Brexit Negotiations

[jaybee]

3 hours ago, Doakes said:

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)

A sensible man, more people should listen to you.

[jaybee]

3 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

? From who?

Erm......................whom old boy.  

[Bud the Baker]

3 hours ago, Doakes said:

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)

Quote

 

Christopher John Penrice Booker (born 7 October 1937) is a British journalist and author. In 1961, he was one of the founders of the magazine Private Eye, and has contributed to it since then. He has been a columnist for The Sunday Telegraph since 1990.^[1] He has taken a stance which runs counter to the scientific consensus on a number of issues, including global warming, the link between passive smoking and cancer,^[2] and the dangers posed by asbestos.

Richard Anthony Edward North^[1] is a British blogger and author. He has published books on defence and agriculture.^[2] He was previously research director in the European Parliament for the now-defunct political grouping Europe of Democracies and Diversities, which included the UK Independence Party (UKIP).

The Great Deception: Can the European Union Survive? Princeton University's Andrew Moravcsik, whose research is heavily cited in the book, has accused the authors of "misconstruing" his work as supporting their narrative and failing to demonstrate that there were any viable alternatives to European Union membership, with Booker and North's economics being "even dodgier than their history".

 

Written by a climate change denier, an ex-employee of an unsavoury political alliance and criticised by a source as misconstruing his work, certainly sounds, erm, interesting!

[Doakes]

4 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Written by a climate change denier, an ex-employee of an unsavoury political alliance and criticised by a source as misconstruing his work, certainly sounds, erm, interesting!

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1005561.The_Great_Deception

Take a look at the reviews 

Well worth a read 

[Kemp]

7 hours ago, Doakes said:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1005561.The_Great_Deception

Take a look at the reviews 

Well worth a read 

Reviews by slevering Brexit halfwits 

If you want to do some reading, pick up a few history books and compare every part of life in Europe with and without the EU.

Enough of entertaining these right-wing British nationalists taking our country down the tubes.

[Bud the Baker]

On 3/5/2019 at 3:47 PM, jaybee said:

Was there not some dubiety with regards to whether Scotland would be able to join as an independent Country?

 

@jaybee As I've said earlier the only country reported to have any objections to Scotland joining the EU as an independent country in 2014 was Spain and their current government are happy to accept Scotland joining the EU provided it is done constitutionally which makes yesterday's refusal of sanctioning a IndyRef2 even more frustrating, Westminster should not have the right to veto an independence referendum called by Hollyrood.

 

Quote

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Spain would have no objection to Scotland rejoining the European Union as an independent nation, as long as the secession process from the United Kingdom was legally binding, Spanish foreign minister Josep Borrell said on Tuesday.

During a fiercely fought referendum on Scottish independence from the United Kingdom in 2014, one of the potential stumbling blocks for Scotland to rejoin the European Union was perceived to be the potential veto of EU member Spain, because of worries about its own secessionists in northeastern region Catalonia.

Spain’s government, then headed by Conservatives, has changed since 2014 and is now headed by Socialist Pedro Sanchez. Scotland rejected independence by a 10-point margin in 2014 but since then support for a separate Scotland has stayed at around the same level, 45 percent, according to polls.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-spain-politics-scotland-idUKKCN1NP25P

************************

I'm one of those Nats of the opinion that Brexit is a significant change to the security that "Better Together" promised us in 2014 and despite the wilful misconstruing of Alex Salmond "once in a generation" comments we're entitled to another IndyRef if that's what the Scottish Parliament wants.  If the Yoons were confident they would win there wouldn't be any fuss!

Edited March 8, 2019 by Bud the Baker

[salmonbuddie]

I think perhaps that nationalist should be replaced with fantasist. 

Really? Why's that then?

[jaybee]

48 minutes ago, salmonbuddie said:

11 hours ago, jaybee said:

I think perhaps that nationalist should be replaced with fantasist. 

Really? Why's that then?

Perchance it should have been wind-assist rather than fantasist ot Nationalist, why? possibly because your argument seems to be based on spouting which ever point of view currently supports what you think,  ie; was a Nationalist in 2014, now a European, and it seems mainly because we (Scotland) get to have say on something (at last).  I would think there is very little chance that a second Indy vote will happen anytime soon, as the UK government is unlikely to sanction it (IMO), ergo the fantasist.  So it would seem you have been a Nationalist; but now wish to become a european (an even smaller fish in a much much bigger pond) just so you can stick it to the English. Jeeeeeeeeeez.

[salmonbuddie]

Perchance it should have been wind-assist rather than fantasist ot Nationalist, why? possibly because your argument seems to be based on spouting which ever point of view currently supports what you think,  ie; was a Nationalist in 2014, now a European, and it seems mainly because we (Scotland) get to have say on something (at last).  I would think there is very little chance that a second Indy vote will happen anytime soon, as the UK government is unlikely to sanction it (IMO), ergo the fantasist.  So it would seem you have been a Nationalist; but now wish to become a european (an even smaller fish in a much much bigger pond) just so you can stick it to the English. Jeeeeeeeeeez.

My argument now is exactly the same as it was in 2014, pro-EU. Nothing has happened since then to change that, I was pointing out the difference between the two unions in my original post.

You have a really vivid imagination to come up with that pile of steaming pish, I'll let people decide for themselves who the fantasist is.

[Bud the Baker]

29 minutes ago, jaybee said:

Perchance it should have been wind-assist rather than fantasist ot Nationalist, why? possibly because your argument seems to be based on spouting which ever point of view currently supports what you think,  ie; was a Nationalist in 2014, now a European, and it seems mainly because we (Scotland) get to have say on something (at last).  I would think there is very little chance that a second Indy vote will happen anytime soon, as the UK government is unlikely to sanction it (IMO), ergo the fantasist.  So it would seem you have been a Nationalist; but now wish to become a european (an even smaller fish in a much much bigger pond) just so you can stick it to the English. Jeeeeeeeeeez.

So that's what it all comes down to, TM vetoing a second Indy vote cos she's scared she'll lose it - must make you proud to be British! 

[jaybee]

2 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

aybee As I've said earlier the only country reported to have any objections to Scotland joining the EU as an independent country in 2014 was Spain and their current government are happy to accept Scotland joining the EU provided it is done constitutionally which makes yesterday's refusal of sanctioning a IndyRef2 even more frustrating, Westminster should not have the right to veto an independence referendum called by Hollyrood.

 

I'm one of those Nats of the opinion that Brexit is a significant change to the security that "Better Together" promised us in 2014 and despite the wilful misconstruing of Alex Salmond "once in a generation" comments we're entitled to another IndyRef if that's what the Scottish Parliament wants.  If the Yoons were confident they would win there wouldn't be any fuss!

How to put my argument forward without sounding like an Englishman in disguise, mmm, difficult.  OK, I would accept (perhaps) that Scotland as an independent nation could join the EEC, however we aren't (in the required sense) an independent nation. Why is that?  Well because we voted to stay as part of the UK. These are facts and unfortunately Westminster does have the right to veto a second Indy vote called by Hollyrood. Just because we don't agree or like something; doesn't mean it's wrong and unfortunately when we voted to stay in the UK there were no caveats, if this; then that etc and referring to the English as Yoons really doesn't lend credence to your points, which you certainly have every right to make; just as I and other are entitled to refute them.  Between this and Brexit not a lot of people are going to be happy.

[jaybee]

4 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

So that's what it all comes down to, TM vetoing a second Indy vote cos she's scared she'll lose it - must make you proud to be British! 

So how many votes do you want then?  Shall we have one every six months just in case opinion has changed again and of course when and if you finally get YOUR way then feck everybody else. 

[Bud the Baker]

1 hour ago, jaybee said:

 

 

How to put my argument forward without sounding like an Englishman in disguise, mmm, difficult.  OK, I would accept (perhaps) that Scotland as an independent nation could join the EEC, however we aren't (in the required sense) an independent nation. Why is that?  Well because we voted to stay as part of the UK. These are facts and unfortunately Westminster does have the right to veto a second Indy vote called by Hollyrood. Just because we don't agree or like something; doesn't mean it's wrong and unfortunately when we voted to stay in the UK there were no caveats, if this; then that etc and referring to the English as Yoons really doesn't lend credence to your points, which you certainly have every right to make; just as I and other are entitled to refute them.  Between this and Brexit not a lot of people are going to be happy.

Refute means prove a statement to be false, show me where you've done that.

1 hour ago, jaybee said:

So how many votes do you want then?  Shall we have one every six months just in case opinion has changed again and of course when and if you finally get YOUR way then feck everybody else. 

I don't want a second referendum because we lost in 2014, I believe we deserve another because the circumstances have changed enough to warrant one!

The PLEDGE (sic) about IndyMax hasn't been fulfilled (see Page 19), the one about voting No being the only way to stay in the EU has proved to be the complete opposite of how it's turned out. Many other of the Project Fear myths like the currency issue and Spain voting to stop an Scotland from entering the EU have been exposed as fabrication or outdated. It's become clear since 2014 that Labour view Scotland as just a "Northern Branch", the Lib-Dems want a People's Vote on Europe but not another IndyRef, even SupeRuth has admitted that the UK is too Londoncentric - refute away!

People are entitled to vote how they feel but Westminster has no moral right to deny a second Independence Referendum if the Scottish Parliament votes for one.

Edited March 8, 2019 by Bud the Baker

[saintnextlifetime]

40 minutes ago, jaybee said:

So how many votes do you want then?  Shall we have one every six months just in case opinion has changed again and of course when and if you finally get YOUR way then feck everybody else. 

How about best of 3 . .

 

. .best of 5 . .

 

. .

[Bud the Baker]

2 minutes ago, saintnextlifetime said:

How about best of 3 . .

 

. .best of 5 . .

 

. .

Running scared...

[saintnextlifetime]

55 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Running scared...

Of what. .

[DougJamie]

This thread is becoming pointless just like Brexit

• Its not going to happen
• We wont leave
• The Torys will win the next election
• UKIP will rise again
• SNPs wont win a second Indy Ref
• Ireland will not Unite
• Corbyn will continue to contradict himself
• The English press will keep on splitting the Labour party
• Johnston and Rees Mogg will get Cabinet positions
• And the shitty UK will continue to let 30000 non EU citizens come every year

Its all good

 

[Bud the Baker]

2 minutes ago, saintnextlifetime said:

Of what. .

Of enough people viewing the irrelevance of Scotland's position within the UK and the contempt shown by the current UK government to the Scottish one as recently as yesterday. The chance to change from being a region of the UK to a country hopefully within the EU.

Region to Country - that's the difference.

 

 

[DougJamie]

12 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Of enough people viewing the irrelevance of Scotland's position within the UK and the contempt shown by the current UK government to the Scottish one as recently as yesterday. The chance to change from being a region of the UK to a country hopefully within the EU.

Region to Country - that's the difference.

 

 

I hear you Bud- however the English do have exactly the same contempt towards the Irish and the Welsh................ its just what the English do so well.

The Thames Barrier will fail one day and all this wont matter 

[Bud the Baker]

1 hour ago, saintnextlifetime said:

How about best of 3 . .

 

. .best of 5 . .

 

. .

................and before we get all precious about how Referendum results must always be respected it's less than 2 month's since TM forgot she voted against implementing the one regarding the Welsh Assembly.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/14/theresa-may-claim-that-all-parties-accepted-welsh-devolution-questioned

Still she may (sic) be forgiven for forgetting as it was about 1000 years ago!  

Edited March 8, 2019 by Bud the Baker

[oaksoft]

55 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Of enough people viewing the irrelevance of Scotland's position within the UK and the contempt shown by the current UK government to the Scottish one as recently as yesterday. The chance to change from being a region of the UK to a country hopefully within the EU.

Region to Country - that's the difference.

 

 

We had our chance in 2014 and we lost. You might get another chance but perssing for one so soon will probably end in the same scoreline and finish the issue for good.  If polls had Yes consistently above 60% you may have a case but you are pissing in the wind with your impatience here IMO.

You keep talking about the Vow, the Tories, austerity, Brexit etc but the polls have barely moved. Not enough people are interested and IMO it's because it's far too soon for IndyRef 2 (by at least a decade) and life is pretty decent in Scotland as part of the UK for the vast majority of people.

Edited March 8, 2019 by oaksoft

[Bud the Baker]

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

We had our chance in 2014 and we lost. You might get another chance but perssing for one so soon will probably end in the same scoreline and finish the issue for good.  If polls had Yes above 60% you may have a case but you are pissing in the wind with your impatience here IMO.

You may very well be correct!

[saintnextlifetime]

42 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

................and before we get all precious about how Referendum results must always be respected it's less than 2 month's since TM forgot she voted against implementing the one regarding the Welsh Assembly.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/14/theresa-may-claim-that-all-parties-accepted-welsh-devolution-questioned

Still she may (sic) be forgiven for forgetting as it was about 1000 years ago!  

Okay.  . Best of 7 it is.  

[Cornwall_Saint]

6 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

We had our chance in 2014 and we lost. You might get another chance but perssing for one so soon will probably end in the same scoreline and finish the issue for good.  If polls had Yes consistently above 60% you may have a case but you are pissing in the wind with your impatience here IMO.

You keep talking about the Vow, the Tories, austerity, Brexit etc but the polls have barely moved. Not enough people are interested and IMO it's because it's far too soon for IndyRef 2 (by at least a decade) and life is pretty decent in Scotland as part of the UK for the vast majority of people.

Polls aren’t everything - they also told us Remain would win the EU vote and Trump wouldn’t get in. Since 2014, I would hazard a guess that more people have moved from No to Yes than the other way around. Whether it’s enough people is a different question. I think the ideal time for another Indyref is once we know exactly what’s going to happen with Brexit and how it’ll affect everything - right now there’s still too much uncertainty with everything, so it is best to hold still until things are clearer.

You say life is pretty decent for the vast majority - that’s not enough. Just like the rest of the UK, Scotland is struggling against Tory austerity, we have a fair number of people on the poverty line, and we’ve also seen a rise in the number of food banks. A country with the resources Scotland has, this really should not be the case. Just look at Norway - no deficit, plenty of money in the bank. A better standard of living as their income helps towards this, while Scotland’s income is used to fund wars, trident and other pish like the House of Lords. 

[Bud the Baker]

2 minutes ago, saintnextlifetime said:

Okay.  . Best of 7 it is.  

6-1 to us!