Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Generali

elantan wrote: »

Tbh I expected austerity for ten years at least, I expected my house value to drop, both were a sacrifice I considered worth it,

Plus unemployment of Greek-style proportions?

elantan

CLAPTON wrote: »

All decent people should continue to condemn racism, corruption, hypocrisy and wrongs (even if it means a little repetition.)

Obviously it is difficult for true acolytes who can't bring themselves to rationally evaluate the behaviour and policies of their great leader(s). Sadly history shows many example of such blind followers and fellow travellers.

Do keep up the refusal to discuss actual policies and only discuss spin and trivia.

However, that leaves the duty of the decent people to keep the wrongs center stage.

Sheesh now your making me repeat myself, my campaigning finished at 10pm sept 18th ... Now this just a passing interest

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

There was a lot of talk about oil as a major driver in the Scottish economy.

Scottish voters aren't stupid. They can work out what happens when one of your major asset income streams collapses.

Perhaps they can flog more Whisky?

Mabye we'll have to if the upper echelon's in Tory land are currently considering...

Conservative Home

It would not be at all surprising were the Tories to end up with more seats than Labour…but not enough to form a majority Government. That figure could be as high as 320 or thereabouts; or it could be as low as 275 or so. Let’s take 290 as a very rough middle-range guesstimate....

This, in turn, would mean striving to come to one with Alex Salmond, and the larger number of SNP MPs who are set to return to Westminster. A constitutional horror? An offence to Conservative principles? An invitation to break up the United Kingdom? Far from it.
Remember: the Conservative Party has already offered more devolution to Scotland than Labour, through the Strathclyde Commission, which said that the country “should have full powers over income tax” – three months or so before the Vow and six months or so before the Smith Commission.
The next logical step would be to offer Scotland Home Rule, together with Home Rule for all the Home Nations – including, of course, England – in a fully federal UK, as recommended in the ConservativeHome Manifesto...


...What is the alternative, if the Union is to be saved (and Cameron to stay on, for that matter)? Margaret Thatcher tried to wish the problem away. John Major sent back the Stone of Scone. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown tried a devolution halfway house with rotten foundations. None of these ploys worked.
Only the federal solution remains: unless, that is, one prefers shouting “Boo!” at Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon in the hope that they will go away (which they won’t) – while simultaneously bringing closer the very SNP-Labour deal that Team Cameron is rightly warning the country against.

http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/03/the-290-seat-conservative-government-1-cameron-should-be-ready-to-negotiate-with-salmond.html

Desperate days in the Tory camp mabye ( not that it will happen ).

elantan

Generali wrote: »

Plus unemployment of Greek-style proportions?

Who knows what would've happened, I know I would've liked to have tried it out

Shakethedisease

elantan wrote: »

Who knows what would've happened, I know I would've liked to have tried it out

I think it's going to happen sooner or later ( more likely sooner ).

The Tories have completely given up on Scotland, and if Labour and Lib dem's lose most of their seats.. they will too. Politically there will be nothing in it for them anymore. Imo, Scottish Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dem's will break off from their UK branches and start afresh making Scotland/Holyrood their primary focus. There's no where else for them to go Scotland wise unless it's to spend years in the wilderness clinging on to Westminster policies that are not vote winners in Scotland. Trying to keep London and South of England happy at the same time as urban Glasgow and the Highlands with 'one size fits all' policies isn't working anymore.

None of them want the SNP being sent down to Westminster repeatedly 'causing bother' either. There's a natural *political conclusion to all of this... It's just too soon to admit it. Though I think the Tories might break ranks at some point soon (ish ) in order to consolidate and concentrate on England where their voters are. UKIP is the same. Labour and Lib Dems are still crossing their fingers hoping that it won't be as bad as the polls are showing. And mabye it won't be. But this Scotland 'thing' isn't going away anytime soon either.

* note I didn't say economic.

elantan

Yes I also believe it will happen sooner rather than later, in the mean time though its all incredibly interesting to watch it unfold

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

...

Desperate days in the Tory camp mabye ( not that it will happen ).

We had plenty of this second guessing of outcomes before the Scottish referendum.

I'm not inclined to second guess the GE. We will end up with what the voters vote for. I can live with that.

If the outcome is Tory. We get one flavour of cuts.

If the outcome is Labour. We get a different flavour of cuts.

There isn't that much to separate them when it comes to economic grounds. There really isn't that much wriggle room when you are trying to find tens of billions in savings.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

We had plenty of this second guessing of outcomes before the Scottish referendum.

I'm not inclined to second guess the GE. We will end up with what the voters vote for. I can live with that.

If the outcome is Tory. We get one flavour of cuts.

If the outcome is Labour. We get a different flavour of cuts.

There isn't that much to separate them when it comes to economic grounds. There really isn't that much wriggle room when you are trying to find tens of billions in savings.

Trident and the House of Lords might be a good start. Labour might go along with the SNP's plans also. There's cuts, and then there's cuts.. There's always wiggle room. We've all just gotten far too used to thinking only massive one's will work. Well, mabye they do for some. But not for some of the most vunerable in society. It's time something changed and a new course taken imho. I understand that it's splashed across newspapers as 'debt fueled SNP spending spree ' but there you go. There are lots of economists who agree with the below. Not just the IFS.

But the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said new figures in this week's Budget showed that not only was her plan feasible, but if Labour agreed to the proposals the party could still meet its aim to balance UK's books by 2020.
When she made her call the SNP leader estimated that £180 billion would be required to meet her proposal - for a 0.5 per cent rise in departmental spending.
The IFS said that an analysis of the latest calculations in the Budget suggested that that figure had dropped dramatically.
Its analysis showed that Labour could meet its target for a balanced Budget by the last year of the next parliament and still increase departmental spending in real terms by £9bn a year between 2015-16 and 2019-20.
The think tank said that this £9bn increase equated to an average growth of 0.5 per cent a year - the same as the SNP proposals.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/wider-political-news/ifs-labour-could-sign-up-to-nicola-sturgeons-call-for-billions-extra-i.121222793

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Trident and the House of Lords might be a good start.
...

Here's a harsh unwelcome fact based on personal knowledge.

I am sure I am not alone here in getting involved with pricing up work (bid work) in the past for major defence projects.

Often you are part of a consortium. Pricing for risk is built into every layer of the contract. After all, there is a lot to lose if you get the sums wrong.

I knew of one big project. Even if it was cancelled early on the customer was committed to more than 90% of the cost.

I wouldn't be surprised if something like Trident has similar restrictions.

You just don't save as much money as you think if you terminate a contract early. The people who draw up these contracts are well paid and sharp. They price both cancellation and change into the contracts.

elantan

The plan isn't to cancel the contract early, its to not renew