UK election result 'blew away' argument for second Brexit vote: Labour's Starmer

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, kingdong said:

They haven,t got a currency.......i,ve got a 25 billion Zimbabwe dollar note some where,they only take usd out there now,probably be like that in Scotland if you leave.

Why would it probably be like that? Show us thick jocks your superior grasp of economics so that we can finally understand the futility of ever thinking that we were capable of looking after our own affairs. I await enlightenment with eager anticipation. 

[samran]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

Why would it probably be like that? Show us thick jocks your superior grasp of economics so that we can finally understand the futility of ever thinking that we were capable of looking after our own affairs. I await enlightenment with eager anticipation. 

Clearly them leaving a union is fine, but when you want to leave their union, well, that's unacceptable. Thank god for their benevolent paternalism!

[jayboy]

8 minutes ago, sandyf said:

It is you that did not think very clearly when you voted for brexit, which was also a vote for breaking up the UK, and are now trying to cover your tracks.

As long as the UK is a member of the UK then Scotland has no chance of independence without the approval of the UK government but once out of the EU things change.

During the Kosovo proceedings the UK supported the right to self determination under international law, Bojo wold have extreme difficulty retracting that statement. When push comes to shove, U turns are not that uncommon.

 

Article 1.2 of the UN Charter recognises the principle of self-determination – making this a right which transcends any state’s domestic laws. A fundamental principle of international law is that the provisions of a state’s constitution cannot be deemed inherently legal – they must equate with international law. For example, a constitution may sanction racial discrimination or genocide, but this is superseded by the international laws which prohibit both. To claim that a state’s constitution is the sole determinant on the legality of action taken within that state is to essentially reject the very idea of international law.

http://theconversation.com/self-determination-is-legal-under-international-law-its-hypocritical-to-argue-otherwise-for-catalonia-86558

 

 

I didn't vote for Brexit.I was and am still a firm Remainer.

 

Furthermore I accept and always accept that Scotland has the right to be independent if its people so decide.There was such a referendum and in due course there may well be another one but it will be Westminster not Edinburgh that determines timing.My point in these posts was simply to emphasize the extreme practical difficulties on the currency side.The SNP leadership fully grasps this.You apparently do not.

[stevenl]

23 minutes ago, jayboy said:

I didn't vote for Brexit.I was and am still a firm Remainer.

 

Furthermore I accept and always accept that Scotland has the right to be independent if its people so decide.There was such a referendum and in due course there may well be another one but it will be Westminster not Edinburgh that determines timing.My point in these posts was simply to emphasize the extreme practical difficulties on the currency side.The SNP leadership fully grasps this.You apparently do not.

So in leaving the EU the UK determines timing and the EU doesn't get a vote.

But in leaving the UK Scotland doesn't determine and the UK gets a vote.

 

Hypocritical much?

[JonnyF]

24 minutes ago, stevenl said:

So in leaving the EU the UK determines timing and the EU doesn't get a vote.

But in leaving the UK Scotland doesn't determine and the UK gets a vote.

 

Hypocritical much?

Scotland had a vote and voted Remain in 2014. But the nationalists don't like the result so they want another go.

 

If the UK had voted to Remain in the EU in 2016, would you be advocating another Brexit referendum to leave just 6 years later? 

 

Why not have one every year until the stupid electorate give the 'correct' result. After all, how can more votes be less democratic, right? ????

[jayboy]

33 minutes ago, stevenl said:

So in leaving the EU the UK determines timing and the EU doesn't get a vote.

But in leaving the UK Scotland doesn't determine and the UK gets a vote.

 

Hypocritical much?

I have no idea what point/s you are trying to make?

[stevenl]

19 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Scotland had a vote and voted Remain in 2014. But the nationalists don't like the result so they want another go.

 

If the UK had voted to Remain in the EU in 2016, would you be advocating another Brexit referendum to leave just 6 years later? 

 

Why not have one every year until the stupid electorate give the 'correct' result. After all, how can more votes be less democratic, right? ????

Thanks, but not related at all to my post.

[sandyf]

6 hours ago, jayboy said:

I didn't vote for Brexit.I was and am still a firm Remainer.

 

Furthermore I accept and always accept that Scotland has the right to be independent if its people so decide.There was such a referendum and in due course there may well be another one but it will be Westminster not Edinburgh that determines timing.My point in these posts was simply to emphasize the extreme practical difficulties on the currency side.The SNP leadership fully grasps this.You apparently do not.

When all else fails attack the messenger.

Nobody has ever said it would be easy but other countries have adopted the Euro without too much problem and as the SNP have indicated an intention to join the EU it would be the obvious way forward. You have just tried to make mountains out of molehills.

At the end of the day currency will be well down in the list of difficulties facing an independent Scotland, but no more so than those facing England as it leaves the EU.

 

As for timing, if Bojo refuses the Section 30 request as is most likely, he will no longer have any say in the timing.

A consultative referendum which does not need Westminster approval could possibly trigger a declaration of independence which through precedence on international law, Westminster should support.

Reality is he would backtrack in some way or other before it came to that, he wouldn't want to tell the Queen she must give up Balmoral.

[sandyf]

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Scotland had a vote and voted Remain in 2014. But the nationalists don't like the result so they want another go.

Scotland voted as Unionists, and they are still Unionists, they want to be part of the European Union. Something the English nationalists fail to understand.

 

[jayboy]

36 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Scotland voted as Unionists, and they are still Unionists, they want to be part of the European Union. Something the English nationalists fail to understand.

 

What have English nationalists got to do with it?

 

As to the Scots you profoundly overstate your case, not least because there are significant numbers of SNP supporters who prefer to remain outside the EU.

 

In the recent election the SNP won 45% votes but 55% voted for non independence parties.The SNP did very well but the first past the post system gives them more MPs than the number of supporters reflect.This would not apply in a referendum.Let's see what happens in the Scottish elections in 2021.If there is increased success the UK government will I think be pressured to accept a referendum on independence. Whether they would win it is another matter altogether

Edited January 9, 2020 by jayboy

[billd766]

19 hours ago, Enki said:

Yes, the UK is close to be "free loaders" if you want to call it that way. After all half of all administration are EU institutions and paid by the EU and not the UK ... go figure.

Where does the EU administration get the money to pay for it all? Perhaps through the very few countries who pay out more than they get back

[Rookiescot]

45 minutes ago, jayboy said:

What have English nationalists got to do with it?

 

As to the Scots you profoundly overstate your case, not least because there are significant numbers of SNP supporters who prefer to remain outside the EU.

 

In the recent election the SNP won 45% votes but 55% voted for non independence parties.The SNP did very well but the first past the post system gives them more MPs than the number of supporters reflect.This would not apply in a referendum.Let's see what happens in the Scottish elections in 2021.If there is increased success the UK government will I think be pressured to accept a referendum on independence. Whether they would win it is another matter altogether

It was a general election not a referendum.

You are failing to allow for the tactical voting that will have occurred.

Johnson is in number 10 with 43.6% of the votes cast and apparently has a mandate from the people to get Brexit done.

The SNP won 45% of the votes in Scotland but somehow this does not become a mandate for another referendum?

As usual British/English nationalists display utter hypocrisy. 

[jayboy]

5 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

The SNP won 45% of the votes in Scotland but somehow this does not become a mandate for another referendum?

Of course it doesn't particularly as the previous referendum was agreed to settle the matter for a generation.

 

As previously pointed out a further good result fo the SNP in 2021 will make the demand for another referendum morally hard to resist

[Rookiescot]

19 minutes ago, jayboy said:

Of course it doesn't particularly as the previous referendum was agreed to settle the matter for a generation.

 

As previously pointed out a further good result fo the SNP in 2021 will make the demand for another referendum morally hard to resist

Where was it agreed to settle the matter for a generation?

Wasnt in the section 30 order.

Wasn't on the ballot paper.

Cameron never once mentioned it was a once in a generation event.

The once in a generation all you Britnats hide behind was an off the cuff remark in the same way Johnson said he would rather be dead in a ditch.

Should Brexit be put on hold until Johnson is actually found dead in a ditch?

[Jip99]

27 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Where was it agreed to settle the matter for a generation?

Wasnt in the section 30 order.

Wasn't on the ballot paper.

Cameron never once mentioned it was a once in a generation event.

The once in a generation all you Britnats hide behind was an off the cuff remark in the same way Johnson said he would rather be dead in a ditch.

Should Brexit be put on hold until Johnson is actually found dead in a ditch?

 

STILL grasping at straws.........

[kingdong]

9 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Why would it probably be like that? Show us thick jocks your superior grasp of economics so that we can finally understand the futility of ever thinking that we were capable of looking after our own affairs. I await enlightenment with eager anticipation. 

I addressed a specific point,remember your last election,when Scotland thought they could leave and still retain sterling (and obviously all their perks and subsidies like free prescriptions and education)when it was pointed out this was not to be the result was stay. Well  must dash,have got to go to the chemist and pick up ( and pay)for my prescription.

[evadgib]

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

Scotland voted as Unionists, and they are still Unionists, they want to be part of the European Union. Something the English nationalists fail to understand.

Scotland participated in a democratic vote then failed to observe losers consent when it went pear shaped. That's a bit like placing a tenner on a lottery ticket on Saturday & demanding your money back on Monday morning cos it didn't win.

Edited January 9, 2020 by evadgib

[kingdong]

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

When all else fails attack the messenger.

Nobody has ever said it would be easy but other countries have adopted the Euro without too much problem and as the SNP have indicated an intention to join the EU it would be the obvious way forward. You have just tried to make mountains out of molehills.

At the end of the day currency will be well down in the list of difficulties facing an independent Scotland, but no more so than those facing England as it leaves the EU.

 

As for timing, if Bojo refuses the Section 30 request as is most likely, he will no longer have any say in the timing.

A consultative referendum which does not need Westminster approval could possibly trigger a declaration of independence which through precedence on international law, Westminster should support.

Reality is he would backtrack in some way or other before it came to that, he wouldn't want to tell the Queen she must give up Balmoral.

Do you honestly think the eu would let Scotland rejoin? Look at what would happen then,Catalonia,the Basque region and several other regions wanting independence and  then come back?,dream on.

[kingdong]

6 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Scotland participated in a democratic vote then failed to observe losers consent when it went pear shaped. That's a bit like placing a tenner on a lottery ticket on Saturday & demanding your money back on Monday morning cos it didn't win

 like the referendum for brexit,then 3 years of political turmoil till democracy prevailed in the general election,sorry,people's vote.j

[jayboy]

1 hour ago, Rookiescot said:

Where was it agreed to settle the matter for a generation?

Wasnt in the section 30 order.

Wasn't on the ballot paper.

Cameron never once mentioned it was a once in a generation event.

The once in a generation all you Britnats hide behind was an off the cuff remark in the same way Johnson said he would rather be dead in a ditch.

Should Brexit be put on hold until Johnson is actually found dead in a ditch?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/17/scottish-independence-referendum-yes-no-agree-once-in-lifetime-vote

Edited January 9, 2020 by jayboy

[JonnyF]

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

Scotland voted as Unionists, and they are still Unionists, they want to be part of the European Union. Something the English nationalists fail to understand.

 

And there I was thinking they wanted independence.

 

Turns out they want to be an insignificant minnow in a huge federalist project.

[kingdong]

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

 

Nobody has ever said it would be easy but other countries have adopted the Euro without too much problem 

Like greece?

[Rookiescot]

27 minutes ago, jayboy said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/17/scottish-independence-referendum-yes-no-agree-once-in-lifetime-vote

Thats it?

Thats your overwhelming arguement as to why there can be not be another refereendum. The opinion of Prof John Curtice?

ROFL I am honestly laughing here.

 

Where is the legally binding commitment to no second referendum?

[Rookiescot]

1 hour ago, Jip99 said:

 

STILL grasping at straws.........

Maybe you could refute the points I made.

[Rookiescot]

56 minutes ago, kingdong said:

Do you honestly think the eu would let Scotland rejoin? Look at what would happen then,Catalonia,the Basque region and several other regions wanting independence and  then come back?,dream on.

Scotland is a country not a region.

 

[jayboy]

8 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Thats it?

Thats your overwhelming arguement as to why there can be not be another refereendum. The opinion of Prof John Curtice?

ROFL I am honestly laughing here.

 

Where is the legally binding commitment to no second referendum?

You unaccountably do not mention the unambiguous view of the then SNP leader.

[Rookiescot]

2 minutes ago, jayboy said:

You unaccountably do not mention the unambiguous view of the then SNP leader.

It was an off the cuff remark which he made and also said "but thats my opinion".

Where is the legally binding commitment to it being once in a generation? 

Oh thats right. There is none.

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, kingdong said:

Do you honestly think the eu would let Scotland rejoin? Look at what would happen then,Catalonia,the Basque region and several other regions wanting independence and  then come back?,dream on.

Scotland may join, I am sure,

it would be political suicide for EU to refuse Scotland membership.

 

EU refusing Scotland membership I see as an absolutely impossible scenario

[Rookiescot]

1 hour ago, kingdong said:

I addressed a specific point,remember your last election,when Scotland thought they could leave and still retain sterling (and obviously all their perks and subsidies like free prescriptions and education)when it was pointed out this was not to be the result was stay. Well  must dash,have got to go to the chemist and pick up ( and pay)for my prescription.

The UK pound is a fiat currency. You could not stop Scotland using the pound if it so wishes. Please google fiat currency. 

Stop with the Daily Mein Kampf parroting of what Scotland can or cannot do.

For those of us who understand such stuff you simply make yourself look foolish.

 

[jayboy]

6 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

It was an off the cuff remark which he made and also said "but thats my opinion".

Where is the legally binding commitment to it being once in a generation? 

Oh thats right. There is none.

Of course there's no legal commitment:it was just the clear understanding between all interested parties - far more than off the cuff remarks.But I could produce a hundred references and you would dismiss them all with some puerile gesture.

 

Nevertheless given the progress of the SNP and the prospect of further gains in 2021, I certainly don't expect that understanding to be honoured on the SNP side.Indeed in the new Westminster Parliament the Scottish MPs have taken the Referendum issue up with a vengeance.Nothing will happen quickly but they expect to wear the Government down.Perhaps they will succeed.

 

Incidentally one area - among many - where you are hopelessly ignorant is your assumption that English nationalists want to deny Scottish independence.They don't at all: they want to get rid of Scotland as soon as possible.The people who are sad are the believers in the United KIngdom (including hundreds of thousands of Scots) who feel the Union has served the various nations well.If Scottish independence ever happens these people won't be angry or vengeful: they will wish Scotland well as a key neighbour tied irrevocably by blood, culture and history.