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

IveSeenTheLight

CLAPTON wrote: »

I won't expect anyone in the SNP to express a different view from the great leader because acolytes don't do that sort of things unlike real democratic people.

LOL, really.

Great leadership would have thrashed this out behind closed doors and have an agreement of the party line before going public.

The democracy and debate could all have been completed out of the public eye and relay a real strength and unity.

As we all know, the electorate have to accept the government that majority voted for and so should the MP's respect and accept the majority of the parties democratically agreed policies.

However, you prefer to look for similar failings in the SNP and dress it up as there is no democracy.

LOL, made me smile today, thank you.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

I think that was just the Cabinet who are meant to be bound by collective responsibility.

Looks like there backbench rebellion for the Human Rights Act scrapping as well.

That's 2 out of 2, not a great start

Cameron faces Tory backbench rebellion over plans to scrap the Human Rights Act

wotsthat

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Are you looking for or desperate for inparty fighting in the SNP like other parties suffer from?

What's wrong with differences of opinion?

Tromking

Tromking wrote: »

Of course not.
You still want your elected representatives to push for its immediate adoption as per the SNP manifesto though?

@ISTL.
We`ll just leave that question hanging shall we?
A bit like the SNP`s attitude in the middle of an oil slump to FFA/FFR!:)

IveSeenTheLight

wotsthat wrote: »

What's wrong with differences of opinion?

Nothing at all.

I just believe that great leadership means that the differences of opinions are debated closed doors and a concencus agreement is presented after deliberation.

Otherwise, you get the opportunity for the media to present derision and dissagreement within the party.

Far better for a politician to answer that the policies have been thoroughly dissected within the party and an agreement reached rather than put something out there, that infers there has been no discussion or agreement and allow the debate to happen in frint of all.

IveSeenTheLight

Tromking wrote: »

@ISTL.
We`ll just leave that question hanging shall we?
A bit like the SNP`s attitude in the middle of an oil slump to FFA/FFR!:)

Not at all.
Your posing a hypothetical question of unlikely reality

I voted for independence, but the country voted against it.
I accept that.

If FFA / FFR was offered, I would snap at it, as it would allow the politicians of Scotland, more authority over how the future of Scotland was directed and the people of Scotlands vote would reflect their preferences of government (with full powers), regardless of who'm that would be.

The question is moot though as FFA / FFR is not being offered.

.string.

Sturgeon made a show of declaring that "she" would act in the interests of all Scots recognising that not all voted Yes.

So much for that; no policy but SNP policy equates to Yes policy.

It's no more than we expected but far less than the Scots deserve.

Tromking

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Not at all.
Your posing a hypothetical question of unlikely reality

I voted for independence, but the country voted against it.
I accept that.

If FFA / FFR was offered, I would snap at it, as it would allow the politicians of Scotland, more authority over how the future of Scotland was directed and the people of Scotlands vote would reflect their preferences of government (with full powers), regardless of who'm that would be.

The question is moot though as FFA / FFR is not being offered.

All manifesto pledges are hypothetical if you don`t become the government. You can still believe in a policy even if its not being offered. The SNP could even table an amendment to the current Scotland Bill and put immediate FFA/FFR in there and let it be voted down, at least it shows SNP voters your intent. Aren`t you in the least bit curious as to why the SNP have gone cold on immediate FFA/FFR?

.string.

Tromking wrote: »

All manifesto pledges are hypothetical if you don`t become the government. You can still believe in a policy even if its not being offered. The SNP could even table an amendment to the current Scotland Bill and put immediate FFA/FFR in there and let it be voted down, at least it shows SNP voters your intent. Aren`t you in the least bit curious as to why the SNP have gone cold on immediate FFA/FFR?

I would be pleased if the SNP tabled an amendment for FFA; then everyone on both sides of the border would see what their arguments are, for and against.

Therein lies the reason why they will chicken out of doing that.

Tromking

.string. wrote: »

I would be pleased if the SNP tabled an amendment for FFA; then everyone on both sides of the border would see what their arguments are, for and against.

Therein lies the reason why they will chicken out of doing that.

I liked the Tory MP yesterday who told the SNP benches that a SNP driven FFA amendment would probably find support with numerous English MP`s also.