• This topic has 612 replies, 70 voices, and was last updated 5 days ago by poly.
Viewing 40 posts - 561 through 600 (of 613 total)
  • Scottish politics thread
  • gordimhor
    Full Member

    “I don’t think it’s that hard to be a little more moderate and reconciliatory:” @ Poly  There’s a real need for people to be a bit more moderate and reconciliatory  in the debate. I for one am sick of the labelling, Snatzis and Yoons guff that goes on in so called debates.  Yes there is very much a need to get on with the nitty gritty boring stuff like council tax,  and schools , housing etc . It ‘s hardly moderate or conciliatory to state that independence is “dead in the water” when 45% or more of the population support it.

    There’s a need for pragmatism and willingness to work together on both sides.

    It won’t come as a surprise to many on here  my vote will be for the SNP though I  have many reservations

    nickc
    Full Member

    It ‘s hardly moderate or conciliatory to state that independence is “dead in the water” when 45% or more of the population support it.

    Pretty much the only thing of note that John Swinney will achieve as interim party leader will be his decision to scrap the role of minister for independence. When the leader of the independence movement while in they’re still in power does something like that it tells every voter the importance to the SNP of the subject.

    If you don’t think that’s moderate, take it up with your SNP candidate.

    piemonster
    Full Member

    There’s a real need for people to be a bit more moderate and reconciliatory  in the debate.

    I mentioned I wasn’t going to vote SNP ‘again’ at the next election and that I wasn’t going to vote Alba, leaving the greens and pretty much no one else, and got a very unexpected response about being ok with/asking if I was ok with all sorts of horrible stuff.  🤷‍♂️

    scotroutes
    Full Member

    minister for independence.

    That was always window dressing. A way for the SNP to signal to the Indy supporters that they hadn’t forgotten their role. I always thought it was a mistake. Every SNP minister should be the minister for independence. It should be baked into their position, not forgotten about to be left to one individual.

    gordimhor
    Full Member

    @piemonster If I do decide to leave the SNP it would be to put all my support into some of the groups who campaign outside of parliamentary politics. Neither Alba nor the greens are for me, for different reasons. So far as I know the ISP don’t have a branch anywhere near me. Somebody spoke about the “vanguard” of the independence movement, I believe the “vanguard” of the independence movement is not in parliamentary politics but in social movements .

    bearGrease
    Full Member
    poly
    Free Member

    Pretty much the only thing of note that John Swinney will achieve as interim party leader will be his decision to scrap the role of minister for independence. When the leader of the independence movement while in they’re still in power does something like that it tells every voter the importance to the SNP of the subject.

    I know its partly because there’s some typos in there, but I can’t actually work out what you meant?

    Do you think the SNP don’t want independence now?  Do you think that John Swinney got rid of Min for Indy because he doesn’t think Indy is important?  You didn’t listed to what he said – he said I don’t think we need a special minister for this as its on every ministers agenda.  Now is it the most important thing for most scots right now?  definitely not.  Is it the most important thing for most of the 45% who voted yes last time round – probably not.  But it it one of the top 6 issues most Scots will discuss on politics – certainly (whether for, against or unsure).

    What the SNP lack is a clear path to a meaningful, legal, useful referendum.  Thats not an SNP issue.  Thats a Westminster issue.  The next prime minister would do well to realise that telling people they can’t have the discussion leads to a resentment that actually increases the desire for independence.   It also stokes the if “WM don’t want us to go, we must be really valuable” argument.

    poly
    Free Member

    Suspended for 27 days and pay docked for 54, check your roaming plans!

    He wasn’t punished for misusing the roaming.  He’s punished for lying about it.

    Interesting that they have the power to dock pay.  That seems to make this a quasi-judicial process (perhaps the suspension does anyway) and I’d argue that there’s no way a group of politicians could be viewed to meet the requirements of Article 6.

    alanl
    Free Member

    “Suspended for 27 days and pay docked for 54 “

    He got off lightly. Lying to his Superiors and the Electorate,and allowing others without security clearance to use his work computer. He should have been thrown out for his contiuing lies, what was it, around 3 months after, when he admitted he had been lying, and he knew it was his Sons who had watched football? All to get out of paying the bill. It wasnt the initial thing he did that was the problem, if he had just admitted he had used the computer for his own use, and offered to settle the bill, no one would have said anything, it was his cover up and lies after that brought him down, which seems to be a recurring theme with Politicians. Remember the MP from Peterborough, had a speeding fine, rather than pay it and take the points, she lied, was caught out, and got a 3 month jail sentence, even then, she thought she could still be a decent MP. Luckily the Electorate have a chance to boot them out now for such things, rather than wait until the next election.

    nickc
    Full Member

    Do you think that John Swinney got rid of Min for Indy because he doesn’t think Indy is important?

    I think he got rid for the reasons he said so at the time, A minister spending time and [taxpayer] money on something  that’s not going to happen in the foreseeable was a spit in the eye to folks suffering from cost of living crisis and it smacked of  party not focussed on the fact that all across the country, services are failing. It was a bit of political theatre to separate his cabinet from Yousef’s. But it was also designed to send a signal to union supporting Labour voters – You can vote for us secure in the knowledge that this is issue is on the backburner now.

    ChrisL
    Full Member

    TJ – doesn’t overall voteshare affect stuff like Short Money? So even if you won’t vote for any of the candidates you feel have a chance of winning in your constituency, there is still an (albeit tiny) effect that your vote will have. Plus there might be a bit of a “success breeds success” effect, the higher the vote percentages for minor parties gets the more people are likely to consider them worth voting for in the future.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    perhaps Chris.  As above I will think hard about this and my position is not fixed.  It does not sit well with me not to vote

    scotroutes
    Full Member

    the higher the vote percentages for minor parties gets the more people are likely to consider them worth voting for in the future.

    Which is the thing that might make me vote.

    irc
    Full Member

    Votes do indeed affect Short Money – which was news to me.  As long as the party has at least one seat.  So does the Scottish Green party qualify by their being Greens in the UK parliament? I thought there was a split between Scotland and UK Greens?

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01663/

    Looks like the SNP will be losing a huge share of their funding.

    poly
    Free Member

    I think he got rid for the reasons he said so at the time, A minister spending time and [taxpayer] money on something  that’s not going to happen in the foreseeable was a spit in the eye to folks suffering from cost of living crisis and it smacked of  party not focussed on the fact that all across the country, services are failing. It was a bit of political theatre to separate his cabinet from Yousef’s. But it was also designed to send a signal to union supporting Labour voters – You can vote for us secure in the knowledge that this is issue is on the backburner now.

    Well which was it the reasons HE said so at the time:

    Because the Scottish Government believes independence offers the best future for Scotland, all Cabinet Secretaries and ministers – not just one – are responsible for helping to bring about that better future.

    As a party we will use every electoral opportunity to advance the cause. The next such opportunity will be the forthcoming UK General Election. The SNP will go into that election on a manifesto which will say on page one, line one: ‘Vote SNP for Scotland to become an independent country.

    We have achieved so much together: a Scottish Parliament and an independence referendum, both of which looked a long way off to me when I joined the SNP.  They were accomplished by always keeping our eye on the prize, building support, keeping up the pressure, and trusting in democratic power. That’s how we are going to win our country’s independence.

    (that is a direct quote from Mr Swinney)

    OR the reasons you’ve listed above which are entirely different?

    nickc
    Full Member

    Sure, he got The Party Secretary to say the thing as party leader he couldn’t

    Chris McEleny said: “The new SNP government has made the decision to de-prioritise independence in order to try and broaden support for itself within parliament.

    poly
    Free Member

    Do you think Chris McEleny is the SNP party secretary?   He’s the General Secretary of Alba.

    poly
    Free Member

    Votes do indeed affect Short Money – which was news to me.  As long as the party has at least one seat.  So does the Scottish Green party qualify by their being Greens in the UK parliament? I thought there was a split between Scotland and UK Greens?

    I’ve just crunched the numbers – the Green Party numbers do seem to be based only on Green Party voted in England and do not include the Scottish Green Party Votes.  That was interesting as I didn’t realise there was a direct 1 vote = xx p per annum relationship.

    gordimhor
    Full Member

    “Sure, he got The Party Secretary to say the thing as party leader he couldn’t

    Chris McEleny said: “The new SNP government has made the decision to de-prioritise independence in order to try and broaden support for itself within parliament”

    Oops 😁

    BruceWee
    Full Member

    They all look alike

    bearGrease
    Full Member

    He wasn’t punished for misusing the roaming.  He’s punished for lying about it.

    Thank you @poly, I had grasped that, I was merely trying to lighten the mood in here.

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    interesting interpretation of what she said (and ignoring the barnet consequences of any such policy in rUK)

    Why should the SNP refuse or agree to co-operate with another party at Westminster on the basis of its policies in England, Wales and Northern Ireland on matters which are devolved to the Scottish Parliament? Seeking to influence those matters outside Scotland while jealously guarding the exclusive right of Holyrood to legislate on them inside Scotland seems…odd.

    In any case, this constitutional crap is tiresome and oxygen-sucking. Let’s see the parties’ manifestos for the next 5 years.

    poly
    Free Member

    pca – I don’t think that’s what she was saying.  My interpretation was “I’m quite happy to help work with them, afterall some of the policies they’d like to introduce in rUK we’ve introduced in Scotland already” now the hidden subplot I read behind that was “if Labour don’t take my offer they are being petty” and “potentail scottish labour voters don’t need to worry that they’ll let the tories in, if they vote for us, because we will help labour if they need it”.  You can argue that since they don’t want to be part of WM long term they should take the Sien Fein stance and not turn up, but given every policy in rUK has a financial consequence for Scotland that would seem a bit dumb.

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    You can argue that since they don’t want to be part of WM long term they should take the Sien Fein stance and not turn up

    No-one is saying that. Comparing the SNP to Sinn Fein is absurd and offensive in every dimension.

    The SNP shouldn’t seek to use its political power to influence policy outside Scotland on matters that are devolved to the Scottish Parliament when it doesn’t stand for election outside Scotland, let alone have a mandate outside Scotland. Should the UUP consider a coalition with the Tories if they promise to impose UUP policies in Scotland?

    gordimhor
    Full Member

    Even on devolved matters Westminster has influence over Scottish Government policy because of the barnett formula. Why should a Scottish Government of any flavour not then attempt to influence decisions taken at Westminster that have implications for the Scottish Government spending plans in Scotland

    mefty
    Free Member

    “Looks like the SNP will be losing a huge share of their funding.”

    Air time too – pretty good chance they will no longer be the third largest party so will lose their spot at PMQs and their Opposition Days.

    squirrelking
    Free Member

    How is SNP supporting Labour any different to the DUP supporting the Tories?

    Same limitations apply.

    As for

    will not work with Labour because of their tribal hatred of Labour and pigheaded view on the union

    You got that completely the wrong way round.

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    You got that completely the wrong way round.

    Whoosh!

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    The oleaginous Anas Sarwar trying, and failing, to dodge a question about whether his family business pays its workers a living wage. He claims he doesn’t own any of the business, which is technically true – it’s a trust for his kids that owns it.

    Sarwar is not my first choice for a clean hands/clean sweep leader to rid the Scottish government of sleaze…

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-scotland-69063836

    https://www.glasgowworld.com/news/scottish-labour-leader-hopeful-sarwar-sheds-cash-and-carry-shares-2070163

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6687889.stm – but this was reversed on appeal to be fair

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/news/05/0525/sarwar.shtml

    piemonster
    Full Member

    Does anyone use the electoral calculus website? How credible is it?

    scotroutes
    Full Member

    Well, they’re predicting that the SNP will be down to 12 seats on 4th July. I can’t see it going that low!

    squirrelking
    Free Member

    Whoosh!

    Yup. Take it that was your point.

    convert
    Full Member

    Does anyone use the electoral calculus website? How credible is it?

    Came here to say exactly that.

    It was a real eye opener to discover the previous voting habits of my new constituency (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) had it existed in 2019.

    They reckon if it had existed in 2019 it would have been  44% SNP, 42.6% CON & 5.1% LAB (who were 4th behind Lib Dem).

    Hadn’t appreciated the new boundaries had made the constituency go so blue (They predict (somehow – no idea how) this time it could be 29.4% SNP, 28.6% CON and 26.1% LAB. That a pretty tasty contest. I’m not sure it’ll work out like that as I think people’s voting this time around is going to be very hard to predict with so many variables.

    scotroutes
    Full Member

    Moray had the narrowest margin for Remain in the vote on Brexit.  I’ve always assumed (probably incorrectly) that some of that was due to the presence of a large number of military and ex-military due to Kinloss and Lossiemouth.

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/30/snp-deletes-tiktok-election-campaign-video-featuring-sexually-explicit-song

    This is an odd story for two reasons:

    1) the SNP’s finances are so wrecked post-Sturgeon that they can only afford to spend £811 on online media advertising in a month.

    2) the SNP is quick to remove songs containing racially-charged words from its campaign. Its last leader spoke at some length and movingly in Parliament about the murder of George Floyd by an American policeman (like Gaza, a subject about which the Scottish government can do absolutely nothing). And yet when it came to police choking a black man to death on the street in Scotland, about which the Scottish government can do something – it’s nine years on and there is no conclusion in the public inquiry. This is glacially slow. The entire leadership of Police Scotland and the Scottish Government will have turned over without anyone ever being found accountable. It is completely shameful.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-68939728

    alanl
    Free Member

    The SNP/John Swinneys principles have gone down a notch by again saying Matheson should not be sanctioned any more for his failure to admit using his Ministerial supplied Tablet for private use, allowing someone not security checked to use it, and then lying to cover this up.
    If this was taken to Court, he’d be prosecuted for Perverting the course of Justice. Why didnt Swinney just say ‘yes, he broke our rules, lied about it, so he needs to take the punishment’ rather than saying he has been punished enough already. What by losing his Ministers salary? He still has his MSP salary of £72k.(against ~£100k for a Minister)
    According to a report on the Radio, the SNP were going to oppose the sanctions against Matheson, even though such votes should be a free vote. I’m sure there must be some SNP MSPs who are/were appalled at his behaviour, and wanted him to be suspended, but Swinney pushed it through that all SNP Members should vote against. Luckily they saw sense when it was clear they couldnt win, then they all abstained.
    Swinney had a chance to show he wont stand for any impropriety in his Party, with a chance to stand up for morals in the Scottish Parliament, but instead, he’s come out to say Matheson was suspended because the other Parties dont like him!
    Total joke, I’ll be glad when they get an arse kicking in the election, then again in 2 years time when the MSP election comes up.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/29/suspension-for-ex-minister-who-claimed-11000-roaming-bill-on-expenses

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    If this was taken to Court, he’d be prosecuted for Perverting the course of Justice.

    Bit of a stretch there.

    Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, said…Swinney’s decision to defend Matheson was proof the first minister’s promises to usher in a new era of integrity in politics were meaningless.

    This isn’t the ground you want to fight on, Anas…

    downshep
    Full Member

    And yet when it came to police choking a black man to death on the street in Scotland

    There’s still time to give Lord Bracadale your evidence, the Inquiry resumes next week.

    poly
    Free Member

    And yet when it came to police choking a black man to death on the street in Scotland, about which the Scottish government can do something – it’s nine years on and there is no conclusion in the public inquiry. This is glacially slow. The entire leadership of Police Scotland and the Scottish Government will have turned over without anyone ever being found accountable. It is completely shameful.

    I’m not sure in real terms what you think the Scottish Government should have done?  There IS an inquiry ongoing.  The PIRC is the correct channel for investigating the police.  Don’t get me wrong, its painful how long the wheels of justice take, but thats a bigger issue than one case.  Do you think politicians should be trying to influence a judicial process?

    The SNP/John Swinneys principles have gone down a notch by again saying Matheson should not be sanctioned any more for his failure to admit using his Ministerial supplied Tablet for private use, allowing someone not security checked to use it, and then lying to cover this up.

    I don’t think he objected to a penalty; it was the magnitude of the penalty and the process for getting there that Swinney was objecting to.  The highest sanction on any MSP ever.  Was it really the worst thing an MSP has done?  At least one member of the committee stated their view before the evidence!  To be honest the idea that any politician can come to a fair view on other politicians is a nonsense.

    politecameraaction
    Free Member

    I’m not sure in real terms what you think the Scottish Government should have done?  There IS an inquiry ongoing.  The PIRC is the correct channel for investigating the police.  Don’t get me wrong, its painful how long the wheels of justice take, but thats a bigger issue than one case.  Do you think politicians should be trying to influence a judicial process?

    Real things the SNP could have done:

    1) not wait 5 years after the man’s death to publish the terms of reference to an inquiry.

    2) not allowed Bracadale so much time in delivery of his report. Even allowing for COVID, it is absurd that 4 years on there is still witness testimony being gathered and no time frame for reporting.

    The Scarman Report into the Brixton Riots (or, as some locals call it, “Brixton Uprising”) was ordered 2 days after the violence finished. It has a far wider scope. It reported within 6 months. Its scope and recommendations were wider than the Bracadale inquiry. It provided a blueprint for massive reforms of police in England and Wales and how they approach ethnic minorities.

    3) not allow Police Scotland to sit around and do nothing substantive for 10 years. Bracadale is not a judge. The inquiry is not a judicial process. It is an executive process.

    The inquiry deals very narrowly with the immediate circumstances of the homicide and the post-homicide procedures. There is nothing to stop Police Scotland reviewing its own race relations, restraint techniques, and response to disturbed and distressed issues in the meantime. There were patently obvious things that could have been implemented years ago.

    But all of these wider issues have been kicked into the long grass, and there has been no accountability in the senior levels of the police or in the government that oversees them.

    4) not been quite so sanctimonious about George Floyd when it could have spent time fixing problems in the police force it does control.

Viewing 40 posts - 561 through 600 (of 613 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.