[Fultonius]

Is Scotland heading for independence? My guess is yes...

However, I'm not Scottish nor do I live there, any opinions?

Neither am I, but consider this:-

You are right that every time Johnson tries to dismiss SNP calls for a referendum, it plays into their hands.  Referenda have a lot to answer for, imo…

There is, however, another way, which I’ve yet to hear a Westminster politician articulate, despite it being quite obvious to me.

The SNP wants a referendum on its desire to leave the United Kingdom, but the UK is a union of 4 countries, all of which would be affected should Scotland decide to go it alone.

It seems only right, therefore, that those entitled to vote in any future referendum on Scottish independence (or Welsh, or for a reunified Ireland) should be the citizens of those nations – all 4 of them.

Clearly Nicola would cry foul, but why should I not have a vote in a proposal which will fundamentally affect the future of the sovereign nation I live in?

Of course any referendum has inherent risks, which is why I shall never forgive Cameron for gambling with the very future of our nation simply to placate his own backbenchers, but I think the chances of the SNP winning independence from such a referendum would be massively reduced.

Could you imagine the brexit referendum had to include the EU 27?

[tomtom]

I may have had some wine for the first time since Xmas day... but...

Isn’t it entirely in the Conservative parties interest to lose Scotland and those 50 or so SNP mp’s?

Guaranteed majority... (nearly)

[TobyD]

I may have had some wine for the first time since Xmas day... but...

Isn’t it entirely in the Conservative parties interest to lose Scotland and those 50 or so SNP mp’s?

Guaranteed majority... (nearly)

I can't see it in reality, although it's plausible; wouldn't it be economically bad news for both parties?

[TobyD]

Is Scotland heading for independence? My guess is yes...

However, I'm not Scottish nor do I live there, any opinions?

Neither am I, but consider this:-

You are right that every time Johnson tries to dismiss SNP calls for a referendum, it plays into their hands.  Referenda have a lot to answer for, imo…

There is, however, another way, which I’ve yet to hear a Westminster politician articulate, despite it being quite obvious to me.

The SNP wants a referendum on its desire to leave the United Kingdom, but the UK is a union of 4 countries, all of which would be affected should Scotland decide to go it alone.

It seems only right, therefore, that those entitled to vote in any future referendum on Scottish independence (or Welsh, or for a reunified Ireland) should be the citizens of those nations – all 4 of them.

Clearly Nicola would cry foul, but why should I not have a vote in a proposal which will fundamentally affect the future of the sovereign nation I live in?

Of course any referendum has inherent risks, which is why I shall never forgive Cameron for gambling with the very future of our nation simply to placate his own backbenchers, but I think the chances of the SNP winning independence from such a referendum would be massively reduced.

I agree that referenda fundamentally don't work for a representative democracy on an issue of any complexity.

But I think that all 4 nations of the UK getting a vote is not really precedented, or likely.

[tomtom]

I may have had some wine for the first time since Xmas day... but...

Isn’t it entirely in the Conservative parties interest to lose Scotland and those 50 or so SNP mp’s?

Guaranteed majority... (nearly)

I can't see it in reality, although it's plausible; wouldn't it be economically bad news for both parties?

Like Brexit? Nailed on then :D

[nai]

Isn’t it entirely in the Conservative parties interest to lose Scotland and those 50 or so SNP mp’s?

Guaranteed majority... (nearly)

Exactly what I thought but you'd imagine there'd have to be some kind of voting reform, although that might just be wishful thinking.

[tomtom]

Maybe I’m being cynical - but efforts at voting reform generally seem to bubble up when then favour the incumbents

[TobyD]

Maybe I’m being cynical - but efforts at voting reform generally seem to bubble up when then favour the incumbents

Pretty much true though. The PR referendum during the coalition government passed many people by and unfortunately went nowhere.

[seankenny]

It seems only right, therefore, that those entitled to vote in any future referendum on Scottish independence (or Welsh, or for a reunified Ireland) should be the citizens of those nations – all 4 of them.

Clearly Nicola would cry foul, but why should I not have a vote in a proposal which will fundamentally affect the future of the sovereign nation I live in?

Of course any referendum has inherent risks, which is why I shall never forgive Cameron for gambling with the very future of our nation simply to placate his own backbenchers...

If there’s one thing we should have learnt from the Brexit debacle, it’s that massive constitutional, economic and cultural changes should probably require a super-majority to pass.

[nai]

And/or maybe not ask the question "should we leave" but "should we look at what leaving would mean?"

[TobyD]

And/or maybe not ask the question "should we leave" but "should we look at what leaving would mean?"

Yeah I believe that the SNP at least has a sort of a plan and idea of how they would do it, unlike the leave campaign, the current trade situation isn't looking terribly positive.
I'm not saying I think that Scotland leaving would be a great thing btw, just that it appears slightly more planned

[SA Chris]

Scottish Conservative Party keep sending me mail with prepaid envelopes to return forms to them. Was wondering, do they pay for these in bulk, or do they get charged per letter that gets returned?

[chris j]

And/or maybe not ask the question "should we leave" but "should we look at what leaving would mean?"

Yeah I believe that the SNP at least has a sort of a plan and idea of how they would do it

Really? I've always got the impression independence was an end in itself and what comes next other than perpetual dictatorship for the SNP is very peripheral! In the EU, out of the EU, using the pound, the Euro, the Scots groat, it all changes... For the true believers it seems to be anything will do, as long as they're in charge.

In some ways on practical terms it will be interesting to see how opinion develops as people see how in trade terms Brexit isn't working. The waverers they need would surely not be attracted to vote for Brexit++ given is it around 70% of trade is with England?

[TobyD]

And/or maybe not ask the question "should we leave" but "should we look at what leaving would mean?"

Yeah I believe that the SNP at least has a sort of a plan and idea of how they would do it

Really? I've always got the impression independence was an end in itself and what comes next other than perpetual dictatorship for the SNP is very peripheral! In the EU, out of the EU, using the pound, the Euro, the Scots groat, it all changes... For the true believers it seems to be anything will do, as long as they're in charge.

In some ways on practical terms it will be interesting to see how opinion develops as people see how in trade terms Brexit isn't working. The waverers they need would surely not be attracted to vote for Brexit++ given is it around 70% of trade is with England?

It's not an unreasonable point, but every economist said that Brexit was likely to be a poor idea as well, economically. A lot of people will decide that they're out of work, things are bad, and that they want to shake it up. I suspect that, as with leaving the EU it would be regretted for years afterwards.
Pretty much the problem with referenda, people vote with the heart, not their heads.

[dr_botnik]

On the note of brexit benefits, Liz Truss announced trade discussions with India https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1358025617661456387?s=20

At the same time The Guardian reports of curtailment of press freedoms under Modi's government https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/06/india-journalists-sedition-no-free-press-police-farmers-modi

It really worries me that we left a union created in the wake of a vision for peace following the great wars to pursue relations with fascistic governments. First Trump, now this.

[TobyD]

On the note of brexit benefits, Liz Truss announced trade discussions with India https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1358025617661456387?s=20

At the same time The Guardian reports of curtailment of press freedoms under Modi's government https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/06/india-journalists-sedition-no-free-press-police-farmers-modi

It really worries me that we left a union created in the wake of a vision for peace following the great wars to pursue relations with fascistic governments. First Trump, now this.

I'd agree, in that I'd frankly rather live in a country with an ethical foreign policy. I think the government should be taking a much harder line on Myanmar, Russia, Saudi Arabia and China, for a start.
Bidens swift decision to stop selling arms to the Saudis was a good one, and one that the UK should follow.

[Oldmanmatt]

On the note of brexit benefits, Liz Truss announced trade discussions with India https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1358025617661456387?s=20

At the same time The Guardian reports of curtailment of press freedoms under Modi's government https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/06/india-journalists-sedition-no-free-press-police-farmers-modi

It really worries me that we left a union created in the wake of a vision for peace following the great wars to pursue relations with fascistic governments. First Trump, now this.

I'd agree, in that I'd frankly rather live in a country with an ethical foreign policy. I think the government should be taking a much harder line on Myanmar, Russia, Saudi Arabia and China, for a start.
Bidens swift decision to stop selling arms to the Saudis was a good one, and one that the UK should follow.

Have you seen the ideological cant of the bastards in power at the mo?
They’re so far up the arse of the “dog eat dog”, “the poor are there to serve us” and “all failure is deserved” ethos, they’re touching it’s fucking Tonsils.

[teestub]

I'd agree, in that I'd frankly rather live in a country with an ethical foreign policy. I think the government should be taking a much harder line on Myanmar, Russia, Saudi Arabia and China, for a start.
Bidens swift decision to stop selling arms to the Saudis was a good one, and one that the UK should follow.

I had always thought with Saudi Arabia the issue was that we relied on oil from there, but in fact it only makes up a tiny fraction of what we import ( https://www.statista.com/statistics/381963/crude-oil-and-natural-gas-import-origin-countries-to-united-kingdom-uk/ ) so I guess it’s just down to the vested interest of the arms dealers?

[Will Hunt]

I'd agree, in that I'd frankly rather live in a country with an ethical foreign policy. I think the government should be taking a much harder line on Myanmar, Russia, Saudi Arabia and China, for a start.
Bidens swift decision to stop selling arms to the Saudis was a good one, and one that the UK should follow.

I had always thought with Saudi Arabia the issue was that we relied on oil from there, but in fact it only makes up a tiny fraction of what we import ( https://www.statista.com/statistics/381963/crude-oil-and-natural-gas-import-origin-countries-to-united-kingdom-uk/ ) so I guess it’s just down to the vested interest of the arms dealers?

Also relevant is that the Saudis can disrupt the world's economy by flooding the market with oil, driving down prices.

[BrutusTheBear]

On the note of brexit benefits, Liz Truss announced trade discussions with India https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1358025617661456387?s=20

At the same time The Guardian reports of curtailment of press freedoms under Modi's government https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/06/india-journalists-sedition-no-free-press-police-farmers-modi

It really worries me that we left a union created in the wake of a vision for peace following the great wars to pursue relations with fascistic governments. First Trump, now this.

I'd agree, in that I'd frankly rather live in a country with an ethical foreign policy. I think the government should be taking a much harder line on Myanmar, Russia, Saudi Arabia and China, for a start.
Bidens swift decision to stop selling arms to the Saudis was a good one, and one that the UK should follow.

Have you seen the ideological cant of the bastards in power at the mo?
They’re so far up the arse of the “dog eat dog”, “the poor are there to serve us” and “all failure is deserved” ethos, they’re touching it’s fucking Tonsils.

Add to that the thinly veiled or indeed open talk of Eugenics, their treatment of the disabled and vulnerable, the likes of Bannon advising from the wings, the dog whistle and blatant racism. Doesn't just whiff of fascism, they've been ticking off more and more of the boxes..

[Fultonius]

I'd agree, in that I'd frankly rather live in a country with an ethical foreign policy. I think the government should be taking a much harder line on Myanmar, Russia, Saudi Arabia and China, for a start.
Bidens swift decision to stop selling arms to the Saudis was a good one, and one that the UK should follow.

I had always thought with Saudi Arabia the issue was that we relied on oil from there, but in fact it only makes up a tiny fraction of what we import ( https://www.statista.com/statistics/381963/crude-oil-and-natural-gas-import-origin-countries-to-united-kingdom-uk/ ) so I guess it’s just down to the vested interest of the arms dealers?

Also relevant is that the Saudis can disrupt the world's economy by flooding the market with oil, driving down prices.

One of the upsides of a move towards renewables - it's distributed and not not very "storable", which, from a technical engineering and cost standpoint is not great, from a "geopolitical power play" standpoint is brilliant - massively reduces the clout of many despotic or otherwise overly influential states.

That said...data and AI will probably become king, and Israel, for better or worse seems to be a world leader in that field. As is China.  This is not meant to be in any way anti-Chinese or anti-Israel (and certainly not anti Jewish before anyone plays that card) just an observation that the power may shift in those directions as they are taking the lead. That said, the US is pushing hard in that arena, with Europe also making strides.

I wonder what the old oil rich states will do as oil becomes less important?

[seankenny]

The think tank "UK in a Changing Europe" has done a "Brexit Witness Archive", a series of interviews with some of the key players in the Brexit process. It's an attempt to find out where we ended up here, with a very hard Brexit and disruption to fairly large parts of the UK economy.

I've only had the time to skim read Philip Hammond's piece and, obviously there is a self-serving element in there, but it is quite shocking and a terrible indictment of Theresa May.

Hammond starts off as a typical Tory Eurosceptic but after being Foreign Secretary realises:

"It (the EU) was a multiplier of British power, not a diminisher of British power....That’s why I wanted to stay in. I saw it as a way of leveraging British power, and multiplying British power and influence, and multiplying the benefit to the British people, and a way of cementing Britain’s economic lead in Europe. That was, I believe, in January 2016, a realistic view of the future: that Britain would have become the dominant power in the European Union."

Kind of obvious, I would have thought, but this clearly shows how far the Tories have become untethered from any reality beyond winning elections (at which, I should say, they are very good, perhaps because many aging voters are also somewhat untethered from reality).

Then he becomes Chancellor:
"When I sat in the Cabinet Room on that evening – and the only other person in the room was Fiona Hill – I did ask her about Brexit, and she said to me, ‘Brexit means Brexit.’ That was it. That was the only discussion we had about it."

To which the only reply can be what the fucking fuck, right? But no, it gets worse! 

"I was completely stunned by the speech that she made at the Conservative Party Conference in October 2016. I hadn’t seen the relevant part of it in advance. I’d had no input to the speech. Nick Timothy kept me completely away from it. I did see some text on the economy the day before, but I had no idea that she was going to describe Brexit in the hardest possible terms.

"I was absolutely horrified by what I was hearing. All I remember thinking was, ‘There will be a television camera that will be on your face. If you move a muscle, it will be the story on the front page of every newspaper tomorrow.’ I remember I wasn’t even really listening to her. I was just sitting there. I remember exactly where I was sitting: on the end of a row, to the side of the stage, looking up diagonally at the stage, looking up at her. I just remember focusing my entire energy on maintaining a rictus half-smile, and trying not to show any reaction at all, and then get out of the room without speaking to any journalists. I was completely and utterly horrified by what I felt was almost a coup: a definition of Brexit without any proper Cabinet consultation at all."

So, a breakdown in the system of government that the UK is supposed to have (not the first time, obviously, but still.) 

Hammond leaves for an IMF meeting:

"When I arrived in Washington, it was to discover that the pound was in free-fall, on the back of the Prime Minister’s speech and the market’s reaction to it. I then had to get out on the TV in Washington, to try to reinterpret the Prime Minister’s speech for the markets in a way that would try to stop the slide in sterling. We had what looked like a genuine sterling crisis on our hands in the couple of days immediately after the speech. It was a disaster on all fronts, a total unmitigated disaster that scarred her Prime Ministership and should have sealed Nick Timothy’s fate, but I think she only realised later how badly that had constrained her ability to deliver any kind of practical Brexit at all.

"Remember, the complex narrative about the nuances of Brexit and so on came much later, so I’m not even sure that she understood, as she was delivering that speech, how extreme the words coming out of her mouth really were."

It was all about - lest we forget - immigration. (Any liberal Leave voters really were patsies, but we knew this all along.)

And the final kicker:

"I think I said at the beginning of this interview that the terrible thing here is that I am pretty sure that, in the end, the one thing I can guarantee is that, whether we have a no deal Brexit or a hard Brexit with a deal, the price, the cost that that imposes on the economy, will be pretty much 100% absorbed by exactly the demographic profile that voted Leave and then voted Boris Johnson, having never voted Tory before, in December 2019. I’m pretty sure that is almost exactly the definition of the people who are going to bear the costs of Brexit."

 

I've no idea what the other interviews are like, but I'm kind of surprised this one hasn't had more coverage.


Full thing here:
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/brexit-witness-archive/

[TobyD]

It is becoming increasingly clear that the Euro sceptics really didn't even have a shred of a plan, to paraphrase Barnier. It's not a sudden catastrophe, but it'll be a slow drip of stories about various industries either seriously affected of almost destroyed by the changes. The UK shellfish industry, while not huge, is screwed. Time sensitive exports just aren't working at the moment; also widely reported are companies outsourcing or setting up shell companies in the EU to avoid the border issues.
I haven't seen any reports of any significant dividend yet; we could have gone our own way on vaccines anyway.

[SA Chris]

I'd agree, in that I'd frankly rather live in a country with an ethical foreign policy. I think the government should be taking a much harder line on Myanmar, Russia, Saudi Arabia and China, for a start.
Bidens swift decision to stop selling arms to the Saudis was a good one, and one that the UK should follow.

I had always thought with Saudi Arabia the issue was that we relied on oil from there, but in fact it only makes up a tiny fraction of what we import ( https://www.statista.com/statistics/381963/crude-oil-and-natural-gas-import-origin-countries-to-united-kingdom-uk/ ) so I guess it’s just down to the vested interest of the arms dealers?

Also relevant is that the Saudis can disrupt the world's economy by flooding the market with oil, driving down prices.

They can, but it hurts them as much as it hurts anyone. Their extraction is not very economically efficient, unlike elsewhere in the world where itnis forced to be. At the mone they are doing the opposite, hence minor climb.

[Offwidth]

The think tank "UK in a Changing Europe" has done a "Brexit Witness Archive", a series of interviews with some of the key players in the Brexit process. It's an attempt to find out where we ended up here, with a very hard Brexit and disruption to fairly large parts of the UK economy.

I've only had the time to skim read Philip Hammond's piece and, obviously there is a self-serving element in there, but it is quite shocking and a terrible indictment of Theresa May.

Hammond starts off as a typical Tory Eurosceptic but after being Foreign Secretary realises:

".... whether we have a no deal Brexit or a hard Brexit with a deal, the price, the cost that that imposes on the economy, will be pretty much 100% absorbed by exactly the demographic profile that voted Leave and then voted Boris Johnson, having never voted Tory before, in December 2019. I’m pretty sure that is almost exactly the definition of the people who are going to bear the costs of Brexit."

I've no idea what the other interviews are like, but I'm kind of surprised this one hasn't had more coverage.


Full thing here:
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/brexit-witness-archive/

I think Hammond is wrong on who gets hit most...I think the damage will be way more widespread than brexit voters and some brexit voters are pretty fireproof (pensioner homeowners were one of the most firm groups supporting brexit). Wait and see how they pay for the pandemic and the brexit fallout.

I refuse to just blame red wall ex Labour voters (and regard blanket accusations by progressives of their "racist stupidity" as dangerous)... the collective 'establishment' who had real power and should have known better let those voters down over decades, then did way too little to explain the risks of brexit and Boris.  In the 2019 election there was a majority of voters not voting tory and there were a good number of remain voting progressive tories.. if people who knew the risks spoke out more, and voted tactically, Boris wouldn't have a majority let alone a safe one. The parliamentary tory party has lost nearly every experienced, genuine one-nation politician, except Hunt, in a ruthless populist power grab supported by mad and bad local constituency parties .... most moderate tory voters just ignored this!!??