SNP are lying b******s as well !

a scotland fit for the future

Quote:

---

• we delivered the £1.35 billion marvel on the forth – the queensferry crossing – under budget.
• we doubled the walking and cycling budget, increased to just over £100 million in 2020/21 – and we have committed to continuing funding at the record level for the next five years.
• we scrapped bridge tolls on the forth and tay crossings – saving individual commuters around £3,000 to date.
• over £9 billion invested in our rail infrastructure since 2007.
• we delivered the borders railway, the longest new domestic railway to be built in britain in over 100 years.
• the first section of our £3 billion project to dual the a9 from perth to invernesshas been completed.
• the £745 million aberdeen bypass opened in february 2019, producing savings in journey times and reductions in hgv traffic through aberdeen.
• we established a £50 million town centre fund to enable local authorities to regenerate scotland’s town centres.
• we have published an action plan to decarbonise scotland’s railway by 2035.
• we’ve invested £16.5 million in the net zero technology centre to focus on emissions reduction.

---

a greener scotland

Quote:

---

• we were the first country in the uk to declare a climate emergency and have since passed legislation for the world’s most ambitious emissions reduction targets.
• we have already halved our greenhouse gases emissions since 1990 – statistically, we’re second only to sweden in western europe for emissions reductions.
• we are world renowned for having underpinned our net zero targets with a legislative commitment to a just transition – ensuring no one is left behind.
• we’ve appointed a minister for just transition.
• we have established the £62 million energy transition fund.
• we have been active on the world stage, leading the edinburgh process on biodiversity and publishing the edinburgh declaration calling for increased action to tackle biodiversity loss.
• since 2012, we have funded the restoration of over 25,000 hectares of degraded scottish peatland.
• no fracking or other onshore unconventional oil and gas activity can take place in scotland.
• we’ve passed legislation to establish an ambitious deposit return scheme for scotland – reducing waste and tackling greenhouse gas emissions.
• in 2019-20, we planted 11,050 hectares of new woodland – exceeding our annual 10,000 hectares target in the climate change plan.
• around 80% of all new woodland creation across the uk is in scotland – in 2019/2020 alone, we’ve planted over 22 million new trees.
• we have established the world first climate justice fund, providing funding for community climate projects in malawi, zambia and rwanda.
• we’ve announced pilot projects to offer free bicycles for school-age children who cannot afford one.

---

There's more, but you get the picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Take your pick

---

I am specifically talking about the 8 years of Nicola Sturgeon as FM seeing as tomorrow she becomes the longest ever serving FM.

Most of the stuff on your list was in place before she started as FM and you could again argue things like "free" tuition and prescriptions etc. (nothing is free we pay taxes for it) is another example of devolution working, allowing Scotland to make different choices and have the funding to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Take your pick

---

Bit cheeky - many of these predate the SNP administration and period poverty policies arose from the campaigning of Monica Lennon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

The opposition have been useless yes, and I am sure she is safe in her job until she decides she wants to quit. But her list of 'achievments' are not exactly overwhelming for 8 years at the top. Dare I suggest Alex Salmond delivered far more. (A referendum for one)

---

Salmond definitely more. Getting referendum, free tuition, free prescriptions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Bit cheeky - many of these predate the SNP administration and period poverty policies arose from the campaigning of Monica Lennon.

---

This one actually shows grown up politics... so often some politicians seem completely unable to even grudgingly support a good policy if put forward by someone from the opposition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Bit cheeky - many of these predate the SNP administration and period poverty policies arose from the campaigning of Monica Lennon.

---

I remember a British labour politician in Scotland demanding we means test most of the stuff we continue to get from the SNP/Green government. If she'd have had her way, we'd be just like England, paying for tuition, and prescription charges to name but two.

Blis just don't want Scotland to prosper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

a greener scotland



There's more, but you get the picture.

---

If only the Tories could put up their list of achievements.😂

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

I remember a British labour politician in Scotland demanding we means test most of the stuff we continue to get from the SNP/Green government. If she'd have had her way, we'd be just like England, paying for tuition, and prescription charges to name but two.

Blis just don't want Scotland to prosper.

---

90% of prescriptions are free in England. You could argue why should people who can afford it not pay for it. Isn't it great Scotland can make different choices and pay for them under the current financial settlement, free prescriptions, free tuition, free bikes and laptops, free care, free bus travel etc. Devolution really working as it should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

90% of prescriptions are free in England. You could argue why should people who can afford it not pay for it. Isn't it great Scotland can make different choices and pay for them under the current financial settlement, free prescriptions, free tuition, free bikes and laptops, free care, free bus travel etc. Devolution really working as it should be.

---

90% of prescriptions given are free, mostly because they were for over 60s. 40% of English are eligible to pay. How many don't bother because 1 item is almost a tenner a shot. My sister in law is a nurse down south and sometimes doesn't get her omeprozole because the price. My mum gives her her unused one, which they probably both know you shouldn't. But worked two years in covid wards so think most Scots tax payers wouldn't mind

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

90% of prescriptions are free in England. You could argue why should people who can afford it not pay for it. Isn't it great Scotland can make different choices and pay for them under the current financial settlement, free prescriptions, free tuition, free bikes and laptops, free care, free bus travel etc. Devolution really working as it should be.

---

Just imagine what we could do with powers over immigration, energy policy, defence policy, full control over social security, drugs policy, the constitution, broadcasting, the right to choose what we do here in Scotland, rather than having someone else doing it for us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

90% of prescriptions given are free, mostly because they were for over 60s. 40% of English are eligible to pay. How many don't bother because 1 item is almost a tenner a shot. My sister in law is a nurse down south and sometimes doesn't get her omeprozole because the price. My mum gives her her unused one, which they probably both know you shouldn't. But worked two years in covid wards so think most Scots tax payers wouldn't mind

---

Really sorry to read this. How many more are like this in England? Thousands going without just so long as the "I'm alright Jack's" and those who benefit/vote for them get to stay in power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

a greener scotland



There's more, but you get the picture.

---

Sure we get the picture , but where is all the money coming from that funds this spending extravaganza.

In England £ 13,166 per head of population is spent , in Scotland £14,842 per head is the figure.
Thats 12.5% more , or £ 9.22 billion more spent every year in Scotland, than an average per head would produce ( the Barnet Formula )

Doe anyone think spending would continue at the same level in an independent Scotland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Sure we get the picture , but where is all the money coming from that funds this spending extravaganza.

In England £ 13,166 per head of population is spent , in Scotland £14,842 per head is the figure.
Thats 12.5% more , or £ 9.22 billion more spent every year in Scotland, than an average per head would produce ( the Barnet Formula )

Doe anyone think spending would continue at the same level in an independent Scotland.

---

What an ambition for Scotland, begging of our neighbour for money.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

What an ambition for Scotland, begging of our neighbour for money.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Redistribution of money across the country is not begging. If you consider yourself left of centre then surely redistribution of wealth to those that need it is a good thing.

In an Indy Scotland would you class the Outer Hebrides as begging for money as they would be sharing and benefiting from the wealth and resources created by the central belt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Sure we get the picture , but where is all the money coming from that funds this spending extravaganza.

---

How much have Scotland's taxpayers paid towards the Elizabeth line? Or HS2?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

How much have Scotland's taxpayers paid towards the Elizabeth line? Or HS2?

---

https://fullfact.org/online/hs2-scotland/


Probably not as much as you think it is. It's funded wholly by the UK Government, of course which we pay some taxes to. But thanks to Barnett any spending on things like HS2 means Scotland gets more money. In effect, all money spent by Scotland on HS2 is returned through the Barnett formula.

"So for every £1 spent on HS2, Scotland receives 9.2p more funding (because HS2 is deemed to benefit England and Wales for the purpose of Barnett calculations and Scotland’s population as a percentage of England and Wales is about 9.2%). (Technically Barnett funding is not worked out on the spending on individual projects, but the change in spending at a departmental level, but this is, in effect, what happens)."

And believe it or not there are some things where all the expenditure is in Scotland but England gets some of the cost allocated to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

Redistribution of money across the country is not begging. If you consider yourself left of centre then surely redistribution of wealth to those that need it is a good thing.

In an Indy Scotland would you class the Outer Hebrides as begging for money as they would be sharing and benefiting from the wealth and resources created by the central belt.

---

Is the current model the only way to run Scotland? Look at the difference between Scotland and Ireland economies now. Every year the gap grows bigger. How long do you want Scotland to be the poor cousins?

Ireland’s economy:-
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...6723489e13.jpg

And now look at Scotland’s:-
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...305966651b.jpg

That is not a small gap.

Public spending in Scotland is only going one way with the Tories in London.
Don’t tell me there isn’t another way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Sure we get the picture , but where is all the money coming from that funds this spending extravaganza.

In England £ 13,166 per head of population is spent , in Scotland £14,842 per head is the figure.
Thats 12.5% more , or £ 9.22 billion more spent every year in Scotland, than an average per head would produce ( the Barnet Formula )

Doe anyone think spending would continue at the same level in an independent Scotland.

---

If only England spent more there might be less poverty in England 🤔

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

https://fullfact.org/online/hs2-scotland/


Probably not as much as you think it is. It's funded wholly by the UK Government, of course which we pay some taxes to. But thanks to Barnett any spending on things like HS2 means Scotland gets more money. In effect, all money spent by Scotland on HS2 is returned through the Barnett formula.

"So for every £1 spent on HS2, Scotland receives 9.2p more funding (because HS2 is deemed to benefit England and Wales for the purpose of Barnett calculations and Scotland’s population as a percentage of England and Wales is about 9.2%). (Technically Barnett funding is not worked out on the spending on individual projects, but the change in spending at a departmental level, but this is, in effect, what happens)."

And believe it or not there are some things where all the expenditure is in Scotland but England gets some of the cost allocated to it.

---

How do the people of Wales benefit from HS2?

Since you're down the rabbit hole fighting the union case against Scotland, HS2 is partially paid for by welsh people, but doesn't go anywhere near their country.

Union dividend in action.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Is the current model the only way to run Scotland? Look at the difference between Scotland and Ireland economies now. Every year the gap grows bigger. How long do you want Scotland to be the poor cousins?

Ireland’s economy:-
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...6723489e13.jpg

And now look at Scotland’s:-
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...305966651b.jpg

That is not a small gap.

Public spending in Scotland is only going one way with the Tories in London.
Don’t tell me there isn’t another way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

There is always another way, but is it the right way?

I think we have done Ireland to death on here, has good points and bad points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

There is always another way, but is it the right way?

I think we have done Ireland to death on here, has good points and bad points.

---

Guess it depends on whether you want Scotland to be wealthier or not. I can’t see much of a downside to doubling our GDP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Guess it depends on whether you want Scotland to be wealthier or not. I can’t see much of a downside to doubling our GDP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

If only there was a plan that said Scotland is here in 2022 and to be like Ireland/Denmark/Norway (delete as appropriate) then we need to do X, Y and Z and it will take X number of years.

Until then it's a useless slogan. I think it was Mark Blythe the economic adviser to the SNP who ridiculed the whole lets be like Denmark etc. slogan.

"The problem that I’ve seen so far is the complete lack of specificity as to ‘here is what the Scottish business model is now, here is where we want to be, this is how we’re going to get from here to here by doing this’,” he said in an online interview.

“Instead of that what we’ve got is ‘Denmark is awesome, we should be like Denmark, if we were independent we would be Denmark’. No, you wouldn’t be Denmark. Denmark took 600 years to become Denmark."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

If only there was a plan that said Scotland is here in 2022 and to be like Ireland/Denmark/Norway (delete as appropriate) then we need to do X, Y and Z and it will take X number of years.

Until then it's a useless slogan. I think it was Mark Blythe the economic adviser to the SNP who ridiculed the whole lets be like Denmark etc. slogan.

"The problem that I’ve seen so far is the complete lack of specificity as to ‘here is what the Scottish business model is now, here is where we want to be, this is how we’re going to get from here to here by doing this’,” he said in an online interview.

“Instead of that what we’ve got is ‘Denmark is awesome, we should be like Denmark, if we were independent we would be Denmark’. No, you wouldn’t be Denmark. Denmark took 600 years to become Denmark."

---

600 years.[emoji23]
Both countries were poorer than Scotland when I was a kid. Scotland is more than capable of matching either of them without copying either model. What we definitely can’t do is match them while operating as part of the UK.
You say there should be a plan? That’s the one thing that is missing right now within the UK. There is zero plan at all to improve Scotland’s economy. None. Not even a pretend plan. They don’t care one little bit so don’t even bother to kid on there is a plan. We are just expected to just keep trundling along.
You want the SNP to produce a plan for powers they don’t have but are just as happy to have zero plan from London when they have all the levers over the economy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

600 years.[emoji23]
Both countries were poorer than Scotland when I was a kid. Scotland is more than capable of matching either of them without copying either model. What we definitely can’t do is match them while operating as part of the UK.
You say there should be a plan? That’s the one thing that is missing right now within the UK. There is zero plan at all to improve Scotland’s economy. None. Not even a pretend plan. They don’t care one little bit so don’t even bother to kid on there is a plan. We are just expected to just keep trundling along.
You want the SNP to produce a plan for powers they don’t have but are just as happy to have zero plan from London when they have all the levers over the economy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Isn't the whole point of Independence to produce a plan for the powers they don't have and how they would use them, that's what the White Paper was?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

Isn't the whole point of Independence to produce a plan for the powers they don't have and how they would use them, that's what the White Paper was?

---

I’m sure there will be but I’m also sure it will be up for change every five years of the election cycle.
What I’m also sure of just now is that Scotland is massively underperforming and Labour and the Tories seem to be just fine with that and actually celebrate it every year when GERS is published.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...cb02b99b1f.jpg

Here is Denmark’s economy. Totally different from Irelands economy, showing that there is no set way of doing things. We could copy either or do our own thing.
What they do have in common is that they are both smashing Scotland out the park.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I’m sure there will be but I’m also sure it will be up for change every five years of the election cycle.
What I’m also sure of just now is that Scotland is massively underperforming and Labour and the Tories seem to be just fine with that and actually celebrate it every year when GERS is published.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

A few posts back I just read a huge list of all the successful things that are being done in Scotland, free this and free that and everything else that's wonderful just now. It's confusing if we are doing really well or really bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...cb02b99b1f.jpg

Here is Denmark’s economy. Totally different from Irelands economy, showing that there is no set way of doing things. We could copy either or do our own thing.
What they do have in common is that they are both smashing Scotland out the park.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

We could yes, nobody is saying we can't.

But as I say just saying we can be Ireland/Norway/Denmark is all good and well, but it's meaningless.

Denmark for example have really high income tax rate, would people in Scotland be willing to pay significantly more tax to be like Denmark? Some will some won't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

We could yes, nobody is saying we can't.

But as I say just saying we can be Ireland/Norway/Denmark is all good and well, but it's meaningless.

Denmark for example have really high income tax rate, would people in Scotland be willing to pay significantly more tax to be like Denmark? Some will some won't.

---

I think they might if they were earning the money the Danes are?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

A few posts back I just read a huge list of all the successful things that are being done in Scotland, free this and free that and everything else that's wonderful just now. It's confusing if we are doing really well or really bad.

---

We are doing as well as we can with the tools we have. We would like more tools though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I think they might if they were earning the money the Danes are?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Maybe, but the changes you are suggesting are quite radical and the SNP are not exactly known for radical change. Their policy for Indy up to now is very much don't rock the boat, keep things as close to they are today, for example, keep the pound, stay in NATO, join the EU, keep the Queen even.

And yes maybe 5 or 10 years after Indy a party may emerge that offers this but again it would be radical and the people of Scotland are actually pretty conservative (with a small c!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

What an ambition for Scotland, begging of our neighbour for money.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

But not afraid to boast about all the benefits Scotland gets from additional spending enabled by the Barnet Formula.

There’s no begging involved.

On the Ireland comparison they have a corporation tax rate of 12.5%, one of the lowest in Europe. That's why they get Facebook, Google and Apple etc locating there. A while back this place was critical of the Chancellor when he was refusing to raise corporation tax! Are we saying an independent Scotland would slash corporation tax to be like Ireland?

So it's a bit all over the place, Ireland is basically a tax haven with low corporation tax yet if the chancellor cut corporation tax you would have most of the same people moaning about how the tax cut helps the fat cat Tory's etc

And of course Ireland has no NHS to fund.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

On the Ireland comparison they have a corporation tax rate of 12.5%, one of the lowest in Europe. That's why they get Facebook, Google and Apple etc locating there. A while back this place was critical of the Chancellor when he was refusing to raise corporation tax! Are we saying an independent Scotland would slash corporation tax to be like Ireland?

So it's a bit all over the place, Ireland is basically a tax haven with low corporation tax yet if the chancellor cut corporation tax you would have most of the same people moaning about how the tax cut helps the fat cat Tory's etc

---

I can see the merit in either approach... and would be perfectly comfortable with either of the two, just as long as the decision to go with either approach was made in Edinburgh, for the benefit of the Scottish people as a whole and with the absolute accountability for making a success of it.

The direction of travel within this union is not good, even if once served us well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

On the Ireland comparison they have a corporation tax rate of 12.5%, one of the lowest in Europe. That's why they get Facebook, Google and Apple etc locating there. A while back this place was critical of the Chancellor when he was refusing to raise corporation tax! Are we saying an independent Scotland would slash corporation tax to be like Ireland?

So it's a bit all over the place, Ireland is basically a tax haven with low corporation tax yet if the chancellor cut corporation tax you would have most of the same people moaning about how the tax cut helps the fat cat Tory's etc

And of course Ireland has no NHS to fund.

---

Are you saying the Irish govt doesn’t fund healthcare?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Are you saying the Irish govt doesn’t fund healthcare?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

It would be fair to say that it doesn't fund it anywhere near as well as the UK.

Whether the population as a whole is any worse off for that is an entirely different story...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Are you saying the Irish govt doesn’t fund healthcare?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Not to the tune of £150BN+ a year it doesn't. It's about 10% of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smartie

It would be fair to say that it doesn't fund it anywhere near as well as the UK.

Whether the population as a whole is any worse off for that is an entirely different story...

---

We could mirror some of the other small countries in Europe that do spend similar amounts on healthcare, like Belgium, Holland and Denmark.

Norway also do but not a great example as unlike Scotland they managed to use their oil to create a fund for these sort of things rather than to finance the infrastructure of a neighbouring countries capital city.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I would say it’s about 49% but I don’t suppose that matters just now as no campaign is underway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1...36236e83d39b4d



"Nicola Sturgeon has failed to achieve the SNP’s main objective of boosting support for Scottish independence over her record seven years as first minister, a poll has found.

Having occupied Bute House for a total of seven years, six months and five days, Sturgeon has overtaken her predecessor Alex Salmond — who quit after the 2014 independence referendum — to become the longest-serving first minister today. However, research by YouGov for The Times shows that voters are no more inclined to break up the UK in 2022 than they were when Sturgeon came into office.

When “don’t knows” are excluded from the latest poll, 55 per cent continue to back the Union while 45 per cent favour Scottish independence — the same result as the 2014 referendum."


Actually only 38% of people were on the day the poll was asked willing to say they would vote for Independence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

"Nicola Sturgeon has failed to achieve the SNP’s main objective of boosting support for Scottish independence over her record seven years as first minister, a poll has found.

---

The Times is a Tory right wing unionist rag. I don't believe a word they say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Does Glasgow have the UK’s highest violent crime rate? Is there a source for that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I've tried to see a source which validated that claim, but it seems to be bringing up cities in England more often than not.

In other news HS2 doesn't go to Wales.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

The Times is a Tory right wing unionist rag. I don't believe a word they say.

---

It's The Times reporting a poll, not The Times saying it themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

That was the Smith Commission that delivered that, yes she enacted the policy but you could argue it's a success of devolution. Allowing Scotland to make different choices and having the funds to do so.

Education and closing the attainment gap was what she wanted judged on but I think that was harder than she probably thought it would be.

---

When you say it's a success of devolution. Do you mean the devolution we were given in 1999, or the devolution as it stands now?

We know it's evolved over the last 20 years but it seems to be going into reverse, with tory ministers from London dabbling in devolved areas of responsibility, and taking control from Scottish ministers.

Lord hope of craighead, former first deputy of the Supreme Court, speaking on the internal market bill.

"The devolved powers are rendered worthless by this new system. UK ministers are given powers to do things which contravene the devolution settlements without consultation let alone consent".

In other words, we're not getting more powers, the Tories are taking them away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

I've tried to see a source which validated that claim, but it seems to be bringing up cities in England more often than not.

In other news HS2 doesn't go to Wales.

---

Not sure how old this is but backs it up, think it's about a year old.

https://www.beltramiandcompany.co.uk...ful-urban-area

https://news.stv.tv/scotland/over-11...sing-last-year


Back to the success of the Scottish Government (at least partially)

Maybe we should compare the tenure of the longest serving first minister with the longest serving prime minister?

Guess who? 🙄

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Maybe we should compare the tenure of the longest serving first minister with the longest serving prime minister?

Guess who? 🙄

---

Walpole? :dunno:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

Walpole? :dunno:

---

Yes, but he wasn't officially titled as prime minister.

The first prime minister of the UK as it is currently was Bonar Law.


Maybe qualify it to longest serving prime minister for the party with the most votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Yes, but he wasn't officially titled as prime minister.

The first prime minister of the UK as it is currently was Bonar Law.


Maybe qualify it to longest serving prime minister for the party with the most votes.

---

Maybe it's me, what point are you making here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

It's The Times reporting a poll, not The Times saying it themselves.

---

You're surely not as naive as all that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

When you say it's a success of devolution. Do you mean the devolution we were given in 1999, or the devolution as it stands now?

We know it's evolved over the last 20 years but it seems to be going into reverse, with tory ministers from London dabbling in devolved areas of responsibility, and taking control from Scottish ministers.

Lord hope of craighead, former first deputy of the Supreme Court, speaking on the internal market bill.

"The devolved powers are rendered worthless by this new system. UK ministers are given powers to do things which contravene the devolution settlements without consultation let alone consent".

In other words, we're not getting more powers, the Tories are taking them away.

---

I think Scotland has more powers now than it ever has, allowing to make the changes to the Social security system you applauded. Do you have any specific examples of powers being taken away from the Scottish Parliament? Or were they powers that Brussels had that have now gone to Westminster?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

You're surely not as naive as all that?

---

So are you saying the poll is rigged? The people they asked were lying or the figure for Yes was higher but they deliberately made it lower than it really was?

I am not sure what you mean?

If a YouGov poll came out showing support for Independence was higher would you believe that poll? Why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

I think Scotland has more powers now than it ever has, allowing to make the changes to the Social security system you applauded. Do you have any specific examples of powers being taken away from the Scottish Parliament? Or were they powers that Brussels had that have now gone to Westminster?

---

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.gov.scot/news/devolution-being-fundamentally-undermined/&ved=2ahUKEwi7kbeQofr3AhXwgf0HHaMKBNYQFnoECAQQAQ&u sg=AOvVaw1V6iQoYYtSA9JUM7bRRIQ9

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.gov.scot/news/devolution-being-fundamentally-undermined/&ved=2ahUKEwi7kbeQofr3AhXwgf0HHaMKBNYQFnoECAQQAQ&u sg=AOvVaw1V6iQoYYtSA9JUM7bRRIQ9

---

That's basically a SNP press release.

Lots of could do this, could do that.

Is there one power that the Scottish Parliament had before but now doesn't have?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

That's basically a SNP press release.

Lots of could do this, could do that.

Is there one power that the Scottish Parliament had before but now doesn't have?

---

The Scottish parliament used to have full control of transport infrastructure and now it doesn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

The Scottish parliament used to have full control of transport infrastructure and now it doesn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Could not see that in the Government papers and struggling to see anything about this. If true then it's wrong and the power should be handed back to the Scottish Parliament.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

Could not see that in the Government papers and struggling to see anything about this. If true then it's wrong and the power should be handed back to the Scottish Parliament.

---

It’s not going to be though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

Could not see that in the Government papers and struggling to see anything about this. If true then it's wrong and the power should be handed back to the Scottish Parliament.

---

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,crossborder-rail-a1-and-a75-improvements-backed-by-longawaited-uk-transport-review


Westminster decision to upgrade roads which are the responsibility of transport Scotland???


Even though it will benefit Scotland it is a devolved power which has been taken back by Westminster!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,crossborder-rail-a1-and-a75-improvements-backed-by-longawaited-uk-transport-review


Westminster decision to upgrade roads which are the responsibility of transport Scotland???


Even though it will benefit Scotland it is a devolved power which has been taken back by Westminster!

---

Not really, the Scottish Government can still do what it wants. I am sure the people who use that road every day are delighted the UK Government is doing it.

It's not really a power that was held but has been taken away, it's different to that.

I don't share the outrage the UK Government is spending money in the UK to improve the lives of people in the UK.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

Not really, the Scottish Government can still do what it wants. I am sure the people who use that road every day are delighted the UK Government is doing it.

It's not really a power that was held but has been taken away, it's different to that.

I don't share the outrage the UK Government is spending money in the UK to improve the lives of people in the UK.

---

Probably a good thing as let’s be honest the track record for transport has been less than acceptable

Planes … Prestwick ….Shambles
Boats ……Ferries……….Shambles
Trains…….Scotrail……..Shambles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

Not really, the Scottish Government can still do what it wants. I am sure the people who use that road every day are delighted the UK Government is doing it.

It's not really a power that was held but has been taken away, it's different to that.

I don't share the outrage the UK Government is spending money in the UK to improve the lives of people in the UK.

---

You claimed that you couldn't find any information on devolved powers being taken back by Westminster, that's just one example.


Here is a longer list


https://www.gov.scot/news/devolution-being-fundamentally-undermined/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berwickhibby

Probably a good thing as let’s be honest the track record for transport has been less than acceptable

Planes … Prestwick ….Shambles
Boats ……Ferries……….Shambles
Trains…….Scotrail……..Shambles

---

Cars..... Queensferry Crossing.... Success
Cars..... A9 dualling.... Success so far (3 further dual carriageway sections opened)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berwickhibby

Probably a good thing as let’s be honest the track record for transport has been less than acceptable

Planes … Prestwick ….Shambles
Boats ……Ferries……….Shambles
Trains…….Scotrail……..Shambles

---

Is Prestwick a shambles?
Is Scotrail the fault of the SG? Surely too early to pass judgement on nationalisation? What’s it been, 3 months?

I’m sure you and James310 are happy enough for these power to go back to Westminster. That’s fine. There will be more power heading that way in years to come to keep you happy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

I don't share the outrage the UK Government is spending money in the UK to improve the lives of people in the UK.

---

So you don't agree that devolution should be in place? You can't say you're happy with devolution and at the same time be happy when devoted powers are unilaterally removed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

So you don't agree that devolution should be in place? You can't say you're happy with devolution and at the same time be happy when devoted powers are unilaterally removed?

---

Devolution is a good thing, when it works. The long list of things you published shows that.

I am still not seeing any specific powers that the Scottish Parliament had that has been removed. Yes the UK Gov is spending money on things that are devolved and I can see why some might not like that, but the people benefiting from the upgraded road are absolutely fine with it I am sure.

I am sure if the UK Gov do take powers away and people don't like it then it will only drive support for Independence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Is Prestwick a shambles?
Is Scotrail the fault of the SG? Surely too early to pass judgement on nationalisation? What’s it been, 3 months?

I’m sure you and James310 are happy enough for these power to go back to Westminster. That’s fine. There will be more power heading that way in years to come to keep you happy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

£50m of tax payers money ploughed in which will never be returned is pretty shambolic IMHO

Presently Scotrail is worse than ever …but you are correct this will need months if not years to rectify the many faults inherited

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

I am still not seeing any specific powers that the Scottish Parliament had that has been removed. Yes the UK Gov is spending money on things that are devolved ...

---

:wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

So are you saying the poll is rigged? The people they asked were lying or the figure for Yes was higher but they deliberately made it lower than it really was?

I am not sure what you mean?

If a YouGov poll came out showing support for Independence was higher would you believe that poll? Why?

---

'The source/paper/pundit etc doesn't align with my own political ideology therefore I choose to ignore it' riposte has always been a lazy get-out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

'The source/paper/pundit etc doesn't align with my own political ideology therefore I choose to ignore it' riposte has always been a lazy get-out.

---

You may see it as a lazy get out. I see it as a rational approach to whether I waste my time on biased right wing media who choose to follow an agenda to skew the messaging in the direction that suits their owners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

I think Scotland has more powers now than it ever has, allowing to make the changes to the Social security system you applauded. Do you have any specific examples of powers being taken away from the Scottish Parliament? Or were they powers that Brussels had that have now gone to Westminster?

---

We're not making changes to the social security system, we've built a new one as the Westminster one is out of date, well, according to the chancellor it is.

It looks like many posts showing how the UK Gov are trying to dictate what happens in devolved areas have been brought to the fore in my coffee break absence.

The Tories didn't want devolution from the start, and they're continuing to try to undermine it again.

Next up GM crops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

We're not making changes to the social security system, we've built a new one as the Westminster one is out of date, well, according to the chancellor it is.

It looks like many posts showing how the UK Gov are trying to dictate what happens in devolved areas have been brought to the fore in my coffee break absence.

The Tories didn't want devolution from the start, and they're continuing to try to undermine it again.

Next up GM crops.

---

When you say we've built a new social social security system, am I correct in saying they have adopted the exact same points system for new PIP claimants (think this benefit now has new name), but have made it more compassionate for existing claimants by not subjecting them to continual reviews? Happy to be corrected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santa Cruz

When you say we've built a new social social security system, am I correct in saying they have adopted the exact same points system for new PIP claimants (think this benefit now has new name), but have made it more compassionate for existing claimants by not subjecting them to continual reviews? Happy to be corrected.

---

You're correct on the more compassionate by not subjecting people to continual reviews.

Someone else will have to help you with the first part re PIP, as we no longer have to go through the process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Cars..... Queensferry Crossing.... Success
Cars..... A9 dualling.... Success so far (3 further dual carriageway sections opened)

---

I'm not saying it wasn't a success, but what makes QFC a success or not? :dunno:

I know it hasn't fallen down... But it does seem to be closed often due to ice and often has bottlenecks causing traffic on the lead up to the bridge.

FWIW I like the bridge, and think it compliments the others nicely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

You're correct on the more compassionate by not subjecting people to continual reviews.

Someone else will have to help you with the first part re PIP, as we no longer have to go through the process.

---

I think it's called a Disability payment now. I don't have a source but do recall reading it's the same points based system. Imo if we want to take a more compassionate approach, this should apply to both new and existing claimants. This was the chance to do so and an opportunity missed. Depending on where you stay, people will still be going through the process. This new benefit won't be rolled out in Edinburgh or Glasgow until August.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

I'm not saying it wasn't a success, but what makes QFC a success or not? :dunno:

I know it hasn't fallen down... But it does seem to be closed often due to ice and often has bottlenecks causing traffic on the lead up to the bridge.

FWIW I like the bridge, and think it compliments the others nicely.

---

Bottlenecks will always be there because it’s only two lane. The funding of a large part of the bridge came from the EU but from a fund that only allowed for a replacement. As the old bridge only had two lanes then the new one could only have two lanes. Anymore would be seen as an upgrade and the money would not have been available. The only difference is that it was allowed a hard shoulder which the old one did not have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

I'm not saying it wasn't a success, but what makes QFC a success or not? :dunno:

I know it hasn't fallen down... But it does seem to be closed often due to ice and often has bottlenecks causing traffic on the lead up to the bridge.

FWIW I like the bridge, and think it compliments the others nicely.

---

How many days has it been closed since it opened?

Did it come in on/ under budget?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santa Cruz

I think it's called a Disability payment now. I don't have a source but do recall reading it's the same points based system. Imo if we want to take a more compassionate approach, this should apply to both new and existing claimants. This was the chance to do so and an opportunity missed. Depending on where you stay, people will still be going through the process. This new benefit won't be rolled out in Edinburgh or Glasgow until August.

---

I'd like to think that the MSPs will find a way to ensure we treat all those applying the same. It's at an early stage in the process and can be tweaked, just as long as the UK Gov don't get involved in another devolved matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

I'd like to think that the MSPs will find a way to ensure we treat all those applying the same. It's at an early stage in the process and can be tweaked, just as long as the UK Gov don't get involved in another devolved matter.

---

I suspect you're right, MSP's will get a fair bit of correspondence re: new claims. The point though is they have had years to plan for taking on this new power and it seems awfy like they've opted for a similar system for new claimants to the chronically unfair existing one. We shall see how this pans out. :aok:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santa Cruz

I suspect you're right, MSP's will get a fair bit of correspondence re: new claims. The point though is they have had years to plan for taking on this new power and it seems awfy like they've opted for a similar system for new claimants to the chronically unfair existing one. We shall see how this pans out. :aok:

---

As the chancellor said, the system was antiquated. I take your point re new claimants though. Good to feed back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Bottlenecks will always be there because it’s only two lane. The funding of a large part of the bridge came from the EU but from a fund that only allowed for a replacement. As the old bridge only had two lanes then the new one could only have two lanes. Anymore would be seen as an upgrade and the money would not have been available. The only difference is that it was allowed a hard shoulder which the old one did not have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I didn't realise there were limitations on the funding like that - interesting. :agree:

I'm not entirely convinced that the roads feeding in don't add to it, but I'm no town planner!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Cars..... Queensferry Crossing.... Success
Cars..... A9 dualling.... Success so far (3 further dual carriageway sections opened)

---

I'll Trump you with Sheriffhall. And the A720 in general. 7 mile queue today. Failure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stuart-farquhar

I'll Trump you with Sheriffhall. And the A720 in general. 7 mile queue today. Failure.

---

Sherriffhall roundabout was first opened in 1988, 11 years before the Scottish Government was created. The A720, 1981. Who are you blaming for the congestion???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Sherriffhall roundabout was first opened in 1988, 11 years before the Scottish Government was created. The A720, 1981. Who are you blaming for the congestion???

---

Lol, you mean that as well.

It's obviously Henry Ford's fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Bottlenecks will always be there because it’s only two lane. The funding of a large part of the bridge came from the EU but from a fund that only allowed for a replacement. As the old bridge only had two lanes then the new one could only have two lanes. Anymore would be seen as an upgrade and the money would not have been available. The only difference is that it was allowed a hard shoulder which the old one did not have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

What percentage of funding came from the EU and can you provide a link to the EU rules that said they wouldn’t invest in improvements to infrastructure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

What percentage of funding came from the EU and can you provide a link to the EU rules that said they wouldn’t invest in improvements to infrastructure.

---

No idea on EU Funding sum, all I know is that it was from Scottish capital funding budget.

In terms of number of lanes I thought that was down to cost and infrastructure capacity out-with the 22km of works that formed the bridge project and also due to planning around local authority concerns about increased traffic volumes. That was why they introduced the the integrated traffic management systems instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James310

Lol, you mean that as well.

It's obviously Henry Ford's fault.

---

Well, I suppose you might be correct, if Karl Benz hadn't beat Ford to it by 22 years. 😂😂😂


Meanwhile I'm wondering when Henry Ford joined the SNP 🤔😁

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Sherriffhall roundabout was first opened in 1988, 11 years before the Scottish Government was created. The A720, 1981. Who are you blaming for the congestion???

---

OK so the Scott Government did not do the original build but they’ve done SFA to address the congestion problems as they have developed over the years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

OK so the Scott Government did not do the original build but they’ve done SFA to address the congestion problems as they have developed over the years.

---

That's a lie. Maybe it should be on another thread 😉


https://www.transport.gov.scot/projects/a720-sheriffhall-roundabout/project-details/


As has been mentioned previously somewhere there are lots of issues with the ground around the area, mine workings, a geological fault line for starters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by degenerated

No idea on EU Funding sum, all I know is that it was from Scottish capital funding budget.

In terms of number of lanes I thought that was down to cost and infrastructure capacity out-with the 22km of works that formed the bridge project and also due to planning around local authority concerns about increased traffic volumes. That was why they introduced the the integrated traffic management systems instead.

---

I’m sure Oz will clear that one up soon.

The second part is how I understood it as well. Building a three lane crossing would have prohibitively expensive. Congestion levels are disappointing but sometimes we just have to concede that there are too many cars on the road, admit we are all part of the problem and turn on the radio and chill as we drive slowly home. greengrin
Politics aside the Queensferry crossing is a magnificent feat of engineering. I get an enormous sense of pride every time I see it. On that level alone I’d claim it as a success.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

I’m sure Oz will clear that one up soon.

The second part is how I understood it as well. Building a three lane crossing would have prohibitively expensive. Congestion levels are disappointing but sometimes we just have to concede that there are too many cars on the road, admit we are all part of the problem and turn on the radio and chill as we drive slowly home. greengrin
Politics aside the Queensferry crossing is a magnificent feat of engineering. I get an enormous sense of pride every time I see it. On that level alone I’d claim it as a success.

---

I had the chance to go up the towers when they were building it but bottled it because of my dislike of heights. :greengrin
Very impressive bit of engineering that came in under budget but it was late in being delivered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

I’m sure Oz will clear that one up soon.

The second part is how I understood it as well. Building a three lane crossing would have prohibitively expensive. Congestion levels are disappointing but sometimes we just have to concede that there are too many cars on the road, admit we are all part of the problem and turn on the radio and chill as we drive slowly home. greengrin
Politics aside the Queensferry crossing is a magnificent feat of engineering. I get an enormous sense of pride every time I see it. On that level alone I’d claim it as a success.

---

I can’t really back it up because I only know because I saw one of the white hats being interviewed on TV during the build and remembered it. I remember thinking at the time that surely they could have found a way. The guy on the TV seemed to be hinting that maybe the hard shoulder could be used at a future date to increase capacity but maybe not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I can’t really back it up because I only know because I saw one of the white hats being interviewed on TV during the build and remembered it. I remember thinking at the time that surely they could have found a way. The guy on the TV seemed to be hinting that maybe the hard shoulder could be used at a future date to increase capacity but maybe not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I remember that as well, maybe not the interview though. I was given a tour of the bridge while it was being built and it might have come up in the Q&A at the end.

I have it in my mind it wasn't the EU funding that wouldn't allow 3 lanes but UK government policy. Maybe some background environmental green policy.

The hard shoulder upgrade was a way round this, as you say could become a 3rd lane in the future but in the meantime meant that accidents or breakdowns were much less likely to cause the chaos they did on the old bridge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

I’m sure Oz will clear that one up soon.

The second part is how I understood it as well. Building a three lane crossing would have prohibitively expensive. Congestion levels are disappointing but sometimes we just have to concede that there are too many cars on the road, admit we are all part of the problem and turn on the radio and chill as we drive slowly home. greengrin
Politics aside the Queensferry crossing is a magnificent feat of engineering. I get an enormous sense of pride every time I see it. On that level alone I’d claim it as a success.

---

the bridge is a fantastic feat of engineering and construction… the time spent arranging the roads on either side of it, not so much :greengrin

what I would say in regards to the queues for the bridge, is every time I’m in a queue there, it’s always when the speed limit on the bridge has been lowered, usually to 40. There’s no need for that to happen on almost any of those occasions, and all it does is back up the traffic on either side, and as soon as you clear the bridge the traffic clears, as the speed limit is back to 70.

I can understand certain times requiring the speed limit to be lowered, but it seems to be very very regularly reduced for no reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack

I remember that as well, maybe not the interview though. I was given a tour of the bridge while it was being built and it might have come up in the Q&A at the end.

I have it in my mind it wasn't the EU funding that wouldn't allow 3 lanes but UK government policy. Maybe some background environmental green policy.

The hard shoulder upgrade was a way round this, as you say could become a 3rd lane in the future but in the meantime meant that accidents or breakdowns were much less likely to cause the chaos they did on the old bridge.

---

It was narrowed due to the original plan of 50m wide bridge being unaffordable at the time of the crash.
It's noted in the big boys book on the Queensferry crossing :greengrin, I'm not a bridge nerd honest. I work for one the lead contractors that made up FCBC, although wasn't involved in it, and there were boxes of these in the office for years after it had all wound down.

We had a boat chartered where they took clients a tour from the water and we could go if there were spaces left and there were engineers etc to explain the process, there was also a free bar so my memory is hazy. Attachment 25878Attachment 25880Attachment 25881Attachment 25882

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

That's a lie. Maybe it should be on another thread 😉


https://www.transport.gov.scot/proje...oject-details/


As has been mentioned previously somewhere there are lots of issues with the ground around the area, mine workings, a geological fault line for starters.

---

A lie ? Improvements have been planned since 2008.

https://www.transport.gov.scot/proje...oject-details/

Paper plans don’t ease congestion, and even if they get to a construction stage will their government partners, the Greens , let it be built ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

A lie ? Improvements have been planned since 2008.

https://www.transport.gov.scot/proje...oject-details/

Paper plans don’t ease congestion, and even if they get to a construction stage will their government partners, the Greens , let it be built ?

---

You clearly know nothing about transport planning if you think that you don't need to look at all options. I've been involved with the A9 dualling and the preparation work before you even decided on the best solution takes years.

What were the improvements planned in 2008? Your link doesn't mention it. 🤔

If you mean 'identified' then yes, but I've already mentioned the geological problems needing to be overcome.

Canada got a 10 lane bridge within 5 years, no messing.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/geor...ge-opening-day

Love some of the Scandinavian bridges that turn into tunnels. A few double decker bridges built recently with light railway and cycling on the lower bridge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7

Canada got a 10 lane bridge within 5 years, no messing.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/geor...ge-opening-day

Love some of the Scandinavian bridges that turn into tunnels. A few double decker bridges built recently with light railway and cycling on the lower bridge.

---

We do impressive infrastructure as well. Cross rail is a fantastic engineering feat. We only do these things in London though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

We do impressive infrastructure as well. Cross rail is a fantastic engineering feat. We only do these things in London though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I'm sure we did all we could with the budget that was given. It came in on budget and looks great I think, but not future proof, especially when the other bridge get decommissioned