FREEDOM!!!! [3]

The English are showing their true colours now- remember all that rhetoric in the referendum from the Unionist side about how Scotland was an equal and valued partner, how our voice was of equal importance and we would be heard?
Well now all the polls predict it will be heard- when Labour get an electoral wipe out at the general election and the SNP return the most MP's to Westminster.

So are the Unionists celebrating this sign of our Union? Erm, no.

This is typical of the sort of response so far in the English media-

'If, as many fear, the Scottish Nationalists take control of English affairs...Democracy is at stake...The price for having the SNP at the heart of government will be high. I don’t believe it is a price that English voters are prepared to pay. The spectre of countryside protest marches is not so far off – nor, more seriously, the shadow of the poll tax anarchy....Many English voters already resent the Scottish position, with its large measure of self-government – no university fees, no prescription charges, free personal care for the old and infirm. It seems to them that the Scots do very well out of the English taxpayer and give nothing in exchange....the English regard a government dependent on the SNP as undemocratic and an insult to democracy itself.'- Sunday Mail


Better Together? Anyone?

Democracy's a bitch.

When is Westminster gonna throw in the towel and approve the creation of an English Parliament?  I really think that just going fully federal would solve most of the issues underlying the West Lothian question.  It's not like the Westminster parliament would cease to exist either.  They'd still have power over certain budgetary issues, defense, immigration, etc.

It might not stop the emerging tide of Scottish national consciousness though.

Doesn't the SNP already abstain form voting on english matters?

"Many English voters already resent the Scottish position, with its large measure of self-government – no university fees, no prescription charges, free personal care for the old and infirm. It seems to them that the Scots do very well out of the English taxpayer and give nothing in exchange"

I think we've been through this before - but don't the English get the same as the Scottish? And are they trying to say Scotland doesn't pay as much taxes per head?

When is Westminster gonna throw in the towel and approve the creation of an English Parliament?- Eldo

The Conservatives are in a tricky place here- UKIP is basically an English party in all but name- their support in Scotland is minimal and not of any import so far, fringe stuff.
But they are making a lot of ground in England on this idea of English votes for English laws (which rather wonderfully goes by the shortened name of EVEL) in part fueled by this insidious and dangerous myth that the that stuff like no tuition fees and free prescriptions is funded by the English taxpayer (its not, its just how we choose to prioritise our spending- we value those things higher than other things- but they all come at a price somewhere else, we have a fixed budget- we get to decide what we spend it on, but we cant keep any cash we raise here, it all goes to the Treasury at Wesminster, so whilst tuition fees are free, it came at the price of cutting a few thousand college places, the money saved there was used to pay the fees).

The English resentment at these things is misplaced, its not at the Scots they should direct it but at their own politicians and ask them why they don't prioritise those things too.

But this all puts the Tories in a tricky place, their full name is 'The Conservative and Unionist Party', the Unionist bit rather relies on their being a single sovereign Parliament that rules all the parts.
So they are trying to argue for a sort of half-way house- where some votes on issues that are English only would only be taken by English MP'S.

But this creates issues too- it will not effect the Tories because they only have 1 Scottish MP, but Labour stand to lose a lot of MP'S from Scotland and Wales in particular- it could leave the weird situation where you have a majority Labour government and a Labour PM in charge of the UK, which on days of English only votes becomes a Tory government and a Tory PM.

And on top of that, and this feeds into Blue's point, what is English only?

For example right now the SNP don't vote on Health matters, as Heath is devolved, and so far all the votes have been about procedure- how the English NHS is run, which is no concern of us, thats their business.
But its different when it comes to budgets- although health is devolved how much money Scotland gets to spend on it is dependent on how much England spends- if they cut the health budget, ours gets cut too automatically (and the reverse if its increased). At the moment the proposals for EVIL say Health would be an English only matter, including its budget- which means Scots would have no democratic representation in votes directly affecting our allocation of tax money we pay into.
And this is true for every devolved matter with a budget. Scotland's allocation is totally dependent on English spending or cutting.
Then there are other issues, particularly surrounding London which has some devolved powers of its own- so if Scots and Welsh and Irish are excluded from voting on devolved matters on the basis the vote doesn't effect them, then so should London be held the same principle.

Its a devil of a thing to settle in that the argument is not just a practical one about how it would work, its a political one too about who gets represented, who doesn't, who gains more power by it who loses.

And its all going to come to an interesting and possibly explosive head come the General Election.

I think we've been through this before - but don't the English get the same as the Scottish? And are they trying to say Scotland doesn't pay as much taxes per head?- Halfwise

This all came out in the referendum debates to the point even Cameron had to publicly state it was not true that England subsides Scotland.

The reason it was an issue, and so many English still believe it is that for decades when the Westminster government gave the figures they excluded all the resources that, if we were independent would legally be ours- like oil, water, hydro, adn the Crown Properties (lots of estates and all of the coast line) ect.
By doing so they could paint a picture that we paid less in and got more out.

But, and I quote the BBC here from an article examining tax and spending from during the referendum debate-

'for every person in Scotland last year, the exchequer received £800 more (in tax) than the UK average (10,000 per head in Scotland, 9,200 in England) And that gap is not new. ....Scottish tax receipts have been higher than the UK average in every one of the past 33 years.'

When it comes to spending Scotland spends over its means, our public spending per head is higher than in England, and an Independent Scotland that year would have spent 12,300 per person compared to 11,000 in the rest of the UK.
Which means we would be running at a deficit of 12.1 billion.

But thats actually not a lot for your average country- the rest of the UK had we become independent would for example be running at a deficit of 117.4billion in the same period (all figures from the BBC).

The annual operating costs for Trident are 2.2 billlion- we'd just get rid of that and have made up the deficit in just 5 years without having to cut any services, not to mention setting up an oil fund similar to he Norwegian model.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:The English are showing their true colours now- remember all that rhetoric in the referendum from the Unionist side about how Scotland was an equal and valued partner, how our voice was of equal importance and we would be heard?
Well now all the polls predict it will be heard- when Labour get an electoral wipe out at the general election and the SNP return the most MP's to Westminster.

So are the Unionists celebrating this sign of our Union? Erm, no.

This is typical of the sort of response so far in the English media-

'If, as many fear, the Scottish Nationalists take control of English affairs...Democracy is at stake...The price for having the SNP at the heart of government will be high. I don’t believe it is a price that English voters are prepared to pay. The spectre of countryside protest marches is not so far off – nor, more seriously, the shadow of the poll tax anarchy....Many English voters already resent the Scottish position, with its large measure of self-government – no university fees, no prescription charges, free personal care for the old and infirm. It seems to them that the Scots do very well out of the English taxpayer and give nothing in exchange....the English regard a government dependent on the SNP as undemocratic and an insult to democracy itself.'- Sunday Mail


Better Together? Anyone?

you mean the UK Government. Not the English.

That depends on who the English vote for- if they go UKIP in numbers then Id say it was the English not just the government.

so you are calling a whole nation anti-Scottish, seems a bit of a stretch.

I agree that creating a pseudo English parliament within Westminster is a bad idea, but I do think greater devolution within England would be good. The extent of centralization in the UK (at least until the last 20 years) is really alien to me. I know voters rejected the idea of regional English assemblies (with the exception of London), but the constitutional status quo seems untenable. In the absence of Scottish independence right now they need to try something different.

so you are calling a whole nation anti-Scottish, seems a bit of a stretch.- Figg

Seems stupid, so obviously not as you are perfectly aware.
I am talking about the English as represented by those they elect- who at the moment are throwing their toys out the pram at the prospect of the SNP having the deciding votes in a hung parliament. And they, and the English press are being very anti-Scottish, promulgating things they know to be untrue (such as England subsidises Scotland) and stoking up anti-Scottish sentiment among the English people. None of which do I think is a good idea, or makes much sense after the referendum.

so the UK gvt then. not the English.

And the English press, and English opinion polls.

Dunno how I missed this at the time- John Oliver's take on the the referendum debate 4 days before the vote -

And just for the hell of it-

Very interesting documentary (about Scottish independence coverage but has broader appeal in that its also just about how news is presented)-

The worst example of the BBC reporting during the referendum- first as it was reported on the BBC news by the Chief Political Correspondent Nick Robinson (the important words here are 'he didn't answer')-



Heres the live stream of what actually happened-

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Dunno how I missed this at the time- John Oliver's take on the the referendum debate 4 days before the vote -

It's nice that John Oliver moved to HBO, it's the closest you'll see to John Stewart at work.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Dunno how I missed this at the time- John Oliver's take on the the referendum debate 4 days before the vote -

not impressed. he is being a dick for laughs, and its not funny material. he wouldn't have the balls to say those things in the UK, funny he does have the courage when he is two thousand miles away.

I dont think his view would be any different if he did that show here.

oh I think it would. it wouldn't get laughs for a start.

talking of Freedom. I just watched that tv show Outlander. OMG its a bonkfest with nice scenery and a hot ginger bloke in a kilt. Dwalin's in it too. you seriously couldn't watch this with your family. they never stop shagging for 5 minutes.

Mrs Figg wrote:talking of Freedom. I just watched that tv show Outlander. OMG its a bonkfest with nice scenery and a hot ginger bloke in a kilt. Dwalin's in it too. you seriously couldn't watch this with your family. they never stop shagging for 5 minutes.

and the problem is?

....

the problem is its unexpected. one minute its tra la la nice scenery, ooh look at that lovely thistle....next minute bam! in your face bonkage. its discombobulating.