2nd Indy Referendum?

[Jack Knave]

But in theory the Brexit deal has to be done by Autumn 2018 to then be approved in the two year period following the triggering of Article 50 expected to be by the end of the month. That ties in with the timetable set out by Nicola to have the referendum late 2018, eatprly 2019. May is saying that it can't happen till after Brexit - note the deal won't be the actual Brexit, and after we have been out for some vague time.

Do you real believe the EU will keep to this, knowing their record on negotiations to the eleventh hour. And with all the votes needed to ratify this thing someone is going to say go back and do that bit again - re. European Parliament. So the 2 years will be taken to the brink of the usual EU madness.

[Jack Knave]

No, queue has no meaning here in any sense.

Just to clarify the 'she' here is May.

A Spanish geezer/official said that Scotland would have to go to the back of the queue. What ever way, Scotland would have to start from scratch in joining the EU.

Yes, she there is May.

[Nearly Sane]

Do you real believe the EU will keep to this, knowing their record on negotiations to the eleventh hour. And with all the votes needed to ratify this thing someone is going to say go back and do that bit again - re. European Parliament. So the 2 years will be taken to the brink of the usual EU madness.

Do I believe it, no. But it's what May is touring as the timescales. So the fact that Nicola is using it is precisely why May has to appear intransigent and cannot afford to call the bluff because it would be clear that the timetable won't work.

[Jack Knave]

And contrariwise if it is a disaster then they would regret the decision to stay.

Sriram is right because if Brexit turns out to be bad then they can still leave.

[Nearly Sane]

A Spanish geezer/official said that Scotland would have to go to the back of the queue. What ever way, Scotland would have to start from scratch in joining the EU.

Yes, she there is May.

yes, I know I mentioned it earlier. There still is not a  queue and here is an alternative about starting from scratch

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independent-scotland-would-fast-tracked-9798523#ICID=sharebar_facebook

[Nearly Sane]

Sriram is right because if Brexit turns out to be bad then they can still leave.

But since the disaster would have gaoiened wholly irrelevant. Look is fairly simple logic.
Sriram's position is:

If I do A (Stay), it might bring disaster, so don't do A.

So you can then change that to

If I do B (Leave), it might bring disaster, so don't do B


It's a logically useless argument.

[Gordon]

Sriram is right because if Brexit turns out to be bad then they can still leave.

Whatever makes you think that Brexit is the only reason for wanting independence: it isn't, even if it does represent the material change of circumstances that supports indyref2.

The implosion of Labour opens the prospect of long-term Tory dominance in Westminster - not an enticing prospect for some Scots (like me)!

[Anchorman]

Exactly!

[Jack Knave]

Do I believe it, no. But it's what May is touring as the timescales. So the fact that Nicola is using it is precisely why May has to appear intransigent and cannot afford to call the bluff because it would be clear that the timetable won't work.

These timescales are not hers they are the EU's; Tusks I think. So I don't see your point.

[Jack Knave]

yes, I know I mentioned it earlier. There still is not a  queue and here is an alternative about starting from scratch

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independent-scotland-would-fast-tracked-9798523#ICID=sharebar_facebook

Stop being literal!!! It is the fundamental idea that Scotland would have to start from scratch in applying to join the EU, whether they are fast tracked or not. They couldn't take up any of UK's opt outs..........and then there is Spain and possibly Belgium.

[Nearly Sane]

Stop being literal!!! It is the fundamental idea that Scotland would have to start from scratch in applying to join the EU, whether they are fast tracked or not. They couldn't take up any of UK's opt outs..........and then there is Spain and possibly Belgium.

This makes no sense how can you be fast tracked and start from scratch? Spain has already said it won't block it.

[Jack Knave]

But since the disaster would have gaoiened wholly irrelevant. Look is fairly simple logic.
Sriram's position is:

If I do A (Stay), it might bring disaster, so don't do A.

So you can then change that to

If I do B (Leave), it might bring disaster, so don't do B


It's a logically useless argument.

It is wrong because Brexit isn't going to lead to a disaster. It may not be too great, especially at first, but it won't bomb. So they can leave if things aren't picking up and they don't think they will.

Sriram, was also right that during Indyref 1 they knew about the Brexit referendum. It was acknowledged in their, SNP's, white paper on what a Yes vote would mean.

[Jack Knave]

This makes no sense how can you be fast tracked and start from scratch? Spain has already said it won't block it.

Fast is a relative term. Lets say compared to Turkey.

[Jack Knave]

Whatever makes you think that Brexit is the only reason for wanting independence: it isn't, even if it does represent the material change of circumstances that supports indyref2.

The implosion of Labour opens the prospect of long-term Tory dominance in Westminster - not an enticing prospect for some Scots (like me)!

....and then there's the Scottish economy....

[Nearly Sane]

These timescales are not hers they are the EU's; Tusks I think. So I don't see your point.

they are  one's she is agreeing tob ut I suspect, as you do, and I think Nicola that it won't happen. So the SNP stance is according to the UK govt details will be available, and if they are not we are willing to work on that. Now if May were to actually calk the bluff she would jyst agree to that. But she doesn't want to be seen as taking a position that Brexit will happen in those timescales because her own Brexiteers and the UKIP v1.0, or UKIP 2.0, or the People's Front of UKIP, will suddenly start calling her a traitor to the will of the people.

[Nearly Sane]

Fast is a relative term. Lets say compared to Turkey.

and as to starting from scratch it obviously goes against that.

[Gordon]

It is wrong because Brexit isn't going to lead to a disaster. It may not be too great, especially at first, but it won't bomb. So they can leave if things aren't picking up and they don't think they will.

Sriram, was also right that during Indyref 1 they knew about the Brexit referendum. It was acknowledged in their, SNP's, white paper on what a Yes vote would mean.

The problem is that the electorate was told by a Tory PM (and other unionist types) that if we wanted to be part of the EU we'd best stay part of the UK -  it is possible that some of the electorate, since we know from June last year that Scotland is pro-EU, voted against independence to safeguard EU status.

The Tories gambled to sort out their internal problems - they lost, and as a result we all lost.

[Nearly Sane]

It is wrong because Brexit isn't going to lead to a disaster. It may not be too great, especially at first, but it won't bomb. So they can leave if things aren't picking up and they don't think they will.

Sriram, was also right that during Indyref 1 they knew about the Brexit referendum. It was acknowledged in their, SNP's, white paper on what a Yes vote would mean.

That's not Sriram's position why are you misrepresenting what he said?

You second point is so confused and again not what Stpriam has said that I have no clue as your point.

[jakswan]

The point is that May is now saying (about Indyref2)

So, the people of Scotland can't have a vote because they don't know the final Brexit deal but the whole Brexit question was settled and (in May's mind, that of the rabid anti-EU press, and what passes as the official opposition) cast in stone as the Unassailable Will of the British People, on far less information about the final details than we have even now.

Can you not spot the tiny, itsy-bitsy bit of inconsistency....?

No, if Scotland leaves it will have to negotiate with the rUK on Scexit but it will still be doing the finishing touches to Brexit. Not knowing a deal subject to negotiations is understandable indyref1 was conducted without knowing what the actual deal would be, it involves speculation.

Having indyref2 before Brexit is settled would result in speculation of a deal which relies on speculation of another deal.

I don't think anyone is bluffing I think Sturgeon feels she has to get this done before Brexit otherwise it will never happen and May just doesn't think its possible.

If polls suggested most Scots wanted another vote then I think May will cave. Despite most Scots here being Nicola fanboys I hear quite a few Scots dislike her a lot.

[jakswan]

We have Tories here too you know: I favour the non-nationalisitic vilification of Tories (including our home grown ones) on the basis of their political ethos and their demonstrable incompetence, such in facilitating Brexit for party reasons without planning for the outcome they got.

Wow so someone who has a different opinion is worthy of vilification. No political party is perfect, how is education in Scotland?

[Stranger]

No, if Scotland leaves it will have to negotiate with the rUK on Scexit but it will still be doing the finishing touches to Brexit. Not knowing a deal subject to negotiations is understandable indyref1 was conducted without knowing what the actual deal would be, it involves speculation.

Having indyref2 before Brexit is settled would result in speculation of a deal which relies on speculation of another deal.

Well, as I understand it Sturgeon wants the referendum before Brexit but after most of the negotiations, so the maximum information before Scotland is dragged off the insane Brexit cliff with the rest of us.

However, that's not the point. May is now wanting to stop a referendum because the people won't have all the information. So, if she believes in only having referendums under those circumstances, then the Brexit referendum was wrong and (at the very least) should be giving the UK another referendum when all the information of the Brexit deal are known. Instead of which, the result of the lie-ridden uninformed Brexit referendum (as interpreted by May, so not even what was voted on) has been given a kind of godlike status and nobody is allowed even to suggest that it might not have been perfect in every respect...

[Gordon]

Wow so someone who has a different opinion is worthy of vilification. No political party is perfect, how is education in Scotland?

The Tories have been vilified here for quite some time now, and well before Brexit, in view of their political ethos: Mrs Thatcher sealed their reputation in the eyes of many Scots, and it has been downhill ever since.

The SNP aren't perfect but they aren't responsible for the current Brexit calamity: that would be the Tories putting party interests before the interests of the rest of us and having it backfire spectacularly.

[Nearly Sane]

Deja Vow



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39309133

[Sriram]

That's not Sriram's position why are you misrepresenting what he said?

You second point is so confused and again not what Stpriam has said that I have no clue as your point.

My position is that once a decision is taken, people should stick by it (at least for a reasonable time frame) and people who are unhappy with the result should just lump it and face it! Throwing tantrums like spoiled brats is not on!

In the 1300's in India we had a muslim king called Mohammad Bin Thuglak. He decided on a whim to change his capital from Delhi to some other place far away near the south. He made all his people pack up and move.  Once there, he was not happy and decided to move back again. So...from then on, any such indecision or vacillation is normally referred to as 'Thuglak decision'. I think the people in the UK (Scotland in particular) have gotten themselves into that situation.

One referendum was conducted on the independence, it was  a clear decision. So...just stick with it.  Once the Brexit consequences are known more clearly, after a few years, maybe another look can be taken about the independence issue.  It would be ridiculous to do it so soon after the first one... without seeing the Brexit issue through.

[jakswan]

Well, as I understand it Sturgeon wants the referendum before Brexit but after most of the negotiations, so the maximum information before Scotland is dragged off the insane Brexit cliff with the rest of us.

Hang on do you think that Scotland can remain in the EU whist the UK leaves? Scexit will have to happen after Brexit.

However, that's not the point. May is now wanting to stop a referendum because the people won't have all the information.

No its about the extent of the information known.

So, if she believes in only having referendums under those circumstances, then the Brexit referendum was wrong and (at the very least) should be giving the UK another referendum when all the information of the Brexit deal are known.

That is not her position, she has not ruled out indyref2 just the timing.

Instead of which, the result of the lie-ridden uninformed Brexit referendum (as interpreted by May, so not even what was voted on) has been given a kind of godlike status and nobody is allowed even to suggest that it might not have been perfect in every respect...

By stating "lie-ridden uninformed Brexit referendum" suggests it wasn't perfect and you have just refuted yourself.