Scottish independence and devolution superthread

[henrysmithsgloves]

1 hour ago, frankblack said:

 

The Nationalists have probably just reported you to the Police for that comment. 😆

 

[Lone Striker]

It will be interesting to see  the stooshie that erupts the first time a trans woman takes offence about being  mis-gendered 

 

"Officer, she did it deliberately. She hates all us trans folk.  She called me "him"  and "he" - thats  so offensive. Its a hate crime".

 

"Umm .... err...let me just check the guidance we've been given by the Chief Constable.    Oh !   Oh gosh !!   it seems you're right. Its there in black & white.     Calling all cars  in Edinburgh - find & apprehend a woman going by the name Joanne Rowling ... or maybe a man going by the name  Robert Galbraith.  She or he could be armed & dangerous"

 

 

 

 

-       

[Mikey1874]

53 minutes ago, Gundermann said:

 

No, the offence isn't recorded against the alleged perpetrator. The complainant may be kept on file but if anything, that would help deter daft complaints.

 

Anyway, why is this subject on the Indy thread? This isn't a constitutional matter and is supported by all parties, save one or two malcontents.

 

Depends how you see it. This was the point made that it is something held on file against someone.

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

6 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Depends how you see it. This was the point made that it is something held on file against someone.

 

 

He’s deliberately misinterpreting the act . 

[Malinga the Swinga]

58 minutes ago, Gundermann said:

 

Not tryingt to silence me?!

 

 

Why would anyone want to silence you? You aren't important and you are making a fool of yourself so most people happy for you to continue.

[JudyJudyJudy]

7 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Why would anyone want to silence you? You aren't important and you are making a fool of yourself so most people happy for you to continue.

Exactly .

[The Mighty Thor]

1 hour ago, luckydug said:

Forgive my ignorance of this matter but what was the vote in favour of this

new law. ?

Did the FM just take it upon himself to introduce it  ?

The SNP does not have a majority in the Scottish Parliament  so surely there must have been some kind of cross party support.

Any one aware of the votes cast by MSPs.

 

82 for, mainly SNP, Labour & Lib Dems

4 abstentions

32 against, mainly Tories and a few Labour.

 

Cross party support to a point.

 

All the posters talking of a glimpse into an 'indy Scotland' might want to consider their support for Labour in that case?

[JudyJudyJudy]

Delicious irony 

 

https://x.com/twisterfilm/status/1774806047640662110?s=46&t=Uyg6zS_aUfEwlXY6vOoxzQ

 

[henrysmithsgloves]

If only they put the same zeal and effort into actually sorting Scotlands real problems 🤬

[JudyJudyJudy]

[Nucky Thompson]

2 hours ago, Gundermann said:

 

It's kind of pleasing to see the HCA wind up the usual types.

 

It's you who seems wound up though 

[Australis]

JK Rowling saying a man pretending to be a women is still a man and always will be.

 

She says she is out of the country and will see what happens to her when she returns.

 

She has plenty of guts and I hope she takes the law on.

 

Good on her.

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

17 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

It's you who seems wound up though 

Hes that wound up he couldnt stand the heat on this thread so created a new thread to discuss it .  Glutton for punishment it seems. Nice SNP tactics of classic deflection. 

[henrysmithsgloves]

35 minutes ago, Jim_Duncan said:

Non-binary cats find your lack of support offensive. 

Had to Google that😲wtaf

[Gundermann]

46 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

It's you who seems wound up though 

 

[Australis]

35 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Hes that wound up he couldnt stand the heat on this thread so created a new thread to discuss it .  Glutton for punishment it seems. Nice SNP tactics of classic deflection. 

Rabbie Burns specifically wrote "To see ourselves as others see us" for gundie, who is getting his gundies in a twist.

 

[Ked]

45 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Hes that wound up he couldnt stand the heat on this thread so created a new thread to discuss it .  Glutton for punishment it seems. Nice SNP tactics of classic deflection. 

Did the right thing.

That subject shouldn't be in this thread.

Not in depth.

[The Mighty Thor]

10 minutes ago, Ked said:

Did the right thing.

That subject shouldn't be in this thread.

Not in depth.

Correct.

[Ked]

Question for those who believe in growing up as a country.

Is the devolved parliament a hindrance to that?

Or would we not have got this far?

Those who think things are better or will be can answer as well.

😄

 

Be better under the current set up or just Westminster.

 

Forgot that bit 

Edited April 1 by Ked

[doctor jambo]

28 minutes ago, Ked said:

Question for those who believe in growing up as a country.

Is the devolved parliament a hindrance to that?

Or would we not have got this far?

Those who think things are better or will be can answer as well.

😄

 

Be better under the current set up or just Westminster.

 

Forgot that bit 

Devolution had led to more division, more conflict , less unity, stunted growth, less representation, higher taxes and poorer services.

It’s been shite.

though I had high hopes for it under a competent Salmond , that has been rapidly reversed .

 

[Hmfc1965]

11 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

I think this may be the first time a member of the public decides if they have been a victim of a crime.

And this is merely accepted.

Then if the prosecution threshold has not been met, it gets recorded against you and kept on file.

Thats madness .

I'm not the biggest fan of the Act but this post is apocalyptic nonsense.

There is absolutely nothing to say every complaint is "merely accepted".

It will be investigated and if it doesn’t meet the threshold won't be pursued.

[Hmfc1965]

3 hours ago, Carter said:

Very good. It'll be the final nail in the coffin for the SNP and the Independence movement by extension. This is a massive overreach. They've shit the bed here and I suspect deep down you know that's the case.

I wouldn't vote SNP but legislation against hate crime is hardly the biggest stick to beat them with.

[Hmfc1965]

1 hour ago, Australis said:

JK Rowling saying a man pretending to be a women is still a man and always will be.

 

She says she is out of the country and will see what happens to her when she returns.

 

She has plenty of guts and I hope she takes the law on.

 

Good on her.

 

 

You're presuming statements like that fall foul of the Act.

They quite clearly don't.

[Cranston]

35 minutes ago, Ked said:

Question for those who believe in growing up as a country.

Is the devolved parliament a hindrance to that?

Or would we not have got this far?

Those who think things are better or will be can answer as well.

😄

 

Be better under the current set up or just Westminster.

 

Forgot that bit 

Devolution has led to maniac fringe politicos let loose upon the people. Patrick Harvie and the greens shouldn't be anywhere near the levers of power that the snp have bestowed upon them. However, its what Blair and Mandelson etc had in mind when empowering the fringe parties with devolution. Devolution could have worked if we had a party in charge that actually wanted devolution to succeed, and for Scotland to develop and thrive as a nation of business and growth, instead of madcap idealism. 

[Cranston]

7 minutes ago, Hmfc1965 said:

I wouldn't vote SNP but legislation against hate crime is hardly the biggest stick to beat them with.

It actually is, when there are so many other much more important issues to deal with. The snp appear to have no ideas other than green agenda idealism. Its a massive turn off for the population at large who look at the snp green coalition with nothing but a shaking of the head at their oppression of the majority. 

[Hmfc1965]

21 minutes ago, Cranston said:

It actually is, when there are so many other much more important issues to deal with. The snp appear to have no ideas other than green agenda idealism. Its a massive turn off for the population at large who look at the snp green coalition with nothing but a shaking of the head at their oppression of the majority. 

Oppression of a majority?

Are you being serious?

[Cranston]

1 minute ago, Hmfc1965 said:

Oppression of a majority?

Are you being serious?

I think it is you who are not being serious. Seriously. 

[Lord Montpelier]

1 hour ago, Ked said:

Question for those who believe in growing up as a country.

Is the devolved parliament a hindrance to that?

Or would we not have got this far?

Those who think things are better or will be can answer as well.

😄

 

Be better under the current set up or just Westminster.

 

Forgot that bit 

Devolution was fine up until about 10 - 15 years ago. Shambolic under Sturgeon and her acolytes 

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said:

Devolution was fine up until about 10 - 15 years ago. Shambolic under Sturgeon and her acolytes 

It was fine until they ran out of sensible areas to legislate on so decided to over reach . 

[Hmfc1965]

38 minutes ago, Cranston said:

I think it is you who are not being serious. Seriously. 

The majority are not being oppressed by the codification of hate crimes, which largely are in place anyway.

[Thunder and Lightning]

8 hours ago, Lone Striker said:

Ah ok - I misunderstood your post.   In your scenario above though, your identity would only be noted if the "victim" could actually describe to the police your name and/or address.     Even online, "doctor jambo" doesn't reveal your identity unless the police somehow have the time and technical skills to unmask you.   So unless you're planning to get into a  very heated argument with a neighbour or friend or work associate  or family member where you make derisory remarks about their religion/ethnicity/gender/sexual orientation etc then I think you're pretty safe.

 

While I agree that this law isn't popular for various reasons, it seems quite likely to tie up police resource in investigating incidents which turn out not to be  relevant to the intended aim of the law.      Meanwhile the inability to get  the police to attend a burglary or car theft  promptly will continue.

 

 

All the police would have to do is contact an admin and they would have no choice but to pass on they details they hold on you surely. 

[Cranston]

8 minutes ago, Hmfc1965 said:

The majority are not being oppressed by the codification of hate crimes, which largely are in place anyway.

I'm not going to be dragged into an argument regarding 'hate crime', as it has all the hallmarks of a failing divisive set of politicos who've run out of ideas, and are hell bent on fringe policies. There are many other policies worthy of attention, that the snp have no intention of delivering upon. If you can't see that, then you are not serious.

[doctor jambo]

24 minutes ago, Cranston said:

I'm not going to be dragged into an argument regarding 'hate crime', as it has all the hallmarks of a failing divisive set of politicos who've run out of ideas, and are hell bent on fringe policies. There are many other policies worthy of attention, that the snp have no intention of delivering upon. If you can't see that, then you are not serious.

This. They could not make sectarian hate at football illegal, but seem to manage to outlaw everything else

[Cranston]

1 minute ago, doctor jambo said:

This. They could not make sectarian hate at football illegal, but seem to manage to outlaw everything else

👍

 

They've managed to finally openly out themselves to the vast majority as the dictators that they have become. Aligning themselves with the Greens was always going to be a disaster. 

[henryheart]

1 hour ago, Hmfc1965 said:

I'm not the biggest fan of the Act but this post is apocalyptic nonsense.

There is absolutely nothing to say every complaint is "merely accepted".

It will be investigated and if it doesn’t meet the threshold won't be pursued.

 

From what I understand it will not be pursued in the sense that it will not be prosecuted, but it will still be accepted and recorded as a non hate crime incident by Police Scotland on the basis that the person who notified the 'hate act' perceived it as such. There does not appear to be any requirement on the complainer to prove that the incident actually happened. This will be kept on police record and logged against the accused person.

 

This does seem to be potentially resource intensive and I would rather that the police focused on dealing with crimes such as housebreaking and car crime. To waste time recording non hate crimes at the expense of not investigating these so called minor crimes is criminal in itself; to any person affected by these they are a big issue and very upsetting.

 

As for being called a name or being offended by the words of others, I would simply repeat what my mother always said; "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never harm me",  or as my dad used to say "just ignore them, they will say the same to someone who is bigger and harder than you one day ......".   

[JudyJudyJudy]

7 minutes ago, henryheart said:

 

From what I understand it will not be pursued in the sense that it will not be prosecuted, but it will still be accepted and recorded as a non hate crime incident by Police Scotland on the basis that the person who notified the 'hate act' perceived it as such. There does not appear to be any requirement on the complainer to prove that the incident actually happened. This will be kept on police record and logged against the accused person.

 

This does seem to be potentially resource intensive and I would rather that the police focused on dealing with crimes such as housebreaking and car crime. To waste time recording non hate crimes at the expense of not investigating these so called minor crimes is criminal in itself; to any person affected by these they are a big issue and very upsetting.

 

As for being called a name or being offended by the words of others, I would simply repeat what my mother always said; "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never harm me",  or as my dad used to say "just ignore them, they will say the same to someone who is bigger and harder than you one day ......".   

You should re post that on the “ HCA “ thread . Knock some sense into some 

 

 

[Lone Striker]

5 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

This. They could not make sectarian hate at football illegal, but seem to manage to outlaw everything else

Its a good point.   Most of us know precisely why it'll never be deemed a criminal offence, and the HCA has been carefully worded so as not mention allegiance to a football team as a protected characteristic.     Yet religion is a protected characteristic - how long before a  devout Bigot Brother fan complains to the police that the "other lot" are committing a hate crime by their singing their songs and displaying  banners which decry his religion. 

[PaddysBar]

2 hours ago, Cranston said:

Devolution has led to maniac fringe politicos let loose upon the people. Patrick Harvie and the greens shouldn't be anywhere near the levers of power that the snp have bestowed upon them. However, its what Blair and Mandelson etc had in mind when empowering the fringe parties with devolution. Devolution could have worked if we had a party in charge that actually wanted devolution to succeed, and for Scotland to develop and thrive as a nation of business and growth, instead of madcap idealism. 

Devolution (max) could have worked if it was delivered as promised on a no vote in 2014. 
 

It was just another lie. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

20 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

Its a good point.   Most of us know precisely why it'll never be deemed a criminal offence, and the HCA has been carefully worded so as not mention allegiance to a football team as a protected characteristic.     Yet religion is a protected characteristic - how long before a  devout Bigot Brother fan complains to the police that the "other lot" are committing a hate crime by their singing their songs and displaying  banners which decry his religion. 

Come on ! It could also happen at Tynecastle !

[Cranston]

11 minutes ago, PaddysBar said:

Devolution (max) could have worked if it was delivered as promised on a no vote in 2014. 
 

It was just another lie. 

Why would Devolution (max) have worked under the snp greens coalition? What would they have done to make it work better than Devolution? 

[PaddysBar]

1 hour ago, Cranston said:

Why would Devolution (max) have worked under the snp greens coalition? What would they have done to make it work better than Devolution? 

Not sure you understood the point I was making though be honest. I specifically said ‘could have worked’ which you erroneously described as me saying ‘would have worked’, whilst not remarking at all on the main point I made regarding promises which weren’t kept. 
 

As such, I’ll not bother taking this any further. 
 

 

[manaliveits105]

A new opinion poll has suggested the SNP and Labour are neck-and-neck in voting intentions for the General Election in Scotland, with the two parties tied on 34%.

The Redfield & Wilton poll actually represents a marginal improvement for Humza Yousaf's party, up by one point since the start of February with Labour unchanged. The Conservatives are on 16% (down 2), with the Lib Dems also down two points on 6%. Reform are unchanged on 4%, tied with the Greens (up 2). Alex Salmond's Alba Party bring up the rear with just 1% of the Scottish electorate intending to vote for them.

If these results were repeated at the ballot box – most likely in the autumn – then Labour would have 27 Scottish MPs, with the SNP falling to just 20 seats – down a staggering 28 from the 48 the party won in 2019. Such a disastrous result would likely spell the end of Mr Yousaf's time as leader. The Tories would hang on to their six MPs,

while the Lib Dems are on course to gain two seats with four Scottish MPs.

One in five Scots want the Scottish Parliamentto be closed down, according to a shock new poll. And while a majority think devolution has been a positive for Scotland, just 22% want Holyrood handed more powers from Westminster.

Less that 40% of those polled thought Scotland should be independent in the survey, carried out to mark 25 years since the Scottish Parliament opened. Diffley Partnership carried out the research on behalf of the Holyrood Sources podcast and spoke to 1,046 Scots between March 11 and 15, asking various questions about devolution.

The poll comes ahead of the podcast’s special looking back at 25 years since the creation of the Scottish Parliament on Thursday, featuring former first ministers Alex Salmond, Henry McLeish and Jack McConnell. Only 40% of people thought Holyrood has served them well as 17 years of SNP rule leaves Scots dissatisfied, but 56% of respondents to the survey said devolution has been positive overall, with 14% saying they viewed it as very positive.
 

[manaliveits105]

The Great man has the measure of snp 

 

Andrew Neil has said the Scottish Parliament has delivered "next to nothing" for Scotland as he delivered a withering verdict on devolution. The TV presenter and political commentator also compared MSPs to Soviet-era bureaucrats who have "buried their beaks deep in the Holyrood trough".

He was speaking after a new poll suggested over a quarter of Scottish voters felt devolution had been bad for the country. While 50 per cent backed devolution, the survey suggests support for Holyrood is dropping among the population. 

A similar poll in 2009 showed 70 per cent of people thought it had been a good thing, indicating 16 years of SNP government had seen confidence in the institution erode. Paisley-born Neil, 74, said he was "surprised" more people hadn't thought devolution had been bad.

[Boris]

11 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Devolution had led to more division, more conflict , less unity, stunted growth, less representation, higher taxes and poorer services.

It’s been shite.

though I had high hopes for it under a competent Salmond , that has been rapidly reversed .

 

That would be the elected governments fault and not holyrood per se to blame? Regards division, rabid Tories and the SNP have helped that along. again, not holyrood as an institution to blame. Imo.

10 hours ago, Cranston said:

Devolution has led to maniac fringe politicos let loose upon the people. Patrick Harvie and the greens shouldn't be anywhere near the levers of power that the snp have bestowed upon them. However, its what Blair and Mandelson etc had in mind when empowering the fringe parties with devolution. Devolution could have worked if we had a party in charge that actually wanted devolution to succeed, and for Scotland to develop and thrive as a nation of business and growth, instead of madcap idealism. 

Ask why the electorate vote for these parties then? What attracts voters to elect them? Not devolutions fault.

Btw, if no devolution previously, and given the SNPs dominance, Scotland would ironically now be independent.

Devolution is actually preventing independence.

[Hmfc1965]

10 hours ago, henryheart said:

 

From what I understand it will not be pursued in the sense that it will not be prosecuted, but it will still be accepted and recorded as a non hate crime incident by Police Scotland on the basis that the person who notified the 'hate act' perceived it as such. There does not appear to be any requirement on the complainer to prove that the incident actually happened. This will be kept on police record and logged against the accused person.

 

This does seem to be potentially resource intensive and I would rather that the police focused on dealing with crimes such as housebreaking and car crime. To waste time recording non hate crimes at the expense of not investigating these so called minor crimes is criminal in itself; to any person affected by these they are a big issue and very upsetting.

 

As for being called a name or being offended by the words of others, I would simply repeat what my mother always said; "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never harm me",  or as my dad used to say "just ignore them, they will say the same to someone who is bigger and harder than you one day ......".   

I agree it's going to be resource intensive for the police.

I don't get the recording bit at all.

If someone reports there was hate speech used and it's concluded there wasn't then there's no crime to record, hate or otherwise.

There may well be a record that a complaint was received,  investigated but that it was unfounded.

That's a long way from what you're suggesting.

[henryheart]

29 minutes ago, Hmfc1965 said:

I agree it's going to be resource intensive for the police.

I don't get the recording bit at all.

If someone reports there was hate speech used and it's concluded there wasn't then there's no crime to record, hate or otherwise.

There may well be a record that a complaint was received,  investigated but that it was unfounded.

That's a long way from what you're suggesting.

 

This can never happen.

 

The advice to police officers is that they are not to challenge the perception of the complainer that there has been a hate act and there is no requirement of evidence that there has been any intent of ill will or malice. Every complaint has to be investigated. The police will never record that there wasn't a hate act because it only takes one person to consider it happened for it to be one and the police require to accept this. The police can never consider whether a complaint is unfounded; the only discretion the police have is in considering whether or not the incident is severe enough to merit prosecution.

[Australis]

6 hours ago, manaliveits105 said:

The Great man has the measure of snp 

 

Andrew Neil has said the Scottish Parliament has delivered "next to nothing" for Scotland as he delivered a withering verdict on devolution. The TV presenter and political commentator also compared MSPs to Soviet-era bureaucrats who have "buried their beaks deep in the Holyrood trough".

He was speaking after a new poll suggested over a quarter of Scottish voters felt devolution had been bad for the country. While 50 per cent backed devolution, the survey suggests support for Holyrood is dropping among the population. 

A similar poll in 2009 showed 70 per cent of people thought it had been a good thing, indicating 16 years of SNP government had seen confidence in the institution erode. Paisley-born Neil, 74, said he was "surprised" more people hadn't thought devolution had been bad.

It will take decades for whoever gets in to fix the mess the nationalists will leave.

 

They have intentionally run Scotland into the ground.

 

Pretty heartbreaking stuff that they're proud of it.

 

Looking forward to less nationalists in both Parliaments spreading their hate.

 

[kingantti1874]

22 minutes ago, Australis said:

It will take decades for whoever gets in to fix the mess the nationalists will leave.

 

They have intentionally run Scotland into the ground.

 

Pretty heartbreaking stuff that they're proud of it.

 

Looking forward to less nationalists in both Parliaments spreading their hate.

 

100%. SNP are a disease. Every service destroyed under their watch and all the can do is blame the tories. 
 

Scotland is a ****ing shambles and these rodents are to blame 

[John Findlay]

15 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

100%. SNP are a disease. Every service destroyed under their watch and all the can do is blame the tories. 
 

Scotland is a ****ing shambles and these rodents are to blame 

Not solely to blame. They share the blame with Westminster, but alas they are not even willing to do that or their sycophants.

[Hmfc1965]

3 hours ago, henryheart said:

 

This can never happen.

 

The advice to police officers is that they are not to challenge the perception of the complainer that there has been a hate act and there is no requirement of evidence that there has been any intent of ill will or malice. Every complaint has to be investigated. The police will never record that there wasn't a hate act because it only takes one person to consider it happened for it to be one and the police require to accept this. The police can never consider whether a complaint is unfounded; the only discretion the police have is in considering whether or not the incident is severe enough to merit prosecution.

Where are you getting this?

Yes the police have said they'll investigate all complaints.

That's to investigate whether there has been a breach of the Act.

That does  not rely solely on the perception of the complainer.

Edited April 2 by Hmfc1965