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

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

The SNP analogy is where you steal my car and then fully expect me to keep up the repayments on it, because you heard about an international convention somewhere which droned on about the need to pay for things on tick.

Whatever. The fact is that this section 30 and the need for it is legally contentious, a grey area and has never been tested in court.

While May can say and do what what she likes politically, blocking a legal referendum from ever happening will go to the courts for the judges to decide. Courts possibly outwith the UK at that.

What Westminster says goes... might not.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Whatever. The fact is that this section 30 and the need for it is legally contentious, a grey area and has never been tested in court.

While May can say and do what what she likes politically, blocking a legal referendum from ever happening will go to the courts for the judges to decide. Courts possibly outwith the UK at that.

What Westminster says goes... might not.

What utter rubbish.
Come down off that cloud because you must be light headed..

Yet again, as TrickyTree has posted before:


Now if we have to post this every few pages until it sinks in, we can.
You ignoring it doesn't make it suddenly cease to exist.

But what court anywhere is going to argue with that; "Reserved matters include: Constitution."
Or were these not accepted by the Scottish Parliament then?

molerat

Any UK law that Nicola & Co don't agree with or doesn't allow them to get their own way is a "grey area"

Shaka_Zulu

beecher2 wrote: »

If we used the same system as England, then I think I'm right in saying that Glasgow City Council would be 100% SNP.

I know you won't see this because you have me blocked but you should do your homework before spreading your fake news.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_City_Council_election,_2017

.string.

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

I know you won't see this because you have me blocked but you should do your homework before spreading your fake news.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_City_Council_election,_2017

Worth repeating

AnotherJoe

beecher2 wrote: »

I'm not sure what would happen if a local authority refused to carry out its duties with regard to a referendum which had been called legally (which I am assuming we're talking about)..

Nope. I was thinking of the scenario where the scottish government tried to run a referendum despite Westminster not authorising it.

beecher2

.string. wrote: »

Worth repeating ��

Have a look at district summary, snp got more 1st votes than any other party in each ward. If fptp used, would be 100% snp.

sss555s

mollycat wrote: »

1. Misquote.
2. Discredit the point made out of hand.
3. Accuse someone of being "hysterical" whilst using emotive language such "crazy". (BTW, my current emotional state is one of contentment, not hysteria )
4. Pretending to be reasonable whilst increasing the provocation,

That pretty much nails tricky trees. :A

.string.

beecher2 wrote: »

Have a look at district summary, snp got more 1st votes than any other party in each ward. If fptp used, would be 100% snp.

Have a look at the reason I gave for quoting it

molerat

beecher2 wrote: »

Have a look at district summary, snp got more 1st votes than any other party in each ward. If fptp used, would be 100% snp.

There is more than 1 councillor elected for each ward so if you use the English FPTP system and take the number of 1s for each candidate in each ward the council would be made up of 36 SNP, 29 Labour, 15 Conservative and 5 Greens. Labour could have got into bed with the Conservatives to take control, maybe even the Greens would have joined them as we all know where their loyalty lies