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

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I'm not disappointed ! Others who are less politically and legally aware are. The Vow was splashed across every newspaper and media outlet in Scotland for about 2 weeks before the referendum. Discussed, analysed and dissected. Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling also on every politics show and news channel in the country talking about 'Home Rule', 'Devo Max' and 'as close to federalism as you can possibly get'.

Hardly.. 'well actually, the Scottish parliament isn't actually permanent' and no govt can bind...and any amendments that allow Scots to have a say in it's dissolution in future.. we'll vote against. And for good reason, that Yes vote was getting scarily close in the polls at the time weren't they.

IIRC in one poll. The result was never in doubt. 2 years of No! way ahead and a single poll for Yes! and you think the establishment would crap itself. LOL.

Read some of the psephological blogs/reports out there (Finkelstein in the Times is particularly good) and you'll see exactly how political organisations like the Tory party treat one off spikes in polls.

Tromking

Rinoa wrote: »

Now, some people south of the border may think the massive falls in employment since the recession are due to the Conservatives handling of the economy. But apparently in Scotland it's all down to the brilliance of the SNP. :rotfl:

There seems to be growing clear water between the unemployment rates in Scotland and rUK, 5.9% in the former and 5.5% in the latter. I guess it depends on your political affiliation as to who might be to blame.

browniej

Shakethedisease wrote: »

No you're talking about an amendment to the Scotland Bill that was put before parliament two days ago.

An amendment that will only work if there is a change to the UK constitution.

Err yes. I 100% do think the Scottish electorate should have a say if Westminster ever decides to dissolve Holyrood. I'm surprised you would think otherwise ? Most Scots would as it affects aspects of their daily lives and finances.

I have no doubt at all that they would want it. However without a change to the constitution, they cannot demand it.

I suppose they could have a stab at trying. In theory.

There's no theory about it. If they wanted they could do so.

1.6 million-ish Scots residents voted Yes. Which QED means obviously, that they disagree with Westminster being able to dissolve the Scottish Parliament. Or that Westminster should 'simply disallow' the Scottish Government from being able to prevent such an action. In fact, they don't want Westminster have any powers at all over the Scottish parliament.

Deflection time again?

I didn't ask you for facts on the Yes voters though, did I? I asked you to back up your assertions on No voters.

Rinoa

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I'm not disappointed ! Others who are less politically and legally aware are. The Vow was splashed across every newspaper and media outlet in Scotland for about 2 weeks before the referendum. Discussed, analysed and dissected. Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling also on every politics show and news channel in the country talking about 'Home Rule', 'Devo Max' and 'as close to federalism as you can possibly get'.

The 'Vow' never mentioned Devo max, home rule or FFA. Either way, according to analysis before and after the referendum, only about 3% of voters were swayed by 'the vow'.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/11497348/The-vow-of-more-devolution-made-little-difference-to-outcome-of-independence-referendum.html

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

There seems to be growing clear water between the unemployment rates in Scotland and rUK, 5.9% in the former and 5.5% in the latter. I guess it depends on your political affiliation as to who might be to blame.

At these levels why blame anyone?

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

IIRC in one poll. The result was never in doubt. 2 years of No! way ahead and a single poll for Yes! and you think the establishment would crap itself. LOL.

Read some of the psephological blogs/reports out there (Finkelstein in the Times is particularly good) and you'll see exactly how political organisations like the Tory party treat one off spikes in polls.

Again, you've taken my post wrongly. It was that ONE poll that had Cameron, Miliband and Clegg high tailing it up to Scotland. That and the fact that No had somehow managed to lose a 30 point lead over the previous few months. The establishment was crapping itself. Cameron was in tears telling the Scots to vote No and not use the referendum as a means to 'give the effing Tories a kicking' ....

The Tories, like the other two main parties ( at the time ) paniced. Hence 'the Vow' and all the other guff that went with it. Or are you now really trying to claim that Cameron wasn't in the least bothered by it ( and the few others that had the Yes vote hovering at 48% at the same time ) ?

And whatever you say about all the polls collectively. The trend was clear all the way through. Yes was going up, No was going down. Not enough in the end. But enough at the time to convince all three parties that the trend overall and the acceleration to Yes was no isolated spike.

An emotional David Cameron illustrated the high stakes at play in the Scottish independence referendum when he pleaded with voters not to use the poll to give the "effing Tories" a kick.
In the first of a series of choreographed interventions by the leaders of the UK's three main political parties in Scotland, the prime minister appeared on the verge of tears as he pleaded with voters to appreciate the scale of the decision and spoke of how he would be heartbroken by a yes vote.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/10/david-cameron-scottish-referendum-effing-tories-kick

Not bothered.. lol.

Shakethedisease

browniej wrote: »

An amendment that will only work if there is a change to the UK constitution.

The UK has no written, formal, codified constitution.

[I have no doubt at all that they would want it. However without a change to the constitution, they cannot demand it.

Again. The UK has no written, formal, codified constitution. You should stop replying as if there is one.

That said, much of the British Constitution is based not on law but on unenforceable convention. It is not without reason that the Labour MP Austin Mitchell has often said the British Constitution is whatever the government can get away with.

http://blogs.ft.com/david-allen-green/2013/11/12/does-the-united-kingdom-need-a-written-constitution/

If Westminster decides to dissolve Holyrood, against the Scottish electorates wishes..then they can be sure independence will be just round the corner. Solid unionists such as Hamish here who would like to see Holyrood abolished..are not all that common in Scotland. Scotland can request what it likes, it's part of the UK too.

There's no theory about it. If they wanted they could do so.

As far as I know there are no plans to dissolve the Scottish parliament at the present time. So the discussion we are having is theoretical.

Deflection time again?

I didn't ask you for facts on the Yes voters though, did I? I asked you to back up your assertions on No voters.

No you didn't. You vaguely asked me to back up my assertions on who disagreed with the Tories voting down that amendment. 1.6 million Yes voters.. and those No voters that voted No on the basis of the Vow...How many at the time voted No on the basis of the Vow and all that flowed from it subsequently ? Is open to question, and polling taken afterwards. A poll taken immediately after the referendum stated that about 25% of No voters cite the Vow as THE reason for voting No. One taken more recently, states that 3.4% cite the Vow as A resason for voting No. So I guess it depends what poll you want to believe. Or any of them come to that ( given polling's recent performances ).

However, I think it's relatively safe to assume, that anyone who voted No citing the Vow either as a reason, or the sole reason.. and now see that even the first line of the Vow wasn't true. Will be disappointed that they factored it into their decision at all last September.

Shakethedisease

Rinoa wrote: »

The 'Vow' never mentioned Devo max, home rule or FFA. Either way, according to analysis before and after the referendum, only about 3% of voters were swayed by 'the vow'.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/11497348/The-vow-of-more-devolution-made-little-difference-to-outcome-of-independence-referendum.html

The Vow didn't rule anything out, or in. It was vague to the extreme, and deliberately so. It meant and didn't mean whatever people wanted it to. It was all the media coverage afterwards that gave it credence and a basis of 'authority'. Gordon Brown in particular all over the place promising that it meant 'Home Rule' and generating masses of 'Devo-Max/Federalism' headlines on the basis of it probably shaped most of what people 'thought' it meant after it's publication. The Vow shouldn't be taken in isolation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye4Ke5KGNwA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I0ydcqsEW4

I didn't see your post before replying to someone else. I mentioned that poll in my other post.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Again, you've taken my post wrongly. It was that ONE poll that had Cameron, Miliband and Clegg high tailing it up to Scotland. That and the fact that No had somehow managed to lose a 30 point lead over the previous few months. The establishment was crapping itself. Cameron was in tears telling the Scots to vote No and not use the referendum as a means to 'give the effing Tories a kicking' ....

...

Are you sure you're not living in some B-movie remake of Brave Heart or something?

It's colourful, I'll give you that.

You had equally catastrophic predictions about the GE.

Remind me how that played out again? Oh yes, no dramatic hung parliament - just a plain old boring Tory majority.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

Are you sure you're not living in some B-movie remake of Brave Heart or something?

It's colourful, I'll give you that.

But true. Ask Generali. We crossed 'swords' numerous times over the referendum polls. BetterTogether (mis)managed to lose a huge lead over the course of the campaign. Generali was trying to pass off that one 'dramatic' poll as a 'spike' that the Tories airily dismissed. It was nothing of the sort when one looks at all the other polls round about the same time and looks at the trend. Does the below look 'spiky' to you ? One 'rogue poll' standing out from all the rest ? Or does it look like there might be a bit of a panic to be had, and Vow's to be made ?

But all in the past now.

You had equally catastrophic predictions about the GE.

I didn't view a large number of SNP MP's as anything like catastrophic. I was postively hoping for it.

[Remind me how that played out again? Oh yes, no dramatic hung parliament - just a plain old boring Tory majority.

Remind me also, what your own predictions were based on the polls ? Because as far as I can recall, they were for a hung parliament... the same as just about everyone else in the UK who follows politics thought.

Were you alone convinced the Tories would have a majority ? And were just hiding your opinions soooo well that it only looked like you agreed there would probably be a hung parliament. And spent just as much time as everyone here speculating on what would happen if there was ? All for show was it ? Remind me.