Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

If that was such an important part of the process perhaps the SNP should have insisted that devolution of those powers was put into the Smith process.

Let's face it, when you've got 5 parties negotiating what should be in or out there's going to be an aspect of we'll give up x if you give us y.

The SNP seem to have decided that they want x so negotiated that. And then a, b, c & d which they gave up in negotiations quite possibly or indeed just decided on a whim to include just to try to muck up the whole process.

Lest we forget, some additional things have been devolved to Scotland on top of what had been previously agreed such as abortion rules.

It was cross party negotiations. All the parties wanted different things. All had to compromise. Labour offered least ( up until it looked like they might get gubbed at the GE anyway ), the SNP wanted the most. Smith was there to mediate and produce an end result. No party could 'insist' on anything.

The SNP took part in good faith as did all the other parties. Not to do so would've looked like sour grapes, grievance and whingeing. In order to win powers, they had to have some input. Folks like yourself would've had an absolute field day if they had refused to take part. And the other parties would simply have given, well, nothing much. They sat round the table like everyone else did and no, they didn't give up.

But for the SNP, the Smith commission was a step in the right direction. Not a line in the sand, never to be crossed for all time like it was for the other parties. I'd have thought that was always going to be pretty obvious to everyone.

When the SNP signed the Smith Agreement, we were clear that this was the start of a process. That the agreement would be the floor and not the ceiling of our country’s aspirations for self-governance.

In our view the first draft of the bill clearly did not deliver the Smith Commission - and a large number of organisations such as trades unions and charities agreed with us. We argued during the election in May that the government's proposals were inadequate - putting an increase in powers for Scotland front and foremost of our manifesto. We sought a mandate and we got it.

Over the last four months we have been trying to strengthen the bill - aiming to bring it more in line with the views of the people who are to be governed by it. It would be fair to say that most of our efforts have failed...

http://tommysheppardmp.scot/index.php/my-blogs/entry/the-scotland-bill

Tommy pretty much sums up SNP thinking re Smith and the Scotland Bill in those few paragraphs. As well as a lot of Scots voters.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

There was a Vow, then the Smith Commission, then the new Scotland Bill.

The Smith Commission and all proposals in it were in response to the referendum and the ( very vague/airy fairy/means nothing/means Home Rule ) Vow.

But. There was a General Election 6 months after those proposals were put forward...And nearly 50% of Scottish voters voted for a party, standing on a manifesto that wanted powers that go much further than the Smith Commission did ( they voted SNP ).

And there we have the nub of it. Immediately after the Smith implementation of the Scottish Referendum, the SNP ignored the result embodied in the Smith report (which was signed off by all including the SNP) and cynically generated a manifesto which ignored what they had just agreed and promised "powers that go much further than the Smith Commission".

Good Faith and the SNP do not go together.

They represent only their own policies and lack honour. No wonder they are not trusted.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

And there we have the nub of it. Immediately after the Smith implementation of the Scottish Referendum, the SNP ignored the result embodied in the Smith report (which was signed off by all including the SNP) and cynically generated a manifesto which ignored what they had just agreed and promised "powers that go much further than the Smith Commission".

Good Faith and the SNP do not go together.

They represent only their own policies and lack honour. No wonder they are not trusted.

Yet how strange...

We argued during the election in May that the government's proposals were inadequate - putting an increase in powers for Scotland front and foremost of our manifesto. We sought a mandate and we got it.

People voted for them. That is actually the real nub of the matter string. There could hardly have been a more emphatic endorsement of what the SNP proposed to do and ask for a la the Scotland Bill. Scots liked what they heard. Voted for it.. and are now being ignored on their own Scotland Bill it seems.

A little unfair, perhaps, as it is after all, Scots residents who will have to live with the outcome. And while we've had EVEL waved through with barely a murmur... it seems that English votes for Scottish Laws is alive, well and watched by 1000's in real time, as it happens in Westminster.

It's not going down too well.. It's well understood that on losing the referendum the SNP wouldn't get everything they wanted. Of course not. But not one single amendment they put forward included ? And MP's live on air crowing 'Good' about no Scottish representation on Human Rights committees etc... Not so good imo.

kabayiri

.string. wrote: »

...
Good Faith and the SNP do not go together.

They represent only their own policies and lack honour. No wonder they are not trusted.

Voters in rUK increasingly knew this which is why they could not trust a Labour / SNP coallition as an option in the GE.

It seems clear that the SNP would have acted in pure self interest. I guess that's politics for you.

Happygreen

kabayiri wrote: »

Voters in rUK increasingly knew this which is why they could not trust a Labour / SNP coallition as an option in the GE.

It seems clear that the SNP would have acted in pure self interest. I guess that's politics for you.

Wow, this is the first time I encountered that much venom, telling us on here that you and or rUK voted Tory to keep the SNP out of the government. Or is it just to be cynical as Eddie had assured you that there would not have been a coalition anyway? Hard to believe you credit (or blame?) the SNP with the Tory election win.

And self - interest? Some people need a mirror to see what they accuse others of. Tories are born and raised with an unshakeable sense of entitlement to power and wealth which will be defended by all means available.

CLAPTON

Happygreen wrote: »

And self - interest? Some people need a mirror to see what they accuse others of. Tories are born and raised with an unshakeable sense of entitlement to power and wealth which will be defended by all means available.

no venom here then?

37% voted Tory
were they all born with an unshakable sense of entitlement to power and wealth......

Happygreen

CLAPTON wrote: »

no venom here then?

37% voted Tory
were they all born with an unshakable sense of entitlement to power and wealth......

Were they not? Maybe they wish they were
I can't to a survey on general voting motivations for Con supporters but always open to hear and learn....
(but maybe not on this thread as it would divert a bit too far from the topic)
- it's already been established that the SNP can also be blamed/credited for the Tory win....

CLAPTON

Happygreen wrote: »

Were they not? Maybe they wish they were
I can't to a survey on general voting motivations for Con supporters but always open to hear and learn....
(but maybe not on this thread as it would divert a bit too far from the topic)
- it's already been established that the SNP can also be blamed/credited for the Tory win....

Clearly the concern over a labour/snp win must have helped the Tories but then a Tory win has massively helped the SNP. so a win win for everyone except labour and libdem

Nicola is well pleased and can now look forward to a massive SNP win in May16.

kabayiri

CLAPTON wrote: »

Clearly the concern over a labour/snp win must have helped the Tories but then a Tory win has massively helped the SNP. so a win win for everyone except labour and libdem
...

Clearly this was the concern. Cameron and co made this point clear frequently in the run up to the election.

I'm surprised the SNP accolytes on here struggle to accept this campaign tactic worked.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

Clearly this was the concern. Cameron and co made this point clear frequently in the run up to the election.

I'm surprised the SNP accolytes on here struggle to accept this campaign tactic worked.

No-one struggles with it. Though some of commentary spilled over into some unpleasant anti-Scottish stuff rather than Anti-SNP stuff. Which in turn probably boosted the SNP vote in Scotland up further.

The Tories will surely repeat the tactic at the next election too ? With even more added nastiness should Corbyn still be in the picture. There will be another independence referendum shortly afterwards imo..(if Scottish polls hold, and the union limps through Trident and the EU ref first of course). Sturgeon's 60% will be a shoo in by then... after another Tory election campaign.