[Closed] rUK

Tony Blair would have won without Scotland.

Without Scotland, Labour would still have won in 1997 (with a majority of 139, down from 179), in 2001 (129, down from 167) and in 2005 (43, down from 66).

But labour will lose 41 MPs while conservative will lose 1. So it will be a helping hand for the conservatives, but not an impossible advantage.

I might be being thick but what is the 'r' in rUK?

Nope. Did England not have the chance to go down the same road is devolution. But was more or less rejected was it not? 70 or 80? so the gave up trying it elsewhere.

the corollary, molly, is the West Lothian question disappears - a truly undemocratic phenomenon. Scottish MPs should be shamed that the issue even exists and that they never created a convention of abstention on English bills.

That the "North & Wales" end up being governed by a Tory government is not a new thing, nor is it to be taken as read. Have you not thought that non-Tory politics (or even Tory politics) will develop over time to reflect the new demographic of the electorate? Politics never stands still.

rUK = rest of the UK. Wikipedia says that it's a term that originated in Scotland [url= http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_of_the_United_Kingdom ]link[/url]

A slight twinge of guilt, yes - but it's England that's changed, not Scotland.

I hope that Scottish independence gives the rUK Labour Party a kick up the arse - they get rid of that wet shite with the whiny voice, grow some backbone, and say that they're not playing the Tory-lite game any more.

Sadly, I don't think that'll happen, and if it does they'll just lose.

Are Labour actually left wing now?

It would enable a new centre right party to rise in Scotland, which would clean up - it being the Tory party that is the problem for most Scots, not conservative values and ideas. So win win for conservatives both sides.

Are Labour actually left wing now?

No, but this vote isn't about NOW, it's about the next few hundred years at least. I hope people remember this.

A slight twinge of guilt, yes - but it's England that's changed, not Scotland.

Yes. But Wales hasn't. I'm writing this from Wales.

I'd love to think that we'd get political reform in rUK but that's just a pipe dream isn't it? Why would the ruling party change anything?

ruling

I think you meant to say "democratically elected party of government" there Molly.

And as you say, why would they change anything. Should they need to if their policies get them elected?

Your chip is showing.

Wales and the North will become part of a right-wing led country forever, despite being very much left-wing (I dunno about the political makeup of NI).

I'm afraid that isn't correct. Scottish MPs have never held the balance of power in Westminster. Whenever there has been a Labour government they had a majority of seats in England.

the corollary, molly, is the West Lothian question disappears - a truly undemocratic phenomenon. Scottish MPs should be shamed that the issue even exists and that they never created a convention of abstention on English bills.

The west lothian quesiton is little more than political onanism. You are right of course that is should have been sorted out but since the balance of power is not and never has been held by Scottish MPs its influence is blown up out of all proportion to the reality of the situation.

Yes. But Wales hasn't. I'm writing this from Wales.

Yeah, sorry. You and the North of England are being overwhelmed by the Tory heartlands. I don't know what you can so about that - you'd be welcome in an independent Scotland of course.

I think you meant to say "democratically elected party of government" there Molly.

The UK hasn't had a democratically elected government in my lifetime, perhaps longer - it's a broken system where the votes of a few undecided voters in a few marginal constituencies decide the whole thing.

Scotland will not vote for independence. Bet the farm.

you'd be welcome in an independent Scotland of course.

So wait - Scots get to be defiantly independently Scottish, but the Welsh have to abandon their nationality? Ok great 🙂

The UK hasn't had a democratically elected government in my lifetime

It has. The system may not always represent the majority of the population, but that doesn't mean it's not democratic - just that it's not representative. But I think most governments are majority govts aren't they? In that the percentage of the total vote matches the outcome? Happy to be proved wrong with stats though as I CBA to google that.

ben - if it's FPTP you're griping about then I concur. But if it's just because you dont like being led by a party in government that won more of the popular vote than any other party and it's the wrong colour for you then it's tough titties. It's still democracy. It's one of many kinds of democracy. It might not be your favourite but it's anything but un-democratic.

2010 Conservative government (in coalition), Conservative party highest popular share of vote
2005 Labour government, Labour party highest share of popular vote
etc etc as you go back.

Are Labour actually left wing now?

I think they're trying Tory-lite right now, only with de-emphasis on the 'lite' bit.....

But I think most governments are majority govts aren't they? In that the percentage of the total vote matches the outcome?

In the UK so called "landslide" election victories are won with around 40% of the popular vote. 1997 was 43% labour, 1979 was 43.9 Conservative with 1983 42.4 (crucially the conservative majority went up in 1983).

http://www.ukpolitical.info/Historical.htm

gonefishin - actually the scottish labour MPs held the balance of power in at least two key votes of recent years: the formation of NHS foundation hospitals and more newsworthy, University fees for English students. There may be only few cases of it having an effect, but it shouldnt happen at all. Especially in the hypocritical case of tuition fees.

Stoner - Member
ben - if it's FPTP you're griping about then I concur. But if it's just because you dont like being led by a party in government that won more of the popular vote than any other party and it's the wrong colour for you then it's tough titties. It's still democracy. It's one of many kinds of democracy. It might not be your favourite but it's anything but un-democratic.

all I want to know is once this vote business is all over

will we have no more freakin threads about independence on here and can get back to more mature debates about wheelsize and hopevshimano brakes etc

YEAH!! AND THESE!!!

[img] [/img]

kimbers - Member

hopevshimano brakes

Clearly Hope for hubs, Shimano for everything else.

Mr Woppit - Member

YEAH!! AND THESE!!!

forking hell not again 😆

I don't like rUK.
We will still be a UK of England,northern Ireland,Wales,Cornwall

All this voting seems a bit soft. Should Scotland have to fight for their FREEEEEEEDDDDOOOOOM?

So long as we move the Scottish border to somewhere around Wolverhampton, they get my full support.

and to which I will add, you don't like it? Do something about it. Get involved in politics

It's not particularly easy is it? The system is set up to make it hard to change I think.

But the West Lothian question is a serious issue. In much the same way as my friends north of the border complain (justifiably) that they were used as the guinea pig for the "poll tax", they're elected representatives were equally responsible for forcing the tripling of tuition fees on English students. They were able to do this safe in the knowledge that this unfair tax on the young (who unfortunately for them don't vote so are an easy target unlike pensioners) would not affect their own constituents.

They should hang their heads in shame...

but they're politicians so they probably celebrated with another bottle of Dom Perignon on expenses!

INDEPENDENCE FOR YORKSHIRE

It would enable a new centre right party to rise in Scotland, which would clean up

I agree with this.

There seems to be an assumption that the Scots will elect a left wing government and create their workers utopia.

My bet is the political landscape will change completely on independence and once free of the UK Tories, the centre right will benefit.

the corollary, molly, is the West Lothian question disappears - a truly undemocratic phenomenon. Scottish MPs should be shamed that the issue even exists and that they never created a convention of abstention on English bills.

PS

it's tough titties. It's still democracy. It's one of many kinds of democracy. It might not be your favourite but it's anything but un-democratic.

Its either tough titties or we can moan and try to change /adapt it to make it fairer. I lean towards the later

There may be only few cases of it having an effect, but it shouldnt happen at all.

Its like the way Boris moans about union vote turnouts when he was elected with a similar piss poor turnout but he says nothing about that in terms of his mandate. The current Union does indeed have anomalies and it may be worth , if the union stays, trying to remove these for both the west lothian issue and the Toryshire issue

I would imagine there will some moves for greater independence in the North tbh and a risk of North /South split as it is clear that South is more Tory than the North and they outnumber us if there is independence

molgrips - Member

and to which I will add, you don't like it? Do something about it. Get involved in politics

It's not particularly easy is it? The system is set up to make it hard to change I think.

Yet every single non [s]Labour[/s] [b]Conservative[/b] govt [ since is it 1925?] is an example of this happening in [s]Scotland[/s] [b]Rural Constituencies[/b] - [b]Towny Labour[/b] MPs ruling them

Until Scotland secede/fully devolve etc, they are part of the UK electorate. Like any other constituency they are bound by the government of their constituency whether they like it or not. Much as any Shire in England (and even some in Wales Molly 😉 ) has to take it on the chin when a Labour government is running the show.

[img] [/img]

Bitching about your constituency being governed by the wrong colour can be taken down to individual parishes if you like. It's a straw man argument.

The West Lothian question is an issue of constituency representation having law making influence over other constituencies that did not apply to their own.

EDIT: and Junky, it's not so much a North/South thing as a Towny/Rural thing. As our dear departed King of Tower Hamlets would attest to.

EDIT 2: At least the Tories can take some comfort that any inroads the LibDems have made into the shires over recent years will come undone next year. I wonder just how much yellow we'll see on that map in 2015 😉

INDEPENDENCE FOR YORKSHIRE

Speaking on behalf of Lancashire, I'd wholeheartedly back this proposal too.

no chance Cougar.
The two counties can be tied together by the wrist and given a knife each. Now that's government! 🙂

not so much the system more apathy.

Not entirely. Because it's so hard to get involved, people can't find the time to devote to it. I'm certainly pretty busy currently.

[img] [/img]

Stoner - Member

The West Lothian question is an issue of constituency representation having law making influence over other constituencies that did not apply to their own.

Nope, it's an issue of making local law and policy in the national government. Which has an obvious solution which doesn't involve blaming the Scots for a problem other regions have.

I don't like "whatabout" but it's hard to feel Scotland has undue influence against a background of a Tory government elected only in England.

(yes yes, it's a coalition allegedly, but a difference that makes no difference is no difference)

Bitching about your constituency being governed by the wrong colour can be taken down to individual parishes if you like. It's a straw man argument.

Straw man is harsh tbh. Yes they are not identical but they are not that different as neither has a mandate and both are "foreigners" legislating to their country

The West Lothian question is an issue of constituency representation having law making influence over other constituencies that did not apply to their own.

Yes they are different and that may be more unfair but neither is fair nor can either be considered to be great example of representative govt

EDIT: and Junky, it's not so much a North/South thing as a Towny/Rural thing. As our dear departed King of Tower Hamlets would attest to.

AH in that case **** em 😉

Fair point that one tbh

Yes they are not identical but they are not that different as neither has a mandate and both are "foreigners" legislating to their country

They aren't foreigners, they are British.....

Which has an obvious [b]and expensive[/b] solution

i.e. English parliament

or a cheap one: Voluntary moratorium on English bill votes by Scottish MPs. It's hardly onerous. And as above, the fact that there's currently a Tory-ish UK government is as relevant as there being a Labour government to the Shires.

They aren't foreigners, they are British

Voluntary moratorium on English bill votes by Scottish MPs. It's hardly onerous.

And as above, the fact that there's currently a Tory-ish UK government is as relevant as there being a Labour government to the Shires.

Stoner - Member

or a cheap one: Voluntary moratorium on English bill votes by Scottish MPs.

Which will last until some unscrupulous party (ie, all of them) wants to win a crux vote. Gentleman's rules don't even work for gentlemen never mind scoundrels.

The national scene is absolutely relevant; it's inevitable that the largest region has the political clout, it's just churlish for them to complain about the rare occasions they don't get it completely their way.

As our dear departed King of Tower Hamlets would attest to.

He's not that far away, you know. Visiting hours are unrestricted...

INDEPENDENCE FROM YORKSHIRE

As the UK isn't in a permanently right wing state now...

Oh come now ohnohesback, you have the choice of 4 different Tory parties, how much more democratic do you want it?

[i]As the UK isn't in a permanently right wing state now...[/i]

It feels like it though. Where's my left wing party that I can vote for?

Just like I have a choice of local radio stations; all playing much the same music.

Except Scotland is a country and the shires arent.

All you are arguing there is "how big does my constituency need to be to be able to have a legitimate whine about things"

That Scotland is a country is irrelevant while governed under the UK.

The People's Republic of Worcestershire on the other hand is has every right to be aggrieved!

"Every nation gets the government it deserves."
Joseph de Maistre 1811

All you are arguing there is "how big does my constituency need to be to be able to have a legitimate whine about things"

[s]That Scotland is a country is irrelevant while governed under the UK.[/s]The west lothian issue is irrelevant whilst governed under the UK

its not a great argument is it ? It is irrelevant as it is what happens

you were earlier arguing that simply being "northern" was enough to be aggrieved at being governed by the Tory party. Which are we going for then if one constituency is to be treated differently to another? Country? Region? Parish? At what point do you like it or lump it? At what point are you large enough to be allowed to kick up a fuss?

This government doesn't give a shit about the Labour-voting areas of the country. I'm not sure why Stoner seems to think this kind of thing isn't a legitimate grievance:

Britain's 10 worst-off areas will suffer the biggest council cuts – as some rich Tory authorities get budget rises, research shows.

Deprived boroughs in Liverpool, London, Manchester and Middlesbrough, will lose ten times more from the government than the ten richest.

The reason lies in funding formulas used by the Tory-led Government which hits Labour-held areas hardest.

These local authorities will have their budgets slashed by an average 16.9% during this Parliament, but Tory-controlled councils will lose just 6.6% and Lib Dem councils, 7.8%.

But Communities Secretary Eric Pickles is hitting worst-off areas harder.

Liverpool will lose 27.1% in funding from 2010-15, Hackney in London, 27%, Manchester City Council, 26%, Middlesbrough, 24% and Birmingham, 23.3%.

But Tory-run Wokingham, one of the richest areas in England, will get a 1.1% rise and Education Secretary Michael Gove’s council of Surrey Heath will receive a 0.9% increase in funding.

Of the 50 worst-hit councils, 43 are Labour. Of the least-hit 50 councils, 42 are Tory.

Breathtaking cynicism.

emsz - Member
As the UK isn't in a permanently right wing state now...
It feels like it though. Where's my left wing party that I can vote for?

Good point emsz, with all this discontent you would think that there would be demand for a LW party and that it would enjoy overwhelming support. What's stopping it?

I didnt say there wasnt legitimate grievance just that if you argue that it's legitimate for a predominantly non-tory Scotland to complain about being governed by a Tory government, then it is equally legitimate to recognise the concerns of the Labour voter in Hackney or the Tory voter in Woolhope under different coloured governments. The fact that one is a Labour voter, a Tory Parish, or a country makes it any more legitimate than the other

What's stopping it?

Where would it get it's funding from? The unions are increasingly marginalised, and people are generally cynical about politics so I doubt membership fees would cover it.

Unless political parties become publicly funded I doubt we will see a truly left-wing party ever again.

I didnt say there wasnt legitimate grievance just that if you argue that it's legitimate for a predominantly non-tory Scotland to complain about being governed by a Tory government, then it is equally legitimate to recognise the concerns of the Labour voter in Hackney or the Tory voter in Woolhope under different coloured governments. The fact that one is a Labour voter, a Tory Parish, or a country makes it any more legitimate than the other

Maybe in theory, but in practice it does make a difference being a country rather than one person.

emsz - Member
It feels like it though. Where's my left wing party that I can vote for?

Green?

@emz I've long held the view that centre wins UK elections, we had 10 years of a center-ist Labour government. Now we have a coalition. If you want true left wing government have a look at the unfolding disaster in France, massively spiralling government debt, a shrinking economy and the rise of the far right in response.

Can we stop using rUK, it's not hard to see it's a Scottish fabrication, "rest" of the UK what a joke. The fact is England is the largest member of the UK, without Scotland the UK still has it's heart.

I just wonder what the Scots will do if they vote for independence and the UK votes to exit the EU ?

The unions are increasingly marginalised

It's also wrong to conflate Union membership with left wing/labour affiliation.

[img] [/img]

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/09/09/labours-limited-appeal-trade-union-members/

So Grum, that seems to be suggesting that there is not sufficient support to make them viable. Surely not? If all the current parties are as bad as everyone is making out, there must be huge support for something new and better.

jambalaya - Member
@emz I've long held the view that centre wins UK elections

...and arguably the results have been better for that very reason.

I voted for them last time 😆

Can we stop using rUK

It's just a shorthand for "the hypothetical remainder of the UK should Scotland leave". Easier to type.

I might start voting Plaid if the Scots leave.

you were earlier arguing that simply being "northern" was enough to be aggrieved at being governed by the Tory party.

I thought you were discussing Scottish independence, the west lothian issue and why a country was different from a constituency

To clarify

The west lothian question is a legitimate one - though those making it never cared when they ruled scotland without a mandate- neither scenario is fair or just and i dont want to defend either though they both may be "tough titties".
The not wanting to be ruled by tories you did not vote for in a COUNTRY is a legitimate issue
Countries are different from constituencies
Either the country of Scotland can be legitimately annoyed at Tory rule [ non resident MPs deciding] AND the country of england can be annoyed by MP's from others regions deciding its policies {west Lothian] - its the same thing basically its either unfair or tough titties in both cases

you seem to only object to one ...just like all the Tory shires 😉

In much the same way they object to the union they dont dominate and love the one they do.

EDIT:

or a country makes it any more legitimate than the other

Then you are probably alone in not seeing a difference between a constituency and a country.

Countries are different from constituencies

Honest serious question - why?

So Grum, that seems to be suggesting that there is not sufficient support to make them viable. Surely not? If all the current parties are as bad as everyone is making out, there must be huge support for something new and better.

Strangely enough the tax-dodging press barons and corporate financiers who donate vast amounts of money to political parties aren't in favour of a truly left-wing party. I can't imagine why.

Why do you have to deliberately and irritatingly miss the point in such a trolly way - all the bloody time?

None of the political parties would survive/run a campaign on membership fees alone - and a party that isn't seen as 'pro business' won't get the big donations. You are perfectly well aware of this - pretending that you're not to try and score points is a bit pathetic.

What would be popular "left wing" policies in the UK?

Do we re-nationalise the transport system?

Get rid of the contractors supporting the MoD and NHS?

Start building council houses again?

Bring back the closed shop?

Or will this just cause the old problems of demarcation, inflexibility, militant unions, over manning, spiraling costs and a flat economy?

Or were those problems myths created by the tories to justify their privatisation of everything?

Are we too far down the line of the open market to turn back the clock?

How is a constituency different from a country ?

LOL like anyone needs that explaining

What next why is chalk not cheese?
which is my arse and which is my elbow?

I value your contributions but not when you do this

i wont engage when you do this

Doing nothing of the sort Grum. There is a pretty obvious fact out there. Demand for more extreme political parties and views is the minority, IMO that is a good thing. Demand for slightly LW parties is also not that strong it seems hence the shift in party positioning, I expect that this will shit back to an extent in the future.

People can't just whinge because their views are not held by the majority. If there was genuine demand and need for a clearly LW party it would be there. Ditto on the RW. But there isn't, so live with it. Otherwise set it up and we can suck it and see.

It's seems pretty obvious to me that this is exactly what the unions should be doing right now.

re West Lothian question - I always assumed that was "Who the f*** are you lookin at?"

If all the current parties are as bad as everyone is making out, there must be huge support for something new and better.

[url= http://wso.williams.edu/~rcarson/lizards.html ]If you don't vote for a lizard, the wrong lizard might get in.[/url]

This government doesn't give a shit about the Labour-voting areas of the country

Better to re-phrase that as governments only really care about swing voters. Core voters of all parties will always get screwed, as unless the party really messes up core voters vote for you regardless.

^^^ fair point it is the floaters they all want

It's seems pretty obvious to me that this is exactly what the unions should be doing right now.

They did this about 100 years ago and called it the labour party

I can see why they may want to do this but the problem ( as UKIP possibly shows for the right) is that sometimes voting for what you really want lets in what you really dont want

Fracturing the vote on the left will do nothing but help the right

"Every nation gets the government it deserves."
Joseph de Maistre 1811

Emsz party policies

1. Nuclear disarmament
2. More social housing built
3. 50% of women as MPs
4. Re-nationalise water electricity and gas
5. Ban House of Lords
6. Vat free tampons

Other stuff that I haven't thought of yet 😆

If there was genuine demand and need for a clearly LW party it would be there.

Your faith in the system is truly touching.

jambalaya - Member

Can we stop using rUK, it's not hard to see it's a Scottish fabrication

Is it? I first saw it in a Westminster briefing paper, long before I noticed it in the public domain...

Leaving that aside, what better idea do you have? You obviously can't just say "UK"- the UK post independence will still be the UK, but when discussing it now you need to be able to clearly make the distinction between current-UK and post-independence-UK. It was originally used with issues where powers are devolved to Scotland or where a different policy applies here, because it's much easier to say than "England, Wales and Northern Ireland"

@Northwind - I take your point (I saw on here it was first coined in Scotland but appreciate STW isn't the Oracle) but I prefer to call it the UK which is what it will be known as ex Scotland. I think the context of the conversation means it will be clear we are talking about ex Scotland.

As for the original question, the devolution of Scotland will give the right an advantage in elections but not a material one. I don't see it leading to a permanent right wing government. I'll say again Blair won by ceasing the centre ground, a move further left by Labour as "anti-Tory" will see them slip further behind.

Is it? I first saw it in a Westminster briefing paper, long before I noticed it in the public domain...

Pretty sure something similar appeared in a mid to late 80s edition of Judge Dredd

prefer to call it the UK which is what it will be known as ex Scotland

It simply can't be - there are only two Kingdoms in the UK (apologies to Fifers) - Scotland and England, you can't have a united Kingdom with only one.