Sign in to follow this  
Alex MacLeod

EU In or Out

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, Kingsmills said:

Is this a private, self congratulatory, conversation between the two of you or can anyone  join in ?

Feel free! We were getting quite lonely and had actually thought that all the separatists had defected to become green dotters on the Whinge Over Skintland site or were maybe away at a Corries tribute concert.

Or a Save The Gelluns rally?:blink:

Edited by Charles Bannerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kingsmills said:

Is this a private, self congratulatory, conversation between the two of you or can anyone  join in ?

In the last 3 or so weeks numerous points have been made criticising the SNP's position and nobody has addressed any of the points.  Instead the only responses are personal attacks on Charles and a suggestion we take our thoughts out of the public domain. I think it is pretty clear from numerous posts above that not only would we warmly welcome someone attempting to defend the SNP's increasingly irrational position on constitutional matters, but we are rather frustrated that nobody seems willing or capable of doing so. So please, feel free to join in.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/07/2016 at 1:47 PM, DoofersDad said:

In the last 3 or so weeks numerous points have been made criticising the SNP's position and nobody has addressed any of the points.  Instead the only responses are personal attacks on Charles and a suggestion we take our thoughts out of the public domain. I think it is pretty clear from numerous posts above that not only would we warmly welcome someone attempting to defend the SNP's increasingly irrational position on constitutional matters, but we are rather frustrated that nobody seems willing or capable of doing so. So please, feel free to join in.

 

I'll bite once there are less irrational opinions on constitutional matters, and the SNP actions/speeches regarding them, to which to respond.  It would also be helpful if, instead of just criticising everything with snide remarks and SNPBAD, you and/or Charles could offer some ideas as to how they could do things better.

Why would anyone expect any pro-indy people, who, incidentally are not all SNP members, to respond to posts made by someone whose whole purpose on posting on this and most other threads in this forum appears to be in order to "wind up nats" as he says quite often....or to respond to people who think  that separatists is a good name for some kinds of "independence" seekers and not for others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oddquine said:

you and/or Charles could offer some ideas as to how they could do things better.

Delighted! Here are a dozen to start the ball rolling.

1 - Stop wasting time looking for new, EU related ways to try to antagonise the electorate into a single fluke "yes" in a second referendum and instead sort out the mess that they're making of the public services, currently delegated by HQ to the Holyrood Branch Office but which they are totally neglecting.

2 - Sack Angela Constance

3 - Put the 56, 55, 54 on a one way ferry to St Kilda. (Having first made sure that Panty Hosiery has packed his Y-fronts.)

4 - Sack Angela Constance.

5 - Shut Ian Blackford up because his attempts to stir up grievance on account of that Australian family being sent home are downright embarrassing. Sorry.... did I mention that the wee boy attends a Gaelic Medium school so is an Honorary Native?  Very important! (By the way, I gather that the Cybernats are getting especially nasty over this one - presumably taking their cue from Mr Blackford's treatment of the late Charles Kennedy.)

6 - Sack Angela Constance.

7 - Also shut up Angus (Brendan when he's not canvassing on Lewis or Harris) MacNeil whose latest anti-Westminster grudgemongering is some defence whinge.

9 - Sack Angela Constance.

8 - Give Fergus Ewing a personality.

10 - Sack Angela Constance.

11 - When Jesus Christ makes his Second Coming, make sure he visits the Holyrood Separation Vigil. That's only fair because they're apparently only there because he told them to go. Make sure he brings them a Betamax player since they've not been able to watch their tape of Braveheart for ages.... oh and a few Corries records as well. And maybe Alex MacLeod's copy of Grand Theft Auto? It must get pretty boring there.... especially at times when Jesus isn't speaking to them.

12 - Sack Angela Bloody Constance!

Edited by Charles Bannerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

It's all gone quiet over there...

Well Oddquine's back! Maybe she's the first of them to return from consulting Jesus Christ about what he thinks the next step should be for the Holyrood Separation Vigil.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14556584._Jesus_Christ_backs_indycamp_in_Holyrood_eviction_fight___court_is_told/

On the other hand OQ maybe didn't need to consult Jesus Christ if she has direct access to Alex Salmond.

Tell you what, though. In the face of all this griping and grievance-mongering about Scotland being "torn against its will from the benevolent, protective breast of Europe", I thought it would be a good idea to go back to that pre-2014 Referendum survey which ranked various issues in the Scottish electorate's order of priority. So where does Europe feature in that league table of how important Scots feel various issues are?

Whisper it..... NINTH:lol:

I do have to say that this kind of squares with the fact that the only people I am hearing complaining about the injustice of Brexit are SNP politicians and that 3% of the electorate rated Europe the top issue. It also rather squares with the much quoted 62-38 split needing to be heavily qualified with a number of observations which I have already referred to. Many of the 62% won't be all that fussed either way. The 62% will also include a contingent of the 30% of Nat supporters who are Leavers but voted tactically in an attempt to enhance the grievance factor. Many other Nat Leavers' tactics will have been to abstain and turnout was indeed remarkably low in separatist areas of the country. Add that lot in, and you're not really left with too many people with steam coming out of their ears on this one - and most of them will be rabid Nats boiling the kettle for all they're worth. Make no mistake about this. The Nats are DELIGHTED at this Leave vote and the opportunity to invent another grievance which it offers.

So the reality is that Nicola Sturgeon cleared off to Brussels, leaving the NHS etc to degenerate into an even worse state, and flounced around faking a hissy based on a "popular dismay" which is a complete fabrication. For goodness sake, the woman heads a regional assembly which looks (badly) after local issues and she thinks she's some kind of international statesperson. (On the other hand she was Alex Salmond's disciple so this is perhaps entirely predictable.)

The current SNP tactic is clearly to try to create some kind of expectation that their faux-devastation at a Leave vote will wring some concessions out of the Brexit negotiations. They of course know perfectly well that there's no chance of this, but the higher the expectations, the greater (they hope) will be the public "indignation" when they inevitably get knocked back. Then they call a second separation plebiscite on the basis that this is now the "only way" to retain a connection with Scottish voters' NINTH:lol: highest priority.

I wonder how "secret" they are going to be able to keep the obvious facts that the "new" European deal (including surrendering control over farming and fishing) - IF they get it - will be much worse even than the current one and that a lot of people may not be all that keen on customs, passport control and currency exchange at Gretna?

 

 

 

Edited by Charles Bannerman
  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, IBM said:

Oh Charles you are always good for a laugh :rotflmao::rotflmao: 

Ah! You're back as well IBM! So what's Jesus Christ's message to the campers then? Is he still backing these Laddies and Lassies or is he going to lay on his healing hands and afford them the gift of sanity?

Edited by Charles Bannerman
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Oddquine said:

I'll bite once there are less irrational opinions on constitutional matters, and the SNP actions/speeches regarding them, to which to respond.  It would also be helpful if, instead of just criticising everything with snide remarks and SNPBAD, you and/or Charles could offer some ideas as to how they could do things better.

Why would anyone expect any pro-indy people, who, incidentally are not all SNP members, to respond to posts made by someone whose whole purpose on posting on this and most other threads in this forum appears to be in order to "wind up nats" as he says quite often....or to respond to people who think  that separatists is a good name for some kinds of "independence" seekers and not for others.

In other words you are doing what others do and having a pop at Charles without even attempting to respond to the numerous objective criticisms made of the SNP Government.  As to offering ideas as to how they could do things better, I'm not sure how often ones needs to repeat things.  What the SNP need to do is to respect the results of the referendums and work with others for the common good.

Sturgeon made a major speech earlier this week in which she identified 5 "key interests" which she says must be protected, and it is maybe worth look at these in a bit more detail.  What these are and what she said are in italics below followed by brief comment from me.

  • Democratic interests - "the need to make sure Scotland's voice is heard and our wishes respected."  The SNP needs to ensure that the wish of the 55% who voted for Scotland to remain in the UK is respected and their voice heard. People everywhere in the UK will expect that their political representatives make their voice heard regardless of how they voted.  
  • Economic interests - "safeguarding free movement of labour, access to a single market of 500 million people and the funding that our farmers and universities depend on".  There is a need to respect the wishes of the voters of all the UK and the concerns a majority has on free movement.  The SNP needs to recognise that free trade with the rest of the UK is more important than with the EU but that it is just as important for the rest of the UK as it is for Scotland that trade deals are optimised and the UK Government funds farmers and universities appropriately.
  • Social protection - "ensuring the continued protection of workers' and wider human rights".  Why would a post Brexit Government not ensure this?  Some of our legislation actually goes well beyond EU requirements.  Ironically the Supreme Court has ruled today that the Scottish Government's Named Person legislation is not compliant with human rights!  That is of course subject to appeal, but it hardly gives the SNP any right to bleat about threats to human rights.  
  • Solidarity - "the ability of independent nations to come together for the common good of all our citizens, to tackle crime and terrorism and deal with global challenges like climate change".  There is absolutely no reason why Brexit stops us doing that!  These are worldwide issues and worldwide bodies like the UN are the key players.  Arguably, major economic trading blocs might be seen as a barrier to wider international cooperation.
  • Having influence - "making sure that we don't just have to abide by the rules of the single market but also have a say in shaping them."  Does Sturgeon seriously believe that an independent Scotland will have any influence in the EU?  Scotland has had far more influence as part of the United Kingdom and if influence is seen as important, Scotland needs to remain in the UK.  In addition, the UK Government is far more concerned about the interests of the Scottish people than the EU is or ever will be.

Sturgeon went on to call the Leave campaign "liars".  The words "pot", "kettle" and "black" spring to mind.  Let's face it, there was a lack of honesty on both sides, but no worse than in the Indy referendum when the SNP's lies about the NHS were described by the then leader of the Scottish Labour Party as the most disgraceful bit of electioneering she had even come across. 

She then went on to call Cameron "reckless" for calling the EU referendum.  What on earth is reckless about giving the electorate the opportunity to vote on our place in the the EU when the EU has changed beyond all recognition from the union we voted to join over 40 years ago?  It is called giving the electorate a democratic voice. It was no less reckless than agreeing to the Indy ref when public opinion polls put support for independence at less than support for leaving the EU was (would she have been happier if the indy referendum had never been called?)  And it was certainly far less reckless than the SNP's suggestion of a 2nd indy referendum so soon after the people have clearly stated their wish to remain in the UK.

She then called Cameron's failure to plan for Brexit  "one of the most shameful abdications of responsibility in modern political history".  Strong words, but when do politicians ever campaign on what they are going to do when they lose a vote!  What was shameful was the lack of planning by the SNP in the event of them winning the Indy vote.  No workable policy on currency, no clarity on EU membership, no realistic financial plan.

I'm sorry this is so long but it simply a reflection of the extent to which the SNP is being fundamentally dishonest and undemocratic and is failing to act in the interests of the Scottish people.  As we have said repeatedly before, the SNP will only gain sufficient support for independence if it can persuade sufficient voters that Scotland will be better off independent from the UK.  It is therefore not in it's interests to have a UK in which Scotland is seen to be a flourishing part and benefits by being part of a greater whole.  And that is what Sturgeon's speech was all about.  It wasn't about being constructive in the interests of the Scottish people, it was about stirring up grievance, creating divisions and maximising uncertainty.  No wonder political leaders in the rest of the UK and in the EU are getting increasingly frustrated by her whinging posturing.

The SNP is dominated by the "Independence for better or worse" brigade.  They will no doubt be loving Sturgeon's sound bites but this appalling negativity is not in the interests of the people of Scotland.  Like it or not, the people of Scotland voted to stay as a part of the United Kingdom and the people of the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU.  The Scottish Government have a responsibility to accept the democratic will of the people in those votes and to work constructively with others to make it work for all of us.  It is about time Sturgeon and her colleagues abandoned the politics of grievance and started acting in the interests of the people of Scotland.  I'm not holding my breath, though.

 

  • Agree 2
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charles, Why, pre-referendum would it not have been ninth on the list (to which I note you omitted to link, so we can't see what the others were),when the Labour Party was assuring the Scots that they would be in Government in 2015 (and were pro-EU) and it was being drummed into the heads of the Scottish population by all the partisan media that If Scotland wants to stay in the EU, they should vote against independence.

Pre-referendum, a Brexit option was a promise by Cameron if he was re-elected in 2015....and Cameron illustrated, prior to the 2010 election, that a promise/pronouncement from him before he actually takes power, is uttered with fingers crossed behind back and is consigned to the dustbin full  of politically expedient lies after election. As far as most of were concerned, on past performance, this was just another such politically expedient lie......so membership of the EU was not high on the list of priorities for the average voter and the sensible knew the only way we'd not get into the EU was if rUK vetoed our membership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oddquine said:

Charles, Why, pre-referendum would it not have been ninth on the list (to which I note you omitted to link, so we can't see what the others were),when the Labour Party was assuring the Scots that they would be in Government in 2015 (and were pro-EU) and it was being drummed into the heads of the Scottish population by all the partisan media that If Scotland wants to stay in the EU, they should vote against independence.

Pre-referendum, a Brexit option was a promise by Cameron if he was re-elected in 2015....and Cameron illustrated, prior to the 2010 election, that a promise/pronouncement from him before he actually takes power, is uttered with fingers crossed behind back and is consigned to the dustbin full  of politically expedient lies after election. As far as most of were concerned, on past performance, this was just another such politically expedient lie......so membership of the EU was not high on the list of priorities for the average voter and the sensible knew the only way we'd not get into the EU was if rUK vetoed our membership. 

Oddquine... I'm surprised you've not changed your "45" to a "62" in recognition of the universal outrage which is there for all to see at the Scottish people being unjustly torn from the bosom of the European Union against their will..... NOT:lol:!

Let's just be absolutely clear about this. Outrage in Scotland at the Brexit vote is merely a figment of the Nationalist imagination.... or should I say "fabrication". What the SNP are saying - in an attempt to make an excuse for another Scottish vote - is very different from from what is being said.... or rather not being said... in the streets, pubs and clubs of the land. I think that a combination of the pre-2014 polling data and the 2016 result - including necessary qualifications to allow for grievance-mongering tactical voting by Nats - makes it pretty clear that the Scots seem to be saying "Aye.... OK but quite honestly I'm not that fussed one way or another". Let's be honest, the Nats don't really give all that much of a toss about Europe either. All this faux-Europhilia is just their current convenience.

But when there's a chance to ignore two lost referenda in order to get yet a second one in Scotland.... what do the facts matter? Indeed it's no surprise whatsoever that the Nats are intent on ignoring this all-UK referendum called by Westminster since they are already even more intent on ignoring the one they called themselves under their own terms... and lost (55.3 - 34.7) even more convincingly than they lost the Euro one (52-48 because your 62% is irrelevant in this context). It looks to me that, if Nicola Sturgeon in any way shares her predecessor's predeliction for the bookies, you would find her going into the shop... putting money on.... losing.... and demanding her cash back so she can back the same nag again and again until it wins.:clapoverhead:

The Nats really have to understand that, if separation is going to happen, this has to be the settled will of the Scottish people and not persisting with trying to wind the electorate up with red herrings until they eventually fluke the vote they want just the once. What Teresa now needs to say is: "Look Nicola, you told us you wanted your big day in September 2014. You got your wish and you lost so you're not getting any more bites at the cheery any time quickly. So bog off back up to Edinburgh and spend your time running your branch office properly for once in your life. It's what you're paid to do so get on with it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Charles Bannerman said:

Ah! You're back as well IBM! So what's Jesus Christ's message to the campers then? Is he still backing these Laddies and Lassies or is he going to lay on his healing hands and afford them the gift of sanity?

Not been away Charles!  Although I have always voted SNP and always will I have not been into promoting politics but likewise I do not continually rant about other parties.  As for the campers you will find they are not supported by the SNP or any other political parties in Scotland and they should have been removed a long time ago!

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Oddquine said:

Charles, Why, pre-referendum would it not have been ninth on the list (to which I note you omitted to link, so we can't see what the others were),when the Labour Party was assuring the Scots that they would be in Government in 2015 (and were pro-EU) and it was being drummed into the heads of the Scottish population by all the partisan media that If Scotland wants to stay in the EU, they should vote against independence.

Pre-referendum, a Brexit option was a promise by Cameron if he was re-elected in 2015....and Cameron illustrated, prior to the 2010 election, that a promise/pronouncement from him before he actually takes power, is uttered with fingers crossed behind back and is consigned to the dustbin full  of politically expedient lies after election. As far as most of were concerned, on past performance, this was just another such politically expedient lie......so membership of the EU was not high on the list of priorities for the average voter and the sensible knew the only way we'd not get into the EU was if rUK vetoed our membership. 

Oh!  This is priceless! :lol:

So, supporters of independence who also wanted to be in the EU, voted against independence despite the fact that the Prime Minister was promising a referendum on EU membership should the Tories be re-elected in 2015.  Apparently they did this because they thought he was lying,  They also apparently thought this was a surer method of retaining EU membership than voting for the independence they wanted and having a Scottish Government that was very vocal in their support for EU membership.  Then, when Cameron actually calls the referendum, they claim they've been duped because they could not reasonably have expected the Prime Minister to keep his word!  It's not really the strongest argument for having a 2nd indy referendum, is it?

I know the nationalists are good at creating grievances, but feeling aggrieved because the UK Prime Minister has the audacity to actually honour a promise he made to the nation really is sinking into new depths of desperation.

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DD - I am very disappointed to see you resorting to what in effect is blasphemy in that last post. If that's what Jesus Christ told Oddquine  on her recent visit to the Holyrood Separation Vigil then it's bound to be the gospel truth so it's blasphemous in the extreme for you to doubt it.

Mind you, I did wonder myself if the somewhat tortured and convoluted conspiracy involved might just be a little beyond your average yes voter, given that thinking for themselves has long since been a function performed on their behalf by Party Central.

But no! Get thee behind me Satan!! If these are the words of the Good Lord himself in his Second Coming at Holyrood, fire and brimstone must be the fate of those who doubt the words of his Prophets and Messengers.

Or has Alex Salmond just cultivated a beard, grown his hair and joined the Vigil?

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the Nats are having a bit of trouble sustaining Project Brexitrage. You Gov separation polling is already back to pre-June 23rd levels, and while 37% would prefer separate Scotland in EU, 46% would prefer to be part of the UK outwith the EU. So what actually appears most "highly likely" is that "the lady doth protest too much."

This certainly would appear to confirm what I've been suggesting ever since the Brexit result - that really not all that many of "The 62" are actually jumping up and down at the outcome. It's just a convenient myth invented by the Nats for an entirely different end - which seems to be unravelling before their eyes at a rate of knots.

Edited by Charles Bannerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is actually a very significant poll if it is a true reflection of the nation's views.  It would be good to see this repeated with a variety of survey methodologies.  The SNP have been boring us all with their claims of an outraged Scottish electorate following a very clear majority of Scots voters voting to stay in the EU.  But despite the pro-EU vote, the poll suggests that nearly 20% more of the electorate would rather accept the UK Brexit vote if it meant staying in the UK, than retain EU membership by gaining independence.

There are 2 explanations for this. Firstly there are voters, like me, who voted no to independence and then to remain in the EU, but who feel that it is more important to remain as part of the UK than as part of the EU.  Secondly, there must be people who voted for independence and to leave the EU but who feel that leaving the EU is more important than leaving the UK.

Not only does this blow the SNP's arguments out of the water, it also demonstrates the extent of the anti EU feeling amongst the supporters of independence.  This has profound implications for SNP strategy because the poll suggests that the SNP could lose an independence referendum unless it abandons it's pro EU stance.  However, if it abandons it's pro EU stance, it loses the the only grievance it has to justify another referendum.  There is, of course a third and better option.  It could actually accept the democratic will of the people in the 2 referendums and start doing what it was elected to do - focus on providing some government from Holyrood.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DoofersDad said:

This has profound implications for SNP strategy because the poll suggests that the SNP could lose an independence referendum unless it abandons it's pro EU stance.  However, if it abandons it's pro EU stance, it loses the the only grievance it has to justify another referendum.  There is, of course a third and better option.  It could actually accept the democratic will of the people in the 2 referendums and start doing what it was elected to do - focus on providing some government from Holyrood.

Yes, a wonderful Catch 22 situation that the Nats can add to their being constantly hemmed in more and more tightly by developing circumstances. Within their own followers, the Mel Gibsoners and people like these complete Tubes making that Declaration of Glasgow are demanding a second Scottish referendum - many of them irrespective of whether there's post-Brexit grievance or not. However the more politically aware realise that in the likely event of them also losing a second Scottish one (*) - and polling isn't at all good - they'll be knackered for decades. Add to that the 30% of SNP supporters who also support Brexit and you sense that the ferrets are simply lining up for a battle royal within that nationalist sack.

Then, post-Brexit, you now have the vastly changed scenario which I've referred to before. A vote for separation is now a vote for the Euro, Schengen, no EU rebate plus customs posts, currency exchange and passport control on a hard border between what may eventually become a EU state and a non-EU one. 

(*) - that would then be a total of three referenda they'd lost so do they get to keep the polling booth?

Edited by Charles Bannerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, I doubt that there is any hope of Sturgeon behaving like a responsible political leader rather than as a mouthpiece for a single agenda pressure group.  She continues to bang on about needing to speak up and act on behalf of the majority of the the Scottish electorate who voted to stay in the EU, yet completely ignores the wishes of the larger number who voted to remain in the UK.  She says she is doing all she can to address the uncertainty caused by the Brexit vote but yet has it in her power to remove the biggest single element of uncertainty by finally respecting the wishes of the Scottish people and ruling out another indy referendum for the foreseeable future.

Her pressure group rhetoric has reached new depths of cynicism this week by referring to the UK's refusal to guarantee EU citizens here the right to stay as "disgraceful".  She then went on to say that it "breaks my heart" that she cannot guarantee their future in Scotland.  It all sounds lovely and makes her sound like a compassionate and caring leader. But the vast majority of people in this country appreciate the contribution EU citizens make to this country and would also like to see them stay.  That includes the Prime Minister and leaders of other political parties - it even includes most of the more prominent Brexit campaigners!  But what we have to remember is that there is also the parallel issue of UK citizen's abroad and we have to consider them as well.

The Prime Minister has already stated that she fully expects EU citizens who wish to remain here will be allowed to, but that their status needs to be determined following negotiations regarding the status of our citizens who wish to remain in the EU.  Clearly that doesn't immediately give people the assurance that they would like but it must be the correct approach.  If the UK Government meekly gave in to the pressure group rhetoric of the SNP, our citizens abroad would become negotiating tools in the Brexit negotiations and would be used to lever concessions from Britain which would result in a less favourable outcome for us.  The UK Government understand the reality of this and are acting accordingly.  By stating that she "fully expects" people will be able to stay in the country they have chosen to live in, the PM has not only confirmed her support for these people, she has laid out a firm negotiating position which will put pressure on political leaders in the EU to accept this common-sense approach. That demonstrates a far greater level of political leadership than the SNP's posturing.

Sturgeon's seemingly compassionate approach will no doubt make her come across as "our caring wee Nicola" to those voters who simply don't think beyond the headline grabbing sound bites the SNP come up with.  But the reality is that it creates huge uncertainty for our citizens abroad, it undermines the wider negotiations and is designed simply to drive a wedge between the Scottish people and the UK Government.  This isn't caring Nicola at her compassionate best, it is heartless Sturgeon at her cynical worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, DoofersDad said:

Sadly, I doubt that there is any hope of Sturgeon behaving like a responsible political leader rather than as a mouthpiece for a single agenda pressure group.  She continues to bang on about needing to speak up and act on behalf of the majority of the the Scottish electorate who voted to stay in the EU, yet completely ignores the wishes of the larger number who voted to remain in the UK.  She says she is doing all she can to address the uncertainty caused by the Brexit vote but yet has it in her power to remove the biggest single element of uncertainty by finally respecting the wishes of the Scottish people and ruling out another indy referendum for the foreseeable future.

Her pressure group rhetoric has reached new depths of cynicism this week by referring to the UK's refusal to guarantee EU citizens here the right to stay as "disgraceful".  She then went on to say that it "breaks my heart" that she cannot guarantee their future in Scotland.  It all sounds lovely and makes her sound like a compassionate and caring leader. But the vast majority of people in this country appreciate the contribution EU citizens make to this country and would also like to see them stay.  That includes the Prime Minister and leaders of other political parties - it even includes most of the more prominent Brexit campaigners!  But what we have to remember is that there is also the parallel issue of UK citizen's abroad and we have to consider them as well.

The Prime Minister has already stated that she fully expects EU citizens who wish to remain here will be allowed to, but that their status needs to be determined following negotiations regarding the status of our citizens who wish to remain in the EU.  Clearly that doesn't immediately give people the assurance that they would like but it must be the correct approach.  If the UK Government meekly gave in to the pressure group rhetoric of the SNP, our citizens abroad would become negotiating tools in the Brexit negotiations and would be used to lever concessions from Britain which would result in a less favourable outcome for us.  The UK Government understand the reality of this and are acting accordingly.  By stating that she "fully expects" people will be able to stay in the country they have chosen to live in, the PM has not only confirmed her support for these people, she has laid out a firm negotiating position which will put pressure on political leaders in the EU to accept this common-sense approach. That demonstrates a far greater level of political leadership than the SNP's posturing.

Sturgeon's seemingly compassionate approach will no doubt make her come across as "our caring wee Nicola" to those voters who simply don't think beyond the headline grabbing sound bites the SNP come up with.  But the reality is that it creates huge uncertainty for our citizens abroad, it undermines the wider negotiations and is designed simply to drive a wedge between the Scottish people and the UK Government.  This isn't caring Nicola at her compassionate best, it is heartless Sturgeon at her cynical worst.

Just as I'm going to whisper the revelation that Cybernattery is actually a vote loser because I wouldn't therefore want them to give it up, I'm also going to whisper this one....

I really don't see the point of all this faux-offence because I think they already have the votes of all the people who are dim enough to be taken in by it. Faux-offence is very much a law of diminishing returns and the more of its bandwagons they jump on whilst continuing to allow the functions devolved to them to disintegrate, the more likely they are instead to antagonise many of their supporters with half a brain enough to see through the con trick. It is therefore a vote loser... but I wouldn't want them to tumble to that one!

But really, all this posturing and dashing off to various European destinations for interviews with token, reluctant minor foreign officials is becoming a complete joke. I'm not actually sure whether she does it to build up an expectation which they then hope will be "cruelly dashed" or whether she has actually inherited some of her predecessor's delusions of grandeur.

Edited by Charles Bannerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Speaking as someone who has never voted Snp, it's still hard to miss what is a rather severe obsession with them on here and it somewhat constricts what is an enormous, wide ranging debate to a much more confined one. The Snp don't have ownership over the independence debate, much as they may wish they did. Yet charging them with 'grievance politics' but then basing nearly every argument from a starting point of deep rooted grievance against them could be deemed contradictory, but at best it creates a rather dizzying cycle of repetitive commentary. Some people have expressed dismay at the polarising or divisive nature of the constitutional debate in this country yet they appear as far away from any reconciliatory rhetoric or an olive branch as they possibly could be

I couldn't quite bring myself to vote Yes for Independence in 2014, I considered it and many of my friends/colleagues voted that way. I was by no means blind to some of it's appeal but the status quo and the sense that I didn't want the boat to be rocked were clear enough in my mind. I don't regret it, given what I knew then 

What I know now, post Brexit, is hugely different, as are my views on the constitutional discussion and thus another referendum. It's no longer possible (for me) to apply the 2014 stance like for like to the current scenario, such is the dramatic difference to the mechanics of the whole debate. Nicholas Macpherson, the senior civil servant behind Better Together's treasury plans along with Osbourne noted as much in his ft article. Though JK Rowling wins the prize for most surprising concession that Brexit has changed opinion 

Brexit came around thanks to the wishes alone of the Conservative's right wing, their splintered right wing (Ukip) and the billionaire media moguls who backed what was a quite dispicible campaign laced with proto-fascist undertones. For many, it was a proxy-vote on English independence, I lost count of how many vox pops I saw with people saying "I want to give England back to the English". Although many of the historical economic failures within communities which voted heavily for Leave may have been down to the neglect of their local industries by repeated governments, it was the immigration blame game card which won the day, reaffirmed by years of hysterical coverage by the press

While the government which placed us on a road to economic peril was in disarray, the media circus instead focused not on accountability but on dismantling the opposition. I cared not for the state of Corbyn and his party, I cared for a plan, which no one apparently had

Given the lack of any sense of control I welcomed the cross-party mandate given to Nicola Sturgeon from Holyrood. If there can be a way in which Scotland can remain in both unions (Uk and Eu) the 'reverse Greenland' scenario, then I endorse it, but given how complex this set-up may be I doubt if it's achievable, as each party that backs the exploratory mandate will be well aware

Some of the sounds coming out of members from Scottish Labour and the Lib dem's is that their independence stance may be revised down the line. Both know that the new Westminster government is now the most right wing in history and along with the prospect that membership of the signal market is not guaranteed without free movement (the main vote winner for leave) it would be more than a tough sell to the scottish electorate in future elections. Add in the ridiculous Boris Johnson as the paragon for the new Uk on the world scene and that sale becomes even more difficult 

Polling appears cautious on independence after Brexit, though the Yes vote had increased across the polls. The key thing to remember though is that this is current polling. Article 50 has yet to be invoked and the economy has been 'shi**ing it' at just the prospect of that act

The Snp will only fancy another referendum if certain things are in place. If they can secure a guarantee from Europe that membership will be continued following a Yes vote, they'll go for it I'm sure. Indications so far have been positive looking broadly at the signals coming from Europe but given most people don't know what the make-up of Brexit will be, we're in a bit of a limbo at present

I applauded Ruth Davidson's attitude and performance on the eve of the Brexit vote but she went from brilliant defender of remain and the European ideal to 'Brexit is what's best now' in what felt like a heartbeat. Passing the buck to the Snp for 'creating instability' by not ruling out another referendum is hilarious from many conservatives, we all know where all this instability has come from and if the Union does split Brexit will have been the catalyst. It's implications are staggering

Some on here are embarrassed by the fact our parliamentarians have voted to try and preserve our european status, I'm not. I know numerous people with partners who are eu citizens and both are very, very concerned at what the future holds for them and their family. What I'm embarrassed by is what the vote says about the Uk's attitude towards others and indeed the hate crime figures that now evidence more than a sense of concern

It's a sorry state of affairs on all levels and as much as I'm currently enjoying and supporting team GB during this Olympics to the hilt, sadly no amount of flag waving or gold medals are going to ensure my child has the same opportunities it had before the Ukipers gained ownership of Uk's future

 

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CaleyCol - you almost make it sound as if the SNP are some kind of decent chaps who can be reasoned with or some kind of reconciliation arrived at! The reality is that they are utterly uncompromising in their pursuit of the only thing that matters to them and will pursue the single outcome the loaded system says they need by any means or deception they can come up with.

As a result they need stood up to and exposed for what they are, especially to the poor souls who have been conned and deluded into supporting them. They have suppressed criticism and opposition through the bullyboy tactics of the Cybernats and allied cranks of which there is no shortage in their ranks. We must therefore take every opportunity to stand up for what the majority of the Scottish electorate have already told the SNP they believe in.

Indeed we would by now have achieved much of the reconciliation you seek if the SNP had accepted the democratic will of the Scottish people they CLAIM to champion.

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Charles

People are free to express their opinions, sadly some people feel that this only extends to opinions that they like. I've read a fair bit about the Cybernats issue recently. The word was coined by Better Together's "twitter squad" as a derogatory term designed to add negative connotations to the Yes voters en masse. I applaud it's Machiavellian conception. The result though was that legitimate, polite, reasoned voices are often tarred with the same brush and in effect many people can be labelled a "Cybernat" even though their actions merit no such label. So the term itself can be a tool of suppression too. 

The same happens with people who support the union, many sensible, decent discussions are framed or tainted in a negative manor just because some idiot or group of idiots have decided to join in. The moral is, there are idiots on both sides, no one holds any moral superiority here

Given that the Snp didn't want another referendum soon and that a second referendum loss would virtually finish them, I'm surprised that some of the people on here aren't singing for one!?

As I said, I doubt they'd call one unless they are guaranteed they'd win. This would surely only come if they could ensure a continuation of the EU membership. It would be something I would vote for if all else had failed before it. I didn't vote in 2014 to suspend my ability to adapt. Given the fluidity of events which have been brought upon us by the EU vote, I see it as key to have a broad perspective and an open mind. Regardless of how it's painted, it's a more insular outlook our friends in the south appear to have endorsed 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Charles Bannerman said:

CaleyCol - you almost make it sound as if the SNP are some kind of decent chaps who can be reasoned with or some kind of reconciliation arrived at! The reality is that they are utterly uncompromising in their pursuit of the only thing that matters to them and will pursue the single outcome the loaded system says they need by any means or deception they can come up with.

As a result they need stood up to and exposed for what they are, especially to the poor souls who have been conned and deluded into supporting them. They have suppressed criticism and opposition through the bullyboy tactics of the Cybernats and allied cranks of which there is no shortage in their ranks. We must therefore take every opportunity to stand up for what the majority of the Scottish electorate have already told the SNP they believe in.

Indeed we would by now have achieved much of the reconciliation you seek if the SNP had accepted the democratic will of the Scottish people they CLAIM to champion.

A post that proves one of CaleyCol's principal points.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome CaleyCol, good posts, you already have Charles going and the more posts you put in the more he rants :lol: 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks IBM, not looking to antagonise anyone, I just enjoy the discourse. Plenty to discuss post Brexit, but as I mentioned, we're in a bit of a limbo just now so there's a lot of conjecture to wade through 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.