It's a meaningless phrase used by idiotic brexiteers to shift focus from the colossal butt puck they've given the nation and it's population.
Or they're just trying to kid themselves their delusion is still possible.

Either way, brexitard speak featuring purple unicorns.

Makes me wonder what the end game will be. In the end the lies will be caught up with the harsh truth. Project fear is exactly what is happening.

As the Johnson government pushes for No Deal as they've always done, brexiters' last hopes are dashed in series:

https://www.politico.eu/article/failure ... ess-lobby/

In a statement, BDI Director General Joachim Lang called the outcome of the latest round " more than a disappointment" and added: "Failure of the negotiations for a partnership agreement is now as good as inevitable. Too many political and technical issues are still outstanding for them to be resolved in time.”

Lang said that both the EU and the German government, which currently holds the presidency of the Council of the EU, must now "join forces and focus all their attention on the necessary emergency measures" to protect themselves from the fallout of a no-deal scenario.

[...]

Lang also delivered a grim assessment of the U.K.'s preparedness for leaving the EU single market at the end of this year, when the Brexit transition period runs out.

“German industry does not expect the U.K. to complete the public infrastructure for cross-border trade in time," he said. "The latest British plans are incomplete. This threatens companies with new customs duties, additional bureaucracy and economic disaster."

This is not what their imagined riding to the UK's rescue was supposed to look like.

And for some reason Angela Merkel isn't singing from the brexiters' hymn book either:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... gotiations

This only continues the long, long list of Brexit issues which have universally gone sideways whenever the proclaimed illusions have actually come into contact with hard reality. And there is nothing indicating that this is going to change while the EU trade deals with Third Countries are about to be withdrawn from the UK and the UK doesn't have anything to put in their place.

Besides Brexit, Scotland apparently better handling of Covid-19, may encourage the Scots to separate from the UK and join with the EU.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/25/uk/boris ... index.html

olle wrote:

Sorry for that I realize that writing from a spanish beach with a cold beer has some disadvantages

LOL; I know that feeling done that once or twice myself

olle wrote:

But that happened after the win. The main strategy of brexiteers was to loose the election, becoming martyrs and ride on the brittish, read English national wave. Suddenly brexit was a fact and there was no brexiteers to be seen the next 72 hours.

That’s an interesting theory campaigning to lose. But not to mention the seismic political movement within UK politics in the main parties was also taking place after the vote.
Cameron resignation within 24hrs, Corbyn facing a vote of no confidence with 24hrs

olle wrote:

After 72 hours the direct economically advantages that was going to make brexit UK into a country full of gold an honey, suddenly brexiteers started to talk about that brexit would give advantage in 2 generations time of 50 years.

Everyone has their view on the benefits to the UK both during the course of the campaign and a couple of years after the vote. There are direct and indirect benefits to Brexit Government policies after transition will determine what will fall within a short term some or longer.term.

But what Rees-Mogg actually said was that “We won’t know the full economic consequences for a very long time, we really won’t.” and the “The overwhelming opportunity for Brexit is over the next 50 years.” a bit different from saying we wont see any benefits for 50 years

Same can be said on direct economic benefit from the UK joining the EEC/EU GDP didn’t consistently rise until the mid-1980’s and most acknowledge it was PM Thatcher policies than actually joining the EEC that lead to the UK becoming a better place than the EEC. its policy of Government that will eventually determine the prosperity of a nation

olle wrote:

Covid 19 is there fore the gift from heaven... Even if UK seems to be in free fall economically next year even worse then south europe of the combination of covid and brexit, only covid will take the blame.

Its pure speculation how the UK economy will performed if Covid had not have happened no one is ever going to truly know, all countries around the world are tacking a hit economically some more so than others

olle wrote:

By doing English brexit into a UK brexit I see that the breakup of UK within one generation is written on the wall.

You have lost me on that one “English Brexit” “UK Brexit” there is only one Brexit
As to the UK breaking up, I’m not going to say if it will happen or not but Scotland has already had a choice just as NI did in 73 both agreed to remain in the UK

olle wrote:

NI, that weill like eastern germany have full citizen rights, better GDP per capita on the way compared to the current situation I see this as simple logic. If Scotland gets connected with ROI / NI with bridges the economical ties will grow even stronger after brexit, therefore the disadvante leaving UK will become smaller. And do not underestimate the Scottish nationalist agenda.

That’s all outside the realms of Brexit, if NI think it has a better at prosperity being one united Ireland why has there been no strong push for a united Ireland given the strong desire to remain as part of the EU. They can force the issue by petitioning Parliament to hold a border poll

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news ... 91878.html

But I suspect that both NI/ Scotland would be more complicated negotiation than the UK leaving the EU. I imagine that there would be some trepidation from the ROI about the cost to government to the ROI considering that subsidies to NI were in excess of the net contributions to the EU

olddog wrote:

It is totally related to Brexit and how the new budget will be without UK.

The only thing that new EU budget directly relates to Brexit is who actually got lumped with the additional membership fees to cover UK withdrawal considering the actual 7-year budget minus the Covid-19 recovery package is larger than previous budget

That would be the one to watch

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

I'm sure there was plenty of hope here in the UK that things would go badly - certainly it was reported as being constantly on the brink of disaster, even though I knew it was just a tricky negotiation which would get solved after a while... Which of course it was.

It’s always a tricky negotiation, in the UK it was more of who was going to step up to the plate to replace the UK funds

SomebodyInTLS wrote:

No sign of EU imminent collapse - rather the opposite .. the member states have agreed closer cooperation and mutual support. The only fly in the ointment is putting curbs on undemocratic tendencies in Hungary and Poland on hold for now (it will certainly be addressed later).

But the seeds of discontent have not truly gone away, there are still Eurosceptics within the EU Parliament. No one really thought that the UK would leave and the government of the day was pro-EU you just never know what circumstances will happen in the future

I'm not saying it will happen just a possibility that it could happen, and that's up to the member nation to decide


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ital ... SKCN24M1N8

Itbewr wrote:

Besides Brexit, Scotland apparently better handling of Covid-19, may encourage the Scots to separate from the UK and join with the EU.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/25/uk/boris ... index.html

The state governments in Australia had different ideas on how to handle the outbreak, I haven’t heard anyone call for Secession, connecting Covid-19 to Scottish independence is like saying 2+2=5

A101 wrote:

Itbewr wrote:

Besides Brexit, Scotland apparently better handling of Covid-19, may encourage the Scots to separate from the UK and join with the EU.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/25/uk/boris ... index.html

The state governments in Australia had different ideas on how to handle the outbreak, I haven’t heard anyone call for Secession, connecting Covid-19 to Scottish independence is like saying 2+2=5

After Brexit the SNP will use every crack to drive a wedge.

olle wrote:

After Brexit the SNP will use every crack to drive a wedge.

Ah Scotland’s Future, Hubris of Nicola Sturgeon and the Third War of Independence

A101 wrote:

Itbewr wrote:

Besides Brexit, Scotland apparently better handling of Covid-19, may encourage the Scots to separate from the UK and join with the EU.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/25/uk/boris ... index.html

The state governments in Australia had different ideas on how to handle the outbreak, I haven’t heard anyone call for Secession, connecting Covid-19 to Scottish independence is like saying 2+2=5

I agree, but:

JJJ wrote:

After Brexit the SNP will use every crack to drive a wedge.

And clearly it's a big enough fear for the Tories to dispatch the PM to Scotland to talk up the Union (ironically from some fishing community on an isolated island up North rather than from some NHS hospital in Edinburgh where he could have piled praise on the staff), as well as to have several ministers in Parliament start their statements with first underlining the benefits of their measures taken for Scotland in particular, before pointing to the benefits for britain as a whole.

These are clear signs government acknowledges the new reality, and is adjusting its communication to it, which should come as no surprise as several opinion polls in Scotland now show a majority (beyond the margin of error) would vote in favour of independance...

Of course, it's just a few opinion polls and it's just a 'termporary' majority right now in the wake of COVID 19, but it all does build up pressure: in the end, Westminster can not keep looking away if this indeed is the new way Scotland is leaning.

I have to say that whan the British PM comes to Scotland, it increasinlngly does look like some foreign dignitary is visiting, rather than a domestic work visit... a sign on the wall, IMHO.

A101 wrote:

olle wrote:

After Brexit the SNP will use every crack to drive a wedge.

Ah Scotland’s Future, Hubris of Nicola Sturgeon and the Third War of Independence

Why are you against sovereignty?

A101 wrote:

Itbewr wrote:

Besides Brexit, Scotland apparently better handling of Covid-19, may encourage the Scots to separate from the UK and join with the EU.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/25/uk/boris ... index.html

The state governments in Australia had different ideas on how to handle the outbreak, I haven’t heard anyone call for Secession, connecting Covid-19 to Scottish independence is like saying 2+2=5

Fair point. Yet Brexiteers are desperately trying to pin whatever is going on on Scottish independence these days to COVID 19, not Brexit. The title of this piece on ConHome says it all:

“Remainers cannot re-write history: it is Covid-19, not Brexit, that challenges the Union”

https://www.conservativehome.com/thetor ... union.html

Admittedly been too tied up to keep an eye on whatever’s happening in Scotland, but even a cursory read of Tory-friendly publications like the Spectator and Telegraph over the past couple of weeks suggest that some combination of Brexit, Johnson and COVID has supercharged Scottish nationalism.

JJJ wrote:

A101 wrote:

olle wrote:

After Brexit the SNP will use every crack to drive a wedge.

Ah Scotland’s Future, Hubris of Nicola Sturgeon and the Third War of Independence

Why are you against sovereignty?

It’s obvious, isn’t it? The “will of the people”/“sovereignty”/[insert meaningless Brexiteer term] only matters if the “people” in question are English. But, of course, there is no such thing as an “English Brexit” - the Scots voted for Brexit whether they liked it or not.

We all knew Brexit might pose a threat to the UK. I was not pro-Scottish independence in 2014 (fervently opposed) but less fussed now. The problem for Brexiteers is that any argument that applies in favour of Brexit applies for Scexit too. Economy? Complicated negotiations? Easy to dismiss as a unionist version of “Project Fear”.

If Scotland secedes, Brexiteers will have to take credit for at least giving the SNP the template on how to go about it, if not the ammunition for energizing it.

It seems like there is not much economic benefit in leaving the EU:

"Brexit will have soon cost the UK more than all its payments to the EU over the past 47 years put together."

https://www.businessinsider.com/brexit- ... -eu-2020-1

Sovereignty can't be valued high enough !!!!

Bostrom wrote:

It seems like there is not much economic benefit in leaving the EU:

I don't think any hard core Brexiteer will care. As long as they see themselves liberated from the EU and can claim they've taken back control, they're happy. Therefore costs are not relevant for them and they'll always agrue that the benefit ("having control over its own destiny") outweighs any cost.

Seems like france looking between the fingers for boats carrying mogrants to uk... uk is complaining.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/13 ... ard-dinghy

The numbers seems to go up after brexit. Is this unofficial strategy from france?

Given that intercepting these people and taking them back does not benefit France, I doubt that it is a priority.

Unofficial can't be of course officially confirmed

LJ wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

It seems like there is not much economic benefit in leaving the EU:

I don't think any hard core Brexiteer will care. As long as they see themselves liberated from the EU and can claim they've taken back control, they're happy. Therefore costs are not relevant for them and they'll always agrue that the benefit ("having control over its own destiny") outweighs any cost.

Probably not, but I seem to remember something written on a bus about money being sent to the EU that should be sent to the NHS instead…

LJ wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

It seems like there is not much economic benefit in leaving the EU:

I don't think any hard core Brexiteer will care. As long as they see themselves liberated from the EU and can claim they've taken back control, they're happy. Therefore costs are not relevant for them and they'll always agrue that the benefit ("having control over its own destiny") outweighs any cost.

that is correct, hardcore Brexiteers don't care about the economic downfall. We have someone here that he accepts 3 times as much as quoted there. The mythical self-control seems to be more important, whatever that means. Rees Mogg said it might benefit the UK in 50 years. It is still crazy, no argument can sway Brexitremist, none, not economical, not a reality check of the non-importance of the UK on the world stage (see japan deal, us trade deal), not the impact on the ordinary Britt, not that the UK could be broken up because of Brexit, nothing.

A101 wrote:

olle wrote:

Sorry for that I realize that writing from a spanish beach with a cold beer has some disadvantages

LOL; I know that feeling done that once or twice myself

olle wrote:

But that happened after the win. The main strategy of brexiteers was to loose the election, becoming martyrs and ride on the brittish, read English national wave. Suddenly brexit was a fact and there was no brexiteers to be seen the next 72 hours.

That’s an interesting theory campaigning to lose. But not to mention the seismic political movement within UK politics in the main parties was also taking place after the vote.
Cameron resignation within 24hrs, Corbyn facing a vote of no confidence with 24hrs

olle wrote:

After 72 hours the direct economically advantages that was going to make brexit UK into a country full of gold an honey, suddenly brexiteers started to talk about that brexit would give advantage in 2 generations time of 50 years.

Everyone has their view on the benefits to the UK both during the course of the campaign and a couple of years after the vote. There are direct and indirect benefits to Brexit Government policies after transition will determine what will fall within a short term some or longer.term.

But what Rees-Mogg actually said was that “We won’t know the full economic consequences for a very long time, we really won’t.” and the “The overwhelming opportunity for Brexit is over the next 50 years.” a bit different from saying we wont see any benefits for 50 years

Same can be said on direct economic benefit from the UK joining the EEC/EU GDP didn’t consistently rise until the mid-1980’s and most acknowledge it was PM Thatcher policies than actually joining the EEC that lead to the UK becoming a better place than the EEC. its policy of Government that will eventually determine the prosperity of a nation

olle wrote:

Covid 19 is there fore the gift from heaven... Even if UK seems to be in free fall economically next year even worse then south europe of the combination of covid and brexit, only covid will take the blame.

Its pure speculation how the UK economy will performed if Covid had not have happened no one is ever going to truly know, all countries around the world are tacking a hit economically some more so than others

olle wrote:

By doing English brexit into a UK brexit I see that the breakup of UK within one generation is written on the wall.

You have lost me on that one “English Brexit” “UK Brexit” there is only one Brexit
As to the UK breaking up, I’m not going to say if it will happen or not but Scotland has already had a choice just as NI did in 73 both agreed to remain in the UK

olle wrote:

NI, that weill like eastern germany have full citizen rights, better GDP per capita on the way compared to the current situation I see this as simple logic. If Scotland gets connected with ROI / NI with bridges the economical ties will grow even stronger after brexit, therefore the disadvante leaving UK will become smaller. And do not underestimate the Scottish nationalist agenda.

That’s all outside the realms of Brexit, if NI think it has a better at prosperity being one united Ireland why has there been no strong push for a united Ireland given the strong desire to remain as part of the EU. They can force the issue by petitioning Parliament to hold a border poll

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news ... 91878.html

But I suspect that both NI/ Scotland would be more complicated negotiation than the UK leaving the EU. I imagine that there would be some trepidation from the ROI about the cost to government to the ROI considering that subsidies to NI were in excess of the net contributions to the EU

I actually think that Brexit is a very English project. Scotland do not want it, Catholics in NI see it as a great chance to become part of ROI, protestants in NI thru DUP thought that they had Ms May protecting them against ever joining ROI but is not effectively seeing them-self disconnected from mainland UK and defacto inside ROI and SM whatever they wanted it in the first place or not.

There is mentioned here that economical gain was presented to come perhaps after 50 years. As I remember it that number came after the election. Before the election UK population was presented from most brexiteers that the land of milk and honey was about arrive day after the gain.

olle wrote:

A101 wrote:

olle wrote:

Sorry for that I realize that writing from a spanish beach with a cold beer has some disadvantages

LOL; I know that feeling done that once or twice myself

olle wrote:

But that happened after the win. The main strategy of brexiteers was to loose the election, becoming martyrs and ride on the brittish, read English national wave. Suddenly brexit was a fact and there was no brexiteers to be seen the next 72 hours.

That’s an interesting theory campaigning to lose. But not to mention the seismic political movement within UK politics in the main parties was also taking place after the vote.
Cameron resignation within 24hrs, Corbyn facing a vote of no confidence with 24hrs

olle wrote:

After 72 hours the direct economically advantages that was going to make brexit UK into a country full of gold an honey, suddenly brexiteers started to talk about that brexit would give advantage in 2 generations time of 50 years.

Everyone has their view on the benefits to the UK both during the course of the campaign and a couple of years after the vote. There are direct and indirect benefits to Brexit Government policies after transition will determine what will fall within a short term some or longer.term.

But what Rees-Mogg actually said was that “We won’t know the full economic consequences for a very long time, we really won’t.” and the “The overwhelming opportunity for Brexit is over the next 50 years.” a bit different from saying we wont see any benefits for 50 years

Same can be said on direct economic benefit from the UK joining the EEC/EU GDP didn’t consistently rise until the mid-1980’s and most acknowledge it was PM Thatcher policies than actually joining the EEC that lead to the UK becoming a better place than the EEC. its policy of Government that will eventually determine the prosperity of a nation

olle wrote:

Covid 19 is there fore the gift from heaven... Even if UK seems to be in free fall economically next year even worse then south europe of the combination of covid and brexit, only covid will take the blame.

Its pure speculation how the UK economy will performed if Covid had not have happened no one is ever going to truly know, all countries around the world are tacking a hit economically some more so than others

olle wrote:

By doing English brexit into a UK brexit I see that the breakup of UK within one generation is written on the wall.

You have lost me on that one “English Brexit” “UK Brexit” there is only one Brexit
As to the UK breaking up, I’m not going to say if it will happen or not but Scotland has already had a choice just as NI did in 73 both agreed to remain in the UK

olle wrote:

NI, that weill like eastern germany have full citizen rights, better GDP per capita on the way compared to the current situation I see this as simple logic. If Scotland gets connected with ROI / NI with bridges the economical ties will grow even stronger after brexit, therefore the disadvante leaving UK will become smaller. And do not underestimate the Scottish nationalist agenda.

That’s all outside the realms of Brexit, if NI think it has a better at prosperity being one united Ireland why has there been no strong push for a united Ireland given the strong desire to remain as part of the EU. They can force the issue by petitioning Parliament to hold a border poll

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news ... 91878.html

But I suspect that both NI/ Scotland would be more complicated negotiation than the UK leaving the EU. I imagine that there would be some trepidation from the ROI about the cost to government to the ROI considering that subsidies to NI were in excess of the net contributions to the EU

I actually think that Brexit is a very English project. Scotland do not want it, Catholics in NI see it as a great chance to become part of ROI, protestants in NI thru DUP thought that they had Ms May protecting them against ever joining ROI but is not effectively seeing them-self disconnected from mainland UK and defacto inside ROI and SM whatever they wanted it in the first place or not.

There is mentioned here that economical gain was presented to come perhaps after 50 years. As I remember it that number came after the election. Before the election UK population was presented from most brexiteers that the land of milk and honey was about arrive day after the gain.

would be nice if the Brexitremist take some responsabilities of the backslash of a (hard) brexit. Everything what is happening and the consequences were known before 2016 and they wanted the Brexit anyway, so they are responsable for all the "benifits" and all the consequences......

JJJ wrote:

Why are you against sovereignty?

I’m not I’m all for it, hence why you call me a Brexiter.

Sturgeon is appealing to the mass within Scotland for an illusion of independence with the EU.

ElPistolero wrote:

Yet Brexiteers are desperately trying to pin whatever is going on on Scottish independence these days to COVID 19, not Brexit. The title of this piece on ConHome says it all:

Just like this headline;
“Scottish support for independence rises as COVID-19 imperils the United Kingdom”

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-healt ... KKCN24P1CN

Sturgeon is doing what every politician does, use events for any political advantage. There is a perception that Scottish government has handled the coronavirus outbreak better which has garnered an up tick for support to Sturgeon. Right or wrong I’m no medical expert if that is the case or not.
This same sort of trend is happening in other countries too, during the Australian bushfire crises whilst I was in Australia, I noted how the PM was getting battered from pillar to post on the Federal Governments response whilst State Government Premiers were basking in their handling of the crises, even though it is a 100% state responsibility to handle the crises. But know that same Morrison Government is riding high in the polls for his leadership during the Covid-19 crises and State Premiers are being battered in the media across the country, high profile leaders use of perception is like the sword of Damocles it can cut both ways

As the old saying goes; “Make Hay While the Sun Shines” in other words make the most of a favourable situation while it lasts you never know what’s around the corner in the future

ElPistolero wrote:

It’s obvious, isn’t it? The “will of the people”/“sovereignty”/[insert meaningless Brexiteer term] only matters if the “people” in question are English. But, of course, there is no such thing as an “English Brexit” - the Scots voted for Brexit whether they liked it or not.

We all knew Brexit might pose a threat to the UK. I was not pro-Scottish independence in 2014 (fervently opposed) but less fussed now. The problem for Brexiteers is that any argument that applies in favour of Brexit applies for Scexit too. Economy? Complicated negotiations? Easy to dismiss as a unionist version of “Project Fear”.

LoL;

I’m actually not opposed to giving both NI/Scots a future referenda on independence and I have said those very things within the forum in previous threads. The only thing I am opposed to is for a referenda to be held before the dust has settled on Brexit and any future trade deals with and the UK given a chance to advance with its future direction of the UK as a whole for a number of years so the Scottish electorate have all the guidance at their disposal to make an informed decision.

But I also see the point that Johnson makes in not granting another section 30 order as Sturgeon endorsed the booklet Scotland’s Future – Your Guide to an Independent Scotland in which Mr Salmond professed that the referenda will be a “a once in a generation opportunity”
And Sturgeon in her own words;

“It is a real privilege to make the last speech in the last debate in this Parliament before the referendum—before our once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to put the future of our country exactly where the future of our country should be: in the hands of the people who live here”

ElPistolero wrote:

If Scotland secedes, Brexiteers will have to take credit for at least giving the SNP the template on how to go about it, if not the ammunition for energizing it.

All those points you bring up will be brought up in any referenda campaign. Just as Brexit also gives any number of EU member nations a lesson’s learned template on withdrawal from the EU, there has to be a first for everything

Bostrom wrote:

It seems like there is not much economic benefit in leaving the EU:
"Brexit will have soon cost the UK more than all its payments to the EU over the past 47 years put together."

Ah that myth again, must be a favourite with the remain crowd

LJ wrote:

I don't think any hard core Brexiteer will care. As long as they see themselves liberated from the EU and can claim they've taken back control, they're happy. Therefore costs are not relevant for them and they'll always agrue that the benefit ("having control over its own destiny") outweighs any cost.

I’m happy to pay the cost as a taxpayer to regain our sovereignty in full from the EU. As I pointed out before as of March 5 2020 the NAO said Brexit has cost the taxpayer £4.4 billion money well spent

A101 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

Why are you against sovereignty?

I’m not I’m all for it, hence why you call me a Brexiter.

Sturgeon is appealing to the mass within Scotland for an illusion of independence with the EU.

That is not an illusion at all but almost a certainty if Scotland wins its independence.

It will be a tough road to that goal, but good faith provided (which can actually be assumed from Scotland, contrary to what we're seeing in Westminster nowadays), Scotland is practically certain to win accession to the EU, including a veto on future treaties with Third Countries such as the rest-England+Wales+(maybe still) Northern Ireland...

olle wrote:

I actually think that Brexit is a very English project. Scotland do not want it,

You are entitled to your opinion, but that does not negate the fact that an EU membership referenda was known entity before voting in the Scottish referenda, yes it was the preferred position of the Cameron government to remain in the EU, but there was a small possibility that we would leave as well.
I’m not Scottish but do the Scottish believe in true independence from the UK or do they believe the EU will be the only saviour from the UK intransigencies?

olle wrote:

Catholics in NI see it as a great chance to become part of ROI, protestants in NI thru DUP thought that they had Ms May protecting them against ever joining ROI but is not effectively seeing them-self disconnected from mainland UK and defacto inside ROI and SM whatever they wanted it in the first place or not.

PM May was not the head of government at the time of the referenda, you are talking with collective hindsight, Also May wasn’t reliant on the DUP until her ill-fated gamble on a GE when she had a slim majority and thru it away.
If Catholics saw Brexit as a chance to unite Ireland then why not seize the opportunity to push for a border poll, surely, they would romp in NI stands are far better chance of forcing the issue than does Scotland as there is a constitutional mandate to do so under the Belfast Agreement

A101 wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

It seems like there is not much economic benefit in leaving the EU:
"Brexit will have soon cost the UK more than all its payments to the EU over the past 47 years put together."

Ah that myth again, must be a favourite with the remain crowd

No myth, lots of evidence that Brexit cost a lot of money, no evidence or a logical train of thought even that it will be economically beneficial.

A101 wrote:

LJ wrote:

I don't think any hard core Brexiteer will care. As long as they see themselves liberated from the EU and can claim they've taken back control, they're happy. Therefore costs are not relevant for them and they'll always agrue that the benefit ("having control over its own destiny") outweighs any cost.

I’m happy to pay the cost as a taxpayer to regain our sovereignty in full from the EU. As I pointed out before as of March 5 2020 the NAO said Brexit has cost the taxpayer £4.4 billion money well spent

You opened the door: you live in Australia, not the UK, so it will not be your money as you pay taxes in Australia not the UK.

The £4.4 billion is only hard cash out, the damage Brexit causes to the economy is the real cost to the UK conveniently forgotten by Brexiteer.

Kluas wrote:

That is not an illusion at all but almost a certainty if Scotland wins its independence.
It will be a tough road to that goal, but good faith provided (which can actually be assumed from Scotland, contrary to what we're seeing in Westminster nowadays), Scotland is practically certain to win accession to the EU, including a veto on future treaties with Third Countries such as the rest-England+Wales+(maybe still) Northern Ireland...

So, its not Sturgeon ambition to cede its hard-won independence to the EU again.

Yet you castigate leavers for objecting to an FTA with the EU that means to incorporate the EU’s laws/regulations and permit jurisdiction of the ECJ.

What is sovereignty in terms of the nation state? “a state with a defined territory that administers its own government and is not subject to or dependent on another power.”

I have no doubt that the Brussels will welcome Scotland. So, what opt outs can Scotland look forward too being a rule taker of the EU………. Schengen. Euro. Defence?????

I’m sure Scottish fisherman are going to be really happy that they have finally withdrawn from CFP that they are thrown straight back in.
Will Scotland again go to the polls for an EU referenda?

Dutchy wrote:

No myth, lots of evidence that Brexit cost a lot of money, no evidence or a logical train of thought even that it will be economically beneficial.

Does that also mean because members within the EU nations lost money due to the down turn in its economy is all the fault of Brexit? What about the rest of the world economy that’s all on Brexit?

Its is a myth as its pure speculation how the UK economy would have performed if the referenda result was to remain, no one can quantify what would/could/did as there is no base line except in speculation.

The only confirmed evidence what Brexit has cost the taxpayer is in the NAO report in March of 2020 of £4.4 billion

Dutchy wrote:

You opened the door: you live in Australia, not the UK, so it will not be your money as you pay taxes in Australia not the UK.

By crikey that’s news to me, but yes I have paid and pay tax in both the UK/AU

Dutchy wrote:

The £4.4 billion is only hard cash out, the damage Brexit causes to the economy is the real cost to the UK conveniently forgotten by Brexiteer.

No not forgotten, we know there will be a dip but the results are pure speculation

A view from afar, but a view also shaped by having spent many months in the UK over the last decade.
Brexit is overly supported by white middle class southern English, either retired or close to retirement age.
In other words those living in a very comfortable part of the UK who are now financially secure and of a demographic that is overly suspicious of "people not like us"
These supporters are largely immune from the economic effects of Brexit. They are also largely unaffected by the reduction of international mobility, and opportunity, in any careers that Brexit entails.
The other significant group of supporters seem to be within those economically deprived, either from lack of opportunity, or living in a location from which industry has fled. Many of these have been sold the idea that their plight is because of "too many foreigners" are taking their jobs and businesses away.
Given the recent major failings in British political leadership, and the recent shenanigans within British Royalty, "regaining sovereignty" seems to be a very dubious prize to offset the self inflicted economic and social damage that a hard Brexit will incur.

olle wrote:

Seems like france looking between the fingers for boats carrying mogrants to uk... uk is complaining.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/13 ... ard-dinghy

The numbers seems to go up after brexit. Is this unofficial strategy from france?

I'm French. What I can say about this is that I've seen it mentioned on British tabloids front pages and youtube comments for months.

Nobody is talking about it in France.

BTW, it's always funny to look at these tabloids, half the "articles" are about the EU collapsing any minute now. Are there still people reading this drivel, and if so, why do they care ? Isn't Brexit all about leaving the EU behind ?

steveinbc wrote:

The whole rationale for Brexit is encapsulated in this final few months of 'negotiations ". It's no surprise to me that the EU wants to preserve the more socialist and regulatory stance while the UK prefers a more market driven and competitive stance. Fundamentally the two can never meet unless there's a focus on mutual benefits. The EU exports more to the U.K. Than vice versa hence economically free trade benefits the EU. The UK doesn't want to have unfettered movement of people across borders but has agreed to "grandfathering" those already there ...so quite reasonable . Most "standards" imposed by the EU are a crock of shit. Does anyone believe that US or Canadian or Singapore standards are inferior? Different yes but inferior? So thes. An be resolved. The Irish issue is a red herring and used to exploit the Achilles heel of the UK. This is disengenuous. Almost every major European country has their own "troublesome" part....Spain with Catalan and Basque, France with Corsica and Alsace, Italy with Sardinia and the "north south" divide, I won't even mention Belgium!! There's no advantage to either party asking for everything in the status quo. Brits want economic freedom and control over citizenry and residency. Europe wants a supra national governance that provides economic and political stability. These highest level needs are compatible. It can be done provided the politics of spite don't prevail

The UK has embraced "economic liberalism above all else" since Thatcher, that's true. It has been quite successful at making the EU do the same thing. "Socialism" in the EU with a 1% budget ? Get real. Now, part of that economic liberalism dogma is to always have a large number of people ready to work for low wages handy. Hence mass immigration. The UK was also successful in making the EU expand east and allow these new europeans in the UK right away. Brexit is about less regulation, yes, mostly ones around money laundering and financial misgivings, but it's not about less immigration, that's only some helpful slogan to win the referendum. Tories have been in power for 10 years and have done nothing about immigration. Europeans are fewer to come, so Pakistanis/Indians/Caribbeans/Africans are more to come instead. I'm sure the people who voted for Brexit because of "too many strangers" are delighted about these new immigrants...

A101 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

No myth, lots of evidence that Brexit cost a lot of money, no evidence or a logical train of thought even that it will be economically beneficial.

Does that also mean because members within the EU nations lost money due to the down turn in its economy is all the fault of Brexit? What about the rest of the world economy that’s all on Brexit?

Its is a myth as its pure speculation how the UK economy would have performed if the referenda result was to remain, no one can quantify what would/could/did as there is no base line except in speculation.

The only confirmed evidence what Brexit has cost the taxpayer is in the NAO report in March of 2020 of £4.4 billion

oh, that's convenient,so we can't put an exact number on it, so we have to do some research and make an educated projection, you just ignore it. It isn't pure speculation, it isn't a myth, it is researched and you can and must do it. Brexit has an economic effect and it is hugely negative. Ignoring it as you want, is naive at best and misleading at worst. £4.4 billion versus £130 billion, the 4,4 is insignificant, 130 is huge, wouldn't you agree?

A101 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

You opened the door: you live in Australia, not the UK, so it will not be your money as you pay taxes in Australia not the UK.

By crikey that’s news to me, but yes I have paid and pay tax in both the UK/AU

You tried to use an authoritarian argumentation: I will pay for it, but that isn't the case or at the very least, only a small portion. Omiting that fact is misleading again.

A101 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

The £4.4 billion is only hard cash out, the damage Brexit causes to the economy is the real cost to the UK conveniently forgotten by Brexiteer.

No not forgotten, we know there will be a dip but the results are pure speculation

So in your view, all research is pure speculation? That is a complete bull of course. Brexit has a huge impact on the British economy and it will be hugely negative, there is no other way it will have an impact. The wet dream of Brexiteers is a hard Brexit, severing the ties with a huge economic block on the doorstep of the UK and the most important trade partner and not just that, but also severing the economic ties with dozens and dozens of other countries. Countries that are open to a trade deal use the UK as a punch back to get the most lucrative trade deal for that country with a take it of leave it mentality. Brexit is a self inflicted economic wound and might will llead to the dismentaling of the UK itself. Brexiteers voted for all of this...................

Aesma wrote:

The UK has embraced "economic liberalism above all else" since Thatcher, that's true. It has been quite successful at making the EU do the same thing. "Socialism" in the EU with a 1% budget ? Get real. Now, part of that economic liberalism dogma is to always have a large number of people ready to work for low wages handy. Hence mass immigration. The UK was also successful in making the EU expand east and allow these new europeans in the UK right away. Brexit is about less regulation, yes, mostly ones around money laundering and financial misgivings, but it's not about less immigration, that's only some helpful slogan to win the referendum. Tories have been in power for 10 years and have done nothing about immigration. Europeans are fewer to come, so Pakistanis/Indians/Caribbeans/Africans are more to come instead. I'm sure the people who voted for Brexit because of "too many strangers" are delighted about these new immigrants...

Indeed, and that's why this deregulation will mean less rights for the British workers and with mass immigration from all these old colonies will have the same impact on British society as having the same number of east Europeans, so everyone voted on Brexit for immigration will be left in the dark. And everyone who voted for Brexit in the hope it will better their lives, someone, believed the Brexit lie and will be frustrated by the outcome. The red wall might have been tricked in voting for the conservatives because of Brexit, but man, what will they think if they see the real impact of their choice?

Aesma wrote:

olle wrote:

Seems like france looking between the fingers for boats carrying mogrants to uk... uk is complaining.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/13 ... ard-dinghy

The numbers seems to go up after brexit. Is this unofficial strategy from france?

I'm French. What I can say about this is that I've seen it mentioned on British tabloids front pages and youtube comments for months.

Nobody is talking about it in France.

BTW, it's always funny to look at these tabloids, half the "articles" are about the EU collapsing any minute now. Are there still people reading this drivel, and if so, why do they care ? Isn't Brexit all about leaving the EU behind ?

I enjoy myself reading them inbetween . They jave during the last 20 years made a living on expressing how bad EU is for UK and the brittish people.

I think it is an essential crisis for them to figure out why people shall read them now when UK is not part of EU, nor sits on the negotiaions like the last budget talks.

Dutchy wrote:

Oh, that's convenient,so we can't put an exact number on it, so we have to do some research and make an educated projection, you just ignore it. It isn't pure speculation, it isn't a myth, it is researched and you can and must do it. Brexit has an economic effect and it is hugely negative. Ignoring it as you want, is naive at best and misleading at worst. £4.4 billion versus £130 billion, the 4,4 is insignificant, 130 is huge, wouldn't you agree?

Well it seems you don’t want to ignore it, that’s your choice. But I take economic forecasts with a pinch of salt.

Of course, you can’t put a number on it as its impossible for them to estimate what way the economy will move if we remained or left, that’s why it’s a myth its theoretical and cannot be proven right or wrong. Even treasury was estimating that trading with the EU on a CETA type deal might cost the UK economy between 4.9% & 6.7% growth over 15 years not that the economy will shrink by that much as some describe it. But once again it is a forecast an estimate, theoretical, speculation. No one I know can accurately predict the future

The German Economy didn’t grow as the theoretical forecast predicted over the last few years pre-Covid has Germany actually lost what never materialised?

£4.4 billion is real money your £130 billion might as well be monopoly money it’s not real. As I have said before you can’t miss something you never had.

Dutchy wrote:

You tried to use an authoritarian argumentation: I will pay for it, but that isn't the case or at the very least, only a small portion. Omiting that fact is misleading again.

Talk about misleading……Did I not say “I’m happy to pay the cost as a taxpayer to regain our sovereignty in full from the EU” in post 179?.....A big difference to what you claim I said "I will pay for it"

You do realise that it’s the taxpayer who ultimately pays as the government is effectively broke without us paying our taxes.

LOL, authoritarian argumentation it’s not me who said “You opened the door: you live in Australia, not the UK, so it will not be your money as you pay taxes in Australia not the UK” why try to turn it when you clearly didn’t know my personal situation and could not substantiate your false narrative

Dutchy wrote:

So in your view, all research is pure speculation? That is a complete bull of course.

Well of course not there is so many types of research going on across the world in different fields. Not all of it is theoretical

Dutchy wrote:

Brexit has a huge impact on the British economy and it will be hugely negative, there is no other way it will have an impact. The wet dream of Brexiteers is a hard Brexit, severing the ties with a huge economic block on the doorstep of the UK and the most important trade partner and not just that, but also severing the economic ties with dozens and dozens of other countries. Countries that are open to a trade deal use the UK as a punch back to get the most lucrative trade deal for that country with a take it of leave it mentality. Brexit is a self inflicted economic wound and might will llead to the dismentaling of the UK itself. Brexiteers voted for all of this...................

Well I’m sure historians will let us know in 50 years when we can evaluate the outcome in detail, hopefully I’ll out live Jiroemon Kimura record and see how we done and get a birthday card from the future King of the UK/Commonwealth.

But in the meantime, I look forward to see if PWC future predictions come true
https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/econom ... -2050.html

A101 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Oh, that's convenient,so we can't put an exact number on it, so we have to do some research and make an educated projection, you just ignore it. It isn't pure speculation, it isn't a myth, it is researched and you can and must do it. Brexit has an economic effect and it is hugely negative. Ignoring it as you want, is naive at best and misleading at worst. £4.4 billion versus £130 billion, the 4,4 is insignificant, 130 is huge, wouldn't you agree?

Well it seems you don’t want to ignore it, that’s your choice. But I take economic forecasts with a pinch of salt.

Of course, you can’t put a number on it as its impossible for them to estimate what way the economy will move if we remained or left, that’s why it’s a myth its theoretical and cannot be proven right or wrong. Even treasury was estimating that trading with the EU on a CETA type deal might cost the UK economy between 4.9% & 6.7% growth over 15 years not that the economy will shrink by that much as some describe it. But once again it is a forecast an estimate, theoretical, speculation. No one I know can accurately predict the future

The German Economy didn’t grow as the theoretical forecast predicted over the last few years pre-Covid has Germany actually lost what never materialised?

£4.4 billion is real money your £130 billion might as well be monopoly money it’s not real. As I have said before you can’t miss something you never had.

Dutchy wrote:

You tried to use an authoritarian argumentation: I will pay for it, but that isn't the case or at the very least, only a small portion. Omiting that fact is misleading again.

Talk about misleading……Did I not say “I’m happy to pay the cost as a taxpayer to regain our sovereignty in full from the EU” in post 179?.....A big difference to what you claim I said "I will pay for it"

You do realise that it’s the taxpayer who ultimately pays as the government is effectively broke without us paying our taxes.

LOL, authoritarian argumentation it’s not me who said “You opened the door: you live in Australia, not the UK, so it will not be your money as you pay taxes in Australia not the UK” why try to turn it when you clearly didn’t know my personal situation and could not substantiate your false narrative

Dutchy wrote:

So in your view, all research is pure speculation? That is a complete bull of course.

Well of course not there is so many types of research going on across the world in different fields. Not all of it is theoretical

Dutchy wrote:

Brexit has a huge impact on the British economy and it will be hugely negative, there is no other way it will have an impact. The wet dream of Brexiteers is a hard Brexit, severing the ties with a huge economic block on the doorstep of the UK and the most important trade partner and not just that, but also severing the economic ties with dozens and dozens of other countries. Countries that are open to a trade deal use the UK as a punch back to get the most lucrative trade deal for that country with a take it of leave it mentality. Brexit is a self inflicted economic wound and might will llead to the dismentaling of the UK itself. Brexiteers voted for all of this...................

Well I’m sure historians will let us know in 50 years when we can evaluate the outcome in detail, hopefully I’ll out live Jiroemon Kimura record and see how we done and get a birthday card from the future King of the UK/Commonwealth.

But in the meantime, I look forward to see if PWC future predictions come true
https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/econom ... -2050.html

LOL, right, so 2050 predictions are fine (2016 interesting year to take as a basis for this forcast), but near term effects of current policies, no we cannot take those seriously. Seriously?

Look, to put is simply, you are cherry-picking research. Either you believe in research or you don't. I think that science and research is a. good thing and predictions based on models is what is done all the time, nothing special there. And consistently all models put the UK at a disadvantadge because of Brexit and more importantly how it is handled, especially your stated desired outcome of a hard Brexit. Not taking that effect into account is misleading. And that is exactly whay you are trying to do here by putting the cost of Brexit on 4,4bn, it isn't, that is only a small fraction of the. true cost. Even if the 200bn at years end isn't true, let's put it at a moddest 50% of that, that is still 25times what you have stated. And that's why. the 4,4bn is complete bull.

As far as Asutralia is concerned, you have said it yourself you are moving/have moved to Australia. So given you said:

A101 wrote:

I’m happy to pay the cost as a taxpayer to regain our sovereignty in full from the EU

So what does that mean? Really, I am trying to take you seriously, really I am. But, given your own statement, if you are only a partly taxpayer at best, it is too easy to make such a claim, you have obmitted crusial information here. Sovereignty the UK have never been lost, never or we go again that each and every international agreement limits a countries sovereignty and if you want that, then you are in favour of the UK getting out of each and every international agreement or you are not consistent. I haven't heard you arguing that, so that must not be it. So yeah, I am trying to take you seriously, but your argumentation is flawed.

A101 wrote:

Just like this headline;
“Scottish support for independence rises as COVID-19 imperils the United Kingdom”

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-healt ... KKCN24P1CN

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the article you posted literally begins with this:

“HELENSBURGH, Scotland (Reuters) - James Henderson has spent most of his life fiercely opposed to Scottish independence. Now, reluctantly he is backing it.

The 71-year-old former marine engineer voted against Scotland leaving the United Kingdom during the last independence referendum in 2014. But after Brexit, the election of Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the coronavirus pandemic, he now believes Scotland would be better off independent.”

Essentially, as I noted in the post you quoted, a combination of Brexit, Johnson and COVID.

Bit disingenuous to compare it to an outright brexiteer denial of Brexit’s role in alienating Scotland.

A101 wrote:

Sturgeon is doing what every politician does, use events for any political advantage. There is a perception that Scottish government has handled the coronavirus outbreak better which has garnered an up tick for support to Sturgeon. Right or wrong I’m no medical expert if that is the case or not.
This same sort of trend is happening in other countries too, during the Australian bushfire crises whilst I was in Australia, I noted how the PM was getting battered from pillar to post on the Federal Governments response whilst State Government Premiers were basking in their handling of the crises, even though it is a 100% state responsibility to handle the crises. But know that same Morrison Government is riding high in the polls for his leadership during the Covid-19 crises and State Premiers are being battered in the media across the country, high profile leaders use of perception is like the sword of Damocles it can cut both ways

As the old saying goes; “Make Hay While the Sun Shines” in other words make the most of a favourable situation while it lasts you never know what’s around the corner in the future

Interesting argument. Hard to escape the obvious implication that Unionist Brexiteer politicians have been particularly inept at using COVID and Brexit to make a case for the Union and Brexit.

Simply goes to reinforce the obvious: Brexit is an English endeavour that’s contributing to the erosion of the Union. Even if Brexiteers don’t want to admit that, we can agree that Brexit is one of the main reasons the sun is shining on the haymakers of Scotland.

A101 wrote:

LoL;

I’m actually not opposed to giving both NI/Scots a future referenda on independence and I have said those very things within the forum in previous threads.

We all deduced that. From last year:

“Conservative party members would be prepared to sacrifice the union, destroy their party or suffer economic damage to get the UK out of the European Union, a poll has suggested.
....
The survey found that 63 per cent of members would be prepared to see Brexit take place even if it meant Scotland leaving the UK.
....
59 per cent would prioritise leaving the EU even if it meant Northern Ireland breaking away from the rest of the UK“

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/u ... 8?mode=amp

Your position merely reinforces what some of us have noted all along - Brexit is an English endeavour, the Union be damned.

A101 wrote:

The only thing I am opposed to is for a referenda to be held before the dust has settled on Brexit and any future trade deals with and the UK given a chance to advance with its future direction of the UK as a whole for a number of years so the Scottish electorate have all the guidance at their disposal to make an informed decision.

Why? The Brexit vote happened four years ago. Plenty of time to make an informed decision. Sounds like a disingenuous attempt to kick it into the long grass.

Besides, that’s an interesting tack to take. Your argument here, when taken to its logical conclusion, provides the basis not just for a Scottish referendum, but also a referendum on reversing Brexit.

A101 wrote:

But I also see the point that Johnson makes in not granting another section 30 order as Sturgeon endorsed the booklet Scotland’s Future – Your Guide to an Independent Scotland in which Mr Salmond professed that the referenda will be a “a once in a generation opportunity”
And Sturgeon in her own words;

“It is a real privilege to make the last speech in the last debate in this Parliament before the referendum—before our once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to put the future of our country exactly where the future of our country should be: in the hands of the people who live here”

And that would hold water if the Brexit vote didnt take place 2 years later. In light of the Brexit vote, it doesnt for obvious reasons. As noted in the article you chose to quote:

“In Scotland, the independence cause has also been bolstered by Britain’s departure from the European Union. Continued membership of the bloc was a key promise of the unionist camp in the 2014 referendum and Scots voted overhwelmingly to remain in the Brexit referendum two years later.

Many feel they are being dragged out by a Conservative government that they did not vote for and which they see as patronising and arrogant.”

It’s disingenuous to argue, as you have, that on the one hand, a referendum isn’t necessary since nothing has changed, while simultaneously arguing that any such referendum should be delayed to allow Scottish voters to be fully informed about the nature and scale of the change.

Anyway, this entire “once in a generation” argument being put forth by Brexiteers and unionists stinks of “bait and switch”, which is illegal as a marketing tool in most western countries. For good reason.

A101 wrote:

All those points you bring up will be brought up in any referenda campaign. Just as Brexit also gives any number of EU member nations a lesson’s learned template on withdrawal from the EU, there has to be a first for everything

Perhaps, but this is different in one very specific way. Unlike most conceivable scenarios, the UK is unique in that the Tory Government is the strongest proponents of both Brexit and the Union. It now finds itself in a bizarre situation - wherein it’s own leaders have completely undermined their own strongest arguments (and credibility) for any type of union.

This is becoming evident in the fact that even Brexiteers like Dan Hannan have resorted to poorly thought through pieces that implicitly acknowledge that rational arguments - based on economics or practicality - no longer carry any weight when coming from English Brexiteers, and so they must resort to some kind of emotional appeals (with a strong dose of nostalgia).

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... -scotland/

Anyway, as the brits have the habit to manipulate who is allowed to vote in a referendum like they did the last two, I doubt that is the solution...

Toenga wrote:

A view from afar, but a view also shaped by having spent many months in the UK over the last decade.
Brexit is overly supported by white middle class southern English, either retired or close to retirement age.
In other words those living in a very comfortable part of the UK who are now financially secure and of a demographic that is overly suspicious of "people not like us"
These supporters are largely immune from the economic effects of Brexit. They are also largely unaffected by the reduction of international mobility, and opportunity, in any careers that Brexit entails.
The other significant group of supporters seem to be within those economically deprived, either from lack of opportunity, or living in a location from which industry has fled. Many of these have been sold the idea that their plight is because of "too many foreigners" are taking their jobs and businesses away.
Given the recent major failings in British political leadership, and the recent shenanigans within British Royalty, "regaining sovereignty" seems to be a very dubious prize to offset the self inflicted economic and social damage that a hard Brexit will incur.

A lot of this rings true, but the important point to note here is that those who may suffer, still stand by their vote. Brexit may reap dividends for them. It may not. Either way, they reap what they sow.

The most likely outcome if the economic promises of Brexit dont come to fruition, is that they will demand that Remainer London bail them out of their own poor economic choices. And, of course, their own (sustained) economic failures in backwaters like Bishop Auckland and Boston will be somebody else’s fault - remainers, Brussels, the Supreme Court, immigrants, civil servants etc.

A101 wrote:

Kluas wrote:

That is not an illusion at all but almost a certainty if Scotland wins its independence.
It will be a tough road to that goal, but good faith provided (which can actually be assumed from Scotland, contrary to what we're seeing in Westminster nowadays), Scotland is practically certain to win accession to the EU, including a veto on future treaties with Third Countries such as the rest-England+Wales+(maybe still) Northern Ireland...

So, its not Sturgeon ambition to cede its hard-won independence to the EU again.

Yet you castigate leavers for objecting to an FTA with the EU that means to incorporate the EU’s laws/regulations and permit jurisdiction of the ECJ.

What is sovereignty in terms of the nation state? “a state with a defined territory that administers its own government and is not subject to or dependent on another power.”

I have no doubt that the Brussels will welcome Scotland. So, what opt outs can Scotland look forward too being a rule taker of the EU………. Schengen. Euro. Defence?????

I’m sure Scottish fisherman are going to be really happy that they have finally withdrawn from CFP that they are thrown straight back in.

Your entire theory of Brexit and everything hinges on your mistaken belief that EU member countries were somehow "oppressed" and "dictated" to.

If nothing else the recent EU budget negotiations should have reminded you that actually every single member country has a veto on crucial matters and a vote on everything else, as do the elected MEPs from each country (the new EU budget hasn't cleared that hurdle yet, and it is not likely to do so unchanged).

Meanwhile today, Scotland is indeed dictated to by Westminster in all crucial matters and even devolved powers can be withdrawn at a whim of the Westminster parliament, so they're not actually real.

Scotland and Northern Ireland getting dragged out of the EU against their will by Westminster overriding the clear will of the regional populations simply obliterates that argument of yours entirely.

By comparison, an independent Scotland would actually have its own constitution and its actual sovereignty to do what they pleased, including pooling some of their sovereign decisions with other like-minded countries, negotiating, voting and if need be vetoing common decisions.

That is night and day relative to Scotland's subordinate status now!

And actually the UK has already now shrunk to a mere rule-taker after exiting the EU not just in the transition period relative to the EU, but the secret negotiations with the US will clearly result only in one of two things: a) the US telling the UK which US rules to take or b) no substantial agreement at all.

As to the ECJ: It's our Single Market, and it can only work when there are consistent rules in it and every participant sticks to those same rules. The ECJ is of course the only possible guarantor of that.

It's a simple fact of life that the EU just won't allow a third country like the UK to participate in the Single Market without sticking at the very least to the same rules as every actual member.

Expecting anything less is delusional, because just objectively that could never work, and all the whining and complaining about it is simply pointless.

Either accept the rules or you get no access. That's just how it goes, and you've been told exactly that all along.

And all the attempts to twist that into a heinous plot to undermine the natural privileges divinely bestowed on the United Kingdom are just silly nonsense, merely deepening the mortal embarrassment the Brexit crew has steered the UK into with an astonishing, but unfortunately no longer surprising level of incompetence.

This is a very hard and cold reality you have chosen for your country. Now brexit supporters need to suck it up and live with the automatic consequences, the same ones they had been warned about for many years, even long before the referendum.

Will Scotland again go to the polls for an EU referenda?

We'll see, but an independence referendum would already unambiguously present that choice as the path into the European Union with no alternative goal, so holding another referendum on whether to actually accede to the EU would seem somewhat redundant as long as the accession conditions were as expected.

And that is in stark contrast to the last indipendence referendum where the Westminster government had presented the Remain option as the exact opposite of what – after winning that option – they have now turned it into in a classic bait-and-switch deception, which makes a new IndyRef a completely fresh and new decision.

As an example I would like to ask if ROI is more sovereign inside EU or outside? Would ROI been in a .stronger position to negotiate with UK regarding it relationship with uk today compared to before it joined EU?

The same can be asked regarding gibraltar and the negotiations uk spain. Is spain in a stronger position to protect its interest inside eu or outside?

A101 wrote:

But in the meantime, I look forward to see if PWC future predictions come true
https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/econom ... -2050.html

Doesn'l look good for the UK unless it somehow repairs its relationship with China...

BTW good that the EU has far reaching trade agreements or is in talks with many of the growth countries.

LJ wrote:

A101 wrote:

But in the meantime, I look forward to see if PWC future predictions come true
https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/econom ... -2050.html

Doesn'l look good for the UK unless it somehow repairs its relationship with China...

BTW good that the EU has far reaching trade agreements or is in talks with many of the growth countries.

Please recognize the study was done in 2016. Don't know if it was done before or after the referendum. The effect of a hard Brexit isn't taken into account because nobody seriously took that scenario for real. So the PWC outlook is completely outdated and of no use. Strange that A101 heels this study, but dismisses any other study, including the most recent one which says it has cost the UK economy 130bn pounds, and 200bn at year-end. It is the inconvenient truth for the Brexiteers, but dismissing it and looking. away, will not let it magically disappear.