EU referendum aftermath

[John Hickman]

The best political survivor is Larry, the No. 10 Cat

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Some of the reshuffling (and there is a lot of this) could have far-reaching consequences. Lots of upheaval in the state departments as well, with portfolios being moved between different offices. I fear the climate change one will go (or be watered down).

[Mick Norris]

Lots of rumours about Hunt, so surprising he stays in place

[Mick Norris]

The Daily Mail has a story that Tom Watson recently received £200,000 from Max Mosley. Something I've been wondering about is: how helpful has Tom Watson been to the Labour Party in the last 10 months?

Well, like Jeremy he was elected last year, but unlike Jeremy he isn't being challenged, which indicates something

I wonder what Mosley's up to?

[Alistair Campbell]

They were given the option of becoming an independent nation quite recently and for reasons which mystified me they said no thanks.

Why does this mystify you? Surely there were plenty of good reasons to vote the way we did?

One of the major factors for Scotland staying in the Union was that they would remain part of the EU, something which they were told was at risk if they left the Union.

Who told them that?

Plenty of people - Barroso for one.

[NickFaulks]

Who told them that?

Plenty of people - Barroso for one.

Anyone who believes anything Barroso says deserves what they get.

[E Michael White]

Scotland leaving UK and staying in EU - fine.

How would Scotland repay the Darien money if they leave the UK ?
After addition of interest at MLR, previously bankrate, without any margin, this is approx £2 Tr

[Michael Farthing]

Such costs would easily be offset by the compensation due to the Scots for the invasion of their country by Edward I and Edward III. However, given the way in which England sought to sabotage this venture (the Darien expedition) at the time it perhaps behoves the English to keep very very quiet - otherwise Europe might get the same idea about banning trading with England.

[MartinCarpenter]

Doubt the party is rich enough for starters

Legal action underway

Labour deputy leader Tom Watson called the legal challenge "very unhelpful".

An under statement I think. Does that mean the whole thing is delayed several months more? It will also, of course, look so good if the challenge wins.

What a sorry mess.

Hunt surviving is quite amazing really. Junior doctors are hardly hyper millitant. Losing the climate change bit of that chunk of Government isn't good either.

[Alistair Campbell]

Anyone who believes anything Barroso says deserves what they get.

Of course, Alex Salmond claimed to have legal advice to the contrary but was unable to produce it.

I don't believe a definitive position was ever outlined on iScotland's position within the EU. It seemed likely that we would have to apply under Article 49, that various fiscal tests on deficit and suchlike would have to be met, that we would have to use the Euro, and that our application would be subject to veto. It was not clear that these hurdles could be easily crossed.

How would Scotland repay the Darien money if they leave the UK ?
After addition of interest at MLR, previously bankrate, without any margin, this is approx £2 Tr

I'd heard mention of this once before. Turns out it was you then as well. Could you elaborate on what the Darien money is, why it should be repaid and why this particular rate of interest is correct?

[Alex Holowczak]

How would Scotland repay the Darien money if they leave the UK ?
After addition of interest at MLR, previously bankrate, without any margin, this is approx £2 Tr

I'd heard mention of this once before. Turns out it was you then as well. Could you elaborate on what the Darien money is, why it should be repaid and why this particular rate of interest is correct?

One of the main reasons that Scotland and England joined to form Great Britain in 1707, is Scotland's botched attempts to form its own Empire. England was busy colonising North America and India, and Scotland was struggling for a variety of civil reasons.

The area targetted is now part of Panama. After two years, the colony was abandoned due to poor planning, disease amongst the colony, and the apparently entirely unexpected response of the Spanish Empire when some upstart Scots invaded what had been Spanish colonial territory.

Estimates vary, but there was 25-50% of the money in circulation in Scotland tied up in establishing the colony, so its failure was not warmly received in Scotland.

Scotland's then decided union with England - with whom they shared a King - was its best way to establish an Empire. During the Act of Union, one of the Agreements was that England absorbed Scotland's debt to the amount of £400,000. England did this because it ensured that Scotland would not try to ally itself with France instead. And so, the Kingdom of Great Britain was formed.

E Michael White asserts that if Scotland voted for independence, England should demand this £400,000, inflation adjusted, because breaking this Union would remove England's obligation to cover the debt under the 1707 Act.

[Alistair Campbell]

<snip> [History Lesson] </snip>

E Michael White asserts that if Scotland voted for independence, England should demand this £400,000, inflation adjusted, because breaking this Union would remove England's obligation to cover the debt under the 1707 Act.

Thank you for replying on E Michael White's behalf.

I'm looking for some sort of legal justification that amendment to the Acts of Union (or new Acts) would trigger repayment of the £400k (which I understood had several purposes) and of the basis for the calculation for the amount to be repaid. You are saying EMW said it should be inflation adjusted (rather than compounded by MLR or equivalent).

Is he stating fact or merely opining?

Most discussion of which I am aware suggests that there would have been a split of assets and liabilities on some basis to be negotiated - in particular the national debt would have been allocated on a per capita basis (as some of the £400k was intended as compensation for liability to future debt).

[MartinCarpenter]

Really don't think it was a fully serious suggestion. Especially not the 4 trillion bit

[Michael Farthing]

While Alex's summary above is substantially accurate it has (from my perspective) a very distinctive slant! It omits that the project was actively obstructed by England, which passed legislation effectively making it illegal for English people to invest in the project. The suggestion that Scotland decided on union is also a strange way of expressing matters. More the case that England used the mess to force union on a rather unwilling Scotland, which was effectivelty bribed with the offer of a bail out.

Now I have no desire for pistols at dawn with Alex over these differing interpretations (far from it- I have great respect for him) but it is interesting to see how even an event of 200 years age can produce such differing views.

[Mick Norris]

Really don't think it was a fully serious suggestion. Especially not the 4 trillion bit

Don't exaggerate, he was only suggesting £2 trillion

I had never heard of it, so had to look up the Darien scheme