Scottish independence and devolution superthread

[Gorgiewave]

No, I don't participate in any of that shite. Catholic Spain is one of the "dos Espa?as" that fought the Civil War.

 

Modern Spain is not remotely ?ber Catholic, except for a few fanatics and a dying generation. The growth religions in Spain are Islam and Mormonism.

[Gorgiewave]

Ulysses's reading of Scottish life is spot on. The egalitarian and progressive instinct the independence movement believes in is often specifically anti-Thatcher and/or based on a resentment of people "getting above themselves".

 

[Ulysses]

They'll be all over us come independence day, making sure we are nicely snug and tucked back up in their respective clubs, that's 100% given. Everything today is just posturing. And everybody with any sense knows that.

 

There would be a lot of political cat-farting about, and I wouldn't phrase it quite the way you do, but it is a racing certainty that what you've set out above will happen.

[Das Root]

No, I don't participate in any of that shite. Catholic Spain is one of the "dos Espa?as" that fought the Civil War.

 

Modern Spain is not remotely ?ber Catholic, except for a few fanatics and a dying generation. The growth religions in Spain are Islam and Mormonism.

 

 

No matter how much of a "growth religion" Mormonism or even Islam is, it will never overtake Catholicism. People may not be in church every Sunday but they would identify with being Catholic more so than saying agnostic or atheist.

 

Ulysses's reading of Scottish life is spot on. The egalitarian and progressive instinct the independence movement believes in is often specifically anti-Thatcher and/or based on a resentment of people "getting above themselves".

 

 

Don't really care who runs the newly independent Scotland, but I do know the parties involved will be far better than they are now.

[Das Root]

There would be a lot of political cat-farting about, and I wouldn't phrase it quite the way you do, but it is a racing certainty that what you've set out above will happen.

 

 

For every broadsheet response such as yourself would provide, comes the tabloid equivalent

[Das Root]

It is an interesting article. Clearly appealing to some (quasi mythical) set of 'scottish values' and anti-toryism will win Yes votes, especially among many one time labour voters, so he asks an interesting question. As a firm believer in Independence, what are your views on it? "what was the argument for independence between 1945-51 when a Labour administration with a majority of Scottish seats was building the New Jerusalem?"

 

 

You're actually asking the wrong person on this. I rarely have any truck with what was, only really what could be. I wouldn't consider what the reason was, even if there was one...or not...I wasn't born then, my Dad was barely born then, what relevance is it to me?

 

Keep moving forward as the great man Cornelius Robinson said. And that's what we should do.

[Gorgiewave]

A comfortable majority of Spaniards associates the Catholic Church with their grandparents' generation and otherwise don't think about it. They remind me of young Irish people I've known.

Anyway, what is St. Andrew's Day celebrating, if anything? It had never been taken seriously until it was recently promoted. That is the sort of infantile demand to have one's own version of everything that one associates with Catalonia and paranoid feminists. It bespeaks rampant insecurity, rampant resentment and rampant paranoia.

[Gorgiewave]

So, Das Root, if Labour got in and reversed the cuts, would you think independence was now unnecessary?

[Patrick Bateman]

I love it how people pick up on my point by deriding St Andrews day, which sees all sorts of small gatherings and celebrations, rather than actually engaging with my point.

[Gorgiewave]

The point is there is nothing to promote or celebrate about the day.

[Das Root]

So, Das Root, if Labour got in and reversed the cuts, would you think independence was now unnecessary?

 

 

We'd be independent, that's all that matters. Whoever gets in on whatever mandate is up to the voters.

[Das Root]

A comfortable majority of Spaniards associates the Catholic Church with their grandparents' generation and otherwise don't think about it. They remind me of young Irish people I've known.

Anyway, what is St. Andrew's Day celebrating, if anything? It had never been taken seriously until it was recently promoted. That is the sort of infantile demand to have one's own version of everything that one associates with Catalonia and paranoid feminists. It bespeaks rampant insecurity, rampant resentment and rampant paranoia.

 

 

It's a good chance for a pissup. It's a great chance to bring in tourists similar to St Paddy's. And you are agreeing with me on Catholicism in Spain by the way. Ask any of the people you mention..."what religion are you", I can guarantee you they won't say "mormon".

[JamboX2]

Business for Scotland contacted a number of UK embassies to see what their plans to celebrate St Andrews day were. Not a single one they contacted had any. Is this one of the benefits of being part of the much heralded 'network of embassies' that we pay towards? http://www.businessf...mbassy-network/ The idea that Scotland's interests are best promoted in this way is ridiculous.

 

A better enquiry would be plans for Burns Night. The single biggest event in the Scottish cultural calender. A night in which Scots, and the world, celebrates the words and sentiments of one of the greatest Scots in history. A celebration of our culture (poetry and the ceilidh), our food (haggis, black pudding cranachain), and our drink (whiskey). An event which is celebrated globally from nations with a heavy Scottish diaspora (Canada, the USA, New Zealand and Australia) to those with little (Japan, China, India).

 

To me there's more to celebrate all things Scottish on January 25th than St. Andrew's day. I remember at school little was done for the 30th of November than was done for the 25th of January. Should independence occur then that should be the "national" day. Burns has far more relevance to modern Scotland - his great poem, A Man's a man, was sung by all sides of the Chamber in 1999, its words are the motto of the Education Department, Auld Lang Syne is sung every Hogmanay - than a story of a saint's bones arriving to Scotland with a pilgrim.

 

All personal opinion imo. But I think that the idea that these saints days are a true celebration of all things Scottish is a bit ott. It's more a modern phenomenon than anything.

[JamboX2]

I love it how people pick up on my point by deriding St Andrews day, which sees all sorts of small gatherings and celebrations, rather than actually engaging with my point.

 

Your point seems to be that St Andrews day has a global significance, or at the least means something to ordinary Scots that means it should be promoted globally. To me Burns Night is a bette way to "sell" Scotland, or as Das Root seems to want to make it - a chance to pull tourists in for a piss up. On both counts you can sell Scotland better on Burns night. Songs, Poetry, Food, Drink, Dancing and bevying all in one event, all hugely Scottish and all easily sellable to the world as Burns is a globally renowned name. More folk will know Burns significance to Scotland than St Andrew, a greek christian who refused to be cruxified on a cross like Christ's.

[Das Root]

St. Andrew's Day is a day nobody gives a shite about. Why not promote Burns Day, citing "Is There for Honest Poverty?" as the best of Scottish aspiration.

 

But a pissup and increasing GDP by 0.01%. Brave New Scotland.

 

I don't celebrate my birthday if I can avoid. Some people who claim to love me sometimes force me.

 

 

Why not promote them both? It's all about tourism and boozism anyway.

 

And tell me, what's wrong with increasing GDP? Any increase in the current climate would be welcomed imo. I would like to see a full on major campaign and a "year of independence" come 2016 with festivals and such all over the country, smack our new brand right onto the world stage and reel in the cash.

[Gorgiewave]

Pith o' sense, Jambo X2.

 

Pishy footering with benefits and nudges to GDP do not a nation make, [modedit]

[Coco]

Pith o' sense, Jambo X2.

 

Pishy footering with benefits and nudges to GDP do not a nation make, [modedit]

 

Growth in GDP usually helps the people of the nation to have better lives. Many caveats but 'usually' applies.

[Das Root]

Your point seems to be that St Andrews day has a global significance, or at the least means something to ordinary Scots that means it should be promoted globally. To me Burns Night is a bette way to "sell" Scotland, or as Das Root seems to want to make it - a chance to pull tourists in for a piss up. On both counts you can sell Scotland better on Burns night. Songs, Poetry, Food, Drink, Dancing and bevying all in one event, all hugely Scottish and all easily sellable to the world as Burns is a globally renowned name. More folk will know Burns significance to Scotland than St Andrew, a greek christian who refused to be cruxified on a cross like Christ's.

 

 

Actually the pissup was for me thanks. They are welcome to join though, first round on them. Both are days that can be used to maximise Scotland's earning potential for tourism, why single out one when you could target both with difference strategies. Why think so small?

[Gorgiewave]

Das Root, that kind of total submission to capitalism and "growth" as the purpose of political life is what makes this independence a wee shuffle of the same old cards and nothing else.

 

 

[Das Root]

Pith o' sense, Jambo X2.

 

Pishy footering with benefits and nudges to GDP do not a nation make, [modedit]

 

Best we wallow in poverty and a stagnating economy eh?

[Das Root]

Das Root, that kind of total submission to capitalism and "growth" as the purpose of political life is what makes this independence a wee shuffle of the same old cards and nothing else.

 

 

I see the possibilities and the prosperity they bring, you do not. Fair play.

[Gorgiewave]

What about Curriculum for Excellence, Das Root? There's a Scottish idea in an area which is the exclusive competence of the Scottish Parliament and which the SNP have kept. What good will it do people or the economy?

 

No, not poverty, but opening one's legs and relying on tourists for the compulsory goal of growth is no independence.

[Das Root]

What about Curriculum for Excellence, Das Root? There's a Scottish idea in an area which is the exclusive competence of the Scottish Parliament and which the SNP have kept. What good will it do people or the economy?

 

No, not poverty, but opening one's legs and relying on tourists for the compulsory goal of growth is no independence.

 

 

Because that's what I said of course

 

What do you think the goal of independence should be?

[JamboX2]

I've noticed that unionist media will now accept views on a currency union from political irrelevances like John Major and Carywn Jones, but I haven't seen the BBC mention Mark Carney 'welcoming' discussions.

 

Why won't the british government seek clarification and declare on matters relating to a currency union or EU membership? Because that would be against their best interests. Does anyone think for a second that if they could get what they wanted, they would keep it to themselves?

 

The BBC have had numerous articles on the Carney - "let's have technical discussions" stuff. The position of the BoE Chairman isn't new. Mervyn King spoke to Salmond about this a few times. It is not an official approval of the position, more a friendly we are open to discuss this. He even says as much in the BBC article - "My predecessor did have some very basic technical discussions with Mr Salmond within the course of the last couple of years. I certainly welcome the opportunity to have those discussions." To me that's a question of very basic talks. It is a step in the right direction for Salmond, but the actual agreement and functioning of this will be down to the two governments, not Carney. The bank is operationally separate, politically it is run from the Treasury, it's mandate is set by them annually in the budget. It's still down to them what happens with the running of the bank.

 

Is the Carney stuff any more than a polite invitation to discuss something which might happen? It is unlikely to be the role of a central banker to rule out a currency union, however daft it is.

 

I'm enjoying this 'refusing to rule out' stuff - when of course no Parliament can bind another. And all the major parties have said they wouldn't want one.

 

Pretty much all he's said is that. He's said my predecessor had basic talks on this. I will too as a matter of continuity in politically heightened times. He's not said "oh boy, I really want this to happen!". And I agree with you, currency union is not a good idea.

 

I'm not sure they would. They would want to be seen to flex their independence from the Westminster parties and given getting rid of Trident was in the WP would they really want to go against that. Other parties could easily argue they are still under command of Westminster by keeping Trident in Scotland.

 

Faslane can be used for the new Scottish navy, maybe even as a port for running repairs to other NATO member vessels. Doesn't need to be rUK's sub base to still be in service.

 

The downside of Faslane not maintaining the nuclear fleet (which is a mix of conventionally armed Astute patrol boats and the Trident system) is that the highly skilled jobs in relation to those ships goes. Now that skill gap will go down south with those ships. No doubting that. It's a downsizing, which will see fewer jobs, but that's a consequence.

 

On Trident removal, there is scope in the White Paper to see a watering down of the 4-5 year pledge. By saying NATO nuclear armed vessels may dock in Scotland on a dont ask dont tell policy means it's open for NATO (US, French and British mainly) pressure to let Trident be there 10-15 years whilst the recommissioning (should that happen) occurs or a new base is set up in Wales, North Western England or Northern Ireland. Trident is where it is for strategically rapid access into the North Atlantic on the far side from the Russian entrance to it. Nothing more. It's why the US wanted Holy Loch. NATO won't let that go easily.

 

And it shows you how bad Labour have become. If their grand dames are saying the SNP are to the left of Labour and you are saying the SNP are essentially the Tories.

 

Does that mean the Tories are more Labour than Labour are?

 

I don't know on that. The SNP talk centre-left act centrist and are by no means some wide eyed radical party of the left. Nor are Labour marxists anymore. And the Scottish Tories are like the Old One Nation Tories - a soft right. As Annabell Goldie said on BBCQT the other night, vote for who you want, but don't be fooled that there's somehow not a strong undercurrent of centre-right-soft-right positioning in Scottish society and voting intentions. The SNP are all things to al men. It's well documented, in official SNP histories it's accepted, that Salmond and Sturgeon studied New Labour and Blairism closely. They are basically Scottish Blairites with their all things to all men antics. Can't last forever.

[Gorgiewave]

Personal liberty in the broadest sense. This means using the economy as a tool of production and exchange. People are scared of the economy, they can't control, they base their education on what the economy capriciously wants and they have to keep consuming to feed the beast. Education which makes people intellectually independent, not patronising them and trying to create a boring paradise by diktat of pedagogues, an aggressive impatience with people who look for excuses throughout life (for their good), etc.

 

If you've seen "Walk the Line", you'll know what I mean when I say the independence campaign reminds me of a Jimmy Davis tune.

[flecktimus]

Your point seems to be that St Andrews day has a global significance, or at the least means something to ordinary Scots that means it should be promoted globally. To me Burns Night is a bette way to "sell" Scotland, or as Das Root seems to want to make it - a chance to pull tourists in for a piss up. On both counts you can sell Scotland better on Burns night. Songs, Poetry, Food, Drink, Dancing and bevying all in one event, all hugely Scottish and all easily sellable to the world as Burns is a globally renowned name. More folk will know Burns significance to Scotland than St Andrew, a greek christian who refused to be cruxified on a cross like Christ's.

 

I take it marketing is not on your CV.

[Ulysses]

I love it how people pick up on my point by deriding St Andrews day, which sees all sorts of small gatherings and celebrations, rather than actually engaging with my point.

 

Agreed. Your point was that an opportunity to promote Scotland and Scottish business - not to mention Scottish jobs - was being missed, and would not be missed if an independent Scotland was in a position to promote them via a network of embassies.

 

Likewise, I might regard St. Patrick's Day as a bit twee, but there's no denying that it is a marketing opportunity that Ireland makes the most of.

[Das Root]

Personal liberty in the broadest sense. This means using the economy as a tool of production and exchange. People are scared of the economy, they can't control, they base their education on what the economy capriciously wants and they have to keep consuming to feed the beast. Education which makes people intellectually independent, not patronising them and trying to create a boring paradise by diktat of pedagogues, an aggressive impatience with people who look for excuses throughout life (for their good), etc.

 

If you've seen "Walk the Line", you'll know what I mean when I say the independence campaign reminds me of a Jimmy Davis tune.

 

 

So a policy of say, free education, is better than paying ?9k a term education?

[JamboX2]

Actually the pissup was for me thanks. They are welcome to join though, first round on them. Both are days that can be used to maximise Scotland's earning potential for tourism, why single out one when you could target both with difference strategies. Why think so small?

 

Because you are talking about a national day. Now yes that can be used to make money and to sell Scotland. But it's also about who we are as a nation. If it's just a chance to squeeze money out of folk for a few extra figures on the balance sheet then it's not a national day, it's no more than a Black Friday event. Burns Night to me is the pinnacle of celebrating a truly unique element of Scots cultural life. St Andrew's day is a side show to that.

 

Because that's what I said of course

 

What do you think the goal of independence should be?

 

The goal of independence should be more than merely making more cash and being better off. It should at the least be a new beginning in how we do things or a challenge to power structures both domestically and internationally. A chance to break the mould. None of what we have been offered will actually do that.

[JamboX2]

I take it marketing is not on your CV.

 

Would you say more know of St Andrew's Day than Burns Night or Burns in general? I'd strongly disagree. There's a tartan day in America. Adopting that would be better placed of generating income in the American market. I can't think of anything unique or special to which St Andrew's day offers people.

[Das Root]

Because you are talking about a national day. Now yes that can be used to make money and to sell Scotland. But it's also about who we are as a nation. If it's just a chance to squeeze money out of folk for a few extra figures on the balance sheet then it's not a national day, it's no more than a Black Friday event. Burns Night to me is the pinnacle of celebrating a truly unique element of Scots cultural life. St Andrew's day is a side show to that.

 

 

 

The goal of independence should be more than merely making more cash and being better off. It should at the least be a new beginning in how we do things or a challenge to power structures both domestically and internationally. A chance to break the mould. None of what we have been offered will actually do that.

 

 

Everybody has their own opinion and whatever rings true with them to produce a Yes works fine with me. Some won't give a hoot if the promised land doesn't appear come the 19th, some just want independence for the sake of it.

 

Equally I would imagine people would celebrate St Andrew's Day based entirely upon their age, you may be a wine and cheese man while I may be a yard of ale with whisky chaser kind of chap. Hence why we have opera and we have rock. We all swim down different streams.

[flecktimus]

Would you say more know of St Andrew's Day than Burns Night or Burns in general? I'd strongly disagree. There's a tartan day in America. Adopting that would be better placed of generating income in the American market. I can't think of anything unique or special to which St Andrew's day offers people.

 

You just don't get it, its all about promoting your countries goods & services to other countries.

 

It is known in marketing circles as networking.

[Das Root]

Would you say more know of St Andrew's Day than Burns Night or Burns in general? I'd strongly disagree. There's a tartan day in America. Adopting that would be better placed of generating income in the American market. I can't think of anything unique or special to which St Andrew's day offers people.

 

 

You make it special, that's where the marketing comes in. What's special about St Paddy's Day? A pint of Guinness. And leprechauns. Four leaf clovers and whatever else they can think of to get folk sticking hand in pocket, churning the cogs and keeping people in jobs.

 

No matter how much you try to fight it, until they abolish money (some time after our glorious currency union with rUK has run it's course) and invent energy to matter convertors, we are all slaves to the bullion.

Edited December 2, 2013 by Das Root

[Gorgiewave]

I don't agree with blanket ?9,000 university fees, no.

 

On the other hand, there's a flourishing private school sector in Scotland and the universities need money. Charge whoever can pay.

 

What about Curriculum for Excellence?

[Das Root]

I don't agree with blanket ?9,000 university fees, no.

 

On the other hand, there's a flourishing private school sector in Scotland and the universities need money. Charge whoever can pay.

 

What about Curriculum for Excellence?

 

 

That would essentially means test education and create a two tier structure. Doesn't sound too healthy imo.

[Gorgiewave]

Same principle as progressive taxation.

[Gorgiewave]

What about CfE?

[JamboX2]

That would essentially means test education and create a two tier structure. Doesn't sound too healthy imo.

 

Issue in Scotland is that those from poorer backgrounds are not getting into uni at the same rate as those from well off backgrounds. Therefore money is being spent to give rich families a series of free runs at university whilst poorer students see cuts to antipoverty measures and cuts in school budgets which harms their chances of getting into university. I don't want tuition fees, but to think we don't have a two tier structure at the moment based on class is being blind to reality.

[Gorgiewave]

Jambo X2, what effect do you think CfE will have on poor children's chances of reaching university.

[JamboX2]

Jambo X2, what effect do you think CfE will have on poor children's chances of reaching university.

 

I know people who are teachers, in my family and a couple mates. At primary I think it could well be a good thing. It's meant to free up learning. However, at secondary it's a bit of a mess. There's a lack of co-ordination between the secondary and tiertiary levels of the education system and that, according to some I know, will ruin a lot of chances in the coming years will the mess is ironed out. Another issue is a lack of formalised testing and grading till 3rd/4th year. This means you work to an "outcome", which will be more subjective than examination and could fail some children and teenagers because it will be harder to judge progress in schools. That in turn makes it harder for universities to judge candidates.

 

It's aim to provide business friendly skills rather than knowledge and what role people have in a society and their relationships. I don't think that's the goal of education - which should be to inspire through learning new things and how to apply them to life. There has also been a lack of funding, friend of mine who teaches biology has said some of the equipment now required to teach certain aspects of the course cannot be afforded by local authority schools. So what happens there? It's not quite comprehensive education if some areas can afford courses that other cannot. And wealthier areas will be able to afford these more than poorer.

 

As a side note, I am not calling for an 11+ system. I also think 5-14 was outdated and that a closer look at the way in which the secondary education worked was needed. But CfE seems to fluid to provide structure at uniformity across Scotland in how people are taught. I think it's well intentioned, but it I don't think it offers much in the way of looking at what universities want, partly because they were barely consulted on this. That in turn may cause many not get into university for lacking things that wont be provided for uniformly at school.

[hughesie27]

Jambo X2, what effect do you think CfE will have on poor children's chances of reaching university.

CfE is a pile of pish for young people from my experience.

 

Makes grand claims of creating active, responsible citizens and effective contributors and so on yet all it's interested in is forcing them down the same route of employability that any school based curriculum will do. Obviously employability is important but there is no point trying to disguise it as anything more than that.

[Gorgiewave]

CfE is a pile of pish for young people from my experience.

 

Makes grand claims of creating active, responsible citizens and effective contributors and so on yet all it's interested in is forcing them down the same route of employability that any school based curriculum will do. Obviously employability is important but there is no point trying to disguise it as anything more than that.

 

I'd like to see the independence campaign speak more about this matter. On the other, since it is a devolved matter and has always been dealt with separately from other parts of the UK, there's no outstanding reason why any education policy should be a feature of an independence campaign.

[hughesie27]

I'd like to see the independence campaign speak more about this matter. On the other, since it is a devolved matter and has always been dealt with separately from other parts of the UK, there's no outstanding reason why any education policy should be a feature of an independence campaign.

 

I can't really help you there. From what I've read you are the one who brought CfE up!?

[Gorgiewave]

I can't really help you there. From what I've read you are the one who brought CfE up!?

 

Yes, but it is one of the most prominent policies in Scotland in recent years, maybe even the principal one after possible independence. I'd like to know from the Yes supporters if they agree with this policy (which has been maintained by the SNP) and what difference they think independence will make, if any, to their ideas on education.

[hughesie27]

Yes, but it is one of the most prominent policies in Scotland in recent years, maybe even the principal one after possible independence. I'd like to know from the Yes supporters if they agree with this policy (which has been maintained by the SNP) and what difference they think independence will make, if any, to their ideas on education.

 

I agree completely with the policy in the sense that everything it sets out to achieve, is pretty much impossible to disagree with actually which I guess makes it fairly desirable.

 

It's implementation has been pretty horrible though. I'd argue that it asks for too much from teachers. It's also asking teachers to educate the young people around issues that are impossible to assess in the traditional sense and impossible to achieve within the timetable.

It also offers no direction or support for young people that are already disengaged from school life.

There isn't anything the SNP could do in independent Scotland that they cannot do now so I imagine that if they wanted to change anything about it then they would have already done so.

[Rand Paul's Ray Bans]

Yes, but it is one of the most prominent policies in Scotland in recent years, maybe even the principal one after possible independence. I'd like to know from the Yes supporters if they agree with this policy (which has been maintained by the SNP) and what difference they think independence will make, if any, to their ideas on education.

 

I don't keep up with all things education policy (not my interest area), but I'm pretty sure that most teachers don't think highly of the Curriculum for Excellence. If one wants to reform the whole curriculum, one must consult with teachers, schools, colleges, and universities when developing the curriculum, and ultimately get their blessing. IMO.

 

Education policy is devolved. The only difference independence could make is if (yes, big if) the economy goes skyward and we suddenly have more money to spend on education. Our education standards would be tested internationally by, for instance, the Pisa Tests (UK is middle-ranking compared to other OECD countries; I think we came 28th last year http://www.bbc.co.uk...cation-25187997), so that might give us a better idea of where our educational standards are. I doubt we'll be much better than rUK, though. We'll certainly not become Finland overnight after independence.

Edited December 3, 2013 by Iago

[Gorgiewave]

Independence is "rearranging consitutional deckchairs" and a "patronising homework exercise" according to Robin Harper.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-robin-harper-to-vote-no-1-3218288

 

I agree that it is a waste of time best described as motivated by "just because".

 

What do the panel think?

[Das Root]

Independence is "rearranging consitutional deckchairs" and a "patronising homework exercise" according to Robin Harper.

http://www.scotsman....te-no-1-3218288

 

I agree that it is a waste of time best described as motivated by "just because".

 

What do the panel think?

 

 

That I couldn't give two hoots about what Robin Harper says? The No side are always going to slap down the idea, that's their only argument against it. Independence will happen, 100% guarantee.

 

[JamboX2]

Independence is "rearranging consitutional deckchairs" and a "patronising homework exercise" according to Robin Harper.

http://www.scotsman....te-no-1-3218288

 

I agree that it is a waste of time best described as motivated by "just because".

 

What do the panel think?

 

Already said on here that, in my personal opinion, constant constitutional bickering will take our eye off the real day-to-day matters affecting Scotland. There is an argument we need greater scope to shape Scotland's social and political life. But that's a case of which powers can help facilitate that and add to what the Scottish Parliament have - like those in the Red Paper on Scotland 2014.

 

There are bigger issues in Scotland, currently under the purvue of the Scottish Government and Parliament which are being neglected till after 2014, arguably 2016;

- stalling attainment in schools

- stagnant social mobility

- poor social housing provision

- stalled land reform

- massive health inequalities in are as a mile apart

- poor public transport provision

- local taxation reform

- local government reform

- falling standards in key public services, especially Free Personal Care and local services

 

These issues are at the core of Scotland's ills. All can be dealt with by the Scottish Government. I think the operation of the Scotland Act needs looked at, the proposals from Wales and the LibDems up here on "shared competencies" and a position in favour of devolution on where power lies needs looked at.

 

Robin Harper is a left-wing Green politician. He's no fan of Westminster-as-it-is politics. So his backing of BT is strange, but welcome. Yet again the Greens show how politics should be - conviction first, political positioning and group mentality second.

Edited December 3, 2013 by JamboX2

[jambos are go!]

Already said on here that, in my personal opinion, constant constitutional bickering will take our eye off the real day-to-day matters affecting Scotland. There is an argument we need greater scope to shape Scotland's social and political life. But that's a case of which powers can help facilitate that and add to what the Scottish Parliament have - like those in the Red Paper on Scotland 2014.

 

There are bigger issues in Scotland, currently under the purvue of the Scottish Government and Parliament which are being neglected till after 2014, arguably 2016;

- stalling attainment in schools

- stagnant social mobility

- poor social housing provision

- stalled land reform

- massive health inequalities in are as a mile apart

- poor public transport provision

- local taxation reform

- local government reform

- falling standards in key public services, especially Free Personal Care and local services

 

These issues are at the core of Scotland's ills. All can be dealt with by the Scottish Government. I think the operation of the Scotland Act needs looked at, the proposals from Wales and the LibDems up here on "shared competencies" and a position in favour of devolution on where power lies needs looked at.

 

Robin Harper is a left-wing Green politician. He's no fan of Westminster-as-it-is politics. So his backing of BT is strange, but welcome. Yet again the Greens show how politics should be - conviction first, political positioning and group mentality second.

Sectarianism and Drink are Scotlands biggest problems and are invisible to all sides in this debate. Edited December 3, 2013 by jambos are go!