The Politics Thread 2020

[BlueSi13]

2 hours ago, Foxy_Bear said:

I'm not sure that's true anymore. Certainly in the lead up to the referendum there was probably alot of ignorance around how difficult it would be initially but i do think that Brexit has served as somewhat of premonition of how tough it will be and in all honesty, has probably damaged our chances. This is partly why I think we should hold off a few years. 

So you think being outside both the United Kingdom AND the European Union, with no currency of your own, with a deficit three times larger than the rest of the UK, ripping up hundreds of years of cultural and economic union, making friends and family foreigners to each other overnight WOULDN'T be a shit-show?

 

[BlueSi13]

Also highly revealing that Labour chose to abstain in Sturgeons no confidence vote and thus continue on their path of appeasement rather than opposition as they know they'll need a coalition with the SNP to stand any chance of getting in to Number 10.

 

Be interesting to see the vote splits in May because the Conservatives are positioning themselves as they only out and out pro-UK voice in Scotland.

[Jon the Hat]

Its very hard to see how an independent Scotland would support itself, let alone meet EU membership requirements.  One can only assume they have lined up a back door entry as a "former member" and then they live on EU handouts instead of UK ones.

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

So you think being outside both the United Kingdom AND the European Union, with no currency of your own, with a deficit three times larger than the rest of the UK, ripping up hundreds of years of cultural and economic union, making friends and family foreigners to each other overnight WOULDN'T be a shit-show?

 

Presumably he means it's not true anymore that the Scottish public don't understand or appreciate the difficulties of pursuing and implementing independence, or at least that's what I took from reading the whole of his post rather than just the first line

[Scotch]

56 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

So you think being outside both the United Kingdom AND the European Union, with no currency of your own, with a deficit three times larger than the rest of the UK, ripping up hundreds of years of cultural and economic union, making friends and family foreigners to each other overnight WOULDN'T be a shit-show?

 

Right.... What you need to do is settle down, wind your neck in and read my post again. Read the post I was replying to whilst your at it. 

 

Maybe then you'll understand what was being said...

[Facecloth]

One for @UpTheLeagueFox

 

 

[bovril]

1 hour ago, BlueSi13 said:

So you think being outside both the United Kingdom AND the European Union, with no currency of your own, with a deficit three times larger than the rest of the UK, ripping up hundreds of years of cultural and economic union, making friends and family foreigners to each other overnight WOULDN'T be a shit-show?

 

You've had an utter mare

[Alf Bentley]

32 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Its very hard to see how an independent Scotland would support itself, let alone meet EU membership requirements.  One can only assume they have lined up a back door entry as a "former member" and then they live on EU handouts instead of UK ones.

 

I selfishly hope that Scotland doesn't leave, but don't see why it would be unable to support itself or to meet EU membership requirements. Ireland, Cyprus, Bulgaria & the Baltic states manage on both fronts. Norway and Iceland get by outside the EU.

Might be difficult at first, as @Foxy_Bearaccepts, but countries adapt to new circumstances. 

 

Short-term that would depend partly on what settlement there was with the rest of the UK, whether Scotland joined the EU or EFTA etc. At least some of the oil resources would presumably go to Scotland, but unclear how much and who would decide - negotiations under international law? Also unclear whether the EU route is viable due to Spanish fears about a precedent for Catalan independence? 

 

If Scotland did join the EU, "handouts" or budget contributions would depend on GDP per capita compared to other EU countries, I think. Ireland used to be a major recipient of EU "handouts" but is now a net contributor due to average incomes having risen faster than other W. European countries and the arrival of poorer countries from the Eastern bloc. Scotland's income levels are lower than the UK average, but it would have at least some oil (short-termish), Scotch whisky is a major British export, Scotland still has some manufacturing, plenty of tourism potential and the majority of UK fisheries. If in the EU, it would probably be eligible for regional development/social funding.

 

If Scotland did end up poorer at first due to choosing independence, doesn't the Brexiteer argument apply that it's worth taking a short-term economic hit so as to "take back control"? Not that I wanted Brexit or want Scottish independence....

 

"Handouts"? I prefer "redistribution according to need". We (or our parents) all received state handouts as children via free education. Many of us will receive handouts if we get old and/or ill or lose our income/capital through no fault of our own.  

[Spudulike]

4 hours ago, Foxy_Bear said:

Yes. Its the only reason I vote SNP. 

What would've happened to Scotland's EU membership had it been a Yes vote in 2014?

[bovril]

25 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

One for @UpTheLeagueFox

 

 

Changes from 09/04/20

[Buce]

31 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

One for @UpTheLeagueFox

 

 

 

I expect he's busy, Facey.

 

I'm sure he would have posted it later...

[Facecloth]

Just now, Buce said:

 

I expect he's busy, Facey.

 

I'm sure he would have posted it later...

Never to busy when the Tory numbers are going up though 

[Scotch]

2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I selfishly hope that Scotland doesn't leave, but don't see why it would be unable to support itself or to meet EU membership requirements. Ireland, Cyprus, Bulgaria & the Baltic states manage on both fronts. Norway and Iceland get by outside the EU.

Might be difficult at first, as @Foxy_Bearaccepts, but countries adapt to new circumstances. 

 

Short-term that would depend partly on what settlement there was with the rest of the UK, whether Scotland joined the EU or EFTA etc. At least some of the oil resources would presumably go to Scotland, but unclear how much and who would decide - negotiations under international law? Also unclear whether the EU route is viable due to Spanish fears about a precedent for Catalan independence? 

 

If Scotland did join the EU, "handouts" or budget contributions would depend on GDP per capita compared to other EU countries, I think. Ireland used to be a major recipient of EU "handouts" but is now a net contributor due to average incomes having risen faster than other W. European countries and the arrival of poorer countries from the Eastern bloc. Scotland's income levels are lower than the UK average, but it would have at least some oil (short-termish), Scotch whisky is a major British export, Scotland still has some manufacturing, plenty of tourism potential and the majority of UK fisheries. If in the EU, it would probably be eligible for regional development/social funding.

 

If Scotland did end up poorer at first due to choosing independence, doesn't the Brexiteer argument apply that it's worth taking a short-term economic hit so as to "take back control"? Not that I wanted Brexit or want Scottish independence....

 

"Handouts"? I prefer "redistribution according to need". We (or our parents) all received state handouts as children via free education. Many of us will receive handouts if we get old and/or ill or lose our income/capital through no fault of our own.  

One thing you failed to mention is renewable energy. 

 

Renewable energy such as tidal, wind and wave energy is our future. We were making massive strides in this field before Westminster blocked anymore investment without so much as a word to the Scottish government about it. 

 

25% or europes offshore wind and Tidal energy, easily enough to power Scotland with some to spare, leaving gas and oil recourses as purely tradeable assets. 

Leading us nicely to the matter of having the choice to trade with many more countries and not have to give up 60% of it to Westminster. 

 

No one is saying it will be easy but like you correctly point out, there are smaller countries with less natural recourses that manage pretty well. 

[Scotch]

14 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

What would've happened to Scotland's EU membership had it been a Yes vote in 2014?

That depends on who you ask. Experts on the matter seem spilt on it. 

[Sharpe's Fox]

2 hours ago, BlueSi13 said:

So you think being outside both the United Kingdom AND the European Union, with no currency of your own, with a deficit three times larger than the rest of the UK, ripping up hundreds of years of cultural and economic union, making friends and family foreigners to each other overnight WOULDN'T be a shit-show?

 

If you were a working class Scottish voter would you care? Your wages have flatlined, the services you use have deteriorated, in the past 50 years you’ve only had 2 or 3 governments you’ve actually voted for, your pension has lost value and then there is a political project offering something you can be proud of that comes along. Why wouldn’t you vote for it? What is there to be scared of? Some sort of economic armageddon? We’ve already had two of those in twelve years!

 

Its time to realise this country is bust. I ticked English on my census for a reason.

[Spudulike]

26 minutes ago, Foxy_Bear said:

That depends on who you ask. Experts on the matter seem spilt on it. 

The reason I raise this as it seems that to the SNP at that time EU membership wasn't a driver for independence. Splitting from the rest of the Union was the goal at all costs. 

 

Now its become the reason to demand another referendum. 

 

Funny how opinions change to fit an agenda. 

[BlueSi13]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

You've had an utter mare

Yup! Hold my hands up! 

[BlueSi13]

1 hour ago, Foxy_Bear said:

Right.... What you need to do is settle down, wind your neck in and read my post again. Read the post I was replying to whilst your at it. 

 

Maybe then you'll understand what was being said...

 Alright mate, maybe follow your own advice there!  Simple mistake on my part!  The touched nerve routine is not a good look!

[BlueSi13]

8 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

The reason I raise this as it seems that to the SNP at that time EU membership wasn't a driver for independence. Splitting from the rest of the Union was the goal at all costs. 

 

Now its become the reason to demand another referendum. 

 

Funny how opinions change to fit an agenda. 

I also think the SNP need to be crystal clear and confirm whether or not any future referendum on breaking up the UK would also be a referendum to rejoin the EU.  Think I read a stat (might be wrong) that over 30% of SNP voters voted for Brexit.  

 

Would the SNP want to opt for two referendums instead?  One on the UK and one on the EU?  Also as the SNP were so keen on a 2nd Brexit referendum once the deal between the UK and the EU had been put on the table, would they get behind a 2nd (3rd) UK referendum once the terms of Scotlands departure from the UK had been agreed upon?  Questions questions questions...

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I selfishly hope that Scotland doesn't leave, but don't see why it would be unable to support itself or to meet EU membership requirements. Ireland, Cyprus, Bulgaria & the Baltic states manage on both fronts. Norway and Iceland get by outside the EU.

Might be difficult at first, as @Foxy_Bearaccepts, but countries adapt to new circumstances. 

 

Short-term that would depend partly on what settlement there was with the rest of the UK, whether Scotland joined the EU or EFTA etc. At least some of the oil resources would presumably go to Scotland, but unclear how much and who would decide - negotiations under international law? Also unclear whether the EU route is viable due to Spanish fears about a precedent for Catalan independence? 

 

If Scotland did join the EU, "handouts" or budget contributions would depend on GDP per capita compared to other EU countries, I think. Ireland used to be a major recipient of EU "handouts" but is now a net contributor due to average incomes having risen faster than other W. European countries and the arrival of poorer countries from the Eastern bloc. Scotland's income levels are lower than the UK average, but it would have at least some oil (short-termish), Scotch whisky is a major British export, Scotland still has some manufacturing, plenty of tourism potential and the majority of UK fisheries. If in the EU, it would probably be eligible for regional development/social funding.

 

If Scotland did end up poorer at first due to choosing independence, doesn't the Brexiteer argument apply that it's worth taking a short-term economic hit so as to "take back control"? Not that I wanted Brexit or want Scottish independence....

 

"Handouts"? I prefer "redistribution according to need". We (or our parents) all received state handouts as children via free education. Many of us will receive handouts if we get old and/or ill or lose our income/capital through no fault of our own.  

Likewise, my ancestry is Scottish on my mothers side, and I would be saddened to see the Union break up.  Unlike Brexit where the UK is a huge economy and can afford to borrow to keep things running if necessary, I do worry that the short term impact in Scotland might see tax hikes and flight of talent south of the Border, or indeed cuts to services already struggling to deliver outcomes as the rest of the UK.

[Scotch]

16 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

The reason I raise this as it seems that to the SNP at that time EU membership wasn't a driver for independence. Splitting from the rest of the Union was the goal at all costs. 

 

Now its become the reason to demand another referendum. 

 

Funny how opinions change to fit an agenda. 

The reason its changed is because Brexit has given a mandate for another referendum. 

 

You're right when you say it was never really a driving force for independence. To be honest, before brexit I had never really came across a Scottish person with a strong opinion on the EU, either for or against BUT following our loss in the last referendum, the SNP said they wouldn't push for another unless there were significant change in our political landscape. The people of Scotland then voted overwhelmingly in favour of the SNP at the following elections.

 

So, then Brexit happened which would in anyones book qualify as a significant change so it gives them a platform to hold another Indyref and be able to say "well, this is what we promised before you elected us", so they kind of HAVE to make it about the EU withdrawal as it gives legitimacy to their push for another vote. 

 

Does this make sense? It makes sense in my head but I don't think I've explained it well. 

[Scotch]

20 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said:

I also think the SNP need to be crystal clear and confirm whether or not any future referendum on breaking up the UK would also be a referendum to rejoin the EU.  Think I read a stat (might be wrong) that over 30% of SNP voters voted for Brexit.  

 

Would the SNP want to opt for two referendums instead?  One on the UK and one on the EU?  Also as the SNP were so keen on a 2nd Brexit referendum once the deal between the UK and the EU had been put on the table, would they get behind a 2nd (3rd) UK referendum once the terms of Scotlands departure from the UK had been agreed upon?  Questions questions questions...

This is a very good point and its where I think we could learn from Brexit. 

 

When we voted on brexit, we didn't really know what we where voting for. Yes, we knew it was about being a member of the EU but in terms of wether or not we had access to the single market, would there be a deal, what the deal would consist of...We had no clue. 

 

In any future indyref, it should be CLEAR (like you say) if A, we plan to attempt to join the EU and B, we there or not we would be allowed to. Aswell as all negotiations with the rUK should be done before hand so we know EXACTLY what percentage of the debt we would carry, how the Scottish waters would be divided, what kind of boarder would we be looking at....

 

This and only this gives people the best opportunity to make an INFORMED decision on the matter. 

[Spudulike]

16 minutes ago, Foxy_Bear said:

The reason its changed is because Brexit has given a mandate for another referendum. 

 

You're right when you say it was never really a driving force for independence. To be honest, before brexit I had never really came across a Scottish person with a strong opinion on the EU, either for or against BUT following our loss in the last referendum, the SNP said they wouldn't push for another unless there were significant change in our political landscape. The people of Scotland then voted overwhelmingly in favour of the SNP at the following elections.

 

So, then Brexit happened which would in anyones book qualify as a significant change so it gives them a platform to hold another Indyref and be able to say "well, this is what we promised before you elected us", so they kind of HAVE to make it about the EU withdrawal as it gives legitimacy to their push for another vote. 

 

Does this make sense? It makes sense in my head but I don't think I've explained it well. 

I think you are saying that EU membership has become a very convenient excuse, a gift to the Nationalists, for an attempt to get another referendum. All this love for the EU is a sham, we all know it. 

[Scotch]

42 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

I think you are saying that EU membership has become a very convenient excuse, a gift to the Nationalists, for an attempt to get another referendum. All this love for the EU is a sham, we all know it. 

Essentially it IS an excuse. You could even go one further and say that the SNP always knew there was going to be a referendum on brexit and hedged their bets, giving themselves a clause to get another. 

 

But  I've always been of mind that the SNP are the Scottish NATIONAL* party. Their goal is right there in the name. You know what you're voting for and they are voted for time and time again. 

 

*edited because my autocorrect made me look like a disabled!

Edited 23 March 2021 by Foxy_Bear

[Dunge]

There’s no doubt to me that the EU would welcome Scotland back in, and any struggles would be overcome as they always are. The EU might demand they take the Euro, at least within a number of years, but that wouldn’t stop the SNP and would be part of relatively civil negotiations. Forget for a moment any practicalities of it and imagine the spiteful joy within the EU at the situation, and the political boon for their project that any country who dared to leave broke up. And again, never underestimate the spitefulness of the EU.

 

What I can’t agree on is that Brexit constitutes a change significant enough to have an indyref2. My position on it remains the same: I accepted indyref1 because I do think it’s important people should have their say on who rules them. But once they’ve decided, that’s it for a generation, and that you can’t just keep running referenda on any excuse until you get the decision you want. Brexit wasn’t war or genocide or anything on that level, it was a democratic decision taken by the country, another referendum to be taken seriously and respected, the kind of decision that being part of a country entails. I don’t think anyone will be able to convince me that indyref2 is justified, particularly just off the back of Brexit. Even if the SNP get voted in again, that’s not nearly enough to persuade me.

 

I suspect I’ll be disagreeing with Scottish nationalists about this for years - decades, fates willing. Maybe we’ll see a referendum again in 2050, when a generation will have passed. Or maybe it’ll come sooner with a Labour government in search of a workable majority. I hope the case for the union will have been much better made by then, instead of everywhere north of Watford being an afterthought as has been the case as long as I can remember.