Stuart Dickson Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) Oh look Barclays don't have a problem with Independence http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26138893 ...obviously the boss was too scared of salmond and all those nasty nationalists to tell the truth They didn't say they didn't have a problem with it. They said they think they would be able to make it work either way. Still I'm glad you Nats have one bank to hang your hat on even if it is extremely tenuous and an English bank with an English HQ. Independence clearly means dependence on London..... Edited February 11, 2014 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 It's not me that was implying university figures are scared to speak out - it was the principle of St Andrews University who had promised that she will protect her staff's freedom of speech no matter what view they hold. There's more and more reports of the Natsi intimidation campaign though throughout Scotland. I wonder what the Scottish Version of the Brown Shirts is and I wonder if they've read up on their history and know what happens next. :roilleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 It's not me that was implying university figures are scared to speak out - it was the principle of St Andrews University who had promised that she will protect her staff's freedom of speech no matter what view they hold. There's more and more reports of the Natsi intimidation campaign though throughout Scotland. I wonder what the Scottish Version of the Brown Shirts is and I wonder if they've read up on their history and know what happens next. :roilleyes: Stuart Dickson is a bare faced Liar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 They didn't say they didn't have a problem with it. They said they think they would be able to make it work either way. Still I'm glad you Nats have one bank to hang your hat on even if it is extremely tenuous and an English bank with an English HQ. Independence clearly means dependence on London..... The banking industy is global and they operate as such. Where they have their HQ doesnt really matter. What matters is that the boss of Barclays has said independence isnt an issue. The govnor of BOE said it would be his job to make sure currency union worked. Better Together - running out of scare stories Stuart Dickson is a bare faced liar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bart Simpson Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) Nah, it's well known that Salmond has been desperate to get Cameron to have a live TV debate with him prior to the referendum. Cameron has said that the Better Together campaign chose Darling as their leader and it would be wrong of him to act as Better Together's representative without a mandate. Cameron is quite right too. In the meantime though Salmond runs scared of Darling and refuses to have a TV debate with him. The tactics are clear. The Yes campaign want to tell those who don't like Salmond and Sturgeon that it's not about personalities - yet as usual with the Nats they want it both ways and they want to use Scottish prejudice against "Posh English Conservatives" to win votes by making it about David Cameron. It's pathetic really I don't know what the survey on immigration was about but I can't see why the No campaign would want to fight on a mandate of anything other than the status quo. There's certainty in what we all know - whether individuals like it or not. The campaign may move to offer Devo Max futher on in the campaign, certainly a lot of people seem to expect that to be the likely outcome anyway. As for immigration surely Scotland, Independent or not, would have to fall into line with the rest of the UK on that policy anyway - either that or accept that there will have to be the dreaded border patrols between Scotland and England. I believe it was a social attitudes survey. http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-26020982 Whilst I can only surmise having not read the study in full, there are stand out figures suggesting Scotland should not be (and is not) in-line with England and Wales at least in terms of public perception of the issue. Furthermore, ardent no campaigners such as the Scottish Labour Party have voiced their wish that Scotland has more control over immigration to help combat a declining population, in recent years. Perhaps control of all issues that are of national relevance to Scotland should have a local solution? Why would there be a need for border patrols? As for the debate, I'd accept your point if David Cameron had a mandate to govern Scotland. How many ConDem MPs are there in Scotland? I accept we live in a democracy and the coalition in Westminster have been democratically elected to govern Britain, but when they have no mandate in Scotland and control reserved issues such as immigration, where Scotland has a different need and apparent tolerance on the issue well that's not democratic at all. ETA: spelling mainly...and location of Edited February 11, 2014 by Bart Simpson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Better Together - running out of scare stories.I doubt it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26147783 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 I doubt it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26147783 Don't ya just love those inverted commas in a headline... At least they are using the word "likely" as opposed to the usual suspects "could" or "may" It'll be interesting to see what he actually says on the subject since so far he has had plenty of chance to rule out currency union but hasn't actually done it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 As for the debate, I'd accept your point if David Cameron had a mandate to govern Scotland. How many ConDem MPs are there in Scotland? I accept we live in a democracy and the coalition in Westminster have been democratically elected to govern Britain, but when they have no mandate in Scotland and control reserved issues such as immigration, where Scotland has a different need and apparent tolerance on the issue well that's not democratic at all. ETA: spelling mainly... Similarly, I have tried to point out that the SNP mainly have a mandate to govern the Central Belt. The northern Isles, in particular, have never been keen on Edinburgh rule - and only recently (as I said in an earlier post), inverness/Aberdeen politicians are upset at the "Scottish" government diverting capital from the north to that central belt. Democracy is what it is: you win some, lose many. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bart Simpson Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Similarly, I have tried to point out that the SNP mainly have a mandate to govern the Central Belt. The northern Isles, in particular, have never been keen on Edinburgh rule - and only recently (as I said in an earlier post), inverness/Aberdeen politicians are upset at the "Scottish" government diverting capital from the north to that central belt. Democracy is what it is: you win some, lose many. I take your point, but in terms of location of SNP vote, I'd imagine there is a north-east bias, if any, rather than a central belt one. However my point wasn't based on party politics, simply pointing out that Scotland on this issue has an acute problem that it is unable to address despite apparently having less ill will towards the idea of immigration in general.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bart Simpson Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) Similarly, I have tried to point out that the SNP mainly have a mandate to govern the Central Belt. The northern Isles, in particular, have never been keen on Edinburgh rule - and only recently (as I said in an earlier post), inverness/Aberdeen politicians are upset at the "Scottish" government diverting capital from the north to that central belt. Democracy is what it is: you win some, lose many. Besides, there is nothing wrong with local politicians sticking up for local issues and trying to get the best their constituency/area? The SNP govern in Holyrood having put this spin on things, being the only party to look out for Scotland's needs. There is a finite pool of resource simply a question of how best to use it and often the squeaky wheel gets oiled first... ETA: unintentionally left the opening sentence antagonistic, which I've tried to change. Edited February 11, 2014 by Bart Simpson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 Don't ya just love those inverted commas in a headline... At least they are using the word "likely" as opposed to the usual suspects "could" or "may" It'll be interesting to see what he actually says on the subject since so far he has had plenty of chance to rule out currency union but hasn't actually done it. The inverted commas are an irrelevance.There's more than just 'sources' close to Osborne... http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/11/main-parties-rule-out-scottish-currency-union Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 Besides, there is nothing wrong with local politicians sticking up for local issues and trying to get the best their constituency/area? The SNP govern in Holyrood having put this spin on things, being the only party to look out for Scotland's needs. There is a finite pool of resource simply a question of how best to use it and often the squeaky wheel gets oiled first... ETA: unintentionally left the opening sentence antagonistic, which I've tried to change. I agree with you Bart. Local politicians sticking up for local issues and trying to get the best for those who voted them into power is the ideal. We have that at Westminster. MP's are directly elected by a majority vote for the residents in the electoral ward they represent. Sadly the Scottish Parliament didn't operate under the same circumstances. Around 40% of current MSP's weren't elected by a majority vote anywhere, instead they got in through the back door on the "Regional List". Who exactly do those MSP's represent? Worse, we also currently have two MSP's who were elected through the Regional List on the basis of the SNP's share of the vote who have since resigned the SNP whip. They currently represent no-one except themselves but they still get paid full MSP salaries and they are able to continue to claim expenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bart Simpson Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 I agree with you Bart. Local politicians sticking up for local issues and trying to get the best for those who voted them into power is the ideal. We have that at Westminster. MP's are directly elected by a majority vote for the residents in the electoral ward they represent. Sadly the Scottish Parliament didn't operate under the same circumstances. Around 40% of current MSP's weren't elected by a majority vote anywhere, instead they got in through the back door on the "Regional List". Who exactly do those MSP's represent? Worse, we also currently have two MSP's who were elected through the Regional List on the basis of the SNP's share of the vote who have since resigned the SNP whip. They currently represent no-one except themselves but they still get paid full MSP salaries and they are able to continue to claim expenses. That's a politicians answer and not addressing the point I raised.Taking you up on it, there is excess somewhere when we are potentially over represented with local council, Holyrood, Westminster and Europe, I simply disagree with you on where that excess is. List MSPs are not ideal, but neither is first past the post perfect and the current set up at Holyrood tries to find a happy medium and be more representative which can only be commended. I'm not defending politicians, there was an expenses fiasco at Westminster recently was there not and was there not also an MP on the TV recently who got intentionally lost in the Australian jungle whilst representing her constituency? So surely scandals and money wasting are not simply reserved to Holyrood? Further thoughts on immigration or the lack thereof and local solutions to this reserved issue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 That's a politicians answer and not addressing the point I raised. Taking you up on it, there is excess somewhere when we are potentially over represented with local council, Holyrood, Westminster and Europe, I simply disagree with you on where that excess is. List MSPs are not ideal, but neither is first past the post perfect and the current set up at Holyrood tries to find a happy medium and be more representative which can only be commended. I'm not defending politicians, there was an expenses fiasco at Westminster recently was there not and was there not also an MP on the TV recently who got intentionally lost in the Australian jungle whilst representing her constituency? So surely scandals and money wasting are not simply reserved to Holyrood? Further thoughts on immigration or the lack thereof and local solutions to this reserved issue? The point I was making about immigration is that if Scotland was to follow a different policy on immigration from England then it would be impossible to operate an open border, because the first thing that would happen is that the immigrant would land in Scotland, be processed in Scotland and then f**k off to England where they most likely would prefer to be. We'd have a real problem containing them in Scotland, unless of course the plan is to put them into concentration camps. I agree there is an excess of political establishments. Personally I think we were all doing just fine before the European Parliament started interfering with everyday life and we certainly didn't need devolution. Westminster has it's flaws and a tightening up of regulations would be very welcome - as would a complete reform of the House of Lords - but over the course of 300 years it's served Scotland very well indeed. Scotland has always been well represented in the Houses of Parliament with many Scot's having served on cabinets of most if not all UK governments over the last 150 years. I can't understand why anyone would look at the current crop of MSP's and believe that we'd be better off if they were running the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 The inverted commas are an irrelevance. There's more than just 'sources' close to Osborne... http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/11/main-parties-rule-out-scottish-currency-union I just love the Natsi response. If they can't get to use the pound they'll not pay their debts. There goes the countries credit rating, interest rates will rocket and any argument that Scots will be better off will be blown away in seconds. The fact is if Salmond can't get monetary union with the Euro now the whole independence debate is f**ked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 I just love the Natsi response. If they can't get to use the pound they'll not pay their debts. There goes the countries credit rating, interest rates will rocket and any argument that Scots will be better off will be blown away in seconds. The fact is if Salmond can't get monetary union with the Euro now the whole independence debate is f**ked. you just make shit up all the time Stuart Dickson is a bare faced liar! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 The inverted commas are an irrelevance. There's more than just 'sources' close to Osborne... http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/11/main-parties-rule-out-scottish-currency-union They are not an irrelevance. The story has been given to the media a day or so ahead of osborne officially giving a statement - as is the way with modern politics. Given that the story from the horses mouth - they still aren't calling it definite, its still only "likely". I'm genuinely looking forward to what he has to say as so far he's said very little. As for balls... last month he was looking forward to working with salmond and snp (big assumption as he needs to be in government first). Has he flipped again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bart Simpson Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 (edited) The point I was making about immigration is that if Scotland was to follow a different policy on immigration from England then it would be impossible to operate an open border, because the first thing that would happen is that the immigrant would land in Scotland, be processed in Scotland and then f**k off to England where they most likely would prefer to be. We'd have a real problem containing them in Scotland, unless of course the plan is to put them into concentration camps. I agree there is an excess of political establishments. Personally I think we were all doing just fine before the European Parliament started interfering with everyday life and we certainly didn't need devolution. Westminster has it's flaws and a tightening up of regulations would be very welcome - as would a complete reform of the House of Lords - but over the course of 300 years it's served Scotland very well indeed. Scotland has always been well represented in the Houses of Parliament with many Scot's having served on cabinets of most if not all UK governments over the last 150 years. I can't understand why anyone would look at the current crop of MSP's and believe that we'd be better off if they were running the country. Ignoring the blatant inflammatory comments, do you not think that the 'good/great' Scottish Politicians in Westminster would subsequently be out of a job and therefore would need to be on the look out for new employment in Holyrood in the event of a Yes vote? As for immigration, open borders within the EU mean it is a difficult issue when one country has a need and another doesn't. However, it is still an issue that needs to be addressed and the status quo highlights the inadequacies of reserved power to individual Scottish needs within the UK. As for devolution, well I think you are in the minority and as I said in my opening points on this thread, as much as it is to your disgust, the majority of Scots believe that further control/Devo Max is the way to go. If this is the case regardless of the Yes campaign potentially ultimately falling short of independence, for now, it does suggest that not everyone is as happy as you are with Westminster. Whilst that result would also suggest that the majority of Scots still aren't quite ready for independence, it would suggest the momentum is moving away from your perspective. The squeaky wheel reference in the event of a No means if the No campaign don't come up with an alternative to the status quo, this whole process may start all over again fairly soon thereafter. You had better get the thinking cap back on rather than burying you head in the sand, people want change, it's just a question of how much and it's certainly not back to where you would want things to be. You can also use history in a number of different ways to suit your point...but the more recent past of x2 votes on devolution, our new Parliament, SNP government and a vote on independence and an apparent want for Devo Max from the population as a whole all point to one thing...the status quo isn't working. Edited February 12, 2014 by Bart Simpson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 (edited) Around 40% of current MSP's weren't elected by a majority vote anywhere, instead they got in through the back door on the "Regional List". Who exactly do those MSP's represent? ..... Change of plan. I'll come back when you stop talking shite and when you stop talking about brownshirts. Between you and bluto you are certainly keeping up the twat quota on this thread. Edited February 12, 2014 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maboza Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 I just love the Natsi response. If they can't get to use the pound they'll not pay their debts. There goes the countries credit rating, interest rates will rocket and any argument that Scots will be better off will be blown away in seconds. The fact is if Salmond can't get monetary union with the Euro now the whole independence debate is f**ked. Apart from the obvious fact that in this scenario, Scotland doesn't actually have any debt to default on. But, then, you already knew that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaside Nipper Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 Thought Nicola Sturgeon spoke well this morning , she is a clever one....................however it does not make her right. I mean it's quite obvious to me that Osborne has simply gone public re the shared currency in response to poll movements recently, a cheap and tawdry, yet totally predicatble and legitimate piece of politics imo.......... Anyway, I was quite struck by her reference to being bullied I feel the same wrt the minimum pricing per unit on alcohol. Am I being bullied to accept it because as a policy she is keen on, she is attempting to drive this through but not in my name thank you very much. Educate the scally's don't apply yet another aherm, discretionary tax on me please ? It's also very similar to the disregard shown to local residents over planning consent awards where a national policy is adopted ( green agendas , telecomms agendas, wind agendas ) by the majority Government and it's imposition on local communities and residents is simply tough. Protest,fine, but you'll lose, be ignored, be patronised. Is this not akin to bullying then, by spinning your own agenda .............................jist asking like ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 I had to laugh at George Osborne trying to sound fierce over currency union... There was me thinking that the UK as it stands, and as it may become was a democracy, and that Osborne goes to great lengths to emphasise the independence of the bank of england... yet when the Tories are f**ked in the polls he seems to be saying he'll prevent monetary union.... Oh George... bless... you can't keep your snout out of the nose candy never mind dictate to scotland what it can or can't have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E=Mc2 Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 What's with "The money is no object" approach by David Cameron? If the world's weather patterns wish to turn the flat lands of the south of England into something similar to the rugged west coast of Scotland then how much will preventing that cost us? Will he spend £1m putting a defense around a £0.5m house? How often are we going to hear the phrase "but you said last February" being uttered as we approach the next general election? Or will the British Minister spend his way back to Downing Street by keeping the Conservative shires happy? I wish someone would tell me the advantages of staying part of the UK as I find it difficult not to shake my head every time I hear our present UK Government open their mouths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bart Simpson Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 Thought Nicola Sturgeon spoke well this morning , she is a clever one....................however it does not make her right. I mean it's quite obvious to me that Osborne has simply gone public re the shared currency in response to poll movements recently, a cheap and tawdry, yet totally predicatble and legitimate piece of politics imo.......... Anyway, I was quite struck by her reference to being bullied I feel the same wrt the minimum pricing per unit on alcohol. Am I being bullied to accept it because as a policy she is keen on, she is attempting to drive this through but not in my name thank you very much. Educate the scally's don't apply yet another aherm, discretionary tax on me please ? It's also very similar to the disregard shown to local residents over planning consent awards where a national policy is adopted ( green agendas , telecomms agendas, wind agendas ) by the majority Government and it's imposition on local communities and residents is simply tough. Protest,fine, but you'll lose, be ignored, be patronised. Is this not akin to bullying then, by spinning your own agenda .............................jist asking like ?? I'm not disagreeing with the comments about politicians and using spin to suit their own agenda, but the minimal pricing for alcohol is not politically driven. It is driven by Health Professionals throughout Europe and as alcohol problems are particularly rife in Scotland the Scottish Government is attempting to implement a local solution to a local problem. There is a big difference.The fact it is not a tax and actually simply forcing drinks companies to charge more for their produce highlights the fact that they know the bulk of their profit comes from dependant drinkers and it is these people who will drink less. Why else would they have any problem with the opportunity to make a profit on individual drinks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 Osborne has completely lost the plot if he rules out monetary union before the vote takes place. It's a fascinating development. Can he really have thought this through? Does he genuinely believe that attempting to leave Scotland with no currency and the RUK shouldering the entire national debt is the best possible outcome? Or does he not realise that Scots don't generally take kindly to bullying threats such as this? Maybe someone can explain the pros of this move because there are a lot of cons. Very risky move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.