Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

kabayiri

zagubov wrote: »

...

I wish England had as much political choice.

It's an interesting perspective.

I caught one of the political debates and it made me think we do have a bit more variety now. Greens and UKIP, Plaid and SNP, and the traditional Labour; Libs and Conservatives.

elantan

I totally agree a one party state is not a good idea, we just need to look atvScotland and labour ( up till now) to see this, the SNP are certainly shaking it up, hopefully once were independent more parties would form CW for example to take the country forward.

I doubt if HR would turn yellow ( SNP as opposed to Lib dems) next year and I can see more Tory seats, Ruth Davidson has a good way of putting herself across... I hope it does turn SNP yellow, and I hope in 2017,2019 it becomes SNP yellow across the board, just till we get independence, then I would love to see a multi coloured HR, council and EU bunch of MEP's

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

...
It's a nasty old world out there regarding press coverage, especially for SNP candidates/members/MSPs/MP's or anyone even vaguely connected to them. Balance hasn't been much in evidence lately, if ever. Best not to feed the wolves, and certainly not at this moment in time. There's too much to lose by exposing even the very slightest mistake for the muck rakers to pick over. Because the slightest mistake will be treated like Watergate and the BBC will have tickers scrolling about it for days.. Is all getting a little bit hysterical and OTT re the SNP and this election. Definitely best everyone knows how to handle things and boundaries are set for a limited time until things calm down.
...

Interesting Shakey. You seem to describe a different world almost from what I see here.

The biggest story yesterday concerned the number of people who hadn't registered to vote. It wasn't pro or anti any one party.

It's pretty calm here I have to say.

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

in what way is the belief in the union being subsumed by narrow party political interest : indeed whatever does that mean?

This article explains my points but frankly I have already explained above:-
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/20/tories-playing-dangerous-game-scotland-lord-forsyth

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

This article explains my points but frankly I have already explained above:-
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/20/tories-playing-dangerous-game-scotland-lord-forsyth

I didn't realise that you admired conservatives so much and that they formed so much of your thinking

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

I didn't realise that you admired conservatives so much and that they formed so much of your thinking

As I've already explained there was an article about this issue in the Torygraph weeks ago. My point on this is not from a narrow party perspective it's about a concern for the consequences to the union. As Forsyth says:

“David Cameron, instead of going up to Scotland the next day [after the referendum] and saying ‘look we’ve got to look at this now from the point of view of the whole United Kingdom’, started this English votes for English laws thing which was not really a unionist position and that shattered the unionist alliance against the breakup of the United Kingdom.
“I personally don’t support English votes for English laws. It doesn’t seem to me to be a very good policy to try and deal with the rise of Scottish nationalism by stirring up English nationalism. I think you have to, we need to find ways of binding the United Kingdom together, of binding that partnership together.”

Tromking

elantan wrote: »

I totally agree a one party state is not a good idea, we just need to look atvScotland and labour ( up till now) to see this, the SNP are certainly shaking it up, hopefully once were independent more parties would form CW for example to take the country forward.

I doubt if HR would turn yellow ( SNP as opposed to Lib dems) next year and I can see more Tory seats, Ruth Davidson has a good way of putting herself across... I hope it does turn SNP yellow, and I hope in 2017,2019 it becomes SNP yellow across the board, just till we get independence, then I would love to see a multi coloured HR, council and EU bunch of MEP's

Scotland is headed toward a simple binary choice in all its elections, Unionist or Nationalist. You need to get your head round that fact.
New Ulster is forming before our very eyes.

Moby

The BBC raised some difficult issues in it’s analysis of the SNP manifesto last night, showing that SNP controlled administrations had spent far less on health and education per head than the coalition, which sits oddly with the concept of a progressive movement determined to end austerity.?

I doubt such facts will trouble the diehards, but there does seem to be a disconnect between the rhetoric and the reality.


I think this is the real strength of the SNP, that they are able to pick the populist policies that appear progressive, while blaming all ills on Westminster. It’s a neat trick, but strangely quite easy to pull off when people are tired of centralised, traditional politics.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

As I've already explained there was an article about this issue in the Torygraph weeks ago. My point on this is not from a narrow party perspective it's about a concern for the consequences to the union. As Forsyth says:

“David Cameron, instead of going up to Scotland the next day [after the referendum] and saying ‘look we’ve got to look at this now from the point of view of the whole United Kingdom’, started this English votes for English laws thing which was not really a unionist position and that shattered the unionist alliance against the breakup of the United Kingdom.
“I personally don’t support English votes for English laws. It doesn’t seem to me to be a very good policy to try and deal with the rise of Scottish nationalism by stirring up English nationalism. I think you have to, we need to find ways of binding the United Kingdom together, of binding that partnership together.”

Lord Forsyth is a born and bred Scot.

He doesn't believe in fairness and equality for all the peoples of the UK but believes Scotland should have special privileges that aren't available to e.g. the people of Yorkshire.


It's outrageous and undemocratic for SNP politicians to vote on mainly English laws.

His solution is basically not to tell the truth about SNP policies or the Barnett formula and to give the SNP everything they want:-

lots more money than for Yorkshire, unlimited voting powers in Scotland and unlimited voting powers for the SNP in England too , and unlimited ability to borrow (and never need to repay).

The Scots need to understand what fairness and equality mean and if they don't want to be merely equal then let them vote for separation.

We will all be better off in our different ways.

Generali

Moby wrote: »

I think this is the real strength of the SNP, that they are able to pick the populist policies that appear progressive, while blaming all ills on Westminster. It’s a neat trick, but strangely quite easy to pull off when people are tired of centralised, traditional politics.

Pretty standard stuff for Nationalists. Take credit for doing what you can and blame your failings on the 'out group' be they Jews (a traditional favourite), Hutus, The English (we all know what the SNP mean when they say 'Westminster'), the EU (UKIP's bloody foreigners of choice) or someone else.

These politics of division end in very dark places.