Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Generali

CLAPTON wrote: »

The logical connection are difficult to unravel

The danger of every minor (untrained) functionary looking out for child protection issue that extend to 'happiness' etc is that their own prejudices may influence their judgement with potentially serious consequences.
So in Rotherham, even though there were dozen of teenage girls suffering terrible real sexual abuse, the 'authorities ' overlooked the issue. However, they were aware of the terrible nature of UKIP supporters (vile racists etc) and took a UKIP couple's children into care on the basis that such a home was unsuitble for children..
Once it got in the newspapers the child/ren were released back into the parents cusody with a half hearted apology.

My reference to Whitfold is that she is/was a NHS consultant and so just the sort of person who would be looking out for problems : as a committed liar and SNP supporter, it would not be beyond the realms of possibility that her firmly help political convictions would lead her to some incorrect conclusion.

Ah, I see.

FWIW I agree with you. What happened to those poor girls in Rotherham was terrible and frankly those in power (e.g. police, social services) that enabled it should be in prison along with the rapists.

kabayiri

elantan wrote: »

This is quite a difficult one to answer, I know many people here that want out of the EU but will vote to remain in just to get a chance at indy, there may be others that want in but will vote out just to stay in the UK...

as for % I would agree it needs to be a definitive amount no more 55-45 I reckon atleast 60-40

Does 60-40 really tell you anything? Two-thirds / one-third might.

Once people start to conflate the EU independence with party political issues (such as Scottish independence, but not exclusively); then things get really murky IMO.

I think you should vote based on your own assessment in a referendum. I also think all parliamentary MPs should be able to campaign based on their own convictions on the ref issue.

elantan

I agree things will get murky and I am not saying I agree with it, I am saying that I have heard people state that it is their intention.

Maybe 60-40 wont be enough, I dare say it will be up to Nicola Sturgeon to decide what exactly % that she would deem important enough to hold another indy ref.

I imagine all the Mp's will campaign on what they believe to be the correct choice, I imagine also atleast 56 of those mp's will think staying in the Eu to be the best option.

Shakethedisease

tberry6686 wrote: »

I'm not convinced that the SNP will ever win an independence referendum. Just because the will have a landslide at the next Scottish elections means nothing.

They are very good at getting there supporters out in normal elections when many Scots just can't be bothered. In the referendum, however, the total voter turnout was far higher than normal and the result was very clear.

The pro independence campaign was (and continues to be) very vocal where as the Unionist side tends to remain pretty quiet. If you look at the polls in the run up to the referendum, in the last days before hand it appeared very close, only the pro independence group believed them, the better together campaign knew differently.

If there's another referendum. It will not be based on the same set of arguments as the last one. Another BetterTogether will struggle. And there will be no 'cross party' platform either. Labour would never risk that again. So any 'unionist' factions will be divided along exactly the same lines as political/election lines. In other words, hopelessly divided with no coherent message between them. Scottish Labour are already making noises about Home Rule and allowing MSP's and members to be out and proud pro-independence should another independence ref be on the cards in future.

I very much doubt if leaving the EU will make much of a difference really. For Scotland to join the EU would take years of talks, almost certainly handing over whatever oil industry it has left, giving up economic control, joining the Euro etc and that is if the EU would want them. A country that would (if the SNP spending plans are to be believed) be an economic basket case as bad as Greece that would require constant subsidies instead of being a net contributor, why would the EU want to bring that into the mix.

It would take years of negotiations to get Scotland OUT of the EU first (as would it for the UK )... before years of negotiations in order to admit Scotland again. A pointless exercise. If there's a leave vote, and then a Yes vote out of the UK. It's far more likely Scotland will just inherit the UK's EU treaties etc. Kind of what BetterTogether claimed rUK would do in the event of a 2014 Yes vote ? I see no reason why the situation can't be reversed in the event rUK votes to leave. The EU might enjoy announcing that actually....:cool:

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Murky is a good word for it.

Some of the cybernat brigade appear to be wondering if they should vote 'out' to tip the very close UK balance to an 'out' and try to trigger another Scottish Indyref through Scotland voting in but the UK voting out, but the risk if they do so is that Scotland may then also vote 'out' which wouldn't trigger another Indyref.

But if the nationalists vote 'in' en masse then that might be enough to tip over the UK vote to staying in, which gives them no grounds for a grievance with WM and removes a potential excuse for another indyref.

Meanwhile the Unionists want to avoid giving the Nationalists an excuse for another indyref, so could vote 'in' if the national polls are very close to ensure we stay in the EU, but could vote 'out' if the national polls point to a 'leave' outcome being most likely, to ensure Scotland votes the same way as the UK thus also removing a potential excuse for another indyref.

Clear as mud then...

Rinoa

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It would take years of negotiations to get Scotland OUT of the EU first (as would it for the UK )... before years of negotiations in order to admit Scotland again. A pointless exercise. If there's a leave vote, and then a Yes vote out of the UK. It's far more likely Scotland will just inherit the UK's EU treaties etc. Kind of what BetterTogether claimed rUK would do in the event of a 2014 Yes vote ? I see no reason why the situation can't be reversed in the event rUK votes to leave. The EU might enjoy announcing that actually....:cool:

Just what the EU needs. Another country with a large budget deficit. They're sure to welcome you with open arms.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

http://no2np.org/named-person/

What on earth business is it of the State to determine whether a child has a say in what TV they watch, or what colour their room is painted?

Why should the State have the power to interfere in or question parental decisions about what is best for their child if no laws have been broken?

Why do we need a network of spies reporting on the decisions of parents and the gossip of their children?

Hmmmmm.....

The appeal judges ruled that Lord Pentland had been right to reject the judicial review and concluded that the concerns raised by the groups about interference in family life were 'hyperbole'....

In a decision delivered by Lord Carloway, the Lord Justice Clerk, the court ruled that the plans did not infringe on parents' right to family life and the Scottish Government was entitled to introduce the policy....
...."The mere creation of a named person, available to assist a child or parent, no more confuses or diminishes the legal role, duties and responsibilities of parents in relation to their children than the provision of social services or education generally," Lord Carloway said.
"It has no effect whatsoever on the legal, moral or social relationships within the family. The assertion to the contrary, without any supporting basis, has the appearance of hyperbole."...

...others welcomed the decision. Theresa Fyffe, Director of nursing body RCN Scotland, said: “We have confidence in in the named person model and the protection and support it will offer to young people and their families across Scotland...

....Seamus Grearson, of the Scottish Secondary Teachers Association, said Lord Carloway had been right to conclude that the law was only intended to provide children and families with a single point of contact if they needed help.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13647529.Named_person_concerns_are__hyperbole___say_appeal_judges/

( article too long to quote in full ).

Shakethedisease

Rinoa wrote: »

Just what the EU needs. Another country with a large budget deficit. They're sure to welcome you with open arms.

The UK is already in the EU ?

elantan

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Murky is a good word for it.

Some of the cybernat brigade appear to be wondering if they should vote 'out' to tip the very close UK balance to an 'out' and try to trigger another Scottish Indyref through Scotland voting in but the UK voting out, but the risk if they do so is that Scotland may then also vote 'out' which wouldn't trigger another Indyref.

But if the nationalists vote 'in' en masse then that might be enough to tip over the UK vote to staying in, which gives them no grounds for a grievance with WM and removes a potential excuse for another indyref.

Meanwhile the Unionists want to avoid giving the Nationalists an excuse for another indyref, so could vote 'in' if the national polls are very close to ensure we stay in the EU, but could vote 'out' if the national polls point to a 'leave' outcome being most likely, to ensure Scotland votes the same way as the UK thus also removing a potential excuse for another indyref.

Clear as mud then...

politics is generally a murky game, did you seriously expect anything different ?

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Murky is a good word for it.

Some of the cybernat brigade appear to be wondering if they should vote 'out' to tip the very close UK balance to an 'out' and try to trigger another Scottish Indyref through Scotland voting in but the UK voting out, but the risk if they do so is that Scotland may then also vote 'out' which wouldn't trigger another Indyref.

But if the nationalists vote 'in' en masse then that might be enough to tip over the UK vote to staying in, which gives them no grounds for a grievance with WM and removes a potential excuse for another indyref.

Meanwhile the Unionists want to avoid giving the Nationalists an excuse for another indyref, so could vote 'in' if the national polls are very close to ensure we stay in the EU, but could vote 'out' if the national polls point to a 'leave' outcome being most likely, to ensure Scotland votes the same way as the UK thus also removing a potential excuse for another indyref.

Clear as mud then...

I wonder how these No voters feel now ?

During the ref campaign.

Fear of not being in the EU may be a factor in motivating some people to vote ‘No’ to an independent Scotland. 36% of ‘No’ voters said European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso’s comments about the difficulty of an independent Scotland joining the EU would make them even more likely to vote ‘No’ to independence.

http://survation.com/a-tale-of-two-referendums-fear-of-leaving-eu-has-little-effect-on-pro-independence-scots-2/

Most of the 'cybernat' brigade will vote to stay in. But for many reasons, probably similar to your own viewpoints. Ie whereas you would argue is better for the UK to remain in the EU, many would say it's better for the same reasons that Scotland/UK remain within the EU independent or not. A trigger for another indy ref would just be an added bonus.