Clarification (again): "Scottish" is friendly forum banter. It is not meant to offend. It is not a racial slur. I have no control over how people receive my words nor honestly, do I want it. Forum tools allow you to blot out my words but they do not allow you to control my thoughts. If I wanted to be offensive, it wouldn't be just one or two people calling me out, it would be everyone. Trust me. I will continue to enjoy the company of Scots who I meet in real life and I will continue to use term the term "Scottish", affectionately, on the forum, for as long as I want. And I will do it with a clean conscience, too. We all have to deal with people who make us want to grit our teeth - taking it all personally though, is not very constructive or helpful to a happy life. I doubt we have more than a handful of real racists on this forum. Culturalists though … we have loads of those here. Of all stripes. I do not consider being culturalist a necessarily bad thing - it is arguably essential, under some circumstances. We could probably discuss this further but I see no good coming from it - so I'll drop that now : o )
Que??? Signed mutual recognition agreements The UK has signed mutual recognition agreements with: Australia New Zealand United States
this is the bit, our esteemed political annalist would point out. . The UK has signed continuity trade agreements with non-EU countries so that trade can continue with minimal disruption after the UK leaves the EU. These countries account for 63% of trade currently covered by EU agreements for which the UK is seeking continuity. The agreements have replicated the EU trade agreements as far as possible. However, there may be some changes to ensure that new agreements work for both countries. . i think we have a fair inclination of what the the usa would like to see in way of "some changes". our food and drink sector is booming. they want to sell us substandard grub and want licenses to produce, Scottish whiskey. they are wanting access to our health care services, the SNHS is just that, devolved, which means the uk gov will need to "take back control" in that area as well. brexit really isn't compatible with devolution. in fact, i have read plenty over the years suggesting devolution came about because of legislation within the EU. for many of us when the phrase "taking back control" was first muted, we knew exactly who they intended taking back control from. over the last 12 years, devolution in scotland, (with 9% of the population and 33% of the uk's wealth) has shone a big fugging light on the incompetence, or is it arrogance? selfishness? malign greed? feck knows what, of those in power in the uk that are feart of losing it.
or, as 63% of tory members want brexit over the union, than would mean their thinking, hopit Scottish. i'm cool with that
