You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Speaking as a Scot living in Ireland I dont think Scottish independence would be all plain sailing. I am not sure how easy/quick it would be to join the EU. Look at the mess brexit has made of the Irish border, I would see issues with England (our biggest trading partner). If we adopt the euro then the EU will dictate a lot of our financial decisions (look at the crash of 2009 and what that meant for ireland/Greece etc) so we would not be as independent as we think. The way I see it (in simple terms) is do we want to answer to the UK or Europe. There is no true independence nowadays.
Says a man who doesn't live here, yet still using the word "we" - why is that?
Did you know that a 4% decline pa of GDP means that in 10 years we’ll be only 2/3rds of our current ‘economic size’?
Arithmetic fail, no?
@intheborders am I not scottish? I was born and bred in Scotland. My family are all scottish and still there and I identify as Scottish. Just because I moved to my wife's home of Ireland a few years ago doesn't stop me being Scottish. My wife was still Irish when she lived in Scotland.
What term should I be using?
@andy4d Of course you can use the term we. If you only moved to Ireland a few years ago it is normal to still think of yourself as Scottish.Of course you can argue over the politics sport history etc of your country. However if /when it comes to a vote it is a matter for those who live in Scotland irrespective of their place of birth.
Arithmetic fail, no?
Enlighten me?
However if /when it comes to a vote it is a matter for those who live in Scotland irrespective of their place of birth.
Which he made quite clear in his original post..
Did you know that a 4% decline pa of GDP means that in 10 years we’ll be only 2/3rds of our current ‘economic size’?
Arithmetic fail, no?
No. 2/3rds is correct.
Gordimor my thoughts exactly. I don't get say in Scottish matters as I have no vote there ( but I can uave an opinion) and i don't get a full say in Irish matters either as I am not a citizen here. Oh well.
regards any England/Scotland border, I can see that by the time Scotland would be ready to join the EU , the UK will have a much closer alignment with EU, I cant see the present situation lasting beyond the next election, whatever position Labour takes atm, brexits popularity with the public will only wane further.
No. 2/3rds is correct.
0.96×0.96×0.96×0.96×0.96
×0.96×0.69×0.96
Typing fail!
I did think when I looked at my answer it looked wrong, but didn't look close enough at what I typed.
andy4d My apologies had'nt noticed that you said "not that I get a say in the matter so it’s a moot point."
Did you know that a 4% decline pa of GDP means that in 10 years we’ll be only 2/3rds of our current ‘economic size’?
Arithmetic fail, no?
No. 2/3rds is correct.
kind of. There is a huge extrapolation going on here.
We're expecting a 4% GDP fall every year for the next 10 years?
First time I've heard of that.....
Really? Its been all over the news
Not a 4% absolute fall but 4% less than it would have been had we stayed in the EU.
Really? Its been all over the news
No it hasn't, because it is complete and utter bollocks like most of your other posts.
Firstly it wasn't my number. Secondly if anything its too low thirdly is there any need to be so rude especially when you are wrong?
This source says 5%
OBR says 4%
The UK-based Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) states that the long-term impact of Brexit will be worse for the UK economy than Covid-19. The OBR estimates that Brexit will reduce the UK’s potential GDP by 4%
https://www.investmentmonitor.ai/analysis/two-years-brexit-uk-eu
It is undeniable that brexit has caused a loss to the UK gdp of around 4% maybe more and that this will continue and its compounding.
etc etc
Im sure you can find a brexity right wing source to tell you its all down to covid and ukraine but on the whole even tho its there to protect tory interests I think the OBR stating it is a decent source.
Where in those reports does it say it's compounding?
Not saying it's not, but skim reading them they're talking about the difference between now and a hypothetical no-voting UK in 2016. Not a 4% decline each year.
That was just a quick search to show mefty was wrong
Its all out there if you want. Our economy will grow around 4% a year less every year than it would have done without brexit. Thats the conclusion of folk much smarter than me
Diffent sources show differnt numbers but its clear its not just a one off. Look at GDP growth charts and stuff
Our economy will grow around 4% a year less every year
That's not what you said the first time...
Did you know that a 4% decline pa of GDP
Very different outcomes there.
Where in those reports does it say it’s compounding?
They don't.
.
This is a graph based on real statistics not theoretical counterfactuals or forecasts. A 5% cost looks pretty unlikely in this context.
Those reports don't say its compounding no but plenty of other info that I have read makes it clear. We lose 4% a year from the GDP we would have otherwise and this continues into the foreseable future.
As is obvious economics is not something I know much about so I cannot argue it however what I do is follow the non biased sources consensus.
Im not getting into another pointless arguement.
doomaniac - thats just sloppy language that can be interpreted as I intended or as you saw it
First indy lead I've seen in a while
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1597999017367343104?t=tVuAAG-PlgNkEG2AAODHzQ&s=19
Supreme Court effect?
Sorry, I'm very late to the party, having other things to do...
This quote caught my eye:
By your logic if we should allow any region of the UK that doesn’t have influence over Westminster to secede, right? How about Devon and Cornwall?
This is what this entire argument is about, right? Government in a democracy is *supposed* to be representative. That's the point. If you don't have influence over your government it's not a democracy.
A pretty significant percentage of the Scots believe that the government they have is *not* representative, that they have no influence. Secession is a reasonable to thing to ask in that case. It would certainly also be for Devon and Cornwall (and maybe they'll think about it if the Scots succeed!)...
So Sunak seems to have quite cluelessy stumbled into the SNPs trap?
I don't get his reasoning
So Sunak seems to have quite cluelessy stumbled into the SNPs trap?
There was no trap other than the one Sunak was trying to make. He spent time carefully building it and then cluelessly wandered into it with that idiotic grin of his.
So Sunak seems to have quite cluelessy stumbled into the SNPs trap?
I don’t get his reasoning
His reasoning? There is none.
He just doesn't get it. He really doesn't. Like so many in power in England, who then speak for the UK.
If Nicola Sturgeon had actually progressed independence (as she was elected to do) then she wouldn't be able to use this furore as yet another grievance distraction.
On some issues i am sure the SNP try to set traps / maneuver to make Westminster the baddies but on the GRA - not at all. this is the scots government making law on a topic totally within their competence and with cross party support and Tories attempting to use it politically for their culture wars
Writing "honestly, this doesn't interfere with EA2010" on the front of the bill doesn't make it fact
It's like me posting "honestly, this isn't spam" and then offering passports for sale 😂
Maybe ScotGov should have referred it to the Supreme Court for assessment before trying to pass the legislation (irony content).
On some issues i am sure the SNP try to set traps / maneuver to make Westminster the baddies but on the GRA – not at all.
I think the irony of all this is that this was an example of the Scottish Parliament trying to do government stuff. IMO this issue was detrimental to the independence cause and damaging to the SNP itself. I still support them and the other parties doing it but even if you don't support it, it's the definition of 'the day job'.
This is what can be thrown back every time the Tories or whoever tell the SNP to concentrate on the day job. We spent six years doing the day job only for the Tories to negate all that work at the PM's whim.
What's the point in focusing on the day job when the day job isn't a real job?
In her Today interview Shona Robison, the Scottish government’s social justice secretary, insisted that the gender recognition reform bill would not undermine or change UK equality law. This is an argument the Scottish government has been making for some time, and Robison said this morning.</p>
[The bill] simplifies the process for obtaining a gender recognition certificate. It does not change the effect of having one. All of the protections under the equality legislation remain exactly the same.
And she stressed that a clause has been included in the bill making exactly this point.
Thats why it has no effect on the equalities act
Writing “honestly, this doesn’t interfere with EA2010” on the front of the bill doesn’t make it fact
6 years of back and forth can be summed up by writing “honestly, this doesn’t interfere with EA2010” on the front of the bill?
I think your loathing of the SNP is clouding your judgement on this one, tbh.
Writing “honestly, this doesn’t interfere with EA2010” on the front of the bill doesn’t make it fact
Those words wil be of legal effect* when it comes to interpretation. They are not completely irrelevant.
*ETA as in "will be takin into account" not "will be taken as fact".
Also, this from the EHRC back in April who now, strangely enough, have 'concerns':
Because the operation of the Equality Act gender reassignment exceptions does not rely on possession, or not, of a Gender Recognition Certificate, any reform of the Gender Recognition Act will not erode the special status of services provided separately for men and women, or for men or women only, as defined by the Equality Act 2010, such as domestic abuse refuges, health services and clubs. We have issued clear, practical guidance for providers of separate and single-sex services to help them fully understand how to meet the needs of all women and men.
Sunak saw this as an issue that would cause Indy voters to see the error of their ways and support the Union. He has badly misjudged the room, I reckon.
The target here Labour, not the SNP... as we will see as this plays out in the press over the next few years.
The target here Labour, not the SNP… as we will see as this plays out in the press over the next few years.
Good point. Despite all the evidence, we keep forgetting that Scotland is an irrelevance to Westminster to be used as the PM sees fit.
honestly, this doesn’t interfere with EA2010” on the front of the bill doesn’t make it fact
As Brucewee points out
It's entirely correct, that Sunak hasn't taken it to supreme court (section 33?)shows he knows this too so just wants a confrontation to shore up his dire polling?
It’s entirely correct, that Sunak hasn’t taken it to supreme court (section 33?)shows he knows this too so just wants a confrontation to shore up his dire polling?
This is a proposed law and as such would not be reviewed by the Supreme Court.
Everyone knew that the UK Government would not allow this to become law. It is not even good law. It has been rammed home by the SNP (/Greens) in attempt to create a grievance between Sturgeon and the UK Government. Labour and the Lib Dems supported it because they wanted to see the resulting mess, potentially impacting the SNP and the Conservatives.
Perhaps if the SNP had allowed a free vote, published the results of the public consultations, listened to the UN's representative and listened to the arguments, then we would not be here. Dismissing concerns as "not relevant" and creating at atmosphere of hatred towards anyone who expresses an opinion against the GRA is nothing to be proud of.
Perhaps if Sturgeon had worked with the UK Government to come up with a 'better' solution, then we would not be in this very, very foreseeable place. No one comes out of this with any credit, regardless of which party they represent. whether they are for/against reduced paperwork to change gender, or those who sit in the shadows yelling abuse. A sad day for all
This is a proposed law and as such would not be reviewed by the Supreme Court.
Is that correct? I'm sure on r4 this morning they said section 33 had been used for others proposed laws
I'm not sure you can say it's been rammed home, it was a manifesto pledge and the SNP were elected with far higher numbers than the tories could dream of!
Major own goal by Westminster
As an aside, I don’t follow this thread much but I was under the impression scotroutes was a big SNP fan? Don’t know where I got that from if that’s not the case. Maybe mixed him up with another poster
As an aside, I don’t follow this threat much but I was under the impression scotroutes was a big SNP fan? Don’t know where I got that from if that’s not the case. Maybe mixed him up with another poster
There are some in Scotland who are pro-independence and dislike SNP performance.
There are some in Scotland who vote for SNP but are not sure of independence.
(etc)
Yep i know that, I like the snp but Im not convinced on independence
I just thought I’d seen he was an snp supporter before, that was all!
On a factual issue - Scottish Government do generally publish results of consultations. Here is the one for the Bill in question. (But let's not let facts get in the way of the two-for-one of transgender people and SNP)
It has been rammed home by the SNP (/Greens) in attempt to create a grievance between Sturgeon and the UK Government...............
Passed with a huge crossparty majority after 6 years. Hardly rammed thru. Lib Dems and Labour will not support the SNP to cause trouble or they would do so on much less controversial issues. Remember they are both unionist parties and hrdly ever co operate with the SNP on any topic.
Everyone knew that the UK Government would not allow this to become law. It is not even good law. It has been rammed home by the SNP (/Greens) in attempt to create a grievance between Sturgeon and the UK Government. Labour and the Lib Dems supported it because they wanted to see the resulting mess, potentially impacting the SNP and the Conservatives.
Sure, some smart cookie came up with this 6 years as a useful 'tool'...
Yep i know that, I like the snp but Im not convinced on independence
I just thought I’d seen he was an snp supporter before, that was all!
Personally i don't see this vote as being within party lines, it's a much wider issue, hence why there's been both pro and anti campaigning by LGBTQ groups, women's groups and so on. The main issue for most, is the drop in age, yes with some limited concessions, but this is the same issue that has been raised in other countries in recent years as well.
In relation to IndyRef2, Independence, etc, etc, we've never really seen what the actual Pro's and Con's are yet, so it's not really mature enough to vote on, bar those at either end of the extreme.
Argee. It can only be 16 under Scots law as that is the age anyone living in Scotland gets full adult decision making on healthcare matters.
In relation to IndyRef2, Independence, etc, etc, we’ve never really seen what the actual Pro’s and Con’s are yet
there has been huge discussion on this over the years and loads of published material
there has been huge discussion on this over the years and loads of published material
There's been a lot of theoretical benefits, and very little discussion on the theoretical negatives of independence.
It can only be 16 under Scots law as that is the age anyone living in Scotland gets full adult decision making on healthcare matters.
Yes, but this issue covers more than just that, otherwise it wouldn't be included within this bill, it would be captured under the powers of the Scot's Law covering consent.
Yes, but this issue covers more than just that,
Im sorry but what? Its clearly a healthcare issue. to have made it 18 would be the only healthcare issue that is 18 rather than 16 and would be clearly open to legal challenge especially given the doctrine of "gillick competence"
very little discussion on the theoretical negatives of independence.
better together campaign and project fear? Huge amount of anti independence stuff has been published including of course the infamous " remaining in the union is the only way to stay in the EU"
How is it a healthcare issue? The proposed Scottish legislation removes all need for a medical diagnosis and turns it into nothing more than an administrative process, the same as changing your name.
The main discussion is on the sunak thread
its obviously a medical issue whether you need a formal diagnosis or not as it involves mental and physical health. Its far from just an administrative rubber stamp. the whole issue is around healthcare
If it’s a healthcare issue then of course you need a diagnosis, even for mental health issues - And if it’s a healthcare issue, then the new legislation is flawed by removing the need for a diagnosis, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t just walk into the chemist and buy anti-depressants can you?
I was under the impression scotroutes was a big SNP fan?
They're a political party not a football team or a pop star 😉😂
Im sorry but what? Its clearly a healthcare issue. to have made it 18 would be the only healthcare issue that is 18 rather than 16 and would be clearly open to legal challenge especially given the doctrine of “gillick competence”
All i've said there is by your reasoning, why have it in the bill, if it's already done it seems weird to add something to a bill that causes controversy, if Scot's Law already covers it, not many changes to legislation include areas already covered?
As Kevog has stated as well, why so focused on the healthcare issue when this change is removing those hurdles, which is basically to get a Gender Recognition Certificate to be issued to allow changes to the required legal documents?
Again, personally, i just see this hurdle being a weird one to allow 16 and 17 year olds that ability without parental consent, yes you'll say Scot's Law, but at 16 how many aren't living at home, aren't in full time eduction, etc, etc, the whole age of consent thing is just a mess across the whole of the UK, you can be tried as an adult in Scotland at 16, but not sent to an adult prison until 21, married at 16, but can't toast the wedding for 2 years, etc, etc, etc.
Green MSP was on telly saying we should be looking at the possibility of reducing the qualifying age to eight.
It's just a different world these days, i have a 7 year old and honestly, it's is just one big minefield with everything being beamed over the internet, i see her language change, opinions change and so on through it, then you add the peer group into the mix, there's so much pressure for them growing up that making life altering decisions before they're fully developed is a bit of a worry, i know this bill is mainly about GRC's, but it's the first steps, and of course it's a decision that can be made without parental consent, whilst they're living at home with the same parents, and those parents who fully back their child wouldn't be a concern in providing consent anyway, i just see those who are going to 'benefit' from this having it cause more confrontation and negativity in the long run, but again, personal opinion.
Green MSP was on telly saying we should be looking at the possibility of reducing the qualifying age to eight.
They’ve totally ****ed this important bill up, whether through incompetence or by wanting a confrontation with the wider uk government, and the greens aren’t helping the matter by allowing fools like Maggie Chapman (green msp) to chip in with their inane thoughts.
https://twitter.com/lnmackenzie1/status/1615029257239134209?s=61&t=O0iTaA8U8ydtpSA-Hkr-kQ
Interesting week for Nicola:
How it started:
https://twitter.com/STVNews/status/1667557246694203392
How it's going:
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1667888651202617349
Clearly didn't do all that well on the Hazard Perception section.
Will the SNP come to an emergency stop and their MPs have to give way to Labour?
Clearly didn’t do all that well on the Hazard Perception section.
Ayyyyyy
TBH it is incredibly cringe that STV was carry that toadying story in the first place
She should probably be suspended, at this point, using all the polite words- "Nicola is of course happy to help the investigation but until it's concluded...". I don't think she should be kicked out just for being interviewed, but tbh I think it'd be smart for her to stand down, again in much the same way- be graceful about it unlike Johnson but still stand her ground, all "I am innocent but, until I am cleared".
TBH I think this next bit is going to be exactly like all the noise about the auditors and accounts- make as much noise and "no smoke without fire", as fast as possible, because if you wait for it to settle it'll all be much less dramatic and you end up writing sad stories like "the SNP submitted their accounts on time and apparently it's all absolutely fine and none of our headlines came to pass but HERE'S WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF IT WASN'T!1!". But politically that doesn't matter so much, everyone already got their shots in and did the damage and that's going to happen here no matter what.
"In custody" looks to have a very short shelf life frinstance, but if you shout "Nicola Sturgeon has been arrested and is in police custody" while it's still happening it sounds way more dramatic than "Nicola Sturgeon was asked to come in, was arrested, interviewed under caution and released without charge" which is probably what's going to happen. So it's well played.
(I bet 20 scottish pence that there she is never charged, but, I don't think at this point it's really all that important)
There is a thread fior discussions about Sturgeon
I have been looking at and thinking about labours prospects in Scotland at the next GE. I have seen " they could take 30 snp seats" and "unlikely to take more than 6 from the SNP. I find this rather odd
Personally I think with Labours anti EU anti devolution stance limits how many seats they can take greatly. My guess is less than 10.
Just seen Ash Regan has now bolted to Alba, hopefully this isn't going to start validating those mentalists, it really has fallen apart since Sturgeon left, Humza doesn't seem to have the same ability to hold a broadchurch together the same way.
Its the bams self identifying and heading for oblivion.
There are two splits in the SNP - gradualist V fundamentalist on independence and left / right. The right made an attempt to assert control but failed. the SNP look like any party that has been in power too long.
What will be interesting is after the next Holyrood election. I can see a labour / tory anti SNP pact again and a labour / tory coalition. Lib dems are not going to take significant numbers of seats and it looks likely no one party will come close to a majority. Its likely that the arithmetic only works for a tory / labour coalition ( Assuming labour and lib dem continue their stance of refusing to talk to the SNP) which would finish labour in Scotland completely
unelected Westminster millionaire writing a pompous letter to Scottish first minister telling him who hes allowed to talk to
https://twitter.com/JimFairlieLogie/status/1733927710185910461?t=FOmSiRQARETAlvzQPOohhA&s=19
Is this the first break yousaf has had since he got the job?
Not seeing the problem myself.
Yousef starts buggering about with reserved matters and gets wings clipped. Non story as far as I'm concerned.
If it was the other way round the Nats would be losing their shit and rightly so, it's only fair that the rules are applied equally. If there are established protocols that he's ignoring then he deserves it.
unelected Westminster millionaire writing a pompous letter to Scottish first minister telling him who hes allowed to talk to
Foreign affairs is outside the Scottish Government's powers. I thought the SNP were all about constitutional principles this week? Yousaf is out of his (very shallow) depth speaking to Erdoğan about Gaza. Not a surprise that wily fox made a beeline for someone who is otherwise a second tier politician at COP, and Yousaf doesn't have a long enough spoon. Still, I expect the SNP will be treating Yousaf the same way as other parties treated other ministers engaging in freelance diplomacy...
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/11/9/uk-minister-priti-patel-resigns-over-secret-israel-trip
Did Fairlie have anything to say about the investigation into Sturgeon's husband's other expensive car? I can't get onto Twitter.
If it was the other way round the Nats would be losing their shit and rightly so, it’s only fair that the rules are applied equally. If there are established protocols that he’s ignoring then he deserves it.
The "other way around"? Show me an example.
And funny how Sturgeon etc have still not been up in front of a Judge - it's almost like nothing illegal has occurred and the UK Govt is just stringing it along to the next General Election.
Er.. you can’t think of an example where the NATS are upset because Westminster is attempting to exert its authority over what it believes are devolved matters???
Er.. you can’t think of an example where the NATS are upset because Westminster is attempting to exert its authority over what it believes are devolved matters???
Exactly this.
Why don't we start with former EU powers going straight to Westminster. Bottle deposit scheme. GRA.
That enough big topic examples for you?
You said:
Yousef starts buggering about with reserved matters and gets wings clipped. Non story as far as I’m concerned.
Since when was the Head of the Scottish Govt talking to foreign leaders "reserved matters"?
And waiting on your comments on the Sturgeon 'case'.
Funny how you're all using the term "NATS", this is our Govt, elected by our voters - wonder if you three voted for Brexit too?
"Since when was the Head of the Scottish Govt talking to foreign leaders “reserved matters”?"
Since the Scotland Act was passed. The Scottish Parliament has foreign affairs in the list of reserved matters.
https://www.parliament.scot/about/how-parliament-works/devolved-and-reserved-powers
Nice, you know nothing about me or my voting history but still make up utter shite, you couldn't be further from the truth. And it's my government too thanks very much, I learned all about devolved and reserved powers since it's first years were whilst I was still at school and we learned it in great detail. Maybe you should look at doing some classes to get yourself up to speed.
And what comments have you invited from me on the Sturgeon case? What does it even have to do with this? FWIW I have no idea why you think Westminster would have any dealing in it since it's a Police Scotland matter, policing being a devolved power.
Yousaf is out of his (very shallow) depth speaking to Erdoğan about Gaza. Not a surprise that wily fox made a beeline for someone who is otherwise a second tier politician at COP, and Yousaf doesn’t have a long enough spoon.
By jumping in and immediately belittling the FM I think youve made made point about this being a gift to the SNP , rather nicely
Since the Scotland Act was passed. The Scottish Parliament has foreign affairs in the list of reserved matters.<br />
oooft…owned..
wonder if you three voted for Brexit too?
Hmm, so you've just shown to be wrong & thus resort to a quick ad hominem attack. I'm a fervent remainer BTW*, not that that has anything to do with the price of fish. Sometimes I wonder what why we ever bother having a discussion on the internet.
* & a consistenely Green voting Vegetarian. Not that that has anything to do with the price of fish either
Owned? Seems not:
First Minister of Scotland - Wikipedia
Whilst foreign policy remains a reserved matter,<sup id="cite_ref-26" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; text-wrap: nowrap; font-size: 11.2px; color: #202122; font-family: sans-serif;">[25]</sup> the Scottish Government, and the First Minister, may promote the economy and Scottish interests on the world stage and encourage foreign businesses, international devolved, regional and central governments to invest in Scotland.
I’m a fervent remainer BTW*
Enough to attack a ruling Party that has a mandate to join the EU, not that "fervent" it seems - bigger picture needs to be seen.
FWIW I have no idea why you think Westminster would have any dealing in it since it’s a Police Scotland matter, policing being a devolved power.
Sure it is, except when it's decided that it's a risk to the UK...
Who is attacking the SNP? All anyone has done is acknowledge that interfering with reserved matters and/or not following established protocol has consequences. It's you doing the attacking here, not us.
You can't have it both ways and cry foul when the other side don't follow the rules if you don't respect them yourself, it does nothing for the standing of a Scottish government of any colour.