That was always my understanding. Not heard it used in decadesQuote:
Originally Posted by Santa Cruz
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Printable View
That was always my understanding. Not heard it used in decadesQuote:
Originally Posted by Santa Cruz
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...ionism-3384548
Gordon Brown is back. More of the same from him. The Tories are terrible, we have to stick with them.[emoji849]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Tories bad, nationalists bad, labour good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Bore off Gordon.
I had to laugh when I saw the front page and he was saying Scotland and England were moving closer together. In what way I wondered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
https://inews.co.uk/news/john-whitti...leabag-1201634
24/7 propaganda coming our way.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Geology isn't his strongest subject, he clearly doesn't understand tectonic plates!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
I’d be interested in how they selected the people to take part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
https://mobile.twitter.com/PoliticsF...74812129746949
Humza should think before calling an ambulance for this fall 😆
Somebody dig up Kenneth Williams, quick!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Sid James, that famously British actor.......Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
What a carry on!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jones28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
It's like a clown car in human form. Nice guy, never a serious politician.
What he means is SNP bad. Labour good. Tories acceptableQuote:
Originally Posted by DaveF
Massive blow for the Indy movement. Annie Wells has been sacked. :boo hoo:
Wasn't absolute staunch enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
She resigned for health reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
Didn't open the link as it's behind a paywall but I see The Telegraph has sounded the "black hole" Klaxon.
Net borrowing for the rest of the world, black holes for Scotland.
It's in all the unionist media, I got as far as impartial think tank and gave up. Attachment 25107Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
If you Google “Scotland black hole” you will notice that various media sources will trot this out every 6 months or so.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
In August 2020 we were informed of a £15.1bn black hole, and that this was set to rise because of the pandemic.
So today’s announcement in The Telegraph of an £8.5bn black hole seems to suggest that the Scottish government has actually halved its deficit during the pandemic.
It does make you wonder though, given that Scotland has a fixed budget and is not able to run a deficit, how they actually arrive at these figures.
Amazing for a country that can't borrow money. I'd say it's something to he proud of, actually.
They just make it up.
I remember someone asking if we voted no in 2014, would we end up with the Tories and Boris Johnson and out of the EU... Don't be ridiculous, they said.
They only bought time back then.
Time is up.
Lol
Wrong thread. You forgot your number. 🙈Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Looks like Henry McLeish's fence finally gave way.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...-independence/
"The party dismissed Mr McLeish as "yesterday’s man desperately seeking relevance"Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Good to see Sarwar's mob taking it well, that's sure to get him back on side :greengrin
Old Pishy Breeks comments aren't much better.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
"I have heard of rats leaving a sinking ship, but I have never heard of rats joining a sinking ship"
Is this the same old snake that endorsed Vladimir Romanov to Hearts? The Vladimir Romanov that, so to speak, sunk their ship along with quite a few creditors ships as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
Same rat who'd sunk a few before assaulting a copper :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
Another example of the statement "Yesterdays man desperately seeking relevance" :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Queen 'privately funding' :faf: son's legal defence.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b1931084.html
Let’s not kid ourselves, this money is coming from us.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What gets me about those that absolutely lap up the Royal family, the flag wavers etc, is that they go right along with the BBC's arrogance about North Koreans as if they are a bunch of deluded brainwashed idiots, when in reality they (the Royal worshipers) are some levels above the North Koreans in the deluded stakes.
Royal family is like a religion for some.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquall
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Always liked Henry hopefully more follow his lead.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
I was going to agree, until I realised you weren't talking about the royals here.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimBHibees
[emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://twitter.com/phantompower14/s...106127877?s=21
With Douglas Ross and the Tories now bypassing our parliament and installing unelected lawmakers to look after Scotland, are supporters of the union on here supportive of this rolling back of democracy?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's like his football team, rules don't matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
I would suggest for the majority yes they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I think this was a Johnson decision rather than one that Ross had any influence over. However I agree with the Independence supporters on this matter and it should not have happened. It doesnt change my mind on Independence but makes me feel even more isolated as I dont support the Tories or Independence and there is no coherent point in between those twoQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Unfortunately for you, the Tories are going to make you choose between democracy and the Union. You can’t have both. I’m interested to see which way people will go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
When faced with the choice of progressive policies or the union, the Labour Party went with the Union. Lots of its members chose differently.
This is a much bigger choice to make though I would think? Democracy should be more important to people I would think?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It really feels like a rubbish position to be in. Totally disenfranchised with the UK government but also totally against Independence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
If the SNP want to push the dial they need to ponder on how they change their approach to appeal to the likes on me. Right now it is just a big no mans land
I think what "people like you" :wink: are holding out for is for someone to come along and shake some sense into a large chunk of the English population.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
If they were to get a grip then a lot of the solutions (solutions which still appear unpalatable to you, are admittedly far from perfect but do solve a lot of problems) would just not be necessary.
Sadly it looks like hell would likely freeze over before that would happen, meaning that trying to make a success of independence remains Scotland's best option imo.
These are the dying days of the English empire and their people are struggling to cope with it. We also lose by tethering ourselves to it.
In part I agree but also think someone needs to shake some sense into the Independence movement as well. Lets be honest about the implications of Independence and how we will mitigate those risks and move forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
I read a really depressing article yesterday where they had interviewed a bunch of english people who seemed fully behind whats going on right now. Change down there is at least one election away, probably even further.
Totally agree with you that the Indy movement have to be honest about some of the challenges that we will have to face. They are mostly short term in the setting up of civil service infrastructure and currency etc but if people are prepared for what is coming they will accept it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Unlike Brexit, we will at least not have to worry about our future trading relationships. Those have been set now. Trade with England will become slightly more difficult and trade with EU a lot easier. This will result in a rebalancing of our trade, much like what Ireland has done over the last 20 years.
Those are all fixable problems though.
The biggest thing we need to make clear is that Indy Scotland will be a full democracy from top to bottom. No unelected law makers. Ever.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I am almost falling off my chair with all this agreement !Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I am not as convinced as you are that the changes are short term and in some cases there could be quite difficult situations to be overcome. I agree that people may come round to these if they are acknowledged and we know how they will be tackled.
As I see it though we are stuck right now and we need a change on one or other side to tip the balance, Thats not coming from the UK any time soon and there is a chance for SNP to change tack.
He makes a valid point about Derek Mackay getting paid 100k for doing nothing:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Douglas Ross promises 'Mackay's Law' to oust absent MSPs - BBC News
I think all political parties agree on Mackay.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Great idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Maybe dross can pick one of his many jobs to do 100% rather than only doing some of the job and picking up a full wage for it. #seldomseeninparliament
It would be more valid if he was focussed on his job at Holyrood rather than having another job at Westminster and SFA.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
That won't make him popular at Westminster and the Lords will go ape at the very thought!Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
I'm interested in where you think the SNP should change tack to?Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
We're mitigating the worst of policies coming from Westminster, and have introduced other social security payments to help those in need (seven of them not introduced elsewhere in the UK).
https://twitter.com/stvnews/status/1...636584964?s=21
Apparently the House of Lords is democratic?[emoji102]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For me, two things:Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
1) Drop the grievances - that has got you so far but isnt really helpful any more
2) Focus on the case for independence, acknowledge the risks and how they will be mitigated.
It would also be helpful if some of the issues in the current administration were acknowledged, but that can follow after the above two. In fact its really the 2nd item that is key if the SNP are serious about Independence and winning over enough support. Just continuing as is will keep us hovering around the 50/50 mark
Interesting use of language. Your grievance is someone else's holding people to account. What grievances are you speaking of?Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Totally agree on point 2. It will be nice to see the argument put at Indyref 2 against the Union record over the last 7 years. I wonder who will make that argument.
I agree that rebalancing of trade and developing a currency are not short term or easy solutions. They are huge, complex issues, and could, and if I'm being totally honest probably will, result in some hardship for a good few years after independence. On the balance of everything else I still think it's worth it for the opportunity for Scotland to be a forward thinking and inclusive society for when our kids reach adulthood.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Let's not kid ourselves though, it could potentially be quite difficult and challenging and nobody really truly knows how everything would turn out.
Whether or not the SNP wish to be as forthcoming with that sort of honesty is another matter.
I am surprised about that question about grievances. I did a google search to see what I found and this was the 2nd item on the list:Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
https://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...s-jim-sillars/
I agree we need to know what we are getting with both options. For the union we know what that is and all its flaws. For independence we dont yet know.
😂Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
I thought you were being serious re the grievances, then you quote the guy who's got more grievances against the SNP than Boris has told lies.
Your point about knowing what the union have in store for us. I don't agree. I remember Blair McDougal laughing about Boris becoming PM, and Alistair Carmichael doing the same when challenged about leaving the EU.
We have no idea what the unionist have in store for Scotland.
Given their latest ruse about bypassing parliament, we might not have one in their future.
lol - I had thought one of your own might persuade you.Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
A good example is the Blackford's reaction to the NI recent increase. Note that I absolutely agree with the sentiment about the NI increase being wrong, but the reasons Blackford was giving were just wrong.
On what the union have in store. By your measure we cannot know what Independence has in store either as things change and the future is unpredictable.
You've already said you don't know what independence will look like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
My point is, you don't know what the union are offering. It's not just the status quo. Look at the amount of change(not for the better 😁) I'd argue. Power grabs, tax rises, removal of FOM, and export markets to name but a few. You can't tell what they're going to do from one day to the next.
All the while, were having to mitigate bad policies from London.
I look forward to both parties, YES, and no, putting their positive cases forward.
The NI increase is going to cost employers, as well as employees. I think that I read the NHS in Scotland will have to find around £61m to pay the increased contribution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Allister Jack really is a buffoon and giving the independence supporters plenty of material for free.
I'm sure the 'requirements' to hold a referendum keep changing as they are met or get closer to being metQuote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Now he thinks every quarter of a century is needed to pass, THEN 60 percent support for a referdum sustained for 12 months AND 60 percent support for YES sustained for 12 months
Gotta love the tories definition of democracy right
Surley unionist can't even defend that?
Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
I didn’t defend it. Complete nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Callum_62
The great thing about the next indyref campaign (there will be one) is that the Tories will be leading it.
Replacing Alistair Darling, Jim Murphy, Gordon Brown, Blair McDougall etc with Douglas Ross, Alistair Jack, Ruth Davidson and Pamela Nash is a massive boost for the Yes campaign before it even starts.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This little 40 page booklet on Scottish Independence just got stuck through the door this morning. Published by the Scottish Independence Foundation.
Wonder if this is getting sent to everyone?
Attachment 25174Attachment 25175
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...c1a74d9757.jpg
Big win for UK govt in preventing Scottish Parliament from protecting children.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm a Scot living in England with a very limited choice in who to vote for. The only consolidation is that my seat is a labour seat so I can at least justify voting Labour to keep a Tory out for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
However, it's ***** all round.
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
Being part of the union has prevented our democratically elected Scottish Parliament from incorporating the rights of the child into Scots law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Just let that sink in for all those Scottish progressives.
That's simply not the case, much as independence supporters will (loudly) try to frame it that way. It has nothing to do with children's rights or devolution. As Andy Wightman points out it's a straightforward procedural matter regarding the law making process.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
How could you frame it any other way? It would be law right now if not for the intervention of the UK govt.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Andrew TickellQuote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
In summary: Westminster will be able to pass legislation which violates children's rights in devolved areas without these being challengeable in the courts, on the basis that the UK parliament must have "unqualified legislative power" to make laws, even in clearly devolved areas.
Next we'll be told its all grievance politics. This time however the whole Scottish Parliament voted it through.
Roddy Dunlop QC the Dean of the Faculty of Advocates offers a different viewpoint about today.
https://twitter.com/RoddyQC/status/1...LX2KOve4g&s=19
Agreed. Lots of cries of “what about the children?!” Not the point of this case. I am aware of no deficit re child rights in Scots law& if there is then Holyrood is free to legislate as a devolved matter. What can’t be done is to pass legislation that qualifies reserved powers.
I must be a yoon :-(
Douglas Ross wrote to me today and asked me to consider standing as a councillor. Quite how I found my way on to his mailing list I have no idea.
All he is saying is he is happy with the way things are? This was new legislation that was backed by all parties in The Scottish Parliament. It put new responsibilities on public bodies operating in Scotland and it has been blocked by the UK govt. Interestingly when the Welsh govt passed the exact same legislation the UK govt let it go without challenge? Why would they treat Scotland differently?Quote:
Originally Posted by James310
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Councillor Skol has a certain ring to it mate :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Fixed that. 😬😬Quote:
Originally Posted by lord bunberry
I assume no fuss with Welsh Gov as it's already part of English (and Welsh) law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Or because it's an opportunity for UK Gov to flex their muscles and show that SNP bad. :dunno:
It's beyond me in all fairness, but I'm pretty sure I read that it's due to wording, and that these laws can be passed again with some changes to the way things are written and not be challenged.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lord bunberry
lol:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by greenlex
I can only think its because my better half objected to a building application and enlisted the support of all local MPs, MSPs and Councillors (*) in an effort to get the application blocked. To be fair they were all very supportive and helped to get the original application blocked and replaced by an alternative which wasnt as bad as the original would have been.
(*) I think they were all either Lib Dem or Conservative at the time.
I regularly get letters from him talking about farming. My address is.... Farmhouse 😁Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
Not been a working farm for over 30 years!!
nimby 😉Quote:
Originally Posted by skol
It appears that the legislation can quite easily be brought into line with the court ruling. There's no serious controversy about its content, with both treaties having long been ratified by the UK. It simply fell outwith the legislative competence of the Scottish government, something they were made well aware of prior to its publication (IIRC the Scottish secretary flagged up the potential problems well in advance but was ignored). Sturgeon & Co can't surely be surprised by the legal defeat as the law is abundantly clear (underlined by the Supreme Court's decision a few years back on the Withdrawal from the EU (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill...yep, I had to look up the wording for that). It seems not unreasonable to suggest that the legislation was drafted in such a way that it was intended to fail, but then our 'chief Mammy' would never resort to such underhand tactics would she?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Our chief mammy believes she is a law unto herself.Quote:
Originally Posted by He's here!
Its a very odd mindset where folk can get a chubby over a bill to protect children's rights in their own country being overturned by a court in another country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunchie
Regardless of what the Tories in the Scottish regional branch say now they, along with the other unionist parties, supported this bill in Holyrood.
Yep, immature nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Quite depressing really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
What was weird yesterday was that although all parties supported this bill in the Scottish Parliament, when it was debated yesterday, all the parties chose to attack the SNP following the UK govt stopping the bill. Not a bad word from Labour for the UK govt. it’s almost like there is no principle they won’t set aside for their precious union.Quote:
Originally Posted by degenerated
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep, they were all mighty proud of themselves when they votes in favour of the bill. Now they are all tugging themselves off on social media about the fact that they've been told these sort of things are above their pay grade.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
The lack of self-respect is staggering.
You believed there weren't any empty shelves in the supermarkets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunchie
I wonder who's judgement to trust.[emoji848]
Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
I wonder how many other people noticed the irony of Boris yesterday telling Scotland that the English government were going to improve the A75 and A1 in Scotland (devolved powers) on the same day that the supreme courts were giving the decision that the Scottish government had overstepped their powers?!
haha, wasnt quite in my back yard but was going to be a property with a roof terrace that pretty much hung over my back yard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns
We managed to get that stopped and they had to get a different design and different location on the plot of land. We now have ugly but less intrusive garage, granny flat and a box that I think contains either a sauna or a hot tub which we can live with
The Presiding Officer, the parliament's legal advisors and the Scottish Government's law officers should probably be taking a long look at themselves over this stuff. Legislating outwith your legal competence is as basic an error as it gets and there is a duty on the PO in particular to get this right in the first place.
I don't doubt that these most likely happened by accident rather than design but it has made the parliament and all the parties in it look pretty foolish. It's all very well to attack Sturgeon - that's politics and she'd be doing the same thing in opposition - but it doesn't make any of them look clever.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Nobody comes out of this looking particularly good.
The P.O. was asked about the point you made in relation to her role.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Miles Briggs (Lothian) (Con)
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Today might not be a good day for ministers but it is certainly not a good day for our Parliament and how we make legislation. The UK Supreme Court ruling calls into question the legal advice that members of the Scottish Parliament have received and, perhaps more so, the legal advice that Scottish National Party ministers have been given and have said that they hold when members are making legislation. In the light of that and the ruling that we have received today, what review or consideration will you and the Parliament undertake of what needs to change?
The Presiding Officer
I thank Mr Briggs for his point of order. The role of the Presiding Officer is to indicate a view—an opinion—on legislative competence at the point when a bill is introduced, and the intention of that statement is to inform the Parliament in any consideration of the bill. The Presiding Officer has no further role in relation to legislative competence during the passage of any bill, and their view on the matter does not prevent any bill from being submitted for royal assent. In all instances, the United Kingdom Supreme Court is the ultimate authority in determining legislative competence. Its ruling on these matters clarifies the legal position and will inform future consideration of legislative competence.
I would say those opposing the protection of children through the courts look worse than others.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
This legislation only concerns incorporating the UN children’s human rights act into Scots law. The only affect it would have had on the UK govt is that it would have to make sure that their own laws also complied with it where they applied in Scotland. Why would the UK govt be against that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The most common response from unionists on this appears to be that everyone looks bad in this?
Surely that’s as clear a sign as any that they know the UK govt comes off a lot worse?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I dont believe anyone is opposing the protection of children though?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Quote:
Originally Posted by Santa Cruz
Point scoring from Briggs and truly pathetic deflection from the PO.
The Presiding Officer receives legal advice on things like this and attempting to downplay having made an ar5e of it with the language of 'indicate a view - an opinion' just makes her office look weaker. It's not like it's a question of 'would you prefer the veal or the pasta Madge?'. These are points of law.
The optics for this are absolutely dreadful for the UK.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
There are already a number of senior legal figures questioning the CA judgement, and the fact that it went there in the first place indicates how legally complicated the issue is. Anyone who thinks this is a "basic error" is either wilfully or blissfully ignorant of the complexities of the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon