using the term scotchlanders on a sensitive issue isn't being a tit? just run of the mill, roll of the tongue stuff? . the uk gov campaigned on us being thrown out of the EU with little or no chance of getting back in. why does the result have to be respected but not the means to secure a vote? can you provide evidence of the snp campaigning for indi 2 after indi 1 and before the Brexit result? you cant. The Smith negations where going on well in to late 2015 to ensure we became the most powerful devolved Gov on the planet. in the end brittish labour blocked every power bar a percentage of controle over income tax, later the Secretary of state Mundell was caught calling it a trap. can you show me where indi was mentioned in the snp's 2015 GE manifesto? nothing was mentioned re indi 2 pre Brexit. yes it will I agree. unless or until you start being taken over and motivated by gobshites. like you.
Okay I'll ask in a basic way Did the snp implant a caveat into indi 1 that said they would accept the vote unless something changed? did they ever claim the 2016 brexit result was that very "something that had changed"? Was that the basis of the claim for indi 2?? If we remained in the eu, that as a reason for indi 2 would no longer be valid ?
salmond said he personally felt it was a once in a lifetime opportunity. but it wasn't for him to stop residents of Scotland electing any future Gov where independence was in their manifesto. a significant change in circumstances. such as, being taken out the EU against the wishes of Scotland. that would be the logical conclusion. but I guess significant changes could mean a few things.
John Mann appears to have done the right thing by himself and everyone else. He does not support the Labour party leader, and does not want the party in its current form to be in government. Therefore being a Labour MP is bad for all concerned. Here's an exerpt from a recent inerview: “I could not have stood at the next election and looked people in the eye and answered them the question they will ask an awful lot, ‘If I vote for you I’m also voting for Jeremy Corbyn to be prime minister’. “In the 2017 election, nobody thought Corbyn would be prime minister… so I was able to say ‘he’s not going to be prime minister’. “But I can’t do that this time and I’m not prepared to lie to my voters. And neither am I prepared to tell them that Corbyn is appropriate to be prime minister. Because I don’t think he is.” If Labour win the seat again, we will see whether the people have voted for him or the party.
Has he just described himself as a donkey? He presumably wore a Labour rosette when his family voted for him.
I find that hard to believe. Wouldn’t Farage have been publicising this? It certainly needs to be checked out though. There’s a huge amount of apparent disinformation from both sides with Brexit.
While researching that I found this in an analysis of the document - when I sell to Norway for instance the same restrictions due to vat apply as they do to the rest of the world - i.e. customers get tax and import duty added as we do when importing from the USA and elsewhere. Why when they are in the 'Trading Block'? Strange, when their borders are open - how do they manage cross border when the borders are open "The Schengen area is a group of 22 EU countries and four non-EU countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland) which don’t have internal border controls".
Here's the full document: https://fullfact.org/europe/viral-l...MIs8j635_D5AIVgbTtCh0LFw0bEAAYASAAEgLqU_D_BwE
I'm sure some may have noticed it Yesterday on Marr, John McDonell gave his visionary way of dealing with brexit. His groundbreaking way forward is to bring back May's deal which they voted against 3 times, get that passed, then go back to the eu to agree it. Would then bring it back to the people of the U.K. in a second referendum, that they themselves would vote against what they had just agreed with the eu
