Brexit Negotiations

[oaksoft]

3 hours ago, Doakes said:

Even more so face to face. Had debates in work where pro indy types can’t explain the difference between the European Union and the United Kingdom. Or there’s an inability to explain why they would support one form of union, but reject another. 

Online, they can somewhat hold a debate as long as they have access to websites where they can pull up random bits of information that supports their political stance. I don’t necessarily blame them, there’s an absolute information overload. Nobody can take it all in. I just wish people would start to look at the future from a less polarised position. It’s kinda vital that we get this right...

That bit in bold is very telling. There is this mistaken belief that you should adopt a strong position on something and never change your mind. That is seen as a great strength of character. Of course it isn't, it's a massive weakness of character. Face to face I find it's usually reasonably easy to coax a bit of compromise from people. Online it's a very rare thing indeed.

[Cornwall_Saint]

4 hours ago, jaybee said:

I realise that you are one of the more sensible posters on here, however I really have to take issue with you on two of the three points stated above. I can't and would not argue with the first as you have every right as indeed does everyone else to have a view and if they wish use that view in a vote.  The second paragraph however utilises what I view as selective reasoning and more importantly ignores three crucial points, firstly the UK is one United Kingdom as far as Europe is concerned, so there are no separate country votes. Just as an aside the Big country gave Scotland the option of voting on independence, I feel sure they didn't want to, but they did, but I assume failing to acknowledge this is part of the selective reasoning.  Secondly, the government stated they would bow to the will of the people regarding the referendum result; which I believe is how Democracy works, (of course they and most others thought it would be a resounding remain vote) So, did they carry out the will of the people? No they didn't and so far; still seem to be looking for a way to renege on their promise aided I might add by people like yourself who want what they want  and never mind Democracy.  Thirdly and it is small point, not all Scottish laws arise from London as Scotland has its own legal system, I think the laws you refer to are in relation to the UK government being the one that deals with Europe.  I mean I could use your 'The EU doesn’t make all our laws (a very Brexit claim)' and substitute Westminster for the EU and then also substitute Scottish for Brexit and it would have the same validity.

The second paragraph is quite clearly a pro- european attempt to justify staying in the EU and I have no problem with that, excerpt we have decided to leave, ergo it has no relevance. 

I read multitudes of justifications for not leaving; or only partly leaving and keeping the customs union and lots of other seemingly sensible suggestions, but again they are irrelevant, if the government honours its promise on the referendum. However that is still to be seen?

That’s fair, I don’t expect everyone to agree with me, and it’s good to have debate without the insults and name calling we’ve seen from others on here. 

I get what you’re saying about us being allowed to have an Indy referendum, but to deny us such a thing would have only strengthened the case for Scotland to leave the UK. Since 2014, more often than not we’ve been ignored, whether it’s the SNP being treated with continuous contempt in parliament, Scotland’s decision on Brexit where we haven’t been included in negotiations, nor have any of our amendments been passed for Brexit (happy to be corrected if wrong on this).

The leave vote wasn’t overly specific on “how” to leave, this is why it’s been so problematic. You’ve got some screaming to go with no deal, others saying we need some sort of deal, etc. The vote on paper never said “Leave on no deal”, it just said leave. The best way to find out the “will of the people” would be to have another vote, where the options are along the lines of “May’s Deal”, “Re-negotiate another deal”, or “No Deal”. Please note I haven’t put remain in there, I’ve been called out before because of the words “another vote” and they completely missed the options I actually placed. Only then would we get a true idea of how people want to leave.

Scotland does indeed have its own legal system and parliament, but there is a huge difference in numbers between EU laws placed on us, and Westminster laws placed on us.

Of course those who are pro-union will say it’s just part and parcel of being part of the UK, and naturally will cite the 2014 vote as the recent example of the decision to be a part of this. I think most Yessers would have accepted this for the time being, but the complete disregard and contempt towards the Scots during these Brexit negotiations have re-ignited the fire to go independent. I was disappointed in 2014 but willing to accept the result, likewise I was disappointed with Brexit (and more pissed off that EU citizens like myself could be shafted in a vote we had no say in), but would still accept it. However, the way the Scots have been pushed aside in these negotiations is exactly why myself and others are keen to see another Scottish referendum, the “material change” Nicola mentioned in 2015 is well and truly here.

[jaybee]

10 minutes ago, Cornwall_Saint said:

That’s fair, I don’t expect everyone to agree with me, and it’s good to have debate without the insults and name calling we’ve seen from others on here. 

I get what you’re saying about us being allowed to have an Indy referendum, but to deny us such a thing would have only strengthened the case for Scotland to leave the UK. Since 2014, more often than not we’ve been ignored, whether it’s the SNP being treated with continuous contempt in parliament, Scotland’s decision on Brexit where we haven’t been included in negotiations, nor have any of our amendments been passed for Brexit (happy to be corrected if wrong on this).

The leave vote wasn’t overly specific on “how” to leave, this is why it’s been so problematic. You’ve got some screaming to go with no deal, others saying we need some sort of deal, etc. The vote on paper never said “Leave on no deal”, it just said leave. The best way to find out the “will of the people” would be to have another vote, where the options are along the lines of “May’s Deal”, “Re-negotiate another deal”, or “No Deal”. Please note I haven’t put remain in there, I’ve been called out before because of the words “another vote” and they completely missed the options I actually placed. Only then would we get a true idea of how people want to leave.

Scotland does indeed have its own legal system and parliament, but there is a huge difference in numbers between EU laws placed on us, and Westminster laws placed on us.

Of course those who are pro-union will say it’s just part and parcel of being part of the UK, and naturally will cite the 2014 vote as the recent example of the decision to be a part of this. I think most Yessers would have accepted this for the time being, but the complete disregard and contempt towards the Scots during these Brexit negotiations have re-ignited the fire to go independent. I was disappointed in 2014 but willing to accept the result, likewise I was disappointed with Brexit (and more pissed off that EU citizens like myself could be shafted in a vote we had no say in), but would still accept it. However, the way the Scots have been pushed aside in these negotiations is exactly why myself and others are keen to see another Scottish referendum, the “material change” Nicola mentioned in 2015 is well and truly here.

I do try to be fair; my problem generally is I'm far to 'open' to see the 'other' point of view and even though I currently live in 'enemy territory'  I consider myself as patriotic as the next Scot, but I am not and never have been a Nationalist and I actually think the predominance that the SNP has had in recent years has been a 'negative' aspect for Scotland as neither Salmond nor Sturgeon are viewed with any serious political credibility (in my opinion of course) south of Berwick.  I do rather think that  the Indy vote was swayed by the likelihood of the Brexit vote being stay and so it might be correct to say 'on another day', the problem with that is hindsight really is a wonderful thing.  I can see your point with regards to another vote on how we leave, but at this juncture things are so up in the air that delay in my opinion will only exacerbate issues with the EU, Brexiteers, remainers and give the Politicians more reason to drag things out.  I, as you can guess wished to leave and whilst I can in all honesty say; it may well have been the wrong way to vote and the wrong decision to take ; I do think it would cause such a shitstorm to try and turn it round now.  My solution is leave, suck it up and think again sometime in the future.  Not a magin answer of course unfortunately.   

[stlucifer]

7 hours ago, jaybee said:

I do try to be fair; my problem generally is I'm far to 'open' to see the 'other' point of view and even though I currently live in 'enemy territory'  I consider myself as patriotic as the next Scot, but I am not and never have been a Nationalist and I actually think the predominance that the SNP has had in recent years has been a 'negative' aspect for Scotland as neither Salmond nor Sturgeon are viewed with any serious political credibility (in my opinion of course) south of Berwick.  I do rather think that  the Indy vote was swayed by the likelihood of the Brexit vote being stay and so it might be correct to say 'on another day', the problem with that is hindsight really is a wonderful thing.  I can see your point with regards to another vote on how we leave, but at this juncture things are so up in the air that delay in my opinion will only exacerbate issues with the EU, Brexiteers, remainers and give the Politicians more reason to drag things out.  I, as you can guess wished to leave and whilst I can in all honesty say; it may well have been the wrong way to vote and the wrong decision to take ; I do think it would cause such a shitstorm to try and turn it round now.  My solution is leave, suck it up and think again sometime in the future.  Not a magin answer of course unfortunately.   

As far as your comments on any delay. It MAY be troublesome to have a delay but it  WILL be disastrous to leave on the wrong terms just for the sake of dogmatism. Only the most hardened Eurosceptic and, in my opinion, little Britons who believe immigration is a scourge still believe "leave means leave". There  never has been a vote on how/when we leave the EU and I believe the MPs MUST look after our countries' interest. You have the leftist demanding leave so they can bring back industries into the public service. The far right wanting to run gung ho through workers rights. Xenophobes wanting to build barriers to people coming into the country.

Besides being lied to about the benefits of leave, If you look into it, the majority of those demanding a "Leave on the 29th even if we're cutting our noses off", are those groups of extremists.

It appears that the vast majority of pro leavers want it for very narrow views. Few seem to be particularly positive reasons

We, as a collection of nations, need to step back and breath. We need to make sure that the reason and method we leave is thought through. Europe is our closest and most easily accessible trading partner yet some are so intent on destroying things they don't care about the impact, or they're hiding their heads in the sand pretending Britain is so Great that nothing will impact on that greatness and all will capitulate when it lifts that mighty sword to cut ties.

IF we leave, and, after looking into all the facts to hand, I've had a rethink and hope we get another chance to change that disastrous destiny, then I hope we leave with that most important of economic tie remaining intact and seamless.

 

Edited March 7, 2019 by stlucifer

[beyond our ken]

10 hours ago, jaybee said:

I do try to be fair; my problem generally is I'm far to 'open' to see the 'other' point of view and even though I currently live in 'enemy territory'  I consider myself as patriotic as the next Scot, but I am not and never have been a Nationalist and I actually think the predominance that the SNP has had in recent years has been a 'negative' aspect for Scotland as neither Salmond nor Sturgeon are viewed with any serious political credibility (in my opinion of course) south of Berwick.  I do rather think that  the Indy vote was swayed by the likelihood of the Brexit vote being stay and so it might be correct to say 'on another day', the problem with that is hindsight really is a wonderful thing.  I can see your point with regards to another vote on how we leave, but at this juncture things are so up in the air that delay in my opinion will only exacerbate issues with the EU, Brexiteers, remainers and give the Politicians more reason to drag things out.  I, as you can guess wished to leave and whilst I can in all honesty say; it may well have been the wrong way to vote and the wrong decision to take ; I do think it would cause such a shitstorm to try and turn it round now.  My solution is leave, suck it up and think again sometime in the future.  Not a magin answer of course unfortunately.   

Salmond and Sturgeon have both been referred to by English political commentators as the canniest politicians in the UK (at separate times).  I think it is wrong to focus on the [ersonalities.

 

As for the shitstorm you refer to, people need to understand that we are on dangerous territory.  After the UK voted to leave TM secured her premiership (just) on a ticket of delivering a deal.  She has not been able to deliver that deal and I have trouble believing that many people outside her circle accept her barrel of fudge (not a sexual euphemism) as being in any way a good deal.  So the problem we have is, those who wanted to leave won't be happy with the deal, those who wanted and continue to want to remain won't be happy with it either.  So we just leave anyway?  Come on, the poverty and straitened circumstances that this deal and no deal represent will cause thrice as much division in the country as having another look and deciding where to go from here.  TM is in hock to the DUP dinosaur-deniers and the avaricious right wing, can you really believe that a deal designed to appease these greedy and bigoted nutters can ever be good for the country?

Anyone who saw the state of Blackpool on the telly will understand the predicament of English northeners who want "their brexit".  Their town, like many in the north of England has been neglected and starved of any kind of investment for decades and the people were not sufficiently politically motiviated to lobby for change where it most matters-at Westminster.  Then the architects of chaos roll along, tell them that it's all Europe's fault and the people suddenly have a demon they want slaying, so they vote leave (in general).  I hate Labour MPs who think they should support leave as they will lose their constituencies if they flip but they never worried a jot about how many lives they ruined with their dogma and negligence over the last 50 years..  It was all about them and keeping the north red.  I also hate tories who see the people as a cash-cow to be milked for the sharp-elbowed middle and upper classes.  The people who tag on to the coattails of the Rees-Moggs and the Cameron's, the ones who think being tory gives them a bigger slice of the pie.  It's not as big as Moggy's slice but it's bigger than the poor and under-educated people's slice so they are quite happy with that as it makes them feel like a success.  My view is, every single one of us is a failure in a country where such inequality can be fostered, even encouraged, to such an extent that the whole country is irrevocably split in a way that will last for generations.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Salmond and Sturgeon have both been referred to by English political commentators as the canniest politicians in the UK (at separate times).  I think it is wrong to focus on the [ersonalities.
 
As for the shitstorm you refer to, people need to understand that we are on dangerous territory.  After the UK voted to leave TM secured her premiership (just) on a ticket of delivering a deal.  She has not been able to deliver that deal and I have trouble believing that many people outside her circle accept her barrel of fudge (not a sexual euphemism) as being in any way a good deal.  So the problem we have is, those who wanted to leave won't be happy with the deal, those who wanted and continue to want to remain won't be happy with it either.  So we just leave anyway?  Come on, the poverty and straitened circumstances that this deal and no deal represent will cause thrice as much division in the country as having another look and deciding where to go from here.  TM is in hock to the DUP dinosaur-deniers and the avaricious right wing, can you really believe that a deal designed to appease these greedy and bigoted nutters can ever be good for the country?
Anyone who saw the state of Blackpool on the telly will understand the predicament of English northeners who want "their brexit".  Their town, like many in the north of England has been neglected and starved of any kind of investment for decades and the people were not sufficiently politically motiviated to lobby for change where it most matters-at Westminster.  Then the architects of chaos roll along, tell them that it's all Europe's fault and the people suddenly have a demon they want slaying, so they vote leave (in general).  I hate Labour MPs who think they should support leave as they will lose their constituencies if they flip but they never worried a jot about how many lives they ruined with their dogma and negligence over the last 50 years..  It was all about them and keeping the north red.  I also hate tories who see the people as a cash-cow to be milked for the sharp-elbowed middle and upper classes.  The people who tag on to the coattails of the Rees-Moggs and the Cameron's, the ones who think being tory gives them a bigger slice of the pie.  It's not as big as Moggy's slice but it's bigger than the poor and under-educated people's slice so they are quite happy with that as it makes them feel like a success.  My view is, every single one of us is a failure in a country where such inequality can be fostered, even encouraged, to such an extent that the whole country is irrevocably split in a way that will last for generations.

This is a very well written post that should add a lot to the debate.
Unfortunately I can't get past the euphemism 🤢

[Cornwall_Saint]

10 hours ago, jaybee said:

I do try to be fair; my problem generally is I'm far to 'open' to see the 'other' point of view and even though I currently live in 'enemy territory'  I consider myself as patriotic as the next Scot, but I am not and never have been a Nationalist and I actually think the predominance that the SNP has had in recent years has been a 'negative' aspect for Scotland as neither Salmond nor Sturgeon are viewed with any serious political credibility (in my opinion of course) south of Berwick.  I do rather think that  the Indy vote was swayed by the likelihood of the Brexit vote being stay and so it might be correct to say 'on another day', the problem with that is hindsight really is a wonderful thing.  I can see your point with regards to another vote on how we leave, but at this juncture things are so up in the air that delay in my opinion will only exacerbate issues with the EU, Brexiteers, remainers and give the Politicians more reason to drag things out.  I, as you can guess wished to leave and whilst I can in all honesty say; it may well have been the wrong way to vote and the wrong decision to take ; I do think it would cause such a shitstorm to try and turn it round now.  My solution is leave, suck it up and think again sometime in the future.  Not a magin answer of course unfortunately.   

Like yourself I live in “enemy territory” too. As much as I am proud to call myself Belgian, I’m also proud to call myself Scottish even if my paperwork doesn’t say so - I grew up there, it made me who I am today.

I think your comment on Alex/Nicola is not helped by the way the English media portray the SNP (just take a look back to the billboards in 2015 about a Labour/SNP coalition with Salmond pickpocketing Miliband). What I’ve noticed is those down here who take the time to watch PMQs, and other parliamentary programmes in the HoC, they will actually say the SNP do stand up for their country, they do stand up for what they believe in, and are actually a decent party. Those who don’t bother watching these debates, but instead get their info from the media are the ones more likely to say the SNP are irrelevant, or just “people who hate England”. When it comes to it, I’m glad the SNP have been running Scotland - the alternative options were not appealing, nor do I reckon any of them would have done as good a job as the SNP. Of course that’s just my opinion.

In regards to Brexit, the way we leave will not please everyone - there is too much disagreement on this. There won’t be an option that satisfies all of us. That’s why I’m personally keen on a vote on “How to leave” but I don’t see that happening. The problem with crashing out on no deal is that we have no trade deals set up, no plans for the future going forward, and we will just be in a state of limbo. Likewise as an EU citizen, I am still none the wiser to my own situation. They tell us we have to pay £65 to remain here, then tell us we don’t (but nothing has actually been agreed yet). My mother has already paid this fee (pilot scheme) - will she get her money back? What happens in regards to us with working? Could employers potentially be avoiding hiring EU citizens due to the uncertainty? An agreed deal would clear a lot of things up from our perspective.

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

17 hours ago, Doakes said:

Even more so face to face. Had debates in work where pro indy types can’t explain the difference between the European Union and the United Kingdom. Or there’s an inability to explain why they would support one form of union, but reject another. 

Online, they can somewhat hold a debate as long as they have access to websites where they can pull up random bits of information that supports their political stance. I don’t necessarily blame them, there’s an absolute information overload. Nobody can take it all in. I just wish people would start to look at the future from a less polarised position. It’s kinda vital that we get this right...

Are you saying Scotland would not have more say in its own affairs independent in the European Union than it currently has under Westminster rule ?  There will be no hard Berxit thing is we will have one leg in one leg out and no say on European rules plus pumping money into the EU. In other words a worse deal than we have in the EU. Nuts. 

[beyond our ken]

17 hours ago, Doakes said:

Even more so face to face. Had debates in work where pro indy types can’t explain the difference between the European Union and the United Kingdom. Or there’s an inability to explain why they would support one form of union, but reject another. 

Online, they can somewhat hold a debate as long as they have access to websites where they can pull up random bits of information that supports their political stance. I don’t necessarily blame them, there’s an absolute information overload. Nobody can take it all in. I just wish people would start to look at the future from a less polarised position. It’s kinda vital that we get this right...

The UK union has had it's beneficial effects on Scotland, but overall it  becomes an abusive relationship as Scotland becomes more politically moderate and England becomes more extreme.  It shouldn't be hard to understand the differences between two different unions.  In case you are wondering, for Scotland,  one of the key ones is access to our biggest export market without tarriffs of excessive customes checks, we lose that as part of a hard brexit and we have a hollow threat that we would lose our second biggest export market (allegedly) in the UK if we leave the UK union.  That signifies the extent to which reason has been less and less obvious in any debates about sovereignty.

 

You should maybe ask the hard-line english and ulster brexiteers why they are so keen on the UK union as opposed to the european one.  Could the phrase "whip hand" be anywhere in the true explanation.

[Doakes]

25 minutes ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:

Are you saying Scotland would not have more say in its own affairs independent in the European Union than it currently has under Westminster rule ?  There will be no hard Berxit thing is we will have one leg in one leg out and no say on European rules plus pumping money into the EU. In other words a worse deal than we have in the EU. Nuts. 

It’s the debate itself I have a problem with. Let me think how I can put this.. 

Someone who was pro Scottish independence in 2014, now arguing the plus points of a union. 

Someone who was anti-independence in 2014, now arguing why we’re better outside of a union. I’ve heard a few quotes from Theresa May which completely contradict her position on Scotland. 

I think the main issue for me is that people are so inconsistent with their views, and tend to follow what they are “meant to follow”, based on a party line, without really thinking of the overall implications for our future. That counts for people/politicians on both sides of the debate. It’s ridiculously polarised.  

[Doakes]

22 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

The UK union has had it's beneficial effects on Scotland, but overall it  becomes an abusive relationship as Scotland becomes more politically moderate and England becomes more extreme.  It shouldn't be hard to understand the differences between two different unions.  In case you are wondering, for Scotland,  one of the key ones is access to our biggest export market without tarriffs of excessive customes checks, we lose that as part of a hard brexit and we have a hollow threat that we would lose our second biggest export market (allegedly) in the UK if we leave the UK union.  That signifies the extent to which reason has been less and less obvious in any debates about sovereignty.

 

You should maybe ask the hard-line english and ulster brexiteers why they are so keen on the UK union as opposed to the european one.  Could the phrase "whip hand" be anywhere in the true explanation.

Agree with most of that, but not so sure that becoming politically extreme is exclusive to England. In Scotland, it's just a different kind of extreme. You do get extreme Scottish nationalists, as well as extreme British nationalists. 

My view is that we should all be looking at this objectively. If we're not careful it's going to result in an even worse mess than we're already in.

[oaksoft]

1 hour ago, TPAFKATS said:

This is a very well written post that should add a lot to the debate.
Unfortunately I can't get past the euphemism

It's an overly emotional post. We are ALL at fault because some people fail in their lives? Seriously? Nonsense like that doesn't help anyone.

[beyond our ken]

18 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

It's an overly emotional post. We are ALL at fault because some people fail in their lives? Seriously? Nonsense like that doesn't help anyone.

Either you didn't read the whole post or I have struck a nerve with you.

Or more likely, all of the above

[jaybee]

4 hours ago, Cornwall_Saint said:

An agreed deal would clear a lot of things up from our perspective.

fair point, for many people methinks

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Either you didn't read the whole post or I have struck a nerve with you.
Or more likely, all of the above

Oaky is well known for his empathy by pass

[salmonbuddie]

It’s the debate itself I have a problem with. Let me think how I can put this.. 
Someone who was pro Scottish independence in 2014, now arguing the plus points of a union. 

As a nationalist, this an easy one to answer. In the UK, our country's view is ignored; in the EU, we could veto.

Imagine the EU was in a union with (say) Russia. In the referendum to decide whether to stay or go, Scotland voting to stay would be all that was required to throw leave under the bus. We would actually be the equal partner we were told we'd be if we stayed in the UK.

[Bud the Baker]

5 hours ago, Doakes said:

Agree with most of that, but not so sure that becoming politically extreme is exclusive to England. In Scotland, it's just a different kind of extreme. You do get extreme Scottish nationalists, as well as extreme British nationalists. 

My view is that we should all be looking at this objectively. If we're not careful it's going to result in an even worse mess than we're already in.

I would say the mainstream of Scottish Nationalism is inclusive and has been for a couple of generations unlike what we see South of the border.

Oh, and who decides what is objective?

Edited March 7, 2019 by Bud the Baker

[Doakes]

2 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:

As a nationalist, this an easy one to answer. In the UK, our country's view is ignored; in the EU, we could veto.

Imagine the EU was in a union with (say) Russia. In the referendum to decide whether to stay or go, Scotland voting to stay would be all that was required to throw leave under the bus. We would actually be the equal partner we were told we'd be if we stayed in the UK.

 

Off the top of my head, I'm sure it's only the UN security council nations that have true veto powers. UK included in that, but doubt that would be the same if we were an independent nation, joining the EU. As part of the UK you're spot on though

2 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

I would say the mainstream of Scottish Nationalism is inclusive and has been for a couple of generations unlike what we see South of the border.

Oh, and who decides what is objective?

Well my definition of "looking at it objectively" would be to look beyond the party politics and bullshit, find out what each side of the debate actually agrees on, rather than focusing on disagreements and petty squabbles. At the moment it's a bit of a stalemate with each side digging their heels in.

(I voted yes btw, for the avoidance of doubt that I'm some kind of SNP hating - Labour/Tory type)

 

Edited March 7, 2019 by Doakes

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Doakes, I think you are getting your UN mixed up with your EU
The app on my phone won't let me quote the first part of your post though.

[Doakes]

45 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:

Doakes, I think you are getting your UN mixed up with your EU
The app on my phone won't let me quote the first part of your post though.

I'm pretty sure I read that the UN security council nations have more influence over certain decisions... As an independent nation of only 5 million our voting percentage/influence would be tiny. Influence as part of the UK is more substantial based on population, size and security council membership. (I could be completely wrong on this but that was my understanding when I read into it before) As part of the UK we had it pretty good in the influence department.

There is the argument that Scotland could do well as part of the EU, would have a veto if we were eventually become a full member state, and would in turn have some level of influence - as well as benefiting from EU funds. 

Edited March 7, 2019 by Doakes

[Guest TPAFKATS]

I'm pretty sure I read that the UN security council nations have more influence over certain decisions... As an independent nation of only 5 million our voting percentage/influence would be tiny. Influence as part of the UK is more substantial based on population, size and security council membership. (I could be completely wrong on this but that was my understanding when I read into it before) As part of the UK we had it pretty good in the influence department.
There is the argument that Scotland could do well as part of the EU, would have a veto if we were eventually become a full member state, and would in turn have some level of influence - as well as benefiting from EU funds. 

All EU member states have a right of veto although as always with EU it's not as simple as that, e. g. some decisions pass on majority as per Lisbon treaty.

UN- There's only 5 permanent security Council members of which France and, at the moment at least, UK are members of EU. Don't see any connection though.

[Doakes]

6 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:

All EU member states have a right of veto although as always with EU it's not as simple as that, e. g. some decisions pass on majority as per Lisbon treaty.

UN- There's only 5 permanent security Council members of which France and, at the moment at least, UK are members of EU. Don't see any connection though.

From memory it was something to do with the EU only having observational rights within the UN security council. Germany hold most of the financial clout, so obviously have a huge say, but the UK and France hold memberships to the security council, which in turn gives us more leverage over the EU. 

Reading an interesting book at the moment called “The Great Deception” by Christopher Booker and Richard North. There’s a lot wrong with the EU, a lot of risk in leaving it, but possibly even more risk in rejoining it as such a small nation with little or no influence over decisions. That’s why I’d say that we shouldn’t just blindly follow the SNP’s plan to take us back in, without giving it real consideration. (If that option becomes a choice)

[stlucifer]

10 hours ago, oaksoft said:

It's an overly emotional post. We are ALL at fault because some people fail in their lives? Seriously? Nonsense like that doesn't help anyone.

I'm just waiting for the, "Me Tarzan, you Jane", law of the jungle statement.

[jaybee]

6 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:

 

 

As a nationalist, this an easy one to answer. In the UK, our country's view is ignored; in the EU, we could veto.

Imagine the EU was in a union with (say) Russia. In the referendum to decide whether to stay or go, Scotland voting to stay would be all that was required to throw leave under the bus. We would actually be the equal partner we were told we'd be if we stayed in the UK.

 

I think perhaps that nationalist should be replaced with fantasist. 

[oaksoft]

1 hour ago, stlucifer said:

I'm just waiting for the, "Me Tarzan, you Jane", law of the jungle statement.

? From who?