|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 15:58
Will the BBC come clean and tell us who leaked details of the Budget to them?
The Guardian reports :-
John Swinney, the Scottish government’s finance secretary, says no one was given authorisation by him to leak budget details.
But he says, inevitably, many people were aware of what the budget was going to say.
He tells Alison Johnstone, the Presiding Officer:
`I unreservedly apologise to you for the situation in which you find yourself as presiding officer in protecting the integrity of parliament.`
He also says some of the information leaked was contained in embargoed information given to the other political parties.
I can`t see that final paragraph in the BBC`s account of his introductory comments.
ETA - Radio Scotland have just replayed Swinney`s opening remarks on their news programme and again haven`t included that last sentence. I find that quite odd.
Post Edited (Thu 15 Dec 16:15)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 15 Dec 16:47
I don`t think anyone should expect BBC to reveal their sources unless its a matter of public/nationally safety and then only if enforced by a court ruling.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 15 Dec 16:52
Imagine pulling the plug on an independence referendum during a budget speech.
So much for "NO IFS NO BUTS"
Ever get the feeling you`ve been cheated ?
Post Edited (Thu 15 Dec 16:52)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 17:08
Why would the SNP leak the budget to the BBC or any other media outlet when about 90 pc of them are anti independence? We had the nonsense of a BBC news presenter asking a BBC political reporter about the leak and not asking the obvious question - where did the leak come from?
Tenruh, as with a lot of your posts I don`t understand the point you`re making. As soon as the Supreme Court decision came out the 2023 referendum wasn`t going to happen and the SG acknowledged that so the budget speech wasn`t telling us anything new in that respect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 15 Dec 17:16
Eck, the opposition parties are furious because some of the info leaked was NOT included in the pre statement detail given to them, therefore they couldn’t have leaked it.
Unfortunately we have a timorous feeble drip of a Presiding Officer so don’t expect any serious action from her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 15 Dec 17:26
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 15 Dec 17:08
Why would the SNP leak the budget to the BBC or any other media outlet when about 90 pc of them are anti independence? We had the nonsense of a BBC news presenter asking a BBC political reporter about the leak and not asking the obvious question - where did the leak come from?
Tenruh, as with a lot of your posts I don`t understand the point you`re making. As soon as the Supreme Court decision came out the 2023 referendum wasn`t going to happen and the SG acknowledged that so the budget speech wasn`t telling us anything new in that respect.
The point I`m making is quite simple, whenever they are approaching an election we are promised a independence referendum, but in reality, they are just a bunch of troughers and cowards sitting in both parliament`s taking all the benefits but sitting on their hands.
What actually do they do for a living ?
Why did they go to the newly constructed English based Supreme Court when they had the option to use a Scottish Court over 500 years old.
Sturgeon promised the electorate a gold standard referendum in October next year
No Ifs no buts, but the minute the SC gave her an open door she couldn`t run through it quick enough.
And to think we all thought she had a secret plan B.....Fools we`ve been....
Post Edited (Thu 15 Dec 17:27)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 17:37
We`ve heard all that stuff before, Tenruh. None of the SNP MPs or MSPs want independence, they just want to enjoy a cushy number while waiting for their pensions. Do they actually feel this way when they put themselves up for election or does something come over them once they get voted in? Don`t the opposition parties realise they don`t really want independence or do they just play along with the pretence?
Parboiled, Alison Johnstone has never seemed particularly timorous to me but we all know how you love to throw insults at people whose opinions don`t accord with your own so I`ll take your comments with a pinch of salt.
No one has addressed my question - what would be the motive behind the SG leaking the details of their budget to a hostile media?
ETA - I`m no lawyer, but I thought any decision of the Scottish Court of Session could be appealed to the UK Supreme Court and no doubt that would have happened if the case had been heard initially in Scotland and a ruling made against the UK government. By going straight to the Supreme Court the SG avoided any potential delay.
Post Edited (Thu 15 Dec 17:58)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 15 Dec 18:11
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 15 Dec 17:37
We`ve heard all that stuff before, Tenruh. None of the SNP MPs or MSPs want independence, they just want to enjoy a cushy number while waiting for their pensions. Do they actually feel this way when they put themselves up for election or does something come over them once they get voted in? Don`t the opposition parties realise they don`t really want independence or do they just play along with the pretence?
Parboiled, Alison Johnstone has never seemed particularly timorous to me but we all know how you love to throw insults at people whose opinions don`t accord with your own so I`ll take your comments with a pinch of salt.
No one has addressed my question - what would be the motive behind the SG leaking the details of their budget to a hostile media?
ETA - I`m no lawyer, but I thought any decision of the Scottish Court of Session could be appealed to the UK Supreme Court and no doubt that would have happened if the case had been heard initially in Scotland and a ruling made against the UK government. By going straight to the Supreme Court the SG avoided any potential delay.
Why then did JC go through the Court of Session then ?
Don`t understand that cause for a delay, the question surely could have been addressed years ago? Why not...
Any idea why all the issues that put the electorate off voting Yes last time have still not been addressed? Pensions Currency Borders etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 18:25
As I said, I`m no lawyer so I`ve no idea why JC went through the CoS but surely there would have been a delay if the CoS ruled against WM and they then appealed to the SC.
There have been papers issued addressing some of the issues raised in 2014 with more to come. Maybe they don`t give the answers you want but it`s not true to say they aren`t being addressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 18:55
no link so no read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 19:00
No thanks. I`ve read enough of that guy`s stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 15 Dec 19:49
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 15 Dec 19:00
No thanks. I`ve read enough of that guy`s stuff.
Alex Salmond, the party`s leader, said: "The people of Scotland were promised a referendum next year, no ifs no buts, and there is a clear democratic mandate for one.
"Today the Scottish Government have flown a white flag on that constitutional imperative when they should have been flying a Lion Rampant.
"The Scottish Government’s decision to concede that there will now not be an independence referendum is even more bizarre considering that only yesterday the SNP led a debate at Westminster calling for one. “
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 19:59
Some things in politics are outwith the control of one person or party. The SNP take the view that any referendum has to be legal otherwise it won`t be recognised by the EU or throughout the world. It`s like the football. It`s easy to sit on the sidelines criticising and saying what the manager should have done but it`s different living in the real world where opponents will always react to what you do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: da_no_1
Date: Thu 15 Dec 20:51
How come it`s fine and dandy to abuse some parties` MPs but not others?
"Some days will stay a 1000 years, some pass like the flash of a spark"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 20:54
Who is that directed at?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 15 Dec 21:03
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 15 Dec 19:59
Some things in politics are outwith the control of one person or party. The SNP take the view that any referendum has to be legal otherwise it won`t be recognised by the EU or throughout the world. It`s like the football. It`s easy to sit on the sidelines criticising and saying what the manager should have done but it`s different living in the real world where opponents will always react to what you do.
So why were we promised by Sturgeon a gold standard referendum in the first half of this parliamentary sitting if the nuSNP got elected?
Ever feel you've been cheated ?
Post Edited (Thu 15 Dec 21:14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 21:13
I`ve said all I`m going to say on this. You`re just going over old ground. Surely you`ve followed politics long enough to understand how they work. It`s easy to come on here and accuse unnamed people of perjury as well. I`ve no idea what the nuSNP is but you are obviously another one of these people I see all the time on social media calling people names and thinking that constitutes political debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 15 Dec 21:20
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 15 Dec 21:13
I`ve said all I`m going to say on this. You`re just going over old ground. Surely you`ve followed politics long enough to understand how they work. It`s easy to come on here and accuse unnamed people of perjury as well. I`ve no idea what the nuSNP is but you are obviously another one of these people I see all the time on social media calling people names and thinking that constitutes political debate.
Old ground, someone could have died in prison if the jury believed the lies.
I`ve not come on here and accused anyone of perjury that`s what the jury decided.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 15 Dec 22:43
The legal position is that an Indyref 2 is unconstitutional. The Tory government will never allow one as is clear. Last week Starmer boasted on radio that he will never form a coalition government with the SNP. The unionist position is pretty clear and undeniable. So what do the SNP propose to do?
I have suggested withdrawing SNP members from Westminster as a first salvo but I have heard no one else suggest this. So maybe there is a better plan I am unaware of. Any word on pensions or the currency which were big issues at the time of the last vote?
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Dec 23:17
The SG recently issued a paper on Scotland`s economy and the currency. It`s accessible on the internet.
Do you qualify for the UK pension despite living in Russia, sammer? If so, why is that? Would it be any different for retired Scots in the event of independence? The fact is that pensions and a lot of other matters would be the subject of negotiations between Scotland and rUK but somehow the SG are expected to give definitive answers on them in advance. Did the UK government tell us what the deal with the EU would be before the 2016 referendum? They still haven`t got NI sorted!
Oops, sorry! I`m not supposed to indulge in `whataboutery`.
Post Edited (Fri 16 Dec 00:12)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 16 Dec 06:47
Quote:
sammer, Thu 15 Dec 22:43
The legal position is that an Indyref 2 is unconstitutional. The Tory government will never allow one as is clear. Last week Starmer boasted on radio that he will never form a coalition government with the SNP. The unionist position is pretty clear and undeniable. So what do the SNP propose to do?
I have suggested withdrawing SNP members from Westminster as a first salvo but I have heard no one else suggest this. So maybe there is a better plan I am unaware of. Any word on pensions or the currency which were big issues at the time of the last vote?
The SNP members in Westminster cannot walk out of Westminster as a large % of their income goes directly to the party funds.
It would also seem strange that a party which should be settling up rather than settling down should be giving theirselfs all shadow secretary titles, They fully indulgence theirselfs sitting on as many committees as possible? Do they get paid for that also?
They`ve definitely "Settled In" instead of "Settling Up"
Post Edited (Fri 16 Dec 08:46)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: da_no_1
Date: Fri 16 Dec 14:59
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 15 Dec 23:17
The SG recently issued a paper on Scotland`s economy and the currency. It`s accessible on the internet.
Do you qualify for the UK pension despite living in Russia, sammer? If so, why is that? Would it be any different for retired Scots in the event of independence? The fact is that pensions and a lot of other matters would be the subject of negotiations between Scotland and rUK but somehow the SG are expected to give definitive answers on them in advance. Did the UK government tell us what the deal with the EU would be before the 2016 referendum? They still haven`t got NI sorted!
Oops, sorry! I`m not supposed to indulge in `whataboutery`.
You`re some boy Eck
Let`s just be a wee bit less corrupt, less informative, less sh1te than Westminster. That`ll do, eh?
Talk about setting the bar low
"Some days will stay a 1000 years, some pass like the flash of a spark"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 16 Dec 16:12
If Holyrood was 10 pc as corrupt as WM it would have been shut down years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 16 Dec 18:00
Thanks for the link Eck, I genuinely was unaware of the recent publication. I can’t say I’m much wiser having read it. It is very wordy, abounds with abstract financial terms such as ‘responsibility, credibility, stability and flexibility,’ and ultimately the message seems to be that you won’t notice much difference in your financial affairs from those in place at present. Which poses the aobvious question: why bother fighting for independence then? Would voting for a Scottish banking cabal make us any better off than the Brussels or Westminster versions have?
The transition phase from the GBP to the unimaginatively christened ‘Scottish pound’ (SP presumably) provides not the merest suggestion of a timeline. Circumstances will dictate of course but when reading I had the suspicion that such a day might never come. The Westminster parliament could easily be obstructive over a number of years whilst the reaction of the EU to absorbing Scotland within the Euro currency is a matter of debate.
I think the answer to the pensions issue is that as a UK citizen born in Scotland my state pension will continue to be paid under independence but not necessarily at the UK rate. I ‘qualify’ for a pension since I paid into the system most of my working life and am only receiving my dues irrespective of where I live. Needless to say the UK will not pay my pension to me direct in Russia, and UK banks have all been instructed not to do business with Russian banks even through a third party. Well, not officially at any rate. So although the NATO sanctions have failed to break the Russian economy, or stopped the EU buying Russian gas via intermediaries, they have worked against me!
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 16 Dec 22:31
Regarding the leak, a journalist would never reveal their sources.
Why someone would leak this, I don’t know. Badness? An attempt to curry favour? To distract from the tax rises?
John Swinney was absolutely raging at Holyrood – he more or less accused the other parties of being responsible for the second leak, only for Daniel Johnson to point out that the detail wasn’t included in their advance copy. I wonder if the detail was embargoed with respect to time, and was duly published when the time came (but the delay in proceedings meant Swinney hadn’t got round to announcing it officially).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 16 Dec 23:10
And on other matters.
I agree (I think) with wee eck – it seems extraordinary to me that you would have a referendum when you don’t know what the ultimate deal is going to be. Would you sell your house without knowing the price, or accept a new job without knowing the salary?
(Although with regard to Europe a lot of people were arguing for a second, confirmatory referendum on the actual deal).
The Pensions argument has been raised many times. Whilst in theory it would have been subject to negotiation, both sides in 2014 agreed that an iScotland would be responsible for payment (and funding) of state pensions. I believe that remains SNP policy despite the bizarre claims of people like Ian Blackford and Ivan McKee.
There is the “ex-Pat” argument – British Citizens overseas receive British State Pensions (sometimes with a degree of inflation-linking, but often these are the subject of reciprocal agreements), and so the same would apply to Scots after independence – but we wouldn’t necessarily be British Citizens any more. The same argument would suggest that if England and Wales declared indy and walked off with 90+% of assets and liabilities, then Scotland (and Northern Ireland) would continue to pay English and Welsh pensions at what, £100bn p.a.? It’s not going to happen.
I’ll save my comments on Ms Sturgeon and her “mandates” and how a failure to convict does not mean witnesses were perjurers for another time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 16 Dec 23:29
`I agree (I think) with wee eck – it seems extraordinary to me that you would have a referendum when you don’t know what the ultimate deal is going to be. Would you sell your house without knowing the price, or accept a new job without knowing the salary?`
I don`t think we agree at all. You would use the lack of certainty as a reason for never having a referendum. As I`ve said on here before the campaign for the Brexit referendum of 2016 was the most dishonest political campaign in my lifetime but there was never any suggestion the result shouldn`t stand after it was clear it was based on lies and spending limits had been breached.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 19 Dec 16:18
Quote:
Tenruh, Thu 15 Dec 17:26
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 15 Dec 17:08
Why would the SNP leak the budget to the BBC or any other media outlet when about 90 pc of them are anti independence? We had the nonsense of a BBC news presenter asking a BBC political reporter about the leak and not asking the obvious question - where did the leak come from?
Tenruh, as with a lot of your posts I don`t understand the point you`re making. As soon as the Supreme Court decision came out the 2023 referendum wasn`t going to happen and the SG acknowledged that so the budget speech wasn`t telling us anything new in that respect.
The point I`m making is quite simple, whenever they are approaching an election we are promised a independence referendum, but in reality, they are just a bunch of troughers and cowards sitting in both parliament`s taking all the benefits but sitting on their hands.
What actually do they do for a living ?
Why did they go to the newly constructed English based Supreme Court when they had the option to use a Scottish Court over 500 years old.
Sturgeon promised the electorate a gold standard referendum in October next year
No Ifs no buts, but the minute the SC gave her an open door she couldn`t run through it quick enough.
And to think we all thought she had a secret plan B.....Fools we`ve been....
"Why did they go to the newly constructed English based Supreme Court when they had the option to use a Scottish Court over 500 years old."
Err the Supreme Court has the competence for determining whether or not Bills published by devolved Adminstrations are within their remit and the Court of Session doesn`t....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Mon 19 Dec 16:42
Quote:
londonparsfan, Mon 19 Dec 16:18
Quote:
Tenruh, Thu 15 Dec 17:26
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 15 Dec 17:08
Why would the SNP leak the budget to the BBC or any other media outlet when about 90 pc of them are anti independence? We had the nonsense of a BBC news presenter asking a BBC political reporter about the leak and not asking the obvious question - where did the leak come from?
Tenruh, as with a lot of your posts I don`t understand the point you`re making. As soon as the Supreme Court decision came out the 2023 referendum wasn`t going to happen and the SG acknowledged that so the budget speech wasn`t telling us anything new in that respect.
The point I`m making is quite simple, whenever they are approaching an election we are promised a independence referendum, but in reality, they are just a bunch of troughers and cowards sitting in both parliament`s taking all the benefits but sitting on their hands.
What actually do they do for a living ?
Why did they go to the newly constructed English based Supreme Court when they had the option to use a Scottish Court over 500 years old.
Sturgeon promised the electorate a gold standard referendum in October next year
No Ifs no buts, but the minute the SC gave her an open door she couldn`t run through it quick enough.
And to think we all thought she had a secret plan B.....Fools we`ve been....
"Why did they go to the newly constructed English based Supreme Court when they had the option to use a Scottish Court over 500 years old."
Err the Supreme Court has the competence for determining whether or not Bills published by devolved Adminstrations are within their remit and the Court of Session doesn`t....
Is that true, you'll have to show me the evidence.
Strange that JC to the proroging to a Scottish Court.
Post Edited (Mon 19 Dec 16:48)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Mon 19 Dec 16:48
Does this help?
www.supremecourt.uk/about/the-supreme-court.html
Perhaps we could get McGlashan to make a ruling with his Hurly Burly bag...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Mon 19 Dec 16:51
Quote:
ipswichpar, Mon 19 Dec 16:48
Does this help?
www.supremecourt.uk/about/the-supreme-court.html
Perhaps we could get McGlashan to make a ruling with his Hurly Burly bag...
Still doesn`t stop them going to the Scottish Court first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 19 Dec 16:53
Quote:
Tenruh, Mon 19 Dec 16:42
Quote:
londonparsfan, Mon 19 Dec 16:18
Quote:
Tenruh, Thu 15 Dec 17:26
Quote:
wee eck, Thu 15 Dec 17:08
Why would the SNP leak the budget to the BBC or any other media outlet when about 90 pc of them are anti independence? We had the nonsense of a BBC news presenter asking a BBC political reporter about the leak and not asking the obvious question - where did the leak come from?
Tenruh, as with a lot of your posts I don`t understand the point you`re making. As soon as the Supreme Court decision came out the 2023 referendum wasn`t going to happen and the SG acknowledged that so the budget speech wasn`t telling us anything new in that respect.
The point I`m making is quite simple, whenever they are approaching an election we are promised a independence referendum, but in reality, they are just a bunch of troughers and cowards sitting in both parliament`s taking all the benefits but sitting on their hands.
What actually do they do for a living ?
Why did they go to the newly constructed English based Supreme Court when they had the option to use a Scottish Court over 500 years old.
Sturgeon promised the electorate a gold standard referendum in October next year
No Ifs no buts, but the minute the SC gave her an open door she couldn`t run through it quick enough.
And to think we all thought she had a secret plan B.....Fools we`ve been....
"Why did they go to the newly constructed English based Supreme Court when they had the option to use a Scottish Court over 500 years old."
Err the Supreme Court has the competence for determining whether or not Bills published by devolved Adminstrations are within their remit and the Court of Session doesn`t....
Is that true, you`ll have to show me the evidence.
Strange that JC to the proroging to a Scottish Court.
It`s not strange at all. They launched cases in England and Scotland at their respective courts as they both have competence to hear cases that aren`t for reserved matters. Scotland found the proroging unlawful and England found it was lawful. Both cases were appealed to the Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 19 Dec 16:55
Quote:
Tenruh, Mon 19 Dec 16:51
Quote:
ipswichpar, Mon 19 Dec 16:48
Does this help?
www.supremecourt.uk/about/the-supreme-court.html
Perhaps we could get McGlashan to make a ruling with his Hurly Burly bag...
Still doesn`t stop them going to the Scottish Court first.
It does. The Court of Session doesn`t have the authority to deal with those cases. Hence the reason they went to the Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
