Scottish Independence

[NAE NOOKIE]

Kind of off topic a wee bit, but I've been watching Scottish questions at Westminster a lot lately and I cant help thinking that it doesn't matter what the SNP have to say the stock answer from Alistair Carmichael is the same no matter what the question.

SPEAKER ......... Stewart Hosie

HOSIE ..... Does the Secretary of State agree that its wrong beat a kitten to death with a puppy?

CARMICHAEL .... The honourable gentleman just has to accept that he lost the referendum.

SPEAKER ...... Pete Wishart

WISHART ..... Does the Secretary of State agree that more needs to be done to eradicate modern slavery in Scotland?

CARMICHAEL .... When will the party on the benches opposite accept that on the 18th of September Scotland voted overwhelmingly to stay in the union?

It seems to me that it doesn't matter if the SNP have accepted the vote or not .... the Tories, Labour and Liberals will continue in this vain at Westminster and Holyrood because its an easy way to deflect any serious questions.

[Moulin Yarns]

Kind of off topic a wee bit, but I've been watching Scottish questions at Westminster a lot lately and I cant help thinking that it doesn't matter what the SNP have to say the stock answer from Alistair Carmichael is the same no matter what the question.

SPEAKER ......... Stewart Hosie

HOSIE ..... Does the Secretary of State agree that its wrong beat a kitten to death with a puppy?

CARMICHAEL .... The honourable gentleman just has to accept that he lost the referendum.

SPEAKER ...... Pete Wishart

WISHART ..... Does the Secretary of State agree that more needs to be done to eradicate modern slavery in Scotland?

CARMICHAEL .... When will the party on the benches opposite accept that on the 18th of September Scotland voted overwhelmingly to stay in the union?

It seems to me that it doesn't matter if the SNP have accepted the vote or not .... the Tories, Labour and Liberals will continue in this vain at Westminster and Holyrood because its an easy way to deflect any serious questions.

Having been at a Common Weal meeting last night, one thing that Tommy Shepherd said was that normally the loser of a vote went away while the winner was ebullient but the reverse was true of the referendum.

My local Green Party branch has a 600% rise in members. The Common Weal group is new, and is cross party, maybe excluding Tory and UKIP. Its organized by a Hibs supporter too

[lucky]

But the common weal has spilt from the Scottish left review in line with what always happens on the left. Egos come first..... Sadly

[7 Hills]

Red Tories always make me laugh, history can't be rewritten from 1979. The Nats gave us Thatcher.

Graham Smith said the powers were not enough. But I was not happy with the STUC submission either. But this is all about opinions. Separatists were never going to happy but the DFM Swinney agreed with this. But his new boss then slaughtered it. Hypocrites!!!

Who just stood shoulder to shoulder with the Tories at the Referendum there?

[lucky]

Who just stood shoulder to shoulder with the Tories at the Referendum there?

Who had Souter, Walsh and Racliffe on their side. The reality the people of Scotland voted no. Just because the Tories got something right for once does not make Labour bad. I campaigned for a no vote but never once saw a Tory involved. This is no longer about independence its a bitter SNP led attack to try and kill off the Labour Party which is failing. Forget the polls a by election on Thursday in mid lothian gave Lab another victory

http://m.midlothianadvertiser.co.uk/news/local-news/breaking-news-labour-s-kenny-young-wins-midlothian-east-by-election-1-3619025

[Beefster]

Who just stood shoulder to shoulder with the Tories at the Referendum there?

What's the problem when there is common ground?

There have been SNP/Tory coalitions on at least one Scottish council. Funnily enough, that doesn't get highlighted by nationalists.

[Moulin Yarns]

Who had Souter, Walsh and Racliffe on their side. The reality the people of Scotland voted no. Just because the Tories got something right for once does not make Labour bad. I campaigned for a no vote but never once saw a Tory involved. This is no longer about independence its a bitter SNP led attack to try and kill off the Labour Party which is failing. Forget the polls a by election on Thursday in mid lothian gave Lab another victory by 69 votes!

http://m.midlothianadvertiser.co.uk/news/local-news/breaking-news-labour-s-kenny-young-wins-midlothian-east-by-election-1-3619025

For some balance, there were 2 other Council by elections on Thursday.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/snp-candidate-claims-victory-aberdeenshire-4712889

SNP - 1159 votes
Labour - 140 votes

An Independent candidate won in Kirkwall, and I can' find the other candidates.

[NAE NOOKIE]

Who had Souter, Walsh and Racliffe on their side. The reality the people of Scotland voted no. Just because the Tories got something right for once does not make Labour bad. I campaigned for a no vote but never once saw a Tory involved. This is no longer about independence its a bitter SNP led attack to try and kill off the Labour Party which is failing. Forget the polls a by election on Thursday in mid lothian gave Lab another victory

http://m.midlothianadvertiser.co.uk/news/local-news/breaking-news-labour-s-kenny-young-wins-midlothian-east-by-election-1-3619025

You can hardly blame the SNP for its attitude towards the Labour party, as far as I can see over the last 10 years Scottish Labours hatred of the SNP has bordered on the pathological and the better the SNP does the worse it gets. As far as I can see the SNP and Labour could find common ground on a number of issues, which is why the SNP have not ruled out a pact with Labour on an issue by issue basis at Westminster after the next GE. I don't think painting people like me as 'tartan Tories' is anything other than counter productive, especially now ....... you wont win people over by insulting them.

As far as I can see the Labour party in Scotland still struggle to accept the fact that it is no longer the case that they just have to turn up to win. They blame the SNP for that and are so busy hating them they have forgotten that they need to work to win back the trust of their voters ... so much so its beginning to affect their heartland vote.

[ronaldo7]

Who had Souter, Walsh and Racliffe on their side. The reality the people of Scotland voted no. Just because the Tories got something right for once does not make Labour bad. I campaigned for a no vote but never once saw a Tory involved. This is no longer about independence its a bitter SNP led attack to try and kill off the Labour Party which is failing. Forget the polls a by election on Thursday in mid lothian gave Lab another victory

http://m.midlothianadvertiser.co.uk/news/local-news/breaking-news-labour-s-kenny-young-wins-midlothian-east-by-election-1-3619025

I saw labour stand alongside Tories in musselburgh. It doesn't make them bad, I just couldn't tell them apart, just like now.

[Beefster]

I saw labour stand alongside Tories in musselburgh. It doesn't make them bad, I just couldn't tell them apart, just like now.

To be honest, I frequently struggle to tell folk's politics just from looking at them too.

[ronaldo7]

To be honest, I frequently struggle to tell folk's politics just from looking at them too.

It's all in the badges mate.

[lucky]

To be honest, I frequently struggle to tell folk's politics just from looking at them too.

That response made smile, love a bit of sarcasm

[lord bunberry]

To be honest, I frequently struggle to tell folk's politics just from looking at them too.

The big blue badges hugging the big red badges was a dead giveaway. People in this country have long memories
Whether you like it or not the Labour party is now seen as being in cahoots with the tory party, and that generally means annihilation.

[Beefster]

The big blue badges hugging the big red badges was a dead giveaway. People in this country have long memories
Whether you like it or not the Labour party is now seen as being in cahoots with the tory party, and that generally means annihilation.

Cahoots like the Tory/SNP council coalition I mentioned, you mean? Not so long memories that that is an issue, it would seem.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Who had Souter, Walsh and Racliffe on their side. The reality the people of Scotland voted no. Just because the Tories got something right for once does not make Labour bad. I campaigned for a no vote but never once saw a Tory involved. This is no longer about independence its a bitter SNP led attack to try and kill off the Labour Party which is failing. Forget the polls a by election on Thursday in mid lothian gave Lab another victory

http://m.midlothianadvertiser.co.uk/news/local-news/breaking-news-labour-s-kenny-young-wins-midlothian-east-by-election-1-3619025

The Tories used to kid themselves on with stuff like this.

Labour have to realise that people don't appreciate being patronised or lied to - if they fail to get their head round that, then they are doomed. They used gutter tactics in the referendum, and it is that which sticks in people's craw, not the result.

[degenerated]

Pretty decent article by Kevin McKenna in the guardian.


http://gu.com/p/43m2q

[Beefster]

Pretty decent article by Kevin McKenna in the guardian.


http://gu.com/p/43m2q

On here, 'decent article' generally means 'confirms my worldview'. I've never really understood why folk use 'Comment is Free' to back up an argument. It's generally up there with a rant on a random forum in terms of authority or objectivity.

[JeMeSouviens]

On here, 'decent article' generally means 'confirms my worldview'. I've never really understood why folk use 'Comment is Free' to back up an argument. It's generally up there with a rant on a random forum in terms of authority or objectivity.

That's a bit unfair. It's usually more "make the argument while saving a lot of typing" than anything else.

McKenna's perspective is interesting in that he is an old labour convert to yes. Exactly the sort of voter the SNP needs to hang on to and Labour needs to win back. I think anybody paying attention can see that Labour's entire strategy is based around the implications for their Westminster MPs. They will campaign from now until May on how "strong" this minimal set of powers is and then post-election will do everything possible to undermine them to try and keep full UK voting rights.

They are gambling big time on a compliant Scottish media (tick)and an apathetic/stupid electorate (don't think so).

[lord bunberry]

Cahoots like the Tory/SNP council coalition I mentioned, you mean? Not so long memories that that is an issue, it would seem.

Most people in the country won't care or even know about a Tory/SNP council coalition as it won't effect them in anyway. There's many strange coalitions that come out of council elections, it's not the same as campaigning together.

[lucky]

Most people in the country won't care or even know about a Tory/SNP council coalition as it won't effect them in anyway. There's many strange coalitions that come out of council elections, it's not the same as campaigning together.

So people don't care about SNP/Tory coalitions but care about Labour campaigning for their well known position on independence. You really believe that? The referendum has changed politics but the SNP were on losing side and still remain the most popular party but need to get back to running the country rather than arguing about the constitution. If they use all the powers they have for the better of the people then Scotland will be a better place for all of us.

[Phil D. Rolls]

So people don't care about SNP/Tory coalitions but care about Labour campaigning for their well known position on independence. You really believe that? The referendum has changed politics but the SNP were on losing side and still remain the most popular party but need to get back to running the country rather than arguing about the constitution. If they use all the powers they have for the better of the people then Scotland will be a better place for all of us.

People care about liars and cheats. Fairly, or unfairly, that's how people see Labour. Lamont's sacking, and Murphy's climb up the greasy pole don't paint the party in a very good light. Nor does the Vow - lack of organisation has seen them set up royally by Call Me Dave.

[lord bunberry]

So people don't care about SNP/Tory coalitions but care about Labour campaigning for their well known position on independence. You really believe that? The referendum has changed politics but the SNP were on losing side and still remain the most popular party but need to get back to running the country rather than arguing about the constitution. If they use all the powers they have for the better of the people then Scotland will be a better place for all of us.

I do really believe that. The polls and the unprecedented amount of people joining the SNP would suggest I'm right in that belief.

[Beefster]

Most people in the country won't care or even know about a Tory/SNP council coalition as it won't effect them in anyway. There's many strange coalitions that come out of council elections, it's not the same as campaigning together.

Well, yes, obviously you have to explain it away somehow.

Given that most people voted to reject independence, I think it's safe to say that most folk don't care about Labour campaigning for the same thing as the Tories. Especially considering it's something that both parties have supported for a long time.

By your logic, every time the Tories propose or campaign for something, Labour should come out against it. Which would be ludicrous.

[lord bunberry]

Well, yes, obviously you have to explain it away somehow.

Given that most people voted to reject independence, I think it's safe to say that most folk don't care about Labour campaigning for the same thing as the Tories. Especially considering it's something that both parties have supported for a long time.

By your logic, every time the Tories propose or campaign for something, Labour should come out against it. Which would be ludicrous.
I'm not suggesting Labour should oppose anything that the Tories propose, but setting up a campaign team with the Tories was a step too far for some people. The people of this country voted no to independence but the Labour Party despite being on the winning side appears to be in complete disarray. There must be reason for their problems, if it's not down to their alliance with the Tories then what is it? We've got a Tory government in Westminster delivering more and more austerity, Labour should be as popular than ever in Scotland.

[Beefster]

I'm not suggesting Labour should oppose anything that the Tories propose, but setting up a campaign team with the Tories was a step too far for some people. The people of this country voted no to independence but the Labour Party despite being on the winning side appears to be in complete disarray. There must be reason for their problems, if it's not down to their alliance with the Tories then what is it? We've got a Tory government in Westminster delivering more and more austerity, Labour should be as popular than ever in Scotland.

Labour were in turmoil UK-wide long before the referendum or the campaign. It's the SNP post-referendum narrative that it's because of "getting into bed with the Tories" but it's completely false IMHO.

TBH, I think Scottish Labour will do much better if Murphy gets the top job. I think part of the reason that the SNP and their supporters hate him so much (and have attempted to repeatedly smear him) is because he's the one they respect/fear the most.

And I'm not a regular Labour voter.

[lord bunberry]

Labour were in turmoil UK-wide long before the referendum or the campaign. It's the SNP post-referendum narrative that it's because of "getting into bed with the Tories" but it's completely false IMHO.

TBH, I think Scottish Labour will do much better if Murphy gets the top job. I think part of the reason that the SNP and their supporters hate him so much (and have attempted to repeatedly smear him) is because he's the one they respect/fear the most.

And I'm not a regular Labour voter.

I'm not sure about Murphy, he was one of the most vocal during the independence campaign, but it took the intervention of Brown to get the no campaign over the line. I feel he may be viewed as another Westminster stooge, but I'm not a Labour voter so im probably not the best person to ask.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Labour were in turmoil UK-wide long before the referendum or the campaign. It's the SNP post-referendum narrative that it's because of "getting into bed with the Tories" but it's completely false IMHO.

TBH, I think Scottish Labour will do much better if Murphy gets the top job. I think part of the reason that the SNP and their supporters hate him so much (and have attempted to repeatedly smear him) is because he's the one they respect/fear the most.

And I'm not a regular Labour voter.

I wonder how a leader of the SLP who doesn't sit at Holyrood will come across? I honestly don't think there is much to fear from Murphy at all, just another Strathclyde Labour Aparatchik.

[lucky]

This is an interesting blog from a Yes voter on how post Scotland politics are panning out
https://faintdamnation.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/jacobites-and-jacobins-the-problem-with-yes-fundamentalism/

[lucky]

Labour were in turmoil UK-wide long before the referendum or the campaign. It's the SNP post-referendum narrative that it's because of "getting into bed with the Tories" but it's completely false IMHO.

TBH, I think Scottish Labour will do much better if Murphy gets the top job. I think part of the reason that the SNP and their supporters hate him so much (and have attempted to repeatedly smear him) is because he's the one they respect/fear the most.

And I'm not a regular Labour voter.

If Murphy gets it I think it would be a disaster for SLP. We need to change and only Neil Findlay can give us the policies of change

[degenerated]

Labour were in turmoil UK-wide long before the referendum or the campaign. It's the SNP post-referendum narrative that it's because of "getting into bed with the Tories" but it's completely false IMHO.

TBH, I think Scottish Labour will do much better if Murphy gets the top job. I think part of the reason that the SNP and their supporters hate him so much (and have attempted to repeatedly smear him) is because he's the one they respect/fear the most.

And I'm not a regular Labour voter.
I would doubt very much if anyone at the SNP were overly worried about Murphy. Anyone that Ive spoken to would actually prefer that he gets the gig. He is divisive and a throwback to new Labour, a proper red Tory. He is exactly the sort of person that will only help drive a wedge between the Scottish electorate and the Labour party.

[hibsbollah]

If Murphy gets it I think it would be a disaster for SLP. We need to change and only Neil Findlay can give us the policies of change

Definitely like his policies on council house building, reversing NHS cuts and increasing the minimum wage. Whether his election would make me return to the Labour fold I don't know. But Murphy represents everything I dislike about the modern Labour Party.

[Phil D. Rolls]

If Murphy gets it I think it would be a disaster for SLP. We need to change and only Neil Findlay can give us the policies of change

Findlay seems a decent guy, can he handle the back stabbing though?

[Phil D. Rolls]

This is an interesting blog from a Yes voter on how post Scotland politics are panning out
https://faintdamnation.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/jacobites-and-jacobins-the-problem-with-yes-fundamentalism/

Interesting article, I agree that fundamentalists are in danger of chasing some away. they are like a political version of the Tartan Army - a bit too far up their own erchies.

[marinello59]

This is an interesting blog from a Yes voter on how post Scotland politics are panning out
https://faintdamnation.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/jacobites-and-jacobins-the-problem-with-yes-fundamentalism/

That is an excellent take on things. I just can't get my head round the fact that some have dropped all pretence that a healthy democracy needs a strong opposition. They want no opposition at all.

[marinello59]

Pretty decent article by Kevin McKenna in the guardian.


http://gu.com/p/43m2q

That's a good article as well. Cameron has indeed played a blinder whilst Labour have set themselves up as the villians here.

[ronaldo7]

Pretty decent article by Kevin McKenna in the guardian.


http://gu.com/p/43m2q

Hits every nail on the head.:top marks

[ronaldo7]

The Lords continue to suck the cash out of the system without doing much for it.

http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/politics/westminster/anger-at-250-000-expenses-claims-of-lazy-labour-lords-1.710315

[lucky]

Hits every nail on the head.:top marks

Sorry but guardian article is just the same regurdutated anti devolution stance. We voted for devolution and voted to retain it. The Smith commission was never going deliver the wishes of the nationalists. But it was agreed by the SNP who were led by John Swinney in the talks. Move on. Let's use the powers to our advantage

[Moulin Yarns]

Sorry but guardian article is just the same regurdutated anti devolution stance. We voted for devolution and voted to retain it. The Smith commission was never going deliver the wishes of the nationalists. But it was agreed by the SNP who were led by John Swinney in the talks. Move on. Let's use the powers to our advantage

The Smith Commission withdrew a few important powers at the 11th hour, because the Labour and Conservatives didn't like it. so, less than 24 hours before publication, what could the SNP do? If they had refused to say they agreed they would have been seen by the Unionists as blocking the Smith Commission.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/revealed-the-devolution-powers-shelved-at-the-last-minute-from-smith-comm.25999250

Neither wonder, after it was published, the pro Independence parties were not happy.

Also, I see that the Unionist parties were still getting their instructions from the puppet masters in London.

[Hibrandenburg]

The Smith Commission withdrew a few important powers at the 11th hour, because the Labour and Conservatives didn't like it. so, less than 24 hours before publication, what could the SNP do? If they had refused to say they agreed they would have been seen by the Unionists as blocking the Smith Commission.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/revealed-the-devolution-powers-shelved-at-the-last-minute-from-smith-comm.25999250

Neither wonder, after it was published, the pro Independence parties were not happy.

Also, I see that the Unionist parties were still getting their instructions from the puppet masters in London.

The unionist parties consciously voted NO to ensure that would continue, can't see how that would upset them. Wasn't that what the referendum was about, either we could vote YES to make our own decisions or NO to continue receiving instructions from Westminster?

[lucky]

The unionist parties consciously voted NO to ensure that would continue, can't see how that would upset them. Wasn't that what the referendum was about, either we could vote YES to make our own decisions or NO to continue receiving instructions from Westminster?

We don't receive instructions from "westminster" devolution is the settled political will of the people Scotland. We vote for for our representatives in both parliaments but don't always get what we want.

[marinello59]

We don't receive instructions from "westminster" devolution is the settled political will of the people Scotland. We vote for for our representatives in both parliaments but don't always get what we want.

Democracy is just so unfair, giving us what the majority wanted. :greengrin

[hibs0666]

The Smith Commission withdrew a few important powers at the 11th hour, because the Labour and Conservatives didn't like it. so, less than 24 hours before publication, what could the SNP do? If they had refused to say they agreed they would have been seen by the Unionists as blocking the Smith Commission.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/revealed-the-devolution-powers-shelved-at-the-last-minute-from-smith-comm.25999250

Neither wonder, after it was published, the pro Independence parties were not happy.

Also, I see that the Unionist parties were still getting their instructions from the puppet masters in London.

Why s this debate still couched in constitutional terms. This is no longer about independence v devolution - the will of the people has been expressed on that issue.

There are two issues now - the first is to ensure that Westminster delivers increased power and the second is to ensure the Scottish parliament uses the new powers to the best advantage of the people of Scotland.

[marinello59]

Why s this debate still couched in constitutional terms. This is no longer about independence v devolution - the will of the people has been expressed on that issue.

There are two issues now - the first is to ensure that Westminster delivers increased power and the second is to ensure the Scottish parliament uses the new powers to the best advantage of the people of Scotland.

That's it in a nutshell.

[degenerated]

We don't receive instructions from "westminster" devolution is the settled political will of the people Scotland. We vote for for our representatives in both parliaments but don't always get what we want.
So why were Scottish Labour having to run everything past London Labour first, likewise their Tory bedfellows with their wm masters.

[degenerated]

Democracy is just so unfair, giving us what the majority wanted. :greengrin
The majority were wrong, some of them just haven't realised it yet :stirrer: :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

Sorry but guardian article is just the same regurdutated anti devolution stance. We voted for devolution and voted to retain it. The Smith commission was never going deliver the wishes of the nationalists. But it was agreed by the SNP who were led by John Swinney in the talks. Move on. Let's use the powers to our advantage

I'm sure the Government will use the limited extra powers to the benefit of the people of Scotland. Just think what we could have done with ALL the powers eh.

How's Neil getting on in his fight to take the branch office to the centre ground? I've seen some of his stuff, and he seems the best candidate to get Labour back on track, but just imagine if you vote in Murphy. :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

We don't receive instructions from "westminster" devolution is the settled political will of the people Scotland. We vote for for our representatives in both parliaments but don't always get what we want.

That's not what your last leader said though is it:confused:

[degenerated]

That's not what your last leader said though is it:confused:
Or the article in Herald (I think) yesterday that stated they were constantly on the blower back to islington to get the nod from HQ before they were allowed to comment on anything in Smith devo mini negotiations.

[Hibrandenburg]

We don't receive instructions from "westminster" devolution is the settled political will of the people Scotland. We vote for for our representatives in both parliaments but don't always get what we want.

Do you seriously believe that the Scottish wings of the Labour/Tory/Liberals fart before receiving permission from Westminster? You're beyond help if you do.

[Hibrandenburg]

That's not what your last leader said though is it:confused:

:agree:

[marinello59]

That's not what your last leader said though is it:confused:

He was speaking about the Scottish people, not the Scottish Labour party.

[ronaldo7]

He was speaking about the Scottish people, not the Scottish Labour party.

I know.

Either way, we're all still receiving orders from WM. Some of us admit it though.:wink:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3yGCU4IcAAdnKS.jpg

[lord bunberry]

Why s this debate still couched in constitutional terms. This is no longer about independence v devolution - the will of the people has been expressed on that issue.

There are two issues now - the first is to ensure that Westminster delivers increased power and the second is to ensure the Scottish parliament uses the new powers to the best advantage of the people of Scotland.

It's also about delivering the powers that the majority voted for. The smith commission falls a long way short of the federal system promised.

[ronaldo7]

So Gordon Brown is leaving us all to get on with it. I wonder if he'll give his pension to a local charity:rolleyes:

[ronaldo7]

Patrick Harvie has his say on the p!sh commission

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3yGCU4IcAAdnKS.jpg

SO the report of the Smith Commission on Devolution goes too far for some people , and not far enough for others . Who could have guessed?

It was inevitable that the parties which campaigned for a Yes vote in the referendum, and many thousands of people who voted for independence, would feel underwhelmed. The final report could have gone much further on issues like welfare, taxation, energy policy, broadcasting and more... and it would still have felt like less than we’d been promised.

That’s because the campaign for a No vote had used such vague language when talking about more devolution as the “jam tomorrow” option. If you go back and re-read the Vow , printed on the front cover of the Daily Record just days before the vote, you’ll see phrases like “extensive new powers” without any commitments about what they would be.

In much the same way terms like “near-federalism”, “home rule”, and “devo-max” were thrown around in public meetings and TV studios, also without any clear meanings. They were just catch-phrases, designed to make people think they’d been promised something real, when in fact they carried no substance at all.

So far, so unsurprising. What was more frustrating was that those who worked hardest to raise those expectations were the very ones who resisted the most when it came to setting out plans for deeper devolution.

Labour’s initial proposals were particularly weak, and while they did give way on a few issues they held the line against a radical package which would have really helped to close the wealth gap and build a fairer and more equal economy.

And of course someone (it remains unclear who) showed such contempt for everyone else in the discussions that they leaked the whole thing on the evening of the final negotiations, sending it to a newspaper from inside the meeting room, before we’d even finished discussing the practical arrangements for the launch the next morning.

That leaves a lot of doubt about how much we can trust such people ever to deliver on the report’s proposals. Many MPs at Westminster clearly oppose the whole scheme, and don’t want Scotland to have any more power than it does at present. Indeed some Labour backbenchers have made no secret of their scorn for devolution from day one.

Many Tories want to bundle this whole issue up with “English votes for English laws”, and are even threatening to stop Scottish MPs from voting on the UK budget.

All in all it’s a pretty messy business. The Greens agreed to take part in the Smith Commission because there was a chance that Scotland could make at least some progress, and it would have been wrong to turn that down just because we couldn’t get everything we’d want. And indeed some progress may still be achieved.

But it’s clear that it won’t be enough to live up to the pre-referendum hype, and I suspect it will leave many No voters wondering if they made the right decision back in September.

[lord bunberry]

Patrick Harvie has his say on the p!sh commission

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3yGCU4IcAAdnKS.jpg

SO the report of the Smith Commission on Devolution goes too far for some people , and not far enough for others . Who could have guessed?

It was inevitable that the parties which campaigned for a Yes vote in the referendum, and many thousands of people who voted for independence, would feel underwhelmed. The final report could have gone much further on issues like welfare, taxation, energy policy, broadcasting and more... and it would still have felt like less than we’d been promised.

That’s because the campaign for a No vote had used such vague language when talking about more devolution as the “jam tomorrow” option. If you go back and re-read the Vow , printed on the front cover of the Daily Record just days before the vote, you’ll see phrases like “extensive new powers” without any commitments about what they would be.

In much the same way terms like “near-federalism”, “home rule”, and “devo-max” were thrown around in public meetings and TV studios, also without any clear meanings. They were just catch-phrases, designed to make people think they’d been promised something real, when in fact they carried no substance at all.

So far, so unsurprising. What was more frustrating was that those who worked hardest to raise those expectations were the very ones who resisted the most when it came to setting out plans for deeper devolution.

Labour’s initial proposals were particularly weak, and while they did give way on a few issues they held the line against a radical package which would have really helped to close the wealth gap and build a fairer and more equal economy.

And of course someone (it remains unclear who) showed such contempt for everyone else in the discussions that they leaked the whole thing on the evening of the final negotiations, sending it to a newspaper from inside the meeting room, before we’d even finished discussing the practical arrangements for the launch the next morning.

That leaves a lot of doubt about how much we can trust such people ever to deliver on the report’s proposals. Many MPs at Westminster clearly oppose the whole scheme, and don’t want Scotland to have any more power than it does at present. Indeed some Labour backbenchers have made no secret of their scorn for devolution from day one.

Many Tories want to bundle this whole issue up with “English votes for English laws”, and are even threatening to stop Scottish MPs from voting on the UK budget.

All in all it’s a pretty messy business. The Greens agreed to take part in the Smith Commission because there was a chance that Scotland could make at least some progress, and it would have been wrong to turn that down just because we couldn’t get everything we’d want. And indeed some progress may still be achieved.

But it’s clear that it won’t be enough to live up to the pre-referendum hype, and I suspect it will leave many No voters wondering if they made the right decision back in September.

:top marks:

[speedy_gonzales]

If you go back and re-read the Vow , printed on the front cover of the Daily Record just days before the vote, you’ll see phrases like “extensive new powers” without any commitments about what they would be.

I thought it was widely accepted that the "vow" was the construct of the daily record and a shadowy figure from the BT campaign? At least that was my understanding and it was certainly inferred in the latest mail shot from the SNP/YES campaign.

[ronaldo7]

I thought it was widely accepted that the "vow" was the construct of the daily record and a shadowy figure from the BT campaign? At least that was my understanding and it was certainly inferred in the latest mail shot from the SNP/YES campaign.

If that's true, why are the 3 Amigos coming out now and saying the Vow will be met? Surely they wouldn't have anything to do with "Extensive new powers", if they didn't have to.

Smoke and mirrors run by Westminster as usual.:wink:

[Phil D. Rolls]

I thought it was widely accepted that the "vow" was the construct of the daily record and a shadowy figure from the BT campaign? At least that was my understanding and it was certainly inferred in the latest mail shot from the SNP/YES campaign.

I remember seeing pictures of Cameron, Clegg, and Miliband with their signatures underneath - don't tell me the Record acted without their permission.

[hibs0666]

Patrick Harvie has his say on the p!sh commission

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3yGCU4IcAAdnKS.jpg

SO the report of the Smith Commission on Devolution goes too far for some people , and not far enough for others . Who could have guessed?

It was inevitable that the parties which campaigned for a Yes vote in the referendum, and many thousands of people who voted for independence, would feel underwhelmed. The final report could have gone much further on issues like welfare, taxation, energy policy, broadcasting and more... and it would still have felt like less than we’d been promised.

That’s because the campaign for a No vote had used such vague language when talking about more devolution as the “jam tomorrow” option. If you go back and re-read the Vow , printed on the front cover of the Daily Record just days before the vote, you’ll see phrases like “extensive new powers” without any commitments about what they would be.

In much the same way terms like “near-federalism”, “home rule”, and “devo-max” were thrown around in public meetings and TV studios, also without any clear meanings. They were just catch-phrases, designed to make people think they’d been promised something real, when in fact they carried no substance at all.

So far, so unsurprising. What was more frustrating was that those who worked hardest to raise those expectations were the very ones who resisted the most when it came to setting out plans for deeper devolution.

Labour’s initial proposals were particularly weak, and while they did give way on a few issues they held the line against a radical package which would have really helped to close the wealth gap and build a fairer and more equal economy.

And of course someone (it remains unclear who) showed such contempt for everyone else in the discussions that they leaked the whole thing on the evening of the final negotiations, sending it to a newspaper from inside the meeting room, before we’d even finished discussing the practical arrangements for the launch the next morning.

That leaves a lot of doubt about how much we can trust such people ever to deliver on the report’s proposals. Many MPs at Westminster clearly oppose the whole scheme, and don’t want Scotland to have any more power than it does at present. Indeed some Labour backbenchers have made no secret of their scorn for devolution from day one.

Many Tories want to bundle this whole issue up with “English votes for English laws”, and are even threatening to stop Scottish MPs from voting on the UK budget.

All in all it’s a pretty messy business. The Greens agreed to take part in the Smith Commission because there was a chance that Scotland could make at least some progress, and it would have been wrong to turn that down just because we couldn’t get everything we’d want. And indeed some progress may still be achieved.

But it’s clear that it won’t be enough to live up to the pre-referendum hype, and I suspect it will leave many No voters wondering if they made the right decision back in September.

Yet another Nat that just cannot get over the will of the people. Poor bloke needs to show some leadership and move on.

[speedy_gonzales]

I remember seeing pictures of Cameron, Clegg, and Miliband with their signatures underneath - don't tell me the Record acted without their permission.
Remember the front page with Graham Taylor with a turnip for a head? He doesn't actually have a turnip for a head! The tabloids are great for printing garbage.

Even Wings over Scotland's own Rev(of what?) Stuart Campbell says "The vow was solely a confection of the newspaper, who therefore bear the responsibility for it. If and when the time comes, let's all remember who we're holding to account.",,,,

[Phil D. Rolls]

Remember the front page with Graham Taylor with a turnip for a head? He doesn't actually have a turnip for a head! The tabloids are great for printing garbage.

Even Wings over Scotland's own Rev(of what?) Stuart Campbell says "The vow was solely a confection of the newspaper, who therefore bear the responsibility for it. If and when the time comes, let's all remember who we're holding to account.",,,,

They should sue. :agree:

[The Harp Awakes]

Yet another Nat that just cannot get over the will of the people. Poor bloke needs to show some leadership and move on.

And where was the leadership of Westminster politicians, the BBC and the big business community during the latter stages of the referendum campaign? Lies, deceit and scaremongering at its worst. A concentrated effort to scare and intimidate ordinary people into voting No, isn't leadership in most people's book. The sad thing is it worked. The good thing is 45% saw through the lies.

That along with the false promises of the so-called 'vow' is the very reason many people are joining the nationalist movement in their thousands and refusing to move on. You better get used to it or you will be disappointed.

[Moulin Yarns]

Yet another Nat that just cannot get over the will of the people. Poor bloke needs to show some leadership and move on.

For some reason you have a bee in your bonnet about Nats. But you also show your total ignorance of which politicians represent which party.

I await your unreserved apology to Patrick Harvie.

[Hibrandenburg]

Yet another Nat that just cannot get over the will of the people. Poor bloke needs to show some leadership and move on.

Yeah, let's just ignore that we were lied to and duped! :rolleyes:

[Peevemor]

Yeah, let's just ignore that we were lied to and duped! :rolleyes:

Exactly.

[hibs0666]

Yeah, let's just ignore that we were lied to and duped! :rolleyes:

Your side failed to make a compelling case for independence or else it would have won - that's life. You need to bite the bullet, accept the will of the people and move on.

To help you on the journey, tell me what three things are you going to do this week to improve the lives of your fellow Scots?

[hibs0666]

For some reason you have a bee in your bonnet about Nats. But you also show your total ignorance of which politicians represent which party.

I await your unreserved apology to Patrick Harvie.

I didn't know the Scottish Green Party backed a no vote in the referendum. Here's me thinking that it backed independence.

Silly me, my bad. :rolleyes:

[Mikey09]

Your side failed to make a compelling case for independence or else it would have won - that's life. You need to bite the bullet, accept the will of the people and move on.

To help you on the journey, tell me what three things are you going to do this week to improve the lives of your fellow Scots?


Its erses with your patronising comments, that last sentance being the best yet, that really piss folk off.... Maybe that's you're aim....

[Moulin Yarns]

I didn't know the Scottish Green Party backed a no vote in the referendum. Here's me thinking that it backed independence.

Silly me, my bad. :rolleyes:


Correct, the Scottish Green Party backed Independence, but they are not Nats. So please don't confuse them as such.

While all parties may have some similar policies, including the Labour Party and the Conservative Party, there are more differences than similarities between the polices of the Scottish Green Party and the SNP at the 2010 Holyrood elections.

[Hibrandenburg]

Your side failed to make a compelling case for independence or else it would have won - that's life. You need to bite the bullet, accept the will of the people and move on.

To help you on the journey, tell me what three things are you going to do this week to improve the lives of your fellow Scots?

I'd probably bite if you weren't obviously trolling for a reaction. Maybe next time the SNP should make their case more compelling by telling porkies.

:rolleyes:

[hibs0666]

I'd probably bite if you weren't obviously trolling for a reaction. Maybe next time the SNP should make their case more compelling by telling porkies.

:rolleyes:

Makes no odds now. The people have spoken and we've moved on.

[Moulin Yarns]

Makes no odds now. The people have spoken and we've moved on.


Except you obviously haven't moved on with the need for point scoring, or trolling.

Until the "Vow" is seen for what it is. Even Lord Smith is having to come out and warn the Westminster Parties less than a week after his report was published.

[Mibbes Aye]

Yet another Nat that just cannot get over the will of the people.


Yeah, let's just ignore that we were lied to and duped! :rolleyes:


Exactly.

:faf:

Did either of you two even have a vote?

[Mibbes Aye]

Correct, the Scottish Green Party backed Independence, but they are not Nats. So please don't confuse them as such.

While all parties may have some similar policies, including the Labour Party and the Conservative Party, there are more differences than similarities between the polices of the Scottish Green Party and the SNP at the 2010 Holyrood elections.

What Patrick Harvie got a free ride on is that he stayed silent when the Yes campaign were arguing about how an oil-rich Scotland would flourish (incidentally, given how much oil prices have slumped in the last few months, does anyone else think that it wouldn't be the most sensible thing to peg our economy to oil prices?).

For me, a true Green would think that moving to an oil-centric economy was absolutely the last thing they would want to sign up to. What an utter betrayal of Green principles. And for what? So that we can have a different stripey flag on our civic buildings?

How anyone can say they are Green and support a Yes campaign based on (supposed and imaginary) oil wealth is an absolute mystery. What utter, utter hypocrisy.

[Mikey09]

What Patrick Harvie got a free ride on is that he stayed silent when the Yes campaign were arguing about how an oil-rich Scotland would flourish (incidentally, given how much oil prices have slumped in the last few months, does anyone else think that it wouldn't be the most sensible thing to peg our economy to oil prices?).

For me, a true Green would think that moving to an oil-centric economy was absolutely the last thing they would want to sign up to. What an utter betrayal of Green principles. And for what? So that we can have a different stripey flag on our civic buildings?

How anyone can say they are Green and support a Yes campaign based on (supposed and imaginary) oil wealth is an absolute mystery. What utter, utter hypocrisy.


So we can have a different stripey flag on our civic buildings?? Is that what you really think this was all about?? :rolleyes:
When the next referendum comes along I'm sure the people of Scotland won't be so easily duped..... But then again if it's just for a different stripey flag then what's the point in voting eh?!

[Phil D. Rolls]

:faf:

Did either of you two even have a vote?

Did David Cameron?

[Mibbes Aye]

Did David Cameron?

What's his username on here? I'll ask him :wink:

[Mibbes Aye]

So we can have a different stripey flag on our civic buildings?? Is that what you really think this was all about?? :rolleyes:
When the next referendum comes along I'm sure the people of Scotland won't be so easily duped..... But then again if it's just for a different stripey flag then what's the point in voting eh?!

Mostly, yes :agree:

Maybe you think differently. The problem for many of the Yes voters who posted on here is quite simple though.

Most folk said No. Some of those said No because they thought it was about silly stripey flags and people who weren't mature enough to put rationalism ahead of tribalism.

You might not like that but that's one of the views you have to engage with if you want to persuade a majority.

Obviously it's easier to throw a massive huff and blame the BBC and imply that the majority of voters are stupid.

Not very sophisticated tactics though.......

[Peevemor]

Mostly, yes :agree:

Maybe you think differently. The problem for many of the Yes voters who posted on here is quite simple though.

Most folk said No. Some of those said No because they thought it was about silly stripey flags and people who weren't mature enough to put rationalism ahead of tribalism.

You might not like that but that's one of the views you have to engage with if you want to persuade a majority.

Obviously it's easier to throw a massive huff and blame the BBC and imply that the majority of voters are stupid.

Not very sophisticated tactics though.......

Almost as unsophisticated as mocking the opinion of ex pat non voters. :wink:

[Mikey09]

Mostly, yes :agree:

Maybe you think differently. The problem for many of the Yes voters who posted on here is quite simple though.

Most folk said No. Some of those said No because they thought it was about silly stripey flags and people who weren't mature enough to put rationalism ahead of tribalism.

You might not like that but that's one of the views you have to engage with if you want to persuade a majority.

Obviously it's easier to throw a massive huff and blame the BBC and imply that the majority of voters are stupid.

Not very sophisticated tactics though.......

About as sophisticated as making promises you have no right or authority to make?? Then within an hour of the result turning it into English votes for English laws?? Mmm.... Very sophisticated....

[Mibbes Aye]

Almost as unsophisticated as mocking the opinion of ex pat non voters. :wink:

Have I mocked your opinion, really?

I've maybe questioned (okay, laughed at) you and Hiberlin's claim to be part of a 'we' that was 'duped'. That was on the basis that you weren't voters.

It's an interesting point though - fair enough you didn't have a vote but I'm guessing you claim a legitimate interest because you consider yourself to be Scottish?

[lucky]

Can't believe that book burning is acceptable to any political party. These councillors are an abosoulte disgrace

http://paisleyindependent.wordpress.com/2014/12/02/time-to-bin-the-smith-commission-report/

[Mibbes Aye]

About as sophisticated as making promises you have no right or authority to make?? Then within an hour of the result turning it into English votes for English laws?? Mmm.... Very sophisticated....

Last time I checked I hadn't done either of those things.

Most people said no. Some of those think nationalism is a silly thing that panders to an irrational and immature need to find a tribal identity.

What's your approach to winning them round?

[Glory Lurker]

Can't believe that book burning is acceptable to any political party. These councillors are an abosoulte disgrace

http://paisleyindependent.wordpress.com/2014/12/02/time-to-bin-the-smith-commission-report/

Chill, chief. They're just putting them in the bucket. Not a match in sight. :aok:

Edit: Curious as to how you'd come to that from the link you posted, I did a quick google. I see that it's being reported that a copy was burned. Agree - bang out of order.

[Peevemor]

Have I mocked your opinion, really?

I've maybe questioned (okay, laughed at) you and Hiberlin's claim to be part of a 'we' that was 'duped'. That was on the basis that you weren't voters.

It's an interesting point though - fair enough you didn't have a vote but I'm guessing you claim a legitimate interest because you consider yourself to be Scottish?

I remain unquestionably Scottish and, yes, we were lied to.

[Mikey09]

Last time I checked I hadn't done either of those things.

Most people said no. Some of those think nationalism is a silly thing that panders to an irrational and immature need to find a tribal identity.

What's your approach to winning them round?


Educating and getting the votes of the younger and next generation of voter..... What do you think the better together mob will bring to scotland?? I'll give you a clue.... 2nd word is "All" and the 1st is "****."

[hibs0666]

Except you obviously haven't moved on with the need for point scoring, or trolling.

Until the "Vow" is seen for what it is. Even Lord Smith is having to come out and warn the Westminster Parties less than a week after his report was published.

The referendum is history. It will not be repeated for a generation at least. The case for nationalism was rejected. Time to move on.

[Mikey09]

The referendum is history. It will not be repeated for a generation at least. The case for nationalism was rejected. Time to move on.


Couldn't agree more..... Time for you to move on wi yer pathetic attempts at trolling.....:aok:

[hibs0666]

Educating and getting the votes of the younger and next generation of voter..... What do you think the better together mob will bring to scotland?? I'll give you a clue.... 2nd word is "All" and the 1st is "****."

Better together has given Scotland income tax powers and the currency settlement demanded by nationalists. You wanted more - tough cheese, that is democracy for you.

Nationalists can now either whinge and moan or develop policies that use the new powers wisely to benefit the people. Party of protest or a Party of statesmanship? Decision time.

[ronaldo7]

Can't believe that book burning is acceptable to any political party. These councillors are an abosoulte disgrace

http://paisleyindependent.wordpress.com/2014/12/02/time-to-bin-the-smith-commission-report/

Can you point me in the direction of the "BOOK BURNING". :confused:

Your spin on the story is more evidence of your pathological hatred of the SNP rather than just reporting what's occurring.

[Glory Lurker]

Can you point me in the direction of the "BOOK BURNING". :confused:

Your spin on the story is more evidence of your pathological hatred of the SNP rather than just reporting what's occurring.

Lucky's right, I'm afraid r7 - it just isn't covered on that link.

[Mibbes Aye]

I remain unquestionably Scottish and, yes, we were lied to.

This is maybe my point. If you are Scottish, you are claiming something on behalf of everyone Scottish i.e. 'we were lied to'.

The problem is that not everyone Scottish agrees with you, or at the very least you can't evidence that. You can't claim to speak for 'Scottish' people. You don't have a 'we'.

To be honest though, that isn't what I'm interested in. My bigger interest is in how people are attributed as being Scottish, or claim that identity. Why are you "unquestionably Scottish"?

[Mikey09]

Better together has given Scotland income tax powers and the currency settlement demanded by nationalists. You wanted more - tough cheese, that is democracy for you.

Nationalists can now either whinge and moan or develop policies that use the new powers wisely to benefit the people. Party of protest or a Party of statesmanship? Decision time.


Thanks for for confirming my point..... **** All.... :greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

Educating and getting the votes of the younger and next generation of voter..... What do you think the better together mob will bring to scotland?? I'll give you a clue.... 2nd word is "All" and the 1st is "****."

I'll let the second half of your post go, it's not adding much, is it?

Getting back to the point, I asked how you would win round people who thought nationalism is a silly, irrational and immature ideology.

You said "Educating".

Fair enough, what would that entail?

[lucky]

Can you point me in the direction of the "BOOK BURNING". :confused:

Your spin on the story is more evidence of your pathological hatred of the SNP rather than just reporting what's occurring.

It will take you a minute to google this story and find out my spin is the truth. If think this is acceptable then your the one with issues as regardless of your political views burning an agreed document is shocking

[ronaldo7]

Lucky's right, I'm afraid r7 - it just isn't covered on that link.

:aok: http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/snp-councillors-under-fire-for-burning-copy-of-smith-commission-report.1417556805

[ronaldo7]

It will take you a minute to google this story and find out my spin is the truth. If think this is acceptable then your the one with issues as regardless of your political views burning an agreed document is shocking

Found it. :aok:

[JeMeSouviens]

Better together has given Scotland income tax powers and the currency settlement demanded by nationalists. You wanted more - tough cheese, that is democracy for you.

Nationalists can now either whinge and moan or develop policies that use the new powers wisely to benefit the people. Party of protest or a Party of statesmanship? Decision time.

You might not have noticed but the nationalists have been running a competent, popular government for 7 years and they've been whinging and moaning about lack of powers all the while. Why change a winning formula? ;-)

[JeMeSouviens]

This is maybe my point. If you are Scottish, you are claiming something on behalf of everyone Scottish i.e. 'we were lied to'.

The problem is that not everyone Scottish agrees with you, or at the very least you can't evidence that. You can't claim to speak for 'Scottish' people. You don't have a 'we'.

To be honest though, that isn't what I'm interested in. My bigger interest is in how people are attributed as being Scottish, or claim that identity. Why are you "unquestionably Scottish"?

Don't bother answering. I wrote a war&peace post-ref analysis he requested and was ignored. Hmmph.

[JeMeSouviens]

Mostly, yes :agree:

Maybe you think differently. The problem for many of the Yes voters who posted on here is quite simple though.

Most folk said No. Some of those said No because they thought it was about silly stripey flags and people who weren't mature enough to put rationalism ahead of tribalism.

You might not like that but that's one of the views you have to engage with if you want to persuade a majority.

Obviously it's easier to throw a massive huff and blame the BBC and imply that the majority of voters are stupid.

Not very sophisticated tactics though.......

Yes needs to persuade 1 in 11 no voters to switch, not all of them. The no side is much more internally divided than yes. Internal divisions that are leading to tasty strategic f-ups like the shambles over EVEL. All good news. :-)

[hibs0666]

You might not have noticed but the nationalists have been running a competent, popular government for 7 years and they've been whinging and moaning about lack of powers all the while. Why change a winning formula? ;-)

I noticed pretty much every area of Scotland that voted snp in an election also rejected nationalism.

The referendum came at a time when UK political leadership is non existent. If the nationalists can't win a referendum under those circumstances then it says a lot about the appeal of their pitch.

[JeMeSouviens]

I noticed pretty much every area of Scotland that voted snp in an election also rejected nationalism.

The referendum came at a time when UK political leadership is non existent. If the nationalists can't win a referendum under those circumstances then it says a lot about the appeal of their pitch.

Why are you so keen on them stopping making it then? ;-)

[lucky]

Found it. :aok:

Regardless of political views I really find elected officials doing something like this offensive. If it were Labour councillors I would want them out. What's your views on this?

[Mikey09]

I'll let the second half of your post go, it's not adding much, is it?

Getting back to the point, I asked how you would win round people who thought nationalism is a silly, irrational and immature ideology.

You said "Educating".

Fair enough, what would that entail?


Its already started with engaging them in political debate. Personally I don't think the younger generation will take anymore bull **** from the Westminster elite like millions in our generation have over the decades. I will leave the educating up to Nicola sturgeon as she is far more clued up and capable than me as I'm just a guy who has had enough of the lies, deceit and complete disregard of not just the scottish people but the working classes of the United Kingdom. We had an opportunity to rid ourselves of these incompetent arse holes but chose to stick with them. I for one can't wait till we get another chance because the younger generation will see us through then......

[ronaldo7]

Regardless of political views I really find elected officials doing something like this offensive. If it were Labour councillors I would want them out. What's your views on this?

Don't think it should have been done. Better use for the paper in the bogs,:aok:

[Mibbes Aye]

Its already started with engaging them in political debate. Personally I don't think the younger generation will take anymore bull **** from the Westminster elite like millions in our generation have over the decades. I will leave the educating up to Nicola sturgeon as she is far more clued up and capable than me as I'm just a guy who has had enough of the lies, deceit and complete disregard of not just the scottish people but the working classes of the United Kingdom. We had an opportunity to rid ourselves of these incompetent arse holes but chose to stick with them. I for one can't wait till we get another chance because the younger generation will see us through then......

Okay, that's not really answering what I asked.

Some people might think that nationalism is petty, irrational and emotive nonsense that avoids the real problems in our society by wrapping things up in tribal identities and silly, stripey flags.

What's your answer to them?

[Mibbes Aye]

Don't bother answering. I wrote a war&peace post-ref analysis he requested and was ignored. Hmmph.

Is that directed at me?

Post it again and I'll have a look. As I recall, in the run-up to the vote and the aftermath this thread was full of Yes voters who swamped anyone challenging them. No wonder posts got lost.

Anyhow, it turned out this thread wasn't representative of the sovereign will of the Scottish people, was it?

[lucky]

Don't think it should have been done. Better use for the paper in the bogs,:aok:

R7 I've argued and debated with you for over a year and we seldom agree but really I'm dismissed at your response. Burning of this document is highly offensive. I would expect most people would agree with this but can't believe you think making a joke about this is the correct thing to do. These 3 councillors should be expelled from the SNP and I would hope that Renfreshire council discipline them for bringing the council into disrepute. With these actions I believe democracy suffered tonight

[Mibbes Aye]

Don't think it should have been done. Better use for the paper in the bogs,:aok:

You're better than that.

The seethe and bitterness that some of the rejected Yessers display simply beggars belief.

It makes a mockery of all their chat about a 'democratic deficit', it feels like they have no respect for democracy simply because it didn't deliver what they wanted.

Sadly, history is littered with examples of nationalists not being able to deal with democracy. That's not the fault of democracy, rather it indicates a certain flaw in nationalist ideology.

[ronaldo7]

R7 I've argued and debated with you for over a year and we seldom agree but really I'm dismissed at your response. Burning of this document is highly offensive. I would expect most people would agree with this but can't believe you think making a joke about this is the correct thing to do. These 3 councillors should be expelled from the SNP and I would hope that Renfreshire council discipline them for bringing the council into disrepute. With these actions I believe democracy suffered tonight


You're better than that.

The seethe and bitterness that some of the rejected Yessers display simply beggars belief.

It makes a mockery of all their chat about a 'democratic deficit', it feels like they have no respect for democracy simply because it didn't deliver what they wanted.

Sadly, history is littered with examples of nationalists not being able to deal with democracy. That's not the fault of democracy, rather it indicates a certain flaw in nationalist ideology.


It was a joke guys. Lighten up FFS.:greengrin

I thought you guys might have been wishing to discuss the Unite union telling their members how to vote in the upcoming Branch office election. There are even some people getting to vote who don't pay the political levy.

Is this how democracy works under Labour?

[Peevemor]

This is maybe my point. If you are Scottish, you are claiming something on behalf of everyone Scottish i.e. 'we were lied to'.

The problem is that not everyone Scottish agrees with you, or at the very least you can't evidence that. You can't claim to speak for 'Scottish' people. You don't have a 'we'.

To be honest though, that isn't what I'm interested in. My bigger interest is in how people are attributed as being Scottish, or claim that identity. Why are you "unquestionably Scottish"?

I was born in Scotland to Scottish parents. I was raised and educated in Scotland and lived there for the first 37 years of my life. I have no intention whatsoever of taking French nationality therefore I am, without question, Scottish (I've played bagpipes for almost 40 years FFS! :greengrin:).

I have no problem with the voting eligibility criteria used for the referendum even though it (correctly IMO) excluded me from the poll, but Scotland will always mean 'we' to me and I'd imagine this to be the case for the majority of expats.

You're assertion that I "don't have a we" is wrong. If not Scottish, what do you suggest I am?

[Moulin Yarns]

The referendum is history. It will not be repeated for a generation at least. The case for nationalism was rejected. Time to move on.

I for one was not voting for 'Nationalism' and I don't think all of the the other 1.6m were either.

I doubt Patrick Harvey was voting for Nationalism, in fact that wasn't even a question on the ballot paper.

I and 1.6m others was voting for the opportunity to govern ourselves with total control of all policy and fiscal powers. A vote against was acceptance that Scotland was a poor region of the UK that needs to be propped up by the south east of England. Nowhere does Nationalism come into that vote.

[Moulin Yarns]

Better together has given Scotland income tax powers and the currency settlement demanded by nationalists. You wanted more - tough cheese, that is democracy for you.

Nationalists can now either whinge and moan or develop policies that use the new powers wisely to benefit the people. Party of protest or a Party of statesmanship? Decision time.


I'll let the second half of your post go, it's not adding much, is it?

Getting back to the point, I asked how you would win round people who thought nationalism is a silly, irrational and immature ideology.

You said "Educating".

Fair enough, what would that entail?


I noticed pretty much every area of Scotland that voted snp in an election also rejected nationalism.

The referendum came at a time when UK political leadership is non existent. If the nationalists can't win a referendum under those circumstances then it says a lot about the appeal of their pitch.


You're better than that.

The seethe and bitterness that some of the rejected Yessers display simply beggars belief.

It makes a mockery of all their chat about a 'democratic deficit', it feels like they have no respect for democracy simply because it didn't deliver what they wanted.

Sadly, history is littered with examples of nationalists not being able to deal with democracy. That's not the fault of democracy, rather it indicates a certain flaw in nationalist ideology.

Apologies for the multiple posts quotes, but it is necessary to the pint I wish to make.

These post are just from this page, but are indicative of a fair number of posts on this thread. The referendum was not about Nationalism, if it was then only the SNP would have been campaigning for a Yes vote. As you are well aware, there were people from almost all parties, and some from no party, campaigning for Independence for Scotland.

Even Labour for Indy, oh aye, even some Unionist Parties had members wanting Independence, if that is Nationalism then it is in truth a strange beast.

13819

[Moulin Yarns]

13820

:wink:

[degenerated]

Apologies for the multiple posts quotes, but it is necessary to the pint I wish to make.

These post are just from this page, but are indicative of a fair number of posts on this thread. The referendum was not about Nationalism, if it was then only the SNP would have been campaigning for a Yes vote. As you are well aware, there were people from almost all parties, and some from no party, campaigning for Independence for Scotland.

Even Labour for Indy, oh aye, even some Unionist Parties had members wanting Independence, if that is Nationalism then it is in truth a strange beast.

13819
I thought it was this one
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14/12/02/82ec8dcb6efb1144cfb659a821a2a1de.jpg

[JeMeSouviens]

This is maybe my point. If you are Scottish, you are claiming something on behalf of everyone Scottish i.e. 'we were lied to'.

The problem is that not everyone Scottish agrees with you, or at the very least you can't evidence that. You can't claim to speak for 'Scottish' people. You don't have a 'we'.

To be honest though, that isn't what I'm interested in. My bigger interest is in how people are attributed as being Scottish, or claim that identity. Why are you "unquestionably Scottish"?

Fishing for blood and soil are we?

[JeMeSouviens]

Apologies for the multiple posts quotes, but it is necessary to the pint I wish to make.

These post are just from this page, but are indicative of a fair number of posts on this thread. The referendum was not about Nationalism, if it was then only the SNP would have been campaigning for a Yes vote. As you are well aware, there were people from almost all parties, and some from no party, campaigning for Independence for Scotland.

Even Labour for Indy, oh aye, even some Unionist Parties had members wanting Independence, if that is Nationalism then it is in truth a strange beast.

13819

It's much easier to throw the pejorative label than think about why 9/20 members of our society don't want to live in the state we're subsumed within.

[JeMeSouviens]

I don't think that's changed in the slightest, tbh.

You attempting to see some sort of conspiracy of bullies rather than disparate individuals having individual though overlapping arguments hasn't changed either. Only thing missing is the usual sneering abusive "circle jerk" term to neatly sidestep the need to make an argument at all.

[marinello59]

You attempting to see some sort of conspiracy of bullies rather than disparate individuals having individual though overlapping arguments hasn't changed either. Only thing missing is the usual sneering abusive "circle jerk" term to neatly sidestep the need to make an argument at all.

Damn, I was just about to use that one. Now I'll have to wait for a couple of days. :greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

What's his username on here? I'll ask him :wink:

I'll save you the bother - he didn't. He doesn't live in Scotland either. Didn't hear too many complaints about his opinion from the Unionists.

[marinello59]

Apologies for the multiple posts quotes, but it is necessary to the pint I wish to make.

These post are just from this page, but are indicative of a fair number of posts on this thread. The referendum was not about Nationalism, if it was then only the SNP would have been campaigning for a Yes vote. As you are well aware, there were people from almost all parties, and some from no party, campaigning for Independence for Scotland.

Even Labour for Indy, oh aye, even some Unionist Parties had members wanting Independence, if that is Nationalism then it is in truth a strange beast.

13819

You are right, some of us didn't vote Yes for nationalist reasons. However given the much trumpeted surge in SNP membership since the referundum can you say that is true of the majority? I have a deep mistrust of nationalist politics. The repeated claims during and after the vote that we care more about fairness and justice simply because we are Scots is not only dangerous, it doesn't stand up to proper scrutiny. There is not much difference in attitudes UK wide.
There are nasty undertones to all this with the smug conceit of the whole 45 movement at the centre of it. The subtext seems to be we may have lost the vote but only because the majority of our fellow Scots failed to see the great shining truth that we did. Alex Salmond made a point of stating that the Saltire was a flag for all Scots no matter what their stance was. I'm not so sure that is true now as it is increasingly hijacked by the 45. I voted Yes and will do so again when asked but to an extent I agree with Beefster. Debate is thin on the ground here now and has now descended in to Labour and all Unionist Parties bad and to be condemned for everything. SNP good, criticism of the only party to have the answers simply will not happen. The tribal allegiance to Labour to the exclusion of other parties weakened democracy up here. Could somebody explain to me why a similar tribal allegiance to the SNP motivated in part by a desire to eradicate all opposition is better?
Hopefully as the hurt of losing the vote recedes attention will turn fully to the full use of the powers we have to make Scotland even better than the wonderful place to live and work in I think it is. Nicola Sturgeon has been impressive so far and if she delivers on her words the future could indeed be bright. Independence was an answer but not the only one, a fact some seem unable to recognise.

[Moulin Yarns]

You are right, some of us didn't vote Yes for nationalist reasons. However given the much trumpeted surge in SNP membership since the referundum can you say that is true of the majority? I have a deep mistrust of nationalist politics. The repeated claims during and after the vote that we care more about fairness and justice simply because we are Scots is not only dangerous, it doesn't stand up to proper scrutiny. There is not much difference in attitudes UK wide.
There are nasty undertones to all this with the smug conceit of the whole 45 movement at the centre of it. The subtext seems to be we may have lost the vote but only because the majority of our fellow Scots failed to see the great shining truth that we did. Alex Salmond made a point of stating that the Saltire was a flag for all Scots no matter what their stance was. I'm not so sure that is true now as it is increasingly hijacked by the 45. I voted Yes and will do so again when asked but to an extent I agree with Beefster. Debate is thin on the ground here now and has now descended in to Labour and all Unionist Parties bad and to be condemned for everything. SNP good, criticism of the only party to have the answers simply will not happen. The tribal allegiance to Labour to the exclusion of other parties weakened democracy up here. Could somebody explain to me why a similar tribal allegiance to the SNP motivated in part by a desire to eradicate all opposition is better?
Hopefully as the hurt of losing the vote recedes attention will turn fully to the full use of the powers we have to make Scotland even better than the wonderful place to live and work in I think it is. Nicola Sturgeon has been impressive so far and if she delivers on her words the future could indeedc be bright. Independence was an answer but not the only one, a fact some seem unable to recognise.


Which is kind of why I followed up my post with a slogan from Common Weal.

I think the Common Weal could be a powerful vehicle for cross party agreement. The Perth and Kinross Common Weal Group had a meeting with people from at least 4 different parties (possibly 6) all with the same aims. That, IMO is what should and could break down the barriers of them and us.

How many of us donate to foodbanks?
What happens after we drop a tin of beans into the foodbank?
Do we know if the recipient is able to heat it up?
Is there a need to go further than food banks? - maybe basic cooking help/lessons are needed too, but we think we are so good because the 35p can of beans we bought, we think will help someone.

Sorry. Didn't mean to rant, but we all think we do good, when we really haven't a clue!

[marinello59]

Which is kind of why I followed up my post with a slogan from Common Weal.

I think the Common Weal could be a powerful vehicle for cross party agreement. The Perth and Kinross Common Weal Group had a meeting with people from at least 4 different parties (possibly 6) all with the same aims. That, IMO is what should and could break down the barriers of them and us.

How many of us donate to foodbanks?
What happens after we drop a tin of beans into the foodbank?
Do we know if the recipient is able to heat it up?
Is there a need to go further than food banks? - maybe basic cooking help/lessons are needed too, but we think we are so good because the 35p can of beans we bought, we think will help someone.

Sorry. Didn't mean to rant, but we all think we do good, when we really haven't a clue!

I was actually going to mention the Common Weal, the way they have progressed so far certainly gives cause for optimism moving forward.

[Moulin Yarns]

I was actually going to mention the Common Weal, the way they have progressed so far certainly gives cause for optimism moving forward.

A much maligned Hibs.net poster is one of the local organisers here in Perth and Kinross. :wink:

[marinello59]

A much maligned Hibs.net poster is one of the local organisers here in Perth and Kinross. :wink:

I think I know who that is. :greengrin
Well done to him. hope it goes from strength to strength.

[Mikey09]

Okay, that's not really answering what I asked.

Some people might think that nationalism is petty, irrational and emotive nonsense that avoids the real problems in our society by wrapping things up in tribal identities and silly, stripey flags.

What's your answer to them?


To be honest I think you're doing people a disservice by presuming they think this way.... Don't judge others by you're own standards. If you want an answer then I'm afraid some unionists will never be swayed to vote for an independent Scotland, as is the case the other way round. I am one of those and proud of it.... Some on here are making that out as if it's a crime when I assure you I'm just as law abiding and non violent as anyone. I accept the no vote. Am I disappointed? Absolutely. Am I bitter as some are accusing? Absolutely not. I believe an independent Scotland will benefit everyone in this country. I do not believe the corporation driven Westminster elite has or ever will do that. I have no axe to grind with you or any other no voter, in fact I would probably enjoy your company over a beer discussing this and Hibs troubles over the past few years, (although that would be harder to fathom). Yes I'm a nationalist. So what? Going by some posts on here it's like being a member of IS......

[Moulin Yarns]

I really should be working, but I've been reading this instead.

http://www.monbiot.com/2014/12/02/breaking-the-silence/

[speedy_gonzales]

It's much easier to throw the pejorative label than think about why 9/20 members of our society don't want to live in the state we're subsumed within.
Just to be a pedant, it was closer to 7/20, around 38% of the electorate voted YES.

[Peevemor]

Just to be a pedant, it was closer to 7/20, around 38% of the electorate voted YES.

In that case, not even half of the electorate (46.7%) voted NO. :greengrin

[speedy_gonzales]

In that case, not even half of the electorate (46.7%) voted NO. :greengrin
Yup, as Mark Twain said, there are lies, damned lies and statistics!

[hibs0666]

Just to be a pedant, it was closer to 7/20, around 38% of the electorate voted YES.

4 out of 32 council areas returned a yes majority.

[lucky]

Good move by the SNP as the book burners are suspended.
http://m.stv.tv/news/scotland/302061-snp-councillors-suspended-for-burning-of-smith-commission-report/

[JeMeSouviens]

Is that directed at me?

Post it again and I'll have a look. As I recall, in the run-up to the vote and the aftermath this thread was full of Yes voters who swamped anyone challenging them. No wonder posts got lost.

Anyhow, it turned out this thread wasn't representative of the sovereign will of the Scottish people, was it?

It took me that long to get round to it, I assume you forgot you asked. :greengrin

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?271802-Scottish-Independence&p=4204190&highlight=#post4204190

This thread probably is fairly representative of the male, working age population, which will be the segment footy forum users would most likely be drawn from? If you want the sovereign will of the people you're going to have to get folk to invite their mums and grans. :wink:

[JeMeSouviens]

4 out of 32 council areas returned a yes majority.

You're losing your (ahem) subtlety now. :greengrin


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32UGD0fV45g

[hibs0666]

You're losing your (ahem) subtlety now. :greengrin


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32UGD0fV45g

Damn - I got taught at the Ecky Salmond School of Subtlety and Smugness too. Only the best for me. :wink:

[Mibbes Aye]

I was born in Scotland to Scottish parents. I was raised and educated in Scotland and lived there for the first 37 years of my life. I have no intention whatsoever of taking French nationality therefore I am, without question, Scottish (I've played bagpipes for almost 40 years FFS! :greengrin:).

I have no problem with the voting eligibility criteria used for the referendum even though it (correctly IMO) excluded me from the poll, but Scotland will always mean 'we' to me and I'd imagine this to be the case for the majority of expats.

You're assertion that I "don't have a we" is wrong. If not Scottish, what do you suggest I am?

No, I think you're 'Scottish'.

This started with Hiberlin claiming 'we' were duped in relation to the vote and you agreeing. My point is that as you weren't enfranchised I don't think you're part of that 'we' and also, if that 'we' covers everyone who was enfranchised there are many who wouldn't agree with how you've represented them.

The bit about what makes you Scottish isn't really related to that, I'll pick it up in my reply to JMS.

[Mibbes Aye]

It was a joke guys. Lighten up FFS.:greengrin

I thought you guys might have been wishing to discuss the Unite union telling their members how to vote in the upcoming Branch office election. There are even some people getting to vote who don't pay the political levy.

Is this how democracy works under Labour?

Union in vote recommendation to members shock!!!

This is the thing with you Nats, a lot of you seem to hold the electorate in absolute contempt (probably because we are too 'stupid' to understand how important it is to shape our own destiny, free of the Westminster elites blah blah blah).

If we're not being manipulated by the BBC, it's the print press. If it's not the print press it's the unions.

It's a surprise no one has done any scientific research into why separatists are impervious to agendas and vested interests but the rest of the population can't see through spin :greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

Fishing for blood and soil are we?

No, but I wondered if someone would think that and I know Peevemor is being serious and I wouldn't want to patronise him.

The example he gives is of being Scottish because of being born in Scotland to Scottish parents, that's fair enough. It's reasonable to suggest that someone like Steven Fletcher, who wasn't born in Scotland, considers himself Scottish too, it maybe means everything to him. I have friends, a couple who are Irish who settled over here. They consider themselves Irish but their son (born here) would say he was Scottish. On the other hand there are people born in Scotland who won't consider themselves Scottish, undoubtedly. The point is that there is no consistent and irreducible defining factor that makes someone Scottish, it is an identity people choose to assume, or that they internalise through a process of social and cultural conditioning, and that conditioning in itself is shaped by the accidents of history e.g. where a peace treaty drew an invisible line to mark out what becomes a nation state of today.

It's fascinating but in itself it fails to convince me that it's a plausible reason for change. If the argument was that an area roughly equating to 'Scotland' could develop greatly if it held certain powers then fair enough. But the starting point with nationalists is it has to be 'Scotland'. So what if South-east Scotland as a small and prosperous mini-state was better? Or what if lowland Scotland with the North-east of England was the right combination of socio-economic determinants to succeed?

We don't explore these options however because we are tied up by flags, tied up by a narrative that says we are inherently something that in reality, for most of human existence hasn't existed in the form that we currently have.

[Mibbes Aye]

To be honest I think you're doing people a disservice by presuming they think this way.... Don't judge others by you're own standards. If you want an answer then I'm afraid some unionists will never be swayed to vote for an independent Scotland, as is the case the other way round. I am one of those and proud of it.... Some on here are making that out as if it's a crime when I assure you I'm just as law abiding and non violent as anyone. I accept the no vote. Am I disappointed? Absolutely. Am I bitter as some are accusing? Absolutely not. I believe an independent Scotland will benefit everyone in this country. I do not believe the corporation driven Westminster elite has or ever will do that. I have no axe to grind with you or any other no voter, in fact I would probably enjoy your company over a beer discussing this and Hibs troubles over the past few years, (although that would be harder to fathom). Yes I'm a nationalist. So what? Going by some posts on here it's like being a member of IS......

Fair enough.

If you genuinely feel persecuted for your viewpoint then that's not on and if I've contributed to that then I apologise.

[Mibbes Aye]

It took me that long to get round to it, I assume you forgot you asked. :greengrin

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?271802-Scottish-Independence&p=4204190&highlight=#post4204190

This thread probably is fairly representative of the male, working age population, which will be the segment footy forum users would most likely be drawn from? If you want the sovereign will of the people you're going to have to get folk to invite their mums and grans. :wink:

:greengrin

Thanks. I enjoyed reading that and I don't disagree with a lot of what you say.

I think there's a more sophisticated explanation to the No camp though (I would say that, wouldn't I :greengrin)

Firstly, people change. I think the cliche about people becoming more small 'c' -conservative as they age is has a lot of truth in it. I suspect there will be people who voted Yes in 1979 who voted No in 2014, in fact there must be.

I also would be fascinated to see polling on public sector attitudes. It's a huge part of the Scottish labour market but also impinges heavily on our national consciousness. I suspect that this workforce, who are acutely placed to see the impact of the economic downturn on our communities, especially our vulnerable and marginalised groups, would have been far more likely to vote No, especially above the basic grades. I don't think that's an example of people being risk-averse, rather it is a case of being risk-sensitive or risk-intelligent.

[ronaldo7]

Union in vote recommendation to members shock!!!

This is the thing with you Nats, a lot of you seem to hold the electorate in absolute contempt (probably because we are too 'stupid' to understand how important it is to shape our own destiny, free of the Westminster elites blah blah blah).

If we're not being manipulated by the BBC, it's the print press. If it's not the print press it's the unions.

It's a surprise no one has done any scientific research into why separatists are impervious to agendas and vested interests but the rest of the population can't see through spin :greengrin

I see you body swerved the subject of people from that union getting to vote even though they don't pay the political levy to the Labour party.

Democracy in action.

[Mibbes Aye]

I see you body swerved the subject of people from that union getting to vote even though they don't pay the political levy to the Labour party.

Democracy in action.

I didn't understand it :greengrin.

If it's a union post can't all union members vote for it, regardless if they pay an affiliated levy?

Anyway, on the subject of swerving things, I think I might develop that theme about some nationalists looking down their noses at voters. It rings true.

On this thread we've seen ordinary folk being described as stupid, weak and malleable for having the temerity to want to vote No.

What is it about fundamentalist stances like nationalism, that you have to portray the non-believers as idiots?

[ronaldo7]

I didn't understand it :greengrin.

If it's a union post can't all union members vote for it, regardless if they pay an affiliated levy?

Anyway, on the subject of swerving things, I think I might develop that theme about some nationalists looking down their noses at voters. It rings true.

On this thread we've seen ordinary folk being described as stupid, weak and malleable for having the temerity to want to vote No.

What is it about fundamentalist stances like nationalism, that you have to portray the non-believers as idiots?

Can you point me to my post which I've done so pretty please:greengrin

Here's the Unison one. https://www.unison.org.uk/upload/sharepoint/On%20line%20Catalogue/22732.pdf

UNISON Labour Link - the Affiliated Political Fund
UNISON Labour Link campaigns for members’ interests through affiliation to the Labour Party,
both nationally and locally. Those paying the affiliated levy can participate in Labour Link activities
and through our representatives in the Party make their contribution on policy and organisational
issues. They are able to vote in elections for the Labour leadership team nationally and for
Labour’s leaders in Scotland, Wales and the candidate for London Mayor

[Mibbes Aye]

Can you point me to my post which I've done so pretty please:greengrin

Here's the Unison one. https://www.unison.org.uk/upload/sharepoint/On%20line%20Catalogue/22732.pdf

UNISON Labour Link - the Affiliated Political Fund
UNISON Labour Link campaigns for members’ interests through affiliation to the Labour Party,
both nationally and locally. Those paying the affiliated levy can participate in Labour Link activities
and through our representatives in the Party make their contribution on policy and organisational
issues. They are able to vote in elections for the Labour leadership team nationally and for
Labour’s leaders in Scotland, Wales and the candidate for London Mayor

Re your first sentence I wasn't talking about you specifically but if you've got anything to confess then go ahead :wink:

I'm still not clear what point you are trying to make, sorry if it's me but I'm baffled!

People pay subscription fees when they are members of unions like UNISON and Unite and my understanding is they have a choice as to whether a proportion of that money goes into a fund for the union to fight political campaigns e.g. for the living wage or they can choose for it to go to the Labour Party (although that is dependent on the union remaining affiliated to Labour I guess).

If they choose to put their money into the affiliated fund then that entitles them to a vote in Labour leadership processes. So far, so straightforward.

The unions can recommend who they think their members should vote for but ultimately it's up to individuals, they get a ballot paper sent to their home by the Electoral Reform Society and they can use that or vote online using a secure code on the form.

[Peevemor]

No, I think you're 'Scottish'.

This started with Hiberlin claiming 'we' were duped in relation to the vote and you agreeing. My point is that as you weren't enfranchised I don't think you're part of that 'we' and also, if that 'we' covers everyone who was enfranchised there are many who wouldn't agree with how you've represented them.

The bit about what makes you Scottish isn't really related to that, I'll pick it up in my reply to JMS.

So Westminster didn't lie to us (I am allowed to use "us" I hope)?

[Hibrandenburg]

No, but I wondered if someone would think that and I know Peevemor is being serious and I wouldn't want to patronise him.

The example he gives is of being Scottish because of being born in Scotland to Scottish parents, that's fair enough. It's reasonable to suggest that someone like Steven Fletcher, who wasn't born in Scotland, considers himself Scottish too, it maybe means everything to him. I have friends, a couple who are Irish who settled over here. They consider themselves Irish but their son (born here) would say he was Scottish. On the other hand there are people born in Scotland who won't consider themselves Scottish, undoubtedly. The point is that there is no consistent and irreducible defining factor that makes someone Scottish, it is an identity people choose to assume, or that they internalise through a process of social and cultural conditioning, and that conditioning in itself is shaped by the accidents of history e.g. where a peace treaty drew an invisible line to mark out what becomes a nation state of today.

It's fascinating but in itself it fails to convince me that it's a plausible reason for change. If the argument was that an area roughly equating to 'Scotland' could develop greatly if it held certain powers then fair enough. But the starting point with nationalists is it has to be 'Scotland'. So what if South-east Scotland as a small and prosperous mini-state was better? Or what if lowland Scotland with the North-east of England was the right combination of socio-economic determinants to succeed?

We don't explore these options however because we are tied up by flags, tied up by a narrative that says we are inherently something that in reality, for most of human existence hasn't existed in the form that we currently have.

Personally I'm tied up by family. My mother who's disabled having to worry about what the Westminster cronies are doing to the NHS.

I'm tied up by a sister who's job depends on Scotland being able to trade freely within the EU.

I'm tied up because my pension is split between a life of working and paying tax in the UK and Germany and the UK's exit from the EU would make it very difficult to draw the pension I've earned and deserve.

But don't let all that stop you from portraying me as a goose stepping, flag waving Nazi.

[ronaldo7]

Re your first sentence I wasn't talking about you specifically but if you've got anything to confess then go ahead :wink:

I'm still not clear what point you are trying to make, sorry if it's me but I'm baffled!

People pay subscription fees when they are members of unions like UNISON and Unite and my understanding is they have a choice as to whether a proportion of that money goes into a fund for the union to fight political campaigns e.g. for the living wage or they can choose for it to go to the Labour Party (although that is dependent on the union remaining affiliated to Labour I guess).

If they choose to put their money into the affiliated fund then that entitles them to a vote in Labour leadership processes. So far, so straightforward.

The unions can recommend who they think their members should vote for but ultimately it's up to individuals, they get a ballot paper sent to their home by the Electoral Reform Society and they can use that or vote online using a secure code on the form.

It's easy really.

I know of people who've opted out of the political levy part of their union dues still got a ballot paper to vote in the upcoming election for the leadership of the Labour party branch office in Scotland. Seems that the union doesn't have all their members details up to date.

No biggy, Electoral fraud is rife in the uk.:wink:

[#FromTheCapital]

Personally I'm tied up by family. My mother who's disabled having to worry about what the Westminster cronies are doing to the NHS.

I'm tied up by a sister who's job depends on Scotland being able to trade freely within the EU.



The westminster cronies just last week announced that they're putting an extra 2 billion into the nhs.
My job is to sell to the NHS and trust me the NHS in Scotland are a procurement obsessed joke. Cheap option always wins.

Was Scotland guaranteed to be in the EU after independance? Sure we wanted to be, but there was no guarantee that we'd be allowed.

[Mibbes Aye]

So Westminster didn't lie to us (I am allowed to use "us" I hope)?

I can't really answer that because I suspect what you mean by 'Westminster' is a handy but ultimately false construction that I don't agree with.

I'm not buying into this Nat line that there's this evil 'Westminster', whose sole aim is to subvert and undermine the sovereign will of the Scottish people in shaping their own destiny.

Rather than blaming the bogeyman (whether 'Westminster' or the BBC or whatever), those separatists who can't get over the fact that most people chose not to agree with them need to wake up, smell the coffee and realise they live in a democracy.

Whining and whinging and blaming everybody and everything except the biggest thing - the sheer paucity in their own arguments, especially their economic arguments, makes their views hard to take seriously.

The more I reflect on the referendum and the Yes strategy, the more similarities I see to BuyHibs.

[Mibbes Aye]

It's easy really.

I know of people who've opted out of the political levy part of their union dues still got a ballot paper to vote in the upcoming election for the leadership of the Labour party branch office in Scotland. Seems that the union doesn't have all their members details up to date.

No biggy, Electoral fraud is rife in the uk.:wink:

You're not helping :greengrin

You made a raisy-eyebrows remark about whether this is what democracy looks like under Labour.

You then clarified that this was because people who had opted out of being able to vote for the Labour leadership were still getting ballot papers but that was maybe the union's fault for not updating their details.

Looks like some poor housekeeping but I'm struggling to see how you can talk about fraud or describe it as an indictment of Labour's relationship with democracy :confused:

[Mibbes Aye]

Personally I'm tied up by family. My mother who's disabled having to worry about what the Westminster cronies are doing to the NHS.

I'm tied up by a sister who's job depends on Scotland being able to trade freely within the EU.

I'm tied up because my pension is split between a life of working and paying tax in the UK and Germany and the UK's exit from the EU would make it very difficult to draw the pension I've earned and deserve.

But don't let all that stop you from portraying me as a goose stepping, flag waving Nazi.

I take it by the lack of smilies and the previous sentences that you're being serious.

What an utterly ridiculous claim to make. Really.

I shouldn't validate your post with a reply but I love how you're using Brexit as a justification for your stance. Is that what it's come to - using things that haven't happened and have no direct causal relationship as an excuse?

[whiskyhibby]

You are right, some of us didn't vote Yes for nationalist reasons. However given the much trumpeted surge in SNP membership since the referundum can you say that is true of the majority? I have a deep mistrust of nationalist politics. The repeated claims during and after the vote that we care more about fairness and justice simply because we are Scots is not only dangerous, it doesn't stand up to proper scrutiny. There is not much difference in attitudes UK wide.
There are nasty undertones to all this with the smug conceit of the whole 45 movement at the centre of it. The subtext seems to be we may have lost the vote but only because the majority of our fellow Scots failed to see the great shining truth that we did. Alex Salmond made a point of stating that the Saltire was a flag for all Scots no matter what their stance was. I'm not so sure that is true now as it is increasingly hijacked by the 45. I voted Yes and will do so again when asked but to an extent I agree with Beefster. Debate is thin on the ground here now and has now descended in to Labour and all Unionist Parties bad and to be condemned for everything. SNP good, criticism of the only party to have the answers simply will not happen. The tribal allegiance to Labour to the exclusion of other parties weakened democracy up here. Could somebody explain to me why a similar tribal allegiance to the SNP motivated in part by a desire to eradicate all opposition is better?
Hopefully as the hurt of losing the vote recedes attention will turn fully to the full use of the powers we have to make Scotland even better than the wonderful place to live and work in I think it is. Nicola Sturgeon has been impressive so far and if she delivers on her words the future could indeed be bright. Independence was an answer but not the only one, a fact some seem unable to recognise.

Great post Marinello59, unfortunately Salmond and Sturgeon have ' called the Jockhadi's to arms' by their refusal to accept the democratic will of the Scottish people and a large group of non UK nationals that should never have had the vote in the first place, the only reasonable response is never again to vote for the SNP irrespective of their platform , that's the approach I am committed to taking......

[whiskyhibby]

I think the telling thing for me was the SNP change in the house purchase tax, just after the voting electorate resoundly rejected their only meaningful policy which is independence at any cost, this is something they could have done at any time since they were elected into power but chose to not take that option for their own selfish reasons, costing homebuyers millions of pounds in the preceding years, that are a bunch of one trick ponies, who irrespective of Sturgeons mantra, are not really the champions Of the poor, but the champions of Independence at any cost......

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Great post Marinello59, unfortunately Salmond and Sturgeon have ' called the Jockhadi's to arms' by their refusal to accept the democratic will of the Scottish people and a large group of non UK nationals that should never have had the vote in the first place, the only reasonable response is never again to vote for the SNP irrespective of their platform , that's the approach I am committed to taking......

What are Jockhadis?

[JeMeSouviens]

I think the telling thing for me was the SNP change in the house purchase tax, just after the voting electorate resoundly rejected their only meaningful policy which is independence at any cost, this is something they could have done at any time since they were elected into power but chose to not take that option for their own selfish reasons, costing homebuyers millions of pounds in the preceding years, that are a bunch of one trick ponies, who irrespective of Sturgeons mantra, are not really the champions Of the poor, but the champions of Independence at any cost......

Sadly your diatribe is somewhat undermined by the fact that stamp duty was only devolved by the Scotland act 2012, effective April *2015*. :rolleyes:

[whiskyhibby]

What are Jockhadis?

Those that have a almost religious and 100% blinded faith believe in the cause of Scottish Independence

[whiskyhibby]

Those that have a almost religious and 100% blinded faith believe in the cause of Scottish Independence

And have committed to continuing ' the war' for Scottish independence irrespective of the legal result of the Scottish referendum

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Oh, right then, very witty.

[JeMeSouviens]

Great post Marinello59, unfortunately Salmond and Sturgeon have ' called the Jockhadi's to arms' by their refusal to accept the democratic will of the Scottish people and a large group of non UK nationals that should never have had the vote in the first place, the only reasonable response is never again to vote for the SNP irrespective of their platform , that's the approach I am committed to taking......

Salmond resigned and they signed up to and participated in the Smith commission. It's not exactly armed insurrection. Those non-UK nationals live here, pay their taxes and fully contribute to society, why should they not get a say?

[whiskyhibby]

Salmond in one of his less enlightened speeches after the result suggested that Scotland ( not sure which part he meant) could ignore the referendum debate and take independence into their own hands, that to me sounds at least irresponsible and perhaps treasonous, hence the Jockhadi's reference

[whiskyhibby]

Salmond resigned and they signed up to and participated in the Smith commission. It's not exactly armed insurrection. Those non-UK nationals live here, pay their taxes and fully contribute to society, why should they not get a say?

Non UK nationals should never had had the vote as they are not resident here ( and I mean that in the Nationality perspective) you could have had the absurd position where 50000 Chinese nationals here on a student visa could have voted for you and I to either leave or stay in the UK, how is that ' the Scottish people, taking decisions into their own hands' to quote Sturgeons dogma..

[whiskyhibby]

Like I say the Scottish National party are a bunch of small minded people with a narrow agenda, manipulating the voting electorate for their own vested interest and manipulating the fears of those people at the bottom of the pile in Scotland, and that for me is a scandalous abuse of their position as Scotland's 'Government'

Hopefully the expanded powers for the Scottish Parliament will help bring these clowns to account, they have always hid behind the UK Parliament, now I want to hear what they can do for us, not what they can't .....

[JeMeSouviens]

No, but I wondered if someone would think that and I know Peevemor is being serious and I wouldn't want to patronise him.

The example he gives is of being Scottish because of being born in Scotland to Scottish parents, that's fair enough. It's reasonable to suggest that someone like Steven Fletcher, who wasn't born in Scotland, considers himself Scottish too, it maybe means everything to him. I have friends, a couple who are Irish who settled over here. They consider themselves Irish but their son (born here) would say he was Scottish. On the other hand there are people born in Scotland who won't consider themselves Scottish, undoubtedly. The point is that there is no consistent and irreducible defining factor that makes someone Scottish, it is an identity people choose to assume, or that they internalise through a process of social and cultural conditioning, and that conditioning in itself is shaped by the accidents of history e.g. where a peace treaty drew an invisible line to mark out what becomes a nation state of today.

It's fascinating but in itself it fails to convince me that it's a plausible reason for change. If the argument was that an area roughly equating to 'Scotland' could develop greatly if it held certain powers then fair enough. But the starting point with nationalists is it has to be 'Scotland'. So what if South-east Scotland as a small and prosperous mini-state was better? Or what if lowland Scotland with the North-east of England was the right combination of socio-economic determinants to succeed?

We don't explore these options however because we are tied up by flags, tied up by a narrative that says we are inherently something that in reality, for most of human existence hasn't existed in the form that we currently have.

Ok, thanks for clearing that up. It is fascinating, I agree. I also agree that Scotland isn't necessarily the optimal national unit. However, I think that it's a hell of a lot more optimal than the UK and already fulfils the criterion necessary for any successful country that the greater part of its inhabitants identify with it and buy into it. You could build a nation with one of your alternative geographies but the job is already well underway with Scotland.

If you had 50 miles to walk, would you turn up your nose at a car because you've always wondered if you might fancy a motorbike?

[JeMeSouviens]

Non UK nationals should never had had the vote as they are not resident here ( and I mean that in the Nationality perspective) you could have had the absurd position where 50000 Chinese nationals here on a student visa could have voted for you and I to either leave or stay in the UK, how is that ' the Scottish people, taking decisions into their own hands' to quote Sturgeons dogma..

Eh? Nobody nonresident in Scotland had a vote. Who should decide how a society is governed if it's not the people who have built their lives in it and pay for it?

[whiskyhibby]

Oh, right then, very witty.

Not witty, meant to be an observation....

[JeMeSouviens]

Salmond in one of his less enlightened speeches after the result suggested that Scotland ( not sure which part he meant) could ignore the referendum debate and take independence into their own hands, that to me sounds at least irresponsible and perhaps treasonous, hence the Jockhadi's reference

Utter drivel. He suggested Scotland could become independent by taking more power through a series of small increments as happened with New Zealand (and he specifically referenced NZ) rather than in one large jump in a referendum. He has never even remotely hinted at a non-democratic route to indy.

[whiskyhibby]

Ok, thanks for clearing that up. It is fascinating, I agree. I also agree that Scotland isn't necessarily the optimal national unit. However, I think that it's a hell of a lot more optimal than the UK and already fulfils the criterion necessary for any successful country that the greater part of its inhabitants identify with it and buy into it. You could build a nation with one of your alternative geographies but the job is already well underway with Scotland.

If you had 50 miles to walk, would you turn up your nose at a car because you've always wondered if you might fancy a motorbike?

I would think if I was in Shetland, And to use your analogy, would turn turn my nose up for the car ( Scotland as it stands today) for the opportunity of a Rolls Royce, if Shetland had control of its own ' national' waters, that's the problem with the SNP they want devolved power, but not so much as it blows apart their own economic arguement............

[whiskyhibby]

Utter drivel. He suggested Scotland could become independent by taking more power through a series of small increments as happened with New Zealand (and he specifically referenced NZ) rather than in one large jump in a referendum. He has never even remotely hinted at a non-democratic route to indy.

That's not how the majority of us heard it.....

[JeMeSouviens]

:greengrin

Thanks. I enjoyed reading that and I don't disagree with a lot of what you say.

I think there's a more sophisticated explanation to the No camp though (I would say that, wouldn't I :greengrin)

Firstly, people change. I think the cliche about people becoming more small 'c' -conservative as they age is has a lot of truth in it. I suspect there will be people who voted Yes in 1979 who voted No in 2014, in fact there must be.

I also would be fascinated to see polling on public sector attitudes. It's a huge part of the Scottish labour market but also impinges heavily on our national consciousness. I suspect that this workforce, who are acutely placed to see the impact of the economic downturn on our communities, especially our vulnerable and marginalised groups, would have been far more likely to vote No, especially above the basic grades. I don't think that's an example of people being risk-averse, rather it is a case of being risk-sensitive or risk-intelligent.

Interesting points but I'd like to see some evidence to back them up, especially on the public sector. The most vehement Yes folk I know are all public sector employed!

[JeMeSouviens]

I would think if I was in Shetland, And to use your analogy, would turn turn my nose up for the car ( Scotland as it stands today) for the opportunity of a Rolls Royce, if Shetland had control of its own ' national' waters, that's the problem with the SNP they want devolved power, but not so much as it blows apart their own economic arguement............

As far as I'm concerned, the people of Shetland should have as much power as they want including independence if they want. However, if that is what they want, they're keeping remarkably quiet about it. The only mention of it comes from trolling unionist politicians.

[JeMeSouviens]

That's not how the majority of us heard it.....

Who is "us"? Did you actually hear it first hand at all?

[whiskyhibby]

Sadly your diatribe is somewhat undermined by the fact that stamp duty was only devolved by the Scotland act 2012, effective April *2015*. :rolleyes:

Ok I accept that's wrong, so why did they announce it recently?

[whiskyhibby]

Who is "us"? Did you actually hear it first hand at all?

No can you provide a transcript?, I heard what he said on the BBC news and the words came from his own mouth, and it clearly supported my position, it may not have been all,of the resignation speech, perhaps you can provide a link to it to clarify the context of his comments

[whiskyhibby]

As far as I'm concerned, the people of Shetland should have as much power as they want including independence if they want. However, if that is what they want, they're keeping remarkably quiet about it. The only mention of it comes from trolling unionist politicians.

On the contrary, they have not been quiet, they had the highest votes for rejection of any area if I remember correctly and the talk about Independence for Shetland is high on their agenda, I know people and have friends there and lived in the Isles of Lewis for a while where the view Is the same.......

[JeMeSouviens]

Ok I accept that's wrong, so why did they announce it recently?

I don't know. Announcing a tax change 6 months before the earliest date you can implement it doesn't seem especially unusual or unreasonable.

[marinello59]

Non UK nationals should never had had the vote as they are not resident here ( and I mean that in the Nationality perspective) you could have had the absurd position where 50000 Chinese nationals here on a student visa could have voted for you and I to either leave or stay in the UK, how is that ' the Scottish people, taking decisions into their own hands' to quote Sturgeons dogma..

I think most reasonable people would happily accept that those who live and work here are perfectly entitled to vote on the future of the country they call home.

[whiskyhibby]

I think most reasonable people would happily accept that those who live and work here are perfectly entitled to vote on the future of the country they call home.

Absolutely and fundamentally disagree and so would most people....

[JeMeSouviens]

On the contrary, they have not been quiet, they had the highest votes for rejection of any area if I remember correctly and the talk about Independence for Shetland is high on their agenda, I know people and have friends there and lived in the Isles of Lewis for a while where the view of the same.......

4th highest, but who's counting? Maybe they're particularly happy with being British. Perhaps you could point me at their independence movement's website, their elected representatives, some reports of their independence rallies maybe?

[marinello59]

Absolutely and fundamentally disagree and so would most people....

I said reasonable people. :greengrin

[whiskyhibby]

I don't know. Announcing a tax change 6 months before the earliest date you can implement it doesn't seem especially unusual or unreasonable.

Ok what about the other things they could do, like their jabbering drivel about extended child crèche support, they also have had the opportunity to increase income tax since day one of the parliament , but no they chose to do nothing to exacerbate the situation between Scotland and the UK and become the ' white knights' of the oppressed, when the damning thing is they had the powers all along.....

[whiskyhibby]

I said reasonable people. :greengrin

That's a rather patronising view

[whiskyhibby]

4th highest, but who's counting? Maybe they're particularly happy with being British. Perhaps you could point me at their independence movement's website, their elected representatives, some reports of their independence rallies maybe?

A rather deluded SNP activist IMHO and that's the reason they will be routed at the next election

[Beefster]

Absolutely and fundamentally disagree and so would most people....

No they wouldn't. Scotland leaving the UK was a decision for Scotland's residents (i.e., those that pay tax here and/or participate in society). It's pretty offensive to suggest that my family, friends and colleagues, who originate from diverse places like Ireland, Romania, Czech Republic, France, India, Canada but live, work and pay tax in Scotland, shouldn't get a say in their adopted country's future.

[whiskyhibby]

No they wouldn't. Scotland leaving the UK was a decision for Scotland's residents (i.e., those that pay tax here and/or participate in society). It's pretty offensive to suggest that my family, friends and colleagues, who originate from diverse places like Ireland, Romania, Czech Republic, France, India, Canada but live, work and pay tax in Scotland, shouldn't get a say in their adopted country's future.

It might be offensive to you but I would suggest that most reasonable people when faced with this sort of decision would agree with my view ......

[whiskyhibby]

I work abroad most weeks and the overriding view of most people that I discussed this with, was that the Scottish approach wa s a highly dangerous route to take and completely undemocratic.....

[whiskyhibby]

If you live in Scotland and pay taxes, irrespective of your nationality, then yes you should have a vote on where those taxes are paid and on whom should make those decisions, but let's be clear, for the decision of should Scotland be an independent country, then under no circumstances should a non UK National have a vote

[Beefster]

I work abroad most weeks and the overriding view of most people that I discussed this with, was that the Scottish approach wa s a highly dangerous route to take and completely undemocratic.....

Giving all residents a vote, irrespective of nationality, was dangerous and undemocratic?

Is this satire and I'm just missing the joke?

[lord bunberry]

No they wouldn't. Scotland leaving the UK was a decision for Scotland's residents (i.e., those that pay tax here and/or participate in society). It's pretty offensive to suggest that my family, friends and colleagues, who originate from diverse places like Ireland, Romania, Czech Republic, France, India, Canada but live, work and pay tax in Scotland, shouldn't get a say in their adopted country's future.

For the first time in a long time I agree with you. To not include people from other countries in the vote would have been like a step back to colonial days.

[whiskyhibby]

Giving all residents a vote, irrespective of nationality, was dangerous and undemocratic?

Is this satire and I'm just missing the joke?

No absolutely correct and the view of most reasonable people

[whiskyhibby]

For the first time in a long time I agree with you. To not include people from other countries in the vote would have been like a step back to colonial days.

Absolutely bonkers........why would you say that someone who has Scottish birth and lived in Scotland for 40 years prior to moving south to England for 6 months preceding the vote has a less valuable view on independence than someone who has moved from France on a 12 month contract is beyond belief and sums up the complete arrogance and condescending contempt for UK. nationals that characterises the National Party position on this issue

[marinello59]

Absolutely bonkers........

If you had stopped right there then self awareness would be your saving grace. :agree:

[lord bunberry]

Absolutely bonkers........why would you say that someone who has Scottish birth and lived in Scotland for 40 years prior to moving south to England for 6 months preceding the vote has a less valuable view on independence than someone who has moved from France on a 12 month contract is beyond belief and sums up the complete arrogance and condescending contempt for UK. nationals that characterises the National Party position on this issue

Because the person who has chosen to leave scotland should no longer have the right to decide how scotland should be goverened. Ex pats are just that. I have every sympathy with these people and I'm sure their allegiances are still with this country, but from what I read on here they also accepted that they didn't have the right to a vote.

[whiskyhibby]

Because the person who has chosen to leave scotland should no longer have the right to decide how scotland should be goverened. Ex pats are just that. I have every sympathy with these people and I'm sure their allegiances are still with this country, but from what I read on here they also accepted that they didn't have the right to a vote.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.....

[lord bunberry]

I guess we have to agree to disagree.....

Only on this subject my friend

[whiskyhibby]

Only on this subject my friend

Absolutely..... I am passionate about many things, but with the various friends I or anyone has, the one thing I know is we cannot ever agree 100% on everything

[whiskyhibby]

If you had stopped right there then self awareness would be your saving grace. :agree:

Another condescending response, not the sharpest tool, in the box....

[Moulin Yarns]

I think whiskyhibby has either had too much whisky or his account has been hacked by Nigel Farage.

[CropleyWasGod]

No absolutely correct and the view of most reasonable people

Source? :cb

[marinello59]

Another condescending response, not the sharpest tool, in the box....

:na na:

[whiskyhibby]

I think whiskyhibby has either had too much whisky or his account has been hacked by Nigel Farage.

No neither, unfortunately I have had no whisky tonight, much to my dismay, and I have. Leaning towards Labour and always have

[marinello59]

Source? :cb

Most reasonable people. :agree:

[whiskyhibby]

:na na:

Wow............. did Stephen Fry throw you that nugget of wisdom?..........

[whiskyhibby]

Most reasonable people. :agree:

Gordon Brown made the mistake that his view of reasonable was based on a Labour political elite and was quite happy to call traditional labour supporters "some bigoted woman" looks like The National party and its supporters on here are making the same mistake......

[marinello59]

Gordon Brown made the mistake that his view of reasonable was based on a Labour political elite and was quite happy to call traditional labour supporters "some bigoted woman" looks like The National party and its supporters on here are making the same mistake......

You are right, I ain't the sharpest tool in the box. Quoting me before making this post has me baffled.

[whiskyhibby]

You are right, I ain't the sharpest tool in the box. Quoting me before making this post has me baffled.

Sorry I don't follow your logic......

[lord bunberry]

Absolutely..... I am passionate about many things, but with the various friends I or anyone has, the one thing I know is we cannot ever agree 100% on everything

Agreed but not 100% :greengrin

[whiskyhibby]

Agreed but not 100% :greengrin

Ok [emoji4]

[marinello59]

Sorry I don't follow your logic......

Bloody Vulcan. Don't tell me you got to vote in the referundum Spock.

[whiskyhibby]

Bloody Vulcan. Don't tell me you got to vote in the referundum Spock.

I think you need to step away from your IPad, mobile device or whatever.....

[Moulin Yarns]

Bloody Vulcan. Don't tell me you got to vote in the referundum Spock.

What? Spock is pure bred Scottish, otherwise he wasn't entitled to vote, according to someone.

[lord bunberry]

What? Spock is pure bred Scottish, otherwise he wasn't entitled to vote, according to someone.
You're thinking of tpol
13831
Hibs through and through

[whiskyhibby]

What? Spock is pure bred Scottish, otherwise he wasn't entitled to vote, according to someone.

What an utterly racist thing to say......

You need to have a look at the definition of Nationality and Race in a dictionary before making that assumption and racist comment...

[whiskyhibby]

And just. In case you can't be bothered to look at a dictionary, there are plenty of UK PASSPORT HOLDERS who originated from Hong Kong, Afghanistan, Sub Saharan Africa etc that will be happy to explain the difference to you

[marinello59]

Just when you think this thread can't get any better. :greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

Just when you think this thread can't get any better. :greengrin

Was thinking exactly the same :greengrin

[over the line]

Just when you think this thread can't get any better. :greengrin


Is it me, or has this thread started to resemble the twelfth round of a pointless comeback fight between two has been boxers that no one cares about anymore and they are both throwing tired inaccurate hay makers at each other, in a vain attempt to land the knockout blow? :confused:

No offence like. ;):)

[Moulin Yarns]

WHOOSH!!


What an utterly racist thing to say......

You need to have a look at the definition of Nationality and Race in a dictionary before making that assumption and racist comment...

WOW, me Racist?!!! :rolleyes:

Take a look back at your posts and think who is being racist?

who started the xenophobia by saying non UK nationals should not have the vote? Are you saying third and fourth generation immigrants should not have a say in the future of the country they live in and contribute to?

I said earlier that it looked like you had been on the drink before you started to fire off all this rubbish which you alone claim to represent the majority view, which you said you had no drink, which leads me to the second option, your account has indeed been hacked by Nigel Farage.

[marinello59]

WHOOSH!!



WOW, me Racist?!!! :rolleyes:

Take a look back at your posts and think who is being racist?

who started the xenophobia by saying non UK nationals should not have the vote? Are you saying third and fourth generation immigrants should not have a say in the future of the country they live in and contribute to?

I said earlier that it looked like you had been on the drink before you started to fire off all this rubbish which you alone claim to represent the majority view, which you said you had no drink, which leads me to the second option, your account has indeed been hacked by Nigel Farage.

I wouldn't worry about it. He has me down as thick and lacking in wit. I'm starting to think he knows me. :greengrin

[Just Alf]

I wouldn't worry about it. He has me down as thick and lacking in wit. I'm starting to think he knows me. :greengrin

:agree:





;-)

[Mibbes Aye]

:faf:

Oh my sides!

:faf:

After all the petty mudslinging about how bad and out of touch 'Westminster' supposedly is, the failed leader of the Yes campaign is only going and trying to rejoin it, according to breaking news on the BBC.

:faf:

So come on Yes folks - there's a massive inconsistency in your arguments here. Whom amongst you is right, and whom amongst you is wrong, and why?

What a palaver!

:faf:

[Mon Dieu4]

:faf:

Oh my sides!

:faf:

After all the petty mudslinging about how bad and out of touch 'Westminster' supposedly is, the failed leader of the Yes campaign is only going and trying to rejoin it, according to breaking news on the BBC.

:faf:

So come on Yes folks - there's a massive inconsistency in your arguments here. Whom amongst you is right, and whom amongst you is wrong, and why?

What a palaver!

:faf:

It's easier to try an effect change from the inside than the outside looking in, he didn't get what he ultimately wanted by why shouldn't he try and get what's best for his constituents in the current framework

[marinello59]

:agree:





;-)

:greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

It's easier to try an effect change from the inside than the outside looking in, he didn't get what he ultimately wanted by why shouldn't he try and get what's best for his constituents in the current framework

They're not his constituents (yet).

Are you seriously saying that he stands a better chance of securing independence as an MP than he did as First Minister?

How does that even work? Is he going to try and introduce a Private Member's Bill?

How can Westminster be so supposedly rotten one minute and then perfectly acceptable the next? There's some extreme backtracking required by some to square this one.

[Mon Dieu4]

They're not his constituents (yet).

Are you seriously saying that he stands a better chance of securing independence as an MP than he did as First Minister?

How does that even work? Is he going to try and introduce a Private Member's Bill?

How can Westminster be so supposedly rotten one minute and then perfectly acceptable the next? There's some extreme backtracking required by some to square this one.

If he stands then he will win by a landslide, with the SNP looking likely to have more seats than they have ever had before, it doesn't need to just be about Independence at the minute, he and they can hopefully work for the people against the shocking cuts that are about to head our way(not that I think it will make a difference but I hope they at least fight our corner)

Westminster is rank rotten to the core, but I'd rather have him in there noising them up and not letting them get all their own way than not have him there

[Mibbes Aye]

If he stands then he will win by a landslide, with the SNP looking likely to have more seats than they have ever had before, it doesn't need to just be about Independence at the minute, he and they can hopefully work for the people against the shocking cuts that are about to head our way(not that I think it will make a difference but I hope they at least fight our corner)

Westminster is rank rotten to the core, but I'd rather have him in there noising them up and not letting them get all their own way than not have him there

What does that actually mean? I would rather not pay him a very decent salary if all he was going to do was fight a corner and not make a difference.

If he had some decent ideas about how we manage the impact of the economic situation on the 'people' then fair enough. Let's not forget that he has presided over a government that's boasted about a council tax freeze that benefits the richest over the poor and benefits the very poorest not at all.

Social justice isn't high up his agenda and the proof is in the policy he put at the very front of his manifestos.

[Mon Dieu4]

What does that actually mean? I would rather not pay him a very decent salary if all he was going to do was fight a corner and not make a difference.

If he had some decent ideas about how we manage the impact of the economic situation on the 'people' then fair enough. Let's not forget that he has presided over a government that's boasted about a council tax freeze that benefits the richest over the poor and benefits the very poorest not at all.

Social justice isn't high up his agenda and the proof is in the policy he put at the very front of his manifestoes.

I don't think that anyone can stop the cuts headed our way as too many people will vote for the Tories or Labour who are one in the same these days imo but I'd at least like my elected representatives to speak out against it, it's akin to watching Mike Tyson batter your pal, there isn't much you could do but you would still jump in

[Mibbes Aye]

I don't think that anyone can stop the cuts headed our way as too many people will vote for the Tories or Labour who are one in the same these days imo but I'd at least like my elected representatives to speak out against it, it's akin to watching Mike Tyson batter your pal, there isn't much you could do but you would still jump in

I see where you're coming from and I agree with your point about saying it's a not a good thing.

The reality is that someone has to take ownership and say we either cut this or we cut that, or if we don't we borrow to pay for it. It doesn't feel like anyone is being that honest, although because of the way we are set up it's understandable why (though not right).

Salmond has made his flagship policy out of a tax freeze that helps the richest more than the poor, and actually does nothing at all for the very poorest.

What credibility does he have to talk about cuts when he is essentially bribing middle-class households with money taken away from the poor and vulnerable?

[degenerated]

I see where you're coming from and I agree with your point about saying it's a not a good thing.

The reality is that someone has to take ownership and say we either cut this or we cut that, or if we don't we borrow to pay for it. It doesn't feel like anyone is being that honest, although because of the way we are set up it's understandable why (though not right).

Salmond has made his flagship policy out of a tax freeze that helps the richest more than the poor, and actually does nothing at all for the very poorest.

What credibility does he have to talk about cuts when he is essentially bribing middle-class households with money taken away from the poor and vulnerable?
If someone has such an issue with the council tax freeze I'm surprised they would never really mention it much :greengrin

[marinello59]

:faf:

Oh my sides!

:faf:

After all the petty mudslinging about how bad and out of touch 'Westminster' supposedly is, the failed leader of the Yes campaign is only going and trying to rejoin it, according to breaking news on the BBC.

:faf:

So come on Yes folks - there's a massive inconsistency in your arguments here. Whom amongst you is right, and whom amongst you is wrong, and why?

What a palaver!

:faf:

It makes sense for the SNP to have a person of his stature leading things in Westminster, especially if they make the expected breakthrough in terms of seats. The only problem I can see is that he would then be seen as the de facto leader with Nicola Sturgeon in charge of the Scottish branch office. Which would be wonderfully ironic but not very helpful.

[JeMeSouviens]

It makes sense for the SNP to have a person of his stature leading things in Westminster, especially if they make the expected breakthrough in terms of seats. The only problem I can see is that he would then be seen as the de facto leader with Nicola Sturgeon in charge of the Scottish branch office. Which would be wonderfully ironic but not very helpful.

The SNP have clearly focused on holyrood over Westminster, even when Swinney was in charge during the Salmond pause. Sturgeon will be given top dog status, don't think there's any doubt about that.

[Mibbes Aye]

It makes sense for the SNP to have a person of his stature leading things in Westminster, especially if they make the expected breakthrough in terms of seats. The only problem I can see is that he would then be seen as the de facto leader with Nicola Sturgeon in charge of the Scottish branch office. Which would be wonderfully ironic but not very helpful.

:greengrin

Thought crossed my mind too. That's assuming there's a strategy with the intention that he leads things from London. Given the apparent lack of strategy in the referendum campaign I'm not assuming anything.

What's still lacking is some sort of reconciliation as to why it's okay to portray Westminster as corrupt, venal and manipulative and then jump, both feet-first on the supposed gravy train. Don't Yes voters feel a bit sold out by Salmond?

I also think the breakthrough is based on a false analysis. It's been predicated on a uniform swing which simply won't happen. I suspect a lot depends on May 2015 I guess. The Telegraph (known Labour sympathisers) are currently running their poll prediction as a Labour majority of 40. If that comes to pass then Salmond won't be holding any cards at Westminster.

[JeMeSouviens]

If someone has such an issue with the council tax freeze I'm surprised they would never really mention it much :greengrin

Has there been a council tax freeze then? Who knew?

Interesting who supported it ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12722355

[Mibbes Aye]

The SNP have clearly focused on holyrood over Westminster, even when Swinney was in charge during the Salmond pause. Sturgeon will be given top dog status, don't think there's any doubt about that.

By whom?

According to you guys, the print and broadcast media actively sought to undermine the Yes campaign.

If you are right and they want to undermine Sturgeon won't they foreground Salmond over her?

[JeMeSouviens]

:greengrin

Thought crossed my mind too. That's assuming there's a strategy with the intention that he leads things from London. Given the apparent lack of strategy in the referendum campaign I'm not assuming anything.

What's still lacking is some sort of reconciliation as to why it's okay to portray Westminster as corrupt, venal and manipulative and then jump, both feet-first on the supposed gravy train. Don't Yes voters feel a bit sold out by Salmond?

I also think the breakthrough is based on a false analysis. It's been predicated on a uniform swing which simply won't happen. I suspect a lot depends on May 2015 I guess. The Telegraph (known Labour sympathisers) are currently running their poll prediction as a Labour majority of 40. If that comes to pass then Salmond won't be holding any cards at Westminster.

No, it's been predicated on poll after poll showing Scottish VI for westminster with SNP 15-20ish points ahead. The swing can be as smooth or lumpy as it likes, if it's as big as that, SLab is toast. (I personally doubt the lead will stay that big but as SNP lead fades in Scotland so Lab UK lead will also evaporate.)

[Mibbes Aye]

If someone has such an issue with the council tax freeze I'm surprised they would never really mention it much :greengrin


Has there been a council tax freeze then? Who knew?

Interesting who supported it ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12722355

Simple proposition to both of you.

Say it's a good thing or say it's a bad thing.

Go on, I dare you to answer.

[JeMeSouviens]

By whom?

According to you guys, the print and broadcast media actively sought to undermine the Yes campaign.

If you are right and they want to undermine Sturgeon won't they foreground Salmond over her?

By Salmond and the rest of the SNP hierarchy. It's easy to be all but anonymous as a Scottish MP, dozens of SLab members manage it after all.

[Mibbes Aye]

No, it's been predicated on poll after poll showing Scottish VI for westminster with SNP 15-20ish points ahead. The swing can be as smooth or lumpy as it likes, if it's as big as that, SLab is toast. (I personally doubt the lead will stay that big but as SNP lead fades in Scotland so Lab UK lead will also evaporate.)

Sorry but that doesn't stand up. The LibDems won't be wiped out in the way UK national polls would suggest, because voting intentions aren't uniform, there's a whole host of subjective factors that come into play.

You need to provide a more sophisticated analysis if you want your argument to stand up.

While I'm no fan, I do value the polling (and the expense involved) that Ashcroft does for the Tories in marginals. He's been banging the drum about them losing key seats for a long time, the kind of seats that swing elections and provide governable majorities.

I've got more faith in that than a poll which tells me lots of folk might vote SNP but doesn't really distinguish how that breaks down into key seats. We heard a lot about pro-Nat strongholds in the run-up to the referendum. It didn't really affect the result in the slightest.

[JeMeSouviens]

Simple proposition to both of you.

Say it's a good thing or say it's a bad thing.

Go on, I dare you to answer.

I've already said it's bad, so I hereby reiterate that.

To go even further, the SNP proposal for a "local" income tax replacement is ridiculous (see, I've been doing my homework). A local income tax should be set at local rates by locally accountable folks, not at a centrally defined rate, that's just stupid.

[Mibbes Aye]

By Salmond and the rest of the SNP hierarchy. It's easy to be all but anonymous as a Scottish MP, dozens of SLab members manage it after all.

So Salmond, if elected, is going to hide in the shadows and give Sturgeon the foreground? That's what you're saying.

Why is he even going to Westminster then? Didn't you disown it? Isn't it a corrupt and venal institution by your terms?

Someone's being a hypocrite here and they're someone who voted Yes in September.

[JeMeSouviens]

Sorry but that doesn't stand up. The LibDems won't be wiped out in the way UK national polls would suggest, because voting intentions aren't uniform, there's a whole host of subjective factors that come into play.

You need to provide a more sophisticated analysis if you want your argument to stand up.

While I'm no fan, I do value the polling (and the expense involved) that Ashcroft does for the Tories in marginals. He's been banging the drum about them losing key seats for a long time, the kind of seats that swing elections and provide governable majorities.

I've got more faith in that than a poll which tells me lots of folk might vote SNP but doesn't really distinguish how that breaks down into key seats. We heard a lot about pro-Nat strongholds in the run-up to the referendum. It didn't really affect the result in the slightest.

You need to look into the stats. With the Libs on <10 and SNP on >40, local factors will be all but drowned. As I said, I really don't expect these numbers to be sustained but if they are you'll be amazed what they could produce.

[Mibbes Aye]

I've already said it's bad, so I hereby reiterate that.

To go even further, the SNP proposal for a "local" income tax replacement is ridiculous (see, I've been doing my homework). A local income tax should be set at local rates by locally accountable folks, not at a centrally defined rate, that's just stupid.

Good for you. Genuinely.

Why don't you join me in criticising those in power who implement this bad thing?

Like, instead of sniping at me for criticising those in power who implement this bad thing :confused:

[degenerated]

Simple proposition to both of you.

Say it's a good thing or say it's a bad thing.

Go on, I dare you to answer.
I don't think it's a particularly redistributive policy and don't agree with it though I would want to see a local income tax being implemented, which is fairer, but unfortunately Labour scuppered that one.

So all in all its not progressive but it's a damn sight more progressive than the unionist parties desire to spend spend spend on weapons of mass destruction.

[JeMeSouviens]

So Salmond, if elected, is going to hide in the shadows and give Sturgeon the foreground? That's what you're saying.

Why is he even going to Westminster then? Didn't you disown it? Isn't it a corrupt and venal institution by your terms?

Someone's being a hypocrite here and they're someone who voted Yes in September.

I prefer pragmatist but hypocrite will do if you like! He's going to Westminster because he wants a role but recognises the need to give Sturgeon space. The sovereign will (remember) said stick with WM and I'm no abstentionist so somebody has to represent us there.

[Mibbes Aye]

I don't think it's a particularly redistributive policy and don't agree with it though I would want to see a local income tax being implemented, which is fairer, but unfortunately Labour scuppered that one.

So all in all its not progressive but it's a damn sight more progressive than the unionist parties desire to spend spend spend on weapons of mass destruction.

Labour didn't scupper the LIT.

The money didn't add up. From memory the tax was several hundreds of millions short of what it needed to cover and the SNP never even put it to a vote in parliament because they couldn't explain how they would fix that.

Don't deflect with talk of Trident or whatever, it's running away from the issue. If you don't agree with the council tax freeze, why are you sniping at me for criticising it instead of posting your own disagreement with it?

[JeMeSouviens]

Good for you. Genuinely.

Why don't you join me in criticising those in power who implement this bad thing?

Like, instead of sniping at me for criticising those in power who implement this bad thing :confused:

I don't. I sniped at you for bogging down an argument about the constitution with an essentially irrelevant policy issue unconnected to the indyref.

[degenerated]

Labour didn't scupper the LIT.

The money didn't add up. From memory the tax was several hundreds of millions short of what it needed to cover and the SNP never even put it to a vote in parliament because they couldn't explain how they would fix that.

Don't deflect with talk of Trident or whatever, it's running away from the issue. If you don't agree with the council tax freeze, why are you sniping at me for criticising it instead of posting your own disagreement with it?
http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/westminster-in-threat-to-withhold-163-400m-1-906287

[degenerated]

Labour didn't scupper the LIT.

The money didn't add up. From memory the tax was several hundreds of millions short of what it needed to cover and the SNP never even put it to a vote in parliament because they couldn't explain how they would fix that.

Don't deflect with talk of Trident or whatever, it's running away from the issue. If you don't agree with the council tax freeze, why are you sniping at me for criticising it instead of posting your own disagreement with it?
I wasnt sniping at your views on the council tax I was flippantly commenting on the volume of them.

[Mibbes Aye]

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/westminster-in-threat-to-withhold-163-400m-1-906287

Just so we are clear.

The SNP wanted to scrap the council tax.

The UK government said this would mean they stop giving people a rebate on their council tax, basically because the SNP had scrapped it.

You've hyperlinked an article which basically reiterates the two sentences above.