Viewing 29 posts - 1 through 29 (of 29 total)
  • West Lothian question reversed?
  • TandemJeremy
    Free Member

    Looks like a Tory UK government – but what legitimacy do they have in Scotland? 1 seat of 59. 4th in the popular vote with under 17% and Labour increased their vote to 42%.

    What price for the SNP to support Cameron? How far down the independence road will Cameron go?

    Is this the final end of the union?

    druidh
    Free Member

    The Tories have all the legitimacy they need as this was an election for a UK government.

    trailmonkey
    Full Member

    but what legitimacy do they have in Scotland

    More than they have in Birmingham

    uplink
    Free Member

    but what legitimacy do they have in Scotland?

    bit of a daft statement, for the very reasons above

    nickc
    Full Member

    Looks like a Tory UK government – but what legitimacy do they have in Scotland?

    See, you've answered your own question…

    BigDummy
    Free Member

    How far down the independence road will Cameron go?

    I'll hazard a guess at "not very far at all", and I'm not convinced he'll need to.

    Will this be the final, deciding moment at which the interminable low muttering of Scottish discontent actually turns into decisive action for political independence? I'm not going to hold my breath. Go on, surprise us… 🙂

    BigDummy
    Free Member

    And it isn't really a "reversal" of the West Lothian Question either. It's part of the nationwide constitutional outrage and failure of democracy that occurs because some constituencies have sent MPs to Westminster who do not belong to the party which forms the government. But you know what the WLQ is, you're just being hysterical. 🙂

    IanMunro
    Free Member

    Looks like a Tory UK government – but what legitimacy do they have in Scotland?

    The same amount of legitimacy that they have in my house.

    hilldodger
    Free Member

    Surely if Callmedave gets the Cleggies onside then the role of any nationalist parties becomes pretty much irrelevant and there won't need to be any concessions made…….

    druidh
    Free Member

    hilldodger – Member
    Surely if Callmedave gets the Cleggies onside then the role of any nationalist parties becomes pretty much irrelevant and there won't need to be any concessions made…….

    He could even appoint a LibDem as Scottish Secretary and the government would have 12 MPs in Scotland, not just 1.

    TandemJeremy
    Free Member

    Hysterical – hardly.

    I find it interesting that labour increased its vote in Scotland and that once again the tories failed to make any impact at all. Very different tot the rest of the UK and I think that the tories actually have a majority of English seats do they not?

    While its not really a reversal of the west Lothian question it has some parallels.

    It certainly looks unsustainable as a constitutional settlement to me. I think this issue needs to be revisited as a part of a greater constitutional reform.

    I think overall my preferred settlement would be a federal one. Full fiscal independence and No UK commons – just 3 parliaments for the constituent parts and a senate that is UK wide to perform a "lords" type role

    aracer
    Free Member

    Full fiscal independence

    Can we include a transfer of all the debts directly attributable to the failings of the Scottish banks as part of that settlement?

    Of far more importance is the West Lothian question original version, given that the Conservatives could pass all the regulation they want which only affects England (eg NHS stuff) if only English MPs were allowed to vote on it. It will only be Scottish and Welsh MPs of various flavours voting against who will prevent this, despite such legislation having no relevance to their constituents.

    druidh
    Free Member

    aracer – Member
    > Full fiscal independence

    Can we include a transfer of all the debts directly attributable to the failings of the Scottish banks as part of that settlement?

    Certainly – as long we also include all the profits made in the last, say, 20 years up to last year and all the shares which the UK government is now holding in said Banks.

    Of far more importance is the West Lothian question original version, given that the Conservatives could pass all the regulation they want which only affects England (eg NHS stuff) if only English MPs were allowed to vote on it. It will only be Scottish and Welsh MPs of various flavours voting against who will prevent this, despite such legislation having no relevance to their constituents.

    You do know that SNP MPs do not vote on English-only issues?

    aracer
    Free Member

    as long we also include all the profits made in the last, say, 20 years up to last year

    I think you'll find those went to shareholders, unlike the debt.

    You do know that SNP MPs do not vote on English-only issues?

    That's kind of irrelevant given how small a proportion of Scottish MPs they are – they don't hold the balance of power.

    uplink
    Free Member

    What happened To Shrek & his SNP parties claim that they'd take 20 seats?

    hilldodger
    Free Member

    As for fairness and relevance:

    SNP 1.7% of vote = 6 MPs
    BNP 1.9% of vote = 0 MPs
    UKIP 3.1% of vote = 0 MPs

    doesn't that mean that if we did have a proportionally representative system then both BNP and UKIP would warrant more seats than SNP ?

    nickc
    Full Member

    It certainly looks unsustainable as a constitutional settlement to me.

    Much the same things were said in '92 when Major had what? 7 or 8 MPs in Scotland. I'm hardly hearing the desperate clamouring for reform…

    TandemJeremy
    Free Member

    uplink – Member

    What happened To Shrek & his SNP parties claim that they'd take 20 seats?

    3rd party squeeze I think.

    The fact that the tories have a majority of English MPs makes for interesting times as well.

    Aracer – I think you will find that the Scottish parts of the banks did not make the losses

    druidh
    Free Member

    hilldodger – Member
    As for fairness and relevance:

    SNP 1.7% of vote = 6 MPs
    BNP 1.9% of vote = 0 MPs
    UKIP 3.1% of vote = 0 MPs

    doesn't that mean that if we did have a proportionally representative system then both BNP and UKIP would warrant more seats than SNP ?

    Correct. But then who'd believe that over 500,000 people would vote for BNP?

    Drac
    Full Member

    If you want your own say then your countrymen should really be voting more for the SNP but they didn't.

    druidh
    Free Member

    TandemJeremy – Member

    Aracer – I think you will find that the Scottish parts of the banks did not make the losses

    Jeremy – stop now. There is no "Scottish part of the Bank" as they were both UK-based institutions.

    TandemJeremy
    Free Member

    Knew you would like that one 🙂 Makes about as much sense as

    aracer – Member
    Can we include a transfer of all the debts directly attributable to the failings of the Scottish banks as part of that settlement?

    uplink
    Free Member

    3rd party squeeze I think.

    I don't think so
    Not bothered counting but they look to have finished 2nd in the majority of seats

    hilldodger
    Free Member

    But then who'd believe that over 500,000 people would vote for BNP?

    That is something to get hysterical about….

    druidh
    Free Member

    aracer – Member
    as long we also include all the profits made in the last, say, 20 years up to last year

    I think you'll find those went to shareholders, unlike the debt.

    I think you'll find you're wrong.

    druidh
    Free Member

    uplink – Member
    3rd party squeeze I think.
    I don't think so
    Not bothered counting but they look to have finished 2nd in the majority of seats

    SNP vote is actually up by about the same as the Labour vote in Scotland.

    aracer
    Free Member

    they were both UK-based institutions.

    Like North Sea oil?

    "I think you'll find those went to shareholders, unlike the debt."

    I think you'll find you're wrong.
    Really – what did they do with the profits then? Should we call in the FSA because they weren't doing what private companies are supposed to with the money they make?

    Waderider
    Free Member

    Is this the final end of the union?

    Hopefully, would be nice.

    No point getting into a debate though as I'm not fully informed, but don't let that stop you lot.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    "aracer – Member

    as long we also include all the profits made in the last, say, 20 years up to last year

    I think you'll find those went to shareholders, unlike the debt."

    Even leaving aside income tax, 5 years of UK banking industry taxation more than paid for the bailout.

    I'm always quite amused at hearing HBOS described as a "scottish bank". I know yorkshire wishes it was in scotland but it's not really.

Viewing 29 posts - 1 through 29 (of 29 total)

The topic ‘West Lothian question reversed?’ is closed to new replies.