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

Hmmm have I got this right

On Wednesday the government effectively talks out the debate on the repatriation of powers from EU to UK/Scotland and in the process manage to 100% stop ANY Scottish politician of whatever party having a say... because that's how Parliamentary rules work.

On Thursday, Westminster decides to break a long standing parliamentary rule because adhering to the rule would mean Scottish politicians would get their say.

And on Friday one Tory can single handedly stop a bill (upskirting law) because that's how Parliamentary rules work.

Does anyone else think Westminster might be broken?



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

Hmmm have I got this right

On Wednesday the government effectively talks out the debate on the repatriation of powers from EU to UK/Scotland and in the process manage to 100% stop ANY Scottish politician of whatever party having a say... because that's how Parliamentary rules work.

On Thursday, Westminster decides to break a long standing parliamentary rule because adhering to the rule would mean Scottish politicians would get their say.

And on Friday one Tory can single handedly stop a bill (upskirting law) because that's how Parliamentary rules work.

Does anyone else think Westminster might be broken?



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

---

There is a 3 hour debate on the very subject on Monday...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyeSloan

There is a 3 hour debate on the very subject on Monday...

---

Do they get to vote on it though?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Do they get to vote on it though?

---

Does every debate / discussion need to end with a vote?

Anyway it seems to me that instead of 15mins tacked on the end of a larger bill, there is a 3 hour session in parliament to discuss the Sewell convention and by extension the devolved matters in the EU withdrawal bill.

The SNP wanted parliamentary time to debate their primary issue and now they have it, doesn’t sound that broken to me (ignoring the staged walkouts, the unlikeable Bercow and much outrage of course 🤪)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyeSloan

Does every debate / discussion need to end with a vote?

Anyway it seems to me that instead of 15mins tacked on the end of a larger bill, there is a 3 hour session in parliament to discuss the Sewell convention and by extension the devolved matters in the EU withdrawal bill.

The SNP wanted parliamentary time to debate their primary issue and now they have it, doesn’t sound that broken to me (ignoring the staged walkouts, the unlikeable Bercow and much outrage of course 🤪)

---

They wanted parliamentary time to discuss and vote on the amendments last week. That's the whole point.

They've had to force an emergency debate on Monday because of the lack of time on the original bill.

All this, after they'd been told the bill would be amended on clause 11 in the commons, and the Tories didn't bother.

It's a stitch up. Good and proper, and Mundell should have considered his position. He's not batting for Scotland, that's for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

They wanted parliamentary time to discuss and vote on the amendments last week. That's the whole point.

They've had to force an emergency debate on Monday because of the lack of time on the original bill.

All this, after they'd been told the bill would be amended on clause 11 in the commons, and the Tories didn't bother.

It's a stitch up. Good and proper, and Mundell should have considered his position. He's not batting for Scotland, that's for sure.

---

You would have had your emergency debate by now, the Speaker would have granted it but instead Blackford went for a manufactured stunt with the walk-out.

Incidentally, how many SNP-tabled questions to the PM were missed as a consequence of the stunt - was it five? Chris Law, Pete Wishart et al?

They're selling their constituents short by doing that aren't they? Or is a tawdry headline better than getting answers for their constituents?

Grievo-max indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

They wanted parliamentary time to discuss and vote on the amendments last week. That's the whole point.

They've had to force an emergency debate on Monday because of the lack of time on the original bill.

All this, after they'd been told the bill would be amended on clause 11 in the commons, and the Tories didn't bother.

It's a stitch up. Good and proper, and Mundell should have considered his position. He's not batting for Scotland, that's for sure.

---

Westminster just isn’t fit for purpose. All the queing for votes etc wastes an enormous amount of time. That’s a large part of the problem. Holyrood on the other hand......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

They wanted parliamentary time to discuss and vote on the amendments last week. That's the whole point.

They've had to force an emergency debate on Monday because of the lack of time on the original bill.

All this, after they'd been told the bill would be amended on clause 11 in the commons, and the Tories didn't bother.

It's a stitch up. Good and proper, and Mundell should have considered his position. He's not batting for Scotland, that's for sure.

---

It wasn’t amended because the SNP made it clear they still wouldn’t support the clause even in its amended format which proposed that powers would be passed by default and those that were ‘frozen’ would face parliamentary oversight every 3 months on progress of finalising the U.K. wide frameworks. They then withdrew it as they knew it still wouldn’t gain the support of those against the first drafting.

The SNP position is rather typical. They want absolutely everything devolved immediately and will not countenance any compromise. So even when the other side does come to the table and offer a compromise they can still walk away claiming they still aren’t being listened to and that it’s all a power grabbing disgrace. Noting of course that they have offered no concession to try and break the deadlock themselves.

Generally I think that most situations like this (rather unprecedented and not exactly at the forefront of any legislation on power sharing when it’s was drafted) would probably entail some kind of compromise (like clarification of the relatively small number of areas effected and changing of the wording of the bill to clarify the primacy of the Scottish government).

But no...all or nothing or it’s tub thumping anti Westminster rhetoric all the way. No doubt It’s an effective route to take for their base vote but it’s also a rather nauseating approach to politics that is highly unlikely to bring about constructive and effective resolution to the matters at hand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

Hmmm have I got this right

On Wednesday the government effectively talks out the debate on the repatriation of powers from EU to UK/Scotland and in the process manage to 100% stop ANY Scottish politician of whatever party having a say... because that's how Parliamentary rules work.

On Thursday, Westminster decides to break a long standing parliamentary rule because adhering to the rule would mean Scottish politicians would get their say.

And on Friday one Tory can single handedly stop a bill (upskirting law) because that's how Parliamentary rules work.

Does anyone else think Westminster might be broken?



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

---

He's delayed it, he hasn't necessarily blocked it.

Bit I do take your point more generally, reform is overdue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

You would have had your emergency debate by now, the Speaker would have granted it but instead Blackford went for a manufactured stunt with the walk-out.

Incidentally, how many SNP-tabled questions to the PM were missed as a consequence of the stunt - was it five? Chris Law, Pete Wishart et al?

They're selling their constituents short by doing that aren't they? Or is a tawdry headline better than getting answers for their constituents?

Grievo-max indeed.

---

It's third rate amateur dramatics dressed up as politics from a party so obsessed with its independence agenda that it would happily impoverish our people to achieve it, regardless of the consequences. The entire 'power grab' proposition is a ludicrous invention to stoke grievance. Laughable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by One Day Soon

It's third rate amateur dramatics dressed up as politics from a party so obsessed with its independence agenda that it would happily impoverish our people to achieve it, regardless of the consequences. The entire 'power grab' proposition is a ludicrous invention to stoke grievance. Laughable.

---

It stokes the fires of the oppressive nature of the English that sadly the SNP rely on for a number of votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

It stokes the fires of the oppressive nature of the English that sadly the SNP rely on for a number of votes.

---

I'm quite sure any issues the SNP have are not with the "English" but with the government in Westminster - which includes Fluffy the Scot, btw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mibbes Aye

You would have had your emergency debate by now, the Speaker would have granted it but instead Blackford went for a manufactured stunt with the walk-out.

Incidentally, how many SNP-tabled questions to the PM were missed as a consequence of the stunt - was it five? Chris Law, Pete Wishart et al?

They're selling their constituents short by doing that aren't they? Or is a tawdry headline better than getting answers for their constituents?

Grievo-max indeed.

---

Had the speaker followed the rules, they would have had a vote on Wednesday to allow the house to sit in private. He didn't bother.

Your faux outrage is showing up your true colours here, and they certainly aren't red.

What isn't reserved is devolved, agriculture, fishing, the environment to name but three.

What was wrong with the UK parliament actually adhering to the rules, and "allowing" the Scottish Parliament the opportunity to shape the frameworks as they wish for Scotland? Why do they need control?

Are we to have fracking forced on us, as was done in England, are we to introduce GM crops?

Devolution was designed to allow, Scotland to make choices it seen fit for our country, not to have to wait 7 years whilst Westminster decided for us.

You seem to be out of step with your party on this, maybe you should go blue, and be done with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by One Day Soon

It's third rate amateur dramatics dressed up as politics from a party so obsessed with its independence agenda that it would happily impoverish our people to achieve it, regardless of the consequences. The entire 'power grab' proposition is a ludicrous invention to stoke grievance. Laughable.

---

Our people. 😂😂😂

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RyeSloan

It wasn’t amended because the SNP made it clear they still wouldn’t support the clause even in its amended format which proposed that powers would be passed by default and those that were ‘frozen’ would face parliamentary oversight every 3 months on progress of finalising the U.K. wide frameworks. They then withdrew it as they knew it still wouldn’t gain the support of those against the first drafting.

The SNP position is rather typical. They want absolutely everything devolved immediately and will not countenance any compromise. So even when the other side does come to the table and offer a compromise they can still walk away claiming they still aren’t being listened to and that it’s all a power grabbing disgrace. Noting of course that they have offered no concession to try and break the deadlock themselves.

Generally I think that most situations like this (rather unprecedented and not exactly at the forefront of any legislation on power sharing when it’s was drafted) would probably entail some kind of compromise (like clarification of the relatively small number of areas effected and changing of the wording of the bill to clarify the primacy of the Scottish government).

But no...all or nothing or it’s tub thumping anti Westminster rhetoric all the way. No doubt It’s an effective route to take for their base vote but it’s also a rather nauseating approach to politics that is highly unlikely to bring about constructive and effective resolution to the matters at hand.

---

The SNP position is to adhere to the devolution settlement. Why should we have to wait 1 minute, never mind 7 years to access the powers in agriculture, fishing, and the environment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

It stokes the fires of the oppressive nature of the English that sadly the SNP rely on for a number of votes.

---

It's seems to be only you who are stoking the flames, with your anti English rhetoric. Try telling that to, Mike Russell, our English born SNP minister.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by marinello59

Westminster just isn’t fit for purpose. All the queing for votes etc wastes an enormous amount of time. That’s a large part of the problem. Holyrood on the other hand......

---

It's going to get worse, as we use the Parnell approach to all government business.

We'll play within the rules, of course, anything else just wouldn't be cricket. 😊

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

The SNP position is to adhere to the devolution settlement. Why should we have to wait 1 minute, never mind 7 years to access the powers in agriculture, fishing, and the environment.

---

I totally see the point of the SNP, but you really do see politics through the eyes of a child - you are reductive and unreasonable.

I am not defending the actions of the UK govt, but it is not an unreasonable position to say lets get this massive thing out of the way, and then we can look at the effects, implications era- particularly given the complexity of current business of Brexit, and given the fact that working through these things is rarely as simply as saying 'why should we wait one minute.

Because in an adult world, run by human beings who are fallible and have a work capacity, dealing with a complex issue, it's usually not as simple as all that. The Brexit side (rightly) get slated for reducing complex problems to simple sound bites, but that is exactly what you are doing.

And let us not pretend that there isn't a malign motivation on the SNP side - they are loving this, they deliberately seek out conflict with the UK govt, and they haven't exactly been an honest partner in the Brexit process, seeking a constructive and mutually beneficial way forward.

Our current govt are being ***** in many different ways, but it's also hard to negotiate with someone who has no interest in those negotiations working well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

I totally see the point of the SNP, but you really do see politics through the eyes of a child - you are reductive and unreasonable.

I am not defending the actions of the UK govt, but it is not an unreasonable position to say lets get this massive thing out of the way, and then we can look at the effects, implications era- particularly given the complexity of current business of Brexit, and given the fact that working through these things is rarely as simply as saying 'why should we wait one minute.

Because in an adult world, run by human beings who are fallible and have a work capacity, dealing with a complex issue, it's usually not as simple as all that. The Brexit side (rightly) get slated for reducing complex problems to simple sound bites, but that is exactly what you are doing.

And let us not pretend that there isn't a malign motivation on the SNP side - they are loving this, they deliberately seek out conflict with the UK govt, and they haven't exactly been an honest partner in the Brexit process, seeking a constructive and mutually beneficial way forward.

Our current govt are being ***** in many different ways, but it's also hard to negotiate with someone who has no interest in those negotiations working well.

---

Isn't that what all political parties in the UK do, Labour in opposition seek out conflict with the Tory government and vice versa to score political points and win voters?

The fact is that the Scottish government has the right to execute certain powers on behalf of the people that elected them. Those rights are now being unilaterally suspended by the UK government for 7 years (going on past form and broken promises it might never happen) and god knows what they will do with them. Whether you like it or not they have a genuine gripe and are fighting their corner as they see fit and so they should otherwise they wouldn't be doing the job they were elected to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

It's seems to be only you who are stoking the flames, with your anti English rhetoric. Try telling that to, Mike Russell, our English born SNP minister.

---

That's like saying I am not racist as I have a black friend.

There is a large element of SNP support drawn from people who seem to have an issue with England and the English, you can't deny that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

The SNP position is to adhere to the devolution settlement. Why should we have to wait 1 minute, never mind 7 years to access the powers in agriculture, fishing, and the environment.

---

See the Brexit thread for my response on that.

In summary life is not black and white, these powers did not exist at U.K. level to be devolved so weren’t at the time and are speciality areas of EU incompetence with industries currently that rely on huge subsidies. Ergo the U.K. government has identified these areas as requiring a U.K. wide framework rather than the post Brexit world being an immediate fracturing of solutions and responses from the different powers that be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg

Isn't that what all political parties in the UK do, Labour in opposition seek out conflict with the Tory government and vice versa to score political points and win voters?

The fact is that the Scottish government has the right to execute certain powers on behalf of the people that elected them. Those rights are now being unilaterally suspended by the UK government for 7 years (going on past form and broken promises it might never happen) and god knows what they will do with them. Whether you like it or not they have a genuine gripe and are fighting their corner as they see fit and so they should otherwise they wouldn't be doing the job they were elected to do.

---

Fighting their corner by walking out the fight en masse. How you fight if you aren't in the ring?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

That's like saying I am not racist as I have a black friend.

There is a large element of SNP support drawn from people who seem to have an issue with England and the English, you can't deny that?

---

You'll have evidence of this "large" element. You constantly try to link an anti English element with the SNP, and I'm sorry, but I've just not seen it. Alternatively, I've seen plenty English members of the Snp who are treated equally to others in the party, which is the norm.

We have English members all throughout the party and they're welcomed with open arms. Long may that continue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

Fighting their corner by walking out the fight en masse. How you fight if you aren't in the ring?

---

Should you continue to participate in a game when you find out the dice is loaded?

Nevertheless, it was enlightening to see the Speaker being so jovial as he mishandled the triviality of democracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

I totally see the point of the SNP, but you really do see politics through the eyes of a child - you are reductive and unreasonable.

I am not defending the actions of the UK govt, but it is not an unreasonable position to say lets get this massive thing out of the way, and then we can look at the effects, implications era- particularly given the complexity of current business of Brexit, and given the fact that working through these things is rarely as simply as saying 'why should we wait one minute.

Because in an adult world, run by human beings who are fallible and have a work capacity, dealing with a complex issue, it's usually not as simple as all that. The Brexit side (rightly) get slated for reducing complex problems to simple sound bites, but that is exactly what you are doing.

And let us not pretend that there isn't a malign motivation on the SNP side - they are loving this, they deliberately seek out conflict with the UK govt, and they haven't exactly been an honest partner in the Brexit process, seeking a constructive and mutually beneficial way forward.

Our current govt are being ***** in many different ways, but it's also hard to negotiate with someone who has no interest in those negotiations working well.

---

All I'm asking, is that the devolved powers, remain devolved, and the Scottish Parliament which refused consent to the bill is respected. Simple really.

I fully understand the reason why people wish UK frameworks, but do the UK gov have all the answers, do we not have people in Scotland who are capable of looking after our requirements.

If the UK gov continue on the path of continually refusing to listen to others, what are we to do?

This has been created by the Tories, for the Tories, and it's time, people took them to task.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

You'll have evidence of this "large" element. You constantly try to link an anti English element with the SNP, and I'm sorry, but I've just not seen it. Alternatively, I've seen plenty English members of the Snp who are treated equally to others in the party, which is the norm.

We have English members all throughout the party and they're welcomed with open arms. Long may that continue.

---

Really....

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/settler-watch-extremist-links-tartan-9834853

So how did this person pass the 'vetting process'?

I am by no means saying this is rife in the SNP, but to deny there is an element of an anti english agenda shows you must not meet many SNP supporters, fair enough if it's something you have not seen but that does not means it's doesn't exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

Really....

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/settler-watch-extremist-links-tartan-9834853

So how did this person pass the 'vetting process'?

I am by no means saying this is rife in the SNP, but to deny there is an element of an anti english agenda shows you must not meet many SNP supporters, fair enough if it's something you have not seen but that does not means it's doesn't exist.

---

You said it was a "large element", it's not.

I'm sure you'd agree all parties have their extremists given the amount off stories in the news these days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

You said it was a "large element", it's not.

I'm sure you'd agree all parties have their extremists given the amount off stories in the news these days.

---

They all do I agree, but I do believe the SNP has the largest element of those across the main UK parties.

So just how did she pass the vetting process I wonder, what do you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnbc70

They all do I agree, but I do believe the SNP has the largest element of those across the main UK parties.

So just how did she pass the vetting process I wonder, what do you think?

---

I've no idea how anyone passes the vetting procedure, just like the Tory councillors, the labour MP's, or the UKIP lot.

You can think what you like about who you think has the most dickheads in their parties, maybe that comes with reading the same papers each day. 😊

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Had the speaker followed the rules, they would have had a vote on Wednesday to allow the house to sit in private. He didn't bother.

Your faux outrage is showing up your true colours here, and they certainly aren't red.

What isn't reserved is devolved, agriculture, fishing, the environment to name but three.

What was wrong with the UK parliament actually adhering to the rules, and "allowing" the Scottish Parliament the opportunity to shape the frameworks as they wish for Scotland? Why do they need control?

Are we to have fracking forced on us, as was done in England, are we to introduce GM crops?

Devolution was designed to allow, Scotland to make choices it seen fit for our country, not to have to wait 7 years whilst Westminster decided for us.

You seem to be out of step with your party on this, maybe you should go blue, and be done with it.

---

So no answers to the point that you could have had your debate by now and by pulling this stunt, a number of SNPs let down their constituents?

Instead you start to suggest I’m a Tory. I’ve already been called a nationalist this week, I’m not sure which is worse :greengrin