Support for Scottish Independence hits 58%

Juninho10

Well-known member
If Scotland leave they will be taking lovely thank you present to the EU.
Bye....and thanks for all the fish.
You are deluded - "The UK's fishing and fish processing industries employ 24,000 people and contribute 1.4 billion pounds (€1.6 billion, $1.8 billion) to the UK economy, according to a House of Commons research library briefing. That is a mere 0.12% of GDP involving under 0.1% of the UK's 33-million national workforce."

So fishing is 0.12% of UK GDP - lovely gift to the EU (y)(y)(y)
 

Ziggy

Well-known member
Most of it being in new Scots coastal waters after independence. Whatever the amount it will fall in to their treasury
It's an insignificant amount granted, but HMG have decided to make 'Our Fishing Grounds' something of huge symbolic importance. While failing to mention the largest quotas were sold off years ago...the majority of which owned by various EU companies
But registered in the UK.
So all the figures quoted. How much stays in the exchequer.
If Scotland is independent it becomes a sovereign nation.
In charge of it's " own laws, money, and borders "..and fishing quotas that the government sold are void....Just like the over the 40 years of agreements made with the EU by UK Gov. expire at 11pm New Years Eve.
Bit of pocket change, but it belongs to them.
 

Juninho10

Well-known member
Yeah the problem is.... "The Scottish Government health budget in 2018/19 was £13.4 billion" , never mind anything else like Police, Council Services, Military, etc, etc

£1.4 Billion from Fish isn't going to cover a lot
 
You are deluded - "The UK's fishing and fish processing industries employ 24,000 people and contribute 1.4 billion pounds (€1.6 billion, $1.8 billion) to the UK economy, according to a House of Commons research library briefing. That is a mere 0.12% of GDP involving under 0.1% of the UK's 33-million national workforce."

So fishing is 0.12% of UK GDP - lovely gift to the EU (y)(y)(y)
Fishing is one of the many (largely irrelevant or extremely small scale) things that leavers have banged on about for the last 4 years, that's why us remainers are bringing it up. It's the one very small thing you might have had, but even that could be going now.

Remainers are the ones who have been saying why are you concerned with fishing, when we don't eat or sell much fish. Maybe ask the service industry what they want or ask manufacturing where they're going to get their parts from now, and how quickly can they get them.
 
Corbyn's fault.
The Labour party got decimated in Scotland and the Scots now being governed by a Tory Govt that has almose zero representation in Scotland. It is undemocratic. Many of the fence sitters have now decided to support independence.
Boris got in because of Corbyn.
Another consequence of the looney left hijacking the Labour party. (n)
 
Corbyn's fault.
The Labour party got decimated in Scotland and the Scots now being governed by a Tory Govt that has almose zero representation in Scotland. It is undemocratic. Many of the fence sitters have now decided to support independence.
Boris got in because of Corbyn.
Another consequence of the looney left hijacking the Labour party. (n)
I don't particularly rate Corbyn, but is someone trying to look after those worse off a looney? If so, why?
He's not the strongest (not a patch on Kier), but I wouldn't call him a looney, I would say that's a closer description of Boris, DC, Gove, Patel etc.

To be fair it was the Tories that allowed the brexit vote, then messed up the campaign, lost the vote and they then went on the side of undermining May and going for an unmandated hard brexit. That's what led to Boris coming in. Corbyn was the opposition but was effectively powerless when the Tories wanted to leave with no deal and loads of Labour voters would rather see us out of the EU than have their party in power, or at least with some seats, which is utterly bonkers.

Loads of skint labour voters were conned into thinking their mistreatment, bad luck, lack of effort or their failure was EU's fault, and this was achieved with plastic patriotism, xenophobia, racism and bull$hit propaganda, aimed squarely at easily led, and poor labour voters. The rich Tory's didn't need convincing as they wouldn't leave their party for anything, so they were effectively in the bag.

The scots were no way going to jump ship to the tories and they didn't want out of the EU either, so in that scenario they were always going to go SNP, which seem to have took their chance well. They will just get stronger and stronger now, I think.
 
Yeah the problem is.... "The Scottish Government health budget in 2018/19 was £13.4 billion" , never mind anything else like Police, Council Services, Military, etc, etc

£1.4 Billion from Fish isn't going to cover a lot
£10 billion from financial services helps out a bit though...
More Fintech start ups than everywhere except Wall St...
4 of the biggest pension firms...
 
Corbyn's fault.
The Labour party got decimated in Scotland and the Scots now being governed by a Tory Govt that has almose zero representation in Scotland. It is undemocratic. Many of the fence sitters have now decided to support independence.
Boris got in because of Corbyn.
Another consequence of the looney left hijacking the Labour party. (n)
:LOL::ROFLMAO:

The SNP won a majority in the Scottish Parliament in 2011 and won 56 out of 59 seats in the UK Parliament General Election in 2015. Both while the Labour right were in charge, had been for decades, and hardly anybody outside his constituency knew anything about Corbyn.

Jeez Louise, poor old Corbyn, is there anything he doesn't get blamed for?
 
If you have a referendum on such a matter with such regularity it makes the whole thing a farce. If they vote no 3 times then the 4th time when they say yes does that mean they should become an independent nation forever?

It needs to be a once in a generation thing, and the SNP shouldn't have pushed for it until they were sure they'd win, which they didn't. Their c0ck up
 
But they haven't voted no to independence 3 times. Just the once. And that was in a referendum where Cameron promised devo max and said staying in the UK was the only way for Scotland to be in the EU. Surely it's farcical now to say they can't ever vote again given that they've had the opposite of what they voted for in 2014?

If they had another referendum at some point after the Scottish Parliament elections next year, and they voted no again, I suspect that would be it done and dusted anyway. Can't see it going to 3rd and 4th attempts.

And thinking about it logistically, nothing will happen before the Parliamentary elections next May, and they'd probably need quite a bit of time to sort out having a referendum. If it was going to happen I expect it'd end up being in 2022 or 2023. By then it'll be 8 or 9 years since the last one. Not sure I think of that as "such regularity". How long would be an appropriate amount of time to wait?
 
If you have a referendum on such a matter with such regularity it makes the whole thing a farce. If they vote no 3 times then the 4th time when they say yes does that mean they should become an independent nation forever?
What a ridiculous comment.

The UK were pretty much the world leaders in slavery for a long, long time time, does that mean when the public opinion swayed and they got rid of it, that it shouldn't have counted, as their decision was already made previously? No, of course not, and it's called changes of circumstance and progression, it's better.

If a referendum took place more often, or in a circumstance of massive change, then that's more democratic, and we're meant to be all for democracy, aren't we?
Timescales and "one in a generation" mean absolutely zero, the most important time to have votes is when there's a change or something to vote on. What if we had a big vote and decided that gas and coal were the best forms of energy to use, but the next day the scientists cracked nuclear fusion. Do we just stick to using gas for the next 25 years, seeing as we voted on it, or do we use common sense and consider that nuclear fusion might now be the best/ most preferred option?

Being undemocratic and not having a vote on the actual leave deal (I mean no deal), or actual factual circumstances of the UK post leaving the EU is what has led us to this. Had there been a vote then we probably would have stayed in the single market, customs union or been more aligned with the EU. Scotland probably wouldn't want to leave the UK in that case.

Now, because of all this we're heading for:
A no deal that only about 20% of voters wanted pre-referendum, and probably less than that now.
A border in the Irish Sea
A border in Kent
Scotland leaving the UK (another border), which in turn may be followed by Northern Ireland a few years down the line
Worse trading conditions, and likely to even get worse according to the massive consensus of market/ trading/ economic experts

When did we have a vote to say we wanted all that? I don't remember there ever being one?

Let Scotland have their vote, they've had the rug pulled from under their feet and things have changed massively since the last referendum, especially for them. It's bad for England and the UK, but maybe some of us English need to finally wake up and realise it's not the 1700's anymore, that might be a wake up we need. I don't think we need another economic kicking though, not after covid and a no-deal. Scotland leaving would be the icing on the cake (a cake made out of dog $hit).
 
Wow from a referendum to Slavery, I wonder when we will get to the price of cheese in Botswana.
It's an example, one of two I posted, I didn't say they were similar or had the same severity. You also seem to have ignored the rest of my post, any comments on that?

Seems you really do just like things the "same as before", I however believe in change, and giving people an opinion, a vote, a choice and if I had to chose more votes or no votes, I would chose more votes.
 
Top
X