Rogue-Nation3
The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - Printable Version

+- Rogue-Nation3 (https://rogue-nation3.com)
+-- Forum: Around the World (https://rogue-nation3.com/forum-24.html)
+--- Forum: Europe (https://rogue-nation3.com/forum-27.html)
+--- Thread: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. (/thread-4586.html)

Pages: 1 2 3


The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - BIAD - 05-27-2019

Here's a map and a display of the results. Please comment.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=5839]

[Image: attachment.php?aid=5838]

SOURCE:


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - guohua - 05-27-2019

Okay,,,, So when does Great Britain Become Great Britain again?  tinybighuh


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - Mystic Wanderer - 05-27-2019

I don't know what any of your symbols mean.


All I know is that the people have spoken and the globalists are losing.  YAY!!!!



[Image: ?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yjdraiman.org%2Fatta...le.png&f=1]



RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - BIAD - 05-28-2019

(05-27-2019, 10:46 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: I don't know what any of your symbols mean...

From right to left on the first diagram and using Wikipedia explanations.

(PC).
Plaid Cymru – Party of Wales is a social-democratic political party in Wales advocating Welsh
independence from the United Kingdom within the European Union.

(UKIP).
The UK Independence Party is a hard Eurosceptic, right-wing to far-right political party in the United
Kingdom. It's seen to stand for the typical white working-class who feel left behind from the middle
and upper-classes.

(Change UK).
The Independent Group is a centrist, pro-European Union political party in the United Kingdom.
Founded in 2019, it is led by Heidi Allen. It has 11 Members of Parliament (MPs) in the House of
Commons. It has no official presence at local government.

(SNP).
The Scottish National Party is a Scottish nationalist, social-democratic political party in Scotland.
The SNP supports and campaigns for Scottish independence.

(CON).
The Conservative Party, officially the Conservative and Unionist Party, is a centre-right political party
in the United Kingdom.

(Green Party).
The Green Party of England and Wales is a green, left-wing political party in England and Wales.

(LAB).
The Labour Party is a centre-left political party in the United Kingdom that has been described as an
alliance of social democrats, democratic socialists and trade unionists. The party's platform emphasises
greater state intervention, social justice and strengthening workers' rights.

(LD).
The Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems) are a liberal political party in the United Kingdom. It is currently led by
Vince Cable. It has 11 Members of Parliament in the House of Commons, 96 members of the House of
Lords, 16 members of the European Parliament, five Members of the Scottish Parliament and one member
in the Welsh Assembly and London Assembly.

(Brexit).
The Brexit Party is a Eurosceptic political party in the United Kingdom. Established in 2019, it is led by Nigel
Farage. The Brexit Party campaigns for the withdrawal of the UK from the European Union.


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - gordi - 05-28-2019

   
(05-27-2019, 10:46 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: I don't know what any of your symbols mean.

All I know is that the people have spoken and the globalists are losing.  YAY!!!!...

BRX = BREXIT Party (New "party" but set up as a company!?!?, no manifesto, one single policy = Brexit / Leave EU)
SNP = Scottish National Party, only in Scotland but (by far) biggest party there, dedicated to independence for Scotland, anti-brexit, supports Scotland being in EU.
PC = Plaid Cymru, Welsh Nationals (only in Wales), anti-brexit, support being in EU.
LD = Liberal Democrats, anti-brexit.
LAB = Labour, should be the main opposition to the Conservatives but have been flapping about over brexit and don't seem able to get a clear message of what they want across.
CON = Conservative and unionist Party, the party currently sitting in minority government in westminster, tasked with delivering brexit, but cannot seem to get agreement on anything and currently going through a leadership crisis / contest, like Labour... their vote in EU elections collapsed due to their dithering and lack of leadership on brexit.
GRN = Greens, anti-brexit and focused mainly on ecological issues.
UKIP = UK Independence Party, pro-brexit, but have lost a lot of support to the actual Brexit party.

minusculebeercheers

Unfortunately, the people have spoken and it seems that they are as divided as ever.
Although the Brexit Party got the biggest share of the votes in the EU elections, more people actually voted for anti-brexit parties than for pro-brexit ones!

Scotland clearly voted VERY differently from the rest of the UK (look at the colours on the voting map), with 62% of Scots voting for parties who support remaining in the EU and a clear majority for the SNP in every single region in mainland Scotland.
Scotland is clearly being dragged out of the EU against its will if Brexit goes ahead, but despite being an "equal" partner in the UK "Union" it's voice is continually ignored, disregarded, and even ridiculed by those in power at Westminster.
There is a definite and pronounced up-swell of impatience and anger (towards Westminster) in Scotland, and I feel that it is only a matter of time now for Scotland to go ahead with it's own Independence Referendum, despite WM desperately trying to prevent this.
The state-controlled media (BBC et al) do not help one bit. Continually misleading and downplaying the strength of feeling in Scotland.
I'll show you a small example here:
[Image: attachment.php?aid=5840]
This graphic was screen-grabbed from the BBC's own News Webpages.
A quick glance at it would suggest that the SNP narrowly won the election in this region, closely followed by Brexit, Labour and the Tory (Conservatives) right?
But LOOK at the ACTUAL FIGURES on the left.
The SNP's yellow coloured bar on the chart should be more than DOUBLE the height that it is shown there.
The SNP got More votes than Brexit, Labour and Tory Combined! (Almost as many as Brexit, Labour, Tory and LD's combined!!!) but it is shown graphically as a very narrow win. THIS is the problem.
An EQUAL partner should not be ignored, manipulated or abused like this.

I don't actually have strong feelings either way on the EU. It has it's good points and bad IMHO and I'm happy to go along with what my fellow Scots DECIDE that THEY want to do, whether that's in the EU or not.
What I do have strong feelings about is that my own country (Scotland) is being treated disgracefully by the leaders of our so-called equal partner in the union.

England (and Wales) voted to leave the EU. Scotland (and N.Ireland) did not.
Brexit Parties won the most regions at the EU elections in England and Wales.
Remain Parties (SNP and LD's) won every region in Scotland.
It seems pretty clear to me that Scotland/NI and England/Wales want different things now.
The simplest solution for most of the people to get what they want is... Independence for England/Wales.
If England/Wales voluntarily left the UK, then they would (according to WM) no longer be a member state of the EU, but the Rest of UK (Scotland/NI) would. Brexit would be meaningless... as England/Wales would simply no longer be in the EU! and would be free to negotiate whatever "deals" they wanted to.
Scotland would effectively get "Independence" from Westminster whilst still retaining a close bond with NI and Europe.
Seems simple enough... right? LOL

G
(Sorry for the long Rant post!!)

PS - Ugh! I just noticed that BIAD fully answered the query about all the symbols and abbreviations whilst I was constructing my post! (Sorry for repeating a lot of that here!)


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - BIAD - 05-28-2019

(05-28-2019, 11:25 AM)gordi Wrote: The state-controlled media (BBC et al) do not help one bit. Continually misleading and downplaying the strength of feeling in Scotland.
I'll show you a small example here:
[Image: attachment.php?aid=5840]
This graphic was screen-grabbed from the BBC's own News Webpages.
A quick glance at it would suggest that the SNP narrowly won the election in this region, closely followed by Brexit, Labour and the Tory (Conservatives) right?
But LOOK at the ACTUAL FIGURES on the left.
The SNP's yellow coloured bar on the chart should be more than DOUBLE the height that it is shown there.
The SNP got More votes than Brexit, Labour and Tory Combined! (Almost as many as Brexit, Labour, Tory and LD's combined!!!) but it is shown graphically as a very narrow win. THIS is the problem.
An EQUAL partner should not be ignored, manipulated or abused like this...
Within your explanation of the diagram, lies a great chunk of the answer.
Of course Westminster continually work to keep countries and regions in a stranglehold for their own ends
and just like Wales, treats them as lesser.
But the Government-funded media -a conduit that has no favourites except its master, are complicit in the
daily control of those north of Watford.


Quote:PS - Ugh! I just noticed that BIAD fully answered the query about all the symbols and abbreviations whilst I
was constructing my post! (Sorry for repeating a lot of that here!)
You didn't repeat it, it was an echo!!!!!!


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - Wallfire - 05-28-2019

Thing is that if the EU continues on the same path there will be war in Europe between the different countries. If the EU is taken over by people who care for there countries and Europe then the UK is in deep dodo.
The UK is seen at the moment as a third world country run from the back ground by islam.
The Uk has proven how hopeless it is and how in the grip of PC and multiculturalism and islam it is.  If any new EU comes into play they wont want the UK any where near them.


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - Wallfire - 05-28-2019

Interesting thing about the Scots is they are not the same people I knew in the late 70s and 80s. They were a strong and proud people, now they just seem sad and lost.  What I have noticed now is that the English seem to see the Scots as a child like people who need to be controlled and guided.
This could be because after the practice of divide and control that has been going on for 100s of years the self confidence of the Scots has been undermined to a point that even if given independence they would not have the emotional strength to handle it.
So what will become of Scotland ? I think it will just continue been used and bled dry as the system has been set up and no one from either side knows how to change it, or what will happen if it is changed.


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - gordi - 05-28-2019

(05-28-2019, 12:15 PM)Wallfire Wrote: Interesting thing about the Scots is they are not the same people I knew in the late 70s and 80s. They were a strong and proud people, now they just seem sad and lost.  What I have noticed now is that the English seem to see the Scots as a child like people who need to be controlled and guided.
This could be because after the practice of divide and control that has been going on for 100s of years the self confidence of the Scots has been undermined to a point that even if given independence they would not have the emotional strength to handle it.
So what will become of Scotland ? I think it will just continue been used and bled dry as the system has been set up and no one from either side knows how to change it, or what will happen if it is changed.

Wow, are you in for a shock. LOL

The Scots are are strong and proud as ever.
They have been deceived by the lies of WM and their media puppets for decades, but (as I mentioned above) I can sense a real build-up of frustration at that.
There is a REAL sense of resentment and anger. One look at the results on that EU election map of the UK should show you that real Scots are voting in their droves for an alternative to WM domination. (If they are sad/lost/controlled/guided/child-like - then why/how are they voting for a completely different future than England? The patterns on that map cannot be any clearer.)

Confidence?
Emotional Strength?
Are you kidding me??
Can you not see the movement of opinion behind the numbers on these EU election results?

As soon as Brexit is confirmed, that will constitute a major material change to the circumstances of the UK Union.
The Scottish Government has already declared that this will trigger a new Scottish Independence Referendum - BUT it will be set up and run by THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT, NOT WM like last time.
I am very confident that a Scottish Election, run by Scots for Scots will be fair and decisive.
Scotland will declare Independence from the UK in the not-too-distant future, and I've NEVER been more confident of that.

Can I just say that I think it's quite sad that England and Scotland seem to be drifting apart?
But sometimes, (as with all kinds of relationships...) there comes a time where the two partners want different futures for their own health & happiness.
That time has now come. IMHO.

minusculebeercheers
G


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - BIAD - 05-28-2019

(05-28-2019, 12:36 PM)gordi Wrote: Wow, are you in for a shock. LOL

The Scots are are strong and proud as ever.
They have been deceived by the lies of WM and their media puppets for decades, but (as I mentioned above) I can sense a real build-up of frustration at that.
There is a REAL sense of resentment and anger. One look at the results on that EU election map of the UK should show you that real Scots are voting in their droves for an alternative to WM domination. (If they are sad/lost/controlled/guided/child-like - then why/how are they voting for a completely different future than England? The patterns on that map cannot be any clearer.)

Confidence?
Emotional Strength?
Are you kidding me??
Can you not see the movement of opinion behind the numbers on these EU election results?

As soon as Brexit is confirmed, that will constitute a major material change to the circumstances of the UK Union.
The Scottish Government has already declared that this will trigger a new Scottish Independence Referendum - BUT it will be set up and run by THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT, NOT WM like last time.
I am very confident that a Scottish Election, run by Scots for Scots will be fair and decisive.
Scotland will declare Independence from the UK in the not-too-distant future, and I've NEVER been more confident of that.

Can I just say that I think it's quite sad that England and Scotland seem to be drifting apart?
But sometimes, (as with all kinds of relationships...) there comes a time where the two partners want different futures for their own health & happiness.
That time has now come. IMHO.

minusculebeercheers
G

As you can see -and I'm a victim too of the propaganda, the Westminster narrative has been sown for a very long time.
minusculebeercheers

In the spirit of honesty, there are announcements -at times, of Scottish Parliamentary community-benefiting decisions,
but they're reported in a flat, neutral manner without the usual biased commentary from television Journalists.

They do seem to like Nicola Sturgeon, however, the questions are pretty tame and when she twists a bland query towards
Scottish independence, they move away from discussing it seriously.


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - BIAD - 05-28-2019

As I said above, the propaganda has been on-going for ages and in fairness, I'd suggest it's evolved
into a social acceptance in England. (The Guardian article is from early last year and check out the image...
Nicola Sturgeon looks very small).


Quote:Independent Scotland would face 'extended austerity' under SNP

Growth commission’s strategy would lead to extra decade of cuts and restraint, says IFS.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=5842]

'An independent Scotland would face an extra 10 years of austerity if it implemented plans outlined by a Scottish
National party report, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has warned.

The IFS, a highly regarded economics research institute, said proposals from the SNP’s growth commission published
in May would leave Scotland’s weak public finances facing continued cost-cutting and restraint.

Analysis by David Phillips, an IFS economist, said the commission should be commended for being honest about “the
challenging public finance position an independent Scotland would start life with”. However, he disputed its claims that its
economic strategy would end austerity. Its analysis in fact implied cuts in spending and benefits equal to 4% of GDP over
a 10-year period. 

“Their proposals imply another decade of the sort of restraint on public spending that Scotland is currently experiencing.
If this is austerity, then austerity would be extended under the commission’s proposals,” he said.

His analysis was seized on by pro-UK opposition parties. Murdo Fraser, the Scottish Conservatives’ shadow finance secretary,
said Sturgeon “should simply admit it: independence comes at a huge cost. Until she does, nobody should believe a word she
says.”

Patrick Harvie, co-leader of the pro-independence Scottish Greens, said the IFS was right to challenge the SNP’s report.
“The compelling case for independence will be one which abandons rather than extends austerity economics,” he said.
“Broadening the tax base to include both corporate profits and asset wealth will offer a better way forward.”

The IFS’s conclusions will be seen as a challenge to Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister, who strongly defended the commission’s
work at the SNP’s spring conference six days ago. An SNP spokesman rejected the IFS conclusions and insisted the commission
had explicitly rejected further austerity and planned real-terms growth in spending.

“The growth commission contrasts the clear opportunities of independence with the despair and economic damage of Brexit
–and replaces fear with optimism and hope about Scotland’s future,” he said. Phillips said the most recent Scottish government
spending and taxation data covering both devolved and UK public spending in Scotland meant the country currently had an
effective budget deficit of 8.3%.

The UK’s overall deficit, which included Scotland’s overspending, was 2.3% of UK GDP. That meant UK taxpayers were subsidising
Scottish spending by about £1,750 per person, a “fiscal transfer” equivalent to 6% of Scottish GDP. Under the commission’s forecasts
the deficit would be more than 7%.

He said the commission report was far more sober than the Scottish government’s previous claims before the 2014 independence
referendum. The commission was right to ignore future oil revenues in its forecasts because they were finite, but that increased the
pressures on spending.

He chastised the commission for failing to set out where cuts would fall or taking any account of the likely trade barriers that would
affect trade with the rest of the UK if Scotland rejoined the EU after Brexit. Philips said he could quibble with other assumptions in
its report but added that it did make sensible proposals on increasing productivity and increasing immigration, to counterbalance
Scotland’s ageing population.

His analysis was released soon after the Scottish and Welsh governments published a letter they had sent to Sajid Javid, the home
secretary, complaining that the UK government had failed to consult them on his plans for allowing EU citizens to remain in the UK
after Brexit.

Sturgeon called for immigration powers to be fully devolved to Scotland last weekend. She is worried that Scotland’s ageing
population and weak birth rates are damaging the economy, and wants to boost immigration to help increase productivity.

Fiona Hyslop, the Scottish external affairs secretary, and Mark Drakeford, the Welsh finance secretary, asked for an urgent meeting
with Javid. They added they remained “deeply troubled” that they had yet to see any details about the UK government’s new but
much-delayed immigration bill...'
The Guardian:


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - Wallfire - 05-28-2019

Its easy to have a paper rebellion, it costs nothing and makes people feel good. But what happens when the truth about independence hits home. Is Scotland going to brake free from England and sell its self to the EU  ?.
If Scotland tries to make it on its own are the people willing to take a drop in the standard of living, work longer hours for less money, less med support, pensions reduced, all these thing for the next 20 or so years in order to make sure Scotland is a good place for the children to live in the future ?
A paper rebellion is an easy way to control people, makes people feel like they have some power. But the price of independence is far too high and will not be accepted by the people. The soft life of today or a hard life for the next 20 years so that Scotland will be a free and good place to live ?
The youth will take the soft life.
The life  people in Finland lived after the war in order to give a better life to the future generations is not something the youth of today could do. Like so many countries Finland sold its freedom and soul to the EU, Scotland will do the same. Not because it wants to, but because the youth of today only know of the internet and me want me want. They care not for what happens next year as long as they have silly harmless things to fell good about rebelling. Its a feel good generation, not a fighting generation.


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - gordi - 05-28-2019

(05-28-2019, 01:03 PM)BIAD Wrote: As I said above, the propaganda has been on-going for ages and in fairness, I'd suggest it's evolved
into a social acceptance in England. (The Guardian article is from early last year and check out the image...
Nicola Sturgeon looks very small).


Quote:Independent Scotland would face 'extended austerity' under SNP

Growth commission’s strategy would lead to extra decade of cuts and restraint, says IFS....

...'An independent Scotland would face an extra 10 years of austerity if it implemented plans outlined by a Scottish
National party report, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has warned.....
The Guardian:

hmm... The IFS has very strong links to WM, Whitehall and the UK political elite.
The very people who have for decades been fudging (and fiddling) the facts.

The Guardian themselves have previously published:
Quote:In 1974, two American political scientists, Hugh Heclo and Aaron Wildavsky, published an influential book about the workings of the British state called The Private Government of Public Money, which argued that an extraordinarily small clique of officials, who know one another well, dominate Britain’s decisions about taxation and spending. More than 40 years later, while the IFS vaunts its independence, multiple ties bind Ridgmount Street, Whitehall and Westminster.

For instance, Paul Johnson served in the Treasury between his first stint at the IFS and returning as director. Prior to the IFS, Johnson was tutorial partner at Keble College Oxford to Ed Balls, the former shadow chancellor. Balls’s pre-government journalistic career at the FT moved in parallel to Robert Chote’s, who was then at the Independent. Chote preceded Johnson as director of the IFS. During his tenure at the IFS, Chote’s wife Sharon White was building a career at the Treasury that would culminate in her role as second permanent secretary at the department. In 1997 Gus O’Donnell, who would go on to become head of the civil service, was in Washington as the UK executive director on the boards of the IMF and World Bank; he held a wedding party at his house for Chote and White. Later, when Chote wrote to Gus O’Donnell to bemoan the Treasury briefing against the IFS, he ended his letter with the words “We have all known each other for a long time …”

from: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/mar/15/british-umpire-how-institute-fiscal-studies-became-most-influential-voice-in-uk-economic-debate

The mere fact that the article quoted above includes the phrase:

"The commission was right to ignore future oil revenues in its forecasts because they were finite, but that increased the pressures on spending..."

Would suggest to me that the figures they are working from are inaccurate and quite frankly misleading.


According to UK government valuations – based upon current and projected markets – North Sea oil has an untapped wholesale value of up to £1.5 trillion (as quoted on the official Scottish Government website HERE
How can it be justified that we can just ignore £1.5 trillion of assets because they are "finite"??
That makes no sense whatsoever.

The IFS also prescribe to the WM mathematical model of the "UK Infrastructure Project" that I alluded to earlier.
The way it works is worryingly simple:
The UK Govt takes approx 85% of Tax revenues raised in Scotland and then (generously) allocates about 35% back to Scotland to "balance the books" there (via Barnett Formula).
The remaining revenues are spent "on Scotland's behalf" by Westminster, but mostly on important "UK infrastructure" projects like:

The High Speed Rail Link (HS1/Channel Tunnel Link) £5.8Billion,
CrossRail (Reading/Heathrow - London - Shenfield/Abbey Wood) £17.6Billion,
HS2 (London - West Midlands - Manchester / Leeds) at least £56Billion *estimated cost.
Crossrail2 (SW London - NE London) at least £30Billion *estimated cost.

Now these projects are all based solely in England (mostly London), come nowhere near to Scotland at any point, and it's very unclear how they will benefit Scotland in any way, but because WM describes them as "UK" infrastructure projects, the monies spent there are apportioned accordingly in the UK's balance sheets with Scotland paying it's "fair share" of almost 10% of the costs...

Tada! with just these 4 projects alone costing over £104Billion, that means that over £10Billion is suddenly wiped off of Scotland's balance sheet to fund English (UK) infrastructure projects!
It is sheer genius!
In the meantime, the Scottish Government does what it can to protect and develop Scotland's infrastructure, but we NEVER receive massive "UK" funding for any "Scottish" projects... funny that.

The latest slap in the face that I came across (quite recently although actually published 5 yrs ago) was a proposed infrastructure project which would "divert" fresh water from the Scottish Borders region down to the parched Southern areas of England via a series of new canals or pipelines.

Sorry I cant find the original link to the official story just this article in the Scotsman
And this from the World Canals Conference Site
[/url][url=http://www.waterindustryforum.com/documents/uploads/case-studies/AECOM%20Presentation%20-%20David%20Weight.pdf]and this from the Water industry Forum

Now, THIS project WOULD indeed be a "UK" project as it would affect both England and Scotland, so we would ALL (UK taxpayers) have to pay for it right?
But, wait a minute here..... it's Scotland's Water.
The proposal is to TAKE Scotland's water away and "divert" (GIVE) it to England. (Isn't that called stealing??)
So, we Scots would actually be PAYING towards a "UK" project who's sole purpose was to take our own water away from us and give it to England.
It would be like paying someone to steal your own wallet from you. Complete and Utter Madness.
But that is what we (in Scotland) are faced with all the time now, in the form of lies, deceit, obfuscation, misdirection, and outright theft!

Sorry if my posts come across as a bit of a rant, but this stuff really gets my blood boiling!

G


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - gordi - 05-28-2019

(05-28-2019, 01:33 PM)Wallfire Wrote: Its easy to have a paper rebellion, it costs nothing and makes people feel good. But what happens when the truth about independence hits home. Is Scotland going to brake free from England and sell its self to the EU  ?.
If Scotland tries to make it on its own are the people willing to take a drop in the standard of living, work longer hours for less money, less med support, pensions reduced, all these thing for the next 20 or so years in order to make sure Scotland is a good place for the children to live in the future ?
A paper rebellion is an easy way to control people, makes people feel like they have some power. But the price of independence is far too high and will not be accepted by the people. The soft life of today or a hard life for the next 20 years so that Scotland will be a free and good place to live ?
The youth will take the soft life.
The life  people in Finland lived after the war in order to give a better life to the future generations is not something the youth of today could do. Like so many countries Finland sold its freedom and soul to the EU, Scotland will do the same. Not because it wants to, but because the youth of today only know of the internet and me want me want. They care not for what happens next year as long as they have silly harmless things to fell good about rebelling. Its a feel good generation, not a fighting generation.

Well, I believe that the UK have been ripping off Scotland for decades and that our standard of living (with us being in control of ALL of our own resources and revenues) would be significantly higher than today. (Please see my reply to BIAD above for details of SOME of the ways that the UK has been ripping off Scotland.)

*Support for Scottish Independence is consistently much HIGHER in the younger age groups than in the older ones.

What do you mean by "sell itself to the EU"?
I presume that Scotland would decide whether to stay in the EU (or re-apply to join EU) as appropriate.
As I mentioned before... I'm neither pro nor anti EU but if a member state of the EU wants to leave... it can.
Westminster knew the EU rules (on leaving EU) BEFORE it tried to start "negotiating" Brexit.
Finland could leave if it wanted to.
An Independent Scotland could leave in the future if it decided to as well. (Unlike leaving the UK, where we apparently have to beg for WM's permission first??)
The EU is like a private club where you have to pay for your membership to access the benefits of being a member.
It's your (country's) choice whether you think you're getting a good deal or not, but nobody can force you to be a member, can they?
G


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - Wallfire - 05-28-2019

I support you fully, Britain has been ripping Scotland off for so long that it has become normal. But I also see the mess that Britain is in has little to do with leaving the EU and more to do with the anger of a people whos culture and way of life has been destroyed and they are hitting back the only way they can as it would never be aloud to express the anger where it belongs.
Back in the 80s I was in a pub with a group of Scottish soldiers, they started singing  O Flower of Scotland 
It was the energy and passion and respect  that I felt coming for the men singing that deeply impressed me.
"When will we see your like again"
A good question that cannot be answered......  yet
I hope the Scots understand what Independence means, and dont just do it so they can kick the Brits in the balls. No country that I know off has ever had an easy first 10-20 years of Independence.


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - gordi - 05-28-2019

(05-28-2019, 03:43 PM)Wallfire Wrote: I support you fully, Britain has been ripping Scotland off for so long that it has become normal. But I also see the mess that Britain is in has little to do with leaving the EU and more to do with the anger of a people whos culture and way of life has been destroyed and they are hitting back the only way they can as it would never be aloud to express the anger where it belongs.
Back in the 80s I was in a pub with a group of Scottish soldiers, they started singing  O Flower of Scotland 
It was the energy and passion and respect  that I felt coming for the men singing that deeply impressed me.
"When will we see your like again"
A good question that cannot be answered......  yet
I hope the Scots understand what Independence means, and dont just do it so they can kick the Brits in the balls. No country that I know off has ever had an easy first 10-20 years of Independence.

I was in a pub in Montrose at the weekend singing Flower of Scotland with a large group of passionate friends!

The Scots are one of the most politically informed and involved nations on the planet (mostly thanks to the 2014 Independence Referendum) and the vast majority fully understand what Independence would mean.
No one here that I'm aware of is seeking Independence to "kick" (anyone) "in the balls".
Those who are seeking Independence are doing so because they believe that self-determination is the only way that we as a nation will take control of our own future destiny, without being ruled by a "foreign" government which is what WM has become.
btw - Scots ARE and ALWAYS WILL BE "Brits" Britons or British. (Scotland forms the northernmost third of the Island of Great Britain. All those who reside on the Island of Great Britain, or any of the British Isles, is technically a Brit, Briton or British. That wouldn't change with Independence, Scotland would no longer be a part of the political Union that is The United Kingdom, but we'd still be British.

No other country that has gained Independence has had the resources, revenue streams, legal and political infrastructure and Governmental set-up that Scotland already has in place. (or Whisky! LOL)


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - BIAD - 05-28-2019

(05-28-2019, 03:03 PM)gordi Wrote: The way it works is worryingly simple:
The UK Govt takes approx 85% of Tax revenues raised in Scotland and then (generously) allocates about 35% back to Scotland to "balance the books" there (via Barnett Formula).
The remaining revenues are spent "on Scotland's behalf" by Westminster, but mostly on important "UK infrastructure" projects like:

The High Speed Rail Link (HS1/Channel Tunnel Link) £5.8Billion,
CrossRail (Reading/Heathrow - London - Shenfield/Abbey Wood) £17.6Billion,
HS2 (London - West Midlands - Manchester / Leeds) at least £56Billion *estimated cost.
Crossrail2 (SW London - NE London) at least £30Billion *estimated cost.

Now these projects are all based solely in England (mostly London), come nowhere near to Scotland at any point, and it's very unclear how they will benefit Scotland in any way, but because WM describes them as "UK" infrastructure projects, the monies spent there are apportioned accordingly in the UK's balance sheets with Scotland paying it's "fair share" of almost 10% of the costs...

Tada! with just these 4 projects alone costing over £104Billion, that means that over £10Billion is suddenly wiped off of Scotland's balance sheet to fund English (UK) infrastructure projects!
It is sheer genius!
In the meantime, the Scottish Government does what it can to protect and develop Scotland's infrastructure, but we NEVER receive massive "UK" funding for any "Scottish" projects... funny that.

I can't counter any of that and being so close to the Scottish border (i.e, anywhere after Leeds!) I can appreciate the
disingenuous bullsh*t that indicates the favorability towards southern schemes.

It is true that Westminster take monies from regions and then state it's for the overall maintenance that -even if a
Government was being honest, could be seen as biased, and maybe it's the perception Gordi referred to in regarding
Scotland as a 'region' and not a country, that makes it feel like a total rip-off.

Again, I'm not batting for the 'sasanach'-side in this debate, but I was interested in knowing where the monies were
generated in Scotland. I only know the brochure-version and unsure about how the money from the oil was dispersed.

Quote:'...The latest slap in the face that I came across (quite recently although actually published 5 yrs ago) was a proposed
infrastructure project which would "divert" fresh water from the Scottish Borders region down to the parched Southern
areas of England via a series of new canals or pipelines...'

They've been trucking water out of a reservoir that's only a mile away from me for two summers now!
All for the south.
Quote:Sorry if my posts come across as a bit of a rant, but this stuff really gets my blood boiling!

Nope, it's not a rant and I know where you're coming from.
minusculethumbsup


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - Wallfire - 05-28-2019

I agree with BIAD, Gordi is not on a rant, most of Europe feels the same way about the EU as he feels about what England has been doing.
Lets say that all of Europe is living in interesting times.


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - gordi - 05-28-2019

(05-28-2019, 05:40 PM)BIAD Wrote: ...Again, I'm not batting for the 'sasanach'-side in this debate, but I was interested in knowing where the monies were
generated in Scotland. I only know the brochure-version and unsure about how the money from the oil was dispersed...



...Nope, it's not a rant and I know where you're coming from.
minusculethumbsup

My understanding is that around 83%-85% of all Tax revenues raised in Scotland (Including Whisky/Oil/Gas etc) are currently sent to Westminster. (The other 15%-17% is collected in relation to "devolved" matters and remains with the Sottish Govt.

All tax revenues sent to Westminster by Scotland, Wales and NI are added to the UK revenue "pot".

Westminster then works out how much it is spending on services in England (e.g. in NHS England) and uses the Barnett Formula to determine what percentage of that should be allocated back to the "regions" of Scotland, Wales and NI.

WM also decides for itself which services and projects are English and which can be deemed to be "UK".
ALL of the earlier projects that I mentioned (including HS1, HS2, Crossrail, Crossrail2) have been deemed by WM as "UK Infrastructure" projects, not English projects.
So Scotland, Wales and NI are forced to pay their share, but have NO SAY in whether the "UK" projects actually benefit them in any way.
It's the same for UK borrowing, UK Defense Spending and MUCH more... WM decides to spend (or borrow) whatever IT wants (wherever it wants) and charges the "regions" accordingly, whether the regions actually receive any direct benefit from that spending/borrowing or not - they don't have any say in it and monies are deducted from the UK tax pot to pay for the WM spending and borrowing.
Once the spending/borrowing has been suitably fudged... the Barnett Formula determines what funds are "allocated" back to Scotland and the other regions and it is broadcast in the media that Westminster is FUNDING the regions... when all they are actually doing is giving us a small percentage of our own tax revenues back after spending what IT wants from the overall pot.

regards
G


RE: The Results of the UK's European Members Election 2019. - BIAD - 05-29-2019

I had to look-up the Barnett Formula and even though it's only from Wikipedia, it's seems there's
doubt in the equation. Personally, I have no current opinion and I need to look at it.

Quote:'...The Barnett formula is said to have "no legal standing or democratic justification", and, being merely a convention,
could be changed at will by the Treasury. In recent years, Barnett himself has called it a "terrible mistake".

In 2009, the House of Lords Select Committee on the Barnett Formula concluded that "the Barnett Formula should no
longer be used to determine annual increases in the block grant for the United Kingdom's devolved administrations...
A new system which allocates resources to the devolved administrations based on an explicit assessment of their
relative needs should be introduced."

Following the September 2014 Scottish independence referendum, the Barnett formula came to widespread attention
amid concerns that in a last-minute government bid to sway voters against independence, Scotland had been promised
continued high public spending....'
Wikipedia:

Again, I need to full appreciate both sides before I'd offer my opinion, but I certainly can already see how London
is always seen to benefit first. I would like to agree with Gordi that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are well
-behind in the queue for infrastructure funding, but here in the North-East of England is also well down on the list
when it comes to looking for help from the Government.

I'm not bitching for my corner, I'm just saying that there is correlation of a certain preference for spending by
the London-based Government, but I don't (or don't want to!)... think that it's connected to the Scottish and
Welsh public not being English.
I'd prefer to say it's about distance from the capital. 

Quote:How the formula works

The formula applies only to expenditure on issues for which the devolved administrations (as opposed to UK central government)
are responsible. Its principle is that any increase or reduction in expenditure in England will automatically lead to a proportionate
increase or reduction in resources for the devolved governments in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Analogous arrangements apply to categories of expense which are only controlled by some of the devolved governments.
The formula is not applied to all public expenditure, but is the default option if no other decisions are made. Expenditure is allocated
en bloc, not by service, allowing each devolved administration to allocate these funds as it believes appropriate.

Where the central government department funding covers England only
For areas of funding where the corresponding central government department funding covers England only, for example education
and health, the formula for funding to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland consists of a baseline plus increases based on the
increases in public spending in England in comparable programmes, applied in proportion to current populations:

Extra funding in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland = Extra funding in England x (multiplied by) population proportion compared
to England x (multiplied by) 
the extent to which the relevant English departmental programme is comparable with the services
carried out by the devolved administration.

For example, in 2000, the Northern Irish, Scottish and Welsh populations were taken to be 3.69%, 10.34% and 5.93% (respectively)
of the population of England. For programmes in the Department of Health, the comparability factor for Scotland and Wales was 99.7%.

Therefore, if £1 billion was to be added to planned health expenditure in England, then the extra amount added to the Scottish block,
compared to the year before, would be £1bn x 10.34% x 99.7% = £103 million, and the amount added to the Welsh block would be
£1bn x 5.93% x 99.7% = £59.1 million.