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

Shakethedisease

Moto2 wrote: »

I'm sure they do a great deal more than just FOI requests.

Isn't it the job of the press to probe and enquire to help hold governments to account. We're surely all very happy when they do that?
And isn't it's the governments duty to respond within the time limits and fully without trying to avoid it or spend public money trying to avoid it.
The Scottish government is woeful in this regard with it's attempts to gag the press.

We should have more FOI requests, not less

I think you have a rather idealised view of the press.

BBC works to restore trust in Scotland

There is affection for the broadcaster but some have doubts about impartiality of news coverage

The report concluded: “While consumption of BBC services in Scotland is high, audiences in Scotland tend to have more negative perceptions of the BBC, and this was also shown in our audience research. This found that most opinions of the BBC are lower in Scotland than in other UK nations.”

https://www.ft.com/content/57715d74-6ad1-11e6-a0b1-d87a9fea034f

BBC Scotland News is dire. Not just for the way it skews things or even doesn't bother reporting them. But for reporting matters such as the NHS, Education and other devolved areas in an English context. How many in Scotland were under the impression that recent Doctor strikes were an English only matter for instance ? This is a regular occurence.

The BBC themselves are starting to wake up to this as a problem. Hence the Scottish Six proposals. But in all honesty most people get their news from other sources these days. Especially younger people. BBC Scotland can knock out all the FOI requests they like, but their audiences are declining and it's mattering less and less anyway.

Governments should always be held to account. But where the media in Scotland falls down is the absolutely ridiculous levels it gets to. The SNP must be the most scrutinised and watched political party in UK history over the last five years. Imo it's actually extremely detrimental to the other political parties, since no one else knows much about what they stand for with the SNP and Sturgeon being the only show in town. The only way any of the other parties can generate airtime and column inches is by joining in shouting about the SNP/Scottish Govt. So, ultimately, they end up being defined as all about the SNP as well !

Is all they ever seem to talk about and it actually boosts the SNP when it comes to elections because even if one isn't 'that' keen on the SNP, one has no idea what the other parties stand for apart from opposing them. Davidson has done well out of the Union. But has very little else on offer.

Shakethedisease

.string. wrote: »

Note to the unblinkered:


The trouble with Post Truth is that it is easily believed. It becomes an intellectual fanaticism beloved unquestionably by its users.

Such has been the fate of the SNP and it's followers for some time and it has reached it's peak in the publication of their Party Policy Document, Scotland's place in Europe.

That document is written to persuade Scottish Voters, previous "Yes" Voters and previous "No" Voters alike, that the EU is the best thing since sliced Sassenach, that the SNP have examined all options to keep that glittering prize and that the only way for Scotland to survive is to vote for separation from a permanent Tory Government.

The trouble is that it is written by the SNP for the SNP and while they may re-convince themselves with its fantasies, it is self evident blather to anyone not under the spell of Scottish Nationalism. It misses its target because the SNP have abandoned objectivity somewhere along the way.

"Scotland's place in Europe" will be read and accepted by the avid "Yes" and read and rejected by the avid "No". The remainder, who hold the balance of opinion, won't read it at all because it is so excruciatingly boring.

So how to combat that bit of self-deceptive spin?

One could take it to pieces bit by bit for example by pointing out valid scenarios which are not included, or (probably "and") taking a precedent from the way Cameron's largely unread agreement with the EU was denigrated as having no value, to dismiss "Scotland's place in Europe" for the muddled con job that it really is.

In the meantime the SNP, far from sentting the agenda on Brexit, has handed the initiative to Theresa May simply because they lack the ability to think out of their own little box.

You didn't answer the question. What is the Scottish Govt supposed to do with that 62%. Just ignore them ?

The paper was about staying in the Single Market, not the EU. And you're right, is all about the economics. A Scotland still in the UK but also in the Single Market while England/Wales aren't would be far too competitive for May.

She'll refuse. And the word 'impractical' is about to be used to the devo maxiness in the coming few months. So an indy ref it will likely be, probably late 2018/early 2019 before Brexit talks are concluded. By then we will all see what full on Brexit actually looks like and whether Scots will like the look of it... or not as the case might be.

I personally think not unless the whole of the UK is staying in the Single Market.

If you truly do believe that Scots will vote No again, you will have no problems with that. But sitting back and letting this happen without a murmur was never, ever going to be on the Scottish Govt's agenda. Not with that 62%. Sorry.

Moto2

I think you have a rather idealised view of the press.

I have an expectation with varying results

I'm glad you think governments should be held to account but do you think it's their duty to respond to legitimate FOI requests within the time limits and fully without trying to avoid it or spend public money trying to avoid it?

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You didn't answer the question. What is the Scottish Govt supposed to do with that 62%. Just ignore them ?

Yes frankly. It was a UK referendum not a Scottish one.

islandannie

Moto2 wrote: »

Do you think they've taken legal advice on it's viability?

Well seeing as they have previous on lots of other Legal advice issues,then the answer is.

.Yes we have.
.You know this is an issue we can`t divulge.
.The legal advice we received advised us that we can`t divulge any legal advice on this matter.
.This matter greatly important to the Scottish people must remain at our discretion as to it`s release .It behoves the SNP to protect the sensibilities of non SNP vote
.In time the truth may come out
.Freedom of information requests are a real pain in the @sre for a democratic government

In the meantime we the SNP will decide on what we want, based on the votes of the Scottish electorate, even if they vote against us we will interpret that as a glowing recommendation of our policies.

What Price Truth EH!!!!!

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Yes frankly. It was a UK referendum not a Scottish one.

A Union of equals is it ? Like Sturgeon said, we'll soon find out. And after all, no one is stopping England and Wales from having their Brexit frankly.

However, Scotland more than likely won't be following, not without either a deal or a referendum. Surprisingly, the Scottish Greens are even more gung ho for another ref than the SNP is. They're not happy with Sturgeon's compromise. :eek: Greens + SNP = indy ref2 majority in Holyrood. It doesn't matter what the other parties say. You can safely discount completely from here on in all the other Scottish parties wailing about it. And all of the other Westminster parties too. If the Greens and the SNP put the bill to Holyrood, it's indy ref 2 one way or the other, legal or advisory.

Greens urge Nicola Sturgeon to push on with indyref2

THE Scottish Green Party ramped up the case for independence as it responded to the Brexit proposals unveiled by the First Minister yesterday, calling on her to press ahead with plans for a second referendum.

It warned Nicola Sturgeon her suggestions to keep Scotland in the EU single market – but not a member of the bloc – were the “maximum limit of compromise” and said progress should be made to hold a new plebiscite on autonomy if they were dismissed by Theresa May.

“The reality is that just under two in three people in Scotland voted to stay in the European Union and the options presented today fall well short of that,” said Ross Greer, the Scottish Green’s external affairs spokesman.
“These plans are the maximum limit of compromise, so if the Westminster Government fails to accept them, it will signal clearly that Scotland’s interests and wishes are to be ignored completely. This would be an act of contempt that would likely end the UK’s fragile union.”

“I urge the Scottish Government to proceed with legislation for an independence referendum – we can’t leave ourselves without that option if Theresa May’s Government acts as we expect.
“Scotland did not vote to leave the European Union and we should not be forced to choose the least worst of the options available.”

http://www.thenational.scot/news/14978382.Greens_urge_Nicola_Sturgeon_to_push_on_with_indyref2/

You never know though. Maybe May will surprise with a soft Brexit or looking seriously at Sturgeon's proposals.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You didn't answer the question. What is the Scottish Govt supposed to do with that 62%. Just ignore them ?

The paper was about staying in the Single Market, not the EU. And you're right, is all about the economics. A Scotland still in the UK but also in the Single Market while England/Wales aren't would be far too competitive for May.

She'll refuse. And the word 'impractical' is about to be used to the devo maxiness in the coming few months. So an indy ref it will likely be, probably late 2018/early 2019 before Brexit talks are concluded. By then we will all see what full on Brexit actually looks like and whether Scots will like the look of it... or not as the case might be.

I personally think not unless the whole of the UK is staying in the Single Market.

If you truly do believe that Scots will vote No again, you will have no problems with that. But sitting back and letting this happen without a murmur was never, ever going to be on the Scottish Govt's agenda. Not with that 62%. Sorry.

I don't remember you asking that question but I see that TT has already answered it. My vote was not ignored, like all votes everywhere in the UK, it was counted, but my side lost so I'm getting with life to get the best out of the new direction for the UK.

The SNP Political paper (Scotland's place etc) was not all about economics, it was about the Scottish Neverendum Party's obsession and your post proves that yet again . See the part above that I put in bold. That was always the SNP aim, the rest is muddled fog.

Shaka_Zulu

The time has come to call IndyRef2 this time with a caveat that it is the last time in a generation ie 25 years. This referendum should be called in 2017 and then hopefully the SNP can put up or shut up.

The question asked should be "Do you wish Scotland to remain part of the UK" thus turning the question asked in to a positive for the union as opposed to a negative.

The SNP would kak their breeks if this was offered.

.string.

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

The time has come to call IndyRef2 this time with a caveat that it is the last time in a generation ie 25 years. This referendum should be called in 2017 and then hopefully the SNP can put up or shut up.

The question asked should be "Do you wish Scotland to remain part of the UK" thus turning the question asked in to a positive for the union as opposed to a negative.

The SNP would kak their breeks if this was offered.

I suspect that such a partial question would not be allowed but no doubt the SNP would like to have a question like " Do you want to be rid of the hated Tories".

But seriously there are a number of reasons not to have a Scottish Referendum in the near future.

For example:

O. The appears to be no appetite in Scotland for another divisive referendum which would set Scot against Scot
O. The last Referendum was itself agreed as definitive
O. The outcome of the Brexit negotiations are completely unclear and since, according to the SNP, Brexit is an important issue requiring break-up of our Union, Scots would be asked to vote knowing little or nothing of the pros and cons
O. Having a Referendum at this time when the UK is negotiating on behalf of the whole of the UK would be damaging to the UK in that negotiation and would affect all our population including Scots whatever the outcome of a referendum

That last issue means that if the SNP were to continue with their present drive towards a Neverendum it would be a deliberate act of political vandalism, deliberately damaging the future prosperity of the UK.To elaborate on that last point, should the Unionist again win the day, the Scottish Government would have deliberately damaged the prospects of its own people.

I would expect May to refuse a referendum and actively combat any cynically called "advisory referendum".

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

A Union of equals is it ? Like Sturgeon said, we'll soon find out. And after all, no one is stopping England and Wales from having their Brexit frankly.
...

Your vote as a Scot was completely equal in the referendum to my vote as a Cheshire. Clapton would also note that it is also equal to a Yorkshire.

This is generally what an UK referendum vote means. It mean't the same in '75 too.

Obviously this doesn't apply to the nearly 1/3rd of Scots who didn't care enough to vote.

Just like their non-voting Lancashire cousins they have to accept the result from those that did.

If you didn't like the format of the referendum question you should have objected at the time