Scots favour independence from United Kingdom, Ashcroft poll shows

[aright]

10 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

For a start could you quote a real newspaper for a change, not a sad Tory party rag,  one that has a huge axe to grind, and the dubious distinction of employing the same lying buffoon twice.

 

It has been made clear, over the past year or so, by a  number of senior EU representatives, that they do not see that Scotland would have any difficulty joining promptly on the simple logical basis that their law on trade standards, human rights, workers rights etc is already the same as EU law, where necessary. 

 

A Senior Spanish minister said just the other day that Scotland joining would cause no problem, so kindly deposit that BS Catalonia fear story to the bucket. Where is France's "Independence movement" BTW, is it quorate?

Yes I saw what the Spanish minister said in The Telegraph and it wasn't just the other day it was last year.. It seems you want to denigrate their reports when they don't support your views but accept them when they do...…...

 

Brexit could split apart the United Kingdom, according to Spain, as Madrid dropped its historic opposition to Scotland joining the EU as an independent country.

Josep Borrell, the Spanish foreign minister, was accused of trying to stoke Scottish nationalism as he said he was worried for the future of the Union.

Madrid also repeated its threats to sink the Brexit deal unless it won concessions over Gibraltar, before Theresa May heads to Brussels on Wednesday for a meeting with Jean-Claude Juncker which will present one of the last opportunities for her to improve the deal on offer.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/11/20/scotland-should-free-rejoin-eu-says-spanish-foreign-minister/ 

 

Spain has no axe to grind then does it. 

What real newspaper or political source do you trust and could recommend as being completely independent so I can check it out?

[Nigel Garvie]

13 minutes ago, aright said:

Yes I saw what the Spanish minister said in The Telegraph and it wasn't just the other day it was last year.. It seems you want to denigrate their reports when they don't support your views but accept them when they do...…...

 

Brexit could split apart the United Kingdom, according to Spain, as Madrid dropped its historic opposition to Scotland joining the EU as an independent country.

Josep Borrell, the Spanish foreign minister, was accused of trying to stoke Scottish nationalism as he said he was worried for the future of the Union.

Madrid also repeated its threats to sink the Brexit deal unless it won concessions over Gibraltar, before Theresa May heads to Brussels on Wednesday for a meeting with Jean-Claude Juncker which will present one of the last opportunities for her to improve the deal on offer.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/11/20/scotland-should-free-rejoin-eu-says-spanish-foreign-minister/ 

 

Spain has no axe to grind then does it. 

What real newspaper or political source do you trust and could recommend as being completely independent so I can check it out?

I read quite widely, a lot on the net from different sources, as a newspaper the Independent is pretty moderate, The Week generally gives two sides to a story, the BBC is much maligned, which is justified in Scotland where it is utterly biased against the SNP, but in general it is still streets ahead of other TV media. The US and European countries views on what is happening in the UK, is edifying, once you get over the embarrassment of being seen as a country lead by international joke, and a supporting cast of clowns.

 

The danger of reading the Torygraph, and the Tory Tabloids, only (Whether this applies to you or not) is that you start believing that what they say is the full story, and that their owners don't have an agenda. I do read articles in them from time to time in order to keep a broad view. I draw the line at the Express though which is not a newspaper, more journalism's answer to Ebola.

 

"It seems you want to denigrate their reports when they don't support your views but accept them when they do". This is not logical, I didn't get the info from them in the first place so how could I be "Accepting their view". 

[aright]

2 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

I read quite widely, a lot on the net from different sources, as a newspaper the Independent is pretty moderate, The Week generally gives two sides to a story, the BBC is much maligned, which is justified in Scotland where it is utterly biased against the SNP, but in general it is still streets ahead of other TV media. The US and European countries views on what is happening in the UK, is edifying, once you get over the embarrassment of being seen as a country lead by international joke, and a supporting cast of clowns.

 

The danger of reading the Torygraph, and the Tory Tabloids, only (Whether this applies to you or not) is that you start believing that what they say is the full story, and that their owners don't have an agenda. I do read articles in them from time to time in order to keep a broad view. I draw the line at the Express though which is not a newspaper, more journalism's answer to Ebola.

 

"It seems you want to denigrate their reports when they don't support your views but accept them when they do". This is not logical, I didn't get the info from them in the first place so how could I be "Accepting their view". 

"It seems you want to denigrate their reports when they don't support your views but accept them when they do". This is not logical, I didn't get the info from them in the first place so how could I be "Accepting their view".

 

I will try to make it clearer.

You said A Senior Spanish minister said just the other day that Scotland joining would cause no problem, so kindly deposit that BS Catalonia fear story to the bucket.

 

I don't know your source of information and if it gave the other side of the argument you didn't mention it.

The Telegraph in the link I provided, gave me the same info but also gave me their possible reason for saying it ….Madrid also repeated its threats to sink the Brexit deal unless it won concessions over Gibraltar,. This left me to make up my own mind regarding the issue. One reason I like the Telegraph.

I read the Telegraph every day with an internet connection almost cover to cover because it accommodates my current political feelings, I have a paper at work, of a different political persuasion, which I read selectively and I use my Public Library about once a month and read articles in mags that take my fancy. I have voted for all 3 main political parties in my life time, I am not wedded to any of them. If there was a GE tomorrow I know who I would vote for. Elections next year would depend on the PM the governments performance and their manifestos. 

The danger in reading any newspaper is accepting what they say as gospel and not having the ability to put your own take on the written word.  

 

 

[sandyf]

18 hours ago, aright said:

There is no Queue? The Commission disagrees with you! You obviously know better than the EU Commission!

 

European Commission: Independent Scotland would have to join queue for EU membership

An independent Scotland would start life outside the EU and be forced to join the queue for membership, the European Commission’s official representative in the UK has said in a major blow to Nicola Sturgeon’s Brexit strategy.

 

She said there are several countries waiting to become member states, including Montenegro and Serbia, and an independent Scotland “would join that list.” This would mean Scotland being outside both the UK and EU for an indeterminate period.

 

With the SNP’s leadership reviewing their stance on currency, she said a separate Scotland would have to commit in principle to joining the euro to get membership and show how it intended to bring down its huge deficit, which is even larger than Greece’s.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/10/european-commission-independent-scotland-would-have-join-queue/

More garbage. The EU said they would join the list of candidates, they did not say they would go to the back of the queue.

[Jip99]

7 minutes ago, sandyf said:

More garbage. The EU said they would join the list of candidates, they did not say they would go to the back of the queue.

 

 

I, for one, hope they go to the top of the list.

 

 

It would be hypocritical of me to want independence for the UK from the EU and not support independence for Scotland from the UK......... as long as the majority of Scottish nationals vote for it.

[sandyf]

17 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 Indeed.

 

But your original argument appeared to be, reinforced by your response to @sandyf, that an independent Scotland would have to join a queue behind other states seeking membership and wait until they had been granted it before their application was even considered.

 

Do you now accept that is incorrect?

The purveyors of anti independence rhetoric will twist anything that gets said in pursuit of that agenda.

The comments from the EU was procedural and were effectively neutral, they cannot make any valid comment on an application that does not exist.

 

Albania, the Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey are candidate countries.

Negotiations are held with each candidate country to determine their ability to apply EU legislation (acquis) and examine their possible request for transition periods. In order to conduct the accession negotiations, EU legislation and standards are divided into 35 chapters which are negotiated one by one. DG Environment is assisting the countries particularly in preparing to comply with the environmental component of chapter 27.

An underlying principle of the negotiations is that countries have to fully transpose and implement the EU legislation by the time of accession.

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/enlarg/candidates.htm

[aright]

 

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

More garbage. The EU said they would join the list of candidates, they did not say they would go to the back of the queue.

Neither did I, I just quoted a link. You need to keep up, The link specifically says the EU said "and be forced to join the queue" . Where did I say they would be at the back of the queue? What I said was ……..

 

"It is unlikely Scotland will wait 20 years to join and I don't think they will be at the back of the queue but my point is it's not going to happen in 3 weeks and the EU have already said they will not consider an application until Scotland is independent."

 

You have put aside the EU's concerns about Scotlands deficit and currency problem and for all your prattle about the preferential treatment Scotland's application will get; the one question I asked people like yourself has not been answered.

 

How long do you think it will take then and what's the plan to cover the interim period?

 

I look forward to your answer.

 

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, aright said:

 

Neither did I, I just quoted a link. You need to keep up, The link specifically says the EU said "and be forced to join the queue" . Where did I say they would be at the back of the queue? What I said was ……..

 

"It is unlikely Scotland will wait 20 years to join and I don't think they will be at the back of the queue but my point is it's not going to happen in 3 weeks and the EU have already said they will not consider an application until Scotland is independent."

 

You have put aside the EU's concerns about Scotlands deficit and currency problem and for all your prattle about the preferential treatment Scotland's application will get; the one question I asked people like yourself has not been answered.

 

How long do you think it will take then and what's the plan to cover the interim period?

 

I look forward to your answer.

 

I take it your middle name is Teflon, and with even more hypothetical garbage.

[aright]

I would have thought the Scottish independence issue was totally hypothetical.

Try being informed instead of just opinionated.

[7by7]

2 hours ago, aright said:

<snip>

Neither did I, I just quoted a link. You need to keep up, The link specifically says the EU said "and be forced to join the queue" .

 The author of the piece said that the European Commission’s official representative in the UK said that an independent Scotland "would be forced to join the queue."

 

But when it came to a quote of what was actually said by the representative, that became "would join that list."

 

Joining a queue and joining a list are not the same.

 

 

 

[aright]

34 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 The author of the piece said that the European Commission’s official representative in the UK said that an independent Scotland "would be forced to join the queue."

 

But when it came to a quote of what was actually said by the representative, that became "would join that list."

 

Joining a queue and joining a list are not the same.

 

 

 

How many times do I have to say I didn't say it. Where did I say it?

I said "It is unlikely Scotland will wait 20 years to join and I don't think they will be at the back of the queue but my point is it's not going to happen in 3 weeks and the EU have already said they will not consider an application until Scotland is independent."

If that's all you have to hang your hat on complain to the European Commission's official representative and tell her she got it all wrong; I am sure she will overrule herself.....pedantry isn't my bag.

Your argument isn't with me it's with the EU......they made the reference to queues and lists not me.

Do you want to try the hypothetical question?

How long do you think it will take then and what's the plan to cover the interim period?

 

[Slip]

7 minutes ago, aright said:

How many times do I have to say I didn't say it. Where did I say it?

I said "It is unlikely Scotland will wait 20 years to join and I don't think they will be at the back of the queue but my point is it's not going to happen in 3 weeks and the EU have already said they will not consider an application until Scotland is independent."

If that's all you have to hang your hat on complain to the European Commission's official representative and tell her she got it all wrong; I am sure she will overrule herself.....pedantry isn't my bag.

Your argument isn't with me it's with the EU......they made the reference to queues and lists not me.

Do you want to try the hypothetical question?

How long do you think it will take then and what's the plan to cover the interim period?

 

His argument (and yours) seems like it should be not with Jacqueline Minor, but with the Torygraph who mis-quoted/ misrepresented the EU official as using the word 'queue' when she actually used the word 'list'.  But this isn't surprising for that particular newspaper.

[aright]

7 minutes ago, Slip said:

His argument (and yours) seems like it should be not with Jacqueline Minor, but with the Torygraph who mis-quoted/ misrepresented the EU official as using the word 'queue' when she actually used the word 'list'.  But this isn't surprising for that particular newspaper.

I haven't read any reports of her being misquoted or misrepresented perhaps you have....can we see it/ them, or are you just making it up as you go along. Punters can agree or disagree with the broad scope of her position but lets not get bogged down with pedantry. The only issue from the link people seem to want to discuss is the difference between queues and lists...…. that imo is small minded. No one has commented on the big issue problems with the Scottish deficit and currency issue. I wonder why?

 

 

[RuamRudy]

I haven't read any reports of her being misquoted or misrepresented perhaps you have....can we see it/ them, or are you just making it up as you go along. Punters can agree or disagree with the broad scope of her position but lets not get bogged down with pedantry. The only issue from the link people seem to want to discuss is the difference between queues and lists...…. that imo is small minded. No one has commented on the big issue problems with the Scottish deficit and currency issue. I wonder why?
 
 

Then what was your thinking when you posted the article? Essentially it reads that there is a list of applicant states, and that Scotland would be added to that list if and when it applied - hardly groundbreaking stuff. How did you think it would advance the discussion?

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Slip]

26 minutes ago, aright said:

I haven't read any reports of her being misquoted or misrepresented perhaps you have....can we see it/ them, or are you just making it up as you go along. Punters can agree or disagree with the broad scope of her position but lets not get bogged down with pedantry. The only issue from the link people seem to want to discuss is the difference between queues and lists...…. that imo is small minded. No one has commented on the big issue problems with the Scottish deficit and currency issue. I wonder why?

 

 

From the article: 
 

Quote

 

An independent Scotland would start life outside the EU and be forced to join the queue for membership, the European Commission’s official representative in the UK has said in a major blow to Nicola Sturgeon’s Brexit strategy.

 

 

 

 

Quote

She said there are several countries waiting to become member states, including Montenegro and Serbia, and an independent Scotland “would join that list.” This would mean Scotland being outside both the UK and EU for an indeterminate period.

Perhaps mis-characterised would be fairer, but I'm not convinced.  The actual quote of her words reported she said they would have to join a list.  The first paragraph in the report said that she said they would have to join a queue (no quotation but a representation of what she said.  (an inaccurate one at that, as can be seen by the actual quote.)  These two things are not the same which is why some posters pulled you on what you said.  I don't think that is your fault.  I think it is the paper's fault.

EDIT: By the way here is the video that I imagine the Telegraph report came from.  I'm sure you will notice that the interviewer is the one who uses the word "queue" but Minor does not agree it.  Hence my argument that the newspaper has misrepresented what she said.

 

[aright]

8 minutes ago, Slip said:

From the article: 
 

 

Perhaps mis-characterised would be fairer, but I'm not convinced.  The actual quote of her words reported she said they would have to join a list.  The first paragraph in the report said that she said they would have to join a queue (no quotation but a representation of what she said.  (an inaccurate one at that, as can be seen by the actual quote.)  These two things are not the same which is why some posters pulled you on what you said.  I don't think that is your fault.  I think it is the paper's fault.

Thanks for a balanced reply

You don't seem to like the Telegraph but this wasn't the only source of the EU's position on Independence. The Scotsman also uses the words queue and list. I hope we are not going to accuse all sources of misrepresentation because they are of an opposite opinion. To make my position perfectly clear I am all for Independence for Scotland if they have a democratic mandate.

I have yet to see evidence that Scotland will get a special deal in Brexit negotiations. Ms Minor discounted this but am willing to accept it if someone can show me evidence on the basis of the large issues like deficit and currency.

 

Brexit: ‘Independent Scotland would need to join EU queue’

 Jacqueline Minor, the head of representation for the European Commission in the UK, said if Scotland became independent and wanted to join the EU it would be added to the list of candidate countries including Montenegro, Serbia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 

Ms Minor also poured cold water on Scotland’s ability to secure a special deal in Brexit negotiations.

 

“As the SNP was repeatedly told during the (2014 independence) referendum campaign, an independent Scotland would have to apply to join the EU like any other country.

 

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/general-election/brexit-independent-scotland-would-need-to-join-eu-queue-1-4362941

 

[ratcatcher]

No big deal. Just a minor tweak.

                                  The Untied Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland.

[Slip]

38 minutes ago, aright said:

Thanks for a balanced reply

You don't seem to like the Telegraph but this wasn't the only source of the EU's position on Independence. The Scotsman also uses the words queue and list. I hope we are not going to accuse all sources of misrepresentation because they are of an opposite opinion. To make my position perfectly clear I am all for Independence for Scotland if they have a democratic mandate.

I have yet to see evidence that Scotland will get a special deal in Brexit negotiations. Ms Minor discounted this but am willing to accept it if someone can show me evidence on the basis of the large issues like deficit and currency.

 

Brexit: ‘Independent Scotland would need to join EU queue’

 Jacqueline Minor, the head of representation for the European Commission in the UK, said if Scotland became independent and wanted to join the EU it would be added to the list of candidate countries including Montenegro, Serbia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 

Ms Minor also poured cold water on Scotland’s ability to secure a special deal in Brexit negotiations.

 

“As the SNP was repeatedly told during the (2014 independence) referendum campaign, an independent Scotland would have to apply to join the EU like any other country.

 

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/general-election/brexit-independent-scotland-would-need-to-join-eu-queue-1-4362941

 

You're right, I don't like the Telegraph much as it is too partisan, but then who isn't these days.  I'm surprised to see the Scotsman making the same 'mistake'.  Perhaps it's all just lazy journalism after all.  Your other points all seem fair to me.  I just saw an article from the time (2014) quoting an EU bureaucrat as saying that it would be "practically impossible" for Scotland to join.

 

Another edit- sorry- I notice The Scotsman is unionist, so perhaps it's not that surprising that they have used the same loaded wording.

[aright]

13 minutes ago, Slip said:

You're right, I don't like the Telegraph much as it is too partisan, but then who isn't these days.  I'm surprised to see the Scotsman making the same 'mistake'.  Perhaps it's all just lazy journalism after all.  Your other points all seem fair to me.  I just saw an article from the time (2014) quoting an EU bureaucrat as saying that it would be "practically impossible" for Scotland to join.

I think they most probably can join the EU once independent but it won't be a quick process. The EU will require them to join the euro and will want to see a plan to tackle the deficit which they approve....look at how much time was taken over the Greek problems and they still aren't solved. I also feel it's naïve to call for independence without explaining to the electorate how they will be without the Barnett Formula or EU subsidies for an undetermined period and how they will accommodate that problem. That explanation alone could well kill thoughts of independence. To a lesser or greater extent their decision might also be influenced by how the rest of us do outside the EU. 

[RuamRudy]

A very interesting comment from arch Unionist Sarah Smith of the BBC in the following article:

 

Does Ruth Davidson going make independence more likely?

 

"I realise that anecdotes are not evidence but I am struck by how frequently I hear people all over the country saying that they have now changed their minds and would vote for independence if there was another referendum."

 

She concludes 

 

"Without the dynamism and charisma of Ruth Davidson leading the campaign for the UK where will a future "Better Together" campaign get its energy from now the Scottish Labour Party is a mere shadow of its former self?"

 

[RuamRudy]

Apologies for linking to such a tawdry hate-filled rag like the Express, but it seems that even this bastion of oppressive negativity is starting to show encouraging signs of seeing the light:

 

END of the UNITED Kingdom: Election increases IndyRef bid- SNP to wipe out Scottish Tories

 

"THE SNP looks set to wipe out the Scottish Tories in a future general election, paving the way for Nicola Sturgeon to make her bid to break up the Union with a second independence referendum, according to shock poll results."

[Nigel Garvie]

12 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Apologies for linking to such a tawdry hate-filled rag like the Express, but it seems that even this bastion of oppressive negativity is starting to show encouraging signs of seeing the light:

 

END of the UNITED Kingdom: Election increases IndyRef bid- SNP to wipe out Scottish Tories

 

"THE SNP looks set to wipe out the Scottish Tories in a future general election, paving the way for Nicola Sturgeon to make her bid to break up the Union with a second independence referendum, according to shock poll results."

Love it - can't wait. Hunt them down on the grouse moors!

[JamesBlond]

Hurry up and kick those whingeing Scots out of the Union. I'm tired of hearing Scottish newsreaders on the BBC. They don't even disguise their ludicrous accent any more.

And while we're about it, kick the Welsh out too - let's see how they get on without England. As for N. Ireland, they can have a civil war to decide which side they want to be on.  Sorted.

Alternatively, they could all just stay part of the United  Kingdom and stop whining.

[7by7]

12 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

I'm tired of hearing Scottish newsreaders on the BBC. They don't even disguise their ludicrous accent any more.

 Based upon many of your previous comments, I'd have thought it was those BBC newsreaders like George Alagiah and Clive Myrie that you really objected to.

 

But perhaps you can't get regular BBC TV news where you are?

[johnnybangkok]

18 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

Hurry up and kick those whingeing Scots out of the Union. I'm tired of hearing Scottish newsreaders on the BBC. They don't even disguise their ludicrous accent any more.

And while we're about it, kick the Welsh out too - let's see how they get on without England.

As for N. Ireland, they can have a civil war to decide which side they want to be on.

Sorted.

Alternatively, they could all just stay part of the United Kingdom and stop whining.

I see your xenophobia even extends to fellow British citizens.  

[JamesBlond]

8 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 Based upon many of your previous comments, I'd have thought it was those BBC newsreaders like George Alagiah and Clive Myrie that you really objected to.

 

But perhaps you can't get regular BBC TV news where you are?

All the racism baiting is getting boring. As are all the people without a sense of humour.

A Scottish person would understand the joke. If you're not Scottish - or even British? - best to keep out of it. This is why we all have a preference for our own cultures.

[7by7]

10 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

I see your xenophobia even extends to fellow British citizens.  

Is he British?

 

1 minute ago, JamesBlond said:

All the racism baiting is getting boring. As are all the people without a sense of humour.

A Scottish person would understand the joke. If you're not Scottish - or even British? - best to keep out of it. This is why we all have a preference for our own cultures.

 Then stop making overt racist comments!

 

I am both British and live in the UK; what about you?

 

 

 

[johnnybangkok]

4 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

All the racism baiting is getting boring. As are all the people without a sense of humour.

A Scottish person would understand the joke. If you're not Scottish - or even British? - best to keep out of it. This is why we all have a preference for our own cultures.

I'm Scottish.

I didn't understand 'the joke'.

[JamesBlond]

50 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Is he British?

 

 Then stop making overt racist comments!

 

I am both British and live in the UK; what about you?

 

"In a PC world, humour is a capital offence" - Taki

If you think joking about someone's accent is racist, you are a public nuisance.

Anyway, let me explain the joke. The Scots are whining about leaving the Union, therefore at issue is a question of cultural connection. Poking fun at their accent is an example of what we British call 'taking the mickey' - it's a test of camaraderie. If they laugh, then we have a connection (sense of humour) and they can stay. If they get offended, then it's proof that they we have come adrift and they might as well leave. I hope you are now better informed about British culture. And please, stop the 'racism' hysteria - that is way off the mark.

Btw, I am British and my ancestors have been British since... ooh... the dark ages when Britain was nothing but bog and forest. How about yours?

 

[johnnybangkok]

8 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

"In a PC world, humour is a capital offence" - Taki

If you think joking about someone's accent is racist, you are a public nuisance.

Anyway, let me explain the joke. The Scots are whining about leaving the Union, therefore at issue is a question of cultural connection. Poking fun at their accent is an example of what we British call 'taking the mickey' - it's a test of camaraderie. If they laugh, then we have a connection (sense of humour) and they can stay. If they get offended, then it's proof that they we have come adrift and they might as well leave. I hope you are now better informed about British culture. And please, stop the 'racism' hysteria - that is way off the mark.

Btw, I am British and my ancestors have been British since... ooh... the dark ages when Britain was nothing but bog and forest. How about yours?

 

Still Scottish.

Still don't get 'the joke'.

I think it's because it's just not funny.