EU in/out Referendum - 23 June 2016

[topcat(The most tip top)]

I did not post here before the referendum. I'm not arguing for UK nationalism, just succession from the EU to reduce the power that politicians and unelected Eurocrats have over our lives.

The independence referendum was lost. This is a separate battle against the power of European, rather than the British, state. I want to secede from both states.

Peoples republic of Maryhill?

[Granny Danger]

That sounds like a combination of "Bris" and "circumcision".

That's about the only cut that we've not been threatened with.

[Peppino Impastato]

 

Spain is a family of nations and the constitutional set-up is not very different to the UK's. Spain has the Basque and Catalonian nations plus around 10 other regions including the Canary and Balearic Islands. The UK has 7 English regions (EU) plus Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. More powers are being devolved as the UK heads towards a more federal structure. 

 

Spains's PM opposed Scottish independence - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11101758/Spanish-Prime-Minister-gives-EU-warning-to-Scots.html

 

"The Spanish Prime Minister has warned an independent Scotland would have to apply from scratch for EU membership and the application process could take eight years. Mariano Rajoy told the Spanish Parliament a yes vote for Scottish independence would be a “torpedo to the vulnerabilities of the European Unionâ€. Mr Rajoy added that the EU was not created “to break up states, but to integrate them†but Mr Salmond insisted the Spanish would not block a Scottish application."

 

Clear enough? The EU and the Spanish government made the same points about Catalonia in Oct/Nov 2014 - it would have to leave the EU and the Eurozone if it was independent. The Spanish government repeated the arguments made by Better Together. IIRC Cameron went to Spain to drive the message home.

 

The Spanish PM isn't in a position to make such a statement, his opinion is 100% irrelevant.

[Bishop Briggs]

Aye says you, but people with a clue say you're talking shite. I know who I believe. EU membership was 100% guaranteed, there was no prospect whatsoever of Scotland spending even one second out of the EU and the terms of membership would be basically the same as just now. We have 60% of the EU's oil and 1% of its population, there couldn't possibly be a single country in Europe they'd be more desperate to have than Scotland.

 

 

 

Not according to the Vice-President the European Commission http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/Letter_from_Viviane_Reding_Vice_President_of_the_European_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf

 

 

Dear Ms McKelvie,

 

Thank you for your letter of 10 March 2014.

 

The European Union has been established by the relevant treaties among the Member States. The Commission, as the guardian of those treaties, is responsible for overseeing their implementation, including the implementation of provisions related to the accession of any European State to the Union.

 

 

The Commission's position on the issue that you raise has been stated on a number of occasions since 20041. The Treaties apply to the Member States. When part of the territory of a Member State ceases to be a part of that State, e.g. because that territory becomes an independent state, the treaties will no longer apply to that territory. In other words, a new independent region would, by the fact of its independence, become a third country with respect to the Union and the Treaties would, from the day of its independence, not apply anymore on its territory.

 

[Bishop Briggs]

   

The Spanish PM isn't in a position to make such a statement, his opinion is 100% irrelevant.

 

Bizarre! 

[Peppino Impastato]

 

Not according to the Vice-President the European Commission http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/Letter_from_Viviane_Reding_Vice_President_of_the_European_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf

 

 

Dear Ms McKelvie,

 

Thank you for your letter of 10 March 2014.

 

The European Union has been established by the relevant treaties among the Member States. The Commission, as the guardian of those treaties, is responsible for overseeing their implementation, including the implementation of provisions related to the accession of any European State to the Union.

 

 

The Commission's position on the issue that you raise has been stated on a number of occasions since 20041. The Treaties apply to the Member States. When part of the territory of a Member State ceases to be a part of that State, e.g. because that territory becomes an independent state, the treaties will no longer apply to that territory. In other words, a new independent region would, by the fact of its independence, become a third country with respect to the Union and the Treaties would, from the day of its independence, not apply anymore on its territory.

 

 

The EU has a body to handle such matters, of which he is not a member. He also doesn't even say what you propose there, simply that the Treaties would no longer apply which we know anyway, that's why we'd have to join. The only question is how that process would happen and how it would take place, according to my tutor who knows more about such things in one hair of her head than you do in your entire brain it would be article 49 entry which is immediate and not subject to a vote.

[Antlion]

I did not post here before the referendum. I'm not arguing for UK nationalism, just succession from the EU to reduce the power that politicians and unelected Eurocrats have over our lives.

The independence referendum was lost. This is a separate battle against the power of European, rather than the British, state. I want to secede from both states.

Hmmm, member since May 2014 but only started to post here during a perceived battle against a mythical European state? Sounds legit.

[Bishop Briggs]

   

The EU has a body to handle such matters, of which he is not a member. He also doesn't even say what you propose there, simply that the Treaties would no longer apply which we know anyway, that's why we'd have to join. The only question is how that process would happen and how it would take place, according to my tutor who knows more about such things in one hair of her head than you do in your entire brain it would be article 49 entry which is immediate and not subject to a vote.

 

That was official Commission reply to the Scottish Parliament. 

 

Article 49 applies to new entrants. An independent would apply like any other new entrant. The terms of entry would not be the same as they are now. They would be subject to negotiation. There UK's rebate and other exemptions, e.g. from the requirement to join the Euro, would not automatically apply.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Hmmm, member since May 2014 but only started to post here during a perceived battle against a mythical European state? Sounds legit.

Good Grief Holmes

What can this all mean?

[Bishop Briggs]

Hmmm, member since May 2014 but only started to post here during a perceived battle against a mythical European state? Sounds legit.

 

I was caring for my closest friend with a terminal illness in 2014. Is that okay with you?

[Peppino Impastato]

 

That was official Commission reply to the Scottish Parliament. 

 

Article 49 applies to new entrants. An independent would apply like any other new entrant. The terms of entry would not be the same as they are now. They would be subject to negotiation. There UK's rebate and other exemptions, e.g. from the requirement to join the Euro, would not automatically apply.

 

That's a lie though, as an independent Scotland would categorically not be remotely like any other new entrant, it couldn't possibly be any less like any other new entrant given we've already been members for over 40 years and every single one of our laws is already harmonised with EU legislation. You're a liar, your position is fundamentally dishonest.

These are the reasons why Scotland is a special case, it is completely unlike all other prospective members as none of them have been members for 40 years already, and your attempts to claim the rules for new members apply to Scotland is dishonest as Scotland is in a very different and better position vis a vis EU membership.

[Bishop Briggs]

   

That's a lie though, as an independent Scotland would categorically not be remotely like any other new entrant, it couldn't possibly be any less like any other new entrant given we've already been members for over 40 years and every single one of our laws is already harmonised with EU legislation. You're a liar, your position is fundamentally dishonest.

These are the reasons why Scotland is a special case, it is completely unlike all other prospective members as none of them have been members for 40 years already, and your attempts to claim the rules for new members apply to Scotland is dishonest as Scotland is in a very different and better position vis a vis EU membership

 

I'm a liar because I posted the official EU response to request (of the SNP's Convener of the European Committee) for clarification on that exact issue? What was the SNP's response to that letter? It appears that it was ignored as it was not challenged.

 

The European Union's Treaties don't allow for special cases. All applicants have to go through the procedure set out in the Articles of the Treaty of the European Union (aka Lisbon Treaty). 

 

It's you who is lying and fundamentally dishonest. But that's been your MO all along.

[Peppino Impastato]

 

I'm a liar because I posted the official EU response to request (of the SNP's Convener of the European Committee) for clarification on that exact issue? What was the SNP's response to that letter? It appears that it was ignored as it was not challenged.

 

The European Union's Treaties don't allow for special cases. All applicants have to go through the procedure set out in the Articles of the Treaty of the European Union (aka Lisbon Treaty). 

 

It's you who is lying and fundamentally dishonest. But that's been your MO all along.

 

No because you completely misrepresented what they said. All they said was treaties don't apply after secession which we knew anyway, that does not mean Scotland would need to apply as a new member, as you said, it does not mean Scotland would be out of the EU at all ever for any amount of time, you said it would, and does not mean there would have to be a vote on allowing Scotland to join, whereas you said it did.

You're a lying, bitter, old man.

[Bishop Briggs]

   

No because you completely misrepresented what they said. All they said was treaties don't apply after secession which we knew anyway, that does not mean Scotland would need to apply as a new member, as you said, it does not mean Scotland would be out of the EU at all ever for any amount of time, you said it would, and does not mean there would have to be a vote on allowing Scotland to join, whereas you said it did.

You're a lying, bitter, old man.

 

You are a thick, Fuzzy. Here's the relevant part of Reding's letter again.

 

The Commission's position on the issue that you raise has been stated on a number of occasions since 20041. The Treaties apply to the Member States. When part of the territory of a Member State ceases to be a part of that State, e.g. because that territory becomes an independent state, the treaties will no longer apply to that territory. In other words, a new independent region would, by the fact of its independence, become a third country with respect to the Union and the Treaties would, from the day of its independence, not apply anymore on its territory. 

 

It's saying that an independent Scotland would cease to be a Member of the EU from the day of its independence. If you can't understand that, you are a moron.

 

 

 

[Broomhill Ultra]

You are a thick, Fuzzy. Here's the relevant part of Reding's letter again.

The Commission's position on the issue that you raise has been stated on a number of occasions since 20041. The Treaties apply to the Member States. When part of the territory of a Member State ceases to be a part of that State, e.g. because that territory becomes an independent state, the treaties will no longer apply to that territory. In other words, a new independent region would, by the fact of its independence, become a third country with respect to the Union and the Treaties would, from the day of its independence, not apply anymore on its territory.

It's saying that an independent Scotland would cease to be a Member of the EU from the day of its independence. If you can't understand that, you are a moron.

^^^^

Star Trek forum for this pish.

[Bishop Briggs]

^^^^

Star Trek forum for this pish.

 

Idiot found. Broomhool Ultra = Tooting Popular Front. Brainless keyboard warrior. 

[Broomhill Ultra]

Idiot found. Broomhool Ultra = Tooting Popular Front. Brainless keyboard warrior.

Harmless joke due to your mistyping of the date. But if you need to rage at something, go ahead 🙂

[Broomhill Ultra]

Idiot found. Broomhool Ultra = Tooting Popular Front. Brainless keyboard warrior.

Incidentally how exactly do you know I am a keyboard warrior?

[ICTChris]

BMG phone poll has Remain 6% ahead, online poll has Leave 10% ahead.  BMG say that they think hte phone poll is a better indicator.  Also, some indications that Leavers are easier to poll, meaning they could be getting a bump.

 

If the pollsters get this wrong then we might need to stop listening to them.

 

Before then though, BMG says that there are a number of divisions in terms of who is remain and Leave.  Higher social classes are more likely to be Remain.  ABs are 57% Remain, C1s 56%, whereas DE classes are 57% Leave.  C2s are apparently 50-50.  Retired people are for Leave but people who are employed or looking for work are more likely to be for Remain.  Home owners and private renters are for remain whereas council house tenants and those living in Housing Association property are more likely to be for Leave.

[welshbairn]

BMG phone poll has Remain 6% ahead, online poll has Leave 10% ahead.  BMG say that they think hte phone poll is a better indicator.  Also, some indications that Leavers are easier to poll, meaning they could be getting a bump.

 

If the pollsters get this wrong then we might need to stop listening to them.

 

Before then though, BMG says that there are a number of divisions in terms of who is remain and Leave.  Higher social classes are more likely to be Remain.  ABs are 57% Remain, C1s 56%, whereas DE classes are 57% Leave.  C2s are apparently 50-50.  Retired people are for Leave but people who are employed or looking for work are more likely to be for Remain.  Home owners and private renters are for remain whereas council house tenants and those living in Housing Association property are more likely to be for Leave.

 

Sounds like the Leave demographic pretty well matches the Trumpets across the pond.