This blog exclusively broke the news that Juncker was much more friendly to Scottish independence, and that was a major reason for Cameron’s bitter opposition.
Unionists were in frenzies of delight this past 24 hours at Juncker’s statement that he saw no further enlargement of the EU for five years. Wings Over Scotland has done an excellent job of summing up the triumphalism of the media and of every senior Unionist politician you can think of.
The BBC deserves the massive criticism it has been given for unionist bias, but James Cook of the BBC deserves credit for asking Juncker’s office whether his statement included Scotland. The reply could not have been more clear. Juncker did not include Scotland in that statement. As Juncker had said before, Scottish independence is a matter for democratic decision and is an internal EU matter. Juncker was talking abut the length of time it would take applicant nations to meet the acquis communitaire, or body of EU law, regulation and obligation. Scotland, by definition, already does meet the acquis.
All this Juncker’s office told the BBC explicitly. What is implicit, and self-evidently true, is that Scotland’s independence is not an enlargement, it is just Scotland remaining in, requiring some internal readjustment.
This ought to be good news for everyone – including the unionists.
I can understand that there are people who genuinely love Scotland, but wish for reasons of history to retain the United Kingdom. I even understand some of those honestly believe Scots will be wealthier and happier in the UK. I think they are very wrong, but entitled to that view and some people hold it sincerely.
But such genuine Unionists, should they lose the referendum, would surely wish Scotland to remain in the European Union? That already guarantees the continuance of all the most essential links between England and Scotland, in particular full freedom of movement and settlement and trade and citizens’ rights. It is also important for Scotland’s future prosperity.
Surely a real unionist would want to retain the Union, but still want Scotland to remain in the EU if it became independent?
But instead, every professional unionist politician was gloating at the entirely fictitious prospect of Scotland being kicked out of the EU. They were absolutely delighted at the prospect. They really hate Scotland.
There are decent unionists. But the professional politicians are not decent unionists. They were delighted at the very idea that Scotland might be kicked out of the EU. Because actually they hate, despise and fear Scotland and the Scots. For them, Scotland only exists to pay for their very comfortable public funded lifestyles. The idea they may lose their power, influence and above all their money, horrifies them.
“You are going to vote for the Union!! You are going to vote for me!! If not, you are going to SUFFER, you bastards, SUFFER!!!”
I have a prize of two hundred pounds available to the first person who can show me an instance of the media reporting Juncker’s clarification with the same prominence, space and energy they devoted to splashing the Unionist scare story.
I think your £200 is safe.
The amount mindless hyperbole spouted on this subject never fails to amaze me.
Doug
The idea that there are a finite number of jobs in the world, and that if I take one I am depriving some Spanish person of work, is infantile. the idea that the world was better before Polish people could work in the UK, and that they are driving down wages of hard-working Brits, is frankly such arrant nonsense I am sorry to see you subscribe to it.
If ever a thread headline was proved in the following comments.
Excellent work Craig.
“Now can we hear your usual litany of how the SNP are just exactly the same as the other NWO parties?”
Not at all, I’m very thankful they voted that way. I will be very envious of an independent Scotland rid of that legislation.
I wonder if there’s a self-loathing element to all this, especially in the Tory ranks.
I mean, some of this lot really would like out of the EU. In fact many of them, on a certain level, surely dream about it. And then when they stumble on a factoid that suggests an independent Scotland may not remain in the UK, there’s an orgy of delight and mockery… that Scotland might get to a place they dream of? Huh?
I’ll confess I’m not hugely pro-independence, but the incoherence of the pro-unionist lobby is quite something.
Very on-topic, from today:
http://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/junckers-hammer-blow/
I’m not anti-EU … but:
I do think the benefit described by many as of major importance, a great boon they say -of freedom of movement, accrues only to those relatively well off, it is not everyone, but few who can simply take off gypsy-like (and I don’t mean that pejoratively) wherever they fancy, own or rent a property here and keep a roof over their head and a place to lay their head, much less here AND somewhere else, so this ‘benefit’ of the EU actually grates with most people, as for most it is as much an option as a daytrip to the moon. It simply is not an option, instead it is one ‘treat’ dangled then pulled away sharply as pesky reality comes in and snatches it away ha-ha. It benefits a slightly widenened elite disproportionally. How does the freedom of movement benefit someone who has never had the means in their adult life to travel much more than 30 miles from their home town? At the other extreme from the jetsetting brigade, it forces people to up-sticks, leave, home, family and friends and migrate without even having any idea of where and how they will live, except by begging or in ‘black’ economic activity. So let’s not overstate this advantage, for others it simply grinds their noses in their powerlessness, confronts them with their relative poverty, it actually disadvantages people by giving them a ‘freedom’ of which they are constantly reminded, which is only hypothetical as far as it could apply to them.
Usual disclaimers: I support Independence from Westminster for Scotland, oppose NATO, and monarchy and think we should and will have our own currency, also called the pound for convenience, using the English pound until transition. I recognise the human rights protection that the EU offers, contrasted with UK nation state erosion of those rights and recognise too that pre-1707 Scotland was blockaded by England and resumption of trade with the continent was a ‘benefit’ of that 1707 Union, notwithstanding it was England which interceded with malice and shut down that trade and trade is still the most important reason for keeping healthy Scottish links with that European market as sellers and buyers, within that European family to which we unquestionably belong.
Don’t know why I have not been able to post on this thread – what has wrongly been dismissed as spam – but so be it, as my attempts have been in general agreement with Craig.
Wonder if he is afraid of just being called another nutter,
Now we know why GCHQ constructed that massive propaganda apparatus. It’s to keep their hooks in their first colony.
That’s not the British pedo-toffs’ last line of defense, sad to say. They’ll certainly stuff the ballot boxes if they have to. You’re going to have to fight your way out as Slovenia did.
Tony M
I honestly don’t think that’s right. There is a really thriving community in Thanet of East Europeans now. I don’t think they are rich. And it’s true that not everyone can be mobile – but the ones who are bring all kinds of benefits to the ones who are not.
I am not rich either, incidentally. But fortunately mobile, I agree.
Trowbridge
Nothing we are doing. But nothing in spam trap either. Best not to worry – I always assume the security services are there, and just take no notice of them.
>The idea that there are a finite number of jobs in the world,
>and that if I take one I am depriving some Spanish person of
>work, is infantile.
So there are an infinite number of jobs, then, and the unemployed are just lazy buggers?
I presume you subscribe to Blair’s view that corporate globalization is unstoppable, right?
Should the Chinese working at Foxconn be thanking Apple and Microsoft for creating jobs, as opposed to complaining like whiny liberals, and, occasionally, even throwing themselves out of windows in a fit of left-wing rage?
Are you also a flat Earther, one who believes that economies can grow and grow ad infinitum, and consumerism and greed is good for society and the world generally?
Do you think that NAFTA has been good for Mexico, and Mexicans who are forced to cross the border into the U.S. are NOT being exploited by corporations, but being given a helping hand up?
Would there be less economic migrants coming to Britain if Poland and other Eastern European countries had more civilized economic and social policies – i.e. if their governments and the EU put people first? Or, are the Poles and penniless foreigners, generally, just lazy bleeders, save, of course, for the ones who come to Briton, individuals who want to contribute to society, not sit on the dole from cradle to grave like many Brits do?
In short, is it your belief that corporations and the business community are backing policies that are improving the lives of the great unwashed, and the government should just get out of everyone’s way?
I no longer trust Westminster to manage Scotland’s affairs. You only have to look at the NHS in England, watch as it is dismantled to make it TIPPS compliant and ask: Is Westminster and the UK really going to tolerate a Scotland with a publicly funded NHS? Westminster would see it as a rebuke to their rightwards lurch to extreme austerity. Poor English voters would be angry as Proud Unionists ™ like Osborne have been telling them how they pay for everything in Scotland.
When we are not being condescended to by an array of “celebs” – we are constantly being crapped on by an array of cartoonishly inept imbeciles from Westminster. Yet I am appalled to see proud Scots but proud to be British, positively wallow in this Arse gravy that passes for the positive case for Union.
The union is already dying. fatally wounded by the very ones who were supposed to protect it. Its simply a matter of how and when it is finally consigned to history, not if.
I’m waiting for Craig’s gracious congratulations to Herbie who was so quickly off the mark at 4.03 pm with a clearly prize-worthy entry. Why not invite Mary to nominate the Gazan charity, to keep her mind off her impending visit to hospital?
Herbie, let me know if Craig pays up to your chosen cause because he’ll owe me a hundred quid in September.
Just happened again when I thanked you for the clarification, said no congratulations were necessary from you for the BBC explaining what a menace Mr. Juncker is when it comes to the Yes vote, and asked Orr to explain about Mary going to the hospital.
Hope the securocrats are really getting worried about my claims regarding the No vote.
Craig
I usually disagree with Mr Scorgie, but you are being too harsh on him (and traducing what he said) when you write:
“..the idea that the world was better before Polish people could work in the UK, and that they are driving down wages of hard-working Brits, is frankly such arrant nonsense I am sorry to see you subscribe to it.”.
It follows from that that I, also also pro-EU, have some sympathy for Mr Scorgie when he writes:
“I am pro EU Craig, but there are issues that need to be addressed.”,
and while I feel he’s over-egging the pudding in his 2nd and 4th paras there is a grain of truth there as well – at the very least, the possibility for workers to move freely enables employers and the state, in the UK for example, to avoid the trouble and expense of ensuring that the UK’s own work force is properly educated and trained to fill the available jobs.
~~~~~~~~~~
A look back to the beginning of the EEC Treaty is required. The position then was that there was a severe labour shortage in a number of the original six Member States, then experiencing rapid economic expansion. And there was one part of one Member State which was not sharing in the economic boom and had a considerable surplus of labour – the Italian Mezzogiorno. The free movement of workers (only workers at that time, not the self-employed or retired people) dates alll the way back to that period and was part of the grand compromise and quid-pro-quoing of the original Treaty*. In essence, it enabled the Italian state to export the unemployed of the Mezzogiorno.
But the phenomenon was limited in extent/numbers (in terms of what was imposed by the Treaty)**
The position the EU is in at present is very far removed from context of 1958. We have a post-crisis EU of 28 which is not booming and in which not the Mezzogiorno but a number of entire Member States have high unemployment and which are, in effect, “improving” their economies by exporting their unemployment.
The argument in a nutshell is, therefore, that a freedom which was beneficial to all concerned back in 1958 is no longer necessarily fit for purpose in the vastly different Europe of 2014.
______________________
* The inclusion of the first social provisions in the original EEC Treaty is another example of this, included at the insistence of France in order to prevent its industry from being undercut by German industry.
** There was also, of course, strong labour movement into certain EEC economies (and Switzerland) from non-EEC countries, but this was at the discretion of the host countries and not an obligation under the EEC Treaty.
Any bet, Anon, for the No vote winning because of a most convenient, man-made disaster unless the polls show that it has proven unnecessary, meaning there is no bet?
Say $200?
“I decided to come and live in Spain a few months.”
An Englishman masquerading as a Scot, constantly bleating on about Scottish Independence, decides months before the referendum he never shuts up about to go and live in Spain rather than his ethnic homeland.
If it wasn’t so pathetic it would be funny.
Sadly Craig has spent too much time globe-trotting on the government payroll to know much about the effects of EU imigration on the ordinary worker. Take the example of the Polish decorators working down the road from me for £70 per 12 hour day. No mortgage, no children, all living together, while local decorators with families and mortgages to pay lose work. But then Craig has expressed his disdain for the English working class on this blog and, what with his frequent jollies around Europe, it’s small wonder he can’t see the increased freedom to work and holiday abroad as of any real consequence to the “racist and intolerant” working class. If only they could see those magnificent Polish castles as he has seen them then they would wonder what all the fuss is about.
“Any bet, Anon, for the No vote winning because of a most convenient, man-made disaster unless the polls show that it has proven unnecessary, meaning there is no bet?
Say $200?”
Give me some properly defined terms and you’re on, Tro. Are we talking sustained rain in the central belt or CIA tectonic manipulation?
Most sensible assumption, and judging by the flack coming your way the boys are pissed off and their Yorkshire terrier weight attack dogs are chewing at you ankles.
However for a nice read on the subject of human rights and freedom freedom freedom hey freedom freedom freedom ho, take a look at this;
My name is Elizabeth Coady and I am the tweeter behind @HeadlineJuice.
@Anon Yes when you have a gold plated civil service pension to live off (paid for by the working tax payer) then you can take the moral high ground without damage to your life-style.
O/T Tony M,
In case you missed my reply over there I didn’t find any other comments by you stuck in moderation/spam on squonk – other than duplicate posts.
Aaron
You have indeed pierced into the heart of the matter.
I think Nicholas Georescu-Roegen the American economist explained the problem and asked a question that goes to the nub of the matter:-
The reality that our system is finite and that no expenditure of energy is free confounds us with a moral decision at every point in the economic process.
What is truly in the interest of man not in the present only but as a continuing species?
David Reid the Scottish academic answered thus:-
This question involves some consideration of policy of social goals and what Herman Daly called the ‘ultimate end’ by which we justify consumption of the ‘ultimate means’ the resources of the planet and the stocks of low entropy they represent.
Until policy makers can grasp this reality there is no hope.
People matter!
Aaron Rant
Since you ask, no, I think there should be policies including but not limited to a good minimum wage (ie much better than in the UK now) and strong trade union rights. I also think there should be a law limiting the differential in total emoluments between the highest and lowest paid in the company or organisation. I think a factor of 6 is probably about right. So if the cleaners at Burberry are on 15,000, the chief executive can’t get more than 90,000 (as opposed to the current 3.5 million). I think we would rapidly have some much better paid cleaners – obviously with safeguards to prevent dodging through contracting, separate companies etc. I have lots more jolly ideas than that one.
None of them however involve controls on freedom of movement of people, goods and capital.
Ed L
I am here because my wife is doing a masters degree here and I am babysitting. I have always lived all around the world. I don’t intend that Scottish people would be held prisoner with an exit visa system. Lots of Polish people live in the UK – does that stop Poland being an independent sovereign country? Of course it doesn’t.
I must say I find the level of personal venom and abuse quite disturbing, both from you and Anon. And I will indeed have a rather small civil service pension, but not until I am 60.
And it is not true in the least that I despise the British working classes. who I do despise are the stupid asses from the Communist Party, the Socialist Workers’ Party, Left Unity or whatever else useless and hopelessly, terminally unpopular organisation you belong to, when you delude yourselves that the working classes somehow mystically hold your opinions because they are “the people” so they must, whereas in fact they are very much more likely to read tabloids and vote UKIP. It is your ludicrous romanticisation of the working class which is patronising and delusional all at the same time.
Craig
Being a diplomat, you should also be ware that despite the fact that mandatory pay structures would be adhered to, however sooner than later the the question of profit sharing, bonuses and stock options will be re-evaluated, with the bosses getting paid even more than before, and the workers pay getting suppressed because the bosses are so poorly paid!
There has to be a cultural shift from winner takes all, greed is good, and more emphasis on prominence of human capital, as oppose to the current trends of the cheapest factory being the human factor.
Those complaining about the working class and their unemployment, these pernicious elements are betting the people remin unaware of the The Poor Relief Act 1601 and its subsequent rehashing in Poor Law Amendment Act 1834.
By stopping someone even poorer earning a living, somehow the poor lot don’t get to be rich, and enjoy the fruits of their labour at a higher premium. Classic case being Detroit, and its civic structures, that has brought on the current bankrupt Detroit. Although this line of patter panders to the insecurity of the poor and keeps them baying for the blood of the even poorer.
Craig
What a misassessment?
EDL (English Defence League) and Anon (JDL Jewish Defence League) are neither communist, nor socialist, or any other lefty lot. These rabid “nationalists” are in the ilk of the “National Socialists” of the yesteryear.
Read their “contributions” again! Anon is sore because you outed Janner, and he/she was flaming the blog, and still is “Angry”.
EDL is busy pushing the “ethnic” Fazerland bullshit.
My money is on; these are one and the same, given the number of the software available for multiple persona activities on the net.