OK, so are we in or out? It’s not a trick question, I don’t know.
The Scottish Politics Thread
One thing that's clearly not been taken into account is the geographical distribution of the threshold. There should be a different limit for Edinburgh versus the rest of the country, in my view, similar to the partitions that were done under the Osbourne right to buy in 2012.Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:28 amI think, from a quick browse of ONS stats, that it affects roughly the same proportion of house sales. Demonstrates the difference in prices across England and Scotland. So the stimulus applies to the same amount of the the market, so should have roughly the same effect.Knuckledragger wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:05 pm Any thoughts on why the SNP have not simply followed the same approach as Westminster and why they can’t implement the change immediately?
And on the 7th day, the Lord said "Let there be Finn Russell".
Yeah, it’s difficult. You want to stimulate the housing market but you don’t want more people buying second homes in the highlands.Caley_Red wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 7:58 amOne thing that's clearly not been taken into account is the geographical distribution of the threshold. There should be a different limit for Edinburgh versus the rest of the country, in my view, similar to the partitions that were done under the Osbourne right to buy in 2012.Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:28 amI think, from a quick browse of ONS stats, that it affects roughly the same proportion of house sales. Demonstrates the difference in prices across England and Scotland. So the stimulus applies to the same amount of the the market, so should have roughly the same effect.Knuckledragger wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:05 pm Any thoughts on why the SNP have not simply followed the same approach as Westminster and why they can’t implement the change immediately?
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
100% agree, very easy within the legislative powers of Holyrood to prevent that though. I still note they've done nothing to correct the airbnb nonsense, that would release a lot of supply in places where people want to live. Have they even said anything about it? I'm not all over scottish news these days so have never even heard it mentioned as a problem (edinburgh council, who have no real power, aside).Biffer wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 8:04 amYeah, it’s difficult. You want to stimulate the housing market but you don’t want more people buying second homes in the highlands.Caley_Red wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2020 7:58 amOne thing that's clearly not been taken into account is the geographical distribution of the threshold. There should be a different limit for Edinburgh versus the rest of the country, in my view, similar to the partitions that were done under the Osbourne right to buy in 2012.Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Jul 10, 2020 5:28 am
I think, from a quick browse of ONS stats, that it affects roughly the same proportion of house sales. Demonstrates the difference in prices across England and Scotland. So the stimulus applies to the same amount of the the market, so should have roughly the same effect.
And on the 7th day, the Lord said "Let there be Finn Russell".
Doing ok with the covid19 numbers up here, they are getting really low. Was in shops early doors this morning and everyone wearing a mask. Didn't see a single customer without a mask but did see one or two staff in Morrisons without one. Had a beer the other lunchtime in local beer garden, well organised and wasn't worried at all, less risk than going into some shops. Hopefully golf clubhouse will open this week, lots or preparation gone into making it safe. Hopefully we are getting the numbers low enough to avoid a major peak in late autumn/winter. There will inevitably be one so just hope there isn't any nasty flu bug on its way, not heard of one, and we have control over any local outbreaks.
The 500+ new cases day in England is still far too high and a bit of a worry for them and the rest of the UK. I suspect we will see a peak in next 4-6 weeks following their release of lock down, the scenes we saw in Soho and the beaches, no wearing of masks etc and the virus gradually spreading from youngsters within their families. My monies on a few more 'Leicesters' appearing and local lock downs in August. Its a shame as I think if the messaging had been done better and they had held lock down for a couple of more weeks then they could have driven the numbers down to more manageable numbers. I suspect their timing was more to do with economics and not 'spoiling' the summer holidays than public health concerns. It could come back to haunt them if more lock downs are required, it would kick the arse out of business confidence going into autumn and winter.
The 500+ new cases day in England is still far too high and a bit of a worry for them and the rest of the UK. I suspect we will see a peak in next 4-6 weeks following their release of lock down, the scenes we saw in Soho and the beaches, no wearing of masks etc and the virus gradually spreading from youngsters within their families. My monies on a few more 'Leicesters' appearing and local lock downs in August. Its a shame as I think if the messaging had been done better and they had held lock down for a couple of more weeks then they could have driven the numbers down to more manageable numbers. I suspect their timing was more to do with economics and not 'spoiling' the summer holidays than public health concerns. It could come back to haunt them if more lock downs are required, it would kick the arse out of business confidence going into autumn and winter.
Got a jury citation through for August. Don't much fancy sitting in a room, whatever size it is, with 30 or 40 other people, nobody wearing any face coverings, for a week. Doubt there's much I can do about it though.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
Just buy a Blue Lives Matter t-shirt and wear it for the first day. I guarantee you will be home quick smart.
It's amazing (well, it's not really) how little you hear about Scotland on the news down here (at my mums for a couple of weeks in England). It's really nice to be honest...
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
Westminster has chosen to stop. Holyrood has chosen to continue. I think better communication has been part of the response in Scotland.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
I suspect the decision to stop the briefings at Westminster is more about avoiding being held to account by journalists publicly than anything else. We are probably in the most critical stage of the pandemic when it is absolutely crucial we get the releasing of lock down right and the communications have to be spot on. The clusterfuck the UK Gov are making of the communications would suggest going in front of journalists and being asked difficult questions is the last thing they want. Wee Nic however, whether you like her or not, has been there every day and has been crystal clear in getting the message across. She needs to keep them going!
-
KingBlairhorn
- Posts: 1856
- Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 9:53 am
A slight change of direction if I may. I have always felt that one of the primary drivers for separatist movements around the world is a feeling of disenfranchisement, of being unconnected in some way to the governance of the country. I think it is clear that there is a certain level of resentment felt towards the centralisation of power in London and this fuels desire for independence. Ironically, in the same way devolution perhaps also fuels this desire by setting an alternative source of power in which many perhaps feel they have more of an influence. I also think that in the UK particularly, very little focus is given on developing more of a feeling of inclusiveness - even the great icons of 'britishness' in the last few years have been things like the Olympics in London which felt somewhat remote to many.
The reason for bringing this up is I saw an article earlier discussing the potential for moving the Lords, albeit temporarily, to York. It made me wonder whether, if the UK had a genuine second house and were to locate it in Edinburgh, would that extinguish some of the fire in the independence movement. Equally, if other changes were made to the way the UK is currently centralised (i.e. wholesale relocation of important government departments around the UK), would that also precipitate change in the public mood?
I'm not sure if I really have a firm opinion on this myself, but I thought it was an interesting topic for discussion.
The reason for bringing this up is I saw an article earlier discussing the potential for moving the Lords, albeit temporarily, to York. It made me wonder whether, if the UK had a genuine second house and were to locate it in Edinburgh, would that extinguish some of the fire in the independence movement. Equally, if other changes were made to the way the UK is currently centralised (i.e. wholesale relocation of important government departments around the UK), would that also precipitate change in the public mood?
I'm not sure if I really have a firm opinion on this myself, but I thought it was an interesting topic for discussion.
Depends whether you see the House of Lords as an abomination or not. 
IMO you're right in that most people in Scotland see Westminster as remote, but for most of them it's about values more than geography. Devolution has shown that a Scottish Government can run things competently whilst being more closely aligned with what Scots want.
What you're seeing lately is more of a contrast in the competence stakes which is pushing a lot of waverers into the independence camp.
Looks like the UK Govt are going to do a bit of grandstanding on regional devolution. I'm not sure yet whether this is some sort of sop to "level-up" the north, to dilute Scottish separatist sentiment, or both. However, expect lots of stories about how Yorkshire has more people than Scotland, or talk about the UK "internal market".
IMO you're right in that most people in Scotland see Westminster as remote, but for most of them it's about values more than geography. Devolution has shown that a Scottish Government can run things competently whilst being more closely aligned with what Scots want.
What you're seeing lately is more of a contrast in the competence stakes which is pushing a lot of waverers into the independence camp.
Looks like the UK Govt are going to do a bit of grandstanding on regional devolution. I'm not sure yet whether this is some sort of sop to "level-up" the north, to dilute Scottish separatist sentiment, or both. However, expect lots of stories about how Yorkshire has more people than Scotland, or talk about the UK "internal market".
I'm not sure whether it will translate into concrete action but we will continue to see the Tories talk up the North of England and not Scotland because the North is where their votes are now (and because they are no longer meaningfully Unionist).Smutley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:12 pm Depends whether you see the House of Lords as an abomination or not.
IMO you're right in that most people in Scotland see Westminster as remote, but for most of them it's about values more than geography. Devolution has shown that a Scottish Government can run things competently whilst being more closely aligned with what Scots want.
What you're seeing lately is more of a contrast in the competence stakes which is pushing a lot of waverers into the independence camp.
Looks like the UK Govt are going to do a bit of grandstanding on regional devolution. I'm not sure yet whether this is some sort of sop to "level-up" the north, to dilute Scottish separatist sentiment, or both. However, expect lots of stories about how Yorkshire has more people than Scotland, or talk about the UK "internal market".
-
KingBlairhorn
- Posts: 1856
- Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 9:53 am
I think the HoL is an anachronistic nonsense and would be delighted to see a genuine elected second house replace it. Preferably not using an arcane voting mehtod.
You'll get some responses on that statement!Smutley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:12 pm IMO you're right in that most people in Scotland see Westminster as remote, but for most of them it's about values more than geography. Devolution has shown that a Scottish Government can run things competently whilst being more closely aligned with what Scots want.
This in itself shows the lack of understanding from Westminster of the potential issue I raised. People want to feel they can make a difference to their lives and, as you say, that the government reflects their ideals. The issues dealt with and experienced by parliamentarians in their own lives are necessarily different given their remoteness geographically from Scotland. The issues that politicians are involved in will always be linked to their own experience which is why things like HS2 and Crossrail are such big issues in Westminster but a public health crisis in Scotland related to obesity or heroin is not.Smutley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 1:12 pm Looks like the UK Govt are going to do a bit of grandstanding on regional devolution. I'm not sure yet whether this is some sort of sop to "level-up" the north, to dilute Scottish separatist sentiment, or both. However, expect lots of stories about how Yorkshire has more people than Scotland, or talk about the UK "internal market".
Until the government starts spending on infrastructure, civil service and military jobs more evenly across the country, there will be massive disparities in economic activity. The past decade or more has only increased the difference, and I have no confidence that the lumpen Uk state will ever redistribute its spending.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
Was speaking to a friend from down south the other day, he is quite high up in Customs, he was saying there was a civil service broadcast at the begining of the week and it was said that there is a huge shift to hubs away from London across the UK, including Atlantic Quay Glasgow. This bit is already planned with the HMRC and few other departments, DWP etc, as they have signed contracts for moving into a new 10 storey building when it is finished.Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:22 pm Until the government starts spending on infrastructure, civil service and military jobs more evenly across the country, there will be massive disparities in economic activity. The past decade or more has only increased the difference, and I have no confidence that the lumpen Uk state will ever redistribute its spending.
-
KingBlairhorn
- Posts: 1856
- Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 9:53 am
I suppose it depends not just what departments they move, but which jobs they move. London currently has just short of 90,000 civil servants, the most of any region by a long way. Scotland has around 44,000; this includes the Scottish government which is around 19,000 strong. The most interesting thing is that 4.4% of all civil servants in London are at the highest grade while this is just 0.6% outside London. Equally, 25.5% of jobs in London are at the next highest grade whereas that is only 8.2% elsewhere. There is a clear bias toward locating the 'best' jobs in London, and equally a clear bias to locating the 'worst' jobs outside of London. This also has to be re-balanced in any move if they really want to change the current system, rather than just shifting the lower-paid, lower-skilled jobs.westport wrote: ↑Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:15 amWas speaking to a friend from down south the other day, he is quite high up in Customs, he was saying there was a civil service broadcast at the begining of the week and it was said that there is a huge shift to hubs away from London across the UK, including Atlantic Quay Glasgow. This bit is already planned with the HMRC and few other departments, DWP etc, as they have signed contracts for moving into a new 10 storey building when it is finished.Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:22 pm Until the government starts spending on infrastructure, civil service and military jobs more evenly across the country, there will be massive disparities in economic activity. The past decade or more has only increased the difference, and I have no confidence that the lumpen Uk state will ever redistribute its spending.
Source: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 019-V2.pdf
That's exactly it. Higher value jobs leads to more influence, more money into the local economy, etc.etc.KingBlairhorn wrote: ↑Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:45 amI suppose it depends not just what departments they move, but which jobs they move. London currently has just short of 90,000 civil servants, the most of any region by a long way. Scotland has around 44,000; this includes the Scottish government which is around 19,000 strong. The most interesting thing is that 4.4% of all civil servants in London are at the highest grade while this is just 0.6% outside London. Equally, 25.5% of jobs in London are at the next highest grade whereas that is only 8.2% elsewhere. There is a clear bias toward locating the 'best' jobs in London, and equally a clear bias to locating the 'worst' jobs outside of London. This also has to be re-balanced in any move if they really want to change the current system, rather than just shifting the lower-paid, lower-skilled jobs.westport wrote: ↑Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:15 amWas speaking to a friend from down south the other day, he is quite high up in Customs, he was saying there was a civil service broadcast at the begining of the week and it was said that there is a huge shift to hubs away from London across the UK, including Atlantic Quay Glasgow. This bit is already planned with the HMRC and few other departments, DWP etc, as they have signed contracts for moving into a new 10 storey building when it is finished.Biffer wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 2:22 pm Until the government starts spending on infrastructure, civil service and military jobs more evenly across the country, there will be massive disparities in economic activity. The past decade or more has only increased the difference, and I have no confidence that the lumpen Uk state will ever redistribute its spending.
Source: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 019-V2.pdf
The military is exactly the same - most of the higher paid roles are based in the south east and along the south coast for the navy. Recently higher paid jobs in Scotland have been removed with the air bases closing, and any replacement e.g at Leuchars has been with lower paid squaddies.
And Scotland is far from the worst off in this regard.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
Who tracks the trackers?
I see that there has been an outbreak of coronavirus in the Sitel run call centre in Motherwell which operates a call centre for NHS England track and trace system. 6 workers positive and testing of others underway. Track and Protect now engaged and doing follow ups to try and track down contacts and ensure they self isolate. Wonder if the Sitel risk assessment and social distancing at work was up to scratch? Just a little touch of irony involved here....
Didn't realise that English folk would be getting calls from Senga in Motherwell telling them to stay in the hoose, major design flaw in the English track and trace system?
I see that there has been an outbreak of coronavirus in the Sitel run call centre in Motherwell which operates a call centre for NHS England track and trace system. 6 workers positive and testing of others underway. Track and Protect now engaged and doing follow ups to try and track down contacts and ensure they self isolate. Wonder if the Sitel risk assessment and social distancing at work was up to scratch? Just a little touch of irony involved here....
Didn't realise that English folk would be getting calls from Senga in Motherwell telling them to stay in the hoose, major design flaw in the English track and trace system?
"Haw, stay the f*ck home, ya dobber"dpedin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:32 am Who tracks the trackers?
I see that there has been an outbreak of coronavirus in the Sitel run call centre in Motherwell which operates a call centre for NHS England track and trace system. 6 workers positive and testing of others underway. Track and Protect now engaged and doing follow ups to try and track down contacts and ensure they self isolate. Wonder if the Sitel risk assessment and social distancing at work was up to scratch? Just a little touch of irony involved here....
Didn't realise that English folk would be getting calls from Senga in Motherwell telling them to stay in the hoose, major design flaw in the English track and trace system?
Pretty effective I reckon
And on the 7th day, the Lord said "Let there be Finn Russell".
Caley_Red wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 12:32 pm"Haw, stay the f*ck home, ya dobber"dpedin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 11:32 am Who tracks the trackers?
I see that there has been an outbreak of coronavirus in the Sitel run call centre in Motherwell which operates a call centre for NHS England track and trace system. 6 workers positive and testing of others underway. Track and Protect now engaged and doing follow ups to try and track down contacts and ensure they self isolate. Wonder if the Sitel risk assessment and social distancing at work was up to scratch? Just a little touch of irony involved here....
Didn't realise that English folk would be getting calls from Senga in Motherwell telling them to stay in the hoose, major design flaw in the English track and trace system?
Pretty effective I reckon
Yeah, an aggressive Scottish accent telling them not to leave the house might have the desired effect. "If you leave the hoose I'll be comin fir ye. I know where you live, pal"And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
Quite a piece.
Stop me if you’ve heard this before. The government is founded upon, and obsessed with, an ideological project that prioritises sovereignty over economics. Its charismatic leader, with whom voters are universally on first-name terms, dominates politics.
Its strategy is to foster bitter cultural divides and then let its outriders accuse its opponents of disloyalty to the nation. It is taking increasing control of the civil service. It browbeats the media. On the coronavirus, it has talked a good game — but excess deaths are higher than they should be. And today its leader celebrates her 50th birthday.
If Boris Johnson would — rightly — object to such a caricature of his administration, Nicola Sturgeon would be downright furious. For the Scottish National Party (SNP), any comparison with the Tories is odious. The founding myth of Scottish nationalism is that it is warm-hearted and open-spirited where English nationalism is inward-looking and closed-minded: that we are nice and they are nasty.
In Scotland’s political culture, applying the label “Scottish” imbues almost anything with the kind of numinous glow that used to be the preserve of Marks & Spencer ads. This is not just a welfare policy, this is a Scottish welfare policy.
Yet in truth, all the mud the Nats sling at the Tories could — and should — be spattered on their own faces. This is a party, to give just one example, that responded to falling down the international educational league tables by withdrawing from the rankings.
On the coronavirus, Scotland’s performance has been broadly similar to England’s and by some measures worse. That Sturgeon talks about eliminating the disease, while Johnson focuses on suppressing it, is a product of population and geography, not any greater competence. And it is Rishi Sunak who is doing most to keep Scotland’s economy afloat, not least by paying the salaries of almost 900,000 Scots.
All of which will, unfortunately, have precious little impact on Scottish opinion. As polling shows, the pandemic is being taken as proof that Scotland really can do things differently and better. Nicola’s addresses to the nation — she is now, always, Nicola — have forged an emotional bond that overshadows inconvenient facts.
The thousands who have signed up to “clap for Nicola” on her birthday may be a bunch of bampots (in that wonderful Scottish phrase), but even Tory voters think she has done an impressive job.
It helps, of course, that she can draw a contrast with Johnson, who even before Covid-19 was as popular in Scotland as Marmite-flavoured shortbread. For Scots, she is Angela Merkel, he is Donald Trump.
The result, as polling for The Sunday Times has shown, is that support for independence has surged during the pandemic. Panelbase’s latest survey has “yes” at 54% and “no” on 46%. The SNP is predicted to win another crushing victory in the Holyrood elections next year, which it will use to call for another referendum. Never before have the Union’s foundations looked so weak.
The government in London is, understandably, taking this threat seriously. Luke Graham, an impressive former MP, has been installed in No 10 to advise on the Union. The aim is to use Brexit to send power and cash north of the border, while pushing back against the nationalists’ broader provocations.
But the stream of grievances and insinuations is never-ending. One fruitful area is Brexit, where England’s trade deals will apparently ram chlorinated chicken down Scottish throats. (Somehow, the 45% of Scots who voted for independence are a weighty bloc whose views must be respected, but the 38% who voted to leave are a tiny minority whose views can be ignored.)
Scotland’s finance secretary, Kate Forbes, wrote a piece for The Times last week complaining that Sunak’s latest £30bn rescue package would “generate just £21m in consequential payments to the Scottish government” — even though its centrepiece was a VAT cut that the SNP itself had called for. In fact, Sunak has bolstered Scotland’s coffers to the tune of £4.6bn in the pandemic.
Key to Sturgeon’s appeal is that she stands above the fray: she is not, she insists, anti-English; merely pro-Scottish. But there is more than a nudge and a wink to the nasty Nats. When a gang waving SNP flags assembled on the border to tell English “plague carriers” to “stay the f*** out”, it took her days to condemn them. Imagine how quickly she would have vaulted on to her high horse had it been the other way round.
It may be that the Scottish parliament’s investigation of the handling of complaints against the former first minister Alex Salmond, who was acquitted in March of charges of sexual assault, knocks some of the shine off, or at least deepens the fissures within, the SNP.
It is also true that the economic facts remain overwhelmingly on the unionist side — and that the SNP’s monomaniacal focus on independence leaves its wider track record, not least on education, open to all manner of criticism. Most Scots do still think you can be both Scottish and British.
But the broader problem for those who love the UK, in all its messy glory, is that Scotland is a five or six-party system, but increasingly a one-party state. Just as Sturgeon is the dominant figure in politics, especially with Ruth Davidson having quit the field, so the SNP is dominant institutionally.
Plausible young thrusters, plotting a political career, have only one obvious option. Ambitious civil servants, who technically report to Whitehall, follow the nationalist line. Businesses keep quiet if they know what’s good for them.
Time is also on Sturgeon’s side. The Union is most popular among the old, and least among the young. If there were a rerun of the referendum, Davidson is the only realistic candidate to lead it: beyond her, and the increasingly silver-haired figures of Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling, the unionist cupboard is alarmingly bare.
As she blows out her birthday candles, Scotland’s first minister is closer than ever to achieving her lifelong dream. If the Conservatives want to thwart her, they need to give the task the attention, and resources, it deserves.
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
-
clydecloggie
- Posts: 1198
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:31 am
A lot in that piece that makes sense (and that's coming from a filthy Nat), but it lost me with saying power and money will get sent north because of Brexit, which must be absolute horseshit. Already devolution is being encroached on due to Brexit, and there is no hope in hell that the UK will be in any state to splash the cash in 2021.
-
Northern Lights
- Posts: 524
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:32 am
clydecloggie wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:15 pm A lot in that piece that makes sense (and that's coming from a filthy Nat), but it lost me with saying power and money will get sent north because of Brexit, which must be absolute horseshit. Already devolution is being encroached on due to Brexit, and there is no hope in hell that the UK will be in any state to splash the cash in 2021.
Swallowing Mike Russell's horseshit hook, line and sinker. The SNP pr machine is magnificent. Devolution is not being impacted at all, the complaint is pure fiction, powers that were in Brussels will now be in Westminster doesnt stop the grievance though.
Landslide for the SNP net year though, not an opposition leader in sight. Would like to see Ian Murray run for a Holyrood seat and become Scottish Leader, he si the only one i can think of now that Davidson has left the scene that would be half decent the rest are out of depth on a parish council.
I'm actually coming down on a new view in Scotland: if people keep voting the SNP in, there should be another referendum in 2022.
Looking at the Scottish economy, government institutions and policy performance in places like education, the long term damage being wrought by having an SNP administration with no independence is starting to permanently damage Scotland's future prospects.
Although independence would be an unmitigated economic disaster in the medium term (I've covered this in depth previously); Scotland could not afford the large government largesse it currently has. This change could shock the economy into becoming more dynamic and cause people to vote for a party that will sort out the deep-rooted issues that our current position means are never addressed.
Akin to cutting off the leg rather than dying of the festering wound.
Given the brutal economic and civic fallout and the large-scale emigration Independence (and the SNP's administration of it) would case, won't expect to see Sturgeon lionized by the history books.
Edit: I should note above that the terms to agree to a referendum should put a multi-decade limit on the next possible referendum date, Scotland has some serious problems which are never addressed due to the obsession over the constitution, if it's taken off the table (by time limit or Independence) then it may allow for these issues to be rectified (though my view is that the latter will mean far more damage over the next 10 years which will need to be undone in addition).
Looking at the Scottish economy, government institutions and policy performance in places like education, the long term damage being wrought by having an SNP administration with no independence is starting to permanently damage Scotland's future prospects.
Although independence would be an unmitigated economic disaster in the medium term (I've covered this in depth previously); Scotland could not afford the large government largesse it currently has. This change could shock the economy into becoming more dynamic and cause people to vote for a party that will sort out the deep-rooted issues that our current position means are never addressed.
Akin to cutting off the leg rather than dying of the festering wound.
Given the brutal economic and civic fallout and the large-scale emigration Independence (and the SNP's administration of it) would case, won't expect to see Sturgeon lionized by the history books.
Edit: I should note above that the terms to agree to a referendum should put a multi-decade limit on the next possible referendum date, Scotland has some serious problems which are never addressed due to the obsession over the constitution, if it's taken off the table (by time limit or Independence) then it may allow for these issues to be rectified (though my view is that the latter will mean far more damage over the next 10 years which will need to be undone in addition).
Last edited by Caley_Red on Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
And on the 7th day, the Lord said "Let there be Finn Russell".
Are you actually for real?Northern Lights wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:30 pmclydecloggie wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:15 pm A lot in that piece that makes sense (and that's coming from a filthy Nat), but it lost me with saying power and money will get sent north because of Brexit, which must be absolute horseshit. Already devolution is being encroached on due to Brexit, and there is no hope in hell that the UK will be in any state to splash the cash in 2021.
Swallowing Mike Russell's horseshit hook, line and sinker. The SNP pr machine is magnificent. Devolution is not being impacted at all, the complaint is pure fiction, powers that were in Brussels will now be in Westminster doesnt stop the grievance though.
Landslide for the SNP net year though, not an opposition leader in sight. Would like to see Ian Murray run for a Holyrood seat and become Scottish Leader, he si the only one i can think of now that Davidson has left the scene that would be half decent the rest are out of depth on a parish council.
Here’s a summary of the changes by which you think devolution is ‘not being impacted at all’.
1. Powers being returned to the UK from Brussels that relate to devolved areas are not being returned to Holyrood. We knew this already, because the SNP correctly pointed out this contravened the Scotland Act and brought a legal case. This failed, as the judge noted, because what was proposed was illegal at the time, but in the interim legislation was passed at Westminster to legalise it.
2. Allegedly due to the need to protect the ‘UK internal market’ (an entirely mythical construct, as there have never been any barriers to free trade throughout the UK) a new quango is to be set up that will scrutinise new Holyrood legislation and will have the power to veto it if it thinks it will be detrimental to this imaginary market.
3. Again, due to this imaginary market, Westminster will now have the power to impose regulatory standards on the devolved governments, whether they agree to them or not. So if Westminster agrees to accept lower standards to make a trade deal with the US, for example, Holyrood will have no power to prevent the goods from going on sale in Scotland.
None of this is my opinion, or even Mike Russell’s. These are facts, and easily verifiable from a boatload of internet sites if you care to google ‘UK internal market bill’. Calling it ‘pure fiction’ is just blotting out reality.
It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.
Yr Alban wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:00 pmAre you actually for real?Northern Lights wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:30 pmclydecloggie wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:15 pm A lot in that piece that makes sense (and that's coming from a filthy Nat), but it lost me with saying power and money will get sent north because of Brexit, which must be absolute horseshit. Already devolution is being encroached on due to Brexit, and there is no hope in hell that the UK will be in any state to splash the cash in 2021.
Swallowing Mike Russell's horseshit hook, line and sinker. The SNP pr machine is magnificent. Devolution is not being impacted at all, the complaint is pure fiction, powers that were in Brussels will now be in Westminster doesnt stop the grievance though.
Landslide for the SNP net year though, not an opposition leader in sight. Would like to see Ian Murray run for a Holyrood seat and become Scottish Leader, he si the only one i can think of now that Davidson has left the scene that would be half decent the rest are out of depth on a parish council.
Here’s a summary of the changes by which you think devolution is ‘not being impacted at all’.
1. Powers being returned to the UK from Brussels that relate to devolved areas are not being returned to Holyrood. We knew this already, because the SNP correctly pointed out this contravened the Scotland Act and brought a legal case. This failed, as the judge noted, because what was proposed was illegal at the time, but in the interim legislation was passed at Westminster to legalise it.
2. Allegedly due to the need to protect the ‘UK internal market’ (an entirely mythical construct, as there have never been any barriers to free trade throughout the UK) a new quango is to be set up that will scrutinise new Holyrood legislation and will have the power to veto it if it thinks it will be detrimental to this imaginary market.
3. Again, due to this imaginary market, Westminster will now have the power to impose regulatory standards on the devolved governments, whether they agree to them or not. So if Westminster agrees to accept lower standards to make a trade deal with the US, for example, Holyrood will have no power to prevent the goods from going on sale in Scotland.
None of this is my opinion, or even Mike Russell’s. These are facts, and easily verifiable from a boatload of internet sites if you care to google ‘UK internal market bill’. Calling it ‘pure fiction’ is just blotting out reality.
Number two is absolutely needed though, it's a bill designed to replace the EU competence and without it, you could have issues with trade as the starting point wouldn't be mutual recognition (or same standards in this case).
The reason there wasn't one before is that trading standards across borders were in their infancy in the 80s and hence, this legislation is to replace the litany of regulations that has been created globally since then by both the WTO and the across trading blocs (EU included). That's why there was never any legislation pre-dating the advent of EU single market or prior to joining EEC.
And on the 7th day, the Lord said "Let there be Finn Russell".
It's the way it's being done though. It's going to be a panel appointed by the UK government with no input from Holyrood. So much for a partnership and all that other bullshit that we were fed during the indyref.Caley_Red wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:18 pmYr Alban wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:00 pmAre you actually for real?Northern Lights wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 2:30 pm
Swallowing Mike Russell's horseshit hook, line and sinker. The SNP pr machine is magnificent. Devolution is not being impacted at all, the complaint is pure fiction, powers that were in Brussels will now be in Westminster doesnt stop the grievance though.
Landslide for the SNP net year though, not an opposition leader in sight. Would like to see Ian Murray run for a Holyrood seat and become Scottish Leader, he si the only one i can think of now that Davidson has left the scene that would be half decent the rest are out of depth on a parish council.
Here’s a summary of the changes by which you think devolution is ‘not being impacted at all’.
1. Powers being returned to the UK from Brussels that relate to devolved areas are not being returned to Holyrood. We knew this already, because the SNP correctly pointed out this contravened the Scotland Act and brought a legal case. This failed, as the judge noted, because what was proposed was illegal at the time, but in the interim legislation was passed at Westminster to legalise it.
2. Allegedly due to the need to protect the ‘UK internal market’ (an entirely mythical construct, as there have never been any barriers to free trade throughout the UK) a new quango is to be set up that will scrutinise new Holyrood legislation and will have the power to veto it if it thinks it will be detrimental to this imaginary market.
3. Again, due to this imaginary market, Westminster will now have the power to impose regulatory standards on the devolved governments, whether they agree to them or not. So if Westminster agrees to accept lower standards to make a trade deal with the US, for example, Holyrood will have no power to prevent the goods from going on sale in Scotland.
None of this is my opinion, or even Mike Russell’s. These are facts, and easily verifiable from a boatload of internet sites if you care to google ‘UK internal market bill’. Calling it ‘pure fiction’ is just blotting out reality.
Number two is absolutely needed though, it's a bill designed to replace the EU competence and without it, you could have issues with trade as the starting point wouldn't be mutual recognition (or same standards in this case).
The reason there wasn't one before is that trading standards across borders were in their infancy in the 80s and hence, this legislation is to replace the litany of regulations that has been created globally since then by both the WTO and the across trading blocs (EU included). That's why there was never any legislation pre-dating the advent of EU single market or prior to joining EEC.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
Well, have the SNP noted any burning areas of desire where they would want a meaningfully different approach on trading standard, origination rules, labeling etc?Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:36 pmIt's the way it's being done though. It's going to be a panel appointed by the UK government with no input from Holyrood. So much for a partnership and all that other bullshit that we were fed during the indyref.Caley_Red wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:18 pmYr Alban wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:00 pm
Are you actually for real?
Here’s a summary of the changes by which you think devolution is ‘not being impacted at all’.
1. Powers being returned to the UK from Brussels that relate to devolved areas are not being returned to Holyrood. We knew this already, because the SNP correctly pointed out this contravened the Scotland Act and brought a legal case. This failed, as the judge noted, because what was proposed was illegal at the time, but in the interim legislation was passed at Westminster to legalise it.
2. Allegedly due to the need to protect the ‘UK internal market’ (an entirely mythical construct, as there have never been any barriers to free trade throughout the UK) a new quango is to be set up that will scrutinise new Holyrood legislation and will have the power to veto it if it thinks it will be detrimental to this imaginary market.
3. Again, due to this imaginary market, Westminster will now have the power to impose regulatory standards on the devolved governments, whether they agree to them or not. So if Westminster agrees to accept lower standards to make a trade deal with the US, for example, Holyrood will have no power to prevent the goods from going on sale in Scotland.
None of this is my opinion, or even Mike Russell’s. These are facts, and easily verifiable from a boatload of internet sites if you care to google ‘UK internal market bill’. Calling it ‘pure fiction’ is just blotting out reality.
Number two is absolutely needed though, it's a bill designed to replace the EU competence and without it, you could have issues with trade as the starting point wouldn't be mutual recognition (or same standards in this case).
The reason there wasn't one before is that trading standards across borders were in their infancy in the 80s and hence, this legislation is to replace the litany of regulations that has been created globally since then by both the WTO and the across trading blocs (EU included). That's why there was never any legislation pre-dating the advent of EU single market or prior to joining EEC.
And on the 7th day, the Lord said "Let there be Finn Russell".
-
clydecloggie
- Posts: 1198
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:31 am
Errmm..apart from keeping EU standards and not be hostage to whatever BoJo's mates from across the Atlantic want?Caley_Red wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:38 pmWell, have the SNP noted any burning areas of desire where they would want a meaningfully different approach on trading standard, origination rules, labeling etc?Biffer wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:36 pmIt's the way it's being done though. It's going to be a panel appointed by the UK government with no input from Holyrood. So much for a partnership and all that other bullshit that we were fed during the indyref.Caley_Red wrote: ↑Wed Jul 22, 2020 11:18 pm
Number two is absolutely needed though, it's a bill designed to replace the EU competence and without it, you could have issues with trade as the starting point wouldn't be mutual recognition (or same standards in this case).
The reason there wasn't one before is that trading standards across borders were in their infancy in the 80s and hence, this legislation is to replace the litany of regulations that has been created globally since then by both the WTO and the across trading blocs (EU included). That's why there was never any legislation pre-dating the advent of EU single market or prior to joining EEC.