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

Tromking

kabayiri wrote: »

He should be bold. It's an opportunity to show a different direction than the rest of the UK.

The excuse that Westminster is holding Scotland back will start to grow thin, particularly if we other areas starting to improve.

Manchester airport expansion plans are well under way, as are Stansted plans.

Hopefully we will see fracking initiatives delivering benefits to the Fylde coast region soon - it's been talked about enough.

We all know the UK economy needs rebalancing away from out of date socialist ideology - it's just a question as to which areas lead the way. Step up to the plate Scotland!

Indeed.
Being the saddo I am, I'm currently watching the Scotland bill being discussed on TV, and the much of the tenor of the debate is as you describe it. As an aside, a very impressive performance by Ian Murray, the shadow Scotland minister.....I like him!

Thrugelmir

Generali wrote: »

Whisky exports grow apace

Until 2014. Like oil a volatile market. Which may not be helped by exchange rates in 2015 either.

Weaker economic conditions and political volatility in some markets saw the value of Scotch Whisky exports decline 7% to £3.95 billion in 2014 from £4.26bn the previous year, according to new figures published today (1 April).

http://www.scotch-whisky.org.uk/news-publications/news/scotch-whisky-exports-down-in-2014/#.VXXNj89Viko

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

Indeed.
Being the saddo I am, I'm currently watching the Scotland bill being discussed on TV, and the much of the tenor of the debate is as you describe it. As an aside, a very impressive performance by Ian Murray, the shadow Scotland minister.....I like him!

He's the only Labour MP left. So not really much in the way of a vast choice there . You may not be aware, but he stood for the election on a distinct anti-Trident, and anti-austerity platform like the SNP. Scraping through with a few hundred votes and the help of ill-advised Twitter comments a few years ago from his SNP opponent.

Wednesday 15 April 2015

LABOUR’S shadow business minister, Ian Murray, has broken ranks with the party leadership over the renewal of Trident by stating that he would not vote for the renewal of the submarine missile fleet under any circumstances...

He said: “I have a different view on Trident. The party !position is the party position. I’ve made it clear that I wouldn’t support it [Trident].”

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/labour-mp-ian-murray-breaks-ranks-over-trident-1-3744485

5 Apr 2015

Ian MurrayVerified account ‏@IanMurrayMP We must end failed austerity and make this the social justice election with a better plan for Scotland.

Lets see how long his views on the above two last. Or how long you continue to 'like' him if he stands firm on his election commitments to those who voted for him.

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

It is heartening to finally see SNP politicians now being put under pressure to say what they'd do with the powers coming Scotland's way. The Hosie fella was asked today if a way round Westminster's £177m cuts for Scotland would be put the SNP GE2015 election pledge to up the top rate of tax to 50% into next years Holyrood election manifesto. Surprise, surprise he seemed to reluctant to make that commitment.😀

You want the SNP to put up income tax rates ? To pay for Tory cuts 56 out of 59 MP's are opposed to ? And are scratching your head over why anyone would be reluctant to do so ?

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You want the SNP to put up income tax rates ? To pay for Tory cuts 56 out of 59 MP's are opposed to ? And are scratching your head over why anyone would be reluctant to do so ?

obviously a very popular policy
no cuts and no tax rises

why not just say you want more and more borrowing
what could go wrong?

.string.

Tromking wrote: »

Indeed.
Being the saddo I am, I'm currently watching the Scotland bill being discussed on TV, and the much of the tenor of the debate is as you describe it. As an aside, a very impressive performance by Ian Murray, the shadow Scotland minister.....I like him!

Yes I thought he did well. I watched it until Roberson had finished plus a couple more speeches but ducked out when the maiden speeches started. I don't think Salmond did well - he scored null point I think. Very ineffectual.

It was interesting to see the SNP castigated for having agreed to the Smith Agreement one day and disowning it the next day. Robertson (the one who has called SNP supporters Sheeple) made a good speech by SNP lights I expect (cheer leader effect) but criticised a number of things (like the "veto" nonsense) that had been well enough explained before.

So the Government tactics are to push through the Smith proposals as agreed by all parties and criticise the SNP dumping their manifesto. The SNP want to claim the Smith proposal is not followed and to demand more and more and more.

Quelle suprise!

Its worth repeating that if the Smith proposals were to be exceeded that should allow the Government to duck out of the Barnet application on the grounds that it was part and parcel of the original offer of which the balance has now been disrupted.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

Yes I thought he did well. I watched it until Roberson had finished plus a couple more speeches but ducked out when the maiden speeches started. I don't think Salmond did well - he scored null point I think. Very ineffectual.

It was interesting to see the SNP castigated for having agreed to the Smith Agreement one day and disowning it the next day. Robertson (the one who has called SNP supporters Sheeple) made a good speech by SNP lights I expect (cheer leader effect) but criticised a number of things (like the "veto" nonsense) that had been well enough explained before.
So the Government tactics are to push through the Smith proposals as agreed by all parties and criticise the SNP dumping their manifesto. The SNP want to claim the Smith proposal is not followed and to demand more and more and more.

Quelle suprise!

Sigh, you weren't really listening to that debate were you ? You might want to run your eye down this list of cross party MSP's on the Devolution Committee. Who all unanimously stated that the Smith Commission proposals were just not up to it as they stand. Nor what had been promised http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/83011.aspx

The above includes Labour/Conservative/Green/Lib Dem MSP's. All state there are big problems with the Smith Commission/Scotland Bill. Do you want to do a big 'Quelle Surprise' for them too ?

3. Over the course of 7 months, involving nearly 20 committee meetings, around 50 submissions of written evidence and fact-finding visits and public meetings in Hamilton, Aberdeen and Lerwick, we have carefully considered views on the Smith Commission’s recommendations and how these have been translated into proposed law by the previous UK Government.


5. The purpose of our report has been to provide a considered and constructive commentary for the new UK Government on the current package of measures being proposed for further devolution and where these can be improved. In short, all of the Committee want to see both the letter and the spirit of the Smith Commission’s report fully translated into a legislative package in the next UK Parliament.

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/89474.aspx

The UK Government’s draft legislation on further devolution fail to meet either the “spirit or substance” of the Smith Agreement, according to the Holyrood’s Devolution (Further Powers) Committee.
The committee has released a report, which saw unanimous agreement among its cross-party members, warning that draft clauses in the new Scotland Bill fall short on Smith’s recommendations on welfare and benefits, leading members to call for the legislation to be redrafted.

https://www.holyrood.com/articles/news/draft-devolution-plans-do-not-meet-%E2%80%9Cspirit-or-substance%E2%80%9D-smith-agreement

Its worth repeating that if the Smith proposals were to be exceeded that should allow the Government to duck out of the Barnet application on the grounds that it was part and parcel of the original offer of which the balance has now been disrupted.

It's worth remembering that ultimately, the Scotland Bill, has to be accepted at Holyrood and voted through also by MSP's. For it will be MSP's that have to work within whatever it ends up as on devolved matters, not the MP's at Westminster.

.string.

Yes Shakey I was listening so I also heard, before Robertson's remarks, that the Smith Bill had many changes.

But I agree on one thing, it will soon be take it or leave it time. At a certain time (close I think, enough will be enough).

I liked the Phrase "Desperate for disappointment" by Murray, applied to the SNP approach.

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You want the SNP to put up income tax rates ? To pay for Tory cuts 56 out of 59 MP's are opposed to ? And are scratching your head over why anyone would be reluctant to do so ?

A progressive social democracy costs you know!
You guys are different up there you keep on telling us, show the rest of the UK that investment in your economy rather than austerity can work!
The 50% top rate of tax was in the latest SNP election manifesto, let's see them put it in the Holyrood one next year.
It's almost as if the SNP like spending other people's money but not money generated in Scotland! 😀

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

A progressive social democracy costs you know!
You guys are different up there you keep on telling us, show the rest of the UK that investment in your economy rather than austerity can work!
The 50% top rate of tax was in the latest SNP election manifesto, let's see them put it in the Holyrood one next year.
It's almost as if the SNP like spending other people's money but not money generated in Scotland! 😀

The UK government doesn't just use income tax as a way of boosting the UK economy. It has a whole range of levers it can use. Income tax and only income tax is a poisoned chalice. As well Osborne knows. Raising it, will ensure business, revenues and jobs flee south. Keeping it as is, risks posts and commentary like yours.

It's partial responsibility without power. And we all know it. Designed to put the SNP back in their box without actually thinking about what would be good for the Scottish people, or what they want.

If Westminster can't even deliver Smith in full without watering it down so much that even it's own Tory MSP's think it's crap. Then there's very little chance of FFA or anything meaningful being on offer any time soon. We know that too. This is only just the start. 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

There are still ammendments to be debated. Everything will hinge on them, and who opposes them in Westminster.

In case they haven't noticed election landslides are now won in the face of massive anti SNP propaganda in both the broadcast and print media. The combination of social media and the huge SNP activist base in Scotland has ensured that the Unionist plan to trap Scotland by giving Holyrood self defeating powers,...The Tories slash the Scottish budget as Osborne taunts the SNP to raise tax to make up the shortfall. Meanwhile Labour and the Libs have a role to play moaning and griping and accusing the SNP as the Scottish Government is forced by London to make cuts to make up the shortfall.

...If we then enter the final scene, if the Bill remains unaltered, if it remains a clear trap then I would expect the Scottish Parliament will throw it out and the SNP will go to the polls in Scotland justifying that decision. Unionists will go to the polls arguing that Scotland should accept the new income tax powers, tax themselves more and accept the crumbs..