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
Spectator have blown up a lot of credibility with their defense of trump & a lot of misinformation about covid
They do offer an insight into Tory thinking
I'm not sure they'll do much to change the minds of Scottish voters
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.
But those questions will and should be asked, if you just ignore them and fail to give an answer, any answer, then you're back to 2014. As for the Indy = Brexit comparison I can totally see where parallels can be drawn. In 2014 we were all set to leave with 50% +1, look at how well that's turned out. Both were voted for with no real idea of the end result other than sovereignty. Brexit has a LOT of lessons to be learned from it, the rationale may be different but the result is the same. Ignore at your peril.
I'm actually for it at this stage but to ignore all that and pretend any arguments against are lies or trolling is naive at best and deliberate misrepresentation at worst.
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
I meant the Brexit promises.
Re the VC, but they won in the end though... down with imperialist oppressors! 🤪
But those questions will and should be asked, if you just ignore them and fail to give an answer,
I can give the answers I believe are true or I would like to see. But none of us know the actual conditions that will exist at the time nor control outside factors such as "does england want an amicable divorce or will they play hardball"
BND just then mocks my views as of no substance while promoting his own views as solid fact
I’m actually for it at this stage but to ignore all that and pretend any arguments against are lies or trolling is naive at best and deliberate misrepresentation at worst.
quite happy to debate with anyone who is not obviously trolling which BND clearly is - read his last post for the snidey tone
I think you just don't like him. Genuinely.
I can see his point entirely, RT aren't exactly the bastion of impartiality now are they? If they give a platform to someone, it's not out of altruism. That doesn't change anything in terms of the person who is taking the platform but it absolutely can be construed as foreign media meddling.
What I do take exception to is the notion that a British publication could be considered foreign. That's not a good look.
Nope squirrelking - its his nasty sneering condescending manner on this thread - clearly intended to get a reaction. You and i differ in opinion a lot but can debate.
bnd does like his sneering, fairly obviously. 😆
Anyway, I’m a no voter now. This swung it for me...
I was sure it was supposed to be a bridge, must have imagined it ...
It's easier to hide lack of progress with a tunnel.
A new rail connection between Carlisle and Stranraer would be needed
Fair enough...
and the width of railway track in Ireland may need to be altered, the proposal said.
🤣🤣
Can't they just change the width of the rails gradually over the length of the tunnel?
Can’t they just change the width of the rails gradually over the length of the tunnel?
You joke but deep down I know someone has probably pitched that.
It’s easier to hide lack of progress with a tunnel
I did hear a comment on the radio that said only Boris could dig himself into a hole (he is presently in) then dig an even bigger one to try and get him out it.
A new rail connection between Carlisle and Stranraer would be needed
Fair enough…
and the width of railway track in Ireland may need to be altered, the proposal said.
🤣🤣
given the railway line from Larne to Belfast has sections of single track and is not electrified there's going to be some significant remodelling required anyway.
I actually think its not a totally bonkers idea for the economic development of NI and SW Scotland if done properly - and clearly Borris thinks it would some how help the Union... but I fail to see how rail link that the majority of scots would never use, to a country that's equally as confused about its place in the union and desire to be part of the EU would help swing independence votes think this was the answer... I'm equally confused why it solves the border in the Irish sea issue...
Of course they will balls it up and the "Scottish" terminus will be just off the M6, with trains connecting (probably via a bus link!) to the south only! And the NI end will probably not join easily to Dublin/South out of political spite!
Speaking as somebody who was born in Ayrshire with connections to NI and who still has to endure the odd event with family from there, I am quite glad that there is a sea between Scotland and some of my battle remembering/bonfire loving distant relatives.
Significant infrastructure upgrades are leagues away from changing the gauge of two (let's be realistic here, it would need to be the entire island) countries railways for one link. That's track, platforms and rolling stock that would need completely renewed.
its a ridiculous idea and this phrase "and the width of railway track in Ireland may need to be altered, the proposal said." is such patronising nonsense
Boris tunnel back on apparently
I like how over he weekend it dawned on them that there wasn't a direct rail link with Carlisle.
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.
Would that be the 'Scottish' Chairman that lives in France?
And if he's Scottish based on where he was born, then Boris Johnson is American, Rory Stewart is Chinese and Peter Hain is Kenyan.
There is no doubt at all that the unionist press which clearly includes the spectator are activly seeking negative stories about the SNP and the Scots government.
Look at the coverage of the scottish budget. One day recently 4 negative stories about the SNP government. On the scots budget there was 3 times as much comment from opposition parties as the SNP and absolutely no analysis of the budget other than amplifying the objections of the opposition. the fact that the budget had really positive things in it for the lower paid was ignored. the tories take on the scots budget was allowed to be the main analysis
Look at the coverage of the scottish budget. One day recently 4 negative stories about the SNP government. On the scots budget there was 3 times as much comment from opposition parties as the SNP and absolutely no analysis of the budget other than amplifying the objections of the opposition. the fact that the budget had really positive things in it for the lower paid was ignored. the tories take on the scots budget was allowed to be the main analysis
Unless you are doing a meaningful study on the press coverage it's more about what you watch rather than what everyone else is watching
It's not hard to find negative stories about any government in the press, it's a key function of the press to hold the incumbents to account. They are the ones making the decisions, spending the money, writing the laws.
Would that be the ‘Scottish’ Chairman that lives in France?
And if he’s Scottish based on where he was born, then Boris Johnson is American, Rory Stewart is Chinese and Peter Hain is Kenyan.
Can you let him know he isn't a Scot. Ideally video the encounter, it should go viral
its a ridiculous idea and this phrase “and the width of railway track in Ireland may need to be altered, the proposal said.” is such patronising nonsense
OK so tell us why it's a ridiculous idea.
I'm not sure why that's patronising. Its a statement of fact - the whole island of Ireland uses a different gauge of railway line to almost the entire world. Its highlighting one of the issues to overcome, I'm not sure how the "proposal" said it when the proposal hasn't been published yet, and suspect you are taking a journalist a bit too literally.
Significant infrastructure upgrades are leagues away from changing the gauge of two (let’s be realistic here, it would need to be the entire island) countries railways for one link. That’s track, platforms and rolling stock that would need completely renewed.
Have you been on a train in NI? Its massively overdue a major upgrade of all of that stuff anyway - and no doubt its more expensive by being all non-standard (I've never been on a train in the Republic but assume it has the same 1980's feel). Even if they were the same gauge the stations on the line into Belfast wouldn't accommodate what would probably be larger trains.
I doubt that they'd replace the whole of the infrastructure in NI never mind the whole island. I can't see any reason why you can't run a different gauge for one "high speed / high capacity" line. Obviously, there might be some interesting debates about what you build for future links. I think the commercial success of such a scheme would likely be much improved by a link that includes Belfast and Dublin, but would need to also take you to Glasgow, Manchester/Liverpool, London and preferably a lot of other places too - but given the Chunnel doesn't let me get on in Scotland and off in France, I'm not sure that completing the links is absolutely essential. Afterall if the train essentially bypasses D&G and Larne those areas will be pushed into further economic decline whilst boosting the cities...
Now, if only there was some larger cooperative way for multiple nations in Europe to work together, perhaps even sharing costs, we could have a Dublin-Belfast-Carlisle-Birmingham-London-Paris-Brussels-Amsterdam high speed link, with huge freight capacity...
You are still talking about a huge civil engineering undertaking but it would seem that it would be possible to run both gauges in tandem as Victoria in Australia does.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_gauge
That's not quite the deal breaker I thought it was. Interesting.
And if he’s Scottish based on where he was born, then Boris Johnson is American, Rory Stewart is Chinese and Peter Hain is Kenyan.
So what say you to the Sean Connery and Alan Cummings darlings of the independence movement?
You really are a tadger big n daft. Are you suggesting the spectator is a neutral publication?
You are still talking about a huge civil engineering undertaking but it would seem that it would be possible
Of course, but that’s kind of the point...
You really are a tadger big n daft. Are you suggesting the spectator is a neutral publication?
Can you suggest a neutral publication that reports on politics?
I'm suggesting it employs Scottish journalists (some if not most actually live in Scotland as some Indy supporters think that matters) and has a Scottish Chairman (currently residing in France). Other publications are freely available for purchase, no-one is compelled to read it, no-one is compelled to agree with the journalists.
I'm sure The National has far higher sales
Edit, nah
In fairness. In print media there is no requirement to be balanced.
Inherent bias is a jungle we all need to be aware of.
Agreed, but trying to defend the spectators standpoint on well; everything concerning independence because it employs Scots is, in my opinion anyway a bit, tadgerish.
Aye BnD's proposition that because scots are involved in the union it somehow negates any reason for independence, is somewhat tenuous. 😆
Can you let him know he isn’t a Scot. Ideally video the encounter, it should go viral
So you'll agree that Shamima Begum is defiantly British then?
Agreed, but trying to defend the spectators standpoint on well; everything concerning independence because it employs Scots is, in my opinion anyway a bit, tadgerish.
I didn't defend the standpoint of The Spectator.
I challenged the Indy supporter's reference to it as "foreign media". It patently isn't, it's a UK publication with Scots journalists living Scotland writing about Scotland with a chairman who is a Scot (although some Indy supporters seem to imply they want to disown/excommunicate/whatever him)
But remember, there are no parallels to Brexit and the false grievances created there.
Aye BnD’s proposition that because scots are involved in the union it somehow negates any reason for independence, is somewhat tenuous.
My argument that the Scots have been active participants in a United Kingdom and have led the country. Claiming Scotland has no representation is patent Brexit level grievance manufacturing
So you’ll agree that Shamima Begum is defiantly British then?
Almost certainly yes, you could say that she indefatigably is. I can't see why she isn't the UK Government case looks pretty tenuous. What's your point?
big_n_daft
Free Member
My argument that the Scots have been active participants in a United Kingdom and have led the country. Claiming Scotland has no representation is patent Brexit level grievance manufacturing
Fair enough, agreed scots have been represented and are represented fairly in the wider democratic group, but given you say this is an indy supporters claim, would you accept that not all indy supporter believe we have been colonised? 😆
My argument wouldn't be that scotland has no representation, that is patent nonsense. It would just simply be that it's voice is somewhat lost within the wider democratic grouping. Individuals in positions of power is irrelevant to that. (democracy is about the collective voice, not an individuals.)
That isn't undemocratic, but it is cause for consideration if something else may work better. (this is where your parallels with brexit breakdown btw, cause the Uk had a massive say in europe, scotland not so much in the UK.)
(Which is another reason why I think scotland should have a longer think about jumping straight into bed with the EU, given that rUK is no longer there, the EU has structurally changed there, for the better or worse, who knows, but you are jumping into another union on an unequal basis. I say that as someone utterly pro EU for the ref.)
That isn’t undemocratic, but it is cause for consideration if something else may work better. (this is where your parallels with brexit breakdown btw, cause the Uk had a massive say in europe, scotland not so much in the UK.)
Of course it can be considered, it was in indyref1. There will always be people calling for another vote because"one more heave" will get the magic 50%+1.
As for the comparison with the UK'S voice in Europe, it's not comparable with the current UK parliamentary model. The UK model is a lot more direct than the way the various EU institutions work, that makes it far more accountable. The section 16 debacle is classic, a UK politician would have had to resign. Yet a non directly elected EU official closed an EU member states border without bothering to discuss with the state.
The UK model isn't brilliant but it's a working compromise that is evolving.
(Which is another reason why I think scotland should have a longer think about jumping straight into bed with the EU, given that rUK is no longer there, the EU has structurally changed there, for the better or worse, who knows, but you are jumping into another union on an unequal basis. I say that as someone utterly pro EU for the ref.)
Brexit and the EU UK trade agreement puts a border in-between iS and rUK whether you are in or out. The first thing iS would need to address is that with the EU, if the EU won't essentially wrap iS into the EU-UK trade agreement from day 1 then you are a "third country" and caught by the rules of origin for rUK manufacturing. If you join the EU on day 1 there is a EU border with rUK. I don't see the EU talking to you before day1 (too many other separatists would use it as a case study)
and if they do it's to lock in advantage for the EU It's a trap with the status quo on the iS/risk border not on the table.
how long do the polls have to sustain their current level before you'll agree another ref is warranted?
big_n_daft
Free Member
Brexit and the EU UK trade agreement puts a border in-between iS and rUK whether you are in or out. The first thing iS would need to address is that with the EU, if the EU won’t essentially wrap iS into the EU-UK trade agreement from day 1 then you are a “third country” and caught by the rules of origin for rUK manufacturing. If you join the EU on day 1 there is a EU border with rUK. I don’t see the EU talking to you before day1 (too many other separatists would use it as a case study)
and if they do it’s to lock in advantage for the EU It’s a trap with the status quo on the iS/risk border not on the table
For me the trading agreement between rUK and iS would supercede that of the EU/iS. Think that's my position at the moment. I'm open to wider discussion on the matter though.
The section 16 debacle is classic, a UK politician would have had to resign. Y
c'mon big n daft , that is hilarious !
with an 80 seat majority Johnsons cabinet are untouchable no matter how badly they screw up
not to mention his unelected advisors!
you could say that she indefatigably is
You are George Galloway & I claim my 5 barrels of oil.
For me the trading agreement between rUK and iS would supercede that of the EU/iS. Think that’s my position at the moment. I’m open to wider discussion on the matter though.
There is a successor state argument to essentially novate the UK-EU agreement and have three parties, however there will be a need for criteria to allow for divergence of iS etc etc not sure if either party could agree and there would need to be a parallel iS-rUK agreement to deal with straightforward cross border trade. Too many moving parts to to it all at once so I would suggest that it will be staged at best and the border change over time. Whichever way it is still lorry parks and customs documents.
with an 80 seat majority Johnsons cabinet are untouchable no matter how badly they screw up
Remind me, hasn't Cummings departed the government?
I don't disagree that Boris hasn't been ruthless enough with his cabinet and that standards have dropped. Maybe the problem with politics now is that you get histrionics constantly over minor issues which then means the important stuff gets lost in the noise and 24hour news media cycle. People don't understand how important an issue is because everything is pitched as a resignation matter.
how long do the polls have to sustain their current level before you’ll agree another ref is warranted?
At the current level come back in twenty years, they go higher then shorten it. But the polling itself needs to be looked at to ensure its accurate as a guide. However I also think there should be a UK referendum act that looks at how we conduct them. Participation, % required for change, frequency, etc. Brexit has taught us the dangers of "anti" referendum where the vote is to abandon the status quo for a herd of contradictory unicorns.
Remind me, hasn’t Cummings departed the government?
I don’t disagree that Boris hasn’t been ruthless enough with his cabinet and that standards have dropped. Maybe the problem with politics now is that you get histrionics constantly over minor issues which then means the important stuff gets lost in the noise and 24hour news media cycle. People don’t understand how important an issue is because everything is pitched as a resignation matter.
Cummings resigned 6 months later after Johnson had blown up the entire governments credibility pushing his cabinet members out to defend him day after day, eroding trust & compliance, and only then beacuse Alegra Straton forced him out
and theres plenty of equivalence between VDLs vaccine failures & the PPE, care homes, Test & trace, school opening/closing, 100,000+ death toll thanks to delaying & dithering over lockdown.....
you're bending over backwards to justify yourself in just the way you're accusing the Yes campainers of doing (as they sometimes do)
At the current level come back in twenty years,
chucking out arbitrary timescales makes no sense
if the SNP /indy parties come home with a majority in May then its very hard to say theres no mandate for a 2nd ref
if the SNP /indy parties come home with a majority in May then its very hard to say theres no mandate for a 2nd ref
This.
and theres plenty of equivalence between VDLs vaccine failures & the PPE, care homes, Test & trace, school opening/closing, 100,000+ death toll thanks to delaying & dithering over lockdown…..
You know these are all devolved matters leading to the terrible death toll. The nuances between the devolved administrations and English policy has not really seen any significant divergence in outcomes. The real issue is a UK wide one. No one is significantly outperforming others, if they were we would be hearing about it.
chucking out arbitrary timescales makes no sense
I'm taking 25years as a generation, if you want to define it differently for Scotland please fill your boots
no parliament can bind the next one
there was no legislation setting out the mythical generational rule of referendums, even if there was it could be overturned
and it came from the same people who brought you this
big_n_daft
Free Member
and theres plenty of equivalence between VDLs vaccine failures & the PPE, care homes, Test & trace, school opening/closing, 100,000+ death toll thanks to delaying & dithering over lockdown…..You know these are all devolved matters leading to the terrible death toll. The nuances between the devolved administrations and English policy has not really seen any significant divergence in outcomes. The real issue is a UK wide one. No one is significantly outperforming others, if they were we would be hearing about it.
tbh a total deaths are about 30% less per 1M than the the UK number and cases about 40% less, that is a significant difference. Particularly when Scotland has an older and more vulnerable population.
Still not good mind you, but those extra powers have made a significant difference.
big_n_daft
Free Member
chucking out arbitrary timescales makes no senseI’m taking 25years as a generation, if you want to define it differently for Scotland please fill your boots
tbh, if you are looking for precedents, you should at least base it on something a bit more solid than an off hand comment made in the emotion of the moment. 79, 97, 14 would put it somewhere around. 31/32ish. 😆 ie 17/18 years. saying 25 years from now is ridiculous.
Which I think is mental from your side tbh, cause time ain't going to help you.
no parliament can bind the next one
there was no legislation setting out the generational rule of referendums, even if there was it could be overturned
And?
Post Brexit the appetite for referendums is significantly diminished.
Plenty of countries place high hurdles for significant constitutional change. "Settled will" for a significant permanent change needs to be more than 50%+1. That would have killed Brexit.
big_n_daft
Free MemberPost Brexit the appetite for referendums is significantly diminished.
not in scotland if you look at the polls.
Plenty of countries place high hurdles for significant constitutional change. “Settled will” for a significant permanent change needs to be more than 50%+1. That would have killed Brexit.
tbh, I don't necessarily disagree with this, but the cat is out the bag on the 50+1 and it's no going back in.
you should at least base it on something a bit more solid than an off hand comment made in the emotion of the moment. 79, 97, 14 would put it somewhere around. 31/32ish. 😆 ie 17/18 years. saying 25 years from now is ridiculous.
Good job I'm some random person on the internet not in any position of power. I'd argue it was a bit more solid than "transitional pound" into "virtually instant" EU membership though and is a happy mid point between the two previous referendum periods
Lets put it to the test then and find out which side has the more solid arguments this time round? 😆 What ye scared of?
The key will be pro indy parties getting a majority in May
Which is hy no means a sure thing
And I dunt necessarily disagree about some sort of supermajority being required, but again there is no legislation for that and if the Tories tried to impose one after brexit the resentment at their hypocrisy could backfire hugely.
Tories may well get a feelgood bounce from vaccine rollout & SNP will want their dirty laundry out & forgotten by then too.
Effects of brexit on fishing communities could nail it though- totemic as it is (see brexit)
tbh a total deaths are about 30% less per 1M than the the UK number and cases about 40% less, that is a significant difference. Particularly when Scotland has an older and more vulnerable population.
I'd wait for the analysis to be done, England has significant BAME communities that live in multigenerational households with very low incomes. Scotland has a very dispersed population outside the central belt. Cases are very low in the SW of England for example and terrible in many of our cities. But if Scotland did it better we need to learn the lessons once we can dig into the data properly rather than focusing on headline numbers without context
My view is that the differences in approach by the devolved administrations is a good thing. We are all learning, therefore trying different things, the important thing is to take the politics out of it and to learn from each other.
Lets put it to the test then and find out which side has the more solid arguments this time round? 😆 What ye scared of?
You aren't getting Brexit flashbacks writing that????
Are you related to David Cameron?
But if Scotland did it better we need to learn the lessons once we can dig into the data properly rather than focusing on headline numbers without context
The covid bounce? Sturgeon has seen is less about what she's done, but how she's gone about it, the endless lies about testing, PPE, Cummings etc from Westminster, coupled with Johnson's dithering on lockdowns, school u-turns etc all eroded public confidence and compliance in a way that Sturgeon avoided (mostly)
big_n_daft
Free Member
tbh a total deaths are about 30% less per 1M than the the UK number and cases about 40% less, that is a significant difference. Particularly when Scotland has an older and more vulnerable population.I’d wait for the analysis to be done, England has significant BAME communities that live in multigenerational households with very low incomes. Scotland has a very dispersed population outside the central belt. Cases are very low in the SW of England for example and terrible in many of our cities. But if Scotland did it better we need to learn the lessons once we can dig into the data properly rather than focusing on headline numbers without context
My view is that the differences in approach by the devolved administrations is a good thing. We are all learning, therefore trying different things, the important thing is to take the politics out of it and to learn from each other.
England has probably got a bigger rural population than scotland tbh percentage wise. Most of us live in or very near cities and towns of the central belt and up the east, up here.
Although everyone is allowed an opinion. Theres a lot of , at best, tenuous shite today.
England has probably got a bigger rural population than Scotland tbh percentage wise. Most of us live in or very near cities and towns of the central belt and up the east, up here.
True - but the density of population, plus multigenerational families (especially in BAME communities) for inner cities in England is higher and the sheer number of people is an order higher. Neither the UK Government or the Scottish Government have anything to be proud of in the way that they have managed the pandemic. But trying to say one has handled it better than the other is almost impossible unless you you do a detailed analysis. This hasn't been done yet and probably take a few years to do.
It is important that it is done, so we can work out if the approach from the Scottish Government was 'better' or just different.
So you’ll agree that Shamima Begum is defiantly British then?
Yup, and groomed at age 15. You'll accept this yeah ?, or do you believe in your heart of hearts that young teenagers groomed by older men are fully to blame for whatever happens to them 😕
You also have to remember in the analysis of the Scottish governments performance that they wanted to do more earlier but did not have the power to do so. No ability to borrow means they could not furlough except when westminster said, neither could they close the borders to Scotland as that is also a westminster power.
So considering they were hamstrung by that and the lower - but still awful deth rate I would given them a B compared to Westminsters D
When Johnson was running round catching covid by shaking peoples hands who were positive Sturgeon had already wanted to go into lockdown but could not.
Another aspect of how Scotland has handled it VS Westminster has been communication
And Sturgeon has been able to sound far more reassuring & on top of things than Johnson & co throughout
The good will Johnson blew up with cummings being a prime example