Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

chewmylegoff

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Are you referring to the joke Salmond made about approving the Labour budget?

It was said in jest.

Are you really so naive?

They have said a historical number of SNP's at Westminster would provide strength in negotiations.

It's looking like the SNP may get almost as much seats as Lib Dems did at the last election, however you can be sure that the SNP would not roll over like the Lib / Dems did.

No as I have already explained, Salmond has stated that the SNP would be able to push through progressive spending increases by rejecting a Labour budget and then proposing amendments to it.

Seems to me that you think it's horrible and dishonest (of the Tories) to make statements that Labour will be propped up by the SNP but noble and worthy (of the SNP) when the SNP talk about forcing labour to compromise for the benefit of Scotland.

If you think the Tories should be more honest by scaling back their statements about the extent of influence the SNP might have then you must also think the SNP are being dishonest about the amount of material influence they will actually have (either that or you are just a hypocrite).

Froggitt

Better_Days wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-30061564
Sturgeon - November 2014
Quote:
"But I ask you to think about this. Think about how much more we could win for Scotland from a Westminster Labour government if they had to depend on SNP votes."
Ms Sturgeon said Labour would be forced to "deliver real powers for our parliament" as well as rethinking the "endless austerity that impoverishes our children" and thinking again about "putting a new generation of Trident nuclear weapons on the River Clyde."

Economic incontinence. Adding to the debt by another few hundred billion pounds is what would impoverish our children for decades into the future, as it is them, rather than us, who would have to repay that debt.

Rinoa

Police in Scotland issuing warnings about threatening behaviour from SNP supporters.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3071622/Fears-voting-Scotland-disrupted-intimidating-SNP-supporters-plan-arrive-late-follow-counting-staff-police-issue-warnings-polling-stations.html

IveSeenTheLight

chewmylegoff wrote: »

No as I have already explained, Salmond has stated that the SNP would be able to push through progressive spending increases by rejecting a Labour budget and then proposing amendments to it.

Seems to me that you think it's horrible and dishonest (of the Tories) to make statements that Labour will be propped up by the SNP but noble and worthy (of the SNP) when the SNP talk about forcing labour to compromise for the benefit of Scotland.

If you think the Tories should be more honest by scaling back their statements about the extent of influence the SNP might have then you must also think the SNP are being dishonest about the amount of material influence they will actually have (either that or you are just a hypocrite).

I think you have not considered or have little knowledge of how a minority government needs to work in order to succeed.

The SNP have that experience and flexibility of succeeding as a minority government.

Take Trident as an example, The SNP had red lined that, meaning they would vote against it, however we all know that Labour would get enough backing from the Tories, hence SNP cannot force through any legislation if the government can get enough votes from the other parties.

On other matters, the government may be swayed to move towards the SNP support ahead of the other parties.

So let me be clear, I do not believe that the SNP can force a Labour government to do anything (Like the Lib Dems couldn't force the Conservatives to abolish tuition fee's), but there will be many factors where LAbour and SNP can reach and agreeable compromise to gain the support.

It will not be in the interest for the SNP to be too demanding as they know that as an opposition party, you have to work with the government to get your ideals incorporated

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

What is wrong with any of these statements?

The previous largest delegate from the SNP to Westminster was 11 MP's This is set to be increased four or five fold.
That does give the SNP voice greater strength and influence at Westminster.

On a vote by vote basis, the minority government will need to work with the other parties and as stated before, with LAbour and SNP policies very similar, it would be easier for Labour to make minor adjustments to gain SNP votes.

The SNP could also "demand" an alternative to "slash and burn austerity", however how much variance they get from those demand may range from nothing to significant. It will all be part of the negotiation process.

P.S. I know I have cited just a minority Labour government as there have been clear stance that the SNP would not prop up the conservatives

I didn't say anything was right or wrong with these statements. They were in reply to another poster.

IveSeenTheLight

Rinoa wrote: »

Police in Scotland issuing warnings about threatening behaviour from SNP supporters.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3071622/Fears-voting-Scotland-disrupted-intimidating-SNP-supporters-plan-arrive-late-follow-counting-staff-police-issue-warnings-polling-stations.html

Is this a continuation of the Jim Murphy publicity stunt.
Totally disgraceful in my opinion.

I do recall a video which clearly showed a counting error made during the referendum, but insufficient to have affected the overall vote.

I think that we have to acknowledge that in the wee small hours, a small element of human error can occur, hence why the process covers close count constituencies to be recounted.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

I didn't say anything was right or wrong with these statements. They were in reply to another poster.

I'm glad we are in agreement that the Tory spin is unjustified

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

It will not be in the interest for the SNP to be too demanding as they know that as an opposition party, you have to work with the government to get your ideals incorporated

the key 'ideal' of the SNP is independence


plus to a lesser extend, the determination to deprive the poor of funding, so that the richer people can be subsidised to go to Uni

Generali

It's a bit mad to be following lorries carrying ballot papers IMHO but there's nothing illegal about it AFAIKS. It's a free country after all.

IveSeenTheLight

CLAPTON wrote: »

the key 'ideal' of the SNP is independence

It is.
No-one denies that, however the party is capable of putting that aside and acting on the interests of the electorate.

I repeat again, Sturgeon has clarified that a vote for the SNP is not a vote for another referendum and that it is simply to unite the voice of Scotland to be greater at Westminster

CLAPTON wrote: »

plus to a lesser extend, the determination to deprive the poor of funding, so that the richer people can be subsidised to go to Uni

Grooooaaaaan!!!

Give it a rest, when will you learn that your baiting techniques don't work?

Really, you come across (to me anyway) as a man holding a sandwich board citing "The end of the world is nigh"