EU in/out Referendum - 23 June 2016

[dorlomin]

Project Fear isn't wasting any time.

Iain Duncan Smith: UK risks Paris-style attacks by staying in the EU

Uh huh.

[Ad Lib]

Rather than tell us which situations aren't analogous to a Scottish secession, it would be beneficial to actually provide examples that are analogous. Let's start by finding a country that was 1/2 of the landmass and 1/10 of the population of another country where both these countries agreed to become a new state over 300 years ago and then through a referendum granted to the historically seperate state, the new state was broken up again.

Which cases in International Law would be the precedent for this or do you agree with the expert opinion that it really doesn't matter a f**k and politics and not legal opinion will prevail.

Precise fractions of landmass and population are legally irrelevant to the operation of international law in this area, as is the amount of time ago that the state was formed and the identity of the parties that existed prior to that state coming into existence.

The relevant factors in respect of which precedent operates is in who seeks to be recognised as the same state and which states are and have in fact been recognised when that was uncontested or not reasonably contested.

[Ad Lib]

Project Fear isn't wasting any time. Vote to stay because Russia's gonnae get ye. The article features quite an intimidating picture of Vlad just in case we've forgotten how scary he is.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12167570/Military-leaders-to-warn-against-a-Brexit.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

The Daily Telegraph is part of a conspiracy to keep us in the European Union. Good one.

[dorlomin]

Yeah, it's nowhere near as simple as stay and Boris is fucked.

He will still have the backing of grass roots Tories and local branches.

It's a no lose for him IMO.

If there is a no vote then May and Osborne will paint him as a delivering policies only popular inside the tory party, of being too prone to wheezes and populist bandwagons. "You are Conservative to make hard choices not just popular ones, too reach to the whole country not just a dialogue with ourselves. Chose those who will engage with all of Britain and not just be a Conservative Corbyn."

[dorlomin]

So the current plan is that an independent Scotland will be a new country but keep its European history.

[invergowrie arab]

Precise fractions of landmass and population are legally irrelevant to the operation of international law in this area, as is the amount of time ago that the state was formed and the identity of the parties that existed prior to that state coming into existence.

The relevant factors in respect of which precedent operates is in who seeks to be recognised as the same state and which states are and have in fact been recognised when that was uncontested or not reasonably contested.

In the case of the dissolution of the Soviet Union population and land mass were cited as supporting factors in Russia's claim to be the continuing state.

In the case of Yugoslavia the fact that the majority of the population no longer resided in the state controlled by Belgrade was a key objection from the breakaway republics to Serbia and Montenegro's claim that they were the continuing state which eventually resulted in the Badinter Arbitration Committee ruling that the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had been dissolved.

They are certainly not deciding factors but have had a relevance in past examples.

[Ad Lib]

In the case of the dissolution of the Soviet Union population and land mass were cited as supporting factors in Russia's claim to be the continuing state.

Yes, I know, which is why I said "precise fractions" and not those as general considerations.

In the case of Yugoslavia the fact that the majority of the population no longer resided in the state controlled by Belgrade was a key objection from the breakaway republics to Serbia and Montenegro's claim that they were the continuing state which eventually resulted in the Badinter Arbitration Committee ruling that the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had been dissolved.

They are certainly not deciding factors but have had a relevance in past examples.

Of course they have an influence. My point was that quoting that we have half the landmass and 1/10th of the population doesn't render the other precedents not valid ones. The salient fact is that taking those considerations into account as it applies to the Scottish situation makes it more, not less, likely that the rUK will seek to be and will be recognised as, the contiguous legal entity.

If England were to secede from the UK the question of population would be analogous to Yugoslavia. This would cause problems if the rump attempted to claim continuing statehood.

Similarly, attempting to use Czechoslovakia on the basis of fairly equal landmass as evidence that no one can claim continuing statehood is rum because it was an explicit decision of the two states not to claim it, and in any case had the Czech Republic sought it they would probably have got it.

The other precedents of similar situations, including the Sudanese but also to a lesser extent the Serbian, Ethiopian, Chinese and USSR secessions would support the norm in international law that rUK would and ought to be recognised as the continuing state by international treaty-based organisations, thus would retain its position in the UN Security Council, NATO, the EU, the Council of Europe and the WTO, whereas Scotland would have to negotiate membership of those organisations either through their normal membership routes or by getting the necessary consent of all the relevant parties to be fast-tracked into those organisations.

Scotland stands to gain nothing out of objecting to the continuing status being granted to the rUK. If anything, any objections on its part would serve to slow down and undermine the negotiations it would be attempting to undertake to secure its place in the international community. The nuclear option that rUK has is to refuse to legislate for independence unless the interim government of a soon-to-be independent Scotland undertakes to support those efforts if challenged in the international arena. The secessionist movement would then have a dilemma whether to make a unilateral declaration of independence, facing the wrath of the UK and its allies on the international stage and a European Union that would not recognise the existence of the new state and in respect of which the UK would still have a veto on it joining. It would be a diplomatic disaster and be completely contrary to the aims of a newly independent Scotland.

Which is why the norms of international law would be respected, and Scotland would have to make reasonable efforts and go through the reasonable processes to negotiate their way into the European Union in the event of secession, and why no one can "guarantee" equally good terms of membership as those the UK has just now.

Which was my original point.

[mjw]

So the current plan is that an independent Scotland will be a new country but keep its European history.

Is that the country or the company that runs the country though?

[stonedsailor]

I am thinking of voting out for one selfish reason. The European Seafarers Convention earlier this year totally ruled out any chance of a European version of the Jones act. With less than 8000 registered British seafarers from what was once the biggest fleet in the world, supplying an island nation totally reliant on the sea, I think it's time to start looking after ourselves again.

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

This is what the Remain campaign is up against. Should be a shoo-in

[stonedsailor]

steuges.png

This is what the Remain campaign is up against. Should be a shoo-in

[RedRob72]

Thought Johnson was generally pro-EU? Don't think he's doing himself any favours if he thinks it's a tactical decision to best place his own future career aspirations. Think the British public will remember that when the time comes. If it really is an honest conviction, would be interested to see what's really changed his mind. You'd think as Lord Mayor of London, he would appreciate more than anyone the number of jobs reliant on the EU there, and what sort of signal it gives to our European trading partners to clearly demonstrate that 'we have no confidence in you'!!?

[doulikefish]

I am thinking of voting out for one selfish reason. The European Seafarers Convention earlier this year totally ruled out any chance of a European version of the Jones act. With less than 8000 registered British seafarers from what was once the biggest fleet in the world, supplying an island nation totally reliant on the sea, I think it's time to start looking after ourselves again.

Im doingthis from memory

The jones act is an american law that covers seaman from any injuries at sea

The eu give you the same right as any onshore employee

Whats the problem?

[HTG]

Thought Johnson was generally pro-EU? Don't think he's doing himself any favours if he thinks it's a tactical decision to best place his own future career aspirations. Think the British public will remember that when the time comes. If it really is an honest conviction, would be interested to see what's really changed his mind. You'd think as Lord Mayor of London, he would appreciate more than anyone the number of jobs reliant on the EU there, and what sort of signal it gives to our European trading partners to clearly demonstrate that 'we have no confidence in you'!!?

I think that as Lord Mayor of London he is of the view that it's now a global hub and will move on serenely whether within an EU block or not. He's probably right. London will very quickly adjust and the private sector - particularly finance and banking - won't give a hoot about it. And the EU countries together with those industries who have a global outlook will trade through London and offer the sort of shared economic platform Boris is on about. Other areas of the country however may struggle badly.

[Fide]

[Jacksgranda]

I was just going to put a £500 note in a card. I know it's a bit impersonal but I'm not sure what to get you.

Granny's giving that from all of us, by the way.

[Jacksgranda]

Fair enough. But his motto is the world his my country, red is my flag. Goes completely against his previous principles

When did George Galloway have these?

[stonedsailor]

Im doingthis from memory

The jones act is an american law that covers seaman from any injuries at sea

The eu give you the same right as any onshore employee

Whats the problem?

The Jones act states that all cabotage in American waters should be by US citizens on US owned and built vessels.

There is legislation in there about safety too.

You googled it and saw this, not memory at all.

[stonedsailor]

Im doingthis from memory

The jones act is an american law that covers seaman from any injuries at sea

The eu give you the same right as any onshore employee

Whats the problem?

As for your point about onshore workers, our lives and safety are protected by the SOLAS convention, nothing to do with any rights the EU afford us.

[welshbairn]

I am thinking of voting out for one selfish reason. The European Seafarers Convention earlier this year totally ruled out any chance of a European version of the Jones act. With less than 8000 registered British seafarers from what was once the biggest fleet in the world, supplying an island nation totally reliant on the sea, I think it's time to start looking after ourselves again.

What makes you think the British Goverment would do any more than the EU to protect British seamen? They're more interested in keeping transport costs down for UK industry as a whole.