Brexit

First topic message reminder :

"man that negotiated the Australia deal with the EU" - Who is this man? I only ask because Australia don't have a deal with the EU; they are, however, in the process of negotiating one.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

Not so sure. Depends on the stated rationale. It could be, but it isn't.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

The BBC are an interesting case study there with Scottish independence due to their flailing funding model.

Back at the last referendum the license fee raised approximately £320m a year in Scotalnd with around £160m a year spent in Scotland and about £60m of that being on programmes such as New Tricks getting a few shots outside Queen Street Station, rather than funding burgeoning creatives. So Scotland remaining part of the UK and paying the license fee represented around a £200m a year bump to the BBC after what is invested back in Scotland.

John Birt (former director general) did an interesting piece back then talking about how losing that at the same time as new obligations to pay for the World Service, S4C, etc would have effectively represented a 25% funding cut for the Beeb in a very short space of time.

Hardly a recipe for objectivity it must be said.

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

McLaren wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

McLaren wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:Wales and Scotland will be independent in the foreseeable future, as will a re-united Ireland. Can't happen soon enough.

Two questions.

Why are you so sure those countries will become independent? And why do you say it can't happen soon enough?

I think it's inevitable. You can't grant them devolved powers and them not think "Hmm. Quite like this bit of power and deciding for ourselves. Why can't we have more? Think we should ask/demand it.". The inevitable end of that road is independence.

Why can't I wait for it to happen? While I totally agree w/ your recent post re. the stupidity of less integration etc, I am fed up to the back teeth of the various nationalist whining etc etc. It's just a vicious circle, creating more and more dislike between the people of the UK and Great Britain. I'd rather it ended and it's clear people aren't going to grow up. Let each go it alone and own it.

The English nationalists have "got what they want" with Brexit. I just can't see that quieting them in terms of the classic right wing/nationalist issues that fuel them. Immigration, relationship with foreign trading partners, human rights laws, international aid are likely to continue to be areas that displease English nationalists.

Would those who want Scottish, Welsh or NI independence be anymore likely to settle with just being broken away from the UK? As I said above the claim from many Scottish nationalists is that they want a more progressive country but I find that quite hard to believe.

I don't think you read so-called English nationalism correctly, especially if you assume that's what fuelled Brexit in its entirety. Sure, there were elements of xenophobia and for some, that was the priority. I think a lot more, particularly out of London and SE, was down to decades of areas being run down. No (or few) jobs for non-University educated people, and I'm not denigrating them by saying that. The manufacturing, ship building, mining etc etc has just been run down and never really replaced. I think there was lot of protest voting due to 30-40 years of industrial decline. It's not even like the forces are a big thing any more either.

As for Scottish and Welsh nationalism (and English), I wouldn't trust those driving for it as far as I can throw them. They're politicians and I haven't seen any who're are remotely trustworthy/altruistic for decades. Suspect they would just want to go down in history as being the one(s) who (re?)-gained Scottish/Welsh independence. I think the Irish are probably the most likely to be on a strong footing in the not too distance future. They've lived w/ the IRA/UDF etc and, in many cases, are far more mature I think. It might p!ss the Unionists off royally (especially the hard liners), but I wouldn't be surprised if a reunited Ireland went from strength to strength quite quickly if it came about.

For me, as I said, I just want it over. I'm fed up of all the petty minded whining all the time. I'd rather we cut everyone loose and got on with it. If they can't see the wood for the trees and want to cut their noses off, be my guest and naff off.

You start with the reasoning of what you think English nationalism is such as closing down of industries not being replaced and you seem to not have a problem with that at all. Yet Scottish nationalism is repugnant to you. Well sunshine do you know what helped fuel that? Exactly what you say you understand about English nationalism. Thatcher's Tories in the 1980s closed down Scottish shipyards, coal mines and later steelyards and that brought a lot of people on board the independence bandwagon and that has grown due to other mitigating factors since then. So for you English nationalism you fully understand the cut of their gib for their stance on Brexit yet Scottish nationalism on the same subject are odious to you. Sheer hypocrisy.

Good grief. Why am I not surprised by your reading of what I wrote and your lack of comprehension? I in no way equated English nationalism to industrial closure and your extrapolation that I both did, and deny Scots the same right, is all your own wrongheaded work. I said that such, over years, was the cause of, in my view, a large protest vote for Brexit. I think many of those that voted actually just wanted something 'different' to the norm of finance/service industry being seen as the norm, property prices making a home out of reach for so many etc etc. A bloody nose for the so-called Establishment elite, if you will.
Did I say I agreed w/ Brexit? No, I ****ing didn't. I think it's pathetic, just as I think the drive for Scottish independence is pathetic. The reasons for both are childish and nationalistic (in the worst sense), but I think Scottish nationalism is worse in the sense that I think (and I could be wrong) that there's a majority hatred for the English as a driving force in that, whereas I think that although there was/is a level of English hatred for 'foreigners' that fed into Brexit, I don't think that was the majority reason for the outcome of the Brexit referendum. One day (maybe), we'll realise we no longer have an Empire.

I'm aware of the loss of those Scottish industries, and Thatcher's so-called role in it, although unlike you, I understand that it wasn't all down to the Milk Snatcher. You just narrowly put the blame entirely there because that suits your narrative. I guess you think that the financial industry in Scotland (and its role in the 2008 crash) was the fault of Westminster as well? Perhaps bailing out RBS to the tune of almost £300 billion was Westminster doing Scotland down?
Coal in the UK was dying, steel production was too expensive cf. other global producers, ship building in Rosyth or the Clyde etc was being undercut by other global players supplying cheaper labour. Etc. Your problem is you blame England and/or Westminster for all of these sort of issues in Scotland. Xenophobia and nationalism - not a nice look, but not entirely surprising.

As I said, the sooner you and yours are gone, the better. No, that's not anything to do w/ any so-called English nationalism on my part - I just can't stand backward-looking, small-minded nationalists whining about how everything wrong in their World is because of those evil doers in Westminster. The sooner you get cut loose, so you can't blame anyone but yourself, the sooner you can grow up. I'm sure you'll be fine.

And equally you are so wrong in your naive nay biased (perhaps) opinion that Scottish Nationalism is driven by an English hatred. It is not. You may get some that latch onto independence with that but the driving force is certainly not that. If you use your brain you could ascertain that. After all when did this anti-English sentiment start exactly? And when did it start driving the independence bus? You are barking way up the wrong tree. Scots want independence for several reasons with the overpowering reason is to cut the ties with the incompetent Westminster governments. And can I just point out this discontent with Westminster is now also fuelling a drive upwards in support for Welsh independence and even parts of England are disenchanted with Westminster's governing - hmmm no anti-English sentiment there surely? The whole Brexit affair is another major reason why Scots see the need for independence. Rather than being treated like retarded kids told what to do by a drunk on power clueless adult (Westminster) they want to decide for themselves on such matters and have their views listened to which it certainly was not with Brexit. And then we have the totally different political viewpoints between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Wherein the Tories have probably governed the UK for 40 of the last 60 years that same party has been a minority party in Scotland in all of that time. Thatcherism stoked up a drive for independence too with her policies. On top of that 2014 was a missed opportunity for sure but many people who voted No then on the back of false promises and who would now vote differently as the polls clearly show now. Dig your head in the sand by all means trying to paint the Scottish independence movement as fuelled by English hatred which is way off the mark - heck I know of many English who live in Scotland now who support independence.

Another huge win for the Brexit crowd comes in the form of the fishing industry. Despite promising it would be great for fisherman some Scottish fishing companies are warning they’re about a week away from closing, as red tape and tariffs have made the fresh shellfish market to the EU they relied on virtually non-existant.

The one argument for Brexit that could stand up to atleast a little bit of scrutiny is now humped. I wonder when the people who voted for this will consider admiting it maybe wasnt the best idea after all.

Still, the NHS is only a few days away from its next £350m payment, silver linings and all that.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

why is the mature vote with independence. That seems like a really weird thing to say?

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

McLaren wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

McLaren wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:Wales and Scotland will be independent in the foreseeable future, as will a re-united Ireland. Can't happen soon enough.

Two questions.

Why are you so sure those countries will become independent? And why do you say it can't happen soon enough?

I think it's inevitable. You can't grant them devolved powers and them not think "Hmm. Quite like this bit of power and deciding for ourselves. Why can't we have more? Think we should ask/demand it.". The inevitable end of that road is independence.

Why can't I wait for it to happen? While I totally agree w/ your recent post re. the stupidity of less integration etc, I am fed up to the back teeth of the various nationalist whining etc etc. It's just a vicious circle, creating more and more dislike between the people of the UK and Great Britain. I'd rather it ended and it's clear people aren't going to grow up. Let each go it alone and own it.

The English nationalists have "got what they want" with Brexit. I just can't see that quieting them in terms of the classic right wing/nationalist issues that fuel them. Immigration, relationship with foreign trading partners, human rights laws, international aid are likely to continue to be areas that displease English nationalists.

Would those who want Scottish, Welsh or NI independence be anymore likely to settle with just being broken away from the UK? As I said above the claim from many Scottish nationalists is that they want a more progressive country but I find that quite hard to believe.

I don't think you read so-called English nationalism correctly, especially if you assume that's what fuelled Brexit in its entirety. Sure, there were elements of xenophobia and for some, that was the priority. I think a lot more, particularly out of London and SE, was down to decades of areas being run down. No (or few) jobs for non-University educated people, and I'm not denigrating them by saying that. The manufacturing, ship building, mining etc etc has just been run down and never really replaced. I think there was lot of protest voting due to 30-40 years of industrial decline. It's not even like the forces are a big thing any more either.

As for Scottish and Welsh nationalism (and English), I wouldn't trust those driving for it as far as I can throw them. They're politicians and I haven't seen any who're are remotely trustworthy/altruistic for decades. Suspect they would just want to go down in history as being the one(s) who (re?)-gained Scottish/Welsh independence. I think the Irish are probably the most likely to be on a strong footing in the not too distance future. They've lived w/ the IRA/UDF etc and, in many cases, are far more mature I think. It might p!ss the Unionists off royally (especially the hard liners), but I wouldn't be surprised if a reunited Ireland went from strength to strength quite quickly if it came about.

For me, as I said, I just want it over. I'm fed up of all the petty minded whining all the time. I'd rather we cut everyone loose and got on with it. If they can't see the wood for the trees and want to cut their noses off, be my guest and naff off.

You start with the reasoning of what you think English nationalism is such as closing down of industries not being replaced and you seem to not have a problem with that at all. Yet Scottish nationalism is repugnant to you. Well sunshine do you know what helped fuel that? Exactly what you say you understand about English nationalism. Thatcher's Tories in the 1980s closed down Scottish shipyards, coal mines and later steelyards and that brought a lot of people on board the independence bandwagon and that has grown due to other mitigating factors since then. So for you English nationalism you fully understand the cut of their gib for their stance on Brexit yet Scottish nationalism on the same subject are odious to you. Sheer hypocrisy.

Good grief. Why am I not surprised by your reading of what I wrote and your lack of comprehension? I in no way equated English nationalism to industrial closure and your extrapolation that I both did, and deny Scots the same right, is all your own wrongheaded work. I said that such, over years, was the cause of, in my view, a large protest vote for Brexit. I think many of those that voted actually just wanted something 'different' to the norm of finance/service industry being seen as the norm, property prices making a home out of reach for so many etc etc. A bloody nose for the so-called Establishment elite, if you will.
Did I say I agreed w/ Brexit? No, I ****ing didn't. I think it's pathetic, just as I think the drive for Scottish independence is pathetic. The reasons for both are childish and nationalistic (in the worst sense), but I think Scottish nationalism is worse in the sense that I think (and I could be wrong) that there's a majority hatred for the English as a driving force in that, whereas I think that although there was/is a level of English hatred for 'foreigners' that fed into Brexit, I don't think that was the majority reason for the outcome of the Brexit referendum. One day (maybe), we'll realise we no longer have an Empire.

I'm aware of the loss of those Scottish industries, and Thatcher's so-called role in it, although unlike you, I understand that it wasn't all down to the Milk Snatcher. You just narrowly put the blame entirely there because that suits your narrative. I guess you think that the financial industry in Scotland (and its role in the 2008 crash) was the fault of Westminster as well? Perhaps bailing out RBS to the tune of almost £300 billion was Westminster doing Scotland down?
Coal in the UK was dying, steel production was too expensive cf. other global producers, ship building in Rosyth or the Clyde etc was being undercut by other global players supplying cheaper labour. Etc. Your problem is you blame England and/or Westminster for all of these sort of issues in Scotland. Xenophobia and nationalism - not a nice look, but not entirely surprising.

As I said, the sooner you and yours are gone, the better. No, that's not anything to do w/ any so-called English nationalism on my part - I just can't stand backward-looking, small-minded nationalists whining about how everything wrong in their World is because of those evil doers in Westminster. The sooner you get cut loose, so you can't blame anyone but yourself, the sooner you can grow up. I'm sure you'll be fine.

And equally you are so wrong in your naive nay biased (perhaps) opinion that Scottish Nationalism is driven by an English hatred. It is not. You may get some that latch onto independence with that but the driving force is certainly not that. If you use your brain you could ascertain that. After all when did this anti-English sentiment start exactly? And when did it start driving the independence bus? You are barking way up the wrong tree. Scots want independence for several reasons with the overpowering reason is to cut the ties with the incompetent Westminster governments. And can I just point out this discontent with Westminster is now also fuelling a drive upwards in support for Welsh independence and even parts of England are disenchanted with Westminster's governing - hmmm no anti-English sentiment there surely? The whole Brexit affair is another major reason why Scots see the need for independence. Rather than being treated like retarded kids told what to do by a drunk on power clueless adult (Westminster) they want to decide for themselves on such matters and have their views listened to which it certainly was not with Brexit. And then we have the totally different political viewpoints between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Wherein the Tories have probably governed the UK for 40 of the last 60 years that same party has been a minority party in Scotland in all of that time. Thatcherism stoked up a drive for independence too with her policies. On top of that 2014 was a missed opportunity for sure but many people who voted No then on the back of false promises and who would now vote differently as the polls clearly show now. Dig your head in the sand by all means trying to paint the Scottish independence movement as fuelled by English hatred which is way off the mark - heck I know of many English who live in Scotland now who support independence.

And I know a lot of Scots that live in Scotland that think Independence is one of the most daftests things you could do, and that Nicola Sturgeon is absolutely abysmal and would make a terrible leader. Whats your point?

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

McLaren wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

McLaren wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:Wales and Scotland will be independent in the foreseeable future, as will a re-united Ireland. Can't happen soon enough.

Two questions.

Why are you so sure those countries will become independent? And why do you say it can't happen soon enough?

I think it's inevitable. You can't grant them devolved powers and them not think "Hmm. Quite like this bit of power and deciding for ourselves. Why can't we have more? Think we should ask/demand it.". The inevitable end of that road is independence.

Why can't I wait for it to happen? While I totally agree w/ your recent post re. the stupidity of less integration etc, I am fed up to the back teeth of the various nationalist whining etc etc. It's just a vicious circle, creating more and more dislike between the people of the UK and Great Britain. I'd rather it ended and it's clear people aren't going to grow up. Let each go it alone and own it.

The English nationalists have "got what they want" with Brexit. I just can't see that quieting them in terms of the classic right wing/nationalist issues that fuel them. Immigration, relationship with foreign trading partners, human rights laws, international aid are likely to continue to be areas that displease English nationalists.

Would those who want Scottish, Welsh or NI independence be anymore likely to settle with just being broken away from the UK? As I said above the claim from many Scottish nationalists is that they want a more progressive country but I find that quite hard to believe.

I don't think you read so-called English nationalism correctly, especially if you assume that's what fuelled Brexit in its entirety. Sure, there were elements of xenophobia and for some, that was the priority. I think a lot more, particularly out of London and SE, was down to decades of areas being run down. No (or few) jobs for non-University educated people, and I'm not denigrating them by saying that. The manufacturing, ship building, mining etc etc has just been run down and never really replaced. I think there was lot of protest voting due to 30-40 years of industrial decline. It's not even like the forces are a big thing any more either.

As for Scottish and Welsh nationalism (and English), I wouldn't trust those driving for it as far as I can throw them. They're politicians and I haven't seen any who're are remotely trustworthy/altruistic for decades. Suspect they would just want to go down in history as being the one(s) who (re?)-gained Scottish/Welsh independence. I think the Irish are probably the most likely to be on a strong footing in the not too distance future. They've lived w/ the IRA/UDF etc and, in many cases, are far more mature I think. It might p!ss the Unionists off royally (especially the hard liners), but I wouldn't be surprised if a reunited Ireland went from strength to strength quite quickly if it came about.

For me, as I said, I just want it over. I'm fed up of all the petty minded whining all the time. I'd rather we cut everyone loose and got on with it. If they can't see the wood for the trees and want to cut their noses off, be my guest and naff off.

You start with the reasoning of what you think English nationalism is such as closing down of industries not being replaced and you seem to not have a problem with that at all. Yet Scottish nationalism is repugnant to you. Well sunshine do you know what helped fuel that? Exactly what you say you understand about English nationalism. Thatcher's Tories in the 1980s closed down Scottish shipyards, coal mines and later steelyards and that brought a lot of people on board the independence bandwagon and that has grown due to other mitigating factors since then. So for you English nationalism you fully understand the cut of their gib for their stance on Brexit yet Scottish nationalism on the same subject are odious to you. Sheer hypocrisy.

Good grief. Why am I not surprised by your reading of what I wrote and your lack of comprehension? I in no way equated English nationalism to industrial closure and your extrapolation that I both did, and deny Scots the same right, is all your own wrongheaded work. I said that such, over years, was the cause of, in my view, a large protest vote for Brexit. I think many of those that voted actually just wanted something 'different' to the norm of finance/service industry being seen as the norm, property prices making a home out of reach for so many etc etc. A bloody nose for the so-called Establishment elite, if you will.
Did I say I agreed w/ Brexit? No, I ****ing didn't. I think it's pathetic, just as I think the drive for Scottish independence is pathetic. The reasons for both are childish and nationalistic (in the worst sense), but I think Scottish nationalism is worse in the sense that I think (and I could be wrong) that there's a majority hatred for the English as a driving force in that, whereas I think that although there was/is a level of English hatred for 'foreigners' that fed into Brexit, I don't think that was the majority reason for the outcome of the Brexit referendum. One day (maybe), we'll realise we no longer have an Empire.

I'm aware of the loss of those Scottish industries, and Thatcher's so-called role in it, although unlike you, I understand that it wasn't all down to the Milk Snatcher. You just narrowly put the blame entirely there because that suits your narrative. I guess you think that the financial industry in Scotland (and its role in the 2008 crash) was the fault of Westminster as well? Perhaps bailing out RBS to the tune of almost £300 billion was Westminster doing Scotland down?
Coal in the UK was dying, steel production was too expensive cf. other global producers, ship building in Rosyth or the Clyde etc was being undercut by other global players supplying cheaper labour. Etc. Your problem is you blame England and/or Westminster for all of these sort of issues in Scotland. Xenophobia and nationalism - not a nice look, but not entirely surprising.

As I said, the sooner you and yours are gone, the better. No, that's not anything to do w/ any so-called English nationalism on my part - I just can't stand backward-looking, small-minded nationalists whining about how everything wrong in their World is because of those evil doers in Westminster. The sooner you get cut loose, so you can't blame anyone but yourself, the sooner you can grow up. I'm sure you'll be fine.

And equally you are so wrong in your naive nay biased (perhaps) opinion that Scottish Nationalism is driven by an English hatred. It is not. You may get some that latch onto independence with that but the driving force is certainly not that. If you use your brain you could ascertain that. After all when did this anti-English sentiment start exactly? And when did it start driving the independence bus? You are barking way up the wrong tree. Scots want independence for several reasons with the overpowering reason is to cut the ties with the incompetent Westminster governments. And can I just point out this discontent with Westminster is now also fuelling a drive upwards in support for Welsh independence and even parts of England are disenchanted with Westminster's governing - hmmm no anti-English sentiment there surely? The whole Brexit affair is another major reason why Scots see the need for independence. Rather than being treated like retarded kids told what to do by a drunk on power clueless adult (Westminster) they want to decide for themselves on such matters and have their views listened to which it certainly was not with Brexit. And then we have the totally different political viewpoints between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Wherein the Tories have probably governed the UK for 40 of the last 60 years that same party has been a minority party in Scotland in all of that time. Thatcherism stoked up a drive for independence too with her policies. On top of that 2014 was a missed opportunity for sure but many people who voted No then on the back of false promises and who would now vote differently as the polls clearly show now. Dig your head in the sand by all means trying to paint the Scottish independence movement as fuelled by English hatred which is way off the mark - heck I know of many English who live in Scotland now who support independence.

I don't think the parts of England ranting about Westminster and talking (even in jest) about secession are any more enlightened than the Scottish nationalists. I think you and the rest are essentially on a 'grass is always greener' trip. I think the idea that you'd break up what has been a ridiculously successful union to pander to the political aspirations and legacy thoughts of some t0ssers in Holyrood is utterly laughable. I think the idea that you'd want to fragment the UK into smaller entities at a point when travel, communication etc is making the World a smaller place is moronic.
Whatever. You've made your mind up and nothing will change it.

As for digging my head in the sand? I think we're too far down the road now and, despite my view that a break up of the UK would be stupid, I want you gone.

MonkeyMan wrote:I only know a handful of people who are anti-devolution in Wales. I know far more people now who are either pro independence or of the attitude that independence down the line is possible as long it is done right

Thing is in Wales is that it would be hard to concentrate all that nationalism/semi nationalism to one vote (Plaid Cymru) as a lot of people I know who are interested in independence or further devolution are actually Labour voters

I always just assumed that Scotland was either SNP for independence or Labour for the Union. The Welsh vote is a lot more split it seems between Plaid (pro independence), Labour (50/50) and Conservative (Welsh people who love Boris and hate Wales and its Senedd)

This is the hurdle that needs to be cleared. If you want independence, it makes no sense to vote for a unionist party that isn't offering / campaigning for it. Having said that, some Labour MSes have come as close as damnit to calling for independence. They know how fragile the devolution settlement is.

The wins for the fishing industry just keep on coming. Europes biggest fish market in Peterhead has seen declines of 18% in the first three weeks of Brexit. The most jarring stat is that on the 01/12/20 there was 6108 boxes (between 30-45kg of fish per box) landed to todays landing of just 255 boxes. A 96% drop in fish. But atleast the fish are “happier because they’re British”

Frak every single person who ran the con that this would be a benefit to the industry. Every one of them. From the top to the bottom.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-turns-europes-biggest-fish-23346030

Samo wrote:The wins for the fishing industry just keep on coming. Europes biggest fish market in Peterhead has seen declines of 18% in the first three weeks of Brexit. The most jarring stat is that on the 01/12/20 there was 6108 boxes (between 30-45kg of fish per box) landed to todays landing of just 255 boxes. A 96% drop in fish. But atleast the fish are “happier because they’re British”

Frak every single person who ran the con that this would be a benefit to the industry. Every one of them. From the top to the bottom.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-turns-europes-biggest-fish-23346030

To be fair, a lot of support for Brexit came from the UK fishing industry. Whoops. Still, early days yet - maybe just teething issues?

navyblueshorts wrote:

Samo wrote:The wins for the fishing industry just keep on coming. Europes biggest fish market in Peterhead has seen declines of 18% in the first three weeks of Brexit. The most jarring stat is that on the 01/12/20 there was 6108 boxes (between 30-45kg of fish per box) landed to todays landing of just 255 boxes. A 96% drop in fish. But atleast the fish are “happier because they’re British”

Frak every single person who ran the con that this would be a benefit to the industry. Every one of them. From the top to the bottom.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-turns-europes-biggest-fish-23346030

To be fair, a lot of support for Brexit came from the UK fishing industry. Whoops. Still, early days yet - maybe just teething issues?

Raab questioned the idea that the problems are due to Brexit. Who are we to disagree....

Maybe Johnson can take some of the next £350m the NHS is due to get tomorrow and use it to help keep the struggling fishing industry afloat.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

Not so sure. Depends on the stated rationale. It could be, but it isn't.

Based on everyone being sane and putting ego aside. If self-interest was removed, it would be possible to do it in a way that doesn't damage anyone. Politics and game-playing would remove that possibility quite sharply.

Derbymanc wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

why is the mature vote with independence. That seems like a really weird thing to say?

I can't see why it's more mature to expect a country to be under the rule and whims of another.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

why is the mature vote with independence. That seems like a really weird thing to say?

I can't see why it's more mature to expect a country to be under the rule and whims of another.

Which country is under the rule and whims of another?

God, I haven't missed this place...

I suppose I feel for the Scots, being forced out of the EU. That's the whims of England it has been directed by. I don't really see why anyone would want Scotland to not have independence on a simple level, taking politics and economics out of it. Certainly no-one who voted Leave, at the least.

The Scots haven't been forced out of the EU, we voted with the United Kingdom being a single entity, and took the decision based on every UK's citizen vote being counted equally. 

If 700,000 of the people who voted Leave in Scotland had actually voted Remain, then the UK would have stayed in the EU. If this had occurred, it also wouldn't be accurate to say the English are forced to stay in the EU by the whims of Scotland, because we voted as one country.

As I've stated before, I have a slight preference for Scotland leaving the UK, purely for the selfish reason that I feel England/Wales would be better off. Ultimately, though, it's up to the Scottish on this issue, and up to them to define what their possible independence means.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'taking politics and economics out of it' - it's purely a political question.

Duty281 wrote:The Scots haven't been forced out of the EU, we voted with the United Kingdom being a single entity, and took the decision based on every UK's citizen vote being counted equally. 

So, as such, were they independent, they would not have had their Remain majority somewhat ignored. They, as a democratic country, voted to remain. That's the clear point I was making.

Duty281 wrote:
If 700,000 of the people who voted Leave in Scotland had actually voted Remain, then the UK would have stayed in the EU. If this had occurred, it also wouldn't be accurate to say the English are forced to stay in the EU by the whims of Scotland, because we voted as one country.

Would be annoying, wouldn't it. Now, imagine...

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sure what you mean by 'taking politics and economics out of it' - it's purely a political question.

Sorry, I mean the politics of Politics, the part where it's more about what suits who is in charge etc etc. The same way you would use the word politics if describing the "politics of football/the dressing room" - which you would recognise doesn't mean Speaker of the House Carlton Cole was not keeping Mark Noble and the Get Stuck In Party on topic as they debated Said Benrahma's Foreign Players Doing Fancy Tricks Party. I probably mean personal politics, the self-serving stuff, the part where two people of two different parties often seem to be rivals in sport rather than people trying to just do the best for the country yada yada yada

Duty281 wrote:The Scots haven't been forced out of the EU, we voted with the United Kingdom being a single entity

Hence more of them are now saying, hey, let's no longer be part of that single entity, so we can decide these things for ourselves. Seems reasonable, although personally I'd rather it didn't happen. Can't blame them, though, for wanting complete autonomy, and a sovereign Scotland.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The Scots haven't been forced out of the EU, we voted with the United Kingdom being a single entity, and took the decision based on every UK's citizen vote being counted equally. 

So, as such, were they independent, they would not have had their Remain majority somewhat ignored. They, as a democratic country, voted to remain. That's the clear point I was making.

Duty281 wrote:
If 700,000 of the people who voted Leave in Scotland had actually voted Remain, then the UK would have stayed in the EU. If this had occurred, it also wouldn't be accurate to say the English are forced to stay in the EU by the whims of Scotland, because we voted as one country.

Would be annoying, wouldn't it. Now, imagine...

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sure what you mean by 'taking politics and economics out of it' - it's purely a political question.

Sorry, I mean the politics of Politics, the part where it's more about what suits who is in charge etc etc. The same way you would use the word politics if describing the "politics of football/the dressing room" - which you would recognise doesn't mean Speaker of the House Carlton Cole was not keeping Mark Noble and the Get Stuck In Party on topic as they debated Said Benrahma's Foreign Players Doing Fancy Tricks Party. I probably mean personal politics, the self-serving stuff, the part where two people of two different parties often seem to be rivals in sport rather than people trying to just do the best for the country yada yada yada

1) You could argue the toss on that all day long if you wanted in any number of 'if' scenarios. If Scotland were independent, if London were independent, if Manchester were independent etc. The fact of it is we voted as a United Kingdom, and Scots haven't been any more forced out of the EU than Mancunians or Londoners.

2) It wouldn't be annoying, it would be the democratic outcome.  

3) I see.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The Scots haven't been forced out of the EU, we voted with the United Kingdom being a single entity

Hence more of them are now saying, hey, let's no longer be part of that single entity, so we can decide these things for ourselves. Seems reasonable, although personally I'd rather it didn't happen. Can't blame them, though, for wanting complete autonomy, and a sovereign Scotland.

Which is their right to do so, of course. Though only about 1/3rd of SNP voters (from 2015) favour complete Scottish independence and sovereignty - i.e. out of the UK and out of the EU.

BamBam wrote:The "tariff free trade deal is really showing what its worth at the moment. My workplace has found that our exports to the EU are likely to be hit with tariffs due to the country of origin rules - essentially our products are made up of various components that we import.

The "assembly" that we do for a large amount of our products is not a "substantial change", which means they are not considered to be a UK produced good under the terms of the trade deal. As a result, the country of origin rules are applied, and despite the fact the vast majority of our inputs come from the EU, the terms of the deal say that they do not look through to our suppliers to confirm whether the country of origin is in the EU or not - all are considered "third countries", and tariffs are applied

For the company, its a short term problem as we have a EU production facility due to go live which will service the EU directly and reduce our costs. Until then we'll source whatever inputs we can from the UK so they aren't affected by origin rules.

For the poor sods who work in the UK production side of the business, you can probably guess what is likely to happen at some point this year

Our goods are sitting waiting for the paperwork to be completed so they can be exported, but for companies who sell perishable goods this isn't an option. I've spoken to friends across different industries who are all dealing with similar problems, and the consultancy firms / customs brokers are completely overwhelmed so haven't been able to provide adequate support. Aren't we lucky that the government took it down to the last week in December!

One week on and we're still in more or less the same limbo. A growing company that previously sold 3/4 trailer loads a week into European markets has moved 1 trailer in total since 1 Jan. From speaking to people around the industry, it seems most would be willing to give up a sliver of mythical sovereignty to be able to run their businesses as they have always done.

We're a small slice of one industry, the media is not reporting it effectively enough but there are countless others with the same problems across all industries. F**k business indeed

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The Scots haven't been forced out of the EU, we voted with the United Kingdom being a single entity

Hence more of them are now saying, hey, let's no longer be part of that single entity, so we can decide these things for ourselves. Seems reasonable, although personally I'd rather it didn't happen. Can't blame them, though, for wanting complete autonomy, and a sovereign Scotland.

Which is their right to do so, of course. Though only about 1/3rd of SNP voters (from 2015) favour complete Scottish independence and sovereignty - i.e. out of the UK and out of the EU.

I didn't think mental patients were allowed to vote.

Duty281 wrote:
1) You could argue the toss on that all day long if you wanted in any number of 'if' scenarios. If Scotland were independent, if London were independent, if Manchester were independent etc. The fact of it is we voted as a United Kingdom, and Scots haven't been any more forced out of the EU than Mancunians or Londoners.

In an incredible twist it turns out countries are a different thing entirely to cities. They've got their own laws and parliaments and everything.

Samo wrote:

Duty281 wrote:
1) You could argue the toss on that all day long if you wanted in any number of 'if' scenarios. If Scotland were independent, if London were independent, if Manchester were independent etc. The fact of it is we voted as a United Kingdom, and Scots haven't been any more forced out of the EU than Mancunians or Londoners.

In an incredible twist it turns out countries are a different thing entirely to cities.  They've got their own laws and parliaments and everything.

Indeed. A rather ridiculous but still oft-used false equivalence.

Duty's response will likely reference how much London and Manchester contribute to the economy, which would again miss the point that a city is not equivalent to a country.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

Not so sure. Depends on the stated rationale. It could be, but it isn't.

Based on everyone being sane and putting ego aside. If self-interest was removed, it would be possible to do it in a way that doesn't damage anyone. Politics and game-playing would remove that possibility quite sharply.

Agreed, but I humbly submit that to revert from the UK/Great Britain to smaller entities is philosophically flawed. It can be handled in a mature way, but I think the aim itself is backwards looking.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

Not so sure. Depends on the stated rationale. It could be, but it isn't.

Based on everyone being sane and putting ego aside. If self-interest was removed, it would be possible to do it in a way that doesn't damage anyone. Politics and game-playing would remove that possibility quite sharply.

Agreed, but I humbly submit that to revert from the UK/Great Britain to smaller entities is philosophically flawed. It can be handled in a mature way, but I think the aim itself is backwards looking.

I'm curious as to what this "mature" way might be? All seems rather vague.

And I believe it's absolutely appropriate to revert to Scotland/Wales/England/NI as individual nations because that's what they are. Yes, they all currently comprise the United Kingdom, but they are still separate nations.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

Not so sure. Depends on the stated rationale. It could be, but it isn't.

Based on everyone being sane and putting ego aside. If self-interest was removed, it would be possible to do it in a way that doesn't damage anyone. Politics and game-playing would remove that possibility quite sharply.

Agreed, but I humbly submit that to revert from the UK/Great Britain to smaller entities is philosophically flawed. It can be handled in a mature way, but I think the aim itself is backwards looking.

Can I suggest a thought experiment?

Imagine for moment that Scotland (or Wales, or Northern Ireland) is the more populous constituent part of the UK, with Edinburgh the seat of government. Scotland's voters choose the vast majority of MPs. England hardly ever votes for Party A, but because Scotland does, England gets a Party A government. Effectively, what Scotland decides to do, England has no choice but to follow.

Then devolution comes. England's allowed to do its own thing in limited areas, but the purse strings are still held by Holyrood. All the major decisions are made by the Scottish-led UK government

Would you be happy with that? Would you shrug and say that's as good as it can get for England?

This sums up Tory and Westminster mindset to Scotland:-

George Osborne's piece in the Evening Standard:

The worst evening I spent in Downing Street? Easy: September 18, 2014, sitting in the small wood-panelled dining room in Number 11 with David Cameron; eating a tepid curry; waiting for the results of the Scottish referendum. We thought: are we the people who have lost Scotland? History allows for no recovery from a disaster like that. Ask Lord North, the prime minister condemned for all time for the loss of America. The mistake he made — and with Irish calls for home rule a century later — had been to assume that doing nothing was an option. Our referendum was a proactive plan to keep the United Kingdom together — and it looked like it had put Scottish nationalism back in its box for a generation.

Not any more. By unleashing English nationalism, Brexit has made the future of the UK the central political issue of the coming decade. Northern Ireland is already heading for the exit door. By remaining in the EU single market, it is for all economic intents and purposes now slowly becoming part of a united Ireland. Its prosperity now depends on its relationship with Dublin (and Brussels), not London. The politics will follow.

Northern Irish unionists always feared the mainland was not sufficiently committed to their cause. Now their short-sighted support for Brexit (and unbelievably stupid decision to torpedo Theresa May’s deal that avoided separate Irish arrangements) has made those fears a reality. It pains me to report that most here and abroad will not care.

Scotland is an altogether different matter. Its history is our history. Its contribution to the world through its literature and philosophy, exploration and art, is our contribution. Its departure — with no disrespect to the Welsh — would represent the end of the United Kingdom. The rest of the world would instantly see that we were no longer a front-rank power, or even in the second row. We would instead be one of the great majority of countries who are on the receiving end of the decisions made by a few, subject to the values of others. We would become another historically interesting case study in how successful nations can perform unexpected acts of national suicide.

So how can Boris Johnson avoid this disaster — and ignoble title of the worst prime minister ever? For every poll shows consistent support now for independence. The Government has two plans. The first is to win more Scots over to the virtues of the Union. Press officers are being hired especially to make the case. We did something similar seven years ago, opening a Treasury office in Edinburgh and badging UK projects with a little Union Jack.

That made little difference; what it did was hold the Scottish National Party to account for the devolved decisions on things like tax we handed over to them. But now the Edinburgh and Glaswegian middle-classes who shied away from the risks of independence in 2014 are recalculating. For what is riskier? Being in Brexit Britain, or becoming independent and rejoining the EU?

Those who want to keep the UK together need to respond with new, powerful arguments against separation. After all, hasn’t the EU negotiations shown Scots that the whip hand lies with the larger, more powerful bloc?

Surely SNP claims of easy trade deals, frictionless borders and a rosy future for Aberdeen fishing and Edinburgh finance can now be easily demolished? If leaving a loose union with European nations after a mere 50 years has caused such division and debilitation, imagine the trauma of sundering an intense 300-year-old union with those we share this island with.

But there’s a problem: this Brexiteer premier can’t say any of this. So what’s the second plan? Simple. Refuse to hold a referendum. It’s the only sure way you won’t lose one. Yes, the SNP will be in full cry — but so what? Domestic opposition has already evaporated, with the Labour leader there resigning last week.

As Tony Blair says, no one has been able to mount a fight since Ruth Davidson left the stage. There’s a risk that the Scottish government holds its own plebiscite — but that won’t be legal, and the courts will stop the arms of the Scottish state, like the police and civil service taking part. Ask the jailed Catalonian leaders how their illegal poll worked out. The only way you can have legal path to independence is through a referendum that is voted for by the House of Commons. So don’t vote for one. Whatever the provocation. Just say no, Boris, and save yourself a long anxious night in Downing Street.

Sorry Craig, I'm struggling to see the cause of your grievance in any of that.

It displays a level of astuteness of which I though Osborne was incapable.

superflyweight wrote:Sorry Craig, I'm struggling to see the cause of your grievance in any of that.  

It displays a level of astuteness of which I though Osborne was incapable.  

Oh so much in there such as the utter crap of what's theirs is ours - sums up what has happened to Scottish money over 300+ years.

And this idea that only the House of Commons decides if there is another referendum? Really? WTAF has it to do with the vast majority of MP's outwith Scotland. Scots alone should decide whether or not it should happen and polls for over a year now suggest people want it and the SNP has been the biggest party in Scotland for over a decade now running on a mandate for independence and will do so again in the 2021 Scottish Elections - and guess what? All polls show the SNP coming in with over 50% of the electorate backed up by Scottish Greens who support independence too and are running at around 8% in the polls.

Pr4wn wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

Not so sure. Depends on the stated rationale. It could be, but it isn't.

Based on everyone being sane and putting ego aside. If self-interest was removed, it would be possible to do it in a way that doesn't damage anyone. Politics and game-playing would remove that possibility quite sharply.

Agreed, but I humbly submit that to revert from the UK/Great Britain to smaller entities is philosophically flawed. It can be handled in a mature way, but I think the aim itself is backwards looking.

I'm curious as to what this "mature" way might be? All seems rather vague.

And I believe it's absolutely appropriate to revert to Scotland/Wales/England/NI as individual nations because that's what they are. Yes, they all currently comprise the United Kingdom, but they are still separate nations.

'Mature'? How about some reasoned discussions etc and less of the xenophobic hate?

As for the nations, aside from my views on breaking up arguably one of the most successful unions ever at a time when I'd argue it's stupid to do so, I have little problem w/ it. As I've made clear before, the sooner the better so we can get on w/ the inevitable fallout of such decisions and move on as separate nations.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:To be fair, the most mature option ends with independence. Now whether politics (and the media, worth adding) can do anything fundamentally mature and reasonable is another matter.

Not so sure. Depends on the stated rationale. It could be, but it isn't.

Based on everyone being sane and putting ego aside. If self-interest was removed, it would be possible to do it in a way that doesn't damage anyone. Politics and game-playing would remove that possibility quite sharply.

Agreed, but I humbly submit that to revert from the UK/Great Britain to smaller entities is philosophically flawed. It can be handled in a mature way, but I think the aim itself is backwards looking.

Can I suggest a thought experiment?

Imagine for moment that Scotland (or Wales, or Northern Ireland) is the more populous constituent part of the UK, with Edinburgh the seat of government. Scotland's voters choose the vast majority of MPs. England hardly ever votes for Party A, but because Scotland does, England gets a Party A government. Effectively, what Scotland decides to do, England has no choice but to follow.

Then devolution comes. England's allowed to do its own thing in limited areas, but the purse strings are still held by Holyrood. All the major decisions are made by the Scottish-led UK government

Would you be happy with that? Would you shrug and say that's as good as it can get for England?

You're posing this to the wrong person. I've said before that you can't offer devolution and expect that not to lead to increased clamouring for full independence. Yes, I understand the argument you're making, but I don't agree it's the best outcome. I think we're better as the UK and our shared history has benefitted from inputs of all four of the parts that make it up.

While I think it's daft, I'm past caring about the inevitable breakup any more. The sooner Scotland et al can do their own thing and take full responsibility for everything (rather than simply whine that it's England's fault), the better.

As usual, suspect this sort of drive for independence is driven by a handful of political opportunists for all that Craig et al believe in it for their own very good reasons.

Speaking of political opportunists, Farage was on Jeremy Vine earlier. It's 'Reform UK' now.

CaledonianCraig wrote:This sums up Tory and Westminster mindset to Scotland:-

George Osborne's piece in the Evening Standard:

The worst evening I spent in Downing Street? Easy: September 18, 2014, sitting in the small wood-panelled dining room in Number 11 with David Cameron; eating a tepid curry; waiting for the results of the Scottish referendum. We thought: are we the people who have lost Scotland? History allows for no recovery from a disaster like that. Ask Lord North, the prime minister condemned for all time for the loss of America. The mistake he made — and with Irish calls for home rule a century later — had been to assume that doing nothing was an option. Our referendum was a proactive plan to keep the United Kingdom together — and it looked like it had put Scottish nationalism back in its box for a generation.

Not any more. By unleashing English nationalism, Brexit has made the future of the UK the central political issue of the coming decade. Northern Ireland is already heading for the exit door. By remaining in the EU single market, it is for all economic intents and purposes now slowly becoming part of a united Ireland. Its prosperity now depends on its relationship with Dublin (and Brussels), not London. The politics will follow.

Northern Irish unionists always feared the mainland was not sufficiently committed to their cause. Now their short-sighted support for Brexit (and unbelievably stupid decision to torpedo Theresa May’s deal that avoided separate Irish arrangements) has made those fears a reality. It pains me to report that most here and abroad will not care.

Scotland is an altogether different matter. Its history is our history. Its contribution to the world through its literature and philosophy, exploration and art, is our contribution. Its departure — with no disrespect to the Welsh — would represent the end of the United Kingdom. The rest of the world would instantly see that we were no longer a front-rank power, or even in the second row. We would instead be one of the great majority of countries who are on the receiving end of the decisions made by a few, subject to the values of others. We would become another historically interesting case study in how successful nations can perform unexpected acts of national suicide.

So how can Boris Johnson avoid this disaster — and ignoble title of the worst prime minister ever? For every poll shows consistent support now for independence. The Government has two plans. The first is to win more Scots over to the virtues of the Union. Press officers are being hired especially to make the case. We did something similar seven years ago, opening a Treasury office in Edinburgh and badging UK projects with a little Union Jack.

That made little difference; what it did was hold the Scottish National Party to account for the devolved decisions on things like tax we handed over to them. But now the Edinburgh and Glaswegian middle-classes who shied away from the risks of independence in 2014 are recalculating. For what is riskier? Being in Brexit Britain, or becoming independent and rejoining the EU?

Those who want to keep the UK together need to respond with new, powerful arguments against separation. After all, hasn’t the EU negotiations shown Scots that the whip hand lies with the larger, more powerful bloc?

Surely SNP claims of easy trade deals, frictionless borders and a rosy future for Aberdeen fishing and Edinburgh finance can now be easily demolished?  If leaving a loose union with European nations after a mere 50 years has caused such division and debilitation, imagine the trauma of sundering an intense 300-year-old union with those we share this island with.

But there’s a problem: this Brexiteer premier can’t say any of this. So what’s the second plan? Simple. Refuse to hold a referendum. It’s the only sure way you won’t lose one. Yes, the SNP will be in full cry — but so what? Domestic opposition has already evaporated, with the Labour leader there resigning last week.

As Tony Blair says, no one has been able to mount a fight since Ruth Davidson left the stage.  There’s a risk that the Scottish government holds its own plebiscite — but that won’t be legal, and the courts will stop the arms of the Scottish state, like the police and civil service taking part. Ask the jailed Catalonian leaders how their illegal poll worked out. The only way you can have legal path to independence is through a referendum that is voted for by the House of Commons. So don’t vote for one. Whatever the provocation. Just say no, Boris, and save yourself a long anxious night in Downing Street.

And?? Only slight issue is w/ the perceived snub in allowing any form of second referendum. Personally, I don't think nixing a second referendum in absence of any proposed alternatives, is going to work in any meaningful way. I don't think UKG are thinking hard enough about this, but that's politicians for you.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

Speaking of political opportunists, Farage was on Jeremy Vine earlier. It's 'Reform UK' now.

Bizarrely, I'm half w/ Farage on this. The UK electoral system is utter scheisse. If he's for a drive to introduce a decent PR system, I'm w/ him on that.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

superflyweight wrote:Sorry Craig, I'm struggling to see the cause of your grievance in any of that.  

It displays a level of astuteness of which I though Osborne was incapable.  

Oh so much in there such as the utter crap of what's theirs is ours - sums up what has happened to Scottish money over 300+ years.

And this idea that only the House of Commons decides if there is another referendum? Really? WTAF has it to do with the vast majority of MP's outwith Scotland. Scots alone should decide whether or not it should happen and polls for over a year now suggest people want it and the SNP has been the biggest party in Scotland for over a decade now running on a mandate for independence and will do so again in the 2021 Scottish Elections - and guess what? All polls show the SNP coming in with over 50% of the electorate backed up by Scottish Greens who support independence too and are running at around 8% in the polls.

The acts of union might have something to say about that, you know the legal foundation of the union itself.

That's certainly a fairer system, but I suspect that's not the party's main policy.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:That's certainly a fairer system, but I suspect that's not the main policy.

I don't trust him. At all. But I think he might be kosher w/ this. Look at the 2015 GE when UKIP got just under 4 million votes for 1 MP and SNP polled ~1/3 as many for 50+ MPs. Yes, we'd have had more from UKIP in 2015, but that's an aside and an excuse not to change a fundamentally bollox electoral system. Who knows? If UKIP had more representation in 2015, maybe Brexit would have been avoided and we'd have argued our points as the UK within the EU...

CaledonianCraig wrote:

superflyweight wrote:Sorry Craig, I'm struggling to see the cause of your grievance in any of that.  

It displays a level of astuteness of which I though Osborne was incapable.  

Oh so much in there such as the utter crap of what's theirs is ours - sums up what has happened to Scottish money over 300+ years.

And this idea that only the House of Commons decides if there is another referendum? Really? WTAF has it to do with the vast majority of MP's outwith Scotland. Scots alone should decide whether or not it should happen and polls for over a year now suggest people want it and the SNP has been the biggest party in Scotland for over a decade now running on a mandate for independence and will do so again in the 2021 Scottish Elections - and guess what? All polls show the SNP coming in with over 50% of the electorate backed up by Scottish Greens who support independence too and are running at around 8% in the polls.

It's an opinion piece by one person.

Incidentally:

https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/

Join up.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:That's certainly a fairer system, but I suspect that's not the main policy.

I don't trust him. At all. But I think he might be kosher w/ this. Look at the 2015 GE when UKIP got just under 4 million votes for 1 MP and SNP polled ~1/3 as many for 50+ MPs. Yes, we'd have had more from UKIP in 2015, but that's an aside and an excuse not to change a fundamentally bollox electoral system. Who knows? If UKIP had more representation in 2015, maybe Brexit would have been avoided and we'd have argued our points as the UK within the EU...

He is, yes. This is something he's be pushing for for well over a decade. While the Reform UK party is unlikely to achieve much electorally (similar to UKIP I suppose) hopefully, like with the EU, he can get the FPTP v PR debate into the national conversation (and the House of Lords too).

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:This is the hurdle that needs to be cleared. If you want independence, it makes no sense to vote for a unionist party that isn't offering / campaigning for it. Having said that, some Labour MSes have come as close as damnit to calling for independence. They know how fragile the devolution settlement is.

Funnily enough I was talking to my mate today who said he is voting Plaid in the next Welsh election. He is a lifelong Labour voter and said that 10 years ago he saw Welsh Independence as laughable. 5 years ago he seen it as possible but unlikely and maybe not the best idea

He said that now he wants Welsh independence more than ever and as long as Plaid continue to push for independence and be the party if elected to offer that referendum of independence then they will now get his vote for the rest of his days

Wish there was more like him...which there are. But it's not happening quick enough for my liking. We need a Scotland 2015 SNP style takeover or Boris and co are going to send us all to our doom pretty quick at the moment

The main problem is that if we did vote to go independent it would be from a largely left wing vote that has developed. The Welsh left wing would want to rejoin the EU. But would they want us?

So the two choices are to either remain in a UK Tory dystopian hell or go independent and face years of being cut off from Europe

MonkeyMan wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:This is the hurdle that needs to be cleared. If you want independence, it makes no sense to vote for a unionist party that isn't offering / campaigning for it. Having said that, some Labour MSes have come as close as damnit to calling for independence. They know how fragile the devolution settlement is.

Funnily enough I was talking to my mate today who said he is voting Plaid in the next Welsh election. He is a lifelong Labour voter and said that 10 years ago he saw Welsh Independence as laughable. 5 years ago he seen it as possible but unlikely and maybe not the best idea

He said that now he wants Welsh independence more than ever and as long as Plaid continue to push for independence and be the party if elected to offer that referendum of independence then they will now get his vote for the rest of his days

Wish there was more like him...which there are. But it's not happening quick enough for my liking. We need a Scotland 2015 SNP style takeover or Boris and co are going to send us all to our doom pretty quick at the moment

The main problem is that if we did vote to go independent it would be from a largely left wing vote that has developed. The Welsh left wing would want to rejoin the EU. But would they want us?

So the two choices are to either remain in a UK Tory dystopian hell or go independent and face years of being cut off from Europe

How does this dovetail w/ the Welsh preferences as expressed in the 2016 Brexit referendum? Wales voted out (see here), unlike Scotland.

I don't think it's controversial to say the Welsh left wing would want to rejoin the EU. Plaid have been consistently pro-EU, and Wales won't find itself independent without Plaid being at least in a coalition government.

My maths isn't great, but looking at those figures, am I right in thinking that even if Wales's margin was 52.5% Remain, as opposed to 52.5% Leave, it wouldn't have been enough to prevent the overall UK result being a majority for Leave?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I don't think it's controversial to say the Welsh left wing would want to rejoin the EU. Plaid have been consistently pro-EU, and Wales won't find itself independent without Plaid being at least in a coalition government.

I didn't say that was controversial. I'm just implying that, in 2016, the majority Welsh voters wanted out. Has that now changed? If not, how would Plaid square that circle? Would they simply ignore it?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:My maths isn't great, but looking at those figures, am I right in thinking that even if Wales's margin was 52.5% Remain, as opposed to 52.5% Leave, it wouldn't have been enough to prevent the overall UK result being a majority for Leave?

Yep. Would have changed overall % for remain from 48.1% to 48.4% (1 d.p.) by my reckoning.

Another **** up of Cameron's in calling this stupid vote was not writing into it that it required a 2/3 majority to overturn the status quo. What a moron.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I don't think it's controversial to say the Welsh left wing would want to rejoin the EU. Plaid have been consistently pro-EU, and Wales won't find itself independent without Plaid being at least in a coalition government.

I didn't say that was controversial. I'm just implying that, in 2016, the majority Welsh voters wanted out. Has that now changed? If not, how would Plaid square that circle? Would they simply ignore it?

'More Welsh voters would vote to rejoin the European Union than those who would vote against in a referendum, a poll for ITV Wales has found.

Despite the relief that the UK and EU reached a last minute deal on their future relationship, 44% said they would vote to rejoin the European Union, as opposed to 38% who said no.'

https://www.itv.com/news/wales/2021-01-20/poll-finds-that-wales-would-vote-to-rejoin-the-european-union