Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

And then they didn't.

Do you regard her as a woman of her word? Interesting.
Even Scottish MPs can't vote on Scottish matters in the Scottish parliament.

After EVEL, some in Scotland will wonder what's the point of sending MPs to Westminster.

Stupidly the Tories believed Nicola so didn't force the vote.

How were they to know she was lying?

zagubov

CLAPTON wrote: »

Stupidly the Tories believed Nicola so didn't force the vote.

How were they to know she was lying?

How do you know?

Shakethedisease

zagubov wrote: »

After EVEL, some in Scotland will wonder what's the point of sending MPs to Westminster.

I wish Labour would wake up. The Scottish branch at least has spent more time slagging off the SNP today and laughing.. than dealing with the consequences of yesterday which may hit them far harder. Scotland AND England wise. They need to seriously get a grip.

EVEL isn't about Scotland. It's about locking Labour out of power in the UK. It will go down in history as the most narrow-minded exercise in partisan constitutionalism in British history

...In fact, answering the West Lothian Question isn’t why the Tory Government is pushing EVEL through Parliament on a procedural motion. It is really about locking Labour out of any future government of the UK...

...However, the next Labour Prime Minister could find that he or she is in office but not in power. This is because Tory MPs sitting in the English Grand Committee will have an effective veto on all legislation on domestic affairs.

...Say Labour tries to repeal the Health and Social Care Bill 2011 that increased the freedom of private firms to bid for NHS contracts. MPs on the English Grand Committee could veto it on the grounds that this is an English only bill.
It would leave UK Labour ministers for health, education and justice unable to implement the policies on which the government was elected. How could any prime minister pretend to govern when he or she can’t implement their manifesto pledges over 85 per cent of the UK population?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/evel-isnt-about-scotland-its-about-locking-labour-out-of-power-in-the-uk-a6706701.html

Exactly Mr McWhirter. This isn't about the SNP, they want out of the union anyway. Though they're a good cover story, I'll say that.

Leanne1812

CLAPTON wrote: »

Tell me : what did the SNP say that was new or unexpected?

Did a single SNP MP change their mind after listening to the other opinions?
Did a single one vote for EVEL?

Not the best example of unifying the union.

David Mundell, Scotland's only conservative MP did. Couldn't imagine him rebelling though to be fair. The rest voted against as you know.

So no, not a single one changed their minds. Tommy Sheppard did give a good speech in which he mentioned a proposed clause which seemed to have the Tories in a bit of a spin. Seems they're not really too sure exactly what EVEL means.

I've been wondering are Scottish lords to be excluded from any decision making? If not why not, anyone know?

zagubov

Leanne1812 wrote: »

David Mundell, Scotland's only conservative MP did. Couldn't imagine him rebelling though to be fair. The rest voted against as you know.

So no, not a single one changed their minds. Tommy Sheppard did give a good speech in which he mentioned a proposed clause which seemed to have the Tories in a bit of a spin. Seems they're not really too sure exactly what EVEL means.

I've been wondering are Scottish lords to be excluded from any decision making? If not why not, anyone know?

Maybe not as there can't be any SNP lords (unless an existing Lord switches parties).

CLAPTON

Leanne1812 wrote: »

David Mundell, Scotland's only conservative MP did. Couldn't imagine him rebelling though to be fair. The rest voted against as you know.

So no, not a single one changed their minds. Tommy Sheppard did give a good speech in which he mentioned a proposed clause which seemed to have the Tories in a bit of a spin. Seems they're not really too sure exactly what EVEL means.

I've been wondering are Scottish lords to be excluded from any decision making? If not why not, anyone know?

so why is not a single SNP after listening to the arguments and then changing their mind, a unifying act?

grow up and try to drop that chip on the shoulder and try to apply the same logic to the hated English as you apply to the SNP.

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

How do you know?

you're right

I simply believed Nicola: I'm a fool I know but I won't do that again.

Leanne1812

Skint,

I read that blog. I found it strange why he didn't name & shame the MP don't you?

He is no different to wings except polar opposite views. Both strong minded and crude at times. I did notice Kevin corresponds regularly on Twitter with Maggie Vaughan. I had no idea who she was until fairly recently! She refers to wings as 'rat boy'. Nice talk from a soon to be 'Lady'.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

So you want to suspend all three devolved governments of the basis of this below ? EVEL like I said is a fair principle. Undermining the unitary nature of the way Westminster is run..if you're fine with that. That's ok too. But it's a very big step to take.. and I honestly doubt it will stop at one or 2 teeny little unnoticed bills a year. Not when it comes to the big issues and Scottish/Welsh and NI MP's still vote on them. Things like the English NHS is going to be contentious. I don't think there's any real denying that it will be.

that's a huge number of decisions

the SNP whinge when some-one says boo to them

here there are substantial issues where democracy was denied

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I didn't describe either of them as actual 'investigative journalists'.

My point was that you said that no-one could take Wings seriously, due to his unashamed bias. Then went on to post a blog link from someone who is also unashamedly biased.

No-one's interested in character assassinations which have nothing much to do with the topic and everything to do with 'slagging other people off who don't agree with me'. It's one of the reasons this thread has probably lasted so long. I for one simply stopped responding to those who are interested in posting up stuff primarily concerned with name calling and treating 'nat minds' like it's some sort of (1.4 million people type) embarrassing disease or mental disorder to decide to vote SNP. It just stirs up unwarranted ill feeling.

.

No I said I didn't think it was possible to be a credible investigative journalist with unashamed bias. Particularly not the level of unashamed bias the Rev has. End of comment.

Just because you choose to misinterpret, or make sweeping assumptions on my comment doesn't make it true.

As for rest methinks you sometimes protest too much, when it suits naturally. Wings isn't followed by 1.4 million Yes voters is it.?

If you keep misinterpreting other's post, I will be left with no option but to think you're doing it on purpose.