Well scotland didnt get independance, thread

I prefer to think that Alex Salmond once spurned THMs sexual advances and that this is the bunny-boiler in him playing up.

Either that or he is jealous that someone with the same education managed to become leader of his country, against a system designed to avoid just that, and is widely regarded as one of the most astute politicians of his generation whereas THM is just a no-mark spouting crap on a mountainbike forum.

teamhurtmore – Member
We do live in a democracy and the people of Scotland have spoken.

aye and we are allowed to try and change the mind of the 55% if we like. That’s called, you know, democracy.

It’s transient.

I’m off to Sevenoaks next week. I hope that the **** EN-GER-LUND attitude here isn’t too fully represented, otherwise I’ll be ordering my pints by writing on a piece of paper, fully avoiding the word “yes”.

Something that seems to have been missed by many of my Southern counterparts in all of this is the lost benefits to them if Scotland had split.

if you don’t mind me saying- (and this is definitely a huge aside): -this has been a massive, massive missed opportunity, not just for Scotland, but for anyone who believes in some form of social democracy for the remainder UK.

So, I’m not going to comment any more on any of this, as you guys are in full bluster mode, except to say:

If Scotland had become independent, and ultimately achieved its goals, anyone with a sense of the wrongness of things in the rUK would only have had to look a wee bit further north to see how things could be done with a bit more justice, fairness, and a bit less craven respect for naked capital.

I know some of you will be laughing into your Yorkshire puds when you read this, but a wee beacon of hope for those who believe it still can be better (is that you, dear reader?) got snuffed out on Friday, not just for Scots but for all of us. Stop slagging each other for a couple of minutes and think about how little The Man would have enjoyed seeing it done the way it should be, 400 miles to the north.

And, I suppose, welcome to more of the same as you had 2 weeks ago.

Ernie, I’m not sure that the welsh are particularly happy. Few voted for their parliment (which they only have themselves to blame for, at least the Scotts didn’t make that mistake and the vast majority voted). From albeit anecdotal evidence from family in South Wales there is an incredibly divisive welsh speaking (minority) running things in their interests, for example succesful English speaking schools are being turfed out of their buildings and combined with poor performance schools to allow new Welsh speaking schools to be created.

It would be more correct to say the extra layer of politicians is already there in Wales and NI, devolved regions in England would create more politicians.

FWIW there are some Yes campaigners coming over as very spiteful losers on here. There also seems to be confusion over many who support the union being supporters of Westminster. For many of us we want the Union, we don’t want the Westminster politicians and we certainly don’t want more mini CMDs and EMs locally. We want Westminster politics to be less about process and more about ideology and practical improvements to peoples lives. The referendum was really a costly exercise in arguing over who was going be in charge with little substance from either side. They money could have been spent far more productively.

teamhurtmore – Member
We do live in a democracy and the people of Scotland have spoken.
aye and we are allowed to try and change the mind of the 55% if we like. That’s called, you know, democracy.
It’s transient.

Unless the vote is for Independence, in which case it is for good. If it was the case that we could vote for Independence and then 5 years later get a vote to rejoin the Union then I wouldn’t have a problem with a continuing campaign. As it is, we had a vote, Yes lost decisively. Respecting the result means just that. Salmond’s rejecting a further vote for a political generation was the correct response.

I am saying the pledge made no mention of a reciprocal tie in with English powers.

The pledge didn’t say there wouldn’t be a reciprocal tie in either though, did it?

Or do you think Scottish people wouldn’t have voted for it if they thought it meant English people might get the same?

Whats truly hilarious is watching all the same people (here and elsewhere) who were spouting that they saw this referendum as the beginning of a popular shift towards political engagement and major changes in the political regime in the UK start bitching because they’ve realised it would be good for the Tories 😆

The pledge didn’t say there wouldn’t be a reciprocal tie in either though, did it?

There is a general rule here and what you do is take what they say as what they say rather than assume it includes everything they did not say as well.

For example you did not say you were not a troll who did not believe a word they have just typed who lives on mars and eats gerbils. It would be foolish of me to claim this on the grounds you have not not said it in your post 😉

I dont think Scots cared much if there was a quid pro quo with england – though of course this would have been a threat had AS said it before hand and a deceiving lie had he not said it and then done it.

A separate england/ednig nthe est lothian question/ fairness whatever you call it is fine with me tbh but they cannot have westminster as the chamber anf they cannot make it conditional with the scottish pledge

I prefer to think that Alex Salmond once spurned THMs sexual advances and that this is the bunny-boiler in him playing up.

About as grown up as the rest of the yS debate. Well done for keeping the standards constant.

Either that or he is jealous that someone with the same education managed to become leader of his country, against a system designed to avoid just that, and is widely regarded as one of the most astute politicians of his generation whereas THM is just a no-mark spouting crap on a mountainbike forum.

So you know so much about me. Wouldn’t swap a thing with AS. I have reached higher status in my chosen profession but didn’t need to rely on bullying, lies and deceit to get there. I can sleep easily at night, thank you very much. Plus at least I can still remember what I was taught.

Notice through your inability to be specific on any so-called crap. Glad to see you keeping standards consistent.

Anyway, bitter loses in a bitter and unpleasant battle. All very apt. you Youse represent your country well?!?

Better get ready for a proper job tomorrow now.

There also seems to be confusion over many who support the union being supporters of Westminster. For many of us we want the Union, we don’t want the Westminster politicians and we certainly don’t want more mini CMDs and EMs locally. We want Westminster politics to be less about process and more about ideology and practical improvements to peoples lives.

Some sound insight in there. I suspect Westminsterites of all colours are going to find it even harder to win the respect of the electorate. UKIP are full of populist nonsense so they’re hardly any panacea.

I suspect most of the UK wants better-quality leadership but frankly I don’t know where to go for it. I believe having a vote is a very very precious thing so I don’t want to refuse to use it next May as some kind of protest but for the first time in my life I really don’t know who to give it to, whilst still having some faith there’s any point in voting…

Basically our politicians have no idea how to deal with the ageing population, the debt, and globalisation, and I don’t know who does…

Either that or he is jealous that someone with the same education managed to become leader of his country, against a system designed to avoid just that, and is widely regarded as one of the most astute politicians of his generation whereas THM is just a no-mark spouting crap on a mountainbike forum.

Haha, quality. I think you might just have that spot on.

A separate england/ednig nthe est lothian question/ fairness whatever you call it is fine with me tbh but they cannot have westminster as the chamber

Well, Westminster remains the chamber for non devolved issues – I see no problem with separate English and UK parliament sittings & votes taking place in the same chamber, and I think its perfectly logical if SMP’s and NI & Welsh members take the place of their respective current MP’s in meetings of the full UK parliament (rather than duplication of one elected member in each as at the moment)

anf they cannot make it conditional with the scottish pledge

I don’t think anyones suggested that its conditional, but in tandem

Of course, if Labour block progress, then you would have to take that up with them…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11111705/Alex-Salmond-says-No-voters-were-tricked.html

cue sniping for the next 20 years

+1 brooess.

Ninfan- the big problem with that is- who decides what’s ‘purely’ English? Other than stuff about badger culls, I can think of nowt. Will the Tories stop at blocking a Scots MP from deciding which areas of Surrey get a badger cull next year?

As if! It will be widespread, it will be sweeping, it will be catch-all, it will benefit the Tories. Of course.

Listen- Scotland f*cked it up for all of us last week- you just haven’t realised yet- aided and abetted by media, business, and the usual political sh*te. I’m sorry about that. We thought we could make it good for you, starting with us- your lords and masters would have felt shame, and trembled at our passing. Within 20 years, you would have been saying: if the Jock Kilt-Wearers can have a decent NHS, no tuition fees, no nukes, decent pensions, cheap, green energy, then why not us, Gideon?

Instead, we’ve got banks that still hold us to ransom (nothing’s moved on since 2010), nuclear weapons we don’t need (other than for status), ever rising costs of every damned thing, itchy feet to get back into Iraq, an NHS carve up, infrastructure projects that largely benefit the SE, and cheap, cheap debt for those who’d buy a one-bed flat in Battersea for £450k.

Just everybody keep the heid, and do yir old pal here a massive favour- keep the eye on the ball, remember the shame of seeing them (not you!) humbled when they thought they’d lose Morlock status, and keep asking them- why?

Good job no one thought this was a vote about whether Scotland should be an independent country or not…. 😉

Details become all important all of a sudden, despite being dismissed throughout the campaign. Brilliant.

If you can meet with triumph and disaster and treat those two impostors both the same.

Well, Westminster remains the chamber for non devolved issues – I see no problem with separate English and UK parliament sittings & votes taking place in the same chamber, and I think its perfectly logical if SMP’s and NI & Welsh members take the place of their respective current MP’s in meetings of the full UK parliament

It like the way the english will sing the british national antherm at england sporting events …its a wee bit arrogant to your cousins you dominate [ due to numbers rather than deliberate effort IMHO] to have our parliament as your parliament as well. It will hardly reduce the power of england, over the UK, if they always sit there and are permanently based there , know the workings, the people there, etc will it ?

Youse need your own chamber but it is an interesting one to replace westminster with members from all the others – problem then is how do we/parties/ the monarch select UK ministers and PM’s? etc
a two chamber solution is inevitable IMHO with devolved assemblies sitting wherever – why not the middle like say Birmingham?

who decides what’s ‘purely’ English? Other than stuff about badger culls, I can think of nowt.

Well, the same type of stuff thats currently devolved to the regions

highways, housing, tourism, health etc.

It will hardly reduce the power of england if they always sit there and are permanently based there no will it ?

What powers does Westminister have on devolved issues?

Its utterly pointless for everyone having an MP and an MSP both sharing the same job and responsibilities as done by one English MP at the moment, not least the electorate who has a problem that needs support/representation on.

Ernie, I’m not sure that the welsh are particularly happy.

Well they appear to unhappy because they want more devolution, not less.

Beaufort Poll shows support for National Assembly for Wales and further powers continues to grow[/url]

“According to an opinion survey undertaken by Beaufort Research on behalf of the Commission on Devolution in Wales, a majority of the Welsh public believe the National Assembly for Wales (NafW) has provided a strong voice for Wales and would like to see further powers devolved over a period of time”.

Devolution has been a success story and support for it continues to grow.

I was making a badly-put facetious argument there, Ninfan- apologies.

OK, so Scots MPs don’t get to vote on ‘English’ matters.

My questions:

1)Who gets to decide what’s just English? Would this mean purely reserved matters?

2)When would the Scottish Parliament be conferred full status, as, at present, it can still be overridden (though rarely is) by Westminster?

Who gets to decide what’s just English? Would this mean purely reserved matters?

It’s the opposite, reserved matters are not “just English”.

What is devolved and reserved is all fairly straight forward, as this Scottish Gov. webpage shows

Devolved and reserved matters

Ninfan I am bitching because the 3 amigos lied

I’m Welsh and quite happy. I want the same devolved powers for our govt as the Scotts have, will have, for theirs.

I am bitching because the 3 amigos lied

Lied about what ?

Mr Cameron made no mention of tying increased devolution for Scotland and Mr Miliband didnt mention his english constitutional convention, It is not normally good practice to make hurried legislation but that being so they should not have signed up for Mr Browns “timetable”.
from the guardian

The letter, signed by David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg, appears on the front page of Tuesday’s Daily Record newspaper. It promises “extensive new powers” for the Scottish parliament “delivered by the process and to the timetable agreed” by the three parties,

OK Nick Clegg hasnt broken that” vow” yet but since the vow says they will keep the barnett formula and the Libdem manifesto for 2010 said they would scrap it…

Ninfan I am bitching because the 3 amigos lied

& that led to you voting No?

Mr Cameron made no mention of tying increased devolution for Scotland and Mr Miliband didnt mention his english constitutional convention

The letter… …promises “extensive new powers” for the Scottish parliament “delivered by the process and to the timetable agreed” by the three parties,

I see nothing contradictory between those two positions

Delivering one does not exclude or prevent delivering the other.

It is not normally good practice to make hurried legislation but that being so they should not have signed up for Mr Browns “timetable”.

You didn’t seem overly worried by the bloke who was going to rush through independence in 18 months…

Perhaps you need to stop worrying about what is being promised to English voters and concentrate on whether anyone has said they plan to stop Scotland having more powers as promised, or on the timetable promised. I’ve yet to see anything pointing to this other than hysterical ranting from a bunch of sore losers!

To repeat Ernie’s question – lied about what? Simple question.

Possibly ninfan but they are not identical statements
I will help you move house tomorrow does not preclude it being conditional on you paying me and me not being hungover [ and a million other caveats we could create] but most would assume it means I will turn up and do it for free

FWIW he has backpedalled away from Goves statement

His chief whip Michael Gove said it would be “impossible to move forward” without being certain of change in Scotland and England

Downing Street has made it clear that David Cameron’s Scottish devolution pledge does not depend on giving more powers to English MPs at the same time.

Mr Cameron vowed to give tax-raising powers to the Scottish Parliament “in tandem” with moves to restrict Scottish MPs from voting on English matters.

But No 10 sources insist that “one is not conditional upon the other”.

May be some facts may come out to see whether there have been lies or not. Tomorrow might be a start. So next weeks lottery numbers…..?

@imnotverygood I voted yes.

Mr Cameron made no mention of tying increased devolution for Scotland and Mr Miliband didnt mention his english constitutional convention

I don’t know what you’re talking about, presumably you’re hoping that the pledge made by the 3 party leaders will be broken so you can cry foul.

Scottish devolution pledge stands insists No 10

Downing Street has made it clear that David Cameron’s Scottish devolution pledge does not depend on giving more powers to English MPs at the same time.

It is perfectly reasonable that as well as increased devolved powers for Scotland the West Lothian Question be resolved – the two issues are clearly closely related.

The Referendum result was announced on Friday, we’ve had the weekend and now tomorrow morning the following motion will be put before the House of Commons :

That this House…

* welcomes the result of the Scottish independence referendum and the decision of the people of Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom;

*recognises that people across Scotland voted? for a Union based on the pooling and sharing of resources and for the? continuation of devolution inside the United Kingdom;

*notes the statement by the prime minister, deputy prime minister and leader of the opposition regarding the guarantee of and timetable for further devolution to Scotland;

*calls on the government to lay before Parliament a Command Paper including the proposals of all three UK political parties by 30th October and to consult widely with the Scottish people, civic Scotland and the Scottish Parliament on these proposals;

*further calls on the government to publish heads of agreement by the end of November and draft clauses for the new Scotland Bill by the end of January 2015.

If things aren’t moving fast enough for you then that’s kinda tuff because they can’t move any faster.

@imnotverygood I voted yes.

I think that is my point.

Maybe Gove is playing games too – I really wouldn’t put it past him to be making a play for the Tory leadership…

That ll be the motion that was supposed to have been presented on Friday.

supposed to have been presented on Friday.

a childish ad hom straw man
You are spoiling us ninfan

The House of Commons was in recess last week.

I’m so glad this thread is still going! I’ve been watching Annoying Orange all day so I feel I’m ready for the level of debate here.

scotroutes – Member
just a no-mark spouting crap on a mountainbike forum

Scotroutes, do you have a mirror in your house?

That ll be the motion that was supposed to have been presented on Friday.

No that’ll be the motion that according to the timetable for a new constitution was to be published on the 19th September and voted on by MPs “at the first opportunity”.

You are desperately hoping that Westminster will break its pledges aren’t you gordimhor ?

I fear you will be deeply disappointed. Remember that it was Westminster which gave devolved powers to Scotland and it was Westminster which gave the Scottish Parliament the legal authority to hold a referendum.

Who else could have done it but westminster? I am not sure what the point is there ernie tbh, its what the word devolved means.

Interesting Guardian article on what has happened today
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/21/cameron-pressure-scotland-devolution-alexander

“It is deeply frustrating that briefings over the last 48 hours have distracted from the crystal-clear commitment of all parties to deliver the change Scotland voted for last week,” Alexander, the chief secretary to the Treasury, told the Guardian. He is likely to sit on a cabinet committee overseeing devolution.

An 11th-hour vow by the three Westminster leaders last week, promising more devolution if Scotland rejected independence, has been in disarray after Cameron appeared to attach new conditions. The prime minister said on Friday that negotiations on only English MPs voting on English laws “must take place in tandem with, and at the same pace, as the settlement for Scotland”.

Fears that the Tories were planning to renege on the pledge were fuelled when the Scottish-born Conservative chief whip, Michael Gove, said on Saturday that it would be “impossible” to devolve further powers to Scotland without addressing the position of Scottish MPs at Westminster.

No 10 moved to distance itself from Gove, saying the prime minister was committed to the timetable agreed by the three main UK party leaders to hand greater powers over tax and welfare to the Scottish parliament. A government source said: “There was an unambiguous commitment by the party leaders to deliver more devolution to Scotland on a clear timetable. That is not conditional on anything else. No ifs, no buts – that will occur.”

Hopefully this will explain why folk were unhappy, including coalition ministers, and how the tories have had to change tack from changing tack
I am not sure how AS can get the blame for any of this.