Scotland Indyref 2

On the contrary ninfan . The mull of Kintyre is still there, you just have to peer through the mist rolling in from the sea. Next you 'll be telling me tony blair realigned the border between Scotland and England in the north sea, just before the Scottish parliament opened.

[i]The cost of running Westminster doesn't even seem to appear in those figures, I presume it is too small - a quick google suggests the pro-rata cost to you is ~£50m a year so pretty much irrelevant. [/I]

We'll save £50m just not having to cover the cost of the MP's, so I'm sure there'll be more.

Just as I have every confidence England's economy will adjust to cope with Brexit, there will be winners and losers, so will Scotland's to cope with Scoxit.

A period of adjustment is a small price to pay for self-determination. Shame you lot will still be still saddled with the real problem though - an entrenched undemocratic ruling elite.

A period of adjustment is a small price to pay for self-determination. Shame you lot will still be still saddled with the real problem though - an entrenched undemocratic ruling elite.

Sounds v like the lament of folk living in Shetland and Orkney saddled with an entrenched ruling elite of the central belt

Joking aside ninfan's chart is the only one that matters, in a national referendum the nation voted Leave.
Boarding you had two years to argue the scenario of a Brexit. 2012-4 was the time to discuss that. The ship has saiked and the Fat Lady is clearing her throat

err.... my nation voted remain

teamhurtmore - Member
Sounds v like the lament of folk living in Shetland and Orkney saddled with an entrenched ruling elite of the central belt

Really, there's a House of Lords in Scotland? Permanently in power and not having to face re-election every few years?

Damn, you'd think I'd have noticed...

Oh, it's the HoL again. Remind me what direct effect the existence of the HoL has had on your life?

[quote=b r ]We'll save £50m just not having to cover the cost of the MP's, so I'm sure there'll be more.

Your MPs cost almost £1m each? 😯 No wonder you're upset, the English ones are a lot cheaper than that.

Typical selfish Scotlandshire, want another referendum when we are still waiting for the "Free Yorkshire" (it better be cheap) vote. If them northern Britains actually had anything about em an SNP weren't just keeping themselves in power with promises of "Freeeeeedom", they'd declare UDI.

I bet MPs don't cost much less than £1m pa, if you add up all their costs and the costs associated with them.

Sure, if you include all the costs of running parliament including the HoL, the total cost of your MPs is ~£50m as I mentioned before.

You could always try getting some facts to support your arguments rather than just speculating. It's not that hard to find out the total cost of running Westminster. Though I suppose the facts probably don't support the argument you're trying to make.

Damn, you'd think I'd have noticed...

You only have to open your eyes, but bravo for the swerve. Strachan would have been proud of that.

But lets consider

1. How many local authorities are there in Scoltand? How many of them voted YES? How many NOs had a higher percentage NO that the highsst Yes (Dundee)?

2. How representative are the current cabinet in Scoltand? Of the ten ministers how many come from one University (not Oxford this time)? Which one is it?

3. How do those in the Notth - lets say the Islands - feel about the Central Belt representing their interests?

Is Scotland really that different - scale aside?

How much have the Scottish Mps cost to date including their palace?

If the posters above who have argued that Scottish MPs have no control over any levers of relevance to the country and the economy are correct, then Scottish MPs would be very expensive indeed. Some might argue a folly......

I worked it out because I was curious - universities of the Scottish cabinet:

Nicola Sturgeon: Glasgow
John Swinney: Edinburgh
Derek Mackay: Glasgow - did not finish
Shona Robison: Glasgow
Roseanna Cunningham: Edinburgh & Aberdeen
Fiona Hyslop: Glasgow
Angela Constance: Glasgow
Michael Mathewson: Open University (and QM College, Edinburgh)
Keith Brown: Dundee
Fergus Ewing: Glasgow

mt - Member
...If them northern Britains actually had anything about em an SNP weren't just keeping themselves in power with promises of "Freeeeeedom", they'd declare UDI.

There's a growing movement outwith the SNP for just that. It's probably the SNP's biggest problem, trying to convince the more radical independence movements to keep their powder dry.

aracer - Member
Oh, it's the HoL again. Remind me what direct effect the existence of the HoL has had on your life?

Perhaps you could also explain why that should be growing when the govt intends reducing the number of elected members in the lower house to save money.

I think it is wrong that the unelected HoL can remove powers from the Scottish Parliament without debate or consultation.
http://www.scottishenergynews.com/lords-axe-holyroods-power-over-scottish-renewables/

Remind me of the democratic benefits of having an unelected upper house that consists of aristos, Church of England bishops, and appointed members.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4616356.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7666022.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34631156

And one can only imagine how you'll change your tune and be jumping up and down cheering them on if they try and block Brexit too 😉

it's the HoL again. Remind me what direct effect the existence of the HoL has had on your life?

You usually make much better points than this

I think we all know the HoL is the least powerful of the two chambers but it is indefinable - not least because of the method by which they are appointed. A credible argument can be made for independent - like say judges are- with expertise , being a check or balance on the power of the govt, but the H o L is not that thing. Its archaic and was outdated 200 years ago never mind now.

[quote=gordimhor ]I think it is wrong that the unelected HoL can remove powers from the Scottish Parliament without debate or consultation.
http://www.scottishenergynews.com/lords-axe-holyroods-power-over-scottish-renewables/
br />

It wasn't a unilateral thing - that amendment was added before the bill even made it to the HoC, so the HoL "removed powers" in just the same way as civil servants "make laws" by drafting bills. I'm struggling to see what is undemocratic about something which was voted on 3 times in the HoC.

In a more general sense JY - yes the HoL is undemocratic, but we have a good recent example of the power of democracy to improve our country 🙄 I'd suggest that in general the HoL provides a useful service of improving the laws made by the HoC - I'm not sure that the lack of democracy is terribly important here, it's just about generating the right laws for governing the country. TBH I'm kind of cynical about democracy always providing the right answers when the people elected to the HoC are all politicians...

I agree with your last point, but that's an argument for improving the selection of peers, not for getting rid of the whole thing.

It doesn't really matter if it ws the commons or the lords - its still undemocratic to remove powers from Holyrood and this in particular stinks - its part of a series of action to attempt to make scotland reliant on england for energy and to prevent scotland becoming a world player in alternative energy.

Typical selfish Scotlandshire, want another referendum when we are still waiting for the [s]"Free Yorkshire"[/s] [b] rhyddid i Yr Hed Ogledd[/b] (it [b]still[/b] better be cheap) vote

FIFY

So Shetland has the right to be unhappy with being governed by the central belt, but the Nation of Scotland doesn't have the right to be unhappy about being governed by Westminster 😆 Since "the truth is out there"© Alistair Carmichael's majority in 2010 in a seat with 33,000 registered voters was 9928. In 2015, before the inquiry, it was down to 817. That would suggest the islands would like stronger links with the mainland,in a seat held by the Liberals since 1950. Obviously none of these are "canny" Scots and "somebody" will be along soon to explain again all about how it is all anti-english sentiment or swallowing SNP lies....again... 🙄

we are still waiting for the "Free Yorkshire" (it better be cheap) vote.

I'd suggest that in general the HoL provides a useful service of improving the laws made by the HoC

I'm not sure that the lack of democracy is terribly important here,

I can see no way that anythign matters more in a democracy than decisions are democratic. They are unelected, unaccountable and often out of touch with the real world and not all reflective of wider society

TO not see a problem with this is strange

its really not about how effective they are its about the fact they are unelected and they have more power than my one vote and often just due to birthright or belonging to the correct religion or kissing the right arses politically- both parties do this. Lord archer, Lord Mandy of smarm etc

I'm kind of cynical about democracy always providing the right answers

Neither will always be "correct" but one is at least the will of the people.
Its indefensible because of how its members are appointed not because of what it does or how it does it- though much of that is outdated as well.

I would imagine a PR style system with longer terms would give independence and provide a check on a govt who get elected on less than 40% of the popular vote and then has a mandate to be an "elected dictatorship"

aracer - Member
...I agree with your last point, but that's an argument for improving the selection of peers, not for getting rid of the whole thing.

I'm astounded anyone really believes that.

ninfan - Member
And one can only imagine how you'll change your tune and be jumping up and down cheering them on if they try and block Brexit too

Not at all. England voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, so an undemocratic body blocking it is wrong.

Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain, so the answer is to dissolve the Union, so Scotland's democratic will can also be implemented.

Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain,

Scotland didn't vote for anything, because Scotland isn't a state or a member of the EU

The UK Voted to leave

ninfan - Member
'Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain,'
Scotland didn't vote for anything, because Scotland isn't a state...

Dream on.

The Empire needs people like you.

its pointless clearly scotland voted to remain and clearly the decision is one for the entire UK who voted differently from Scotland. You are both correct and the views are not mutually exclusive- though ninfan has an agenda- mainly to make himself look daft as he argues against anything and everything-

Clearly this is a source of friction between the Uk govt and the Scottish govt and no one knows how it will end

Its hard to see how the rUK will just ignore a vote to leave the UK even if it is not legally binding

Clearly this is a source of friction between the Uk govt and the Scottish govt and no one knows how it will end

Here's a reminder as to how these things normally work out

duckman - Member
So Shetland has the right to be unhappy with being governed by the central belt, but the Nation of Scotland doesn't have the right to be unhappy about being governed by Westminster

Woooossshhhh

ninfan - Member
Here's a reminder as to how these things normally work out

Actually it's not. That was not Scotland versus England.

It was an attempt to restore the Stuart monarchy. Many of the clans abstained or supported the govt side.

However abstaining or supporting the govt side did not save them from what came afterwards, the deliberate destruction of our culture and language. Lesson learned.

Woooossshhhh

Commons/Lords/Westminster/Holyrood - all discussed for 2 years and voted on in 2014, 55 v 45

The EU Referendum was a UK one, regional analysis is an interesting academic excersize. Or possibly it's not interesting. It is however academic with no democratic or constitutional impact

However abstaining or supporting the govt side did not save them from what came afterwards, the deliberate destruction of our culture and language.

Yes the The Abolition of Heritable Jurisdictions Act of 1747 was a shocking act of cultural vandalism

the answer is to dissolve the Union, so [s] Scotland's [/s] [b]Yr Hen Ogledd 's[/b] democratic will can also be implemented.

FIFY

JY; while being unable to refute the point...Strange Teamhavermore must have missed that, just as he ignored Ben's list of cabinet ministers Universities. thought he was bringing truth as a counter to the YS BS. Well he said that's what he was doing anyway! Well

JY; while being unable to refute the point...

You didnt make a point, you missed one

ust as he ignored Ben's list of cabinet ministers Universities.

No Ben made my point for me - although I make it 7/10 went to Glasgow.

thought he was bringing truth as a counter to the YS BS. Well he said that's what he was doing anyway! Well

So what do we know? All you are arguing is to replace one unrepresentative elite with another. The yes vote is highly concentrated geographically and even then is not as conclusive (ie % of voters saying yes) as many other areas of Scotland. In Dundee, the hotbed of nationalism the vote was only 57% (IIRC) below the level many (even nats in here) believe is a sensible threshold for votes of this importance.

The University question was simple. Replace an Oxford-elite with a Glasgow version (and some other ancients) - so a narrowly focused background and groupthink mentality, exactly the same accusation that is levelled at W'minster, albeit a budget version in this case.

And we know how the Islanders feel about the dominance of representation by the Central Belt.

So the argument about representation and avoiding elites and a fairer more representative governments is largely hogwash. You merely replace one elite with another - the story of history - but in the meantime throw away the benefits of being part of one of the most successful economic and political unions in history.

That is barking mad.

So Shetland has the right to be unhappy with being governed by the central belt, but the Nation of Scotland doesn't have the right to be unhappy about being governed by Westminster

I am in favour of devolving power where appropriate and as much as possible as I said in the previous indy comedy. Its the inconsistency in your attempt at a point that I reject. Equally there are areas where it makes sense to give up some "sovereignty" to enjoy the benefits of interdependence. There are two groups of lunatics who want toe take positions of balance and throw them away on that basis of illogical arguments. So far, only one has succeeded in delivering such folly.

What do we know about how the Islanders feel;that they are turning to the SNP? That what is happening, how does that fit your narrative? Since you frequently claim it is anti English sentiment that is a main driver of the Indy movement, why the sudden upswing?

Wow, another spectacular miss.

big_n_daft - Member
'However abstaining or supporting the govt side did not save them from what came afterwards, the deliberate destruction of our culture and language.'
Yes the The Abolition of Heritable Jurisdictions Act of 1747 was a shocking act of cultural vandalism...

Seeing as you're erudite enough to mention Yr Hen Ogledd, then you know full well what disasters befell the highlands in the wake of the '45.

By you; you are the one who comments on what the islanders feel, yet seem unable to notice the fact that whatever it is; it is making them vote SNP. You then try to divert attention away from your own mistakes by pretending that wasn't what you meant.So again, tell us all; what do they feel?
On another note, does your own personal BoD not tell you not to ignore the log in your own eye? Maybe want to think of that when commenting on ANYBODY playing the man.

Seeing as you're erudite enough to mention Yr Hen Ogledd, then you know full well what disasters befell the highlands in the wake of the '45.

You are probably still singing The Flowers of the Forest

Tell me duckie - which party represents the Orkneys and Shetland (and Fife and one of the other Tayside authorities whose name escapes me)?

You are the one making unsubstantiated comments - I know there is a trend here, so do not expect a change

it is making them vote SNP.

The member for the Orkney Isles is....? (you can fill in if you like)
"" " Shetlands....?
" " Edinburgh western....?
" " NE Fife....?
" " NE Scotland...?

A leading Scottish Liberal Democrat MSP has demanded Shetland be given the option of independence if the SNP again try to force the break-up of the UK. In a blistering attack on the government’s record, Tavish Scott said islanders should have the chance to choose “self-determination” in the face of “[b]arrogant central belt government[/b]”.

The parallels are striking to all but the most myopic. Same arguments, different scale. That's all.

If the people of the nothern islands want to get togther and go for independence, don't really see a problem with that.

Well I do, it's a proposition that only exists on here.