SNP nonsense

[Peevemor]

Started with a Wings rumour so it must be true. If there was really £600k missing I'm sure Salmond, Cherry et al would already have used that to their advantage.


The SNP treasurer insists there is £593,501 in the 'Referendum Appeal Fund' which can be deployed 'instantaneously'

THE*SNP*has emailed all of its donors in a bid to “quash rumours” that money supposedly ring-fenced for indyref2 has already*been spent.*

It comes after the Electoral Commission published the SNP’s 2019 accounts late last night.*

The paperwork reveals*that the party has just under £97,000 in the bank, despite two major fundraising drives for an indyref2 fighting fund.*

However, the SNP treasurer, insists that there is £593,501 in the "Referendum Appeal Fund" which is ready to be deployed*"instantaneously".

The pro-independence*Wings Over Scotland blog has long accused the party of having spent the money “on something else.”

This morning, in an unprecedented intervention, the SNP’s treasurer, Colin Beattie wrote to all donors.*

He said: “I felt it was important for me to get in touch today to quash rumours spreading on social media about one of our fundraising appeals.”

Beattie insisted the funds “remain earmarked for the referendum and are ready to be fully deployed at a moment's notice”.

He added: “Since becoming national treasurer, I’ve worked hard to ensure ongoing prudence and financial control, striving to use your donations in the most effective and efficient ways possible.

“The current strength of our financial position, for example, enabled us last year to win a landslide in the General Election, secure our best European election result ever, and contest a parliamentary by-election.

“All three of these events were unforeseen, but thanks to donors like you and our inherent financial strength we were able to allocate £1.4 million at short notice to contest these elections.”

He said the pary had moved “from being heavily in debt” to “operating in the black and with zero commercial borrowing.”

“And that’s why I simply will not have this hard-won progress trashed,” he added.

“Like all other political parties, the SNP does not separate out restricted funds in annual accounts. Any such donations are woven through the overall income figures each year.

“The Referendum Appeal Fund has a current balance of £593,501 and we can fully deploy those funds instantaneously - guaranteeing maximum impact when vital funds are needed most.

“I’ll leave our opponents to the social media conspiracies, but I wanted you to get the facts direct from me.”

https://www.thenational.scot/news/18828133.snp-try-quash-rumours-independence-fighting-fund-already-spent/

[GlesgaeHibby]

Started with a Wings rumour so it must be true. If there was really £600k missing I'm sure Salmond, Cherry et al would already have used that to their advantage.


https://www.thenational.scot/news/18828133.snp-try-quash-rumours-independence-fighting-fund-already-spent/

There's an easy solution if the money is there. The SNP can come out and confirm it is there and point to where it's shown in the accounts.

From the 2019 accounts it appears that the money isn't there when looking at cash balance and net assets.

People that have contributed to a ring fenced fund in good faith have a right to a straight answer on this, rather than the garbage from Colin Beattie about it being 'woven through the accounts'.

[CropleyWasGod]

There's an easy solution if the money is there. The SNP can come out and confirm it is there and point to where it's shown in the accounts.

From the 2019 accounts it appears that the money isn't there when looking at cash balance and net assets.

People that have contributed to a ring fenced fund in good faith have a right to a straight answer on this, rather than the garbage from Colin Beattie about it being 'woven through the accounts'.

Do you have a link to the accounts?

[He's here!]

Relates to the £600k independence fund which was to be ring fenced for a future independence campaign, which is nowhere to be seen in the most recent set of accounts published by the SNP. Douglas Chapman is the 4th member of the finance and audit committee to resign in recent months. 3 resigned in March over Mr Murrell refusing to allow them access to the books apparently.

In addition to the unexplained missing £600,000, the SNP also received a warning recently about spending their UK government-allocated Covid funding on their election campaign:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19198801.snp-ministers-warned-use-covid-cash-pre-election-giveaways/

I see 'honest John' Swinney has swept away Chapman's allegations with an emphatic 'not to my knowledge' rebuttal. He's only the deputy first minister after all. How could he be expected to know one way or the other?

Another 'move along, nothing to see here' response from the SNP.

[Peevemor]

In addition to the unexplained missing £600,000, the SNP also received a warning recently about spending their UK government-allocated Covid funding on their election campaign:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19198801.snp-ministers-warned-use-covid-cash-pre-election-giveaways/

I see 'honest John' Swinney has swept away Chapman's allegations with an emphatic 'not to my knowledge' rebuttal. He's only the deputy first minister after all. How could he be expected to know one way or the other?

Another 'move along, nothing to see here' response from the SNP.And what if there isn't?

[GlesgaeHibby]

Do you have a link to the accounts?

http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/English/Accounts/ST0022937

[CropleyWasGod]

http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/English/Accounts/ST0022937

Thanks.

Those accounts are for 2019. At that point there "wasn't" £600k in the bank.

However, the statement above from the Treasurer says that there "is" £600k in the bank.

The 2 statements aren't mutually exclusive, as there's a 17-month difference.

Is there anything in the public domain that is more useful?

[GlesgaeHibby]

Thanks.

Those accounts are for 2019. At that point there "wasn't" £600k in the bank.

However, the statement above from the Treasurer says that there "is" £600k in the bank.

The 2 statements aren't mutually exclusive, as there's a 17-month difference.

Is there anything in the public domain that is more useful?

Those are the most recent set of published accounts.

Most of the money was raised in 2017, so it should have been showing in those accounts https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-40260769.amp

[Crunchie]

In addition to the unexplained missing £600,000, the SNP also received a warning recently about spending their UK government-allocated Covid funding on their election campaign:

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19198801.snp-ministers-warned-use-covid-cash-pre-election-giveaways/

I see 'honest John' Swinney has swept away Chapman's allegations with an emphatic 'not to my knowledge' rebuttal. He's only the deputy first minister after all. How could he be expected to know one way or the other?

Another 'move along, nothing to see here' response from the SNP.
His boss used the not to my knowledge defence in her testimony to squirm out of the Salmond inquiry, it seems to be a recurring theme.

[Peevemor]

His boss used the not to my knowledge defence in her testimony to squirm out of the Salmond inquiry, it seems to be a recurring theme.Or maybe just an honest answer?

Somebody has apparently complained to the police who now have to decide whether to open an investigation.

I'm not sure what other answer he could have given.

[Peevemor]

Those are the most recent set of published accounts.

Most of the money was raised in 2017, so it should have been showing in those accounts https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-40260769.ampBeattie also said that the SNP had been in debt but were now in the black. Could the "missing" £600k not be ring-fenced in an agreed borrowing facility?

[CropleyWasGod]

Those are the most recent set of published accounts.

Most of the money was raised in 2017, so it should have been showing in those accounts https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-40260769.amp

That would only be the case if the party ring-fenced the money. According to the Treasurer, political parties don't ring-fence funds (I'm not sure if that is the case, just quoting him.)

None of this, though, is supporting the assertion that they don't have the money currently.

[GlesgaeHibby]

That would only be the case if the party ring-fenced the money. According to the Treasurer, political parties don't ring-fence funds (I'm not sure if that is the case, just quoting him.)

None of this, though, is supporting the assertion that they don't have the money currently.

https://archive.is/tce0U

SNP spokesman in 2017 confirmed it was ringfenced.

[GlesgaeHibby]

Beattie also said that the SNP had been in debt but were now in the black. Could the "missing" £600k not be ring-fenced in an agreed borrowing facility?

I'm not sure - but would have my doubts given the initial appeals for funds were not exclusively to SNP members, but from independence supporters more widely.

[CropleyWasGod]

https://archive.is/tce0U

SNP spokesman in 2017 confirmed it was ringfenced.

So someone is telling porkies :greengrin

I will leave judgement on that to those who have an agenda. :cb

[TrapperJohn]

I'm not sure - but would have my doubts given the initial appeals for funds were not exclusively to SNP members, but from independence supporters more widely.
And another question may be ... Given the money was raised for one stated purpose - Indyref2 campaign- is it right to spend it elsewhere?

[Peevemor]

And another question may be ... Given the money was raised for one stated purpose - Indyref2 campaign- is it right to spend it elsewhere?They've already answered that.

[Crunchie]

Beattie also said that the SNP had been in debt but were now in the black. Could the "missing" £600k not be ring-fenced in an agreed borrowing facility?
Or could it have been used to meet Salmond's court costs :cb

[TrapperJohn]

They've already answered that.
And what was the answer? Yes or No?

[Peevemor]

And what was the answer? Yes or No?You must have missed this -

Beattie insisted the funds “remain earmarked for the referendum and are ready to be fully deployed at a moment's notice”.

[TrapperJohn]

You must have missed this -

Beattie insisted the funds “remain earmarked for the referendum and are ready to be fully deployed at a moment's notice”.

Thanks.

So does that mean the money has been spent ... but hey we will have another £600K from some other fundraiser when or rather if we have indref2? :wink:

[Peevemor]

Thanks.

So does that mean the money has been spent ... but hey we will have another £600K from some other fundraiser when or rather if we have indref2? :wink:What are you on about?

[CropleyWasGod]

His boss used the not to my knowledge defence in her testimony to squirm out of the Salmond inquiry, it seems to be a recurring theme.

In this case, the police have confirmed his claim.

[TrapperJohn]

What are you on about?
Sorry ....
If the money is not explicitly mentioned in the accounts - from 2017 onwards then

Has it been woven thru by some accounting practice?
or has it been spent on something that wasn’t indyref2?
or have I’ve missed indyref2?


#1 is nothing to see here
#2 is not good as the money was raised on false pretences and to save face £600k will have to be found from somewhere else.

[Peevemor]

In this case, the police have confirmed his claim.Yeah, but if all you have is innuendo and groundless claims then you'll crack on regardless of the facts.

[TrapperJohn]

In this case, the police have confirmed his claim.
The bbc report says there is a complaint that they are evaluating.

[CropleyWasGod]

The bbc report says there is a complaint that they are evaluating.

..which they have to do. But there is no investigation as yet.

[CropleyWasGod]

Sorry ....
If the money is not explicitly mentioned in the accounts - from 2017 onwards then

Has it been woven thru by some accounting practice?
or has it been spent on something that wasn’t indyref2?
or have I’ve missed indyref2?


#1 is nothing to see here
#2 is not good as the money was raised on false pretences and to save face £600k will have to be found from somewhere else.

On the other hand, the current treasurer claims that there is currently £593k in their account.

[Peevemor]

Sorry ....
If the money is not explicitly mentioned in the accounts - from 2017 onwards then

Has it been woven thru by some accounting practice?
or has it been spent on something that wasn’t indyref2?
or have I’ve missed indyref2?


#1 is nothing to see here
#2 is not good as the money was raised on false pretences and to save face £600k will have to be found from somewhere else.

Why and where would it be explicitly mentioned in the accounts?

Ring-fencing is a budgetary notion and budgetary provisions don't generally appear in accounts.

Say the SNP had £1m of debt in 2016. Since then with the various donations and subscriptions they've got themselves £100k in credit. If they still have a borrowing facility of £1m then where's the problem?

I've no idea if that's what the script is but is it not a possibility?

[TrapperJohn]

On the other hand, the current treasurer claims that there is currently £593k in their account.
Cool. So just different accounting practice for the earlier years then...

[CropleyWasGod]

Cool. So just different accounting practice for the earlier years then...

No idea. That's TBC.

[TrapperJohn]

Why and where would it be explicitly mentioned in the accounts?

Ring-fencing is a budgetary notion and budgetary provisions don't generally appear in accounts.

Say the SNP had £1m of debt in 2016. Since then with the various donations and subscriptions they've got themselves £100k in credit. If they still have a borrowing facility of £1m then where's the problem?

I've no idea if that's what the script is but is it not a possibility?

Yes it is.

It is just the term ring-fenced for indyref2 suggests putting it in a pot that u don’t touch until indyref2. :aok:

[Hibrandenburg]

Yes it is.

It is just the term ring-fenced for indyref2 suggests putting it in a pot that u don’t touch until indyref2. :aok:

Or you use to fight for the right to hold Indy 2.

[Skol]

See no evil. Speak no evil. Hear no evil.

[Mr Grieves]

The boy that's reported this to the police is Sean Clerkin and folk are taking it seriously :rolleyes:

[Skol]

The boy that's reported this to the police is Sean Clerkin and folk are taking it seriously :rolleyes:

Four SNP people have resigned over it yet we are turning a blind eye !

[Ozyhibby]

The boy that's reported this to the police is Sean Clerkin and folk are taking it seriously :rolleyes:

Only some people. [emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Four SNP people have resigned over it yet we are turning a blind eye !

Who?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peevemor]

Four SNP people have resigned over it yet we are turning a blind eye !

Who's we?

I'd like to know, but I'm willing to wait on clarification rather than jumping to conclusions and making all sorts of insinuations.

[Skol]

Who?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Three members of the Audit Committee and the Treasurer - forget their names.

[Skol]

Who's we?

I'd like to know, but I'm willing to wait on clarification rather than jumping to conclusions and making all sorts of insinuations.

That was the jist of the discussion I read from last night on here. Nothing to see, move on.

If I have misread that and we do want to see whats gone on then I agree with that. At present we know the money was raised and it doesnt appear to be ringfenced in the last available accounts. Whether or not it does in the most recent accounts we dont know. The fact that 4 people have resigned due to lack of transparency of the accounts from roles where there should be transparency suggests to me there is something to be investigated.

[Peevemor]

That was the jist of the discussion I read from last night on here. Nothing to see, move on.

If I have misread that and we do want to see whats gone on then I agree with that. At present we know the money was raised and it doesnt appear to be ringfenced in the last available accounts. Whether or not it does in the most recent accounts we dont know. The fact that 4 people have resigned due to lack of transparency of the accounts from roles where there should be transparency suggests to me there is something to be investigated.


The discussion is still there for all to see and I don't see how you get that jist at all.

[lucky]

The boy that's reported this to the police is Sean Clerkin and folk are taking it seriously :rolleyes:

This man is the fools fool and is a disgrace of an individual. He’s more anti anything that pro. He’s gets coverage for his aggressive stupid alleged campaigning. Jim Murphy is more an asset to the independence movement that this cretinous individual

[Peevemor]

This man is the fools fool and is a disgrace of an individual. He’s more anti anything that pro. He’s gets coverage for his aggressive stupid alleged campaigning. Jim Murphy is more an asset to the independence movement that this cretinous individual

Apart from that, what do you think of him?

[Skol]

Beattie also said that the SNP had been in debt but were now in the black. Could the "missing" £600k not be ring-fenced in an agreed borrowing facility?

That sounds like something Hearts would be proud of. Of course the money hasnt been spent, we will just borrow it when its needed !

[Skol]

The discussion is still there for all to see and I don't see how you get that jist at all.

I just re-read it and thats still the way I read the posts.

At this stage there is nothing proven, but there is enough doubt to make me suspicious.

[Peevemor]

That sounds like something Hearts would be proud of. Of course the money hasnt been spent, we will just borrow it when its needed !

Are you really having difficulty understanding my suggestion or are you being deliberately obtuse?

[Hibrandenburg]

That was the jist of the discussion I read from last night on here. Nothing to see, move on.

If I have misread that and we do want to see whats gone on then I agree with that. At present we know the money was raised and it doesnt appear to be ringfenced in the last available accounts. Whether or not it does in the most recent accounts we dont know. The fact that 4 people have resigned due to lack of transparency of the accounts from roles where there should be transparency suggests to me there is something to be investigated.

Can you at least point those of us who can't see where you believe people are saying "Nothing to see, move on" to where you are seeing this?

[Ozyhibby]

I just re-read it and thats still the way I read the posts.

At this stage there is nothing proven, but there is enough doubt to make me suspicious.

Your suspicious of the SNP? Well I’m well and truly shocked. [emoji23]
Us Indy types welcome the scrutiny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

Are you really having difficulty understanding my suggestion or are you being deliberately obtuse?

I am clearly having difficulty understanding this. What I think you are saying is the £600k is there as there is a borrowing facility as and when it is required. Which to me suggests the money is not there. Is that what you meant ?

[Skol]

Which other people are saying is nonsense, including external auditors.

Is this not saying there is nothing to see here ?

[Ozyhibby]

I am clearly having difficulty understanding this. What I think you are saying is the £600k is there as there is a borrowing facility as and when it is required. Which to me suggests the money is not there. Is that what you meant ?

No idea if this is the situation or not but it could be. If that SNP were operating with an overdraft of £500k and they were £300k into it and they received £600k from pro Indy supporters for the next Indy ref campaign with the money to be ring fenced. Their accounts would now show a balance of £300k with a £500k overdraft facility. In other words, the £600k is still there to be spent on indyref2. Totally hypothetical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peevemor]

Is this not saying there is nothing to see here ?

No, just that up until now there has been no evidence of dishonesty/fraud.

Further clarification is obviously required, but I think the SNP's detractors who are rubbing their hands in anticipation of yet another smoking gun are once again going to be dissappointed.

[Skol]

No idea if this is the situation or not but it could be. If that SNP were operating with an overdraft of £500k and they were £300k into it and they received £600k from pro Indy supporters for the next Indy ref campaign with the money to be ring fenced. Their accounts would now show a balance of £300k with a £500k overdraft facility. In other words, the £600k is still there to be spent on indyref2. Totally hypothetical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That sounds like the way my wife views our finances :confused:

I think I see what your are saying but:

1) That seems like a risky strategy to employ if other costs are required to be covered
2) It goes against what was said about the funds being ringfenced

I still get the impression the money has been used on bau running costs and we know the last published accounts didnt show the money being ring fenced. The question is, have they brought in enough money in 2020 to be able to show this in their latest accounts.

I still think that this could be simply stated and if it was the case we wouldnt have the 4 resignations due to lack of transparency.

Only time will tell.

[Peevemor]

That sounds like the way my wife views our finances :confused:

I think I see what your are saying but:

1) That seems like a risky strategy to employ if other costs are required to be covered
2) It goes against what was said about the funds being ringfenced

I still get the impression the money has been used on bau running costs and we know the last published accounts didnt show the money being ring fenced. The question is, have they brought in enough money in 2020 to be able to show this in their latest accounts.

I still think that this could be simply stated and if it was the case we wouldnt have the 4 resignations due to lack of transparency.

Only time will tell.

Exactly.

[Jack]

No idea if this is the situation or not but it could be. If that SNP were operating with an overdraft of £500k and they were £300k into it and they received £600k from pro Indy supporters for the next Indy ref campaign with the money to be ring fenced. Their accounts would now show a balance of £300k with a £500k overdraft facility. In other words, the £600k is still there to be spent on indyref2. Totally hypothetical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds reasonable. Why service, pay interest, on £300k when there's no real need. Money Martin Lewis would be proud!

[Crunchie]

That sounds like the way my wife views our finances :confused:

I think I see what your are saying but:

1) That seems like a risky strategy to employ if other costs are required to be covered
2) It goes against what was said about the funds being ringfenced

I still get the impression the money has been used on bau running costs and we know the last published accounts didnt show the money being ring fenced. The question is, have they brought in enough money in 2020 to be able to show this in their latest accounts.

I still think that this could be simply stated and if it was the case we wouldnt have the 4 resignations due to lack of transparency.

Only time will tell.
If this was the tories they would be dissecting it for months. As you say FOUR resignations and they don't think there's anything untoward? I think outwith this thread out in the real world even the most die hard of their supporters have to be concerned at this latest turn of events.

[Peevemor]

If this was the tories they would be dissecting it for months. As you say FOUR resignations and they don't think there's anything untoward? I think outwith this thread out in the real world even the most die hard of their supporters have to be concerned at this latest turn of events.

Time and time again the tories have shown themselves to be shameless, crooked b*****ds. This isn't the case with the SNP who merit the benefit of the doubt.

[Skol]

Time and time again the tories have shown themselves to be shameless, crooked b*****ds. This isn't the case with the SNP who merit the benefit of the doubt.

I agree with you on the Tories.

The issue I have is that the SNP hold the Tories up as everything that is wrong in the UK and as a result I expect a lot better from the SNP as a result. However there are so many areas of doubt that have cropped up in recent times that make them appear hypocritical (too me anyway).

[Crunchie]

Time and time again the tories have shown themselves to be shameless, crooked b*****ds. This isn't the case with the SNP who merit the benefit of the doubt.
:faf: you keep telling yourself that you might end up believing it

[Ozyhibby]

Time and time again the tories have shown themselves to be shameless, crooked b*****ds. This isn't the case with the SNP who merit the benefit of the doubt.

Especially when the four resignations all come from the ‘Alba’ wing of the party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

I agree with you on the Tories.

The issue I have is that the SNP hold the Tories up as everything that is wrong in the UK and as a result I expect a lot better from the SNP as a result. However there are so many areas of doubt that have cropped up in recent times that make them appear hypocritical (too me anyway).

Like what?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kato]

If this was the tories they would be dissecting it for months.


There wouldn't be time to dissect it for months. There are dodgy financial and governmental scandals on a weekly basis from the Tories - it would need to get in the queue.

[Peevemor]

:faf: you keep telling yourself that you might end up believing it

I already believe that the tories are inherently crooked.

I also believe that the SNP deserve the benefit of the doubt.

What's funny?

[Peevemor]

I agree with you on the Tories.

The issue I have is that the SNP hold the Tories up as everything that is wrong in the UK and as a result I expect a lot better from the SNP as a result. However there are so many areas of doubt that have cropped up in recent times that make them appear hypocritical (too me anyway).

They've been put under the microscope from without and within. If there was major dirt to be found then the British state and the Alba faction have yet to unearth it.

I'm not going to hold my breath.

[Smartie]

I agree with you on the Tories.

The issue I have is that the SNP hold the Tories up as everything that is wrong in the UK and as a result I expect a lot better from the SNP as a result. However there are so many areas of doubt that have cropped up in recent times that make them appear hypocritical (too me anyway).

Whilst I accept there have been doubts, there has generally been a willingness to comply with investigation and the vast majority of those "doubts" have either been dispelled entirely or dealt with appropriately.

The Tories are barefaced liars and are simply corrupt. As much as many would like to draw a false equivalence based on nonsense such as "no smoke without fire" unfortunately no parallels can be drawn.

I accept that people may have genuine reservations regarding the merits of Scottish independence but by and large I think the SNP and Sturgeon have appropriate levels of candour and honesty.

This whole "the money was only resting in my account" business is new to me but based on the fact that I'm still waiting for umpteen smoking guns to appear based on past allegation, I'm not exactly holding my breath that this will be as appalling as some would like to think - especially if it is being driven by that utter bell end Clarkin.

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210531/f435798764068fac91c442ab28ad4694.jpg

Just defect already. [emoji23]
These people worked so hard to get on the NEC and are chucking it all away.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210531/21df9735bfd43e3caa6cbd2baa6db713.jpg

He’s not wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[7 Up]

Shame it's only the NEC she's quitting.

[He's here!]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210531/f435798764068fac91c442ab28ad4694.jpg

Just defect already. [emoji23]
These people worked so hard to get on the NEC and are chucking it all away.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

By and large I find her as much of a pain in the erse as your average SNP MP/MSP (especially with her tiresome attempts to stop Brexit a couple of years ago), but Cherry's been shabbily treated by her party here. Her perfectly reasonable stance on the transgender issue is one of the few things I agree with her on and she's right to go public on the flak she's received. I don't think she deserved to get thrown under a bus for it.

[Peevemor]

By and large I find her as much of a pain in the erse as your average SNP MP/MSP (especially with her tiresome attempts to stop Brexit a couple of years ago), but Cherry's been shabbily treated by her party here. Her perfectly reasonable stance on the transgender issue is one of the few things I agree with her on and she's right to go public on the flak she's received. I don't think she deserved to get thrown under a bus for it.Yeah, that's what this is all about of course.... [emoji848]

[Crunchie]

By and large I find her as much of a pain in the erse as your average SNP MP/MSP (especially with her tiresome attempts to stop Brexit a couple of years ago), but Cherry's been shabbily treated by her party here. Her perfectly reasonable stance on the transgender issue is one of the few things I agree with her on and she's right to go public on the flak she's received. I don't think she deserved to get thrown under a bus for it.
:top marks I bet if you look back in time on here to when she took the govt to court over brexit she was a genius.

Now, just like the others who are questioning the leadership or resigning, they are all pariahs or were never any good anyway.

[Ozyhibby]

By and large I find her as much of a pain in the erse as your average SNP MP/MSP (especially with her tiresome attempts to stop Brexit a couple of years ago), but Cherry's been shabbily treated by her party here. Her perfectly reasonable stance on the transgender issue is one of the few things I agree with her on and she's right to go public on the flak she's received. I don't think she deserved to get thrown under a bus for it.

How has the party treated her?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crunchie]

How has the party treated her?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Deplorably might be a good word. Do you think she deserved to be sacked?

[Moulin Yarns]

Deplorably might be a good word. Do you think she deserved to be sacked?

https://news.stv.tv/politics/joanna-cherry-announces-resignation-from-snps-ruling-body?top

Where does it say she was sacked??

[Peevemor]

:top marks I bet if you look back in time on here to when she took the govt to court over brexit she was a genius.

Now, just like the others who are questioning the leadership or resigning, they are all pariahs or were never any good anyway.

She vocally opposed her front bench colleagues and party policy - and not just on the gender thing.

She was also the most influential of the pro-Salmond camp.

She was rightly set aside and it's no big surprise if she's being cold shouldered at NEC level.

I haven't seen anyone on here criticising the work she did throughout the whole pre-Brexit process. Far from it in fact.

It's hilarious the respect that she's now getting from the anti-SNP gang on here.

Very credible chaps!

[Ozyhibby]

Deplorably might be a good word. Do you think she deserved to be sacked?

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crunchie]

https://news.stv.tv/politics/joanna-cherry-announces-resignation-from-snps-ruling-body?top

Where does it say she was sacked??
She was sacked from the front bench not so long ago was she not.

[Ozyhibby]

She was sacked from the front bench not so long ago was she not.

And this was deplorable because?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

She was sacked from the front bench not so long ago was she not.

There was a reshuffle, and, along with others she no longer has a position on the front bench.

However, we are currently discussing her resignation from the NEC.

[Skol]

It appears to me that life was being made difficult for Cherry by the SNP with a combination of events such as her re-shuffling, making her NEC role difficult and changing the rules to make it harder for her to stand as an MSP in Edinburgh Central. It is pretty clear her face doesnt fit any more.

It does now seem to me that there is a pretty clear split in the Independence movement and there is a lot of animosity between the two factions. I am not quite why the SNP are so worried about Alba and what are the leaks that they fear so much. Short term though this has no impact.

I have found the jaggy.blog to be an interesting read in recent times. I dont always agree with his position, but it is well written and gives an alternative view on what is going on.

[Peevemor]

It appears to me that life was being made difficult for Cherry by the SNP with a combination of events such as her re-shuffling, making her NEC role difficult and changing the rules to make it harder for her to stand as an MSP in Edinburgh Central. It is pretty clear her face doesnt fit any more.

It does now seem to me that there is a pretty clear split in the Independence movement and there is a lot of animosity between the two factions. I am not quite why the SNP are so worried about Alba and what are the leaks that they fear so much. Short term though this has no impact.

I have found the jaggy.blog to be an interesting read in recent times. I dont always agree with his position, but it is well written and gives an alternative view on what is going on.

Cherry made life difficult for herself by being too outspoken in her criticism of some SNP policy. Now she's been sent to the naughty step which is only to be expected.

Sturgeon wants to choose exactly the right time for another indyref because she knows if it doesn't happen this time then it probably never will, however there is a small but vocal faction with the SNP (and now Alba) who don't want to wait and, had they had their way, would have tried to force something through a couple of years ago. They even question whether Nicola Sturgeon wants independence at all.

Sturgeon is a very tough cookie and is not to be messed with as more and more of Salmond's cronies are now discovering.

[Ozyhibby]

It appears to me that life was being made difficult for Cherry by the SNP with a combination of events such as her re-shuffling, making her NEC role difficult and changing the rules to make it harder for her to stand as an MSP in Edinburgh Central. It is pretty clear her face doesnt fit any more.

It does now seem to me that there is a pretty clear split in the Independence movement and there is a lot of animosity between the two factions. I am not quite why the SNP are so worried about Alba and what are the leaks that they fear so much. Short term though this has no impact.

I have found the jaggy.blog to be an interesting read in recent times. I dont always agree with his position, but it is well written and gives an alternative view on what is going on.

Is it really a split when it’s 2% splitting away from 98%? Surely those percentages would need to be a bit more even to count as a split?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Cherry made life difficult for herself by being too outspoken in her criticism of some SNP policy. Now she's been sent to the naughty step which is only to be expected.

Sturgeon wants to choose exactly the right time for another indyref because she knows if it doesn't happen this time then it probably never will, however there is a small but vocal faction with the SNP (and now Alba) who don't want to wait and, had they had their way, would have tried to force something through a couple of years ago. They even question whether Nicola Sturgeon wants independence at all.

Sturgeon is a very tough cookie and is not to be messed with as more and more of Salmond's cronies are now discovering.

Agree. She knows that the difficult and most important thing is building enough support for independence to win a referendum, not just getting a referendum.
If you look at people like Angus McNeil and Joanna Cherry, they spend more time trying to persuade people we need a referendum than they do trying to persuade people we need independence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

Agree. She knows that the difficult and most important thing is building enough support for independence to win a referendum, not just getting a referendum.
If you look at people like Angus McNeil and Joanna Cherry, they spend more time trying to persuade people we need a referendum than they do trying to persuade people we need independence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree that the timing is key and Sturgeon knows that there is too much risk right now. What isnt clear is when the time would be right and there is a feeling amongst some that Sturgeon will never seek a referendum.

As someone who doesnt support independence, I dont see any real effort being made to try and win me over whether thats from Sturgeon and the SNP or even in the responses I see to any questions in places like this.

[Peevemor]

I agree that the timing is key and Sturgeon knows that there is too much risk right now. What isnt clear is when the time would be right and there is a feeling amongst some that Sturgeon will never seek a referendum.

As someone who doesnt support independence, I dont see any real effort being made to try and win me over whether thats from Sturgeon and the SNP or even in the responses I see to any questions in places like this.

She's said that there will be a referendum during this parliament but only once Covid is under control. I don't see how whe could realistically be much clearer.

[lapsedhibee]

I dont see any real effort being made to try and win me over whether thats from Sturgeon and the SNP or even in the responses I see to any questions in places like this.

If Sturgeon was to lift as much as a pinkie to seriously try to win you over right now, Johnson and cronies Kuenssberg, Smith, Ross etc would have a meltdown about how she was banging on about independence in the middle of a pandemic.

[StevieC]

As someone who doesnt support independence, I dont see any real effort being made to try and win me over whether thats from Sturgeon and the SNP or even in the responses I see to any questions in places like this.

I wouldn’t expect any effort at all until a referendum is granted (or the right to hold one taken through the courts) and an Independence campaign is under way.

The Independence cause (it’s more than just the SNP) will have learnt lessons from the last one with regards to being to open and poorly prepared for the media onslaught.
I’d also maybe expect all the big questions (currency, borders, EU, etc.) to be addressed toward the end of a campaign than at the very start. The Alistair Darling “what’s your plan B” mantra on currency is why I think there would be tactical advantages to doing this.

[StevieC]

If Sturgeon was to lift as much as a pinkie to seriously try to win you over right now, Johnson and cronies Kuenssberg, Smith, Ross etc would have a meltdown about how she was banging on about independence in the middle of a pandemic.

Spot on.

[Just Alf]

If Sturgeon was to lift as much as a pinkie to seriously try to win you over right now, Johnson and cronies Kuenssberg, Smith, Ross etc would have a meltdown about how she was banging on about independence in the middle of a pandemic.

Ross etc were saying it during the election even when she was doing the opposite!

[Skol]

I wouldn’t expect any effort at all until a referendum is granted (or the right to hold one taken through the courts) and an Independence campaign is under way.

The Independence cause (it’s more than just the SNP) will have learnt lessons from the last one with regards to being to open and poorly prepared for the media onslaught.
I’d also maybe expect all the big questions (currency, borders, EU, etc.) to be addressed toward the end of a campaign than at the very start. The Alistair Darling “what’s your plan B” mantra on currency is why I think there would be tactical advantages to doing this.

This seems like a catch 22. Wont call a referendum until she has enough support. Wont give details to win support until she has secured a referendum. You can see why the Alba faction have concerns. Well I can anyway.

[Moulin Yarns]

This seems like a catch 22. Wont call a referendum until she has enough support. Wont give details to win support until she has secured a referendum. You can see why the Alba faction have concerns. Well I can anyway.

I don't suppose you have any idea what the answers are from ALBA to your questions?

[Peevemor]

This seems like a catch 22. Wont call a referendum until she has enough support. Wont give details to win support until she has secured a referendum. You can see why the Alba faction have concerns. Well I can anyway.

I don't see their logic at all. Both Alex Salmond & Joanna Cherry are far, far brighter people than me but they've lost me on this one.

[Skol]

I don't suppose you have any idea what the answers are from ALBA to your questions?

lol - agitate for a referendum now and hope to win the argument during the campaign.

The reality is that there is not enough support for the Alba approach and so thats not going to happen. Sturgeon has no need to rush and wont and in fact I would be surprised if there is a referendum during this term despite what she said. There is history about not delivering on manifesto promises. Boris just needs to avoid putting his foot in his mouth, which is actually the best option Sturgeon has to build support

[GlesgaeHibby]

If Sturgeon was to lift as much as a pinkie to seriously try to win you over right now, Johnson and cronies Kuenssberg, Smith, Ross etc would have a meltdown about how she was banging on about independence in the middle of a pandemic.

They'll have a meltdown at any point Sturgeon, or the SNP try to win voters over to backing independence. If it's in a couple of years they'll bang on about the need for stability after the pandemic and years of constitutional debate. There will never be a time where they wont be up in arms about it.

[GlesgaeHibby]

I agree that the timing is key and Sturgeon knows that there is too much risk right now. What isnt clear is when the time would be right and there is a feeling amongst some that Sturgeon will never seek a referendum.

As someone who doesnt support independence, I dont see any real effort being made to try and win me over whether thats from Sturgeon and the SNP or even in the responses I see to any questions in places like this.

As someone who does support independence, this is my greatest frustration with Sturgeon's leadership of the SNP. What has been done since she took charge to address some of the difficult questions that will need addressed ahead of indyref2 on currency, borders, pensions etc. The hard reality is that we're no further forward. All we got during the last 5 years was the carrot of indyref2 'next year' every year (except 2020 for obvious reasons). I'll be very surprised if there is a referendum in the next 5 years.

I also fail to see the logic in putting independence after recovery. If you believe independence is needed to deliver a fairer, better Scotland then why on earth would you want to leave most of the levers of recovery from the pandemic in the hands of Boris Johnson and the Tories. It should be independence for recovery. I fear the opportunity may be sailing away from us. In a few years, when things have hopefully settled will people really have the appetite to vote for major upheaval again? We've lived through a turbulent period from the 2008 financial crash, austerity, indyref, Brexit and now the pandemic. After 15 or so years of challenging times I think many folk will just want to see a period of stability and growth again.

[Ozyhibby]

As someone who does support independence, this is my greatest frustration with Sturgeon's leadership of the SNP. What has been done since she took charge to address some of the difficult questions that will need addressed ahead of indyref2 on currency, borders, pensions etc. The hard reality is that we're no further forward. All we got during the last 5 years was the carrot of indyref2 'next year' every year (except 2020 for obvious reasons). I'll be very surprised if there is a referendum in the next 5 years.

I also fail to see the logic in putting independence after recovery. If you believe independence is needed to deliver a fairer, better Scotland then why on earth would you want to leave most of the levers of recovery from the pandemic in the hands of Boris Johnson and the Tories. It should be independence for recovery. I fear the opportunity may be sailing away from us. In a few years, when things have hopefully settled will people really have the appetite to vote for major upheaval again? We've lived through a turbulent period from the 2008 financial crash, austerity, indyref, Brexit and now the pandemic. After 15 or so years of challenging times I think many folk will just want to see a period of stability and growth again.

Sturgeon has lifted support for independence to the point where it is 50/50. That’s no mean feat. And the SNP should always operate within the law so we have to work with the UK govt to secure the referendum. There are no shortcuts to this.
As far as currency goes, there has been a change in SNP policy. It is now for a Scottish currency pegged to the pound initially. This is different from the last campaign and has the benefit that nobody can say no to it.
The borders will be the same as the NI-UK border. Things may change slightly there over time but the arrangements there will be the same as we have. There will be free movement for people but some goods will be restricted. That’s obviously not as good as we have now but the trade off will be full and free access to the very much larger European market.
With Pensions, I’m not sure if there is a policy yet but if I was them I would include a commitment to raise our pensions to the EU average. That would be a significant uplift.
As far as waiting until after Covid, that’s just smart politics. The strength of the Yes campaign is in the mass gatherings and the massive amount of grassroots activists getting out there and spreading the word. Difficult to do in the middle of a pandemic.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

Sturgeon has lifted support for independence to the point where it is 50/50. That’s no mean feat. And the SNP should always operate within the law so we have to work with the UK govt to secure the referendum. There are no shortcuts to this.
As far as currency goes, there has been a change in SNP policy. It is now for a Scottish currency pegged to the pound initially. This is different from the last campaign and has the benefit that nobody can say no to it.
The borders will be the same as the NI-UK border. Things may change slightly there over time but the arrangements there will be the same as we have. There will be free movement for people but some goods will be restricted. That’s obviously not as good as we have now but the trade off will be full and free access to the very much larger European market.
With Pensions, I’m not sure if there is a policy yet but if I was them I would include a commitment to raise our pensions to the EU average. That would be a significant uplift.
As far as waiting until after Covid, that’s just smart politics. The strength of the Yes campaign is in the mass gatherings and the massive amount of grassroots activists getting out there and spreading the word. Difficult to do in the middle of a pandemic.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am no expert but the problem with the currency plan is that Scotland would then have no control over decisions made by the BoE and the BoE would not factor Scotland or any impact into their actions. I know you can argue thats the case now, however potentially you are losing control. The currently plan is then to establish our own, but hat comes with a risk of devaluation which could have wider issues. The ultimate endgame is to join the Euro.

[Ozyhibby]

I am no expert but the problem with the currency plan is that Scotland would then have no control over decisions made by the BoE and the BoE would not factor Scotland or any impact into their actions. I know you can argue thats the case now, however potentially you are losing control. The currently plan is then to establish our own, but hat comes with a risk of devaluation which could have wider issues. The ultimate endgame is to join the Euro.

Of course we would not have full control until we set up our own currency but it’s a stepping stone. And it doesn’t have to take that long to set up a Scottish currency. I think it will be pegged for about ten years to allow contracts, mortgages etc to be converted to Scottish pound.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CloudSquall]

There is a risk of devaluation with every currency in the world, with the level of exports Scotland has there would be a consistent demand for the currency which would limit any type of run on the currency.


In the beginning of a separate currency however there would be the potential for an "attack" by the markets, however with significant planning and reserves plus following a time pegged to the rUK pound which woud give time for confidence to build in an independent Scotland and currency I don't think this would be a significant risk.

I remember reading an article that explained very well that due to the reserve swapping between the Bank of England and Bank of Scotland the chances of a devaluation of Argentine levels would be extremely minimal.

[Smartie]

I'm content with the "slowly slowly" approach.

The current situation is good for the SNP and the independence cause and I think there is sense in letting Boris Johnson and the Tories do the work for them. England is going very much in one direction, Scotland is going in the other and rather than debate "minutiae" (I know) it's more about a matter of time - let the unionists die off and let the youngsters make up their own minds. There are very few floating voters who will be prepared to have their minds changed by anything.

For me the issue is far less about what is happening in Scotland and is being debated in Scotland but rather what is happening in England. I'm prepared to keep and open mind on remaining in the union but for that to happen it would require the vast nation of England to get a firm grip of itself, and I reckon hell will freeze over or Boris and Carrie will have a long, happy marriage before that happens. I've simply lost faith in them, see no way how any Labour Party or even any centrist party is going to make any headway there anytime soon. They're off to hell in a far right handcart and it's just a matter of how long it takes before enough Scots decide they don't want to be part of that any more. Aggression and animosity from South of the border is only going to increase.

I just find all the "but what about the pound" stuff utterly tedious. The likelihood of a nation like Scotland, with all of it's resources, it's established legal system and all the rest of it becoming a chilly Albania is ridiculously remote. We'd get the odd thing wrong and we'd fix it. There would be hardship along the way but as it stands there is a fair bit of hardship around already if you care to look for it, and it's not going to get any better with the way England is looking at being for at least the next decade with the level of support this absolutely god-awful corrupt and incompetent government has from it's population there.

I guess the problem we have here is that there are a few people who actually have it really good and they don't want to risk what they already have by way of power and wealth. Their trick is to make you think you're one of them and that you're going to lose out in every way come independence. I'm convinced the reality is that the vast majority of Scots would be better off. There would be more to go around. It would require a risk on behalf of those who already have a lot though, and so they will (perhaps understandably on some levels) be going all out to prevent it from happening.

[StevieC]

This seems like a catch 22. Wont call a referendum until she has enough support. Wont give details to win support until she has secured a referendum. You can see why the Alba faction have concerns. Well I can anyway.

That’s a very black and white approach to something that’s a shade of grey.

Views are constantly changing with certain voters (depending on what “news” gets aired on TV) but they will have an idea of how many “don’t knows” could be persuaded, and will have an idea of how many “yes” they already have. That’ll give them an idea of when to fire the starters gun.

[GlesgaeHibby]

Sturgeon has lifted support for independence to the point where it is 50/50. That’s no mean feat. And the SNP should always operate within the law so we have to work with the UK govt to secure the referendum. There are no shortcuts to this.
As far as currency goes, there has been a change in SNP policy. It is now for a Scottish currency pegged to the pound initially. This is different from the last campaign and has the benefit that nobody can say no to it.
The borders will be the same as the NI-UK border. Things may change slightly there over time but the arrangements there will be the same as we have. There will be free movement for people but some goods will be restricted. That’s obviously not as good as we have now but the trade off will be full and free access to the very much larger European market.
With Pensions, I’m not sure if there is a policy yet but if I was them I would include a commitment to raise our pensions to the EU average. That would be a significant uplift.
As far as waiting until after Covid, that’s just smart politics. The strength of the Yes campaign is in the mass gatherings and the massive amount of grassroots activists getting out there and spreading the word. Difficult to do in the middle of a pandemic.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd argue that the increase in support is as much down to Boris, Brexit, and the form of Brexit delivered by the Tories, as well as more younger voters joining the pool of eligible voters than anything the SNP or NS have done. I reckon if the SNP had put as much effort into delivering indyref2 as they did in trying to oppose Brexit we'd already be independent. Still, whatever way the 50:50 support was reached, it's a fantastic starting point given that we started the last campaign at around 30% support for yes.

Completely agree that the greatest strength of the yes movement is a huge number of grassroots activists, and successfully mobilising them will be key to victory.

[Peevemor]

I'd argue that the increase in support is as much down to Boris, Brexit, and the form of Brexit delivered by the Tories, as well as more younger voters joining the pool of eligible voters than anything the SNP or NS have done. I reckon if the SNP had put as much effort into delivering indyref2 as they did in trying to oppose Brexit we'd already be independent. Still, whatever way the 50:50 support was reached, it's a fantastic starting point given that we started the last campaign at around 30% support for yes.

Completely agree that the greatest strength of the yes movement is a huge number of grassroots activists, and successfully mobilising them will be key to victory.I'm not sure that's true. Salmond (for example) has always been a marmite character. I'm pro SNP and even though I have/had a huge amount of respect for his intellect and political skills I can't say I've ever really liked him.

I'd probably be the same with Joanna Cherry. I've met her a few times as I've known her wee sister for almost 30 years. Again she's one very smart cookie but she'll never get the same affection from the public that Nicola Sturgeon attracts.

To gain votes a party leader had to be liked and trusted and Sturgeon's miles ahead of anyone in this respect.

[He's here!]

lol - agitate for a referendum now and hope to win the argument during the campaign.

The reality is that there is not enough support for the Alba approach and so thats not going to happen. Sturgeon has no need to rush and wont and in fact I would be surprised if there is a referendum during this term despite what she said. There is history about not delivering on manifesto promises. Boris just needs to avoid putting his foot in his mouth, which is actually the best option Sturgeon has to build support

I'll be quite surprised if there's a referendum during this term as well. The oft-repeated mantra that the blessed Nicola is still 'building the case' after all these years seems to be enough for the converted to keep the SNP in power ad infinitum but the reality I suspect is five more years of grievance politics from Sturgeon at Holyrood and Blackford at Westminster. The latter is that rarest of beasts, somebody you're actually disappointed to learn is a Hibby. Him and that slippery husband of Sturgeon's.

Internally the party looks horribly divided, while Salmond v Sturgeon part 2 is looming large in the courts - and the fact that in the midst of a pandemic the repellent Angus Robertson came out with the assertion that the independence will happen naturally once a few thousand more of those annoying old folk die off sums up the kind of mentality that exists among those fixated on separation. It's not a great look.

[Peevemor]

I'll be quite surprised if there's a referendum during this term as well. The oft-repeated mantra that the blessed Nicola is still 'building the case' after all these years seems to be enough for the converted to keep the SNP in power ad infinitum but the reality I suspect is five more years of grievance politics from Sturgeon at Holyrood and Blackford at Westminster. The latter is that rarest of beasts, somebody you're actually disappointed to learn is a Hibby. Him and that slippery husband of Sturgeon's.

Internally the party looks horribly divided, while Salmond v Sturgeon part 2 is looming large in the courts - and the fact that in the midst of a pandemic the repellent Angus Robertson came out with the assertion that the independence will happen naturally once a few thousand more of those annoying old folk die off sums up the kind of mentality that exists among those fixated on separation. It's not a great look.

Haha - wishful thinking!

As for "five more years of grievance politics" - were they meant to stand and applaud throughout the Brexit fiasco(s) while Labour sat in the corner twiddling their thumbs?

[Crunchie]

Of course we would not have full control until we set up our own currency but it’s a stepping stone. And it doesn’t have to take that long to set up a Scottish currency. I think it will be pegged for about ten years to allow contracts, mortgages etc to be converted to Scottish pound.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why would you need a currency, surely the euro is a slam dunk.

[Ozyhibby]

Why would you need a currency, surely the euro is a slam dunk.

I’m personally comfortable with the euro but the most important thing is that we get to choose what best suits us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

I'll be quite surprised if there's a referendum during this term as well. The oft-repeated mantra that the blessed Nicola is still 'building the case' after all these years seems to be enough for the converted to keep the SNP in power ad infinitum but the reality I suspect is five more years of grievance politics from Sturgeon at Holyrood and Blackford at Westminster. The latter is that rarest of beasts, somebody you're actually disappointed to learn is a Hibby. Him and that slippery husband of Sturgeon's.

Internally the party looks horribly divided, while Salmond v Sturgeon part 2 is looming large in the courts - and the fact that in the midst of a pandemic the repellent Angus Robertson came out with the assertion that the independence will happen naturally once a few thousand more of those annoying old folk die off sums up the kind of mentality that exists among those fixated on separation. It's not a great look.

That much hatred isn’t good for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crunchie]

I’m personally comfortable with the euro but the most important thing is that we get to choose what best suits us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thankfully the majority of the country sees sense and doesn't, and until they have a concrete plan of what they're going to do, independence is pie in the sky imo.

[Crunchie]

That much hatred isn’t good for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't see any hatred in that post whatsoever but dear god man I've seen plenty in a lot of yours :confused:

[Crunchie]

She vocally opposed her front bench colleagues and party policy - and not just on the gender thing.

She was also the most influential of the pro-Salmond camp.

She was rightly set aside and it's no big surprise if she's being cold shouldered at NEC level.

I haven't seen anyone on here criticising the work she did throughout the whole pre-Brexit process. Far from it in fact.

It's hilarious the respect that she's now getting from the anti-SNP gang on here.

Very credible chaps!
And equally hilarious that after each defection the snp cabal dismiss each defector as a dud :cb

[Ozyhibby]

And equally hilarious that after each defection the snp cabal dismiss each defector as a dud :cb

While you elevate them to new saviour of the union. [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peevemor]

And equally hilarious that after each defection the snp cabal dismiss each defector as a dud :cb

I haven't seen anyone dismiss Joanna Cherry as a dud. Are you making things up again?

[Crunchie]

While you elevate them to new saviour of the union. [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I just find it all a hilarious turn of events whilst you all combust from within :greengrin I don't think I'll ever see independence in my lifetime but if I do It'll not affect my wealth or life I'm too old. :wink:

[Crunchie]

I haven't seen anyone dismiss Joanna Cherry as a dud. Are you making things up again?
I don't need to make anything up it's all there :aok:

She has been the victim of a smear campaign from within the party for a while now, much the same as goes on here.

[Peevemor]

I don't need to make anything up it's all there :aok:

She has been the victim of a smear campaign from within the party for a while now, much the same as goes on here.

Smear campaigns on here?

You're either making stuff up or imagining things.

[Crunchie]

Smear campaigns on here?

You're either making stuff up or imagining things.
Ok boss, things to do here. Have a great day :aok:

[lucky]

Why are SNP members, MSPs and MP not allowed to have independent opinions on subjects. The ridiculous attempt at total control of everything and everyone in the party is stiffing debate and and our democratic institutions. They can’t all agree on everything all the time. It’s good for political parties to have a healthy debate without the witch-hunts that go on.

[Ozyhibby]

Why are SNP members, MSPs and MP not allowed to have independent opinions on subjects. The ridiculous attempt at total control of everything and everyone in the party is stiffing debate and and our democratic institutions. They can’t all agree on everything all the time. It’s good for political parties to have a healthy debate without the witch-hunts that go on.

Witch hunts?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hiber-nation]

Why are SNP members, MSPs and MP not allowed to have independent opinions on subjects. The ridiculous attempt at total control of everything and everyone in the party is stiffing debate and and our democratic institutions. They can’t all agree on everything all the time. It’s good for political parties to have a healthy debate without the witch-hunts that go on.

All this stuff about SNP witch hunts is utter guff. Hollie Cameron anyone??

[Smartie]

Why are SNP members, MSPs and MP not allowed to have independent opinions on subjects. The ridiculous attempt at total control of everything and everyone in the party is stiffing debate and and our democratic institutions. They can’t all agree on everything all the time. It’s good for political parties to have a healthy debate without the witch-hunts that go on.

I tend to agree tbh.

A party bound by one common goal should have room for different opinions on all manner of subjects.

I’m not sure the culture within the SNP is entirely healthy in this regard and you might argue that this is what led to the establishment of the Alba party.

[Smartie]

I haven't seen anyone dismiss Joanna Cherry as a dud. Are you making things up again?

She’s clearly a very intelligent and competent woman and when focussed in the right direction should be a huge asset.

When being more wayward she can be a bit of a liability though, and given there has been a bit of an unhappy relationship between herself and the SNP for a while, I can understand why her departure may not be mourned as a disastrous loss.

Has anyone actually left yet that would be considered either a surprise or much of a loss? MacAskill maybe?

[Peevemor]

I tend to agree tbh.

A party bound by one common goal should have room for different opinions on all manner of subjects.

Correct, but the big hitters/front benchers should all sing from the same hymn sheet, more or less, in terms of major policy.

Scottish independence is the raison d'être of the SNP - senior party figures shouldn't be contradicting each other (and certainly not the leadership) regarding the timetable and method of trying to obtain it.

[He's here!]

I don't need to make anything up it's all there :aok:

She has been the victim of a smear campaign from within the party for a while now, much the same as goes on here.

'Stalinist revisionism' was, I recall, the phrase Cherry used to describe the way she was airbrushed out of the SNP front bench reshuffle by Blackford. Mind you Blackford's a guy who likely doesn't bother too much about whose sensibilities he offends judging by the flak he's taken over his alleged role in the disgraceful hounding of the late Charles Kennedy.

[Crunchie]

'Stalinist revisionism' was, I recall, the phrase Cherry used to describe the way she was airbrushed out of the SNP front bench reshuffle by Blackford. Mind you Blackford's a guy who likely doesn't bother too much about whose sensibilities he offends judging by the flak he's taken over his alleged role in the disgraceful hounding of the late Charles Kennedy.
I wouldn't be able to keep a straight face if bully boy started on me :faf:

[Ozyhibby]

Cherry will be gone from the SNP shortly I would think. Her refusal to campaign in the Scottish elections has not gone down well. She’ll likely defect to Alba at some point or step back from politics altogether. She’s not a team player at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WeeRussell]

Thankfully the majority of the country sees sense and doesn't, and until they have a concrete plan of what they're going to do, independence is pie in the sky imo.

Are you saying that if you’re given the ‘concrete plan’ for currency (whatever that looks like) you won’t find another ‘issue’ to tell us all that independence is pie in the sky? Personally I don’t think it’s the determining factor on an independence vote and in some ways is an old argument/tactic.

FWIW I’m in agreement with Oz. I wouldn’t have a problem joining the euro as things stand.

[Jack]

'Stalinist revisionism' was, I recall, the phrase Cherry used to describe the way she was airbrushed out of the SNP front bench reshuffle by Blackford. Mind you Blackford's a guy who likely doesn't bother too much about whose sensibilities he offends judging by the flak he's taken over his alleged role in the disgraceful hounding of the late Charles Kennedy.

I've never heard about this hounding. Do you have a link to anything supporting this?

A link will do. We wouldn't want to replicate anything unfounded here.

[lord bunberry]

I'll be quite surprised if there's a referendum during this term as well. The oft-repeated mantra that the blessed Nicola is still 'building the case' after all these years seems to be enough for the converted to keep the SNP in power ad infinitum but the reality I suspect is five more years of grievance politics from Sturgeon at Holyrood and Blackford at Westminster. The latter is that rarest of beasts, somebody you're actually disappointed to learn is a Hibby. Him and that slippery husband of Sturgeon's.

Internally the party looks horribly divided, while Salmond v Sturgeon part 2 is looming large in the courts - and the fact that in the midst of a pandemic the repellent Angus Robertson came out with the assertion that the independence will happen naturally once a few thousand more of those annoying old folk die off sums up the kind of mentality that exists among those fixated on separation. It's not a great look.
I can’t take anything you say seriously with that much hatred.

[Peevemor]

I can’t take anything you say seriously with that much hatred.

It's not so much the hatred but the level of wishful thinking/fantasy that removes any credibility from these posts.

[He's here!]

I've never heard about this hounding. Do you have a link to anything supporting this?

A link will do. We wouldn't want to replicate anything unfounded here.

There's been plenty written and said about it over the years. Here's the most recent article I read:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ian-blackford-and-the-hounding-of-charles-kennedy

[Peevemor]

There's been plenty written and said about it over the years. Here's the most recent article I read:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ian-blackford-and-the-hounding-of-charles-kennedy

The Spectator - good unbiased source.

Charles Kennedy was in a bad way and was no longer capable of doing his job. That a political opponent referenced this in the run up to an election is hardly hounding, it was simply the unfortunate truth.

[degenerated]

The Spectator - good unbiased source.

Charles Kennedy was in a bad way and was no longer capable of doing his job. That a political opponent referenced this in the run up to an election is hardly hounding, it was simply the unfortunate truth.From what I remember it was grossly exaggerated by a lib dem staffer.

The lib Dems are also particularly nasty in their canvassing, the stuff Cole Hamilton was using about Michelle Thomson was ridiculous. He even had the brass neck to bombard her letterbox with them personally.

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

The Spectator - good unbiased source.

Charles Kennedy was in a bad way and was no longer capable of doing his job. That a political opponent referenced this in the run up to an election is hardly hounding, it was simply the unfortunate truth.

If you actually read the article you'll see there's no attempt to claim Kennedy was capable of continuing, but you'll also see that your description of a political opponent merely 'referencing' his problems falls well short of what actually happened.

If you prefer, however, here's the Scotsman version from a few years previously:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brian-wilson-i-couldnt-let-blackford-re-write-history-about-kennedy-269971

I find Blackford and his melodramatic whining at Westminster unpleasant in the extreme. Last year I remember him taking to twitter to berate an English photographer who he claimed had travelled up during lockdown to take photos in his constituency before having to back down when it turned out the poor guy actually lived there. There was a nasty undertone of anti-English sentiment to it all.

[Peevemor]

If you actually read the article you'll see there's no attempt to claim Kennedy was capable of continuing, but you'll also see that your description of a political opponent merely 'referencing' his problems falls well short of what actually happened.

If you prefer, however, here's the Scotsman version from a few years previously:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brian-wilson-i-couldnt-let-blackford-re-write-history-about-kennedy-269971

I find Blackford and his melodramatic whining at Westminster unpleasant in the extreme. Last year I remember him taking to twitter to berate an English photographer who he claimed had travelled up during lockdown to take photos in his constituency before having to back down when it turned out the poor guy actually lived there. There was a nasty undertone of anti-English sentiment to it all.

Brilliant - you're alternative source is a different (pro-union) publication but the same author - who admits he was a close friend of Kennedy. The article says that Kennedy knew he was going to get voted out, but nothing about his incapacity to continue.

As for the English photographer thing - yes Blackford was wong but he admitted it and apologised. And yes, he makes a total nuisance of himself at Westminster - it's great eh? I hope he keeps it up until such time as we no longer need to be represented in London.

[Ozyhibby]

If you actually read the article you'll see there's no attempt to claim Kennedy was capable of continuing, but you'll also see that your description of a political opponent merely 'referencing' his problems falls well short of what actually happened.

If you prefer, however, here's the Scotsman version from a few years previously:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brian-wilson-i-couldnt-let-blackford-re-write-history-about-kennedy-269971

I find Blackford and his melodramatic whining at Westminster unpleasant in the extreme. Last year I remember him taking to twitter to berate an English photographer who he claimed had travelled up during lockdown to take photos in his constituency before having to back down when it turned out the poor guy actually lived there. There was a nasty undertone of anti-English sentiment to it all.

Of all the unpleasant things happening at Westminster just now, it’s Ian Blackford that annoys you most? Says a lot about you.
For reference I don’t rate Blackford much but given what is happening with the govt, it’s not really top of my list of concerns.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Smartie]

If you actually read the article you'll see there's no attempt to claim Kennedy was capable of continuing, but you'll also see that your description of a political opponent merely 'referencing' his problems falls well short of what actually happened.

If you prefer, however, here's the Scotsman version from a few years previously:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brian-wilson-i-couldnt-let-blackford-re-write-history-about-kennedy-269971

I find Blackford and his melodramatic whining at Westminster unpleasant in the extreme. Last year I remember him taking to twitter to berate an English photographer who he claimed had travelled up during lockdown to take photos in his constituency before having to back down when it turned out the poor guy actually lived there. There was a nasty undertone of anti-English sentiment to it all.

Absolute nonsense.

It was at a time when senses were heightened and there was firm feeling of disapproval for people travelling on long distances across the country in any direction and in breach of lockdown laws for spurious reasons.

Blackford was totally wrong on this occasion for not getting his facts right in advance and simply shouldn't have jumped in the way he did.

I don't think it helps anything in any way when false claims or racism or in this case "anti-Englishness" are made.

You realise this is quite offensive and emotive and that is why you use it. It actually detracts from occasions where anti-Englishness or other forms or racism exist.

If I were were you I'd stick to the valid reasons that exist against independence, few as they may be and getting fewer.

[He's here!]

Brilliant - you're alternative source is a different (pro-union) publication but the same author - who admits he was a close friend of Kennedy. The article says that Kennedy knew he was going to get voted out, but nothing about his incapacity to continue.

As for the English photographer thing - yes Blackford was wong but he admitted it and apologised. And yes, he makes a total nuisance of himself at Westminster - it's great eh? I hope he keeps it up until such time as we no longer need to be represented in London.

Is a story or viewpoint only valid in your view when it comes from an independence-supporting source? Dismissing anything that casts the SNP in a bad light as 'pro-union' seems rather narrow-minded.

Where does Wilson say he was a close friend of Kennedy's? He makes the point that this was not the case during their respective political careers.

Google Ian Blackford and Charles Kennedy and you can take your pick of any number of stories in various publications about what happened. A number of them focus on the pain it caused Kennedy's family and colleagues. The reason I picked the articles I did is because Wilson has always been a first-class journalist and writer who I thought summed up the story best. He was also, in my view, a very fine politician, the calibre of whom is sorely missed by today's Labour party.

[degenerated]

Is a story or viewpoint only valid in your view when it comes from an independence-supporting source? Dismissing anything that casts the SNP in a bad light as 'pro-union' seems rather narrow-minded.

Where does Wilson say he was a close friend of Kennedy's? He makes the point that this was not the case during their respective political careers.

Google Ian Blackford and Charles Kennedy and you can take your pick of any number of stories in various publications about what happened. A number of them focus on the pain it caused Kennedy's family and colleagues. The reason I picked the articles I did is because Wilson has always been a first-class journalist and writer who I thought summed up the story best. He was also, in my view, a very fine politician, the calibre of whom is sorely missed by today's Labour party.:hilarious

Brian Wilson is a bitter opinion piece writer whose utter hatred for for the SNP only marginally eclipses his self loathing.
Trying to paint him as either a journalist or a beacon of impartiality is almost as funny as it is wrong.



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[Peevemor]

Is a story or viewpoint only valid in your view when it comes from an independence-supporting source? Dismissing anything that casts the SNP in a bad light as 'pro-union' seems rather narrow-minded.

Where does Wilson say he was a close friend of Kennedy's? He makes the point that this was not the case during their respective political careers.

Google Ian Blackford and Charles Kennedy and you can take your pick of any number of stories in various publications about what happened. A number of them focus on the pain it caused Kennedy's family and colleagues. The reason I picked the articles I did is because Wilson has always been a first-class journalist and writer who I thought summed up the story best. He was also, in my view, a very fine politician, the calibre of whom is sorely missed by today's Labour party.Do you even read the content of the links that you post?

"*I was not close to Charles Kennedy through most of his Parliamentary career but we were always on friendly terms and had sufficient overlapping interests to ensure a good dialogue and laugh whenever we met.

It was only in the latter stages of his career and, as it proved, his life that I became one of those from whom he could seek support and advice in the face of the pressures he was under.*"

I know how I interprete that!

I enjoy decent input from both sides of the debate. If you ever manage to present some I promise to take it on board.

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210603/5da1ef3969bd5d4b31c945bee57c1121.jpg

Alba have done a good job of purging the SNP of it’s more erratic members.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

:hilarious

Brian Wilson is a bitter opinion piece writer whose utter hatred for for the SNP only marginally eclipses his self loathing.
Trying to paint him as either a journalist or a beacon of impartiality is almost as funny as it is wrong.



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

We'll just need to disagree on that I guess. The West Highland Free Press, which he founded, was exciting and trailblazing and his body of work as a journalist is of the highest quality and demonstrates brilliant diversity and versatility (as his spell as a very decent football writer for the Guardian illustrated).

Isn't it the job of an opinion piece writer to offer an opinion and provoke debate?

[He's here!]

Not before time:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57346742

Bizarrely, just two hours earlier, Sturgeon was declaring she had full confidence in the SQA?!

[degenerated]

We'll just need to disagree on that I guess. The West Highland Free Press, which he founded, was exciting and trailblazing and his body of work as a journalist is of the highest quality and demonstrates brilliant diversity and versatility (as his spell as a very decent football writer for the Guardian illustrated).

Isn't it the job of an opinion piece writer to offer an opinion and provoke debate?Does he provoke debate? I'm guessing that most people probably just glance at the headline and think , I see Brian Wilson has written his article again and move on.


Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[Future17]

We'll just need to disagree on that I guess. The West Highland Free Press, which he founded, was exciting and trailblazing and his body of work as a journalist is of the highest quality and demonstrates brilliant diversity and versatility (as his spell as a very decent football writer for the Guardian illustrated).

Isn't it the job of an opinion piece writer to offer an opinion and provoke debate?

Would demonstrating brilliant diversity and versatility not require him to write from different perspectives on all issues, including independence?

[Skol]

I see sturgeon had refuted allegations of the lost money but at the same time confirmed it does not exist in a ring fenced account and instead has been used for cash flow purposes.

[Peevemor]

I see sturgeon had refuted allegations of the lost money but at the same time confirmed it does not exist in a ring fenced account and instead has been used for cash flow purposes.

Which is exactly what's been suggested on here. Ring-fencing isn't a real thing administratively. As long as there's £600k accessible to spend, whether it's cash in hand or agreed borrowing there's no issue.

[He's here!]

Would demonstrating brilliant diversity and versatility not require him to write from different perspectives on all issues, including independence?

A political opinion piece writer who hopped between opinions wouldn't last long at most publications.

What I meant was that he has explored a vast range of subject matter throughout his journalistic career. I don't always agree with him, but I grew up devouring newspapers and he was somebody whose writing always shone. As I said, I also thought he was a heart on the sleeve politician who coupled that with being (in my experience) a decent bloke. Check out his work in reviving the Harris Tweed industry, for which he has rightly received global recognition.

I think that with the demise of newspaper culture there's been a decline in the amount of quality writing in a world where a 'just give me the news now' mentality increasingly prevails. Social media tends to drive people to their own little echo chambers whereby they only connect with those whose opinions tally with their own and dismiss contradictory viewpoints as irrelevant.

[Skol]

Which is exactly what's been suggested on here. Ring-fencing isn't a real thing administratively. As long as there's £600k accessible to spend, whether it's cash in hand or agreed borrowing there's no issue.

If that’s how you want to see it then that’s your call. It does bend reality and does not match the intent when the money was raised.

Ring fencing is not difficult to achieve and is something many people do.

[Future17]

Which is exactly what's been suggested on here. Ring-fencing isn't a real thing administratively. As long as there's £600k accessible to spend, whether it's cash in hand or agreed borrowing there's no issue.

Is the point not that those who were asked to donate on the basis of their cash being used for a specific campaigning purpose may feel misled that it has clearly been used for something else?

[Future17]

A political opinion piece writer who hopped between opinions wouldn't last long at most publications.

What I meant was that he has explored a vast range of subject matter throughout his journalistic career. I don't always agree with him, but I grew up devouring newspapers and he was somebody whose writing always shone. As I said, I also thought he was a heart on the sleeve politician who coupled that with being (in my experience) a decent bloke. Check out his work in reviving the Harris Tweed industry, for which he has rightly received global recognition.

I think that with the demise of newspaper culture there's been a decline in the amount of quality writing in a world where a 'just give me the news now' mentality increasingly prevails. Social media tends to drive people to their own little echo chambers whereby they only connect with those whose opinions tally with their own and dismiss contradictory viewpoints as irrelevant.

Fair enough, partly matters of opinion and preference as you've said. I do think he writes well in the general sense, but I've previously found his views on certain matters are too forcibly skewed by his politics. That being said, we're all probably blind to that to a certain extent when it's our politics the views are skewed towards! :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

A political opinion piece writer who hopped between opinions wouldn't last long at most publications.

What I meant was that he has explored a vast range of subject matter throughout his journalistic career. I don't always agree with him, but I grew up devouring newspapers and he was somebody whose writing always shone. As I said, I also thought he was a heart on the sleeve politician who coupled that with being (in my experience) a decent bloke. Check out his work in reviving the Harris Tweed industry, for which he has rightly received global recognition.

I think that with the demise of newspaper culture there's been a decline in the amount of quality writing in a world where a 'just give me the news now' mentality increasingly prevails. Social media tends to drive people to their own little echo chambers whereby they only connect with those whose opinions tally with their own and dismiss contradictory viewpoints as irrelevant.

I don't think a CBE is global recognition when compared with the work that Vivienne Westwood did to raise the profile of tweed in a global fashion industry.

[Ozyhibby]

Is the point not that those who were asked to donate on the basis of their cash being used for a specific campaigning purpose may feel misled that it has clearly been used for something else?

It’s not been used for something else though has it? It’s still there, ready to be used.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

No it’s not. Unless it is borrowed.

[Smartie]

A political opinion piece writer who hopped between opinions wouldn't last long at most publications.

What I meant was that he has explored a vast range of subject matter throughout his journalistic career. I don't always agree with him, but I grew up devouring newspapers and he was somebody whose writing always shone. As I said, I also thought he was a heart on the sleeve politician who coupled that with being (in my experience) a decent bloke. Check out his work in reviving the Harris Tweed industry, for which he has rightly received global recognition.

I think that with the demise of newspaper culture there's been a decline in the amount of quality writing in a world where a 'just give me the news now' mentality increasingly prevails. Social media tends to drive people to their own little echo chambers whereby they only connect with those whose opinions tally with their own and dismiss contradictory viewpoints as irrelevant.

I don't think Wilson is in the same league as someone like Alex Massie, another devout unionist.

With Massie I find it possible to find common ground at times yet respect where he dives off and forms his different opinion. It's not because he is an "Uncle Tom", occasionally there will be bits where it is harder to agree with anything he says, but I do find him someone who is occasionally pretty challenging to read but worth reading nonetheless.

Wilson just comes across as bitter, entrenched and someone who writes as a preacher to the converted. Massie feels (on occasion, not always) like he is trying to advance an argument and is worth reading by "the other side".

As a result I just din't have much desire to read what Wilson writes about other subjects, although I may look out for more based on what you have said.

[Peevemor]

If that’s how you want to see it then that’s your call. It does bend reality and does not match the intent when the money was raised.

Ring fencing is not difficult to achieve and is something many people do.


Is the point not that those who were asked to donate on the basis of their cash being used for a specific campaigning purpose may feel misled that it has clearly been used for something else?

OK, imagine I'm overdrawn by £500 on an agreed overdraft limit of £1000. Someone gives me a cheque for £600 to buy a car for them at the auctions next month. I stick that in my account which brings my balance up to +£100.

I don't have £600, but as long as I have an overdraft facility of £1000 I can still pay for the car.

It really isn't complicated.

[Ozyhibby]

OK, imagine I'm overdrawn by £500 on an agreed overdraft limit of £1000. Someone gives me a cheque for £600 to buy a car for them at the auctions next month. I stick that in my account which brings my balance up to +£100.

I don't have £600, but as long as I have an overdraft facility of £1000 I can still pay for the car.

It really isn't complicated.

It’s complicated only if you really want it to be. If you want to attack the SNP at every turn then it becomes very complicated.
Simple for normal people though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

Is the point not that those who were asked to donate on the basis of their cash being used for a specific campaigning purpose may feel misled that it has clearly been used for something else?This one's going in circles :D

When the money's needed it will be used for its intended purpose and I'm totally happy with that.
As it stands, it's made their current account less negative.... it can still become negative again at a drop of a hst when required for the new campaign.

I've actually done this on a personal level during lockdown, taking savings required for a house,renovation and popped some of it into a couple of bank accounts running overdrafts, as soon as I need the cash I'll transfer the money back and the accounts drop back into overdraft... it'll be a good few hundred less though due to not paying OD fees this past year.

The argument of course could be that me, and the SNP are loosing out on interest, for me it was a no brainer, not sure what interest terms political parties get.


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

OK, imagine I'm overdrawn by £500 on an agreed overdraft limit of £1000. Someone gives me a cheque for £600 to buy a car for them at the auctions next month. I stick that in my account which brings my balance up to +£100.

I don't have £600, but as long as I have an overdraft facility of £1000 I can still pay for the car.

It really isn't complicated.

Probably the term "ring fenced" isn't helpful here, conjuring up an image of something physical being protected by something else physical. A trunkful of pound notes surrounded by a physical shield.

[CropleyWasGod]

Probably the term "ring fenced" isn't helpful here, conjuring up an image of something physical being protected by something else physical. A trunkful of pound notes surrounded by a physical shield.

Indeed.

Ring-fenced funds (funds, not cash) don't even need to be in a separate bank account.

[Crunchie]

It’s complicated only if you really want it to be. If you want to attack the SNP at every turn then it becomes very complicated.
Simple for normal people though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Normal people know the meaning of the term ring fenced though, nothing complicated in that either unless you're trying to convince someone otherwise.

[Peevemor]

Normal people know the meaning of the term ring fenced though, nothing complicated in that either unless you're trying to convince someone otherwise.

So why are people making an issue of this?

[lapsedhibee]

So why are people making an issue of this?

Residual need to prove some, any, sort of jaw-dropping, eye-popping allegation of wrong-doing? :dunno:

[Crunchie]

So why are people making an issue of this?
The latest in 4 resignations would suggest there's definitely an issue to be made here. Go look up the term ring fenced if you're still in any doubt.

[Moulin Yarns]

The latest in 4 resignations would suggest there's definitely an issue to be made here. Go look up the term ring fenced if you're still in any doubt.

Thanks but I'm more inclined to take the word of an accountant that the funds will be available when required.

This isn't some tinpot football club like hearts or rangers we are talking about.

Corruption is alive and well in politics, see the tories for that. 😉

[Peevemor]

The latest in 4 resignations would suggest there's definitely an issue to be made here. Go look up the term ring fenced if you're still in any doubt.

Until some proof of wrongdoing is presented I'm not in any doubt whatsoever, but thanks anyway.

[Smartie]

TBF I think there is a question to answer here.

My time in business has taught me that banks can call most debts (especially overdrafts) whenever they like and will do so when they are in trouble.

There is a sequence of events, not all that unfathomable, that could see the "ring fence" disappear very quickly along with that money.

Obviously there's a lot to this that we don't know but I'd like to know a fair bit more, and I'm prepared to accept that there may be a case to answer.

[Skol]

If there is a borrowing facility in place that still needs paid back and to do so money will need to be generated from somewhere. Essentially people will need to fund the £600k again. If you are happy with that as the level of transparency then fine but to me it’s not how people should operate.

[Ozyhibby]

I’m trying to imagine a world where the SNP don’t spend more than double this £600k on the upcoming indyref campaign?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peevemor]

I’m trying to imagine a world where the SNP don’t spend more than double this £600k on the upcoming indyref campaign?


If the serial numbers don't correspond with the banknotes that were donated then it doesn't count.

[lapsedhibee]

If the serial numbers don't correspond with the banknotes that were donated then it doesn't count.

When I get interest added to my bank account at the end of the year, I always make a point of going in to the branch, withdrawing the interest, counting it to make sure that it's correct, and then paying it back in. I think the bank keeps my interest in some sort of compound.

[CropleyWasGod]

When I get interest added to my bank account at the end of the year, I always make a point of going in to the branch, withdrawing the interest, counting it to make sure that it's correct, and then paying it back in. I think the bank keeps my interest in some sort of compound.

Does that compound have a fence around it?

And can the bank do what it wants with the contents of said compound?

[Moulin Yarns]

Does that compound have a fence around it?

And can the bank do what it wants with the contents of said compound?

Interesting question 🤔

[Skol]

Imagine hibs ask us all to contribute to a ring fenced fund to buy a new striker rather than use existing borrowing. Once the funds are in place there are no strikers available and hibs say the money is ring fenced until a suitable striker is available.

Over a few years the money is used to run the club. All of a sudden a new striker becomes available and we have to borrow money to get the new striker.

[Hibrandenburg]

Imagine hibs ask us all to contribute to a ring fenced fund to buy a new striker rather than use existing borrowing. Once the funds are in place there are no strikers available and hibs say the money is ring fenced until a suitable striker is available.

Over a few years the money is used to run the club. All of a sudden a new striker becomes available and we have to borrow money to get the new striker.

That's not what's happening here though.

[Peevemor]

Imagine hibs ask us all to contribute to a ring fenced fund to buy a new striker rather than use existing borrowing. Once the funds are in place there are no strikers available and hibs say the money is ring fenced until a suitable striker is available.

Over a few years the money is used to run the club. All of a sudden a new striker becomes available and we have to borrow money to get the new striker.

For years up until STF took on all our debt, Hibs effectively did this. We were however many millions in debt and Hibs asked us all to buy season tickets. The millions in income weren't in the bank as we were still in debt, but we still managed to pay fees, wages, bills, etc. throughout the seasons that followed. There was never any (public) talk of ringfencing either, but there was access to the required funds.

I'm not going to post again on the subject as you obviously don't want to understand (or at least don't want to admit it).

[Moulin Yarns]

Imagine hibs ask us all to contribute to a ring fenced fund to buy a new striker rather than use existing borrowing. Once the funds are in place there are no strikers available and hibs say the money is ring fenced until a suitable striker is available.

Over a few years the money is used to run the club. All of a sudden a new striker becomes available and we have to borrow money to get the new striker.

Except it wouldn't be 'all of a sudden', it would be planned for and hibs would decide when to approach the new striker. At that point the ring fenced funds will be released. 😉


Edit : others have described it better than I ever could. 😁

[lapsedhibee]

Does that compound have a fence around it?


Bloody better have. It's my money and if I find out the bank have been using it for something else, like lending it to other people, for example, between my annual checks, I swear I'll do time.

[He's here!]

I don't think Wilson is in the same league as someone like Alex Massie, another devout unionist.

With Massie I find it possible to find common ground at times yet respect where he dives off and forms his different opinion. It's not because he is an "Uncle Tom", occasionally there will be bits where it is harder to agree with anything he says, but I do find him someone who is occasionally pretty challenging to read but worth reading nonetheless.

Wilson just comes across as bitter, entrenched and someone who writes as a preacher to the converted. Massie feels (on occasion, not always) like he is trying to advance an argument and is worth reading by "the other side".

As a result I just din't have much desire to read what Wilson writes about other subjects, although I may look out for more based on what you have said.

Yes, Massie is very good as well. I read a lot of his stuff in the Spectator which, as a Labour voter, I wouldn't have imagined being a publication in which I'd find much common ground. However, while I more naturally gravitated towards the New Statesman I've increasingly found the Spectator to have a more talented stable of writers which includes a number of 'lefties' like Wilson and Julie Burchill, Tony Parsons' NME partner in crime during the halcyon days of punk.

[Future17]

OK, imagine I'm overdrawn by £500 on an agreed overdraft limit of £1000. Someone gives me a cheque for £600 to buy a car for them at the auctions next month. I stick that in my account which brings my balance up to +£100.

I don't have £600, but as long as I have an overdraft facility of £1000 I can still pay for the car.

It really isn't complicated.

I think there's few different arguments going on here, but my concern is whether those who donated may have been misled.

In your scenario, if you've told me you'll keep my £600 aside to buy me a car for £600, you can only do that next month if the bank allows you to borrow money in order to do it. You've lost control of your promise and, therefore, it's a promise you can't guarantee you'll keep.

An overdraft facility isn't your money and you have no legal right to it.

[Ozyhibby]

Yes, Massie is very good as well. I read a lot of his stuff in the Spectator which, as a Labour voter, I wouldn't have imagined being a publication in which I'd find much common ground. However, while I more naturally gravitated towards the New Statesman I've increasingly found the Spectator to have a more talented stable of writers which includes a number of 'lefties' like Wilson and Julie Burchill, Tony Parsons' NME partner in crime during the halcyon days of punk.

Massive is a good writer but a bit of a one trick pony in that he only writes pro union articles. The Spectator has now become a Better together campaign paper. Thankfully it’s readership is tiny.
Labour voters all over the UK are moving to something else so your not alone there. You’ll find the jump to voting Tory really easy after reading the Spectator for a while. Thousands did in the recent election, comforting themselves that it’s tactical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peevemor]

I think there's few different arguments going on here, but my concern is whether those who donated may have been misled.

In your scenario, if you've told me you'll keep my £600 aside to buy me a car for £600, you can only do that next month if the bank allows you to borrow money in order to do it. You've lost control of your promise and, therefore, it's a promise you can't guarantee you'll keep.

An overdraft facility isn't your money and you have no legal right to it.That I understand, but the SNP obviously have had borrowing facilities in place for some time and I doubt any bank is about to pull the plug on the country's ruling party, especially given that they're finances are moving in the right direction regardless of the extra £600k.

The chances are that there are people securing the overdraft/loan who prefer to keep such information private.

[Hibrandenburg]

I think there's few different arguments going on here, but my concern is whether those who donated may have been misled.

In your scenario, if you've told me you'll keep my £600 aside to buy me a car for £600, you can only do that next month if the bank allows you to borrow money in order to do it. You've lost control of your promise and, therefore, it's a promise you can't guarantee you'll keep.

An overdraft facility isn't your money and you have no legal right to it.

I think a better example would be the state pension. You pay your NI contributions with the expectancy to get it back in the form of a pension when you retire. However the money you've paid in is long gone by the time you reach retirement and the pension you receive is being paid by NI contributions from people still working.

[ronaldo7]

I think a better example would be the state pension. You pay your NI contributions with the expectancy to get it back in the form of a pension when you retire. However the money you've paid in is long gone by the time you reach retirement and the pension you receive is being paid by NI contributions from people still working.

:agree: The best analogy yet.

If it was ring fenced though, what happened to the money of the people dying prior to receiving their pension. :greengrin

[He's here!]

Massive is a good writer but a bit of a one trick pony in that he only writes pro union articles. The Spectator has now become a Better together campaign paper. Thankfully it’s readership is tiny.
Labour voters all over the UK are moving to something else so your not alone there. You’ll find the jump to voting Tory really easy after reading the Spectator for a while. Thousands did in the recent election, comforting themselves that it’s tactical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's not the case. It's completely bucked the trend of printed publications with close to 100,000 subscribers (and that's only the folk paying for it. The readership will be a great deal higher). Most newspapers would kill for those figures these days. They must be doing something right.

With regard to your final point, I had no qualms joining the many Labour voters who opted for a Tory list vote in last month's elections. If, like at least half the country, you abhor nationalism and have no desire to see Scotland leave the UK why wouldn't you vote tactically? It was the obvious way to counter the SNP's in-built advantage in the constituency vote and it paid off. I'd prefer not to have felt compelled to do so but needs must.

[Kato]

That's not the case. It's completely bucked the trend of printed publications with close to 100,000 subscribers (and that's only the folk paying for it. The readership will be a great deal higher). Most newspapers would kill for those figures these days. They must be doing something right.

With regard to your final point, I had no qualms joining the many Labour voters who opted for a Tory list vote in last month's elections. If, like at least half the country, you abhor nationalism and have no desire to see Scotland leave the UK why wouldn't you vote tactically? It was the obvious way to counter the SNP's in-built advantage in the constituency vote and it paid off. I'd prefer not to have felt compelled to do so but needs must.

"Abhor nationalism! VOTE TORY"

Aye, barry.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

That's not the case. It's completely bucked the trend of printed publications with close to 100,000 subscribers (and that's only the folk paying for it. The readership will be a great deal higher). Most newspapers would kill for those figures these days. They must be doing something right.

With regard to your final point, I had no qualms joining the many Labour voters who opted for a Tory list vote in last month's elections. If, like at least half the country, you abhor nationalism and have no desire to see Scotland leave the UK why wouldn't you vote tactically? It was the obvious way to counter the SNP's in-built advantage in the constituency vote and it paid off. I'd prefer not to have felt compelled to do so but needs must.

On the figures, the pro independence parties have a majority in parliament and received slightly more than the pro status quo parties. So any tactical voting failed to prevent the pro independence majority. But aye, it paid off. 🤣



I forgot, Mon Scottish Tories

[Ozyhibby]

That's not the case. It's completely bucked the trend of printed publications with close to 100,000 subscribers (and that's only the folk paying for it. The readership will be a great deal higher). Most newspapers would kill for those figures these days. They must be doing something right.

With regard to your final point, I had no qualms joining the many Labour voters who opted for a Tory list vote in last month's elections. If, like at least half the country, you abhor nationalism and have no desire to see Scotland leave the UK why wouldn't you vote tactically? It was the obvious way to counter the SNP's in-built advantage in the constituency vote and it paid off. I'd prefer not to have felt compelled to do so but needs must.

So your not a Labour voter. You’re a Tory voter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

On the figures, the pro independence parties have a majority in parliament and received slightly more than the pro status quo parties. So any tactical voting failed to prevent the pro independence majority. But aye, it paid off. 🤣



I forgot, Mon Scottish Tories

The SNP won less than half the vote and failed to win a majority. A blow for them whichever way they try to dress it up.

[Peevemor]

The SNP won less than half the vote and failed to win a majority. A blow for them whichever way they try to dress it up.Dream on!

[He's here!]

So your not a Labour voter. You’re a Tory voter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you say so. But in the Scottish parliamentary elections you can be both when required - and on this occasion it was required. Thanks to mind-numbing neverendum issue, these elections have ceased to become about seats being contested by several parties. It comes down to the SNP v whichever party is best placed locally to challenge them. Had Sarwar cottoned on to that sooner the SNP may have fallen further short of a majority. You can spare me the moralising, it's the sad truth about today's Scottish political landscape.

[weecounty hibby]

I couldn't vote Tory at any level of election and still try to take any kind of moral high ground! Most right wing, isolationist, nationalistic main stream party ever seen in the UK. And no matter how many times you may have shouted 'mon Scottish Labour in the past you put your cross in their box. Union above all else is very British Nationalist. But it appears only Scottish Nationalism is a problem

[CropleyWasGod]

The SNP won less than half the vote and failed to win a majority. A blow for them whichever way they try to dress it up.

"Pro independence parties"

[Future17]

I think a better example would be the state pension. You pay your NI contributions with the expectancy to get it back in the form of a pension when you retire. However the money you've paid in is long gone by the time you reach retirement and the pension you receive is being paid by NI contributions from people still working.

That's probably a better example of what appears to be happening in practice, in that you'll only get what you paid for if other people make payments after you stop doing so. It doesn't sound like that's what the donors were told by the SNP in this instance though.

[Kato]

"Pro independence parties"You're not allowed to dress it up that way as it doesn't suit his argument. Just like your not allowed to dress up pro-Independence supporters making up a third of the Labour vote.

It is ok to dress up nationalism as a europhobic kleptocracy as long as it's not Scottish nationalism.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

The SNP won less than half the vote and failed to win a majority. A blow for them whichever way they try to dress it up.

The yes side, including the magnificent Scottish Green MSPs, wona a majority. :greengrin

SNP increased the number of seats, as did the Scottish Greens

Your tories stayed the same and your red tories lost 2 seats. And what happened to the liberal democrats?? But you can still claim your tactical voting worked :rolleyes:

Mone the scottish westminster branches:wink:

[Moulin Yarns]

If you say so. But in the Scottish parliamentary elections you can be both when required - and on this occasion it was required. Thanks to mind-numbing neverendum issue, these elections have ceased to become about seats being contested by several parties. It comes down to the SNP v whichever party is best placed locally to challenge them. Had Sarwar cottoned on to that sooner the SNP may have fallen further short of a majority. You can spare me the moralising, it's the sad truth about today's Scottish political landscape.

So long as you keep believing that your beloved union is doomed. :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

"Pro independence parties"


Aye, he missed that bit in my post he replied to, because, let's face it, it's all about he SNP!

[CapitalGreen]

Imagine hibs ask us all to contribute to a ring fenced fund to buy a new striker rather than use existing borrowing. Once the funds are in place there are no strikers available and hibs say the money is ring fenced until a suitable striker is available.

Over a few years the money is used to run the club. All of a sudden a new striker becomes available and we have to borrow money to get the new striker.

HSL donations are “ring fenced” to be solely used within the football operations budget but you won’t see any unspent donations listed as a separate cash line on the balance sheet.

[CapitalGreen]

If you say so. But in the Scottish parliamentary elections you can be both when required - and on this occasion it was required. Thanks to mind-numbing neverendum issue, these elections have ceased to become about seats being contested by several parties. It comes down to the SNP v whichever party is best placed locally to challenge them. Had Sarwar cottoned on to that sooner the SNP may have fallen further short of a majority. You can spare me the moralising, it's the sad truth about today's Scottish political landscape.

I could never be a Tory voter John, regardless of the alternatives.

[WeeRussell]

The SNP won less than half the vote and failed to win a majority. A blow for them whichever way they try to dress it up.

It was a brutal blow. Still getting over it myself.

Not only did every tory and unionist flump on the bbc try to make out it was some sort of blow for the SNP and independence, but you (prolific and logical poster that you are) have just confirmed it.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Does that compound have a fence around it?

And can the bank do what it wants with the contents of said compound?

Osama got executed in a compound, there was plenty interest in that.

[ronaldo7]

If you say so. But in the Scottish parliamentary elections you can be both when required - and on this occasion it was required. Thanks to mind-numbing neverendum issue, these elections have ceased to become about seats being contested by several parties. It comes down to the SNP v whichever party is best placed locally to challenge them. Had Sarwar cottoned on to that sooner the SNP may have fallen further short of a majority. You can spare me the moralising, it's the sad truth about today's Scottish political landscape.

I get where you're coming from on the 2 votes available. I used mine to vote for the SNP on the constituency vote and the greens on the list. My thinking was that I don't think my party go far enough on land reform and the greens would push them on that. They are both on the same political spectrum. Apart from Labour and the Tories both voting for Brexit, what policies appealed to you enough to make you vote for D Ross and friends?

[Ozyhibby]

I get where you're coming from on the 2 votes available. I used mine to vote for the SNP on the constituency vote and the greens on the list. My thinking was that I don't think my party go far enough on land reform and the greens would push them on that. They are both on the same political spectrum. Apart from Labour and the Tories both voting for Brexit, what policies appealed to you enough to make you vote for D Ross and friends?

They both think we are better off under the Tories in London than we are taking decisions for ourselves in Scotland?
They both think it’s best for Scotland to live of subsidies from the south east of England?
Both believe unelected Lords should be making our laws?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crunchie]

They both think we are better off under the Tories in London than we are taking decisions for ourselves in Scotland?
They both think it’s best for Scotland to live of subsidies from the south east of England?
Both believe unelected Lords should be making our laws?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Whereas you'd prefer to have your decisions made by Germans and French, to name but 2, it makes no sense. Either be independent or not, why jump from one union to another? unless it's just a hatred of the English of course.

[Moulin Yarns]

Whereas you'd prefer to have your decisions made by Germans and French, to name but 2, it makes no sense. Either be independent or not, why jump from one union to another? unless it's just a hatred of the English of course.

In the case of the UK Scotland has no say in decision made in Westminster that affect Scotland (fishing and agriculture). The Westminster government is also interfering in devolved issues such as transport.

On the other hand if Scotland was a member of the EU then Scotland will be able to influence EU policy as the MEPs would have a vote and veto.

[Callum_62]

Are folk intentionally blind to the differences in one union over another?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

In the case of the UK Scotland has no say in decision made in Westminster that affect Scotland (fishing and agriculture). The Westminster government is also interfering in devolved issues such as transport.

On the other hand if Scotland was a member of the EU then Scotland will be able to influence EU policy as the MEPs would have a vote and veto.

The veto being the most important of all. We have no such veto on Westminster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Are folk intentionally blind to the differences in one union over another?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Yes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Are folk intentionally blind to the differences in one union over another?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Deliberately blind maybe. I'd have thought those who espouse those opinions would at least do some research.

[Crunchie]

In the case of the UK Scotland has no say in decision made in Westminster that affect Scotland (fishing and agriculture). The Westminster government is also interfering in devolved issues such as transport.

On the other hand if Scotland was a member of the EU then Scotland will be able to influence EU policy as the MEPs would have a vote and veto.
Scotland has as much chance of influencing EU policy as winning the World Cup.

We get more than a fair share of the UK wealth under the Barnett formula, do you think we'd get a similar or better deal under the EU? not a chance and you know it.

[He's here!]

I get where you're coming from on the 2 votes available. I used mine to vote for the SNP on the constituency vote and the greens on the list. My thinking was that I don't think my party go far enough on land reform and the greens would push them on that. They are both on the same political spectrum. Apart from Labour and the Tories both voting for Brexit, what policies appealed to you enough to make you vote for D Ross and friends?

It's not complicated. I like being British. That's nothing do with politics. I've grown up and worked all over the UK and feel an immense affinity with it. Independence would take away what I feel is a major part of my identity. Unfortunately the issue has become relentlessly politicised since the SNP got a grip on power. Last month's election was billed by them as a dry run for another referendum and most voters, if they were being honest, would agree party policies were all but irrelevant in shaping the way they voted. I wanted to register my opposition to the SNP in the strongest way available to me at the ballot box and duly exercised my democratic right to vote whichever way I choose.

[Crunchie]

The veto being the most important of all. We have no such veto on Westminster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Only an idiot would want a veto if you're proprortionally getting a bigger share of the pie.
Where does the money come from that enables free prescriptions and tuition fees when England itself doesn't?

[bawheid]

It's not complicated. I like being British. That's nothing do with politics. I've grown up and worked all over the UK and feel an immense affinity with it.

This is a perfectly acceptable view and a few of my friends feel the same. It’s the only reasonable argument left on the ‘no’ side of the debate IMO. All others are gone.

[ronaldo7]

It's not complicated. I like being British. That's nothing do with politics. I've grown up and worked all over the UK and feel an immense affinity with it. Independence would take away what I feel is a major part of my identity. Unfortunately the issue has become relentlessly politicised since the SNP got a grip on power. Last month's election was billed by them as a dry run for another referendum and most voters, if they were being honest, would agree party policies were all but irrelevant in shaping the way they voted. I wanted to register my opposition to the SNP in the strongest way available to me at the ballot box and duly exercised my democratic right to vote whichever way I choose.

Thanks for the response. Fair play. Being British is not really a policy though.

[Smartie]

Only an idiot would want a veto if you're proprortionally getting a bigger share of the pie.
Where does the money come from that enables free prescriptions and tuition fees when England itself doesn't?

Taxation and spending it on what you see fit within the frameworks of the powers you have.

We have free prescriptions and tuition fees whereas they have HS2 and multi-billion pound bogus contracts going to Tory pals to provide them with sweet FA.

And it is entirely within their right, as it is ours, to spend that money as they see as the best way to benefit that nation.

Obviously there's the odd, grey "Blackburn" area in there but you get what I mean.





And I guess I'd happily accept a smaller proportion of either a much larger or much tastier pie.

[Ozyhibby]

Only an idiot would want a veto if you're proprortionally getting a bigger share of the pie.
Where does the money come from that enables free prescriptions and tuition fees when England itself doesn't?

You view of Scotland’s future as subsidy junkies constantly begging for more money from our neighbours is not one I share.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

Scotland has as much chance of influencing EU policy as winning the World Cup.

We get more than a fair share of the UK wealth under the Barnett formula, do you think we'd get a similar or better deal under the EU? not a chance and you know it.

We wouldn't get our wealth removed from us and then handed a fraction of it back as pocket money in the first place.

[Moulin Yarns]

Scotland has as much chance of influencing EU policy as winning the World Cup.

We get more than a fair share of the UK wealth under the Barnett formula, do you think we'd get a similar or better deal under the EU? not a chance and you know it.

28 countries, but in political blocks, so that, for example, the environmentalists have a bigger vote. Is there any way that could happen in the UK parliament? Of course Scotland would have a voice in the EU, it certainly doesn't at Westminster.

As far as the share of the UK wealth, I think that you need to look at the current balance of payments (debt) which the UK government has. Or indeed that £350m on the side of a bus. 😁

[WeeRussell]

Whereas you'd prefer to have your decisions made by Germans and French, to name but 2, it makes no sense. Either be independent or not, why jump from one union to another? unless it's just a hatred of the English of course.

Come on Crunchie, I think you’re better than that. Especially your final line. There’s a large number of countries who make-up the EU pretty happy with their position and how it works. If they want out they can get out. The situation is nowhere near the same as our ‘union’ in the British isles.

[WeeRussell]

Thanks for the response. Fair play. Being British is not really a policy though.

Yep, at least it’s an honest response and a view someone is perfectly entitled to. Though I reckon if I said I like being Scottish and would prefer to identify as that rather than British I would be accused of watching too much braveheart and hating the English.

On the subject of reasoning, mine is quite simple too - my principle reason for being pro-independence is a hatred of tories and I genuinely believe the only way I’ll see my country escape their rule and everything that comes with it is through Scottish independence. I have other reasons (many outlined in this thread) but I feel this one is strong enough.

[Peevemor]

Are folk intentionally blind to the differences in one union over another?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using TapatalkYes.

[WeeRussell]

28 countries, but in political blocks, so that, for example, the environmentalists have a bigger vote. Is there any way that could happen in the UK parliament? Of course Scotland would have a voice in the EU, it certainly doesn't at Westminster.

As far as the share of the UK wealth, I think that you need to look at the current balance of payments (debt) which the UK government has. Or indeed that £350m on the side of a bus. 😁

I don’t know this for a fact, and other posters will definitely know better, but I don’t think there will be widespread ‘wanting out’ of the EU throughout member countries’ population. I think it’s a brexit thing relatively unique to the UK which people continue to regurgitate, in some ways to justify voting for brexit and criticise a wish for Scottish independence at the same time. It comes across very silly to me but each to their own etc.

I reckon a lot of people in England would be fairly indifferent to independence (their country and its leaders see ‘the Union’ as England anyway), and Northern Ireland obviously have previous issues where a majority feel a longstanding attachment to the Union.

Scotland and Wales on the other hand? I think plenty people in both countries would gladly accept the break-up of the Union. And to sum-up, as noted above.. take away the Union Jack waving and ‘British pride’ thing, I really don’t think there is much argument left for Scotland not being independent.

[Peevemor]

It's not complicated. I like being British. That's nothing do with politics. I've grown up and worked all over the UK and feel an immense affinity with it. Independence would take away what I feel is a major part of my identity. Unfortunately the issue has become relentlessly politicised since the SNP got a grip on power. Last month's election was billed by them as a dry run for another referendum and most voters, if they were being honest, would agree party policies were all but irrelevant in shaping the way they voted. I wanted to register my opposition to the SNP in the strongest way available to me at the ballot box and duly exercised my democratic right to vote whichever way I choose.But Scots will still be British even after independence.

Despite Brexit, British people are still European are they not?

[ronaldo7]

Scotland has as much chance of influencing EU policy as winning the World Cup.

We get more than a fair share of the UK wealth under the Barnett formula, do you think we'd get a similar or better deal under the EU? not a chance and you know it.

I was listening to Mark Drakeford the other day on the radio, lamenting about the loss of the European funds which supported the Welsh Government. He mentioned the UK shared prosperity fund which is supposedly coming in to replace the European structural and development fund. This new fund will not be anywhere like what they had under the old EU system, in cash terms, and the fund will be managed by a UK government minster instead of the devolved nations.

The Tories at work.

Open your eyes

[ronaldo7]

But Scots will still be British even after independence.

Despite Brexit, British people are still European are they not?

:agree:

[Jack]

Scotland has as much chance of influencing EU policy as winning the World Cup.

We get more than a fair share of the UK wealth under the Barnett formula, do you think we'd get a similar or better deal under the EU? not a chance and you know it.

You only have to look at Brexit to see the difference between the two unions.

The EU has worked with Ireland to support it and work through problems. The UK government flung Scotland and its industries under a bus.

[Crunchie]

Come on Crunchie, I think you’re better than that. Especially your final line. There’s a large number of countries who make-up the EU pretty happy with their position and how it works. If they want out they can get out. The situation is nowhere near the same as our ‘union’ in the British isles.
I think you know that your last line is not true, both Holland and Ireland I think it was voted out and were not allowed to leave. I think Greece and a few others want out at the moment but they've no chance of getting out either after being handed billions in bail out loans.

[Ozyhibby]

I think you know that your last line is not true, both Holland and Ireland I think it was voted out and were not allowed to leave. I think Greece and a few others want out at the moment but they've no chance of getting out either after being handed billions in bail out loans.

Eh???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

I think you know that your last line is not true, both Holland and Ireland I think it was voted out and were not allowed to leave. I think Greece and a few others want out at the moment but they've no chance of getting out either after being handed billions in bail out loans.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/more-than-90-of-irish-people-want-to-stay-in-eu-poll-reveals-1.3488112

More than 90% of Irish people want to stay in EU, poll reveals

[Crunchie]

Eh???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If people in a lot of the EU countries were given a vote I reckon the majority would vote to leave, look beyond your blinkered vision and you can find the evidence.

[Crunchie]

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/more-than-90-of-irish-people-want-to-stay-in-eu-poll-reveals-1.3488112

More than 90% of Irish people want to stay in EU, poll reveals
A dated poll? I could go find another poll saying differently, I didn't even bother reading the article btw.

[ronaldo7]

If people in a lot of the EU countries were given a vote I reckon the majority would vote to leave, look beyond your blinkered vision and you can find the evidence.

The number of those who believe Ireland should follow the United Kingdom out of the European Union has shown a sharp and continuing decline.

Just one in nine voters say Ireland should quit the EU, down from nearly three times that level five years ago, a new poll for the European Movement in Ireland has found.

While 29 per cent believed in 2013 Ireland should leave the union if the UK left, the figure is down now to 11 per cent – apparently in reaction to the experience of Brexit.

Ninety two per cent of those surveyed – 96 per cent in Dublin – now say Ireland should stay in. Support is greatest in Dublin (96 per cent) and among 18-24 year olds (97 per cent).

I'm sure you'll provide evidence which backs up your assertion. :aok:

[Peevemor]

If people in a lot of the EU countries were given a vote I reckon the majority would vote to leave, look beyond your blinkered vision and you can find the evidence.Well that's as good an argument as we're ever likely to hear.

[ronaldo7]

A dated poll? I could go find another poll saying differently, I didn't even bother reading the article btw.

Go on then. :greengrin

[Crunchie]

The number of those who believe Ireland should follow the United Kingdom out of the European Union has shown a sharp and continuing decline.

Just one in nine voters say Ireland should quit the EU, down from nearly three times that level five years ago, a new poll for the European Movement in Ireland has found.

While 29 per cent believed in 2013 Ireland should leave the union if the UK left, the figure is down now to 11 per cent – apparently in reaction to the experience of Brexit.

Ninety two per cent of those surveyed – 96 per cent in Dublin – now say Ireland should stay in. Support is greatest in Dublin (96 per cent) and among 18-24 year olds (97 per cent).

I'm sure you'll provide evidence which backs up your assertion. :aok:

I believe that poll as much as I believe Lord Lucan is still alive. 90 odd % :faf:

[Peevemor]

I believe that poll as much as I believe Lord Lucan is still alive. 90 odd % :faf:Yeah. We're better sticking with what you reckon.

[Crunchie]

Well that's as good an argument as we're ever likely to hear.
It's a fact at least 2 countries wanted out, they were told to have another vote. They tried that bs here and look what happened to the Labour party :faf:

[Ozyhibby]

It's a fact at least 2 countries wanted out, they were told to have another vote. They tried that bs here and look what happened to the Labour party :faf:

No it is not a fact. It is exactly the opposite. It’s untrue.[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

I believe that poll as much as I believe Lord Lucan is still alive. 90 odd % :faf:

Oh dear. :rolleyes:

[Crunchie]

No it is not a fact. It is exactly the opposite. It’s untrue.[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Alright Oz, I'll bow to your superior knowledge :aok: I must have imagined them wanting out :confused: I best go for a lie down maybe I've got heat stroke.

[Ozyhibby]

Alright Oz, I'll bow to your superior knowledge :aok: I must have imagined them wanting out :confused: I best go for a lie down maybe I've got heat stroke.

You must have because it didn’t happen. Your clearly a fantasist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

A dated poll? I could go find another poll saying differently, I didn't even bother reading the article btw.

Is that you saying that you have a blinkered vision? 🤔

[Jack]

Alright Oz, I'll bow to your superior knowledge :aok: I must have imagined them wanting out :confused: I best go for a lie down maybe I've got heat stroke.

Seems you imagine a lot.

[Moulin Yarns]

It's a fact at least 2 countries wanted out, they were told to have another vote. They tried that bs here and look what happened to the Labour party :faf:

That's the second time you have claimed that at least 2 (or the Netherlands and Ireland) have held referendums and voted to leave the EU.

You will have to give me links to these referendums because I have looked and can't find them.

[Kato]

I believe that poll as much as I believe Lord Lucan is still alive. 90 odd % :faf:

Yet everyone else is supposed to blinkered. :rolleyes:

[lapsedhibee]

I think you know that your last line is not true, both Holland and Ireland I think it was voted out and were not allowed to leave. I think Greece and a few others want out at the moment but they've no chance of getting out either after being handed billions in bail out loans.

I recall Brexiters assuring me in 2016 that as soon as Britain left, the EU would start to collapse like a house of cards. I'm starting to seriously wonder now whether there might have been anything else they were saying at the time that wasn't true.

[Stick]

Just joined this thread and only read back today’s discussions, so apologise if I missed anything.
I don’t remember any vote for Ireland to leave the eu, there was a vote to reject the Lisbon treaty, which was not the same thing. The Dutch likewise had a vote on the eu constitution but again this was not about leaving. I was on holiday in Spain shortly after the Dutch vote and had a chat with a Dutch couple in a bar. They were against the EU and wanted to leave, but they didn’t claim that their referendum was about leaving, only about details of the constitution. They claimed that a lot of their friends felt the same and would vote to leave if given the chance, this was back about roughly 15 years ago.

[Hibrandenburg]

Yet everyone else is supposed to blinkered. :rolleyes:

Not blinkered, we simply inhabit another universe to the one he lives in.