When will indyref2 happen?

[Ad Lib]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

That all depends on how messy the UK's divorce is from the EU, or if it happens at all, which is entirely unknown.

Even if it doesn't happen a lot has already changed.

If a Brexit happens it won't be neat.

If a Brexit doesn't happen Scotland isn't getting another referendum.

[welshbairn]

40 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

Even if it doesn't happen a lot has already changed.

If a Brexit happens it won't be neat.

If a Brexit doesn't happen Scotland isn't getting another referendum.

Uk law has already diverged from the acquis?

Maybe not, a lot of overtime for the Commons library.

That depends on how much a party needs the SNP vote to gain the confidence of the House. The old unionist certainties have gone out of the window.

P.S. The EU are good at finding creative solutions for willing parties, look at Liechtenstein. They'd likely find it refreshing to deal with Edinburgh after the red lines, changing demands and inability to agree on anything from London.

Edited June 10, 2019 by welshbairn

[Daydream]

Scotland has been part of a member state of the EU for over 40 years and unless there's been some covered up clandestine sweeping change to laws and legislation; legally, Scotland complies  with EU law and statute. 
Membership of the EU if an independent Scotland wished to join would be the most seamless and straightforward entry the supernational entity had ever seen. 

Do all new members need to use the Euro? Would we be classed as new?

[Tibbermoresaint]

8 minutes ago, Daydream said:

Do all new members need to use the Euro? Would we be classed as new?

No.

[Ad Lib]

7 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Uk law has already diverged from the acquis?

Yes. More than 600 statutory instruments have provided for changes to domestic law so as to diverge from the acquis if and when Article 50 expires and several pieces of primary legislation facilitate active policy divergence.

7 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Maybe not, a lot of overtime for the Commons library.

That depends on how much a party needs the SNP vote to gain the confidence of the House. The old unionist certainties have gone out of the window.

They won’t let it happen. If the SNP wants to bring down a Labour Government and let Dominic Raab in as Prime Minister that would be fatal to their electoral alliance.

7 hours ago, welshbairn said:

P.S. The EU are good at finding creative solutions for willing parties, look at Liechtenstein. They'd likely find it refreshing to deal with Edinburgh after the red lines, changing demands and inability to agree on anything from London.

Liechtenstein isn’t surrounded by states with massive red lines though. Even Switzerland accepts all the EU lines for no influence.

Scotland will be next to and dependent upon a neighbour screaming for divergence and special pleading.

[Tibbermoresaint]

27 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

 

Scotland will be next to and dependent upon a neighbour screaming for divergence and special pleading.

Dependent upon? Oh my. Feel the cringe.

A neighbour which is not in the EU and which is therefore of no relevance to the EU.

[tirso]

16 hours ago, strichener said:

You are (mostly) correct that we are not amending non-EU competent law however I disagree that it will be "simply a case of porting" as you have put it.  If you take the IPA 2016 as a more recent example, this specifically refers to the Police Act 1997, Northern Ireland Act 1998, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2016, Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, Social Security Fraud Act 2001, Social Security Fraud Act (Northern Ireland) 2001, Public Finance and Accountability (Scotland) Act 2000, Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Police Reform Act 2002, Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003, Audit and Accountability (Northern Ireland) Order 2003, Public Audit (Wales) Act 2004, Constitutional Reform Act 2005, Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005, Serious Crime Act 2007, Legal Services Act 2007, Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Act 2008, Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009, Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Act 2010 and at least a dozen more. 

Hardly any Acts that are passed exist in their own bubble and many repeal or re-word previous acts.  Moreover, the actual implementation of the Acts is frequently by secondary legislation such as SIs.  There will be no copying and pasting with a dose of Ctrl-H in Microsoft Word.  There is also a difference between passing laws and passing competent laws and I for one would rather the latter.  @Ad Lib has noted before some of the shit legislation that the country has passed (and this is not explicitly a Scottish or UK trait rather both have history in trying to do so)

I have no doubt that Scotland would, in the event of a Yes vote, be able to setup the necessary legal framework to allow membership of the EU.  It just won't be on the timescales previously mentioned for independence.

BTW. the aforementioned IPA 2016 was found to be incomaptible with EU Law (specifically GDPR) hence why I used the (mostly) qualifier at the beginning of the post.

Sorry but I don't agree.  If they are competent now they are competent within their own large bubble.

If they're not, they aren't competent or unused.

In any case, it's still simply a matter of drafting rather than actual material issue.  You've listed a lot of subsidiary legislation for affect but it's still drafting.  Happy to be persuaded otherwise.  It's easier to say, it won't be a copy and paste job.  Okay, what will the actions actually be then?  

Edited June 11, 2019 by tirso

[strichener]

31 minutes ago, tirso said:

Sorry but I don't agree.  If they are competent now they are competent within their own large bubble.

If they're not, they aren't competent or unused.

In any case, it's still simply a matter of drafting rather than actual material issue.  You've listed a lot of subsidiary legislation for affect but it's still drafting.  Happy to be persuaded otherwise.  It's easier to say, it won't be a copy and paste job.  Okay, what will the actions actually be then?  

All laws are a matter of drafting, not all are simple.

[tirso]

2 minutes ago, strichener said:

All laws are a matter of drafting, not all are simple.

no.  come on now.  All laws are a matter of intention and then drafting.

I think you have dodged what the actions would be.  Unless, it really is, simply the drafting.

Edited June 11, 2019 by tirso

[Tibbermoresaint]

5 minutes ago, strichener said:

All laws are a matter of drafting, not all are simple.

I'm no expert but when you're simply translating existing legislation it can't be that difficult.

[Moonglum25]

11 hours ago, Kuro said:

There are 5.4 million EU citizens in Scotland, who have voted overwhelmingly to remain EU citizens and who the EU want to remain EU citizens.  Show me one comparable example from history and I'll accept you're not a trolling fuckwit.  Since we both know you can't, hows about cutting to the chase and hauding your wheesht.

Want to spin this again and where do you get 5.4 million who are entitled to vote.

Scotland Region total

Remain: 1,661,191

Leave: 1,018,322

Electorate: 3,987,112

Verified Ballot Papers: 2,681,179

Turnout: 67.2%

Ballot Papers Counted : 2,681,179

Valid Votes: 2,679,513

Rejected Ballots: 1,666

So just over 1.3 million or 32% did not vote but you are right that was "Overwhelmingly to remain"

[strichener]

28 minutes ago, Tibbermoresaint said:

I'm no expert but when you're simply translating existing legislation it can't be that difficult.

Lets look at the UK implementation of GDPR which for all intents and purposes was translating an EU directive into UK Law, only it wasn't as it also touches on areas outside of the EU competence such as National Security.  So what should have been a simple matter took 8 1/2 months of parliamentary time plus however long to draft.  In the process, as I have already mentioned, it's introduction then led to the IPA 2016 being incompatible with the DPA 2018 which resulted in a court ordering the government to change the law.  Simples.

[tirso]

Lets look at the UK implementation of GDPR which for all intents and purposes was translating an EU directive into UK Law, only it wasn't as it also touches on areas outside of the EU competence such as National Security.  So what should have been a simple matter took 8 1/2 months of parliamentary time plus however long to draft.  In the process, as I have already mentioned, it's introduction then led to the IPA 2016 being incompatible with the DPA 2018 which resulted in a court ordering the government to change the law.  Simples.

Was GDPR existing legislation or were they implementing it?

[Tibbermoresaint]

6 minutes ago, strichener said:

Lets look at the UK implementation of GDPR which for all intents and purposes was translating an EU directive into UK Law, only it wasn't as it also touches on areas outside of the EU competence such as National Security.  So what should have been a simple matter took 8 1/2 months of parliamentary time plus however long to draft.  In the process, as I have already mentioned, it's introduction then led to the IPA 2016 being incompatible with the DPA 2018 which resulted in a court ordering the government to change the law.  Simples.

So translating a law which already applies to Scotland into Scots Law should take minutes. 

Edited June 11, 2019 by Tibbermoresaint
Tense

[John Lambies Doos]

Strichener, boring everyone to submission here..

[NotThePars]

Strichener, boring everyone to submission here..

The strategy at large for Better Together tbf.

[strichener]

4 hours ago, tirso said:

4 hours ago, strichener said:

Lets look at the UK implementation of GDPR which for all intents and purposes was translating an EU directive into UK Law, only it wasn't as it also touches on areas outside of the EU competence such as National Security.  So what should have been a simple matter took 8 1/2 months of parliamentary time plus however long to draft.  In the process, as I have already mentioned, it's introduction then led to the IPA 2016 being incompatible with the DPA 2018 which resulted in a court ordering the government to change the law.  Simples.

Was GDPR existing legislation or were they implementing it?

The DPA was existing, the GDPR directive from the EU was a replacement for the European Data Protection Directive.  I am not sure of the relevance of the question as the point isthat a piece of legislation that existed (GDPR Directive) had to be written into national (UK) Law and to do so took 8 1/2 months of legislative time.  The same requirement will be on Scotland since this is not currently a devolved area.  Of course we could just mirror the existing UK framework and set up an ICO, information commissioner etc. but we will still need to pass legislation to do it.

Every time the Scottish Government complain about not having the power to do something then in the event of independence this will require legislation to be drawn up.  Given the frequency of such complaints, the task should not be under estimated.

[Tibbermoresaint]

4 minutes ago, strichener said:

The DPA was existing, the GDPR directive from the EU was a replacement for the European Data Protection Directive.  I am not sure of the relevance of the question as the point isthat a piece of legislation that existed (GDPR Directive) had to be written into national (UK) Law and to do so took 8 1/2 months of legislative time.  The same requirement will be on Scotland since this is not currently a devolved area.  Of course we could just mirror the existing UK framework and set up an ICO, information commissioner etc. but we will still need to pass legislation to do it.

Every time the Scottish Government complain about not having the power to do something then in the event of independence this will require legislation to be drawn up.  Given the frequency of such complaints, the task should not be under estimated.

Scotland already has an Information Commissioner.

http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/home/AboutSIC/AboutCommissioner.aspx

I agree that the task should not be underestimated. But it should not be overestimated either.

[strichener]

37 minutes ago, Tibbermoresaint said:

Scotland already has an Information Commissioner.

http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/home/AboutSIC/AboutCommissioner.aspx

I agree that the task should not be underestimated. But it should not be overestimated either.

The title is the same but the function is not.  http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/FAQ/GeneralFAQ/SIC_FAQ.aspx#difference

 

[welshbairn]

3 minutes ago, strichener said:

The title is the same but the function is not.  http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/FAQ/GeneralFAQ/SIC_FAQ.aspx#difference

 

Shit, that's blown indy, they'll have to change his job description. Damn.