exactly intheborders. We also would no longer have to pay for the hugely expensive nuclear power station that is decades late
Nickc - we would still have a government we voted for and most importantly accountable to us. its also a PR parliament so no one party cantake absolute power on a minority of the vote
So according to yo because our current lot of MSPs have lost their way we have to stick with an unrepresentative government in a feudal system that is orders of magnitude more incompetent and where no one is offering the sort of leftish social democratic government we continuously vote for
Ok, let’s stop exporting then we’d have cheaper power – another indy win!
The problem is it isn't Scotland's power. It belongs to the private companies that generate it. Their contracts state that either the power is bought by the grid or they are paid to turn the generators off. So if it isn't going to England they are paid to turn off instead. You aren't just paying for what is used you pay for the whole system whether it is used or not. Cheap it won't be
the energy policies that are in place now work against Scotlands needs. so independence is the answer
It wasn't Westminster that refused to consider replacing Scottish nuclear or going all out for wind power which they seem surprised to find doesn't work when there is no wind. That was the SNP
The problem is it isn’t Scotland’s power. It belongs to the private companies that generate it. Their contracts state that either the power is bought by the grid or they are paid to turn the generators off. So if it isn’t going to England they are paid to turn off instead. You aren’t just paying for what is used you pay for the whole system whether it is used or not. Cheap it won’t be
That's a rubbish system. Who agreed to that?
🙂
So according to yo because our current lot of MSPs have lost their way we have to stick with an unrepresentative government
I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that you yourself express almost total dismay at the entirety of your political options, and these will be broadly the same group of people in charge post Indy. I just hope they don't **** it up if they're handed it that's all. On current form I think there's every chance they will, and then some. You only need look at Brexit, at Northern Ireland to see that where ever the political classes are asked to look at and make complex agreements that last decades they will make a pigs ear of it.
IRC - but it was Westminster who refused to allow the Scottish government to build state owned generators. It was westminster who rigged the "market" to make it uneconomical for private companies to build new generators. Oh - and it is Westminster who set up the subsidy scheme for renewables as it was also westminster who made sure the Scottish government could not invest in tidal
No nuclear is actually the only thing you can lay at the Scots governments door because that is done under planning law - a devolved power whereas energy supply is retained. i also agree with the no nuclear. Hows your new nuclear power stations coming on? Over a decade late already is it not? Most expensive electric generated anywhere is it not going to be? Porfits all going to subsidise french electricity?
The “profits all going to support French electricity” claim is a bit far fetched.
For most of the last decade the retail profits for EDF haven’t even been enough to fully cover the cost of working capital - so French consumers have been subsidising British consumers.
In 2021 EDF’s EBIT was around -£1.7B.
You only need look at Brexit, at Northern Ireland to see that where ever the political classes are asked to look at and make complex agreements that last decades they will make a pigs ear of it.
The current political classes - the Good Friday Agreement seems to be holding up nicely.
@tj You are seriously misguided if you think the SNP haven't pushed hard for as much wind as possible. Possibly because they knew that the subsidies were UK cost so it didn't matter.
Scotland already had enough wind power to cover Scottish generation on windy days by 2016. It has increased since then. All with SNP planning permission. This is not a balanced portfolio for an independent country. It doesn't matter while we are part of the UK but would be a problem for an Indy Scotland.
Luckily that is nowhere in sight. But as always you have a blind spot for SNP policies.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Scotland
We will just need to disagree on how ready the Scottish electricity system is for Indy and whose fault it is.
Also nickc - why are they so useless? ( not in comparison to at westminster of course)
labour and tory parties in Scotland have to dance to the tune of the westminster parties - and in doing so left a free run fro the SNP who have been unchallenged in holyrood leading to the Hubris we see in the SNP
Go back a bit and we had high quality leaders of all parties. Compare Dewar to Sarwar. compare Ross to Goldie
IRC - yes they did push for wind. the only option open to them bar nuclear which we don't want. tidal - no serious investment allowed, Conventional - the same
I agree its unbalanced and that the system is not fit for purpose. thats why we need independence to build a system fit for purpose because we are not allowed to build system fit for purpose as Westminster will not allow it
Your point shows why we need independence and is not an argument against it - its an argument for it.
I’m saying that you yourself express almost total dismay at the entirety of your political options, and these will be broadly the same group of people in charge post Indy.
presumably in a post Indy world the parties 1. Stop arguing about Indy and focus on the country; 2. Have greater freedom to set their own policies; 3. Stop spreading their talent between holyrood and Westminster; 4. Will have such a huge reform that people who currently refuse to work together over a single issue might start to cooperate - that could even help local authority politics where “antiSNP mentality” sees unnatural bedfellows like Labour and Tory in partnership mostly out of spite over issues completely out of the local authority remit.
the interesting thing is - IF the SNP go bust, which doesn’t seem impossible their MPs / MSPs remain in post so there would actually be an opportunity for some smart thinking other parties to find a new variety of Scottish politics NOW rather than post Indy (who knows it could even save the Union!) but that seems as unlikely as all the SNP folk just hopping over to Alba.
Indeed Poly.
Holyrood was supposed to be co operative and consensual hence PR and a chamber in an arc not opposing seating. labour in particular since losing power have been an obstacle automatically opposing anything the Snp want to do - even on occasion when its been UK policy . Labours attitude has not been helpful to good governance at all both by being needlessly obstructive and by being so allowing the SNP a free run. When the only response is no no no SNP bad its easy to ignore. If it had been " decent policy but needs this added or does not go far enough" it would have contributed to better governance of Scotland.
Labours behavior has lost them votes and the chance to influence policy
Isnt that what an opposition is supposed to do on most subjects, challenge the party in power to ensure some robust dialogue
Latest beeb
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65385825
Former treasurer 'didn't know' about the battle bus. I mean how did he not know? Surely the treasurer might be expected to notice, and do things like sign off a £100k spend out of a total pot of £600k??? If thats the case it sounds like there was zero oversight of the finances.
Don’t forget he was out of office for a year. Might be they bought it during that period.
Not how holyrood was supposed to work and labour would be far more effective if they made real points rather than just automatically opposing everything the SNP wanted to do. This even extended to things that were london labourr policy. Policy in Westminster, opposed at holyrood
Everyone including the electorate could see this which is a large part of the reason why their vote collapsed
Goldie was the tory leader during the first SNP minority government. No formal deal was done but by engaging constructively she gained influence and both altered some SNP policy to avoid things the tories did not like and got some of her wishlist enacted.
Once it became obvious labour were just going to oppose everything on principle they lost all influence even when it was a minority SNP government. Google "Bain principle"
Isnt that what an opposition is supposed to do on most subjects, challenge the party in power to ensure some robust dialogue
In a FPTP system, probably, but we've a PR system - one designed to try and stop a majority Govt.
From my perspective all I see are loads of List MSP complaining on Twitter but never actually offering an alternative policy.
Isnt that what an opposition is supposed to do on most subjects, challenge the party in power to ensure some robust dialogue
There's a difference between challenge and debate and sound bit politics. The media like a fighting match but the public mostly want their politicians to discuss stuff and find common ground rather than argue. It really feels like the SNP could rebrand any opposition policy as their own and the opposition would oppose it because it was being promoted by a guy in a yellow tie. The greens have been smart - their alignment on the one issue everyone else hates the SNP for has given them the ability to get a lot of green policy high on the agenda (its wrong to suggest that the GRA is not a core green policy - it absolutely is; economic policy; A9 dualling; even the Ferries Fiasco probably has a touch of green influence throughout. Imagine if the Lib Dems had held their nose on Indy what they might have been able to influence.
It is astonishing that the treasurer was unaware of such a purchase. I'm not saying he's lying (it would be pretty dumb to lie, as in 2023 someone always has an email, or whats app that can catch you out). Chaotic governance doesn't surprise me that much - but presumably there's an accountant or bookkeeper on the payroll who much be getting their CV ready?
The SNP's former treasurer has clarified when he found out that the party had bought a luxury motorhome.
Colin Beattie, who was in the role for a total of nearly 20 years, was asked by journalists whether he knew about and had signed off the purchase.
"No, I didn't know about that," he said.
He later said although he did not know about the transaction at the time of purchase, he found out about it in the 2021 annual accounts.
That's cleared that up then 🤷♂️
So, I bet whoever signed the paperwork for the purchase is going to be sweating.
I wonder if the 'never been used' comment is actually 'never been used by the SNP as a battle bus' hence its seizure, I hope we will find out in due course
Also nickc – why are they so useless?
Ooof, where to start? party messaging and control loss of individuality, social media is horrific, a generally hostile environment, pay, hours, no support, no thanks, the ever grinding loss of your soul, anxiety paranoia, petty jealousy. Who'd be an MP or SMP these days? I certainly wouldn't. I think genuinely intelligent thoughtful people take one look at that and run a mile, we're left with the folks that don't. Dunning-Kruger perhaps plays a role
We can all name one or two politicians we can genuinely say are in it for the right reasons, We can all name dozens who're are useless party hacks, what's that expression? "Politics is show business for ugly people" seems pretty spot on most of the time.
Scotland already had enough wind power to cover Scottish generation on windy days by 2016. It has increased since then. All with SNP planning permission. This is not a balanced portfolio for an independent country. It doesn’t matter while we are part of the UK but would be a problem for an Indy Scotland.
Is that installed power or capacity factor power? Because wind has a circa 0.33 capacity factor which means you need roughly 3x the actual required load spread across as large an area as possible to account for outages (low/high wind, maintenance, failure etc). The industry does itself no favours with nonsense like "enough to power the whole of Glasgow" when in fact they mean 33% of the time. Now that can vary by location and wind can be up to 0.5 but not much more than that.
When we were running (Hunterston) we had a capacity factor nearer 0.8 albeit that wasn't running at full tilt.
@DT78
I'm quoting the Daily Record but this is widely reported on many media outlets.
"A motorhome allegedly bought as an SNP “battle bus” is said to have sat outside the home of party boss Peter Murrell's mum for more than two years until it was seized by cops."12 Apr 2023
When we were running (Hunterston) we had a capacity factor nearer 0.8 albeit that wasn’t running at full tilt.
Is one of the issues with capacity of single installations like that not that when it goes down it has a much bigger impact on the total network? Its a bit like Calmac ferries. You can have two big boats each with more than enough capacity but as soon as one breaks down everyone is crossing their fingers are praying that the other one lasts until its sister ship is fixed.
Who’d be an MP or [MSP] these days? I certainly wouldn’t. I think genuinely intelligent thoughtful people take one look at that and run a mile, we’re left with the folks that don’t.
Actually, that is a good point. There was a time when I'd have looked positively at the possibility if there was a party that truly reflected my beliefs. Now there is no way I'd want the Social Media hassle etc. I also suspect that getting elected requires a SM façade with 140-character soundbites and polarised views which many genuinely intelligent, thoughtful people probably don't embrace.
I also suspect that getting elected requires a SM façade with 140-character soundbites and polarised views
In most cases I doubt it. In most cases the only real requirement is to wear the right party colours. The SM facade is good for getting you invites to news shows etc if you are into that sort of thing which then might help you get promoted.
In terms of actually getting elected its getting yourself onto the list of candidates most likely with an unwinnable seat for a cycle or two before managing to get onto a good seat list.
presumably in a post Indy world the parties ... Stop spreading their talent between holyrood and Westminster
But if there is a shortage of talent among Scottish political parties, why the enthusiasm for rejoining the EU among Scot Nats? That'll just spread political talent across Edinburgh and Strasbourg and Brussels. 😱
It does amuse me that things that are the responsibility and under the control of Westminster like that or the electricity "market" are used to show an independent scotland could not survive.
Its almost as if folk believe the tory way is the only way and iScotland could not do anything differently or alter anything
@poly yes one big producer does have a bigger impact if it goes down but wind turbines are rarely isolated beasties. If you get a loss of grid event that's going to have the same effect on Whitelees as Torness. Of course wind tends to be a lot more intermittent than fission hence the lower capacity factor for wind. It's not a bad thing, it's just an idiosyncrasy.
If it costs so much to transmit electricity South to the main population centres, why don't the folk local to the generating capacity get it cheap?
Or move more of the heavy users North (Fort William smelter anyone?)
Re Fort William smelter This is another skeleton in a fairly crowded cupboard.
But if there is a shortage of talent among Scottish political parties, why the enthusiasm for rejoining the EU among Scot Nats? That’ll just spread political talent across Edinburgh and Strasbourg and Brussels.
I think Scotland only had 8 MEPs across all parties so I don’t think it creates a brain drain. My perception, which may be entirely wrong, is that EU politics was much more about negotiation and deals (not necessarily all as transparent as we would like) than scoring points on the telly.
If it costs so much to transmit electricity South to the main population centres, why don’t the folk local to the generating capacity get it cheap?
Have you not noticed that prices are dependant on DNO?
Besides, if you follow your analogy to it's conclusion then anyone consuming power in London would be paid to do so. Yes, that's how the grid works. No, it makes no ****ing sense to me either.
just out of interest what was the view of westminster after the labour years? sure, by the end things were pretty ropey and let's put aside iraq please - that's more to do with blair than the party itself. those years gave scotland devolution and more than a few other things in the whole of the UK were functioning a hell of a lot better than they are now. thoughts?
NHS significantly improved but left us with a legacy of incredibly bad value for money PFI hospitals and wasted vast sums on holyrood so they could avoid using the old royal high as it was a "nationalist shibboleth"
B-
Load of good stuff that helped Scotland but huge vanity and money wastage that we are still living with today and is still costing us vast sums.
Better than the tories for sure but thats a low bar.
MY personal view. I don't speak for anyone else
I don't think that Scotland and England had diverged so much at that point (yes - I'm talking about electorally, I know that neither population is homologous). Devolution was in its infancy and some of the recent changes hadn't been made. There was still anger in Scotland about "Scottish" Labour not even spending all of the block grant available to it and instead returning it to the Treasury (perhaps in order not to upset their masters in London??) As has been much hypothesised, a future Labour Govt at Westminster could spike the Indy guns for a while, but I don't think the present Labour leadership/policies really chime all that much with the current Scottish electorate. On Europe alone there is a massive gulf.
Humza Yousaf seems to be prepared to settle for (more?) devolution rather than Independence anyway so I genuinely can't see anything changing much for the next 5 - 10 years or so, making much of this thread absolutely pointless 🙂
well if you believe the hype many seats are set to fall to labour. i don't mean to be disrespectful but i'm wondering if a fundamentally better governed and fairer UK would mean scottish nationalists would be better prepared to muck in with the UK, or if there's just no way back?
and let’s put aside iraq please - that’s more to do with blair than the party itself.
Why are we putting aside Iraq?
As I said earlier, Iraq was the seed of my support for independence and it's still a very pressing issue because the conditions that allowed Blair to invade Iraq are still very much present.
I laid out my conditions for supporting the Union earlier and a big part of that is that the UK has to be run by consensus rather than a tiny minority of swing voters (possibly as few as a couple of hundred thousand) deciding the direction of the country for the rest of the 60 million.
Until the underlying problems are fixed (which they are showing absolutely no signs of doing) then independence is always going to be the best option.
i’m wondering if a fundamentally better governed and fairer UK would mean scottish nationalists would be better prepared to muck in with the UK, or if there’s just no way back?
Let's say, by some miracle, the best of all governments is elected with such a huge majority that it is able to enact all the policies it wants without hinderance.
What happens in 10 years time when the inevitable Tory government is elected and simply undoes all these reforms?
Even if a fantastic Labour government comes to power, it's a temporary blip in a system that is rigged to elect governments with huge majorities returned by a tiny percentage of the population.
And more often than not it's going to return a Tory government.
Unless Labour commits to the points I made earlier, there's no way back for many, I feel. Forget about Labour and Tory, it's the UK system of government itself that's rotten.
more often than not it’s going to return a Tory government.
Extend that to Tory-lite and we're back to the Keir Starmer thread 😁
@Del - look up "The Vow" as relates to the last Indyref and then look at what happened subsequently. There's a very good reason that many (by no means all) Scottish voters won't trust any Labour government. I think it's inevitable that a Scottish Independence movement will exist as long as control exists in Westminster. What's unknown, and subject to campaigning, is what the strength of that movement will be. For sure it will ebb and flow, but we've not really had a hard push at it since 2014, despite the golden opportunity that Brexit provided and I can't (yet) see another Brexit-type situation arising, though who knows with this current Tory government 😁
well if you believe the hype many seats are set to fall to labour.
Many? For me 15 is the top of the range - that would still leave the SNP as the biggest party at holyrood and a labour / tory coalition in Holyrood as likely - but the holyrood election is still a ways off.
At Westminster? SNP still the largest block
i don’t mean to be disrespectful but i’m wondering if a fundamentally better governed and fairer UK would mean scottish nationalists would be better prepared to muck in with the UK, or if there’s just no way back?
Trouble is we are not being offered that in any way - perhaps better run but the labour party are so far from their roots and are not offering what a large section of the Scots electorate want
I do not think there is any way back at all. We have seen what a left of centre social democratic government is like and will not be bought off by a right wing labour government throwing a few crumbs but refusing to even consider return to the EU, PR for westminster, getting rid of the HOL etc
Devolution and the independence campaign has meant that the scots electorate have become more sophisticated in thinking about how to use their vote
Labour have made it totally clear they have no understanding or consideration for the people of Scotland. they are merely fighting over the unionist vote with Tories and Lib Dems
I was a life long labour voter until 2014. I will not vote for them in their current guise. Doing deals with the tories on local councils and at elections has put them beyond the pale for me. a labour / tory / lib Dem coalition in Holyrood as an anti SNP deal will destroy labour in Scotland
The behaviour of Labour in Holyrood since losing power has be appalling and off putting to the swing voters
vote labour get tory / two cheeks of the same arse
I do often wonder what your average unionist thinks (or hopes) is going to happen in the future.
Like, what do the Scottish Unionist voters see as being a win? What are you hoping is going to eventually happen to Scotland and the UK as a whole and how likely do you think some or part of what you hope for is going to happen?
In terms of actually getting elected its getting yourself onto the list of candidates most likely with an unwinnable seat for a cycle or two before managing to get onto a good seat list.
Or just be drafted in as per Ross was (or Sunak into probably the safest seat in the House).
Re Fort William smelter This is another skeleton in a fairly crowded cupboard.
You'd prefer a 'free market' solution, or something else?
what do the Scottish Unionist voters see as being a win?
Never met one that could explain TBH.
I believe the Scots electorate splits roughly into thirds on independence
1/3 for whom self determination is the only thing that matters - for richer or poorer - call them the ideological independence folk
1/3 for whom the union is the only thing that counts - call them the ideological unionists
1/3 that are looking for what will make Scotland a better place to live - call them the pragmatics
I'm ignoring the greens and lib dems and alba here as their vote is small and for simplicity
Of the ideological unionists most of them are tory. The tory base vote seems to be around 20% of the electorate so labour get around 12-15 % of the electorate from the ideological unionists. Labour have made it clear that they are resolutely unionist and will not even consider any significant electoral / constitutional reform so they will get very few votes from the ideological independence supporters. That leaves them fighting for the pragmatics . Now without a progressive set of policies then many of the pragmatics will look at a labour manifesto and go - there is nothing here for us. Even if labour attract half the pragmatics then they are still only on 30%ish of the vote. I believe that is about their ceiling in Scotland now - 30 - 35% of the vote. that would gain them a few seats maybe a dozen or even a few more if they do another anti SNP electoral pact with the tories but with the tory vote dropping I don't see the tories agreeing another pact
If labour in Scotland were allowed to produce policies aimed at Scotland ie serious constitutional reform and / or a willingness to have another referendum plus some properly progressive policies they perhaps they could peel off some of the ideological independence supporters and a chunk more of the pragmatics. Anytime Sarwar has made a hint in this sort of direction he has been rapidly slapped down by london.
The anti SNP pact with the tories also alienates a lot of the leftish voters who are generally on the independence side anyway. It certainly does for me.
So for me until Labour in Scotland divorce from London and start with some constructive engagement at holyrood ( their obstructionist stance is obvious to all) and repudiate the pact with the tories and start to look at policies that attract the pragmatics and the lefties they will be stuckwth a celiing of 30 - 35% of the vote
A labour / tory anti SNP coalition at holyrood which I fear is likely after the next holyrood election will destroy the labour party as an electoral force in Scotland
