Jump to content

The fall of unionism.


Roxy Hearts

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Space Mackerel said:

 

That is a poor excuse for saying you don't understand Devolution and who is responsible for what.

That’s a poor excuse for a response. Until The country is independent the government of that country is not governing fully. It really is as simple as that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 369
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Space Mackerel

    43

  • Justin Z

    40

  • GinRummy

    40

  • IronJambo

    35

Space Mackerel
2 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

That’s a poor excuse for a response. Until The country is independent the government of that country is not governing fully. It really is as simple as that. 

 

OK, so the Torys implement austerity slashing the budgets of all councils and nations across the UK.

 

Scottish Government raises taxes slightly for middle income earners and Boris Johnson attacks them for being the highest taxed area of the UK.

 

Bearing in mind the average worker earns something like £25,000 up here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Space Mackerel said:

 

OK, so the Torys implement austerity slashing the budgets of all councils and nations across the UK.

 

Scottish Government raises taxes slightly for middle income earners and Boris Johnson attacks them for being the highest taxed area of the UK.

 

Bearing in mind the average worker earns something like £25,000 up here.

You’re proving my point. The Scottish government can’t fully implement the taxation and benefits systems they would like because we are still too strongly tied to the rest of the uk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GinRummy said:

You’re proving my point. The Scottish government can’t fully implement the taxation and benefits systems they would like because we are still too strongly tied to the rest of the uk. 

I may have misinterpreted the above, but it sounds like you are blaming Westminster for holding back the Scottish Government?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Boris said:

I may have misinterpreted the above, but it sounds like you are blaming Westminster for holding back the Scottish Government?

Yeah I wasn’t very clear. I’m not actually blaming anyone. I’m just saying it’s very difficult to assess the Scottish Governments record as they’re not actually governing. They devolved education and healthcare quite early. What difference would you see living in England or Wales to education or healthcare?

 

To the average punter there’s no difference in which part of the UK you live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deodato said:

 

Oh dear. 

 

History lesson: is that it was the eleven SNP MPs  in the Commons in 1979 that pushed the no confidence motion in
Jim Callaghan's government. Margaret Thatcher knew she could win once she saw the SNP were on her side of this particular battle. The maths proved right as ten of the eleven SNP MPs voted with her. Really sorry I failed to brush this under the carpet, it must be something to do with the brush not removing what is clearly stuck to the floor. 

 

Let us forget and pretend it never happened and carry on blaming Maggie and anyone who is English for Scotland's woes 

 

Ask yourself why The SNP voted with Thatcher. I was around at that time 1979, and there was a vote on devolution ,and whilst the yes vote won the government at the time refused it, saying it did not reach the 40% rule because of the low turnout. The SNP were furious and maybe this was the reason for voting down the Labour government. Personally I felt it was a stitch up and was I happy with SNP voting with Thatcher, no, but they had little choice IMO, you may disagree but there it is.

Edited by micole
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roxy Hearts
2 hours ago, Deodato said:

 

Oh dear. 

 

History lesson: is that it was the eleven SNP MPs  in the Commons in 1979 that pushed the no confidence motion in
Jim Callaghan's government. Margaret Thatcher knew she could win once she saw the SNP were on her side of this particular battle. The maths proved right as ten of the eleven SNP MPs voted with her. Really sorry I failed to brush this under the carpet, it must be something to do with the brush not removing what is clearly stuck to the floor. 

 

Let us forget and pretend it never happened and carry on blaming Maggie and anyone who is English for Scotland's woes 

What about the rebel Labour MPs? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, micole said:

 

Ask yourself why The SNP voted with Thatcher. I was around at that time 1979, and there was a vote on devolution ,and whilst the yes vote won the government at the time refused it, saying it did not reach the 40% rule because of the low turnout. The SNP were furious and maybe this was the reason for voting down the Labour government. Personally I felt it was a stitch up and was I happy with SNP voting with Thatcher, no, but they had little choice IMO, you may disagree but there it is.

This is fair comment - and for disclosure I wasn't around at the time but I'm a keen political historian, so good to peel another layer of perspective back on this hidden piece of history. I also think the SNP find themselves stronger when the Conservatives are in power, compared to Labour. It's easier to distance yourself from a union as its easier to blame the tories right-of-centre policies than Labour's left-of-centre policies. So you have a perverse incentive to want a Tory government to keep the SNP strong, as opposed to anyone but Tory (therefore Labour) which leaves SNP exposed. The game theory balances out too - the Tories will always be in power whilst the evaporation of Scottish labours super safe fifty seats remains unchanged. Labour -50 will struggle to win back power for the next two terms. 

 

So a cosy alliance - SNP keep labour out, and the Tories keep SNP in. 

 

Boris - your balanced opinion on this logic, please?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Deodato said:

This is fair comment - and for disclosure I wasn't around at the time but I'm a keen political historian, so good to peel another layer of perspective back on this hidden piece of history. I also think the SNP find themselves stronger when the Conservatives are in power, compared to Labour. It's easier to distance yourself from a union as its easier to blame the tories right-of-centre policies than Labour's left-of-centre policies. So you have a perverse incentive to want a Tory government to keep the SNP strong, as opposed to anyone but Tory (therefore Labour) which leaves SNP exposed. The game theory balances out too - the Tories will always be in power whilst the evaporation of Scottish labours super safe fifty seats remains unchanged. Labour -50 will struggle to win back power for the next two terms. 

 

So a cosy alliance - SNP keep labour out, and the Tories keep SNP in. 

 

Boris - your balanced opinion on this logic, please?

 

 

 

 

You make some valid points, however I would suggest that in 2020 this is not the case. Labour are on a looser now IMO.The reason I say this is Scotland is basically a broad socialist country and middle England will never be that, so "new" Labour will never appeal or cannot appeal to everyone esp Scotland , Corbyn tried and failed. The only way IMO Labour could regain any credibility in Scotland is to break away from the UK party , unlikely I know. So I really think even if Labour got into power at Westminster it would not make any difference to the SNP in Scotland I maybe wrong but time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jack D and coke
47 minutes ago, micole said:

 

You make some valid points, however I would suggest that in 2020 this is not the case. Labour are on a looser now IMO.The reason I say this is Scotland is basically a broad socialist country and middle England will never be that, so "new" Labour will never appeal or cannot appeal to everyone esp Scotland , Corbyn tried and failed. The only way IMO Labour could regain any credibility in Scotland is to break away from the UK party , unlikely I know. So I really think even if Labour got into power at Westminster it would not make any difference to the SNP in Scotland I maybe wrong but time will tell.

Yeah labour screwed completely now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
On 06/04/2020 at 21:45, GinRummy said:

Yes it would be better than the Tories, I’ve no doubt but it’s the level of change, economically, that can be achieved. There’ll be no hard border and we’ll be competing with England in many ways. Sweeping changes to our tax and benefit system are needed but where the money coming from? You can’t hammer the rich because they’ll just go and live in England. You raise VAT and it effects the poor more. How much can an overhaul of business rates really raise? Council tax could be changed but it already charges heavily for those fortunate to live in expensive houses. 
 

re your first paragraph, health and education have been devolved for quite some time. If I were going to live in England what difference do you think I’d notice in my families health or children’s education?
 

 

Scotland has plenty resources, without oil, to be a rich country if it was invested in. We have an investment bank opening shortly to help with that. Independence won’t be a radical change, unfortunately, but we will get what we vote for whoever that may be.

The last bit about people moving to England, more folk will move here to get away from the country England is descending into. If you went your family would be paying for prescriptions and for their university education.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
1 hour ago, micole said:

 

You make some valid points, however I would suggest that in 2020 this is not the case. Labour are on a looser now IMO.The reason I say this is Scotland is basically a broad socialist country and middle England will never be that, so "new" Labour will never appeal or cannot appeal to everyone esp Scotland , Corbyn tried and failed. The only way IMO Labour could regain any credibility in Scotland is to break away from the UK party , unlikely I know. So I really think even if Labour got into power at Westminster it would not make any difference to the SNP in Scotland I maybe wrong but time will tell.

Their only hope is to embrace Independence and move away from their overlords in England, the youth in the party are in favour of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Deodato said:

This is fair comment - and for disclosure I wasn't around at the time but I'm a keen political historian, so good to peel another layer of perspective back on this hidden piece of history. I also think the SNP find themselves stronger when the Conservatives are in power, compared to Labour. It's easier to distance yourself from a union as its easier to blame the tories right-of-centre policies than Labour's left-of-centre policies. So you have a perverse incentive to want a Tory government to keep the SNP strong, as opposed to anyone but Tory (therefore Labour) which leaves SNP exposed. The game theory balances out too - the Tories will always be in power whilst the evaporation of Scottish labours super safe fifty seats remains unchanged. Labour -50 will struggle to win back power for the next two terms. 

 

So a cosy alliance - SNP keep labour out, and the Tories keep SNP in. 

 

Boris - your balanced opinion on this logic, please?

 

 

 

I guess there may be some truth in what you say. Certainly the Tories seem to be permanently electorally toxic in Scotland, but the SNP won its first Holyrood election while Blair was still PM. Labour lost its mojo up here, and the SNP benefitted.

Even after that, at the 2010 general election, Labour still massively won with 41 of the 59 seats..  So Tory rule has no doubt helped the SNP given results since then.

 

But now with this new political landscape, cones a new political narrative. The SNP have positioned themselves in the social democrat, just left of centre, area. Blairite Labour seemed to vacate this area, moving to the centre. After Kennedy's ousting, the lib Dems moved to the centre, slightly right and got into bed with Cameron. The SNPs strength is equally attributed to Labours ineptitude post 2010, imo.

 

Now in Scotland , thanks to the SNP but perhaps more so the Tories, the union is the dominant political issue. If your in favour of the union, do you hold your nose and vote Tory? A step too far for many. But you won't vote SNP, so you stick to labour or lib dem and watch as the Westminster system that you want to preserve neuters your vote.

 

Westminster's political system needs changed if the union is to survive. I have my own idea of how a federal UK may work, but it would never be implemented, certainly not by the Tories, and I doubt by a Labour party that still doesn't appreciate its former heartlands.

 

Anyway, all IMHO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Deodato said:

This is fair comment - and for disclosure I wasn't around at the time but I'm a keen political historian, so good to peel another layer of perspective back on this hidden piece of history. I also think the SNP find themselves stronger when the Conservatives are in power, compared to Labour. It's easier to distance yourself from a union as its easier to blame the tories right-of-centre policies than Labour's left-of-centre policies. So you have a perverse incentive to want a Tory government to keep the SNP strong, as opposed to anyone but Tory (therefore Labour) which leaves SNP exposed. The game theory balances out too - the Tories will always be in power whilst the evaporation of Scottish labours super safe fifty seats remains unchanged. Labour -50 will struggle to win back power for the next two terms. 

 

So a cosy alliance - SNP keep labour out, and the Tories keep SNP in. 

 

Boris - your balanced opinion on this logic, please?

 

 

 

Logic

 

 

:illogical:

 

 

If labour hadn't stabbed Scotland in the back Thatcher would never had been. And with people like you telling the whole of Scotland how it was the SNP and not Labour who betrayed them, they had Scotland in their pockets until we woke up.

 

Real logic, not Unionist propaganda like yours.

 

 

 

ri Alban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

Scotland has plenty resources, without oil, to be a rich country if it was invested in. We have an investment bank opening shortly to help with that. Independence won’t be a radical change, unfortunately, but we will get what we vote for whoever that may be.

The last bit about people moving to England, more folk will move here to get away from the country England is descending into. If you went your family would be paying for prescriptions and for their university education.

Wasn’t aware of the investment bank, will need to check that out. 
 

You put what I’ve been trying to say more clearly.  There won’t be radical changes you’re right, because even after independence our proximity to England will prevent that imo. People I speak to think there will be sweeping changes but they’re going to be disappointed imo. Also, we’ll get shafted at every turn by Westminster, which is a concern tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

If labour hadn't stabbed Scotland in the back Thatcher would never had been. And with people like you telling the whole of Scotland how it was the SNP and not Labour who betrayed them, they had Scotland in their pockets until we woke up.

 

Real logic, not Unionist propaganda like yours.

Clarity: I pose the logic with regards to the present, not the events of 1979. But I would reiterate that Thatcher would not have made her move without the knowledge the SNP were onside. I'm not suggesting we conflate the opinions of both parties, but at least recognise the actual events of history. 

 

I don't see it as unionist propaganda to suggest that if you want independence, you need power - and maintaining power involves a balancing act. I think it is convenient that the Tories are in power in London, and the SNP holds power in Edinburgh - the former strengthens the latter and the latter strengthens the former. 

 

Politics is a balancing act, nationalism is a belief. I always recap on how the US works: Joe Biden has to appeal to 1% of republicans, and Trump has to appeal to 1% democrats in order to win - you might believe you are one or the other, but you need to balance your appeal so the other joins the one. 

 

If nationalism wants to win, it needs to win over unionists - *just* 191,969 of them based on the last count. Therefore nationalism needs to reset itself from "I believe in this" (and anything that threatens it is 'unionist propaganda like yours') towards 'this is why I need you to believe in that'. Engage, not argue. 

 

2 hours ago, Boris said:

Westminster's political system needs changed if the union is to survive. I have my own idea of how a federal UK may work, but it would never be implemented, certainly not by the Tories, and I doubt by a Labour party that still doesn't appreciate its former heartlands.

 

Boris - If the UK become more federal, does that increase or decrease the current desire for a separation. In my own 50/50 mind I'm always haunted by the point Gavin McCrone made in his book: 'most independence movements come from one country being nasty to the other, the opposite is the case here'. 

 

Sure Scotland can point to bad deals it has got from the union to make its case, but it has to be careful of bias - inflating the bad and excluding the good. There are areas of England who may feel they've had worse deals, a Barnet Formula which was insanely generous in its allocation (I'll take questions on this as I had to model it). 

 

Boris - one incident that always intrigued me is how the SNP put sweeteners in front of Amazon to get its depot to Fife, sweeteners the Northumbrian 'local' government couldn't offer. One might argue that's unfair competition, other's (especially Americans) argue that's exactly what federal competition should look like. 

 

What is your view on this balancing act between self interest and the common good?

 

Eumir Deodato

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
2 hours ago, GinRummy said:

Wasn’t aware of the investment bank, will need to check that out. 
 

You put what I’ve been trying to say more clearly.  There won’t be radical changes you’re right, because even after independence our proximity to England will prevent that imo. People I speak to think there will be sweeping changes but they’re going to be disappointed imo. Also, we’ll get shafted at every turn by Westminster, which is a concern tbh.

We’re shafted at every turn by Westminster  just now, they shaft everyone so we will be in good company when we’re independent.

If you’re looking for things to read look up the Common Weal or the Common Green Craig Dalzell whose ideas about the Investment bank have been taken on board by the Scottish Government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

We’re shafted at every turn by Westminster  just now, they shaft everyone so we will be in good company when we’re independent.

If you’re looking for things to read look up the Common Weal or the Common Green Craig Dalzell whose ideas about the Investment bank have been taken on board by the Scottish Government.

Will make a not of those, thank you.  Can’t concentrate on books just now just end up glued to the news after ten minutes. Attention span of a goldfish just now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
Just now, GinRummy said:

Will make a not of those, thank you.  Can’t concentrate on books just now just end up glued to the news after ten minutes. Attention span of a goldfish just now. 

Yeah I’ve a pile of books still waiting to be dusted off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better together though! At least if you enjoy being expendable.

 

UK Government 'telling companies not to send PPE to Wales and Scotland'

 

“You must be registered and operating within England – apologies to Wales and Scotland, we are told you have different processes for getting emergency supplies,” the message reads.

 

The company, Gompels HealthCare, which makes gloves, gowns and face masks, is one of the larger companies supplying PPE in the UK.

 

The UK Department of Health and Social Care said that supplies were being co-ordinated at a UK level.

. . .

Last week a care home owner in Wales says she has been refused PPE by Gompels because her suppliers are reserving stock for English customers.

 

:fonzie:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...