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

elantan

Shakethedisease wrote: »

That's because the tax raising powers as they were, were useless. Labour didn't use them either remember.. I imagine because they also thought that the tax raising powers were useless too.

Oh I know and I agree , I don't reckon they should use anything that will harm the country .... If it were me I would continue to push for indy

But let's not forget they did have these powers ready and didn't use them ... So they may not this time also

Generali

elantan wrote: »

I don't reckon they should use anything that will harm the country

Hence why the SNP's proposed revision to the Scotland Bill doesn't provide Scotland with FFA. They know it would be economic suicide.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

So if we look at the actual amendments to the Scotland Bill that have been proposed:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2015-2016/0003/amend/pbc031906a.pdf

the only amendments relating to FFA are to set up a commission to look into FFA.

Mr Swinney, as an MSP, of course can't propose amendments to the Scotland Bill so all we have here is a lot of what Aussies call 'jawboning'.

The SNP had better get on with it if they are going to put in a clause granting Scotland FFA. They haven't done it yet.

This amendment was proposed by Ian Murray (Lab), Wayne David (Lab) and Douglas Carswell (UKIP).

So despite all the hot air, the only amendment to the Scotland Bill submitted so far relating to FFA was submitted by 2 Labour MPs and 1 UKIP MP.

As the Bill is already at the committee stage with day 1 of 4 having sat (days 2 and 3 are 29th and 30th June with the date of the 4th day to be decided), the SNP had better pull their fingers out if they are going to but forward an amendment for consideration.

According to the SNP's website, the proposed amendment wouldn't introduce FFA, it would instead allow the Scottish Parliament to introduce FFA at a time of its choosing:

http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2015/jun/snp-table-amendment-scotland-bill

You know, it sounds to me like the SNP don't actually want FFA any more. If they wanted FFA, why not propose an amendment to the Scotland Bill granting FFA, or introducing it in a 'gradual way'?

Yes that's all very nice. However, again you didn't post ALL amendments that were voted on last week.

MPs have rejected attempts to have full fiscal autonomy (FFA) included in the Scotland Bill on more Holyrood powers.
The SNP and Tory MP Sir Edward Leigh submitted amendments calling for the Scottish Parliament to have full control of tax and spending.
However, they were both voted down, the SNP's by 309 votes to 60 and Sir Edward's by 298 to 68.

The SNP's was at a time of Holyrood's choosing. Edward Leighs was FFA asap. The SNP voted for both.

The SNP wanted Holyrood to be able to move towards FFA without it being imposed immediately.
Sir Edward wanted the Bill to be amended to give the Edinburgh parliament the fiscal controls straight away.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-33146586

Give up on the FFA stuff, and realise that Westminster/the other parties will never give it. I know it suits your narrative to keep 'jawboning' on about how the SNP don't seem to want it etc etc. But face reality. It's Westminster's to give, not the SNP's to take. While Westminster won't give, then there's little mileage in trying to paint the SNP as renaging on anything.

And certainly not on a day when it's plastered all over Scottish newspapers that the House of Commons Library seem to have noticed that parts of agreements from the Smith Commission are missing altogether....

MPs have been told that potentially "problematic and controversial" elements of the Smith Agreement on further devolution are not included in the Scotland Bill currently going through Westminster.

The House of Commons Library noted that some important parts of the cross-party proposals on welfare, drawn up in the wake of the independence referendum, were missing .
These include on so-called additionally, the principle that discretionary extra benefits must provide additional income.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/part-of-the-smith-agreement-not-included-in-scotland-bill-mps-told.129745998

It might be better to just assume that any reneging going on is probably from the other direction. Swinney is proposing, as are the 56 MP's exactly what priority powers they want implemented asap. As stated in the SNP manifesto.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Hence why the SNP's proposed revision to the Scotland Bill doesn't provide Scotland with FFA. They know it would be economic suicide.

Well the voters didn't think so. Probably heard far too much of the same over independence the last few years and have now tuned out. It's the electorate that hold the power, and they didn't and probably still don't, believe it would be economic suicide. Probably far more worried about what's in store from the next five years of the Tories rather than an imaginary FFA situation.

THE first hustings of Scottish Labour’s leader and deputy leader contest saw Kezia Dugdale MSP admit that “the electorate don’t believe us” on the party’s warnings over the economic dangers of the SNP’s devolution policy of full fiscal autonomy (FFA).
The anti-FFA message was a key part of former leader Jim Murphy’s General Election campaign strategy, but now appears to have been put on the back burner by Dugdale, who is the clear front runner to take over as party leader ahead of Ken Macintosh MSP.
“The electorate don’t believe us,” Dugdale admitted in front of the Edinburgh audience of party members. “It didn’t work on the doorstep”.

https://commonspace.scot/articles/1682/voters-don-t-believe-our-warnings-on-full-fiscal-autonomy-scottish-labour-leader-hopeful-kezia-dugdale-admits

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Yes that's all very nice. However, again you didn't post ALL amendments that were voted on last week.

I posted the latest slate of amendments.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Give up on the FFA stuff, and realise that Westminster/the other parties will never give it.

From the apparent proposal, the SNP don't want FFA. They said they did but now apparently they want the Scottish Parliament to have the ability to decide when FFA should come into force. As that would have an impact on the other nations of the UK that seems unreasonable and, I suspect, is never meant to be passed.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I know it suits your narrative to keep 'jawboning' on about how the SNP don't seem to want it etc etc. But face reality. It's Westminster's to give, not the SNP's to take. While Westminster won't give, then there's little mileage in trying to paint the SNP as renaging on anything.

And certainly not on a day when it's plastered all over Scottish newspapers that the House of Commons Library seem to have noticed that parts of agreements from the Smith Commission are missing altogether....

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/part-of-the-smith-agreement-not-included-in-scotland-bill-mps-told.129745998

It might be better to just assume that any reneging going on is probably from the other direction. Swinney is proposing, as are the 56 MP's exactly what priority powers they want implemented asap. As stated in the SNP manifesto.

The SNP is the third largest party at Westminster and have plenty of power to put forward changes to Bills proposed by the Government. It's very interesting that they had the opportunity to add FFA to the Scottish Bill but decided not to do so.

FFA (aka Devo Max I think) was the priority before the referendum question was decided. Now the SNP don't want FFA at all, just the ability for the Scottish Parliament to set up FFA.

Hmmm. If the SNP wanted FFA why not put in an amendment to introduce FFA. Unless, I think I might be working this through, they realise that FFA would wreck the Scottish finances.

We know that Scotland runs a deficit in advance of the UK deficit of over £7bn. The SNP leadership understand this but have to try to keep their manifesto promises so decide to put in a toothless and ridiculous amendment.

The SNP have painted themselves into a corner. It'll be interesting to see how they get out of it.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

I posted the latest slate of amendments.

From the apparent proposal, the SNP don't want FFA. They said they did but now apparently they want the Scottish Parliament to have the ability to decide when FFA should come into force. As that would have an impact on the other nations of the UK that seems unreasonable and, I suspect, is never meant to be passed.

This was in the first amendment also 'at a time of Holyrood's choosing'. But they also voted for Edward Leigh's amendment that would implement FFA immediately.

The SNP is the third largest party at Westminster and have plenty of power to put forward changes to Bills proposed by the Government. It's very interesting that they had the opportunity to add FFA to the Scottish Bill but decided not to do so.

Only if Labour MP's ( along with others ) or Tory MP's vote with them. Basic arithmetic. Neither Labour, Tories or any others have voted for FFA. Nor will they.

FFA (aka Devo Max I think) was the priority before the referendum question was decided. Now the SNP don't want FFA at all, just the ability for the Scottish Parliament to set up FFA.

Hmmm. If the SNP wanted FFA why not put in an amendment to introduce FFA. Unless, I think I might be working this through, they realise that FFA would wreck the Scottish finances.

Setting up FFA will take years. The last big tranche of devolution ( Calman ) has taken 8-9 years so far. Much of it was only due to come into force in 2016. The new Scotland Bill is just a lot of rehashing from that one. If the Smith proposals don't even make it to the bill, there is very little chance of FFA. Once again, it's time you gave up with this nonsensical argument that the SNP don't want FFA... because Westminster won't pass it... so that means the SNP don't want it. It's daft and is making you look daft to keep on about it. Simply recognise that it isn't ever going to be on the cards.

We know that Scotland runs a deficit in advance of the UK deficit of over £7bn. The SNP leadership understand this but have to try to keep their manifesto promises so decide to put in a toothless and ridiculous amendment.

The SNP have painted themselves into a corner. It'll be interesting to see how they get out of it.

Not really. Despite 90% of media coverage in the lead up to the general election being dominated by negative stories, reports and figures regarding FFA/Devo-Max. Voters still voted for the party offering it. The SNP has a duty to take their voters wishes forward to Westminster. That FFA and possibly a fair number of even more minor powers will be repeatedly voted down by other parties.. will certainly not be to the SNP's detriment.
In fact, it will prove their points, made repeatedly during the independence campaign..A) that Westminster doesn't listen to Scottish voters and The Vow/Smith/Scotland Bill is a pile of mince. And that any further powers that will be 'allowed' are a transparent political trap designed to make the SNP unpopular ( income tax ) rather than any real interest in devolving further meaningful powers.

All the SNP have to do is keep proposing further powers, FFA and have them repeatedly voted down. And watch horrified as the Tories railroad through their own economic policies, Trident and scrapping Human rights etc etc. All of which will be deeply unpopular up here.

Which way Labour jumps with it's new leader will be pivotal. There will be another ( vaguely worded but able to instantly put into motion with a quick lead up ) referendum contained within the 2016 SNP manifesto I should imagine. Whether the SNP will pull the trigger depends on events. As Hamish states, public opinion can turn on a whim. It will only take one really deeply unpopular Tory policy, possibly supported by Labour to set things in motion again. There is a Scottish election in 2016.. however, the SNP now have the option to run another one in 2019 should they wish to.

There will be no more Vows from Westminster, and public opinion in England is also veering towards Scotland leaving. They certainly aren't keen on Scottish MP's being anywhere near power in there anyway these days. The SNP just need to be very careful that the Tories don't push them into another referendum too soon, and before they are sure of winning it.

Tromking

The SNP delaying tactic on FFA will be the first in what will be long line of similar fudges in the future. Advocating independence/devo max/FFA etc. for the Scottish people but not really wanting quite yet, is not honest and sustainable politically and they will suffer for it eventually at the ballot box.

skintmacflint

^^^^^ to post427

Meanwhile back in the real world.............

Life moves on outside the SNP bubble of 'will' .

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

The SNP delaying tactic on FFA will be the first in what will be long line of similar fudges in the future. Advocating independence/devo max/FFA etc. for the Scottish people but not really wanting quite yet, is not honest and sustainable politically and they will suffer for it eventually at the ballot box.

You can't 'delay' something that isn't going to be offered. The Scots have returned +60% in polls for Devo Max for about the last 3 or 4 years... so it's not new to us. It was much discussed as an option leading up to the choice of the referendum question. In fact it was much discussed even here at the time. I was an undecided voter back then.

But again, completely daft to be accusing the SNP of 'delaying tactics' when FFA isn't on the table. Nor is ever likely to be. I doubt they'll suffer much at the ballot box through Westminster's intransigence. They've already voted for it twice.. and are about to try again.

Shakethedisease

skintmacflint wrote: »

^^^^^ to post427

Meanwhile back in the real world.............

Life moves on outside the SNP bubble of 'will' .

There doesn't seem to BE much life outside the SNP in Scotland at the moment. Labour UK/Scotland leaderless reduced to 1 MP, Lib Dems reduced to 1 MP, and the Tories barely hanging on to their 1 MP.

It's perhaps about time you started adjusting to the real world and the way things are, rather than living in the political past. It's not about 'will'... it's about cold hard votes. And the SNP managed a majority of them in 56 constituencies. Scottish Labour are going to have a tough time with the next election if they carry on as they are and have been. One of the leadership prospects wants to work with the SNP on a more progressive agenda. And after watching that show last night ( The Fall of Scottish Labour ).. it seems more than a few now ex-MP's/First Ministers are reassessing and coming to the same conclusions.

Anyway, I thought you weren't going to respond to my posts any more.