|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 15 Jun 02:47
`I need the SNP, but not if it is a 35 per cent party. That I have no use for whatsoever.`
So spake Goering and many before and since. There will independence supporters on this site who will remember that back in the late 1960s, the SNP could not even stand candidates for local elections. They didn`t have the funds. Back then the SNP was seen as a party of middle class do gooders represented by small town lawyers and teachers with leather patches on the elbows of their sports jackets. They were lucky to get 5% of any vote.
It was a very bourgeois party then and has remained so ever since, but under Salmond was able to reach out to the wider Scottish public. The zealotry of genderism overseen by Sturgeon, which helped to bring her down, is a classic example of taking the electorate for granted. Of telling the people what they need, instead of asking people what they want.
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Jun 09:16
I presume you live in Russia by choice, sammer. Are you happy with the political system there?
Do you see any parallels between Putin and Sturgeon? Both have had fantastic electoral success but Sturgeon could only dream about the size of majorities Putin has achieved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 15 Jun 09:22
To be fair to Sturgeon, she doesn`t get to choose the size of her majority...
"Who you are and what you feel comes not just from inside you, but from where you are in the power structure"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 15 Jun 09:33
I don’t recall any of her detractors plummeting to their deaths out of hotel windows either..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Thu 15 Jun 10:00
What was the donbas referendum result again? 98%?
As sometime said at the time, you wouldn`t even get that high a score of it was a referendum to be given free cake
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 15 Jun 10:19
SNP ministers - eg Slater, Constance, Gilruth, Matheson, Somerville to name but a few all absolutely clueless. A lot of them recycled from one failed post to make a mess of another, just like Humza himself.
But at least some of them can read from a script. Behind them sits an array of non talent who can barely parrot a planted question.
Laugh? Snigger more like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Jun 10:38
They were democratically elected and their party won a majority in accordance with the rules laid down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 15 Jun 10:47
The rest of the benches at Holyrood are filled with runners up!
Suppose that`s what a PR election system brings, I believe one member has been there forever collecting the coin for never having won anything other than a raffle!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 15 Jun 12:00
Eck, they didn’t win a majority. Only Salmond ever won a majority.
Btw there is a Yoon voter majority in every Westminster seat bar a very few. Split of course, but not in anther Indy ref- not that there is gonna be one!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Jun 12:11
Yeah, we know they didn`t win a majority under a system that was designed to stop a single party winning a majority but they formed a coalition which was encouraged for the devolved parliaments.
I`m not sure what the relevance of votes for Westminster seats is. We`re stil waiting to hear what the democratic route is to having a referendum on Scottish independence. Maybe there are some parallels with Russia after all.
Post Edited (Thu 15 Jun 12:16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 15 Jun 12:32
The relevance of Westminster votes is that those who reject the SNP outnumber those in thrall to them, and is an indication of what would happen in a two option vote where Yoons would rule the roost.
And there won’t be votes for kids and non British citizens if there is ever a next time either, even though Salmond still got stuffed by dishing out votes to anybody over 16, and adults who had been here five minutes
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Jun 12:47
If you`re so confident of a Unionist majority why not have a referendum? I see you dodged the question about democracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tad Allagash
Date: Thu 15 Jun 13:37
But we had a referendum. What the point of another referendum if you’re not accepting the result of the last one?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Jun 14:00
Things change. We were in the EU then for a start. The electorate isn`t one constant, unchanging mass. If the result of the 2014 referendum was intended to be forever, or for a minimum length of time, that should have been stated in the legislation which authorised it.
Here`s a scenario worth considering. If Scotland were an independent country, performing as it is now, and was invited by rUK, performing as it is now, to join its union on the same conditions which apply in the present union, do you think the Scottish electorate would vote for it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Thu 15 Jun 14:06
If you can join the army etc at 16 any argument against dropping the age to 16 is madness. I guarantee 16yr olds are more clued in and less single party focussed than most of their parents generation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 15 Jun 14:20
Quote:
Tad Allagash, Thu 15 Jun 13:37
But we had a referendum. What the point of another referendum if you’re not accepting the result of the last one?
I always start replies to these sorts of things by highlighting that I am a fence sitter. I not a nationalist, not am I a unionist. At best I`m a status quo-ist.
Before that referendum the people of Scotland had a few thing either directly stated to them or strongly implied. These included:
A prosperous future within the UK
Remaining in the EU
More devolved powers
What we`ve actually received in Scotland is
Real term budget cuts
Brexit destroying out industries
New legislation put in place to reduce Scotland`s decision making.
Some of these things may be temporary and changed with new Westminster leadership. However, the biggest and most significant change was Brexit. It`s unlikely the UK will return. It has harmed the Scottish economy and is predicted to get worse. It has also reduced and protections to the Scottish Government meaning Westminster can essentially remove the devolved administration should they wish to.
As I`ve said, I`m a fence sitter but that fence is being shoved into a nationalist garden by unionists who seem happy to fiddle whilst Rome burns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: buffy
Date: Thu 15 Jun 14:23
The first referendum vote was accepted otherwise we’d be independent now, or did I miss that headline on the telly?
”Buffy’s Buns are the finest in Fife”, J. Spence 2019”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 15 Jun 14:50
I recall Mike Russell solemnly saying that five million Scots voted to stay in the EU.
Surely such mathematical gymnastics should have been ministerially rewarded?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Jun 15:31
You seem to hang on every word and deed an SNP politician utters or does. Maybe you should spread your interest a bit farther.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 15 Jun 15:42
Well, they are such a reliable source of merriment it would be a shame not to laugh at them.
Even those who once took them seriously are joining in now..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 15 Jun 16:16
Some of us get much more fun listening to and observing the goings-on at Westminster. Have you heard that the chap who was UK Prime Minister and Minister for the Union less than a year ago has been deemed a liar by a committee of his peers which had a majority from his party but apparently amounted to being a `kangaroo court`?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 15 Jun 16:26
"Some of these things may be temporary and changed with new Westminster leadership. However, the biggest and most significant change was Brexit.
It`s unlikely the UK will return. It has harmed the Scottish economy and is predicted to get worse. It has also reduced and protections to the Scottish Government meaning Westminster can essentially remove the devolved administration should they wish to."
That was one of Brexits hidden agenda jake .. to take back/remove devolved decisions from Scotland
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 15 Jun 16:48
Quote:
Buspasspar, Thu 15 Jun 16:26
"Some of these things may be temporary and changed with new Westminster leadership. However, the biggest and most significant change was Brexit.
It`s unlikely the UK will return. It has harmed the Scottish economy and is predicted to get worse. It has also reduced and protections to the Scottish Government meaning Westminster can essentially remove the devolved administration should they wish to."
That was one of Brexits hidden agenda jake .. to take back/remove devolved decisions from Scotland
One thing is for sure, none of us will see independence in our lifetime.
But where did it go wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Thu 15 Jun 19:41
Quote:
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Thu 15 Jun 09:33
I don’t recall any of her detractors plummeting to their deaths out of hotel windows either..
Nah travel irons oot the hotel windae is more her thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Fri 16 Jun 09:07
Scottish Parliament opened with agreed devolved powers and over the years others have been established.
Which of these have since been removed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 16 Jun 12:29
Quote:
Parboiled, Fri 16 Jun 09:07
Scottish Parliament opened with agreed devolved powers and over the years others have been established.
Which of these have since been removed?
Already been covered. Westminster shifted the goalposts after Brexit so it can veto any devolved decision making in Scotland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parboiled
Date: Sat 17 Jun 12:47
I’m still waiting for a list of devolved powers that that Westminster took back.
Or one even…?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 17 Jun 12:55
They don`t take them back they just override them. We`re still waiting to hear why glass should not be included in any UK recycling scheme. Have Wales been told they can`t include glass in their scheme?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 17 Jun 12:57
Quote:
Parboiled, Sat 17 Jun 12:47
I’m still waiting for a list of devolved powers that that Westminster took back.
Or one even…?
If you would care to read my post again you`ll find I said they changed legislation so they can essentially interfere with devolved matters. We`ve seen that happen twice this year already.
If you want to continue to ask questions, did you ever answer my question about which party you prefer? I don`t recall ever receiving a reply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 17 Jun 12:58
Quote:
wee eck, Sat 17 Jun 12:55
They don`t take them back they just override them. We`re still waiting to hear why glass should not be included in any UK recycling scheme. Have Wales been told they can`t include glass in their scheme?
Still waiting to be told which parts of the GRA were illegal too...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Sat 17 Jun 14:46
Are we talking about Section 35 of the Scotland Act 1998? Wasn`t that in place at the beginning?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 17 Jun 15:37
So was the Sewel Convention :-
The Sewel convention
In section 28 of the Scotland Act 1998 (Acts of the Scottish Parliament) at the end add—
“(8)But it is recognised that the Parliament of the United Kingdom will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.”
That depends on good faith though which is in short supply with the present Westminster government.
The Internal Markets Act wasn`t in force then though.
Why has it taken so long to apply the override? Will a change of government have a different approach?
|
|
|
|
|
|
