Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Leanne1812

Shakethedisease wrote: »

'Grievance' is the new 'pooling and sharing'. It's the current 'buzzword' to describe the SNP. Expect to hear a lot more of it in the coming months.

Exactly my thoughts. I was actually going to respond to skint that grudge & grievance are the new buzzwords. They're all over Twitter.

Each to their own skint. You have your views and I mine.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It doesn't matter what the SNP are proposing re tax credit cuts.. ( again they want them fully devolved ). Reversing them, in full, is a Scottish Labour proposal. And it should be up to them to outline fully, what they propose to do. So far vague answers about not cutting APD and raising the top rate of tax are pie in the sky.

It's a Labour policy that has to be paid for. And if they get into Scottish Govt, then they need to lay out why not cutting APD will bring in 250/400m extra. Kezia has already admitted that raising the top rate of tax might bring in 0. And not cutting a tax when the budget is already fully allocated, means they'll have to find the cash elsewhere.

That the SNP is making headlines about hypothetical tax credits cuts next year, for not doing something Labour proposes it might do two years into the future.. to me, Scottish media has gone totally tonto.

Osborne better not do too much of a u-turn.

It does matter what SNP propose ( once Osbourne announces his changes). They've just been caught out being dishonest in saying Smith didn't give them the powers to do anything. Now they have had to do a U turn and say they will do what they can. Not to mention they are without doubt going to be in power at H/R next year.

SNP may want full control of welfare, but they are unlikely to get it. As the UK government agreed to deliver Smith, not SNPs wish list or misinterpretation of ' The Vow' . There is still enough work to get through to sort and agree the fiscal framework , possibly the next contentious issue without creating further delays.

Labour have taken a fair size risk with this. Could cost them middle earning group , and lower earners depending how it pans out.
Meanwhile SNP's reputation and credibility has been slightly dented.

Just another day at the office.

Generali

elantan wrote: »

Erm I did .... read my post quoting him

I didnt see how the Convo progressed after the post from Shakey till after I had posted the reply quoting sheky ... but I have found Gen several times now of accusing SNP supporters of being anti English ... he is sadly showing his true colours

I like Gen he's a nice guy ? But he seriously needs to understand the truth instead of what's easier for him to believe

So what is the truth? A lot of people seem happier playing the man than the ball regarding the proposed new tax and spend powers.

My opinion, which I have not read elsewhere, it that it is designed specifically to close a door on the Scottish Government. If they can raise money for themselves at nil or very low incremental cost then the argument that Westminster should pay for something can relatively simply be deflected.

Under the Thatcher Government, poll after poll came back stating that people wanted to pay more in tax and get more in services. The fact was, when the Labour Party offered that they got trounced at the election.

I suspect the calculation is that the Scots are the same as everyone else: they want services but want someone else to pay for them. Now they are being put into a position where the Scottish Government can't stand by the people and say something like, "It's a disgrace. You should have xxx only those bar stewards in Westminster won't pay for it" as the obvious response is, "You can pay for it yourselves. If that is a priority, increase taxes to pay for it".

Tax credits is just the start here. Pretty much every time the Scottish Govt wants to object to some cut or another, the Tories can simply tell them to increase taxes and pay for it themselves. That means that the SNP has either to come up with a plausible reason not to raise taxes (people not liking it very much and so perhaps leaving Scotland as a result isn't a plausible reason as it plays straight into the hands of the Tories as that is their argument for cutting!) or raise taxes and consequences be damned which may well mean losing power and the ability to push through their main aim of independence.

Politically I think this is a masterful piece of work by the Tories.

Generali

skintmacflint wrote: »

It does matter what SNP propose ( once Osbourne announces his changes). They've just been caught out being dishonest in saying Smith didn't give them the powers to do anything. Now they have had to do a U turn and say they will do what they can. Not to mention they are without doubt going to be in power at H/R next year.

SNP may want full control of welfare, but they are unlikely to get it. As the UK government agreed to deliver Smith, not SNPs wish list or misinterpretation of ' The Vow' . There is still enough work to get through to sort and agree the fiscal framework , possibly the next contentious issue without creating further delays.

Labour have taken a fair size risk with this. Could cost them middle earning group , and lower earners depending how it pans out.
Meanwhile SNP's reputation and credibility has been slightly dented.

Just another day at the office.

I have a funny feeling that you might be wrong. I wonder whether the aim of this is to get the SNP to demand powers over welfare that will lead them to make some very unpopular decisions once they have these powers.

I've not seen the breakdown for Scotland but the consensus in the UK as a whole is that welfare is far too high and people are lying about smoking, drinking and watching Sky while some poor schmuck has to pay for it.

That may or may not be true but it is the opinion of lots of voters.

https://www.tuc.org.uk/social-issues/child-poverty/welfare-and-benefits/tax-credits/support-benefit-cuts-dependent

The TUC poll reveals many misconceptions about welfare and benefit spending including:

- On average people think that 41 per cent of the entire welfare budget goes on benefits to unemployed people, while the true figure is 3 per cent.

- On average people think that 27 per cent of the welfare budget is claimed fraudulently, while the government's own figure is 0.7 per cent.

- On average people think that almost half the people (48 per cent) who claim Jobseeker's Allowance go on to claim it for more than a year, while the true figure is around 10 per cent (Note: we originally thought that the figure was 27.8 per cent, but have corrected this March 2014).

- On average people think that an unemployed couple with two school-age children would get £147 in Jobseeker's Allowance - more than 30 per cent higher than the £111.45 they would actually receive - a £35 over-calculation.

- Only 21 per cent of people think that this family with two school-age children would be better off if one of the unemployed parents got a 30 hour a week minimum wage job, even though they would actually end up £138 a week better off. Even those who thought they would be better off only thought on average they would gain by £59.

- The poll confirms that hostile attitudes to welfare are widespread with over four-tenths (42 per cent) thinking that benefits are too generous and nearly three in five (59 per cent) agreeing that our current welfare system has created a culture of dependency.

skintmacflint

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Exactly my thoughts. I was actually going to respond to skint that grudge & grievance are the new buzzwords. They're all over Twitter.

Each to their own skint. You have your views and I mine.

Goodness me, I'm asked a question, give a polite, reasonable, honest response, and end up accused of starting a new Buzzword campaign on Twitter.

But never mind , I've been assured Twitter doesn't reflect real life etc. It's just a bit of fun.

Just as well or people would be highlighting some other key buzzword/phrases on their like ' not 'paying tax twice' or 'not the responsibility of SG to mitigate Westminster 'Tory Cuts' blah blah.

elantan

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Mundell only put the amendment in three days ago. The SNP were unaware it had gone through which is why everyone was working off the previous draft of the Scotland Bill. I think Labour were 'pre warned'. The Daily Record certainly knew about it before anything was officially announced. They were tweeting about it and there were people asking why they knew of amendments before the SNP/Scottish Govt did... But the 'powers' to do so are only 3 days old. Newspapers are spinning it as 'the SNP admit' they have the powers. *sigh*

Tag team politics from Tories and Labour. That's why Nicola was so fuming mad today lol. Still it was quite a refreshing change from PMQ's where Corbyn is so polite and exudes the air of a bored teacher going over basic equations for the 6th time.

Corbyn must've okayed Scottish Labour reversing tax credits... but only in Scotland.

Ahh see I've been working stupid hours this week and missed a lot ... asked o twitter what had happened but the explanation by 140 character were confusing ... cheers for catching me up

elantan

I noticed there were some that started a DR boycott ... thought that a tad silly tbh ...

wotsthat

elantan wrote: »

Ahh see I've been working stupid hours this week and missed a lot ... asked o twitter what had happened but the explanation by 140 character were confusing ... cheers for catching me up

No way. Do you really use Twitter to keep up to date with politics?

If not, and you're being ironic, I'm lobbying for MSE to introduce a sarcasm smilie to help those of us who struggle to detect it on the Internet.

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

It does matter what SNP propose ( once Osbourne announces his changes). They've just been caught out being dishonest in saying Smith didn't give them the powers to do anything. Now they have had to do a U turn and say they will do what they can. Not to mention they are without doubt going to be in power at H/R next year.

No they haven't been caught out or dishonest. That's 'spin' you're falling for. The draft Scotland Bill was only amended two ( not three like I said ) days ago. Labour absolutely knew in advance via Mundell and Murray.

4 November 2015

His comments came after new amendments to the Scotland Bill were lodged by the UK government. Scottish Secretary David Mundell said the amendments made it "crystal clear" that Scotland could act on tax credits...

...Mr Neil responded: "The amendments tabled today should give the Scottish Parliament those powers, but until today none of the amendments tabled would have given us that power.
"We will properly address the needs of people affected by cuts in tax credits.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-34720846


The old 'one/two' of Labour and the Tories a la BetterTogether. And a little bit underhand imo. But that's politics for you.

SNP may want full control of welfare, but they are unlikely to get it. As the UK government agreed to deliver Smith, not SNPs wish list or misinterpretation of ' The Vow' . There is still enough work to get through to sort and agree the fiscal framework , possibly the next contentious issue without creating further delays.

Labour have taken a fair size risk with this. Could cost them middle earning group , and lower earners depending how it pans out.
Meanwhile SNP's reputation and credibility has been slightly dented.

Just another day at the office.

I agree with most of the above. Except the 'Vow' and Smith parts. There are many agree with the SNP's interpretation. And that shouldn't be simply discounted as meaningless. As it stands it's 49.9% of Scottish voters. However, May 16 is about Holyrood, Westminster not so much.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

So what is the truth? A lot of people seem happier playing the man than the ball regarding the proposed new tax and spend powers.

My opinion, which I have not read elsewhere, it that it is designed specifically to close a door on the Scottish Government. If they can raise money for themselves at nil or very low incremental cost then the argument that Westminster should pay for something can relatively simply be deflected.

Under the Thatcher Government, poll after poll came back stating that people wanted to pay more in tax and get more in services. The fact was, when the Labour Party offered that they got trounced at the election.

I suspect the calculation is that the Scots are the same as everyone else: they want services but want someone else to pay for them. Now they are being put into a position where the Scottish Government can't stand by the people and say something like, "It's a disgrace. You should have xxx only those bar stewards in Westminster won't pay for it" as the obvious response is, "You can pay for it yourselves. If that is a priority, increase taxes to pay for it".

Tax credits is just the start here. Pretty much every time the Scottish Govt wants to object to some cut or another, the Tories can simply tell them to increase taxes and pay for it themselves. That means that the SNP has either to come up with a plausible reason not to raise taxes (people not liking it very much and so perhaps leaving Scotland as a result isn't a plausible reason as it plays straight into the hands of the Tories as that is their argument for cutting!) or raise taxes and consequences be damned which may well mean losing power and the ability to push through their main aim of independence.

Politically I think this is a masterful piece of work by the Tories.

Yes it is. I agree.

But they may underestimate the depth of feeling that will swell against them ( like it did during the poll tax years ). Online and social media has allowed people to work out already what Osborne is trying to do, and fair play, he's playing his hand well. But the scenario you outline is already well understood. As it is that the media will once again punt the spin too. But they're losing dominance now and becoming white noise.

Unlike the poll tax /'red' Labour years .. there's a way out. Lets face it, if tax rises in order to pay for things Scots don't want to see cut is all that's on the horizon for the forseeable. Coupled with being powerless to implement what many see as better policies ( for example getting shot of Trident, or pressing on with renewable energy developments )... May as well be independent.