The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

TrickyTree83

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I understand where you are coming from, but just from your example above, each part will be weighted differently for each persons preference.

Straight away, there is a conflict between opposition to Brexit and Opposition to Scottish Independence.

We've seen examples of anti SNP, anti Independence, now become pro Independence because of Brexit.

So its flawed thinking to summarise that there is unification across the parties (even though we have also seen for the first time a coalition between Tory and Labour at council levels)

It's not flawed thinking.

Lib Dems - don't want Brexit, don't want independence.

Labour - probably a mishmash of wanting Brexit and not but will see it through anyway, don't want independence.

Conservatives - probably a mishmash of wanting Brexit and not but will see it through anyway, don't want independence.

SNP - don't want Brexit, want independence.

SGP - don't want Brexit, want independence.

Those are the positions of the main parties in Scotland on the two divisive topics of the day. 3 don't want Brexit, 2 either do or will see it through anyway. 3 don't want independence and 2 do. Most Scottish voters will find a home in one of these parties. The temperature of the electorate will be evident in the outcome of the vote share in the general election on June 8th 2017.

IveSeenTheLight

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

No.
You avoid the point entirely.
As usual.
Oh what a surprise.

My responses above.

Either you need more sleep or you are being deliberately obtuse.
Which is it?

I've not avoided the point, your just in disagreement with my responses

Anyway, to your green responses

Voting for say two or three main, large parties & a few smaller ones in an election.
A majority of hands for the most popular party does not necessarily equal a majority of hands from all those showing hands, does it?
It might be a majority of all those showing hands.
But it doesn't need to be.
I'll reiterate again, the Vote on June 08th is not a binary question on Independence.
There are a lot of considerations for which party to vote for.
That comes from where? Do you see independence mentioned? No. Try to concentrate. Yes considerations ..... so what? Again, try to stay on track eh?

Do I see Independence mentioned? Yes, from the Conservatives, Labour, and from posters on here.

I am on track, I am concentrating.
Stop trying to play the man instead of scoring own goals

Whereas for say a vote on independence, a majority of hands is needed.
I'm happy for a binary question on Independence that a binary responce is required.
It's folly to try and link a GE vote with the Independence vote
Again, I am not linking GE & independence votes.
I am explaining the differences.
Do pay attention.

You joined in on a discussion in which was linking the GE votes as a defacto Independence referendum where the vote share was proposed as a direct indication of preference for Independence.

I'm in agreement with you that they should not be

Were you expecting to join a topic and then go off on a tangent from the topic of discussion.

I am paying attention.
Stop trying to play the man instead of scoring own goals

Scotland does not consistently have such a majority.
Lets ask the question
The question is repeatedly being asked.
Look at the results.
The people say no.

I've only been asked the question once, in 2014

If your referring to polls, I think we have covered that they can be in error , as they have in the past.

So we need the questions to be asked again for the whole of the nation

Either you need more sleep or you are being deliberately obtuse.
Which is it?

Stop trying to play the man instead of scoring own goals

Shakethedisease

cogito wrote: »

For the first time? Hasn't there been a Tory Labour coalition in Aberdeen for the last 5 years as well as in a few other places. Not to mention a couple of SNP Tory coalitions.

Had you forgotten or didn't you know?

Yes but not when their own party leader ( Dugdale ) and HQ expressly forbid it. Which they did. It's too close to a GE and they gifted the SNP a fab 'Vote Labour, get Tory' soundbite for the next few weeks.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I've not avoided the point, your just in disagreement with my responses

Anyway, to your green responses


Do I see Independence mentioned? Yes, from the Conservatives, Labour, and from posters on here. But not in my post.

I am on track, I am concentrating.
Stop trying to play the man instead of scoring own goals I am not . You however certainly are.



You joined in on a discussion in which was linking the GE votes as a defacto Independence referendum where the vote share was proposed as a direct indication of preference for Independence.

I'm in agreement with you that they should not be

Were you expecting to join a topic and then go off on a tangent from the topic of discussion. Ha ha ha ha ha - you're doing what exactly?

I am paying attention. No
Stop trying to play the man instead of scoring own goals You are doing that, not me.


Scotland does not consistently have such a majority.
Lets ask the question
The question is repeatedly being asked.
Look at the results.
The people say no.


I've only been asked the question once, in 2014 All those questioned in the published polls don't count now? Oh well, let's stop polling. ISTL says so.

If your referring to polls, I think we have covered that they can be in error , as they have in the past. All of them, over years? Desperation there.

So we need the questions to be asked again for the whole of the nation IF the nation wants to. It doesn't.



Stop trying to play the man instead of scoring own goals
Your whole post is exactly that.
It is nothing more than a "dig" at me, because you will not accept that you are wrong.

Read it again.
Digest.
And then at least try to understand.
Because so far that = on your part.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

It's not flawed thinking.

Lib Dems - don't want Brexit, don't want independence.

Labour - probably a mishmash of wanting Brexit and not but will see it through anyway, don't want independence.

Conservatives - probably a mishmash of wanting Brexit and not but will see it through anyway, don't want independence.

SNP - don't want Brexit, want independence.

SGP - don't want Brexit, want independence.

Those are the positions of the main parties in Scotland on the two divisive topics of the day. 3 don't want Brexit, 2 either do or will see it through anyway. 3 don't want independence and 2 do. Most Scottish voters will find a home in one of these parties. The temperature of the electorate will be evident in the outcome of the vote share in the general election on June 8th 2017.

The Tories don't want to link it to elections apparently.. just the 'principle' ( May in Scotland today ).

BBCPhilipSim 39m39 minutes ago
Efforts to define indyref2 terms in Tory manifesto continue. "Played out" seems to mean post Brexit & after any resulting devolution beds in.
"Public consent" still a grey area; Tories say 2014 ref agreement "gold standard" with all on board, but don't want to link to elections etc. Basically the Conservative position is that "public consent" line is about principle, not specifics - not "timings or dates or parliaments"

Want to have us all hanging about for a few years until she says No all over again no doubt.

This is quite a good read on legalities for those interested. ( long though with lots of legal speak ).

But here we are considering what happens if the Scottish Parliament persists in the face of objection not from Westminster but from Whitehall?
To claim that a government, even a national government, can dictate to a Parliament on the proper scope of its powers is at odds with the vision of the devolution settlement set out in AXA General Insurance v HM Advocate [2011] UKSC 46, not to mention the vision of the separation of powers set out in Miller. Indeed, in Attorney General for England and Wales v Counsel General for Wales [2014] UKSC 43, [34-36], [68] (Lord Reed) the UK Supreme Court rejected a similar argument in respect of a much more limited devolution settlement.

Like Northern Ireland, Scotland is part of the United Kingdom because a majority of its people consent to be. The same is also true for England and Wales.Even if the legal power to grant independence lies with Westminster, it does not follow that Westminster is best placed to establish what Scottish people think about the Union. By any account of subsidiarity, the exercise of consulting people should be made as close to the people as possible.

If both governments cannot reach consensus on how to manage a future referendum, the power of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish government to consult Scottish people, as devolved by the Scotland Act, is undisturbed by the Edinburgh Agreement, and undiminished by its newfound importance.

https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2017/03/15/ewan-smith-and-alison-young-thats-how-it-worked-in-2014-and-how-it-would-have-to-work-again/

A_Pict_In_A_Past_Life

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Read it again.
Digest.
And then at least try to understand.
Because so far that = on your part.

The answer would be that he's being obtuse then.
Again.

Repeatedly polls say there is no appetite for another independence referendum but ISTL willnae even admit tae that - and it's repeatedly proven!
There's a word for that.
And for that behaviour on forums.

Shaka_Zulu

Shakey is not going too be happy.

North Ayrshire Council - Labour will continue to run the council despite a surge from the Scottish Conservatives in the local elections. The SNP have the same number of seats as Labour.

The Tories are supporting Labour.

cogito

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Yes but not when their own party leader ( Dugdale ) and HQ expressly forbid it. Which they did. It's too close to a GE and they gifted the SNP a fab 'Vote Labour, get Tory' soundbite for the next few weeks.

The people of Aberdeen have a right to expect that those they have elected to represent them should get on with delivering local services instead of playing silly games.

You could of course say the same about the Nats in Holyrood who seem to have forgotten why they were ever elected in the first place.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The Tories don't want to link it to elections apparently.. just the 'principle' ( May in Scotland today ).

Want to have us all hanging about for a few years until she says No all over again no doubt.

This is quite a good read on legalities for those interested. ( long though with lots of legal speak ). https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2017/03/15/ewan-smith-and-alison-young-thats-how-it-worked-in-2014-and-how-it-would-have-to-work-again/

As a good read, it's a bit of a struggle I must admit. But there is a good exposure to some of the issues (it's an article not a judgement by the way). There are comments at the end of it which are worth reading. The closing statement is

... referendums are pieces of legislation which are enacted through the Parliament at Westminster. Indeed, every referendum in the U.K. has only been legal due to the fact that Westminster has given its consent for them. Now, the Scottish Parliament voted to request a Section 30 Order, but it does not bind nor compel Westminster to reciprocate.,

I recommend those interested read those comments

It is difficult to read such an article without selectively selecting from it which you have done and I have done, but, noting that, what I take from it is that the conduct of the referendum is one which the devolved parliament is best placed to conduct but the agreement on their being one is up to the UK Parliament.

With respect to the matter of a consultation , the article seems to confirm what I have written previously, that a consultancy can be done if it does not have the intent of achieving independence. That being so to be legal it would have to be argued by the SNP Scottish Government that was not the aim but if they strayed from that either by it's phrasing or their actions it would become illegal. It would be amusing indeed to observe SNP contortions on that one.

Very messy indeed. A long long time spent in arguing.

Shakethedisease

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

Shakey is not going too be happy.
The Tories are supporting Labour.

I'm not really that bothered to be honest, it was all explained via an independent ( no party ) councillor in my local town pages yesterday. Not the Irvine one I'm not originally from Irvine.

Referring to the original post as it seems we have strayed off it. The Conservatives didn't whip their members so some voted for the labour nominations for Council leader and deputy leader, the rest along with the independents abstained.

Underwhelmed would be the best word to describe it on there though looking through the comments.