Where does that entitlement come from? They already had a say, as did the rest of the country. Do Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle, Liverpool, Bristol all get to ask for vetos as well? Do I get to ask for a veto?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The UK votes to leave the European Union |OUT2| Mayday, Mayday, I've lost an ARM
- Thread starter Hasney
- Start date
- Status
Where does that entitlement come from? They already had a say, as did the rest of the country. Do Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle, Liverpool, Bristol all get to ask for vetos as well? Do I get to ask for a veto?
chromatic9
Member
I'm sure a history lesson on Scotland for high ups in Spain would sort any confusion they have. Scotland is a country of it's own and is merely part of a union.
Khan is smart enough to know that London doesn't have the right levers to get this to work, which is why the first thing he did after the referendum was ask for more control (eg. powers) to be handed to London directly. It won't save them from Brexit, but if enough functions are transferred to London then maybe at somepoint in the future they'll have the leverage to make London a political entity in its own right.
Obviously Scotland is much further ahead on this, and already has much of the infrastructure of a stand-alone government.
nature boy
Member
London has an argument, when you look at the impact of a Brexit.
Do you even believe it's comparable?
Yep, but the direct impact of Brexit on London should give London a legitimate seat at the discussion table.
inoperativ
Member
Was going to write something like this in response to all the "What could May possibly give Sturgeon" posts but you say it better than I could.
Sturgeon is not Salmond and is unlikely to pursue independence at any cost. A federal UK with enough powers devolved to make it possible for some regions to stay in the EU while others leave would be the best option for everyone including Scotland. If England would want to divide itself into separate regions this would be a pretty massive endeavour but just giving Scotland and NI more autonomy would be enough to solve the most immediate problems, and would not be terribly difficult since the legal and political structures are already in place.
It's surprising that May gave Sturgeon such am advantage. Sturgeon played her cards really well, but I appreciate that May tries to solve the situation with diplomacy. On the other hand the only way this can be solved with both Brexit started and Scotland not going for full independence is probably the federalisation of UK and some kind of reversed Greenland deal, where Scotland remains in UK. Might be also the best solution for Scotland as it avoids any possible uncertainties and keeps the current status quo. Plus a big boost to local economy as being the only part in UK and in EU.
Let's see how this plays.
London *isn't* England anymore and the sooner we deal with that and act accordingly the better we'll all be.
Ah so because all the places outside of the M25 aren't as rich they have less to lose and don't get a "seat at the table". You're right, tbh I don't see why all the poor Northerns even got a vote they were always just going to stay poor either way.
The Hamburglar
Banned
More Fun To Compute
Member
Honestly if people didn't want to vote to take a massive steaming dump on people who have less than them they wouldn't have voted Tory in the first. Do unto others.
PJV3
Member
Can you think of another country that has done something similar to its capital and financial centre?
The shit that fell on industrial areas was wrong, but partly out of our control, this time it is deliberate and can be dealt with.
I'm not sure giving that lesson to the leaders of the Kingdoms of Castille and Aragon will have as much impact as you hope for.
SporeCrawler
Member
Great for the motorsport industry in UK.. Which is like.. How much of the GDP??
SporeCrawler
Member
Man I always wondered why UK wouldnt give itself a written constitution.. Now all the jurists claiming that it doesnt need one will probably bight themselves in the ass.
Honestly, that announcement about Scotland makes me think even more that May has no intention of leaving the EU. Which is actually pretty amazing since, if there's anybody who you would expect to be willing to trade leaving the single market for losing freedom of movement, it would be her. But since she got in May has done everything you would do if you wanted to prevent Brexit without just coming out and saying so.
"We will leave the EU as soon as we have a plan that makes economic sense and as soon as we all agree it is a good idea" is not that far from "we won't leave the EU, it makes no economic sense and is not a good idea." Putting the Leavers in charge of the plan and Scotland in charge of the veto is just the icing on the cake. BoJo and his buddies have to own the fact that there's no good plan to leave and Nicola has to choose between an independence referendum that would ultimately leave Scotland in terrible economic straits or staying in the union to keep Britain in the EU.
Teresa May is the hero Britain needs.
"We will leave the EU as soon as we have a plan that makes economic sense and as soon as we all agree it is a good idea" is not that far from "we won't leave the EU, it makes no economic sense and is not a good idea." Putting the Leavers in charge of the plan and Scotland in charge of the veto is just the icing on the cake. BoJo and his buddies have to own the fact that there's no good plan to leave and Nicola has to choose between an independence referendum that would ultimately leave Scotland in terrible economic straits or staying in the union to keep Britain in the EU.
Teresa May is the hero Britain needs.
The basic point I wanted to make was that demanding more powers, protection, a larger voice etc for London and then thinking about the rest of the country as an afterthought / extension is one of the biggest reasons why the UK is so divided in the first place (indyref, EU, economically), and continuing down that route will evidently solve nothing.
Sure, I get that the financial passport is important to financial institutions, London itself and therefore the rest of the country, and things like this need to be fought for and protected, but these are such nebulous, trickle-down concepts and you can't realistically expect somebody working for the minimum wage in Merthyr Tydfil to give a shit about any of that.
Approach the problem from the opposite way and spread power, economic activity and 21st century political representation out across the country by consent. That's the only way out of this mess, not by giving London more power.
Ideally this should have been done decades ago or in 2014 when the problem and its solution could not have been any clearer, but London has showed that it is loath to relinquish its power over the rest of the country.
Sure, I get that the financial passport is important to financial institutions, London itself and therefore the rest of the country, and things like this need to be fought for and protected, but these are such nebulous, trickle-down concepts and you can't realistically expect somebody working for the minimum wage in Merthyr Tydfil to give a shit about any of that.
Approach the problem from the opposite way and spread power, economic activity and 21st century political representation out across the country by consent. That's the only way out of this mess, not by giving London more power.
Ideally this should have been done decades ago or in 2014 when the problem and its solution could not have been any clearer, but London has showed that it is loath to relinquish its power over the rest of the country.
Brexit impact is going to be horrible, says leading City fund manager: http://ebx.sh/2a3I5nw
There's a precedent for this - the disgraceful creation of Northern Ireland
chromatic9
Member
Well I don't hope and these regions are part of Spain. Scotland is a country.
Also what grievance would Spain have exactly? Not only is Scotland a country, if it leaves the UK union it will be as separate as any other country in Europe. Conversely if any region like Catalonia or some other region anywhere wants to become totally independent, Scotland nor any other country would be sticking their oar in on their EU application.
shinra-bansho
Member
You can't just magically spread economic activity and associated power and whatever to whogivesafuck nowheresville. There are scale and concentration effects. Whether you're looking at New York or Sydney or Shanghai or London. There's a reason places become financial and economic hubs in countries.
Bottom line is that I struggle to think of another country where one city dominates economic, political, media landscapes to the extent that London does in the UK. Paris is probably the closest but even then it's nothing on London and how the UK operates.
You mention Sydney but Australia's national capital is in Canberra and Melbourne and other cities provide a decent counter weight to Sydney. Same with New York and USA. Same with China. Same with Germany, Italy, Spain etc.
The UK just doesn't have any kind of counterweight to London whatsoever and despite Cameron's government promising to re-balance the economy, this hasn't even begun to happen and the civil service has actually entrenched itself in even deeper in London since 2010.
Royal_Phalanx
Member
Here's hoping Scotland keeps the UK in the EU. Not everyone consents, there is a strong mandate for Scotland to stay in the EU.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Someone asked what we trade with Australia, I'm just providing an answer. Thanks for the snide, though. Some people just can't help but be asshats.
There is indeed no problem for Sturgeon. She can do what is best for her voters.
Chances of asset stripping are????
London is literally one of the only places where people identify as British instead of English. It's economically and culturally unique from England, Scotland, Wales and NI.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/17/boris-johnson-plane-emergency-landing-luton
EU foreign ministers (plus John Kerry) are meeting in Brussels today, to be precise.
I am increasingly convinced this is the case.
Low. They said they intend to double the number of UK employees.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
Totally not SoftBank's strategy.
Officially they want to double employees but wait until brexit hits
KarneeKarnay
Member
I've seen some talk about a Fedralised UK and I have to say. This makes sense. The UK's weakest aspect has always been that its never really been that united.
Think Rome. Rome built an empire. It conquered all the lands in Europe. But it didn't unite them. When Rome fell the Empire did too.
The UK didn't really unite the peoples of the UK, the English conquered them all and then declared a Union. This has always been a sticking point for the different cultures in the UK. Irish, Welsh, Scottish and even Cornish. While I think we all agree that we are better together than apart, that still doesn't mean that the problem isn't any less. the UK is run from the Westminster Parliament. There isn't and English Parliament like the Scottish/Welsh/Northern Irish Parliament. And the other parliaments don't really have any effect in comparison to Westminster.
Maybe a new parliament just for England should be created. Westminster instead being made up of members of each parliament instead. That way everyone no matter how small a part of the UK, gets a say in where the UK goes.
Think Rome. Rome built an empire. It conquered all the lands in Europe. But it didn't unite them. When Rome fell the Empire did too.
The UK didn't really unite the peoples of the UK, the English conquered them all and then declared a Union. This has always been a sticking point for the different cultures in the UK. Irish, Welsh, Scottish and even Cornish. While I think we all agree that we are better together than apart, that still doesn't mean that the problem isn't any less. the UK is run from the Westminster Parliament. There isn't and English Parliament like the Scottish/Welsh/Northern Irish Parliament. And the other parliaments don't really have any effect in comparison to Westminster.
Maybe a new parliament just for England should be created. Westminster instead being made up of members of each parliament instead. That way everyone no matter how small a part of the UK, gets a say in where the UK goes.
Um, sorry but that doesn't match historically at all.
Firstly, the English didn't conquer Scotland. A Scottish monarch took the throne of England, and after an economic collapse due to unsafe oversees investments England and Scotland voted through the act of union. Bad films like Braveheart aside, Scotland din't join England at the tip of a bayonet.
Secondly, in terms of unity outside of Ireland the UK has always been extremely united until recently relatively. The Scottish independence movement was always tiny (and also right wing - the Tartan Tories), and Welsh independence even smaller. The British empire had Scottish and Welsh people at its heart for over a century. Look at how Scotland was portrayed during the Victorian era.
I don't disagree with the premise of a federated UK at all, but to portray it as a country that's always been struggling to hold itself together and splitting apart at the seams isn't realistic - this is a very modern problem.
No, the bayonet came out after the act of union (which lest we forget wasn't particularly popular in Scotland at the time)
KarneeKarnay
Member
The treaty was hugely disproved of by the Scottish when it happened. It also helped lead to the Jacobite rebellions.r
In the History of the UK it's only been the last 300 years that we have really been that peaceful with each other. There has always been independence groups in Scotland, Wales and Ireland. However It's only really been recently that things have started to come ahead again. There has always been problems with representation and many have argued that the Parliaments are only a half measure.
Neither would I. The UK has proved that we are all better together. However there has always been a problem with how the rest of the peoples in the UK are represented in government. In the past it led to rebellions. Now it's led to public campaigning for referendums.
RedSparrows
Member
Aye, there was certainly enough blood shed to form the UK, but other than Northern Ireland it was hundreds of years ago. There's pain and trouble (radicalism, strikes, riots, etc etc...) and then there's 'disunity', and I'm not sure that from the fall of Jacobinism (anything more recent?) to the early 2000s there was ever a real threat to the unity of the British Isles. NI wasn't - of course that's not to say it wasn't a horrible, tense mess.
Edit: 300 years, if we agree that as a rough number, is bloody good going!
Edit: 300 years, if we agree that as a rough number, is bloody good going!
Camp Freddie
Member
Talking about a federal UK is silly. There is no public desire for this, especially in England.
People in England generally don't want another set of politicians in their lives, especially politicians with poorly defined powers (see also: why we are not a republic and have no elections for Lords). It works in Scotland and Wales, because they're small and have specific local issues to manage. Scotland has the huge advantage of already having a separate legal system.
However, England is far too huge and diverse to be a state in a federal system. You can't have a federal system where one state is 10x the GVA of all the others.
To give each federated state roughly equal power, you'd need something like 9 English regional states Even without London, the rest of England is still 8x more GVA than scotland
(this wiki gives a good breakdown)
And what happened when we asked the North East (similar economic size to Wales and about as culturally non-London English as you can get) if they wanted devolution?
Nope
The May/Sturgeon talks are very interesting though. It does make me think May is trying to kick this stuff into the longest pampus grass she can find. She is totally opposed to Scottish independence, as are most Tories (and probably most English people), so it probably benefits them both is Scotland blocks/delays Brexit. May gets more time to think, Sturgeon takes the 'blame' while also standing up for Scotland.
Sturgeon probably knows that indieref2 would be close, and might prefer the long game, rather than a hard Brexit, snap unilateral indieref, massive political fight and economic apocalypse (full Brexit + indieScotland negotiating re-entry EU = utter short-term disaster for the Scottish economy and loss of a lot of independence support). If Sturgeon can get credit for securing a better deal for Scotland, then it goes down as yet another reason why the Scottish need more decision making power in Hollyrood.
Oh, and that poll of opinions on May/Corbyn... How does May only get 16% "nasty", especially when Corbyn gets 18%? The rest of the figures seemed as I expected, but I've always thought of May as the stereotypical "nasty Tory".
People in England generally don't want another set of politicians in their lives, especially politicians with poorly defined powers (see also: why we are not a republic and have no elections for Lords). It works in Scotland and Wales, because they're small and have specific local issues to manage. Scotland has the huge advantage of already having a separate legal system.
However, England is far too huge and diverse to be a state in a federal system. You can't have a federal system where one state is 10x the GVA of all the others.
To give each federated state roughly equal power, you'd need something like 9 English regional states Even without London, the rest of England is still 8x more GVA than scotland
(this wiki gives a good breakdown)
And what happened when we asked the North East (similar economic size to Wales and about as culturally non-London English as you can get) if they wanted devolution?
Nope
The May/Sturgeon talks are very interesting though. It does make me think May is trying to kick this stuff into the longest pampus grass she can find. She is totally opposed to Scottish independence, as are most Tories (and probably most English people), so it probably benefits them both is Scotland blocks/delays Brexit. May gets more time to think, Sturgeon takes the 'blame' while also standing up for Scotland.
Sturgeon probably knows that indieref2 would be close, and might prefer the long game, rather than a hard Brexit, snap unilateral indieref, massive political fight and economic apocalypse (full Brexit + indieScotland negotiating re-entry EU = utter short-term disaster for the Scottish economy and loss of a lot of independence support). If Sturgeon can get credit for securing a better deal for Scotland, then it goes down as yet another reason why the Scottish need more decision making power in Hollyrood.
Oh, and that poll of opinions on May/Corbyn... How does May only get 16% "nasty", especially when Corbyn gets 18%? The rest of the figures seemed as I expected, but I've always thought of May as the stereotypical "nasty Tory".
It's still her "honeymoon period". Just wait until she actually starts making decisions. What happened to Cameron will happen to her, no doubt.
PJV3
Member
Lol, he's casually throwing around talk of borders in Ireland as if it's nothing. He's going to get the sack before he even starts the process.
He just can't wind his fucking neck in for 10 minutes.
QuicheFontaine
Member
They (leavers) only have that attitude because it went their way, Farage etc... all said if it was a narrow win for Remain they would have been all up in that shit.
Also, if 17.5M people said David Davis needed to kill himself would he?
Can't disobey? of course you can, you don't care about the "will of the people", it just happens to support your shit view of the world.
PJV3
Member
Come on now, this is an obvious piss take.
And Davis really thinks he's in charge.
Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, David Davis, the Brexit secretary, and Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, will get joint use of Chevening, the grace and favour home traditionally used by the foreign secretary.
The three leading Brexit ministers are not great chums and quite how the Brexit house-share will work in practice remains to be seen although, given that Chevening has 115 rooms, it should be possible for them all to turn up at once without having them having to worry about one of them hogging the bathroom.
It is not the first time Chevening has been shared - under the coalition, Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, had joint use of it with the foreign secretary, first William Hague and then Philip Hammond - but a three-way split like this may be unprecedented.
Explaining the decision to give Johnson, Davis and Fox joint use of the property, the prime ministers spokeswoman said this reflects the fact that all of these secretaries of state will, as part of their work, be needing an opportunity to host foreign visitors and leaders.
The move also reflects that fact that there is some ambiguity as to whether Davis is more important and influential than Johnson in the Brexit negotiations. Asked about a claim by Davis in the Mail on Sunday yesterday that he could pull rank on Johnson and Fox, the prime ministers spokeswoman said that leaving the EU would be a collective government effort.
Egomaniacs Mansion.
And Davis really thinks he's in charge.
Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, David Davis, the Brexit secretary, and Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, will get joint use of Chevening, the grace and favour home traditionally used by the foreign secretary.
The three leading Brexit ministers are not great chums and quite how the Brexit house-share will work in practice remains to be seen although, given that Chevening has 115 rooms, it should be possible for them all to turn up at once without having them having to worry about one of them hogging the bathroom.
It is not the first time Chevening has been shared - under the coalition, Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, had joint use of it with the foreign secretary, first William Hague and then Philip Hammond - but a three-way split like this may be unprecedented.
Explaining the decision to give Johnson, Davis and Fox joint use of the property, the prime ministers spokeswoman said this reflects the fact that all of these secretaries of state will, as part of their work, be needing an opportunity to host foreign visitors and leaders.
The move also reflects that fact that there is some ambiguity as to whether Davis is more important and influential than Johnson in the Brexit negotiations. Asked about a claim by Davis in the Mail on Sunday yesterday that he could pull rank on Johnson and Fox, the prime ministers spokeswoman said that leaving the EU would be a collective government effort.
Egomaniacs Mansion.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked