Brexit: Now What? Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
ceptimus said:
Sturgeon can ask for an Indy 2 - that's more achievable than asking for Scotland to remain in the Single Market. I think we should make the Scots pay for the next referendum by themselves though - we already paid for a 'once in a generation' referendum a couple of years ago.

I expect if and when she does get her Indy 2 referendum then she'll lose and after that we won't hear so much from her - which will be a relief.
Click to expand...
If these things happen, it will be a relief to unionists and reactionaries perhaps, but it will not solve the Brexit problem, will it? Neither will grovelling to Trump solve it, so your relief will not be complete and comprehensive.
 
I don't expect universal relief. But it will be a relief not to have to watch or listen to Sturgeon asking for same impossible thing for the ten thousandth time.

She knows she's asking for the impossible and is just using it as a negotiating tactic to get what she really wants - a second Scottish independence referendum. I suppose she's no different to all the other lying scheming politicians really but I find her monomania combined with her whiny voice to be particularly grating.
 
ceptimus said:
I don't expect universal relief. But it will be a relief not to have to watch or listen to Sturgeon asking for same impossible thing for the ten thousandth time.

She knows she's asking for the impossible and is just using it as a negotiating tactic to get what she really wants - a second Scottish independence referendum. I suppose she's no different to all the other lying scheming politicians really but I find her monomania combined with her whiny voice to be particularly grating.
Click to expand...

That's fine. She thinks you're a **** as well.
 
ceptimus said:
The electorate were never told what 'Remain' meant either.
. . . . .
Click to expand...

Neither were the electorate told of:-
For stays of over three months: the right of residence is subject to certain conditions. EU citizens and their family members — if not working — must have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay. Union citizens do not need residence permits, although Member States may require them to register with the authorities. Family members of Union citizens who are not nationals of a Member State must apply for a residence permit, valid for the duration of their stay or a five-year period.
Click to expand...
Straight from the here - my bold. Neither May, nor her predecessors mentioned this when calls of "we don't want immigrants and their families sponging off the state" were raised. Equally despite years of complaints, no real measures were taken to curb immigration from outside the EU when it could be done. Still, what should we expect from politicians? the truth?
 
ceptimus said:
It depends on your interpretation of 'Single market access' - every country on Earth has that. EU single market membership is a different thing - and as long as the EU insist on that being tied to free movement of people then it's clearly unachievable for the UK, post referendum.
Click to expand...

Why? Was there a referendum about free movement of people or something like that?

Last time I checked the only relevant referendum was whether or not UK should be a member of EU. It didn't say "should UK limit migration from EU" or anything like that.

McHrozni
 
ceptimus said:
Why would any sane person take you seriously when you continue to ask for something that is manifestly impossible?
Click to expand...
Why is that manifestly impossible? Even today, not all parts of the UK are in the EU - nor all of France or all of the Netherlands. And there's even precedent that half an island is part of the EU: the northern, French half of St. Martin is part of the EU, while the southern Dutch part is not. So why not do the same with the island Britain? :)
 
ddt said:
Why is that manifestly impossible? Even today, not all parts of the UK are in the EU - nor all of France or all of the Netherlands. And there's even precedent that half an island is part of the EU: the northern, French half of St. Martin is part of the EU, while the southern Dutch part is not. So why not do the same with the island Britain? :)
Click to expand...
It may perhaps happen that the northern part of the island Britain could come within
French influence while the southern part could be under Dutch administration. That is not manifestly impossible I admit.
 
ddt said:
Why is that manifestly impossible? Even today, not all parts of the UK are in the EU - nor all of France or all of the Netherlands. And there's even precedent that half an island is part of the EU: the northern, French half of St. Martin is part of the EU, while the southern Dutch part is not. So why not do the same with the island Britain? :)
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_of_Man#European_Union

England could opt for that while Scotland remains in EU. Problem solved, sort of.

McHrozni
 
There is an interesting quote from a 1930 book called Imperial Economic Unity by Lord Mancroft, who I think was chairman of ICI at the time. It is now relevant to Brexit.

When we turn to examine the continent of Europe we observe that, treated as a unit, it also is well balanced as between manufacture and agriculture, though as in the United States of America, the manufacturing activities are somewhat concentrated. The bulk of the exports of the manufacturing countries of Europe is absorbed by the agricultural parts of Europe, and therefore it is not altogether surprising that Monsieur Briand, the French Foreign Minister, should be seeking to bring about a United States of Europe in the economic sense, though very obviously the differences in language and race would make it a a very remote possibility in the political sense. That we should ever see Europe a Free trade area with a common external tariff is exceedingly improbable, but the development of inter-European preferential arrangements is a possibility that we must contemplate very seriously indeed.

We now pass to to the consideration of the United Kingdom.

This nation, dependent as it is on its success in exporting a large proportion of Manufactures, finds itself between the highly protected United States of America on the one hand, ever seeking to increase its exports to the agricultural parts of the world, and Europe on the other hand, almost every country of which is highly protected, and some of the countries of which are also seeking to develop largely their exports to the agricultural parts of the world. Both America and Europe are also able to dispose of large quantities of manufactured goods in the unsheltered British market.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
ceptimus said:
Sturgeon can ask for an Indy 2 - that's more achievable than asking for Scotland to remain in the Single Market. I think we should make the Scots pay for the next referendum by themselves though - we already paid for a 'once in a generation' referendum a couple of years ago.

I expect if and when she does get her Indy 2 referendum then she'll lose and after that we won't hear so much from her - which will be a relief.
Click to expand...

I infer from this that Ceptimus does not consider Scots to fall within the definition of "we", and whilst I might be misrepresenting the poster that would square with my own perceptions of some of our cousins when working south of the Border. I don't think it does anything to assist the Unionist cause.
 
Craig B said:
if France recalls that alliance, Scotland might get a favourable deal from the rEU. But it requires us to vote Yes in an Indyref.
Click to expand...

Then start a petition on the Scottish Government website and campaign to get at least a million signatures demanding that Nicola holds a referendum.
 
Architect said:
I infer from this that Ceptimus does not consider Scots to fall within the definition of "we", and whilst I might be misrepresenting the poster that would square with my own perceptions of some of our cousins when working south of the Border. I don't think it does anything to assist the Unionist cause.
Click to expand...
We the UK (as a whole) paid for the last 'once in a generation' indyref a couple of years ago. If the SNP want another one so soon, they should pay for it themselves this time. If the other devolved and non-devolved countries have to share in the cost, then the population of those countries should get to vote too.
 
Last edited:
ceptimus said:
We the UK (as a whole) paid for the last 'once in a generation' indyref a couple of years ago. If the SNP want another one so soon, they should pay for it themselves this time.
Click to expand...
We paid for the Brexit one, that cancelled out the Indy one; because then we were told that if we became independent, we would automatically cease to be in the EU. Scottish voters don't want that. We showed that by 62 to 38% in the EU referendum.

However, be as unhelpful, and obstructive and exclusive of Scotland as you feel disposed to be. That will do the cause of independence no harm at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom