Can King Charles repair Johnson's Disunited Kingdom?

[Pat ex]

I disagree about Scotland, it wants independence not a republic. That would have to be a new different discussion. And if it retained the Pound Sterling, it may have no choice but to retain Charles III as monarch.
For sure NI, if united with Ireland, may not seek to retain Charles III as the monarch.

I see Angus Robertson, the current Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, (SNP) addressed this very point on the news last night.
He specifically said that independence and King Charles III as monarch of Scotland were entirely separate issues. He also went on to say that the Royals have a long and deep connection to Scotland, and, in his opinion, the Scots would retain the monarch as monarch of Scotland also.

 

[Deleted member 174758]

As said several times but generally ignored

Animal welfare standards ??

We always had the option when in the EU to have higher standards than the rest of the EU, because the EU only ever sets the MINIMUM acceptable standards. On bith animal welfare and electrical safety we had/have national standards which are higher than the EU mandated minimum. So leaving the EU gave us ZERO advantage that we didn't already have. Another Brexer untruth methinks

As to live exports, this area exports sheep to the EU, although my understanding is that a proportion are transited onwards to Islamic countries as they insist on slaughter in a non-kafir country. The RSPCA was indeed in the
vanguard of trying to limit this trade on the grounds of animal welfare, and was also heavily involved in trying to improve EU minimum standards, but to say that the EU made it mandatory to live export is utter piffle published by the mainstream media (i.e the Mail and Express). It was PERMITTED not MANDATED. Some difference

Personally I am opposed to transporting livestock great distances - it is distressing to the animals, and from a commercial point of view it diminishes the quality if the meat, so there are good grounds to prevent it. But as we are no longer in the EU our ability to persuade others to follow our lead is very much diminished.

 

[Justin Passing]

It seems some on here "regularly compose their posts by chucking a bag of scrabble tiles onto a Ouija board to summon the spirit of Alf Garnett".

The spirit of Alf Garnett....

Remember him standing up in the bath to salute, on hearing the National Anthem?

 

[Pat ex]

Another Brexer untruth methinks

Along with the notion that only live animals are exported for slaughter, as transam originally claimed.

The EU insisted that live animals had to be exported for slaughter

Well there's no point exporting dead animals for slaughter.

 

[Pat ex]

In reality, Scotland has to choose to do one of the following:

. Introduce it's own floating currency - the only option that gives independence
. Introduce it's own currency but peg it to GBP
. Keep using GBP

If they have any sense at all they will, if they get the choice, opt for the first option.

It rather depends on how much independence is wanted/ negotiated.
Independence isn't a black and white issue, there's shades of grey.
Rather like BREXIT.

 

[wellyfish]

It rather depends on how much independence is wanted/ negotiated.
Independence isn't a black and white issue, there's shades of grey.
Rather like BREXIT.

Either Scots want to stay in the UK or they want independence from the UK. It's as black and white as that.
If they vote for independence from the UK and keep using Sterling then the whole thing has been utterly pointless.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

I will be extremely disappointed if a second referendum is held and leave wins. I see absolutely no (zero) value in breaking us away from the UK, union, whatever you want to call it. And if it does come to pass, it'll still mean anywhere between 40-49% of those who voted didn't want to leave. Yes, of course that will mean a majority did want to leave, however not a significant majority.

Yep, tear us away from the UK to be 'independent', then start talks to rejoin the EU ...

 

[Deleted member 174758]

And if it does come to pass, it'll still mean anywhere between 40-49% of those who voted didn't want to leave. Yes, of course that will mean a majority did want to leave, however not a significant majority.

Have you ever had that feeling of deja vu?

 

[Pat ex]

Either Scots want to stay in the UK or they want independence from the UK. It's as black and white as that.
If they vote for independence from the UK and keep using Sterling then the whole thing has been utterly pointless.

I disagree, Brexit is not, and was not a black and white issue. neither is Scottish independence, There's a whole array of shades.

 

[just pumps]

Have you ever had that feeling of deja vu?

Yep, with about one thread in every four on this forum.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

Either Scots want to stay in the UK or they want independence from the UK. It's as black and white as that.
If they vote for independence from the UK and keep using Sterling then the whole thing has been utterly pointless.

We're not one homogenous group all wanting the same thing

 

[wellyfish]

We're not one homogenous group all wanting the same thing

I agree with you, there's plenty of diversity in any group.

However, in the end it will probably come down to choosing one of two options in a referendum.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I will be extremely disappointed if a second referendum is held and leave wins. I see absolutely no (zero) value in breaking us away from the UK, union, whatever you want to call it. And if it does come to pass, it'll still mean anywhere between 40-49% of those who voted didn't want to leave. Yes, of course that will mean a majority did want to leave, however not a significant majority.

Yep, tear us away from the UK to be 'independent', then start talks to rejoin the EU ...

As I see it, Scotland has as much right to decide its future as we did with Brexit. If they want a vote every 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 years or even a vote every 10 years isn't really relevant, if it is what they want.

And a mixed result ( a very slight majority) is sufficient in either direction. I think it is a shame to even consider the breakup of the union, but that was always likely after the referendum we had, as was voiced at the time. I don't think it is right for England to decide Scotlands future though.

 

[Deleted member 174758]

And there was me thinking this thread was about King Charles and I find myself back at night school. I think my eyes have glazed over...

 

[diy_fun_uk]

As I see it, Scotland has as much right to decide its future as we did with Brexit. If they want a vote every 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 years or even a vote every 10 years isn't really relevant, if it is what they want.

And a mixed result ( a very slight majority) is sufficient in either direction. I think it is a shame to even consider the breakup of the union, but that was always likely after the referendum we had, as was voiced at the time. I don't think it is right for England to decide Scotlands future though.

Of course it's relevant, it's very relevant. People want stability in their personal life, business wants stability. The SNP weren't stupid when they latched on to the mantra of 'whenever there's a material change, we should have the right to determine our future ...' the way the world is these days, it could be argued there are 'material changes' every few years. In my view that shouldn't mean additional referendums at the drop of a hat.

And consider this, let's say we have the referendum and leave win. Then, 5-10 years down the line things are worse in Scotland and there's a 'material change.' I wonder how supportive the SNP would be to holding another referendum to see if folk wanted to rejoin the union? Surely that would only be fair?

Or ... MMmmm ... I wonder if the tact would then change to 'we need to give independence a generation or more to bed in ...'