[Closed] SNP. You LOST, get over it

With road signs becoming a devolved responsibility, some of the new designs are already on show.

[img] :large[/img]

I would like to see Bagpipes get licesened and taxed - about Eleventy Million pounds per minute of play - except for pipe bands - they would get 99% rebate at Hogmanay. See if you can guess which city centre I work in...

[img] [/img]

"A kilt covers the body from the waist down to the centre of the knees"

so the waist and the knees then ?

Not really 'evidence' granted but two close friends of mine who were undecided ended up voting no, largely on the basis of the proposed new powers.

Also whilst new powers have been proposed they are nowhere near what Gordon brown spoke of but they are closer to what the Labour / CONservative party suggested. It is also too early to judge as they are still just proposals and need Westminster approval.

SNP. You LOST, get over it

For ***** sake

I was quite happy ignoring both sides as they agreed amongst themselves and ignored the fact that those that disgreed still exist. At least on FaceTwit the two camps are still blissfuly ignoring each other.

Actually no, it doesn't look like they did.

Is scotland going to be an independent country any time soon?

No.

Additional powers wasn't what the SNP campaigned for, they campaigned for full independence. Hence theres no two ways about it, they lost.

Additional powers wasn't what the SNP campaigned for, they campaigned for full independence. Hence theres no two ways about it, they lost.

They certainly didn't win, but did they lose? They managed to wring a lot more concessions out of Westminster than looked possible at the start of the campaign.

Sturgeon needs some proper tax advice if she thinks making the top rate 50% will actually do anything.

Page 2 already - is this one going to be as long as the last Scottish Independence thread?

I might disconnect my internet now, just in case...

Even if the SNP had a 100% of the seats in Holyrood it could not declare independence, I am sure they would make plenty of noise, we know they are good at that, but they cannot exit unilaterally whether the UK remains in the EU or not.

True but it would be an interesting stand off as I dont the rUK would invade either and would have to respect a vote if they held one

Sturgeon needs some proper tax advice if she thinks making the top rate 50% will actually do anything.

They can abolish APT and get a few extra passengers from Newcastle but they will have a big hole in their budget.

[quote=NZCol ]Sturgeon needs some proper tax advice if she thinks making the top rate 50% will actually do anything.
I'm pretty sure that's a Labour policy and not an SNP one. Tax take has been estimated at around £8m pa. Hardly worthwhile in the grand scheme of things.

JY, why would the UK have to respect a vote in the regional Scottish parliament for independence ? I can't see us sending in the troops either but there are plenty of other mechanisms for preventing a unilateral declaration of independence having any meaning.

FWIW I cannot see there being another independence referendum without there being a corresponding vote in the UK, "Should Scotland be allowed a another referendum ?"

I totally understand why the SNP is trying to ride the wave in Scotland (interesting there is one at all given they lost the vote) as they want to reinforce their majority there and make trouble in Westminster

Hardly worthwhile in the grand scheme of things

Depends, how many votes will it win?

[quote=jambalaya ]
They can abolish APT and get a few extra passengers from Newcastle but they will have a big hole in their budget.
Lost tourism income due to APD estimated at £200m. Income from APD - £130m.

I can think of other reasons it should be retained (or even increased) but the financial argument in favour of reduction seems sounds>

True but it would be an interesting stand off as I dont the rUK would invade either and would have to respect a vote if they held one

Would they though? Without a very large majority i don't think the UK government would need to respect a vote they didnt agree to, especially if they haven't actively been engaged in the referendum process. I wouldn't see it any differently than the situation in Spain, only with less appetite for independence

And how would that sit with the fairly sizable and influencial population that voted no? I dont think Scotland could just walk away from the uk without their consent. Certainly there would be even greater challenges around aspects such as currency, split of wealth etc, that played such a prominant part in the recent ref debate.

Sure would be interesting, but i doubt in a good way!

I think part of the reason for the strong push for independence for Scotland come from the fact that power have been so slow to head north of the boarder. You see this throughout history, central governments trying to keep too tight a control for too long. Give Scotland these promised powers, but also with it less backup from Westminster. Its too easy for the SNP to paint a picture of utopia if only they had more power where as the reality would be some improvements in some areas and other areas would get worse but the compromises made would come from Scottish parliament rather than Westminster and and the SNP would have to take responsibility rather than slopey shoulders.

TheBrick - Member
I think part of the reason for the strong push for independence for Scotland come from the fact that a minority of Scots love to whinge, especially about the English.

FTFY

Fortunately the majority saw and see sense and know what's in their best interests. They are less vocal but know how to vote - the beauty of the ballot box, you can't intimidate in there. hence the %age of SNP voters who voted NO!

Lost tourism income due to APD estimated at £200m. Income from APD - £130m.

I'd say the lack of decent direct flights does more harm. Yes, Easyjet etc offer foreign routes but it's an absolute pain that BA don't and everything needs to go via London. It took me 10 hours to get to from Glasgow to Stuttgart last week via two flights and a 4 hour wait in Heathrow.

Lost tourism income due to APD estimated at £200m. Income from APD - £130m.

You see this throughout history, central governments trying to keep too tight a control for too long.

Due to the late intervention of the UK parties with the promise of some kind of DevoMax, no-one can say for sure what would have happened without that. My view is that there would still have been a No vote, but with a smaller majority.

In most cases I think that would have parked the issue for maybe 20 years or so, however UK wide politics is in such a confused state at the moment that I can see a few scenarios where an earlier referendum might be likely:
1) If we were to get a Tory/UKIP coalition as a UK government
2) If there is Yes vote in a referendum to exit the EU
3) If the SNP were to gain a majority of the Scottish seats in westminster and use that to bargain their votes for another referendum
4) If the SNP were to get more than 50% of the vote at the next Scottish election with a referendum in their manifesto
5) If the next government backs away from the devoMax promises leading to some No voters feeling betrayed

And how would that sit with the fairly sizable and influencial population that voted no? I dont think Scotland could just walk away from the uk without their consent.

I think there would need to be a pro-independence vote of maybe 60% before it could actually happen without a significant backlash. A narrow Yes vote would have been a big problem in the last referendum I think.

the fact that a minority of Scots love to whinge, especially about the English.

Have you ever considered that you are part of the problem?

Well, we were not part of Scotland being slow to adjust to an unbalanced and uncompetitive industrial structure in the 70s and 80s and we are not to blame for an over concentration on Oil and financial services now.

But given the high percentage of foreign ownership of oil and whiskey these days, there is already an alternative set of targets to blame not just the English.

Still let's see if (unlike the tartan tax) these new powers can be put to good use.

Well, we were not part of Scotland being slow to adjust to an unbalanced and uncompetitive industrial structure in the 70s and 80s and we are not to blame for an over concentration on Oil and financial services now.

Who's "we" in this context?

We'll have to wait and see if they are implemented first. Much of what was previously recommended as part of the Calman Commission got no further (e.g. APD).

It took me 10 hours to get to from Glasgow to Stuttgart last week via two flights and a 4 hour wait in Heathrow.

Did you pick odd flights, as KLM and BA both offer flights on that route, with a total time of under 5 hours.

why would the UK have to respect a vote in the regional Scottish parliament for independence ?

I don't want to get dragged into this but people (not just here) keep alluding to the "fact" that older people and OAPs were the only group who voted majority No in the referendum.

This is probably based on the "Ashcroft poll" of 2000 people after the referendum which showed a majority for Yes in all age groups except the over 55s and 18-24s ..

This poll (although mentioned to by Alex himself and massively tweeted by yes voters after the vote, usually with jolly "wait until they die" undercurrent) was probably very wrong.

A larger Yougov poll of 4000 people, which came out a bit later and received very little attention, showed a majority No vote among all but one age group (25-39).

Theres more info here in an article at the [url= http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/referendum-survey-suggests-a-slender-majority-of-young-people-voted-no.25407723 ]herald scotland[/url] (registration required for full article)

Incidentally the Ashcroft poll also showed 71/29 in favour of independence for 16-17 year olds (also widely tweeted as an example of Alex Salmonds political canniness). That particular result was based on just 14 people out of the 2000, so draw your own conclusions.

I realise that yes voters want to find reassurance in the fact that they "almost won" or "would've won except for X.. Y or Z", but as they were fond of saying during the campaign "only one poll matters ".

Well they were right about that.

While there is no question that the SNP lost the referendum vote it's also quite possible that they've come out of the referendum by far the strongest of the parties in Scotland. Whether the current polling figures actually continue into the general election is debatable (as that often comes down to a straight Tory v Labour fight so voting for that has been very different than the voting for the Scottish parliament) but if they did then we'd be in a very confused situation indeed. If Labour lost enought Scottish seats that they'd need SNP votes in the UK parliament then it's very hard to see the price for that being anything other than an agreement to support the holding of another referendum.

The only people I know who are chuntering for extra powers are those who lost. All the No voters I know, don't want them. Which side was in the majority?

Back to the tax issue. How do you have a nation set it's own taxes, that then get paid to Westminster! What if the taxes are not comparable with the rest of the UK, how is the "big pot" then divi'd up? if the nation sets lower taxes, does that mean they get less back and that then affects everything in that nation,e.g Hospital, schools, roads etc?? or is it a bit like have your cake and eat it!

the alternative offer was for MORE devolution

[quote=bearGrease ]

the alternative offer was for MORE devolution

The only people I know who are chuntering for extra powers are those who lost. All the No voters I know, don't want them. Which side was in the majority?

The majority voted no, but it was their own side that created the confusion over the extra powers. I have heard some rumblings on the subject of betrayal from folks that voted No and who have said the offer of new powers was a factor in their decision.

Hard core No voters will always vote No (well, maybe not always because UK politics could easily impact that for some of them - especially the traditional Labour vote which hasn't always been pro-Union) and hard core Yes voters will always vote Yes. There is a fair chunk in-between (and the polling indicated this as well), many of whom were attracted to the idea of independence but were scared at the prospect and seemed to want to give the UK parties one last chance.

As I understand it yes if tax take dropped because of reduced income tax then yes choices would have to be made on cutting schools, hospitals, roads etc. Obviously some tax still would go to Westminster to pay for UK wide things like border control, defence, the Research Councils etc.

[quote=dragon ] Obviously some tax still would go to Westminster to pay for UK wide things like border control, defence, the Research Councils etc.
70-80% of tax take still goes to Westminster. Seriously, these are pretty minor tweaks to the existing arrangements.

If Labour lost enought Scottish seats that they'd need SNP votes in the UK parliament then it's very hard to see the price for that being anything other than an agreement to support the holding of another referendum.

It'll be a Tory majority regardless so Labour wont win/get in. I'd also like to see UKIP shut the **** up. They have two pissing seats. Big deal. 750 total and they have two. Wish they'd shut up. Idiots.

Really? Have you forgotten the question on the ballot paper already? The alternative offer was to remain in the union, which is what two million people voted for.

It was the No campaign that changed what that meant to "stay in the UK, but with more powers" and certainly some people thought that's what they were voting for when the put their mark in the No box.

It certainly would have been better if they devoMax option was on the ballot paper - especially as it wasn't offered until after some people had already voted by post. At the moment it's possible to know what percentage wanted independence, but it's not possible to say how many voter for No on the basis that they thought devoMax was the best available option, and how many were an outright No under any circumstances. I'd hazard a guess that the majority of the No vote was the latter, but I wouldn't hazard a guess at what percentage. I don't think the offer made the difference between winning and losing for the No camp though - they'd have won anyway. In fact if the No vote didn't send their big-guns up to Scotand to campaign they'd probably have won with a much healthier margin. Given the vast majority of the press outlets were supporting the Union then there wasn't really any need for the UK politicians to get involved.

It'll be a Tory majority regardless so Labour wont win/get in. I'd also like to see UKIP shut the **** up. They have two pissing seats. Big deal. 750 total and they have two. Wish they'd shut up. Idiots

I'd be surprised if there is an outright Tory majority at the next general election. It seems one of the least likely outcomes to me. So if the Tories are to retain control it'll need to be with the support of someone else - and that could be UKIP if they win more seats at the general election. Whether they do win more seats (or even retain what they've currently got) is definitely open to question though - the Tories will be arguing that a vote for UKIP is effectively a vote for a Labour government, just as Labour will be saying that a vote for SNP is a vote for a Tory government.

It'll be a Tory majority regardless so Labour wont win/get in. I'd also like to see UKIP shut the **** up. They have two pissing seats. Big deal. 750 total and they have two. Wish they'd shut up. Idiots.

While they are indeed idiots, it would appear that 19% of the country are presently stupid enough to consider voting for them. And all the polling says that nobody is going to get a majority at the general election. Theres potentially going to be some serious horse-trading going on to establish a working majority. And whether we like it or not UKIP and the SNP are going to be right in the mix

The nightmare scenario is a Tory/UKIP coalition. Imagine Nige holding sway in the role of kingmaker 😯

Cheers!

[img] [/img]

The nightmare scenario is a Tory/UKIP coalition.

Not if you're the SNP. They must be praying for that.

Looks like the Smith report contains potential legislation aimed at stopping there being another referendum: "To provide an adequate check on Scottish Parliament legislation changing the franchise, the electoral system or the number of constituency and regional members
for the Scottish Parliament, UK legislation will require such legislation to be passed by a two-thirds majority of the Scottish Parliament."