NPR

Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:05 pm

Lobby wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 2:41 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 12:10 pm

"talking through the back of his neck"

Erasmus was a great scheme for European students, but the numbers of UK students that took advantage of it was very small. Only 15,000 UK students took part, at a cost of £200 MILLION a year, or about £13K for each for them. In return about 32,000 European students came here to study for free.

Yeah, but how many of those 32,000 stayed here, added to our research base etc. The universities viewed Erasmus as a recruitment tool to help the UK university infrastructure remain ahead of Europeans by recruiting their brightest and best. It worked.

And all that lovely cash. Cold, hard cash.

Lobby wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 2:41 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 12:10 pm

"talking through the back of his neck"

Erasmus was a great scheme for European students, but the numbers of UK students that took advantage of it was very small. Only 15,000 UK students took part, at a cost of £200 MILLION a year, or about £13K for each for them. In return about 32,000 European students came here to study for free.

Because it was impossible to get a place

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:31 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:05 pm

Lobby wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 2:41 pm

Erasmus was a great scheme for European students, but the numbers of UK students that took advantage of it was very small. Only 15,000 UK students took part, at a cost of £200 MILLION a year, or about £13K for each for them. In return about 32,000 European students came here to study for free.

Yeah, but how many of those 32,000 stayed here, added to our research base etc. The universities viewed Erasmus as a recruitment tool to help the UK university infrastructure remain ahead of Europeans by recruiting their brightest and best. It worked.

Does this not mean in that case that the unis will now have to work harder to attract the brightest and best without a state subsidy?

Yeah, it’ll be harder for them to attract talented young researchers.

Universities UK International (UUKI), the umbrella group representing higher education providers, said membership of Erasmus gave a bonus to the British economy worth £243m a year, after subtracting membership costs from the £420m generated by EU students visiting the UK under the programme.

If this is even remotely true , surely the whole "state subsidy " issue for UK is completely null and void

If the new Turing scheme ( world beating .No doubt ) will only cover the cots of UK students working abroad , with none of the associated benefits of what were foreign Erasmus Students coming to the UK ( Northern Ireland excepted )

Rinkals wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:57 pm

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:34 pm

Rinkals wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 10:21 am

Sorry, I took this as an endorsement.

Which is not an endorsement or otherwise of their business methods. Plenty to admire with the yanks, no mention of their business methods, not that a bright spark like you would see it.

I was under the impression that this thread was about Brexit. If you post expressing admiration for Americans on this thread, I don't think it's unreasonable to to surmise that you are not referring to their prowess on the football field.

But if you assure me that this admiration has nothing to do with the prospect of doing trade with the US on their terms then I will take your word for it.

I have plenty of admiration for the US and definitely the prospect of increasing trade with them is a positive but that does not equate to admiration or otherwise of their business methods.

You however are flailing around as usual as opposed to putting your hands up and admitting your wrong but you probably struggle to even see where you were wrong.

Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 9:44 pm

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:31 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:05 pm

Yeah, but how many of those 32,000 stayed here, added to our research base etc. The universities viewed Erasmus as a recruitment tool to help the UK university infrastructure remain ahead of Europeans by recruiting their brightest and best. It worked.

Does this not mean in that case that the unis will now have to work harder to attract the brightest and best without a state subsidy?

Yeah, it’ll be harder for them to attract talented young researchers.

Hopefully they will move to attract from the global pool. As you said earlier which I fully agree our top unis are ranked very favourably globally so that should be an attraction in itself.

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:01 am

Rinkals wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:57 pm

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:34 pm

Which is not an endorsement or otherwise of their business methods. Plenty to admire with the yanks, no mention of their business methods, not that a bright spark like you would see it.

I was under the impression that this thread was about Brexit. If you post expressing admiration for Americans on this thread, I don't think it's unreasonable to to surmise that you are not referring to their prowess on the football field.

But if you assure me that this admiration has nothing to do with the prospect of doing trade with the US on their terms then I will take your word for it.

I have plenty of admiration for the US and definitely the prospect of increasing trade with them is a positive but that does not equate to admiration or otherwise of their business methods.

You however are flailing around as usual as opposed to putting your hands up and admitting your wrong but you probably struggle to even see where you were wrong.

I fail to see why you are getting so worked up about this.

This is a thread covering Brexit and as business matters are a fundamental part of the ramifications of Brexit, I somehow surmised that your admiration of Americans extended to their business practices.

I merely expressed surprise at this and added my own experience which was when I was working in your neck of the woods.

I really wasn't expecting you to go ballistic on the matter.

meanwhile on the buy British FB group, confusion sets in.

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:04 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 9:44 pm

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:31 pm

Does this not mean in that case that the unis will now have to work harder to attract the brightest and best without a state subsidy?

Yeah, it’ll be harder for them to attract talented young researchers.

Hopefully they will move to attract from the global pool. As you said earlier which I fully agree our top unis are ranked very favourably globally so that should be an attraction in itself.

They already do that, and there was nothing in Erasmus to stop them from doing more. We’re limiting them by leaving Erasmus, not encouraging them to expand. It’s idiocy.

Folk moan about lack of opportunities to go and travel but it never stopped my cousin, prior to Erasmus. She finished her degree in Edinburgh in 1979 then travelled to Paris and go to the Sorbonne to continue her education, before becoming a teacher and later a proffesor de l’anglais.

Or my mates missus came from Denmark in 1991 to the UK to Uni and studied for her degree on a course where nationals of France, Belgium, Greece, Tunisia, Finland, Canada and many more countries studied. There really was a world of education and study before the EU came along.

It is called getting off ones backside and achieving your goals.

westport wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:44 am Folk moan about lack of opportunities to go and travel but it never stopped my cousin, prior to Erasmus. She finished her degree in Edinburgh in 1979 then travelled to Paris and go to the Sorbonne to continue her education, before becoming a teacher and later a proffesor de l’anglais.

Or my mates missus came from Denmark in 1991 to the UK to Uni and studied for her degree on a course where nationals of France, Belgium, Greece, Tunisia, Finland, Canada and many more countries studied. There really was a world of education and study before the EU came along.

It is called getting off ones backside and achieving your goals.

Don't let Nicola hear you say that. 1 of her tweets recently citied this as a reason for an independent Scotland

Most Brits don’t study abroad because they don’t want to and don’t speak the language. Nothing new or revolutionary here. Erasmus is getting people hot under the collar, but it really isn’t a big deal

westport wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:44 am Folk moan about lack of opportunities to go and travel but it never stopped my cousin, prior to Erasmus. She finished her degree in Edinburgh in 1979 then travelled to Paris and go to the Sorbonne to continue her education, before becoming a teacher and later a proffesor de l’anglais.

Or my mates missus came from Denmark in 1991 to the UK to Uni and studied for her degree on a course where nationals of France, Belgium, Greece, Tunisia, Finland, Canada and many more countries studied. There really was a world of education and study before the EU came along.

It is called getting off ones backside and achieving your goals.

I’m not making a point about individuals, I’m making the point about how you invest in the human capital of your research infrastructure. The Uk government has announced £100 million for uk students to study abroad - great, that means minds leaving our unis and going elsewhere. Universities make great efforts to retain their brightest PhD students; this is the future of their research departments. If we send lots of UK students overseas to study for post graduate study, many of them will stay, after getting their doctorate, as your cousin did. If we don’t have schemes to help get overseas students to come here, we will watch our universities slowly slide in international rankings, with the knock on effects for industry and innovation, and in turn the economy.

This was the key benefit of Erasmus, we were making sure our universities maintained their advantage, not that some kids got to study abroad. Now we’re replacing that by doing the opposite.

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:52 am Most Brits don’t study abroad because they don’t want to and don’t speak the language. Nothing new or revolutionary here. Erasmus is getting people hot under the collar, but it really isn’t a big deal

It might be that Johnson stood up in Parliament and said it was going nowhere, and lo and behold it was tossed aside faster than one of his paramours.

Biffer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:53 am

westport wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:44 am Folk moan about lack of opportunities to go and travel but it never stopped my cousin, prior to Erasmus. She finished her degree in Edinburgh in 1979 then travelled to Paris and go to the Sorbonne to continue her education, before becoming a teacher and later a proffesor de l’anglais.

Or my mates missus came from Denmark in 1991 to the UK to Uni and studied for her degree on a course where nationals of France, Belgium, Greece, Tunisia, Finland, Canada and many more countries studied. There really was a world of education and study before the EU came along.

It is called getting off ones backside and achieving your goals.

I’m not making a point about individuals, I’m making the point about how you invest in the human capital of your research infrastructure. The Uk government has announced £100 million for uk students to study abroad - great, that means minds leaving our unis and going elsewhere. Universities make great efforts to retain their brightest PhD students; this is the future of their research departments. If we send lots of UK students overseas to study for post graduate study, many of them will stay, after getting their doctorate, as your cousin did. If we don’t have schemes to help get overseas students to come here, we will watch our universities slowly slide in international rankings, with the knock on effects for industry and innovation, and in turn the economy.

This was the key benefit of Erasmus, we were making sure our universities maintained their advantage, not that some kids got to study abroad. Now we’re replacing that by doing the opposite.

I think you are getting confused. Erasmus provided opportunities for students to study abroad for between 3 and 12 months before returning to their home universities to complete their degrees. It’s not about people undertaking all their studies in another country, and then staying there. Similarly, this shouldn’t have any impact on European students undertaking MScs and PhDs here, which is what really has a positive impact on research. The biggest barrier to this will be the change in fee structures for these students, who will have to now pay overseas fees. This would still be the case whether or not we continue to participate in the Erasmus scheme.

Students will still be able to study for degrees abroad, and large numbers of foreign students will continue to study in the UK. It is this, and not Erasmus, which has benefitted the UK science base.

Edited to add: As we will continue to be part of the Horizon research programme, we should also be able to continue to recruit high quality RAs, Research Fellows and PhD students from across Europe onto these Europe-wide collaborative research projects. This is far more important to maintaining the UK's research excellence, than any student exchange scheme.

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:04 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 9:44 pm

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Sat Dec 26, 2020 3:31 pm

Does this not mean in that case that the unis will now have to work harder to attract the brightest and best without a state subsidy?

Yeah, it’ll be harder for them to attract talented young researchers.

Hopefully they will move to attract from the global pool. As you said earlier which I fully agree our top unis are ranked very favourably globally so that should be an attraction in itself.

We already attract huge huge numbers of international students and want that because of the cash they have. Universities can't get enough international students so won't make any difference there.

Realistically as UK universities are such big business don't think it'll be too damaging for Europeans coming here either. If the international students stop appearing the bubble pretty quickly bursts.

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:08 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:52 am Most Brits don’t study abroad because they don’t want to and don’t speak the language. Nothing new or revolutionary here. Erasmus is getting people hot under the collar, but it really isn’t a big deal

It might be that Johnson stood up in Parliament and said it was going nowhere, and lo and behold it was tossed aside faster than one of his paramours.

Why would that matter? Johnson's entire career is lying. Everyone knows that, few care.

I like neeps wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 1:46 pm

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 12:08 pm

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 10:52 am Most Brits don’t study abroad because they don’t want to and don’t speak the language. Nothing new or revolutionary here. Erasmus is getting people hot under the collar, but it really isn’t a big deal

It might be that Johnson stood up in Parliament and said it was going nowhere, and lo and behold it was tossed aside faster than one of his paramours.

Why would that matter? Johnson's entire career is lying. Everyone knows that, few care.

Our PM is a compulsive liar and nobody cares, well that certainly makes me feel better

Well the good news is Brits can travel in Europe for up to 3 months in every 6 without a visa

Oh.

Worth reading the thread this partnership can take legally binding decisions without even consulting the UK just informing they have...

I like neeps wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:58 pm

Oh.

Worth reading the thread this partnership can take legally binding decisions without even consulting the UK just informing they have...

But fish.....

Honestly, you all swallowed the punish the poor, sick and unemployed line the Tories put out there between 2008 and 20..indefinately.., christ even our newly resident, South Africans, who have everything to say about Brexit..were the biggest cheerleaders.
Their latent inhumanity towards their fellow man came right to the fore on these issues.

And then they weaponised peoples resentment this created towards Europe.
You were never going to have one without the other.
You follow Tory narratives down the rabbit hole and they all end the same way.
In the case of the war on the poor sick and unemployed it was 135 thousand deaths and millions forced to use foodbanks and millions more terrorised and then half the country voting to exit the EU.

A direct line.
It all started with the war on the poor.

I like neeps wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:58 pm

Oh.

Worth reading the thread this partnership can take legally binding decisions without even consulting the UK just informing they have...

more wasteful bollocks

Openside wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 11:12 pm

I like neeps wrote: ↑Sun Dec 27, 2020 3:58 pm

Oh.

Worth reading the thread this partnership can take legally binding decisions without even consulting the UK just informing they have...

more wasteful bollocks

Just the reality openside. No deal brexit was never a serious possibility and everyone was told there would be significant concessions as the UK had the weaker position. It wasn't listened to and here we are.

You can't run away from lies and falsehoods forever. Newspaper headlines aren't currency in technical trade negotiations.

Amusing to see the SNP tie themselves in knots over this. Voting against the deal implies voting for a no deal which they don’t want as any deal is better than a no deal

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:23 am Amusing to see the SNP tie themselves in knots over this. Voting against the deal implies voting for a no deal which they don’t want as any deal is better than a no deal

The logic is pretty clear, the deal will pass without the SNP hence the need for independence so our vote is going to be against the deal as a symbiotic anti-Brexit measure.

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:34 am

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:23 am Amusing to see the SNP tie themselves in knots over this. Voting against the deal implies voting for a no deal which they don’t want as any deal is better than a no deal

The logic is pretty clear, the deal will pass without the SNP hence the need for independence so our vote is going to be against the deal as a symbiotic anti-Brexit measure.

Yeah, it's to have a go at the Scottish tories who said they'd vote down anything that compromised on fishing

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:34 am

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:23 am Amusing to see the SNP tie themselves in knots over this. Voting against the deal implies voting for a no deal which they don’t want as any deal is better than a no deal

The logic is pretty clear, the deal will pass without the SNP hence the need for independence so our vote is going to be against the deal as a symbiotic anti-Brexit measure.

Of course, in the unlikely event that Scotland leaves the Union and joins the EU, it’s relations with rUK would then be subject forever to the terms of the deal (albeit from the other side). Given that 60% of Scotland’s trade is with rUK, they would do well to consider very carefully how trade under this deal will work in future.

Lobby wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:44 am

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:34 am

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:23 am Amusing to see the SNP tie themselves in knots over this. Voting against the deal implies voting for a no deal which they don’t want as any deal is better than a no deal

The logic is pretty clear, the deal will pass without the SNP hence the need for independence so our vote is going to be against the deal as a symbiotic anti-Brexit measure.

Of course, in the unlikely event that Scotland leaves the Union and joins the EU, it’s relations with rUK would then be subject forever to the terms of the deal (albeit from the other side). Given that 60% of Scotland’s trade is with rUK, they would do well to consider very carefully how trade under this deal will work in future.

But whilst true that's not the point. The SNPs vote is totally irrelevant to whether the bill passes so they are going to play politics.

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:52 am

Lobby wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:44 am

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:34 am

The logic is pretty clear, the deal will pass without the SNP hence the need for independence so our vote is going to be against the deal as a symbiotic anti-Brexit measure.

Of course, in the unlikely event that Scotland leaves the Union and joins the EU, it’s relations with rUK would then be subject forever to the terms of the deal (albeit from the other side). Given that 60% of Scotland’s trade is with rUK, they would do well to consider very carefully how trade under this deal will work in future.

But whilst true that's not the point. The SNPs vote is totally irrelevant to whether the bill passes so they are going to play politics.

Oh I understand that, but so far their scrutiny of the deal appears to have been limited to identifying those parts that they can make political capital out of, rather than considering how it might impact Scotland’s future relationship with rUK.

I suspect that the deal will ultimately make it harder for the SNP to maintain with any credibility the argument that an independent Scotland should join the EU.

Lobby wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:06 am

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:52 am

Lobby wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:44 am

Of course, in the unlikely event that Scotland leaves the Union and joins the EU, it’s relations with rUK would then be subject forever to the terms of the deal (albeit from the other side). Given that 60% of Scotland’s trade is with rUK, they would do well to consider very carefully how trade under this deal will work in future.

But whilst true that's not the point. The SNPs vote is totally irrelevant to whether the bill passes so they are going to play politics.

Oh I understand that, but so far their scrutiny of the deal appears to have been limited to identifying those parts that they can make political capital out of, rather than considering how it might impact Scotland’s future relationship with rUK.

I suspect that the deal will ultimately make it harder for the SNP to maintain with any credibility the argument that an independent Scotland should join the EU.

Yes that's true but the deal is negotiable and by the time a hypothetical independent Scotland joined the EU would've been changed many times over anyway. And this deal might make an independent Scotland harder but when in sovereignty debates have feelings cared about facts? Take a leaf from leave and use this deal to create negative rUK feelings to further your independence goals. Critical thinking isn't required about this deal. We've just watched Johnson pretend there's a no deal over fish before predictably flopping on fish. And we're watching the press pretend the EU's trade of goods where they have a surplus being fully covered and the UK's trade on services where we have a surplus ignored which is a clear win win for Europe is actually good for us! With the Commons to join this charade this week. This is a fact free debate and your position being made worse is cause for celebration if it gets you what you want which is the tangible sovereignty benefit (power).

This is the end of the beginning for the deal. Not the beginning of the end. And I don't believe for a second it makes independence less likely. (and I'm of the opinion indy is a mistake).

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:34 am

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:23 am Amusing to see the SNP tie themselves in knots over this. Voting against the deal implies voting for a no deal which they don’t want as any deal is better than a no deal

The logic is pretty clear, the deal will pass without the SNP hence the need for independence so our vote is going to be against the deal as a symbiotic anti-Brexit measure.

As a 'quasi' Scot I reckon the Scots need to tone down the independence rhetoric a bit, I seriously think they would be screwed outside the UK. If they carry on bellyaching they might encourage the English to have a referendum and that result wouldn't be a surprise this time!!

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:18 am

Lobby wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:06 am

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:52 am

But whilst true that's not the point. The SNPs vote is totally irrelevant to whether the bill passes so they are going to play politics.

Oh I understand that, but so far their scrutiny of the deal appears to have been limited to identifying those parts that they can make political capital out of, rather than considering how it might impact Scotland’s future relationship with rUK.

I suspect that the deal will ultimately make it harder for the SNP to maintain with any credibility the argument that an independent Scotland should join the EU.

Yes that's true but the deal is negotiable and by the time a hypothetical independent Scotland joined the EU would've been changed many times over anyway. And this deal might make an independent Scotland harder but when in sovereignty debates have feelings cared about facts? Take a leaf from leave and use this deal to create negative rUK feelings to further your independence goals. Critical thinking isn't required about this deal. We've just watched Johnson pretend there's a no deal over fish before predictably flopping on fish. And we're watching the press pretend the EU's trade of goods where they have a surplus being fully covered and the UK's trade on services where we have a surplus ignored which is a clear win win for Europe is actually good for us! With the Commons to join this charade this week. This is a fact free debate and your position being made worse is cause for celebration if it gets you what you want which is the tangible sovereignty benefit (power).

This is the end of the beginning for the deal. Not the beginning of the end. And I don't believe for a second it makes independence less likely. (and I'm of the opinion indy is a mistake).

It’s fairly clear that the recent poll ratings for independence have been boosted by remainers who want to rejoin the EU. If it becomes clear that independence is unlikely to offer a direct route back to the EU, their support for the SNP might wane a bit. Of course, as you say, this is largely a fact-free debate on all sides, so this may be a forlorn hope.

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:52 am

Lobby wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:44 am

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:34 am

The logic is pretty clear, the deal will pass without the SNP hence the need for independence so our vote is going to be against the deal as a symbiotic anti-Brexit measure.

Of course, in the unlikely event that Scotland leaves the Union and joins the EU, it’s relations with rUK would then be subject forever to the terms of the deal (albeit from the other side). Given that 60% of Scotland’s trade is with rUK, they would do well to consider very carefully how trade under this deal will work in future.

But whilst true that's not the point. The SNPs vote is totally irrelevant to whether the bill passes so they are going to play politics.

I can see the symbolic point of voting against at Westminster, but they have now recalled Holyrood for a vote which if they win they will presumably have to tell UKG is the “will of the Scottish people” for a no deal

What's the official line from the SNP as to why they are voting against?

Slick wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:34 am

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:52 am

Lobby wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 8:44 am

Of course, in the unlikely event that Scotland leaves the Union and joins the EU, it’s relations with rUK would then be subject forever to the terms of the deal (albeit from the other side). Given that 60% of Scotland’s trade is with rUK, they would do well to consider very carefully how trade under this deal will work in future.

But whilst true that's not the point. The SNPs vote is totally irrelevant to whether the bill passes so they are going to play politics.

I can see the symbolic point of voting against at Westminster, but they have now recalled Holyrood for a vote which if they win they will presumably have to tell UKG is the “will of the Scottish people” for a no deal

Ah fair that's stupid.

Lobby wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:33 am

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:18 am

Lobby wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 9:06 am

Oh I understand that, but so far their scrutiny of the deal appears to have been limited to identifying those parts that they can make political capital out of, rather than considering how it might impact Scotland’s future relationship with rUK.

I suspect that the deal will ultimately make it harder for the SNP to maintain with any credibility the argument that an independent Scotland should join the EU.

Yes that's true but the deal is negotiable and by the time a hypothetical independent Scotland joined the EU would've been changed many times over anyway. And this deal might make an independent Scotland harder but when in sovereignty debates have feelings cared about facts? Take a leaf from leave and use this deal to create negative rUK feelings to further your independence goals. Critical thinking isn't required about this deal. We've just watched Johnson pretend there's a no deal over fish before predictably flopping on fish. And we're watching the press pretend the EU's trade of goods where they have a surplus being fully covered and the UK's trade on services where we have a surplus ignored which is a clear win win for Europe is actually good for us! With the Commons to join this charade this week. This is a fact free debate and your position being made worse is cause for celebration if it gets you what you want which is the tangible sovereignty benefit (power).

This is the end of the beginning for the deal. Not the beginning of the end. And I don't believe for a second it makes independence less likely. (and I'm of the opinion indy is a mistake).

It’s fairly clear that the recent poll ratings for independence have been boosted by remainers who want to rejoin the EU. If it becomes clear that independence is unlikely to offer a direct route back to the EU, their support for the SNP might wane a bit. Of course, as you say, this is largely a fact-free debate on all sides, so this may be a forlorn hope.

I could be wrong but an indy Scotland wouldn't be allowed in the EU anyway? Spain don't want to encourage anyone being the key reason. As would Scotland's dent and likely currency problem.bThere's a whole thread on indy with more engaged posters than I but the currency, borders, EU membership and the problems therein don't seem to matter a huge amount.

This is a bad deal, we're celebrating how great getting a deal is - easier when you cave to EU demands - rather than analyse how the EU have tariff free access to our markets and have stopped passporting so will chip away at our biggest industries. And they can't change our laws which they don't want because there's no customs union or free market to protect. And we celebrate success over sovereignty which we would've had had we joined a customs union as that's our choice. The facts don't matter. They don't matter to the Tories, their press backers or their voters. They won't matter to the SNP or the Indy campaign either. Scottish politicians and voters should look at how when a weaker minor partner meets the major partner in negotiations it doesn't end well for that minor partner. But they won't, and therefore this deal right now only matters as a device to further indy. And when they meet problems down the road they can try to spin like the UK govt are. But without a supportive press will struggle with that.

Michael Gove seem to be making the argument that making it difficult to trade with Europe means our companies are better prepared to trade with the rest of the world.

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 10:28 am Michael Gove seem to be making the argument that making it difficult to trade with Europe means our companies are better prepared to trade with the rest of the world.

I saw that haha. He also said that now we're out of the EU we can finally tackle inequality. Which is to my point above. Facts don't matter.

I like neeps wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 10:31 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Dec 28, 2020 10:28 am Michael Gove seem to be making the argument that making it difficult to trade with Europe means our companies are better prepared to trade with the rest of the world.

I saw that haha. He also said that now we're out of the EU we can finally tackle inequality. Which is to my point above. Facts don't matter.

But they are only going to be "bumpy moments"

There will be "bumpy moments" for UK businesses and travellers as they get to grips with new EU rules, says government minister Michael Gove.

If anyone has studied the document could they please let me know which bits I should be very angry about Thanks in advance
That nice Mr Gove has a record as long as his arm for telling huge porkie pies and the blonde slug is even worse