Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Labour laid very strong foundations many years ago re Westminster during the Thatcher years. Reaping what they sowed now I'm afraid.

to Scottish labour earlier on Twitter, just about sums the general feeling at the moment. As you say. Roll on May. At least there will be a few years free of elections and referendums after that. Whatever happens.

Yes they did, but simply against the Conservatives , or possibility of Conservatives being in power. Not Westminster nor the Union. There is a difference, unless you choose not to see it.

Not that I'm defending them. I totally disagree with the grudge and grievance politics which have prevailed and still prevail in Scotland today.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

... I can assure you that in day to day life no-one would know I am an SNP member. I don't talk politics much. There's simply no occasion to do so at the gym, or on the school run, work etc. People that know me are far more likely to associate myself with being a huge Depeche Mode fan than anything else. ...

Oh dear, and there I had this picture of a strapping blue-faced dragon lady, fetchingly attired in the SNP ceremonial tartan, with a brace of thistles attractive lodged in her bright red dreadlocks, carrying a shopping bag filled with the day's supply of whisky and haggis and with a caber nonchalantly tucked under one arm.

I would have recognised you anywhere.

Ah such is the way of dreams!

Edit: By the way,

Leanne1812

I will add to that string the reason I believe most of us still follow & contribute to this thread is because of the lovely aforementioned lady.

Without Shakes posts there would be little or no debate.

Leanne1812

I thanked your post as I thought it was funny:rotfl:

It was a joke wasn't it?........

If not prepare for battle with at least one fiery scots lass :-)

Leanne1812

skintmacflint wrote: »

Yes they did, but simply against the Conservatives , or possibility of Conservatives being in power. Not Westminster nor the Union. There is a difference, unless you choose not to see it.

Not that I'm defending them. I totally disagree with the grudge and grievance politics which have prevailed and still prevail in Scotland today.

When you say grudge & grievance I think if you were to just look on it as 'the opposition' maybe you'd see it as just normal politics. Every party is out to discredit the others and win support.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

Oh dear, and there I had this picture of a strapping blue-faced dragon lady, fetchingly attired in the SNP ceremonial tartan, with a brace of thistles attractive lodged in her bright red dreadlocks, carrying a shopping bag filled with the day's supply of whisky and haggis and with a caber nonchalantly tucked under one arm.

I would have recognised you anywhere.

Ah such is the way of dreams!

Edit: By the way,

Sorry to disappoint...



...But I confine that to my weekends. Where I wear the above while at my stall selling Yes badges, 'The Dream Shall Never Die' and Iain McWhirter's 'Disunited Kingdom'... ( through the latter pile shall burned while I dance round it singing 'Scot's Wha Hae' after his betrayal !!!! ).

Perhaps you'd be interested in the special offer I have on this week ?

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

Except that's not strictly true is it, as McWhirter in a Herald article commented he'd no idea if Labour costings were credible, or even if anyone would believe them? AFAIUI MSM and orher parties don't generally start real scrutiny of what is put forward at Conferences. That would begine once manifesto's are out. Albeit I see some social media bloggers have gotten off to a head start on this. But as we both agree it's all hypothetical for now.

I heard about SNP's amendment, to devolve full power, and also it being suggested it's a gesture to delay implementation. But not sure I agree Scotish Labour now have to support it or lose face, or even that they are at odds with Labour Uk on this.

Smith agreed the UK would retain the responsibility for guaranteeing a set amount of welfare being paid out across the entire UK, and for which the UK government have budgeted. It also agreed to give a SG the power to increase, create in any way it sees fit anything over and above that, as long the SG were prepared to find the funding for it. After that national payment is made. With I believe the exception of temporary national policy welfare sanctions ?

Same applies to tax credits. Labour UK are opposing the cuts in Westminster along with Lib Dems, and SNP , for the entire UK. Scottish Labour as far as I can see are in general agreement with this policy, therefore are simply saying as they will have the powers, and allegedly can find the funding for it, they will offset them in Scotland, if they are pushed through eventually at Westminster.

Now I could be wrong, as it's all hypothetical . But the level of detail of these powers and all this will be clarified in detail very shortly , as long as SNP don't delay things further with amendments. And as SNP have now said if it is in their power to offset them , they will , I'll leave it there.

Like I say it's all in the wording. And personally, I think it's better to have control than to just 'mitigate'. Otherwise it sets a precedent of the Scottish Govt having to keep doing so.. and eventually they'll have to cut other areas to do so.

And at the end of the day, this is a Labour proposal after all. Not an SNP one ( <--- they want the powers devolved ). I think it should be for Scottish Labour to set out their own details. Scottish Labour proposing something, then the collective media turning round once blaming the SNP for something they didn't propose ? So predictable. No-one is disputing that 'it may be possible somehow'. Iain McWhirter however, has spent the last few months telling us all that these things weren't and would be detrimental to the SNP to get trapped in. Mabye there's been too many redundancies at the Herald recently.

Tory cuts are Tory cuts and they're using Labour once again imo. It's all very reminiscent of when Osborne announced 'no currency union' during the ref. And when Jim Murphy was elected and there was policy after policy announced before the General Election. It's all to make sure the SNP don't get a majority in May. All of it.

But from my personal viewpoint and from what I see and hear ( I appreciate your viewpoint and perspectives are very different from mine). There's a shift occurring big time due to this tax credits issue, and what people see as Labour pushing a deeply flawed proposal, hardly mentioning the Tories, without their own credible costings nor even addressing the fact that the cuts are in 2016, yet the powers to mitigate won't be fully available until 2017/18.. yet totally dominating the media unchallenged once AGAIN ( they have one MP ).... The SNP grass roots are getting annoyed, galvanised and organised for May now. I'm not sure that ended so well for Murphy for all his grand policies and positive coverage. We'll see.

elantan

I think it would be a huge mistake if the SNP offset these tax credits cuts tbh

Generali

elantan wrote: »

I think it would be a huge mistake if the SNP offset these tax credits cuts tbh

What's the reasoning?

elantan

There's many reasons really ... the cuts are Tory cuts made from WM and whilst we are offsetting the bedroom tax at a huge cost we can't and shouldn't offset every cut, we don't have a bottomless pit the money we use for offsetting the bedroom tax could be used elsewhere but it is sacrificed to offset a tax ( to use the commonly recognised term) so things are suffering already, add in the working tax credits and that's a huge cutback for other things that is just unsustainable IMHO