Economists Urge Scotland to Vote No......

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

yes I think it right and proper that that Scottish MPs elected to Westminster democratically by a part of the UK electorate should take their place as equals etc taking into account the devolved powers of the Scottish 'nation'.
i.e. the Scottish nation should not have greater powers compared to their Northern Irish, Welsh or English peoples

Of course the easiest way of doing this would be one unified nation and one parliament;
however as we don't have that, then there have to be compromises etc that some will be unhappy with.

e.g. if the majority in the Westminster parliament determined that Scotland should charge the same Uni charges to the NI, Welsh and English young people as the Scottish young people then should that be respected by holyrood?

Oh no, it was English MP's and Scottish Labour that voted fees in for English students. The SNP voted against them. A fact I'm sure you'll be applauding them endlessly for from now on ?

But just to repeat and so you are perfectly clear, the SNP voted against tuition fees in Westminster. The fact they are there is nothing whatsoever to do with them. They had too little in the way of MP's to make any difference. But didn't introduce them, nor vote them into existence in UK. The main three parties did. Lib Dems are going to pay the piper in May I suspect.

However, fees are a devolved matter. And they did what they could with their limited powers there. And made sure Scots students at least wouldn't have to pay. There was nothing else really, they could have done.

I'm so glad you agree than democratically elected UK MP's should be allowed an equal say in Westminster on UK matters that aren't devolved. That greatly heartens me. You might want to make your views clear however, to the Guardian who runs articles likening SNP MP's as 'insurgents' and the Telegraph who has likened the SNP to 'date rapists' in analogy.

There's absolutely no reason why a Scottish Labour MP, or a Scottish National MP should be differentiated between democratically. The press however, seem to have different ideas. I really hope they don't continue in this vein for the next few months. It will push the SNP vote up significantly given that they now use Scots and SNP interchangeably ( as one of the authors of the articles notes, before his unwise 'date rapist' analogy ) .

I'm sure you'll agree with that too.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Indeed.

End the Scottish, NI, and Welsh assemblies completely and just have MP's from Scotland, England, Wales, etc, only vote on the few matters concerning only those areas.

Gets rid of a needless layer of self serving, bloated, expensive, pointless bureaucracy and allows more money to be spent on local priorities.

Well I guess it's too late for all that.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Well I guess it's too late for all that.

Not yet.

The Scottish executive can be dissolved any time the UK parliament feels like it.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Oh no, it was English MP's and Scottish Labour that voted fees in for English students. The SNP voted against them. A fact I'm sure you'll be applauding them endlessly for from now on ?

But just to repeat and so you are perfectly clear, the SNP voted against tuition fees in Westminster. The fact they are there is nothing whatsoever to do with them. They had too little in the way of MP's to make any difference. But didn't introduce them, nor vote them into existence in UK. The main three parties did. Lib Dems are going to pay the piper in May I suspect.

However, fees are a devolved matter. And they did what they could with their limited powers there. And made sure Scots students at least wouldn't have to pay. There was nothing else really, they could have done.

I'm so glad you agree than democratically elected UK MP's should be allowed an equal say in Westminster on UK matters that aren't devolved. That greatly heartens me. You might want to make your views clear however, to the Guardian who runs articles likening SNP MP's as 'insurgents' and the Telegraph who has likened the SNP to 'date rapists' in analogy.

There's absolutely no reason why a Scottish Labour MP, or a Scottish National MP should be differentiated between democratically. The press however, seem to have different ideas. I really hope they don't continue in this vein for the next few months. It will push the SNP vote up significantly given that they now use Scots and SNP interchangeably ( as one of the authors of the articles notes, before his unwise 'date rapist' analogy ) .

I'm sure you'll agree with that too.

Devolved governments leads to a differentiation of the power of the politicians that represent the different peoples of the UK.
All the peoples of the UK should have equal representation at Westminster to vote on Reserved powers like security, foreign policy etc.
For devolved matters then one would expect one would expect different level of voting rights at Westminster for those peoples with the own devolved power: in practice there may not be a 100% clear division but that an inevitable consequence of devolving power.
Obviously the peoples of the UK will expect the Scottish people to continue to argue they should have a higher per capita share of UK resources, to argue that the other 60 million are out of step with the 5 million etc, that 'Scottish' resources shouldn't be shared etc.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote:

Don't embarrass yourself any more string. You have nothing of note to contribute apart from anti-SNP rants. Every. Single. Post. I don't have a personal stance on Trident. If I did I would have said so. However, that shouldn't negate the fact other people, and lots of them do. Most especially those who live nearby. It is a big issue for some people, throughout the entire UK for that matter.

If you don't get that EVEL coupled with reserved matters and disagreements over who can vote on what...Taken forward into the next government is going to be a complete minefield of a mess on an epic scale.. As well as alienating Scots still further ( ie the example of Trident I provided ) ? Then all you're doing is using my posts to justify anti-SNP rants instead of debating the actual content of them.

I've no reason to be embarrassed but I would be if I simply acted as a conduit for a political party like the SNP. If you continually promulgate what are recognisably SNP views and interpretations you must expect reaction.


Regarding Trident, while there are those that who against it, it is agreed by a majority in our democratic system, not a parochial distortion by one local party.

ruggedtoast

Is Shakey the last cybernat? There don't seem to be many others left (for some reason). Will she hold out forever like those Japanese soldiers found on lost islands who don't realise the war is over and who won't surrender?

padington

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Is Shakey the last cybernat? There don't seem to be many others left (for some reason). Will she hold out forever like those Japanese soldiers found on lost islands who don't realise the war is over and who won't surrender?

That's where you're wrong, they are fast approaching the most actively supported political party in the UK. Cameron's rant about stopping Scotland vote on English decisions the day after the referendum was a colossal fail. That should have been the time to pay respect to the people that voted SNP and assure them that Scotland would always play a very significant role in our future.

He chose selfish political gain in England over the well being of Britain. It was a School boy error, with very real repercussions for possibly many years to come.

.string.

That, padington, is colossal nonsense. I'd would been unprofessional of any Government not to consider the ramifications of the increase in Scottish Powers on the rest of the United Kingdom, not just England but also Wales and NI.

Of course it has been spun as a bad thing by Labour who see a potential for them to loose a built-in advantage and also by the SNP who find fault on anything that could possibly be used to derail the increased devolution. In that respect I recall that England only voting for English matters was supported by the SNP in the past. So the SNP is hypercritical on that one.

I myself think non-English MPs should vote on all things but for some few in an advisory role only and in the latter case voting should be re-done (like for the House of Lords but for one time only) in the event that a majority of non-English MPs vote against a particular decision.

padington

.string. wrote: »

That, padington, is colossal nonsense. I'd would been unprofessional of any Government not to consider the ramifications of the increase in Scottish Powers on the rest of the United Kingdom, not just England but also Wales and NI.

Of course it has been spun as a bad thing by Labour who see a potential for them to loose a built-in advantage and also by the SNP who find fault on anything that could possibly be used to derail the increased devolution. In that respect I recall that England only voting for English matters was supported by the SNP in the past. So the SNP is hypercritical on that one.

I myself think non-English MPs should vote on all things but for some few in an advisory role only and in the latter case voting should be re-done (like for the House of Lords but for one time only) in the event that a majority of non-English MPs vote against a particular decision.

The timing to discuss those matters was a big error. Hence why we are where we are. It felt underhand and biased even from an English perspective. God knows how it felt from a Scottish perspective. Foolish in delivery and selfishly political in timing.

CLAPTON

padington wrote: »

The timing to discuss those matters was a big error. Hence why we are where we are. It felt underhand and biased even from an English perspective. God knows how it felt from a Scottish perspective. Foolish in delivery and selfishly political in timing.

why, in a democracy is it wrong to state the blinding obvious?

The situation whereby Scottish MPs voted on English matters was clearly wrong and the individual MPs who did this sought only party political advantage and lack any sense of morality : their Scot's voters are likewise a disgrace.

The Barnett formula is a similar disgrace only defended by selfish people or by party hacks who care nothing for justice, fairness or democracy.