Tories are lying *******s (warning may contain traces of Tory)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

On Barnett. I may be in a minority of one and may be plain wrong but my firm belief is that it will be scrapped as soon as (if) the threat of Scottish independence has receded to a level the UK establishment is comfortable with.

As an illustration ...

David Cameron 2010:

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...ormula-1924151

David Cameron 2014:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...n-9872879.html


And apart from anything else, if you are of the Mibbes Aye position that Scotland is not and should not be a country in its own right then, given the inevitable zero sum of spending across the UK, why are you not campaigning for something that is directly disadvantaging British citizens in some parts of the UK to the benefit of others to be scrapped?

I would rather Scotland stood on its own feet.

---

Fwiw, I've enjoyed the discussion between the three of you above.

It really does get to the nub of the argument for me, which when shorn of ideology and romantic nationalism (either Scottish or British) really does come down to what will each option cost, and what are the risks.

Unfortunately at the moment the benefit of doubt from that question leads most people to opt for the UK- better the devil you know, if you like.

However if Brexit is a disaster, that could tilt the balance, but I think it would have to be pretty bad to get a majority effectively willing to throw their wealth and their children's futures into what is, ultimately a big gamble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

A minor quibble first. I think my position is that I think nationalism is regressive and don't believe we should welcome it any more than we already have to put up with.

---

On the quibble, one of the reasons I don't like being part of the UK is the strong strain of imperialistic, exceptionalist British nationalism that runs through it. In Scotland as well as rUK btw, where it manifests itself through the various incarnations of Rangers. This is particularly sair to bear because one of its strongest redoubts is the ****** Tories that habitually make up the UK government! While I concede that a similar strain of exceptionalism runs through Scottish nationalism, I think it is less and less prevalent as the years go by to the point it's no longer the mainstream view in the indy movement and that an independent Scotland would hasten its demise because we'd be forced to sort out own house out rather than blaming the absentee toffs down the road.

Quote:

---

The point you make about spending is, I think, a different argument because it applies at any scale.

If you take health spending in Scotland (...'ahem, a devolved matter, m'lud'), NHS Lothian will vehemently argue and have done publicly for years, that they receive an unfair allocation of resource which other parts of the country disproportionately benefit from.

Go down a level. People in Caithness will argue vehemently that they receive an unfair allocation of resource and that other parts of NHS Highland, Inverness especially are treated more favourably.

Or you can go in the other direction. The EU budget has net gainers and net losers in terms of resource. Always has had.

Whichever level of resource allocation you want to go to, you will find differences that usually aggrieve someone. The differences may be for political or economic reasons, they may be pragmatic or dogmatic and they're often complicated and complex. That's just the nature of how government, at whatever level, allocates resource.

---

Back to Barnett. Your argument seems to be that 453 wrongs might make a right? I'm not buying that in this case because:

1. We know exactly how Barnett works, it is a simple formula, nothing complex.
2. We know exactly how inequitable it now is (because of 1) and how it has become so. The arguments of those aggrieved by it are unanswerable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

Fwiw, I've enjoyed the discussion between the three of you above.

It really does get to the nub of the argument for me, which when shorn of ideology and romantic nationalism (either Scottish or British) really does come down to what will each option cost, and what are the risks.

Unfortunately at the moment the benefit of doubt from that question leads most people to opt for the UK- better the devil you know, if you like.

However if Brexit is a disaster, that could tilt the balance, but I think it would have to be pretty bad to get a majority effectively willing to throw their wealth and their children's futures into what is, ultimately a big gamble.

---

The problem with the devil you know is that when you vote it might be a devil in the EU but choose to leave it shortly afterwards. It might be a devil who is happy to disproportionately fund your public spending but reassess things down the line ...

I guess the long term good thing about Brexit is that the strategic advantage of being in the EU while rUK is out is likely to be on the table for a long time. Unlike oil, for instance, which would still be of benefit if we were quick, but has largely passed us by.

I think you are probably right that we will reject the gamble but I also think we'll regret it down the line. To be honest, as I've said before, I'd happily give up Indy in the short term for Brexit to fail and the whole UK to remain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Your argument seems to be that 453 wrongs might make a right? I'm not buying that in this case

---

I'm saying no such thing but I also am not sure if you understand the complexity of what's involved in public finance.

To go back to the example of health finance in Scotland, there is a formula, commonly referred to as NRAC, which seeks to allocate monies to the various health boards around the country.

It is complicated and incredibly detailed and is calculated by very talented statisticians, using reams of data about population, demographics, relative health profiles (e.g. Shettleston is unhealthier than Morningside for a number of reasons, but affluent areas where people live into older age for longer also brings pressures e.g. people who are in reasonable physical health but living with dementia for longer) and broader issues, like how resourcing health services in Edinburgh looks and costs differently than it does in Argyll and Bute, because of the rurality and remoteness involved.

All this, to come up with a funding formula that is fair, equitable and meets the needs of those it applies to. And despite it being a carefully-planned industry in its own right, it will never be perfect because it is an attempt to systemise something that is complex and chaotic (in the pure sense) by nature.

You are hypothesizing about Barnett being changed. The point I'm making is that it doesn't matter if it is or it isn't - the complexity of public sector finances, most especially around health, is that it is almost always going to be a game of 'Whack-a-mole'.

That's not accepting wrongs make a right, that's acknowledging that we have to work in an adaptive manner, where priorities shift and resources follow in sadly a rather reactive fashion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

. To be honest, as I've said before, I'd happily give up Indy in the short term for Brexit to fail and the whole UK to remain.

---

Im not sure I get that? You would happily not see Indy as long as Brexit brings economic misery and the U.K. remains intact? Is that so you can come on here and repeatedly tell me ‘“I told you so” as I can’t see any other benefit to anyone for such a stance? [emoji2]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyeSloan

Im not sure I get that? You would happily not see Indy as long as Brexit brings economic misery and the U.K. remains intact? Is that so you can come on here and repeatedly tell me ‘“I told you so” as I can’t see any other benefit to anyone for such a stance? [emoji2]

---

No, fail as in the UK remains in the EU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

I'm saying no such thing but I also am not sure if you understand the complexity of what's involved in public finance.

To go back to the example of health finance in Scotland, there is a formula, commonly referred to as NRAC, which seeks to allocate monies to the various health boards around the country.

It is complicated and incredibly detailed and is calculated by very talented statisticians, using reams of data about population, demographics, relative health profiles (e.g. Shettleston is unhealthier than Morningside for a number of reasons, but affluent areas where people live into older age for longer also brings pressures e.g. people who are in reasonable physical health but living with dementia for longer) and broader issues, like how resourcing health services in Edinburgh looks and costs differently than it does in Argyll and Bute, because of the rurality and remoteness involved.

All this, to come up with a funding formula that is fair, equitable and meets the needs of those it applies to. And despite it being a carefully-planned industry in its own right, it will never be perfect because it is an attempt to systemise something that is complex and chaotic (in the pure sense) by nature.

You are hypothesizing about Barnett being changed. The point I'm making is that it doesn't matter if it is or it isn't - the complexity of public sector finances, most especially around health, is that it is almost always going to be a game of 'Whack-a-mole'.

That's not accepting wrongs make a right, that's acknowledging that we have to work in an adaptive manner, where priorities shift and resources follow in sadly a rather reactive fashion.

---

What I know about such things you could write on the back of a stamp in marker pen. :greengrin

But, however difficult it may be to allocate fairly, I know that starting from multiplying using relative population sizes that are 40 years out of date is a no brainer to change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

What I know about such things you could write on the back of a stamp in marker pen. :greengrin

But, however difficult it may be to allocate fairly, I know that starting from multiplying using relative population sizes that are 40 years out of date is a no brainer to change.

---

Yeah, it’s a wee bit like the council tax in that regard. I think the scale of the task in pressing the reset button is beyond the capacity of government, UK or Scottish, at the moment.

Which means we end up in a situation similar to that quote attributed to Churchill about democracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

No, fail as in the UK remains in the EU.

---

Ha ha that makes a bit more sense now [emoji23]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

Yeah, it’s a wee bit like the council tax in that regard. I think the scale of the task in pressing the reset button is beyond the capacity of government, UK or Scottish, at the moment.

Which means we end up in a situation similar to that quote attributed to Churchill about democracy.

---

Surely there is plenty of data out there that can be mined to give a reasonably accurate picture without that much effort?

Is that not what the Office for National Statistics is there to do?

I know about as much as JMS on this specific topic but is the suggestion that the basic assumptions under pinning healthcare spending allocation are 40 years old?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyeSloan

Surely there is plenty of data out there that can be mined to give a reasonably accurate picture without that much effort?

Is that not what the Office for National Statistics is there to do?

I know about as much as JMS on this specific topic but is the suggestion that the basic assumptions under pinning healthcare spending allocation are 40 years old?

---

No, my fault for wording my posts badly I suspect!

Regarding your last sentence, there is a huge wealth of data on healthcare, it spans weekly performance data in individual hospitals to national data gathered in 24-month cycles and everything in between. To an extent, it's probably too much data - you can count just about everything in healthcare but bridging that gap between those different forms of data and turning it into meaningful and purposeful allocations of resource is a Herculean task.

With regard to your first sentence, the point I was trying to make was that if you tried to introduce a new form of council tax, rates or local income tax, it would be a mammoth exercise that would require huge resourcing across central and local government. Likewise any piece of work to change or restructure how healthcare is resourced.

There has been an erosion in capacity within central and local government over the last eight years due to 'austerity' or whatever we choose to call it. Brexit has taken up a massive amount of what was left, with civil servants removed from their substantive posts to work on the sheer volume of detail involved in leaving the EU. The actual practicalities of trying to reset Barnett, at least in my opinion, would be a huge ask of an already depleted workforce and were it to be done properly, I don't think there's the adequate resource to do it properly while there is so much flux in the system.

The ONS and the likes of the General Register Office are important in providing projections, but the planning and implementation work still needs to be done by people (and the ONS and GRO are only making projections, based on pre-existing evidence and reason-based assumptions)

Thanks MA, interesting stuff [emoji1303]

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit...id=mailsignout

SNP and Labour voters are knocking lumps out of each other whilst the Tory mask slips again. What an odious bunch of racists they are.

http://thenational.scot/thejouker/16...it-goes-viral/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45693143

:hilarious

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg

SNP and Labour voters are knocking lumps out of each other whilst the Tory mask slips again. What an odious bunch of racists they are.

http://thenational.scot/thejouker/16...it-goes-viral/

---

Ah Jenkin, the epitome of the home counties Tory






https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.V...5&pid=3.1&rm=2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg

SNP and Labour voters are knocking lumps out of each other whilst the Tory mask slips again. What an odious bunch of racists they are.

http://thenational.scot/thejouker/16...it-goes-viral/

---

This is the sort of thing Ruth Davidson should be tackled on instead of the round the clock "Oor Ruth, what's she like?!?" North Korean esque levels of adulation the media bestows on her.

Just listening to the Tory conference speeches it's incredible that they've still not understood that article 50 is designed to facilitate the departure of a nation from the EU and not what the relationship will be after that departure. Article 50 is only intended as a process for exit negotiations and the UK need to get on with the job at hand instead of what should happen afterwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg

Just listening to the Tory conference speeches it's incredible that they've still not understood that article 50 is designed to facilitate the departure of a nation from the EU and not what the relationship will be after that departure. Article 50 is only intended as a process for exit negotiations and the UK need to get on with the job at hand instead of what should happen afterwards.

---

They haven't got a clue, it's incredible that they're responsible for delivering Brexit.

They make it up as they go, soft/hard Brexit, no deal better than a bad deal, hard/soft border in Ireland...

Where was all this when the referendum was coming up?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

They haven't got a clue, it's incredible that they're responsible for delivering Brexit.

They make it up as they go, soft/hard Brexit, no deal better than a bad deal, hard/soft border in Ireland...

Where was all this when the referendum was coming up?!

---

The leave camp were all over the place with mixed messages. A lot of them said 'of course we're going to remain in the single market'. Bunch of lying gits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby

The leave camp were all over the place with mixed messages. A lot of them said 'of course we're going to remain in the single market'. Bunch of lying gits.

---

Agreed, hence the reason we need a 2nd referendum to say whether what's been agreed is acceptable to us all or that they need to go back to the drawing board.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

Agreed, hence the reason we need a 2nd referendum to say whether what's been agreed is acceptable to us all or that they need to go back to the drawing board.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

---

We need to stop calling it a “Second referendum” its the First referendum on the Deal (or not) that the Government have managed to achieve (or not).

The referendum on Leaving the European Union was an advisory referendum that set the course for Government Policy. We must now decide whether we are content with what they have achieved.

J

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bristolhibby

We need to stop calling it a “Second Reffrendum” its the First reffrendum on the Deal (or not) that the Government have managed to achieve (or not).

The reffrendum on Leaving the European Union was an advisory reffrendum that set the course for Government Policy. We must now decide weather we are content with what they have achieved.

J

---

Very good point and I agree with you 100%



Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I'm not a great fan of open letters, they have something Jomboesque about them, but this one's a corker.

Dear Mr. Hunt,
Greetings from Lithuania, Britain’s loyal partner in NATO.

Greetings also from myself, Mark Adam Harold, a British immigrant democratically elected to the City Council of the beautiful capital city Vilnius, a city which, thanks to EU freedom of movement and to those who fought to free Lithuania from the Soviet Union, I have been proud and able to call my home since 2005.

I was elected in 2015 on a platform of tolerance, openness, transparency and liberal democratic values. These values, until sometime during 2016, I held to be British. I was, in part, elected by Lithuanians who hoped that a Brit would have a deep and historic understanding of those values, making him the ideal antidote to lingering socialist ideals and the persistently oppressive, top-down approach of Eastern European governance. I hope you can agree, that bearing in mind the enormously hard work she did to free the East, the previous female leader of your party would be overjoyed to see me sitting here carrying the torch, a torch that was once your party’s logo.

When I was sworn in as a representative of the people of Vilnius, I became, as far as I am aware, the only non-citizen in Lithuanian history to pledge allegiance to the Lithuanian Constitution. With my hand on that Constitution, I promised the people of Vilnius that I would defend their interests, their rights and their freedoms with every breath I take. Of this fact, as you might be able to understand, I am extremely proud. This duty and solemn responsibility I take extremely seriously.

It is in accordance with my oath that I write to you today.

This morning I read with shock, disgust and embarassment that you, a high-ranking British parliamentarian and a potential pretender to the office of Prime Minister, in a Conservative Party Conference speech, compared the EU to the Soviet Union.

Your comparison was not only infantile, it is also irresponsible for a person in your position to push such buttons in the context of the Kremlin’s continued propaganda war to divide Europe, a war in which far too many British politicians have become enthusiastic footsoldiers, useful idiots and collaborators.

This is a war which Mr. Putin finances lavishly, finances which undoubtedly influenced the referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union, finances which successfully ensured the result Russia so dearly wanted. This is the result which you now cherish and pervert, presenting it in your latest speech as the desire of “52% of the British people”, while clearly much less than 50% had in mind the kind of chaotic, amateurish, economically damaging exit that you and your colleagues have succeeded in arranging.

Your hysterical and hallucinogenic speech will be applauded in the corridors of the Russian secret services whose disinformation campaign tactics you are mimicking so closely that it makes me wonder whether or not you are receiving their payment via a Maltese bank.

You campaigned for Remain but have since decided, presumably for Machiavellian career-progression reasons, to reverse your position and give speeches that pander to the most europhobic and vile sectors of your party, along with knowingly rousing the rabble of deranged and discredited organisations such as UKIP, the EDL and Moscow First.

The latter organisation does not exist, although in the current degenerate political atmosphere to which you, Mr. Hunt, are contributing, it would not surprise me to learn that such an organisation already operates and organises rallies without your condemnation.

More importantly, and I cannot stress this enough, your speech spat in the faces of millions of dead people’s surviving relatives, people who experienced and resisted and suffered under actual soviet terror, people who were actually imprisoned in the actual Soviet Union, people who fought for and prayed for the kind of freedom you take for granted and now recklessly abuse.

Ordinary words cannot fully express my fellow Vilnians’ feelings about you, but swearwords can. Unfortunately, due to the restrictions of the oversight of the Vilnius City Council Ethics Commission, I am unable to use such words freely in official communications. Suffice it to say, Mr. Hunt, that one of the words I would like to deploy rhymes with your name.

Sincerely,

Mark Adam Harold
City Councillor (Independent)
Vilnius, Lithuania, European Union

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bristolhibby

We need to stop calling it a “Second referendum” its the First referendum on the Deal (or not) that the Government have managed to achieve (or not).

The referendum on Leaving the European Union was an advisory referendum that set the course for Government Policy. We must now decide whether we are content with what they have achieved.

J

---

Spot on, and a good way to put it.

If there had been a white paper before the vote and the government were delivering as per the white paper then we wouldn't need a vote on the deal. Given the pre-vote mess and range of options/opinions on future relationship with EU that were presented by Leave we absolutely have a right to vote on the terms (which will almost certainly be a no-deal Brexit now).

May has played a blinder here. Make an absolute fool of herself at the party conference so that becomes the main focus, taking everybodies attention away from the parties policies. No mention of the policies in the newspapers, TV or other media platforms. Just a single nonsensical moment that doesn't matter whatsoever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

May has played a blinder here. Make an absolute fool of herself at the party conference so that becomes the main focus, taking everybodies attention away from the parties policies. No mention of the policies in the newspapers, TV or other media platforms. Just a single nonsensical moment that doesn't matter whatsoever.

---

You see what you want to see. There has been plenty of commentary on the actual content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

You see what you want to see. There has been plenty of commentary on the actual content.

---

Really? Because i've read the party manifesto and very little that i'm hearing from the media reflects what i've read. It's just one pointless distraction after another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

May has played a blinder here. Make an absolute fool of herself at the party conference so that becomes the main focus, taking everybodies attention away from the parties policies. No mention of the policies in the newspapers, TV or other media platforms. Just a single nonsensical moment that doesn't matter whatsoever.

---

Sitting here in Berlin, it took me all of 20 seconds to find Guardian articles doing just what you claim is no-where to be found ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

Really? Because i've read the party manifesto and very little that i'm hearing from the media reflects what i've read. It's just one pointless distraction after another.

---

Looks like you are easily distracted then. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

Really? Because i've read the party manifesto and very little that i'm hearing from the media reflects what i've read. It's just one pointless distraction after another.

---

Is that another straw man argument from you?! 😉

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

May has played a blinder here. Make an absolute fool of herself at the party conference so that becomes the main focus, taking everybodies attention away from the parties policies. No mention of the policies in the newspapers, TV or other media platforms. Just a single nonsensical moment that doesn't matter whatsoever.

---

It would have been absolutely great if she'd slipped on her backside while bopping across the floor.

She'd probably have had to resign or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heretoday

It would have been absolutely great if she'd slipped on her backside while bopping across the floor.

She'd probably have had to resign or something.

---

In other news, the judging panel from Strictly will be presenting their own Brexit plan on Saturday.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I hate myself for this, but her crap dancing is actually making me warm to her.

Sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

In other news, the judging panel from Strictly will be presenting their own Brexit plan on Saturday.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

---

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...5a71d80965.png



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Radium

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...5a71d80965.png



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Plagiarist.

I would have had no idea who he was. Does he play for Liege? [emoji3]

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I see the Tory *******s have underpaid people on certain benefits to the tune of nearly £1 billion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

I see the Tory *******s have underpaid people on certain benefits to the tune of nearly £1 billion.

---

The errors made in calculations were inexcusable.

Has the SNP though not had the ability to take over the welfare payment system in Scotland since 2017? If so why have they not done this? Why did I read recently that the SNP have actually asked to Tories to keep administering it for even longer?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

The errors made in calculations were inexcusable.

Has the SNP though not had the ability to take over the welfare payment system in Scotland since 2017? If so why have they not done this? Why did I read recently that the SNP have actually asked to Tories to keep administering it for even longer?

---

Is that it, the errors were inexcusable?

It's only those disabled, and on the bread line, so let's move along and find out what the SNP are doing about it.

Fyi, carers in Scotland received £221 uplift to their allowance last month, with another payment coming along in December.

Maybe we should take a bit of time to get the system we want rather than duplicate the failures from England.

Fairness, dignity, and respect in Scotland. What's not to like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Is that it, the errors were inexcusable?

It's only those disabled, and on the bread line, so let's move along and find out what the SNP are doing about it.

Fyi, carers in Scotland received £221 uplift to their allowance last month, with another payment coming along in December.

Maybe we should take a bit of time to get the system we want rather than duplicate the failures from England.

Fairness, dignity, and respect in Scotland. What's not to like.

---

I think the DWP deserve the criticism and rightly so, they are a Tory government department. But at the same time the SNP have had the ability to take over the welfare payment system in Scotland but have failed to so do, they have even asked the Tories to keep administering it for them on their behalf. That also deserves some criticism as well does it not? If they had the chance to take it out the hands of their tories in 2017 then they should have. They could have implemented their fairness, dignity and respect much sooner and as you say that's a good thing.

So both the Tories and SNP could have done better on this episode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I think the DWP deserve the criticism and rightly so, they are a Tory government department. But at the same time the SNP have had the ability to take over the welfare payment system in Scotland but have failed to so do, they have even asked the Tories to keep administering it for them on their behalf. That also deserves some criticism as well does it not? If they had the chance to take it out the hands of their tories in 2017 then they should have. They could have implemented their fairness, dignity and respect much sooner and as you say that's a good thing.

So both the Tories and SNP could have done better on this episode.

---

That will never do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I think the DWP deserve the criticism and rightly so, they are a Tory government department. But at the same time the SNP have had the ability to take over the welfare payment system in Scotland but have failed to so do, they have even asked the Tories to keep administering it for them on their behalf. That also deserves some criticism as well does it not? If they had the chance to take it out the hands of their tories in 2017 then they should have. They could have implemented their fairness, dignity and respect much sooner and as you say that's a good thing.

So both the Tories and SNP could have done better on this episode.

---

But more the SNP surely, John? :wink::faf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I think the DWP deserve the criticism and rightly so, they are a Tory government department. But at the same time the SNP have had the ability to take over the welfare payment system in Scotland but have failed to so do, they have even asked the Tories to keep administering it for them on their behalf. That also deserves some criticism as well does it not? If they had the chance to take it out the hands of their tories in 2017 then they should have. They could have implemented their fairness, dignity and respect much sooner and as you say that's a good thing.

So both the Tories and SNP could have done better on this episode.

---

So you want us to take over the running of a failed system, rather than taking time to get it right.

Theirs a jolly good chap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

But more the SNP surely, John? :wink::faf:

---

Well no, but I think it's reasonable if we are to call out a failed process it's also fair to call out the Scottish Government had the ability to take over this process and completely overhaul it but has failed to do so, and has asked the failing department on this case to keep administering the payments even longer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

So you want us to take over the running of a failed system, rather than taking time to get it right.

Theirs a jolly good chap.

---

No, why did the SNP not implement their own welfare payment system in 2017 when they could have?

You know you can criticise the SNP, I don't think Nicola reads Hibs.net.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

Well no, but I think it's reasonable if we are to call out a failed process it's also fair to call out the Scottish Government had the ability to take over this process and completely overhaul it but has failed to do so, and has asked the failing department on this case to keep administering the payments even longer.

---

Presumably they weren't ready. Which may be a major failing on their part (I don't know) but I'd much rather they prepare properly and take over with a fully functioning system than take over with something half-arsed that leaves recipients suffering in the meantime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

No, why did the SNP not implement their own welfare payment system in 2017 when they could have?

You know you can criticise the SNP, I don't think Nicola reads Hibs.net.

---

They don't do things in a hurry - like taking over Prestwick Airport - they take their time and get it right, like payments to farmers. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

No, why did the SNP not implement their own welfare payment system in 2017 when they could have?

You know you can criticise the SNP, I don't think Nicola reads Hibs.net.

---

It's simple really, the system is so ****ed, it'll take a while to get it right.

Carers payments made. Check

Best start grants to be paid in December(6 months earlier than planned). Check

Changes to your failed universal credit system in place. Check.

We are only getting 15% of welfare powers, and we'll do it correctly from the start, rather than follow your failed system.

If only the Tories had listened to us when we said the universal credit roll out was underfunded and failing.

They didn't care, didn't listen, and decided to roll it out and cut it further.

This is your parties policies in action, and all you want to do is shout SNP baaaad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by One Day Soon

They don't do things in a hurry - like taking over Prestwick Airport - they take their time and get it right, like payments to farmers. :rolleyes:

---

We can't pay the farmers, due to the money having gone to English farmers instead. 😩

Another Tory hijack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Presumably they weren't ready. Which may be a major failing on their part (I don't know) but I'd much rather they prepare properly and take over with a fully functioning system than take over with something half-arsed that leaves recipients suffering in the meantime.

---

Your right, it has been a major failing on their part as they have had reasonable time to implement their own welfare system but were not ready.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

Your right, it has been a major failing on their part as they have had reasonable time to implement their own welfare system but were not ready.

---

Oh right, I didn't realise you were an internationally renowned expert on government administration. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

It's simple really, the system is so ****ed, it'll take a while to get it right.

Carers payments made. Check

Best start grants to be paid in December(6 months earlier than planned). Check

Changes to your failed universal credit system in place. Check.

We are only getting 15% of welfare powers, and we'll do it correctly from the start, rather than follow your failed system.

If only the Tories had listened to us when we said the universal credit roll out was underfunded and failing.

They didn't care, didn't listen, and decided to roll it out and cut it further.

This is your parties policies in action, and all you want to do is shout SNP baaaad.

---

But the SNP could have implemented everything in 24 months if there had been a Yes vote in 2014. Wonder how that would have turned out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Oh right, I didn't realise you were an internationally renowned expert on government administration. :rolleyes:

---

No, I stick to estimating crowds for my internationally renowned expertise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by One Day Soon

They don't do things in a hurry - like taking over Prestwick Airport - they take their time and get it right, like payments to farmers. :rolleyes:

---

They've been working on this one since 2011. It might have been a lie though.


Attachment 21320

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

No, why did the SNP not implement their own welfare payment system in 2017 when they could have?

You know you can criticise the SNP, I don't think Nicola reads Hibs.net.

---

I wouldn't be too sure about the last bit. Her husband supports Hibs so may well pass on any criticism he reads on here. :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

But the SNP could have implemented everything in 24 months if there had been a Yes vote in 2014. Wonder how that would have turned out.

---

Standard deflection from you.

Universal credit is underfunded, slow in paying out, and people are dying waiting.

You seem happy with that though eh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

They've been working on this one since 2011. It might have been a lie though.


Attachment 21320

---

Still working on those classroom sizes as well, been quite a few years now though....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

They've been working on this one since 2011. It might have been a lie though.


Attachment 21320

---

We were voted down on this in parliament. It's democracy old chum. But you knew that anyway didn't you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Standard deflection from you.

Universal credit is underfunded, slow inn paying out, and people are dying waiting.

You seem happy with that though eh.

---

Ironic you accusing me of deflection, having read your many posts maybe I picked up something from the master.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

We were voted down on this in parliament. It's democracy old chum. But you knew that anyway didn't you.

---

Were you voted down on classroom sizes as well? Don't think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

We were voted down on this in parliament. It's democracy old chum. But you knew that anyway didn't you.

---

:faf::faf::faf::faf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

Ironic you accusing me of deflection, having read your many posts maybe I picked up something from the master.

---

😂 I though I was on a Tory thread as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

We can't pay the farmers, due to the money having gone to English farmers instead. ��

Another Tory hijack.

---

I suppose that's a better excuse than the 'our expensive IT system has been a total cock up' one used in previous years.Although that wasn't an excuse. The Scottish Government had cocked up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

I suppose that's a better excuse than the 'our expensive IT system has been a total cock up' one used in previous years.

---

And you on another thread complaining about it being hijacked.

Oh the irony.

😉

It's like Tory John's got you on speed dial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

And you on another thread complaining about it being hijacked.

Oh the irony.

😉

---

Ah, I get it, let's pretend that didn't happen. Shhhhhhh. :wink:
It's a thread about politicians telling lies and breaking promises isn't it? Tory, SNP.....all the same to me. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

Ah, I get it, let's pretend that didn't happen. Shhhhhhh. :wink:
It's a thread about politicians telling lies and breaking promises isn't it? Tory, SNP.....all the same to me. :greengrin

---

Actually, if you go back to the original post, it's a thread that shows that while all politicians tell some lies, Tories tell almost nothing but lies!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Actually, if you go back to the original post, it's a thread that shows that while all politicians tell some lies, Tories tell almost nothing but lies!

---

😊

Tories are lying *******s, now back to them lying to the disabled, and underfunding universal credit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Actually, if you go back to the original post, it's a thread that shows that while all politicians tell some lies, Tories tell almost nothing but lies!

---

Fair point. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

They've been working on this one since 2011. It might have been a lie though.


Attachment 21320

---

That's a bit harsh, surely they've just been too busy 'Locking the Tories out of No.10'. That's going extremely well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by One Day Soon

That's a bit harsh, surely they've just been too busy 'Locking the Tories out of No.10'. That's going extremely well.

---

Of all the Snp bashing threads in all the world, and you pick this one. 😂

I thought you'd hijacked the Jerusalem thread with your mention of unionists, and got away with it too.

Yes, it was £160 million stolen from Scottish farmers.

Such a radical transformation from the current DWP system will take several years to fully implement in Scotland. The hand over isn't instantaneous, it occurs in manageable stages.

Anybody who thinks that it's just a case of "handing it over", doesn't understand the deep complexity of the economic structure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

Such a radical transformation from the current DWP system will take several years to fully implement in Scotland. The hand over isn't instantaneous, it occurs in manageable stages.

Anybody who thinks that it's just a case of "handing it over", doesn't understand the deep complexity of the economic structure.

---

But as pointed out the SNP said they could deliver independence in a 2 year time scale. 24th March 2016 was the day I think where we would be free of the English...oh I mean Westminster.

So complete independence was achievable in 2 years? Do you think that was achievable or did they underestimate the deep complexity of it all with that prediction?

Can't have it both ways, either it's all deeply complex, like you say, or it's not that complex and 2 years seemed about right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

But as pointed out the SNP said they could deliver independence in a 2 year time scale. 24th March 2016 was the day I think where we would be free of the English...oh I mean Westminster.

So complete independence was achievable in 2 years? Do you think that was achievable or did they underestimate the deep complexity of it all with that prediction?

---

You do realize that there have been both political and economic matters than have slowed the whole process down? Devolution isn't exactly at the top of the UK Governments agenda at the moment, kicking the process into the long grass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

You do realize that there have been both political and economic matters than have slowed the whole process down? Devolution isn't exactly at the top of the UK Governments agenda at the moment, kicking the process into the long grass.

---

It was the SNP who asked for the delay as they were not ready. I am sure UK government would have happily handed this power across if the SNP were ready.

You never really said if you thought the 2 year timetable was realistic for delivering independence? If you believe that 2 years is not enough for a new welfare system how would 2 years have delivered that and everything else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

It was the SNP who asked for the delay as they were not ready. I am sure UK government would have happily handed this power across if the SNP were ready.

You never really said if you thought the 2 year timetable was realistic for delivering independence? If you believe that 2 years is not enough for a new welfare system how would 2 years have delivered that and everything else?

---

The UK Government wanted to hand their broken system over to the Scottish Government early. The Scottish Government quite rightfully called for the process to be delayed, as they knew brexit would slow down the reforms required to take the system on in a way that would be economically functional. It was the sensible route to take. So i'm not sure what you're getting at in this regard.

2 years may well have been enough time if it wasn't for the collosal mess that the UK Government created to appease a few rebel backbenchers.

However, this discussion with you is pointless as your stance is clearly "back the UK Government over Scotland no matter what". :aok:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

The UK Government wanted to hand their broken system over to the Scottish Government early. The Scottish Government quite rightfully called for the process to be delayed, as they knew brexit would slow down the reforms required to take the system on in a way that would be economically functional. It was the sensible route to take. So i'm not sure what you're getting at in this regard.

2 years may well have been enough time if it wasn't for the collosal mess that the UK Government created to appease a few rebel backbenchers.

However, this discussion with you is pointless as your stance is clearly "back the UK Government over Scotland no matter what". :aok:

---

Having seen your post about Russia then yes let's just leave it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

Having seen your post about Russia then yes let's just leave it.

---

If you have evidence of Russias involvement, rather than just linking to articles that claim their involvement with zero evidence provided, then please feel free to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

If you have evidence of Russias involvement, rather than just linking to articles that claim their involvement with zero evidence provided, then please feel free to do so.

---

I am rarely lost for words, but this time....

I would not even know where to begin, so I won't. All the best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I am rarely lost for words, but this time....

I would not even know where to begin, so I won't. All the best.

---

No?

Ok then, no worries.

At lunchtime I saw the post on this thread doing a wee bit whataboutery....

I thought to my self, classic deflection tactic... someone raises an issue about the Tory government on the "Tory thread" and someone immediately brings up another parties performance (+80% of the post is about the non Tory party).... thought then that the thread would be nicely hijacked and would no longer be about the Tories.... #

back from work and you've all proved me correct :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

At lunchtime I saw the post on this thread doing a wee bit whataboutery....

I thought to my self, classic deflection tactic... someone raises an issue about the Tory government on the "Tory thread" and someone immediately brings up another parties performance (+80% of the post is about the non Tory party).... thought then that the thread would be nicely hijacked and would no longer be about the Tories.... #

back from work and you've all proved me correct :wink:

---

So you expect every post to be just about Tory lies?

Does that mean the SNP nonsense thread can only be exclusively about SNP nonsense? Is this board not about debate and calling out hypocrisy and inconsistencies? That's on both sides as well.

This place would be pretty boring if all we had was lists. Tory lie #1, #2 and SNP nonsense #1, #2 etc.

Unless you don't mean that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

So you expect every post to be just about Tory lies?

Does that mean the SNP nonsense thread can only be exclusively about SNP nonsense? Is this board not about debate and calling out hypocrisy and inconsistencies? That's on both sides as well.

This place would be pretty boring if all we had was lists. Tory lie #1, #2 and SNP nonsense #1, #2 etc.

Unless you don't mean that?

---

If it was balanced (after a fashion) it would be seen as a proper response.

But looking back over recent months posts on the differing threads it's starting look a bit like.

Snp nonsense thread 90 odd % Snp fails getting talked about (as it should be)

The Labour thread, Snp & tories get brought up but die away in the discussion back to Labour

Tory thread, a tory fail gets highlighted and within 2 posts it's now an Snp thread.

The Snp could have done better, they did announce at the time it was a massive job and needed done properly, both the UK and Scottish governments agreed that was the correct thing to do. If its wrong to delay it then they're both wrong, if its right then they're both right.

PS. I don't mean you personally, although this particular time yer in the frame for the diversion tactic! :D

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

If it was balanced (after a fashion) it would be seen as a proper response.

But looking back over recent months posts on the differing threads it's starting look a bit like.

Snp nonsense thread 90 odd % Snp fails getting talked about (as it should be)

The Labour thread, Snp & tories get brought up but die away in the discussion back to Labour

Tory thread, a tory fail gets highlighted and within 2 posts it's now an Snp thread.

The Snp could have done better, they did announce at the time it was a massive job and needed done properly, both the UK and Scottish governments agreed that was the correct thing to do. If its wrong to delay it then they're both wrong, if its right then they're both right.

PS. I don't mean you personally, although this particular time yer in the frame for the diversion tactic! :D

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

---

I think if the diversion was off topic then that's a fair comment, for example 'Tories have ****** up the welfare system' and then the reply is 'Yea but what currency will we have' but on most occasions its related to the lie or nonsense that's been posted. In this case yes the Tories may well have ******* up, but the SNP could have taken control of it in 2017 and for whatever reason never did and that seems a reasonable response and on topic to the original post.

As long as they stay on topic then I would expect it and encourage it on both sides. With the massive SNP slant we have on this board then we would end up with one list considerably bigger than the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I think if the diversion was off topic then that's a fair comment, for example 'Tories have ****** up the welfare system' and then the reply is 'Yea but what currency will we have' but on most occasions its related to the lie or nonsense that's been posted. In this case yes the Tories may well have ******* up, but the SNP could have taken control of it in 2017 and for whatever reason never did and that seems a reasonable response and on topic to the original post.

As long as they stay on topic then I would expect it and encourage it on both sides. With the massive SNP slant we have on this board then we would end up with one list considerably bigger than the other.

---

I DO know where you're coming from and that post I tend to agree with, it's perfectly valid to bring up a counterpoint re a similar issue by another party. This time it seemed that we're now talking about the SNP (actually the Scottish government I guess cause there was cross party support) rather than the original point.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

I DO know where you're coming from and that post I tend to agree with, it's perfectly valid to bring up a counterpoint re a similar issue by another party. This time it seemed that we're now talking about the SNP (actually the Scottish government I guess cause there was cross party support) rather than the original point.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

---

When you say cross party support do you mean all parties except the Tories who are there only to block everything the government wants. :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

I DO know where you're coming from and that post I tend to agree with, it's perfectly valid to bring up a counterpoint re a similar issue by another party. This time it seemed that we're now talking about the SNP (actually the Scottish government I guess cause there was cross party support) rather than the original point.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

---

I think what we were actually talking about was civil service ****-ups but that doesn't suit either the Tories are evil* or SNP are incompetent narratives.


* they totally are btw. :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I think if the diversion was off topic then that's a fair comment, for example 'Tories have ****** up the welfare system' and then the reply is 'Yea but what currency will we have' but on most occasions its related to the lie or nonsense that's been posted. In this case yes the Tories may well have ******* up, but the SNP could have taken control of it in 2017 and for whatever reason never did and that seems a reasonable response and on topic to the original post.

As long as they stay on topic then I would expect it and encourage it on both sides. With the massive SNP slant we have on this board then we would end up with one list considerably bigger than the other.

---

Really? I accept the majority of the hibs.net population are more Yes than No (and rightly so, obv :wink:) but in terms of active HG posters it's much more balanced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

I think what we were actually talking about was civil service ****-ups but that doesn't suit either the Tories are evil* or SNP are incompetent narratives.


* they totally are btw. :wink:

---

It was the DWP and I did point that out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Really? I accept the majority of the hibs.net population are more Yes than No (and rightly so, obv :wink:) but in terms of active HG posters it's much more balanced.

---

I would disagree, in some cases it almost feels like you post an anti SNP message and the dogs are let loose on you. Some posters can be balanced and accept other people have a different view or opinion, but there are a lot who just don't understand that someone might have a different viewpoint or opinion. They can't fathom that someone cannot think what they think or what they feel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I would disagree, in some cases it almost feels like you post an anti SNP message and the dogs are let loose on you.

---

Perhaps it's because, whatever the subject under discussion, you always seem to weigh in with an anti-SNP message? Even like on this thread, where the topic is the Tories and their duplicity, you've succeeded in turning the discussion against the SNP.

Maybe it's not us, it's you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Perhaps it's because, whatever the subject under discussion, you always seem to weigh in with an anti-SNP message? Even like on this thread, where the topic is the Tories and their duplicity, you've succeeded in turning the discussion against the SNP.

Maybe it's not us, it's you?

---

In a nutshell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I would disagree, in some cases it almost feels like you post an anti SNP message and the dogs are let loose on you. Some posters can be balanced and accept other people have a different view or opinion, but there are a lot who just don't understand that someone might have a different viewpoint or opinion. They can't fathom that someone cannot think what they think or what they feel.

---

What grunt said plus you repeatedly raise points you don't actually want to discuss. The obvious one being currency. Currency choice in iScotland has been debated seriously on here multiple times. There are only a few options and they are well known. You bring it up not to discuss it but because you know it's a Better Together Talking Point stick for beating nats. I think this forum is (mostly) better than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

I think the DWP deserve the criticism and rightly so, they are a Tory government department. But at the same time the SNP have had the ability to take over the welfare payment system in Scotland but have failed to so do, they have even asked the Tories to keep administering it for them on their behalf. That also deserves some criticism as well does it not? If they had the chance to take it out the hands of their tories in 2017 then they should have. They could have implemented their fairness, dignity and respect much sooner and as you say that's a good thing.

So both the Tories and SNP could have done better on this episode.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

It was the DWP and I did point that out.

---

So you did.:faf::faf:

Reports coming in of a middle aged man nicking bags of sugar from food banks ...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DttyKh9W0AAGobH.jpg

A snippet from the Scottish Sun. :Ummm:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DtzcguPW4AAxvAk.jpg:large

They're not even trying anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

A snippet from the Scottish Sun. :Ummm:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DtzcguPW4AAxvAk.jpg:large

They're not even trying anymore.

---

Ffs, I'm eating my lunch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stoneyburn hibs

Ffs, I'm eating my lunch.

---

PC nearly oot thi windae there!!! :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xyz23jc

PC nearly oot thi windae there!!! :greengrin

---

😁😁😁

Looks like the tories used this drone story to quietly bury an £85m cut to health funding for the NHS down south.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0407e90785176

Don't you just love it when something big happens to distract the public?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lendo

Looks like the tories used this drone story to quietly bury an £85m cut to health funding for the NHS down south.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0407e90785176

Don't you just love it when something big happens to distract the public?

---

Can’t be. Brexit is going to provide more money for the NHS