Brexit slowly becoming a Farce.

[williemillersmoustache]

12 minutes ago, jakedee said:

This constant reference to the budget deficit being a problem has me asking,has anyone given a figure what the actual deficit would be? Once the historical debts and the UK's assets have been divied up, what is the figure?

And the only answer you'll get is shrill yoon screams of "BLACK HOLE!!!"

Depends very much on the divorce settlement and what we decide to spend our oil, whisky and wind money on. Not an infinite budget CASD i'd wager.

[git-intae-thum]

19 minutes ago, jakedee said:

This constant reference to the budget deficit being a problem has me asking,has anyone given a figure what the actual deficit would be? Once the historical debts and the UK's assets have been divied up, what is the figure?

No. No one can give a definitive figure on Scotlands deficit or indeed surplus figure in union. The best we have is Gers. However by its own admussion large parts are guestimate.

So as far as an independent Scotland is concerned, no definitive deficit surplus figure can be defined. However I would imagime it will not be too different from current UK figures.

When someone cries "10 billion......deficit...... blackhole" etc, they are talking shite.

[Granny Danger]

41 minutes ago, HTG said:

The big swing factor will be the attitude of the non Scots. In the UK referendum, non UK citizens were not able to vote. In the Scottish referendum they were. Surely the vast majority voted No in the Scottish referendum to preserve EU guarantees.  Even if May guaranteed them the right to stay now, they wouldn't necessarily trust that commitment in the longer term - not when you know that EU membership is pretty much a given for an independent Scotland. 

Much of the indigenous No vote will stay as they are - the over 60s who fear everything and those with a disproportionate allegiance to the Queen on account of their football team and an enjoyment of marching. And of course those who really, really want out of the EU anyway. 

IIRC the support for NO from non Scots was very high.  Whilst non UK residents may be likely to change their vote I think the position of English born voters could shift the other way if the spectre of a hard border is raised.

[1320Lichtie]

IIRC the support for NO from non Scots was very high.  Whilst non UK residents may be likely to change their vote I think the position of English born voters could shift the other way if the spectre of a hard border is raised.

70 odd percent I'm sure.

[Bishop Briggs]

59 minutes ago, Crùbag said:

 

Do you know that for sure? We're already members and the anger within the EU over Brexit is obvious. If we gained independence before Brexit - which could take years - then it's likely the EU would welcome us. Though, as you've said before, surely you'd be happy with this situation - independence outwith the EU?

Yes - the official statement from the European Commission Vice-President that refuted the claims in the White Paper -http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/Letter_from_Viviane_Reding_Vice_President_of_the_European_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf

That was in response to this letter from the SNP chair of the European and External Relations Committee that sought clarification on the White Paper's claims -http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/20140310_Convener_to_Vivianne_Reding_European_Commission.pdf

Both were conveniently ignored by Salmond, Sturgeon etc who repeated the White Paper's lies right up to the referendum. The White Paper also claimed that full independence, including a currency union and full EU membership, could be achieved within 18 months. It lacked credibility and undermined the case for independence.

[HTG]

35 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

IIRC the support for NO from non Scots was very high.  Whilst non UK residents may be likely to change their vote I think the position of English born voters could shift the other way if the spectre of a hard border is raised.

The border strategy should be self evident by the time we get close to a second referendum. We already know that a heap of effort is going into ensuring a sensible border in Ireland and as such the shite that was flung by Miliband, Cameron and Clegg on their panic stricken journey north last time round just won't be repeatable. 

If Ireland has a hard border then I agree with you. But it looks like they want to avoid that. 

[AUFC90]

18 minutes ago, Bishop Briggs said:

Yes - the official statement from the European Commission Vice-President that refuted the claims in the White Paper -http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/Letter_from_Viviane_Reding_Vice_President_of_the_European_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf

That was in response to this letter from the SNP chair of the European and External Relations Committee that sought clarification on the White Paper's claims -http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/20140310_Convener_to_Vivianne_Reding_European_Commission.pdf

Both were conveniently ignored by Salmond, Sturgeon etc who repeated the White Paper's lies right up to the referendum. The White Paper also claimed that full independence, including a currency union and full EU membership, could be achieved within 18 months. It lacked credibility and undermined the case for independence.

Different times now, absolutely no one knows waht an independent Scotlands financial position will look like and to be honest I doubt the EU will care very much anyway, Scotland has a a much better economy than about half of EU members. If you genuinely believe that the EU will make it difficult for us to be a member after succeeding from a member state whcih has voted to leave the EU then it's not really worth debating with you. I'll assume you'll be voting yes if you're so certain that Scotland will be out the EU but then we all know you talk some amount of pish Britnat boy.

Edited January 18, 2017 by AUFC90

[Alan Stubbs]

Wonder how big businesses leaving the UK will be explained as a good thing that the Brexiteers have wanted all along.

[git-intae-thum]

11 minutes ago, Bishop Briggs said:

Yes - the official statement from the European Commission Vice-President that refuted the claims in the White Paper -http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/Letter_from_Viviane_Reding_Vice_President_of_the_European_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf

That was in response to this letter from the SNP chair of the European and External Relations Committee that sought clarification on the White Paper's claims -http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/20140310_Convener_to_Vivianne_Reding_European_Commission.pdf

Both were conveniently ignored by Salmond, Sturgeon etc who repeated the White Paper's lies right up to the referendum. The White Paper also claimed that full independence, including a currency union and full EU membership, could be achieved within 18 months. It lacked credibility and undermined the case for independence.

In relation to the first point and your links. These were all prior to Brexit. So probably have little relevance. 

Secondly, who are you to diss the 18 month timespan that the 2014 referendum proposed.

[Bishop Briggs]

Just now, AUFC90 said:

Different times now, absolutely no one knows and independent Scotlands financial position. If you genuinely believe that the EU will make it difficult for us to be a member after succeeding from a member state whcih has voted to leave the EU then it's not really worth debating with you. I'll assume you'll be voting yes if you're so certain that Scotland will be out the EU but then we all know you talk some amount of pish Britnat boy.

Like it or not, Indyref2 requires another Referendum Act to be passed in Westminster (i.e May's Government) if it is to have full legal effect.  Otherwise, the Unionist parties can dismiss it as being consultative only. I will support a credible and deliverable independence plan but not one that includes the crap, ridiculous forecasts and barefaced lies that we got in the White Paper last time.

Under the EU's consolidated Treaties, Scotland can't apply to the join the EU whilst it is part of a Member State, i.e. the UK pre Brexit. Only independent nation states can apply for membership and the EU currently regards Scotland as a one of the UK's ten regions.  After Brexit, an independent Scotland would free to apply like any other nation state. It would have to go through the application process set out in the Treaties, i.e. demonstrate full compliance with the acquisition (EU law), including areas that are not currently devolved. 

The Scottish people should have a say in a referendum before re-joining the EU.

[Granny Danger]

15 minutes ago, HTG said:

The border strategy should be self evident by the time we get close to a second referendum. We already know that a heap of effort is going into ensuring a sensible border in Ireland and as such the shite that was flung by Miliband, Cameron and Clegg on their panic stricken journey north last time round just won't be repeatable. 

If Ireland has a hard border then I agree with you. But it looks like they want to avoid that. 

The pressures that led to the Tories calling an In/Out referendum in the first place are the same ones that could determine the type of border control in Ireland.  I agree that both sides will prefer to avoid a hard border but paranoia from UKIP types and right wing Tories about potential immigration issues may dictate the eventual outcome.

 

[AUFC90]

Just now, Bishop Briggs said:

Like it or not, Indyref2 requires another Referendum Act to be passed in Westminster (i.e May's Government) if it is to have full legal effect.  Otherwise, the Unionist parties can dismiss it as being consultative only. I will support a credible and deliverable independence plan but not one that includes the crap, ridiculous forecasts and barefaced lies that we got in the White Paper last time.

Under the EU's consolidated Treaties, Scotland can't apply to the join the EU whilst it is part of a Member State, i.e. the UK pre Brexit. Only independent nation states can apply for membership and the EU currently regards Scotland as a one of the UK's ten regions.  After Brexit, an independent Scotland would free to apply like any other nation state. It would have to go through the application process set out in the Treaties, i.e. demonstrate full compliance with the acquisition (EU law), including areas that are not currently devolved. 

The Scottish people should have a say in a referendum before re-joining the EU.

As i've told you a million times, Westminster wont block a democratic call from Holyrood to have another referendum although it would be good if they did. Even Ruth davidson is careful to avoid answering that one or she'd be out on her arse too. Bla bla, we maybe legally can't apply until we're indpendent but do you seriously believe discussions wont take place. I doubt we'll even be out the EU and no amount of treaties will change the fact that sensible politics will win the day. Just like you said that Germany and France will dictate Brexit negotiations they'll also dictate scotland becoming a full member. You'll never support a credible independence plan and your desperation to convince us all otherwise is pathetic. Ten reasons why you think an independent Scotland out of the EU is preferable to being part of the UK out of the EU ? You're reasons can't involve the EU so what are they ?

[AUFC90]

5 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

The pressures that led to the Tories calling an In/Out referendum in the first place are the same ones that could determine the type of border control in Ireland.  I agree that both sides will prefer to avoid a hard border but paranoia from UKIP types and right wing Tories about potential immigration issues may dictate the eventual outcome.

 

I think the risk of losing hundreds of thousands of jobs will outweigh that and can be fairly easily explained as well. David Davis has been Dublin a lot since the vote, that tells you something.

[Granny Danger]

3 minutes ago, AUFC90 said:

I think the risk of losing hundreds of thousands of jobs will outweigh that and can be fairly easily explained as well. David Davis has been Dublin a lot since the vote, that tells you something.

I hope you're correct but I'm not sure logic has ever ruled the day in the whole Bexit debate.  I've been trying to find a poll carried out a few weeks past that I saw that showed a majority of Leave supporters would still vote that way even though they think that they personally will be worse off as a result of us leaving the EU.

 

[doulikefish]

2 hours ago, Jambomo said:

Boris being Boris again

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38658998

He was nearly the prime minister its the only thing that p***k Gove has ever done right in his life stabbing him in the back

[mizfit]

I'm honestly frightened i'm going to lose my job because of this. 

[WILLIEA]

24 minutes ago, doulikefish said:

He was nearly the prime minister its the only thing that p***k Gove has ever done right in his life stabbing him in the back

Utterly embarrassing stuff, from Boris!

[doulikefish]

That extra 350 mill a week will come in handy now

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/18/retired-britons-eu-return-campaigners-pensioners-spain-healthcare?CMP=share_btn_tw

[williemillersmoustache]

13 minutes ago, mizfit said:

I'm honestly frightened i'm going to lose my job because of this. 

Sorry to hear that. Maybe it'll be fine?

 

JP Morgan Warns Theresa May’s Brexit Threats Are ‘Very Dangerous’ For UK Jobs

Quote

“Taken as a whole, we do not view the no-deal WTO option as credible. So what happens in these negotiations? We assume that the EU will not seek a punitive arrangement for the UK, only that it will negotiate guided by its legitimate self-interest. Even so, we see a high likelihood of a disruptive and damaging outcome.

“For some time, we have argued that the bespoke FTA route would ultimately see the UK realise that it could not land the required deal within a pre-2020 election timeframe, while the option of a “WTO only” route would be recognised as untenable.

“Hence, it would be forced to prioritise a set of sectoral deals while seeking to extend the Article 50 process, and the result would be an exit under a hastily arranged patchwork of deals with some sectors seeing significant disruption upon the EU exit.”

Spoiler

 

[RedRob72]

Utterly embarrassing stuff, from Boris!

May put him on the front bench given his lead position on Brexit and leaving the EU.
She wasn't letting Johnson off lightly, after Cameron and Gove were on their toes, appointing him as Foreign Secretary to help sort the shambles out that ensued.

It was seen as a pretty shrewd move at the time by a number of high profile political commentators, but I wonder how much she's regretting that decision now!?