Even More SNP Nonsense

[Doogz]

On 15/06/2018 at 20:39, Space Mackerel said:

 

Alll of you Unionists on here.

Found any quotes yet?

[Space Mackerel]

Didn’t know this till a minute ago but Jim Sillars left the SNP some time ago and is now a member of RISE. 

 

Anyway, he’s an irrelevance in the Yes movement, no one pays him any attention.  He is more interested in his Brexit dreams. 

[Space Mackerel]

19 minutes ago, Doogz said:

Found any quotes yet?

 

Heres a few

 

 

 

 

[Doogz]

1 minute ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Heres a few

 

 

 

 

Should I just take your inability to provide any evidence as proof that you lied? 

[Space Mackerel]

7 minutes ago, Doogz said:

Should I just take your inability to provide any evidence as proof that you lied? 

 

Im just giving you some compelling evidence. It’s what you wanted right? 

[Doogz]

17 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Im just giving you some compelling evidence. It’s what you wanted right? 

 

More spin and deflection... 

Can you provide a single quote to back up your claim regarding the 3 "too" quote you like to use so often

On 15/06/2018 at 20:30, Doogz said:

Which unionist said this? 

 

On 15/06/2018 at 20:39, Space Mackerel said:

 

Alll of you Unionists on here.

 

On 15/06/2018 at 20:41, Doogz said:

You can provide quotes then ?

Surely if all the unionists have used that phrase it can't be difficult to find one .... unless of course you were lying ... but why would you have to resort to lies if the case for Indy is so strong ?

[Space Mackerel]

4 minutes ago, Doogz said:

 

More spin and deflection... 

Can you provide a single quote to back up your claim regarding the 3 "too" quote you like to use so often

 

 

Surely if all the unionists have used that phrase it can't be difficult to find one .... unless of course you were lying ... but why would you have to resort to lies if the case for Indy is so strong ?

 

 

 

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/06/17/tipping-point-why-scotlands-ultimate-independence-now-looks-inevitable/

[Doogz]

1 minute ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

 

 

 

More deflection - what a shock.

Still can't back up your earlier accusations/lies. Why should anyone trust anything you post?

[Space Mackerel]

4 minutes ago, Doogz said:

More deflection - what a shock.

Still can't back up your earlier accusations/lies. Why should anyone trust anything you post?

 

Why did you delete my link in my quote?

 

[Doogz]

3 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Why did you delete my link in my quote?

 

Because it was more deflection from you to try and get away from your inability to back up your earlier claims.

So as you still can't provide any evidence it's increasingly clear you lied.

Did you do this in error or did you lie intentionally?

[Space Mackerel]

15 minutes ago, Doogz said:

Because it was more deflection from you to try and get away from your inability to back up your earlier claims.

So as you still can't provide any evidence it's increasingly clear you lied.

Did you do this in error or did you lie intentionally?

 

 

[jack D and coke]

1 hour ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Bit silly to say SNPs vision when there will be a GE within 3-6 months after the day. 

 

To use an anology, first you have to get the keys to the house then you can decorate it anyway you want. No dicky dots though. 

I know that but they campaign about the EU etc and imo they should offer complete independence first then give the options for other things. Not everybody thinks the EU or full EU membership is a great idea. 

[Geoff the Mince]

Just now, Space Mackerel said:

 

 

[jambo lodge]

1 hour ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Bit silly to say SNPs vision when there will be a GE within 3-6 months after the day. 

 

To use an anology, first you have to get the keys to the house then you can decorate it anyway you want. No dicky dots though. 

You don't get the keys to the door and then hand over the house to another owner. The Murrells are power crazy which is why they " control " everything that goes on in the SNP and why they run a twin track system for Freedom of Information requests. They would not hold an election within 3-6 months that is bullshit. 

[Doogz]

Just now, Space Mackerel said:

 

 

So your deflecting with a post about deflection - all very meta and quite clever if it was intentional....

Oh that reminds me was your earlier lie a mistake or did you do it intentionally?

[Space Mackerel]

35 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

I know that but they campaign about the EU etc and imo they should offer complete independence first then give the options for other things. Not everybody thinks the EU or full EU membership is a great idea. 

 

I know but there was/is a sizeable amount of support to remain in the EU from the ref result. 

 

[Space Mackerel]

36 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

You don't get the keys to the door and then hand over the house to another owner. The Murrells are power crazy which is why they " control " everything that goes on in the SNP and why they run a twin track system for Freedom of Information requests. They would not hold an election within 3-6 months that is bullshit. 

 

How do you know that they wouldn’t.

[jack D and coke]

4 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

I know but there was/is a sizeable amount of support to remain in the EU from the ref result. 

 

But a lot of Yes voters voted leave. You have to include everyone. It might be the difference. 

[Space Mackerel]

1 minute ago, jack D and coke said:

But a lot of Yes voters voted leave. You have to include everyone. It might be the difference. 

 

3 of my mates daughters voted Naw and they are firmly Yes now since Brexit. 

[jambo lodge]

14 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

How do you know that they wouldn’t.

They are daft enough to think Independence would work therefore they would stay ...... for a while until the rails come off then it would be a Natinal Coaltion to try and sort the mess out.

[jambo lodge]

10 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

3 of my mates daughters voted Naw and they are firmly Yes now since Brexit. 

Only 3 , charisma is slipping. 

[Space Mackerel]

1 hour ago, jambo lodge said:

They are daft enough to think Independence would work therefore they would stay ...... for a while until the rails come off then it would be a Natinal Coaltion to try and sort the mess out.

 

If you do not think there would a GE soon after indy then you really are talking utter drivel Lodgey.

[jambo lodge]

22 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

If you do not think there would a GE soon after indy then you really are talking utter drivel Lodgey.

Its called responsibility Spacey. Whoever has pushed us over the line to Indy( God forbid)needs to be responsible for their promises. Its called Government with a big G, unlike the big Council game at Holyrood.

[Space Mackerel]

8 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Its called responsibility Spacey. Whoever has pushed us over the line to Indy( God forbid)needs to be responsible for their promises. Its called Government with a big G, unlike the big Council game at Holyrood.

 

SNP government are doing OK it seems seeing as its been 11 years and still holding 40 odd %

[Dawnrazor]

9 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

SNP government are doing OK it seems seeing as its been 11 years and still holding 40 odd %

Tories on 42, by your reckoning they're doing better? 

[jambo lodge]

10 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

SNP government are doing OK it seems seeing as its been 11 years and still holding 40 odd %

Its a whole different thing  raising tax to just spending it as its given to you. Land and Buildings Tax is an example of where SNP has got its sums wrong. Only 26% of SNP members voted in deputy leadership race. Membership knows that Deputy is just a puppet.

[AuldReekie444]

10 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

Thats a side step. 

My whole point is folk are talking factually about ‘10 years of additional Scottish austerity’ after Indy when the real truth is “experts” know heehaw as is proven every budget every year since god knows when. Predict what you like. The path is well trodden. 

 but you said "westminster experts"

if you say all expersts, id probably agree, that trusting expert economists is a dodgy game. but you said "westminster experts"  

[JamboX2]

7 hours ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

 

 

Attacking the man and not the content of his article shows a lack of intellectual ability to construct a counter argument or a fear that he may be right.

 

As it stands, I do think Sturgeon has (again) over played her hand here. Polling shows that pro-independence brexit backers are less likely to vote Yes if they think they'll end up back in the EU. Much like May should not ignore soft-Brexiters, Sturgeon (if she's going to win) can't ignore pro-indy folk who want nothing to do with the EU.

 

For what it's worth on Foote, it's a slap in the face for the No side. But they should - the Tories especially - listen to his concerns and act to correct their errors. Much like Sturgeon needs to take account of the Greens, RISE and other independent pro-yes groups which in the past few weeks have increasingly sought to put blue water between them and the SNP over a few matters: NI abortion, the Growth Commission and the EU.

Edited June 17, 2018 by JamboX2

[AuldReekie444]

13 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Attacking the man and not the content of his article shows a lack of intellectual ability to construct a counter argument or a fear that he may be right.

 

As it stands, I do think Sturgeon has (again) over played her hand here. Polling shows that pro-independence brexit backers are less likely to vote Yes if they think they'll end up back in the EU. Much like May should not ignore soft-Brexiters, Sturgeon (if she's going to win) can't ignore pro-indy folk who want nothing to do with the EU.

 

For what it's worth on Foote, it's a slap in the face for the No side. But they should - the Tories especially - listen to his concerns and act to correct their errors. Much like Sturgeon needs to take account of the Greens, RISE and other independent pro-yes groups which in the past few weeks have increasingly sought to put blue water between them and the SNP over a few matters: NI abortion, the Growth Commission and the EU.

im not bothered about Foote in the slightest. 

i don't think anyone is.

 

 

 

[AuldReekie444]

On 16/06/2018 at 23:11, Boris said:

 

Not sure, I think I heard it on the radio, but will check and get back.

did you source where that claim came from Boris?

[Gorgiewave]

In summary, we said No and we would tomorrow or any day from here to eternity.

 

 

[Thunderstruck]

16 hours ago, Space Mackerel said:

Didn’t know this till a minute ago but Jim Sillars left the SNP some time ago and is now a member of RISE. 

 

Anyway, he’s an irrelevance in the Yes movement, no one pays him any attention.  He is more interested in his Brexit dreams. 

 

I thought that you told us that the independence movement was a broad church extending beyond the SNP but now you ask us to dismiss the views of a longstanding advocate of independence as he is no longer in the SNP. 

 

Has he become an irrelevance because he left the SNP or because he questions the wisdom of its leadership. 

[Pans Jambo]

11 hours ago, AuldReekie444 said:

 but you said "westminster experts"

if you say all expersts, id probably agree, that trusting expert economists is a dodgy game. but you said "westminster experts"  

I do mean all so called “experts”. 

 

But, in terms of balancing the books, I think Scotgov has done a better job than WM over the last 10 years. 

Edited June 18, 2018 by Pans Jambo

[Boris]

7 hours ago, AuldReekie444 said:

did you source where that claim came from Boris?

 

Hiya,  yes, I saw it here: http://indyref2.scot/reporting-scotland-fails-to-report-positive-economic-news-for-scotland 

 

Obviously this is reporting the report, so not the source of the report.  FM tweeted about it so doubt it's "made up".

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-44436783

 

Was an RBS report.

[Space Mackerel]

36 minutes ago, Thunderstruck said:

 

I thought that you told us that the independence movement was a broad church extending beyond the SNP but now you ask us to dismiss the views of a longstanding advocate of independence as he is no longer in the SNP. 

 

Has he become an irrelevance because he left the SNP or because he questions the wisdom of its leadership. 

 

Its quite funny that the media roll out all the yesterdays men like Sillars and Brown to have a swipe. 

 

I mean, all they are now are just common voters like you and I now TS, that’s all. 

[JamboX2]

1 hour ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Its quite funny that the media roll out all the yesterdays men like Sillars and Brown to have a swipe. 

 

I mean, all they are now are just common voters like you and I now TS, that’s all. 

 

Not really. One's an ex-MP of 30 years, who was a leading independence campaigner since the 1970s. Who - much like his wife when she was alive  - is rightly applying scrutiny of the SNP case from within the tent. The other is an ex-MP of 30 odd years, ex-Chancellor and ex-PM. A wealth of political experience there. 

 

Whilst I agree they are yesterdays men. Their knowledge and past experiences shouldn't be ignored readily. Nor are they common voters. They are anything but common voters.

[Space Mackerel]

1 hour ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Not really. One's an ex-MP of 30 years, who was a leading independence campaigner since the 1970s. Who - much like his wife when she was alive  - is rightly applying scrutiny of the SNP case from within the tent. The other is an ex-MP of 30 odd years, ex-Chancellor and ex-PM. A wealth of political experience there. 

 

Whilst I agree they are yesterdays men. Their knowledge and past experiences shouldn't be ignored readily. Nor are they common voters. They are anything but common voters.

 

From within the tent? He left the SNP years ago. 

 

How has “no boom or bust” Broon suddenly the worlds leading economist all of a sudden?

[JamboX2]

2 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

From within the tent? He left the SNP years ago. 

 

How has “no boom or bust” Broon suddenly the worlds leading economist all of a sudden?

 

Within the indy tent which you claim is broader than the SNP.

 

Never said he was. I've said he's not a common voter. Which was your original point.  Goal post shifting specialist.

[jack D and coke]

Brown is an absolute arsehole. 

[gjcc]

1 hour ago, jack D and coke said:

Brown is an absolute arsehole. 

 

My arsehole is offended. 

[Dawnrazor]

2 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Brown is an absolute arsehole. 

Aren't all arseholes? 

[gjcc]

2 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Aren't all arseholes? 

 

Not if you bleach them. 

 

[Dawnrazor]

15 minutes ago, gjcc said:

 

Not if you bleach them. 

 

I see what you mean. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2930063/Nicola-Sturgeon-tells-Alex-Salmond-decide-SNP-shares-power-Labour.html

[Space Mackerel]

4 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Brown is an absolute arsehole. 

 

Remember, Broon sold off all the gold and screwed the pensions and came out with "no boom or bust" just before the entire worldwide capitalist system came to a grinding halt.

 

We need to listen to this man according to some on here

[Space Mackerel]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16295834.Iain_Macwhirter__When_it_s_gone_it_s_gone__why_the_week_in_Westminster_has_changed_everything/?ref=twtrec

 

 

 

 

“Petulant..vulgar...immature attention-seeking”. The UK press were largely united in condemning the SNP's parliamentary walkout. “A stunt”, they called it. Well, of course it was a stunt – but such theatrics are as much a part of Westminster tradition as Black Rod.

You don't have to go back to Charles Stewart Parnell's use of parliamentary disruption to promote Irish Home rule in the 19th Century. There was the then Labour MP Denis Canavan crying “strangers in the gallery” back in 1987 after the Tories had been routed in Scotland. Even the ultra-respectable Donald Dewar appreciated the importance of political theatre and led a walk out of MPs shortly thereafter. And of course we had Alex Salmond's disruption of the 1988 budget speech.

And the point is that it works. Does anyone seriously believe that, had it not been for this “stunt", that the Sewel Convention and the Scotland Act would have received a smidgeon of the attention it did last week? It led the BBC news for the first time, was examined at length in Channel 4 News, and was a hot topic on Question Time. The Guardian even ran an editorial on the issue of consent which, typically, condemned the walk out while saying it was actually justified.

And of course it was. Having the Scottish parliament's powers stripped away was bad enough, but leaving only 15 minutes to debate this was provocation too far. The UK government's view, echoed in a screamingly pompous Spectator comment on the walk out, is that no one in Scotland is interested in the constitution. ”It's anarchy up there” it teased, “Elderly ladies are smashing up tearooms and Church of Scotland ministers have started lamping passing policemen with bottles of Irn Bru”.

Well, the SNP got the last laugh as 5,000 new members signed up to the party within the next 24 hours. The former editor of the Daily Record, Murray Foote – the man who actually drafted the infamous Vow - then declared that he was now a supporter of independence. The combination of losing EU citizenship and seeing Holyrood demoted drove him over the edge. One suspects many more No voters from 2014 are having similar second thoughts – even if they can't thole the thought of another referendum right now.

People are beginning to understand why the parties in the Scottish parliament united – bar the Tories – to refuse legislative consent to the Brexit bill. It is because the UK government has not the least interest in respecting the fundamental principle of devolution: that Westminster should only legislate for Scotland with the consent of the Scottish parliament. It's not just about fish, farming and food labelling, important though these matters are. It is about the power relations between Scotland and Westminster. Parliamentary politics is all about precedent: once it is established that Westminster can dictate to Holyrood, “whenever there is disagreement” as David Mundell put it baldly in his statement, then that will set the ground rules for the future.

It is also about whether Holyrood continues to be a proper parliament with primary law-making powers, or reverts to the status of a city council. As the Brexit insider, and Times journalist, Tim Shipman, put it last week, with inadvertent candour: “why should Scotland be regarded as any more important than Manchester?”. The answer is because Scotland is one of the two nations of the Union, which Manchester is not, and because it has had its own parliament for domestic affairs since 1999. That is called Home Rule. Anyone with the slightest understanding of the UK constitution, and the history of Ireland, should surely understand why this is important. Yet, the vast majority of Tory MPs – and I fear many Labour ones – are condemned to repeat the mistakes of the past.

This was exactly the kind of dismissive talk about devolution that led to the Scottish Tories being wiped out in the 1997 general election. They had been insisting that “only 1000 people in Scotland care about the constitution”, as Michael Forsyth put it. That was barely a year before the landslide in the 1997 devolution referendum, when three out of four Scots voted for the creation of the Scottish parliament. They may not smash windows and burn effigies of Theresa May, but that doesn't meant that Scottish voters are uninterested in the fate of Holyrood, even though they don't necessarily engage with the constitutional hermeneutics of asymmetrical federalism.

 

The Sewel convention is the rule that Westminster should not legislate in areas that are the Scottish parliament’s responsibilities without consent. As a reward for voting No in 2014, Scots were promised that this would be put on a statutory basis - a law not a mere convention. This was soon undermined by the insertion of the word “normally” before “legislate”in the 2016 Scotland Act – a cynical exercise in parliamentary draftsmanship. Now all pretence that Holyrood is a co-equal partner in domestic legislation is being openly discarded. As Mundell put it, in a remarkable statement, “Scotland is not a partner in the UK, it is part of the UK”.

It is abundantly clear that Brexit is all about rolling back Scottish home rule. It is incompatible with the creation of the new unitary British state, envisaged by the no-imperialist romantics of “Global Britain”. It is naïve in the extreme to believe that after seven years, in which the UK government will exert a kind of colonial authority over the Scottish parliament, that the powers will be returned and all will be as before. Once it’s gone, it’s gone.

The EU (Withdrawal) Bill will now become law, though technically it cannot get the Royal Assent without the consent of the Scottish parliament, which has been withheld. This can probably be resolved by another quick vote when the Withdrawal Bill comes back from the Lords for its final stages. Regrettably, since Labour has decided to tacitly endorse the power grab – it abstained on the vote on Clause 11/15 – there is little chance that this can now be prevented. Similarly, Labour MPs will likely ensure that the government prevails in the forthcoming trade bills in July, from which the Scottish parliament will also be withholding consent. Why Labour is so reluctant to challenge Theresa May on her approach to devolution is a mystery. They claim it is to support Wales, who have accepted the power grab clause.

But Wales is not Scotland, and the consent issue is central to the original Scotland Act, which was the brainchild of the celebrated Labour Scottish Secretary, Donald Dewar. Moreover, Labour MSPs voted in Holyrood to refuse legislative consent to the very Bill which their UK MPs are now helping to impose on Scotland. This may make sense to someone, but it is politically dyslexic. Home Rule should be Labour's political property, it's unique contribution to Scottish political culture. Why throw it away to help a UK Prime Minister, who is on the ropes and on her way out, deliver a discredited Brexit bill that makes the case for Scottish independence by confirming Enoch Powell’s famous claim that “power devolved is power retained”.

[Hasselhoff]

22 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16295834.Iain_Macwhirter__When_it_s_gone_it_s_gone__why_the_week_in_Westminster_has_changed_everything/?ref=twtrec

 

 

 

 

“Petulant..vulgar...immature attention-seeking”. The UK press were largely united in condemning the SNP's parliamentary walkout. “A stunt”, they called it. Well, of course it was a stunt – but such theatrics are as much a part of Westminster tradition as Black Rod.

You don't have to go back to Charles Stewart Parnell's use of parliamentary disruption to promote Irish Home rule in the 19th Century. There was the then Labour MP Denis Canavan crying “strangers in the gallery” back in 1987 after the Tories had been routed in Scotland. Even the ultra-respectable Donald Dewar appreciated the importance of political theatre and led a walk out of MPs shortly thereafter. And of course we had Alex Salmond's disruption of the 1988 budget speech.

And the point is that it works. Does anyone seriously believe that, had it not been for this “stunt", that the Sewel Convention and the Scotland Act would have received a smidgeon of the attention it did last week? It led the BBC news for the first time, was examined at length in Channel 4 News, and was a hot topic on Question Time. The Guardian even ran an editorial on the issue of consent which, typically, condemned the walk out while saying it was actually justified.

And of course it was. Having the Scottish parliament's powers stripped away was bad enough, but leaving only 15 minutes to debate this was provocation too far. The UK government's view, echoed in a screamingly pompous Spectator comment on the walk out, is that no one in Scotland is interested in the constitution. ”It's anarchy up there” it teased, “Elderly ladies are smashing up tearooms and Church of Scotland ministers have started lamping passing policemen with bottles of Irn Bru”.

Well, the SNP got the last laugh as 5,000 new members signed up to the party within the next 24 hours. The former editor of the Daily Record, Murray Foote – the man who actually drafted the infamous Vow - then declared that he was now a supporter of independence. The combination of losing EU citizenship and seeing Holyrood demoted drove him over the edge. One suspects many more No voters from 2014 are having similar second thoughts – even if they can't thole the thought of another referendum right now.

People are beginning to understand why the parties in the Scottish parliament united – bar the Tories – to refuse legislative consent to the Brexit bill. It is because the UK government has not the least interest in respecting the fundamental principle of devolution: that Westminster should only legislate for Scotland with the consent of the Scottish parliament. It's not just about fish, farming and food labelling, important though these matters are. It is about the power relations between Scotland and Westminster. Parliamentary politics is all about precedent: once it is established that Westminster can dictate to Holyrood, “whenever there is disagreement” as David Mundell put it baldly in his statement, then that will set the ground rules for the future.

It is also about whether Holyrood continues to be a proper parliament with primary law-making powers, or reverts to the status of a city council. As the Brexit insider, and Times journalist, Tim Shipman, put it last week, with inadvertent candour: “why should Scotland be regarded as any more important than Manchester?”. The answer is because Scotland is one of the two nations of the Union, which Manchester is not, and because it has had its own parliament for domestic affairs since 1999. That is called Home Rule. Anyone with the slightest understanding of the UK constitution, and the history of Ireland, should surely understand why this is important. Yet, the vast majority of Tory MPs – and I fear many Labour ones – are condemned to repeat the mistakes of the past.

This was exactly the kind of dismissive talk about devolution that led to the Scottish Tories being wiped out in the 1997 general election. They had been insisting that “only 1000 people in Scotland care about the constitution”, as Michael Forsyth put it. That was barely a year before the landslide in the 1997 devolution referendum, when three out of four Scots voted for the creation of the Scottish parliament. They may not smash windows and burn effigies of Theresa May, but that doesn't meant that Scottish voters are uninterested in the fate of Holyrood, even though they don't necessarily engage with the constitutional hermeneutics of asymmetrical federalism.

 

The Sewel convention is the rule that Westminster should not legislate in areas that are the Scottish parliament’s responsibilities without consent. As a reward for voting No in 2014, Scots were promised that this would be put on a statutory basis - a law not a mere convention. This was soon undermined by the insertion of the word “normally” before “legislate”in the 2016 Scotland Act – a cynical exercise in parliamentary draftsmanship. Now all pretence that Holyrood is a co-equal partner in domestic legislation is being openly discarded. As Mundell put it, in a remarkable statement, “Scotland is not a partner in the UK, it is part of the UK”.

It is abundantly clear that Brexit is all about rolling back Scottish home rule. It is incompatible with the creation of the new unitary British state, envisaged by the no-imperialist romantics of “Global Britain”. It is naïve in the extreme to believe that after seven years, in which the UK government will exert a kind of colonial authority over the Scottish parliament, that the powers will be returned and all will be as before. Once it’s gone, it’s gone.

The EU (Withdrawal) Bill will now become law, though technically it cannot get the Royal Assent without the consent of the Scottish parliament, which has been withheld. This can probably be resolved by another quick vote when the Withdrawal Bill comes back from the Lords for its final stages. Regrettably, since Labour has decided to tacitly endorse the power grab – it abstained on the vote on Clause 11/15 – there is little chance that this can now be prevented. Similarly, Labour MPs will likely ensure that the government prevails in the forthcoming trade bills in July, from which the Scottish parliament will also be withholding consent. Why Labour is so reluctant to challenge Theresa May on her approach to devolution is a mystery. They claim it is to support Wales, who have accepted the power grab clause.

But Wales is not Scotland, and the consent issue is central to the original Scotland Act, which was the brainchild of the celebrated Labour Scottish Secretary, Donald Dewar. Moreover, Labour MSPs voted in Holyrood to refuse legislative consent to the very Bill which their UK MPs are now helping to impose on Scotland. This may make sense to someone, but it is politically dyslexic. Home Rule should be Labour's political property, it's unique contribution to Scottish political culture. Why throw it away to help a UK Prime Minister, who is on the ropes and on her way out, deliver a discredited Brexit bill that makes the case for Scottish independence by confirming Enoch Powell’s famous claim that “power devolved is power retained”.

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44522940

 

"It is not unknown for political parties to seek political advantage over these sort of issues, and there's a fair bit of that going on. It's not a constitutional crisis."

 

SNP are at it 

 

 

 

[Phil Dunphy]

Seems like folk aren’t buying into the nonsense of the SNP after all. 

[Space Mackerel]

1 minute ago, Phil Dunphy said:

Seems like folk aren’t buying into the nonsense of the SNP after all. 

 

Is that Twitter not run by ex Blairites?

 

41% my arse

[Space Mackerel]

1 hour ago, Hasselhoff said:

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44522940

 

"It is not unknown for political parties to seek political advantage over these sort of issues, and there's a fair bit of that going on. It's not a constitutional crisis."

 

SNP are at it 

 

 

 

 

BBC....check.

Lord...check

 

Bollocks...check. 

[Phil Dunphy]

8 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

Is that Twitter not run by ex Blairites?

 

41% my arse

 

So how come you’re not able to discuss politics with your “real life” pals?