Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I don't think it's a matter 'red herrings'. Any cut in public spending reduces the amount Scotland and Wales get in block grants. Which in turn reduce amounts going to their respective NHS's. Why would any MP vote for or abstain from voting on something that affects their constituents for the worse ? It's also very unlikely that the Tories have implemented the reforms over the last few years in England in order to pour more public money in.

Oh it's clear what the SNP excuse is, the fact remains that the SNP want to meddle in English affairs with their only, repeat only, aim being to support anything that costs more money and be against anything that reduces cost.

But you can see that. What you don't seem to understand, or pretend not to, is admit to the mendacity of the SNP approach; even Sturgeon called it "self-interest".

It is also hypocritical, how would you like it if the wicked English were to vote in the Scottish Parliament and voted against any improvement in Scottish affairs because it might cost England money?

But it comes as no surprise - it sums up the SNP approach.

I think the greatest worry is that this is just the 'thin end of the wedge' as far as the English NHS is concerned. And there seem to be so many MP's that have active vested interests in 'smoothing' the way for more private sector involvement. Mabye it would be best to put things on pause for a bit. Farage is already openly talking about insurance schemes. Mabye he's right.. but there has been a lot of change in a very short space of time, and the NHS seems to be struggling a bit with them all. Not least front line staff having to put up with pay freezes.

"so many MP's that have active vested interests in 'smoothing' the way for more private sector involvement" - don't be silly. If that's what the SNP think they need more psychiatrists in the Scottish NHS.

But anyway, the die has been cast. And the SNP have now said they would be prepared to vote against any proposals that directly impact Scotland's NHS or other public services. And IF Sturgeon holds any significant sway in the next parliament.. then it's more likely, not less that any devolution packages currently proposed will be voted into law. In fact, they are likely to go a bit further. EVEL will disappear. Labour and Lib Dems are also against it. The Tories will have to crack on very quickly with it if it's to be implemented before May. Either that or win power again, which of course is also perfectly feasible.

No change is likely before the implementation of the new Devolution arrangements unless of course, the SNP get even more obnoxious.

It looks like Cameron's bluff re TV debates has been called though.

Not really, the attendance at the Discussion session has been expanded. Personally I dislike these circuses, they have little real value and are more rabble-rousing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30935369

For my comments see bold italics above.

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

It used to be a campaign poster against Thatcherism
If you sack a teacher
- he can't buy a Metro so you sack a British Leyland worker
- so he doesn't need steel, so you sack a steelworker
- so he doesn't need coal, so you lay off a miner
- so he doesn't go to Brighton for his holiday and a landlady goes out of business.

it was breathtaking stupid and ignorant when quoted against thatcher and it's still as stupid and ignorant.

jjlandlord

zagubov wrote: »

It used to be a campaign poster against Thatcherism
If you sack a teacher
- he can't buy a Metro so you sack a British Leyland worker
- so he doesn't need steel, so you sack a steelworker
- so he doesn't need coal, so you lay off a miner
- so he doesn't go to Brighton for his holiday and a landlady goes out of business.

Today I learned: In the 70s-80s the situation was so bad that the coal and steel industries were relying on orders from school teachers...

Shakethedisease

@.string.

Oh it's clear what the SNP excuse is, the fact remains that the SNP want to meddle in English affairs with their only, repeat only, aim being to support anything that costs more money and be against anything that reduces cost.

But you can see that. What you don't seem to understand, or pretend not to, is admit to the mendacity of the SNP approach; even Sturgeon called it "self-interest".

It is also hypocritical, how would you like it if the wicked English were to vote in the Scottish Parliament and voted against any improvement in Scottish affairs because it might cost England money?

But it comes as no surprise - it sums up the SNP approach.

I don't think the Conservative one is doing them any favours either though.

Sturgeon's plan, Cameron has declared, would be "wrong".

This would not matter much if he hadn't then taken a step further than he ought to have done - by bringing the SNP's voting rights on English matters into play.
"It wouldn't be appropriate for English constituents to have a rate of tax essentially imposed on them by Scottish members of parliament," he added.


Where on earth had this come from?


Only three days have passed since George Osborne told MPs Scottish MPs would still be permitted to vote on the Budget.
And under the Conservatives' three proposals published in the government's command paper on options for English votes for English laws, there is nothing at all which suggests the SNP would be restricted from having a say on these issues.
The approach being pursued by William Hague is one of ensuring a double-veto. English MPs would be given the opportunity of voting down anything they don't like being imposed by a Labour government propped up, say, by MPs in Scotland. But the bill would ultimately have to be passed by a majority of British MPs for it to become law. That would apply to Budgets as well as everything else.

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2015/01/23/david-cameron-declares-war-on-scotland

And talking of posters :-



:rotfl:

Even by the standards of the Conservative and Unionist (sic) party this is an impressively stupid poster. Do they really want to encourage Scots to vote for the SNP? Evidently they do...

Of course we know why. Every seat Labour lose in Scotland makes it less and less likely Labour will emerge from the election as the largest party. Consequently, every SNP gain makes it a little more likely David Cameron will have a chance of cobbling together a second ministry. But, my god, think of the price at which that comes. In their desperation to stop Miliband the Tories are prepared to risk the future of the United Kingdom. They might win this election but at the expense of losing their country. As Pyrrhic conquests go, that takes some beating...


...Worse still, the cry goes, no more appeasement! No more buying-off the Jocks! No more of this tiresome business of having to pay attention to the other parts of this realm. We’ve heard enough from you lot as it is. So pipe down. Or else.
You don’t need to be grievance-seeking Nat to be appalled by this sort of behaviour. On the contrary, it is the kind of thing that makes Scottish Unionists – of any kind – despair.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/01/conservative-central-office-appear-to-be-working-for-the-snp/

I think all parties are displaying more than a touch of 'self-interest' wouldn't you string ?

.string.

@Shakey - The criticism is not against Scots it is against the SNP, a difference you seem incapable of understanding, as well proven during the recent Referendum.

But it is correct that people South of the Border are fed up with the SNP demanding more and more. There was an understanding, at the time that the Referendum was agreed, that both sides would work in the interests of both Scotland and the United Kingdom. The SNP, as usual, renege on commitments. The Vow is well responded to in the Devolution proposals and the ever-increasing demands by the SNP are transparent attempts to damage the Union.

I expect the UK Government to honour its part of the Vow; I expect nothing from the SNP, just the usual whinging.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

@Shakey - The criticism is not against Scots it is against the SNP, a difference you seem incapable of understanding, as well proven during the recent Referendum.

But it is correct that people South of the Border are fed up with the SNP demanding more and more. There was an understanding, at the time that the Referendum was agreed, that both sides would work in the interests of both Scotland and the United Kingdom. The SNP, as usual, renege on commitments. The Vow is well responded to in the Devolution proposals and the ever-increasing demands by the SNP are transparent attempts to damage the Union.

I expect the UK Government to honour its part of the Vow; I expect nothing from the SNP, just the usual whinging.

The referendum was 4 months ago. The SNP and all other parties accepted the result. However, politics continues. Did you expect the SNP just to 'stop' after the referendum ? They've been around since the 1930's. You're asking for the impossible. The Edinburgh agreement didn't bind the SNP to shut up shop for the next 100 years.

As for the ridiculous assertion that the SNP are not the Scots. Of course they aren't. However, 1.6 million of them agreed with a Yes vote. And a good proportion beyond that wish further powers.. further powers I may add, that go much further than the Smith commission's offerings. Which, also, it should be also be pointed out again.. have yet to be voted through and delivered into law by MP's in Westminster.
Nor are the next parliament bound by them either. There is a very distinct nasty deja vu ( a la 1979 ) feeling that the Smith commission was a time buying exercise until May. And if there is a Tory/UKIP or similar coalition in power after May. Then it's highly likely there is little in it that will ever see the light of day for the length of the long grass it will be kicked into. We know it too.

Those south of the border have had Scottish Labour/Lib Dem and Conservative MP's voting on 'English' issues for years without any disernable haste to resolve the West Lothian question. Labour and Lib Dems in particular liked it that way. Well it's come back to bite them all in the rear now. And, even worse, there is absolutely nothing at all they can do about it. Not without further weakening the union considerably.

The hysterics just now is fear because Westminster has been backed into a corner. By it's own FPTP system and all it's 'BetterTogether/One Nation/Pooling and sharing' narratives over the last few years. If Westminster or England don't like or want to accept a ( potential ) boatload of SNP MP's sharing equally in UK-wide democracy.. then they know what to do.

Anyway, the SNP, if we put away the independence side for a second.. are fairly good at running countries. Definitely popular in the one they've ran for the last wee while anyway. Might be good if they injected some fresh thinking down Westminster way, social democracy and all that, with a bit of Greens and Plaid thrown in. Especially if Labour take note.The real problem for you string, and everyone else.. is that they didn't lose the ref, then curl up and die a quick party political death as predicted. Expect to hear more whining from Nicola for quite a while yet.

skintmacflint

In our area I know several people who don't bother voting as it's normally Labour who are elected with or without their vote. But they've all said they will be sure to vote Labour in May as they're sick to the back teeth of Sturgeon misrepresenting their views.

Will be interesting to see if the silent majority turn out again.

Any you're right Nicola will continue to whine no matter what happens. Hard to change the habits of a lifetime.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Those south of the border have had Scottish Labour/Lib Dem and Conservative MP's voting on 'English' issues for years without any disernable haste to resolve the West Lothian question. Labour and Lib Dems in particular liked it that way. Well it's come back to bite them all in the rear now. And, even worse, there is absolutely nothing at all they can do about it. Not without further weakening the union considerably. .

Oh there is one thing they could do.....

Abolish the Sottish executive and mandate that only Scottish MP's vote on Scottish issues, English MP's vote on English issues, etc. West Lothian question solved in one fell swoop.

One parliament, a stronger Union, immense cost savings, and a single set of laws throughout the UK without indulging the ill thought out and vainglorious pet projects of amateurs.

Plus, we get rid of the bunch of incompetent glorified county councillors currently riding the Holyrood gravytrain - which is always a bonus.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Oh there is one thing they could do.....

Abolish the Sottish executive and mandate that only Scottish MP's vote on Scottish issues, English MP's vote on English issues, etc. West Lothian question solved in one fell swoop.

One parliament, a stronger Union, immense cost savings, and a single set of laws throughout the UK without indulging the ill thought out and vainglorious pet projects of amateurs.

Plus, we get rid of the bunch of incompetent glorified county councillors currently riding the Holyrood gravytrain - which is always a bonus.

They won't though.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

They won't though.

They won't, yet.....