[Closed] This SNP rout.....

Actually, they kept the Seperate databases in place up until 2007 and in 2010 the SNP decided not to pay to update it...

SVR would raise about £300 million per penny, so that's a potential billion quid a year less austerity.

Now, of course the big defence for not doing it is how much would it cost to get this up and running - what a good question...

Just remember how according to the SNP during the referendum campaign the set up costs for the [b]entirety[/b] of an independent Scotland were just £200 million 😆

tbh I dunno, I've never looked all that much into it, I know it's not a particularly widing ranging power though. That it's never been used by any incumbent government is evidence that it's never really been a well thought out power anyhow. tbh simply being able to raise or lower a simple rate is some way away from the type of tax reform that would be desireable to implement imo. I'd imagine for any powers to be useful you would need to be allowed to get alot more complex about it.

It's not just about raising a few extra quid that is the aim.

ninfan - Member

😆

You regularly use the laughing emoticon at the end of your posts Z-11, a habit which along with your incoherent posts you seem to uniquely share with Chewwy.

Now it doesn't appear to me to be the best way to influence people or win them over to your argument.

It's almost as if point-scoring and taunting is the only thing which you can reasonably expect to achieve.

If so can I congratulate you on your realistic and self-critical appraisal of your own limited powers of persuasion.

I'm all for giving the Peoples Republic of Sturgikistan full fiscal autonomy and removing all state subsidy from south of the border then sitting back and hearing the squeals from the Scottish electorate when their taxes go up to pay for the socialist utopia they clearly have voted for. But perhaps I'm wrong and the fantasists on here may actually be right and the Scots will relish paying Scandinavian levels of tax for Scandinavian levels of benefits but we'll never know unless we give it a try and the rest of the UK pull the plug on them.

Uponthedowns....now you're talking my language.

When do the English get to vote on jettisoning Scotland?

I'm all for giving the Peoples Republic of Sturgikistan full fiscal autonomy and removing all state subsidy from south of the border then sitting back and hearing the squeals from the Scottish electorate when their taxes go up to pay for the socialist utopia they clearly have voted for.

The Guardian described Sturgeon’s support for full fiscal autonomy as an [i]"eye-watering"[/i] blunder which [i]"puts the SNP on the Tory side of a key devolution argument"[/i]. Quote :

[i]Full fiscal autonomy means that what the Scottish government spends, the Scottish government raises. Apart from that, Ms Sturgeon’s government has no money, since it refuses to use its tax-raising powers. That’s why the SNP is already putting on the squeeze. Local councils are running into debt partly as the price of the SNP’s council tax freeze, which has greatly benefited the wealthiest. Scottish students are having to borrow at record levels as grants are reduced and tuition remains free, even to the rich. The NHS is enduring big funding shortfalls.

As the Institute for Fiscal Studies argues, fiscal autonomy also means that £7.6bn currently provided to Ms Sturgeon’s government by UK taxpayers would be switched off. All these gaps would either have to be made good by higher Scottish taxes or by deeper Scottish cuts. Scotland’s link with the UK pension system would be ended. And all at a time when the price of oil has collapsed.

There is no disputing that thousands of Scots have embraced the SNP in the hope that it represents a more dynamic and vernacular progressivism than Labour offers. But is this progressivism credible? To what degree is it frustrated separatism in progressive clothing?

The question facing Scottish voters in May is whether the hard facts and options square with the SNP rhetoric on full fiscal autonomy. Scottish Labour’s Jim Murphy said on Friday that it is a slogan that has collided with some truths. It is hard to disagree – or to overestimate the importance of the big call it poses. Progressive voters outside Scotland need Scots to get this big call right. But Scots themselves need it even more.[/i]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/10/guardian-view-on-election-scotland-slogan-hit-facts

It's rare for me to agree so strongly with a Guardian editorial but in this case I reckon they got it spot on. As did Labour in their criticism of the SNP's lack of joined-up thinking.

Having said that I believe that the SNP's wipe out of Labour in Scotland is the most positive aspect of the 2015 General Election.

But Scotland needs to move beyond emotive pleas of fairness and grasp reality. The SNP needs to put money where their rhetoric is. It needs to offer a real economic alternative to the failed neoliberal experiment. Something which up until now they have comprehensively failed to do, and I suspect that it is almost certainly beyond their grasp. They are ultimately a nationalist party selling dreams and not a great deal more imo.

It needs to offer a real economic alternative to the failed neoliberal experimen

Hence my comment : I suspect that it is almost certainly beyond their grasp. They are ultimately a nationalist party selling dreams and not a great deal more imo.

Personally, I've absolutely no doubt in what they are, I never have been, they are a centrist party dangling a few bobbles.

They are still much preferable to the utterly incompetent excuse for a labour party, and a thousand times more palatable than the tories.

Roll of full fiscal autonomy(which is ultimately independence imo.)

But Scotland needs to move beyond emotive pleas of fairness and grasp reality. The SNP needs to put money where their rhetoric is.

We've come from different starting points and reached the same conclusion. I'd just rather the SNP use the Scottish voters' money for their economic alternative rather than mine and the rest of the UK taxpayers. I'm prepared to concede they might make it work but without generating the economic base to pay for it (and please no cries of Maggie destroyed it- that's ancient history now and besides no modern economy depends on making steel and digging coal except maybe Australia) for which I've not heard a coherent plan I rather think it will end in tears.

uponthedowns - Member
But Scotland needs to move beyond emotive pleas of fairness and grasp reality. The SNP needs to put money where their rhetoric is.
We've come from different starting points and reached the same conclusion. I'd just rather the SNP use the Scottish voters' money for their economic alternative rather than mine and the rest of the UK taxpayers. I'm prepared to concede they might make it work but without generating the economic base to pay for it (and please no cries of Maggie destroyed it- that's ancient history now and besides no modern economy depends on making steel and digging coal except maybe Australia) for which I've not heard a coherent plan I rather think it will end in tears.

The SNPs ultimate plan for independence will be incredibly simple imo, undercut England.

I'd just rather the SNP use the Scottish voters' money for their economic alternative rather than mine and the rest of the UK taxpayers.

I disagree. Investing in Scotland would benefit the whole of the UK. Austerity, maintaining economic inequality, unaffordable housing, unemployment, spunking money on trident replacement, lack of training and opportunities for young people, privatisation, in work benefits, etc, is bad for the whole of the UK.

Neoliberalism has not delivered on the promises. Which is precisely why Scotland has firmly rejected the Conservatives, Labour, and the Liberal Democrats. And why voters in the rest of the UK are so thoroughly disillusioned with politics.

An alternative for Scotland would be a step forward for the rest of the UK.

ernie_lynch - Member

An alternative for Scotland would be a step forward for the rest of the UK.

I don't believe that is possible, there needs to be some upheaval and a new type of politics will need to form.

It's interesting times coming up, as with the SNPs surge in popularity in memebership, and now votes, it'll be a task to hold that all together, long term, short term they will(ie this westminster term), they are fairly disciplined.

But the most interesting thing for me is what opposition dynamic will develop at holyrood next year, as if Labour don't understand that the connection to the UK party is toxic and break away, they are utterly finished. I would like to see an independent SLP develop though.

In that context, there are alot of seats up for grabs, but I personally would really like the Greens to fill that void as much as possible(if they can't in this climate they are as well as chucking it.)

What that then gives Scotland is a completely different dynamic from westminsters centre right politics. We then have genuine centre Left politics to start to work with, and we can see what that develops.

I agree an alternative for Scotland is good for the UK or rUK, if a genuine alternative does present itself, the constitution won't matter a jot.

It's absurd to blame Scots for a Tory government when they voted for the SNP and the English/Welsh voted for the Tories. Even if every Scottish seat was Labour, the Tories would still have won.

The test of the SNP is what they do with their seats, they can claim to represent Scotland but Scotland is only a very small part of the UK with on 4 of the 46 million voters.

Do you think a real alternative is going to present itself in a neatly packaged white paper ready for the electorate to sign off on?

You appear to have completely missed my point. I need to work on making myself clearer.

I wonder to what extent the televised leaders debate influenced the result.
She came across very well and as a party leader who'd give dave a hard time.

I wonder to what extent the televised leaders debate influenced the result.
She came across very well and as a party leader who'd give [s]dave[/s] Ed a hard time

chickenman - Member
I believe Milliband had a fairly left wing agenda when he was made party leader.

No really.

He would IMO have been better sticking to anti austerity policies with the idea of Britain spending it's way out of recession; investment in jobs, industry + services, more jobs, more tax receipts etc...Britain does stand alone a bit in the world with the belief that cutting spending is going to improve your economy.

So are we spending more than we earn at the moment or the other way round? How about the socialists in Brazil just for starters?

Instead, Ed tried to be the party that cut spending but in a "nicer" way than the Tories.
Scottish voters could vote for a party that has competent politicians with credible left wing intentions. I don't get any sense of a "surge in nationalism" in Scotland, just people fed up with 36 years of Adam Smith Institute economics.

And so voted for the only party seriously proposing ASI policies during the referendum debate. Have we airbrushed the idea of no lender of last resort. And a party that wants a corporation tax war with rUK. So left wing??

And not a smiley in sight in the original post!!! 😯

Have we airbrushed the idea of no lender of last resort. And a party that wants a corporation tax war with rUK. So left wing??

Did you miss the result of the referendum? You been asleep?

No, it was noted with relief and confirmation that Scots can see through BS. And the answer to the question?

Sorry forgot to mention the SNP mantra - the end justifies the means even if that is proposing policies right out of the Adam Smith Insitutitues handbook of more radical options. As the great, late Bill McLaren would have said, they will be celebrating down in Kirkaldy with that one!

11,334,920 - Votes for Conservative
4,094,784 - Total Scottish electorate

So are we spending more than we earn at the moment or the other way round?

That you then go on to mock AS for his spin is somewhat ironic.

I have to hand it to the SNP for convincing the Scottish electorate that "neoliberalism" south of the border is not delivering for Scotland when those governments send many billions in support every year. They've managed to win the argument that all Scotland woes are due to Westminster mismanagement not least with regard to "Scotland's oil" and gloss over their own record at Holyrood

@cloudnine, as I have posted before I think Milliband and Labour where the big losers vs Sturgeon on that TV debate, she made it quite clear who would be wearing the trousers in any coalition. It's my view that really helped the Tories South of the border.

I have to hand it to the [s]SNP[/s] Tories for convincing the [s]Scottish[/s] english electorate that [s]"neoliberalism" south of the border is not delivering for Scotland when those governments send many billions in support every year.[/s] labour ruined the economy and cannot be trusted and the SNP would bully them and destroy the Union. They've managed to win the argument that all [s]Scotland [/s] the UK's woes are due to [s]Westminster [/s] labour mismanagement not least with regard to [s]"Scotland's oil"[/s] economy and gloss over their own record [s]at Holyrood[/s] in regulating the financial markets and agreeing to match labour spending plans

Its what politicians do demonise the opposition, largely with lies or half truths if we are being kind, and blame them for everything. We all know the reality is far more complicated that this

Which party lied the most depends on your own political persuasion rather than reality

I think Milliband and Labour where the big losers vs Sturgeon on that TV debate, she made it quite clear who would be wearing the trousers in any coalition. It's my view that really helped the Tories South of the border.

I wonder what that says about the English psyche. England seems to be becoming a scared and angry place, turning more and more in on itself. Depressing to watch.

Anyway, have we done this pic yet?

[img] [/img]

That look 😀

England seems to be becoming a scared and angry place, turning more and more in on itself

@jambalaya - I don't think that's why people in Scotland voted for the SNP on Thursday. You can call their policies progressive, left-wing or social-democratic but I think the SNP are just reflecting how Scottish people feel about themselves. England is moving to the right, Scotland isn't.

Did a nationalist party sweep the board there then?

Pretty much - the two parties standing on an anti-SNP, English nationalist agenda (UKIP and Tory) got a similar vote share in England as the SNP did in Scotland.

Did a nationalist party sweep the board there then?

Yes. The Tories are much more an English nationalist party than the SNP are a Scottish one. More than that, many people who voted SNP are not nationalists.

@cloudnine, as I have posted before I think Milliband and Labour where the big losers vs Sturgeon on that TV debate, she made it quite clear who would be wearing the trousers in any coalition. It's my view that really helped the Tories South of the border.

This was basically the point of my OP.

Why would England want to be governed by a collation that would be controlled a Nationalist party of another Country? It's not about the fact that the SNP are left wing, if they were a popular right wing Nationalist party who were going to prop up a weak Tory result, then I believe the response would of been a labour win.

er what that says about the English psyche. England seems to be becoming a scared and angry place, turning more and more in on itself. Depressing to watch.

They've managed to win the argument that all Scotland woes are due to Westminster mismanagement not least with regard to "Scotland's oil" and gloss over their own record at Holyrood

You seem to have England and Scotland mixed up

Well, I live in Scotland and I'm guessing you're in England, so probably both our views are skewed.

However:

The EU: England voted strongly for anti-EU parties, Scotland strongly for a pro-EU party.

Immigrants: England voted for parties that demonise immigrants, Scotland for a party that supports them and wants more.

Welfare: England voted for parties that want to implement yet more massive cuts affecting the poorest (they've already started), Scotland voted for a party that whats to reverse them and is already trying to in Scotland.

Trident: England voted for a party that wants to spend £100bn building weapons of mass destruction to threaten other countries, Scotland voted for a party that wants to scrap them.

Human rights: England voted for a party that's going to scrap the Human Rights Act, Scotland for a party that supports the HRA.

I could go on, but I think that proves my point.

More importantly, though the Union might still exist on paper, it's definitely gone in people's heads.

What's going to be interesting is that, for the first time, there's going to be an opposition party at Westminster who haven't just been defeated.

More importantly, though the Union might still exist on paper, it's definitely gone in people's heads

What's going to be interesting is that, for the first time, there's going to be an opposition party at Westminster who haven't just been defeated.

Immigrants: England voted for parties that demonise immigrants, Scotland for a party that supports them and wants more.

Bollocks.

England is far more diverse than Scotland. You have no significant number of immigrants. Wait until Central Scotland gets a load more.
There are parts of England where people are greatly affected by mass immigration, to deny that these areas do not have issues and to ignore them is the problem that causes support for the likes of UKIP.

Do you really believe Trident was a key issue for the SNP voters?

The EU: England voted strongly for anti-EU parties, Scotland strongly for a pro-EU party.

Scotland voted for a party that wants to leave one Union and join another. Despite the fact that this may not be possible.

The SNP won on the back of a feeling that they would be able to control Westminster, get another referendum and leave the Union on very favorable terms.

I could go on but this going over the same old stuff.

[img] [/img]

Bollocks.

England is far more diverse than Scotland. You have no significant number of immigrants. Wait until Central Scotland gets a load more.

Then maybe things will change, but for the moment at least I'm correct.

Do you really believe Trident was a key issue for the SNP voters?

I think it was one important issue, yes.

The Scots are up to their necks in it and are sinking fast but don't realise it. Ernie's analysis earlier is correct. Cameron will plow ahead with fiscal control by the Scots pulling up the money drawbridge behind him. He'll get what he wants, an end to Scottish whinging, a lack of meaningful influence from Scottish MPs and none of the cost or political fallout from an actual separation.

As for comments about English insecurities and anger, I think most English people were quite agnostic if that's the right word before the referendum, since then we seem to have had this express train of anti English sentiment and seperatist talk from some of the Scots. I don't know about Scotlands lion roaring, I think the English lion has just had it's tail pulled, woken up and is likely to bite.

It's going to be an interresting few years, in the meantime the Sottish sideshow could do with going on the back burner. The real crisis looming is the potential for Cameron to muck up the EU referendum, if he gets that wrong and we come out we'll all go down together regardless.

Part of the SNP's argument for independence was that they would work to create a fairer society. I agree with that and I'd happily pay more tax to help make it happen. However, I voted no because there were too many unanswered questions and I doubted their ability to deliver what they promised.

I voted for them in the GE because I still agree with the notion of a fairer society. I believe the SNP will strive for that even within the union if only because it will help to win people over to the notion that Scotland can work as an independent nation. They've been handed a golden opportunity by the Scottish electorate - Show us what you can do SNP it's up to you now.

I don't know about Scotlands lion roaring, I think the English lion has just had it's tail pulled, woken up and is likely to bite.

Looks more like two Chihuahas squabbling over some loose kibble to me

That look

Ahh yes, just what our governance could do with. More contempt.

since then we seem to have had this express train of anti English sentiment and seperatist talk from some of the Scots.

Interesting posts, enjoyed reading those on a lazy Saturday morning.

I think the Tories and UKIP are very pro UK, pro the Union. Labour too in many ways hence their conflict in Scotland. The anti SNP feeling comes from the SNP being a nationalist party campaigning to end that union. If the Tories where anti Scotland they would t be sending £8bn a year North

One of my colleagues picked up on something Cameron said, he talked not just about the Smith commission powers but fiscal control or a degree of. Cameron is clearly looking for English powers to match those devolved to Scotland, this makes perfect sense and will be very popular. What I foresee is Scotland being handed more powers, for example the ability to income tax rates and thresholds (ie switch points for different rates) but not personal allowance or corporate tax rates. England will then get the same. This will really put the SNP in a difficult spot as they will have the ability to set the top rate of tax at 50% and move other rates and bands. It's a trap they cannot escape and will challenge them to match their rhetoric with action. The SNP will whine and whine but do little, a 50% band will just see behavioural changes with top brass either moving over the border for all/part of a year or corporate tax planning which reduces income payable in Scotland.

History will be very kind to Cameron who has played a blinder, he gave up very little to the Lib Dems to get into power in 2010. The result of which is that the Lib Dems have been crushed with most of their seats falling to Tories. The referendum led to more powers for Scotland but England (Wales and NI) will get the same which is very significant. Labour have been crushed in Scotland, the Tories had little to lose or gain there in terms of seats. The only way the SNP could hurt the Tories was if they formed a coalition at Westminster and that's not how it's played out. The SNP will strengthen their position in Scotland as the a to Tory rhetoric will be ratcheted up funded by the £8m in salaries and expenses they now have.

ernie_lynch - Member
You appear to have completely missed my point. I need to work on making myself clearer.

As far as I'm concerned England and Scotland politely just stuck 2 fingers up at each other the other day!

I think the Tories and UKIP are very pro UK, pro the Union.

I think they've very pro-England, which isn't quite the same thing.

all I'm going to say on the subject is this.

As a Scottish person living in Scotland the bollocks spouted about anti-English this and that is complete nonsense.

The mainstream media are what spouts this pish. I stopped buying newspapers many years ago as it's nowt but lies in the main.

The old saying of don't believe what you read in the papers is certainly true here. Unfortunately there's nothing I can do to stop this except not buy the papers etc, so I don't.

Oh! and the whole thign about ending the Union. The only people talking about this are every other party except the SNP! It's a scaremongering load of shite!
The SNP right now are wanting to do the best they can for the people of Scotland. And I hope they do. I see nothing wrong with that.

So. No anti-English nonsense. But I very much do despise the whole Westminster thing. But hey, maybe one day it will change?

Have a good day everyone.

Ben, go and read the manifestos and look which one frames the whole debate around an insular focus!! Have you also forgotten that most of your countrymen believe in the union and we have a PM talking the same story now. At some point, the nats really need to talk straight otherwise you will be getting very dizzy.

The gap between what our government spends and receives is among the highest in the advanced world and this gets spun how exactly? Better that Shane Warne at his best. We will be exporting more than we import next?

Ben the SNP are clever with their language, they speak of Wesminster mismanagement and elite's, they speak of despising the Tories. To those listening it's anti English whether or not the SNP argue otherwise. It's like Galloway declaring Bradofrd and Isreal Free Zone, what people hear and interpret is free of Jews. Galloway absolutely knows that. When Salmond talks he speaks not of the SNP lion roaring but of Scotland, the inference is very clear that when he speaks of Wesminster and the Tories he is speaking of England.The SNP know exactly what they are doing in this regard.

They've been handed a golden opportunity by the Scottish electorate - Show us what you can do SNP it's up to you now.

Indeed. Delivery time not excuse time and with less whining preferably. With responsibility comes accountability.

To those listening it's anti English

Only if they're stupid. Many areas of the north of England have similar issues with feeling abandoned by London-centric, right wing politics by both the red and blue flavours of Tory. Unfortunately it's current only north of the border that there is an alternative to vote for.

She has done well since the Krankies split.
[img] [/img]

To those listening it's anti English

Only if you are a London dwelling tory voting elite 😯

Or frankkly a tim nice but dim. what a daft thing to say.
You are the RW media and I claim my phone tapping

Most people in the North [ from all parties] would agree with that view of that their London .

when he speaks of Wesminster and the Tories he is speaking of England

Out of interest do you think the tory message about legitimacy was anti scottish?
When they said the SNP did they mean all of scotland
etc

Daft daft argument even by your standards

* forgive me for the harshness and not meant as an insult [ i struggled to convey how much i disagreed and that worked] but I dont see how you can argue westminster tory = england Its nonsensical in the extreme.

With regards to the RW conspiracy in London, is London more or less labour now than 48 hours ago?

er what that says about the English psyche. England seems to be becoming a scared and angry place, turning more and more in on itself. Depressing to watch.

You seem to have England and Scotland mixed up

Only if you are a London dwelling tory voting elite

With regards to the RW conspiracy in London, is London more or less labour now than 48 hours ago?

Labour is a RW party.

We'll according to Balls (remember him?) it's "a centre, centre left party" whatever that is.

SNP in practice is not a LW party indeed less than the Labs. So there may be some hangover coming.

We'll according to Balls (remember him?) it's "a centre, centre left party" whatever that is.

I think he meant "Tory lite"

Ben the SNP are clever with their language, they speak of Wesminster mismanagement and elite's, they speak of despising the Tories. [b]To those listening it's anti English[/b]

When Salmond talks he speaks not of the SNP lion roaring but of Scotland, the inference is very clear that [b]when he speaks of Westminster and the Tories he is speaking of England[/b].

Drivel. It's interesting that you interpret it as such, but drivel never the less.

As others have pointed out this has nothing to do with anti English or anti any other member of the Union.

The SNP are obviously campaigning for Scotland only (clue is in the S in SNP), however its not a case of campaigning for powers at the expense of the rest of the Union. Instead hopefully all the members including England will have the opportunity to benefit from increased local powers.

it's "a centre, centre left party" whatever that is.

Its not the most complicated comprehension test ... unless Precott said it 😉

Which bit of this is difficult to understand

At this election, we have the opportunity to shake up the out of touch Westminster system so that [b]it serves Scotland better. [/b]A vote for the SNP on May 7th is a vote for MPs who will [b]always stand up for Scotland's best interests[/b]

??

None of it is any more complicated than centre or centre left

Is someone disputing the SNP want to put Scotland first ?

Are you arguing this automatically makes them anti -english?

We all put our families first does this means we are anti everyone elses family?

The dreaded Westminster that allowed the establishment of a Scottish parliament and also a referendum on Scottish independence. What is really so wrong about Westminster?

fasternotfatter - Member
The dreaded Westminster that allowed the establishment of a Scottish parliament and also a referendum on Scottish independence. What is really so wrong about Westminster?

[quote=fasternotfatter opined]The dreaded Westminster that allowed the establishment of a Scottish parliament and also a referendum on Scottish independence. What is really so wrong about Westminster?

Gawd bless you be thanking you kindly sir for your generosity

So your reply to they rule and have to much power is to show that they rule from Westminster and only they can grant powers to scotland

Some times I just love the unintentional satire/irony of the internet 😆

Thanks for that

they rule from Westminster and only they can grant powers to scotland

Who else do you think should be able to grant powers to Scotland?

A.G. Barr? Jimmy Crankie? Sean Connery?

The clue is in the name. It's a Nationalist party. They want more for Scotland. There is only a finite amount of resource, so therefore if they get more, rUK will have less.

From what I saw, the party of fear and anger was UKIP. You might want to have a look at how UKIP did in Scotland as opposed to Scotland.

Presuming you mean England in there somewhere, then yes - UKIP did depressingly well in this election, getting 12.5% of the popular vote. In Scotland it was about 1/10th of that*.

*Can't find the exact figure, the BBC have them under "other" who got 2.5% in total.

JY do you mean Westminster grants powers in accordance with the current system of government that applies to the whole of the UK that defines the relationship between the UK government and devolved governments and executives? Of course they do don't they? 🙄

That is what the people of Scotland voted for when they voted to remain part of the UK. The majority of Scots want to remain part of the Westminster system.

Scotland vote share
SNP 50.0%
LAB 24.3%
CON 14.9%
LD 7.5%
UKIP 1.6%
GRN 1.3%

There is only a finite amount of resource

No, there isn't - this is the lie at the heart of the whole austerity agenda, that there's only so much money to go around. It's like those people who compare the national debt to a credit card.

The SNP's plan was to grow the economy for everyone, with some more public spending. It worked for Roosevelt with the New Deal. Whether it would work for the UK is debatable of course, but the idea that the pot of money (which doesn't exist anyway) is only a fixed size fuels the selfish nature of this debate.

That is what the people of Scotland voted for when they voted to remain part of the UK. The majority of Scots want to remain part of the Westminster system.

Last year they did. Now? Debatable. After another 5 years of Tory government? Probably quite unlikely.

Scotland vote share
SNP 50.0%
LAB 24.3%
CON 14.9%
LD 7.5%
UKIP 1.6%
GRN 1.3%

Thanks for finding that - so UKIP did a fraction better than my guess 😉

UKIP took 1.6% of the vote in scotland.

So what?

A lot of UKIP's support comes from, perceived or otherwise, the problem with mass immigration and the loss of "native" British culture.

As Scotland has no problem with mass immigration and their cultural identity has only become stronger in the last 20 years, why would UKIP achieve much support there?

their cultural identity has only become stronger in the last 20 years

Out of interest, what do you think that cultural identity is? Because it's not tartan, bagpipes, och-aye-the-noo and all that stuff. It's certainly not based on where you were born.

Out of interest, what do you think that cultural identity is? Because it's not tartan, bagpipes, och-aye-the-noo and all that stuff. It's certainly not based on where you were born.

No need to be so patronising.

As the vast majority live in the Central Belt, I would say there is a strong, post industrial society, that has seen massive problems and change in the last 30 years. There is also a very strong Celtic influence which puts a different slant on it from what you would find in similar areas in the NE or NW of England.

Am I correct, in that you are not actually Scottish?

No need to be so patronising.

I wasn't aware that I was. The stuff I listed was what often comes up when discussing Scottish culture.

Am I correct, in that you are not actually Scottish?

Define Scottish. I was born in Glasgow and have lived here all my life, but neither parent was born in Scotland.

A lot of UKIP's support comes from, perceived or otherwise, the problem with mass immigration and the loss of "native" British culture.

English culture surely.

Yah lets move the goalposts and discuss that instead

That is what the people of Scotland voted for when they voted to remain part of the UK. The majority of Scots want to remain part of the Westminster system.

Your broad point is true in that they did vote to remain in the union but no one had disputed that and it seems ot have no relevance to the question of whether the UK parliament is westminster dominated/centric.