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

Rinoa

kabayiri wrote: »

I find it ludicrous that they believed independence could be achieved in 18 months, yet FFA would take years.

It exposes the tactic of drawing out FFA out even more, in my view. Maybe they realise they would struggle to match the Scottish voter expectations with the economic reality.

Easy to see now why they don't really want FFA

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-33268851

kabayiri

Rinoa wrote: »

Easy to see now why they don't really want FFA

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-33268851

One word : ouch.

However, this is the time when Scotland needs to step up to the plate on it's own.

An independent Scotland could not go around blaming others. To show they are ready the Scottish government needs to diversify the economy even more. They need to be leaner, more austere even.

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

I don't know better than anyone else who profers their opinion on these boards, it is however always my opinion and unlike some of your posts not packed full of links to other people's opinions.
It is not English nationalism to tell a party that has won a mandate in one part of the UK off the back of an imagined greviance to "put up or shut up!" in my view.

It was a Lib Dem MP and the recent Secretary of State for Scotland. I think he perhaps knows a little more about the situation that you do. Ruth Davidson is the Scottish Conservative Party leader.. who also warned of the same thing yesterday. Davidson stating that if there was a referendum ran within the next five years.. that she didn't think they would win again.

I post links to back up my points. Because if I didn't people like yourself would simply say I was lying or that what I was stating was just personal opinion. I've been accused of being some sort of extremist cult member several times on this board. So best to err on the safe side I think. If I didn't include links. You'd scoff at that too I imagine.

The SNP has been part of the Scottish Government since 1997. And in power for the last 9 years. They didn't get there, or stay there so long by being parochial in terms of Scottish matters, nor are the Scottish electorate 'grievance ridden'. They just want better that what has gone before and see the SNP as they party that will deliver it or at least make a vague attempt at it, not Labour.

But of course, you know better...

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

One word : ouch.

However, this is the time when Scotland needs to step up to the plate on it's own.

An independent Scotland could not go around blaming others. To show they are ready the Scottish government needs to diversify the economy even more. They need to be leaner, more austere even.

Then they need independence to achieve the above, and 'step up on it's own;..not dependence. And anyway, even Cameron admits things like this can take years when working within a larger economic entity...

Nick Robinson ‏@bbcnickrobinson 2 hrs2 hours ago No 10 insists PM remains committed to "proper, full on treaty change" but say not realistic to deliver at speed. British people will judge

Pot, Kettle and Black.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Then they need independence to achieve the above, and 'step up on it's own;..not dependence. And anyway, even Cameron admits things like this can take years when working within a larger economic entity...

Pot, Kettle and Black.

What on earth are you trying to say? That's just blather.

There is no connection between the complexity of getting several nations to agree on far reaching changes to a treaty and the SNP being devoid of any ability to propose or let alone do anything without magic powers.

Is Project Whinge all there is?

Time has run out.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

What on earth are you trying to say? That's just blather.

There is no connection between the complexity of getting several nations to agree on far reaching changes to a treaty

Two nations with different parliaments transferring power. And there certainly is a large degree of complexity which will take some time. Cameron is protesting the same on a larger scale.

and the SNP being devoid of any ability to propose or let alone do anything without magic powers.

They've proposed FFA three times now. Perhaps you missed it ? So no, they certainly aren't devoid of any ability to propose. I'm actually not sure how many more times you want them to propose FFA in order to satisfy you to the fact that they have done so.

Is Project Whinge all there is?

Time has run out.

For what exactly ? Time has run out for what ?

.string.

You are comparing the complexity of 28 sovereign countries trying to reach agreement on some fundamental issues with the machinations of the SNP! Now that is really being vainglorious. In any case, the discussion was about what the SNP's policies might be apart from Project Whinge. It becomes clearer by the day that they have no vision to offer except for their Indy obsession.

The SNP has achieved nothing and will not do so unless they cut out the posturing on silly and unacceptable amendments which are generated solely for Project Whinge purposes .


Time has run out for the SNP's credibility, if ever they had any.

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It was a Lib Dem MP and the recent Secretary of State for Scotland. I think he perhaps knows a little more about the situation that you do. Ruth Davidson is the Scottish Conservative Party leader.. who also warned of the same thing yesterday. Davidson stating that if there was a referendum ran within the next five years.. that she didn't think they would win again.

Scottish politicians of all colours need to get it in their heads that very few English people outside of the political elite give a stuff about the political machinations north of the border. The Tories have simply tapped into a growing grass roots antipathy toward Scottish nationalism in England, get over it or persuade enough of your number to leave.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I post links to back up my points. Because if I didn't people like yourself would simply say I was lying or that what I was stating was just personal opinion. I've been accused of being some sort of extremist cult member several times on this board. So best to err on the safe side I think. If I didn't include links. You'd scoff at that too I imagine.

No scoffing from me, I`d rather you just had confidence in your own opinion.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP has been part of the Scottish Government since 1997. And in power for the last 9 years. They didn't get there, or stay there so long by being parochial in terms of Scottish matters, nor are the Scottish electorate 'grievance ridden'. They just want better that what has gone before and see the SNP as they party that will deliver it or at least make a vague attempt at it, not Labour.

Any parochial parish council can spend a block grant. The challenge is as others have described, the Scottish people have mandated the SNP to do things differently, let`s see them do it.

elantan

and yet on the streets of Scotland ( and even elsewhere in the UK) the SNP's popularity is growing, people are much more visable in their support of independence and the SNP.

Personally speaking I think the SNP are playing quite a risky game just now, they are not producing the goods, ok they can't but the people will only put up with that for so long, Change has a petition on just now calling for the SNP to put another referendum in their 2016 manifesto, I wonder if the SNP will listen, and if they dont then I think they will loose support by the bucket load

kabayiri

OT, but if you fancy rustling up some Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh on Toast, I suggest you catch today's Daily Politics show on the iPlayer.

I didn't realise Andrew Neil was such an accomplished telly chef


-- perhaps he sought the opportunity to speak to Tasmina whilst she is an SNP MP; she does go through quite a few transformations. Perhaps her home is on the road to Damascus..