Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

elantan

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Reading it too... very interesting. Especially McDougall's ineptness.

Aye it's quite good ... I hear he is involved in the EU referendum as well as special advisor ... on how not to do it

But they still won allegedly so what does that say about our camp ?

Mistermeaner

Can you not find a link to anything that disagrees with what I said shakey?

I've noticed you ignore anything you can't argue with.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Well austerity means keeping spending frugal and carefully under control. I'd say any underspend was a good thing in that regard. Wouldn't you ?

Sometimes you post things which are difficult to reply to and that is one of them. Do I take offence that you are insulting me as a fool that will swallow such nonsense or shall I be similarly rude back at you or shall I simply leave the post standing as a testament to SNP spin?

Being charitable, you have maybe forgotten that the Scottish funding allocated by Westminster already takes account of the needs of austerity, maybe you have forgotten that Swinney consistently asks for the maximum budget he can get, maybe you have forgotten that the underspend, remaining in Scotland, contributes not one bit to achieving the desired end result of reducing total UK spend.

It simply becomes an SNP slush fund.

Don't talk such BS on austerity with the surreal claim that the SNP is acting in any way consistent with that process, or at least save the silliness for those already in the thrall of the SNP collective mindset.

This year the next funding for Scotland was agreed You will read with pleasure I'm sure that Scotland yet again gets a better deal than the rest of the UK; and yet still the whinges keep on coming - See the last paragraph.

Bearing in mind the underspend we've been discussing it's difficult for me as a UK tax payer to understand why the funding can't be cut by the whole of the underspend rather than receiving kid glove treatment.

But though it's difficult, I know in my heart that while the SNP may be cynical enough to want to play their silly games, I want to do right by Scotland as for other parts of the UK and not increase further the pain caused by the SNP.

Finally I refer you to Osborne's remarks earlier this year, which can be found readily enough by googling the text;

the Chancellor said: "If we had listened to the SNP there would be a massive hole in Scotland's public finances because of the price of oil.

"We are obviously going to be hearing a lot more from SNP members in this Parliament because of their numbers.

"If there are cuts that they oppose, let me point out that the Scottish National Party in Holyrood has the power to increase taxes to increase spending.

"It has the power to increase income tax already and it is getting more powers next year to do so.

"When it comes to complaints about public expenditure, it is time for the SNP to put up or shut up."

Shakethedisease

And look who are all just hopping mad that the Scottish Govt have awarded the contract to an English company.... ( though Jackie Baillie is talking complete guff as usual ).

Fury at Scottish Government decision to hand £350m water contract to private firm based in England...

Scottish Labour public services spokeswoman Jackie Baillie said: "This decision has effectively privatised water management for our schools and hospitals "...

Patrick Harvie, leader of the Scottish Greens,
said: "This was an opportunity to prevent the supply of water services to Scotland's public sector falling into the hands of a private firm whose profits won't benefit the Scottish economy"

Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said: "Ministers have exaggerated the savings to pull the wool over our eyes."

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/13806738.Fury_at_Scottish_Government_decision_to_hand___350m_water_contract_to_private_firm_based_in_England/

They all sound so anti-English ! :eek:

:cool:

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

Sometimes you post things which are difficult to reply to and that is one of them. Do I take offence that you are insulting me as a fool that will swallow such nonsense or shall I be similarly rude back at you or shall I simply leave the post standing as a testament to SNP spin?

Being charitable, you have maybe forgotten that the Scottish funding allocated by Westminster already takes account of the needs of austerity, maybe you have forgotten that Swinney consistently asks for the maximum budget he can get, maybe you have forgotten that the underspend, remaining in Scotland, contributes not one bit to achieving the desired end result of reducing total UK spend.

It simply becomes an SNP slush fund.

Don't talk such BS on austerity with the surreal claim that the SNP is acting in any way consistent with that process, or at least save the silliness for those already in the thrall of the SNP collective mindset.

This year the next funding for Scotland was agreed You will read with pleasure I'm sure that Scotland yet again gets a better deal than the rest of the UK; and yet still the whinges keep on coming - See the last paragraph.

Bearing in mind the underspend we've been discussing it's difficult for me as a UK tax payer to understand why the funding can't be cut by the whole of the underspend rather than receiving kid glove treatment.

But though it's difficult, I know in my heart that while the SNP may be cynical enough to want to play their silly games, I want to do right by Scotland as for other parts of the UK and not increase further the pain caused by the SNP.

Finally I refer you to Osborne's remarks earlier this year, which can be found readily enough by googling the text;

Translation :-

The SNP have reported a surplus which will be rolled over into next years spending and drawn down with agreement from HM Treasury... But I don't like it ( it might make them look like they're doing something right ).. and there must be something devious and underhand going on because it's the SNP. Obviously those that see underspends/surpluses as simply 'living within one's means' are only to be listened to if they are Labour or Tory politicians and supporters. If it's SNP politicians and supporters then they can be accused of a some kind of weird cultish collective 'mindset' instead. We can also casually replace the word 'surplus' with 'slush fund' as needed it's the SNP( bad) and not George Osborne( good).... Oh and if they'd been reporting an overspend, I'd be all over that like a rash as well.

I don't think you're a fool either. Far from it.

Shakethedisease

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Can you not find a link to anything that disagrees with what I said shakey?

I've noticed you ignore anything you can't argue with.

Poor soul. Did I miss you out ? I can't remember what you said to be honest. Was it really something I can't argue with ? :eek:

Shakethedisease

elantan wrote: »

Aye it's quite good ... I hear he is involved in the EU referendum as well as special advisor ... on how not to do it

But they still won allegedly so what does that say about our camp ?

Media backout on BBC, STV and in 99% of all newspapers. Yes were put on the defensive all the time re currency/oil/spaceships and cancer cures. Just about everything in fact. Never the offensive until right at the end re the NHS. Salmond a marmite politician. White paper far too long and technical, easy to pick holes in. And boy, the No side sure did that. Labour ran their side like GE campaign against the SNP. Meaning lots thought Salmond would be in power forever if there was a Yes vote. And other Yes groups, with completely different visions of independence,.. sadly got ignored completely.

Put it this way, can you imagine what things would've been like if 99% of newspapers and the BBC/STV were full of yes leaning journo's instead ? Social media/pro-indy bloggers/doorstep word of mouth got Yes to 45% and nothing much else imo.

elantan

I know ... just can't understand how people want another country to male their decisions for them though... don't think I will ever understand that tbh lol

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Translation :-

The SNP have reported a surplus which will be rolled over into next years spending and drawn down with agreement from HM Treasury... But I don't like it ( it might make them look like they're doing something right ).. and there must be something devious and underhand going on because it's the SNP. Obviously those that see underspends/surpluses as simply 'living within one's means' are only to be listened to if they are Labour or Tory politicians and supporters. If it's SNP politicians and supporters then they can be accused of a some kind of weird cultish collective 'mindset' instead. We can also casually replace the word 'surplus' with 'slush fund' as needed it's the SNP( bad) and not George Osborne( good).... Oh and if they'd been reporting an overspend, I'd be all over that like a rash as well.

I don't think you're a fool either. Far from it.

Scotland's financial health is down to GO's austerity drive........:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

The SNP has yet to deliver on it's promises of a more generous welfare system, better pensions and universal free childcare

Where's the funding going to come from. :shhh:

islandannie

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Scotland's financial health is down to GO's austerity drive........:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

The SNP has yet to deliver on it's promises of a more generous welfare system, better pensions and universal free childcare

Where's the funding going to come from. :shhh:

ERM ERM. No you can`t possibly mean the Westminster Government.

Surely not, cough cough.