DS Forums

 
 

SNP Watch


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 26-11-2016, 12:52
thms
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,818
....and French and Spanish objections ?
I don't think there is a veto when it comes to amending Article 48.
thms is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 26-11-2016, 13:13
CoolSharpHarp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,003
And after independence people will pay their contributions to the Scottish Government. Not too difficult to understand.

Here is a scenario for you -

Bob Smith, 59, originally from Leicester. He moved to Aberdeen 2 years ago with work. An independence referendum comes around. Bob votes No. Scotland votes for independence. Bob keeps his British passport and citizenship as deep down he feels British. However Bob loves life in Aberdeen and has no intention of returning south. A few years later Bob reaches UK state pension age. He has well over 40 years of UK National Insurance contributions

The Scottish Government at the time was not able to come to an agreement with the Westminster Government as they demanded to be recognised as the sole successor state. No negotiations.

Meanwhile a fella from Bulgaria who came to the UK had one year working, hurt his back and spent the next 11 years on a qualifying benefit before moving back to Bulgaria. He applies for and is awarded his state pension when he reaches UK qualifying age.

Will Bob lose out on his UK pension because he now chooses to live in Scotland? That is the ridiculous scenario that some unionists will have us believe.

Independence does indeed mean independence, but that does not mean missing out on current contributions we have made as part of the UK.
This will be negotiatd and in fact the Scottish Government has already said they'll take responsibility for making the payments, but if we take your doomsday scenario of no agreement, then possibly Bob won't get a pension.

Given that there is no state pension fund, do you expect people in the rUK to keep on paying their taxes to pay the State pension to those north and south of the border, whilst we're not making reciprocal arrangements, i.e. we're not paying our population share of pension's down south.
CoolSharpHarp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 13:33
zarkov
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 424
This will be negotiatd and in fact the Scottish Government has already said they'll take responsibility for making the payments, but if we take your doomsday scenario of no agreement, then possibly Bob won't get a pension.

Given that there is no state pension fund, do you expect people in the rUK to keep on paying their taxes to pay the State pension to those north and south of the border, whilst we're not making reciprocal arrangements, i.e. we're not paying our population share of pension's down south.
But the person from Bulgaria...and every other country around the world who had made contributions will? This is laughable

We would merely be taking the amounts entitled to from UK NI payments made.

That is how it works. That is the reality.

No possibles about it.
zarkov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 13:39
CoolSharpHarp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,003
But the person from Bulgaria...and every other country around the world who had made contributions will? This is laughable

We would merely be taking the amounts entitled to from UK NI payments made.

That is how it works. That is the reality.

No possibles about it.
The reality is that there is no fund.... state pension comes from current tax payers.
CoolSharpHarp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 13:40
The infidel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,047
The Scottish Gov would have us believe that there's massive support for remaining in the EU in Scotland, when the numbers don't back that up.

Yet there is a reason why they want to promote this great support of the EU. Back at the run up to the Scottish independence referendum, they were so desperate for an independent Scotland to be in the EU, and the reason for that is because they don't believe Scotland is viable as an independent country in its own right and needs to be in the EU.

Now we've had the EU referendum and far from acknowledge that it is the collective UK vote that counts, and therefore the regional results are neither here nor there, the Scottish gov is still clinging on in desperation to Brussels. And the reason for it is the same as before. It still has designs on Scotland becoming independent (of Westminster, that is) but knows that that is not viable out of the UK without being in the EU.
Yes it is a little peculiar that the SNP constantly promote the idea of 'independence' while being part of the EU but never say how being ruled by the EU equates to 'independence'. The aims of the EU are to implement ever tighter control, by stealth, of member states which is the complete opposite of independence is it not?

As you say, the main drivers behind the SNP are separation from the UK at absolutely any cost. Should the country last more that a few months after separation then that's just a bonus to them.
The infidel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 13:43
zarkov
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 424
The reality is that there is no fund.... state pension comes from current tax payers.
That simply does not matter. Its about national insurance contributions and qualifying years. If you meet the criteria, it gets paid.

That really is all you need to know.
zarkov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 13:46
CoolSharpHarp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,003
That simply does not matter. Its about national insurance contributions and qualifying years. If you meet the criteria, it gets paid.

That really is all you need to know.
Yes just now... and we both agreed the rules can change. I'm really not sure you understand that independence means independence. You do know things will change don't you
CoolSharpHarp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 14:09
zarkov
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 424
Yes just now... and we both agreed the rules can change. I'm really not sure you understand that independence means independence. You do know things will change don't you
Glad you have finally grasped what the rules are. Though I see you have now set about inventing a scenario that will somehow deny people living in an independent Scotland...but not in any other country.

Utter nonsense
zarkov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 14:39
CoolSharpHarp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,003
Glad you have finally grasped what the rules are. Though I see you have now set about inventing a scenario that will somehow deny people living in an independent Scotland...but not in any other country.

Utter nonsense
I know your post is utter nonsense... you seem to be confusing the calculation of how much state pension you receive and who is eligible. The latter may change and for some reason you think the rUK taxpayers will be happy to continue to pay our state pensions, whilst we swan of into the sunet...

I'm having recollections of 2014 and the SNP approach, which is everybody will do what we, just cause.
CoolSharpHarp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 14:50
Black Sheep
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 13,468
You can draw your own conclusions. The facts are the Minister is wrong when he says -

''Similarly people in the rest of the UK would not be expecting to guarantee or underwrite the pensions of those living in what would then have become a separate country.''

That is what happens right now. Anyone can move to another country, take citizenship, and when they reach UK State Pension age can claim on the contributions they have paid in.

Did you think people from the UK who retire abroad lose out on their UK state pension?
I see you ducked my questions. No answer then?
Black Sheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 14:58
Black Sheep
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 13,468
Yes, and you would expect him to say that. In fact that was what the Scottish Government were offering to do in the White Paper.

It does not change the fact that, if both sides could not agree, then ultimately it would be the UK Governments responsibility to pay out pensions on any contributions paid before independence.
Of course it wouldn't. Following independence Scotland would want to pay its own pensions surely?

If not almost 1/5 of our nations population would be relying on state benefits from another country. Are you seriously expecting people to vote for that situation?
Black Sheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:03
Black Sheep
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 13,468
And after independence people will pay their contributions to the Scottish Government. Not too difficult to understand.

Here is a scenario for you -

Bob Smith, 59, originally from Leicester. He moved to Aberdeen 2 years ago with work. An independence referendum comes around. Bob votes No. Scotland votes for independence. Bob keeps his British passport and citizenship as deep down he feels British. However Bob loves life in Aberdeen and has no intention of returning south. A few years later Bob reaches UK state pension age. He has well over 40 years of UK National Insurance contributions

The Scottish Government at the time was not able to come to an agreement with the Westminster Government as they demanded to be recognised as the sole successor state. No negotiations.

Meanwhile a fella from Bulgaria who came to the UK had one year working, hurt his back and spent the next 11 years on a qualifying benefit before moving back to Bulgaria. He applies for and is awarded his state pension when he reaches UK qualifying age.

Will Bob lose out on his UK pension because he now chooses to live in Scotland? That is the ridiculous scenario that some unionists will have us believe.

Independence does indeed mean independence, but that does not mean missing out on current contributions we have made as part of the UK.
No because as a resident in Scotland, Scotland would pick up his pension. Unless of course he decided to move here after independence and had qualified for a U.K. Pension.

It's not rocket science as post independence the Scottish government would assume pensions for folk registered to vote in Scotland.

Otherwise the whole thing becomes a shambles.
Black Sheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:09
zarkov
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 424
I know your post is utter nonsense... you seem to be confusing the calculation of how much state pension you receive and who is eligible. The latter may change and for some reason you think the rUK taxpayers will be happy to continue to pay our state pensions, whilst we swan of into the sunet...

I'm having recollections of 2014 and the SNP approach, which is everybody will do what we, just cause.
Going back to the earlier scenario -

Bob moves from Aberdeen to Dublin....or Brisbane or Moscow or even Timbuktu!

On doing so, he suddenly becomes eligible again for payment of his UK state pension. For a reason lost on Bob, it seems it is only while residing in Scotland he won't receive his entitlement through payment of his UK national insurance contributions.

Is this really what you expect people to believe?

zarkov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:16
CoolSharpHarp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,003
Going back to the earlier scenario -

Bob moves from Aberdeen to Dublin....or Brisbane or Moscow or even Timbuktu!

On doing so, he suddenly becomes eligible again for payment of his UK state pension. For a reason lost on Bob, it seems it is only while residing in Scotland he won't receive his entitlement through payment of his UK national insurance contributions.

Is this really what you expect people to believe?

No his residency would be deemed at the point of independence... Bob will be entitled to a pension from the Scottish Government.
CoolSharpHarp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:22
zarkov
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 424
No his residency would be deemed at the point of independence... Bob will be entitled a pension from the Scottish Government.
Now you really are just making it up as you go along
zarkov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:26
SmoggyTheTowny
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: UTB!
Posts: 470
Not sure if Scotland has to become an independent country or if it can remain a part of the UK, but it could remain in the EU.
You are not sure because you do not want to be. You are clinging on to this delusion because you refuse to accept reality.
It is known that Scotland could not remain in the EU, because it is not an EU Member.
Citing a possible but unlikely amendment to allow Scotland to become a member doesn't mean it becomes a likely outcome.

The claim that Scotland could remain part of the UK and remain in the EU is a complete work of fantasy. Why would the EU allow Scotland, who would not even be a UN Recognised Country, to be an EU Member when it would still be in the overall control of the UK, who would not be in the EU? They wouldn't.

Article 50 includes a section about amending Article 48 (this is the Treaty on the Function of European Union, which itself is new name for the Treaty of Rome).

Amendments to Article 48 may be required as part of the agreement between the UK and the EU.
None of which points to Article 48 being used to allow Scotland to bypass the entry process. Why would the EU do that? There is no benefit to them in allowing that.
If Scotland wants to be part of the EU, the process of doing that is well established.

It is interesting that the procedure for Qualified Majority Voting was changed by the EU just weeks after the Scottish Referendum and that the transition period before it comes into effect is the 31st March 2017 because that is when the UK government intend to activate Article 50.
None of this means anything. Allowing Scotland to bypass the entry process was not even a guaranteed option, let alone something that would be agreed on under QMV.
You may obsess over Scotland with everything in it's favour, but the rest of the world does not.

The White Paper 'Scotland's Future' refers to a process where Scotland could remain in the EU under Article 48.
A claim that was contradicted by the EU itself.
The White Paper said a lot of things, just because it claimed something does not mean it was enforceable. That was merely the Scottish Government's intended plan, a plan that had not been agreed to by any of the other parties that would need to be involved.

An amendment to Article 48 is seen as the simplest way of enabling the internal enlargement of the EU.
The easiest way is for Scotland to just do as every other member has and apply to join when it becomes eligible to do so.
Amending the treaties regarding entry to the EU will be far from simple.

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2014...dent-scotland/

"EU law provides the resources for Scotland’s continued EU membership"
Ah yes, Sionaidh Douglas-Scott, someone who views everything with a pro-Scotland bias because of her Nationality.
She falls into the same trap you are, thinking because it is possible for amendments to be made, that they would be in order to give Scotland what it wants.
SmoggyTheTowny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:28
Black Sheep
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 13,468
Going back to the earlier scenario -

Bob moves from Aberdeen to Dublin....or Brisbane or Moscow or even Timbuktu!

On doing so, he suddenly becomes eligible again for payment of his UK state pension. For a reason lost on Bob, it seems it is only while residing in Scotland he won't receive his entitlement through payment of his UK national insurance contributions.

Is this really what you expect people to believe?

On the date of independence he would be paid by Scotland. It wouldn't matter where he moved after that, Scotland would still pay him.

I fail to understand why it would be anything else or even why Nationalists would want another country paying benefits or welfare for a fifth of its population.

Especially since the SG have already stated they would pay these pensions.
Black Sheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:35
SmoggyTheTowny
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: UTB!
Posts: 470
It does not even have to be a person from the UK going abroad that has entitlement.

A person can come to the UK and meet the state pension minimum qualifying period through contributions from work or benefits. They can then return overseas and the UK has a responsibility to pay that person their state pension on reaching UK retirement age.

The situation would be no different in the unlikely event an independent Scotland or Westminster decided there would be no negotiations.
The situation would be different. People being eligible for a UK pension despite emigrating is not the the same as Scottish people being eligible after Scotland ceases to be part of the UK.

Some arrangement will surely be sought, but I can't see the people of the UK being expected to pay for the pensions of people who live in what would be a separate, foreign country.
That would hardly be fair, since it would essentially be the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland funding the pension cost of Scotland with Scotland then not having to fund it.

It's likely that the UK government would remain responsible for the pensions of those eligible for it currently and those who are close to being eligible, until a time when the Scottish Government is in a position to take over responsibility for this, with the Scottish Government being responsible for everyone else from the time Scotland became Independent.

But then this whole conversation is very typical of this topic, supporters of Independence want Scotland to be free of the UK in regards to certain things, but still expect the UK to be responsible for other aspects because it suits them.
SmoggyTheTowny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:37
zarkov
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 424
No surprise to see you jumping in to defend an obviously ridiculous proposition. As long as it sounds pro-union.

On this one you are both just wrong. It is quite an embarrassment you would both try and defend it.

That you choose to is your own business of course. Good luck
zarkov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:48
SmoggyTheTowny
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: UTB!
Posts: 470
Indeed rules can change. I don't really expect a UK state pension this side of 75 if I'm lucky.

Also unlike a benefit state pension cannot be taken away from you (unless you are sent to prison). If you meet the qualifying criteria, you are entitled.
But this entitlement in relation to pension recipients in Scotland could (and likely will) be transferred from the UK Government to the Scottish Government, so the responsibility for pensions of Scotland's residents then is given to the Scottish Government instead of the UK Government.
This is unlikely to happen overnight and will probably be done in stages with some people being still covered by the UK Government, until such a time that the Scottish Government is able to assume responsibility for all pensions.

This is not the same as a person living in the UK and gaining the entitlement to a pension prior to moving elsewhere. We are not talking about entitlement but rather who funds this entitlement.
If someone lived in the rUK but then moved to an Independent Scotland then the UK government would still pay, but that is different to someone who has lives and works in Scotland and is eligible for a state pension.
SmoggyTheTowny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:54
CoolSharpHarp
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,003
Now you really are just making it up as you go along
I'm just following the Scottish Government's stated position, which is they would take on the responsibility.
CoolSharpHarp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 15:54
Black Sheep
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 13,468
No surprise to see you jumping in to defend an obviously ridiculous proposition. As long as it sounds pro-union.

On this one you are both just wrong. It is quite an embarrassment you would both try and defend it.

That you choose to is your own business of course. Good luck
And with that you describe another failed argument from another badly thought out independence stance.

Scotland cannot possible go independent and have a million Pensioners still be reliant on the UK to pay them. The pensions wouldn't rise with inflation for a start and are you actually proposing that a Scotland abandon a million voters to the vagaries of a foreign economy?

It's a very strange stance and Smoggy is right. You can't say you want independence but then turn around and argue that the UK still has to foot the bill for a million Scots.
Black Sheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 16:21
SmoggyTheTowny
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: UTB!
Posts: 470
That simply does not matter. Its about national insurance contributions and qualifying years. If you meet the criteria, it gets paid.

That really is all you need to know.
The criteria as to who is eligible can be and has been changed in the past though, just because someone is eligible now doesn't mean they will be when they reach pensionable age.
Having just checked, I will be eligible for a pension at 68, but by that time it is unlikely to still be the case.

People will still have those national insurance contributions and qualifying years, they will still be meet the criteria (whatever the criteria is at the time) but it will be the Scottish Government that will be responsible for their pension following Independence, not the UK Government.

What you're expecting is for the UK Government, and therefore the UK taxpayers, to continue paying for the pensions in Scotland despite Scotland no longer being part of the UK.

Those who accrued their pension elsewhere in the UK (outside of Scotland) would likely still be covered by the UK Government, but those who accrued their pension mainly within Scotland would be covered by the Scottish Government.
SmoggyTheTowny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 16:27
SmoggyTheTowny
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: UTB!
Posts: 470
Going back to the earlier scenario -

Bob moves from Aberdeen to Dublin....or Brisbane or Moscow or even Timbuktu!

On doing so, he suddenly becomes eligible again for payment of his UK state pension. For a reason lost on Bob, it seems it is only while residing in Scotland he won't receive his entitlement through payment of his UK national insurance contributions.

Is this really what you expect people to believe?

Then Bob, having become entitled to a pension within the UK would still be eligible to a UK pension. Just like everyone else. Having earned his pension within the UK, the UK would pay.

Those who have lived and worked in Scotland for the majority of their working life would be covered by the Scottish Government as they would have assumed responsibility for this.

The UK Government would cover pensions that were accrued here, and the Scottish Government would cover pension that were accrued there. It really isn't that hard to understand.
SmoggyTheTowny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-11-2016, 16:38
Black Sheep
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 13,468
Then Bob, having become entitled to a pension within the UK would still be eligible to a UK pension. Just like everyone else. Having earned his pension within the UK, the UK would pay.

Those who have lived and worked in Scotland for the majority of their working life would be covered by the Scottish Government as they would have assumed responsibility for this.

The UK Government would cover pensions that were accrued here, and the Scottish Government would cover pension that were accrued there. It really isn't that hard to understand.
I think that in the weird world that is inhabited by certain Nationalists the UK is responsible for every bad thing and will be made to pay for every Scot who is a pensioner.

I find it strange that they say Scotland would be a rich independent country but then they also say that they would rely on the UK to fund a fifth of our population. Are pensioners not to benefit from an independent Scotland? Are they to be tied into a foreign pension scheme where they won't receive inflationary rises while the rest of the country, according to them, is in economic boom.

Somehow, it doesn't seem fair. It's also something which the Scottish Government has stated they won't do, which I find equally strange because these certain Nationalists are now going against the SNP by stating pensions will be paid by the UK.

Can they actually be criticising the SG here
Black Sheep is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:40.