Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Do you not tire of typing the same spiel time and again?

Why does it unset you so much when the Scottish attitude to fairness is mentioned?

Castle

Froggitt wrote: »

No Nicola, he wants to reduce Scottish influence over England, not over the UK. Why should Scottish MPs have a say on Income Tax in England if English MPs no longer will have a say on Income Tax in Scotland?

Scottish MPs at Westminster won't have a say on Scottish Income tax either, it will be decided by MSPs in Edinburgh.

If Mr Cameron wants "English votes for English Issues" then he needs an English Parliament not Westminster.

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

Nope, poor habit of yours , always trying to make assumptions on others behalf.

But thanks for confirming precisely the reasons I and thousands of other voters feel a Labour minority government , will be difficult and unstable for the UK as a whole at the present time.

And for clarity that SNP's new branding of being an anti austerity party who will work for the benefit of all the UK in Westminster is whitewash.

However unlike thousands of SNP supporters, I do accept the reality that all democratically elected members to Westminster have a right to be there.

That's your opinion. And am sorry that you can't quite grasp yet that minority governments, whether Labour OR Tory won't have the numbers to pass legislation on their own. It's a pretty simple concept to grasp. A Tory minority government will be just as 'unstable' as a Labour one.

Labour/SNP and Lib Dem plans over (anti)austerity over the next 5 years, the IFS said there wasn't much between them. All of them said the IFS had got things wrong.

And what are you on about saying that thousands of SNP members don't accept the reality that all democratically elected members to Westminster have a right to be there ? You've lost me. That's precisely what they are arguing.

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

How can Cameron doing MORE than Nicola and Alex as they specifically want Scotland to leave: no ifs, no buts, no compromises but leave.
You may, of course be implying that the Scots reaction to fairness in voting and grant distribution across all the people of the UK, will make them more likely to vote for independence.
If that be so, then the soon they leave the better.

He's simply saying Cameron is banging the English Nationalist drum for party political reasons at the expense of the Union. I've already said this remember....Forsyth...Tebbit's comments a couple of days ago?

Generali

Moby wrote: »

He's simply saying Cameron is banging the English Nationalist drum for party political reasons at the expense of the Union. I've already said this remember....Forsyth...Tebbit's comments a couple of days ago?

The worst thing is this absolutely plays into the hands of the SNP.

The best thing that can happen to the SNP is that the English say, "Eff you, we ain't paying your bills no more you muppets".

The SNP just want to drive a wedge between England and Scotland. They hate the English and want to be separate at any cost to either side.

Moby

skintmacflint wrote: »

I and thousands of other voters feel a Labour minority government , will be difficult and unstable for the UK as a whole at the present time.

.

So how exactly is David Cameron going unite us all behind him then?
I think he has been the most divisive PM we have had for years. Blair was obviously divisive because of Iraq but at least that was out of principle and it was one issue! Cameron however didn't actually want a EU referendum. He changed party policy to allow one because of internal party political reasons. His speech following the referendum result attempted to tie the 'Vow' to an English Parliament. He did this with no consultation with other parties and was not interested in a constitutional convention because he wanted to score a party advantage.
He is doing the same now banging the English Nationalist drum and alluding to the chaos that would follow a Lab/SNP govmt. This is highly damaging to the union! Can you describe an outcome in which Cameron leads a govmt which is an oasis of calm in comparison? I reckon the Libdems will hardly be in a position to offer him such a Govmt?

Moby

Generali wrote: »

The worst thing is this absolutely plays into the hands of the SNP.

The best thing that can happen to the SNP is that the English say, "Eff you, we ain't paying your bills no more you muppets".

The SNP just want to drive a wedge between England and Scotland. They hate the English and want to be separate at any cost to either side.

Agreed....he may get some short term gain re. the 'fear factor' in England re. the election result but at what long term cost for the Union? he has to decide what is more important to him the fortunes of his party at this election or the continuation of the Union?

Generali

Moby wrote: »

So how exactly is David Cameron going unite us all behind him then?
I think he has been the most divisive PM we have had for years. Blair was obviously divisive because of Iraq but at least that was out of principle and it was one issue! Cameron however didn't actually want a EU referendum. He changed party policy to allow one because of internal party political reasons. His speech following the referendum result attempted to tie the 'Vow' to an English Parliament. He did this with no consultation with other parties and was not interested in a constitutional convention because he wanted to score a party advantage.
He is doing the same now banging the English Nationalist drum and alluding to the chaos that would follow a Lab/SNP govmt. This is highly damaging to the union! Can you describe an outcome in which Cameron leads a govmt which is an oasis of calm in comparison? I reckon the Libdems will hardly be in a position to offer him such a Govmt?

I think the best thing that can happen after the election is that if a party wins both the most votes and most seats, the main National parties plus any interested regional ones rally around them and form a National Government.

I think constitutional reform is going to have to happen: some form of PR is needed in a multi-party system.

I don't think Cameron is particularly divisive. I can't imagine that people will be dancing in Trafalgar Square as they did when Lady Thatcher died for example.

The EU referendum is a dumb zit of an idea which could be lanced too with a unionist coalition.

Froggitt

Castle wrote: »

Scottish MPs at Westminster won't have a say on Scottish Income tax either, it will be decided by MSPs in Edinburgh.

If Mr Cameron wants "English votes for English Issues" then he needs an English Parliament not Westminster.

I can see that happening as well. Right by the Birmingham Interchange Station of HS2, by the NEC, the M6, the M42, Birmingham Airport, and the West Coast Main Line. And it is less than one mile from Meriden, the "centre of England".

It would be good to delineate which authority was responsible for which powers.

And of course, the English Parliament would get the same amount per capita as the Scottish Parliament does.

CLAPTON

The British system isn't to be united behind a single party.
Instead its about a party in power being held to account by an able opposition, offering an alternative vision.

The issue of Europe is a reasonably one on which to hold a referendum as the current situation is very different from the initial vision.

Democracy in action is no bad thing even if some of our parties feel they know what is best for the British people.

The Scottish situation is a result of the craven politics of the last 30 years where the main parties have vied to buy Scottish votes.

Unfortunately there is no easy way of correcting the wrongs of the past but all the more reason to get it fair and just now.

If a fair and just resolution of the Scottish devolved power offends some people then so beit.
A price worth paying for a more equal and just society.