Hanging out
With today's announcement of a hung parliament "shopping list", the SNP and their Welsh chums Plaid Cymru are trying to turn a potentially weak position into one of relative strength.
The weakness is that, by dint of simple arithmetic, neither the SNP nor Plaid can win the UK General Election in the conventional sense of seeing their leader entering Downing Street as Prime Minister.
That prompts rival parties to claim that the Nationalists are irrelevant in a UK contest, that the voters should, as a consequence, disregard their appeal for support.
So how to turn that round? By positing a hung parliament - and suggesting that a bloc of SNP and Plaid MPs would be able, in such circumstances, to extract substantial concessions for Scotland and Wales.
By this device, the Nationalists argue that their leaders would indeed be able to enter Downing Street - as invited visitors, to negotiate a deal in the interests of their respective nations.
Today's launch suggests that the two parties would be looking for "fair funding for Wales and Scotland" plus protecting local services, action to help the green economy and support for housing growth.
The document suggests that both would seek to replace the current Barnett formula which determines spending in Wales and Scotland by comparison with changes in relevant English departmental budgets.
Spending advantage
Of course, many English MPs have long regarded Barnett with loathing (the formula, that is, not Lord Joel Barnett who devised it.)
They regard it as feather-bedding the Scots and the Welsh, entrenching higher spending levels.
By contrast, Nationalists in Scotland point to the fact that Barnett is and was designed to be a convergence mechanism, progressively squeezing Scotland's historic spending advantage.
In Wales, Barnett is cordially disliked.
So, for Scotland, the "Celtic Alliance" would seek fiscal autonomy. For Wales, they would seek "fairer funding". Translation: more generous.
It is all eerily reminiscent of the earlier claim by Gordon Brown that his Labour party offered investment while the Tories promised cuts.
Mr Brown finessed this when the extent of the potential spending crisis made this difficult to sustain.
'Disadvantage to gain'
But, of course, the SNP and Plaid don't have to spell out a UK spending programme of their own.
They merely demand concessions from the parties seeking UK power. Again, their relative remoteness from that UK power is turned, they hope, from a disadvantage to a gain.
Problems? Of course. Rival parties will say that the programme is thoroughly unrealistic, given the condition of the accumulated deficit.
The Nationalists will reply that they are entitled to stand up for their own nations' interests.
Further, will the Celtic Alliance be in a position to bargain. Will there be a hung Parliament? Will they win enough seats to get, potentially, to the table?
If they do, will the UK leaders negotiate with them? Or would, say, the Tories prefer to strike a deal with the Liberal Democrats or parties in Northern Ireland?
Challenges ahead. Potentially.
I'm 
© 2012~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~57~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
PC may well get concessions from a Labour minority government but the SNP have little chance with the Tories and zero chance with Labour.
Salmond has a regular habit of burning bridges in the most spectacular fashion (calling the banks "a bunch of spivs" and then asking Lloyds to move its entire head office to Edinburgh was a particular stunner!) and it looks like he has done it again.
PC have played the game well but the SNP have blown any chance of a regular place in a Westminster coalition.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Full fiscal autonomy for Scotland would make this situation altogether more straightforward, with Scotland having to take responsibility for its own revenue and expenditure.
Fiscal autonomy, as successfully demonstrated in Catalonia, should be supported by all except the most self-flagellating Unionists (we're too poor, we're too wee...). Conservatives think people should stand on their own two feet, I believe. And socialists advocate people getting rewarded fairly for their own efforts and not ripped off by proprietors, I believe. Will anyone come on here and tell us why fiscal autonomy would be a bad thing?
(a hint: oil is now over $80/bbl and rising on strong demand from China and elsewhere).
Complain about this comment
It all goes to show that in Scotland, and indeed in Wales, there is another choice, and that choice can make a real difference. The press, the beeb, the party leaders, the SofS, can go on all they like about relevance and the election of a PM - it could well be that one of them will have to come cap in hand knocking on the Edinburgh or Cardiff door if they want the keys to No 10 - or they could try minority administration.
The Celtic Block have a loud voice, despite what some would have us believe. There is no reason at all for mindlessly crossing the labour box for the sole reason that it is what has always been done in the family/area/lodge or whatever.
Complain about this comment
I've just got a reply from Brian's 'blog team' Re my complaint:
Dear sir/madam,
Thanks very much for getting in touch with your comments in relation to Brian Taylor's blog.
In relation to your query about blog moderation, you are quite correct to state that, previously, Brian's blogs were left open to allow posters to leave their comments.
A decision has now been taken that new blogs will be closed off to new comments after they have been running for a certain length of time.
In general, this has been set at about 24 hours, although there may be occasions where particular blogs might be left open to comment for longer periods.
Because Brian blogs on a range of issues, this approach intends to provide more of a focus for comments in relation to the specific subject or subjects covered in each individual blog.
I'd also like to take this opportunity to issue a reminder of the "house rules" set by the BBC in relation to posting comments on our blogs, which you will find listed at the bottom of this message.
Thanks again for getting in touch with your comments.
Regards,
Andrew Black,
Senior broadcast journalist, politics,
BBC Scotland news website.
The BBC has established the following house rules so everyone can get the most out of the bbc.co.uk message boards.
Member names will be failed if they:
Contain website or email addresses
Contain contact information ie phone numbers, postcodes etc Appear to impersonate someone else Contain swear words or are otherwise objectionable
We reserve the right to fail messages which:
Are considered likely to disrupt, provoke, attack or offend others Are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable Contain swear words or other language likely to offend Break the law or condone or encourage unlawful activity, including breach of copyright, defamation and contempt of court Advertise products or services for profit or gain Are written in anything other than English - Welsh and Gaelic may be used where marked Contain links to other websites which break our Editorial Guidelines Describe or encourage activities which could endanger the safety or well-being of others Are considered to be 'spam', that is posts containing the same. or similar, message posted multiple times Are considered to be off-topic for the particular message board.
{Your Email to the BBC}
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The dinosaurs proclaim that we need strong Government. We have just had 13 years of strong Government, eye-watering majorities. What have we got for these 13 wasted years? A minimum wage and ..., not forgetting two disastrous devolution settlements, that leave voters in England at a democratic disadvantage wrt Scotland and Wales, a house of lords larger even than the Commons packed with political has beens and placemen bought off at our expense and a Commons that has lost all sense of common morality and feels that it is "entitled" to trough and act the whore, but call it a taxi. Strong Government indeed.
Our Holyrood has shown that consensual government can work in a UK context. Its now up to Westminster to show that it can work for the good of our conjoined nations. I don't fear for a hung Parliament, I fear for the UK's AAA rating, as our dinosaurs have failed to explain that Westminster could work with a hung Parliament and foreigners see the big two threatening anyone who doesn't vote for them with the most condign "punishment" of a hung Parliament.
Complain about this comment
Brain,
I think the most telling words in your blog today are these:
their relative remoteness from that UK power
This, to my mind, is the reason that we need independence for Scotland. The days of Scotland being managed by a remote power are done. It is time for change, and the sooner all concerned recognise this the better.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The obvious thing, in the event of a hung parliament, for both nationalist parties to do is NOT to enter any kind of alliance, except with each other. Then they can extract the utmost benefits from each difference of opiunion by the big two. However, the first hurdle is for a government to be formed and that means one, or other, of the big two must do a deal with someone. So perhaps the way forward is for the LD party to form the alliance with one of the big two while the nationalists stand by with a load of spanners to throw into the works of the government alliance. This would depend greatly upon the final make-up of the government alliance but could well be the way things eventually end up.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Not long now 'till the only posters on here are all unionists.
Well done to all concerned.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Or we could just answer the 'West Lothian Question' and ban Scottish, Welsh and N.Irish MP's from voting on any matters that aren't applicable to their constituancy and they will have almost no power and be thankful for all the benefits they get which the English people don't.
Complain about this comment
An interesting take on the SNP always picking fights with Westminster.
http://scotsandindependent.blogspot.com/2010/03/picking-fights-part-xviii.html
Complain about this comment
raisethegame re 5
Reply still does not answer the question of why a Scottish blog should be treated any different from the other political blogs on the BBC.
You would think we pay a smaller TV tax than everyone else.
Complain about this comment
Thats quite a bit of an angle (aka distortion) you got there Brian. So by self proclamation that puts the BBC and you firmly in the same camp as 'rival parties to claim that the Nationalists are irrelevant in a UK contest'
It is not a UK contest, it is a UK wide election for all parties and all nations and not just for those who have a unionist view of UK future. The undemocratic bias shown and abetted by the BBC has reached new heights.
'They regard it as feather-bedding the Scots and the Welsh'
Except it is a view unchallenged and essentially promoted by the BBC as often as possible specially prior to elections.
The fact is, and it was admitted by Calman, that Fiscal control would lead to independence. Meanwhile the BBC and others are more than happy to spread the myths and obfuscations and total lack of transparency or accountability.
Meanwhile the BBC is quite happy to exclude or limit political debate and broadcasting in my country going as close to the edge of illegal as they possibly can get away with and try to tell us that everyone in the UK is equal and that this is fair.
Having said all that, this strategy by the SNP and PC looks too much like 'please sir can I have some more' and the BBC and others will CERTAINLY make it look like that. The SNP and PC should be discussing championing our national interests in a broader sense regarding UK policy and spending.
Complain about this comment
Brian wrote "the SNP and their Welsh chums Plaid Cymru".
Must say I like that terminology, conjuring up as it does the idea of a cosy alliance with a common aim.
One might say Labour and their unionist chums the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are similarly matey with their desire to protect the established order and keep us British.
Complain about this comment
#5 raisethegame,
So you can say whatever you like as long as its "Black".
That's a reference to the alleged Henery Ford quote, for the benefit of effy.
Complain about this comment
Yesterday's edition of the Daily Politics was an unalloyed disaster during the first discussion session. Guests, David Davis, Caroline Flint and Charles Kennedy together with presenters Coburn and Neil were all talking over each other like budgies, with complete disregard for the audience. After the first video presentation all were more subdued and Kennedy admitted that they had been ticked of by the programme director. You would think they would have learned by now. Newsnight is no better at times, last night being a case in point. Of course we shouldn't expect anything else with Prescott. Does he ever listen to himself?
Complain about this comment
Brian,
One cheer for at least opening a new thread more or less as you close an old one so that some comment is permitted. But could somebody from BBC Scotland please explain why previous threads should be closed while people are still commenting? Can anybody claim that UK democracy is enhanced by closing comment on these threads while it is left open on all of the BBC's other political blogs?
The closure of the previous thread is a special case in point as you have highlighted Mr Salmond's last appearance in the House of Commons without making any remarks upon it yourself or even allowing more than a few snippets of his speech to be published but no discussion of them. Did Mr Salmond say something embarrassing you don't want aired, or perhaps the Rev. Bliar opened a fresh can of worms?
On topic, you are right that neither "the SNP nor Plaid can win the UK General Election in the conventional sense of seeing their leader entering Downing Street as Prime Minister" but by standing candidates in every seat in their respective nations they each retain the possibility of an outright win for their nation, entitling them to withdraw from the unequal union should either win a majority of seats nationally. That is unlikely to happen this time, but any gains in seats by either party can only improve the visibility of the unequal nature of the UK union and most likely increase the pressure in England for devolution to be abandoned (as UKIP and the BNP seem to want) or made symmetric (as none of the unionist Tweedles want). Any advance at all will show that the days of the existing UK unitary state are numbered.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
10. Auld Bob
If you read the article, the SNP/PC alliance has made an absolute commitment NOT to be part of any coalition government so they are in total agreement with what you are saying.
Salmond has already announced that he will be in talks with the LibDems and has already been in talks with the Tories.
Since by FAR the most likely makeup of a coalition government is Tory/LibDem this makes perfect sense. The SNP and PC are doing an excellent job of positioning themselves post-election for what is far and away the most likely outcome.
"By positing a hung parliament"?
Brian, dear boy, every voting intention poll for weeks has screamed hung parliament. Newspapers in England have been writhing and thrashing over the horror of such an outcome--although oddly enough such a probability continues to be ignored in Scotland.
Complain about this comment
1. Reluctant-Expat
'Salmond has a regular habit of burning bridges in the most spectacular fashion (calling the banks "a bunch of spivs" and then asking Lloyds to move its entire head office to Edinburgh was a particular stunner!)'
In case anyone lurking out there isn't aware of Reluctant-Expat's (self documenting) penchant for lies and misrepresentation, this is the expanded version of the quote where he claims Salmond calls the banks names -
'"I am very angry that we can have a situation of a bank being forced into a merger by a short-selling bunch of spivs and speculators in the financial markets"'
Which rather exposes the whole post as a weak and dishonest attack against a person, rather than honestly trying to make a valid point.
The usual stuff from Reluctant-Expat, there are no babies with this bathwater.
Complain about this comment
And here we go again with this tired old nationalist lie. It's almost every day now!
3. Feel free to quote one unionist who thinks Scotland is "too small" or "too wee" for independence.
If you opened your eyes to the unionist argument just for a few seconds, instead of constantly hiding behind those rigid nationalist blinkers, you'll see that the unionists' real argument is that the case for independence is weak, inconsistent, self-contradictory or just outright nonsense.
The Scottish Parliament has just reported that £470bn was spent just on rescuing our biggest banks (yes, I know the nationalists now refuse to accept RBS and HBOS as Scottish since they failed, but they are again on their own here). That sum alone, three times Scotland's entire GDP, proves the benefits of staying as part of one of the world's largest economies. Swinney's failure to grasp that this bailout was needed only continues to highlight the weakness of the independence case.
Nationalists continue to disagree with the SNP when the latter publish figures showing Scotland already receives all oil income. This income (and overall productivity) continues to drop as it has for the past 11 consecutive years...and yet nationalists repeatedly claim oil will make Scotland rich beyond our dreams!
Time to change the record, nationalists. Time to stop treating your fellow Scots like fools.
No-one swallowed your nonsense before and they never will.
Complain about this comment
16. An SNP candidate claiming the SNP don't look for conflict?!
Well, I'm a believer!
Complain about this comment
UK Polling Report "Tonight’s YouGov poll has topline figures of CON 38%(-1), LAB 31%(-1), LDEM 19%(+1). The lead remains at seven points and there is clearly no significant change from yesterday. The increased Tory lead post budget does seem to be genuine, though as I said yesterday, we can’t tell if it will last."
Latest UNS Projection: Conservatives short by 19
I did a quick check and I don't think ANY poll has shown the Conservatives with a large enough lead to get a majority since the middle of March.
"Positing a hung parliament"?
It would be a TOUCH difficult at this point to posit anything BUT a hung parliament.
Complain about this comment
26. Reluctant-Expat
"This income (and overall productivity) continues to drop as it has for the past 11 consecutive years..."
In other words... Scotland is too wee, too poor and too stupid.
If someone doesn't give them a handout they'd starve to death poor dears. Other small countries can do it (even most with NO oil) but they're just too wee, too poor and too stupid.
Complain about this comment
27. Reluctant-Expat
"An SNP candidate claiming the SNP don't look for conflict?!
"
I'm sure that The Right Honourable Ian Davidson, Scottish Labour Co-operative MP who signed that House of Commons Rreport will be started to know that he is now an SNP candidate. You might want to mention that fact to him, RE.
Let's see what was it the report he signed off on said?
Daily communication between the UK and Scottish governments at a ministerial and official level appears to work well. Problems only tend to occur where civil servants in Whitehall are less used to dealing with devolution issues.
Huh. This LABOUR MP signs off on a report blaming WHITEHALL.
Complain about this comment
28. JRMacClure
That is liable to change as a FOI re gold sale is due for release before election with possible serious repercussions around the globe.
Complain about this comment
Hardworkinghobbes may be unaware that SNP MPs abstain from voting on English only matters.
He may be able to ease his conscience further by persuading his party of choice, be they red, blue, orange or whatever that independence for England should come onto the agenda. Maybe if we attack from both sides we can make more progress.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"That prompts rival parties to claim that the Nationalists are irrelevant in a UK contest, that the voters should, as a consequence, disregard their appeal for support.
So how to turn that round? By positing a hung parliament - and suggesting that a bloc of SNP and Plaid MPs would be able, in such circumstances, to extract substantial concessions for Scotland and Wales.
By this device, the Nationalists argue that their leaders would indeed be able to enter Downing Street - as invited visitors, to negotiate a deal in the interests of their respective nations."
Are you really suggesting that the nats are simply trying to stay in the frame? That they don't really just want to get politcal gain from Westminster to help them implement their own policies at home, that's really just a front to looking relevant !?!
I think that's putting the cart before the horse!
'device' yourself, artifice even.
This is not a PR manouevre; the desire of the nationalist parties to work their agenda as best they can at westminster is a valid and obvious course of action. Now that the media & political mainstream are acknowledging the possibility of a hung parliament it is natural that the the nationalists will seek to maximise their potential gain from it, will work together to do so, and will announce that fact to the electorate.
Just because the unionist parties and media are trying to frame the nationalists as irrelevant doesn't mean they (or we) have to go along with the presentation of their political intent as being a reaction to such framing, however much that would help the unionist attempts to keep them in their little box.
Complain about this comment
#33 Freeman wrote "In case you have not figured it out. Salmond is a politician and would sell his own mother for the smallest chance to make history as the First President of Scotland."
Sheesh... I hope 'Freeman' is in reference to your name and not your political beliefs!
Complain about this comment
Reluctant expat
Cyprus has no oil,no manufacturing and relies mainly on the tourist trade yet manages to survive.I know you'll probably reply that a third of the country is controlled by Turkey after their invasion in 1974, to prove that it is unable to govern itself successfully, but an independent Scotland is unlikely to be invaded.Scotland has more advantages than many of the world's small nations but being part of Great Britain is not one of them.
Complain about this comment
26. Reluctant-Expat
Oh NOOOO!
Not your 470bn one again, have you picked a different source for it this time (one which doesn't directly contradict you)?
Don't worry though, Freeman's here to back you up!
lol
Complain about this comment
Hung out indeed. What an embarrassing a position to be in, to have to go begging for enough money please. But maybe Scotland is not yet a grown up, 800 years+ is not long enough?
Complain about this comment
#3 mince and mealie
"Full fiscal autonomy for Scotland would make this situation altogether more straightforward, with Scotland having to take responsibility for its own revenue and expenditure."
Absolutely. That was effectively Salmond's parting sentence to the HoC yesterday: "However, I should say that what has happened over the past 23 years has strengthened my absolute conviction that the case for our having full determination over Scotland's finances and resources has never been more urgent and has never required to be better made than it is now". Pity the last thread was closed after exactly 24 hours, preventing proper discussion of his remarks.
I would take that one step further and say that the only possibility of the UK remaining long in any form is for full fiscal autonomy of all of the home nations. This is total anathema to Westmidden, of course, because it would result in an English First Minister [Boris, perhaps?] having much more effective power than the Prime Minister, and with control of the purse-strings in the four home nations it would be the Prime Minister who had to go with his begging bowl to the four First Ministers in search of the funds for "vanity" projects like Trident.
Complain about this comment
Given the criticism of Westminster for failing to keep Scottish ministers in the loop, is this likely to improve if say the Celtic Block have an important role to play?
I see that Westminster has to consider whether Scotland has a right to know more information. The thinking apparently is to appoint 'devolution champions' to help the civil service understand the impact of policy so far as the devolved nations are concerned.
So it's all the fault of the civil servants is it - another reason for giving the Celtic Block a greater say and voting to ensure no majority?
Complain about this comment
"The weakness is that, by dint of simple arithmetic, neither the SNP nor Plaid can win the UK General Election in the conventional sense of seeing their leader entering Downing Street as Prime Minister."
Weakness, Brian? Since neither the SNP nor Plaid aim to either 'win' the General Election or enter Downing Street I can hardly see how this is a weakness. In fact, I'd view it more as a good thing.
As for smaller parties being 'irrelevant', a claim frequently levelled at the Nationalists and occasionally the Lib-Dems, is it not the case that the Labour party went from being 'irrelevant' to 'relevant' in the space of a decade or so in the early part of last century? Is it not also the case that the SNP are the ruling party in Scotland? Irelevant? I don't think so.
I tried to answer a question in a previous blog about where we could meet when this blog was closed, but it seems the mods are acting a little bit quirky . Us nats shouldn't be put off though.
Complain about this comment
#1. At 1:26pm on 31 Mar 2010, Reluctant-Expat wrote:"PC have played the game well but the SNP have blown any chance of a regular place in a Westminster coalition.You don't get to be part of another parties government because you share their policies. If you did you would be part of their party. You get there because they cannot do it without you. The point is that YOU force them to give you concessions that suit YOUR policy. i.e., you get what you want by holding a gun to their heads and if you don't have a gun they do their thing, not yours.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#7. At 2:04pm on 31 Mar 2010, handclapping wrote:"not forgetting two disastrous devolution settlements, that leave voters in England at a democratic disadvantage wrt Scotland and Wales".
In view of the simple fact that there are 533 MPs from English Constituencies and only 99 from Scottish & Welsh constituencies. Plus the fact that SNP MPs do not vote on English matters can you explain why you think England has a democratic disadvantage at Westminster?
Complain about this comment
15. HardWorkingHobbes
"Or we could just answer the 'West Lothian Question' and ban Scottish, Welsh and N.Irish MP's from voting on any matters that aren't applicable to their constituancy and they will have almost no power and be thankful for all the benefits they get which the English people don't."
"Ban them". So you're admitting that the control of Westminster is actually in English hands--as it always has been.
You know the English could go out and CAMPAIGN for their own parliament instead of just whinging and whining that others have them. They could call and write their own MPs and demand changes in the devolution settlement.
Instead, they'd rather come on forums and complain how hard done by they are. Why is that?
Incidentally, the SNP would be the FIRST to encourage English independence and, as someone has already pointed out, do not vote on English only matters.
Complain about this comment
33. Freeman
"Impressive misquote/lie there.."
By the way, it's hard to misquote someone when you copy and paste their words. I did NOT misquote him. But I can understand that you don't like my pointing out the REAL meaning of what he was saying and what you are saying.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat --
The budget Appendix C report shows the expected cost to the taxpayer for bailing out
of all British Banks and there was quite a packet.
LLods and RBS togther is 6 Billion estimate - Still a high figure.
Biggest loss is the 23Billion outstanding loss to the taxpayer of Northern Rock.
Please feel free to challenge these treasury figures, as budget figures are disputable, but they are the official figures as opposed to your hysteric fanatasies.
For the record: The budget refers to British banks, British fiscal policy, Bank of England monitory policy, FSA (the British Regulator of all providers of financial services in the UK (That includes Scotland last I looked); Bank of England retains responsibility for systemic risk.)
It does mention RBS and indeed has its part of the baleout and we are paying our share of the cost but we all know who has clear responsibility! The UK economy is finance lead; debt and usury driven and geared to the South. Scotland is an Energy based economy and has shedloads of resources of intrinsic value compared to our share of British debt.
Just what is the UK guaranteeing its international Loans with?
Note: Last year the uk paid more in its existing AAA interest repayments than the Entire Education budget.
Complain about this comment
Off Topic I see the man who saved the world has been caught out about immigration figures and has been told to be careful with his quotes,caught out again Mr Broon.
Complain about this comment
5. raisethegame
"A decision has now been taken that new blogs will be closed off to new comments after they have been running for a certain length of time.
In general, this has been set at about 24 hours, although there may be occasions where particular blogs might be left open to comment for longer periods."
That only seems to be the case in Scotland, better know our place eh!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#5 raisethegame
"I've just got a reply from Brian's 'blog team' Re my complaint"
Snap. My mail server received word for word the same reply from Andrew Black [the "the owner of the Brian Taylor blog", perhaps?] at 13:54:03 BST today. Unsurprising that a meaningless standard reply is given but sad for Scottish politics that no reason is given why BwB should receive different treatment to all of the other six political blogs on this website's http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/comment/ which are currently being left open to comment indefinitely.
The need for threads to remain open longer than 24 hours was evident on the last thread, with outcomes not yet being apparent. For this thread, the wisdom or otherwise of Brian's, PC's or the SNP's words will not be evident before 7 May at the very earliest.
Could that mean that this thread is one of those "occasions where particular blogs might be left open to comment for longer periods"? Not holding my breath!
I do plan to respond to Mr Black, and will attempt to share my response with everyone here, but it won't be before I've slept on it.
Complain about this comment
27.
Which SNP candidate are you referring to Ian Davidson, Lindsay Roy or David Mundell?
Complain about this comment
#20 A_Scottish_Voice
"So you can say whatever you like as long as its "Black"."
LOL, but C. H. Ellis, the railway historian and artist always maintained that Ford was thirty or more years late due to Francis Webb - the Locomotive Superintendent of the LNWR from 1871 - having told the directors he would paint their engines any colour they liked so long as it was black.
Complain about this comment
33. Freeman
"The point was... Do not rely on oil to turn Scotland into the land of milk and honey."
Is there for honest poverty
That hangs his heed and a' that
The coward slave we pass him by
We dare be poor for a' that
For a' that and a' that
Our toils obscure and a' that
The rank is but the guinea's stamp
The mans the gowd for a' that
What tho' on hamely fare we dine
Wear hoddin-gray and a' that
Gie fools their silks and knaves their wine
A mans a man for a' that
For a' that and a' that
Their tinsel show and a' that
The honest man tho' e'er sae poor
Is king o' men for a' that
Ye see yon birkie ca'd a lord
Wha struts and stares and a' that
Tho' hundreds worship at his word
He's but a coof for a' that
For a' that and a' that
His riband, star and a' that
The man o' independent mind
He looks and laughs at a' that...
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#33 Freeman
"Salmond is a politician and would sell his own mother for the smallest chance to make history as the First President of Scotland."
Salmond is indeed a politician and might just "sell his own mother for the smallest chance to make history as the First" Prime Minister of Scotland, but by all accounts he's on friendly terms with Brenda and her brood. In any event, the SNP are on record as wanting to take it one step at a time: Independence referendum first; Constitutional referendum later.
But whatever people say of Salmond they would be hard pressed to show that he does not work as hard as he possibly can for his own nation. Something it's not easy to say of any UK politicians.
Complain about this comment
#45 Auld Bob
It is in essence MP's expenses all over again. They vote themselves more money for their health service and they find they have given Scots more too and the Scots have gone and done something different like free care for the elderly. It makes them look stupid and they don't like that, e.g. see the foot dragging over their expenses.
If they, the English voters, had a devolved government like Holyrood, then they would be able to spend the money voted to them on local government and services, police, fire, ambulances, health and justice etc., as they wished and know that they would not affect or be affected by any Scottish expenditure. Nor would they be affected by the 52 Labour, Tory and LibDem MPs for Scottish constituencies who do vote on English matters.
However it is unlikely to come to pass as it would leave exposed the cost of keeping alive the Westminster dream of British post-imperial pomp and glory, e.g. Trident and embassies to everywhere, as opposed to accepting that we are an impoverished archipelago North West of Europe.
I'm sure it will not have escaped you notice that, if there is a hung Parliament, that the voters of Scotland and Wales will probably have affected the result to the extent that "England" will not have got the Government that they voted for. That may not play well to certain sections of the English electorate that have trouble differentiating England from Britain.
Complain about this comment
At this point the moderating makes carrying on a coherent discussion. It is outrageous that most comments in this thread have been removed.
Complain about this comment
33. Freeman
"In case you have not figured it out. Salmond is a politician and would sell his own mother for the smallest chance to make history as the First President of Scotland."
Odd, since neither he nor the SNP have PROPOSED a president for Scotland. Just how would THAT work?
Complain about this comment
18. EphemeralDeception
"Having said all that, this strategy by the SNP and PC looks too much like 'please sir can I have some more' and the BBC and others will CERTAINLY make it look like that. The SNP and PC should be discussing championing our national interests in a broader sense regarding UK policy and spending."
As I see it, championing Scottish and Welsh interests is EXACTLY what they are doing. How that equates to "please, sir" I don't understand. Is it "please, sir" if they LibDems form a coalition? Why only if PC/SNP get the best for their own people?
They have every right and duty to serve and protect those who elect them--which strangely enough they are well known for doing (odd for politicians, but there are exceptions to every rule).
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
1. Reluctant-Expat
"PC have played the game well but the SNP have blown any chance of a regular place in a Westminster coalition."
Both PC and the SNP have ruled out any coalition.
Complain about this comment
I feel the nationalists will be forced to back very unpopular policies in the near future, especially if the nationalists are asked to back the next UK Government. I highly doubt that either Labour or the Conservatives will be interested on allowing Scotland to have full control over taxes and economy. It will be a lot of hassle, both I suspect, will claim that the recovery comes first. The Liberal Democrats will also be able to back the next Government, you see. If they ask for something simple, then I guess we can forget our extra powers. However, it's nice to see someone attempting to help their constituents/nation from cuts. Isn't it the purpose of our elected representatives to work in the best interests of the people who elected them into office? I would have expected all MPs be doing their best to ensure their constinuency is properly funded, I certainly will not be voting for parties who want to make my life any more difficult then it needs to be.
HardWorkingHobbes:
#15.
"Or we could just answer the 'West Lothian Question' and ban Scottish, Welsh and N.Irish MP's from voting on any matters that aren't applicable to their constituancy and they will have almost no power and be thankful for all the benefits they get which the English people don't."
I see someone has a chip on their shoulder. Perhaps, instead of whining, you can create your own Parliament and Westminster can continue as the British Parliament, it's slightly cheeky to suggest British MPs to have their powers limited based on geography at the national Parliament.
I would point out that even English-matters are not always English-only matters. In some circumstances spending in Scotland for example can be increased if England receives extra spending, why wouldn't a British MP from Scotland want to support whatever measure is brought forward if it ensures their own constinuency might have more money to spend?
It's amusing. The irony that a Parliament dominated by English MPs has failed the very people they are suppose to represent and yet, a small minority of uneducated English wasters criticse Scotland for the benefits we worked for. You should really look closer to home before you complain further.
Complain about this comment
46. At 5:04pm on 31 Mar 2010, JRMacClure wrote:
There are people campaigning for an English Parliament but they feel they are being squeezed out by the media. They have a blog up and running, Google for "Campaign for an English Parliament". I'd best not put the web address in with my comment just in-case it falls foul of the Mods.
The only problem I have with the it, is at times they are using resentment of Labour using Scottish MPs voting on English only matters, to tar the whole country of Scotland with the same brush, to make out that all of us up here are out to scupper England in anyway possible. Some don't have any grasp on powers that have been Devolved and are very resentful, especially with NHS matters.
I am speaking to a few of them through twitter, they are generally nice people but some have a misguided chip on their shoulder bigger than some "Nats" out there.
Their Blog is well laid out and they are very organised and is defiantly worth a look.
Complain about this comment
7. handclapping
"not forgetting two disastrous devolution settlements"
Disastrous for the cosy Tory/BLP alliance, perhaps. You won't find many people in Wales or Scotland seeking to turn the clock back. Other than the Tory/BLP alliance, of course.
Complain about this comment
15. HardWorkingHobbes
"Or we could just answer the 'West Lothian Question' and ban Scottish, Welsh and N.Irish MP's from voting on any matters that aren't applicable to their constituancy..."
There are no "Scottish, Welsh and N.Irish MP's" at Westminster. Only UK MPs.
BTW - Neither the SNP nor PC vote on matters not relevant to Scotland and/or Wales.
Complain about this comment
From 26 Reluctant Expat
3. Feel free to quote one unionist who thinks Scotland is "too small" or "too wee" for independence.
Shall we start with you on the same post. Two paragraphs later: "The Scottish Parliament has just reported that £470bn was spent just on rescuing our biggest banks ... ... That sum alone, three times Scotland's entire GDP, proves the benefits of staying as part of one of the world's largest economies."
If that isn't saying Scotland is too small on it's own, and requires the buffer of the UK to protect it, was on earth is it you are trying to say?
I think it's the fourth thread you've raised the 470 number, to no obvious point. Yet you go on to say in the same post: "Time to change the record, nationalists."
There are a variety of sensible, rational arguments that can be made for Scotland persisting within the Union. Working within it's framework to obtain a "better" future for it's own people. A locally driven Scottish direction does not necessarily imply separation. Your view as you've chosen to express it in these threads reads to me as: "Anything the Nats say is rubbish, lies and/or madness"
...and yet nationalists repeatedly claim oil will make Scotland rich beyond our dreams!
Well I've still to hear a nationalist say that, never mind a serving or would be SNP representative. Maybe I don't get about enough among them. What I have heard though is unmentionable in mainstream UK speak. There is talk of cutting production levels. Finding a level with an economic return to maintain the infrastructure, yet conserving the stocks for a couple of generations. Husbanding the resource.
Yield enough to invest in developing what might come after, for it must end someday. When it gets to $1000 a barrel, it'll be worth having a few left up the pipe, won't it?
The UK stance has been find it, rip it out, find more, rip it out. Walk away.
The globalised "big" UK economy will have trouble thinking like that, given the potential red bills from it's credit card.
Complain about this comment
21. hamish42
"Of course we shouldn't expect anything else with Prescott. Does he ever listen to himself?"
Surely that would constitute cruel and unnatural punishment.
Complain about this comment
Another try here which isn't likely to be any more successful than the first. I have become convinced that the entire intent of moderation is to PREVENT discussion. Remarks are being removed as offensive that contain NO HINT of anything offensive. They do nothing but run counter to the politics the BBC is trying to advance.
33. Freeman
"The point was... Do not rely on oil to turn Scotland into the land of milk and honey.
In case you have not figured it out. Salmond is a politician and would sell his own mother for the smallest chance to make history as the First President of Scotland."
Only you and other unionists talk about independence and "the land of milk and honey". Other independent nations are not "the land of milk and honey" either.
They DO manage their own resources for their own best interest--which SCOTLAND can not do.
And speaking for someone sounding like a politician, you then go on to a totally unsupported personal attack on Mr. Salmond. The desire for independence in Scotland for predated Mr. Salmond and has nothing to do with him except that he is a leader of a party that is fighting for it.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
26. Reluctant-Expat
"...the unionists' real argument is that the case for independence is weak, inconsistent, self-contradictory or just outright nonsense. "
The very negativity that we are all so weary of. The very negativity that is all the Tory/BLP alliance has to offer. I have yet to see any of them advance a positive argument for retaining the union.
Complain about this comment
Vote Match explained: General Election 2010
Complain about this comment
33. Freeman
"Salmond is a politician and would sell his own mother for the smallest chance to make history as the First President of Scotland."
Hard to imagine a more honourable aspiration. But, in your ignorance, you sorely mistake Mr Salmond's attitude to his sadly deceased mother.
Complain about this comment
26. Reluctant-Expat
"The Scottish Parliament has just reported that £470bn was spent just on rescuing our biggest banks..."
Being a one-trick pony may be OK, if it is a good trick. This one is a one-way ticket to the glue factory.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As this is on topic I hope it stays as democracy comes before selfish union attitudes.
Plaid Wrecsam
Complain about this comment
Isn't it amazing how suddenly with an ELECTION in the offing almost every regular poster most of whom have rarely if ever had posts removed now say NOTHING that is not:
considered likely to disrupt, provoke, attack or offend others Are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable Contain swear words or other language likely to offend Break the law or condone or encourage unlawful activity, including breach of copyright, defamation and contempt of court Advertise products or services for profit or gain Are written in anything other than English - Welsh and Gaelic may be used where marked Contain links to other websites which break our Editorial Guidelines Describe or encourage activities which could endanger the safety or well-being of others Are considered to be 'spam', that is posts containing the same. or similar, message posted multiple times Are considered to be off-topic for the particular message board.
Funny that.
Or not so much.
Complain about this comment
65. Electric Hermit
""PC have played the game well but the SNP have blown any chance of a regular place in a Westminster coalition."
Both PC and the SNP have ruled out any coalition."
Hush! Don't confuse him with facts.
Complain about this comment
Just when you thought that the "unionist cringe" try this one for size.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7542143/General-Election-2010-Nationalists-willing-to-gamble-with-sterlings-future.html
If there is a run on the pound it will not be the party that was in government and had light touch regulations on the banks and money markets that are at fault, it will be surprise, surprise Alex Salmond.
You could not make it up.
Complain about this comment
#27. At 3:50pm on 31 Mar 2010, Reluctant-Expat wrote:"Well, I'm a believer".
It takes at least two people to have a disagreement. So tell us why you think it is always the Labour Government that is wrong and thus forces the SNP to pick a fight with them? After all you cannot pick a fight unless your opponent has disagreed with you.
Complain about this comment
On the SNP fighting for Scotland, a few going-ons here in EK:
First Group have just raised their bus fares by 60 percent. That's right, 60 percent. Glad to see that deregulation is helping the economy. Had the SNP implemented reregulation as they promised two elections ago - but conventiently omitted from the last election's manifesto - the price rises would have been reasonable. First Group's excuse is that the original fares were "shopping specials". Codswallop. One fare has rised from 90p to 1.45. Train fares went up as well earlier this year above the rate of inflation. Transport Scotland, under the Scottish Government, are doing absolutely nothing for a service that is increasingly expensive and increasingly inefficient.
We need an affordable transport system if we want a successful economy.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
33. At 4:11pm on 31 Mar 2010, Freeman wrote:
In case you have not figured it out. Salmond is a politician and would sell his own mother for the smallest chance to make history as the First President of Scotland
..........
On the last thread a man wrote a response to a different dig - using just his name as an identifier. It might be a plant. I don't think so. It's copied below. If we slag all politicians off as corrupt self servers by default, instead of just catching and exposing the real ones, there'll be no one left to employ the Lollipop ladies.
57. At 3:49pm on 30 Mar 2010,
#41 Salmond saw me and my family through lean times under the Tories and The NuLab fiasco and at least gave our communities a voice while our livlihoods were being sold to europe for a pittance.
Don't you dare insinuate he did anything other than stand up for his country and stand up for us, the people who overlwhelmingly voted him to represent us and our future in Westminster.
Complain about this comment
#38. At 4:25pm on 31 Mar 2010, Elles Belles wrote:, "maybe Scotland is not yet a grown up, 800 years+ is not long enough"? Strange that! Thing is it is exactly the same time as England has been in the Union. Remember, though, that while the Ancient Britons behind both Antonine's and Hadrian's walls remained free the southeron Britons were under Roman rule and then the Anglo Saxons, Normans, and Scandanavians were running what was to become England. Not only that but if the Scots had full autonomy they would be far better off as an independent nation of around 5 million than England with her overpopulation and historic dependence upon other nations to run their country. The Scots are, at present doing that job for you and your next choice might carry that fine old English name of, "Cameron", Clan Cameron is a West Highland Scottish clan, with one main branch Lochiel, and numerous cadet branches such as Erracht, Clunes, Glen Nevis, and Fassifern. The Clan Cameron lands are in Lochaber. The chief of the clan is customarily referred to as simply "Lochiel".
Complain about this comment
You know we Americans have such trouble with your langauge over there, so perhaps you can tell me whether this is what is known as same terminological inexactitude?
Complain about this comment
Shhhh! Don't mention this or the comment will be removed.
Mustn't have people know what's going on.
Complain about this comment
#41. At 4:37pm on 31 Mar 2010, Richard_the_Rogue wrote:"As for smaller parties being 'irrelevant', a claim frequently levelled at the Nationalists and occasionally the Lib-Dems, is it not the case that the Labour party went from being 'irrelevant' to 'relevant' in the space of a decade or so in the early part of last century"?
Not only did the Labour Party do that but it started life in Scotland as, "The Crofter's Partry", and was a home rule party.
Complain about this comment
84. enneffess
"Transport Scotland, under the Scottish Government, are doing absolutely nothing for a service that is increasingly expensive and increasingly inefficient.
"
It seems to have escaped your notice that we have a minority government hobbled by the unthinkingly obstructionist Tory/BLP alliance. To whatever extent the deregulated regime leaves even the most committed government scope to act for the benefit of the travelling public, the cabal on the opposition benches are determined that their own petty, partisan concerns should take precedence over the interests of the Scottish people.
Complain about this comment
67.
I'd agree with you, the CEP's aims of greater self-determination I'm sure would be supported by the SNP or Plaid, but the way they go about arguing for it a lot of the time involves claiming that Scotland or Wales are a "drain on English taxpayers", this coupled with comments about "sweaty socks" and "porridge wogs" drives a bit of a wedge between CEP and their natural allies in the SNP and Plaid.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#60. At 6:17pm on 31 Mar 2010, handclapping wrote:"England" will not have got the Government that they voted for".
There is no way in this old World that England will not get the government she voted for - English MPs 533; Scottish MPs 59; Welsh MPs 40; N.I MPs 18:
So even if the others returned 117 of the opposite to 50% of the English voters the English would still get the government they voted for. The difference is that the 117 could vote with or against that English choice of government.
Complain about this comment
FYI http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radioscotland/2010/03/one-month-in-kaye-adams-reflec.shtml
Kaye Adams reflects on her first moneth on Call Kaye
Complain about this comment
82. dubbieside
Have a look at Scotland unspun and one might find that it has more to do selling gold cheap to prop up the currency values.
Complain about this comment
So yet again England will end up paying for the excesses of the Nationalists, whether Scottish or Welsh, and at present England is dictated to by a Scottish junta in Westminster. If the Nationalists of Scootland and Wales are looking to have their countries hated by the English then they should go ahead with these policies.
I for one will be voting UKIP and hoping that UKIP will hold the ballance of power so that we can have our referendum and then wave good bye to the EU. We will also be able to send back all the immigrants that have flooded over our borders since the Eastern Block joined and which has had a profound effect on our ballance of payments.
Complain about this comment
re 15. At 2:47pm on 31 Mar 2010, HardWorkingHobbes
In case you don't understand it
If the Scots spend money on something like Fee Personal Care for the Elderly, they have to pay for it by either savings or not spending on something else, you lovely folks are not subsidising our evil old folks
Complain about this comment
97. SnoddersB
"So yet again England will end up paying for the excesses of the Nationalists"
Throwing all that money about on free Elder Care, medicines and schooling... Bunch of wastrels and you'd be well rid of them.
Complain about this comment
67. MrJingles
"There are people campaigning for an English Parliament but they feel they are being squeezed out by the media. They have a blog up and running, Google for "Campaign for an English Parliament". I'd best not put the web address in with my comment just in-case it falls foul of the Mods.
The only problem I have with the it, is at times they are using resentment of Labour using Scottish MPs voting on English only matters, to tar the whole country of Scotland with the same brush, to make out that all of us up here are out to scupper England in anyway possible. Some don't have any grasp on powers that have been Devolved and are very resentful, especially with NHS matters.
I am speaking to a few of them through twitter, they are generally nice people but some have a misguided chip on their shoulder bigger than some "Nats" out there.
Their Blog is well laid out and they are very organised and is defiantly worth a look."
I sympathize with those AIMS completely. What I do not sympathize with is the frankly racist attitude they take although being Scottish is not a race--they don't seem to see it that way and their remarks tend to be at best stomach turning.
They manage to alienate anyone who would be a natural ally.
Complain about this comment
#82 dubbieside
"Just when you thought that the "unionist cringe" try this one for size."
Mr Hjul rather gives the game away when he talks about keeping "Britain’s political establishment, indeed the entire British nation, on tenterhooks". Nailing his trousers to the mast, as Sir Humphrey would have called it.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
95. RandomScot
Thanks for that nothing favourable yet.
Complain about this comment
I remember speaking to Stewart Stephenson in the run up to the 2007 Holyrood election , I asked him where all the money the SNP would need to run the country would come from and he said this "we will tax all of the obscene bank profits at 50% and put a tax increase on the oil companies" , well after the last couple of years I guess its a good job we weren't under independent control by the SNP we would be going begging to the IMF !!!
Complain about this comment
#75 cynicalHighlander
"Vote Match explained: General Election 2010"
Quite fun, but not entirely believable. For reasons I don't pretend to understand, my scores were: L-D 78%, SNP 73%, Grn 72%, Lab 61%, UKIP 45%, BNP 33%, Con 30%. My own descending order of preferences would probably be: SNP, Grn, L-D, Con, UKIP, BNP, Lab
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Re my 102. Guess you can't pull them up about their comment about a "Scottish junta" into another country's setting of government and show them up for being racist/xenophobic.
You can go around accusing people of being anti-English, but you can't call them up about being Anti-Scottish I guess.
Complain about this comment
105. Brownedov
I only compared 3 parties and my results were the same as yours and I agree with your probs as well.
Complain about this comment
One really should'nt bother reading Mr Hjul particularly as ones ulcer is in a delicate state!An utterly facile article but high on irritation.
What do these journalists believe will be their reward?
Are they pleasing Scots anywhere?
Does the Cochrane team have a huge mortgage to service that they have to be so biased?
Surely they are not the Cherie and Tony ,mortgage-wise, of the world of journalism?
Woops ! Mentioned T Blair ,ulcer really playing up now to the point of medication.
Complain about this comment
#97 SnoddersB
"I for one will be voting UKIP"
Bully for you. Oddly but probably the quickest and most effective way of breaking up the UK as europhobic England goes its own way while the other "home" nations co-operate in a post-colonial Europe. The only reason I don't advocate that solution is that I feel England might find its European soul and at the same time learn that it can no longer afford big boys' toys like Trident if it tried home rule first.
Complain about this comment
My reply to the spam reply we all received re: complaints about early closing (maybe I should've slept on it):
""Dear Mr B***k,
Thank you for your email of which an exact copy has, I believe, been sent to many of the posters on "BwB".
Unfortunately, I did not mention any previous policy relating to Brian's Blog and therefore you did not exactly reply to my email; merely stated that a new policy has been applied.
I would suggest that before applying policies in future, you alert users of the service provided by you and your colleagues of any changes? Were that the case, you would not receive so many complaints. Hence you would be free to devote more time to the replies and therefore not make the error I mentioned in my second paragraph.
Whether or not you decide to make adjustments to your "approach" has no relevance to my original complaint. I would take this opportunity to remind you of it:
"Other political blogs were left open for new posts and it would seem that the only Scottish blog worth reading and contributing to has been discriminated against."
I would draw your attention to the above and ask again why it would seem you have decided, unilaterally, to apply a time-limit on comments and therefore stifle debate on any particular topic blogged by Brian? Other BBC political blogs have not applied any such "approach"; why have you?""
I have already received his reply:
"I am out of the office"! Indeed!
Complain about this comment
#97. At 8:22pm on 31 Mar 2010, SnoddersB wrote:"So yet again England will end up paying for the excesses of the Nationalists, whether Scottish or Welsh, and at present England is dictated to by a Scottish junta in Westminster."
It may have escaped your notice but there are 533 English MPs at Westminster and only 99 from Scotland & Wales. Not only that, but there are far more English Ministers in the Cabinet than Scots. Then there is the simple fact that the government's own figures prove Scotland & Wales subsidise England - unless of course - you can bring official figures to prove otherwise?
(And, of course, you cannot do so).
Complain about this comment
#98. At 8:33pm on 31 Mar 2010, RandomScot wrote:"If the Scots spend money on something like Fee Personal Care for the Elderly, they have to pay for it by either savings or not spending on something else, you lovely folks are not subsidising our evil old folks".
Indeed they don't but the Scots do subsidise the English. These people come on here and make these claims yet in all the time I've been interested in politics, (and that's going on 60 years), not a single one of them has ever shown figures to prove that Scotland does not subsidise England. Wait and see if this one is any different. It must be ther biggest urban myth Dan Saff.
Complain about this comment
Brocher2010 re 104
Of course you did, we all believe you! well dont we?
Complain about this comment
100, mind you the CEP are the best of the bunch IMO, I came across a (now invitation-only) English Independence Party Blog, people say the BNP are the lowest of the low ain't met anyone from the EIP, ANYONE not "ethnic white English" are seen as the enemy. They have a particular hatred of the BBC and the SNP, in their eyes the SNP vote on English only matters, a quick comment telling them to check up on their facts before spouting their bile got the Blog closed to outsider's.
Complain about this comment
84. enneffess wrote:
"Transport Scotland, under the Scottish Government, are doing absolutely nothing for a service that is increasingly expensive and increasingly inefficient.
We need an affordable transport system if we want a successful economy."
Transport Scotland (with their £2,028,412,000 budget) are no more under control of the Scottish government than the GCC. They are a force to be reckoned with. It, like GCC, needs a strong light shone into its dingy corners.
Complain about this comment
I think that the whole thing is now getting past a joke.
A reply from the BBC which gt-cri shared with us at 111 has been refered.
The BBC now moderating their own comments, you could not make it up.
Complain about this comment
My 111 has been "referred". Impossible, as it wasn't posted to be referred.
Shouldn't have mentioned the complaint, or the reply I received (identical to all the others), or quoted my reply to their reply and ultimately their reply which was what email systems refer to as an "auto-reply" describing the recipient's locality to their place of work.
Also worth noting my referral of re's attack on JRMacC, several threads ago required several references to the House Rules before it was accepted and while they deliberated, the bile remained "unreferred".
Obvious where the motives really lie...way too obvious.
Complain about this comment
#97 SnoddersB
"I for one will be voting UKIP"
Jolly spiffing. old chap! Toodle-oo.
Complain about this comment
Thanks dubbieside. You must have refreshed your browser at just the right moment; mine didn't even appear!
Prepare for a microsecond of my #118 before it goes to the sin-bin.
I now wish it was more worthy of the viewing! :-)
Complain about this comment
91. Electric Hermit:
You are missing the point that the SNP dropped the pledge to re-regulate public transport, coincidently just after receiving an unrelated large cash donation to the party coffers.
The fare rises by First Group have hit the local papers. There is genuine outrage since fares have gone up by a huge amount. That has an impact on low paid workers, many of whom have to take a bus to work in the town.
Try for once accepting some criticism about the Scottish Government. Public transport is not one of their strong points.
Complain about this comment
It is strange how many English people are so convinced that England subsidises everyone else in the UK in spite of the real facts. They all make the same assumptions that England & the UK are one and the same. It never enters their head to check the figures and think what they mean. They often point at a tiny area of Glasgow that has bad employment figures and extrapolate these to cover the entire country of Scotland. What they do not do is look at the figures for the whole country of Scotland and these are consistently a lower figure than the UK average. The thing they don't look at is that the London Boroughs are consistently the highest unemployment figures but that there are actually more unemployed people there than in the rest of the UK put together. The very good reason they can never bring official government figures for England is that there are none. Then they are so dumb they quote the UK figures, forgetting that these figures not only include Scotland, N.I., & Wales but that England's large population means there are bigger outgoings to support them. The sheer ignorance of the facts is breathtaking.
Complain about this comment
118. gt-cri
"Shouldn't have mentioned the complaint, or the reply I received (identical to all the others), or quoted my reply to their reply and ultimately their reply which was what email systems refer to as an "auto-reply" describing the recipient's locality to their place of work.
Also worth noting my referral of re's attack on JRMacC, several threads ago required several references to the House Rules before it was accepted and while they deliberated, the bile remained "unreferred".
Obvious where the motives really lie...way too obvious."
First thank you for that. A number of people have expressed their disgust with his personal spite.
I had a link with a brief quote regarding the GCC from NotW, a comment that the attack on the First Minister contained nothing of substance, a comment that most small nations prefer to manage their own resources lack of milk or honey notwithstanding, AND best of all, a link to the BBC POLITICAL PAGE removed!
What IS allowed is an interesting question. Obviously personal attacks on the First Minister ARE allowed but a defense of him is not.
This is shameful.
Complain about this comment
#108 cynicalHighlander
I suspect the £10K tax question may skew towards L-Ds and not wanting BoE overall responsibility may skew to Lab. I did hold my nose when selecting them all and ignored "don't include any party you would never consider voting for" in the spirit of academic research!
Complain about this comment
Was it not George Orwell that once said -
"If we cannot control your minds, then we will control your actions."
My mistake that wasn't him, that was actually me.
Complain about this comment
Not that I expect the slightest satisfaction, I did finally make a formal complaint about the fact that a substantial portion of the comments to this blog are now being removed with, in my opinion, the SOLE purpose of stifling political discussion.
Complain about this comment
121. enneffess
"The fare rises by First Group have hit the local papers. There is genuine outrage since fares have gone up by a huge amount. That has an impact on low paid workers, many of whom have to take a bus to work in the town."
That does sound like a real concern. Whether it is something that the Scottish Government had control over, I don't know. Exactly who raised the fares? Who is responsible for it? Was it something that the SNP could have prevented.
While reregulating public transport sounds like a good idea, is it something that realisticlly the SNP could have achieved?
I'm not defending the SNP which will, like any political party or any organization, make mistakes. I am just asking a few questions that come to mind.
Complain about this comment
@121. enneffess
The Donation you are talking about was from Brian Soutar, Brian Soutar runs Stagecoach not First Group.
Stage Coach aren't in the same business as First as far as busses are concerned, can you give further links that back up your implication please?
Thanks
Complain about this comment
David and Goliath
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
124. Brownedov
I woudn't call it well questioned and am sure it could be improved but fun.
Complain about this comment
126. JRMacClure
And it had done that but one has one hand tied behind the back, well until ref...
Complain about this comment
Just watched Brewer on News night who and what does he thinks he is,just a pity he would not use the same sort of tone and interrupting on the likes of Spud I wonder if he is a card carrying Lab man.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
125. At 10:23pm on 31 Mar 2010, A_Scottish_Voice wrote:
"Was it not George Orwell that once said -
'If we cannot control your minds, then we will control your actions.'
My mistake that wasn't him, that was actually me."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4rBDUJTnNU
...There is truth and there is untruth!!!
Complain about this comment
II think we saw the 'Mandelson defence' in action again tonight in Gordon Brewer's interview with Alex Salmond on Newsnight Scotland.
A month or so ago, Peter Mandelson demolished Andrew Marr's interview by continuously putting his point in spite of attempted interruptions from Marr.
Salmond did the same tonight with Gordon Brewer. It's very gratifying when the interviewer doesn't get his own way.
I reckon the final score was Salmond 10 - Brewer nil. Gordon should try to get his facts right as he was demolished on every one of the points he put to Salmond and didn't even appear to be listening to the answers he was given judging by the number of times Salmond had to repeat himself. There was also a sense that Salmond is totally sick of the political games that BBC Scotland are playing.
Complain about this comment
#124, It's close and a bit of fun, but I know the reason the SNP were not top was because of my anti-Euro stance. If I had answered as Pro-European, then the UKIP would have sunk down the ranks and the SNP would have been clear top.
What the test does not account for is policy priorities. For me, it's independence for Scotland first and foremost, before worrying about the Euro question. Ultimately, the question's are not weighted to reflect this aspect of an individuals decision making process.
My results as follows...
UK Independence Party: 65%
Scottish National Party: 61% (My Choice to vote for)
Liberal Democrats: 59%
Scottish Green Party: 55%
Labour Party: 34%
British National Party: 25%
Conservative Party: 22%
Ps. At least I proved I am a Scot... The Conservatives came last, even below the distasteful BNP.
Complain about this comment
A political blogging ditty (with apologies to Shel Silverstein):
Oh, I'm being eaten
By a moderator,
A moderator,
A moderator,
I'm being eaten by a moderator,
And I don't like it one bit.
Well, what do you know?
He's nibblin' my toe.
Oh, gee,
He's up to my knee.
Oh my,
He's up to my thigh.
Oh, fiddle,
He's up to my middle.
Oh, heck,
He's up to my neck.
Oh, dread,
He's upmmmmmmmmmmffffffffff...
Complain about this comment
I see David McLetchie of the Tories, who tell us they understand business, can't tell the difference between a multi-national company and a single nation, in this case Scottish, one.
No chance to do down Scotland left unturned
Complain about this comment
#136 Hamish .. Alex had a good reply for Gary Robertson this morning on Good Morning Labour erm i mean Scotland. When trying to fend off the point of getting 60 grand for leaving Westminster (which everybody gets) he made sure everybody listening knew that he would donate a chunk to charity as well as the fact that he gave a third of his salary to the same charity...as if Garys nose wasnt bloody enough he then pointed out that he was the only leader to be cleared of expenses shenannagans. I think it will be game on from now with the media.
Complain about this comment
Interesting reading about the Barnett formula
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-392231/My-scheme-gives-Scots-cash-aid-says-peer.html
Complain about this comment
137. Alba4eva
"Ps. At least I proved I am a Scot... The Conservatives came last, even below the distasteful BNP."
All right. I have a question. Who ARE these mysterious disappearing Scots who vote Tory? I mean except for the since vanished DeantheTory (who was generally pretty tolerantly treated I must say) I have never seen, read or talked to a Scot who didn't hack, gag and cough at the very mention of Tories. Yet supposedly some 16-18% of Scots do vote Tory. Are all of the Tory voters transplanted English or what? (Except for the Tories in Holyrood who I don't consider to count)
Explain please. Is there a garden where they are grown from rootstock out of decent Scots' sight? Just wondering. =)
Complain about this comment
#141 I was a bit confused there ... First Minister Jack McConnell ? Then i saw the date .. 2006 ! The Daily Mail is a pile of p**h anyway i doubt the anti Scottish sentiment is what they reckon. Certainly i wasnt lynched the last 2 times i was there this year.
Complain about this comment
140. Scarymannie
"I think it will be game on from now with the media."
And good for Mr. Salmond!
Complain about this comment
142. JRMacClure
"Is there a garden where they are grown from rootstock out of decent Scots' sight? Just wondering. =)"
I hope everyone realizes I'm joking about that part (but I do wonder who the Tory voters are). As an American, I'm pretty neutral on the lib/con/libdem thing in spite of making fun of them and what sympathies I have go to the ones who I've come to admire which is 95% SNP (making an exception for Malcolm Chisholm).
None of the big parties seem any too honest OR concerned about the people. We have the same problem over here and a more entrenched big party system if anything, by the way.
Complain about this comment
142. At 02:19am on 01 Apr 2010, JRMacClure wrote:
"Who ARE these mysterious disappearing Scots who vote Tory? ...
... Are all of the Tory voters transplanted English or what? "
Not at all, we're an extremely conservative-minded race generally, it's just that the ones who actually vote Tory these days tend to keep quiet about it out of guilt...
Complain about this comment
142.
When my father first arrived in the UK, he voted Tory. He equated the unions with the communists back home and agreed with Thatcher that they must be stopped at all costs.
With the expansion of the EU, we've seen a greater influx of people from former communist states, and it is possible that they many of them are also voting Tory for similar reasons.
My dad has stopped voting Tory in the 26 years between then and now, partly because he felt that Scotland should have a far greater say in its affairs and because Alex Salmond was one of the few to criticise the UK & NATO's actions in Serbia, and partly because in 2001 he went to the polling station and was told he wasn't allowed to vote in UK elections because he was not a British citizen,(he can still vote in Holyrood elections as a resident of Scotland).
Complain about this comment
#123:
JRMacC; thank you and I guess it had to be shoved in my face, before I was prepared to get fired-up about it!
There's nothing worse than a reply from a public-servant which patronises and wastes our time by pointing out "here are our rules; be aware that they are for our own good and that we may use, change and/or add to them as we see fit!"
Back on topic; good to hear Mr Brewer received a drubbing by Eck and as far as the Tory vote in Scotland goes, we'll definitely hear a clatter of closet-doors opening after Independence is acheived. A Scottish Conservative Party or equivalent would appeal to a great number of Scots, if my informal research is anything to go by!
Complain about this comment
148. gt-cri
I've been looking for that interview and can't seem to find it. Does anyone have a link?
Complain about this comment
Yes Auldbob, and how many of those Welsh and Scots MP's are Labour thus keeping a minority party incharge of England.
Complain about this comment
#123. At 10:17pm on 31 Mar 2010, JRMacClure:
Indeed it is becoming increasingly obvious that any form of defence against an attack upon Scotland, Scottish people or the Scottish government will be blocked. I found an e-mail in my inbox this morning. I have read it several times and see nothing wrong with it other than it was a reply against a quite abusive attack upon Scottish MPs. Now I expect to see this one also withdrawn as I'm about to use the only word in my reply that could remotely be described as, "abusive". I did use the phrase, "I thought I had lived long enough to have heard all the silly ideas - but no - there is always some numptie who comes up with a new one". Now if that is termed an abuse they should also remove this post.
Complain about this comment
150. SnoddersB
And how many MORE English MPs are Labour. Do a little math, for heaven's sake. Scotland may be their heartland but they couldn't win if the ENGLISH didn't vote for them too. Scotland has 59 MPs TOTAL. Out of 650 MPs in the House of Commons.
Labour has 346 MPs at the moment. So don't blame Scotland that ENGLAND voted in by far most of the Labour MPs and made Gordon Brown Prime Minister. If ENGLAND have voted Tory, it wouldn't have mattered how the Scots voted. But they didn't--so stop blaming other people for what YOU did.
Complain about this comment
Again we have those peddling the myth that English taxpayers are subsidising Scotland.
If the UK in 2005 produced 1,870,000 barrels of oil per day Here in 2005 and there are 158.7 litres of oil in a barrel Here then that equals 297,143,000 litres per day (1,870,000x158.9)or 105,782,908,000 litres per year (297,143,000x356) and the UK charges $1 of taxes on every litre of oil Here and the current exchange rate between the dollar and the Pound is 65p per dollar Here then that amounts to £68,758,890,200 per year (105,782,908,000x0.65) going into the UK treasury.
Isn't that considerable more than we get from the Barnett formula?
This is taking into account all the other taxes raised in Scotland. People might forget that whisky is the fourth largest export of the UK. The truth is that Scotland donates more money to the UK treasury than it receives back. People like RE are playing around with figures trying to make it look like the Scots need to be in the UK. In reality, we would be much better off, financially, if we were to leave. It is not Scotland that would suffer if it were to leave the Union; it is England. Quite a large chunk of its current revenues would cease to go into the treasury's purse. Eventually, when Scotland builds its own refineries, England will be obliged to buy our oil, our whisky, our electricity and possibly our gas. This is not something that the UK government wishes to contemplate.
Complain about this comment
# 150 SnoddersB
No where near the amount of English Labour MPs keeping a minority party in charge of England.
Complain about this comment
# 152 JRMacClure
You beat me to it.
Complain about this comment
# 153 you
"This is taking into account all the other taxes raised in Scotland."
It should, of course, be 'NOT taking into account'.
Complain about this comment
#141. At 01:13am on 01 Apr 2010, dbbaye wrote:"Interesting reading about the Barnett formula".
There is nothing of great interest in that, 23 June 2006, newspaper article. The lies in its first sentence are too easy to spot, "The Labour peer who invented the system by which billions of pounds of English taxpayers' money is diverted to Scotland said the system should be scrapped because it is unfair".
It is the same old deliberate mixed up, 'English=United Kingdom/United Kingdom=England', propaganda again. So whatever follows after that first statement has to be utter tosh. There is no such thing as an English Treasury so it is UK funding for Scotland not English funding.
Complain about this comment
My goodness me !
This blog is still alive and kicking, now ain't that sumthin'!
Complain about this comment
Oh and worth mentioning my Tory list MSP is standing for Westminster this year and has a great deal of backing from the farming community hereabouts...always helps to come from a background where in this case money can be found readily...he won't win but may push the incumbent. Second place is more likely and the SNP may well be a close third.
Doesn't stop me voting for them.
Complain about this comment
#149
[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00rwqbl/b00rwq9m/Newsnight_Scotland_29_03_2010/]Ouch![/url]
Complain about this comment
#149: JRMacC,
Try here, since you have the "freedom" and the bandwidth from your "I" s "P" to do so:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00rwrjz/Newsnight_Scotland_31_03_2010/
It's not available where I am but I heard it was entertaining from a good source back home.
Complain about this comment
I see that Gordon Brown has been accused (again) of a 'terminological inexactitude'.
Brown admits 'misusing' immigration statistics
This seems to getting a habit with 'Oor Gordon'.
Complain about this comment
#158: Diabloandco
roughly 4hrs 20mins before shut-in; or shut-out to be more precise.
Wonder if they have an hourglass which shows our torment-level and if we pour water on them, they'll melt? ;-)
Complain about this comment
#160 I will get the hang of BBCodes eventually!
Complain about this comment
#150. At 06:53am on 01 Apr 2010, SnoddersB wrote:"Yes Auldbob, and how many of those Welsh and Scots MP's are Labour thus keeping a minority party incharge of England".
Do you actually contend that it matters a jot how many of the Welsh & Scots MPs are Labour? Can you not do simple arithmatic?
The party numbers in Westminster are, Labour 345; Conservative 193; Democratic Unionist 8; Independent 8; Independent Conservative 1; Independent Labour 1; Liberal Democrat 63; Plaid Cymru 3; Respect 1; Scottish National 7; Sinn Fein 5; Social Democratic & Labour Party 3; Speaker and Deputies 4.
I will not confuse you further with the others but there are 345 Labour MPs and 193 Conservative MPs, (including the Scots and Welsh). That is a Labour majority of 152 over the Conservatives.
Now there are 59 Scottish MPs and 40 Welsh MPs, so that adds up to 99 MPs.
So, even if all the Welsh and Scots MPs were Labour, the Labour majority over the Conservatives is 152 and if we take away the 99 Scots+Welsh MPs that still leaves a Labour majority over the Conservatives at Westminster of 53.
Now I have not even factored in the Welsh+Scots MPs who are Conservatives, (or NOT Labour), so just how did you come to the strange conclusion that the Scots & Welsh MPs have given England a minority government?
Complain about this comment
#160 bmc875
"[url=.....]Ouch![/url]"
Good try, but for "pretty" links you need to use regular HTML.
If you had entered
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00rwqbl/b00rwq9m/Newsnight_Scotland_29_03_2010/">Ouch!</a>
it would have appeared as:
Ouch!
Complain about this comment
#164 bmc875
"I will get the hang of BBCodes eventually!"
If you want to check out what HTML works on BBC blogs, see my #84 on the New ways into blogs thread, where there are other code tests. For the character set and changes to the blogs that happened a year ago, see here.
Complain about this comment
150.SnoddersB wrote:
"Yes Auldbob, and how many of those Welsh and Scots MP's are Labour thus keeping a minority party incharge of England."
At the 2005 election, there were 355 Labour MPs elected to the UK parliment. 40 of these came from Scotland and 29 from Wales and 286 were elected from English constituencies.
At the 2005 election, there were 198 tory mps elected. 1 came from Scotland and 3 from Wales, leaving 194 elected from English constituencies.
Of the 633 mps in the UK Parliament 59 are Scottish, 40 Welsh and 18 Northern Irish (total 117). This leaves 516 English MPs.
Labour had 286 out of 516 and hence a does not require any support from Scottish or Welsh mps i.e Labour has a majority in England.
Since then Labour have lost 10 seats and the tories have lost 5.
You can check these figures if you like on the UK Parliament web site. It is under, "Current state of the parties."
Complain about this comment
#153. At 07:50am on 01 Apr 2010, gedguy2 wrote:"Again we have those peddling the myth that English taxpayers are subsidising Scotland".
It goes even deeper than that. If we read the many claims made they usually start off with one glaring lie. England is substituted for The UK of GB & NI, in the figures given. Everything that precedes or follows such a glaring error is therefore rubbish. Add to this the simple fact that England is funded as if she, and she alone, were the UK and the lies get more obvious. Not only do the official United Kingdom figures used, in place of the English figures, give the claims a lie but the added Extra-Regio incomes do not take into account that around 98% of them come out of Scottish waters. Then we have the figures for Crown Properties Rents and Incomes which are also included in those United Kingdom figures they are using instead of proper English figures and, again, much of that income comes from outwith Enbgland. If you look at some of the silly claims made on this very forum, like the one claiming Scots and Welsh voters gave England a government she never voted for, and it becomes obvious there are either a great many innumerate people in England or a great many who think there are a great many innumerate Scots who will not notice the numerical lies they tell.
Complain about this comment
@ 7
That is absolutely unacceptable. We are PAYING for this blog and I am NOT willing to accept this reduction in service, especially when other BBC blogs are not suffering from the same reduction.
I think we need to pursue this to it's fullest.
Complain about this comment
#153
Gedguy2
If the "arc of prosperity" is still alive, then why isn't Alex Salmond screaming at the top of his voice about a more prosperous Independent Scotland, instead of trying to secure deals with the westminster parliament on the block-grant?.
Complain about this comment
# 169 Auld Bob
If what you are saying is true, and I have no reason to doubt you, then it points to the UK Government lying to the Scottish people for years about the wealth generated in Scotland.It could be viewed that our neighbour (England) has stolen our wealth and is dealing a smaller percentage back to us. While at the same time telling us that we should be thankful for what we get off them. Basically the same technic that the UK used, during its empire days, to rip of the rest of the world.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
# 171 kered
"instead of trying to secure deals with the westminster parliament on the block-grant?."
Surely that's a good thing to do for the Scots. The political system that we are in at the moment calls for political expediency.
I'm not to sure about listening to a 'screaming' Alex Salmond but I do believe that he hasn't yet changed his views on independence.
Complain about this comment
Interesting to see at the end of this website's Council debates Purcell departure that the by-election for his replacement in the Drumchapel and Anniesland ward will be held on 6 May - yet another indication of the UK general election date, methinks.
In May 2007, Purcell was 2nd to Cllr Paul Carey on 1st preferences, with all three Lab candidates being elected, plus Bll Kidd of the SNP. The first preference vote shares were:
60.39%, Lab
21.53%, SNP
4.75%, Con
4.02%, L-D
3.00%, Grn
2.57%, Solidarity
2.04%, SUP
1.71%, SSP
As there will be only one candidate elected this time, it's obvious that Lab will be favourites, but if their 60.39% first preferences can be pushed below 50% life could become interesting as the least popular candidates get squeezed out.
Complain about this comment
#174
Gedguy2
The point would be? that if Scotland was certain to be wealthier under Independence, then surely the logical political programme to follow, would be the call to send more than halve(59) the number of Scottish SNP MP's
to westminster.
Complain about this comment
#167 In your debt Sir. Thanks
Complain about this comment
#171. At 09:40am on 01 Apr 2010, kered wrote:"If the "arc of prosperity" is still alive, then why isn't Alex Salmond screaming at the top of his voice about a more prosperous Independent Scotland, instead of trying to secure deals with the westminster parliament on the block-grant?."
Might one ask is, (?.),a question or just the end of a statement?
I'll treat it as a question even although your intention is unclear.
The simple answer is that the present circumstance is the looming General Election for a Westminster Government. The matter of Salmond's recent dealings with the three main Westminster party leaders has to do with that matter.
As to the little matter of a prosperous independent Scotland the facts are unchanged and an independent Scotland would indeed be a prosperous independent nation. Using current United Kingdom Treasury figures shows that Scotland's income, under such independent circumstances, would indeed make Scotland a rich nation and far better off than her present linkage to the United Kingdom.
Can you produce official figures to show that she would NOT be better of?
Remember that the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland figures DO NOT equate to being those of England and ONLY English figures can show the true facts. For example, "Extra-regio", "Crown Property Rents and Incomes", and VAT, Vehicle Excise License, TV Licence and Hydro-carbon excise duty are NOT English income as these are, among many others, United Kingdom incomes and thus partly Scottish. I look forward to your educated calculations to prove your oft expressed views.
Complain about this comment
153. gedguy2
There is no question as to Scotland's contribution, I think that the problem is that Scotland doesn't subsidise England enough!
Too many of us up here can now afford shoes, while many in England can't afford the latest BMW.
But it is not something we should worry ourselves about, Mr Darling or Mr Osborne will soon see to that after the election. The rape of the Scottish economy will continue apace.
Complain about this comment
170. MartinOfBothwell wrote:
"I think we need to pursue this to it's fullest."
Indeen Martin, all the way to independence. Many in the Scottish media should be asking themselves this question; what is more important, the respect of the Scottish public, or the OBE? (Clue: The OBE won't be worth a jot after independence)
Complain about this comment
PS to my #175
GCC seems to be having lots of web traffic this morning and http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/ is currently giving a Server Too Busy error, but later anyone wanting to check the 2007 stats for Drumchapel and Anniesland should find them here.
There was a by-election on 4 June 2009 when SNP Cllr Bill Kidd stood down to concentrate on his MSP duties. This was won by Anne McTaggart, who managed only 48.44% of first preferences, and it took four exclusions [Ind then BNP then Grn then Con] for her to be elected. This bodes pretty well for 2010 being an even more protracted process. Details should become available here.
The details for this year's Drumchapel and Anniesland should also become available here.
Complain about this comment
#172. At 09:48am on 01 Apr 2010, gedguy2 wrote:"what you are saying is true, and I have no reason to doubt you, then it points to the UK Government lying to the Scottish people for years about the wealth generated in Scotland".
You got it in one. All I ask is that when you examine any claims made to the effect that Scotland is subsidised by England you note whether the quoted figures for England are actually English figures. English figures are usually never quoted. The lie is to use UK figures as if these were English. This goes for both finance and employment/unemployment figures.
Just for example have a look at - Stats
Complain about this comment
#177 bmc875
You're most welcome. If you're a Firefox user, you should check out mrbfaethedee's excellent bbc comment responder, used by many here to reply to comments. The code it produces can be easily modified by anyone to produce "pretty" links to any web page.
PS: GCC web server now working again, albeit slowly.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#169. At 09:28am on 01 Apr 2010, Auld Bob wrote:
#153. At 07:50am on 01 Apr 2010, gedguy2 wrote:"Again we have those peddling the myth that English taxpayers are subsidising Scotland".
Whilst I agree that England subsidising Scotland is a myth, I've got a real problem with the numbers in the sum at 153. That ends up showing £68.7 billion (GBP) going to the UK treasury from North sea oil. I'm sorry but I think the working is wrong.
You have a barrel of oil of 157l. You have a UK tax on oil at $1 a litre.
That would make a barrel of Brent crude start at $157 - it's around $82. I don't think we'd be flogging much at $239 a barrel. I think the $1 per litre of UK tax on oil has come from the excise duty and VAT on the refined products petrol and diesel.
Even that doesn't generate that income number. One litre of crude doesn't yield a litre of the refined product - it's much less. And the final issue would be that even if the equivalent of the whole of the North Sea output was being refined and sold at the pump across the UK. If Scotland and England were separated - then tax take at the point of sale would go to the government of that point of sale. Very roughly 90% of any number conjured from that total would be "English" and 10% "Scots". Further, the tax take at the point of sale in England would still be the same if all their crude was sourced from the Middle East.
The number I've seen published for UK North Sea oil revenue show it to be combined petroleum revenue tax and corporation tax. The petroleum revenue tax is on profits generated not per litre of crude produced.
That's a fairly modest £6.4 billion (GBP) last year - less than half the year before, projected to recover next year to £8.5 billion (GBP).
My point is that where there are spurious numeric arguments directed against your position, you have to be rock certain of any you deploy. I stand prepared to be corrected on my fag packet working.
Complain about this comment
The Taxpayers Alliance New Research: "Town Hall Rich List 2010: The 1,250 people in councils earning over £100,000
John O'Connell, Policy Analyst at the TaxPayers' Alliance, said:
"Town Hall bosses have had a very good recession at taxpayers' expense. More of them than ever are earning massive amounts, and they even enjoyed a healthy pay rise while everyone else was suffering pay freezes, cuts or redundancies. It is unfair that these public servants have been having a whale of a time while the ordinary taxpayers who fund their generous deals have been struggling to survive the recession. Now that most councils are in financial trouble, these senior managers must take serious pay cuts to help make ends meet."
I haven't linked to the report as it is a PDF. You will find a link on their website to the report.
I notice that the chief executive in Glasgow is one W.G.Black.
5. At 1:58pm on 31 Mar 2010, raisethegame wrote:I've just got a reply from Brian's 'blog team' Re my complaint:
Regards,
Andrew Black,
Senior broadcast journalist, politics,
BBC Scotland news website
I wonder if there is any connection? It would make a lot of sense to me if there was.
Complain about this comment
178. Auld Bob
Bob the question really is why is Alex not using every single electoral battle as an opportunity to demonstrate Scotland's overwhelming majority in favour of Independence?
Alec moans that the other parties are denying us our right to a vote on the issue. They can't deny us a vote at the election. If as the SNP argue the Scots are in favour of independence then if we elect 30 or 40 SNP MP's then Alec has a mandate for independence. 20 would probably do. there will never be an easier sell to the people of Scotland, labour is a party in crisis, the only alternative is the SNP. It would seem to be pushing against an open door.
Instead his argument appears to be, vote SNP and we might get more of the UK cake, if they need us, otherwise well you get nothing... Almost accepting defeat it appears to me.
Complain about this comment
PS to my 186
Some of the information contained in the taxpayers Alliance report is eye-wateringly shocking. The comment from John O'Connell of the alliance doesn't even begin to tell the whole story. Note especially the GCC.
Complain about this comment
#180. At 10:31am on 01 Apr 2010, X_Sticks wrote:"The OBE won't be worth a jot after independence".
The SNP had already, (before the Leader's Debates thing), threatened to do away with the BBC as the Nationally Funded Broadcasters in an Independent Scotland. Perhaps this is what has led to the present BBC pro-Labour Party bias. I doubt it, though. It is probably not so much a BBC Pro-Labour bias as a Pro-Establishment bias. There is no doubt the first, "B", in BBC stands for British and that is the Establishment. I would postulate that if the biggest, (Westminster based),opposition party in Scotland had been the Conservatives the Establishment bias would have been for Tory against the SNP. The daft thing is that an independent Scottish Government, (of any political shade), would still require a nationally funded broadcaster and there would be no reason the BBC could still fill that bill. After all just because the Union of the Parliaments had ended there would still be a United Kingdom - there has been no move to ditch the monarchy and Lizzie is still Queen of Scots.
Complain about this comment
I wonder if this could happen in any other country in the world?
A foreign owned newspaper slagging off Scotland's First Minister for trying to get money that is Scotland's released from the Westminster treasury.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/2010/04/01/alex-salmond-sent-packing-by-labour-and-lib-dems-after-seeking-hung-parliament-cash-for-support-deal-86908-22153344/
They are celebrating the fact that Scotland did not get this money. Some people still pay to read this! you could not make it up.
Complain about this comment
Brown defied Bank of England warning over his £6bn gold giveaway
http://tinyurl.com/y8htdob
Complain about this comment
189. Auld Bob
Totally agree Bob, it IS the establishment that we are up against here, not just any one political party. As someone mentioned earlier Wee Eck seems to get on quite well with Brenda, so I don't expect us to turn into a republic anytime soon. Independence would do fine for me.
Complain about this comment
#191 tullibardine
"Brown defied Bank of England warning over his £6bn gold giveaway"
Thanks for the heads up and what a shock that it doesn't seem to appear anywhere on this website. What odds that it will be the topic of Brian's next thread?
Complain about this comment
North Highlander:
#187.
"Bob the question really is why is Alex not using every single electoral battle as an opportunity to demonstrate Scotland's overwhelming majority in favour of Independence?"
Because even nationalists are concerned about providing for their families, the constituational arrangements will always come second compared with the personal circumstances of the individual. This is natural. Then again, not every battle can avoid the SNPs record of their minority administration. They have to defend aswell as argue for the future.
"Alec moans that the other parties are denying us our right to a vote on the issue. They can't deny us a vote at the election. If as the SNP argue the Scots are in favour of independence then if we elect 30 or 40 SNP MP's then Alec has a mandate for independence."
It does not work like that. It's not SNP policy to withdraw from the political union without a referendum, so your making things up as you go along to fit your agenda, which I find as misleading. You may support the SNP for different reasons, I certainly suspect the SNP may gain votes as the only party willing to argue for more funding to help protect their constinuency and Scotland from cuts. That's the position I would expect all elected officials to take, why would we elect someone not willing to work in our interests?
"Instead his argument appears to be, vote SNP and we might get more of the UK cake, if they need us, otherwise well you get nothing... Almost accepting defeat it appears to me."
His argument is quite simple, as the only party willing to wheel and deal for more funding. It's better compared to the other three parties admitting the cuts will be worse then Thatcher. What else do you expect?
You know, it's amazing individuals still see reasons to argue against the SNP for the sake of arguing against the group. The SNP as the sole party willing to fight for more money for Scotland should be attractive to all concerned, why the hell would you willingly accept cuts to your public services?
If I were an elected official I certainly would screw over the entire country to ensure the people I elect have their interests protected. Thats kinda the point of elected a representative.
Complain about this comment
The operative word being 'HUNG', then possibly adding 'DRAWN' & 'QUARTERED' seems appropriate for all hailing to be trustworthy politicians! Whats the diffrence between now and the likes of the 'BORGIAS' (think I spelt that correctly)
Complain about this comment
#192. At 11:58am on 01 Apr 2010, X_Sticks wrote:"Totally agree Bob, it IS the establishment that we are up against here, not just any one political party.
The trouble is the subject has been made ever more complex by the establishment since it was established in 1707. I've been banging on a bit, of late, about the Crown Estates Rentals & Incomes. This is a massive hidden income to HM Treasury. Like the Extra-Regio incomes it is first disguised as UK income by the establishment but is then trotted out in the mis-information to prove how poor Scotland is. This always takes the shape of calling UK of GB & NI incomes English income for the sake of their, (the establishment's), arguament. We must always keep in mind that there are no direct English income or expendature figures as the Establishments UK funding system has NI, Wales & Scotland devolved and with capped block grants. There is, though, no English Block grant and, as England is funded as the UK, and UK funding is not capped. It almost always thus overspends. Then, of course, they use the UK figures as if they are those of England, (Only when it suits them though). You will find how it is done by reading this - The Great Deception
Complain about this comment
194. Tom
"It's not SNP policy to withdraw from the political union without a referendum"
I never said it was. However it is entirely logical that a majority vote for the SNP would make it impossible for the other parties at Holyrood to vote any referendum proposal down. Simple logic really.
"why the hell would you willingly accept cuts to your public services"
Everyone has to accept the realities of the financial mess we are in. All politicians got us into the mess, none were arguing for the type of controls needed to avoid the mess. What Alec should be arguing for is a fair share of the pain. Why should we expect someone else to suffer disproportionally?
What he should be working on is how to deliver more in the public sector for less. Making our services more efficient. Looking at some sacred cows and deciding if they are really necessary. Things like pre-school education, the first kids that enjoyed this came through standard grade last year. Where was the improvement in performance? There has been none, across any indicator. Why therefore continue a policy that doesn't work.
We need fresh ideas, not more old politics.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
185. WestCountryScot
Surely you are not suggesting that GedGuy may be guilty of factual inaccuracies? Not possible. Scotland is getting ripped off here, makes them feel much better why let a few simple facts get in the way of a good story?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS