Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Well it wasn't here. I think you might be missing quite a lot..

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/21/nicola-sturgeon-snp-leader-old-two-party-system

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/queen-palace-coup-miliband-snp-cameron-huitson-345

The right wing press is running very scared. The polls haven't turned and time is running out.

Perhaps less running scared of than hating Nationalists.

That's my viewpoint after all. I'm not scared of the SNP but I f!!!ing hate them.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

do you have an evidence to suggest such a thing?

lots of things have been trialled out in a region before national rollout: can you select any examples where that particular region still has a huge chip on the shoulder 25 years later?

I used the Poll tax as an example. Saying that someone like Lord Forsyth has 'Scotland's interests at heart' because he was born there is so removed from perceived truth up here that it's laughable even to suggest it. He presided over the Tory wipeout in Scotland in 1997. There's are reason for that. Between himself and Rifkind, they are probably a big reason Nicola Sturgeon is where she is today, politically speaking, re an independent Scotland...and didn't just join the Labour party instead in her teens.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Perhaps less running scared of than hating Nationalists.

That's my viewpoint after all. I'm not scared of the SNP but I f!!!ing hate them.

Well, good for you.. I think ? Your opinion. But you'll be hearing a lot more about them regardless if you hate them or not. Thems the breaks in politics.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

That's a very good point.

So as a question for the SNP apologists, what exactly do you want now?

Independence is off the table "for a generation", FFA is unaffordable. So what exactly do Nats want from the SNP now if not independence nor fiscal autonomy?

What does the SNP stand for now? Is it just more and more pork: an ever increasing subsidy from London? Is it a genteel decline into poverty as taxes and spending in Scotland equalise or something else? Do you all get your prayer mats out and beg the Big Yin to push oil prices back up?

Further powers will be enough to be going along with. And a the very least it looks like they will actually be delivered rather than kicked into the long grass ( as was feared if normality, re Labour or Tory majorities in power returned this election ). Devo Max/!!!!!!/FFA as a long term aim. And I think there's a good chance that in the 2016 Holyrood elections there will be either a massive public consultation on Devo Max/FFA/!!!!!! and what powers the Scots really do want to see delivered.. or a non-advisory non-binding referendum. I think the public consultation would be the most likely.

Then the findings will be presented to whichever party is in power, which at the moment, looks like it may be Labour. Seems a good enough way forward to me. But the above is only my opinion. You did ask.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Well it wasn't here. I think you might be missing quite a lot..

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/21/nicola-sturgeon-snp-leader-old-two-party-system

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/queen-palace-coup-miliband-snp-cameron-huitson-345

The right wing press is running very scared. The polls haven't turned and time is running out.

well, let's hope that the SNP use their awesome power like they did in 1979.

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

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.

Ok so Forsyth is disqualified from having a view in your eyes because he is Scottish.....so how about Norman Tebbit saying similar things today then:-

• Tebbit said David Cameron’s decision to talk up the threat posed by the SNP was “puzzling”.

What I find puzzling now is the prime minister’s position that the SNP is far worse than Labour because, if so, as there are not many seats in Scotland where the Conservative Party has a chance to win, the logic would seem to be that Conservatives should vote tactically for Labour as the lesser of two evils.
I think it’s a huge scare tactic against Labour and whether the particular seat in the House of Commons is occupied by a Labour member or an SNP member perhaps it’s not a great difference.

• Tebbit accused Cameron of “irritating” the Scots for no good reason.

Having bungled the Scottish referendum it seems pointless to just irritate Scots by shouting at them from Westminster - the English are irritated into voting for Ukip, by being shouted at from Westminster - and the Scots are irritated similarly.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I used the Poll tax as an example. Saying that someone like Lord Forsyth has 'Scotland's interests at heart' because he was born there is so removed from perceived truth up here that it's laughable even to suggest it. He presided over the Tory wipeout in Scotland in 1997. There's are reason for that. Between himself and Rifkind, they are probably a big reason Nicola Sturgeon is where she is today, politically speaking, re an independent Scotland...and didn't just join the Labour party instead in her teens.

you used the example of the poll tax because you have a victims' culture and live in the past

only the Scots, mired in their own lack of worth and their benefits culture, could possibly still dwell on the past and give a hoot about the poll tax (I guess they could find common cause with the Socialist Workers Party but no-one else )

does Forsyth support the unfair Barnett formula?

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Well it wasn't here. I think you might be missing quite a lot..

...

The right wing press is running very scared. The polls haven't turned and time is running out.

You mistake the tabloid media for what people are actually talking about. The papers are not a mirror for real life.

I'm not interested in the sensationalist rags. That's their job - to spice things up and sell copy.

On local television last night the talk was about getting people to register to vote.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

Ok so Forsyth is disqualified from having a view in your eyes because he is Scottish.....so how about Norman Tebbit saying similar things today then:-

• Tebbit said David Cameron’s decision to talk up the threat posed by the SNP was “puzzling”.

What I find puzzling now is the prime minister’s position that the SNP is far worse than Labour because, if so, as there are not many seats in Scotland where the Conservative Party has a chance to win, the logic would seem to be that Conservatives should vote tactically for Labour as the lesser of two evils.
I think it’s a huge scare tactic against Labour and whether the particular seat in the House of Commons is occupied by a Labour member or an SNP member perhaps it’s not a great difference.

• Tebbit accused Cameron of “irritating” the Scots for no good reason.

Having bungled the Scottish referendum it seems pointless to just irritate Scots by shouting at them from Westminster - the English are irritated into voting for Ukip, by being shouted at from Westminster - and the Scots are irritated similarly.

Any-one can express a view about how Cameron is addressing the election and the issue of fair voting for the English and fair and equitable block support grants.

However, the fact that Forsyth is conservative gives his view no special merit: it is only in the SNP that dissent is outlawed.

I accept that asking for fair and equal rights and money for all the people of the union will irritate the Scots: but that shouldn't stop all the politicians doing the right thing.

The Scots should be ashamed be defend the indefensible.

elantan

Moby wrote: »

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.

Although yes they have not kept up with the increase of % spending on the NHS Scotland still spends more per head that England .... England have just closed the gap a bit that's all