Another Scottish Referendum just around the corner?

[pete75]

Name calling again, the refuge of those with no arguments. Can't be bothered to answer.

As for a different point of view in Scotland, it does exist and is a voice of reason.

Al

Believe me I have plenty of arguments not all of which centre upon how much money we will have in our pockets which seems to be the sole criteria for those who argue against.

Yes - didn't a lot of the Brexit voters do so because they wanted us to leave the EU "run our own affairs" and any subsequent economic problems would be a price worth paying for it. Why now object to giving Scotland an opportunity to vote for the same?

[JimL]

The holier than thou attitude of the SNP contingent at Westminster is starting to wear a bit thin and the mean spirited response to David Cameron's last Parliamentary appearance as Prime Minister didn't reflect well in my opinion.

+1 Went down like a lead balloon. Creating a reciprocal anti Scot feeling in many which has never existed before. Very sad. But, its obviously the sort of response that the SNP is actively trying to provoke. Their many opponents in Scotland need to make their voices clearly heard otherwise they will find themselves in a broke Scottish Socialist 'Paradise' ruled by the undemocratic EU, constantly raiding their Sporrans.

Al

You obviously live in a different universe from myself and I suspect from the many thousands of vulnerable people who have suffered from Cameron's austerity policies. You think that the person responsible for the EU referendum, which may cause as yet unknown hardships to many ordinary people and may yet cause the break-up of the UK, should be applauded upon leaving his position.....I don't. His irresponsibility as a Prime Minister in launching Brexit will be recorded in history as will the condemnation of his austerity policies by the UN as being a breach of international human right obligations.....but hey...let's give him a clap and not be a spoilsport. Why even a little curtsey might be appropriate.

There is no austerity policy

Six years ago Ed Balls (followed by the SNP) accused Osborne of cutting too much ,too quickly when he (Osborne) pledged to eliminate the deficit in 5 years..After six years the deficit is reduced by 1/3 in monetary terms and by half as a percentage of GDP, how slow should they go?

Cameron made an election pledge to hold a referendum and kept his word, he should be applauded for that. He should also be applauded for the way he accepted the democratic decision, in stark contrast many on the other side who like to loudly proclaim their democratic credentials.

I don't expect them to curtsey btu I do expect common courtesy and so I think do most people in Scotland.

And no I didn't vote for David Cameron

[JimL]

Without Scottish oil and gas (all 200+ years worth of it)

Fact Check - There is nowhere near 200+ years of Scottish oil and gas.

UK_oil_gas_production.png

Production from 1970 - 2012 43.6 BOE or so, estimates vary slightly. Estimated remaining reserves .....

Some 41 billion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) have already been produced from the United Kingdom Continental Shelf (UKCS) and it is estimated that a further 12 to 24 billion boe could be produced

The remaining reserves are of course mainly harder to find and more expensive to extract.

http://euanmearns.com/maximising-econom ... od-review/

And if we burn all the remaining reserves there won't be much of society left in 200 years.

I have always found the SNP policy of covering every available open space with windmills while at the same time promising great things on the revenues from burning every last drop of oil a bit contradictory.

[53x13]

Without Scottish oil and gas (all 200+ years worth of it)

Fact Check - There is nowhere near 200+ years of Scottish oil and gas.

UK_oil_gas_production.png

Production from 1970 - 2012 43.6 BOE or so, estimates vary slightly. Estimated remaining reserves .....

Some 41 billion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) have already been produced from the United Kingdom Continental Shelf (UKCS) and it is estimated that a further 12 to 24 billion boe could be produced

The remaining reserves are of course mainly harder to find and more expensive to extract.

http://euanmearns.com/maximising-econom ... od-review/

I've seen this tired graph rolled out over the years with tedious familiarity. It's a graph of easy to extract oil reserves. There's at least another 50 years of 'easy to get at' oil and gas, with technology advances the more difficult to get at deeper sea sea reserves will easily last another 200 years. The oil extraction tech that will be available in 50 years time will doubtless extend even that, and considerably.

Once the Scots get rid of the silly, utterly pointless fire crackers they have in Trident, then the entire west coast (which has this far been prohibited even test drilling to any extent) could potentially yield the same again.

Not that this makes any difference at all. As with the ludicrous Brexit vote 'it's not about the $$$s' baby...

[53x13]

Of course, the tired excuse for a graph is just North Sea production, test drilling is already active in 7 other Scottish sites, notably off the Clyde Coast where significant finds may very will provide high yield crude.

Not that it makes a whit of difference. The Scots just want what the British now have: true sovereignty and the freedom to run ones own affairs without the pig in the trough parasites of Westminster sucking the country dry.

[Psamathe]

Name calling again, the refuge of those with no arguments. Can't be bothered to answer.

As for a different point of view in Scotland, it does exist and is a voice of reason.

Al

Believe me I have plenty of arguments not all of which centre upon how much money we will have in our pockets which seems to be the sole criteria for those who argue against.

Yes - didn't a lot of the Brexit voters do so because they wanted us to leave the EU "run our own affairs" and any subsequent economic problems would be a price worth paying for it. Why now object to giving Scotland an opportunity to vote for the same?

That surprised me in the Brexit vote. I'm still unsure how many people believed the economists and their predictions (however much they made logical sense). I wondered if the sound bites from Leave, the "more unreliable experts who didn't predict the banking crisis supporting Project Fear" made it easy for people pre-displosed to vote Leave or wavering to vote Leave.

However, if such warnings were ignored in the Brexit referendum, I agree that they will probably be ignored in an independent Scotland referendum. And with a pretty right wing Conservative group running Westminster and no viable opposition holding them to account, I can see a Scottish referendum choosing an independent Scotland (and if I was in Scotland I'd now be voting to leave the UK). The Conservatives have really strengthened the case the independent Scotland campaigners can make.

Ian

[georgew]

................................................snip
There is no austerity policy

"George Osborne will announce fresh austerity measures on Wednesday as he delivers his eighth budget against the backdrop of a darkening economic outlook."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... -in-budget

"George Osborne’s austerity budgets show ever-diminishing returns"
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ng-returns

"George Osborne keeps austerity in mind for his eighth budget"
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... hth-budget

"George Osborne’s austerity choked off the recovery: Brexit is his legacy "
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... dum-revolt

"Thirteen million people live below the poverty line in the UK, with individuals going hungry every day for a range of reasons, from benefit delays to receiving an unexpected bill on a low income."
https://www.trusselltrust.org/what-we-do/

"Trussell Trust foodbank use remains at record high with over one million three-day emergency food supplies given to people in crisis in 2015/16. "
https://www.trusselltrust.org/news-and- ... est-stats/

"Food banks see 'shocking' rise in number of users"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27032642

Well......if you say so.

[JimL]

I gave up The Guardian years ago and not only because it got ridiculously expensive so I won't bother reading your links but there is no austerity policy ( I've now said it twice so it must be true)

[53x13]

I gave up The Guardian years ago and not only because it got ridiculously expensive so I won't bother reading your links but there is no austerity policy ( I've now said it twice so it must be true)

Manc33 says 'The earth is flat'...

I don't believe him either.

[Psamathe]

Another thought:

Last referendum it was pretty universally thought that it was Scotland leaving the UK and thus Scotland would be the new independent country and thus have to join the EU as a new member (adopting the €, going through all the "chapters", subject to acceptance by unanimous vote, etc.).

However, Scottish citizens are (mostly) also EU citizens and now that the UK is leaving the EU those Scottish citizens are presumably going to lose their EU citizenship (although there are apparently significant legal issues over that). Plus, Scotland is in effect a member of the EU. So 2nd referendum with UK leaving the EU there is a debatable element that it is the UK leaving and dragging Scotland with it as well. Scotland would just be choosing not to leave.

Ian

[blackbike]

I'm not sure leaving the UK would mean Scotland could get back into the EU.

Having just lost one of it biggest cash contributors, the UK, would the EU want to take back an ex-UK country which would not be a net contributor to the Brussels, but a drain on its finances?

I doubt it.

Other countries which are net recipients of EU money would probably veto Scotland's membership, fearing that Scotland would simply reduce the money they get from the reduced number of net contributors.

[53x13]

I'm not sure leaving the UK would mean Scotland could get back into the EU.

Having just lost one of it biggest cash contributors, the UK, would the EU want to take back an ex-UK country which would not be a net contributor to the Brussels, but a drain on its finances?

I doubt it.

Other countries which are net recipients of EU money would probably veto Scotland's membership, fearing that Scotland would simply reduce the money they get from the reduced number of net contributors.

You don't seem to get the time frame. If theres another Scottishrl referendum #before Article 50 comes into play (and that's looking to be kicked well into the long grass) Scotland will technically still BE in the EU, so it's simply a matter of cutting off the Brexit nose to spite it's face.

Scotland overwhelmingly voted to stay in Europe. For the EU, the prospect of welcoming a lost sheep back into the fold, while being able to gives the rUK a bloody nose AND be divisive and prevaricating over terms and conditions (which will ultimately involve rUK accepting free movement of people, if they won't bend for Norway or Switzerland, thet ain't doing no favours for big Theresa) must have them salivating at the jaw.

It's a win win for the EU. With the current administration in play, more austerity, snoopers charter ect ect, the break up of the UK is only a well timed referendum away.

It's not about the money, honey, it's about the decision making process.

[pete75]

I gave up The Guardian years ago and not only because it got ridiculously expensive so I won't bother reading your links but there is no austerity policy ( I've now said it twice so it must be true)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07 ... e-osborne/

[al_yrpal]

Anyway, it would be vetoed by Spain, they have said as much. Scotland voted decisively to remain a member of the UK. Thats how it stands and plenty of Scots want it to remain that way. The 'Nasty Party' has departed after sorting out Gordons socialist mess. The UK needs to come together to eliminate poverty, raise up those struggling and move forward.

Al

[blackbike]

I'm not sure leaving the UK would mean Scotland could get back into the EU.

Having just lost one of it biggest cash contributors, the UK, would the EU want to take back an ex-UK country which would not be a net contributor to the Brussels, but a drain on its finances?

I doubt it.

Other countries which are net recipients of EU money would probably veto Scotland's membership, fearing that Scotland would simply reduce the money they get from the reduced number of net contributors.

You don't seem to get the time frame. If theres another Scottishrl referendum #before Article 50 comes into play (and that's looking to be kicked well into the long grass) Scotland will technically still BE in the EU, so it's simply a matter of cutting off the Brexit nose to spite it's face.

Scotland overwhelmingly voted to stay in Europe. For the EU, the prospect of welcoming a lost sheep back into the fold, while being able to gives the rUK a bloody nose AND be divisive and prevaricating over terms and conditions (which will ultimately involve rUK accepting free movement of people, if they won't bend for Norway or Switzerland, thet ain't doing no favours for big Theresa) must have them salivating at the jaw.

It's a win win for the EU. With the current administration in play, more austerity, snoopers charter ect ect, the break up of the UK is only a well timed referendum away.

It's not about the money, honey, it's about the decision making process.

It is about the money.