Scottish Independence ( 'Independence Lite' )

Davidth88

With the SNP conference underway this morning , there was much discussion on the BBC about Scottish Independence.

There is now talk of not ' full ' independence , but ' independence lite '

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/09/scotland-independence-alex-salmond

In my view ( as an Englishman ) , this seems to be the Scots wanting their cake and eating it.

The currently have the advantage ? of a Scottish Parliament that can cause the English to look with envy at free prescriptions , free third level education and other benefits.

What are other people opinion ? Do Scotland truly want full independence , along with all that goes along with that ie their own forces/ no more subsidies from London ( does London really subsidy Scotland ? ) etc

I know there is already a thread on this , but that was from a NI perspective , mods , if you think this is really much of the same please merge

OS119

the 'independance lite' option being put forward - by people like Henry McLeish, not so much by SNP people - is fiscal autonomy, and full legislative power over everything execpt Foriegn Affairs and Defence. its actually a resolution to the current problem of the block grant, and it means that if Scottish voters want x, y, or z services, they alone have to pay for them.

its also, imv, quite convenient for the SNP - if you talk to them, you will find that many, while not being fans of the current set-up, have, in the financial and political meltdown of the last couple of years, rediscovered the advantages of being part of a big, powerful gang that weilds its own big sticks.

they have, again imv, been stung by the collapse of the 'arc of prosperity' that they used to talk about, and how easily these small, formerly wealthy countries have been pushed about by the big beasts of the European and financial jungles.

you should also be aware that while Scotland gets more money, proportionately, than England that allows it to do things like free university education, free prescriptions and free social care, some of the money that is used for those things has come out of the budgets that we, in England, use for other things - an obvious example being after-hours GP provision, which in Scotland is pretty woeful, but in England is quite good. and expensive.

Killer Pigeon

Davidth88 wrote: »

What are other people opinion ? Do Scotland truly want full independence , along with all that goes along with that ie their own forces/ no more subsidies from London ( does London really subsidy Scotland ? ) etc

Better asks the Scots themselves but this is an Irish forum, so invariably there's going to be a little bit more of a biased nationalist opinion.

Manach

From an EU PoV what might this involve
- would Scotland become a new member state by default or would it have to re-apply for membership status as an aspirant nation. These might need to be clarified prior to the referendum. AFAIK, only Greenland has left the EU in 1985 and the exit criteria are laid down.

Davidth88

Hmmmm the EU thing is an interesting one , wow that would really wind a lot of people up in England if Scotland pulled out of the EU as well.

Then consider this , travelling to Scotland for your Duty Frees

They did say on the TV this morning about the possibility of a different currency , I suppose if the Euro meltdown hadn't happened they may have thought about adopting the Euro.

There is quite a bit of ill feeling right now in England towards Scotland and Wales ( not so much towards NI I think ) that they get more money , can make their own rules etc , and a growing movement for an English Assembly. Of course their cause isn't helped my terrible groups like the EDL ( NF by another name IMO ) etc.

_Beau_

Davidth88 wrote: »

Do Scotland truly want full independence

None of us can speak for an entire nation.

Let them decide in a referendum.

I'd like to see all GB states independent.

Ickle Magoo

Davidth88 wrote: »

They did say on the TV this morning about the possibility of a different currency...

They already do - try handing over a scottish note south of the border. :pac:

I don't think full independence is going to happen any time soon - unless there are drastic political changes in how the UK operates, I think independence lite will struggle to get widespread support. Yes the nats are doing a good job and of course a tory government in west minster was always going to help the nat vote in holyrood but I don't think independence has sufficient support from the scots or the legions of english, irish and welsh living north of the border who would also be eligible to vote to ever pass referendum.

woodoo

I think that would be a baby step towards independence. If they found that they could pay for their country to run efficiently on their own with the Independence lite option. They may be bolstered to go for full Independence then.

OS119

woodoo wrote: »

...They may be bolstered to go for full Independence then.

they may also decide that fiscal autonomy is enough.

when, by and large, you speak to people who are in favour of Scottish independance, you quickly discover that they want independance from westminster because it would allow them to persue x, y, or z policy - few are, ime, in favour of independance purely for its own sake.

the 'independance lite' option would, imv, pass because it satisies most peoples asperations - complete freedom to set domestic policy and taxation, while retaining the 'big gang' security of remaining in the UK.

some will, of course, object that its not full independance, paint their faces blue and scream 'freedom', but, imv, i think they'd be pretty small proportion of the population.

Davidth88

_Beau_ wrote: »

None of us can speak for an entire nation.

Let them decide in a referendum.

I'd like to see all GB states independent.

I wasn't really asking people to speak for a Nation , just their opinions .

As for all GB ' states ' independent, you mean a separate England , Scotland and Wales ?

I think England and Scotland might be able to standalone , but I think Wales for all their wish to become separate are too small and too reliant on money from the central coffers.

I actually have no objection to Scotland going it alone , I do however feel that they can't pick and choose what they do , what I mean by that is if they go it alone , then fine go away and have a great time , but don't come back looking for money/support or whatever

I have not lived in England now for 10 yrs , but the vibes I get from my family/friends , and from the media is that there is a growing unease about the way Scotland and Wales command their own destiny , but still seem to have their hands out looking for support to pay for their policies . Of course a lot of this is English people looking with slightly green eyes at the extra benefits .

bobbysands81

Davidth88 wrote: »

With the SNP conference underway this morning , there was much discussion on the BBC about Scottish Independence.

There is now talk of not ' full ' independence , but ' independence lite '

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oct/09/scotland-independence-alex-salmond

In my view ( as an Englishman ) , this seems to be the Scots wanting their cake and eating it.

The currently have the advantage ? of a Scottish Parliament that can cause the English to look with envy at free prescriptions , free third level education and other benefits.

What are other people opinion ? Do Scotland truly want full independence , along with all that goes along with that ie their own forces/ no more subsidies from London ( does London really subsidy Scotland ? ) etc

I know there is already a thread on this , but that was from a NI perspective , mods , if you think this is really much of the same please merge

It's no-one's business but the Scots as to whether they want full independence or not and only a referendum will answer your query.

Personally I believe that the last vestiges of the Empire are clinging on for life and the break-up of the so called United Kingdom is inevitable... but might still be a while before it happens.

Don't forget Scotland has a lot of oil.

getz

i cannot see how it is going to work, as a independant scotland,they would lose instantly,over half a million jobs from the public secter,all the UK army,navy,and airforce bases would have to be relocated to the rest of the UK,and all the companies and workforces who depend on them would lose their work and jobs,they would have to issue their own passport,they would not be able to use stirling as their base currency,they will have to run and finance their own NHS pensions ect,[if they still want one] ,and the cheeky thing is that they have already asked the rest of the UK ,to give them,more money to build up the local scottish economy ready for the independance referendum

getz

bobbysands81 wrote: »

It's no-one's business but the Scots as to whether they want full independence or not and only a referendum will answer your query.

Personally I believe that the last vestiges of the Empire are clinging on for life and the break-up of the so called United Kingdom is inevitable... but might still be a while before it happens.

Don't forget Scotland has a lot of oil.

as soon as i looked at your name i knew what was comming,

Davidth88

getz wrote: »

i cannot see how it is going to work, as a independant scotland,they would lose instantly,over half a million jobs from the public secter,all the UK army,navy,and airforce bases would have to be relocated to the rest of the UK,and all the companies and workforces who depend on them would lose their work and jobs,they would have to issue their own passport,they would not be able to use stirling as their base currency,they will have to run and finance their own NHS pensions ect,[if they still want one] ,and the cheeky thing is that they have already asked the rest of the UK ,to give them,more money to build up the local scottish economy ready for the independance referendum

I agree with a lot of what you are saying there .

getz

Davidth88 wrote: »

I agree with a lot of what you are saying there .

i have a family friend who is high up in the scottish independance party,and he keeps on telling my son ,that most have realized that they are trying to run before they can walk,and they would lose support if they tried to push through a referendum in the near future

getz

eight weeks ago alex salmond comments in a comprehensive scottish goverment submission,quote;its a vital economic and social case for retaining both the RAF leuchars and RAF lossiemouth in scotland,following the closure of RAF kinlos,stating that to lose more than one of scotlands flying bases would be disportionate unreasonable,a devasttating blow for our communities,he also went on to say,they owe it to our communities to reverse the disportionate level of cuts and closures we have faced in scotland,we stand united in a fight for the FUTURE OF OUR FORCES ,these are our armed services and they form a vital part of our communities in scotland,we will must make sure that they continue to do so for GENERATIONS TO COME, that doesent sound very much like he wants a independent scotland in the near future does it ?

OS119

getz wrote: »

...that doesent sound very much like he wants a independent scotland in the near future does it ?

no, because if you actually listen to him - and the SNP - rather than interpreting what he says through the prism of Irish politics, you'll find that they've not be talking about independance in the Irish context for a long time.

he is talking about 'independance within the UK', much as he used to talk about 'independance within Europe' - 'independance within the UK' means independant domestic policy and taxation, but joint foriegn policy and defence, joint passports, joint border policy, joint overseas represntation.

he's talking about a Federal Britain, where each constituant part decides its own domestic policy - and pays for it - and where a federal government (a rump Westminster with an English/Welsh/Scottish council of governments) decide on the non-domestic bits of policy.

Davidth88

OS119 wrote: »

he's talking about a Federal Britain, where each constituant part decides its own domestic policy - and pays for it - and where a federal government (a rump Westminster with an English/Welsh/Scottish council of governments) decide on the non-domestic bits of policy.

That's an interesting idea.

As long as England gets the same treatment , in the view of people I have spoken to ( and my view ) it seems that England is getting the rough end of the stick right now .

getz

OS119 wrote: »

no, because if you actually listen to him - and the SNP - rather than interpreting what he says through the prism of Irish politics, you'll find that they've not be talking about independance in the Irish context for a long time.

he is talking about 'independance within the UK', much as he used to talk about 'independance within Europe' - 'independance within the UK' means independant domestic policy and taxation, but joint foriegn policy and defence, joint passports, joint border policy, joint overseas represntation.

he's talking about a Federal Britain, where each constituant part decides its own domestic policy - and pays for it - and where a federal government (a rump Westminster with an English/Welsh/Scottish council of governments) decide on the non-domestic bits of policy.

but that not true,on the SNPs blue print for a referendum,it has proposals for a scotland currency,and armed forces, the SNP has dug a big hole for themselfs because the will not be able to deliver,it never even dawned on the that they also would have to pay a share of the national dept,

Fratton Fred

getz wrote: »

but that not true,on the SNPs blue print for a referendum,it has proposals for a scotland currency,and armed forces, the SNP has dug a big hole for themselfs because the will not be able to deliver,it never even dawned on the that they also would have to pay a share of the national dept,

A huge chunk of which is currently bailing out Scottish Banks.

Victor

Davidth88 wrote: »

does London really subsidy Scotland ?

the suggestion is that Scottish oil subsidises the UK.

OS119

getz wrote: »

but that not true,on the SNPs blue print for a referendum,it has proposals for a scotland currency,and armed forces...

ah, but it is true.

everytime Salmond goes on the media he talks about 'independance lite', an idea he apparently isn't in favour of, yet he mentions it everytime, explains it well, and calls the man proposing it - Henry McLiesh of the Labour Party - 'nobodys fool'.

which, to me at least, is saying 'vote for this' in 300ft letters across a clear blue sky.

i'm certain the SNP have some political baggage they have to parade to keep up appearences, as well as to to keep the lunatics who make up most political party's activists in full frothing mode, but if you talk to them you won't hear the words 'scottish army' 'scottish air force', or 'scottish navy' at anytime...

getz

OS119 wrote: »

ah, but it is true.

everytime Salmond goes on the media he talks about 'independance lite', an idea he apparently isn't in favour of, yet he mentions it everytime, explains it well, and calls the man proposing it - Henry McLiesh of the Labour Party - 'nobodys fool'.

which, to me at least, is saying 'vote for this' in 300ft letters across a clear blue sky.

i'm certain the SNP have some political baggage they have to parade to keep up appearences, as well as to to keep the lunatics who make up most political party's activists in full frothing mode, but if you talk to them you won't hear the words 'scottish army' 'scottish air force', or 'scottish navy' at anytime...

being fair to him,all political parties promise things that they cannot do ,just to get the vote,on a federal uk on equal terms could never work as england has a far bigger population that other UK countries,47 million,the other three jointly only adds up to 10 million, but the big laugh for me was[you will like this fred] george mathewson former chairman of the royal bank of scotland,said in holyood,independance is the best way to deal with scotlands dependence culture,if the country stops taking money from london,that will encourage welfair claiments to stop taking benefits from the state,if he is the best they have got,god help them

Batsy

Davidth88 wrote: »

Hmmmm the EU thing is an interesting one , wow that would really wind a lot of people up in England if Scotland pulled out of the EU as well.

I doubt the English would give a damn whether or not an independent Scotland stayed in the EU.

Of course their cause isn't helped my terrible groups like the EDL ( NF by another name IMO ) etc.

The EDL is not the National Front. The National Front and the EDL are two completely different entities. The National Front is a far-right political party, still in existence, which put up 18 candidates for the 2010 General Election.

The EDL is a non-racist organisation - it's not even a political party - which campaigns against the rise of Islamism, Islamic terrorism and Sharia Law in England which has Muslim members.

Batsy

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

They already do - try handing over a scottish note south of the border. :pac:

English (and Welsh) stores have every right to refuse to accept Scottish banknotes. Scottish banknotes are not legal tender in England & Wales. Northern Irish notes aren't legal tender in England & Wales, either.

Batsy

getz wrote: »

being fair to him,all political parties promise things that they cannot do ,just to get the vote,on a federal uk on equal terms could never work as england has a far bigger population that other UK countries,47 million,the other three jointly only adds up to 10 million, but the big laugh for me was[you will like this fred] george mathewson former chairman of the royal bank of scotland,said in holyood,independance is the best way to deal with scotlands dependence culture,if the country stops taking money from london,that will encourage welfair claiments to stop taking benefits from the state,if he is the best they have got,god help them

England's population is about 52 million; Scotland's is about 5 million; Wales's is about 3 million; and Northern Ireland's is about 1.7 million.

That means England has around five-and-a-half times as many people as Scotland, Wales and NI combined.

Davidth88

Batsy wrote: »

I doubt the English would give a damn whether or not an independent Scotland stayed in the EU.

I would say it would wind a lot of people up no end , because they would love to leave the EU too.

Batsy

Davidth88 wrote: »

I would say it would wind a lot of people up no end , because they would love to leave the EU too.

The whole of the UK is going to leave the EU in the not-too-distant future when we vote for that in the referendum.

I cannot envisage England being in the EU and Scotland being out of it at the same time.

In fact, I would bet £100 quid that, if Scotland broke away from a UK independent of the EU that Scotland would try and rejoin the EU.

who the fug

Davidth88 wrote: »

I would say it would wind a lot of people up no end , because they would love to leave the EU too.

Hopefully them pub bores would all move to Scotland with They leave

who the fug

Batsy wrote: »

The whole of the UK is going to leave the EU in the not-too-distant future when we vote for that in the referendum.

Doubt that is going to happen the far right of the Tory party is not very attractive with the spotlight on it, so can’t see them winning a majority

Would welcome one though to put this issue to bed then maybe the party could start to function again

getz

Batsy wrote: »

The whole of the UK is going to leave the EU in the not-too-distant future when we vote for that in the referendum.

I cannot envisage England being in the EU and Scotland being out of it at the same time.

In fact, I would bet £100 quid that, if Scotland broke away from a UK independent of the EU that Scotland would try and rejoin the EU.

all three parties have told their MPs that if they vote to have a referendum on the EU,they will be sacked from the parties,if scotland gains independance,they would automatically be out of the EU,and would have to re-apply ,and be tested to see if they match the EU standards.

Batsy

getz wrote: »

all three parties have told their MPs that if they vote to have a referendum on the EU,they will be sacked from the parties,if scotland gains independance,they would automatically be out of the EU,and would have to re-apply ,and be tested to see if they match the EU standards.

I doubt, when there is such huge and overwhelming support for a referendum on EU membership amongst the people of the UK, that any of the three main parties will sack any of their MPs who decide to vote for a referendum. Not if they don't want to suffer badly in the polls and in elections. Doing such a thing will only show to the British people the utter contempt that those parties therefore hold for them, their views and British democracy.

getz

Victor wrote: »

the suggestion is that Scottish oil subsidises the UK.

all they would get is a equal fraction of the overall profit ,which is more than swallowed up by share of debt,and there is not that much oil left in the fields,that is why the scottish parliament propose to have large windfarms built in the north sea,for when it runs out,

Batsy

who the fug wrote: »

Doubt that is going to happen the far right of the Tory party is not very attractive with the spotlight on it, so can’t see them winning a majority

Would welcome one though to put this issue to bed then maybe the party could start to function again

What makes you think only the far right of any party will vote for a referendum on leaving the EU?

mike65

Davidth88 wrote: »

The currently have the advantage ? of a Scottish Parliament that can cause the English to look with envy at free prescriptions , free third level education and other benefits.

Not quite the case, if you are Scottish third level is free, if you are from the rest of the UK you pay a certain amount and if you are from further afield you pay more again.

This policy is being challenged by Public Interest Lawyers as contravening UK and European laws

getz

Batsy wrote: »

I doubt, when there is such huge and overwhelming support for a referendum on EU membership amongst the people of the UK, that any of the three main parties will sack any of their MPs who decide to vote for a referendum. Not if they don't want want to suffer badly in the polls and in elections. Doing such a thing will only show to the British people the utter contempt that those parties therefore hold for them and their views.

yes it was on yesterdays news, they will not hold a open vote ,the whips and the threats are out, but what the alternative ?,all the other parties are loonies,

Batsy

mike65 wrote: »

Not quite the case, if you are Scottish third level is free, if you are from the rest of the UK you pay a certain amount and if you are from further afield you pay more again.

That's nonsense.

Scottish universities charge English students to study at them but students from the rest of the EU are able to study at Scottish universities for free.

EU students also pay nothing because EU law means that they must be treated in the same way as home students. That law, though, doesn't extend to England, apparently, because England is part of the UK like Scotland rather than a separate state.

If that sounds unfair and discriminatory towards the English that's because it is.

Batsy

getz wrote: »

yes it was on yesterdays news, they will not hold a open vote ,the whips and the threats are out, but what the alternative ?,all the other parties are loonies,

They wouldn't dare do such a thing. Not if they want to be ousted from power at the next election.

who the fug

Batsy wrote: »

What makes you think only the far right of any party will vote for a referendum on leaving the EU?

Can you see Ken Clarke voting for it?

Monty Burnz

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Don't forget Scotland has a lot of oil.

Had a lot of oil.

Batsy

who the fug wrote: »

Can you see Ken Clarke voting for it?

It seems to me that those pro-EU MPs who will vote against having a referendum on whether or not to leave the EU would do so because they are scared as to what the answer might be.

They are cowards who care nothing about the views of the British people.

getz

Batsy wrote: »

It seems to me that those pro-EU MPs who will vote against having a referendum on whether or not to leave the EU would do so because they are scared as to what the answer might be.

They are cowards who care nothing about the views of the British people.

its now on the BBC news,the E U referendum debate has been moved,so david cameron can attend,the three big parties at westminster have told their MPs to vote against a motion calling for a referendum to be held on UK membership of the EU,stewart jackson tory MP,who is the PPS for northern ireland,said he will risk his post over EU vote

Fratton Fred

Batsy wrote: »

The EDL is not the National Front. The National Front and the EDL are two completely different entities. The National Front is a far-right political party, still in existence, which put up 18 candidates for the 2010 General Election.

The EDL is a non-racist organisation - it's not even a political party - which campaigns against the rise of Islamism, Islamic terrorism and Sharia Law in England which has Muslim members.

There were a lot of NF supporting skinheads in my school, most of them are now in the EDL.

The EDL is not racist, but it is anti black, anti muslim, anti immigration and anti everything else that is not white anglo saxon.

Its not racist though.

Batsy

getz wrote: »

its now on the BBC news,the E U referendum debate has been moved,so david cameron can attend,the three big parties at westminster have told their MPs to vote against a motion calling for a referendum to be held on UK membership of the EU,stewart jackson tory MP,who is the PPS for northern ireland,said he will risk his post over EU vote

However, I've just found this:

Tories' euro-mutiny spreads: Cameron aides may quit to join rebellion on EU referendum

• Downing Street is warned that five ministerial aides could quit if a three-line whip is imposed
• Ed Miliband will order Labour MPs to oppose vote
• But Labour face divisions too as a senior MP vows to defy the order
  

By James Chapman and Jason Groves

The Daily Mail


Several junior members of the Government are threatening to resign as almost a third of Tory backbenchers join a mutiny against David Cameron over Britain’s future in Europe.

The Prime Minister is scrambling to hammer out a compromise as dozens of Conservatives defy him by signing up to a Commons motion backing a referendum on EU membership, with several ministerial aides telling colleagues they are ready to quit.


Campaigners are furious at Mr Cameron’s last-minute decision to bring forward the debate to Monday.

Meanwhile, the row is set to cause ructions within Labour ranks as well, a senior MP warned today.

Graham Stringer accused leader Ed Miliband of making a 'mistake' by subjecting the party to a three-line whip on Monday's vote.

The former Labour whip said he will defy the order for MPs to oppose the proposals, arguing it was time people were 'given a choice'.

Mr Miliband's claims a national poll on the issue will be a 'distraction' at a time when the UK should be focused on the economy.

Downing Street believes the presence of Mr Cameron and William Hague, who are out of the country later in the week, will help persuade wavering MPs to back the Government.


Mr Cameron, who may meet rebel MPs on Monday, is likely to pledge to renegotiate Britain’s relationship with Europe at some future date – probably when a new EU treaty is discussed – but reject any possibility of a referendum until after 2015.


There is bewilderment among the Prime Minister’s colleagues about why he has chosen to pick a defining fight over a backbench debate inspired by a public petition, with no binding impact on government policy.

Several members of the Cabinet are understood to be deeply unhappy about Downing Street’s decision to impose a three-line whip – the toughest possible instruction to MPs on how to vote – and threaten any members of the Government who will not fall into line with the sack.

Tory whips have warned Downing Street that up to five ministerial aides could quit their posts on Monday in protest at the imposition of a three-line whip. There were rumours last night that one junior minister is also considering his position.

Peterborough MP Stewart Jackson yesterday became the first member of the Government to declare publicly that he will quit to vote for a referendum.

Mr Jackson, Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Northern Ireland Secretary, Owen Paterson, said the Government was wrong to impose a three-line whip.

‘I will vote in favour of the motion and in so doing, I will very likely relinquish my position,’ he added. ‘That will disappoint me, but . . . this is a question of putting country and constituency first.’

By yesterday morning the referendum motion had been signed by 76 MPs, including 60 Conservatives – roughly one third of the backbench party.

Signatories include the influential chairman of the Commons culture committee, John Whittingdale, former leadership contender David Davis, the chairman of the backbench 1922 Committee, Graham Brady, and former Cabinet minister John Redwood.

Mr Redwood was the most senior to declare publicly that he will defy Mr Cameron.


But, to the alarm of Downing Street, the list of supporters includes dozens of new MPs, who are normally fiercely loyal to the leadership.

Up to half a dozen more Tories were expected to sign up overnight.

One minister said Mr Cameron had so infuriated the 2010 intake of MPs by appointing Chloe Smith, 29, as a Treasury minister ahead of colleagues seen as more capable, that many would use the EU vote to ‘fight back’.

Other signatories to the motion, which proposes allowing voters to decide between staying in the EU, leaving or renegotiating Britain’s membership, include all eight Democratic Unionist MPs and eight Labour MPs, among them the former Europe minister Keith Vaz.

All three main parties look set to impose a three-line whip to vote against an EU referendum, despite all having supported one at various times in recent years.

Mr Miliband said a referendum was ‘not the right thing for Britain’.

And Nick Clegg, who campaigned at the last election for a referendum on Europe, risked charges of hypocrisy by imposing a three-line whip on his MPs as well.




Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2051139/EU-referendum-Tory-mutiny-spreads-Cameron-aides-quit-join-rebellion.html#ixzz1bQJhnmfo

getz

Fratton Fred wrote: »

There were a lot of NF supporting skinheads in my school, most of them are now in the EDL.

The EDL is not racist, but it is anti black, anti muslim, anti immigration and anti everything else that is not white anglo saxon.

Its not racist though.

now you have pointed them out,i have seen a lot of them marching around blackpool singing racist songs and chanting,but i always believed they were scotsmen on holiday

meglome

getz wrote: »

its now on the BBC news,the E U referendum debate has been moved,so david cameron can attend,the three big parties at westminster have told their MPs to vote against a motion calling for a referendum to be held on UK membership of the EU,stewart jackson tory MP,who is the PPS for northern ireland,said he will risk his post over EU vote

First day I heard about the referendum I thought the MP's would vote against having one.

I have a feeling you and batty will disagree but the lack of honesty about the EU is the biggest problem with UK's relationship with the EU. Too much finger pointing and agendas (like the Daily Mail) and very little honesty about just how good for the UK the EU is. There's a part of me that hopes the UK does vote to leave and let them suffer the consequences of their nationalist bull****.

View

Batsy wrote: »

It seems to me that those pro-EU MPs who will vote against having a referendum on whether or not to leave the EU would do so because they are scared as to what the answer might be.

Much more likely is - that with other more pressing political business (e.g. the economy) - they can think of better things to do than hold a referendum.

The electorate didn't get too excited about changing the electoral system and that is a lot more immediate to them than having to decide, in the midst of a major recession, whether to leave the EU or not. The politicians probably guess that when push comes to shove the electorate wouldn't be in a rush to leave.

who the fug

meglome wrote: »

First day I heard about the referendum I thought the MP's would vote against having one.

I have a feeling you and batty will disagree but the lack of honesty about the EU is the biggest problem with UK's relationship with the EU. Too much finger pointing and agendas (like the Daily Mail) and very little honesty about just how good for the UK the EU is. There's a part of me that hopes the UK does vote to leave and let them suffer the consequences of their nationalist bull****.

I think the main problem goes back to the seventies, when there seems to have been this collective head in the sand (or conspiracy) by both Labour and the Tories about the political agenda of Europe.

In national school, the books always said that the long term aim of Europe was a political union, people the same age as me in the UK say this was never on the agenda

We are not beggers in europe yet, so we can have out Nationalist Bull**** agenda if you please

meglome

who the fug wrote: »

I think the main problem goes back to the seventies, when there seems to have been this collective head in the sand (or conspiracy) by both Labour and the Tories about the political agenda of Europe.

As I said there is a lack of honest debate. But let's not forget the the UK was glad of their membership when they joined, they needed to join as things were not rosy economically.

who the fug wrote: »

In national school, the books always said that the long term aim of Europe was a political union, people the same age as me in the UK say this was never on the agenda

Well again the EU has always openly said it's about more than economic union, it's not a secret. It's in the treaties for all to see. How far it eventually goes is up to the people of the EU. No one has ever been forced to do anything.

who the fug wrote: »

We are not beggers in europe yet, so we can have out Nationalist Bull**** agenda if you please

Nope not suggesting you are. But I am saying the UK has gained a lot from EU membership and it's a pity there are so many vested interests the message fails to get out.

Fratton Fred

As we are on the subject of EU referendums, how many have passed and how many have failed.

I remember Maastricht was rejected by the French and Danes, so subsequent referendums were cancelled. Then Lisbon was initially rejected by the Irish.

It would appear that the people are talking, buy the governments aren't listening.

getz

Fratton Fred wrote: »

As we are on the subject of EU referendums, how many have passed and how many have failed.

I remember Maastricht was rejected by the French and Danes, so subsequent referendums were cancelled. Then Lisbon was initially rejected by the Irish.

It would appear that the people are talking, buy the governments aren't listening.

you are on the money when you say that fred,the people do not like the political side of the EU,it was all good and rosey in its early days, but in the end it not about democracy is it ,all the man in the street can see is the UK giving hand outs to the EU members,who have f...d up their own economy ,