Political Leaders' debate...but no SNP

[Commander Harris]

If you have something to say, or a story to tell, have the b***s to come out and say it rather than hiding behind cryptic innuendo (if it is a true "story" what have you to fear?)

 

If I had any respect for you, I've now lost it!

essentially I've said what happened, he muttered "English *******" under his breath after having a short conversation with an English colleague of mine. I just don't want to give more details, i.e. where the incident took place etc as it was a place of employment and wouldn't want anyone to face any (unjust) repercussions.

 

I trust this clarifies matters.

[NEILY1874]

essentially I've said what happened, he muttered "English *******" under his breath after having a short conversation with an English colleague of mine. I just don't want to give more details, i.e. where the incident took place etc as it was a place of employment and wouldn't want anyone to face any (unjust) repercussions.

 

I trust this clarifies matters.

 

 

I smell sheeite.

[Bonnie Prince Charlie]

I smell sheeite.

 

Agree, I smell the same sheeite.

BTW Does anyone know if Lord Feck Sake posts on here. He must take a look surely? Saw him on Sunday, sits near me, gets fatter every time I see him. Much fatter than Salmond.

[Guest King]

essentially I've said what happened, he muttered "English *******" under his breath after having a short conversation with an English colleague of mine. I just don't want to give more details, i.e. where the incident took place etc as it was a place of employment and wouldn't want anyone to face any (unjust) repercussions.

 

I trust this clarifies matters.

 

It does, I am not surprised by this.

[Cabbie754]

I could tell a story about Alex Salmond on here but I'm not going to go into details for various reasons suffice to say that the words "english *******" were involved and they didn't come from my lips.

 

I've lost any respect I had for him.

 

Maybe he was talking to Jimmy Hill :santa1:

[Cabbie754]

I doubt that the debate will move into issues related to Wales, N.Ireland or Scotland hence why there are seperate debates planned for these parts of the UK.

 

If the debate includes subjects that are devolved, I would argue that they are probably more relevant to three parts of the UK than to Scotland - as things devolved to Scotland may still be under the remit of Westminster for Wales & N.Ireland.

 

Eh? things devolved to Scotland will still be under the remit of Westminster

 

So if they debate say Education, what relevence will this have to viewers in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland without representation from these 'regions' as you put it?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Eh? things devolved to Scotland will still be under the remit of Westminster

 

So if they debate say Education, what relevence will this have to viewers in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland without representation from these 'regions' as you put it?

 

It will have immediate relevance via the Barnett Formula for starters.

[topcat]

This is a debate about the Westminster government. The SNP does not compete nationally. The BNP does.

 

So does the MRLP and I'd wager more people would want to hear their case.

 

and they've got the most sensible policy for Asylum Seekers

[auldbauldfan]

essentially I've said what happened, he muttered "English *******" under his breath after having a short conversation with an English colleague of mine. I just don't want to give more details, i.e. where the incident took place etc as it was a place of employment and wouldn't want anyone to face any (unjust) repercussions.

 

I trust this clarifies matters.

 

 

Thanks for the clarification. What a nasty little Scottish person he must be! Unless, of course, your English colleague is a *******!

[Commander Harris]

Thanks for the clarification. What a nasty little Scottish person he must be! Unless, of course, your English colleague is a *******!

 

not a *******, just a young guy doing his job. Anyway, i've taken this thread slightly off-topic, people can believe or not believe me, that's their prerogative.

 

Back to the rather difficult question of who should be represented at a tv debate. uk wide it does make sense to just have the 3 major parties. There does have to be a limit somewhere and the 3 parties that compete nationally seems the most appropriate.

 

Perhaps gordon brown could have seperate debates in scotland, wales and northern Ireland with each of the leading parties there allowing them representation on the local scale in which they compete.

[auldbauldfan]

not a *******, just a young guy doing his job. Anyway, i've taken this thread slightly off-topic, people can believe or not believe me, that's their prerogative.

 

Back to the rather difficult question of who should be represented at a tv debate. uk wide it does make sense to just have the 3 major parties. There does have to be a limit somewhere and the 3 parties that compete nationally seems the most appropriate.

 

Perhaps gordon brown could have seperate debates in scotland, wales and northern Ireland with each of the leading parties there allowing them representation on the local scale in which they compete.

 

 

 

Just having a wee laugh with you mate but seriously...

 

In electoral terms the SNP is in the unique position of being classed as a "minor" party nationally whilst being a "major" party in Scotland.

Come the election, unless the SNP win 50% of the seats in Scotland which I admit is unlikely, we will be told that they have no mandate for independence. Fair comment perhaps on a level playing field, but if we have a scenario of the SNP being excluded from any debate being screened in Scotland they will be at a distinct disadvantage.

 

I am quite content that any debate screened outside of Scotland need not include the SNP.

[Big D]

 

Back to the rather difficult question of who should be represented at a tv debate. uk wide it does make sense to just have the 3 major parties. There does have to be a limit somewhere and the 3 parties that compete nationally seems the most appropriate.

 

The SNP have 7 times as many MPs as the Tories in the the seats they contest. Who are the 3 main parties and why does there have to be a limit and who is to decide the limit?

[Commander Harris]

 

The SNP have 7 times as many MPs as the Tories in the the seats they contest. Who are the 3 main parties and why does there have to be a limit and who is to decide the limit?

there has to be a limit, the alternative to that is that any minority party that is standing at all would be entitled to partake in the debate.

 

it is a difficult question but uk wide the 3 biggest parties are clearly Labour, Conservative and Libdem both in terms of seats and in terms of percentage of the total vote. Yes in terms of Scotland the Conservatives are much smaller than the SNP but i think the best way to give representation is to do a seperate local debate.

In terms of Northern Ireland you can't even vote for the party of government! the answer to that is again a seperate local debate rather than expanding a uk wide debate to include some or all of the parties in that part of the UK.

 

otherwise you've got an unmanageable debate between the leaders of several parties which just isn't practical in terms of a televised debate.

 

for what it's worth the whole idea of a televised debate given our political system makes little sense to me. We vote for members of Parliament, not for a president or party.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Do the SNP want to censor the debate from being streamed on the net as well? Should digital TV channels from other UK regions be pulled?

 

The SNP may well have a case in terms of representative time but their raison d'etre is independence and, to be frank, they won't be fighting a Westminster election on anything radically different from their current policies in Holyrood.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

there has to be a limit, the alternative to that is that any minority party that is standing at all would be entitled to partake in the debate.

 

it is a difficult question but uk wide the 3 biggest parties are clearly Labour, Conservative and Libdem both in terms of seats and in terms of percentage of the total vote. Yes in terms of Scotland the Conservatives are much smaller than the SNP but i think the best way to give representation is to do a seperate local debate.

In terms of Northern Ireland you can't even vote for the party of government! the answer to that is again a seperate local debate rather than expanding a uk wide debate to include some or all of the parties in that part of the UK.

 

otherwise you've got an unmanageable debate between the leaders of several parties which just isn't practical in terms of a televised debate.

 

for what it's worth the whole idea of a televised debate given our political system makes little sense to me. We vote for members of Parliament, not for a president or party.

 

To be fair, the Tories have now joined forces with the Ulster Unionists.

[Big D]

otherwise you've got an unmanageable debate between the leaders of several parties which just isn't practical in terms of a televised debate.

 

for what it's worth the whole idea of a televised debate given our political system makes little sense to me. We vote for members of Parliament, not for a president or party.

 

Totally agree, there is no justification for this debate given the antiquated style of democracy Westminster insists on protecting. I am concerned at the real reasons why this is being forced on to our national broadcaster. Who is behind it, and what system is in place to check and refute the lies and misinterpretation that must result from a discussion predicated on a bias. Time delay perhaps, to remove inaccurate information. Follow on programme to allow those the authorities deemed to be minority leaders to have the chance to reply. If people really want to know about politics, go to the meetings, the hustings etc. Phone them up, email them. Trust me you won't have difficulty finding a politician to speak to next year. And if it's party politics, they will all be saying the same as their leaders anyway.

[Nelly Terraces]

The SNP are a total joke.

 

Can't even get an overall majority in the mickey mouse 400million pound 'parliament' (AKA the home for people who could'nt ever make it as a proper MP and have been councillors for 30years), and the calibre of politician in their ranks is laughable, Nicola Sturgeon, haha, not just a lightweight, a total nonentity.

 

What right have they to be involved in any debate, when they are such a small insignificant reactionary faction?

 

None. Jog on nobodies.

[Frankie Pal]

Salmond isn't even standing for a Westminster seat!

[Therapist]

The SNP are a total joke.

 

Can't even get an overall majority in the mickey mouse 400million pound 'parliament' (AKA the home for people who could'nt ever make it as a proper MP and have been councillors for 30years), and the calibre of politician in their ranks is laughable, Nicola Sturgeon, haha, not just a lightweight, a total nonentity.

 

What right have they to be involved in any debate, when they are such a small insignificant reactionary faction?

 

None. Jog on nobodies.

 

Correct Nelly. Say what you like about Mr Cameron, Brown and Clegg but there's no way Salmond deserves a place beside them at the top table. As you say,Salmond and his acolytes are nothing more than glorified Cooncillors.

[Cabbie754]

I see the usual apologists are using this to slag off the SNP. What a surprise and with the usual allegations of being anti English.

 

In the interests of democracy to exclude the party of government in Scotland is not just undemocratic but insulting.

 

The only acceptable argument is that the three leaders, Brown, Cameron and to a lesser extent Clegg may be the next prime minister but the SNP, Plaid Cymru or parties from NI could hold the balance of power after these elections and to exclude them from a 'national debate' is anti Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish.

[Therapist]

In the interests of democracy to exclude the party of government in Scotland is not just undemocratic but insulting.

 

Regional diddy parties like the SNP and Plaid Taffy are being offered their own diddy debate about issues they can influence. I really can't see how they can complain.

[Big D]

I see the usual apologists are using this to slag off the SNP. What a surprise and with the usual allegations of being anti English.

 

In the interests of democracy to exclude the party of government in Scotland is not just undemocratic but insulting.

 

The only acceptable argument is that the three leaders, Brown, Cameron and to a lesser extent Clegg may be the next prime minister but the SNP, Plaid Cymru or parties from NI could hold the balance of power after these elections and to exclude them from a 'national debate' is anti Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish.

 

Back to the intelligent debate Cabbie. Anyone who can't see that this is cynical manipulation by the london based parties to marginalise those who may hold sway in a hung parliament, shouldn't really get involved in a political discussion. Compo, Foggy and Clegg are terrified of a hung parliament because unlike us grown ups in Scotland and the rest of Europe, they don't know how to work a modern democracy with a possible minority government and the concensus politics it demands.

[Therapist]

unlike us grown ups in Scotland and the rest of Europe, they don't know how to work a modern democracy with a possible minority government and the concensus politics it demands.

 

:smiliz21:

 

Is this the same concensus government that has failed to deliver on many major electoral promises, including one on primary school class sizes that resulted in the very public humiliation and sacking of the largest party's own education minister?

[shaun.lawson]

Plaid Taffy

 

:santa1:

[shaun.lawson]

The SNP are a total joke.

 

Can't even get an overall majority in the mickey mouse 400million pound 'parliament' (AKA the home for people who could'nt ever make it as a proper MP and have been councillors for 30years), and the calibre of politician in their ranks is laughable, Nicola Sturgeon, haha, not just a lightweight, a total nonentity.

 

What right have they to be involved in any debate, when they are such a small insignificant reactionary faction?

 

None. Jog on nobodies.

 

They're not nobodies. They're the biggest party in the Scottish Parliament, the major party in the Scottish Executive, and have made extraordinary progress in recent years. Down here, we'd love a party which'd offer something different and distinctive: for all their faults, the SNP certainly do that, and have already proven a lot of people wrong under Salmond.

 

Paradoxically though, I do agree about the lack of talent within their ranks. That's why I find Salmond so impressive: without him, they'd be totally lost. Sturgeon is a joke, I quite agree; and the way Salmond returned from semi-retirement to become leader again at her expense was highly amusing.

[shaun.lawson]

Back to the intelligent debate Cabbie. Anyone who can't see that this is cynical manipulation by the london based parties to marginalise those who may hold sway in a hung parliament, shouldn't really get involved in a political discussion. Compo, Foggy and Clegg are terrified of a hung parliament because unlike us grown ups in Scotland and the rest of Europe, they don't know how to work a modern democracy with a possible minority government and the concensus politics it demands.

 

Utterly bizarre and ludicrous paranoia. People have been calling for a debate between the three major party leaders for as long as I can remember; now, at last, it's happening. Clegg would love a hung Parliament, as it's the only chance the Lib Dems ever have to enjoy real influence and implement at least some of their policies; I imagine Labour would settle for one too given the state they've been in in recent times.

 

"Us grown ups in Scotland"? The chip on your shoulder inferiority complex and conspiracy theories which inhabit your posts suggests anything but to me. The SNP will have their voice in debates specifically on Scotland; the three main parties will have their voice in debates covering the whole UK. Perfectly normal and sensible; nothing for you to throw your toys out of the pram about. :santa1:

[Therapist]

Down here, we'd love a party which'd offer something different and distinctive: for all their faults, the SNP certainly do that, and have already proven a lot of people wrong under Salmond.

 

The SNP's list of achievements is the same length as the list of Italian WW2 heroes.

[Big D]

Utterly bizarre and ludicrous paranoia. People have been calling for a debate between the three major party leaders for as long as I can remember; now, at last, it's happening. Clegg would love a hung Parliament, as it's the only chance the Lib Dems ever have to enjoy real influence and implement at least some of their policies; I imagine Labour would settle for one too given the state they've been in in recent times.

 

"Us grown ups in Scotland"? The chip on your shoulder inferiority complex and conspiracy theories which inhabit your posts suggests anything but to me. The SNP will have their voice in debates specifically on Scotland; the three main parties will have their voice in debates covering the whole UK. Perfectly normal and sensible; nothing for you to throw your toys out of the pram about. :santa1:

 

Ignoring the no surrender monkeys on the thread, I am questioning why there is a need for a debate at all as it is so obviously democratically flawed. I have repeatedly linked this to the democratic flaws inherent in the westminster system, and not unreasonably suggested that with their history of factual economy the london parties have a democratically dangerous ulterior motive. You conveniently omitted my mention of the rest of europe in my quotation. Rather than a chip on my shoulder, I am suggesting that it is Britain that is out of step, and this further attempt to pretend to be America is damaging to rational and sane attempts to force westminster and its apologists and adherents to grow up. I'd be delighted if Scotland was one of the toys thrown out of london's pram.

[The White Cockade]

They are a regional party, and a diddy one to boot.

 

Incidentally, for those who are doing some rather un-subtle fishing regarding Fat Alex's Hearts credentials I suggest you post on the specific thread that addresses the subject. :santa1:

 

complete fandango alert

when will Trollapist get the message nobody buys his bull**** any more

Mods why is this guy allowed on the board when every thread he posts is trolling?

[shaun.lawson]

Ignoring the no surrender monkeys on the thread, I am questioning why there is a need for a debate at all as it is so obviously democratically flawed. I have repeatedly linked this to the democratic flaws inherent in the westminster system, and not unreasonably suggested that with their history of factual economy the london parties have a democratically dangerous ulterior motive. You conveniently omitted my mention of the rest of europe in my quotation. Rather than a chip on my shoulder, I am suggesting that it is Britain that is out of step, and this further attempt to pretend to be America is damaging to rational and sane attempts to force westminster and its apologists and adherents to grow up. I'd be delighted if Scotland was one of the toys thrown out of london's pram.

 

Would I prefer PR in Britain? Sure I would. I'd certainly favour conciliation and consensus over Punch and Judy nonsense, especially as the choice on offer is so pathetic. I have no problem at all with leaders' debates though: I think it'll engage people, and bring some interest back into politics at last. I'm sure you'll find they have similar debates on the continent too, even though PR exists across most of it; and while we technically vote for individual MPs, I'm deeply unconvinced this system works any more. We need change in my view: real electoral reform.

[jammyheart]

The SNP's list of achievements is the same length as the list of Italian WW2 heroes.

 

You really get on my t-ts with the comments you come out with at times i`m sure you do it to wind people up and as for the debate Salmond would wipe the floor with Cameron and you know it but Cameron is a better talker than Brown but they`re no match for Salmond like him or not and thats probably why they don`t want Salmond in the debate.

[Big D]

I've hopefully never met therapy man, but have enjoyed the occassional opportunity to talk to the First Minister. The rap ist's interventions on this and many other threads suggest to me a real envy of Alex's ability, one that he wishes more unionists had. Himself included.

[graygo]

I think he's complaining due to his position as an MP and leader of the SNP, as are the welsh nationalist; and probably the BNP and the greens, etc.

 

Fair play to them to. It seems undemocratic to give lots of prime air-time to the three main parties. Almost as if the fringe parties are not not to be invited to the shindig. Its not a 2 party system like the states, so why alienate everyone but the big three?

 

Totally agree. Was listening to 5 live the other day and someone put that very thing to some tory mp and incredibly his response was that none of the nationalist parties, BNP or even the Lib Dems should be involved in the debates as everyone knows they have no chance of winning.

 

Attitudes like that do my head in!!

 

Anyway, thought there was a law that tv stations had to give a fair and even platform to every party.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

You really get on my t-ts with the comments you come out with at times i`m sure you do it to wind people up and as for the debate Salmond would wipe the floor with Cameron and you know it but Cameron is a better talker than Brown but they`re no match for Salmond like him or not and thats probably why they don`t want Salmond in the debate.

 

I'm not so sure that's the case. Salmond could be his usual populist self but what input would he offer into macroeconomic policy for the UK apart from the usual 'blame Westminster' game the SNP are prepared to play? That might play well in Scotland but will offer nothing to voters in the rest of the UK, except the usual "whinging Jock" stereotype.

 

Similarly, the SNP economic policy of keeping the pound and then offering the Euro as part of a referendum deal would come under major scrutiny. The UK is in no position now and for the forseeable future in adopting the Euro given the standard economic criteria for doing so. The SNP would have to inflict major public sector cuts to hit the targets for Euro adoption.

 

Tactically, the SNP, to my mind, should continue the "fighting for Scotland" angle and steer well clear of these debates.

[Cabbie754]

I'm not so sure that's the case. Salmond could be his usual populist self but what input would he offer into macroeconomic policy for the UK apart from the usual 'blame Westminster' game the SNP are prepared to play? That might play well in Scotland but will offer nothing to voters in the rest of the UK, except the usual "whinging Jock" stereotype.

 

Similarly, the SNP economic policy of keeping the pound and then offering the Euro as part of a referendum deal would come under major scrutiny. The UK is in no position now and for the forseeable future in adopting the Euro given the standard economic criteria for doing so. The SNP would have to inflict major public sector cuts to hit the targets for Euro adoption.

 

Tactically, the SNP, to my mind, should continue the "fighting for Scotland" angle and steer well clear of these debates.

 

Geoff, I'm surprised at the level of debate from the usual unionists, or maybe not. You know full well or ought to that on Defence the SNP offers a different choice to the nuclear option. No Trident on the Clyde. Against weapons of mass distruction. Same goes for energy as the SNP are opposed to Nuclear power and want to see the potential Scotland has in renewables. Then there is foreign policy and wars. This is why they don't want the SNP to debate as they offer something different to the so called big two.

 

So when all these subjects are debated, there will be no alternative expressed. Scotland gagged as usual.

[scott_jambo]

I'm not so sure that's the case. Salmond could be his usual populist self but what input would he offer into macroeconomic policy for the UK apart from the usual 'blame Westminster' game the SNP are prepared to play? That might play well in Scotland but will offer nothing to voters in the rest of the UK, except the usual "whinging Jock" stereotype.

 

Similarly, the SNP economic policy of keeping the pound and then offering the Euro as part of a referendum deal would come under major scrutiny. The UK is in no position now and for the forseeable future in adopting the Euro given the standard economic criteria for doing so. The SNP would have to inflict major public sector cuts to hit the targets for Euro adoption.

 

Tactically, the SNP, to my mind, should continue the "fighting for Scotland" angle and steer well clear of these debates.

 

Probably offer more than Cameron to be honest.

 

 

Salmond attended Linlithgow Academy[2] and the University of St Andrews, where he graduated with an MA in Economics and History. He was first employed as an assistant economist in the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland from 1978.

 

In 1980, he joined the Royal Bank of Scotland, for which he worked until 1987, first as an assistant economist, then as the Oil Economist and latterly as Royal Bank Economist. While with the Royal Bank, he wrote and broadcast extensively for both domestic and international outlets. He also contributed regularly to oil and energy conferences. In 1983 he devised the "Royal Bank / BBC Oil Index", which continues monthly publication to this day.

[Big D]

I'm not so sure that's the case. Salmond could be his usual populist self but what input would he offer into macroeconomic policy for the UK apart from the usual 'blame Westminster' game the SNP are prepared to play? That might play well in Scotland but will offer nothing to voters in the rest of the UK, except the usual "whinging Jock" stereotype.

 

It is entirely appropriate that a smaller nation with a larger neighbour with a mutually beneficial economic alliance comment on their aspirations for both economies. The Belgians, Danes, Swiss, Slovenians, Estonians etc etc do not stay silent on the policies of their much larger neighbours. Why should we? Why would they want us to? Although the attitudes of fear of improvement from some on this thread probably answer that for me. This is a rigged debate designed to marginalise the true opposition in the U.K. The opposition is not Lib Lab Con, it is U.K. v the normal powers of a country. Stop the opposition and of course you win the debate. Can we have a grown up democracy please?

[topcat]

The SNP are a total joke.

 

Can't even get an overall majority in the mickey mouse 400million pound 'parliament' (AKA the home for people who could'nt ever make it as a proper MP and have been councillors for 30years), and the calibre of politician in their ranks is laughable, Nicola Sturgeon, haha, not just a lightweight, a total nonentity.

 

What right have they to be involved in any debate, when they are such a small insignificant reactionary faction?

 

None. Jog on nobodies.

 

Like most points in threads like this yours is overstated

 

To get an overall majority in the Edinburgh Parliament would require something approaching an overall majority of votes cast. It is a long, long time since any party has managed that in the context of a westminster election.

 

:smiliz21:

 

Is this the same concensus government that has failed to deliver on many major electoral promises, including one on primary school class sizes that resulted in the very public humiliation and sacking of the largest party's own education minister?

 

You don't seem to have grasped the idea of consensus government*

 

Unless there was a corresponding consensus promise then there can't be a failure of the consensus to deliver on it.

 

And for that matter if we were to accept that past failures to deliver on promises were enough reason to silence parties at the hustings then it would be a very quiet campaign.

 

The United Kingdom is famously said to have no written constitution which has meant that arrangements are worked out by compromise, trial and error. Change is generally slow which means that it will take some time for everything to adjust to the relatively seismic shift of devolution. It'll all work out eventually (unless of course the SNP and David Cameron persuade enough people to give up on devolution and make the issue redundant first).

 

My suggested solution would be for Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories to effectively give the SNP a couple of extra PPBs by way of compensation.

[jambos are go!]

The SNP are claiming that the current transport problems at caused by the worst snow storm in 20 years. What a load of twaddle. What they are really saying is that things cannot be bad under this much better SNP regime unless the utterly unexpected occurs. Smell the coffee - under this Regime this administration has overseen the usual chaos following a moderate snowfall. Mythical like the Arc of Prosperity a nationalist fantasy.

[davemclaren]

The SNP are claiming that the current transport problems at caused by the worst snow storm in 20 years. What a load of twaddle. What they are really saying is that things cannot be bad under this much better SNP regime unless the utterly unexpected occurs. Smell the coffee - under this Regime this administration has overseen the usual chaos following a moderate snowfall. Mythical like the Arc of Prosperity a nationalist fantasy.

 

So the weather is the fault of the SNP? Scotland ( or the UK ) has never coped with bad weather well ( even under your beloved Labour ) but I don't blame the government ( Labour or SNP ). Basically it happens so seldom it's not worth investing to do things any better imo.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Geoff, I'm surprised at the level of debate from the usual unionists, or maybe not. You know full well or ought to that on Defence the SNP offers a different choice to the nuclear option. No Trident on the Clyde. Against weapons of mass distruction. Same goes for energy as the SNP are opposed to Nuclear power and want to see the potential Scotland has in renewables. Then there is foreign policy and wars. This is why they don't want the SNP to debate as they offer something different to the so called big two.

 

So when all these subjects are debated, there will be no alternative expressed. Scotland gagged as usual.

 

Fair point on the SNP policy for Trident. To be honest though, I can't see Defence being that major an issue in the election, with the obvious exceptions of withdrawal from Afghanistan and equipping the troops properly.

 

My personal view on Trident is that it is unaffordable in any case given the mess of the public finances.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

It is entirely appropriate that a smaller nation with a larger neighbour with a mutually beneficial economic alliance comment on their aspirations for both economies. The Belgians, Danes, Swiss, Slovenians, Estonians etc etc do not stay silent on the policies of their much larger neighbours. Why should we? Why would they want us to? Although the attitudes of fear of improvement from some on this thread probably answer that for me. This is a rigged debate designed to marginalise the true opposition in the U.K. The opposition is not Lib Lab Con, it is U.K. v the normal powers of a country. Stop the opposition and of course you win the debate. Can we have a grown up democracy please?

 

Hold on! There's a difference between commenting and actually implementing. The point is that the SNP economic policy can only be fully implemented with full Scottish independence. Even fiscal autonomy would have limits on how much debt raising a Scottish government could offer in the markets.

 

Ireland, for example, has already commented that the pound's devaluation is unfair as money has headed north of the border. Bottom line is so what? They were actually forced to cut excise duties as a result to try and repatriate monies. That is a true policy response - the SNP can only deliver a similar outcome with full independence.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Incidentally, cybernats, I do plan to vote SNP! :santa4:

[Big D]

Geoff fair point, but again I'm trying to expose the hypocrisy and cyncism inherent in the current insistent for a rigged pseudo presidential debate. Scotland will work fine with the expanded economic union which encompasses our traditional Iberian, Baltic, Low Countries and Scandanavian trading partners and the rest of the EC. The 3 leaders debate is designed to deny a platform to anyone other than the unionist, EC wary concensus of the 3 london parties. What sort of democracy says, you are the opposition and therefore we deny you a platform for your policies and rebuttales. Scared and insulting? Certainly not democratic.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Geoff fair point, but again I'm trying to expose the hypocrisy and cyncism inherent in the current insistent for a rigged pseudo presidential debate. Scotland will work fine with the expanded economic union which encompasses our traditional Iberian, Baltic, Low Countries and Scandanavian trading partners and the rest of the EC. The 3 leaders debate is designed to deny a platform to anyone other than the unionist, EC wary concensus of the 3 london parties. What sort of democracy says, you are the opposition and therefore we deny you a platform for your policies and rebuttales. Scared and insulting? Certainly not democratic.

 

There are separate debates being held for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, which I think is fair enough given that none of the parties in these countries are standing in England.

 

Alex Salmond should challenge Messrs Brown, Clegg and Cameron to a fourth debate against him in Scotland.

[jambos are go!]

So the weather is the fault of the SNP? Scotland ( or the UK ) has never coped with bad weather well ( even under your beloved Labour ) but I don't blame the government ( Labour or SNP ). Basically it happens so seldom it's not worth investing to do things any better imo.

 

I did not blame the SNP for the weather. I criticised a pathetic attempt to to pretend there would not ever be transport chaos under SNP unless the weather was almost historically bad. It has not been almost historically bad as Im sure you ok me travels through Bonnyrigg regularly over the last few decades.

[Bonnie Prince Charlie]

complete fandango alert

when will Trollapist get the message nobody buys his bull**** any more

Mods why is this guy allowed on the board when every thread he posts is trolling?

 

Have to agree with you 100%.

What does the Rapist, class name byw, think of Lord Feck Sake or are they one and the same?

[Big D]

Have to agree with you 100%.

 

Keep your enemy close and understand the benefits to be exploited by a weak but vain opponent. Not in favour of a thera****ed ban .

[jammyheart]

There are separate debates being held for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, which I think is fair enough given that none of the parties in these countries are standing in England.

 

Alex Salmond should challenge Messrs Brown, Clegg and Cameron to a fourth debate against him in Scotland.

 

 

I think there should be four debates one in Scotland, one in England, one in Wales and one in Nothern Ireland with all the respective leaders of there countries plus your other two Cameron and Clegg who could be elected for PM and that would be fare to all countries in the UK.

 

But Salmond would still wipe the floor with them:santa1:

[Big D]

I think there should be four debates one in Scotland, one in England, one in Wales and one in Nothern Ireland with all the respective leaders of there countries plus your other two Cameron and Clegg who could be elected for PM and that would be fare to all countries in the UK.

 

Clegg will not be allowed to become PM. If the debate is for potential PMs then it's Brown v Cameron only. If it is not for potential PMs but is a genuine debate on the future of the U.K., then it is scandalous that the unionists fear of Alex Salmond allows them to get away with a rigged debate in an election year.