Should supporting the UK in Europe be treasonous?

[floo]

Having put the revenue from the oil to good use will not magically make the future non revenue reappear.  When you are talking about nationhood, 50 years is not a long time. This is also why the arguments against independence based on the current low oil price are also nonsense. It'll give you a rocky road for the first few years, but nothing more.

Petrol is steadily going up in price.

[Anchorman]

One of the reasons for that, floo, is the collapsing £ due to international lack of confidence in Westminster's cackhanded handling of the whole brexit farce.

[L.A.]

One of the reasons for that, floo, is the collapsing £ due to international lack of confidence in Westminster's cackhanded handling of the whole brexit farce.

But world prices are also creeping back up. OPEC are finally starting to get their act together again.

[Hope]

One of the reasons for that, floo, is the collapsing £ due to international lack of confidence in Westminster's cackhanded handling of the whole brexit farce.

The problem with this arguement, Jim, is that the £ fell within minutes of the result of the referendum being announced.  The fall in the value is directly related to that vote and the lies that the Leavers were pedalling.

[Anchorman]

The problem with this arguement, Jim, is that the £ fell within minutes of the result of the referendum being announced.  The fall in the value is directly related to that vote and the lies that the Leavers were pedalling.

That wasn't an arguument, Hope - simply a statement. Although world prices are slowly creeping up, since we pay in dollars, the price will naturally rise faster here because of the international rise in lack of confidence in the pound - a situation which will only get worse as long as this Westminster uncertainty over what brexit means continues.
And that uncertainty will continue - the meeting between the pathetic Westminster prime minister and the leaders of the devolved nations two days ago showed just how disasterously fractured the so-called union is.
It will take more than the kings horses, kings men, and a government we did not vote for, to sort it out.

[Hope]

That wasn't an arguument, Hope - simply a statement. Although world prices are slowly creeping up, since we pay in dollars, the price will naturally rise faster here because of the international rise in lack of confidence in the pound - a situation which will only get worse as long as this Westminster uncertainty over what brexit means continues.
And that uncertainty will continue - the meeting between the pathetic Westminster prime minister and the leaders of the devolved nations two days ago showed just how disasterously fractured the so-called union is.
It will take more than the kings horses, kings men, and a government we did not vote for, to sort it out.

And unfortunately, it highlights the seriously divided nature of the nation - not just North/South of Hadrian's Wall, but East/West of Offa's Dyke.  Remember that had Tory and Labour voters followed the policies of their own parties, we would never have been close to a Leave result.  Ironically, person for person, I believe that it was the Welsh who tipped the balance - so stop blaming the Westminster Government.

As for a 'government we did not vote for', by taking part in the General Election in which they were elected, both you and I are responsible for their being in power.  Its called democracy.  As I understand it, neither of us voted for the party now in power, but both of us - if not all of us here - exercised our right to vote within an accepted process.

[Anchorman]

Thing is, though, many in these islands do not regard the territory overseen by Westminster as a 'nation'....how can natiomns exist within a nation? At best, it is a political union which should govern with the consent of its constituent nations, provinces and principalities. Since Scotland elected only one (rather pathetic) member of the Tory party to Westminster, we quite rightly feel Westminster Tories have no right to impose their will here.

[Enki]

Thing is, though, many in these islands do not regard the territory overseen by Westminster as a 'nation'....how can natiomns exist within a nation? At best, it is a political union which should govern with the consent of its constituent nations, provinces and principalities. Since Scotland elected only one (rather pathetic) member of the Tory party to Westminster, we quite rightly feel Westminster Tories have no right to impose their will here.

I know you, quite understandably in my opinion, emphasise the fact that you think that Westminster has no right to impose their will in Scotland, but this also extends to large parts of the UK also. One of the reasons why so many people outside London voted for Brexit was because they haven't, for a long time, thought that Westminster really reflected their views and aspirations.

[JP]

You will eventually get your wish Jim. Neverendums will work and all it needs is a 50.01 of a yes and I guarantee you that will suddenly become an acceptable majority.

In the meantime, to what degree are you happy to see the whole governance thing go down to. Does the SNP have the right to impose its will on the constituency who did not vote for them, but went for the Tory instead.

In the meantime, we English have in Parliament lots of MP's who have no interest in anything English. They are single issue MP's whose sole purpose is to seek the best for Scotland and the Scottish people, but hey, that's democracy I suppose.

[Gordon]

In the meantime, we English have in Parliament lots of MP's who have no interest in anything English. They are single issue MP's whose sole purpose is to seek the best for Scotland and the Scottish people, but hey, that's democracy I suppose.

You, or is that 'we' in Westminster terms, also have English, Welsh, N. Ireland MP's there - you could surely say the same about any of these too. One of the first things Cameron did after the 2014 referendum was EVEL, so charges of parochialism surely apply to English MPs too.

Clearly the constitutional situation is broken, since there isn't the English equivalent of Holyrood - best fixed by us Scots opting out of the UK.

[JP]

You, or is that 'we' in Westminster terms, also have English, Welsh, N. Ireland MP's there - you could surely say the same about any of these too. One of the first things Cameron did after the 2014 referendum was EVEL, so charges of parochialism surely apply to English MPs too.

Clearly the constitutional situation is broken, since there isn't the English equivalent of Holyrood - best fixed by us Scots opting out of the UK.

I don't really know, but is looking at it as "I didn't vote for them, but they still govern me" how it works? If you think it does, then the constitutional situation will always be broken.

[Gordon]

I don't really know, but is looking at it as "I didn't vote for them, but they still govern me" how it works? If you think it does, then the constitutional situation will always be broken.

You'd have to acknowledge, JP, given that only 1 of 59 Scottish MPs is a Tory, given that 68% of Scots votes in the EU referendum were to remain in the EU and given that in 2014 we were told by a Tory Prime Minister that if we wanted to stay in the EU we really needed to stay in the UK - that in this combination of circumstances some of us justifiably feel were are being hung out to dry by a government that may have a mandate within current political governance arrangements but who don't have our support.

   

[JP]

I believe that less than 50% of those who voted in the 2015 general election voted SNP, yet with this vote they got all seats bar one. Do you think the majority who did not vote for the SNP should be governed by the SNP.

[JP]

I believe that less than 50% of those who voted in the 2015 general election voted SNP, yet with this vote they got all seats bar one. Do you think the majority who did not vote for the SNP should be governed by the SNP.

* Those who voted in constituencies where the SNP had a candidate

[Gordon]

I believe that less than 50% of those who voted in the 2015 general election voted SNP, yet with this vote they got all seats bar one. Do you think the majority who did not vote for the SNP should be governed by the SNP.

For as long as we have FPP that scenario can happen.

In that same election the current Tory government were elected on 36.9% of votes cast, so clearly to follow your point most of those voting didn't want a Tory government - and yet we have one anyway that has since then caused havoc!

By the way the percentage of Tory votes within Scotland in the 2015 GE was 14.9%.

[Gordon]

* Those who voted in constituencies where the SNP had a candidate

In the 2015 GE the SNP contested all 59 Scottish seats, winning 56 of them with 50% of the votes cast.

[JP]

In the 2015 GE the SNP contested all 59 Scottish seats, winning 56 of them with 50% of the votes cast.

Indeed. 95% of the seats with less than 50% of the votes (49.97% according to wiki)

[Walter]

Hope re  your OP . He's having a laugh, have you seen his name?

[Anchorman]

Remember, JP, that the majority of seats in the last Holyrood elections (in a semi-proportional representation election, btw) are occupied by parties which are very anti-brexit - Labour (what's left of it up here), the rump of the Lib Dems, SNP and Scottish Greens. Of the last two named, both are in favour of ending the union - the latter - the greens - probably more in favour of a second independence referendum than SNP are at the moment.

[Hope]

Hope re  your OP . He's having a laugh, have you seen his name?

Yup - Christian (as in Fletcher) Holliday (sort of as in Billy).  As for his having a laugh, it seems as if he has been suspended by his local party - suggesting that some of his colleagues don't believe he was.

[Walter]

Oh no, now you've ruined a humorous story by letting the truth confuse things