Rather sensational own goal by SNP leadership removing Joanna Cherry from the SNP front bench at Westminster. She was by far their best asset there. Presumably her long standing position as a Salmond ally, her vocal advocacy for women's rights above trans rights and her criticism of the slow path to Indy were too much for the Murrell's. She may get her revenge in the long run....
The SNP has been in power for a long time. The infighting that always goes on behind the scenes has now bubbled out into the public area. Getting rid of good politicians is just another step. As the party leadership tries to suppress the any criticism of what they are doing.
A cynic might think that the push to raise the profile of Indyref 2 has less to do with it being wanted and more to do with trying to create news to deflect from the infighting. Perhaps also to deflect from the news about the slow rollout of the vaccine compared to the other parts of the UK.
If you look at political leaders, not many survive at the top for 10 years, you sense a change is coming and then we shall really see the knives out as the factions start to gain control.
(see Conservatives post Thatcher, Labour post Brown Liberals post anyone of their leaders. Even the Greens had their public squabbles.)
The SNP has been in power for a long time. The infighting that always goes on behind the scenes has now bubbled out into the public area. Getting rid of good politicians is just another step. As the party leadership tries to suppress the any criticism of what they are doing.
A cynic might think that the push to raise the profile of Indyref 2 has less to do with it being wanted and more to do with trying to create news to deflect from the infighting. Perhaps also to deflect from the news about the slow rollout of the vaccine compared to the other parts of the UK.
I'm not sure you can accuse the SNP leadership of doing that.
If you have a cause to fight, a desire to change the world, then it makes most sense to do that within politics and it's then natural to want to be in a position to do something about it - ideally in Government. By their very success, the SNP are attracting all sorts of folk who actually have very little desire for independence, their priorities lie elsewhere. To many, that looks like the SNP are no longer really fighting for independence at all. The argument is thay "well, vote SNP, get independence and then we'll vote for the folk/party we really want" (it's been repeated several times in this very thread). Well, these folk are equally able to recognise that's what would happen and many would therefore be happy to never have a referendum, to actually have a minority SNP government or at least a range of seats in Holyrood that would be less than a total mandate for a referendum.
Nicola Sturgeon now looks like a totally weak leader. She has been unable to stop the infighting and, indeed, has been pouring fuel on the fire herself. This wasn't a time to be "taking sides" it was a time for a calm head. As the two inquiries into the SCotGov/Sturgeon handling of the Salmond affair drag on, her position looks increasingly murky. Peter Murrell now refusing to attend the current inquiry doesn't look good either.
sadmadalan
A cynic might think that the push to raise the profile of Indyref 2 has less to do with it being wanted
why? do you think the last 10 or 15 polls have been manipulated?
sadmadalan
Full Member
Perhaps also to deflect from the news about the slow rollout of the vaccine compared to the other parts of the UK.
It's no particularly slow, it's a wee bit behind at the minute, long way to go though.
It’s no particularly slow, it’s a wee bit behind at the minute, long way to go though.
A healthcare professional and prolific poster on here accused those managing the vaccinations in England of going for numbers and ignoring clinical need by not doing care homes first. The obvious implications were that England was going for crowd pleasing numbers and Scotland cared more about it's people.
I'm sure Scotland is working hard, logistics in these situations are always difficult, it's very unlikely to be a political issue just lots of people trying to do their best. Just as in the other parts of the UK.
Nicola Sturgeon now looks like a totally weak leader. She has been unable to stop the infighting and, indeed, has been pouring fuel on the fire herself. This wasn’t a time to be “taking sides” it was a time for a calm head. As the two inquiries into the SCotGov/Sturgeon handling of the Salmond affair drag on, her position looks increasingly murky.
I'm inclined to agree, and it doesn't matter if there's anything to hide the unionists/media have now found a crack that they might be able to drive a wedge into. Even if she comes out exonerated they'll not let it go, and more than Salmond's supporters will. HOWEVER:
Rather sensational own goal by SNP leadership removing Joanna Cherry from the SNP front bench at Westminster
Not sure about that! Cherry is a prominent, vocal, articulate but highly divisive character. And I'm not talking about trans rights or internal party politics - I just mean her style comes across as "I know better, listen to me, I don't need to listen to you" and that doesn't resonate well will the "maybe" voters. Salmond was the same. Great for drumming up core support but could really grate, and it becomes about them not the policy.
big_n_daft
Free Member
It’s no particularly slow, it’s a wee bit behind at the minute, long way to go though.A healthcare professional and prolific poster on here accused those managing the vaccinations in England of going for numbers and ignoring clinical need by not doing care homes first. The obvious implications were that England was going for crowd pleasing numbers and Scotland cared more about it’s people.
I’m sure Scotland is working hard, logistics in these situations are always difficult, it’s very unlikely to be a political issue just lots of people trying to do their best. Just as in the other parts of the UK.
Posted 6 hours ago
Yeah there's no political capital in anyone in the UK going slow with vaccinations. It does none of them in any of the nation's any good to go slow about it. So on that basis. I tend to think most are doing their best. Plus as I've mentioned we just need to look at the worldwide context. We are well on our way.
I just canny see how sniping about a few percent here and there or what amounts to, at the minute, a 5 day difference is particularly helpful to anyone(part from those looking to gain political points), neither is it particular slow.
All we are seeing is mildly different approaches and logistical challenges. We'll all get there or there abouts at the same time. If there's a week or 2 difference at the end up who cares. They are also systems getting put in place that will likely be used year on year.
Far as I can tell there very little cause to complain about the vaccines so far. It's the one thing they seem to have got right in this whole shit show(well in lieu of questions about Sharing supply equitably world wide but that's a whole other argument)
Nicola Sturgeon now looks like a totally weak leader. She has been unable to stop the infighting and, indeed, has been pouring fuel on the fire herself
Disagree, it's been blown out of all proportion (by interested parties). Give it a week/month and no one will remember it even occurred.
(well in lieu of questions about Sharing supply equitably world wide but that’s a whole other argument)
It's good to see you recognise that. If scottish voices say it rather than the English "our contract trumps your contract so there" it demonstrates a willingness to be part of the world order rather than an isolated island. The vaccine attitude will do as much harm to England as Brexit itself if people could but see it. The industrial strategy of European business will adapt.
Cherry is a prominent, vocal, articulate but highly divisive character. And I’m not talking about trans rights or internal party politics – I just mean her style comes across as “I know better, listen to me, I don’t need to listen to you” and that doesn’t resonate well will the “maybe” voters.
👆 definitely this.
Nicola Sturgeon now looks like a totally weak leader. She has been unable to stop the infighting and, indeed, has been pouring fuel on the fire herself
Dunno if I'd agree, the infighting is always going to happen, twas ever thus - look at every other party and it's there, indeed it was infighting in the Tory party that took us out of the EU.
The Salmond issue hasn't been the feeding frenzy the anti-SNP folks thought it would, it'll keep bubbling away, but will it come to much?.
Poly is spot on about Cherry and Salmond tbh.
I just canny see how sniping about a few percent here and there or what amounts to, at the minute, a 5 day difference is particularly helpful to anyone(part from those looking to gain political points), neither is it particular slow.
All we are seeing is mildly different approaches and logistical challenges. We’ll all get there or there abouts at the same time. If there’s a week or 2 difference at the end up who cares. They are also systems getting put in place that will likely be used year on year.
I'll be devils advocate. Do you believe if Scotland was number 1, the SNP wouldn't make sure everybody was aware of it? Although that would be admitting that the UK's vaccine purchasing strategy was incredibly successful, so who knows...
baboonz
I’ll be devils advocate. Do you believe if Scotland was number 1, the SNP wouldn’t make sure everybody was aware of it? Although that would be admitting that the UK’s vaccine purchasing strategy was incredibly successful, so who knows…
They more than likely would aye, sturgeon does like her subtle wee hints that scotland is doing a wee bit better than england, no doubt I'd say. It'd be equal bullshit though.
Same as scotland doing a wee bit better in infection rates and deaths and comparing, sorry nicola but it's still honking what ever way we look at it.
Edukator
Free MemberIt’s good to see you recognise that. If scottish voices say it rather than the English “our contract trumps your contract so there” it demonstrates a willingness to be part of the world order rather than an isolated island. The vaccine attitude will do as much harm to England as Brexit itself if people could but see it. The industrial strategy of European business will adapt.
Yeah, I stuck a thread up about it on here, I would look at a more equitable share, particularly once the over 50s and vulnerable are done. but tbh I don't really see it happening, the UK will go full steam ahead with vaccinating the whole population I think. The politics domestically outweigh any international concerns though is really the only conclusion you can come to there.
in fairness to the uk they, they haven't been shy in funding for vaccine development and will more than likely continue to help fund the likes of the WHO and COVAX etc, but vaccinating the domestic population will take priority I think.
Ultimately though, I think this whole vaccine issue is going to be a longer running issue, so the fact of who gets there first in general is a bit moot, because the goal isn't to vaccinated 1 country and that's it. The goal is to vaccinate all countries every year or every couple of year, depending on what will be needed. So for that the world needs much more robust systems in place.
So really the initial race is a bit of an irrelevance to the ultimate goal.
Hmm, as with any story, look beyond the headline and the reporting...
Headline:
Independence could cost Scotland's economy £11bn a year, forecast suggests
Economists say impact of leaving UK’s common market would hit two to three times as hard as leaving EU
Within the story:
Suggesting that the worst economic effects would take several decades to take hold, the LSE’s Centre for Economic Performance said the impacts on its trade with both the UK and the EU would shrink Scotland’s economy in the long run by between 6.3% and 8.7%.
Now lets look at the data:
The analysis leads to two main conclusions. First, the negative impact of independence on
Scotland’s economy is two to three times greater than the costs of Brexit. As shown in Figure
1, we estimate that Brexit reduces Scotland’s long-run income per capita by 2.0%. By contrast,
the combination of Brexit and independence reduces Scottish income per capita by between
6.3% and 8.7% depending upon whether border costs are low or high and whether Scotland
rejoins the EU. Independence hits Scotland’s economy harder than Brexit primarily because
Scottish trade with the rest of the UK is four times larger than its trade with the EU
Both the UK and Scottish Govt's forecast Brexit at a 6% hit on the Scottish economy, so either they're both way out and it's "only" 2% or someone is trying to hide the cost of Brexit within independence OR the worse case, the report authors have missed the additional 4% hit.
Or am I reading this wrong?
Given that brexit has happened. I personally can't see Scotland, when the time comes, prioritising rejoining the EU over negotiating issues on this island first.
Guess it'll all depend on London's attitude when it comes to negotiating mind.
Most of the folk saying Scotland can't make it are regurgitating BritNat bilge like this.
I saw and heard similar stuff when I lived in the East African colonies* about them during their independence campaigns. It's from the same playbook.
It was first used during the American Revolution, and it's almost the same words. (I'll try and find the quote, it's a long time since I've seen it)
I wonder if there's an old Colonial Office handbook somewhere that prescribes the wording and the superior honeyed tones in which to make such pronouncements.
*And before any BritNats start wittering on about the African economies, what really matters is not one of them wants British rule again, no matter how dire things are there.
I can safely bet you haven’t read the book, nor have 99.99% of the electorate
I'm still waiting big & daft.
Just because I NOW live in the Borders doesn't mean I'm just some rural cousin who hasn't been, seen & done it.
+1 epicyclo
Just had a conversation on Twitter:
Them:
Scotland are tragically poor under the SNP.
Me:
GDP per Capita
UK - £31,900
Scotland - £32,800
Seems someone is dragging the UK down, and it ain't us.
Them:
Yes, the UK businesses in Scotland boost your economy significantly. That's as long as you remain part of the UK of course. Otherwise they'll move south...
Summary
I CBA to go any further with the conversation, but, according to the above 'theory' if we left the UK then they'd take all their jobs that they pay us more to do than it'd cost them to do them themselves.
I’m still waiting big & daft.
Just because I NOW live in the Borders doesn’t mean I’m just some rural cousin who hasn’t been, seen & done it.
I'm dutifully surprised that you read it, but as a former/ current wonk I'm sure you can give a better précis than a review by a labour MP. What are the basic arguments from your "seen it, done it" perspective?
Why do you think politicians write these books? The sales must be tiny so who reads them and why? Then why do they move on from them when they are in office and can implement their radical agenda?
GDP per Capita
UK – £31,900
Scotland – £32,800
Seems someone is dragging the UK down, and it ain’t us.
Remind me, what's the Barnett formula differential and what is it's influence on GDP of the individual nations?
Most of the folk saying Scotland can’t make it are regurgitating BritNat bilge like this.
On here no-one is saying Scotland can't be independent, so why are you saying they are?
Has anyone on here used "BritNat bilge", what was it they said?
So you think the Barnett formula is boosting the Scottish GDP? Presumably you can explain the lack of correlation between Barnett and GDP in other nations and at other times?
So you think the Barnett formula is boosting the Scottish GDP? Presumably you can explain the lack of correlation between Barnett and GDP in other nations and at other times?
Are you saying it doesn't?
Are you ignoring the issues for the other nations as a fig leaf to say there is no link between public spending and GDP?
Why do you think politicians write these books? The sales must be tiny so who reads them and why? Then why do they move on from them when they are in office and can implement their radical agenda?
I'll come back to your first question, but for the above in a nutshell, to get noticed.
And it worked as they're all Ministers and now able to both feast from the trough AND get their backers (with the shovels) to the trough.
The Formula for Expenditure GDP
GDP=C+I+G+(X−M)
where:
C=Consumer spending on goods and services
I=Investor spending on business capital goods
G=Government spending on public goods and services
X=exports
M=imports
I’ll come back to your first question, but for the above in a nutshell, to get noticed.
By who and why? Do you not think it is essentially long form click bait by being "radical".
And it worked as they’re all Ministers and now able to both feast from the trough AND get their backers (with the shovels) to the trough.
Does this not apply to all political parties? Is any party immune to grifters and the influence of their backers?
George Monbiot putting my local MP Andrew Bowie to the sword on the BBC of all places was glorious viewing.
big_n_daft
...Has anyone on here used “BritNat bilge”,
Yes most of the objections on here are are just that, including yours.
All variations of that Malta crap.
Here's what others are saying:
India in 1946 was told that its economy would collapse without British administration and logistical knowledge - while we plundered its riches.
The Sunday Times reported in 1962 that ‘Singapore can’t go it alone. Succession futile .. Face this fact of life says Siew Sin’ .
The Times reported in 1959 that ‘Malta could not live on its own .. the island could only pay for one fifth of her food and essential imports; well over of a quarter of the present labour force would be out of work and the economy of the country would collapse without British treasury subventions. Talk of full independence for Malta is therefore hopelessly impractical’.
Of the 59 Nations that have left British rule from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe guess how many have rejoined after leaving?
Not one..
(I'm still trying to find that same jeremaiad that was first used about American independence, but it's basically the same anyway)
It's the same sad song played by Westminster and its placemen, over and over and over again.
To our eternal shame it's only now the majority of Scots are realising what the old colonies realised generations ago.
If only we had an independent media...
You got any sources for those?
It seems like it’d be legit. But some proof would be nice once in a while rather.
Yes most of the objections on here are are just that, including yours.
All variations of that Malta crap.
Nope, you will need to quote me and because I don't see it. What I do see is the well trodden path of manufactured grievance we had in the Brexit debate.
If you think pointing out that taking a "transitional pound" into "virtually instant" EU membership is a bit of a unicorn or that there isn't a scenario on the table that doesn't see a EU imposed border between iS and rUK is similar to the arguments in 1954 for Malta then you might as well go back to your fixation with Scotland being "occupied" by rUK or Westminster or whomever you blame
Also can you go round to Gordon Brown's house and call him a "Westminster placeman", ideally get a mate to video the encounter, should go viral.
If only we had an independent media…
Let me guess, it's all run by a cabal in Westminster? Not one single independent voice to counter the lines cooked up in some club in Pall Mall
epicyclo
Full Member
big_n_daft
…Has anyone on here used “BritNat bilge”,Yes most of the objections on here are are just that, including yours.
Infairness to bnd. He's not saying Scotland can't be independent at all. He admitted it can on multiple occasions. You're really just trying to project what you want him to say.
Like it or not he has some valid arguments. Some he knows can't be answered definitively mind you cause they are political choices. And others like a fast track EU entry. Which I agree with him on tbh. It'll take longer than people think. And shouldn't be fast tracked anyhow. It's a decision that needs careful consideration.
If Scotland did not get back into the EU it would not be a dealbreaker for me (we wouldn't know until after we split from the UK anyway) I am personally fed up with decisions being taken in Westminster that go against what is beneficial for Scotland (Brexit being the prime example of this) The tories seem to be in power in the UK for the forseeable (and they don't like the Scots or the working class ) so for me it is a no brainer.
Big and daft is still just trolling folks
Big and daft is still just trolling folks
As someone said on another thread, disagreeing with someone is not trolling. This is the same nonsense that everyone foisted on THM, I never agreed on him but the crap slung at him was unfair.
Its not the disagreeing. Its the false claims ( Indyref is like brexit) its the constant sneering tone, its the continual asking of questions that are unanswerable at this point. Its the pejorative terms he uses
He spent two pages attempting to rile me with slurs. don't be taken in. Its trolling pure and simple
He spent two pages attempting to rile me with slurs.
I'm sure you have been upset at me for longer than that.
Other than an impolite comparison to a Scottish politician now residing in England and the similarities with your strident views as an Englishman in Scotland which I decided not to repeat I'm not sure what other grievance you have.
Its the false claims ( Indyref is like brexit)
If you can’t can’t see there are distinct parallels to drawn between the two them then, what’s that saying again, those who ignore history are destined to repeat it, something like that anyway. The answer to the problem is to exit an economic and political union with the neighbours and main trading partners... yes, sound familiar? And all the promises made, that went well? That Scotland actually may not be welcomed back into the EU arms 5 minutes after we’ve gone indy is something that needs to be understood and properly planned for. Disengagement from rUK will not happen overnight and further divergence will occur in the meantime.
It might be that a ‘Norway type solution’ is be the best we can hope for in the medium term.
Post independence are we going to have another plebiscite to determine whether we re-enter the EU (seems this is how questions of political union are determined)? Populations have a habit of voting for mutually opposed things (cf Switzerland)...
Ignoring this would be a repeat of the Brexit cake and eat it.
On the plus side, the EU distribution routes with Ireland should be well established by then and we shouldn’t have the issues they have with goods travelling through a third country.... the Boris Bridge might even be up and running by then too 😂🤣🤣
Boris tunnel back on apparently - in the process of trying to create unity in Ireland, but likely to fail miserably simply due to demographics and at the same time creating a solution for the England - Scotland border.
The Conservatives also appear to be busy in putting their oar into the Alex Salmond enquiry via the Spectator. 'Foreign' media meddling in the politics of another country never really goes down well.
The Conservatives also appear to be busy in putting their oar into the Alex Salmond enquiry via the Spectator. ‘Foreign’ media meddling in the politics of another country never really goes down well.
Like this you mean?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56028750
Continued allegations after someone has been cleared of all charges should result in a waive of anonymity for the accuser.
@metalheart No one seriously claimed that re-entry to the EU would be without difficulty. What they did dispute is the notion that there is a queue.
And all the promises made, that went well?
Well we didn't win so we'll never know about that, unless we do win in the future. Although you could equally apply that to the BetterTogether campaign and the so called vow.
"We love you Scotland" they said now we've got sources in number ten likening the SNP to the Viet Cong. FFS
Continued allegations after someone has been cleared of all charges should result in a waive of anonymity for the accuser.
I'm not defending Salmond, but the suggestion that the FM was somehow involved in the failure of the apparatus of Scottish Government to conduct an inquiry correctly is somehow the fault of the FM is stretching credulity - but any sniff of the opportunity to smear her is jumped on by most including the BBC.
Meanwhile, Boris and chums continue to stuff billions into the pockets of their donors and deflects attention with stories about vaccines and creating 'talking points' about holidays abroad whilst the UK hospitality industry crumbles...
The Conservatives also appear to be busy in putting their oar into the Alex Salmond enquiry via the Spectator. ‘Foreign’ media meddling in the politics of another country never really goes down well.
Seeing as the Spectator (a UK magazine) employs some respected Scottish journalists and has a Scottish Chairman I'm not sure how much traction you can get with it as foreign media.
Obviously the various SNP bigwigs with RT shows were nothing of the sort. Merely by Scots for the people of Scotland
