The 2015 General Election Megathread

[JamboX2]

OK, I withdraw those last three words. Bit pedantic as it's an over-arching assessment which looks into a number of areas, the considerations to society will form part of that basis.

No it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the courts are down and the job they're doing in relation to this proposed law.

 

A judicial review is based on assessing whether a law or action by government is unreasonable, irrational or ultra vires.

 

Those are the limits to the consideration of its societal impact. Whether it is good or bad for children and families is up to Parliament.

Edited August 1, 2015 by JamboX2

[jambos are go!]

Social Workers and Social work throughout the UK owe virtually everything to various Labour Governments and nothing to the SNP. IMO.

[Malinga the Swinga]

I know, imagine wanting to save lives, how trivial. You reference a unionist newspaper that carried out a survey on a predominantly Scottish act?

It will save lives, look into the case of baby P.

Am I capable to changing either of your minds on this? No. Therefore, there's little chance of you changing mine. I believe it to be positive, if such a scheme was available when I was young, it'd have made my childhood far easier, alongside 1000's of others.

Let the courts decide.

if the social workers involved had actually done what they were paid for instead of all passing the buck and trying to protect themselves, then perhaps Baby P would still be alive, although with the people she had looking after her, perhaps not.

 

The vast majority of the people who will now be trying to carry out the monitoring are already overworked but no matter, there opinions will just be ignored anyway.

[deesidejambo]

Only a year to go now till Nicola Sturgeon (no children) appoints a named person (who could also be childless) to overlook the well being of my two daughters.

I can't wait for my son to tell whoever is appointed to stalk them to gtf.

[jambo1185]

Wasn't primarily the failing of social services. Laming's investigation found that multiple services were responsible and his main recommendation was the introduction of the multi-disciplinary approach. Could the act have saved Baby P? Possibly. The named-person would have been aware of the danger that he was in and could have coordinated between services.

 

The vast majority of people that find themselves as a named-person will have no additional work. They're simply a support function if their assistance is required.

To be fair, the named person would have been as aware of the situation as the people who were assigned to Baby P anyway. If that individual fails to pick up on something or does but for whatever reason fails to take it forward, or its taken forward but not appropriately acted upon by the next link in the chain, the end result is the same.

 

The idea is basically just to have an extra pair of eyes on every child to make it a tiny bit less likely of something dropping through the cracks but rather than targeting action and adding resource where it is most needed they are doing another centralised one size fits all approach to the entire country with no additional funding to put it into place to assist. Plus, every teacher, for example, that im aware of is on the look out for these issues anyway when kids come into school so it actually adds little to nothing other than to formalise an existing role and in doing so increase workload as something done informally as part of the job now has a ton of beurocracy added to it.

 

It could work if they actually put some effort into creating and implementing the policy, but the current proposal is a mess. And i don't believe it will save any more lives than having well trained, supported, dedicated (which there is but they are underresourced and overstretched) and resouced social services, health visitors and teachers would.

Edited August 1, 2015 by jambo1185

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

This whole named person thing makes me glad I no longer live in Scotland. Having some arsehole telling me how to bring up my kids? Feck off!

[aussieh]

This whole named person thing makes me glad I no longer live in Scotland. Having some arsehole telling me how to bring up my kids? Feck off!

Somehow, i dont think thats the case.

 

But, i do think some weans will play this against their parents.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Are you a good parent? If so, your children could go through their entire lives without the intervention of the 'named-person'. They don't interfere, they're only contacted if concerns are raised about wellbeing.

Define a "good parent" please?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Why?

Because the whole concept is subjective. For example, if I tell my kids that voting is a waste of time is that not teaching them the importance of civic duty and therefore an intervention is needed?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Exactly, not only is it subjective but also about different perceptions. I don't know of all the specifics, but it seems that it will refer to the wellbeing and safety of a child. Telling your children, how to vote, what football team to support, how to dress etc., will not call for an intervention. This is all to be decided, it has to get past the law-makers first.

So if I tell my children that you should vote BNP is that being a bad parent?

 

The whole concept is shite!

 

On a personal note, my youngest son has high functioning autism which means his behaviour can be far from ideal from time to time. As he has grown up, we have proactively engaged his schools and teachers to help them understand him while at the same time agreed boundaries. The idea that an outsider can tell me I'm being a bad parent in those circumstances when the difference in primary schooling between Australia and Scotland is night and day in terms of parental involvement tells me that the only people who will win out of this law are lawyers, not children.

[GBJambo]

All children will be "assessed " by completing a questionare. If the answers dont match what the state deem to be a "good life", the state will intervene.

To have a "good life" as they put it the child/parent must meet the following criteria:

Safe

Healthy

Achieving

Nurtured

Active

Respected

Responsible

Included

 

One of the things that the np advises that will ensure the child is respected is that it's ok for the child to keep secrets from their parents. They can also decide what they watch on television.

 

The above is from the governments GIRFEC leaflet.

Edited August 2, 2015 by GBJambo

[deesidejambo]

All children will be "assessed " by completing a questionare. If the answers dont match what the state deem to be a "good life", the state will intervene.

To have a "good life" as they put it the child/parent must meet the following criteria:

Safe

Healthy

Achieving

Nurtured

Active

Respected

Responsible

Included

 

One of the things that the np advises that will ensure the child is respected is that it's ok for the child to keep secrets from their parents. They can also decide what they watch on teion.

 

The above is from the governments GIRFEC leaflet.

This ridiculous policy is guaranteed to fail.  Bring it on Nicola.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

All children will be "assessed " by completing a questionare. If the answers dont match what the state deem to be a "good life", the state will intervene.

To have a "good life" as they put it the child/parent must meet the following criteria:

Safe

Healthy

Achieving

Nurtured

Active

Respected

Responsible

Included

 

One of the things that the np advises that will ensure the child is respected is that it's ok for the child to keep secrets from their parents. They can also decide what they watch on television.

 

The above is from the governments GIRFEC leaflet.

If that's true then times one million. My eldest son is 14 at Christmas and we are at pains to get him to talk to us about all kinds of stuff because it is a healthy thing, we believe in any case.

[deesidejambo]

That would make you proud would it DJ? Your son, telling his school-teacher to FO.

It is not his school teacher he will tell to gtf, he respects his teachers and is a good kid.  He, like me, is aware of the new snooping approach, and he, like me, has decided, on his own, that he doesn't want someone telling him, or me, what to do.   To that extent I'm proud of him.

 

Presumably this is funded by taxpayers?

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

All children will be "assessed " by completing a questionare. If the answers dont match what the state deem to be a "good life", the state will intervene.

To have a "good life" as they put it the child/parent must meet the following criteria:

Safe

Healthy

Achieving

Nurtured

Active

Respected

Responsible

Included

 

One of the things that the np advises that will ensure the child is respected is that it's ok for the child to keep secrets from their parents. They can also decide what they watch on television.

 

The above is from the governments GIRFEC leaflet.

Sorry but that sounds absolutely fecking ridiculous.

 

For one thing, how can you trust the state's judgement? Look at the fantastic job the authorities in Rotherham did when it came to protecting vulnerable people.

[jack D and coke]

Sorry but that sounds absolutely fecking ridiculous.

 

For one thing, how can you trust the state's judgement? Look at the fantastic job the authorities in Rotherham did when it came to protecting vulnerable people.

That was purely down to fear of being accused racist. Labour protecting their Muslim vote. Utterly shameful.

You could only imagine the outcry if the SNP had been involved in something similar.

Edited August 2, 2015 by jack D and coke

[GBJambo]

Sorry but that sounds absolutely fecking ridiculous.

 

For one thing, how can you trust the state's judgement? Look at the fantastic job the authorities in Rotherham did when it came to protecting vulnerable people.

I know. Let's hope the courts see sense.

Here is a link to the GIRFEC leaflet.

 

http://no2np.org/wp-content/uploads/GIRFECleaflet.pdf

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

That was purely down to fear of being accused racist. Labour protecting their Muslim vote. Utterly shameful.

You could only imagine the outcry if the SNP had been involved in something similar.

Doesn't really matter what it was down to. The point still stands - governments are full of inept idiots.

[aussieh]

That was purely down to fear of being accused racist. Labour protecting their Muslim vote. Utterly shameful.

You could only imagine the outcry if the SNP had been involved in something similar.

Liberals, will not want it.

bunch of kidney fiddlers.

I see the loyalists, oh i mean the unionists are having a good sunday moanathon

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Liberals, will not want it.

bunch of kidney fiddlers.

I see the loyalists, oh i mean the unionists are having a good sunday moanathon

I'd imagine the SNP membership has its share.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Liberals, will not want it.

bunch of kidney fiddlers.

I see the loyalists, oh i mean the unionists are having a good sunday moanathon

 

Do you have kids?

[aussieh]

 

Do you have kids?

Bit like Scotland, non of your business.

[Hasselhoff]

Bit like Scotland, non of your business.

Nationalists don't own Scotland you know....

[aussieh]

Nationalists don't own Scotland you know....

Soon.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Bit like Scotland, non of your business.

As I said, I'm glad I don't live there anymore if this is the prevailing attitude.

[Hasselhoff]

John Swinney has applied for planning permission to erect a 20ft flagpole from which to fly the saltire.

 

He is clearly more scottish than those who don't exhibit their feelings like this. Next he will be wearing a Scotland strip to Holyrood.

[aussieh]

John Swinney has applied for planning permission to erect a 20ft flagpole from which to fly the saltire.

 

He is clearly more scottish than those who don't exhibit their feelings like this. Next he will be wearing a Scotland strip to Holyrood.

Home kit, may i add.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

John Swinney has applied for planning permission to erect a 20ft flagpole from which to fly the saltire.

 

He is clearly more scottish than those who don't exhibit their feelings like this. Next he will be wearing a Scotland strip to Holyrood.

Aye, but it's all about Westminster innit?

[Gizmo]

As I said, I'm glad I don't live there anymore if this is the prevailing attitude.

Hardly, Geoff, and it's a tad disingenuous, even by your "devil's advocate" posting style, to judge Scottish society by the utterings of one rather 'forceful and strident' poster.

[Stuart Lyon]

Canada calling for one Nationalist I hope. Their lose is our gain.

[coconut doug]

Always happy to help so here is some easy-to-read stuff on National Debt, Bonds and Yields that might help you develop an understanding.

 

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/3028/economics/interest-payments-on-uk-debt/

 

The UK is now paying around ?1bn/week in interest payments. It is a stretch to see that as 0.5% interest.

 

UK bonds are relatively attractive as we have an independent Central Bank/Lender of last resort - you will remember from debate last year that, despite Plans A, B and C, there was no credible notion about what an independent Scotland would do for money or a Lender of last resort. A premium would the be required by the lender to offset greater risk - it might be 5%, it might be 6% but we will not know until the market is tested (hopefully no time soon).

 

I would also suggest that reneging on a share of debt is hardly likely to endear an independent Scotland to potential future lenders.

 

But, who knows, you may be right - I will pop into the BMW dealership later and see if I can get some nice wheels on a 0.5% APR loan.

Thanks for the links. I'm trying hard to develop my understanding but the more i learn the more questions there are.

 

The point i tried to make is that i can get a mortgage for for 2.3% apr. Millions of people have mortgages at similar or even lesser rates. http://www.money.co.uk/mortgages.htm

Why would countries like rUK and Scotland have to pay 5% - 6.65% when i can get it much cheaper? The current bank rate is 0.5%. Billions of pounds are lent from the Bof E to clearing banks at this rate.

 

Why is it that Local Authorities and government departments are forced to pay huge rates of interest even though traditionally they have been the safest places to lend?

 

Why are we paying huge interest rates on PFI contracts that are now seriously inhibiting the abilty of some local authorities to provide stautory services?

 

Why are they not allowed to borrow directly from the BofE?

 

It seems to me that such deals, as well as poor management and criminal activity from banks has created austerity.

 

other points

 

Nobody was going to renege on a share of debt unless they were denied assets.

 

You can even get your BMW without paying any interest at all. http://www.kentbmw.co.uk/0_BMW_finance_offers/

[ToadKiller Dog]

Never voted labour but if Corbyn wins leadership I would seriously consider giving them my vote .

[coconut doug]

It is absolutely not reasonable to assume the oil companies are "hiding oil".      They maximise production, hence revenues at all opportunities.    May as well be in the Conspiracy Theory Thread.

 How does that work with the laws of supply and demand?  You don't think they would hold back production if the price is low or if they knew a tax concession was coming?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Hardly, Geoff, and it's a tad disingenuous, even by your "devil's advocate" posting style, to judge Scottish society by the utterings of one rather 'forceful and strident' poster.

Fair enough but getting back to the point before McGlashan intervened, I'm still glad I don't live in Scotland given this nonsense of state parenting.

[Malinga the Swinga]

Soon.

the SNP will never own Scotland, neither will their band of supporters, or for that matter any political party. We are a country belonging to all its people, regardless of who you vote for and you would do well to remember that. As for independence, the majority spoke once and they will speak again, whenever Nicola has the guts to call a referendum. She won't though, because she knows she will lose again.

[deesidejambo]

 How does that work with the laws of supply and demand?  You don't think they would hold back production if the price is low or if they knew a tax concession was coming?

No on both counts.

 

If prices are low, then their revenues, and hence return to investors is low, so they need to produce as much as possible to try and maintain profits.

 

On the second one - tax concessions only are usually only given to encourage new field developments, which by definition are not yet on stream.  If the Gov't was to consider concessions for currently producing fields, as per recent events, then if the oil companies were silly enough to cut back production, the Gov't would immediately know about this, as the Gov't monitors all fields via DECC.     

 

Furthermore, if the Oil Companies were to cut back production, all staff, from the Senior Leaders all the way through to the operators on the platforms would know about it, and whistles would be blown immediately.

[Thunderstruck]

Thanks for the links. I'm trying hard to develop my understanding but the more i learn the more questions there are.

 

The point i tried to make is that i can get a mortgage for for 2.3% apr. Millions of people have mortgages at similar or even lesser rates. http://www.money.co.uk/mortgages.htm

Why would countries like rUK and Scotland have to pay 5% - 6.65% when i can get it much cheaper? The current bank rate is 0.5%. Billions of pounds are lent from the Bof E to clearing banks at this rate.

 

Why is it that Local Authorities and government departments are forced to pay huge rates of interest even though traditionally they have been the safest places to lend?

 

Why are we paying huge interest rates on PFI contracts that are now seriously inhibiting the abilty of some local authorities to provide stautory services?

 

Why are they not allowed to borrow directly from the BofE?

 

It seems to me that such deals, as well as poor management and criminal activity from banks has created austerity.

 

other points

 

Nobody was going to renege on a share of debt unless they were denied assets.

 

You can even get your BMW without paying any interest at all. http://www.kentbmw.co.uk/0_BMW_finance_offers/

I don't think you can realistically compare personal borrowing with that of Governments which borrow a major proportion of money from those willing to invest in bonds and they have to pay sufficient interest to attract that investment. The investor will demand a higher rate of interest on the basis of risk (see Greece).

 

Local Government Prudential Borrowing will have an interest rate of between 2 and 5% (with discount) depending on length of loan (that is from the Public Works Loan Board).

 

As a comparison, the Regulators (eg Ofcom) will allow a Cost of Capital of between 7 and 9% for regulated industries. That is their estimate of the real cost of borrowing for such industries.

 

Yes, 0% car loans are available, but there will be trade-offs elsewhere. Usually, these are on hard-to-shift stock not on a brand new car built to your spec (that will be 5.9% APR from BMW Finance).

[JamboX2]

Never voted labour but if Corbyn wins leadership I would seriously consider giving them my vote .

Good article on "who'd" back a Corbyn Labour was in the Scotland on Sunday: http://www.scotsman.com/news/euan-mccolm-corbyn-would-nail-the-lie-of-socialist-sturgeon-1-3847188

 

Tend to agree. Don't think Corbyn will win an election and lead a government, he may well win the contest but I reckon he's likely to influence the direction of the party from the race to be leader at the moment. Although he has highlighted a disconnect between the elected representatives and their party colleagues on a lot.

[aussieh]

Canada calling for one Nationalist I hope. Their lose is our gain.

Brilliant

[aussieh]

the SNP will never own Scotland, neither will their band of supporters, or for that matter any political party. We are a country belonging to all its people, regardless of who you vote for and you would do well to remember that. As for independence, the majority spoke once and they will speak again, whenever Nicola has the guts to call a referendum. She won't though, because she knows she will lose again.

We are owned.

[TheMaganator]

Dugdale wanting new second chamber to be established and based in Glasgow

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-33754088

[Boris]

Dugdale wanting new second chamber to be established and based in Glasgow

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-33754088

Not a bad idea and, personally, would like to see an elected second chamber at Holyrood once more powers are devolved and certainly in any independent Scotland.

 

Not sure why it should be on Glasgow, but anyway....

[pablo]

Not a bad idea and, personally, would like to see an elected second chamber at Holyrood once more powers are devolved and certainly in any independent Scotland.

 

Not sure why it should be on Glasgow, but anyway....

 

How do you see the election process working?  Do you think the public are keen on even more politicians and elections?

[deesidejambo]

Not a bad idea and, personally, would like to see an elected second chamber at Holyrood once more powers are devolved and certainly in any independent Scotland.

 

Not sure why it should be on Glasgow, but anyway....

No - the public will rightly not support proliferation of Gov't.   Two chambers for a wee Country like Scotland?  Not for me.

 

And definately not in Weegland.

[Boris]

How do you see the election process working? Do you think the public are keen on even more politicians and elections?

In place of the Lords a national list system with each party getting its share of the vote translated as seats. 4 home nations are the four constituencies with seats allocated as per population. Votes cast for Westminster are those counted.

[Boris]

No - the public will rightly not support proliferation of Gov't. Two chambers for a wee Country like Scotland? Not for me.

 

And definately not in Weegland.

Dugdale was referring to the HoL.

 

Regardless of size I'm a firm believer in bicameral parliament.

[TheMaganator]

Dugdale was referring to the HoL.

 

Regardless of size I'm a firm believer in bicameral parliament.

Ditto - there needs to be something there to assess and scrutinise. 

 

Putting it somewhere that will see regeneration around it would be a good idea too - so Glasgow or any of the northern English cities. Or Leith. 

[pablo]

In place of the Lords a national list system with each party getting its share of the vote translated as seats. 4 home nations are the four constituencies with seats allocated as per population. Votes cast for Westminster are those counted.

Cheers. Makes sense come up with a system that can use votes cast for a Westminster election.

[Boris]

Ditto - there needs to be something there to assess and scrutinise.

 

Putting it somewhere that will see regeneration around it would be a good idea too - so Glasgow or any of the northern English cities. Or Leith.

Indeed. Checks and balances needed.

 

Move the whole UK Govt elsewhere and let Westminster be a separate English parliament as a move to federalism would strengthen this creaking Union. IMO.

[Gizmo]

Fair enough but getting back to the point before McGlashan intervened, I'm still glad I don't live in Scotland given this nonsense of state parenting.

 

I'm pretty sure it would be easy for someone in Scotland to pour scorn on Australia if they so chose too. Not one person of sane mind would swap the SNP for Tony Abbot's government, for instance. 

 

That said I am not a fan of the SNP's tendency towards authoritarianism when they legislate. Well intentioned I'm sure but still, whilst their unequivocal opposition of the ideologically driven lie that is austerity, their commitment to universal free access to education and health care is welcome (as is a commitment to increasing social housing availability) the manner in which they bring in legislation seems high-handed. I don't suppose they are unique in this aspect of governing but there must be a way in which common sense and pragmatism can be worked into legislation.