Scottish Nationalists: Why leave one union to join another?

[FrancinePefko42]

From my understanding, the primary motive for Scotland leaving the United Kingdom is to have full autonomy as independent sovereign state - with all the freedom that would confer.

Why does being closely tied to Brussels have greater appeal than retaining the ties with England?

zsazsajuju

Francine- not sure what you are ranting and raving about. As I said Brussels is a city. If you want to critique the EU, please be accurate instead of some rubbish you have read in the sun.

The Sun uses too many long words for me. I can look at the pictures but then I get bored.

I have no idea what all your links are about or if they are aimed at me. Maybe other people also are inaccurate in their descriptions of the EU
They were just several examples of speakers / writers on the Remain side who also occasionally use "Brussels" synonymously with the EU. Most people with two brain cells to run together kinda / sorta know that they are not referring to the City.

I am sorry if this has come as a shock to you.

You were earlier trying to mock people with a university education as if that’s something to be ashamed of. It’s not.

I was not mocking at all zsazsajuju. It would be impossible to mock you. I a, actually really envious. You haven't told us yet what universal city... sorry universe sty ... sorry uni...is really like. Do you have the same teacher all day or do you have different teachers for different lessons. Please share.

Perhaps Francine would like to wheel out Gordon Brown too, since we're going back in time for quotes?

Jim Sillars campaigned with Leave EU. He supports fracking in Scotland and is a climate-change denier. He was depute leader of the SNP for a grand total of 1 year (1991-92), yet is given prominence as a pro-Brexit 'former SNP depute'. He's also campaigned for Rise (a different political party), and is regularly quoted by UKIP and the Tories. The fact that Francine quotes him tells me everything I need to know.

zsazsajuju
Just answer the question Francine- no more racist drivel please

Also, you still haven't quoted me where I said anything at all mentioning race. Could you please?

“There is no mechanism for ordinary citizen voters of Europe to get rid of Junker.”

You keep insisting that a general election is a mechanism for voters to ‘get rid’ of a PM... it’s not, it’s the end of their term... which is the same length as Juncker’s

Once chosen by other politicians they’re there for the duration if they want to be.

It’s only different because you’re insisting it is.

Not sure what people’s obsession with Juncker is anyway. If David Cameron hadn’t thrown his toys out of the pram so publicly about Juncker’s appointment, I doubt anyone on here would even know who he was.

I think there was a lot of disquiet about Junker's elevation from several quarters including the open secret of his alleged penchant for cognac for breakfast. But the powers that be decided he was to be their man. So it happened.

Junker is not accountable to any ordinary citizen voter. That is whatbos meant by the "democratic inversion" of the EU.

You keep insisting that a general election is a mechanism for voters to ‘get rid’ of a PM... it’s not, it’s the end of their term... which is the same length as Juncker’

In the UK, a sitting PM who has failed to win more seats than another party would not be able to o continue as PM. So yes, the UK electorate as a whole has the power to kick out the PM (even if he / she wins his / her own constituency).

The voters of Europe have no such power when it comes to the President of the European Commission.

Keep you can't really expect to be taken seriously if you are airbrushing Jim Sillars from the SNP. Are you very young or a recent very ill informed convert?

Neither is Sir Jeremy Heywood.

As for the “open secret” of Juncker’s “alleged penchant for cognac for breakfast”, what of it? The same rumours circulated about Churchill.

The elected Westminster elite is absolutely riddled with sex scandal. Boris Johnson signed an NDA with one of his aides - that is highly incriminating. Jacob Rees-Mogg is a religious extremist who believes that women who are pregnant as a result of rape should have to carry their rapist’s child to term. Jeremy Corbyn and his friends in Momentum are repeatedly being accused of antisemitism.

Any of these people could be our next prime minister.

Hundreds of MPs are known to have fiddled their expense claims. It is widely believed that some MPs have either participated in or helped to cover up wide scale child abuse.

“Likes a drink” is a long way down the list of things to worry about, IMO.

“In the UK, a sitting PM who has failed to win more seats than another party would not be able to o continue as PM.”

The PM doesn’t win the seats...

"Jim Sillars campaigned with Leave EU. He supports fracking in Scotland and is a climate-change denier. He was depute leader of the SNP for a grand total of 1 year (1991-92), yet is given prominence as a pro-Brexit 'former SNP depute'. He's also campaigned for Rise (a different political party), and is regularly quoted by UKIP and the Tories. The fact that Francine quotes him tells me everything I need to know."

I'm a 47 year old who has voted SNP since I started voting and I agree with everything Keeptrudging says here. it's all true.

There is such a thing as distortion by omission Calyx. Jim Sillars and his deceased wife are hardly 1 year footnotes in the history of the SNP.

howabout I am old enough to remember the old Jim Sillars. I am old enough to have marched in the first referendum march (as a child). Parties evolve and change. I can look back at the history and respect those who were there in its early days, but that doesn't make them right forever. At no point have I claimed he is a footnote, however his views are discordant, and at times bizarre.

Francine, I think there was a lot of disquiet about Junker's elevation from several quarters including the open secret of his alleged penchant for cognac for breakfast. But the powers that be decided he was to be their man. So it happened.

European Commission president – Jean-Claude Juncker. Appointed by: national leaders (heads of state or government of EU countries), with the approval of the European Parliament.

Hmm. Appointed by the elected national leaders and the elected MEP's of the European Parliament. You're probably right in the democratic deficit. After all 20 something Kipppers are elected to the European Parliament. After people who can't be arsed to vote, below that is people who vote through their arses.

Forgive my Franglais.

And does that apply to Alex Neil as well Keep? Not quite sure how Ayrshire managed to produce NS given the discordant voices abounding.

Ah no, people who on principle don't believe in the EU so don't vote. Yet to the rest of us it looks exactly like can't be arsed.

I have yet to have a positive response from the Leave voters who go on about Juncker, (who will be gone fairly soon anyway), as to whether they vote in the European Elections. Not doing so, on principle has lumbered us with the likes of Farage.

Harold Wilson also formed a minority Government for a while without either confidence and supply or a coalition. He then went on to call another election smartish and won a slender majority, but he still clung on for a couple of years. He then departed suddenly, but I believe it was later revealed that this was because he knew he was getting dementia.

Harold Wilson still had more MPs than any other party.

tabulahrasa
The PM doesn’t win the seats
Correct. I apologise.
The PM is usually (but not always) the leader of the parliamentary party with the most seats in parliament. He / she is invited by the Queen to form an administration of government if he /she is able to win the confidence of the house. Brussels is a city in Belgium. It wrong to use Brussels synonymously with the various commissions, councils, officers and other administrative bodies of the European Union. The European Union is a supranational body of sovereign states. I did not know Remainera were so pedantic. But I like it.

“The PM is usually (but not always) the leader of the parliamentary party with the most seats in parliament.”

Yes but they are not directly elected as PM and their party having most seats may or may not be a reflection on them being leader.

But you know that, you’re just insisting it’s more democratic... but, it’s so similar that it’s badically your opinion.

They’re both undemocratic.

I think it would still be theoretically possible for a PM who didn't have more MPs than any other party, to still try to continue. If Theresa May hadn't been able to stitch up her confidence and supply agreement with the DUP there was discussion as to whether Corbyn could have a go at forming a Govt. Had that happened, you would have a PM with fewer seats than another party. I agree that in this case the PM would not have continued.

But the electorate wouldn't have kicked out the PM, they would have kicked out the party. The PM would be collateral damage as it were. This is so theoretical, almost certainly another GE would have been called - which might of course produce another stalemate.