NPR

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:08 am

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:03 am

Dogbert wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:01 am

Who in this thread have ever suggested the 'English are evil '? -

Do you do hyperbole?
"We're better than you are"

Who said that, seeing as it's in quotes?

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:11 am

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:36 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 8:19 am

But in replying to a post about a bonus to NHS staff just now, your immediate reply was about the post independence fiscal situation. Don't you see how that can be taken as an archetypal Unionist response?

How about for a change you actually address the point he is making and not just give a typical nat response

Which point? Your point the the Scottish government isn't spending the consequential or tc's point that we can't afford it?

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:11 am

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:36 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 8:19 am

But in replying to a post about a bonus to NHS staff just now, your immediate reply was about the post independence fiscal situation. Don't you see how that can be taken as an archetypal Unionist response?

How about for a change you actually address the point he is making and not just give a typical nat response

Which point? Your point the the Scottish government isn't spending the consequential or tc's point that we can't afford it?

tc27 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:22 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:11 am

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:36 am

How about for a change you actually address the point he is making and not just give a typical nat response

Which point? Your point the the Scottish government isn't spending the consequential or tc's point that we can't afford it?

Where did I claim that?

In fact my point was that the SG could easily make it tax free by increasing SNHS worker gross pay proportionately because it has lots of extra cash on hand due to lots of extra Barnett consequentials it has not yet decided how to spend - and it would get every penny back because it directly receives all revenue from income tax.

The fact they have deliberately decided to try and turn it into another grievance is telling.

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:25 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:11 am

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:36 am

How about for a change you actually address the point he is making and not just give a typical nat response

Which point? Your point the the Scottish government isn't spending the consequential or tc's point that we can't afford it?

Either or both.

Fraser of Allander reckons there is £1bn that hasnt been spent of the £8bn that was allocated to come north to help deal with C19.

How would we ahve managed to find an extra £8bn of public spending if we were independent when we are already at enormous deficit levels, it will also require an answer with regards to currency for this as if we are to continue using sterling as is currently proposed we wont be able to "print it/quantitively ease it".

However the SNP is too feart to go for a new currency because that will put off all the soft 'Indy curious' voters who have mortgages and pensioners. So they propagate the idea that they can just keep on using sterling but fail then to address the big drawbacks.

Drew Smith, who represents GMB Scotland, said: “Sick to my stomach to see pay for care workers on less than £10 an hour and who have been put through hell this year being turned into the latest bit of constitutional game-playing. There is no shame left.”

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 11:20 am On the £500 bonus I was bit surprised to see the unions voicing concern over it, even they appear to see through what amounts to a political stunt.

Drew Smith, who represents GMB Scotland, said: “Sick to my stomach to see pay for care workers on less than £10 an hour and who have been put through hell this year being turned into the latest bit of constitutional game-playing. There is no shame left.”

clydecloggie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 11:27 am

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 11:20 am On the £500 bonus I was bit surprised to see the unions voicing concern over it, even they appear to see through what amounts to a political stunt.

Drew Smith, who represents GMB Scotland, said: “Sick to my stomach to see pay for care workers on less than £10 an hour and who have been put through hell this year being turned into the latest bit of constitutional game-playing. There is no shame left.”

Is that former Labour MSP Drew Smith? Funny he should say something like that.

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 8:19 am

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 7:31 am

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 7:16 am

So do you want to talk about financing this pledge which was what you replied to a post on?

Well you're clearly trying to conflate these things and obfuscating on it: my reference to the gutting of public finances was clearly in reference to an independent Scotland whereas the previous comment was specific to the UK fiscal transfer providing under-committed funding.

But in replying to a post about a bonus to NHS staff just now, your immediate reply was about the post independence fiscal situation. Don't you see how that can be taken as an archetypal Unionist response?

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 12:13 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 8:19 am

Caley_Red wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 7:31 am

Well you're clearly trying to conflate these things and obfuscating on it: my reference to the gutting of public finances was clearly in reference to an independent Scotland whereas the previous comment was specific to the UK fiscal transfer providing under-committed funding.

But in replying to a post about a bonus to NHS staff just now, your immediate reply was about the post independence fiscal situation. Don't you see how that can be taken as an archetypal Unionist response?

Are you actually going to adress anything directly? The point was that these poorly designed pieces of headline-grabbing welfare are going to be blitzed by the budgetary maelstrom that Sturgeon is wanting to enact. My post was about the naivety of the poster viewing all fiscal give-aways as generous contributions to the good people of Scotland from the the teat of Sturgeon.

In truth, you have no answers on the financial viability of independence and, worse than that, you nod along with anything that comes out of Sturgeon's mouth as you seem unwilling to admit that you're content to have independence despite the vast hardship it would confer on a great many people in the country. Your nationalism is neither principled nor high-minded, it's insular and foolhardy- at least admit that you're happy to see grave economic hardship and subsequent mass emigration as the ends justify the means for you.

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:12 pm Biffer.
I ask this in a sincere manner, and I won't give any sarcastic reply. But please can you answer the issues raised. Especially the one about the deficit and using sterling in an independent country I genuinely want to hear you POV. It is a most important issue for Scotland.

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:20 pm

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:12 pm Biffer.
I ask this in a sincere manner, and I won't give any sarcastic reply. But please can you answer the issues raised. Especially the one about the deficit and using sterling in an independent country I genuinely want to hear you POV. It is a most important issue for Scotland.

Bu this is what I mean. We started talking about a £500 bonus for nurses and all of a sudden I’ve got to explain fiscal policy four or five years from now.

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:24 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:20 pm

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:12 pm Biffer.
I ask this in a sincere manner, and I won't give any sarcastic reply. But please can you answer the issues raised. Especially the one about the deficit and using sterling in an independent country I genuinely want to hear you POV. It is a most important issue for Scotland.

Bu this is what I mean. We started talking about a £500 bonus for nurses and all of a sudden I’ve got to explain fiscal policy four or five years from now.

I think the point was being made that without being part of the UK the £500 gift would not have been possible.
It's fair enough if you'd rather not tackle the issues (Brexiteers do that all the time) but you can see why I asked.

And if you really want my currency preference you need to tell me in what way the UK has broken up. Are we a seceding nation and a successor nation, are both Scotland and RUK new countries, how has the break up been managed? Because that has implications on distributions of assets and debts, which is something that is never acknowledged and has obvious knock on effects on the economic policy and set up of Scotland post independence.

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:20 pm

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:12 pm Biffer.
I ask this in a sincere manner, and I won't give any sarcastic reply. But please can you answer the issues raised. Especially the one about the deficit and using sterling in an independent country I genuinely want to hear you POV. It is a most important issue for Scotland.

Bu this is what I mean. We started talking about a £500 bonus for nurses and all of a sudden I’ve got to explain fiscal policy four or five years from now.

And if you really want my currency preference you need to tell me in what way the UK has broken up. Are we a seceding nation and a successor nation, are both Scotland and RUK new countries, how has the break up been managed? Because that has implications on distributions of assets and debts, which is something that is never acknowledged and has obvious knock on effects on the economic policy and set up of Scotland post independence.

tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 30, 2020 4:58 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Mon Nov 30, 2020 12:51 pm

Longshanks wrote: ↑Mon Nov 30, 2020 11:42 am I suppose Scottish independence is the main reason why Boris is not giving in on the fishing rights with the EU. It will damage the SNP if their policy is to give it all back to the EU.

Could be shot NG himself in the foot though, if the Scottish government plays the same fishing rights card the leavers have.

Personally, as I said previously somewhere in here, I'd now lean towards EFTA membership in the short to medium term allowing us to have side agreements with the UK on certain areas for customs and phytosanitary for example. That would lead to some border checks but it'd be an easier border to manage as its shorter, has substantially fewer crossings and the main ones for freight are well established and have space for border infrastructure

EFTA membership (on it own) is not worth a whole hill of beans - a free trade zone with a few relatively non EU European economies and a few FTA's that replicate largely what the EU has with other trade blocs (and the UK has now mostly replicated).
If you want to plug into the EU single market through it you need to sign up to its EEA treaty (not a straightforward process).

This brings you back to needing the border with non EEA rUK..so it doesn't really solve any problems.

clydecloggie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:00 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:20 pm

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:12 pm Biffer.
I ask this in a sincere manner, and I won't give any sarcastic reply. But please can you answer the issues raised. Especially the one about the deficit and using sterling in an independent country I genuinely want to hear you POV. It is a most important issue for Scotland.

Bu this is what I mean. We started talking about a £500 bonus for nurses and all of a sudden I’ve got to explain fiscal policy four or five years from now.

And if you really want my currency preference you need to tell me in what way the UK has broken up. Are we a seceding nation and a successor nation, are both Scotland and RUK new countries, how has the break up been managed? Because that has implications on distributions of assets and debts, which is something that is never acknowledged and has obvious knock on effects on the economic policy and set up of Scotland post independence.

Following the Declaration of Drumchapel, in which the Act of Union was declared null and void as of 1 January 2022, the Bank of England was split up into the Bank of Westminster and the Caledonian Bank, a new entity acting as the central bank and lender of last resort for the newly independent country of Scotland. As agreed, the Scottish Government took on 8.9% of UK liabilities and an equal share of its assets. Through the colloquially called 'Swinney-Sunak formula', the Caledonian Bank gained the assets formerly belonging to the Bank of England, which served to underpin the launch of the new Scottish currency, the poond, on 1 March 2022 - at an exchange rate of 1£ to 1SP (roughly equal to €0.87). Due to Scotland's EU membership and the relocation of the last remaining major banks of the City of London to Edinburgh, within 12 months the Scottish Poond was valued considerably higher than GBP and became a medium-volume international trading currency. Despite the significant negative effect on, primarily agricultural, producers from the Scottish Borders who saw their wares become unaffordable to their traditional customers in the North of England, the valuation of the Scottish Poond is now generally considered to have been a clear driver of Scotland's unprecedented economic success as an independent nation in the mid-21st century.

tl;dr: my tea leaves are as good as yours.

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:27 pm

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:24 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:20 pm

Bu this is what I mean. We started talking about a £500 bonus for nurses and all of a sudden I’ve got to explain fiscal policy four or five years from now.

I think the point was being made that without being part of the UK the £500 gift would not have been possible.
It's fair enough if you'd rather not tackle the issues (Brexiteers do that all the time) but you can see why I asked.

I can, and I’ve updated, I’ll add a bit here - what’s the international reception and reaction? How was the UK fared since Brexit and the pandemic? Is the pound actually a reputable currency anymore? How receptive is the EU to accelerated membership and on what terms?

Depending on these, I’d likely have different answers. But whatever I post, NL will just scream about it and continually insist that nothing is possible, ever.

clydecloggie wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:00 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:20 pm

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:12 pm Biffer.
I ask this in a sincere manner, and I won't give any sarcastic reply. But please can you answer the issues raised. Especially the one about the deficit and using sterling in an independent country I genuinely want to hear you POV. It is a most important issue for Scotland.

Bu this is what I mean. We started talking about a £500 bonus for nurses and all of a sudden I’ve got to explain fiscal policy four or five years from now.

And if you really want my currency preference you need to tell me in what way the UK has broken up. Are we a seceding nation and a successor nation, are both Scotland and RUK new countries, how has the break up been managed? Because that has implications on distributions of assets and debts, which is something that is never acknowledged and has obvious knock on effects on the economic policy and set up of Scotland post independence.

Following the Declaration of Drumchapel, in which the Act of Union was declared null and void as of 1 January 2022, the Bank of England was split up into the Bank of Westminster and the Caledonian Bank, a new entity acting as the central bank and lender of last resort for the newly independent country of Scotland. As agreed, the Scottish Government took on 8.9% of UK liabilities and an equal share of its assets. Through the colloquially called 'Swinney-Sunak formula', the Caledonian Bank gained the assets formerly belonging to the Bank of England, which served to underpin the launch of the new Scottish currency, the poond, on 1 March 2022 - at an exchange rate of 1£ to 1SP (roughly equal to €0.87). Due to Scotland's EU membership and the relocation of the last remaining major banks of the City of London to Edinburgh, within 12 months the Scottish Poond was valued considerably higher than GBP and became a medium-volume international trading currency. Despite the significant negative effect on, primarily agricultural, producers from the Scottish Borders who saw their wares become unaffordable to their traditional customers in the North of England, the valuation of the Scottish Poond is now generally considered to have been a clear driver of Scotland's unprecedented economic success as an independent nation in the mid-21st century.

tl;dr: my tea leaves are as good as yours.

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:38 pm

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:27 pm

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:24 pm

I think the point was being made that without being part of the UK the £500 gift would not have been possible.
It's fair enough if you'd rather not tackle the issues (Brexiteers do that all the time) but you can see why I asked.

I can, and I’ve updated, I’ll add a bit here - what’s the international reception and reaction? How was the UK fared since Brexit and the pandemic? Is the pound actually a reputable currency anymore? How receptive is the EU to accelerated membership and on what terms?

Depending on these, I’d likely have different answers. But whatever I post, NL will just scream about it and continually insist that nothing is possible, ever.

Aye scream, that's me. Seems i am the Unionist bogeyman, fair enough, every forum seems to need one for the nats to rally against.

Just the sort of reaction that is the norm though as any serious attempt to answer these legitimate concerns exposes the whole host of problems with whichever course of actions is proposed. This of course doesnt mean that nothing is possible, ever, as the Brexit vote showed a populist vote can indeed change things and economic consequences be damned, for the ardent seperatists though they are proposing a course of action that will be a multitude worse than Brexit on economic terms there is simply no avoiding that, they can bluster all they like but this is the reality.

Oh and of course the pound is still a reputable currency, hence why the government is still able to borrow at historically low levels, it is for sure weakened since the Brexit vote but that's it.

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 4:08 pm On a completely different subject I’m pissed off that there was no mention of potential changes for Edinburgh in today’s briefings on levels. Edinburgh hits level one on four of the five measures and level two in the other measure. Still at level three. No mention of it, no explanation, nothing.

If you’re going to have a system you have to show faith in it. Or people will just ignore it.

The arrogant SNP is turning into everything it despises
Nicola Sturgeon regularly accuses Boris Johnson of undermining the Scottish parliament, but she treats it with contempt too when it suits her
Alex Massie
Monday November 30 2020, 5.00pm, The Times
Share
Save
Iregret to inform you that the government has been at it again. After a series of parliamentary setbacks — defeats, to you and me — senior ministers are once more broadcasting their contempt for parliament by refusing to follow the instructions repeatedly given to them by the legislature.

At the weekend, one leading member of the government told Sky News: “I have said to parliament that we will consider the fact that parliament has voted in that way.” The government has been told what to do but the minister insists that “consideration is ongoing at the moment” over “what approach we should take” in response “to the votes that parliament” has made.

But this was not Jacob Rees-Mogg defying the will of the House of Commons, and neither was it Boris Johnson demonstrating his impatience with traditional standards of parliamentary scrutiny. It was John Swinney trying to justify the unjustifiable.

The Scottish parliament has twice demanded that the Scottish government release the legal advice it was given when contesting the judicial review brought by Alex Salmond in connection with the government’s investigation of complaints against Mr Salmond, and the Scottish government has twice refused to comply.

Well might we imagine how the SNP would react if it was the British government ignoring parliament’s clearly-expressed will in this fashion. There would be much talk of that government’s anti-democratic instincts and much umbrage would have been taken at the demise of parliamentary accountability. Nicola Sturgeon would argue that it made independence more necessary than ever and Ian Blackford would have spluttered his way to an aneurysm.

Perhaps unfashionably, I think the Scottish government should be held to the same standard it applies to Mr Johnson’s ministry. It bears repeating that the SNP frequently insists that the British government release the legal advice upon which it bases its decisions. Clearly, it would be absurd to suppose that standards applied at Westminster might also apply at Holyrood. One rule for them; quite another for us.

So I suppose it is just as well that Mr Swinney is almost universally liked, because otherwise we might have to confront the possibility that his appearance on Sky News at the weekend was an unconscionable display of overbearing arrogance, of the sort typical of a party that has been in power for too long, and become so accustomed to the privileges of office it now considers them its birthright. Because what other interpretation is available?

There is much talk these days about the importance of respecting devolution but the party disrespecting it in this instance is the SNP. If the executive is permitted to ignore the legislature, what is the point of the legislature? “L’etat, c’est nous” appears to be the SNP’s position now. The content of this legal advice must be embarrassing, but can it really be so awkward as to justify all this secrecy?

Mr Swinney is not the only offender. His boss and party leader is at it too. Appearing on Andrew Marr’s BBC programme on Sunday, Ms Sturgeon repeatedly suggested that her critics should pipe down and contemplate the opinion polls. If, she intimated, she’s doing such a poor job, why is she the most popular girl in school?

The first minister insisted that the SNP’s unassailable position in the polls was proof that her government is performing splendidly. You need not be a student of logic to appreciate the second part of this bears no relation to the former. It is certainly no kind of consequence and only a party intoxicated by its own reflection could think it is. At best, it means the SNP is failing less badly than everyone else. That’s enough to win well, but not enough to govern well.

But it has been apparent for some time that the SNP has completed its transformation into the Scottish Labour party it supplanted as Scotland’s natural party of government. Everything the SNP once criticised Labour for now applies to the nationalists themselves. There is the same arrogance, the same contempt for process, the same sneering inability to appreciate others might have a respectable difference of opinion, the same suggestion that election results are themselves proof of virtue.

This is how you end up with the named person farrago, with a sham consultation into gender recognition reforms (fake because the first minister has already advertised its conclusions), and a hate crime bill that has to be gutted before MSPs have even had the chance to vote on it. Each of these are important issues and in each of them the SNP has put forward thoroughly inadequate proposals and then traduced the intentions of those in opposition trying to improve them.

Yesterday the first minister told her party’s conference that “We serve the people — they do not serve us”, and it would be nice to think this true. She accused the prime minister of trying to “undermine the Scottish parliament” and turn “democracy on its head”. Fair enough. But what, then, are we to make of a government that takes a more straightforward approach and simply ignores the explicitly expressed views of the Scottish parliament?

Because this week, in the matter of Nicola Sturgeon contra mundum, it is her ministry, not Mr Johnson’s, that is defying and undermining the Scottish parliament. Ms Sturgeon once asked to be judged on her record but it is increasingly obvious that only a politician confident she will not be held to that exacting standard would ask for it to be applied. That’s her good fortune, but it bodes ill for the country.

Slick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:22 pm It’s just a fact that intelligent, free thinking people that commit to independence have to suspend their beliefs and not consider the financial or currency implications.

There is simply no other way around it

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:29 pm

Slick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:22 pm It’s just a fact that intelligent, free thinking people that commit to independence have to suspend their beliefs and not consider the financial or currency implications.

There is simply no other way around it

Apart from the currency, its what Brexiteers do.
Great summary BTW.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 7:25 pm

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:29 pm

Slick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:22 pm It’s just a fact that intelligent, free thinking people that commit to independence have to suspend their beliefs and not consider the financial or currency implications.

There is simply no other way around it

Apart from the currency, its what Brexiteers do.
Great summary BTW.

There’s a vast difference in scale. Vast.

Longshanks wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 7:37 pm I suppose the point with Brexiteers Bimbo, is that the claim was that the UK would be better off outside the EU. That part is clearly in the land of the fairies like the SNP

Slick wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:22 pm It’s just a fact that intelligent, free thinking people that commit to independence have to suspend their beliefs and not consider the financial or currency implications.

There is simply no other way around it