Listener 4842 For Me And You By...
Crosswords2 mins ago
I
9 Answers
Nicola Sturgeon wants to leave the UK and become an independent Scotland but wants to stay in the EU that Would be defeating the purpose as we would then be under European rule??? Am I right or wrong please can someone explain this!
Answers
1 to 9 of 9
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by KodiWolf. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
No, nobody can explain that. It's one of the great mysteries of our time.
I can make an attempt at an explanation in that I assume Ms Sturgeon believes that the control the UK Parliament enjoys over Scotland is far more unfavourable than that which Westminster does. But that aside, I think she neglects a couple of important points:
Firstly, an independent Scotland is not viable. The Scots currently enjoy a considerable bounty from England and, wherever and however they draw the map to carve up North Sea oil (much of which they consider to be "theirs") will not make up the difference. The second is that the EU may not welcome them on board as readily as they think. The EU currently has five official candidate nations all of whom have been waiting some time for their ticket to share in the riches of the four remaining net contributing nations (assuming the UK leaves). They may have something to say if they are bounced. As well as that, it is fairly clear that an independent Scotland will not meet the criteria for EU membership.
I can make an attempt at an explanation in that I assume Ms Sturgeon believes that the control the UK Parliament enjoys over Scotland is far more unfavourable than that which Westminster does. But that aside, I think she neglects a couple of important points:
Firstly, an independent Scotland is not viable. The Scots currently enjoy a considerable bounty from England and, wherever and however they draw the map to carve up North Sea oil (much of which they consider to be "theirs") will not make up the difference. The second is that the EU may not welcome them on board as readily as they think. The EU currently has five official candidate nations all of whom have been waiting some time for their ticket to share in the riches of the four remaining net contributing nations (assuming the UK leaves). They may have something to say if they are bounced. As well as that, it is fairly clear that an independent Scotland will not meet the criteria for EU membership.
You live in Scotland ? If Scotland became independent "we" in the UK can still leave the EU, if Westminster stops messing about.
As for an independent Scotland, they would have to apply to be an EU nation. May not get in. But yes, getting out of a local union in which one votes in those who make the laws then joinjng one where all one votes in are effectively yes "men" voting as they are expected to by the EU elite, is rather weird.
If the SNP doesn't want to rule Scotland they just need to disband rather than go through the fuss of trying to pass control to the EU so they can do EU elites 's bidding.
As for an independent Scotland, they would have to apply to be an EU nation. May not get in. But yes, getting out of a local union in which one votes in those who make the laws then joinjng one where all one votes in are effectively yes "men" voting as they are expected to by the EU elite, is rather weird.
If the SNP doesn't want to rule Scotland they just need to disband rather than go through the fuss of trying to pass control to the EU so they can do EU elites 's bidding.
The speculation regarding the motives of those (not just Nicola Sturgeon - remember 2014 ?) wanting Scotland to become independent can be approached from many different angles. One such is to simply view other examples with open eyes, totally fearless of the bias often presented and preached so fervently.
There is a wealth of statistics and general information on the relative performance of different countries. Time and again the same collection of fewer than 10 countries come out as the best performers when it comes to a wide range of socio-economic parameters. Then the question is what is it that makes these countries so good at these things ? They are all of a similar population size to or smaller than Scotland. Most of them have no gas or oil resources and with the exception of Norway (who pile up the money for the day it runs out, refusing to spend it now) all who do have less of the stuff than Scotland - in any case, even before the 70s North Sea oil exploration/exploitation they were doing enviably well. Again and again the UK trails well behind.
The argument that Scotland is subsidised in net terms by England is something that is repeatedly brought up, as is the suggestion that an independent Scotland would possibly/probably not gain membership of the EU. This, until it is tried and tested, is no more than pessimism and/or ill will, perhaps both and more negativity besides.
For the negative predictions, any of them, to come to pass for an independent Scotland, the people of Scotland would have to be incompetent by comparison to said ten or so countries. In fact, all that an independent Scotland would need to do would be to literally copy the administrative/management/etc. systems in use (in some/most cases for the past decades) in those countries. Personally, I have no doubt at all that Scotland could come up to compare pretty well with the standards of well being enjoyed in the Nordic countries, the Netherlands, Switzerland, etc. My only reservation/fear is that nostalgia, inertia and hesitation would seriously slow down (hopefully not hinder altogether) the escape from the backward UK state of affairs because even though the numbers might change to more than 50% in favour there would still be substantial numbers of people who would not wish to let go of the dead-weight UK model. Additionally, the politicians might lack the very substantial imagination, initiative and courage to push on with the changes needed. When applying for EU membership an independent Scotland should present itself realistically - a backward breakaway from a backward country needing a good bit of support until it reaches its potential. I strongly disagree with those who will insist that Scots are inherently inferior (to for example the English).
There is a wealth of statistics and general information on the relative performance of different countries. Time and again the same collection of fewer than 10 countries come out as the best performers when it comes to a wide range of socio-economic parameters. Then the question is what is it that makes these countries so good at these things ? They are all of a similar population size to or smaller than Scotland. Most of them have no gas or oil resources and with the exception of Norway (who pile up the money for the day it runs out, refusing to spend it now) all who do have less of the stuff than Scotland - in any case, even before the 70s North Sea oil exploration/exploitation they were doing enviably well. Again and again the UK trails well behind.
The argument that Scotland is subsidised in net terms by England is something that is repeatedly brought up, as is the suggestion that an independent Scotland would possibly/probably not gain membership of the EU. This, until it is tried and tested, is no more than pessimism and/or ill will, perhaps both and more negativity besides.
For the negative predictions, any of them, to come to pass for an independent Scotland, the people of Scotland would have to be incompetent by comparison to said ten or so countries. In fact, all that an independent Scotland would need to do would be to literally copy the administrative/management/etc. systems in use (in some/most cases for the past decades) in those countries. Personally, I have no doubt at all that Scotland could come up to compare pretty well with the standards of well being enjoyed in the Nordic countries, the Netherlands, Switzerland, etc. My only reservation/fear is that nostalgia, inertia and hesitation would seriously slow down (hopefully not hinder altogether) the escape from the backward UK state of affairs because even though the numbers might change to more than 50% in favour there would still be substantial numbers of people who would not wish to let go of the dead-weight UK model. Additionally, the politicians might lack the very substantial imagination, initiative and courage to push on with the changes needed. When applying for EU membership an independent Scotland should present itself realistically - a backward breakaway from a backward country needing a good bit of support until it reaches its potential. I strongly disagree with those who will insist that Scots are inherently inferior (to for example the English).
Scotland might well try to present itself as a backward breakaway from a backward country needing a good bit of support until it reaches its potential. But no one is likely to be fooled by that claim. No one has insisted that Scots are inherently inferior (to for example the English) as it would be rude, although permissible as jest. But this doesn't negate the reality that the EU would be much more interested in the UK being a member than in Scotland alone. For sure thse north of the border could take the gamble and see if all is just pessimism, but I trust the majority of Scots have more sense that to support that. They seemed to have at the last independence referendum.
OG, in 2014 the initial prediction was that, if they did well, the Yes campaign might just get a bit past 20%. In the very first paragraph (if I remember correctly) the Better Together (No) campaign was opened by Mr.Darling saying that of course Scotland could go it alone. Yes, you are correct, it is rude to suggest Scots are inferior and, yes, you are correct that that is why it is not openly uttered (although I have heard it said in all seriousness several times and continue to see and hear it very clearly implied) - but that does not mean it is never thought in all seriousness.
In the event it was a very close thing (2014) and in the finishing stages the Westmister missionaries were filling their incontinence pants while saying and doing anything they thought might dissuade Yes voters. One of the things put forward to deter was the suggestion that, in the event of a Yes win, an independent Scotland would find itself outside the EU and in the cold. We will never know how many No votes resulted from this dragon's tale. We do know that some two years later the majority of Scottish voters, by a wider margin than against independence, voted to stay in the EU. Now the dragon's tale outcome is in imminent prospect. What we will unlikely ever know is how many would now vote for independence for precisely that reason but it seems reasonable to assume that not just those previously influenced to vote No but everyone stares reality in the face: The dragon's tale ending has resulted from the 2014 outcome.
Again, you are correct that the EU would prefer all of Europe, including the UK, to be members - being a part of the developing integration and a united Europe. But that does not at all mean that an independent Scotland would be prevented from joining - especially when the UK is leaving. It is as ever, probably more than ever, unlikely that the EU would oppose Scotland's independence. An already weak argument used to frighten dissatisfied/ambitious people is now much weaker. From several perspectives looking purely toward the Scottish question, the UK has demonstrated reasons for Scotland to think again.
In the event it was a very close thing (2014) and in the finishing stages the Westmister missionaries were filling their incontinence pants while saying and doing anything they thought might dissuade Yes voters. One of the things put forward to deter was the suggestion that, in the event of a Yes win, an independent Scotland would find itself outside the EU and in the cold. We will never know how many No votes resulted from this dragon's tale. We do know that some two years later the majority of Scottish voters, by a wider margin than against independence, voted to stay in the EU. Now the dragon's tale outcome is in imminent prospect. What we will unlikely ever know is how many would now vote for independence for precisely that reason but it seems reasonable to assume that not just those previously influenced to vote No but everyone stares reality in the face: The dragon's tale ending has resulted from the 2014 outcome.
Again, you are correct that the EU would prefer all of Europe, including the UK, to be members - being a part of the developing integration and a united Europe. But that does not at all mean that an independent Scotland would be prevented from joining - especially when the UK is leaving. It is as ever, probably more than ever, unlikely that the EU would oppose Scotland's independence. An already weak argument used to frighten dissatisfied/ambitious people is now much weaker. From several perspectives looking purely toward the Scottish question, the UK has demonstrated reasons for Scotland to think again.
1 to 9 of 9
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles13 mins ago
Trump/Ukraine, What Will He Do?
News13 mins ago
News20 mins ago
