Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Re: #60947


Can you name a few with figs Haystack?

Sturgeon warns of second referendum over EU exit


11:50 Tuesday 02 June 2015


126 comments



Have your say


A VOTE to take the UK out of the European Union (EU) could result in a “clamour” for another referendum on Scottish independence, according to the First Minister.

Nicola Sturgeon said that if Scotland was taken out of the EU against its will in the in/out referendum on membership it would create a “groundswell of anger”.

“ I believe that the groundswell of anger amongst many ordinary people in Scotland under these circumstances could produce a clamour for another independence referendum
Nicola Sturgeon

She used her first Brussels speech as First Minister to renew calls for a “double majority” to ensure that all four UK nations back withdrawal from the EU before it can take place.





The SNP leader said: “I previously stated my view that if Scotland were to be taken out of Europe despite voting as a nation to have remained, it would provoke a strong backlash amongst many ordinary voters.


“Quite what the result of that would be no-one can perceive but I’ve stated before that this could be one scenario producing the kind of material change in circumstances that would precipitate popular demand for a second independence referendum.

“Bluntly, I believe that the groundswell of anger amongst many ordinary people in Scotland under these circumstances could produce a clamour for another independence referendum that may well be unstoppable.

“Of course it is open to the UK Government to stop that happening, to guard against that scenario by agreeing to the double majority provision.”

Prime Minister David Cameron embarked on a tour of European capitals last week in an effort to drum up support for the reform of Britain’s relationship with the EU he hopes to secure before the referendum promised by the end of 2017.


In her address to the European Policy Centre, Ms Sturgeon reiterated her Government’s “unequivocal” support for the UK remaining in the EU and argued that “sensible proposals” for reform could be achieved without the need for treaty change.

With a legal challenge against Scottish Government plans for a minimum price for alcohol currently making its way through the European courts, she called for member states to be given autonomy in key areas such as public health policy, and for the development of a single EU market in energy and digital services.

The Scottish Government also wants more localised discretion in implementing regulations to make EU policies “more proportionate and less burdensome”, pointing to changes made to the Common Fisheries Policy last year.

comments

If UK votes to leave EU then why not have a 2nd ref for Indy . Scotland can go Indy and rejoin the EU and have all the benefits they want. U.S. Down south want Barnett money stopped and go for growth. The professionals and businesses of Scotland can come south. The SNP mob left in Scotland can be bailed out like Greece

Does that mean that is Scotland votes Yes to exit the EU and the rest of the UK votes No then Ms. Sturgeon will demand a second referendum with a view to keeping an independent Scotland out of the EU?

In the light of recent developments with the SNP stating that they want FFA (retaining Barnett subsidy of circa £10bn per year for as long as they can stretch that out if at all) and the Tories now proposing that Scotland be granted FFA (the real version without Barnett subsidy) here's a thought!

Would there be an appetite amongst NO (for Independence) voters to use something like CROWDFUNDING to raise sufficient funds to mount a legal action against the SNP and it's "Leaders" and "Officebearers" for seeking to "mislead, deceive and lie to The Scottish People regarding FFA and/or Independence for Scotland by "implying" or "suggesting" that either FFA or Independence was ECONOMICALLY VIABLE for Scotland AND The Scottish People"?

This kind of ACTION might just focus the minds of ALL The Scottish People AND the SNP "Leaders", "Officebearers" and cult followers that either FFA (without Barnett subsidy) OR Independence for Scotland IS NOT THE WILL OF THE SCOTTISH PEOPLE?

Interested to hear the thoughts of other rationally thinking Scots on these thoughts.

Any deflection (irrational or just plain stupid) from the topic or racist comments or inane non topic drivel will confirm that the posters of such haven't a clue about the points raised or the huge constitutional & economic changes to The Scottish People that either FFA (without Barnett subsidy) OR Independence for Scotland would bring to The Scottish People!

When did this beauty and stature challenged lady get the authority to speak for " the people of Scotland " ? She speaks only and I stress only, for the SNP and their supporters, who in no sense of the word are a majority in Scotland. At least the Tory government has the good grace and democratic principles to allow the people of the UK to decide , in a referendum, whether they wish to remain as members of the EU or not. In case the lowlife of the SNP are unaware of the fact, Scotland is and always will be part of the UK and has the same right to vote on this matter as the rest of the UK. If the dictatorial mindset of the SNP cannot handle the thought of democracy, then they are , as often suggested a threat to the people of Scotland.

This is downright undemocratic for our First Minister to threaten those of us who wish to leave the EU with another referendum on independence. Scots said NO, and that means they remain British, and therefore subject to the democratically arrived decisions taken by Westminster and the British people as a whole.The SNP form only a tiny part of the overall national electorate (UKIP got almost three times the popular vote), and therefore must not dictate to he rest of us. You lost the referendum; accept the verdict of the people, and pretend that you are real democrats!

I used to do financial modelling in the Treasury department of ICI and they were operating in virtually every country in the world. In 2006 they had turnover of £4.6bn. Almost all that turnover was done abroad. Just think of every large UK company, including all the banks who do business worldwide.

If you want to change the way you tax foreign companies doing business here then you need worldwide agreement. The net result will be tax paid in the countries that business is done in instead of the home country. That will probably net out to the same amount for each country as now.

I'll ask again, cos I don't think you read it right!


£5.3bn sales from British internet shoppers = £11mil in tax...and you think that's ok?

Yes. They do exactly what our companies do when trading abroad. They are fulfilling their legal obligations. There is no moral association with paying or not paying taxes. It is about legal requirements. If you don't like it then change the law and make them pay their taxes here. Then other countries will retaliate and they will tax our companies.

You are wilfully disregarding the questions, your position seems to be that there is no answer.

I suspect the real answer is, there is no will to anser the answer.

across the world, more and more countries impose withholding tax on any transaction with an overseas company...... in saudi it's 10%, and colombia (or some other south american country) charges a whopping 34%

where there is a tax treaty, this money can eventually be reclaimd by the company so hit in its receipts ...... if there is no treaty, i'm pretty sure the withholding tax charged is forfeit

in any case, the result is that the country charging the withholding tax at the very least gets a considerable boost to its cashflow
so overall, not a bad second best to a complex method of trying to claim corporation tax on the turnover of where the business is transacted


i hope that makes some sense :-)

Watching the news yesterday Calais is now out of control ,something has to done .

What do you suggest?

As common sense seems to have no position in this affair.

Tough one Max , this has to be stopped though ,i'm all for us getting out of the EU .
I feel for Italy as well with all the thousands arriving on their beaches .
Maybe if we got out it would start the end of the union and we could have all the borders back up .

the only way to stop the flow is by passing a law in the uk anyone employing or housing illegal immigrants will be closed down lose their right to stay in the uk
and take all their money and sell their homes to pay the cost .
stop all charities from helping them .

stop giving money to charities they are the problem
the red cross assists murderers and rapists do not give them money

Yes.

It would be good to see England as a NO GO area.

I suppose all that you saw last night in Calais Fred you would give them a step ladder to get as many of them in the back of the trucks as possible ,then welcome them all in to the UK .

they are low life scum using knifes to fight and stab others
we do not want the scum
and their country do not want them because they no they are criminals and scum
round them up put them to sleep and drop them back in Africa

uk population up over 500.000 last year.

The NCA launched a major investigation into the scandal after a damning report by Professor Alex Jay last year, revealed that as many as 1,400 children had been raped, trafficked and groomed by mainly Asian gangs in the South Yorkshire town between 1997 and 2013.

it appears that posters like fred think this is ok
hang the scum

this bb shows that most posters on here do not care about children being raped and abused

The thoughts of chairman Fred