How will the economy be affected by SNP MPs; will it be for richer or for poorer and

Tromking

Generali wrote: »

It's because the majority of English people neither want nor see the need for it.

Really?
I've seen polls saying just the opposite.

kabayiri

How has this thread become another pro-anti SNP whinge like the other?

What has a picture of beach tidying got to do with the economy?

Back to the original question.

I believe SNP policy will make the economy poorer because I have no confidence in left of centre policies in general.

Luckily, we have a right/centre party with a broad appeal and a mandate to implement their manifesto. The economy has a chance.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Only you could make an MP getting their hands dirty among 'local people' into a bad thing. The above illustrates the point re social media. Now everyone in Central Ayrshire knows that their MP was out picking up litter today... because it was all over Twitter/Facebook. We have no idea what the other parties do.. because they mainly prefer to talk through newspapers still. A dwindling resource these days, or only accessible through a paywall.

You and wotsthat between you have managed to post the image another twice after I did. Positive reinforcement. I like it. And it's got to be better than the ex-Labour MP who'd like to tell his previous constituents about how he's really felt representing them all those years... ( ie F off lol )..

I think it an excellent thing for people to pick up litter.
And excellent PR job to ensure it is all over Twitter/facebook.

I know nothing about your ex labour MP (but obviously any non SNP person is vile, awful, stupid etc)

however I would put it in the context of, say, causing great upset, worry and stress for cancer suffers and their family and friends by saying that treatment in the NE of England is substandard.
For a normal politician to say such things might be 'normal' party politics but for (usually) trusted oncology specialist Consultant to lie for personal gain is particularly disgusting.
To reward such behaviour is awful but of course all decent judgement is suspended for the 'cause'.

Generali

Tromking wrote: »

Really?
I've seen polls saying just the opposite.

Could you link to one. I genuinely have never seen a poll with a majority wanting an English Parliament nor do people I know want one. Perhaps it's a further sign of the divisiveness that the SNP have introduced to British politics.

Nationalism brings hate and division. Unfortunately the British, who have resisted admirably for decades, seem to be succumbing. I hope they'll draw back from the abyss.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Could you link to one. I genuinely have never seen a poll with a majority wanting an English Parliament nor do people I know want one. Perhaps it's a further sign of the divisiveness that the SNP have introduced to British politics.

Nationalism brings hate and division. Unfortunately the British, who have resisted admirably for decades, seem to be succumbing. I hope they'll draw back from the abyss.

Support for an English devolved parliament has been rising over the last decade, not just because of the 'SNP'. Most especially in northern regions of England.

In the first five years of devolution for Scotland and Wales, support in England for the establishment of an English parliament was between 16 and 19 per cent, according to successive British Social Attitudes Surveys.[8] A report, also based on the British Social Attitudes Survey, published in December 2010 suggests that only 29 per cent of people in England support the establishment of an English parliament, though this figure had risen from 17 per cent in 2007.[9] One 2007 poll of 1,953 people throughout Great Britain carried out for BBC Newsnight, however, found 61 per cent support among the English for a parliament of their own, with 51 per cent of Scots and 48 per cent of Welsh people favouring the same.[
A 2014 poll by Cardiff and Edinburgh universities found that 54% of English people surveyed agreed with a devolved parliament,

5 November 2014

He said appetite for devolution had been a "growing trend" and although people were still split on the idea of an English Parliament, support had grown over the past decade.
"I think people in northern England, for example, are seeing how the referendum has benefited Scotland and they want a share of the pie."


74% of people living in the East Midlands would support plans to allow only English MPs to vote on issues which affect England alone



62% supported the idea of setting up an English parliament – against an England average of 53%

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-29880995

There's more would like to see it than not I daresay.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

How has this thread become another pro-anti SNP whinge like the other?

What has a picture of beach tidying got to do with the economy?

I posted that picture as a reponse to another post disparaging SNP MP's as Sturgeon automations.

Back to the original question.

I believe SNP policy will make the economy poorer because I have no confidence in left of centre policies in general.

Luckily, we have a right/centre party with a broad appeal and a mandate to implement their manifesto. The economy has a chance.

They will have a tough time implementing a lot of their policies. Their majority isn't big enough. And the HoL is going to be another problem for them. EVEL is a giant fudge which is going to upset how things work, mabye not short term.. but definitely in future.

The implications of Evel extend beyond Scotland. Imagine if Labour had won the 2010 election on the strength of its then 41 Scottish MPs? The Labour prime minister would have found himself in Parliament faced with an inability to get his legislation approved across 85% of Britain.
Say that Labour PM had tried to repeal the Health and Social Care Act, 2011, which has led to private companies invading the English NHS (but not the Scottish NHS because it is devolved). Tory MPs would uner Evel have demanded a veto on this on the grounds that they have a majority in the English Grand Committee.


It would make any government that didn't have a clear majority of English MPs practically impossible. Ed Miliband could have had a cabinet of ministers for health, education, justice etc who were in office but not in power.

As is Smith.

Under the Scotland Bill to implement the Smith reforms, Holyrood is, apparently, to get powers to increase welfare benefits, if it wishes, and income tax powers to pay for them. This is such a transparent trap I can't quite believe the SNP has fallen into it - but they signed up to Smith last year.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/the-scotland-bill-is-a-tory-trap-and-snp-mps-need-to-get-to-grips-with-it-fast.127538314

Stormy waters ahead most likely.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Support for an English devolved parliament has been rising over the last decade, not just because of the 'SNP'. Most especially in northern regions of England.



5 November 2014http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-29880995

There's more would like to see it than not I daresay.

yes that is probably so

it shows how little needs to be done, to create nationalism and dislike and malice where formerly there was very little

but the genie is out of the bottle and a rapid referendum and departure is probably the least harmful solution

.string.

@Shakey – thanks for reply re what you wrote on the matter of English Votes etc. We seem to have some common ground, but I feel that you do not address the matter of the imbalance between zero voting influence by the rest of the UK on matters decided by the Spanish Parliament and Scottish Influence on English matters or, come to that, still un-devolved matters relevant to other parts of the UK which are still not devolved to Wales/NI. That is at the root of the problem here.

The matter of whether Mps are equal or not may be debateable to some but is somewhat irrelevant since it can be solved immediately by declaring that the Physical Building of the HoC has 2 (or 4!) functions, one to debate Common (Reserved) Matters, and the other to debate English Matters, English + Welsh Matters and English + NI Matters. We could of course build three more Parliament buildings but that would be daft. In order to manage that, the job description for each MP would be defined according to what separate Parliaments he/she would sit in. So the whole matter is diverted from being a question of what rights MPs have to what is their job at Westminster.

As I’ve written, I like the idea of all MPs being able to vote so I don’t like that clumsy proposal and therefore return to the concept I have espoused.

As to the question of deciding which Bills and their financing relate only to a part of the country, that can be simply decided by reference to the subject matter (quite possible by a vote in the HoC) or having a vote of all MPs coincident with the closing vote of the Bill, to decide the matter. I favour the latter to avoid constant bickering before the Bill’s implications are known (via the debate) and to avoid doubling the number of debates.

To be frank I would not care so much about any of this at all were it not for the fact that it has repeatedly been said/strongly implied that SNP MPs would vote for any Bill that increased cash returns or advantage to Scotland and against Bills which did not.

.string.

kabayiri wrote: »

How has this thread become another pro-anti SNP whinge like the other?

What has a picture of beach tidying got to do with the economy?

Back to the original question.

I believe SNP policy will make the economy poorer because I have no confidence in left of centre policies in general.

Luckily, we have a right/centre party with a broad appeal and a mandate to implement their manifesto. The economy has a chance.

The economic issues will arrive soon enough, but beach tidying is part, I think, of the SNP strategy of using the publicity that comes with the novelty of lots of their fellows at Westminster. It's part of the SNP=good, other parties=bad message, a game that all parties play but orchestrated in a trite but effective way. The immediate target is the Labour Party and the Lib-Dems ---we've seen it used here a few posts back in the reference to the MP who bad-mouthed his former constituents.

It amounts to opening shots in the battle for people's (Scots) affections which will happen all through this Parliament. We'll see it in claims that the Tories are "short-changing" the Scots and counter claims that the SNP are making unrealistic claims. We've seen that all ready in the question and reply on the Queens Speech debate between Cameron and Robertson. Very revealing that was .

.string.

Perhaps Shakey can confirm this, having insight into the middle of the SNP, but as far as I know, the SNP in the form of Sturgeon, has said that it is opposed to the Referendum on the EU. They will campaign for starying in the (European) Uunion.

I'm not sure yet how they will approach the negotiation with the EU, but it seems to me that the Referendum and particularly the negotiation are hugely to the advantage of the SNP should Scotland ever be so daft as to separate from this very good (UK) Union.

Although they deny it to be the case, if Scotland were leaving the UK, they would not automatically be part of the EU and would have to apply for membership. Their chances of joining eventually are good but at the moment that would only be by accepting the EU treaty in total, meeting strong economic strictures, and joining the EuroZone......... 'Bye Bye independence.

Now , think of what Cameron is doing; he is trying to establish a way that a non Eurozone State can exist in the Union alongside the EuroZone counties. This is against the background of the closer union being mooted for the EuroZone counties.

So if Cameron is successful, he will establish a separate status of membership. We used to call such a thing as a two speed Europe, but that inference seems softened now.

Such a precedent could well be useful for a Scotland not wanting to be dragged into accepting the euro as it's currency, it can go on using the groat or haggis or whatever (as we know they are unlikely to be using the pound, at least not as part of a currency union).

So it puts the SNP in a quandary - be seen to be supporting (as they claim it to be) an anti-EU process (negotiation) or pass up the opportunity to put input into the process which would help them later (I really mean Never).