Scottish Independence

[Ad Lib]

I don't believe everything they say. Of course not that would be entirely foolish.

Which is what we've been saying all along.

How dare you.

ArabianKnight. Part of the too wee, too poor, too stupid axis of evil.

[ArabianKnight]

"Oooh uhhhh my brain hurts" - then step out of the chess tournament....

Wow way to misconstrue what I was saying. You and HB have your specialist areas I have mine. You truly are a pedantic p***k Ad Lib, clearly you think studying Law is the pinnacle of educational achievement and us mere mortals who study different areas are far, far beneath you.

f**k off Cunto.

[wingsoverperthshire]

See this is the nub of the matter. If you believe the SNP the answer is 'we will automatically get the exact same terms that the UK has.'.

Do you believe the Scottish government?

Well I do as history backs things up.

Will we have a referendum on independence ? YES

Will it be in the second term of the parliament? YES

Will we propose the question ? YES

Will 16/17 be able to vote on the referendum ? YES

All of this is utterly embarrassing for yourself and Ad Lib. You both admit that Scotland will be in the EU and will be keeping the pound. YET, your only tactic is to churn out Law school shite because you couldn't present a rational case for the union, when pressed.

[H_B]

I don't believe everything they say. Of course not that would be entirely foolish.

Well quite. But people do.

Which is why you have yes posters asking why its not our Pound we will let rUK keep using and the ridiculous co-equal successor state dross Sturgeon has peddled.

There is almost zero critical assessment of the SNP from their fanboys.

If you dare to say Sturgeon is talking out of her arse it is Unionist scaremongering.

[H_B]

 

Well I do as history backs things up.  

 

 

Will we have a referendum on independence ?     YES

 

Will it be in the second term of the parliament?    YES

 

Will we propose the question ?          YES

 

Will 16/17 be able to vote on the referendum ?    YES

 

 

All of this is utterly embarrassing for yourself and Ad Lib.    You both admit that Scotland will be in the EU and will be keeping the pound.    YET, your only tactic is to churn out Law school shite because you couldn't present a rational case for the union, when pressed. 

Great contribution.

[wingsoverperthshire]

Great contribution.

Better than anything you've came up with. Scotland will be(proportionally) a 'bigger' net contributor to the EU, than the rUK. They will be rolling out the red carpet for us, there is nothing rational to suggest we'll be given inferior terms. We'll be the third richest country in the EU and in a position of absolute power.

[Ad Lib]

Wow way to misconstrue what I was saying. You and HB have your specialist areas I have mine. You truly are a pedantic p***k Ad Lib, clearly you think studying Law is the pinnacle of educational achievement and us mere mortals who study different areas are far, far beneath you.

f**k off Cunto.

When the question is one of law: "will Scotland automatically become a member-state of the EU or will it have to apply and receive the consent to (the conditions of) membership from all 28 member-states" then the fact that H_B and I understand the law is more important than you, whatever your academic credentials, posturing "uhm uhm politics trumps law".

For the record, most mere mortals who only have one degree which isn't law probably are far beneath me. There are a small number of medics, engineers, dentists, scientists, vets, historians and economists that exist in the same league. Not many though.

[Ad Lib]

Well I do as history backs things up.

Will we have a referendum on independence ? YES

Will it be in the second term of the parliament? YES

Will we propose the question ? YES

Will 16/17 be able to vote on the referendum ? YES

All of this is utterly embarrassing for yourself and Ad Lib. You both admit that Scotland will be in the EU and will be keeping the pound. YET, your only tactic is to churn out Law school shite because you couldn't present a rational case for the union, when pressed.

1. It wasn't denied that there would be a referendum on independence

2. There's no such thing as the second term of the Parliament. Unless you're referring to the second Labour-Lib Dem administration. Which you aren't. Fail.

3. There is no "we" proposing the question. The Scottish Parliament is legislating for it after, as the UK Government pointed out from the outset, the power was given to them to do it. To have done so pre s30 Order would have been ultra vires.

4. The 16-17 issue is entirely dealt with by part 3.

I don't "admit" that Scotland will be a member-state of the EU or that it will "keep the pound". I do not control the negotiations or decisions of the sovereign executive of a future independent Scotland any more than you do. I absolutely agree that Scotland will, in all probability, remain within the EU's jurisdiction and eventually become a member-state if it so desires, but the precise terms of that membership remain very much uncertain. I absolutely agree that there is nothing to stop Scotland from unilaterally adopting the pound as their currency, though I remain hugely sceptical that a currency union is a good idea and I reject the claim that we can unilaterally force such an agreement on the rest of the UK.

I have no interest in making a case for the Union, because I'm pragmatically not in favour of it.

[ArabianKnight]

When the question is one of law: "will Scotland automatically become a member-state of the EU or will it have to apply and receive the consent to (the conditions of) membership from all 28 member-states" then the fact that H_B and I understand the law is more important than you, whatever your academic credentials, posturing "uhm uhm politics trumps law".

For the record, most mere mortals who only have one degree which isn't law probably are far beneath me. There are a small number of medics, engineers, dentists, scientists, vets, historians and economists that exist in the same league. Not many though.

Academic snobbery at its finest ladies and gentleman.

[Ad Lib]

Academic snobbery at its finest ladies and gentleman.

Ploblem?

[ArabianKnight]

Ploblem?

Not really, if it cane to a qualifications dick-swinging contest you would no doubt trounce me. That doesn't bother me in the slightest. What irks me is your bullying tactics when others venture an opinion forward, you go "I KNOW THE LAW, I AM THE LAW".

Personally I think as others have noted "realpolitik" will no doubt win the day and the various opinions put forward from the legal eagles will prove to be not entirely correct. Fair enough many of your points regarding the legal mechanisms and whatever may be right, I just think that there will be a middle ground between what the NO and YES sides both posture to be true.

In the end though the very fact that all that seems to be getting discussed is what will happen when (not if) Scotland becomes independent cheers me up no end.

[H_B]

Academic snobbery at its finest ladies and gentleman.

Mmm... well let's look at your earlier contribution :-

"What's barking mad is your complete bluster and know it all attitude with this situation."

What you've now been forced to admit is that I'm actually right and you are rowing back frantically from agreeing with the well, wrong, position of the SNP government here.

As I said before, the Sherlock Holmes clue for the uninitiated here was that the UK went to the top of the tree in what is quite a narrow field for their advice. Very cleverly. That advice backs up what Ad Lib and I have said here for several years .

The SNP's counter to that? Appeal to the lowest common denominator by calling the independently sourced and published legal advice "arrogant and colonial."

Follow that up by repeating your previous baseless assertions, fail completely to provide any peer-reviewable legal advice to challenge the Crawford/Boyle paper and then claim that a special arrangement will be made for Scotland just cos.

Now, doesn't that set alarm bells ringing?

[H_B]

Personally I think as others have noted "realpolitik" will no doubt win the day

Mmm. See there is a problem here.

Even if we accept for a moment that the international and EU law will not apply as Crawford states, and let's say the EU say "we'll find a political solution to this".

Why is it in the political interests of the other EU members to accord Scotland special privileges on membership that it did not grant say Croatia?

[Ad Lib]

Not really, if it cane to a qualifications dick-swinging contest you would no doubt trounce me. That doesn't bother me in the slightest. What irks me is your bullying tactics when others venture an opinion forward, you go "I KNOW THE LAW, I AM THE LAW".

Tone trolling. I do not "bully". I correct incorrect people and mercilessly mock them in the process. Because I am the law.

Personally I think as others have noted "realpolitik" will no doubt win the day and the various opinions put forward from the legal eagles will prove to be not entirely correct. Fair enough many of your points regarding the legal mechanisms and whatever may be right, I just think that there will be a middle ground between what the NO and YES sides both posture to be true.

There is no middle ground in a binary question. No amount of "realpolitik" can supplant international law and the content of Articles 48 and 49 of the Treaty of the European Union.

I'll ask you again: do you think Scotland will get a special rebate condition like that the UK currently enjoys? Yes or no?

[H_B]

Better than anything you've came up with. Scotland will be(proportionally) a 'bigger' net contributor to the EU, than the rUK. They will be rolling out the red carpet for us, there is nothing rational to suggest we'll be given inferior terms. We'll be the third richest country in the EU and in a position of absolute power.

Is that taken directly from one of Nicola's speeches?

[Mr. Bojangles]

Pretty shocking stuff Ad Lib. Only a few people will be in the same league as you? And you've not even entered the workplace yet? Astonishingly arrogant.

The rebate is worth about £380M to Scotland on a per capita basis. Our farmers, just over a month ago, were denied the EU CAP subsidy by the UK government which amounted to around £200M. So just with that one case where we're being screwed by Westminster we're looking at a possible drop of around £180M. This is obviously insurmountable, right?

[H_B]

In the end though the very fact that all that seems to be getting discussed is what will happen when (not if) Scotland becomes independent cheers me up no end.

It's a hypothetical situation predicated on an event that hasn't happened yet. The likelihood or otherwise of that event is completely irrelevant.

We could discuss whether or not Cameron Diaz and i should get married in a church or registry office. That wouldn't mean I was going to marry Cameron Diaz.

[H_B]

Pretty shocking stuff Ad Lib. Only a few people will be in the same league as you? And you've not even entered the workplace yet? Astonishingly arrogant.

The rebate is worth about £380M to Scotland on a per capita basis. Our farmers, just over a month ago, were denied the EU CAP subsidy by the UK government which amounted to around £200M. So just with that one case where we're being screwed by Westminster we're looking at a possible drop of around £180M. This is obviously insurmountable, right?

And again. Who has said it is "insurmountable"?

I do like that we've moved beyond the "Nicola Sturgeon is a liar" bit and we're now discussing the financial consequences of her lies, as if her lies are inconsequential.

[ayrmad]

And again. Who has said it is "insurmountable"?

I do like that we've moved beyond the "Nicola Sturgeon is a liar" bit and we're now discussing the financial consequences of her lies, as if her lies are inconsequential.

Laughable.

[H_B]

Laughable.

Are you saying Sturgeon hasn't lied?