Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

browniej

Happygreen wrote: »

Nope, we don't. Only once as far as I remember - sorry I really do not have the time today to quote a reference (yet) - did Scotland get the government the majority of Scottish voters actually voted for. Which we would have each time if it was a country with its own government.

You might find it difficult to quote a reference that backs up that assertion but please do if you can.

From http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/debunk/vote1

Out of the 18 General Elections since 1945, Scotland has got the party at Westminster which won the Scottish popular vote 12 times. That is, exactly two thirds of the time Scotland gets what it wants.

Or if we're referring to actual votes cast by Scots;

https://planetpedro.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/scots-myths-1-scotland-always-gets-the-government-that-england-votes-for/

I deliberately used the percentages of votes cast as the basis of my comments, as these concentrate on voters. The idea is to show that a Scottish elector casting their vote gets the government of their choice nearly as frequently as their English counterpart.

browniej

Elantan - so sorry to hear the news of your Mum. Glad you got there safely and in time.

Shakethedisease

browniej wrote: »

You might find it difficult to quote a reference that backs up that assertion but please do if you can.

From http://www.aforceforgood.org.uk/debunk/vote1

Or if we're referring to actual votes cast by Scots;

https://planetpedro.wordpress.com/2013/07/19/scots-myths-1-scotland-always-gets-the-government-that-england-votes-for/

I think the point is more that Scotland always gets the government that England votes for, whether they vote the same way or not. It doesn't matter. I guess that's the price of staying within the UK political system.

However, whatever your own personal feelings, there is a good mix of Labour/Conservative/Lib Dems MP's etc in England. I think people might look at things a little differently if, hypothetically, there was only 1 Labour MP in England and had been for a long time...yet England as part of the UK had had to follow ( for example ) Corbyn/Diane Abbot policies nonetheless for the last 6 years. And looking forward to another 9 years of them ? You and probably millions of others would have a completely different perspective then I dare say. COMPLETELY different.

browniej

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I think the point is more that Scotland always gets the government that England votes for, whether they vote the same way or not.

Although that is not what happygreen said, it's not actually true either.

From the 2nd link I quoted and out of 18 elections since 1945;

•5 elections when the Scottish electorate prevented the outcome that England had voted for:


•1 election when more people in England voted Labour but got a Tory government Scotland voted for (1951);
•3 elections when more people voted Tory in England but got the Labour government Scotland voted for ( 1964, Feb 1974, 2005); and
•1 election when Scotland prevented Tories from getting the overall majority which was voted for by the English electorate (in 2010).

Shakethedisease

This isn't the best news re the Scotland Bill today.

ONE of the country's leading economists has warned Scotland could be left hundreds of millions of pounds worse off as a result of the financial deal that will underpin Holyrood's new powers. Professor Anton Muscatelli, the principal of Glasgow University, said the so-called "fiscal framework" around the
Scotland Bill now going through Westminster was "arguably even more important" than the powers the new legislation will transfer.

"This means that even if Scotland matched UK economic performance and grew its tax revenues by the same rate as the rest of the UK, the amount deducted from the block grant would always be larger than the revenues collected from tax. "Within three or four years, the Scottish Budget could be hundreds of millions of pounds lower as a result, and this loss would grow over time."

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14040892.Top_economist__new_powers_deal_could_cost_Scotland_hundreds_of_millions_of_pounds/

Shakethedisease

browniej wrote: »

Although that is not what happygreen said, it's not actually true either.

From the 2nd link I quoted;

Planetpedro needs to check his facts a bit better ( and mabye you should double check too )... There wasn't a Conservative party in Scotland until 1965. And the Unionist Party before that ( Unionist as in Ireland ).. was popular because it was anti-Westminster :-

This may seem paradoxical, but the Unionist Party had benefited greatly from its projection as an independent Scottish party opposing the London-based British Labour Party.

Politics change all the time. However, one constant since around the Thatcher years and certainly since 1997.. is that Scotland doesn't vote Conservative in anywhere near the numbers proportionately England does. So it can be pretty tough, both for SNP and Scottish Labour voters... to have to deal with Conservative policies and their effects channelled through the a mandate of only 1 sitting MP. While the other 58 are by and large ignored. Even on Scottish matters on things like the Scotland Bill ? And
another possible decade of the same to look forward to.

You'd feel the same way if it was the other way round.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I think the point is more that Scotland always gets the government that England votes for, whether they vote the same way or not. It doesn't matter. I guess that's the price of staying within the UK political system.

However, whatever your own personal feelings, there is a good mix of Labour/Conservative/Lib Dems MP's etc in England. I think people might look at things a little differently if, hypothetically, there was only 1 Labour MP in England and had been for a long time...yet England as part of the UK had had to follow ( for example ) Corbyn/Diane Abbot policies nonetheless for the last 6 years. And looking forward to another 9 years of them ? You and probably millions of others would have a completely different perspective then I dare say. COMPLETELY different.

the difference is that (most of ) the english see themselves as part of the UK, whilst the (some) scottish see themselves as being different from all other people and therefore deserving of 'special' treatment to (say) the people of Yorkshire.

the scottish MPs have the same powers on UK matters as anyother MP, but they have chosen to be deliberately destructive and confrontational rather than working for the common good.

anyway roll on May 16

Rinoa

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Planetpedro needs to check his facts a bit better ( and mabye you should double check too )... There wasn't a Conservative party in Scotland until 1965. And the Unionist Party before that ( Unionist as in Ireland ).. was popular because it was anti-Westminster :-

In 1974 and 2005 England voted Conservative and got Labour. On both occasions Scotland voted Labour and got Labour.

Shakethedisease

Rinoa wrote: »

In 1974 and 2005 England voted Conservative and got Labour. On both occasions Scotland voted Labour and got Labour.

There were two elections in 1974. Surely you haven't just casually missed out an entire General Election ?

1974 Minority Labour govt (Wilson)
————————————————
Labour majority: -33
Without Scottish MPs: -42
POSSIBLE CHANGE – LABOUR MINORITY TO CONSERVATIVE MINORITY
(Without Scots: Con 276, Lab 261, Lib 11, Others 16)


1974b Labour govt (Wilson/Callaghan)
—————————————————–
Labour majority: 3
Without Scottish MPs: -8
CHANGE: LABOUR MAJORITY TO LABOUR MINORITY
(Lab 278 Con 261 Lib 10 others 15)

2005 Labour govt (Blair/Brown)
——————————————–
Labour majority: 66
Without Scottish MPs: 43
NO CHANGE

In any case, a certain blog ( and we know how keen you are these days to believe whatever anyone says in blog posts as unassailable proof ).. laid this out in great detail for anyone looking for info a few years ago ( 2012 ).;)

Rinoa

Shakethedisease wrote: »

There were two elections in 1974. Surely you haven't just casually missed out an entire General Election ?



In any case, a certain blog ( and we know how keen you are these days to believe whatever anyone says in blog posts as unassailable proof ).. laid this out in great detail for anyone looking for info a few years ago ( 2012 ).;)

Not a surprise, but you've conveniently ignored the number of people voting for Labour v Con in England and Scotland.

How SNPesque.