Scottish Parliament Elections 2016

[bawheid]

Right, I'm sick of talking about Hibs.

How's this one going to go? Looks like an SNP landslide all the way but I wonder if it'll pan out like that as May approaches. The Tories and Scottish Labour have been chipping away on taxes from either side of the argument for a while now. Is it having any effect?

Will the problems with Police Scotland and agricultural subsidies do the SNP juggernaut any damage, or will the fact that 45% of us were convinced by the Independence argument see their vote hold up?

Personally can't see anything other than an SNP majority, but then I took us to win the League Cup Final.

[Pretty Boy]

I'll be voting Labour with my constituency vote and Green as my list.

[Future17]

I'll be voting Labour with my constituency vote and Green as my list.

I think a lot might depend on the people who are still relatively new to politics (having become engaged by the referendum). Will they have the Scottish Parliamentary voting system explained to them properly and will they understand it fully?

I don't think Labour will have won back many Scottish 1st preference votes, but they might pick up more list seats. I'm hoping the Greens will be the big winners amongst those who voted SNP last year.

[JeMeSouviens]

I think a lot might depend on the people who are still relatively new to politics (having become engaged by the referendum). Will they have the Scottish Parliamentary voting system explained to them properly and will they understand it fully?

I don't think Labour will have won back many Scottish 1st preference votes, but they might pick up more list seats. I'm hoping the Greens will be the big winners amongst those who voted SNP last year.

They're not "first preference", it's constituency and then regional! Are you relatively new to politics by any chance? :wink:

[JeMeSouviens]

Btw, polls wise the SNP are rock solid with a 30%ish lead. Labour are floundering and may do even worse than last year. It's not impossible they could come behind the Tories who are still not showing signs of revival.

The Libs are now an irrelevance and may be overtaken by the Greens. UKIP have an outside chance of a list seat, the various lefties look like coming nowhere.

[Onceinawhile]

As I was always told. Vote for the party who have the same colours as your football team.

So that's the greens. (and ukip, but I'll not be following the rule for that)

[SHODAN]

Will be voting SNP in my constituency and probably in the list too, though swaying towards the Greens. It will be an embarrassment if UKIP win a single seat - you could not find a more anti-Scottish mainstream party in the country.

[Bishop Hibee]

SNP constituency and Green on the list. SNP will need to carve their own path in the next session of parliament implementing policies that help the less well off or that will be the last time I vote for them. I suspect many feel similarly.

[marinello59]

My first vote will go to the candidate I think will represent my constituency best, regardless of party.
Second vote? No idea yet.

[CropleyWasGod]

Will be voting SNP in my constituency and probably in the list too, though swaying towards the Greens. It will be an embarrassment if UKIP win a single seat - you could not find a more anti-Scottish mainstream party in the country.
Why would it be an embarrassment? If it happens , it will be because of the democratic process, which IMO is fairer than in the UK parliament.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[steakbake]

Why would it be an embarrassment? If it happens , it will be because of the democratic process, which IMO is fairer than in the UK parliament.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Fully agree with this - I wouldn't mind them getting a seat. Sunlight and oxygen will expose them for the bunch of crackpots and oddballs that they really are.

That Coburn lad is a total rocket, before we even get onto the Orange apologist, Thackeray.

Mind you, folk get sacked and rehired by UKIP like nobody's business, so god knows who they've got in mind today to be their candidate. Nige likes to be the front man - he doesn't like it when people steal his limelight.

[lucky]

Labour both votes for me. Hope that the SNP don't get a landslide but suspect it's a certainty. Our parliament works better when the party's communicate with each other.

[GlesgaeHibby]

Btw, polls wise the SNP are rock solid with a 30%ish lead. Labour are floundering and may do even worse than last year. It's not impossible they could come behind the Tories who are still not showing signs of revival.

The Libs are now an irrelevance and may be overtaken by the Greens. UKIP have an outside chance of a list seat, the various lefties look like coming nowhere.

They are, but as this Tory government starts to implement harsher cuts that penalise the vulnerable, further dismantling the NHS, and implementing tax cuts for the rich it's becoming more evident that they actually did a reasonable job in coalition at preventing some of what we're now seeing from the Tories.

No idea which way I'll vote in this election yet.

As an aside, whatever happened to FalkirkHibee? He used to post a lot on politics threads on here (resident UKIP man).

[steakbake]

They are, but as this Tory government starts to implement harsher cuts that penalise the vulnerable, further dismantling the NHS, and implementing tax cuts for the rich it's becoming more evident that they actually did a reasonable job in coalition at preventing some of what we're now seeing from the Tories.

No idea which way I'll vote in this election yet.

As an aside, whatever happened to FalkirkHibee? He used to post a lot on politics threads on here (resident UKIP man).

Gone... Like FilledRolls - one of my favourite posters. There was some barney a year or so ago and several people got their virtual jotters. Falkirk also posted missing. He was a bit of a curiousity but interesting one at that.

[SHODAN]

Gone... Like FilledRolls - one of my favourite posters. There was some barney a year or so ago and several people got their virtual jotters. Falkirk also posted missing. He was a bit of a curiousity but interesting one at that.

Isn't FalkirkHibee still here but under a different name? Unless you mean FalkirkHibby - easy to get the names mixed up. :greengrin

Since I've moved there I'll try my best to provide a bit of balance to the political opinions on hibs.net coming from Falkirk.. :wink:

[Betty Boop]

Gone... Like FilledRolls - one of my favourite posters. There was some barney a year or so ago and several people got their virtual jotters. Falkirk also posted missing. He was a bit of a curiousity but interesting one at that.

Filled Rolls is a big miss on here. Not the same without him.

[steakbake]

Isn't FalkirkHibee still here but under a different name? Unless you mean FalkirkHibby - easy to get the names mixed up. :greengrin

Since I've moved there I'll try my best to provide a bit of balance to the political opinions on hibs.net coming from Falkirk.. :wink:

Is he now RastaHibee? Haha :wink:

I'm not sure - wherever you are Falkirk, I miss your rightwing banter.

[Hibrandenburg]

Is he now RastaHibee? Haha :wink:

I'm not sure - wherever you are Falkirk, I miss your rightwing banter.

Think your wish might "Trigger" a reaction.

[GlesgaeHibby]

Gone... Like FilledRolls - one of my favourite posters. There was some barney a year or so ago and several people got their virtual jotters. Falkirk also posted missing. He was a bit of a curiousity but interesting one at that.

Shame, enjoyed his rants on here. The only UKIP Scottish Independence supporter I've ever encountered!:greengrin

[One Day Soon]

The rational part of my brain wants some kind of minority government constrained by the need to do deals.

The irrational part wants an SNP majority - just for the entertainment value of the Lego Movie response they seem to have to any kind of problem, challenge or failure.

Question: "First Minister, how do you respond to the evidence that literacy and numeracy attainment is falling in Scotland despite your party having run Scotland for the last eight years?"

Answer: Queue music and "Everything is awesome, everything is cool when you're part of a team, everything is awesome when we're living our dream..." Repeat ad nauseum.

[AndyM_1875]

I've got a good local Labour MSP and I'd like her to keep her seat so she's getting my vote (both) . She's very community focused and engaged with the area, doing 200+ surgeries a year any where from a Supermarket to a Street corner.

Her SNP challenger is incredibly complacent and hasn't even bothered to show up in the constituency yet and doesn't live in it, yet expects to win. I'm struggling (like Billy Brown) to see what she's going to bring to the area and how she's going to represent my area better? We've already got one lame duck SNP MP who is useless so the last thing we need is an MSP who doesn't give a toss.

[JeMeSouviens]

I've got a good local Labour MSP


Her SNP challenger is incredibly complacent

Quelle surprise there then. :rolleyes:

[AndyM_1875]

Quelle surprise there then. :rolleyes:

Nice to see you to jump on one of my posts with your usual sense of open minded balance and proportion. :cb

[JeMeSouviens]

Nice to see you to jump on one of my posts with your usual sense of open minded balance and proportion. :cb

If I see any sign of balance in your posts I'll be sure to point it out. :wink:

[AndyM_1875]

If I see any sign of balance in your posts I'll be sure to point it out. :wink:

Now there's a quid pro quo statement.:wink:

[JeMeSouviens]

Now there's a quid pro quo statement.:wink:

I'm not entirely sure that makes any sense but based on the (wild) assumption you mean something along the lines of pots and kettles, at least my bias is clearly stated rather than couched in terms of "good local candidates" and so on.

[HarpyHibby]

The SNP have shot themselves in the foot massively with the shambolic farm payment saga. It's peoples livelihoods they're affecting! Although a community which is typically Tory regardless, I reckon the SNP will have lost a large number of votes because of this.

FWIW, I'll be either both votes SNP or SNP & Green. Labour are totally incompetent, Lib Dems are a non-entity and the I'd be disowned if I voted Tory.

If all had went to plan back in September 2014, I'd be voting Green in May.

[GlesgaeHibby]

David Coburn. Wow! How hopeless is this guy?

Asked about UKIPs Welfare plans, and prattles on about the NHS. Glenn Campbell makes clear the question is about welfare, not health, and continues to prattle some nonsense about the NHS. Surely this clown isn't going to end up as an MSP?

[Ronniekirk]

David Coburn. Wow! How hopeless is this guy?

Asked about UKIPs Welfare plans, and prattles on about the NHS. Glenn Campbell makes clear the question is about welfare, not health, and continues to prattle some nonsense about the NHS. Surely this clown isn't going to end up as an MSP?

He was an embarrassment ,some of the other politicians on stage couldn't hide their smirks as he stumbled and failed to articulate key points of policy




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GlesgaeHibby]

He was an embarrassment ,some of the other politicians on stage couldn't hide their smirks as he stumbled and failed to articulate key points of policy




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Willie Rennie and Patrick Harvie managed to get a few good digs in. Mind you, with that buffoon it's hardly a challenge.

[bawheid]

Patrick Harvie was the clear winner tonight IMO.

[marinello59]

Patrick Harvie was the clear winner tonight IMO.

Agreed.
Ruth Davidson did well too. Dugdale and Sturgeon cancelled each other out, both of them were very poor. Not that it matters to Sturgeon, the only real question is who will come second.

[ronaldo7]

No clear winners last night, only one clear loser.

I thought my Tv was going to blow up with the heat emanating from Ruthie's puss when caught telling porkies about the disability questions.

[marinello59]

No clear winners last night, only one clear loser.

I thought my Tv was going to blow up with the heat emanating from Ruthie's puss when caught telling porkies about the disability questions.

I'm shocked and stunned you didn't notice and mention Sturgeon....the blessed Nicola to you...fudging on tax. She squirmed there just as much as Davidson did on the disability issue.
Ruth Davidson did a very good job of putting clear water between herself and the others on tax. It's the issue that will be most remembered from last nights debate. That is fertile ground for the Tories. The myth that Scots are more willing to pay more tax than others the UK is already being exposed.

[ronaldo7]

I'm shocked and stunned you didn't notice and mention Sturgeon....the blessed Nicola to you...fudging on tax. She squirmed there just as much as Davidson did on the disability issue.
Ruth Davidson did a very good job of putting clear water between herself and the others on tax. It's the issue that will be most remembered from last nights debate. That is fertile ground for the Tories. The myth that Scots are more willing to pay more tax than others the UK is already being exposed.
Fudging on tax? Clear as day. You need to clean your ears out. Want a bet that 50% tax rate will be in before the end of the parly? All proceeds going to kicks for kids?

[marinello59]

Fudging on tax? Clear as day. You need to clean your ears out. Want a bet that 50% tax rate will be in before the end of the parly? All proceeds going to kicks for kids?

My ears were clear. Surely we can't pretend that 'Nicola' is wonderful all of the time can we?

[Casey1875]

Right, I'm sick of talking about Hibs.

How's this one going to go? Looks like an SNP landslide all the way but I wonder if it'll pan out like that as May approaches. The Tories and Scottish Labour have been chipping away on taxes from either side of the argument for a while now. Is it having any effect?

Will the problems with Police Scotland and agricultural subsidies do the SNP juggernaut any damage, or will the fact that 45% of us were convinced by the Independence argument see their vote hold up?

Personally can't see anything other than an SNP majority, but then I took us to win the League Cup Final.

I'm not sure who I will be voting for, but, it sure as hell won't be the SNP again. They have ruined the police force are doing the same to the fire service and felt it right to give one of the largest, if not the largest, contracts to a Dutch company to run our railways, despite Abellio having one of the worst reputations in the rail network in this country. They are now ruining a lot of the good work that first group were doing due to pure penny pinching.

They are also keen to go for any legislation that will make them seem caring to the masses but are effectively pointless such as the airgun ban, which was not needed in the slightest as legislation is in place relating to misuse of them and also this minimum price for alcohol which has no effect at all on anyone's drinking habits.

Aside from that my local MP for Edinburgh West has been suspended and doesn't ever feel the need to reply to correspondence.

[johnbc70]

Don't like the tax differential at all. Heard a few people who work down south on a regular basis saying they will investigate if they can claim they are English based seeing as they spend more time working down there. Not saying it's right or wrong but that's what happens.

[CropleyWasGod]

Don't like the tax differential at all. Heard a few people who work down south on a regular basis saying they will investigate if they can claim they are English based seeing as they spend more time working down there. Not saying it's right or wrong but that's what happens.

The "tax differential" will work out at a maximum of £322 for a year.

[steakbake]

The "tax differential" will work out at a maximum of £322 for a year.

Unbelievable that people on a 40k+ salary would try to work out some kind of tax avoidance to dodge a couple of hundred quid.

That's a weekly shop in Waitrose. Folks need to grow up and smell the hand-ground organic Guatemalan coffee.

[RyeSloan]

The "tax differential" will work out at a maximum of £322 for a year.

Thin end of a wedge though?

I found it concerning that the majority of parties here have immediately proposed raising tax as soon as they had the power to do so.

Even more so was Nicola's assertion that higher earners take more of the burden...considering the rather slim percentages of the population that these people represent (about 7% of the population) that seems a rather fruitless journey...that segment already pays substantially more in terms of the share of revenue and it seems non sensical to keep asking so few to pay (more and more) for so many.

I also found Nicola's assertion hat she wants to impose a 50% tax rate but won't as she understands it will raise less revenue...with that knowledge just what is the driver for wanting to do it then?

Still at least we are finally starting to see some real debate on how Scotland's spending can be financed...as I have alluded to before the SNP (and most of the rest to be fair) have railed against austerity and promised more spending on this and that without ever having to be clear on how it will be paid for.

One day we might think about where and how the money is spent rather than just how much but that approach seems rather distant, just now it's all about how big the figure is and being seen to squeeze the 'well off' to pay for it.

[CropleyWasGod]

Thin end of a wedge though?

I found it concerning that the majority of parties here have immediately proposed raising tax as soon as they had the power to do so.

Even more so was Nicola's assertion that higher earners take more of the burden...considering the rather slim percentages of the population that these people represent (about 7% of the population) that seems a rather fruitless journey...that segment already pays substantially more in terms of the share of revenue and it seems non sensical to keep asking so few to pay (more and more) for so many.

I also found Nicola's assertion hat she wants to impose a 50% tax rate but won't as she understands it will raise less revenue...with that knowledge just what is the driver for wanting to do it then?

Still at least we are finally starting to see some real debate on how Scotland's spending can be financed...as I have alluded to before the SNP (and most of the rest to be fair) have railed against austerity and promised more spending on this and that without ever having to be clear on how it will be paid for.

One day we might think about where and how the money is spent rather than just how much but that approach seems rather distant, just now it's all about how big the figure is and being seen to squeeze the 'well off' to pay for it.

Pretty well agree with most of that.

I think that the tax debate will be bluster and grandstanding for the most part. The "tinkering at the edges", which is all it can be, should (and hopefully will) be much less important than other issues.

I also think that one of the reasons the SNP have said that they won't raise the HR thresholds is, quite simply, because they can. It's a statement of independence, in the same way that the Labour administration up here did the same with some policies that weren't those of UK Labour.

[AndyM_1875]

My ears were clear. Surely we can't pretend that 'Nicola' is wonderful all of the time can we?

She was all over the place tonight. Shambolic on the tax question.
However the others weren't particularly good either.

I'm assuming Coburn was booked as a comedy turn though? No?

[ronaldo7]

My ears were clear. Surely we can't pretend that 'Nicola' is wonderful all of the time can we?

You seem to be the only one mentioning her. You've clearly got a crush Jon.

[GlesgaeHibby]

She was all over the place tonight. Shambolic on the tax question.
However the others weren't particularly good either.

I'm assuming Coburn was booked as a comedy turn though? No?

:agree: Agree. Voted yes in the referendum, and SNP for a number of years now but the SNP are starting to get on my nerves just now. Dugdale had a valid point when Sturgeon was trumpeting education being her main focus over the next parliament, yet she's had 8 years to do so and has failed so far. I'm still pretty hacked off that they didn't get rid of the council tax like they promised too.

The debate was frustrating last night, with Glenn Campbell letting some questions that weren't being answered remain that way (Clarity on how those under £20k won't pay a penny more tax under labours new tax policy).

I agree with Lab and the Lib Dems that more needs invested into education, but raising taxes that will hit low/middle income earners the hardest to do so is nonsensical. We already pay a ridiculous amount of tax in this country, when you add up income tax, NI, fuel duty, alcohol duty, council tax, VAT. Time to go after those that aren't paying their fair share (highest earners, and some big businesses), and redistributing wealth to fund our public services.

[One Day Soon]

My ears were clear. Surely we can't pretend that 'Nicola' is wonderful all of the time can we?

Queue Lego music and the SNP happy clappy chorus: "Everything is awesome, everything is good...."

[CropleyWasGod]

Queue Lego music and the SNP happy clappy chorus: "Everything is awesome, everything is good...."

I let it go earlier, as I thought it was a typo.

Education standards really are slipping under the SNP, eh no? :greengrin

[One Day Soon]

I let it go earlier, as I thought it was a typo.

Education standards really are slipping under the SNP, eh no? :greengrin


I think you'll find that either is an acceptable usage. Either way its Epsilon-Minus Semi-Moron time. Queue or cue your disagreement.

"Everything is cool when you're part of a team..."

[RyeSloan]

Pretty well agree with most of that. I think that the tax debate will be bluster and grandstanding for the most part. The "tinkering at the edges", which is all it can be, should (and hopefully will) be much less important than other issues. I also think that one of the reasons the SNP have said that they won't raise the HR thresholds is, quite simply, because they can. It's a statement of independence, in the same way that the Labour administration up here did the same with some policies that weren't those of UK Labour.

Yup bluster and grandstanding will sadly be much more to the fore than any serious attempt to understand what is raised, who it comes from and how it is spent.

I would be much more interested in how value for money is measured when it comes to government spending yet I don't think this was ever mentioned. It's all about how much can be spent not if it's actually being spent well and in the most effective areas.

[Moulin Yarns]

Queue Lego music and the SNP happy clappy chorus: "Everything is awesome, everything is good...."


I think you'll find that either is an acceptable usage. Either way its Epsilon-Minus Semi-Moron time. Queue or cue your disagreement.

"Everything is cool when you're part of a team..."

Describe what the queue is for.

Is it,

a) QUEUE: A line of waiting people or vehicles.

or

b) CUE: A signal, such as a word or action, used to prompt another event in a performance, such as an actor's speech or entrance, a change in lighting, or a sound effect.

[RyeSloan]

Time to go after those that aren't paying their fair share (highest earners, and some big businesses), and redistributing wealth to fund our public services.

I see this type of quote quite a lot...about people paying their fair share (see sturgeons quote re higher earners shouldering more of the burden). I'm interest though if you are aware of how much of a share these ever popular tax targets already provide?

The answer is surprisingly hard to find (maybe my google skills are lacking but let's just say it's not information that's freely available)

The best I can find suggests those few thousand that earn £150k + already contribute 7.5% of income tax receipts...so about 0.7% of the population is providing 7.5% of income tax. You want them to pay their 'fair share', what does that constitute?

Higher earners account for about 15% of the workforce yet contribute 27% of the income tax total.

So under 16% of the workforce is contributing almost 35% of income tax. That leaves the remaining 83% contributing 66%.

To me that seems like the higher earners and especially the highest earners are already giving their 'fair share' in fact well beyond what most people would describe as a 'fair share' where that would be considered something equivalent to an equal contribution.

All of that before you consider almost half the population does not pay income tax at all.

I know I bang on about this a lot but I find it really annoying that the narrative seems focussed on getting the higher earners (and to be honest its rather scary how few big earners there is in Scotland!) to pay more, the figures don't add up and the sooner the politicians admit that and stop pretending their is some magic money tree just waiting to be taxed, or indeed spinning the line that these higher earners are somehow not pulling their weight then the better off we will all be as we can have a real debate about everyone contributing to the countries fiscal position and how those monies can be best spent.

[Beefster]

Describe what the queue is for.

Is it,

a) QUEUE: A line of waiting people or vehicles.

or

b) CUE: A signal, such as a word or action, used to prompt another event in a performance, such as an actor's speech or entrance, a change in lighting, or a sound effect.


I recommend that you get out some more.

[marinello59]

You seem to be the only one mentioning her. You've clearly got a crush Jon.

Young M59 was at a conversation with the First Minister event for school kids at the corn exchange this week. He came back referring to her as just 'Nicola'. She's like Madonna or Adele, one name only seems to do. It's weird. :greengrin

[fulshie]

SNP for me and Green for list vote.

[One Day Soon]

Describe what the queue is for.

Is it,

a) QUEUE: A line of waiting people or vehicles.

or

b) CUE: A signal, such as a word or action, used to prompt another event in a performance, such as an actor's speech or entrance, a change in lighting, or a sound effect.


1. You do need to get out more often

2. You can cue music - which means to start it or you can queue music which means to line up a whole sequence of it. I suggest that in this context either will do - particularly since we're going to meet every criticism with the same response. Um, First Minister there's a giant oil-shaped hole in the budget. Don't worry about it Scotland because "Everything is awesome.."

3. None of this grammar debate matters anyway because, hey, its SNP Scotland so "Everything is awesome"

[johnbc70]

The "tax differential" will work out at a maximum of £322 for a year.

Hardly worth all the hassle then really is it.

[CropleyWasGod]

Hardly worth all the hassle then really is it.

Indeed.

For me, as I said earlier, it's about making a statement. The statement being "we can do it, so we will."

[Moulin Yarns]

Queue Lego music and the SNP happy clappy chorus: "Everything is awesome, everything is good...."

Am I to guess correctly that'Lego music' references the song from the film?

[steakbake]

Green x 2 for me.

I had the misfortune to be stuck in traffic listening to a debate on Radio Scotland today about local tax: council tax and or an.other.

The Tory lad had nothing to say apart from that their plans will be announced in a couple of weeks.

Coburn blamed everything on migrants - no seriously, he actually did.

Ken MacIntosh from Labour and whoever it was from that other party - LibDems? - were falling over themselves to attack the SNP person but had precious little to say about what they would do - apparently the LibDems will tell us on Tuesday. Not sure what Labour will do, but whatever it is, it wasn't going to be what the SNP would do, is the short of it. Reminded me of Limmy's "Yes or No" character.

Marco Biagi from the SNP - campaigned for the end of council tax in two successive elections, yet we still have it. Pointed out the local income tax was defeated. Beyond that, made a pretty unconvincing argument about what they will do next.

On guy that spoke any sense about what his party Greens wanted to do both in theory and practice was Patrick Harvie.

[CropleyWasGod]

Green x 2 for me.

I had the misfortune to be stuck in traffic listening to a debate on Radio Scotland today about local tax: council tax and or an.other.

The Tory lad had nothing to say apart from that their plans will be announced in a couple of weeks.

Coburn blamed everything on migrants - no seriously, he actually did.

Ken MacIntosh from Labour and whoever it was from that other party - LibDems? - were falling over themselves to attack the SNP person but had precious little to say about what they would do - apparently the LibDems will tell us on Tuesday. Not sure what Labour will do, but whatever it is, it wasn't going to be what the SNP would do, is the short of it. Reminded me of Limmy's "Yes or No" character.

Marco Biagi from the SNP - campaigned for the end of council tax in two successive elections, yet we still have it. Pointed out the local income tax was defeated. Beyond that, made a pretty unconvincing argument about what they will do next.

On guy that spoke any sense about what his party Greens wanted to do both in theory and practice was Patrick Harvie.

I heard the same programme.

I was puzzled that MB was on it, since he has now stepped down.

[Moulin Yarns]

Green x 2 for me.

I had the misfortune to be stuck in traffic listening to a debate on Radio Scotland today about local tax: council tax and or an.other.

The Tory lad had nothing to say apart from that their plans will be announced in a couple of weeks.

Coburn blamed everything on migrants - no seriously, he actually did.

Ken MacIntosh from Labour and whoever it was from that other party - LibDems? - were falling over themselves to attack the SNP person but had precious little to say about what they would do - apparently the LibDems will tell us on Tuesday. Not sure what Labour will do, but whatever it is, it wasn't going to be what the SNP would do, is the short of it. Reminded me of Limmy's "Yes or No" character.

Marco Biagi from the SNP - campaigned for the end of council tax in two successive elections, yet we still have it. Pointed out the local income tax was defeated. Beyond that, made a pretty unconvincing argument about what they will do next.

On guy that spoke any sense about what his party Greens wanted to do both in theory and practice was Patrick Harvie.

Do you have a Green candidate on the ballot? Most are only on the list. Patrick and Maggie might be the only 2 standing as candidate.

[steakbake]

Do you have a Green candidate on the ballot? Most are only on the list. Patrick and Maggie might be the only 2 standing as candidate.

You are absolutely right. Deary me... if it was Malcolm Chisholm, I'd have voted for him. It's Lesley Hinds for Labour, and I'm not a fan. May give the constituency vote a miss haha

[AndyM_1875]

You are absolutely right. Deary me... if it was Malcolm Chisholm, I'd have voted for him. It's Lesley Hinds for Labour, and I'm not a fan. May give the constituency vote a miss haha

Isn't Andy Wightman 1st pick for the Greens in Edinburgh?
He'd be an excellent MSP. Very sharp and well informed guy. Anything to do with Land use and he's the number 1 guy to talk to.

[RyeSloan]

You are absolutely right. Deary me... if it was Malcolm Chisholm, I'd have voted for him. It's Lesley Hinds for Labour, and I'm not a fan. May give the constituency vote a miss haha

Jeez Lesley Hinds, as an MSP?

What talent we have in the political ranks....

[steakbake]

Jeez Lesley Hinds, as an MSP?

What talent we have in the political ranks....

Yes, Edinburgh North and Leith. I figure the SNP don't need my vote which narrows the field badly. There's a guy running as an independent but it's a bit like reading Malcolm Malcolm from Limmy's politics bar stuff. Fair play to him though for giving it a go.

[Moulin Yarns]

Yes, Edinburgh North and Leith. I figure the SNP don't need my vote which narrows the field badly. There's a guy running as an independent but it's a bit like reading Malcolm Malcolm from Limmy's politics bar stuff. Fair play to him though for giving it a go.

We had an independent candidate for Westminster last year. Half way between Conservative and UKIP. I expect he will stand again in May.

[Glory Lurker]

I've just had a check of Scotland, and in fact everything IS awesome - apart from stuff that's Westminster's responsibility, and that's a disaster! :wink: :greengrin

[marinello59]

I've just had a check of Scotland, and in fact everything IS awesome - apart from stuff that's Westminster's responsibility, and that's a disaster! :wink: :greengrin

:greengrin

[AndyM_1875]

:greengrin
I've just had a check of Scotland, and in fact everything IS awesome - apart from stuff that's Westminster's responsibility, and that's a disaster! :wink: :greengrin

:agree: everything is awesome :agree:

:greengrin

[One Day Soon]

:greengrin

:agree: everything is awesome :agree:

:greengrin

Yay! Flags and marches and selfies and helicopters

Everything is awesome!

[weecounty hibby]

Yay! Flags and marches and selfies and helicopters

Everything is awesome!
Is this really the best that Labour/Tory/Libdems have in the run up to the election? Is it any wonder that voters in Scotland are deserting these parties, Labour in particular, in their droves. The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of people who think that things are better under the SNP government. Maybe not awesome at the moment, but perhaps if you all keep saying it often enoughthen people might indeed start to think things are awesome!!

[marinello59]

Is this really the best that Labour/Tory/Libdems have in the run up to the election? Is it any wonder that voters in Scotland are deserting these parties, Labour in particular, in their droves. The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of people who think that things are better under the SNP government. Maybe not awesome at the moment, but perhaps if you all keep saying it often enoughthen people might indeed start to think things are awesome!!

I quite like Dugdale's statement on North Sea Oil. An idea the SNP could easily support. She has surprised me, she is making a decent job of leading Labour in Scotland. They are still only fighting for second spot though.
All in all the SNP have done a good job of managing Scotland as Labour did before them. Take Independence out of things and there really isn't that much between them. It's quite funny watching both parties try to pretend otherwise though.

[One Day Soon]

Is this really the best that Labour/Tory/Libdems have in the run up to the election? Is it any wonder that voters in Scotland are deserting these parties, Labour in particular, in their droves. The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of people who think that things are better under the SNP government. Maybe not awesome at the moment, but perhaps if you all keep saying it often enoughthen people might indeed start to think things are awesome!!

Yay! Who cares about the other parties? They don't matter! SNP is in charge so "Everything is awesome..."

Everything is awesome
Everything is cool when you're part of SNP team
Everything is awesome when we're living our dream

Everything is better when we SNP together
Side by side, you and I gonna win forever, let's party forever
We're the same, I'm like you, you're like me, we're all working in harmony...

[weecounty hibby]

Yay! Who cares about the other parties? They don't matter! SNP is in charge so "Everything is awesome..."

Everything is awesome
Everything is cool when you're part of SNP team
Everything is awesome when we're living our dream

Everything is better when we SNP together
Side by side, you and I gonna win forever, let's party forever
We're the same, I'm like you, you're like me, we're all working in harmony...
So the answer to my question to you is a resounding yes! Brilliant reply and as I said if it's the main strategy for the election it is a see bit desperate

[One Day Soon]

I quite like Dugdale's statement on North Sea Oil. An idea the SNP could easily support. She has surprised me, she is making a decent job of leading Labour in Scotland. They are still only fighting for second spot though.
All in all the SNP have done a good job of managing Scotland as Labour did before them. Take Independence out of things and there really isn't that much between them. It's quite funny watching both parties try to pretend otherwise though.

New tax powers are the most interesting thing to happen to Scottish politics since 1999. Parties will have to have some original thought at last. And their actions (or inactions) will have some serious consequences - for them as well as for electors.

I'd disagree on the good job of managing Scotland part - more like the SNP have done just as average-to-poor a job of managing Scotland as Labour did before them.

[marinello59]

New tax powers are the most interesting thing to happen to Scottish politics since 1999. Parties will have to have some original thought at last. And their actions (or inactions) will have some serious consequences - for them as well as for electors.

I'd disagree on the good job of managing Scotland part - more like the SNP have done just as average-to-poor a job of managing Scotland as Labour did before them.

The Tories of all people have a lot to gain from the new powers. Actually having to pay more tax or not has a powerful effect at the ballot box. Interesting times ahead.

[One Day Soon]

So the answer to my question to you is a resounding yes! Brilliant reply and as I said if it's the main strategy for the election it is a see bit desperate

Aren't you paying attention? The SNP are going to win an overall majority easily. So on top of the 8 years that they've already been running Scotland they are going to go on to 13 years. With an SNP overall majority the other parties don't matter - and they've been out of power for nearly a decade anyway.

The SNP will run the Scottish Government unfettered, dominate the Scottish bloc at Westminster and probably win next year's Council elections too, making them the majority party or lead coalition partner in most Scottish councils.

That's why Nikla's answer to every problem can just be, "Everything is awesome..." In fact it usually is at First Minister's Questions. The answer to every challenging question about failure is: never mind that, look at my opinion polls. So really and truly its "Everything IS awesome!"

[One Day Soon]

The Tories of all people have a lot to gain from the new powers. Actually having to pay more tax or not has a powerful effect at the ballot box. Interesting times ahead. :agree:

[AndyM_1875]

Is this really the best that Labour/Tory/Libdems have in the run up to the election? Is it any wonder that voters in Scotland are deserting these parties, Labour in particular, in their droves. The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of people who think that things are better under the SNP government. Maybe not awesome at the moment, but perhaps if you all keep saying it often enoughthen people might indeed start to think things are awesome!!

No of course it isn't but it's a polar reflection on the clichéd nonsense & sound bytes (red Tories, Westmonster, Yoons etc) that SNP supporters trot out as either fact or as reaction to criticism.

And at the risk of being accused of "talking Scotland down", another cliche, everything really isn't awesome just now.

[bawheid]

Aren't you paying attention? The SNP are going to win an overall majority easily. So on top of the 8 years that they've already been running Scotland they are going to go on to 13 years. With an SNP overall majority the other parties don't matter - and they've been out of power for nearly a decade anyway.

The SNP will run the Scottish Government unfettered, dominate the Scottish bloc at Westminster and probably win next year's Council elections too, making them the majority party or lead coalition partner in most Scottish councils. "

But if that's the case, what are the other parties in Scotland going to do to about it?

Have they considered why the SNP's poll ratings are so high? Why do you think they poll so highly, particularly in the face of a predominantly anti-SNP print and broadcast media?

Other than Lego Movie parodies, what's the answer for Labour and the Lib Dems? (I actually think the Tories are onto a winner with tax policy with a decent section of the electorate).

[AndyM_1875]

But if that's the case, what are the other parties in Scotland going to do to about it?

Have they considered why the SNP's poll ratings are so high? Why do you think they poll so highly, particularly in the face of a predominantly anti-SNP print and broadcast media?

Other than Lego Movie parodies, what's the answer for Labour and the Lib Dems? (I actually think the Tories are onto a winner with tax policy with a decent section of the electorate).

Labour have put clear water between themselves and the SNP & Tories so nobody can say "we don't know what you stand for". I know if I vote Labour and if by some miracle they actually were the largest party that I would pay a penny more in income tax to go to a Public Services & Education and that fracking will be banned. There would also be a focus on education and Named Person would be abandoned and OBaF will both be scrapped.

Of course none of this will happen as the SNP will win a majority. They are riding a populist wave (thanks to Salmond and Sturgeon) , the public aren't looking too carefully at what they're serving up as a Government and there's still a lot of people angry at the way the Referendum was lost.
I don't see them losing their majority until 2021.

[ronaldo7]

Aren't you paying attention? The SNP are going to win an overall majority easily. So on top of the 8 years that they've already been running Scotland they are going to go on to 13 years. With an SNP overall majority the other parties don't matter - and they've been out of power for nearly a decade anyway.

The SNP will run the Scottish Government unfettered, dominate the Scottish bloc at Westminster and probably win next year's Council elections too, making them the majority party or lead coalition partner in most Scottish councils.

That's why Nikla's answer to every problem can just be, "Everything is awesome..." In fact it usually is at First Minister's Questions. The answer to every challenging question about failure is: never mind that, look at my opinion polls. So really and truly its "Everything IS awesome!"

Isn't this what LABOUR have been doing for decades? Where has it got us?

[ronaldo7]

Labour have put clear water between themselves and the SNP & Tories so nobody can say "we don't know what you stand for". I know if I vote Labour and if by some miracle they actually were the largest party that I would pay a penny more in income tax to go to a Public Services & Education and that fracking will be banned. There would also be a focus on education and Named Person would be abandoned and OBaF will both be scrapped.

Of course none of this will happen as the SNP will win a majority. They are riding a populist wave (thanks to Salmond and Sturgeon) , the public aren't looking too carefully at what they're serving up as a Government and there's still a lot of people angry at the way the Referendum was lost.
I don't see them losing their majority until 2021.

Can you explain how Fracking will be banned, when Licenses have already been approved by London?

[bawheid]

there's still a lot of people angry at the way the Referendum was lost.

Interested in your thoughts on this as a former SNP supporter. Do you mean angry at the margin of victory or angry at something else?

[marinello59]

Can you explain how Fracking will be banned, when Licenses have already been approved by London?

I like the SNP policy on this, hold fire for the time being and let scientific evidence decide rather than simply saying No now. It was disappointing to see Nicola Sturgeon waver slightly on that during the leaders debate the other night. She shouldn't , her policy is sensible despite it being unpopular with many.

[ronaldo7]

I like the SNP policy on this, hold fire for the time being and let scientific evidence decide rather than simply saying No now. It was disappointing to see Nicola Sturgeon waver slightly on that during the leaders debate the other night. She shouldn't , her policy is sensible despite it being unpopular with many.

You must have seen something different from me. Labour and Kezia said they would ban Fracking, meaning a challenge in the courts, which would definitely see Ineos win, as Licences have been approved by Westminster. The SNP Scottish Government have placed a Moratorium on Fracking which means not a Scooby can happen in the future unless SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE says that it's fine to Frack.

For me, I'd rather drink fine SCOTTISH WATER, than some pash which has feathered the nest of some Unionist who's got money to burn.:aok:

[marinello59]

You must have seen something different from me. Labour and Kezia said they would ban Fracking, meaning a challenge in the courts, which would definitely see Ineos win, as Licences have been approved by Westminster. The SNP Scottish Government have placed a Moratorium on Fracking which means not a Scooby can happen in the future unless SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE says that it's fine to Frack.

For me, I'd rather drink fine SCOTTISH WATER, than some pash which has feathered the nest of some Unionist who's got money to burn.:aok:

Eh? What is different about my summing up of Scottish Government policy from yours.
Step away from the bottle. :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

Eh? What is different about my summing up of Scottish Government policy from yours.
Step away from the bottle. :greengrin

You said Nicola wavered...She didn't, just ask your lad:aok:

[marinello59]

You said Nicola wavered...She didn't, just ask your lad:aok:

Actually she did. After the Greens and Labour both gave an emphatic No to fracking rather than defend her position she made noises suggesting it was case closed for fracking and it wouldn't happen. I don't know why she did that. Scottish Government policy is sensible, rule nothing out, she should be happy to say that.

[ronaldo7]

Actually she did. After the Greens and Labour both gave an emphatic No to fracking rather than defend her position she made noises suggesting it was case closed for fracking and it wouldn't happen. I don't know why she did that. Scottish Government policy is sensible, rule nothing out, she should be happy to say that.

Again your ears were blocked. She said she'd go with the evidence, until then, a moratorium it is. Labour's ban is nothing short of a stitch up for Ineos.

[marinello59]

Again your ears were blocked. She said she'd go with the evidence, until then, a moratorium it is. Labour's ban is nothing short of a stitch up for Ineos.

We will just need to agree to disagree.
Even though we agree on what SNP policy is. :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

We will just need to agree to disagree.
Even though we agree on what SNP policy is. :greengrin

Ok.:aok:

Only the best for us eh:greengrin

[AndyM_1875]

Again your ears were blocked. She said she'd go with the evidence, until then, a moratorium it is. Labour's ban is nothing short of a stitch up for Ineos.

Well that's Interesting seeing as the only Scottish party with any links to Ineos are the SNP.

[ronaldo7]

Well that's Interesting seeing as the only Scottish party with any links to Ineos are the SNP.

:faf: Apart fi Stevie Deans though.:wink:

[marinello59]

Ok.:aok:

Only the best for us eh:greengrin

We are ****ing awesome. 😃

[AndyM_1875]

:faf: Apart fi Stevie Deans though.:wink:

An ex Grangemouth Union official..... Right...


Pretty small compared with the First minister & finance secretary being in their pocket.....

[One Day Soon]

But if that's the case, what are the other parties in Scotland going to do to about it?

Have they considered why the SNP's poll ratings are so high? Why do you think they poll so highly, particularly in the face of a predominantly anti-SNP print and broadcast media?

Other than Lego Movie parodies, what's the answer for Labour and the Lib Dems? (I actually think the Tories are onto a winner with tax policy with a decent section of the electorate).


Who cares what the other parties are or aren't going to do about it? The SNP run Scotland, have done for the last 8 years and will do for the next 5 too.

It has been and still is down to them and them alone to grow the economy, stop child literacy and numeracy from falling, implement their class sizes pledge, implement their Local Income Tax pledge, implement their 50p tax rate pledge, lock the Tories out of Downing Street and all the rest of the broken promises.

[One Day Soon]

Isn't this what LABOUR have been doing for decades? Where has it got us?


If you are happy with the way the SNP government is mutating into a tartan copy of the worst of New Labour's approach to government then truly everything is awesome for you.

I for one welcome our SNP overlords...

[One Day Soon]

You must have seen something different from me. Labour and Kezia said they would ban Fracking, meaning a challenge in the courts, which would definitely see Ineos win, as Licences have been approved by Westminster. The SNP Scottish Government have placed a Moratorium on Fracking which means not a Scooby can happen in the future unless SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE says that it's fine to Frack.

For me, I'd rather drink fine SCOTTISH WATER, than some pash which has feathered the nest of some Unionist who's got money to burn.:aok:

Pure McGlashan. Magnificent.

[One Day Soon]

Actually she did. After the Greens and Labour both gave an emphatic No to fracking rather than defend her position she made noises suggesting it was case closed for fracking and it wouldn't happen. I don't know why she did that. Scottish Government policy is sensible, rule nothing out, she should be happy to say that.

SNP Scottish government policy is far from sensible. It is a classic Lib Dem type fudge designed to postpone decision making until after the election in the hope that something else will turn up to sort the problem out for them. Labour's policy is even more worse, but both are just contemptible playing of politics with something of huge strategic importance to Scotland's economy.

We have a new oil boom sitting right under our feet and low grade spineless politicians would rather pander to an environmental lobby that hates anything which extends the carbon economy. Massive revenues, lots of employment and skills development opportunities and the regeneration of Grangemouth as a global facility? Sod that, taking on the argument might cost us votes.

The same attitude would have seen the oil and gas industry still-born decades ago and the coal industry before it too.

The notion that Labour are lined up with Ineos by directly opposing their plans is, even by the 1984 Doublespeak standards of SNP Legoists, utterly ridiculous. Just for a start Labour in Scotland won't be in a position of power for at least another five years to have any say in the matter, if ever.

On another note, I could be wrong here but aren't fracking licences now under the control of the Scottish Government as part of the Smith Commission transfer of powers? And on another note hasn't the SNP Scottish Government stymied the building of any new nuclear power stations in Scotland using the planning system (which it controls) rather than any of the energy statutory powers (which it doesn't control)? Why couldn't planning veto be used in exactly the same way on fracking proposals?

[marinello59]

SNP Scottish government policy is far from sensible. It is a classic Lib Dem type fudge designed to postpone decision making until after the election in the hope that something else will turn up to sort the problem out for them. Labour's policy is even more worse, but both are just contemptible playing of politics with something of huge strategic importance to Scotland's economy.

We have a new oil boom sitting right under our feet and low grade spineless politicians would rather pander to an environmental lobby that hates anything which extends the carbon economy. Massive revenues, lots of employment and skills development opportunities and the regeneration of Grangemouth as a global facility? Sod that, taking on the argument might cost us votes.

The same attitude would have seen the oil and gas industry still-born decades ago and the coal industry before it too.

The notion that Labour are lined up with Ineos by directly opposing their plans is, even by the 1984 Doublespeak standards of SNP Legoists, utterly ridiculous. Just for a start Labour in Scotland won't be in a position of power for at least another five years to have any say in the matter, if ever.

On another note, I could be wrong here but aren't fracking licences now under the control of the Scottish Government as part of the Smith Commission transfer of powers? And on another note hasn't the SNP Scottish Government stymied the building of any new nuclear power stations in Scotland using the planning system (which it controls) rather than any of the energy statutory powers (which it doesn't control)? Why couldn't planning veto be used in exactly the same way on fracking proposals?

I'm just pleased that the SNP have not completely ruled Fracking out.
I agree with you about the North Sea Oil industry being strangled at birth if the green lobby had as loud a voice back then as it does now. For Labour to rule it out completely at this stage is a bad decision. With the expertise we have in this area in Scotland we should be pretty well placed to find a safe way of extracting this resource.

[One Day Soon]

I'm just pleased that the SNP have not completely ruled Fracking out.
I agree with you about the North Sea Oil industry being strangled at birth if the green lobby had as loud a voice back then as it does now. For Labour to rule it out completely at this stage is a bad decision. With the expertise we have in this area in Scotland we should be pretty well placed to find a safe way of extracting this resource.

Yup. Any party worth its salt and genuinely committed to Scotland's economy should be taking a position of "we want fracking to go ahead and we are urgently seeking the scientific evidence to allow that to happen as soon as possible."

Unfortunately what we are getting from Labour on the one hand and the SNP on the other is destructive in the case of the former and dishonest in the case of the latter.

[SkintHibby]

SNP all the way for me.

Cant stand they Dugdale and Davidson bints.

[allmodcons]

Labour have put clear water between themselves and the SNP & Tories so nobody can say "we don't know what you stand for". I know if I vote Labour and if by some miracle they actually were the largest party that I would pay a penny more in income tax to go to a Public Services & Education and that fracking will be banned. There would also be a focus on education and Named Person would be abandoned and OBaF will both be scrapped.

Of course none of this will happen as the SNP will win a majority. They are riding a populist wave (thanks to Salmond and Sturgeon) , the public aren't looking too carefully at what they're serving up as a Government and there's still a lot of people angry at the way the Referendum was lost.
I don't see them losing their majority until 2021.

I love it when somebody/anybody comes with this stuff. Are we to assume the wider electorate aren't quite as switched on as you?

[marinello59]

I love it when somebody/anybody comes with this stuff. Are we to assume the wider electorate aren't quite as switched on as you?

I made exactly the same point several times during the referundum. :wink:

[allmodcons]

I made exactly the same point several times during the referundum. :wink:

You and me agreeing :confused:

[AndyM_1875]

I love it when somebody/anybody comes with this stuff. Are we to assume the wider electorate aren't quite as switched on as you?

Never said that. I said (as an ex SNP member) that the legislation they are putting though or planning to put through isn't exactly being given the scrutiny it deserves and given the attention it deserves.

OBAF is unworkable. Ask judges and football fans.

Named Person is a disaster waiting in the wings. Ask the Support Services.

The record on Further Education is patchy at best, ask the college lecturers.

The Soft Option Organ Donation bill originally supported by the SNP and then voted down by SNP MSPs because they don't like Jackie Baillie who summed up for Labour that day was arguably one of the most disgusting things that I've seen at Holyrood.

Still.... everything is awesome, lets take a selfie.

[Moulin Yarns]

SNP Scottish government policy is far from sensible. It is a classic Lib Dem type fudge designed to postpone decision making until after the election in the hope that something else will turn up to sort the problem out for them. Labour's policy is even more worse, but both are just contemptible playing of politics with something of huge strategic importance to Scotland's economy.

We have a new oil boom sitting right under our feet and low grade spineless politicians would rather pander to an environmental lobby that hates anything which extends the carbon economy. Massive revenues, lots of employment and skills development opportunities and the regeneration of Grangemouth as a global facility? Sod that, taking on the argument might cost us votes.

The same attitude would have seen the oil and gas industry still-born decades ago and the coal industry before it too.

The notion that Labour are lined up with Ineos by directly opposing their plans is, even by the 1984 Doublespeak standards of SNP Legoists, utterly ridiculous. Just for a start Labour in Scotland won't be in a position of power for at least another five years to have any say in the matter, if ever.

On another note, I could be wrong here but aren't fracking licences now under the control of the Scottish Government as part of the Smith Commission transfer of powers? And on another note hasn't the SNP Scottish Government stymied the building of any new nuclear power stations in Scotland using the planning system (which it controls) rather than any of the energy statutory powers (which it doesn't control)? Why couldn't planning veto be used in exactly the same way on fracking proposals?


All current fracking licences were approved by the Dept of Energy and Climate change at Westminster. To date 8 exploratory drillings have taken place in the Central Belt, mainly around Airth, a further 10 have approval from Cumbernauld to Dollar. To go into production the Scottish Government will need to revise climate change targets which are already the toughest of any country. Either way a bad news story.

[One Day Soon]

All current fracking licences were approved by the Dept of Energy and Climate change at Westminster. To date 8 exploratory drillings have taken place in the Central Belt, mainly around Airth, a further 10 have approval from Cumbernauld to Dollar. To go into production the Scottish Government will need to revise climate change targets which are already the toughest of any country. Either way a bad news story.

I'm not sure that answers any of the points I was making.

[Moulin Yarns]

I'm not sure that answers any of the points I was making.

Perhaps you don't realise that those drills already doing exploration drilling required planning approval from the relevant local government. And are licensed by Westminster, so have nothing to do with Holyrood

[ronaldo7]

Never said that. I said (as an ex SNP member) that the legislation they are putting though or planning to put through isn't exactly being given the scrutiny it deserves and given the attention it deserves.

OBAF is unworkable. Ask judges and football fans.

Named Person is a disaster waiting in the wings. Ask the Support Services.

The record on Further Education is patchy at best, ask the college lecturers.

The Soft Option Organ Donation bill originally supported by the SNP and then voted down by SNP MSPs because they don't like Jackie Baillie who summed up for Labour that day was arguably one of the most disgusting things that I've seen at Holyrood.

Still.... everything is awesome, lets take a selfie.

The NP scheme has been running for some time. It's been going since 2009 in Highland, with the effects of less children going to the Children's reporter, less children on the child protection register, and fewer children offending.

Have a look through these, and then tell me what's so wrong with the NPS. Is it really a "Disaster waiting in the wings"? Can you also provide some evidence of who's been asked in the support services, and what was said.

http://www.gov.scot/Topics/People/Young-People/gettingitright/named-person …

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-31172161

http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/14387035.Named_persons_hype_is_becoming_embarrassi ngly_shrill/ …

[johnbc70]

With this NP scheme I am all for helping the most vulnerable children, but are the teachers and health visitors not already under enough pressure without this added into the mix.

No idea what the cost of implementation and ongoing administration costs will be but sure it could be spent on better things than this, like more services for the really vulnerable children that need it.

Also if the SNP say most won't need/use the service why is it compulsory by law?

[One Day Soon]

Perhaps you don't realise that those drills already doing exploration drilling required planning approval from the relevant local government. And are licensed by Westminster, so have nothing to do with Holyrood

I know that but you still aren't really addressing any of the points I was raising. They are:


1. SNP Scottish government policy is far from sensible. It is a classic Lib Dem type fudge designed to postpone decision making until after the election in the hope that something else will turn up to sort the problem out for them. Labour's policy is even more worse, but both are just contemptible playing of politics with something of huge strategic importance to Scotland's economy.

2. The notion that Labour are lined up with Ineos by directly opposing their plans is, even by the 1984 Doublespeak standards of SNP Legoists, utterly ridiculous. Just for a start Labour in Scotland won't be in a position of power for at least another five years to have any say in the matter, if ever.

3. Fracking licenses are now under the control of the Scottish Government as part of the Smith Commission transfer of powers. So the decision to proceed with or to stop fracking lies entirely and exclusively with the Scottish Government.

4. Hasn't the SNP Scottish Government stymied the building of any new nuclear power stations in Scotland using the planning system (which it controls) rather than any of the energy statutory powers (which it doesn't control)? Why couldn't planning veto be used in exactly the same way on fracking proposals (not that they need to be because Scottish Government now controls fracking licensing)

[AndyM_1875]

The NP scheme has been running for some time. It's been going since 2009 in Highland, with the effects of less children going to the Children's reporter, less children on the child protection register, and fewer children offending.

Have a look through these, and then tell me what's so wrong with the NPS. Is it really a "Disaster waiting in the wings"? Can you also provide some evidence of who's been asked in the support services, and what was said.

http://www.gov.scot/Topics/People/Young-People/gettingitright/named-person …

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-31172161

http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/14387035.Named_persons_hype_is_becoming_embarrassi ngly_shrill/ …


The scheme is disproportionate to what is actually required which is better support for the SCRA & children's Panel and the Care Services. It's open to abuse. Every time a child attends the doctor or uses an nhs service, the NP is informed. Is that really necessary?

I'm married to a woman who works for the SCRA, she isn't convinced at all, despite being an SNP voter.

And here's the opinion of the Scottish Parent Teacher Council.

http://scottishptc.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/there-has-been-lot-in-papers-and.html

[ronaldo7]

With this NP scheme I am all for helping the most vulnerable children, but are the teachers and health visitors not already under enough pressure without this added into the mix.

No idea what the cost of implementation and ongoing administration costs will be but sure it could be spent on better things than this, like more services for the really vulnerable children that need it.

Also if the SNP say most won't need/use the service why is it compulsory by law?

There is no obligation to accept the offer of advice or support from a Named Person. (Taken directly from the gov website on the first link)

[ronaldo7]

The scheme is disproportionate to what is actually required which is better support for the SCRA & children's Panel and the Care Services. It's open to abuse. Every time a child attends the doctor or uses an nhs service, the NP is informed. Is that really necessary?

I'm married to a woman who works for the SCRA, she isn't convinced at all, despite being an SNP voter.

And here's the opinion of the Scottish Parent Teacher Council.

http://scottishptc.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/there-has-been-lot-in-papers-and.html

Thanks for that:aok:

Having run the system in Highland from 2009 without a hitch and, it been rolled out in Fife, Edinburgh, Angus, and South Ayrshire, I've not heard of any "Disasters" yet.

We'll just have to disagree on this one:aok:

[johnbc70]

There is no obligation to accept the offer of advice or support from a Named Person. (Taken directly from the gov website on the first link)

So why make it law? Why make something that has no obligation into something written into the law of the land?

[ronaldo7]

So why make it law? Why make something that has no obligation into something written into the law of the land?

The Named person is there, needed or not. Simples. Instead of a family who goes into crises going round the houses with the authorities, they know who to go and seek help from (if required).

If it saves one child then it's Awesome.

[johnbc70]

The Named person is there, needed or not. Simples. Instead of a family who goes into crises going round the houses with the authorities, they know who to go and seek help from (if required).

If it saves one child then it's Awesome.

There should be no need to introduce this scheme if all that is required is someone who a family can go to for help, expensive way of saying go to your teacher if you need help.

But I realise I am fighting a losing battle with you on this, it's the SNP so its all good.

P.S. Maybe they could solve that class size promise they have miserably failed on for years first before spending millions on this.

[ronaldo7]

With this NP scheme I am all for helping the most vulnerable children, but are the teachers and health visitors not already under enough pressure without this added into the mix.

No idea what the cost of implementation and ongoing administration costs will be but sure it could be spent on better things than this, like more services for the really vulnerable children that need it.

Also if the SNP say most won't need/use the service why is it compulsory by law?


There should be no need to introduce this scheme if all that is required is someone who a family can go to for help, expensive way of saying go to your teacher if you need help.

But I realise I am fighting a losing battle with you on this, it's the SNP so its all good.

P.S. Maybe they could solve that class size promise they have miserably failed on for years first before spending millions on this.

Jeez, you're quick:aok:

[johnbc70]

Jeez, you're quick:aok:

I have no idea of the cost, I assume it will be in the millions as these things are. No clue if it will be £10M or £100M, or more.

Is that what you have resorted to, you disappoint me.

I see your even learning a politicians ways by avoiding the questions, well done

[ronaldo7]

I have no idea of the cost, I assume it will be in the millions as these things are. No clue if it will be £10M or £100M, or more.

Is that what you have resorted to, you disappoint me.

I see your even learning a politicians ways by avoiding the questions, well done

Just pointing out that in one post you say you don't know the costs, and in the next it's Millions.

I don't know the costs, but if it saves one kids life, then all good with me, whichever political party brought it in.

[Moulin Yarns]

I know that but you still aren't really addressing any of the points I was raising. They are:


1. SNP Scottish government policy is far from sensible. It is a classic Lib Dem type fudge designed to postpone decision making until after the election in the hope that something else will turn up to sort the problem out for them. Labour's policy is even more worse, but both are just contemptible playing of politics with something of huge strategic importance to Scotland's economy.

2. The notion that Labour are lined up with Ineos by directly opposing their plans is, even by the 1984 Doublespeak standards of SNP Legoists, utterly ridiculous. Just for a start Labour in Scotland won't be in a position of power for at least another five years to have any say in the matter, if ever.

3. Fracking licenses are now under the control of the Scottish Government as part of the Smith Commission transfer of powers. So the decision to proceed with or to stop fracking lies entirely and exclusively with the Scottish Government.

4. Hasn't the SNP Scottish Government stymied the building of any new nuclear power stations in Scotland using the planning system (which it controls) rather than any of the energy statutory powers (which it doesn't control)? Why couldn't planning veto be used in exactly the same way on fracking proposals (not that they need to be because Scottish Government now controls fracking licensing)

Repeating things in bold don't make them true. AFAIK all extant exploration licensed drilling is the direct result of Westminster approval and I will repeat is nothing to do with the Scottish Government. Planning approval is the responsibility of local government. I'll leave you to digest those facts and sing yourself silly with your lego song once you have queued it up.

[marinello59]

There is no obligation to accept the offer of advice or support from a Named Person. (Taken directly from the gov website on the first link)

Correct. But parents can't opt out of the named person scheme so it is hardly a willing arrangement. I don't know what the schools are like around you but recruitment and retention rates up here amongst already overworked staff are a big worry. To increase their workload to this degree is not going to help. The fact that the named person has a legal responsibility means that the pressure on them to act in the loosest possible definition of well being ( which has not been properly defined) could lead to a replacement of the current informal access to guidance teachers for a friendly chat with an atmosphere of suspicion and resentment.
And if the parent decides not to act on the advice of the named person what then? That is a big question that really should be answered.
The current agencies in partnership with parents are more than capable of looking after the wellbeing of our kids. We should be keeping the focus and resources concentrated on the truly vulnerable rather than overloading those resources and invading the family lives of the whole population.
I know your justification is that if one life is saved then it is all worthwhile. I would counter that with what if resources are stretched so thinly the truly vulnerable who need the most supervision receive less protection?
It's a pity that the SNP rules prevent their elected members from any contradiction of the party line because I am willing to bet there are more then a few who feel rather uncomfortable about this.

[johnbc70]

Police Scotland have already criticised the NP scheme saying it lacks clarity. Even as far as saying it could put more children at risk as the change and lack of clarity means children at risk who would normally be picked up could be missed. And of course major concerns about the already over burnded resources that are supposed to administer and carry this out.

[johnbc70]

Just pointing out that in one post you say you don't know the costs, and in the next it's Millions.

I don't know the costs, but if it saves one kids life, then all good with me, whichever political party brought it in.
Is there any SNP policy you don't agree with? Maybe just one?

Do you think the money used for this scheme is money well spent when likely large majority of children will have no need for it, or put the funds into more resources for social care and child protection services.

Notice you keep avoiding the classroom size failure as well, maybe the money would be better spent on fulfilling that manifesto promise that was never kept?

[Mr Grieves]

Police Scotland have already criticised the NP scheme saying it lacks clarity. Even as far as saying it could put more children at risk as the change and lack of clarity means children at risk who would normally be picked up could be missed. And of course major concerns about the already over burnded resources that are supposed to administer and carry this out.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/letters/14329815.Letters__Plan_for_state_guardians_will_no t_erode_the_rights_to_privacy/

You have groups representing Social workers, teachers and nurses supporting it. And a number of children's charities.

[Colr]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/letters/14329815.Letters__Plan_for_state_guardians_will_no t_erode_the_rights_to_privacy/

You have groups representing Social workers, teachers and nurses supporting it. And a number of children's charities.

Who identifies the named person?

[One Day Soon]

Repeating things in bold don't make them true. AFAIK all extant exploration licensed drilling is the direct result of Westminster approval and I will repeat is nothing to do with the Scottish Government. Planning approval is the responsibility of local government. I'll leave you to digest those facts and sing yourself silly with your lego song once you have queued it up.


Classic awesomness. Your answer can basically be summarised as: "I don't like the truth because it doesn't fit with my world view, anyway its all Westminster's fault and the Scottish Government doesn't have any power to stop it". Unfortunately that's all lego cobblers.

You're right, repeating things in bold doesn't make them true. But facts do and you can find what you need here: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/97413.aspx#a89

You do know there is a difference between exploration drilling and commercial extraction? The former is part of the process of establishing whether the shale oil is there and whether it can be extracted (that's actually part of Nikla's 'scientific process' to determine whether or not it should go ahead), the latter is the large scale process of doing actual fracking.

Fracking cannot take place without the explicit permission of the Scottish Government. The power to grant licenses of all types now sit with the Scottish Government as a result of the Westminster legislation which passed control of a range of powers including taxation powers, consumer protection, the Crown Estate, a bunch of welfare powers and fracking licenses to the Scottish Government.

Your planning point is just silly. Firstly the Scottish Government has the power to call in major planning proposals to be dealt with by them rather than local government and this is seen frequently with eg wind farms. Secondly, certain major and strategic planning proposals are dealt with by Scottish Government automatically - not by local government. Thirdly, perhaps you can explain how the Scottish Government has managed to maintain its explicit policy of threatening to use a planning veto to not allow any new nuclear power stations to be built in Scotland if it has no such powers?

I know they're not terribly important to Lego people, but I'll leave you to digest these facts and to reflect on the other fact that singing your lego song is no substitute once you have cocked it up. :wink:

[ronaldo7]

Is there any SNP policy you don't agree with? Maybe just one?

Do you think the money used for this scheme is money well spent when likely large majority of children will have no need for it, or put the funds into more resources for social care and child protection services.

Notice you keep avoiding the classroom size failure as well, maybe the money would be better spent on fulfilling that manifesto promise that was never kept?

I actually had a poster ask me this question directly. The one policy I've disagreed with is Land Reform. :aok:

[marinello59]

I actually had a poster ask me this question directly. The one policy I've disagreed with is Land Reform. :aok:

That's also the only thing that there has been any genuine grass roots rebellion about at conference in recent years as well isn't it?

[marinello59]

Nicola Sturgeon looks to be shading the leaders debate tonight. Davidson v Dugdale positioning themselves for second spot is proving interesting. Neither seems to be having a good night.

[ronaldo7]

That's also the only thing that there has been any genuine grass roots rebellion about at conference in recent years as well isn't it?

Only joined last year, but they do seem like a tight knit bunch. A bit like the Greens, but not anything like the Lab/Tories.:aok:

[ronaldo7]

Nicola Sturgeon looks to be shading the leaders debate tonight. Davidson v Dugdale positioning themselves for second spot is proving interesting. Neither seems to be having a good night.

Patrick started well, but Nicola's winning it at the moment. Willie Rennie's a waste of space.

[marinello59]

Patrick started well, but Nicola's winning it at the moment. Willie Rennie's a waste of space.

Rennie is truly dreadful.

[Pretty Boy]

Rennie would be as well just not turning up, he'd probably do less damage to his chances if he didn't bother.

Kezia Dugdale confuses me. She was a really good speaker in the parliament before she was elected as Jim Murphys deputy. I don't know whether it was trying too hard or whatever but she became all shouty and didn't speak well at all. She seemed to have improved a bit since becoming leader but she's performed very poorly tonight. So much of politics is PR these days she really needs to sort herself out.

[ronaldo7]

I thought the format was great. It blew away the BBC debate the other week.

It was great to see the personal challenges of the candidate for First Minister, and there was only 1 winner.

[Jonnyboy]

Rennie is truly dreadful.

Like being savaged by a dead sheep :agree:

[steakbake]

Rennie is truly dreadful.

He is poor. He's the kind of shrill politician that does mock outrage very well.

[lucky]

No point in posting who people think won the debate as everyone always stays loyal to their preferred party.

[snooky]

I thought all the leaders made good points at the debate and defended their corners fairly well with the exception of Willie Rennie who sounded like a stuck record. He's the leader of a 'Dead Party Walking' I'm afraid. Sadly sacrificed for Nick Clegg's 15 minutes of fame.

Incidentally, in the warm up, Kezia said she lived near ER & was a Hibby. :aok:
Nicola tossed in that her hubby was a Hibby. :aok:
Ruth added that she was a Dunfy fan. :applause:
The men didn't mention fitba' which I thought was odd :wtf:.

[marinello59]

No point in posting who people think won the debate as everyone always stays loyal to their preferred party.

I'm struggling to make up my mind where my first vote goes, let alone my second vote. These debates are helping me decide who I definitely won't be voting for though. :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

I thought all the leaders made good points at the debate and defended their corners fairly well with the exception of Willie Rennie who sounded like a stuck record. He's the leader of a 'Dead Party Walking' I'm afraid. Sadly sacrificed for Nick Clegg's 15 minutes of fame.

Incidentally, in the warm up, Kezia said she lived near ER & was a Hibby. :aok:
Nicola tossed in that her hubby was a Hibby. :aok:
Ruth added that she was a Dunfy fan. :applause:
The men didn't mention fitba' which I thought was odd :wtf:.

Does that mean Kez and Nic have leanings towards the Geens while for Ruth everything is in black and white?

[GlesgaeHibby]

I thought the format was great. It blew away the BBC debate the other week.

It was great to see the personal challenges of the candidate for First Minister, and there was only 1 winner.

Agree. Would have been entertaining to see David Coburn included for the cross examination though!

[lyonhibs]

Who even is Willie Rennie??

Is he that one that looks a bit like Ratty from WitW crossed with a startled sheep in the headlights?

[Moulin Yarns]

I thought all the leaders made good points at the debate and defended their corners fairly well with the exception of Willie Rennie who sounded like a stuck record. He's the leader of a 'Dead Party Walking' I'm afraid. Sadly sacrificed for Nick Clegg's 15 minutes of fame.

Incidentally, in the warm up, Kezia said she lived near ER & was a Hibby. :aok:
Nicola tossed in that her hubby was a Hibby. :aok:
Ruth added that she was a Dunfy fan. :applause:
The men didn't mention fitba' which I thought was odd :wtf:.


Pat was born in Vale of Leven and Will was born in Strathmiglo so not exactly hotbeds of football rivalries.

[lucky]

The Times called last nights debate in favor of Dugdale whilst hammering Davidson's performance

[ronaldo7]

Labour, respecting the people of Scotland.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/your-voice-counts-for-nothing/ …

Meanwhile the Tories will be putting up your prescription charges to £8, and introducing a graduate tax...£6,000 for 4 years.

https://vine.co/v/iDFddeqenl9

[steakbake]

I'm struggling to make up my mind where my first vote goes, let alone my second vote. These debates are helping me decide who I definitely won't be voting for though. :greengrin

I'm struggling for my first vote. Really struggling. I would have voted for the independent to help save his deposit. Malcolm Chisholm used to be the MSP and I would have voted for him as a person. His replacement is Lesley Hinds - no way. Wish I could vote for Monty Brewster and the none of the above option.

[Moulin Yarns]

Classic awesomness. Your answer can basically be summarised as: "I don't like the truth because it doesn't fit with my world view, anyway its all Westminster's fault and the Scottish Government doesn't have any power to stop it". Unfortunately that's all lego cobblers.

You're right, repeating things in bold doesn't make them true. But facts do and you can find what you need here: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/97413.aspx#a89

You do know there is a difference between exploration drilling and commercial extraction? The former is part of the process of establishing whether the shale oil is there and whether it can be extracted (that's actually part of Nikla's 'scientific process' to determine whether or not it should go ahead), the latter is the large scale process of doing actual fracking.

Fracking cannot take place without the explicit permission of the Scottish Government. The power to grant licenses of all types now sit with the Scottish Government as a result of the Westminster legislation which passed control of a range of powers including taxation powers, consumer protection, the Crown Estate, a bunch of welfare powers and fracking licenses to the Scottish Government.

Your planning point is just silly. Firstly the Scottish Government has the power to call in major planning proposals to be dealt with by them rather than local government and this is seen frequently with eg wind farms. Secondly, certain major and strategic planning proposals are dealt with by Scottish Government automatically - not by local government. Thirdly, perhaps you can explain how the Scottish Government has managed to maintain its explicit policy of threatening to use a planning veto to not allow any new nuclear power stations to be built in Scotland if it has no such powers?

I know they're not terribly important to Lego people, but I'll leave you to digest these facts and to reflect on the other fact that singing your lego song is no substitute once you have cocked it up. :wink:

For some reason you think I may be a supporter of the SNP, which couldn't be further from the truth.

At the risk of repeating myself:


ALL extant fracking licences approved for fracking in Scotland were issued by Westminster, and NONE have been issued by Holyrood.

All extant exploratory drilling required planning approval from the relevant local authorities, NOT Holyrood

Your link to the report on the Scotland Bill 2015-16 gives details of powers which only received royal assent on 23 March 2016, so nothing has been decided by the Scottish Parliament yet.

My Planning point is not silly, I looked at 1820 Planning Applications in my Local Authority last year, currently there are 12 applications with the Scottish Government, none of them are renewable applications. They prefer to let the Local Authorities deal with major planning issues unless there is a strategic reason, e.g. building on a flood plain, Roads and Transport infrastructure, etc. Yes, they have the power, but rarely use it.

Happy now are are you away to play your Lego movie again? :wink:

[ronaldo7]

The Times called last nights debate in favor of Dugdale whilst hammering Davidson's performance

Meanwhile in Scotland...

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/holyrood/874901/poll-leader-performed-best-scotland-debates/

Even your own paper, the record, called it for Sturgeon.:aok:

[One Day Soon]

For some reason you think I may be a supporter of the SNP, which couldn't be further from the truth.

I thought everyone was now a supporter of the SNP, but happy to withdraw that implication from you.

At the risk of repeating myself:

You and me both.

ALL extant fracking licences approved for fracking in Scotland were issued by Westminster, and NONE have been issued by Holyrood.

All extant exploratory drilling required planning approval from the relevant local authorities, NOT Holyrood

These licenses do not permit Ineos or anyone else to commence commercial fracking - if they did there would not currently be such a political bun fight on the subject because it would already be decided. In order to commercially extract fracked shale oil the Scottish Government would have to withdraw its objection (Scottish Government call this a 'moratorium') to fracking going ahead - see below.

Your link to the report on the Scotland Bill 2015-16 gives details of powers which only received royal assent on 23 March 2016, so nothing has been decided by the Scottish Parliament yet.

This is precisely why fracking cannot go ahead at present. It requires the Scottish Government - not the Scottish Parliament, these are two different things - to withdraw its objections or at least not to call in any planning application.

My Planning point is not silly, I looked at 1820 Planning Applications in my Local Authority last year, currently there are 12 applications with the Scottish Government, none of them are renewable applications. They prefer to let the Local Authorities deal with major planning issues unless there is a strategic reason, e.g. building on a flood plain, Roads and Transport infrastructure, etc. Yes, they have the power, but rarely use it.

You are making my point for me. You know this already but Scottish Ministers have the power to call in planning applications. Here's a briefing on the subject: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefingsAndFactsheets/S4/SB_14-87_Scottish_Ministers_Power_to_Call-in_Planning_Applications.pdf

This is exactly how the Scottish Government made clear that new nuclear stations would not be built in Scotland. Their threat to call in the planning applications from local government is enough to prevent any developer from proceeding with the time and cost involved. The same approach would prevent any attempt to commercially extract shale oil via fracking. The only way in which this becomes a matter for local government planning committees is in the event that Scottish Government firstly makes clear that it has no objection in principle to fracking taking place - and even then there's a fair chance Ministers would intervene due to the scale and sheer politics of any application.

9 out of the 11 applications called in by Scottish Government between 2011 and 2014 in the report linked to were for wind turbines. Perhaps you are processing planning applications in a local authority like Edinburgh where very few large scale wind farm applications are lodged?

Happy now are are you away to play your Lego movie again? :wink:

If your point is that current exploration licenses were originally issued by Westminster then I have no disagreement - but then exploratory drilling is a marginal side issue.

The real issue is the commercial production opportunity and the utterly crap nature of both Labour and SNP policies on that proposition. Both designed to grub for votes rather than to serve the best interest of the Scottish economy.

I won't be tiring of the Lego analogy any time soon - unless Nikla and the ravers move on from the Everything is awesome approach they've adopted.

Apologies for the bold, couldn't see a more sensible way to delineate between your post and mine.

[Moulin Yarns]

If your point is that current exploration licenses were originally issued by Westminster then I have no disagreement - but then exploratory drilling is a marginal side issue.

The real issue is the commercial production opportunity and the utterly crap nature of both Labour and SNP policies on that proposition. Both designed to grub for votes rather than to serve the best interest of the Scottish economy.

I won't be tiring of the Lego analogy any time soon - unless Nikla and the ravers move on from the Everything is awesome approach they've adopted.

Apologies for the bold, couldn't see a more sensible way to delineate between your post and mine.

No probs, and to give you a clue to where I live and work, there is a 68 turbine, 156.4MW windfarm about 7 miles as the eagle flies from my home!

[CropleyWasGod]

For those of you that missed UKIP in last night's debate:-

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/ukip-mep-david-coburn-went-on-periscope-and-everyone-pretended-they-couldnt-hear-him_uk_56fb8618e4b069ef5bff8b6d

[GlesgaeHibby]

For those of you that missed UKIP in last night's debate:-

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/ukip-mep-david-coburn-went-on-periscope-and-everyone-pretended-they-couldnt-hear-him_uk_56fb8618e4b069ef5bff8b6d

That is hilarious!!

[lucky]

Meanwhile in Scotland...

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/holyrood/874901/poll-leader-performed-best-scotland-debates/

Even your own paper, the record, called it for Sturgeon.:aok:

My paper? Not sure I'll claim any tabloid as mines. The Times is widely regarded as a non Labour paper. So it was an interesting call by them.

[snooky]

BTW, full marks to STV for having an audience that reflected the general political cross-section of voters in Scotland.
Underlined by the more or less consistant 50% of applauders (depending on the pro YES or NO angle of the comment).

This was a universe away from BBC's Question Time in Dundee.

[Hibrandenburg]

For those of you that missed UKIP in last night's debate:-

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/ukip-mep-david-coburn-went-on-periscope-and-everyone-pretended-they-couldnt-hear-him_uk_56fb8618e4b069ef5bff8b6d

:greengrin

[ronaldo7]

My paper? Not sure I'll claim any tabloid as mines. The Times is widely regarded as a non Labour paper. So it was an interesting call by them.

Sorry, it should have read, The Labour paper.:aok:

[Mr Grieves]

Police Scotland have already criticised the NP scheme saying it lacks clarity. Even as far as saying it could put more children at risk as the change and lack of clarity means children at risk who would normally be picked up could be missed. And of course major concerns about the already over burnded resources that are supposed to administer and carry this out.
http://www.spf.org.uk/2016/03/spf-media-release-named-person-proposals/

The Scottish Police Federation, who represent 98% of police officers in Scotland, are also supporting Named Person.

There seems to be a number of teachers, social workers, nurses and police officers - that folk were worried about being overworked- supporting the scheme...

[Mr Grieves]

Who identifies the named person?
Not got a clue?

[marinello59]

Only joined last year, but they do seem like a tight knit bunch. A bit like the Greens, but not anything like the Lab/Tories.:aok:

I guess I am just surprised that land reform is such a strong issue for you, can't remember you posting up anything about it other than to say you joined the other wee scamps at conference and voted against the leadership.
Lesley Riddoch is particularly strong on this. She has upset a few of the major estates in the Highlands and Islands so she seems to be doing something right.

[ronaldo7]

I guess I am just surprised that land reform is such a strong issue for you, can't remember you posting up anything about it other than to say you joined the other wee scamps at conference and voted against the leadership.
Lesley Riddoch is particularly strong on this. She has upset a few of the major estates in the Highlands and Islands so she seems to be doing something right.

So are the Greens and Andy Wightman. I'd adopt all he's doing on Land reform if I could.:aok:

[Moulin Yarns]

So are the Greens and Andy Wightman. I'd adopt all he's doing on Land reform if I could.:aok:

Second vote Green. Lesley Riddoch has said as much.

[ronaldo7]

Second vote Green. Lesley Riddoch has said as much.

No thanks:aok::greengrin

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

I've not read the whole thread but, whats with all the Lego references? It all seems a bit childish. I don't pay much attention to politics but, quite enjoy reading these threads.

[One Day Soon]

I've not read the whole thread but, whats with all the Lego references? It all seems a bit childish. I don't pay much attention to politics but, quite enjoy reading these threads.


You may need to read the whole thread. Its not like it is the length of the much missed Calender Signing thread...

[Moulin Yarns]

I've not read the whole thread but, whats with all the Lego references? It all seems a bit childish. I don't pay much attention to politics but, quite enjoy reading these threads.

I think the poster IDS started it in some thinly veiled dig at the SNP as the theme tune from the Lego Movie is something like "Everything is Awesome" and they feel this is the standard SNP answer to any question.

It has become tedious and boring. IMHO :agree:

[RyeSloan]

I think the poster IDS started it in some thinly veiled dig at the SNP as the theme tune from the Lego Movie is something like "Everything is Awesome" and they feel this is the standard SNP answer to any question. It has become tedious and boring. IMHO :agree:

What has? The SNP's stock response or ODS overuse of it? Or both? ;-)

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

I think the poster IDS started it in some thinly veiled dig at the SNP as the theme tune from the Lego Movie is something like "Everything is Awesome" and they feel this is the standard SNP answer to any question.

It has become tedious and boring. IMHO :agree:

I see, in the words of another cartoon song perhaps its time to "Let it go", the point has been made now.

[Beefster]

I think the poster IDS started it in some thinly veiled dig at the SNP as the theme tune from the Lego Movie is something like "Everything is Awesome" and they feel this is the standard SNP answer to any question.

It has become tedious and boring. IMHO :agree:

No more tedious and boring than posters who can't deviate from the party line, even when it's not even their party IMHO.

[GlesgaeHibby]

Another Dugdale U-turn. How many this week?!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35948407

[marinello59]

Another Dugdale U-turn. How many this week?!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35948407

To be fair to Dugdale that's a minor gaffe rather than a u turn.

[danhibees1875]

I've not read the whole thread but, whats with all the Lego references? It all seems a bit childish. I don't pay much attention to politics but, quite enjoy reading these threads.

I'm glad you asked. I thought there was maybe a failed PR video the snp had tried with the Lego theme. But googling the answer just led me back to hibs.net as the only reference (and one tweet from about 3 years ago where an msp had said everything was awesome at the snp).

Anyway, I'm quite enjoying the debate. Not sure where I'm sitting at the moment. Somewhere between them all and not really sure where my vote will go, never mind my second!

How would I find out who is running in my area? Edinburgh north and Leith .

[steakbake]

To be fair to Dugdale that's a minor gaffe rather than a u turn.

As much as a u-turn is an over statement, I think it's a bit more than a minor gaffe.

Just confirms her as slippery as any politician in her position. They only really believe what they say depending on who is watching on.

[Glory Lurker]

No more tedious and boring than posters who can't deviate from the party line, even when it's not even their party IMHO.

What if folk agree with the party line?

[Moulin Yarns]

I'm glad you asked. I thought there was maybe a failed PR video the snp had tried with the Lego theme. But googling the answer just led me back to hibs.net as the only reference (and one tweet from about 3 years ago where an msp had said everything was awesome at the snp).

Anyway, I'm quite enjoying the debate. Not sure where I'm sitting at the moment. Somewhere between them all and not really sure where my vote will go, never mind my second!

How would I find out who is running in my area? Edinburgh north and Leith .

All local Authorities should now have the lists of candidates.

http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/info/20033/elections_and_voting/1429/who_you_can_vote_for

[SkintHibby]

Dugdale is hopeless. Labour is still a complete shambles in Scotland. Happy days!

[Pretty Boy]

Dugdale is hopeless. Labour is still a complete shambles in Scotland. Happy days!

It's not really happy days though is it?

Having an uncontested, almost unaccountable one party state isn't at all healthy. Especially given the various failings that ruling party has overseen and continues to preside over.

[DaveF]

It's not really happy days though is it?

Having an uncontested, almost unaccountable one party state isn't at all healthy. Especially given the various failings that ruling party has overseen and continues to preside over.

It isn't but Labour in Scotland was, for as long as I remember growing up, a one party state and how did that work out.

It'll change though. SNP won't ride this wave much longer and I'd be amazed if Labour and Tories were fighting it our for 2nd place as I always assumed the traditional Labour vote would drift back now that the party have had their kicking. Will be an interesting election though.

[allmodcons]

It's not really happy days though is it?

Having an uncontested, almost unaccountable one party state isn't at all healthy. Especially given the various failings that ruling party has overseen and continues to preside over.

They're 100% accountable to the electorate. That's why we have democratic elections.
This one party state nonsense is just embarrassing. North Korea is a one party state.
Scotland is a democracy end of. As if proof of this is needed there's an election next month!!!!

[steakbake]

It's only a one party state from the point of view of the party who used to be the one party.

I didn't see them magnanimously proposing that after a couple of decades dominating Scottish politics, they'd politely step aside in the interests of democracy.

[Pretty Boy]

They're 100% accountable to the electorate. That's why we have democratic elections.
This one party state nonsense is just embarrassing. North Korea is a one party state.
Scotland is a democracy end of. As if proof of this is needed there's an election next month!!!!

The electorate doesn't have the ability to challenge the ruling party on a day to day basis, that is the job of the opposition and they are failing miserably. It was the opposition parties my post was a critique of as opposed to the SNP although it's good to see im my absence from debates on this forum any perceived slight of the SNP, who I voted for at the last 3 elections btw, is still jumped all over.

One party state may well have been a poor choice of words but the point remains that, in my opinion, a party with an overall majority who are not being correctly challenged and held to account during the parliamentary term is not a healthy situation. I would feel exactly the same if it was Labour, Greens or the Landless Peasant Party in the same position. Again, for clarity, that's a criticism of the abject opposition rather the ruling party.

[One Day Soon]

The electorate doesn't have the ability to challenge the ruling party on a day to day basis, that is the job of the opposition and they are failing miserably. It was the opposition parties my post was a critique of as opposed to the SNP although it's good to see im my absence from debates on this forum any perceived slight of the SNP, who I voted for at the last 3 elections btw, is still jumped all over.

One party state may well have been a poor choice of words but the point remains that, in my opinion, a party with an overall majority who are not being correctly challenged and held to account during the parliamentary term is not a healthy situation. I would feel exactly the same if it was Labour, Greens or the Landless Peasant Party in the same position. Again, for clarity, that's a criticism of the abject opposition rather the ruling party.


The lack of accountability is a serious and worrying weakness.

We are about to have an SNP Government which will have a five year term, coming on the back of 8 years in power. It will have a majority on all Parliamentary committees and it whips the backbenchers ruthlessly - no dissent there. There is no amending second chamber. The Scottish media is on its knees - especially the press - struggling with industry downturn and falling revenues - little meaningful scrutiny there.

It is not the SNP's fault - the people elect the Government - but it is very, very unhealthy. Just today we have the story of a deal Sturgeon signed with the Chinese for £10bn of private investment in Scotland. The response to journalist questions about it? Ask under FoI, because we're not telling you.

The opposition is weak and history teaches us that any party/govt wielding absolute power is dangerous.

[SkintHibby]

The lack of accountability is a serious and worrying weakness.

We are about to have an SNP Government which will have a five year term, coming on the back of 8 years in power. It will have a majority on all Parliamentary committees and it whips the backbenchers ruthlessly - no dissent there. There is no amending second chamber. The Scottish media is on its knees - especially the press - struggling with industry downturn and falling revenues - little meaningful scrutiny there.

It is not the SNP's fault - the people elect the Government - but it is very, very unhealthy. Just today we have the story of a deal Sturgeon signed with the Chinese for £10bn of private investment in Scotland. The response to journalist questions about it? Ask under FoI, because we're not telling you.

The opposition is weak and history teaches us that any party/govt wielding absolute power is dangerous.

How is it unhealthy?

The people are quite happy with the job the SNP are doing hence the reason they will get re-elected. If the people were not happy then they would get booted out. Simples!

As for your other comment about the deal Sturgeon signed - I can guess what newspaper that story has been dredged up from. If you think governments don't do underhand deals here, there and everywhere then you are naive in the extreme. It's a fact of political life. Why should Scotland be any different?

I'm having a good laugh at the pathetic depths journalists are going to to discredit the SNP with utter nonsense stories. Keep them coming because most of us can see through the SNP haters BULL S**T!

[allmodcons]

The electorate doesn't have the ability to challenge the ruling party on a day to day basis, that is the job of the opposition and they are failing miserably. It was the opposition parties my post was a critique of as opposed to the SNP although it's good to see im my absence from debates on this forum any perceived slight of the SNP, who I voted for at the last 3 elections btw, is still jumped all over.

One party state may well have been a poor choice of words but the point remains that, in my opinion, a party with an overall majority who are not being correctly challenged and held to account during the parliamentary term is not a healthy situation. I would feel exactly the same if it was Labour, Greens or the Landless Peasant Party in the same position. Again, for clarity, that's a criticism of the abject opposition rather the ruling party.

Not jumping all over you because I support the SNP, simply pointing out that the term "one party state" is nonsense.

[Pretty Boy]

How is it unhealthy?

The people are quite happy with the job the SNP are doing hence the reason they will get re-elected. If the people were not happy then they would get booted out. Simples!

As for your other comment about the deal Sturgeon signed - I can guess what newspaper that story has been dredged up from. If you think governments don't do underhand deals here, there and everywhere then you are naive in the extreme. It's a fact of political life. Why should Scotland be any different?

I'm having a good laugh at the pathetic depths journalists are going to to discredit the SNP with utter nonsense stories. Keep them coming because most of us can see through the SNP haters BULL S**T!

It's unhealthy because political systems are built on checks and balances. With no 2nd chamber Scotland doesn't have that. I accept that many upper chambers or whatever systems are in place aren't anywhere near perfect in many examples.

It's never been an issue before as the whole Holyrood set up was designed to negate the need for one, no one was ever supposed to win an outright majority. Again I'll say this isn't the fault of the SNP but a weak opposition and no amending chamber is not a comfortable poltical situation.

[steakbake]

Reading more about Kezia Dugdale's swithering over the independence issue - seems to me that Labour have an eye not necessarily on the SNP but a valid concern that they may be outflanked by the Tories as the reliably pro-union voice. I don't think that "middle" Scotland voters who are avowedly pro-union, would care whether it was Labour or the Tories carrying forward that agenda.

l think that outside of the SNP, where independence is one of their primary standpoints of course, it would be reckless of any party to think independence is completely off the table. Especially with the Tories trying to fix the electoral system to their advantage down South and big question marks over the future UK membership of the EU - something we were told 18 months ago, was of critical interest to Scotland.

[Hibrandenburg]

It's unhealthy because political systems are built on checks and balances. With no 2nd chamber Scotland doesn't have that. I accept that many upper chambers or whatever systems are in place aren't anywhere near perfect in many examples.

It's never been an issue before as the whole Holyrood set up was designed to negate the need for one, no one was ever supposed to win an outright majority. Again I'll say this isn't the fault of the SNP but a weak opposition and no amending chamber is not a comfortable poltical situation.

If it's a problem the system will correct itself. The SNP will have their time in office and if they don't live up to the expectations of the electorate then they'll be hoofed at the next election.

[steakbake]

If it's a problem the system will correct itself. The SNP will have their time in office and if they don't live up to the expectations of the electorate then they'll be hoofed at the next election.

This is the thing - various commentators trotting out the one party state stuff forget that all political careers end in failure. I wish some of them would be a bit stronger in being specific: what would they offer? Not keep telling us where they differ from the SNP and the often hyperbolic, faux outrage that goes with it. I like the greens precisely because they have a clear manifesto that differs in approach from all the others.

[Just Alf]

This is the thing - various commentators trotting out the one party state stuff forget that all political careers end in failure. I wish some of them would be a bit stronger in being specific: what would they offer? Not keep telling us where they differ from the SNP and the often hyperbolic, faux outrage that goes with it. I like the greens precisely because they have a clear manifesto that differs in approach from all the others.
Good post, it's exactly why I'll be voting for them this time around.


Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Glory Lurker]

A one party state with two governments, only one of which the country actually elected, being the far less powerful of the two.

And we aren't a state. There was a vote about that a couple of years ago which was won by the folk who didn't want us to be a state (the same ones that say Scotland is a one party state).

Apart from that, it is a very reasoned argument.

[Pretty Boy]

A one party state with two governments, only one of which the country actually elected, being the far less powerful of the two.

And we aren't a state. There was a vote about that a couple of years ago which was won by the folk who didn't want us to be a state (the same ones that say Scotland is a one party state).

Apart from that, it is a very reasoned argument.

Except it was myself who first used the one party state argument on this thread and I voted yes. I also admitted it was a poor choice of phrase and then expanded my argument. The lack of an 'upper house' in Scotland is something that I have long argued about, way before the SNP gained a majority and I stand by the argument that one is needed. That's not to hold up the House of Lords as a shining example of what I envisage either.

[One Day Soon]

How is it unhealthy?

The people are quite happy with the job the SNP are doing hence the reason they will get re-elected. If the people were not happy then they would get booted out. Simples!

As for your other comment about the deal Sturgeon signed - I can guess what newspaper that story has been dredged up from. If you think governments don't do underhand deals here, there and everywhere then you are naive in the extreme. It's a fact of political life. Why should Scotland be any different?

I'm having a good laugh at the pathetic depths journalists are going to to discredit the SNP with utter nonsense stories. Keep them coming because most of us can see through the SNP haters BULL S**T!


If you can't see the difference in purpose between the people choosing the government every four or five years on the one hand and having effective scrutiny of what the government is up to in between those elections on the other then you are either blinkered by party loyalty or remarkably trusting of those in power. It is unhealthy regardless of the party in government.

Of course governments do deals but part of the way we keep our democracy functioning is by holding them to account. This deal may be perfectly fine or it may not, the point is we don't know. I thought the whole point of many on the Yes side was precisely that Scotland should be different?

You could be right, it could be an utter nonsense story. The point is you don't have a clue whether it is or not.

[Glory Lurker]

Except it was myself who first used the one party state argument on this thread and I voted yes. I also admitted it was a poor choice of phrase and then expanded my argument. The lack of an 'upper house' in Scotland is something that I have long argued about, way before the SNP gained a majority and I stand by the argument that one is needed. That's not to hold up the House of Lords as a shining example of what I envisage either.

Where did I say I'd actually been paying attention to the thread, and wasn't just taking the chance to fire off a rant, like? :greengrin Sorry, it definitely was not intended to be a pop at you.

I am not against a second chamber in principle, but I think it would be excessive within a devolved system. I would say that's all the more reason for anti-SNP folk to argue for us to become independent as soon as possible. :greengrin

[One Day Soon]

A one party state with two governments, only one of which the country actually elected, being the far less powerful of the two.

And we aren't a state. There was a vote about that a couple of years ago which was won by the folk who didn't want us to be a state (the same ones that say Scotland is a one party state).

Apart from that, it is a very reasoned argument.


Strange, I distinctly remember voting in the elections for both governments.

There is a difference between the state and being a state. The state in Scotland is largely that which is run by the SNP - health, education, police etc.

This argument has nothing to do with who is in power as far as I'm concerned. It is all about the importance of keeping the government accountable to the people. My prescription would be for any party winning an overall majority to voluntarily take minority positions on two or three of the key Scottish Parliament committee. They won't though.

[Glory Lurker]

Strange, I distinctly remember voting in the elections for both governments.

If you are content that the Scots elected the Tories to run Scotland, then fine.

There is a difference between the state and being a state. The state in Scotland is largely that which is run by the SNP - health, education, police etc.

I hadn't picked up this nuance of the argument before. Perhaps those that espouse it could say "one party the bit of the state that operates the devolved functions". Not sure where that leaves the bit of the state that is not devolved and which is, er, run by one party.

This argument has nothing to do with who is in power as far as I'm concerned. It is all about the importance of keeping the government accountable to the people. My prescription would be for any party winning an overall majority to voluntarily take minority positions on two or three of the key Scottish Parliament committee. They won't though..why should the SNP (in this case) do this. It's not as if it is written in to the committee rules (that were devised by others).

[One Day Soon]

Strange, I distinctly remember voting in the elections for both governments.

If you are content that the Scots elected the Tories to run Scotland, then fine.

Anyone can twist that stuff to suit their own purpose. For example, in the last Scottish Parliament elections the majority of votes in both list and constituency sections weren't for the SNP, but the SNP ended up running Scotland with an overall majority.

There is a difference between the state and being a state. The state in Scotland is largely that which is run by the SNP - health, education, police etc.

I hadn't picked up this nuance of the argument before. Perhaps those that espouse it could say "one party the bit of the state that operates the devolved functions". Not sure where that leaves the bit of the state that is not devolved and which is, er, run by one party.

I think you're just splitting hairs here. We're talking about the Scottish Government and those elements of the state which it represents and delivers. Westminster at least has a second revising chamber and a stronger committee system where backbenchers take their scrutiny committee roles very seriously and are a lot more independent of government.

This argument has nothing to do with who is in power as far as I'm concerned. It is all about the importance of keeping the government accountable to the people. My prescription would be for any party winning an overall majority to voluntarily take minority positions on two or three of the key Scottish Parliament committee. They won't though.

.why should the SNP (in this case) do this. It's not as if it is written in to the committee rules (that were devised by others).

Another poster had asked for people to suggest ways to try and address the lack of scrutiny, that's why I made this suggestion. It is not in the Committee rules but then neither is the matter of who becomes Presiding Officer. The SNP chose to take that post in the last parliament which I suggest was not in the best interests of the Parliament.

[Glory Lurker]

Strange, I distinctly remember voting in the elections for both governments.

If you are content that the Scots elected the Tories to run Scotland, then fine.

Anyone can twist that stuff to suit their own purpose. For example, in the last Scottish Parliament elections the majority of votes in both list and constituency sections weren't for the SNP, but the SNP ended up running Scotland with an overall majority.

There is a difference between the state and being a state. The state in Scotland is largely that which is run by the SNP - health, education, police etc.

I hadn't picked up this nuance of the argument before. Perhaps those that espouse it could say "one party the bit of the state that operates the devolved functions". Not sure where that leaves the bit of the state that is not devolved and which is, er, run by one party.

I think you're just splitting hairs here. We're talking about the Scottish Government and those elements of the state which it represents and delivers. Westminster at least has a second revising chamber and a stronger committee system where backbenchers take their scrutiny committee roles very seriously and are a lot more independent of government.

This argument has nothing to do with who is in power as far as I'm concerned. It is all about the importance of keeping the government accountable to the people. My prescription would be for any party winning an overall majority to voluntarily take minority positions on two or three of the key Scottish Parliament committee. They won't though.

.why should the SNP (in this case) do this. It's not as if it is written in to the committee rules (that were devised by others).

Another poster had asked for people to suggest ways to try and address the lack of scrutiny, that's why I made this suggestion. It is not in the Committee rules but then neither is the matter of who becomes Presiding Officer. The SNP chose to take that post in the last parliament which I suggest was not in the best interests of the Parliament.

1 MP out of 56 is somewhat more of an issue than 40-and-bit % being less than half.

Okay, so let's agree that "one party state" does not mean what the words suggest it does. Surely, whatever interpretation you put on it, it means you can't change the government? That is hyperbolic nonsense. The opposition needs to dry its eyes, stop being useless, and maybe things will change.

A second chamber within a devolved system would be over the top. I'd support one in a fully-independent Scotland, though! The committee system at Westminster isn't the democratic wonder-drug that some non-SNP folk would like to make out, otherwise we would never have biased legislation. Fair enough the principle that you are suggesting is not contentious, but turkeys and Christmas and all that. Why wasn't it provided for when the Parliament was being legislated? Was it simply thought that the voting system would prevent it being an issue (very short-sighted)? In any case, why just a majority? A coalition is still a united government that deserves to be challenged, no? I don't remember the drum being banged for change by Labour and Lib Dems when they had the gig.

[marinello59]

Reading more about Kezia Dugdale's swithering over the independence issue - seems to me that Labour have an eye not necessarily on the SNP but a valid concern that they may be outflanked by the Tories as the reliably pro-union voice. I don't think that "middle" Scotland voters who are avowedly pro-union, would care whether it was Labour or the Tories carrying forward that agenda.

l think that outside of the SNP, where independence is one of their primary standpoints of course, it would be reckless of any party to think independence is completely off the table. Especially with the Tories trying to fix the electoral system to their advantage down South and big question marks over the future UK membership of the EU - something we were told 18 months ago, was of critical interest to Scotland.

Labour are quite rightly worried about being beaten in to second spot by the Tories but to suggest it is because Dugdale fears not being seen as the dominant reliable pro-Union voice is stretching it a bit. There's only one party for whom the constitutional issue over rides all others and it ain't Labour. I fear that tagging absolutely everything the opposition parties do as being 'Unionist' driven is going to prove counter- productive in the long term. There will be plenty of Yes voters backing parties other than the SNP.

[ronaldo7]

Things seem on track for the moment.

16351

I wonder if Kezia will want to http://www.snp.org/join after the results are in.

Onwards and Upwards fellow Scots.:aok:

[marinello59]

Things seem on track for the moment.

16351

I wonder if Kezia will want to http://www.snp.org/join after the results are in.

Onwards and Upwards fellow Scots.:aok:

I must have missed something. Has anybody ever doubted what the result is going to be? :confused:

[ronaldo7]

I must have missed something. Has anybody ever doubted what the result is going to be? :confused:

Have you got the result of the match on Saturday:greengrin

It's not over till it's over.:aok:

Meanwhile the current bun has done a hatchet job on Kezia. Wooft (I know, it's only the sun):aok:

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/7049225/Kezia-Dugdale-badgered-the-SNP-for-a-job-in-a-bid-to-kick-off-her-politics-career.html …

[steakbake]

Labour are quite rightly worried about being beaten in to second spot by the Tories but to suggest it is because Dugdale fears not being seen as the dominant reliable pro-Union voice is stretching it a bit. There's only one party for whom the constitutional issue over rides all others and it ain't Labour. I fear that tagging absolutely everything the opposition parties do as being 'Unionist' driven is going to prove counter- productive in the long term. There will be plenty of Yes voters backing parties other than the SNP.

Perhaps it's an exaggeration, on reflection. It is though, a dominant issue in our politics, I'm sure we'll agree.

I think more of people in the senior generation. Some Yes voters of course, but many No voters and many of them certainly opposed to any prospect of a rerun. A lot of the older folks I know were very firmly No, bordering on the Never. In some leafier parts of the country, I wouldn't be surprised if some people do turn to the Tories on that basis. I don't know - just a feeling that might be the case based on people I speak to. I also think it might be an attack line the Tories will use in those kinds of places: "the only vote that guarantees the Union..." kind of thing.

[marinello59]

Have you got the result of the match on Saturday:greengrin

It's not over till it's over.:aok:

Meanwhile the current bun has done a hatchet job on Kezia. Wooft (I know, it's only the sun):aok:

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/7049225/Kezia-Dugdale-badgered-the-SNP-for-a-job-in-a-bid-to-kick-off-her-politics-career.html …

Ah, I hadn't seen that. That is quite funny. :greengrin

[marinello59]

Perhaps it's an exaggeration, on reflection. It is though, a dominant issue in our politics, I'm sure we'll agree.

I think more of people in the senior generation. Some Yes voters of course, but many No voters and many of them certainly opposed to any prospect of a rerun. A lot of the older folks I know were very firmly No, bordering on the Never. In some leafier parts of the country, I wouldn't be surprised if some people do turn to the Tories on that basis. I don't know - just a feeling that might be the case based on people I speak to. I also think it might be an attack line the Tories will use in those kinds of places: "the only vote that guarantees the Union..." kind of thing.

I got a leaflet in from the Tories the other day and quite a lot of it was along the lines of protecting the Union so can I exclude them from my previous comments. :greengrin

[AndyM_1875]

Perhaps it's an exaggeration, on reflection. It is though, a dominant issue in our politics, I'm sure we'll agree.

I think more of people in the senior generation. Some Yes voters of course, but many No voters and many of them certainly opposed to any prospect of a rerun. A lot of the older folks I know were very firmly No, bordering on the Never. In some leafier parts of the country, I wouldn't be surprised if some people do turn to the Tories on that basis. I don't know - just a feeling that might be the case based on people I speak to. I also think it might be an attack line the Tories will use in those kinds of places: "the only vote that guarantees the Union..." kind of thing.

You may also find that the SNP could get hit in some seats by tactical voting where it is a 2 horse race.
Seem to recall that happened in a council seat up north recently where the LibDems won.

[Future17]

I can't believe the Dugdale "story" is even considered worthy of the name.

[marinello59]

I can't believe the Dugdale "story" is even considered worthy of the name.

It's a bit of knockabout fun, nothing more. Just The SNP's pal Murdoch doing his bit. :devil:

[steakbake]

I can't believe the Dugdale "story" is even considered worthy of the name.

Papers are littered with nonsense stories.

The Daily Mail had one about Chelsy Davy pulling a hair out of her mouth while shopping.

As this one goes, this one is pretty interesting. More because I believe, it shows that political animals will seek a route in to their profession, regardless of principles they eventually reflect.

I'm a total believer that the last people who should be in positions of power should be those who want to be there. How we do that, I'm not sure and that's why I am not involved in politics haha

[snooky]

Papers are littered with nonsense stories.

The Daily Mail had one about Chelsy Davy pulling a hair out of her mouth while shopping.

As this one goes, this one is pretty interesting. More because I believe, it shows that political animals will seek a route in to their profession, regardless of principles they eventually reflect.

I'm a total believer that the last people who should be in positions of power should be those who want to be there. How we do that, I'm not sure and that's why I am not involved in politics haha

Billy Connolly says it all at 40 seconds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58OBTi18bsY

[Hibrandenburg]

Papers are littered with nonsense stories.

The Daily Mail had one about Chelsy Davy pulling a hair out of her mouth while shopping.

As this one goes, this one is pretty interesting. More because I believe, it shows that political animals will seek a route in to their profession, regardless of principles they eventually reflect.

I'm a total believer that the last people who should be in positions of power should be those who want to be there. How we do that, I'm not sure and that's why I am not involved in politics haha

Do it like the old Greeks. They used to force some people to take up seats in the assembly.

[ronaldo7]

I can't believe the Dugdale "story" is even considered worthy of the name.

It's not, the lassie was only trying to get on in life, and made some enquiries. However when you're in the public eye, it opens up a whole new world of crap.

[snooky]

It's not, the lassie was only trying to get on in life, and made some enquiries. However when you're in the public eye, it opens up a whole new world of crap.

I feel sorry for KD. When you're young and starting out primarily you need work experience and, lets be fair, nowadays politics is a chosen career.
IMO, she deserves a bit of slack on this one. I note that Sturgeon has said more or less the same thing about the issue.
When you think on the major news stories that are going on in the UK and elsewhere in world, the time & space spent on this trivial item is pathetic.

[Moulin Yarns]

It's not, the lassie was only trying to get on in life, and made some enquiries. However when you're in the public eye, it opens up a whole new world of crap.

This story is old news. It first surfaced when she was elected to deputy leader. Her father is, I believe, a member of the SNP

[ronaldo7]

This story is old news. It first surfaced when she was elected to deputy leader. Her father is, I believe, a member of the SNP

:agree:

[marinello59]

It's not, the lassie was only trying to get on in life, and made some enquiries. However when you're in the public eye, it opens up a whole new world of crap.

Exactly. It's not as if she went and joined the Tories.

[ronaldo7]

Exactly. It's not as if she went and joined the Tories.

I thought she did in the run up to Sept 2014:wink:

[marinello59]

I thought she did in the run up to Sept 2014:wink:

A bit unfair but I did enjoy watching her squirm last week when Ruth Davidson asked her if she would be willing to stand shoulder to shoulder again if there was a second Yes/No vote.

[snooky]

This story is old news. It first surfaced when she was elected to deputy leader. Her father is, I believe, a member of the SNP

... and a Tory before that, I think.

[marinello59]

... and a Tory before that, I think.

It's not that big a leap to make. :greengrin

[steakbake]

It's not that big a leap to make. :greengrin

Let's be honest, four of the main parties in Scotland are pretty much just the same with varying shades on a continuum. Only one is properly radical and not afraid of putting forward that platform. The SNP like to say they are radical or appear it, but they aren't: they've built up a lot of credit with the electorate, but are afraid to spend any of it on doing something truly different. Labour are led by a "radical" leader certainly as far as Westminster might be concerned - and they are! - but most of their party can't bear it. Scottish Tories are slightly lighter blue than their RUK counterparts but that just takes them to the centre ground... and there we find the LibDems, who I have no idea what they stand for, other than varying shades of what the others don't. The only thing I'd ever give the LibDems some credit for is that after seeing them not in government any more, it's clear they did prevent some of the worse elements of the Tories from having it all their own way.

Green is the only one that stands out.

[marinello59]

Let's be honest, four of the main parties in Scotland are pretty much just the same with varying shades on a continuum. Only one is properly radical and not afraid of putting forward that platform. The SNP like to say they are radical or appear it, but they aren't: they've built up a lot of credit with the electorate, but are afraid to spend any of it on doing something truly different. Labour are led by a "radical" leader certainly as far as Westminster might be concerned - and they are! - but most of their party can't bear it. Scottish Tories are slightly lighter blue than their RUK counterparts but that just takes them to the centre ground... and there we find the LibDems, who I have no idea what they stand for, other than varying shades of what the others don't. The only thing I'd ever give the LibDems some credit for is that after seeing them not in government any more, it's clear they did prevent some of the worse elements of the Tories from having it all their own way.

Green is the only one that stands out.

I agree with all of that. But aren't the Greens now carrying out the role the LibDems used to?

[steakbake]

I agree with all of that. But aren't the Greens now carrying out the role the LibDems used to?

In what way? (Respectfully)

[Moulin Yarns]

I agree with all of that. But aren't the Greens now carrying out the role the LibDems used to?

I seriously hope not :wink:

http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i/keep-calm-and-blame-the-whipping-boy.png (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=imgres&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiQ_8a6kfzLAhWFbhQKHS0CBU4QjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk%2Fp%2Fkeep-calm-and-blame-the-whipping-boy%2F&psig=AFQjCNHL5Fdu6mgRK_p5qClNj4aHhftjkQ&ust=1460105088676273)

[Pretty Boy]

I've always given the Greens credit for, nationally at least, being the only 'mainstream' party to acknowledge, to an extent, that the rabid free market Thatcherite capitalism that has been the norm for the best part of 40 years is essentially a failed experiment.

Unfortunately in practice in minority control in Brighton they have enacted the Tory cuts without too much of a fight, certainly compared to say Liverpool council in the 80s.

[marinello59]

I agree with all of that. But aren't the Greens now carrying out the role the LibDems used to?

We'll all say we like their refreshing alternative take on things but we are unlikely to vote them in to a position of real majority power.
Just a thought.:greengrin

[RyeSloan]

I've always given the Greens credit for, nationally at least, being the only 'mainstream' party to acknowledge, to an extent, that the rabid free market Thatcherite capitalism that has been the norm for the best part of 40 years is essentially a failed experiment. Unfortunately in practice in minority control in Brighton they have enacted the Tory cuts without too much of a fight, certainly compared to say Liverpool council in the 80s.

Except the world today has nothing like rabid free market capitalism...it's a phoney corrupted facsimile where central bankers (and their political masters) control the markets with huge swathes of money printing and false interest rates creating huge and dangerous imbalances.

I quite like the greens for their approach on at least presenting some sort of alternative...sadly though policies like a 60% top rate of tax shows them to be rather removed from reality on a number of things.

[steakbake]

Except the world today has nothing like rabid free market capitalism...it's a phoney corrupted facsimile where central bankers (and their political masters) control the markets with huge swathes of money printing and false interest rates creating huge and dangerous imbalances.

I quite like the greens for their approach on at least presenting some sort of alternative...sadly though policies like a 60% top rate of tax shows them to be rather removed from reality on a number of things.

Do you mean that from the point of view that it will 'scare people off', or from the point of view that some feel it is unworkable and wouldn't raise money?

[RyeSloan]

Do you mean that from the point of view that it will 'scare people off', or from the point of view that some feel it is unworkable and wouldn't raise money?

Both! And that's aside from the moral objection I have to a government thinking it has a right to take more than 50% of people's earnings after a certain level no matter what that level is set at.

And if you want to discourage tax evasion and avoidance setting punitive tax rates is not the way to go about it. 60% rates will only encourage such activity.

[CropleyWasGod]

We'll all say we like their refreshing alternative take on things but we are unlikely to vote them in to a position of real majority power.
Just a thought.:greengrin

The main impact of the Greens, IMO, is as a pressure group.

If you look at the environmental policies of the main parties 15-20 years ago, and compare them with now, there will be huge differences. That's because those parties have looked at the Greens' policies and realised "there's votes in this green stuff.." Thus policies that were just "Green" are now mainstream, indeed law in some cases.

In that light, the Greens are winners. I, for one, would be happy for other parties to continue to appropriate the Green manifesto if it meant that those aims would be achieved.

[ronaldo7]

Theirs a bit for everyone in here. He covers all the bases and gets it right in the end:aok:

http://derekbateman.scot/2016/04/07/a-poor-do/ …

[RyeSloan]

Theirs a bit for everyone in here. He covers all the bases and gets it right in the end:aok: http://derekbateman.scot/2016/04/07/a-poor-do/ …

Unionist this, unionist that...he even brands the whole middle class as unionist. Reads all a bit like there is to much navel gazing going on for Batemans own good..

[AndyM_1875]

Unionist this, unionist that...he even brands the whole middle class as unionist. Reads all a bit like there is to much navel gazing going on for Batemans own good..

Bateman is basically like one of those guys you see in Vietnam war movies who has been out in the bush for a bit too long. He's a one time fierce intellect who is rapidly losing it, his once razor sharp analytical skills now blunted by repeatedly churning out simplistic SNP jargon & cliche to his target audience.

[ronaldo7]

The SNP Scottish Government leading the way again in safeguarding the Scottish steel Industry, or what's left of it. At least they kept going until a buyer was found.

http://youtu.be/NTW4LDx8SCQ

Meanwhile Samcam needs a spad on £53k pa to plan her wardrobe.

Better Together ma erchie.

Indy2 here we come.

[ronaldo7]

Unionist this, unionist that...he even brands the whole middle class as unionist. Reads all a bit like there is to much navel gazing going on for Batemans own good..

Some Unionists even dislike getting called Unionists. Shame eh.:greengrin

[snooky]

The SNP Scottish Government leading the way again in safeguarding the Scottish steel Industry, or what's left of it. At least they kept going until a buyer was found.

http://youtu.be/NTW4LDx8SCQ

Meanwhile Samcam needs a spad on £53k pa to plan her wardrobe.

Better Together ma erchie.

Indy2 here we come.

FFS £53k for a wardrobe!
Come back MFI, all is forgiven.

[Benny Brazil]

The SNP Scottish Government leading the way again in safeguarding the Scottish steel Industry, or what's left of it. At least they kept going until a buyer was found.

http://youtu.be/NTW4LDx8SCQ

Meanwhile Samcam needs a spad on £53k pa to plan her wardrobe.

Better Together ma erchie.

Indy2 here we come.

By buying cheap steel from abroad for the new Forth crossing?? :greengrin

[johnbc70]

By buying cheap steel from abroad for the new Forth crossing?? :greengrin

Wait for the reasons why it was not their fault.

[steakbake]

By buying cheap steel from abroad for the new Forth crossing?? :greengrin

Not how it went - I only comment because I know not because I want to stick up for them. There was a procurement process and no Scottish companies bid for it.

I don't see what any government could have done.

Subsidise it, and they'd get **** from the electorate and media and their political opponents. Plus it may not be legal.

[ronaldo7]

Not how it went - I only comment because I know not because I want to stick up for them. There was a procurement process and no Scottish companies bid for it.

I don't see what any government could have done.

Subsidise it, and they'd get **** from the electorate and media and their political opponents. Plus it may not be legal.

But don't let the facts get in the way of an SNP kicking.:wink:

[steakbake]

I'm sure they can stick up for themselves but the amount I've heard about this, it's a matter of accuracy than political points scoring.

[allmodcons]

Not how it went - I only comment because I know not because I want to stick up for them. There was a procurement process and no Scottish companies bid for it.

I don't see what any government could have done.

Subsidise it, and they'd get **** from the electorate and media and their political opponents. Plus it may not be legal.

:agree: 100%

Some posters don't mind letting the facts get in the way of an anti SNP rant .

IMO they should have built the bridge using the PPI model :wink:

[Colr]

Obviously, unlike UK ex-pats, I don't get a vote in the Scottish elections, however, I was looking at the candidate list for London mayor the other day and, considering how woeful it is, I wondered if there should be a none of the above box on ballots so I can record my dissatisfaction.

[steakbake]

Obviously, unlike UK ex-pats, I don't get a vote in the Scottish elections, however, I was looking at the candidate list for London mayor the other day and, considering how woeful it is, I wondered if there should be a none of the above box on ballots so I can record my dissatisfaction.

There should be some way of registering your discontent. If folks want to vote but for none of the cretins standing, they need to give options.

[CropleyWasGod]

There should be some way of registering your discontent. If folks want to vote but for none of the cretins standing, they need to give options.
Spoiling your paper is a way of doing that. Spoiled papers are counted and announced.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[Colr]

Spoiling your paper is a way of doing that. Spoiled papers are counted and announced.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

But not reported in the media when they publish announce the results. Only the geeks at the count hear it and they don't care.

[RyeSloan]

I see the greens have published their manifesto today. I like their land value tax idea for business and agree with their ideas to remove stamp duty on house transactions (a simple move that will increase supply). I also like their support of the concept of local government having more scope to raise their own finance.

Not surprisingly I don't agree with their personal tax bands or proposals nor their suggestion that higher earners are not currently paying their fair share (see previous posts where I have explained why ad nauseam!)

Their figures for their green energy workforce (200k) seem totally fanciful as does the concept of not providing government work to any employer who does not recognise a union.

All in all a mixed bag where they have some decent ideals but rather old fashioned ways to implement them (a forced living wage+, large personal tax rises on the few, more and more government spending)

[Sergio sledge]

I see the greens have published their manifesto today. I like their land value tax idea for business and agree with their ideas to remove stamp duty on house transactions (a simple move that will increase supply). I also like their support of the concept of local government having more scope to raise their own finance.

Not surprisingly I don't agree with their personal tax bands or proposals nor their suggestion that higher earners are not currently paying their fair share (see previous posts where I have explained why ad nauseam!)

Their figures for their green energy workforce (200k) seem totally fanciful as does the concept of not providing government work to any employer who does not recognise a union.

All in all a mixed bag where they have some decent ideals but rather old fashioned ways to implement them (a forced living wage+, large personal tax rises on the few, more and more government spending)

We already see this question on some of the public sector tenders that we do, I'm not sure if they can use that as a reason for rejecting the tender, but it is already asked.

[ronaldo7]

I've just heard that Labour are launching their Manifesto 8 days prior to Election day.

Postal voters won't get a look at it before they've voted. Speaks volumes. Disrespectful to the voting public.