to get onto the next stage of negotiations. It's clear who has the upper hand in these negotiations, presently and, no doubt, in the remaining (sic) stages, I don't remember the "divorce bill" being an issue during the referendum campaign which is a further damnation of the half-hearted nature of the Remain campaign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabuddies Posted November 21, 2017 Report Share Posted November 21, 2017 No, it's just the way the hard right are stirring up trouble. The amount is exactly what the UK committed to pay towards ongoing budgeted projects a couple of years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted November 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2017 2 hours ago, rabuddies said: No, it's just the way the hard right are stirring up trouble. The amount is exactly what the UK committed to pay towards ongoing budgeted projects a couple of years ago. I don't think it's quite as simple as that, here's what Danish Finance Minister Kid Jensen said last month https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/08/denmark-dismisses-eu-wrangling-brexit-divorce-bill-game Quote Kristian Jensen told the Guardian he believed both sides should be ready to move the talks on following the concessions made in Theresa May’s speech in Florence last month. Jensen said: “In any political negotiations, there is not enough time, not enough money, not enough this, not enough that. This is part of the game. Because what we are dealing with here is not rocket science. We are not speaking about putting a man on Mars or solving the problem of CO2 emissions. “We are now on the same page … In my view it is rather important we get into a more close and more speedy process on concluding some of the issues.” and Quote Yet, while careful not to criticise Barnier, whose negotiating mandate was set in April by the 27 other EU member states, Jensen told the Guardian that both parties in the negotiation needed to up the pace of their talks. and finally Quote “This will never be a 100% win for one side or the other side. This will be a political compromise.” What we're talking about is discussions about an eventual settlement which is up for negotiation not a figure based on previously defined criteria. I agree with you that the current mess is part of May's need to keep the xenophobes and "free marketeers" from splitting the Tory party and I'm not sure that there is a better alternative than accepting what the remaining EU states will offer I'm just pointing out the weakness of the UK's position. The final sentence from Kid Jensen seems particularly laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted December 4, 2017 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 (edited) Um, perhaps we should wait until the details are released but it seems that NI will remain in the Single Market. Quote The BBC's political editor said Mr Lamberts said the UK was prepared to accept that Northern Ireland may remain in the EU's customs union and single market in all but name. But, she stressed, the BBC has not yet seen the draft document nor has it yet been signed off. I'd imagine the DUP will be upset. ******************** From a Scottish Angle NS has already tweeted the following Quote If one part of UK can retain regulatory alignment with EU and effectively stay in the single market (which is the right solution for Northern Ireland) there is surely no good practical reason why others can’t. ********************* Funnily enough I saw an item on BBC's Breakfast Program last week about a new business park somewhere in NI that was attracting attention from companies who reckoned that they could benefit from being within the Single Market on one hand while still remaining the UK. How it'll all work is anyone's guess. Edited December 4, 2017 by Bud the Baker 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.