4 ms·

To quote a Tory MP: "Nicola Sturgeon seems to be the only one who knows what's she's doing". Warning of a constitutional crisis is good tactics. It probably wi

by pi-err 10y ago

To quote a Tory MP: "Nicola Sturgeon seems to be the only one who knows what's she's doing". Warning of a constitutional crisis is good tactics. It probably will not lead to canceling brexit, though it will probably break the 1998 devolution law and change how Scotland can "sell" independence and its claim to stay in the EU. So it looks like this is either to lay ground for a "fast track" EU access due to special circumstances - OR getting special new rights within the UK to compensate leaving the EU.

ck425 10y ago
Definitely the former. That and possibly an attempt at a second indyref if the current momentum doesn't die. I live in Edinburgh, one of the areas with the highest No vote in the indyref, and pretty much everyone I talk to who voted No would strongly consider a Yes vote. Depending how the situation in westminster develops, this might calm down or it could get stronger.
- sievebrain 10y ago
  They're mad now. But a second referendum would force the situation to be analysed a lot more carefully. And that situation would not be a strong argument for leaving, no matter how much the Scots might like the idea of the EU.
  - ck425 10y ago
    You presume the referendum will be based on sound analysis. If there's one thing the EUref has shown it's that you don't need sound analysis. It also depends heavily on how the UK does in the coming year. The UK needs to be economically and politically powerful enough that it's not worth giving up for self determination. It doesn't need to be a better deal, it has to be better enough to defeat romantic notions of independence.
    - sievebrain 10y ago
      There you go: assuming the analysis of leave voters was not sound. Many voters made a very straightforward analysis: "the EU means I compete against an essentially infinite supply of labour, I can't do that, therefore we should get out of the EU so we can restrict immigration again". You may not agree with this reasoning or you may feel the various other benefits of the EU outweigh them in your personal circumstances, but it's not an illogical analysis: they think leaving will make them economically better off and there are millions of such voters. It's actually quite difficult to mount a robust economic argument against this idea: you have to argue that the EU will erect such serious trade barriers that all the jobs disappear. But a lot of these people are working in local service industries anyway, they aren't selling to the EU, so you end up arguing a very indirect path to them personally suffering which basically rests on "the EU will be such bastards that the entire UK economy collapses", which then stirs up patriotic sentiments very strongly (reminds people of the war). And you rapidly end up in economic wonk territory because the details of the damage depend so much on details of the final deal, etc. The public, quite rightly, does not trust economists due to their track record of getting the big things wrong. The economic rationale for Scotland leaving the UK and joining the EU is much less clear. The big one is public spending. The Scots may not like it but their country is subsidised by the UK to a huge degree. The spending deficit alone is the same size as ALL Scottish NHS spending. The economic argument from "lose the subsidies from the English, public services are cut because oil is cheap" is very direct and much more easily understood. Scotland does not have a problem with massive immigration. People like the idea of the EU but what specific economic problem would it solve for them?
      - _Understated_ 10y ago
        > The Scots may not like it but their country is subsidised by the UK to a huge degree. ^This! I am a Scot, living in Scotland and I voted out (and against independence) but a great many of my peers over the years wanted independence "because Westminster/England". It was the most childish of reasons. The economic argument wasn't there the last time and it absolutely isn't there this time but last time it wasn't pressed much... this time it will be but once the Indy Propaganda machine gets going then all bets are off.
      - ck425 10y ago
- _Understated_ 10y ago
  At the last indeyref the budget figures were plucked out the air and with the oil price collapse the hole in the finances is massive. How is Scotland going to finance it this time? FYI I am Scottish, living in Scotland and I voted out!
  - ck425 10y ago
    Out of curiosity, why?
    - _Understated_ 10y ago
      I wanted out of the EU to have control of the future of our country in the hands of the people we elected... I have no control over the elites in Europe. That was the primary (possibly only!) factor in my decision.
      - MagnumOpus 10y ago
        Do you have control over the elites in Westminster? Be realistic, we can obviously not influence who gets to be the next head of state, nor who gets placed into the Tory/Labour safe seats by the inner parties, nor who gets chosen by those people to run the civil service and our lives. Even if you think that you have influence over who your SNP MP is - he/she won't ever be in the UK government, they will never have a say on anything, resigned to jeer from the opposition backbenches. It is the epitome of disenfranchisement.
      - ck425 10y ago
        You have elected MEPs that make many of the decisions. Additionally in the UK currently you have a FPTP system that is arguably undemocratic and an unelected House of Lords (which I don't necessarily disagree with) so surely there are bigger easier fish to fry.
- pi-err 10y ago
  I still see major obstacles to indyref 2: Scotland would have to join the Euro and Schengen, and build a border with England. That's choosing work over family and I bet Sturgeon doesn't underestimate the risk of a 2nd (and final) "stay". Also: borders are sacred in Europe. States don't want to split/remodel per a 60 years old tradition. There is a very strong case for indy Scotland (and i support it) but I admire that Sturgeon is smart enough to try and get the best of all possible outcomes.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
    > Scotland would have to join the Euro and Schengen Theoretically, yes, Scotland has to join the Euro. The EU treaties as they stand today, however, would prevent that from happening any time soon. Scotland would need its own currency first, and then to join ERM2, and meet the conditions for several years, and so on. And, like Sweden, Scotland could choose to deliberately not join ERM2. Schengen is more interesting, particularly the future potential situation in Ireland.

by pi-err 10y ago

ck425 10y ago

Definitely the former. That and possibly an attempt at a second indyref if the current momentum doesn't die. I live in Edinburgh, one of the areas with the highest No vote in the indyref, and pretty much everyone I talk to who voted No would strongly consider a Yes vote. Depending how the situation in westminster develops, this might calm down or it could get stronger.

sievebrain 10y ago
They're mad now. But a second referendum would force the situation to be analysed a lot more carefully. And that situation would not be a strong argument for leaving, no matter how much the Scots might like the idea of the EU.
- ck425 10y ago
  You presume the referendum will be based on sound analysis. If there's one thing the EUref has shown it's that you don't need sound analysis. It also depends heavily on how the UK does in the coming year. The UK needs to be economically and politically powerful enough that it's not worth giving up for self determination. It doesn't need to be a better deal, it has to be better enough to defeat romantic notions of independence.
  - sievebrain 10y ago
    There you go: assuming the analysis of leave voters was not sound. Many voters made a very straightforward analysis: "the EU means I compete against an essentially infinite supply of labour, I can't do that, therefore we should get out of the EU so we can restrict immigration again". You may not agree with this reasoning or you may feel the various other benefits of the EU outweigh them in your personal circumstances, but it's not an illogical analysis: they think leaving will make them economically better off and there are millions of such voters. It's actually quite difficult to mount a robust economic argument against this idea: you have to argue that the EU will erect such serious trade barriers that all the jobs disappear. But a lot of these people are working in local service industries anyway, they aren't selling to the EU, so you end up arguing a very indirect path to them personally suffering which basically rests on "the EU will be such bastards that the entire UK economy collapses", which then stirs up patriotic sentiments very strongly (reminds people of the war). And you rapidly end up in economic wonk territory because the details of the damage depend so much on details of the final deal, etc. The public, quite rightly, does not trust economists due to their track record of getting the big things wrong. The economic rationale for Scotland leaving the UK and joining the EU is much less clear. The big one is public spending. The Scots may not like it but their country is subsidised by the UK to a huge degree. The spending deficit alone is the same size as ALL Scottish NHS spending. The economic argument from "lose the subsidies from the English, public services are cut because oil is cheap" is very direct and much more easily understood. Scotland does not have a problem with massive immigration. People like the idea of the EU but what specific economic problem would it solve for them?
    - _Understated_ 10y ago
      > The Scots may not like it but their country is subsidised by the UK to a huge degree. ^This! I am a Scot, living in Scotland and I voted out (and against independence) but a great many of my peers over the years wanted independence "because Westminster/England". It was the most childish of reasons. The economic argument wasn't there the last time and it absolutely isn't there this time but last time it wasn't pressed much... this time it will be but once the Indy Propaganda machine gets going then all bets are off.
    - ck425 10y ago
_Understated_ 10y ago
At the last indeyref the budget figures were plucked out the air and with the oil price collapse the hole in the finances is massive. How is Scotland going to finance it this time? FYI I am Scottish, living in Scotland and I voted out!
- ck425 10y ago
  Out of curiosity, why?
  - _Understated_ 10y ago
    I wanted out of the EU to have control of the future of our country in the hands of the people we elected... I have no control over the elites in Europe. That was the primary (possibly only!) factor in my decision.
    - MagnumOpus 10y ago
      Do you have control over the elites in Westminster? Be realistic, we can obviously not influence who gets to be the next head of state, nor who gets placed into the Tory/Labour safe seats by the inner parties, nor who gets chosen by those people to run the civil service and our lives. Even if you think that you have influence over who your SNP MP is - he/she won't ever be in the UK government, they will never have a say on anything, resigned to jeer from the opposition backbenches. It is the epitome of disenfranchisement.
    - ck425 10y ago
      You have elected MEPs that make many of the decisions. Additionally in the UK currently you have a FPTP system that is arguably undemocratic and an unelected House of Lords (which I don't necessarily disagree with) so surely there are bigger easier fish to fry.
pi-err 10y ago
I still see major obstacles to indyref 2: Scotland would have to join the Euro and Schengen, and build a border with England. That's choosing work over family and I bet Sturgeon doesn't underestimate the risk of a 2nd (and final) "stay". Also: borders are sacred in Europe. States don't want to split/remodel per a 60 years old tradition. There is a very strong case for indy Scotland (and i support it) but I admire that Sturgeon is smart enough to try and get the best of all possible outcomes.
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
  > Scotland would have to join the Euro and Schengen Theoretically, yes, Scotland has to join the Euro. The EU treaties as they stand today, however, would prevent that from happening any time soon. Scotland would need its own currency first, and then to join ERM2, and meet the conditions for several years, and so on. And, like Sweden, Scotland could choose to deliberately not join ERM2. Schengen is more interesting, particularly the future potential situation in Ireland.