Brexit: Now What? Part II

[ceptimus]

No it was the Tories who scheduled the referendum. On the back of their own little englander issues.

Specifically, it was the remain arm of the Tories that did the scheduling.

They were concerned that the later they left the referendum, the more likely that the leave side would win - so they held it at the earliest feasible date following a period for Cameron's EU reform negotiations. Of course, it turned out that the EU were so unwilling to negotiate any meaningful reforms that Cameron himself stopped talking about what he'd achieved after just a few days of campaigning.

Thankfully, even with Cameron setting the date, muzzling his cabinet and spending tax payers money on pro-remain propaganda, the British public had the good sense to vote against his wishes.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Specifically, it was the remain arm of the Tories that did the scheduling.

Even if true that would be far from 'the remain side'

 

[Garrison]

No it was the Tories who scheduled the referendum. On the back of their own little englander issues.

Fair's fair, Cameron wasn't worried about Little Englander issues, he was just trying to cling to his job. And the idea that Remain controlled the timing is ludicrous, as the piece I posted from the BBC website a couple of days ago explains Cameron got outmanuevered by the 'Little Englanders' in his party. The notion that he was ever in control of events flatters him far too much.

 

[Garrison]

Yet not all of those that you label "little Englanders" voted to leave, all you are demonstrating yet again is your anti-English bigotry.

The UK is member of the EU, the UK had a referendum open to UK citizens. None of the constituent parts of the UK had a separate referendum. I know you want a couple of new countries to be created but at the moment the only democratic way to address the UK's EU membership is at the level of the UK. Anything else would be meaningless which is why when the repeated falsehood that "Scotland" voted to stay is made I try to point out that it is a falsehood.

Scotland is a nation unto itself and it most assuredly voted Remain. It was simply outvoted because that nation was part of a larger group. |By your logic California can't have voted for Clinton because Trump won in the USA as a whole. It should also be noted that one of the reasons Scotland is still part of the Union was the understanding that it could only retain EU membership as long as it remained part of the UK. Another downside of Brexit is that the independence debate that one could assume had been put to rest for a generation at least has been reignited.

 

[Aepervius]

Scotland is a nation unto itself and it most assuredly voted Remain. It was simply outvoted because that nation was part of a larger group. |By your logic California can't have voted for Clinton because Trump won in the USA as a whole. It should also be noted that one of the reasons Scotland is still part of the Union was the understanding that it could only retain EU membership as long as it remained part of the UK. Another downside of Brexit is that the independence debate that one could assume had been put to rest for a generation at least has been reignited.

The open question is : what will win ? The economical consideration and want of staying in the EU ? or the cultural reason and stay in the UK no matter what.

I guess we will see in march.

 

[CapelDodger]

The open question is : what will win ? The economical consideration and want of staying in the EU ? or the cultural reason and stay in the UK no matter what.

The cultural divide has become a lot more stark since the independence referendum. First came the Tory majority in 2015, then the EU fiasco. Looking south across the border, the question "is that our culture?" has to be a lot more debatable.

I guess we will see in march.

We won't see anything through the fog for a couple of years at least. Apart from anything else there are lawyers all over the case.

 

[CapelDodger]

It was the remain side who scheduled the referendum.

It was Cameron who put it in the manifesto, for fear of UKIP and his own backbenchers. That set the disaster in motion.

 

[CapelDodger]

Fair's fair, Cameron wasn't worried about Little Englander issues, he was just trying to cling to his job. And the idea that Remain controlled the timing is ludicrous, as the piece I posted from the BBC website a couple of days ago explains Cameron got outmanuevered by the 'Little Englanders' in his party. The notion that he was ever in control of events flatters him far too much.

Cameron's abject weakness allowed the ball to get rolling: he was never going to be able to stop it. His general ineptitude meant he got led by the nose to a quick referendum, when he could have got four solid years under his belt as a real PM before drinking the hemlock.

A complete twat. Blair with less substance; I wouldn't have thought it possible either, but Eton continues to surprise.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Fair's fair, Cameron wasn't worried about Little Englander issues, he was just trying to cling to his job. And the idea that Remain controlled the timing is ludicrous, as the piece I posted from the BBC website a couple of days ago explains Cameron got outmanuevered by the 'Little Englanders' in his party. The notion that he was ever in control of events flatters him far too much.

He was worried about the Little Englanders in his party and keeping the votes of the Little Englanders who were tempted to defect to UKIP. I don't think Cameron himself is a Little Englander.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

The open question is : what will win ? The economical consideration and want of staying in the EU ? or the cultural reason and stay in the UK no matter what.

I guess we will see in march.

I think that's back to front in some ways. There are at least as many people who feel culturally separate from the UK but economically think it's pragmatic to remain within the Union.

I don't for a second pretend that there will be an obvious argument to be made that Scotland will be better off in the EU but out of the UK if the UK is not part of the single market.

That will be a hugely complex thing to tease out properly and there will be very clear 'common sense' arguments that point to the opposite at least on initial inspection - we do more trade with England than we do with the EU.

 

[Craig B]

Another issue, reported in the Guardian

MP Sarah Wollaston also urged ministers to scrap an obscure rule that bars EU citizens who are not working – such as full-time parents – from obtaining permanent residency unless they have taken out private health insurance.

The government has repeatedly said the rights of the 3 million-plus EU citizens in the UK have not so far changed and that the issue, along with UK citizens’ rights in Europe, would be a priority in the article 50 Brexit negotiations.

But Wollaston highlighted the case of one of her constituents who was told his Dutch wife of 30 years was in the UK illegally because she had never been in full-time employment, and said a whole new system was needed​

It isn't going to be easy, throwing Johnnie Foreigner out of the UK.

 

[The Don]

It isn't going to be easy, throwing Johnnie Foreigner out of the UK.

Yeah, but we're repeatedly told that it's not about immigration

 

[MCel58]

Yet not all of those that you label "little Englanders" voted to leave, all you are demonstrating yet again is your anti-English bigotry.

The UK is member of the EU, the UK had a referendum open to UK citizens. None of the constituent parts of the UK had a separate referendum. I know you want a couple of new countries to be created but at the moment the only democratic way to address the UK's EU membership is at the level of the UK. Anything else would be meaningless which is why when the repeated falsehood that "Scotland" voted to stay is made I try to point out that it is a falsehood.

Where do you stand on Gibraltar which has been forgotten both in this thread and in the general debate. Is it part of the UK? Is it a separate nation?

 

[Lothian]

Where do you stand on Gibraltar which has been forgotten both in this thread and in the general debate. Is it part of the UK? Is it a separate nation?

Currently considered by Liz's minions that it is part of the UK and not part of the EU although there is a reference to the ECJ on its status.

 

[McHrozni]

I think that's back to front in some ways. There are at least as many people who feel culturally separate from the UK but economically think it's pragmatic to remain within the Union.

No doubt, but which one? Scotland is currently in two Unions.

Here's an idea, devolution of powers to Scotland involves:

- health.
- education and training
- local government
- law, including most aspects of criminal and civil law, the prosecution system and the courts
- social work
- housing
- tourism and economic development

Leaving the EU would certainly impact the fields of education, tourism and economic development, and you can make reasonable (though weaker) arguments about law and health too. Scotland could therefore claim in court that Westminster can't trigger Article 50 without either having the consent of the parliament of Scotland, or else withdrawing the devolution of these areas from Scotland, violating the treaty of devolution, altering the deal under which Scotland voted to remain in UK, legitimizing another referendum.

It's an imperfect way to keep Brexit in courts for at least several more months, and possibly stopping it altogether. Time is not on the side of government. That said, it could be UKIP will also simply try to push for independence due to Brexit and stopping it isn't in their interests.

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

Where do you stand on Gibraltar which has been forgotten both in this thread and in the general debate. Is it part of the UK? Is it a separate nation?

It is a random fragment of a deceased empire. A bit like St Pierre-Miquelon in relation to France. In the context of the EU referendum it was treated - to my surprise - much as if it was in the U.K., and that may be its destiny, as with the surviving French overseas possessions, which are now départements of the French Republic. Although in the event of a pro-EU secession of Scotland from Brexit UK, it might make more sense for Gib to become an "island" local authority area of Scotland, like Orkney.

That suggestion is jocular. The last thing Scotland needs is another Darien Scheme^WP-style imperial dispute with England and Spain. One of these is enough.

 

[Blue Bubble]

Oh dear, oh dear ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38498839

Brexit: UK's top EU diplomat Sir Ivan Rogers resigns



The UK's top diplomat in Brussels, Sir Ivan Rogers, has resigned.
Sir Ivan, who was appointed to the role of permanent representative by David Cameron in 2013, had been expected to play a key role in Brexit talks expected to start within months.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

No doubt, but which one? Scotland is currently in two Unions.

the Union refers to the UK. The one in which Scotland is a member.

Here's an idea, devolution of powers to Scotland involves:

- health.
- education and training
- local government
- law, including most aspects of criminal and civil law, the prosecution system and the courts
- social work
- housing
- tourism and economic development

Leaving the EU would certainly impact the fields of education, tourism and economic development, and you can make reasonable (though weaker) arguments about law and health too. Scotland could therefore claim in court that Westminster can't trigger Article 50 without either having the consent of the parliament of Scotland, or else withdrawing the devolution of these areas from Scotland, violating the treaty of devolution, altering the deal under which Scotland voted to remain in UK, legitimizing another referendum.

Not sure. I doubt it would fly.

It's an imperfect way to keep Brexit in courts for at least several more months, and possibly stopping it altogether. Time is not on the side of government. That said, it could be UKIP will also simply try to push for independence due to Brexit and stopping it isn't in their interests.

McHrozni

I doubt it would stop it and I'm not sure what would be gained by a few more months of bun-fights.

 

[The Don]

UK ambassador to the EU resigns

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38498839

The UK's ambassador to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers, has resigned.

Sir Ivan, appointed to the job by David Cameron in 2013, had been expected to play a key role in Brexit talks expected to start within months.

No doubt he is making way for a far more Eurosceptic ambassador who will get us our "red, white and blue Brexit"

 

[Craig B]

UK ambassador to the EU resigns

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38498839

No doubt he is making way for a far more Eurosceptic ambassador who will get us our "red, white and blue Brexit"

Is it a "hara kiri" style "suicide" protest? If so, May is in real trouble.

Or is it a scheduled event; foreseen and provided for as part of an organised smooth Brexit process, as spin doctors will no doubt tell us soon?