We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies
Comments
-
Once again we see the conflation of the SNP and Scotland. The ads were anti-SNP but not anti-Scottish.
No matter how SNP likes to portray things, the SNP isn't Scotland.
By this rhetoric, the Consevatives are even less United Kingdom:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »You absolutely can blame it on the SNP.
It was the fear of the SNP holding a weak minority government to ransom (as indeed they were proudly claiming they would through the campaign) and pushing the country too far left that likely caused a Tory majority.
Nicola got what she wanted.:)0 -
Enterprise_1701C wrote: »Why do the Scots want more Scottishness in Westminster.
They have their own parliament.
If they did not have their own parliament it would be different.
As it is, Westminster is not an English parliament. It's a UK one.
As the Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dems etc kept telling us, were supposed to be "better together"
Now, as have some laws devolved, I'm happy for votes in the ROUK to be ROUK only, where it does not impact the constituencies on which the abstaining MP's represent.
If Westminster was to become ROUK only for 1 or 2 days then that's fine.
Until then..........:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »In this election, the SNP DID get the majority of the vote, something that has never occurred in UK politics to my knowledge
The SNP got 50% of the vote thanks to tactical voting of the Yes supporters coalescing behind them. While the other 50% was split between many different parties.
The percentage of the total electorate that voted SNP was 35%, only a whisker lower than the 38% that voted for Independence.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Now, as have some laws devolved, I'm happy for votes in the ROUK to be ROUK only, where it does not impact the constituencies on which the abstaining MP's represent.
If Westminster was to become ROUK only for 1 or 2 days then that's fine.
Until then..........
So based on that theory we should just abolish the Scottish Executive and have Scottish Westminster MP-s handle Scotland-only legislation.
But back to reality...
Any comment on the SNP economist admitting fiscal autonomy without subsidy would be 'economic suicide' for Scotland?"For Scotland to accept fiscal autonomy without inbuilt UK-wide fiscal balancing would be tantamount to economic suicide"
~George Keravan, Economist, SNP MP for East Lothian
.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »You absolutely can blame it on the SNP.
It was the fear of the SNP holding a weak Labour minority government to ransom (as indeed they were proudly claiming they would through the campaign) and pushing the country too far left that likely caused a Tory majority.
I'm sorry, but that is laughable.
Are you seriously saying that if the SNP was not polling so well, that Labour would have a majority.
Like it or not, the 59 seats in Scotland is representative of the Scottish population in the UK. Under the FPTP system , the MAJORITY vote in Scotland has united behind one party.
If the majority had voted Labour, the MAJORITY Scottish vote would not had been properly represented at Westminster as they danced to the UK Labour puppetry. The MAJORITY of Scottish voters voted against dancing to that tune:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »The SNP got 50% of the vote thanks to tactical voting of the Yes supporters coalescing behind them. While the other 50% was split between many different parties.
All of the other parties totalled 49.6%, leaving SNP with 50.4%
SNP 50.4%
Labour 24.3%
Conservatives 14.9%
Liberal Democrats 7.5%
Others 2.9%HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »The percentage of the total electorate that voted SNP was 35%
More than all the other parties combined AND more than twice their nearest rivals.
Oh how the UK parties would have loved such a majority backing:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »So based on that theory we should just abolish the Scottish Executive and have Scottish Westminster MP-s handle Scotland-only legislation.
Only if you want to act against the electorates wishes, which it appears you often do.
Back to realityHAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Any comment on the SNP economist admitting fiscal autonomy without subsidy would be 'economic suicide' for Scotland?
No one denies that our economy is heavily dependent on a single industry.
The SNP would like to controls to grow all areas of business and make the country less dependent on one singular resource.
So nothing unexpected from the economists point given oil price is almost at 50% of what it was at peak:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »In this election, the SNP DID get the majority of the vote, something that has never occurred in UK politics to my knowledge
They got the majority of the vote in a part of the country not all of it.
Baldwin got over 50% of the vote in '31 and came close in '35 in the whole of the UK.
If you look at regional voting I bet the Tories got more than 50% in parts of the South in the 80s and that Lab did the same in chunks of the North in the 90s & 00s.0 -
They got the majority of the vote in a part of the country not all of it.
Yes that's correct.
They got a majority of the vote in Scotland which comprises of 59 seatsBaldwin got over 50% of the vote in '31 and came close in '35 in the whole of the UK.
I'll take your word for it.
I looked back to the second world war, but can consider that the great depression could have swung the electorate for a particular voteIf you look at regional voting I bet the Tories got more than 50% in parts of the South in the 80s and that Lab did the same in chunks of the North in the 90s & 00s.
By parts of the south and chunks of the north, I'm wondering how you are partitioning this.
SNP had a majority of the electorate of a 9% UK population over 59 seats.
Looking back over the last 70 years, the highest UK vote was just over 40%, so I doubt that there were areas over a 59 seat area.:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards