Queen Elizabeth's speech

[Scotsman69]

Hard_Rom, there are dozens of independent countries in the world, with populations similar to or smaller than Scotland's 5.35m. The vast majority of them are poorer than Scotland, and lack our advanced education provision.

In Europe alone these include Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania. Only Iceland, Norway, Denmark and Luxembourg are richer than Scotland. Many of them have historically been part of larger nations. To the best of my knowledge, and I visited it a few years ago, there is NO political movement in Slovakia seeking to re-unite it with the larger and richer Czech Republic, from which it peacefully divorced just twenty-two years ago.

But perhaps you know differently?

The reign of Scottish kings over the English did not go over well. James I not bad, Charles I lost his head, Charles II kept his, James II had to run and hide to keep his. Very turbulent times. Stuart/Stewarts clan not the best rulers the UK has had.

I see no reason for Scotland not to be more independent. Economics says stay close. Money does talk and matter. Scotland may be a bit small to go it completely alone. North Sea oil won't last forever. Might be to late for a Norwegian style heritage fund for oil tax revenue. Maybe a federal system like Canada. Make Eng. Scot. and Wales provinces of UK. N. Ireland too if they want. Of course population will give Eng. the nod in may decisions.

Hard to avoid being dominated by large population on your borders especially if similar culture. We in Canada are always on our guard with the Yanks.

Heck if the Europeans can give up some "nationalistic" ideals for the EU and it's economic clout, Scotland and England can admit they are closer than France and Germany in culture, language and trade and work out a system that is fair to all.

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

Does the UK Parliament have to approve bills passed by the Scottish Parliament before they can become laws?

No. However, all bills passed by the Scottish Parliament – like those in the UK Parliament - must be given royal assent by HM The Queen before they can come into force.


The Scottish Parliament is entirely separate from the UK Parliament and can pass laws on all those issues devolved to it. However, the UK Parliament retained the power to make laws for Scotland on certain issues. These issues, which generally have a UK-wide or international impact, are known as reserved matters. You can find a list of devolved and reserved matters on the Devolved and reserved matters explained page of this website.


http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/help/61875.aspx



The role of the Sovereign in the enactment of legislation is today purely formal, although The Queen has the right ‘to be consulted, to encourage and to warn’ her ministers via regular audiences with the Prime Minister.

The Sovereign’s assent is required to all bills passed by Parliament in order for them to become law. Royal Assent (consenting to a measure becoming law) has not been refused since 1707.

It is also a long established convention that The Queen is asked by Parliament to provide consent (which is different to assent) for the debating of bills which would affect the prerogative or interests of the Crown. Where Queen’s Consent is given it is signified in each House of Parliament and recorded in Hansard. Consent has not been withheld in modern times, except on the advice of Government.

In the annual State Opening of Parliament ceremony, The Queen opens Parliament in person, and addresses both Houses in The Queen's Speech. Neither House can proceed to public business until The Queen's Speech has been read.

This speech is drafted by the Government and not by The Queen. It outlines the Government's policy for the coming session of Parliament and indicates forthcoming legislation.

(Ect.)

http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/QueenandGovernment/QueeninParliament.aspx


gsgs comment-

HM The Queen can give a displeased, and affronted side glance, but she is "gagged" from saying anything, with her own voice (pertaining to government issues) ?

 

[Hard_Rom]

Hard_Rom, there are dozens of independent countries in the world, with populations similar to or smaller than Scotland's 5.35m. The vast majority of them are poorer than Scotland, and lack our advanced education provision.

In Europe alone these include Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania. Only Iceland, Norway, Denmark and Luxembourg are richer than Scotland. Many of them have historically been part of larger nations. To the best of my knowledge, and I visited it a few years ago, there is NO political movement in Slovakia seeking to re-unite it with the larger and richer Czech Republic, from which it peacefully divorced just twenty-two years ago.

But perhaps you know differently?

Iceland has been hard it recently with bank failures. Norway has their heritage oil funds.

So what accounts for Scotland's success? Three similar countries with a degree of economic success. Out of how many countries in the world. Both Slovakia and Slovenia have suffered from the split. Unless Scotland makes it's self a tax haven for rich Englishmen, I don't see how it can excel in the world's economy. Is poverty and unemployment worth nationalistic pride? Can pride be sat on long enough to evolve and negotiate a fairer union?

Scots and Quebecois nationalists will be watching the new Catalonian state closely if it succeeds. Spain is shit economically though. Not the same as the U.K. or Canada.

I was born an Englishman. And as a Canadian, I am a strong Federalist. But I can see the need for a possible change in the U.K. union.

 

[PoppingTom]

So what accounts for Scotland's success? Three similar countries with a degree of economic success. Out of how many countries in the world. Both Slovakia and Slovenia have suffered from the split. Unless Scotland makes it's self a tax haven for rich Englishmen, I don't see how it can excel in the world's economy. Is poverty and unemployment worth nationalistic pride? Can pride be sat on long enough to evolve and negotiate a fairer union?

National pride overrules the need for excel in the world's economy, that's why nations exist at all, that's why they go independent, even by heavy disadvantage.

How did Slovenia suffered from the split?

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

And PM Cameron's reference to the Queen's disapproval of Scottish independence in the immediate runup to last year's referendum here on the subject was intended to have NO political consequences Ogg?

The monarch has considerable political power.

Witness the fact that she has insisted that, flying in the face of history, she is Queen Elizabeth II of the UK, when in fact all reputable historians agree that she is Queen Elizabeth II only of England. And NOT of the UK.

Well when Scotsman69 dies and goes to heaven (God forbid) that there will be at least one angry whining, bleating scot with a grievance. I hope St Peter and the Almighty have earplugs.

 

[Hard_Rom]

And PM Cameron's reference to the Queen's disapproval of Scottish independence in the immediate runup to last year's referendum here on the subject was intended to have NO political consequences Ogg?

The monarch has considerable political power.

Witness the fact that she has insisted that, flying in the face of history, she is Queen Elizabeth II of the UK, when in fact all reputable historians agree that she is Queen Elizabeth II only of England. And NOT of the UK.

Your right she is Elizabeth the first in Scotland. England's first Elizabeth ruled before the Act of Union in 1707. Like James the first of England (the guy who published the bible) who is what? James the fifth or sixth of Scotland.

Here in Canada she is called Elizabeth II Queen of Canada. Our independence has evolved from being English and French monarchial possessions.

Of course the Queen has political power. She's a head of state. Even as a figurehead, the amount of time she has been reigning and the vast amounts of information and experience she has is undeniable. She is a freaking asset to any British government. Heck if she wasn't Queen she would sit on the boards of every major multinational mega-corp and earn millions from her rolodex.