Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

.string.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

All of which is coming from Westminster via the £9bn a year subsidy anyway.

Hamish - was there another underspend last year? They roll over don't they.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I have to be honest skintmacflint.. After the Vow and then Smith. That it's no real surprise that the SNP won't pass anything that doesn't adhere to them in full. Yes, neither of them came close to what they wanted, but they lost the referendum, at it's what was agreed by everyone. I fail to see where the problem is if the Scottish Govt don't accept the bill on the basis, very simply, that it wasn't what all parties signed up to at the time. Let's face it, it's not like the SNP got anything else through in the following months to change it.



I know you'd like to think that's true. And I can understand why. But they've been saying this

Labour collapsing, and a UK Tory government.. make that even more the case going forward not less. Labour's only hope now in Scotland really, is to declare support for independence or real Home Rule. And to be honest, I can't see that it's very far off now. It'll be irrelevance or independence ( one way or the other ). Because holding fast to this dogged belief in the union with only 1 Westminster MP, and their votes eroding fast both in Holyrood ( where they're predicted to lose all constituency seats ) and the year following perhaps all the councils... Cannot continue. Uk Tories have given up on Scotland. Uk Labour will at some point too. Scottish Labour still have a chance to pull things back.. but only if they stop reliving 2011-2014 and realise that priorities have changed for voters.

Well if we're going to be honest I don't agree with you. It certainly suits SNP to delay signing off these new powers for a while. For a number of reasons.

But Sturgeon knows she can't risk the fall out of refusing them outright. So an agreement will be reached. It's simply the timing that is debate able. While she knows her devoted supporters are prepared to accept party line excuses, No voters aren't. And it's No voters she wants and needs to persuade now.

As for the rest, at my time in life, I tend not to make long term predictions.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

As I've already stated there were many other factors at play with Yes and No voters in 2014. I've linked you to them a few times. Gender was another massive deciding factor ( which Sturgeon seems to be eliminating ).

Regarding the SNP however, their traditional heartlands were primarily in area's where it was Conservative v's SNP, and Lib Dem v's SNP. Labour dominated elsewhere. With both Labour and the Lib Dem vote collapsing... the SNP has hoovered up most of their previous support.. across all constituencies, age's, employment levels, financial status, bludger and grafter, regardless.

In fact, at the current time. It's the older Conservative and older 'traditional' Labour voters which are holding up both their voting shares going forward in Scotland. Which is most probably why the %'s are evening out between them in second place. Younger age groups have already switched to SNP in ALL areas, which is why the large scale swings happened. Bludger and grafters alike.

According to research from You Gov, the main young age group, 18-24 year olds voted No. You love to peddle a myth that just the old need to die and independence is a shoo in but it simply isn't true.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/20/scottish-independence-lord-ashcroft-poll

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014

As the Scottish Government under the SNP doesn't hold schools account publicly for their performance it is hard to say which regions underperform. Thankfully, some academics do some excellent work with the data that are available:

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/oct/05/educational-inequality-scotland-data

That tells us that the 9.3% of Scots get 3 As or better in their Highers. The average proportion that acheived the same in the 4 yes regions were:

- Dundee 7%
- Glasgow 4.6% (second lowest in Scotland)
- North Lanarkshire 7.2%
- West Dumbartonshire 6% (third lowest in Scotland)

So the few areas of Scotland that voted Yes seem to do very badly at school.

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

Well if we're going to be honest I don't agree with you. It certainly suits SNP to delay signing off these new powers for a while. For a number of reasons.

But Sturgeon knows she can't risk the fall out of refusing them outright. So an agreement will be reached. It's simply the timing that is debate able. While she knows her devoted supporters are prepared to accept party line excuses, No voters aren't. And it's No voters she wants and needs to persuade now.

As for the rest, at my time in life, I tend not to make long term predictions.

Swinney and Sturgeon will have very broad support if they don't accept, on the basis I've already put to you ( ie is not what was agreed ). I honestly think most people think the new Scotland Bill isn't worth the bother, as it's nothing like what Brown and the Vow were promising.

And it always helps when the current Scottish Secretary of State and Conservative MP.... isn't headlining in newspapers that it's a fiscal 'trap' don't you think ?

Mundell sets tax trap for SNP

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/610077/David-Mundell-SNP-Holyrood :rotfl:

The trap is that Westminster wants to force the Scottish Government to raise income tax in order to protect public services. Westminster has refused to devolve any other major tax, and it’s not accidental that the one major tax for which they are willing to give partial control to Holyrood is the tax which has the greatest direct impact on the wage packets of ordinary working people.

Westminster is keeping its paws firmly on taxes on businesses. They hope that they can force Holyrood to raise taxes on working people, which will then cause fewer voters to give their support to the SNP and to turn to the Tories instead. Saving the Union and increasing Conservative support in Scotland in one.

https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2016/01/28/stick-it-where-the-evel-doesnt-shine/

Deal or No deal.... given the above... eerrmmmm....

Or, the deal could be vetoed ( because it's a trap ), Scottish Labour's campaign crashes and burns... and the SNP still win a majority, on the basis that the new Scotland Bill.. is a trap. The very fact that Scottish Labour and the Conservatives are putting pressure on to accept the deal, whatever it is.. personally ? Should really have me and half of Scotland running screaming for the hills away from it.

Sturgeon doesn't need No voters right now skinmacflint. She needs Yes one's to stick with her for an SNP majority in May. Most Yes voters ( those who voted for FULL independence ), think the Scotland Bill as it stands is just totally awful, and would love to see it sent back. Worth remembering ? Sturgeon has very little to risk right now, in vetoing it. 44% got them a landslide in Holyrood 2011.

That you don't agree with me is kind of par for the course. And what good debate is all about.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

According to research from You Gov, the main young age group, 18-24 year olds voted No. You love to peddle a myth that just the old need to die and independence is a shoo in but it simply isn't true.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/20/scottish-independence-lord-ashcroft-poll

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014

I've already linked you to the study of 5000 referendum voters afterwards. Age, Gender, Scottish born or not, Catholic/Protestant and many other factors were discussed. ALL had influence. Scottish born was a biggie also.

SNP support at the present time though, is dominated by younger voters getting progressively less as one goes up the age groups.

TNS #SP16 poll by age:
16-34 SNP 75% LAB 15% CON 6% LD 2%
35-54 SNP 60% LAB 23% CON 11% LD 2%
55+ SNP 44% LAB 30% CON 16% LD 8%

Women also, for the last few polls, are now after years behind, in front of men % wise in SNP support. ( Salmond always did have a 'women problem' there ). Sturgeon seems to have eliminated it.

As the Scottish Government under the SNP doesn't hold schools account publicly for their performance it is hard to say which regions underperform. Thankfully, some academics do some excellent work with the data that are available:

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/oct/05/educational-inequality-scotland-data

That tells us that the 9.3% of Scots get 3 As or better in their Highers. The average proportion that acheived the same in the 4 yes regions were:

- Dundee 7%
- Glasgow 4.6% (second lowest in Scotland)
- North Lanarkshire 7.2%
- West Dumbartonshire 6% (third lowest in Scotland)

So the few areas of Scotland that voted Yes seem to do very badly at school.

So 'thick' in other words ? Your esteemed opinion is that Yes voters are all 'thick'. And you're now desperately trying to flail about finding figures on unemployment and academia in order to 'prove' it. As well as inadvertently lumping every single unemployed person, and those that didn't do well in Highers at school who reads these posts as 'thick'.

Well done you ! I must be of 'low intelligence' then.. and so must be many other Yes voters on this site ( as well as anyone unemployed currently or without loads of highers )... I do hope that makes you feel vindicated. *jazz hands* :T

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

SNP support at the present time though, is dominated by younger voters getting progressively less as one goes up the age groups.

But as Sturgeon herself has repeatedly pointed out, SNP voters are not the same thing as Yes voters.

Remember the 'rural heartlands' of the SNP, where people elected SNP politicians time after time, and then voted NO in droves during the indyref.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I've already linked you to the study of 5000 referendum voters afterwards. Age, Gender, Scottish born or not, Catholic/Protestant and many other factors were discussed. ALL had influence. Scottish born was a biggie also.

SNP support at the present time though, is dominated by younger voters getting progressively less as one goes up the age groups.

Women also, for the last few polls, are now after years behind, in front of men % wise in SNP support. ( Salmond always did have a 'women problem' there ). Sturgeon seems to have eliminated it.

So 'thick' in other words ? Your esteemed opinion is that Yes voters are all 'thick'. And you're now desperately trying to flail about finding figures on unemployment and academia in order to 'prove' it. As well as inadvertently lumping every single unemployed person, and those that didn't do well in Highers at school who reads these posts as 'thick'.

Well done you ! I must be of 'low intelligence' then.. and so must be many other Yes voters on this site ( as well as anyone unemployed currently or without loads of highers )... I do hope that makes you feel vindicated. *jazz hands* :T

Well Yes supporters (not the same thing as SNP supporters) are disproportionately likely to live in areas with high levels of unemployment and low levels of educational achievement.

And yes, if you were unable to complete any education past the age of 16 I'd say you are either thick or made a very poor life choice.

Individuals are unemployed for many different reasons but high levels of unemployment in an area correlate with low levels of educational achievement.

skintmacflint

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Swinney and Sturgeon will have very broad support if they don't accept, on the basis I've already put to you ( ie is not what was agreed ). I honestly think most people think the new Scotland Bill isn't worth the bother, as it's nothing like what Brown and the Vow were promising.

Prior to Salmond recognising an opportunity to create his own urban myth of what the 'Vow' had offered, Sturgeon unfortunately stated she had no clear idea of what new powers if any had been offered in in the Vow. The next day she had joined in with Salmond's embellishment

SNP have shown little but bad faith and political misrepresentation throughout the entire process.

Or, the deal could be vetoed ( because it's a trap ), Scottish Labour's campaign crashes and burns... and the SNP still win a majority, on the basis that the new Scotland Bill.. is a trap. The very fact that Scottish Labour and the Conservatives are putting pressure on to accept the deal, whatever it is.. personally ? Should really have me and half of Scotland running screaming for the hills away from it.

Huge difference between a political trap which could result in SNP actually having to put their policy decisions behind their political campaign slogans and a fiscal trap. Not that I'd ever expect you to acknowledge it. Even when you know the difference.

Sturgeon doesn't need No voters right now skinmacflint. She needs Yes one's to stick with her for an SNP majority in May. Most Yes voters ( those who voted for FULL independence ), think the Scotland Bill as it stands is just totally awful, and would love to see it sent back. Worth remembering ? Sturgeon has very little to risk right now, in vetoing it. 44% got them a landslide in Holyrood 2011.

Jings crivvens and there was me confidently stating 18 months ago Sturgeon's Yes voters would all stick by her at H/R. Now you're suggesting she has some work to do.

Course that was before the small cracks and arguments started appearing in the broad Yes movement. Some of those belonging to the more radical independent parties ( whose members did a huge amount of work for SNP in the less well off Labour heartlands) have started to question giving SNP such a huge majority with no opposition by lending their vote again.

And questioned whether it is right for SNP to continue on their don't rock the boat ' talk left but walk right way , nor make full use of available and potential new powers to make a difference for another 5 years. All for the 'prize' as you call it, which is still uncertain if and when it could happen.

Swinney is slashing council funding affecting public services those in less well off areas rely and make most use of. Meantime Swinney is happily continuing to fund his universal 'extras' which benefit middle earners most. So far around 2.5 billion out of his DEL fund over the years to support his council tax freeze. Not to mention the increasing cost of the rest of their popular policies.

Meanwhile Sturgeon's new independent poverty Tzsar has stated much the same, and all Sturgeon seems to say is her usual 'there is still work to be done' .

That you don't agree with me is kind of par for the course. And what good debate is all about.

Sturgeon is always trying to persuade No voters to her side. As evidenced in her latest TV party political broadcast. Unless you're happy to still be going round in the same circles or in an even worse position in 5 years time. .

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

But as Sturgeon herself has repeatedly pointed out, SNP voters are not the same thing as Yes voters.

Remember the 'rural heartlands' of the SNP, where people elected SNP politicians time after time, and then voted NO in droves during the indyref.

And are now voting in droves for the SNP, since the referendum, in unprecedented numbers. We're going round in circles Hamish. I'm not really sure what point you and Generali are trying to make here, other than to insinuate that Yes voters are of lower intelligence.

Is that what you're saying ?

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Well Yes supporters (not the same thing as SNP supporters) are disproportionately likely to live in areas with high levels of unemployment and low levels of educational achievement.

And yes, if you were unable to complete any education past the age of 16 I'd say you are either thick or made a very poor life choice.

Individuals are unemployed for many different reasons but high levels of unemployment in an area correlate with low levels of educational achievement.

Yes voters ARE overwhelmingly SNP voters. It's why their base support is so strong in elections, staying static at over 45%.

As for the rest of your post. I think you've made your point very clear already.