Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

By realities do you mean the £14bn or so net flow of cash every year into Scotland to prop up your free prescriptions and Higher Ed?

...just so we are clear

I think you're confusing me with Hamish. Just so we're clear.

Either that or FFA has happened and gone completely unnoticed by absolutely everyone in the UK !

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

'Not being considered legitimate by some' IS sinister in a UK democracy. The fact you personally feel the need to explain why exactly 'some don't consider' the SNP, Plaid Cymru or the SDLP as legitimate parties in terms of Westminster, after a Scottish No vote in an independence referendum.. even more so. I don't need it explained to

I was disappointed by the referendum result. Accepting the result means the SNP stay as part of Westminster. Perfectly legitimately.

An explanation is usually necessary to one who does not read or comprehend what is written. I did not write what you claim.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

An explanation is usually necessary to one who does not read or comprehend what is written. I did not write what you claim.

If you say so.

I don't think any have suggested that the SNP should not be allowed to vote, but there is a problem with legitimacy.

explain to the blinkered why they are not considered legitimate by some.

I don't think you can have one without the other can you ? Voting and 'legitimacy' ? In fact you took the comments made by Theresa May, and turned them into some sort of ramble against the SNP and how I'd missed a point somewhere.

The fact that the Home Secretary of the UK is making such statements is fundamentally wrong, whichever legally recognised political party she directs them against. The fact that you have sadly yet to admit she and those who come out with these sorts of comments are wrong.. instead preferring to ignore comments such as these, and concentrate instead on shaky youtube videos which are months old, and twitter comments that are in some cases years old.. Well, I think that says a lot.

Somehow though, you seem to think that I should be the only one apologising for misguided comments made by some in this campaign ( or in fact months before it started ) ? I think you're being just a little unfair. I am no more responsible for those youtube clips, than you are for Theresa May.

Lets leave this here. Theresa May has done more for the SNP in the last few days than those youtube clips will ever do against them. I'll be betting, though I haven't checked that most of those SNP members are standing in very closely contested seats too.. conveniently.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Aaah, so you have nothing left constructive to say, so go on an attempted personal character assassination, telling me what I think. Jolly good.

lots of constructive important issue to discuss but you seem a little shy about doing so

-maybe discuss the morality and fairness of the Barnett formula

-maybe discuss whether the people of Yorkshire should have the same share of the block grant as Scotland

-maybe discuss what shape new politics in Scotland would take : you know the one with fairness and reduced inequality

-maybe discuss the new democracy that the SNP would bring : more grass roots decision making etc.

-maybe discuss whether it is democratic for Westminster MP to form formal or informal coalitions to keep out another party
and whether it would be fair if SNP were frozen out
and whether it would be fair if Tories were frozen out

-maybe discuss whether in the event of independence it would be fair for Scotland to default on its share of the UK debt burden

-maybe discuss the best tactics for the next referendum

so lots of meaty debating points there but .........................

cepheus

If anyone thinks the SNP are far left they have no idea what they are talking about. Most of their policies differ little from Labour who are still a right wing party.

Why the SNP wouldn't drag Labour far to the left

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/04/why-snp-wouldnt-drag-labour-far-left

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

lots of constructive important issue to discuss but you seem a little shy about doing so

-maybe discuss the morality and fairness of the Barnett formula

It's being phased out Clapton. I posted it earlier, by 2020 Scotland will be raising much of its own revenue. The SNP want rid of Barnett completely.

-maybe discuss whether the people of Yorkshire should have the same share of the block grant as Scotland

Block grant is being phased out. See above. The whole discussion is out of date.

-maybe discuss what shape new politics in Scotland would take : you know the one with fairness and reduced inequality

Free school meals for primary 1-3, Free tuition care, abolish bedroom tax, up childcare hours, living wage, higher national minimum wage, end of over zealous sanctions, carers allowance up to JSA levels, council house building program, ending council house right to buy, social care merged with NHS services for the elderly, NHS remains in public hands..

No party or it's policies are perfect.

-maybe discuss the new democracy that the SNP would bring : more grass roots decision making etc.

It's happening now re grassroots, 105,000 members, SNP union membership now on par with Labour's.

-maybe discuss whether it is democratic for Westminster MP to form formal or informal coalitions to keep out another party
and whether it would be fair if SNP were frozen out
and whether it would be fair if Tories were frozen out

If the Tories can't get a majority, then that's just tough. At least the SNP have been upfront about what people are voting for. Unlike the Lib Dems last time where a lot of voters thought they were voting to 'keep the Tories out'. There is a difference between being up front in intentions.. and freezing an entire country's ( or region if you prefer ) representation at Westminster for their constituents, or even questioning their legitimacy to be there.

Freezing the SNP out is perfectly feasible. Is politics after all. The fallout from something like a Grand Coalition of Labour and Tory MP's ( all based elsewhere ) voting to renew Trident on the Clyde.. is quite another.

-maybe discuss whether in the event of independence it would be fair for Scotland to default on its share of the UK debt burden

No, it wouldn't. But assets TO Scotland are the flip side.

-maybe discuss the best tactics for the next referendum

Wait and patience. There is very little appetite for a second referendum in Scotland right now 8 months after the last. Even from SNP supporters ( see Ashcroft Scotland focus group today) and the SNP leadership. I count myself among the 'oh god, no, not right now camp'. There is this election, then another one in Holyrood 2016. Much to be going on with.

That's why it's so very, very wearing when folks keep bringing up 'neverendums'.. There is no appetite for one right now. But I can say with 100% absolute certainty.. that Scottish Labour and the Telegraph will spend the next 10 days pretending that Indy ref 2 is just around the corner. All the flapping over FFA has failed. ( Yougov 2 days ago ). The below results are despite 99% of Scotland's media peddling the doom scenario Hamish paints.



And I think the Daily Record has just 'turned' looking at their front pages today. Second poll in 24 hrs putting SNP at +50%.

Another 50%+ SNP poll. This one by Survation for Daily Record.

SNP 51% (+4); LAB 26% (-1); CON 14% (-1); LD 5% (+1); OTHER 4% (-4)

.@Survation #GE15 poll breakdown - @theSNP support at 52.5% among women, 50.0% for men. 57.3% for 16-34 year-olds:

I do hope the above extensive post meets with your approval.

kabayiri

Nicola Sturgeon was interesting on the 1/2 hour Leaders interview earlier tonight.

It's hard to argue with her core job of representing Scotlands' interests as First Minister.

It just felt a bit unbalanced, given that there is a Scottish Parliament; a Welsh Assembly; even NI; but no purely English Assembly.

If we did have an English Assembly, there would always be the accusation of bias towards English issues given the sheer size of England compared to the others anyway.

If you redefine the sub-structures within the UK to be at the level of Scotland; Wales; Yorkshire+NE; NW; SW; SE;Midlands, then the numbers seem more balanced.

zagubov

kabayiri wrote: »

Nicola Sturgeon was interesting on the 1/2 hour Leaders interview earlier tonight.

It's hard to argue with her core job of representing Scotlands' interests as First Minister.

It just felt a bit unbalanced, given that there is a Scottish Parliament; a Welsh Assembly; even NI; but no purely English Assembly.

If we did have an English Assembly, there would always be the accusation of bias towards English issues given the sheer size of England compared to the others anyway.

If you redefine the sub-structures within the UK to be at the level of Scotland; Wales; Yorkshire+NE; NW; SW; SE;Midlands, then the numbers seem more balanced.

.
There's clearly an English democratic deficit. I've lived here for more than three decades and when a devolved assembly for London was offered I voted for that immediately.

I've also lived in a part of England that had no clear regional identity whatsoever. I honestly don't know at what level England needs parliamentary representation below Westminster, but whether it was at the all-England level or for regions within England I'd vote for it 100%.

England needs a parliament or parliaments. In fact it needs a lot of careful and considered thought about the next step. Apart from maybe the Lb Dems, I don't know who's offering this.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Freezing the SNP out is perfectly feasible. Is politics after all.

Indeed it is.

Just as Sinn Fein should (quite rightly) expect to have little cooperation in a political body they are avowed to destroy, nor should the SNP.

The fallout from something like a Grand Coalition of Labour and Tory MP's ( all based elsewhere ) voting to renew Trident on the Clyde.. is quite another.

You think Scots (as opposed to the SNP) want to get rid of our nuclear deterrent?

The reality is somewhat different....

51% of Scots want a replacement for Trident, while only 34% would give up nuclear weapons completely

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2013/05/trident-the-snp-shoots-the-messenger/

Better_Days

Shakethedisease wrote:

Wait and patience. There is very little appetite for a second referendum in Scotland right now 8 months after the last. Even from SNP supporters ( see Ashcroft Scotland focus group today) and the SNP leadership. I count myself among the 'oh god, no, not right now camp'. There is this election, then another one in Holyrood 2016. Much to be going on with.

That's why it's so very, very wearing when folks keep bringing up 'neverendums'.. There is no appetite for one right now. But I can say with 100% absolute certainty.. that Scottish Labour and the Telegraph will spend the next 10 days pretending that Indy ref 2 is just around the corner.

The thing is the rUK don't know what the appetite is in Scotland for another referendum (as they don't live there ) and there is nothing that I could find on the SNP's website that stated their position either way. It really isn't surprising that there is debate about this when there is uncertainty and it looks as if the SNP (who are pro independence) are set to gain many more seats.

Just to add, I find it wearing too, but with lack of clarity there will continue to be debate on such an important issue. And if I hear the phrase 'hard working families' again I think I will go quietly and comprehensively mad. There wont be long to wait.