Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Really?

You're still humouring the Gnats with responses?

Well good on you for having the patience......

Back in the real world, the SNP are an irrelevance, they're already being sucked into the 'Westmonster bubble' demanding Kensington flats and all, and we can expect them to implode over the next 5 years as the people realise they are no different to any other party.

The fox hunting sideshow was a useful reminder of SNP lies and hypocrisy, but I'm sure it'll only be the start.

Oh get real Hamish. That's wishful thinking. They went down there with everyone saying how 'destructive' they'd be, and now they're not being 'destructive' and turning up every day... they're 'going native'. Sturgeon doesn't belong in Westminster. There is no chance whatsoever of her 'going native'. But she leads the party.

Cameron on the other hand. Is starting to look distinctly 'lame duck-esque' with his very slim majority. How many headline policies has he had to delay so far for fear of defeat ? The Fox Hunting sideshow was a smack on the nose for the Tories. And a useful one. Widely regarded as a complete SNP success, and best of all...they didn't even have to break with their own former policy of not voting. All they did was threaten to... Didn't have to vote in the end. Nicely done ( politically ) if you ask me.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The Fox Hunting sideshow was a smack on the nose for the Tories. And a useful one. Widely regarded as a complete SNP success,

Eh?

By who, the SNP twitterazi? :rotfl:

Back in the real world, we have this delightful contradiction to mull over...

Writing in the Guardian earlier this year, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon explicity ruled out voting on foxhunting, as part of the SNP's policy to not vote on matters that do not impact on Scotland.

In the article on 8 February 2015, Sturgeon said: "The SNP have a longstanding position of not voting on matters that purely affect England – such as foxhunting south of the border, for example – and we stand by that."

And just a few short months later....

With her cynical foxhunting vote, Sturgeon has joined the Westminster club

The decision to vote on an English matter in order to spite David Cameron is parliamentary game-playing of the kind the SNP claims to despise

There is only one argument for the Scottish Nationalists’ decision to vote on England’s foxhunting laws.

It should hasten the day when they never do so again.

Fans of their leader, Nicola Sturgeon, can only be saddened to see her falling for the trap of the Westminster political club

Whooops....

Generali

Delaying EVEL and a fox hunting vote: some mighty victories for the SNP.

On the other side of the ledger the Tories managed to get their flagship policies through the budget so successfully that not only are the laws in place but the Labour leader herself supports them!

This Government is doing just fine.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Does it matter ? They don't canvas for votes outside Scotland ? And they didn't write that article for the Guardian either.

From an SNP marketing spin perspective, yes I think it does matter. Which makes it unlikely they will ever be revealed. But reading several pro Yes social media pages during and immediately after the Referendum, there were loads of ex pats and people from Catalonia etc etc proudly announcing they'd just joined SNP.

On considering SNPs new tactics to get involved over the border, perhaps they should take a moment to remember Mdme Sturgeons SNP conference Friends, Delegates. Members lend SNP your vote speech. Where she announced a vote for SNP would lock the bad Tories out of power. With the more quietly announced exclusion of as long as there were more anti Tory MPs elected . Made it all sound so easy she did.

Which resulted in a Tory majority. That's twice in less than a year SNP have got 2 major outcomes wrong. So this new strategy sounds like yet more SNP empty rhetoric, nothing more. Maybe they don't have enough to do to keep themselves busy.

Not sure some of these MPs constituents will be best pleased to see their MP allocating chunks of their working time on behalf of another constituency with it's own MP. PartIcularly in deprived areas . Keeping social media up to date issuing SNP central controlled rhetoric isn't going to cut in the longer term.

skintmacflint

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Eh?

By who, the SNP twitterazi? :rotfl:

Back in the real world, we have this delightful contradiction to mull over...

And just a few short months later....

Whooops....

Gives Patrick Harvie of the Greens the edge for honesty in comparison to SNP. At least he has stood by his opinion on FFA being a disaster, despite being near savaged by some of SNP 'types ' as he called them. By which I assumed he meant some of the more recently converted ex labour supporters who now comprise the Cybernats.

.string.

skintmacflint wrote: »

To be honest I don't have a problem with MPs salaries in general.

Otherwise we're back to the circumstances of only those who don't need a salary entering politics.

I agree with that; the pay should attract competent people,.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Oh get real Hamish. That's wishful thinking. They went down there with everyone saying how 'destructive' they'd be, and now they're not being 'destructive' and turning up every day... they're 'going native'. Sturgeon doesn't belong in Westminster. There is no chance whatsoever of her 'going native'. But she leads the party.

Cameron on the other hand. Is starting to look distinctly 'lame duck-esque' with his very slim majority. How many headline policies has he had to delay so far for fear of defeat ? The Fox Hunting sideshow was a smack on the nose for the Tories. And a useful one. Widely regarded as a complete SNP success, and best of all...they didn't even have to break with their own former policy of not voting. All they did was threaten to... Didn't have to vote in the end. Nicely done ( politically ) if you ask me.

A lot of wishful thinking there, Shakey! :rotfl:

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

They didn't. It was Labour. Quite some time ago when they were in charge of Holyrood, linking MP's salaries to MSP one's. MSP's have since voted to break the link with MP's salaries. Nicola Sturgeon didn't take the pay rise either.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-31923794

Fact check before regurgitating Telegraph bile next time perhaps Clapton ? Whatever happened to that newspaper ? They used to be respected. A complete comic these days.

did SNP people vote for the higher salary of holyrood members?

did SNP people vote for the high first minister salary?

Has nicola declared she will NOT accept the higher pension she will accrue?


Have they formally reduced the salaries now they are a one party 'nation'?


to a true acolyte it doesn't matter of course as any behaviour of the great leader must be supported on the usual faux grounds.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

No-one has a problem with English votes for English only matters. Or at least they didn't. But you're trying to have it both ways. English MP's vote down every single amendment proposed to the Scotland Bill by Scottish MPs = 'Well that's what being part of the UK means'. Scottish MP's threaten to vote in English proposals = 'You can't do that, it's English only'. Come on now. Fair's fair.

There are consequences to EVEL being introduced the way it is being. Imo EVEL won't get passed in the HOC easily. Cameron has too many of even his own party against it. The consequences of a constitutional change on this scale, and removing the premise of all UK MPs sitting in Westminster 'as equals' are too far reaching. To do so by the 'back door' (standing orders ) without proper debate and scrutiny is lunacy. And most informed people will know that it's simply a way for the Tories to keep perpetual power in England, even if in future they aren't actually in power. Because as long as they have the majority of MP's in England, then they'll retain the majority of power within the UK and Westminster.

EVEL will either have to be watered down to practically nothing. Or else beefed up so that much it places the UK onto a path of much further separation. As long as there is Barnett and no meaningful range of powers for the devolved nations... EVEL will be a few MP's at a committee meeting, bored and rubber stamping 99% of proposed English law changes.. as impacting the other three nations and therefore 'not English only'..

I know you hate democracy when the vote goes against you, but the people of Scotland rejected total separation.

Tory motivation is a matter for the voters to decide on and act accordingly.

the issue is should Scotland based people decide on hunting policy in Scotland without interference from English MPs
and should hunting policy in England be decided by England based people without interference from Scottish MPs

the fact you hate parliamentary democracy is self evident : obviously you are happy with a one party state for the simple people of Scotland.

.string.

Generali wrote: »

In fact from the SNP supporter's point of view it's even better than that because 'when the inevitable happens and Scotland splits' (something which is not inevitable) or FFA happens or even the country carries along as is, Scotland will only be responsible for at most a tenth of the debts currently being incurred.

Yes, it is surely a policy of the SNP to get the other parts of the UK to pay for some form of privileged lifestyle for which the SNP would claim credit, and on top of that to pay for borrowed investment in Scotland which would bolster the substance of areas where start up costs for Natland have been shown to be too large to hide.

All that and pay less than 10%.

The same sort of mendacious approach is shown up in the staggeringly ludicrous claim that SNP amendments have some sort of right to succeed over the will of Parliament. The matter of what is to be devolved to Scotland is a decision to be made by the whole of the UK, based on what is affordable and fair to all, not to pander to a money-grabbing secessionist party with nothing in their little minds but their own agenda.

It's take it or leave it time.

In the mean time the SNP are reduced, as we see in Shakey's post above, to glorying in imaginary victories in being a nuisance.