uk and eu membership

[123scotty]

yes its that time again. tory mp's and ministers have naff all or sensible to say so like whining kids in the back of a car on a long journey asking, are we there yet. it's the tory version, can we leave the e.u. yet. does the rest of Europe not get sick of the endless wining uk ministers wanting to leave. listening to how the uk is paying for all and everything. how better we would all be with only Westminster passing laws. and no european courts to over rule the dissisions made by courts here. we could send all the poles and european migrant workers home. ok and the same could happen to british workers in the eu. but hay ho we can keep the pound measure in feet and inches again. fuk why not go back to pounds shillings and pennies. i can almost hear vera Lynn singing those wonderful war years songs on the radio now. ok we would have to pay a tariff because the uk would be outside the eu. but we could deal with 3rd world countries that wouldn't pay there bills. or negotiate a trade deal with the usa bet that special relationship wouldn't be worth a toss then. makes you wonder why we dont deal with all those countries now and why we have to leave the eu to do it. so i say to Europe like the whining kids in the back of the car that slowly grind you down. kick the uk out. they will only hold you back. just let Scotland stay after independence. anyhow thanks for reading this post and try to say something positive if not why not join the tory party you could have a hoot there with the rest of the backwards thinking people

 

[Jason]

It should be up to the people of the UK. We need a referendum to settle the matter.

If people vote IN, that' s a decision made for a good many years. If people vote OUT, well likewise it is a decision made. The Lisbon Treaty does have a process for an orderly leaving of the EU over a two year period.

Similarly Scottish independence should be up to the people of Scotland. The new consideration is that if Scotland becomes independent (within the EU) while Britain and NI decide to leave the EU - a scenario which is certainly possible - then we would be looking at border controls from Berwick upon Tweed to Gretna Geen. This scenario should have an impact both on how people might vote in an EU in/out referendum and in a Scottish independence referendum. Probably the referenda should be held in this order so that people in Scotland can make a decision after the UK has decided on the EU. The opposite order could lead to people in Scotland assuming Britain and NI would vote to stay in and being badly affected by a subsequent out vote over which they have no influence.

 

[dandelion]

I would think england leaving the EU would make it more likely, not less that scotland would vote to join the eu as an independant country. I also do not think english citizens would accept the english parliament imposing border controls between england and scotland but would insist on some arrangement for free travel.

 

[D_Percy_Prettywillie]

The United States banded together at the expense of the sovereignty of the individual states and formed what we have today. Beyond that we're a part of the North American Free Trade Association (or NAMBLA) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. What I'm saying is that we have managed to secure our own self interests while actively engaging in partnerships with larger organizations, so why can't the UK?


(With obviously zero inclination to be informed on this topic my opinion carries very little if any weight at all whatsoever. Comparisons from the United States' history to the current state of affairs in the UK are simplistic and ignore a whole host of factors that no doubt must be taken into account when formulating an opinion on the subject. So having an American come in and say "Well, we did it, why can't you," is irritating is it not?)






JSZ

 

[tbrguy]

The UK had a referendum, the population voted in favour of Europe.

I remember - I voted.

I realise the wording did not encompass the developments so many now rail against, but we knew the implications of voting in favour.

I take the long view.

The motives for creating the original iron and coal alliance in the first place were to make it all but impossible for any nations within Europe ever to go to war with each other again.

Apart from the break up of the Czech Republic, (not in the EU) after the fall of communism, it seems to be working.

I may be wrong but, the period since WWII without conflict in Europe must represent the longest for centuries.

There were bound to be problems - social economic, political etc - but these are merely bumps in the road along the way.

I know that WWII is now history and not a living memory for many, but it's really not too long ago; and I'm sure that our parents/grandparents really believed that after WWI it couldn't happen again.

It's possible the idealism that spurred them to create the embryonic EU, NATO and the UN the second time round were not just airey fairy aspirations done for... well what?

 

[Jason]

The USA is an example of a union which has worked. But would a union of the whole American continent, north and south, work? One forced through without agreement of the peoples? One where the USA subsidises the crooks of S America?


The case for Scottish independence becomes harder with a failing euro and EU. First of all it is not certain that Scotland would be an EU member. The EU is about union, so the idea of a nation breaking away doesn't really enter into the thinking. It would need agreement from all other EU nations, and Spain has said she will veto. Probably a solution could be found, but it is messy. And what sort of EU will exist in a few years? Will there be a euro?

 

[dandelion]

(With obviously zero inclination to be informed on this topic my opinion carries very little if any weight at all whatsoever.

Not at all. You belie this yourself by making a relevant comment.

Comparisons from the United States' history to the current state of affairs in the UK are simplistic and ignore a whole host of factors that no doubt must be taken into account when formulating an opinion on the subject.

So you think we should ignore all the lessons of history because it is impossible to learn every single detail so as to be fully informed?

[QUPTE]So having an American come in and say "Well, we did it, why can't you," is irritating is it not?)[/QUOTE]No, its interesting. The US is a much more integrated system then the Eu, though in some ways more and in some ways less. The obsession at the moment for propping up bankrupt countries in the EU is a case in point. I understand the US just lets then get on with it.

 

[dandelion]

But would a union of the whole American continent, north and south, work? One forced through without agreement of the peoples?

Thin ice there, I think. The United states was formed by agreement of those concerned, though I have no idea if anyone was asked to vote on it? In the UK case the population was asked to vote, albeit retrospectively, and voted 'for'. In the case of the united states some of the states then changed their minds and tried to leave. The remainder required them to stay by force. This seems to have worked out quite well and is a good deal more extreme than any situation here. There is no real issue between the UK and the EU such that people want to leave.

what sort of EU will exist in a few years? Will there be a euro?

Well who knows, but if there is, both will be staying forever. What we see now is the die hard's last ditch effort to get rid of them.

 

[B_crackoff]

Scotland wouldn't be in the EU if it had independence - which really wouldn't be independence anyway.

I think half of the English want rid of the Scots anyway - because of Blair, Brown & Darling fucking up the economy - let alone all those Scot MPs voting on purely English matters, & their racist attitude towards university fees.

I would only hope that any vote would be an open one, & all those Scots continually bleating in England are legally obliged to go back to Scotland should independence ensue - & stop suckling so greedily at the teat that they claim to despise.

All Scots would therefore become non-EU - & prevented from working in the remaining UK - they would also be charged the appropriate ex-European tariffs for coming through the borders. At least that might kick start the Scot shipping industry again.

Britain could then veto any EU or EFTA arrangement. The total real Scottish national debt would be about £300 Billion, plus their unlimited liabilities on RBS, & share in HBOS. Nice.

It would be some payback for the pish poor Scottish antipathy to the rest of the union.

We still have the Scots refusing to allow any players for an Olympic team, & who can forget the Scottish FA making representations to UEFA about the English before Euro 96? They insisted that England, the host nation, should have to qualify - a stance they never took before, & have yet to repeat.

I truly hope that Edinburgh will one day realise its claim of being the Athens of the North - it'll be a lot like Greece if they were independent - as the SNP know full well now.

As for the rest of the UK - only a better age could be envisioned.

 

[tbrguy]

Scotland wouldn't be in the EU if it had independence - which really wouldn't be independence anyway.

As I understand it, the Scot Nats intend to remain in the EU.

 

[Jason]

As I understand it, the Scot Nats intend to remain in the EU.

This is the plan of the SNP, but not of the EU, and not of some member states in the EU, particularly Spain.

The EU is about integration, not separatism and nationalism. Right now the thrust would be economic. An independent Scotland could not support the debts that would be attached to it, so would immediately require ECB/IMF help. So of course they would block independence. If Scotland actually gets as far as an independence referendum then it will be the ECB/ IMF that explain the facts of life to the Scots.

Do the people of Scotland want to do a Greece? Do people in Scotland realise how poor Greeks are?

 

[dandelion]

yugoslavia anyone? Are its breakup states going to join? USSR, are its breakup states going to join? Cyprus, are its breakup states going to join?

 

[B_crackoff]

As I understand it, the Scot Nats intend to remain in the EU.

They might intend to, but they wouldn't automatically be. Independence from the rest of the UK literally means independence from the EU too! They'd be leaving two unions.

Therefore, they'd need to apply, & gain the acceptance from all the other members, which hopefully the rest of the UK would block - as Scotland would be immediately after subsidies - & who wants to keep on paying for them, or more accession countries?

I find it deeply ironic that any nationalist party would want to be part of a federal Europe! The Scots have been over represented in the UK, with 7 out of 54 PMs, serving for 30, out of 290 years, but one can only boggle at what kind of influence they think that a nation of 5 million would wield in a community of 500 million.

EDIT: I do find the whining kids in the back of the car analogy far more suited to describing the Scots - though perhaps, perpetually sulky teenagers would be a better fit:wink:

 

[dandelion]

I find it deeply ironic that any nationalist party would want to be part of a federal Europe!

perhaps you misunderstand the Eu and therefore see it as a threat to nation states rather than an enormous boost?

The Scots have been over represented in the UK, with 7 out of 54 PMs, serving for 30, out of 290 years, but one can only boggle at what kind of influence they think that a nation of 5 million would wield in a community of 500 million.

The Scotts representation in Westminster parliament was guaranteed as recompense for giving up their independence. It is only now being scaled back because they have recovered some of their own authority to a national parliament. It has only become an issue now because the Scots vote markedly differently to the rest of the UK, particulalry the south east of England. Which was exactly the reason they were given those votes, to make sure an English majority party could not steamroller them unles it had a (still quite modest) supermajority.

EDIT: I do find the whining kids in the back of the car analogy far more suited to describing the Scots - though perhaps, perpetually sulky teenagers would be a better fit:wink:

Maybe more like someone born in britain but noticeably foreign for some reason who finds they never get offered more than being your chauffeur and told what to do?

 

[Jason]

It occurs to me that there is a nation likely to test the EU's views on separation before Scotland gets round to it - Belgium. The background is that Belgium is still without a government more than a year after an election. The key sticking point is that politicians representing Flanders and Wallonia cannot agree.

Here is potentially a nation splitting in two, a bit different from the Scottish scenario of a part of a nation leaving. But there is recognition that there would need to be an EU agreement to accommodate what could be two new nations. And there are special issues around Brussels with it's mixed population - one idea is some sort of EU capital territory. What would exacerbate matters is a Noro/Soro euro split, with the Netherlands on the Noro and France on the Soro. It is all very messy, which may well keep Belgium together. But it is still much simpler than Scottish independence. It is possible to see scenarios where the two parts of Belgium could be as solvent as Belgium is (ie broke) or form some sort of confederation with Netherlands and France. But Scotland would be catastrophically broke.

Within the Union it seems to me that democracy demands that Scottish votes count for no more and no less than those elsewhere. It also seems to be that equity requires that the funding formula is the same for the whole of the UK. I can see no democratic justification for the present over-representation and over-funding of Scotland - or of NI. I think issues around the Union have to be got right. Then it is up to the people of Scotland as to what they want to do. The sadness is that I think it is Hobson's choice. Scotland can be a prosperous part of the UK or an independent nation that cannot fund pensions and health care.

 

[B_crackoff]

perhaps you misunderstand the Eu and therefore see it as a threat to nation states rather than an enormous boost?

The Scotts representation in Westminster parliament was guaranteed as recompense for giving up their independence. It is only now being scaled back because they have recovered some of their own authority to a national parliament. It has only become an issue now because the Scots vote markedly differently to the rest of the UK, particulalry the south east of England. Which was exactly the reason they were given those votes, to make sure an English majority party could not steamroller them unles it had a (still quite modest) supermajority.

Maybe more like someone born in britain but noticeably foreign for some reason who finds they never get offered more than being your chauffeur and told what to do?

Awae widja MaDandelion:wink: The corridors of power are stuffed full of Scots! Who'd want a Scot as a driver?

Scotland is already a regional entity in the EU.
http://www.aer.eu/fileadmin/Images/Tabula/2009/Tabula_2009_Grande.jpg

Thankfully, the current constituency reviews will complete the process of reducing Scottish seats from 72 in 2005 to 52, the Welsh from 40 to 30, & the NIs from 18-16! Ally this to consituency sizes being harmonized, & we should have a more representative Parliament.

We had a chancellors & a primeminister deciding policy for the English for which they had no electoral right to do so. Neither did they have any electoral right in their own country.

We must remove this idiotic state of affairs.

I'm all for the UK, but if people consistently whine, & get more say & funds than anybody else, then sometimes its better to throw them off the back of the lorry. They might have some good fiddlers there, but there comes a time, as Wellington did, to burn your bloody violins & move on.:biggrin1:

I find the Scots Nats indistinguishable from the Brit Nats in their approach. It all smacks of racism, rather than cultural & economic realism.

I think the Govt should force a referendum now just to settle it, & shut people up for good, & if successful, the Scots & English should be allowed to boot the other's citizens out of their countries, but it seems to me that most Scots would be clinging on to the other parts of the UK. "Awm English I tell youse".

At least that droning & whining will stop, but what do you expect from the land of the bagpipe.:wink:

 

[ConanTheBarber]

Apart from the break up of the Czech Republic, (not in the EU) after the fall of communism, it seems to be working.

Quibble time, tbrguy: Czechoslovakia broke up, and the Czech Republic, along with Slovakia, was one of the bastard children.

 

[tbrguy]

Quibble time, tbrguy: Czechoslovakia broke up, and the Czech Republic, along with Slovakia, was one of the bastard children.

Yeah, well spotted... didn't really make sense the way I put it.

But I stick by my main point, I still think the underlying premise on which the whole unification processs started was sound and its reasons still valid.

 

[123scotty]

I find the Scots Nats indistinguishable from the Brit Nats in their approach. It all smacks of racism, rather than cultural & economic realism.

:

the s.n.p. is not anti english or racist. if you like i could take you to local our councilor or mp. or go to a s.n.p. local meeting. or check the s.n.p. web site Scottish National Party (SNP) and see if there is any racist rhetoric there. to compare the s.n.p to the b.n.p is at best an outright insult

 

[Jason]

The SNP have made a big effort to get rid of racist elements. For example they kicked out siol nan gaidheal (blood of the Gael), a rather nasty nationalistic group.

But race remains potent as a popular issue in Scotland, though the idea of a Scottish racial identity is flawed. Legally of course it does not exist, either in Scots or English law. Additionally DNA studies have now demonstrated that there is no such thing as a Scottish race. Indeed the mix of Celtic and Germanic is pretty much identical in mainland Scotland and in many English southern counties, including Kent (by contrast the Scottish islands show a greater Germanic proportion, legacy of the Vikings, England's West shows more Celtic). Instead the identity of Scotland is a cultural identity.

A cultural identity is a weak justification for a nation state - most nations have an ethnic and linguistic foundation. What shocks me with SNP is their willingness to tell lies about the wealth of Scotland. The wealth of a nation is determined by the markets. An independent Scotland would be forced to slash state pensions, charge for school education and health care, all the things Greece is now being forced to do. It just won't work. There is a risk of Scotland sleepwalking into voting for independence and into total economic collapse. There's also a risk of an English backlash, with elements in England deciding to stir the nationalist pot with a view to getting Scotland to leave the Union.

In the end it is 100% up to the people of Scotland. But just as Greece and Belgium are badly served by their politicians so Scotland is abysmally served by SNP.