Tories are still lying *******s

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So what you are saying is they won’t exercise the power, not that they don’t have it. I think I can agree with that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure who this 'they' is? I watched PMQs today and the Speaker invited a gaunt, emaciated man with no hair to ask two questions. It turns out his name is Stephen Flynn and he is in charge of fifty-odd other MPs who call themselves the SNP.

So, by your logic that lot are 'they'? I think someone should tell 'them'

[marinello59]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Isn't that a local authority function? If he is bypassing that down south how long before he starts overturns planning application rejections for fracking in Scotland?

The Council had already approved it. The Government called it in for review, Gove just rubber stamped their decision yesterday.

[neil7908]

It's actually scary how bad things are. BBC (even them) have their main article focusing on shocking situations in hospitals:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-63890726

The cause of course isn't named (its the BBC after all) but the graph showing waiting times rising exponentially since 2010, and not just since covid.

What big political change could happened in 2010 I wonder? BBC gives no hint so I guess we'll never know.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not sure who this 'they' is? I watched PMQs today and the Speaker invited a gaunt, emaciated man with no hair to ask two questions.

Well this is a somewhat pathetic post. Union supporting people got all upset on the Labour thread when someone called Gordon Brown a degenerate auld goat. You've really lowered the tone since your return to these discussions. IMO.

[hibsbollah]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well this is a somewhat pathetic post. Union supporting people got all upset on the Labour thread when someone called Gordon Brown a degenerate auld goat. You've really lowered the tone since your return to these discussions. IMO.

Blackford is being called ‘Fatty Blackford’ on the main board, but it seems if they are NOT fat they are now ‘emaciated’, which my dictionary describes as ‘painfully or dangerously thin, especially after disease’.

I’m sure SNP supporters can also give as good as they get at times but it’s all a bit disappointing and puerile.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm surprised you are referencing that. Trunk roads are pretty much devolved but there is a place for central government investment where it links to the UK strategic road network and connectivity. The A75 links Cairnryan and therefore NIron to the M74. Understandably business is keen on that route being effective and efficient. I have family in D+G and the A75 has its fair share of accident blackspots and fatalities. You would think that £5m to carry out a feasibilty study around improvement was welcome news to one and all.

Yet it appears that Scottish ministers have dragged their feet on this and there is a lot of talk of Transporrt Scotland being ordered not to engage with HMG officials on this. It's hard not to see that as political, isn't it? I mean, are you really going tribal about independent work to try and improve the safety of the road network? Is that the level we sink to?

Anyway my original post was refuting the suggestion that Michael Gove could impose ftracking in Scotland. I said he can't. I assume you are agreeing with me.

Interference by Westminster in devolved issues such as transport is the thin edge of the wedge. If they are willing to do this then they are likely to be willing to do it in other areas as well.

[ronaldo7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Interference by Westminster in devolved issues such as transport is the thin edge of the wedge. If they are willing to do this then they are likely to be willing to do it in other areas as well.

The internal market bill drives a coach and horses through the devolved settlement, but it's ok, nothing to see here.

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well this is a somewhat pathetic post. Union supporting people got all upset on the Labour thread when someone called Gordon Brown a degenerate auld goat. You've really lowered the tone since your return to these discussions. IMO.

No irony there then!

I made around half a dozen posts since yestersay evening, initially refuting a post that any objective person would have dismissed as errant nonsense.

Those posts were a mixture of the rational and factual, two of them quite detailed, and a couple that questioned the post I was replying to.

All in all I must thave asked ten or so questions, pretty much all serious, apart from a few light-hearted ones in one post replying to Ozyhibby. But I wasn't overwhelmed with serious answers to serious questions, which is a bit dispiriting given this place is meant to be about genuine discussion and debate. Maybe you would care to comment on those?

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

All in all I must thave asked ten or so questions, pretty much all serious, apart from a few light-hearted ones in one post replying to Ozyhibby. But I wasn't overwhelmed with serious answers to serious questions, which is a bit dispiriting given this place is meant to be about genuine discussion and debate. Maybe you would care to comment on those?

I don't know enough about the Scotland Act and related legislation to answer your questions.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No irony there then!

None.

[JeMeSouviens]

https://www.instituteforgovernment.o...wel-convention

How does the Sewel convention work in practice?

When the UK government plans to introduce a bill with provisions that fall within the scope of the Sewel convention, it is expected to consult with the devolved administrations early in the process, to ensure that devolved views are taken into account.

After a bill of this type is introduced in parliament, the devolved administrations publish a legislative consent memorandum, as required by the standing orders of the devolved legislatures in Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast.

The legislative consent memorandum sets out the bill’s objectives, the reasons why consent is required, and usually indicates whether and why the devolved government believes consent should be given.

Before a bill reaches its final amending stage in the UK parliament, the devolved legislatures then vote on a legislative consent motion to either grant or withhold consent for the bill, in part or in full. If consent is not granted, the UK parliament can decide whether to amend the bill to meet the devolved concerns, or to pass the legislation as it stands.

It might be politically difficult for the UK gov to override Holyrood on devolved matters very often, but, de jure, they absolutely can on anything at any time. 100% of UK sovereignty ultimately rests with the "crown in parliament". The devolved legislatures have licence to exercise some of it but only on Westminster's behalf.

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Interference by Westminster in devolved issues such as transport is the thin edge of the wedge. If they are willing to do this then they are likely to be willing to do it in other areas as well.

If Westminster (which includes a lot of SNP MPs) - although I suspect it is more Whitehall than WM - decides it wants to spend £5m on something that Scottish people and Scottish businesses would benefit from then it is surely taking political zealotry to the limit to find fault in that?

"Damn those colonialists with their funding to reduce accident blackspots, damn them I say!"

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't know enough about the Scotland Act and related legislation to answer your questions.

Well that explains you "playing the man, not the ball". Can't fault you for honesty on that one.

How about the behaviour of people calling Westminster 'them', when it has fifty-odd SNP MPs attending and participating. Are Mr Flynn and his colleagues 'them' then?

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.instituteforgovernment.o...wel-convention



It might be politically difficult for the UK gov to override Holyrood on devolved matters very often, but, de jure, they absolutely can on anything at any time. 100% of UK sovereignty ultimately rests with the "crown in parliament". The devolved legislatures have licence to exercise some of it but only on Westminster's behalf.

But by definition that has to be the case, because Holyrood exists as an entity because of legislation passed in Westminster! And Holytrood, referenda and appeals to the Supreme Court are all consequences of a pre-existing system of legislature and judiciary.

It's not as if some Spanish bloke came along and said '"I want to build this thing that looks like overturned boats" and then another bunch of folk came along and said "We are going to call this a parliament and make some rules, but not all the rules, for everyone north of Carter Bar"

It's not a political issue, it's a process one. We don't exist in a vacuum.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well that explains you "playing the man, not the ball". Can't fault you for honesty on that one.

As you well know, I was comparing your description of Flynn with the previous description of Brown, which received some condemnation on here. It appears to be ok for "those who support the union" to use "name calling" and "gratuitous, below the belt comments", but when separatists do it, people complain.

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How about the behaviour of people calling Westminster 'them', when it has fifty-odd SNP MPs attending and participating. Are Mr Flynn and his colleagues 'them' then?

As far as I'm concerned, if I ever use the term "them", I would be using it to describe the Tories.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But by definition that has to be the case, because Holyrood exists as an entity because of legislation passed in Westminster! And Holytrood, referenda and appeals to the Supreme Court are all consequences of a pre-existing system of legislature and judiciary.

It's not as if some Spanish bloke came along and said '"I want to build this thing that looks like overturned boats" and then another bunch of folk came along and said "We are going to call this a parliament and make some rules, but not all the rules, for everyone north of Carter Bar"

It's not a political issue, it's a process one. We don't exist in a vacuum.

It has to the case in a devolved setup, yes. But if we had a federal setup then it would be the other way round. Westminster would exercise powers pooled by the federated states on their behalf.

[Jack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As you well know, I was comparing your description of Flynn with the previous description of Brown, which received some condemnation on here. It appears to be ok for "those who support the union" to use "name calling" and "gratuitous, below the belt comments", but when separatists do it, people complain.

Perhaps it would be better in some instances to refer to HM Government rather than Westminster although I'm sure nearly everyone knew what you meant 😉

[Ozyhibby]

I see Keir Starmer using ‘them, they’ all the time? Is it ok for him to do it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As you well know, I was comparing your description of Flynn with the previous description of Brown, which received some condemnation on here. It appears to be ok for "those who support the union" to use "name calling" and "gratuitous, below the belt comments", but when separatists do it, people complain.

I hope you don't mean me. I've posted at length, when asked, what I felt was the best form of administration for people, say in the south-east of Scotland. And I was crystal clear that it was neither Holyrood or Westminster.

I didn't say anything about any comments you or anyone else made re Gotdon Brown. As far as Flynn goes, yesterday was genuinely the first time I had seen him and let's face it, if John Swinney was compelled to take a paternity test then I'm sure we would be having a different discussion

But yes, calling people 'old goats' and the like probably isn't the standard we should aspire to. I've called out some of the really crass language that I've seen on here directed by what are mostly middle-aged men (and that is true) at women politicians like Jo Swinson. That's why I don't resort to the Wee Nicky Krankie stuff, or suggesting that she goes to Legoland to get her hair done, stuff like that, which I know some folk disappointingly do.

[Crunchie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well this is a somewhat pathetic post. Union supporting people got all upset on the Labour thread when someone called Gordon Brown a degenerate auld goat. You've really lowered the tone since your return to these discussions. IMO.

I don’t think anyone got upset about Brown being called anything. What was being questioned was a particular individuals constant name calling in the vast majority of his posts. I’ve no doubt we’ve all name called at times, he takes it to a pathetic new level.

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I see Keir Starmer using ‘them, they’ all the time? Is it ok for him to do it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice but not very accomplished try

It's a fair and serious point I'm making, I believe trying to deflect it merely reinforces the lack of a credible counter to it.

I have read 'Westminster' being referred to as 'them', and usually in a negative way, by people who want independence/support the SNP/all of the above countless times on here. Countless in individual posts almost!

But Westminster is Stephen Flynn and Mhairi Black and four dozen of their colleagues, and rather prominently at times. So, are they 'them' or 'us'? And before you even offer up an answer, what gives you or anyone else the right to state as objectove fact who we should consider as 'them' or 'us'?

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don’t think anyone got upset about Brown being called anything. What was being questioned was a particular individuals constant name calling in the vast majority of his posts. I’ve no doubt we’ve all name called at times, he takes it to a pathetic new level.

I don’t think I do? Can’t remember ever calling any politician a name on here? I don’t repeat names others use either. Just as bad.
I’ve desisted from certain terms for ‘No’ voters but I never thought of any of them as derogatory anyway. We’ll see how long that ceasefire lasts but it won’t be me that breaks it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Nice but not very accomplished try

It's a fair and serious point I'm making, I believe trying to deflect it merely reinforces the lack of a credible counter to it.

I have read 'Westminster' being referred to as 'them', and usually in a negative way, by people who want independence/support the SNP/all of the above countless times on here. Countless in individual posts almost!

But Westminster is Stephen Flynn and Mhairi Black and four dozen of their colleagues, and rather prominently at times. So, are they 'them' or 'us'? And before you even offer up an answer, what gives you or anyone else the right to state as objectove fact who we should consider as 'them' or 'us'?

I very much think of the UK govt as them or they. I’m very comfortable with it.
Last I looked, the SNP were not part of the UK govt.
You can consider who you like as them or they, knock yourself out. I’m not trying to influence you either way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

Anyway, trying to get back onto the subject of the Tories (and bashing them seems to be fair enough and I'm not complaining ), I've seen a lot of comment on the various individual and concerted things they have done to generally make our existence as bleak and desolate as possible, but within all that there is some real fascinating tectonic stuff going on for them.

They have allways been riven by Europe, needless to say, but there are so many other fault lines coming to the surface it's almost impossible to keep track. These have been evident in the never-ending stream of policy u-turns, paying and playing off one faction against another. The homebuilding targets fiasco is the latest great example. For many Tories strengthening access to home ownership is a cornerstone of the Thatcherite, self-improvement philosophical agenda. For others, especially in the leafy shires, the targets are deeply un-conservative (deliberate small 'c'). And there will be an uber neo-liberal element who see any government targets as unnecessary meddling by an already-bloated state!

The Tories like the image of always reinventing themselves to secure electoral success but the sheer scale of cognitive dissonance going on within their party and government is surely unsustainable? Although I worry that maybe people have said this throughout their history.......

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I very much think of the UK govt as them or they. I’m very comfortable with it.
Last I looked, the SNP were not part of the UK govt.
You can consider who you like as them or they, knock yourself out. I’m not trying to influence you either way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My off-the-cuff definition of UK government would probably be the MPs and peers who hold ministerial office and the civil servants who execute policy, but that's not important here.

But that wasn't the question was it?

[cabbageandribs1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don’t think anyone got upset about Brown being called anything. What was being questioned was a particular individuals constant name calling in the vast majority of his posts. I’ve no doubt we’ve all name called at times, he takes it to a pathetic new level.

so be a big adult and finally put me on ignore, i ignore you for many reasons even though you constantly try to get a reaction, plenty on here are intelligent enough and chose to ignore posters they have no desire to converse with, i have absolutely no desire whatsoever to converse with you, none whatsoever, anyone with half a brain would realise that but not you, that's perfectly obvious, so instead of trying to get a bite try using the ignore function pathetic? right back at ya

[Santa Cruz]

How is the OP above managing to read and respond to all posters they state they ignore?

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How is the OP above managing to read and respond to all posters they state they ignore?

Presumably they "ignore" them in a more traditional way than using forum software's "ignore"?

[Santa Cruz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Presumably they "ignore" them in a more traditional way than using forum software's "ignore"?

Aah, understood. Thanks for pointing this obvious mistake I made out and apologies to the OP who I didn't reply to directly as I wrongly assumed I was on ignore.