|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Wed 23 Nov 10:18
…so it would appear that whoever sits in No. 10 can decide unilaterally if Scotland gets the chance to even ask itself the question (a choice mandated during an election).
Surely even unionists can’t agree/defend the position that having no democratic route for anything, other than the whim of one person is not a good state of affairs
Post Edited (Wed 23 Nov 10:19)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 23 Nov 10:30
This result was always win-win for the SNP but I think being told NO is a bigger win. They will immediately bring into question the legitimacy of a union where one side can`t walk away without permission. The other "win" for the SNP will be seeing Westminster justify saying no.
Ignoring any views on Scottish independence, it`s going to be an interesting few months as a weak Tory government tries to explain why Scotland is so important to the UK whilst simultaneously pushing the narrative that Scotland is best placed remaining in the UK.
All of this will be in the backdrop of a potential move to go back into the EU in some shape or form, which will be seen as backpedaling rather than sensible assessment of something that hasn`t gone as anticipated.
Personally, I think Westminster should say yes to a vote but this time ensure there is something recorded that says there will be no further votes unless particular criteria are met.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 23 Nov 10:45
I can`t recall unionists ever saying that Scotland is important to the UK other than generalities like `better together` and the `broad shoulders` of the union. Their arguments have always been about how more difficult things would be for us outside the union eg currency, borders, defence, trade, etc.
Now the argument will switch to the legitimacy of a union which a smaller party can`t leave without the permission of the largest party. Westminster will just try and kick the can farther down the road but it won`t go away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 23 Nov 10:59
Quote:
wee eck, Wed 23 Nov 10:45
I can`t recall unionists ever saying that Scotland is important to the UK other than generalities like `better together` and the `broad shoulders` of the union. Their arguments have always been about how more difficult things would be for us outside the union eg currency, borders, defence, trade, etc.
Now the argument will switch to the legitimacy of a union which a smaller party can`t leave without the permission of the largest party. Westminster will just try and kick the can farther down the road but it won`t go away.
It was a large part of the discussion near the end. Though not political, surely you remember the broadcast with various celebrities asking Scotland to stay?
Being honest, what Scotland needs is clear facts in front of them rather than the emotional nonsense about either "being a family" or "deciding our own destiny". Utter tripe. Tell the people why/why not. What are the pros and cons and let the people decide. Of course, it`ll be the usual crap in the media we always see. I`ve already seen two news articles with Alba supporters but the references being to Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP. A subtle thing but very odd IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 23 Nov 11:16
`What are the pros and cons and let the people decide.`
Last time a White Paper was produced and already a series of papers are being issued about relevant issues. The problem is a lot of the important matters won`t be decided unilaterally but will be the subject of negotiations, firstly with the UK government and latterly with the EU. Surely the last few years have demonstrated that nothing is certain in politics but the experience of other countries of a similar size, but often lesser resources, gives some optimism.
`Let the people decide`! Will they get the chance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Wed 23 Nov 11:22
If they lost again, would they be shouting for a third referendum?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Wed 23 Nov 12:01
If they lost again, would they be shouting for a third referendum?
That probably depends on whether or not Westminster did something stupid again, e.g. withdraw from the EU.
Despite what some people are beginning to say, the shift in narrative that will come as a result of this judgement isn`t one that is being pushed or forced by any political movement. It is simply the true narrative that there are currently no legal ways for Scotland to ask its population a question about its place in the Union without asking permission from the bigger partner. People will make their own judgments about how to feel about that.
I have a simple test - what if the EU had pulled this? What would that say about the UK`s place in that union?
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Wed 23 Nov 12:26
I don`t think there will be any huge in the political landscape. Those who are in favour of independence will be disappointed and angered. Those who prefer the status quo will delighted. The smaller number who are somewhat on the fence about it, which now includes me, will remain on the fence. Quite frankly I think I`m like most people, in that now and for the next couple of years I was going to be more concerned with making ends meet rather than thinking about a referendum next autumn.
The snp are stuck in a quandary, though its one that will probably see them remain in power for years to come. They have two central pillars on which they stand. To push for Scotland to be an independent nation and to continually press the interests of the Scottish people. Sometimes though those two aims aren`t compatible with each other.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Wed 23 Nov 12:28
In terms of reaction you make a fair point Wotsit.
I suspect Britain would have left the EU. And we can see how that worked out....
There`s a difference between looking after yourself and intentional self harm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 23 Nov 12:48
Fairly kicked off in Westminster. Lots of talk of "family" and that sort of narrative.
It would a clear own goal to deny the Scottish Government its vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Wed 23 Nov 12:56
I suspect Britain would have left the EU. And we can see how that worked out....
There`s a difference between looking after yourself and intentional self harm.
That`s my point though Ipswich, many in Scotland no longer trust Westminster to act in their interests as a direct result of the decision to leave the EU. Especially given the fearmongering about losing our EU membership had we voted to leave the UK. In this case people feel that o remain as a part of the UK would be the self harm, and events over the past decade or so have done nothing to dissuade us from that view.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Wed 23 Nov 13:02
Have to admit, I think being told no is the more powerful message. This was always a win-win for the SNP: a positive answer meant they could hold a referendum (which they would likely win) while a negative answer would mean a delay in a vote and a symbolic diktat, both of which will push more to the Yes side.
The whole affair simply reaffirms that the UK is not a Union of consent and people will make their own judgements about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Wed 23 Nov 13:05
Oh dear.. FM says the next GE will be a de facto ref? Bonkers. She looked unhinged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 23 Nov 13:20
Parboiled, how about engaging in the debate rather than indulging in personal insults which seems to be your chosen modus operandi?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Wed 23 Nov 13:26
Wee eck - no point trying. The guy will just ignore any substantive questions about the performance of the UK government and claim he "can`t be bothered" to reply. Personally, I find it quite amusing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 23 Nov 13:30
Interestingly, the next GE should be a massive opportunity for Labour. The SNP and Alba can`t do anything as they`re too small. Labour are across the UK and I would suggest take the approach of change within the union.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 23 Nov 13:57
Do you think there is any interest in England about changing the Union? That issue might resonate in Scotland, Wales and NI but I doubt if voters in England see it as significant so I can`t see Labour getting much traction from it down south. Gordon Brown`s working on new devolved powers I believe on behalf of Labour but we`ve heard all that before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Wed 23 Nov 14:46
Strange when their supporting Ukraine in their efforts!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Wed 23 Nov 15:39
Quote:
ipswichpar, Wed 23 Nov 11:22
If they lost again, would they be shouting for a third referendum?
If a political party has a referendum in their manifesto and the public vote them in they can persue as many referenda they want.
That`s Democracy something that some folk forget
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Wed 23 Nov 17:22
True, but after today`s judgment it would be possible to regard any future referendum as illegal. In that case Craig Murray would not be the last independence supporter to see the inside of Saughton prison.
If the UK deems a referendum as illegal it would be very difficult for any EU country to work round that fact.
Using a General Election as a de facto referendum is a legal minefield.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 23 Nov 17:46
So what`s the legitimate route to independence without a referendum, sammer? I haven`t heard any alternative solution to that proposed by the SNP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 23 Nov 20:30
If Labour were elected, which is fairly likely, the Scottish branch could more easily push for real reform. However, the issue will always be that Scotland can`t massively diverge from the rest of the UK.
A big issue in terms of "Better Together" is that a lot of the previous claims are now untrue. Are our pensions safe? Are we more stable within the UK? We`re not in the EU anymore...
People will presumably be wondering what happened to the vow and all the supposed respect and love for Scotland`s people went as it went right out the window when Brexit happened and destroyed the livelihoods of many Scots.
I`m a real fence-sitter on the subject of independence so if nothing else it`s fascinating to watch. What isn`t so enjoyable is seeing how poorly both the UK and Scotland are performing right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 24 Nov 02:01
Today`s judgment is an attempt to delegitimise any move to Scottish independence.
The alternatives are civil disobedience or armed conflict against the state. Westminster assumes that these are unlikely to gain much traction since the idea of Scottish independence is something a small majority of the Scottish people support but will not fight for. As the writer Grassic Gibbon described it many moons ago, `They`re feart of the jail.`
Craig Murray was jailed for reporting on a political trial where Alex Salmond escaped the same fate narrowly. There was a BBC programme prepared for Salmond being found guilty which had to be clumsily edited at the last minute. That`s the problem with jury trials but when the system is under attack they can be abolished, as in Northern Ireland back in the 1970s. That way you can jail the awkward squad more easily.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 24 Nov 08:02
The UK truly is the Hotel California.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 24 Nov 08:58
Hotel California is a good analogy, jake. I was thinking Catch-22; you can have a referendum on independence if it`s agreed by the Westminster government which will always be controlled by a party that doesn`t agree with independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 24 Nov 10:02
"Craig Murray was jailed for reporting on a political trial where Alex Salmond escaped the same fate narrowly."
That`s the thing though he wasn`t. He was jailed for writing articles that allowed the complainants to be identified when their identities are protected by law. He chose to disregard those protections and was jailed. A myriad of other people and organisations reported on the case and weren`t jailed so you could easily report on the case as long as you didn`t reveal (or provide enough data) that would identify who had made the complaint.
In terms of the plan to turn the election into a referendum I agree with the Scottish news reporter last night in that there appears to be virtually no upside to the strategy. Win and Westminster can ignore it and lose and you reset the movement at least a decade as you`ve lost again. It`s actually a terrible idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 24 Nov 10:08
Meanwhile Polis Alba are trying to trace the FM’s marbles following her wild eyed and manic chuckled tv appearance yesterday
Post Edited (Thu 24 Nov 10:19)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 24 Nov 11:03
So if it`s a terrible idea, londonparsfan, what`s the democratic alternative assuming you don`t want to go down sammer`s route of civil disobedience and armed conflict which wouldn`t be recognised by other nations? I`ve heard a lot of criticism of the proposed strategy but no acceptable options.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 24 Nov 11:23
I don`t have the answer, or even a half decent suggestion, unfortunately Eck. Civil disobedience would just be met with force on the other side so wouldn`t be great especially as you might be fighting for a position that is in the minority.
UDI wouldn`t fly for the same reason and the other alternative is to continue to try and pressure Westminster to allow a referendum which isn`t going to happen until they are confident they could win it. Element of the definition of madness in that approach. Outside of that I`m not clever enough to come up with a better way forward. I just think Sturgeon`s proposal is a really bad move strategically.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 24 Nov 12:26
You sound like the Opposition leaders at FMQs - lots of criticism of government performance but absolutely zero suggestions of how to improve things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Thu 24 Nov 13:21
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 24 Nov 12:26
You sound like the Opposition leaders at FMQs - lots of criticism of government performance but absolutely zero suggestions of how to improve things.
You could not have one at all. That`s the only one I can think of.
It was deemed anf stated to be once in a generation.
The challenge is that you have enough of the population who want this to happen that are noisy enough that`ll only stop going on about it at the point they win. They only need to win once. And I`m pretty sure after x years if it has gone to hell in a hand cart that they would be equally vociferous in not allowing another referdum about rejoining the UK to be run.
Meanwhile all this energy is stopping delivering better services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Thu 24 Nov 13:30
The best thing the UK Government could do is allow a referendum as soon as possible. It`s probably about 50/50 at the moment and if they launched a new Project Fear at the same time as pouring some money up here and making some promises it could just be enough to sway some people.
Their other option is to ignore the calls for a referendum, but the calls for one aren`t going to go away, they are only going to get louder.
Then when they have no choice but to deliver a referendum they will be faced with a situation where the older people that will have been in favour of the union will have died out, and the younger, more informed electorate will vote for independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 24 Nov 13:45
If the referendum was to be `once in a generation` surely that should have been written into the Edinburgh Agreement whereby Westminster granted authority to Holyrood to hold the referendum? It wasn`t, it was simply a throwaway line used during the campaign.
We`re now getting Tory politicians saying the last Holyrood election did not give a mandate for a referendum, despite the SNP and Greens winning a majority of seats, because in one interview apparently Nicola Sturgeon said the election was about Covid recovery rather than independence! They obviously disagreed at the time because their pre-election literature made it clear you had to vote Tory if you wanted to stop another independence referendum. There was also a lot of tactical voting amongst union supporters to stop the SNP winning seats.
We`ve still to hear what the democratic route is to achieving independence. It`s the old Tory tactic of ignoring the question and hoping it goes away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 24 Nov 14:16
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 24 Nov 12:26
You sound like the Opposition leaders at FMQs - lots of criticism of government performance but absolutely zero suggestions of how to improve things.
Difference is I`ll happily admit that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 24 Nov 14:59
There are now 44 SNP MPs legitimising a Westminster parliament which does not recognise their democratic right to establish independence. If the SNP are serious about fighting for Scottish independence, these MPs should be withdrawn under a policy of abstentionism. Of course there will be fanciful claims that these MPs can actually achieve more inside the system than without, but yesterday’s legal judgment surely kills that argument stone dead. How can the Scottish electorate or the EU be expected to acknowledge the case for Scottish independence if the SNP continues to recognise the legitimacy of the Westminster parliament, one which denies the right of the Scottish people to decide their own destiny?
LPF has a greater belief in the political independence of the legal system than myself, at least in relation to Craig Murray’s ‘jigsaw evidence’ case. Tommy Sheridan, who attended yesterday’s judgment in London, also saw the inside of a prison cell although Alex Salmond avoided that indignity. In all three cases there was an element of sexual misbehaviour or disrespect towards women, now a staple feature of bringing charges against a political opponent. Yet Boris Johnson is jail proof it seems. That’s the law.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Thu 24 Nov 16:21
Ipswich Par - Can you kindly reiterate to me the reasoning behind the 8 year rule for a "border poll" in Northern Ireland?
The time difference between 2014 and 2022 is of course 8 years...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 24 Nov 17:14
I wouldn`t go that far Sammer! Although I did think he was guilty, I thought the length of his sentence was strange relative to other similar cases such as that of Yaxley Lennon`s especially as he had previous convictions. The sentence seemed disproportionate relative to his.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: da_no_1
Date: Thu 24 Nov 23:50
Quote:
red-star-par, Thu 24 Nov 13:30
Then when they have no choice but to deliver a referendum they will be faced with a situation where the older people that will have been in favour of the union will have died out, and the younger, more informed electorate will vote for independence.
That last line really, really p1sses me off. Pray tell us all what age do we become less "informed"?
"Some days will stay a 1000 years, some pass like the flash of a spark"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: dafc
Date: Thu 24 Nov 23:57
At the end of the day all the main sticking points during referendum 1 are all still there, and have never been addressed properly by the SNP, yesterday was a win for the SNP as it blame the bogeyman WM tories, stirring up hatred and more División.
“Fiscal sustainability is of course essential” Nicola Sturgeon.
“No estimate of the fiscal starting position is
Set out in this document” recent SNP document
The list goes on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 25 Nov 01:15
How could they know the fiscal starting position? No one even knows what date it would be. Could the UK government predict what their fiscal position would be at some random date in the future?
People expect certainty when so many matters would be the subject of negotiation. During the Brexit referendum campaign there was virtually no hard economic information from the `Leave` side but no one seemed to care.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Fri 25 Nov 08:19
Well said above Da no 1, that is pure ageism you identified there. It is also resoundingly stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 25 Nov 08:34
Da-no-1,
I don’t think Red-Star intended to offend when he referred to the ‘younger, more informed electorate.’ He was merely offering what he sees as a likely development of shifting public opinion in the years ahead.
I’m not sure history supports him though. The Blair cabinet was full of former student Marxists- Mandelson, Clarke, Straw- who were quite comfortable managing an economy shaped by the ideology of Milton Friedman. They even found time to engage in an old fashioned colonial type war in Iraq. A similar story exists in Germany today where Scholz- once a self-proclaimed enemy of capitalism and NATO- is shipping weaponry to Ukraine and garnering support from the Greens to reopen nuclear power plants.
The idealism of youth might influence public opinion in the years to come but history shows that for politicians, holding the levers of power counts for more. As for the electorate, some of the views they held as young people were simply fashionable and can be jettisoned over time.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Fri 25 Nov 09:10
Wise words Sammer, having a mortgage, kids, looking out for older parents etc does bring changes in outlook over the years.
As for the ageism referred to above, it is rather trivial compared to the glee expressed by that cretin Angus Robertson over the Grim Reaper’s Covid culling of oldies being a boost for Indy
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 25 Nov 09:46
It`s probably generally true that political views tend to move from left to right as people grow older and acquire financial responsibilities but I`m not sure if the same will apply to views about independence. People who lived through WW2 or its immediate aftermath may have had an attachment to the Union which influenced their views on independence but that kind of sentimental affinity is lost on younger generations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 25 Nov 11:08
Quote:
Parboiled, Fri 25 Nov 09:10
Wise words Sammer, having a mortgage, kids, looking out for older parents etc does bring changes in outlook over the years.
As for the ageism referred to above, it is rather trivial compared to the glee expressed by that cretin Angus Robertson over the Grim Reaper’s Covid culling of oldies being a boost for Indy
Folk on here were quite happily saying that 16 year olds shouldn`t get a vote as they didn`t have enough life experience despite the fact they can do pretty grown up things like starting a family and pay tax. Quite a few 16 year olds will be brighter than the folk that said that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 25 Nov 11:36
Every generation has its share of ignorant fools. The problem in society is people naively believe that older means wiser. In many cases older means even more ignorant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Fri 25 Nov 12:50
There as none so ignorant than Indy supporting fools of all ages who Sturgeon is hoodwinking into believing she can morph a UK GE into a de facto referendum. A de fukto stunt more like.
There even a few old dodders who think the taxpayers of England Wales and NI will pay Scots state pensions if we leave the UK.
Post Edited (Fri 25 Nov 12:52)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Fri 25 Nov 13:08
so assuming you believe in democracy parboiled, what is the legal, democratic route that the SNP/Greens should take to fulfil the mandate that the scottish electorate gave them?
or do you believe that democracy/mandates should be on the whim of whomever is planted in No. 10 this week?
and the state pensions of those living in scotland will be paid for from pension funds already contributed towards - or do you think that scotland should lose all of our share of any assets but still be expected to take our share of the debts WM has racked up on our behalf?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Fri 25 Nov 13:54
Unionists bringing in Arlene Foster to bolster their cause, a sure vote winner!🤔🤣🤣🤣
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Fri 25 Nov 15:41
Arlene Foster to get involved up here?
surely not... i`m expecting Brown to be wheeled out at the behest of the state (supposed he should really do something to earn/protect is £115k per annum), but can`t see how Arlene Foster would add anything positive to the constitutional debate in Scotland.
Arlene Foster and her ilk are brexiteers, oppose social reforms like same-sex marraige, are anti-abortion, creationists, climate change deniers and their backward vision of being british excludes things like supporting native languages, e.g. gaelic.
i`m sure she`d preach to a certain section of the unionists, but don`t think anyone she`d appeal to would need convinced really
Post Edited (Fri 25 Nov 15:42)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Fri 25 Nov 17:29
Quote:
DBP, Fri 25 Nov 15:41
Arlene Foster to get involved up here?
surely not... i`m expecting Brown to be wheeled out at the behest of the state (supposed he should really do something to earn/protect is £115k per annum), but can`t see how Arlene Foster would add anything positive to the constitutional debate in Scotland.
Arlene Foster and her ilk are brexiteers, oppose social reforms like same-sex marraige, are anti-abortion, creationists, climate change deniers and their backward vision of being british excludes things like supporting native languages, e.g. gaelic.
i`m sure she`d preach to a certain section of the unionists, but don`t think anyone she`d appeal to would need convinced really
Part of the UK Together Foundation.
Was rumoured she was going on the road with Ruth the mooth.
Should appeal to the Ibrox faithful!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Sat 26 Nov 13:57
In my experience, many Unionists have never lived outside of the UK and so struggle to be critical of the way the system works because they have no point of reference for comparison. Essentially, they moan that the system is knackered but have no suggestions of how to fix it.
The age thing definitely plays a role as well. Younger people are more adept at judging sources of information now than they would have been pre-internet. Put on top of that how easy information is to access these days and the comparative ease of travel that we enjoy these days and it`s quite easy to see why attitudes are different between the old and young in Scotland. The older generation are used to getting news from newspapers and tv stations based in London. The oldies were also taught "respect her elders" and are more ingrained with heirarchy than youngers in today`s society and they don`t like being questioned and view it as ana attack rather than something to be debated upon. Think about it in the modern context and from a business perspective - do you think any media company would want to be subject to two sets of rules and potentially lose 9% of its customer base? Nae surprise that the UK media outlets are pro-Union.
I actually come from a family of Tory-voting Brexiteers, the majority of whom served as senior officers in the police and/or UK armed forces. None of my immediate family have lived outside of Scotland ever, nor do they speak any other languages fluently while my Uncle on my Dad`s side was a Vulcan pilot and moved out to Australia - says he dislikes the royals and would vote Scotland out of the UK. My father was a Senior Cop and officer in the RAF reserve and is precisely the opposite. It`s all about how you experience the world that determines how you think and the best way is to get out there and see it and live in other countries. I`ve lived in Scotland, Germany, Japan, England, Netherlands and Australia and I am now a Swedish citizen. My experience of seeing these systems has shown me good and bad in all, but I can safely say that the country that will struggle the most going forward will be England and it would be very hard to convince me that Scotland will be better off in the UK. The main variable for me is whether those in the Independence cause are well-informed enough to choose the right model.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sat 26 Nov 15:31
Being monolingual in a world dominated economically by the US dollar is a major weakness in the UK mindset. It perpetuates the idea that we are a major player on the world stage which is not the case. Within the EU we were seen as a less crucial member than Germany or France, and we no longer have a Commonwealth where we can call most of the shots. The American Dean Acheson (very Scottish name) famously remarked that the UK had lost an empire but had yet to find a role in the world: that was back in the 1950s and little has changed since.
Whether an independent Scotland would amount to much more I would like the chance to find out. The background of SNP MPs at both Holyrood and Westminster is not encouraging: an overwhelmingly monolingual existence within banking or law, devoted to fashionable positions on gender and the environment. If any of them have authored a text or a pamphlet that set out an inspiring vision for an independent Scotland I must have missed it. At present they seem unclear on what currency a future Scotland would use, although they are clear on retaining membership of NATO and the Monarch as Head of State. So respect for the hierarchy is not reserved for the oldies after all.
I can only assume HJ was not around in the 1960s or 1970s when respect for authority or one’s elders and betters was rather less widespread than today. The word ‘compliance’ was not in use back then. Organisations he is familiar with such as the police and military were more likely to have been satirised in a Monty Python sketch rather than treated with reverence by a fly-on-the-wall documentary of ‘our boys’ in training. I imagine today’s youth are no more cowed by hierarchy than in the past; the problem is they are no longer the main cohort of society and an older, property conscious elder generation (once quite dismissive of authority) now holds most political clout.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sat 26 Nov 15:34
What an accomplished chap you are HJ
I’m sure that before you could crawl you were changing your own nappy and brushing your tooth…
Post Edited (Sat 26 Nov 15:35)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 26 Nov 15:54
"In my experience, many Unionists have never lived outside of the UK and so struggle to be critical of the way the system works because they have no point of reference for comparison"
He`s bang on the money with that though and it doesn`t apply to just Unionists - it`s actually far more reaching than that. If you spend any time living abroad you realise quite quickly that the UK is at the forefront of very little and so many of the structures need complete overhauls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Sat 26 Nov 21:51
It`s very true. When you have travelled and lived abroad you realise how much of a backwater the UK is. There isn`t many countries I have been to that have been run into the ground as much as the UK but some folk seem to think its the land of milk and honey as they pick up Europe`s lowest pension and tug their forelocks in thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sat 26 Nov 22:21
Must be really bad for those that are lower than 6th on the GDP ranking list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 26 Nov 23:55
To be fair GDP per Capita is a more reflective comparison and we were 26th but trending downwards. We don`t utilise what we have particularly well but have a smug arrogance that we are a leading country when we don`t really lead the way in anything anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Nov 01:00
I`d say in the creative arts quite possibly. If not the leader certainly punching way above its weight.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sun 27 Nov 11:19
One structure needing overhaul is the NHS. On a politics show this morning it was lauded that although it has problems it is the envy of the world, but strange nobody else has copied it.
European nations also have free at the point of use systems funded by a mix of contributions to the state and state nominated and regulated insurance schemes.
Survival rates for serious conditions are better and patients sometimes even have a choice of where to be treated and by who. Fancy that!
We have ended up with with a lumbering bottomless money pit that is has all the flexibility you would expect of biggest single employer in Europe, and seems to be in perpetual crisis.
Surely lessons can be learned from those abroad who are doing better, and I would be interested in the thoughts of those who have been treated there, particularly as residents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Sun 27 Nov 11:23
Have to say I agree with the comments about the UK being at the forefront of very little.
A lot of that is down to the mentality of "low public spending" that the Tories have peddled, which really has stuck in England and is rather ironic considering that they claim to be the party of financial prudence but don`t understand the idea that investing and creating opportunities for higher-paid jobs would increase their coffers because of increased tax revenue. England in particular will suffer from this because they insist on indebting their students which affects their purchasing power later on and this isn`t helped by the abysmal wage growth in the UK. I know from my own sector (Fintech) that I`d be looking at at least a 40% wage cut to move from Copenhagen to say Glasgow and the cost of living relative to salary is now far higher in Scotland than it was back in 2014 when I left. Seems as well that they`re desperate for people in London as well - getting inundated with messages from IT recruiters on LinkedIn for positions in London and their salaries are just absolute gash and these recruiters seem oblivious to the salary situation outside of the UK.
Parbroiled - Such a response really only reveals your own insecurities about your (or likely lack of) achievement or perhaps, in this case, worldliness. Nae doubt you`ve preached the "experience is key" line many times in your life, but when faced with someone who has a bit more than you it seems that all you can do is sling mud and act like an erse. Grow up min!
Post Edited (Sun 27 Nov 11:28)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sun 27 Nov 12:00
HJ blowing his own trumpet. Must tootle the last post in his Jim jams
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Sun 27 Nov 12:34
Parbroiled - As I`ve said in other threads (along with other posters), it really seems that you have nothing substantive to contribute. When I`ve asked you to respond to questions regarding the Tory Government`s economic response, you simply shirk away but still post on other threads. Definitely showing your age there as well with the use of "jim jams". Why not actually contribute a substantive argument instead?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sun 27 Nov 12:58
He did make a serious post just before your last post HJ.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 27 Nov 13:40
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Sun 27 Nov 01:00
I`d say in the creative arts quite possibly. If not the leader certainly punching way above its weight.
I have to admit that`s an area I know virtually nothing about so you might well be right!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 27 Nov 13:50
Quote:
Parboiled, Sun 27 Nov 11:19
One structure needing overhaul is the NHS. On a politics show this morning it was lauded that although it has problems it is the envy of the world, but strange nobody else has copied it.
European nations also have free at the point of use systems funded by a mix of contributions to the state and state nominated and regulated insurance schemes.
Survival rates for serious conditions are better and patients sometimes even have a choice of where to be treated and by who. Fancy that!
We have ended up with with a lumbering bottomless money pit that is has all the flexibility you would expect of biggest single employer in Europe, and seems to be in perpetual crisis.
Surely lessons can be learned from those abroad who are doing better, and I would be interested in the thoughts of those who have been treated there, particularly as residents.
A lot of the issues with the NHS can be tracked back to the creation of the internal market. Segregating it the way we have means that a lot of adminstration is duplicated and we`ve created a huge amount of costs that are associated to the tendering process. We also opened the NHS up to litigation under Competition Law. Similar inefficiencies exist in the rail network now where we have some of the highest rail fares in Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 27 Nov 17:44
The UK just likes to complicate things. In Scotland alone there are potentially 32 different approaches to health and social care. I`m not suggesting merging all local authorities, but some processes and systems could and should be nationalised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sun 27 Nov 18:55
You mean we should centralise the NHS in Scotland just like the various regional police forces were amalgamated into Police Scotland? Ever since that happened the SNP have been criticised for it even although all the political parties agreed it was the right thing to do at the time.
Now apparently the state of NHS Scotland is the fault of the SNP for pursuing a second independent referendum instead of concentrating on the `day job`. I don`t know how that squares with the inferior performances of the NHS in England and Wales where the governments presumably aren`t distracted by constitutional matters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 27 Nov 22:15
No, I`m talking purely in terms of processes and systems, not the actual bodies. Care needs and how care is delivered will vary depending on the area whereas the systems and processes shouldn`t in most cases.
I`m unconvinced by the national police and fire services but have no evidence to suggest they don`t work. My (ill-informed) view is it merely pushes more resource at problem areas like Glasgow at the expense of places like Dunfermline.
Generally, I think the SNP are pretty poor. Flagship schemes like minimum unit pricing have pushed problem drinkers to rely on cheap drugs, which may account for the increase in drug deaths (again, this is an ill-informed view). Curriculum for Excellence seems like a pile of crap IMO.
However, that`s the SNP. They`re no better or worse than Labour most likely. They`re also not going to be the ones leading an independent Scotland as their primary objective will be complete. People need to remember that an independent Scotland can be governed by whoever the people of Scotland wish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sun 27 Nov 22:25
Can`t agree more with your last sentence... SNP are a means to an end, and the only realistic party to drive home independence.
Once that`s won, then as a nation we can choose the government we actually want, whose vision and direction for the country is one that we agree with.
The problem with the SNP is that until independence is gained, they have to kinda be and govern as a broad church to appease/appeal to as many people as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sun 27 Nov 23:19
The first review of minimum alcohol pricing didn`t find any link between increased drug use or other illegal activity. It found its not reduced the alcohol consumption of some problem drinkers but it has reduced alcohol consumption overall and has also had a positive impact overall so it is working although there are groups of higher risk people where its not had an effect.
The latest report also shows a net reduction in sales of alcohol in Scotland compared to an increase in England and Wales which came out after the below article.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jun/07/minimum-alcohol-pricing-causes-poorest-cut-back-food-scotland
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sun 27 Nov 23:29
Great to hear your `ill-informed` views, Jake. I know from your posts that you are probably better informed than the majority of the population so I`m not clear as to why you decided to mention them. There must be a reason people vote for the SNP. Maybe it`s because they like policies like free prescriptions, free travel for young people, free tuition fees, no road tolls, child payments, etc. Unfortunately these are never mentioned in the MSM who only highlight what they see as failures. All the good stuff the SNP has done is just taken for granted now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 28 Nov 08:09
That`s very selective reporting by the Guardian. Reduction in alcohol consumption wasn`t the aim of Minimum Unit Pricing. The aim was to reduce consumption amongst problem drinkers. The final report concluded there is no clear evidence of this working and, in some cases, evidence of people moving from high strength ciders to spirits.
The study only looked at existing users, it didn`t focus on a new generation as you can`t evidence that someone skipped problem drinking to go straight to benzos or the like. However, there has been a marked increase in drug use in Scotland, particularly of cheap street drugs.
I`m not suggesting the SNP haven`t done well, just that they haven`t done particularly well. Free prescriptions, school meals, tuition etc have lifted many out of poverty, which is why levels are lower in Scotland than elsewhere. However, like every government before them, they fail to tackle to root causes of poverty and instead focus on treatment. That offers only a short term solution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 28 Nov 09:47
Devolved powers are quite restricted despite what Westminster tell us. They also seem to me to be quite random and are sometimes contradictory with some of the powers that are still reserved there. What`s the point of giving the SG limited powers over income tax without giving them any power over NI, VAT, excise duties etc? The expression `giving enough rope to hang themselves` springs to mind. As soon as the SNP used these powers to increase tax on higher earners but reduce it on lower earners Scots were branded as the highest-taxed in the UK.
I fear you are deluded if you think the devolved governments of the UK have sufficient powers to allow them to eliminate the root causes of poverty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 28 Nov 10:00
"Reduction in alcohol consumption wasn`t the aim of Minimum Unit Pricing. The aim was to reduce consumption amongst problem drinkers."
Actually it was as the aim was to improve the Nations health overall and as the report says there have been less admittance to hospital for liver issues and 10% less deaths due to alcohol related issues so its working. It`s not working as well for those in the problem drinkers category but that`s one sub section of the population. Reducing deaths by 10% in 3 years is pretty successful by any measure. It also confirms there are no increases in drug use or criminality based on the implementation of minimum pricing.
Out of a matter of interest what are you basing the increase in numbers of drug users on? I`ve seen the increased number of deaths being reported but I`ve not seen it confirmed there was necessarily more users? Drug death increases had been increasing before MUP was introduced and if there is no link to an increase for existing users it would be surprising if a new generation of young folk are taking more drugs because the price of cheap high strength ciders and lagers had gone up when it didn`t impact any other demographic.
I don`t mind folk sticking the boot in the SNP - they perpetuate a lot of economic policies i don`t particularly like but for stuff like this which is actually working I don`t mind standing up for them a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Mon 28 Nov 11:06
https://www.gov.scot/policies/alcohol-and-drugs/minimum-unit-pricing/
It was designed to have the most impact on harmful drinkers.
This would of course have an impact on the nations health as the health system would be deploying less resources helping this group and those resources could be directed elsewhere.
Alcohol specific deaths have actually risen since this initiative started and last year saw the highest number of deaths since 2008. It clearly isn`t working as intended but to what extent the pandemic had on those numbers will only become clear I n the years ahead.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 28 Nov 11:27
Yeah, let`s discuss the inconclusive results of one particular policy rather than address the question of whether Scotland is a member of a voluntary union. You guys should write to the Daily Mail if you feel so strongly about this. They love that sort of deflection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 28 Nov 13:54
The purpose of Minimum Unit Pricing was very much to focus on those abusing alcohol rather than target people having a couple of pints. Of course, any reduction is good but the biggest win would be reducing alcohol dependency.
I can be a bit of an amateur data geek (note: amateur!) and certainly what I`ve seen reported by Public Health Scotland is an increase in people using cheap street drugs as opposed to the more common drugs like cannabis, coke, heroin etc.
Admittedly, I`ve not looked into any correlation between increased drug deaths and a move to cheaper drugs.
I`m also not naive enough to think the Scottish Government can eradicate the issues of premature death and poverty with their current powers. One thing that really boils my urine though is acting like being better than England is a success - it`s not. We should be aiming higher than being better than other UK nations, though I understand why we do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 28 Nov 14:03
We probably are aiming higher than being better than other UK nations but comparisons with them are inevitable and they work both ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 28 Nov 19:06
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Mon 28 Nov 11:06
https://www.gov.scot/policies/alcohol-and-drugs/minimum-unit-pricing/
It was designed to have the most impact on harmful drinkers.
This would of course have an impact on the nations health as the health system would be deploying less resources helping this group and those resources could be directed elsewhere.
Alcohol specific deaths have actually risen since this initiative started and last year saw the highest number of deaths since 2008. It clearly isn`t working as intended but to what extent the pandemic had on those numbers will only become clear I n the years ahead.
Apologies I`d used out of date figures without realising. The deaths went down 10% in the first year then increased a lot after the lockdowns so you`re right they have gone up. I did say the problem drinkers weren`t really impacted but if you have got less hospital admissions and a drop in deaths (if that first year really was a better indicator vs the lockdown year which admittedly is yet to be confirmed) then its a success irrespective of where the lives are saved but there might be different strategies required for the most at risk group. I will try and make sure I include up to date figures though - normally do try to make sure my stuff is accurate!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Tue 29 Nov 15:15
My post above that nobody has copied the NHS is far too too simplistic.
If someone would be kind enough to Google and link “ PNHP Health Care Systems - Four Basic Models”
Pity the poor souls in Number 4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 7 Dec 14:01
Support for independence is now at 56% according to the latest Ipsos poll.
|
|
|
|
|
|
