Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Scottish Politics 2011-2017


Recommended Posts

Spotted a post you think may be an issue? Please help the team by reporting it.
  • Replies 30.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Scottish-Irish Skier

    8874

  • mountain shadow

    1528

  • skifreak

    1435

  • frogesque

    1306

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

And that ignorant, offensive, rant sums up exactly why the YES campaign failed  

Good god. What a load of boarish spiteful bile from bad losers has been posted during the night. I actually dread to think how Scotland would be run if this is representative of how the yes vote behav

I'm disappointed in the lack of grace shown by some across the net in accepting this No vote. A complete lack of any empathy and understanding as to why fellow Scots didn't vote Yes.   I personally

Posted Images

Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    ByjkdUxIEAAjdov.jpg

     

    They can yes, and perfectly legally. Scotland's MPs have the legal ability to withdraw it from the union at any given moment. This is what I grew up with; 'Vote SNP if you want indy'.

     

    However, better that is remembered in ongoing negotiations rather than used directly; only in extreme circumstances should such a power be used.

     

    I'd be happy enough for it to be used to run another iref if devo offer was not up to scratch. Let people vote. This is the stance of the SNP; the voters have the final say, not them.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City

    ByjkdUxIEAAjdov.jpg

     

    It would also be the most brazenly anti-democratic move in recent British political history.

    And you wonder why doctormog is talking about how a section of the YES side seems to be having trouble accepting the referendum result??

    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: North of Falkirk
  • Weather Preferences: North Atlantic cyclogenesis
  • Location: North of Falkirk

    I was also wondering how much of Scotland's "kitty" is being spent on (soon to be) bombing in Iraq (granted IS are filth of the earth) in comparison to actually getting food-banks closed?

     

    I was also wondering when the new powers to Scotland will occur considering it took such a quick time to decide at WM that bombing was a must...when all the while (a week previously in fact) a huge amount of effort to sway the potential No voters was taking place. No recall of parliament for that was there? "Better Together" fell apart about 3am on September 19 :)

     

    I was also wondering if No voters (decomm -  we're watchin' ya') will soon demand the extra powers they voted for - that was the jist of the referendum, yeah?


    It would also be the most brazenly anti-democratic move in recent British political history.

    And you wonder why doctormog is talking about how a section of the YES side seems to be having trouble accepting the referendum result??

    I don't wonder anything the good Dr has said considering I haven't read a thing he wrote - should I?!

    Edited by BurntFishTrousers
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City
  • Location: Gilesgate Moor, Durham City

    I was also wondering how much of Scotland's "kitty" is being spent on (soon to be) bombing in Iraq (granted IS are filth of the earth) in comparison to actually getting food-banks closed?

     

    I was also wondering when the new powers to Scotland will occur considering it took such a quick time to decide at WM that bombing was a must...when all the while (a week previously in fact) a huge amount of effort to sway the no voters was taking place.

     

    I was also wondering if No voters (decomm -  we're watchin' ya') will soon demand the extra powers they voted for - that was the jist of the referendum, yeah?

    I don't wonder anything the good Dr has said considering I haven't read a thing he wrote - should I?!

    Up to you. If you want to be selective about what you read on the thread, that's your choice.

     

    My point about any UDI being shamefully undemocratic stands, though.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    It would also be the most brazenly anti-democratic move in recent British political history.

    And you wonder why doctormog is talking about how a section of the YES side seems to be having trouble accepting the referendum result??

    This has been the position of the UK's unionist parties for decades. A majority of SNP MPs is a mandate for independence. The unionist parties may try to use this to attack the SNP over the next 6 months, but as with Holyrood where the SNP spiked their guns with a referendum lock on Indy, this time they may very well stand seeking a mandate for DevoMax next May.

    If they get that mandate next May and Westminster won't go down that road, then we are potentially looking at the pro-indy parties going into the 2016 Scottish General Election with a manifesto commitment to another indyref.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    They can yes, and perfectly legally. Scotland's MPs have the legal ability to withdraw it from the union at any given moment. This is what I grew up with; 'Vote SNP if you want indy'.

     

    However, better that is remembered in ongoing negotiations rather than used directly; only in extreme circumstances should such a power be used.

     

    I'd be happy enough for it to be used to run another iref if devo offer was not up to scratch. Let people vote. This is the stance of the SNP; the voters have the final say, not them.

    How exactly does that process occur? So Scottish MP's decide to withdraw from the Union, what actually happens? And does the legality in terms of having the authority to do that mean its a UDI or something else.

     

    I think the SNP would be best advised to not even suggest this route as the repercussions could be disastrous. This would in effect be seen as ignoring the Scottish referendum, the process of which was highly regarded across the world as being a good template to follow.

     

    One simply can't keep moving goalposts because the SNP didn't get the answer they wanted. The only process that will be internationally respected aswell as least divisive is another referendum.

     

    The question is clear in that case , the Scottish public can't be expected to be put under a situation where their fate is in the hands of 30 or so MP's rather than their fellow citizens. This type of action will surely lead to civil unrest and terrible consequences both economically and politically.

     

    This also could rebound badly on the SNP if they seek to suggest this course of action, I don't think people would have a big problem with a manifesto calling for another referendum if theres an EU exit or another if Scottish voters aren't happy with the devolved powers however suggesting in the manifesto that the SNP would hit the nuclear option could be a big own goal.

     

    One should also add that its perfectly possible that the SNP could win a majority of seats whilst not polling more than 50 percent of votes cast, if the turnout was lets say good by GE standards at 70 percent effectively a minority of voters would be deciding the future of Scotland.

     

    What sort of mandate is this?

    Edited by nick sussex
    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    How exactly does that process occur? So Scottish MP's decide to withdraw from the Union, what actually happens? And does the legality in terms of having the authority to do that mean its a UDI or something else.

     

    I think the SNP would be best advised to not even suggest this route as the repercussions could be disastrous. This would in effect be seen as ignoring the Scottish referendum, the process of which was highly regarded across the world as being a good template to follow.

     

    One simply can't keep moving goalposts because the SNP didn't get the answer they wanted. The only process that will be internationally respected aswell as least divisive is another referendum.

     

    The question is clear in that case , the Scottish public can't be expected to be put under a situation where their fate is in the hands of 30 or so MP's rather than their fellow citizens. This type of action will surely lead to civil unrest and terrible consequences both economically and politically.

     

    This also could rebound badly on the SNP if they seek to suggest this course of action, I don't think people would have a big problem with a manifesto calling for another referendum if theres an EU exit or another if Scottish voters aren't happy with the devolved powers however suggesting in the manifesto that the SNP would hit the nuclear option could be a big own goal.

     

    Nick the SNP only have 6 out of 59 MPs. That can't move any goalposts.

     

    It is the old route; the one before Scotland had a parliament that people in Scotland consider the one that should govern them; hence the 74% for all but indy vs 18% against.

     

    It does remain a valid route, but, as I said, is not SNP policy.

     

    However, if the UK government 'went to war' on Scotland, e.g. by slashing its budget (e.g. giving it far less back than it puts in), it would be a valid route although there's be potential problems with international recognition.

     

    SNP policy remains 'put it to the people'.

     

    So folk should calm down.

     

    I believe in indy through referendum. I believe a referendum should come from manifesto commitment in whatever form. You can't argue with what people vote for (they voted for the union and apparently based on devo max this time and I'm not disputing the result). Vote pro-indy parties and you are voting for a possible iref unless they absolutely commit against that, which would be silly as they are pro-indy.

     

    If people don't want indy, they'll vote No and vote for other parties at the next election. This is normal democracy.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Peterborough
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and frost in the winter. Hot and sunny, thunderstorms in the summer.
  • Location: Peterborough

    So.... if Scotland did UDI, would they still be asking for a currency union as this seems to also be a key mandate for the SNP? A serious question.

     

    To be honest things like this should just not be suggested, either out of jest or an off the cuff comment as people or media can interpret it whatever way they like. 

    Edited by Captain shortwave
    • Like 4
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Nick the SNP only have 6 out of 59 MPs. That can't move any goalposts.

     

    It is the old route; the one before Scotland had a parliament that people in Scotland consider the one that should govern them; hence the 74% for all but indy vs 18% against.

     

    It does remain a valid route, but, as I said, is not SNP policy.

     

    However, if the UK government 'went to war' on Scotland, e.g. by slashing its budget (e.g. giving it far less back than it puts in), it would be a valid route although there's be potential problems with international recognition.

     

    SNP policy remains 'put it to the people'.

     

    So folk should calm down.

    I know its not current SNP policy, but as for a valid route I disagree seeing as there is now a Scottish Parliament. I don't see any chance of some economic war on Scotland. As for international recognition that would be a big problem. It's all hypothetical and hopefully remains so because its really a dreadfully bad option.

    • Like 3
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    I know its not current SNP policy, but as for a valid route I disagree seeing as there is now a Scottish Parliament. I don't see any chance of some economic war on Scotland. As for international recognition that would be a big problem. It's all hypothetical and hopefully remains so because its really a dreadfully bad option.

     

    We are looking at a possible massive slash to the Scottish budget, i.e. the rUK stops being more fair to Scotland in terms of what it puts in vs what it gets back.

     

    That for me should not mean UDI, but should be a case for an iref if public support is there. Promises were made for devo max and the pro-union campaign say this swung it for them last minute.

     

    We are in a fluid situation. I don't want to say 'I told you so' but if polls are right, then that is the case. Polls said if it was a No, the pro-indy parties would gain in strength. That seems to be happening.

     

    If folk wanted normality, they should have voted Yes. That or a huge No it seems.

     

    Jeez we are dealing with a situation where nearly half the Scottish electorate voted to end the union. Normality will only be achieved when the vast majority are happy with how the matter is resolved and those for change drops below say 30%.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    We are looking at a possible massive slash to the Scottish budget, i.e. the rUK stops being more fair to Scotland in terms of what it puts in vs what it gets back.

     

    That for me should not mean UDI, but should be a case for an iref if public support is there. Promises were made for devo max and the pro-union campaign say this swung it for them last minute.

     

    We are in a fluid situation. I don't want to say 'I told you so' but if polls are right, then that is the case. Polls said if it was a No, the pro-indy parties would gain in strength. That seems to be happening.

     

    If folk wanted normality, they should have voted Yes. That or a huge No it seems.

    I just don't see Devo Max being offered SS. If you look at all the cross party proposals this was nowhere near Devo Max. I don't see this commission coming out with this either. Income tax and welfare likely will be offered but I see Westminster hanging onto full Devo Max as a last resort option.

     

    I think Westminster might get away with this if they can somehow answer the oil/gas question and put that together with tax and welfare. There is a problem though because they could still end up being blamed if theres a problem with Scottish finances due to the volatility of the price there.

     

    One has to look at this from a question of the long game for Westminster, giving full Devo Max now would probably still lead to independence more quickly. They probably want to drag this out for as long as possible, sort of kick the can down the road.

     

    They may also think that this surge in popularity for pro-indy parties might wane with time.  In their view its probably what they can get away with as a bare minimum, just enough to look like they've given more if you know what I mean.

    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    I just don't see Devo Max being offered SS.

     

    For sure. Nae chance.

     

    Hence 'fluid situation'.

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    Labour haven't been "leftist Red" for at least 17 years. Where have you been?

    ...I'm literally talking about the colours used for their party literature / image.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    The unionist parties may have unwittingly laid a trap for themselves. There is a section of the no vote who would have been no anyway, but because the vow has been made and given the language that was used around it they expect nothing less than DevoMax to now be delivered or in the words of the no voting Billy Connolly - "there will be hell to pay".

    As the Smith Commission takes shape it is the Labour Party in Scotland that is looking isolated, the Lib Dem SoS for Scotland Michael Moore saying the "the lowest common denominator" of increased powers must not prevail in the commission and the second Lib Dem nominee Tavish Scott like the SNP's John Swinney referencing Gordon Brown's comments on home-rule and federalism as bench marks.

    Edited by skifreak
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl
  • Weather Preferences: Freezing fog, frost, snow, sunshine.
  • Location: Inbhir Nis / Inverness - 636 ft asl

    As a Highlander, if the Lib Dems actually push for true Devo-max, I might stop absolutely despising them for their treachery.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie
  • Weather Preferences: Cold and snowy or warm and dry
  • Location: Tullynessle/Inverurie

    EDIT, SNP now 70,000 members. Will soon be three times the size they were on iref day.

     

    Well I said to my boss the Monday after the Referendum that I thought it could hit 70K. I wonder how high it will go, especially since Mr Murrell has been slacking and hasn't tweeted an updated for 18hrs.

    Edited by Ravelin
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Labour's anti-English / anti-democratic stance already causing 'the vow' to fall apart.

     

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/labour-fears-english-votes-plan-will-halt-new-powers.25442967

     

    Row as Labour fear English votes plan will halt new Scottish powers
     
    THE first major row between the pro-Union parties over extra powers for Holyrood has erupted amid accusations that David Cameron's surprise bid to restrict Scottish MPs' voting rights has made it harder to strike a deal.
     
    Sources close to Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont have suggested the Prime Minister's "English votes for English laws" announcement, made after the No vote in the independence referendum, makes it more difficult to reach a compromise on devolving income tax to Holyrood.
     

     

     
    Seems devo max / home rule / sovereignty is just 'income tax' now too.
     
    We could be back voting in a new iref quite soon at this rate.
     
    ---
     
    Also, confirmation from Glasgow City Council that, as believed, every Holyrood constituency voted Yes.
     
    Rather worrying for the Labour party. City Chambers the last bastion of the union then in Glasgow, but for how long?
    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Highland Scotland
  • Location: Highland Scotland

    Does the Treaty of Union present a constitutional trip wire for David Cameron? English votes for English laws in the UK Parliament is incompatibe with the requirement that Scottish MPs have the same rights to vote on everything that comes before that Parliament. To maintain that principle and deliver EVEL requires an English Parliament.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    Anum Qaisar cancels membership of the Labour party, resigns as General Secretary for Muslim Friends of Labour, and joins the SNP.

     

    https://www.facebook.com/anum.qaisar/posts/709770875770998 

     

    ...Therefore after much consideration and deliberation I, Anum Qaisar, cancel my membership to the Labour Party. I also, with immediate effect, resign from my position of General Secretary of Muslim Friends of Labour, Scotland. I now see that the Labour party no longer stands for the founding values of social justice and equality and will compromise those very values for political gain.
     
    Anum Qaisar
     
    - One of the new 37,000 members of the Scottish National Party.

     

    Edited by scottish skier
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    LOL.

     

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/11127836/Businesses-that-speak-out-for-Britains-EU-membership-will-be-punished-vows-John-Redwood.html

     

    Businesses that speak out for Britain's EU membership will be punished, vows John Redwood
     
    Leading Tory eurosceptic says companies who publicly back staying in EU will pay 'very dear economic and financial price", with executives potentially losing their jobs

     

     

    This is hilarious.

     

    You couldn't actually make this stuff up.

     

    And the Scottish electorate watches with interest. What was it the Tories were saying just a few weeks back?

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    LOL.

     

     

     

    This is hilarious.

     

    You couldn't actually make this stuff up.

     

    And the Scottish electorate watches with interest. What was it the Tories were saying just a few weeks back?

    Exactly the Tories want it both ways. Talk about hypocrisy, I don't doubt that business will speak out though regardless of the vile Redwood. There is an interesting aspect to this for Scotland and Labour, vote Labour to keep the UK in the EU. If Labour get wiped out in Scotland then that helps the Tories.

     

    It's complicated for Scottish voters because on the one hand they want rid of the Tories but are also underwhelmed with the current Labour party.

    • Like 2
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl
  • Location: Near Lauder, SE Scotland, 175 m asl

    If Labour get wiped out in Scotland then that helps the Tories.

     

    Erm, we can send other non-Tory MPs nick. You know, SNP ones. It's not as if we either send Labour MPs or none at all. :)

     

    I'm not sure how that would 'help the Tories'. SNP are actually not right-wing; at least Labour are so support the Tories more.

     

    SNP are in second place in a large majority of Westminster seats, so a vote for the SNP is a vote for the SNP, i.e. no accidentally letting the Tories in by the back door due to FPTP.

     

    I suspect Scotland will vote for Scotland now, not for the UK if you catch my drift. It has been doing this at Holyrood level since 2007 for sure. If early polling indications are right, it will do this at Westminster too, i.e. votes will be based on the aim of devo max / potential future indy. 

     

    Would that be such a surprise given 74% back devo max and 45% full indy? Holyrood is being cemented as Scotland's parliament meaning old UK party loyalties are dying.

     

    I think there's a good chance Ed will need to forget Scotland as a source of MPs for good. We'll need to wait and see.

     

    The in-fighting seems to have already started with Holyrood Labour attempting to shut-out Westminster Labour in anticipation of the latter looking for new jobs next May.

    Edited by scottish skier
    • Like 1
    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE
  • Location: NR LOURDES SW FRANCE

    Erm, we can send other non-Tory MPs nick. You know, SNP ones. It's not as if we either send Labour MPs or none at all. :)

     

    I'm not sure how that would 'help the Tories'. SNP are actually not right-wing; at least Labour are so support the Tories more.

     

    SNP are in second place in a large majority of Westminster seats, so a vote for the SNP is a vote for the SNP, i.e. no accidentally letting the Tories in by the back door due to FPTP.

    I'm looking at it more in terms of if Labour had to form a coalition. It's hard to say exactly what will happen to the Libs at the GE, although their polling is currently dire they might manage to just target sufficient seats.

    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    • Staying cool and showery with heavy, thundery downpours

      The weather continues on with its cool, showery and unsettled pattern, with more heavy downpours during the next few days. Then, to finish the week, a deep low arrives bringing a spell of wet and windy conditions. Read the full update here

      Netweather forecasts
      Netweather forecasts
      Latest weather updates from Netweather

      UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

      UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2021-05-18 06:21:01 Valid: 18/05/2021 0600 - 19/05/2021 0600 THUNDERSTORM WATCH - TUES 18TH MAY 2021 Click here for the full forecast

      Nick F
      Nick F
      Latest weather updates from Netweather

      Strong winds from an Atlantic low later this week adding to cool, wet May

      May 2021 has been colder than average with a lot of rain for some parts of the UK. A low pressure heading in for the end of the week could bring gales. Read more here

      Jo Farrow
      Jo Farrow
      Latest weather updates from Netweather
    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×
    ×
    • Create New...