|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Sept 19, 2014 11:04:19 GMT
You might be right but I suspect that Cameron will be HUGELY satisfied that after the last couple of weeks and yesterday's result, he now has the Tories, The Lib Dems and UKIP all determined that English votes (alone) will decide legislation which only affects England. That is hugely bad news for Milliband and Labour. It means that if the other parties get their way then, even if Labourhave a majority after next general election, they will probably not have a majority when it comes to votes on English matters. On other areas like devolution of powers to England, wales and NI there is much more common ground but in respect of English votes on English legislation, Labour may never have a majority again. And this has happened without Scotland leaving the UK. To all English parties bar Labour this is a great end result. Devolution to the English regions based on the Scottish model granted at the eleventh hour will arguably be a good thing for Labour and ensure Tories don't start appearing on the map in great number until Oxford. It depends what we really mean when we talk devolution. It would be interesting to see how that is applied in Northern Ireland.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 19, 2014 11:07:41 GMT
You might be right but I suspect that Cameron will be HUGELY satisfied that after the last couple of weeks and yesterday's result, he now has the Tories, The Lib Dems and UKIP all determined that English votes (alone) will decide legislation which only affects England. That is hugely bad news for Milliband and Labour. It means that if the other parties get their way then, even if Labourhave a majority after next general election, they will probably not have a majority when it comes to votes on English matters. On other areas like devolution of powers to England, wales and NI there is much more common ground but in respect of English votes on English legislation, Labour may never have a majority again. And this has happened without Scotland leaving the UK. To all English parties bar Labour this is a great end result. Devolution to the English regions based on the Scottish model granted at the eleventh hour will arguably be a good thing for Labour and ensure Tories don't start appearing on the map in great number until Oxford. It depends what we really mean when we talk devolution. all 4 countries are different and each country is differnet inself take wales devolution vote. yes for devolution in the mainly rural isolated areas and no along the border and m4 corridor. the yes won by less than 2% england is massive in comparison and whilst their is an argument for regional assemblies they would be very hard to please everyone. yorkshire is half industrial cities and half rural farming town and villages. the best we can hope for is a no extra cost system where english MPs go to westminster to debate and vote english issues. we already have county and town councils to look after regional matters. devolution is great but to devolve past the separate countries is just extra cost and administration
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Sept 19, 2014 11:09:57 GMT
So why, with so little real detail or substance behind the 'Yes' campaign, were they allowed to go as far as get the referendum? they humoured him the government knew he had no plan so let him have his day knowing he couldnt win and knowing the matter is put to bed for ever. to be fair he ran a decent campaign in popularity stakes, he speaks well but what he said had no substance its showed him to be very naive, if th esnp get this chance in 50 years they will learn from it. by then devo max will be in full swing, oil will be nearly gone and there will be no need or call for it apart from bitter ex tennis players living in miami The utter bollocks about the Pound which they could not veto Scotland from using, which the Bank of England said it had no opinion either way on and would have been economic suicide for the rest of the union not to enter an official currency union is just one example of how the no campaign cheapened the debate and scared voters.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 19, 2014 11:12:14 GMT
Devolution to the English regions based on the Scottish model granted at the eleventh hour will arguably be a good thing for Labour and ensure Tories don't start appearing on the map in great number until Oxford. It depends what we really mean when we talk devolution. It would be interesting to see how that is applied in Northern Ireland. although it wont happen i would be happy for the republic to join the union,with a 20 year wait before full reunification with n ireland as part of the union i know that is pie in the sky thinking but we have loats of irish in our forces, pretty much hassle free travel between the countries, so many connections and ireland joing would strengthen the union, help both sides economically, too much blood shed for it ever to happen and work though
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Sept 19, 2014 11:15:11 GMT
Devolution to the English regions based on the Scottish model granted at the eleventh hour will arguably be a good thing for Labour and ensure Tories don't start appearing on the map in great number until Oxford. It depends what we really mean when we talk devolution. all 4 countries are different and each country is differnet inself take wales devolution vote. yes for devolution in the mainly rural isolated areas and no along the border and m4 corridor. the yes won by less than 2% england is massive in comparison and whilst their is an argument for regional assemblies they would be very hard to please everyone. yorkshire is half industrial cities and half rural farming town and villages. the best we can hope for is a no extra cost system where english MPs go to westminster to debate and vote english issues. we already have county and town councils to look after regional matters. devolution is great but to devolve past the separate countries is just extra cost and administration England has 23 cities bigger than Scotland's third biggest city, why should they be deprived the devolved rights that Scotland has?
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 19, 2014 11:18:30 GMT
Maybe the greater Glasgow area and Dundee just need to go their separate way? Wouldn't be much oil heading with them though. when you look at it like that.... King Salmond...ruler of Glasgow.....oh, and Dundee.
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Sept 19, 2014 11:21:42 GMT
It would be interesting to see how that is applied in Northern Ireland. although it wont happen i would be happy for the republic to join the union,with a 20 year wait before full reunification with n ireland as part of the union i know that is pie in the sky thinking but we have loats of irish in our forces, pretty much hassle free travel between the countries, so many connections and ireland joing would strengthen the union, help both sides economically, too much blood shed for it ever to happen and work though I think you're right. My guess is that Northern Ireland would vote to stay part of the UK (Protestant majority)...but most Nationalists would want Independence & greater ties with the Republic..if not complete re-integration This would be a political union more than anything because as you say..we can drive anywhere in Ireland and people living there have dual passports...and the days of getting helicoptered out of Crossmaglen/South Armagh are over....hopefully.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 19, 2014 11:21:58 GMT
all 4 countries are different and each country is differnet inself take wales devolution vote. yes for devolution in the mainly rural isolated areas and no along the border and m4 corridor. the yes won by less than 2% england is massive in comparison and whilst their is an argument for regional assemblies they would be very hard to please everyone. yorkshire is half industrial cities and half rural farming town and villages. the best we can hope for is a no extra cost system where english MPs go to westminster to debate and vote english issues. we already have county and town councils to look after regional matters. devolution is great but to devolve past the separate countries is just extra cost and administration England has 23 cities bigger than Scotland's third biggest city, why should they be deprived the devolved rights that Scotland has? does scotland have devolved regions? its all opinion mate, we can devolve right down to individual hamlets if we want, the more devolution the more cost, admin, time etc you'd get nothing done. devolve england first, lets see how it works and go further if and when it is needed. london is always seen has having more money, influence etc and its true, so there is also an argument that delvoved cities would increase the divide with london, the cities, and the rest
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 19, 2014 11:32:57 GMT
Gordon Brown the Behemoth of the left? Are you sure? Lukey tells us that New Labour was a rightwing government? How could it be with a left behemoth at the heart of its government? No, no, it was Margaret Thatcher who said that! I quote "I see no socialism on the Labour front benches". I just happen to agree with her (on this point ). Are you saying she was wrong, mcf Is that a genuine quote? Sorry to question you but you can hardly blame myself after these last few days can you!? "probably the most formidable Labour leader since Hugh Gaitskell. I see a lot of socialism behind their front bench, but not in Mr Blair. I think he genuinely has moved". ...I think it was said in 1994 as well. That was from a Wilki page.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 11:43:04 GMT
There are a few clues there, mcf, which I'm surprised you left in! One being, "I've no feelings either way re independence or staying put", another being it'd be interesting to see how it all panned out [with independence]. In other words, it'd make life more interesting politically which has been what I've said all along. To spell it out, I don't live in Scotland so I'm seeing it from an interested observer's point of view. See if you can find some quotes along those lines. Oh look, you did When asked how I would've voted if Scottish, I would've gone for the Westminster bribe, retained the status quo re the Union and accepted the promised extra powers. That would be what I would've done if I lived up there as it would have affected me directly, but I don't and it doesn't! It's a lot easier to be an interested observer and want something to happen when it doesn't directly affect you. Of course I would leave it in. I'm not like you. I don't misquote or tell blatent lies etc about what other posters have penned. I think the way you treated this shows a lack of moral fibre to be honest Lukey. It was a pretty important decision for the Scots to take and you treat it like some sort of game because it doesn't affect you. It's one thing for a selfish rightwinger like myself to act like that but I expected better from a 'social justice' champion like yourself. Blimey, someone's a touch sensitive this morning! It's like this, mcf, it's not too hard to grasp if you really try. Let's say I was a Rep Ireland citizen. I would be very interested in seeing what happened to the UK after the EU referendum if it voted to leave because that would be different to what is going on in my country and I would therefore be interested to see what leaving did to the UK as there may be pointers towards what would happen if we left. I would therefore want it to happen. However, I personally wouldn't vote to leave in an irish referendum because I think Ireland is better off in than out. Is that too hard to understand as to my interest in the politics of the whole thing re Scotland?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 11:46:23 GMT
No, no, it was Margaret Thatcher who said that! I quote "I see no socialism on the Labour front benches". I just happen to agree with her (on this point ). Are you saying she was wrong, mcf Is that a genuine quote? Sorry to question you but you can hardly blame myself after these last few days can you!? "probably the most formidable Labour leader since Hugh Gaitskell. I see a lot of socialism behind their front bench, but not in Mr Blair. I think he genuinely has moved". ...I think it was said in 1994 as well. That was from a Wilki page. Spot on. You do know the front bench is the cabinet? You think she was wrong on that?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 11:55:04 GMT
No. It's just that you forget to mention that most of the problems you've listed are Labour's fault. Maybe you can tell us all how a government left with less can fix the problems you've listed or improve the situation? By raising taxes. Like everything in life, you get what you pay for. Or, in the case of Scotland now, you get more than you pay for Pay peanuts, get shit services.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 19, 2014 12:50:57 GMT
Is that a genuine quote? Sorry to question you but you can hardly blame myself after these last few days can you!? "probably the most formidable Labour leader since Hugh Gaitskell. I see a lot of socialism behind their front bench, but not in Mr Blair. I think he genuinely has moved". ...I think it was said in 1994 as well. That was from a Wilki page. Spot on. You do know the front bench is the cabinet? You think she was wrong on that? Always misquoting..... She didn't comment on the front bench. She commented on Blair particularly and that she could see socialism on the backbenches. She did this in 1994 before they even got in power. Yep, I think she was wrong.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 19, 2014 12:53:44 GMT
No. It's just that you forget to mention that most of the problems you've listed are Labour's fault. Maybe you can tell us all how a government left with less can fix the problems you've listed or improve the situation? By raising taxes. Like everything in life, you get what you pay for. Or, in the case of Scotland now, you get more than you pay for Pay peanuts, get shit services. Were you campaigning for these tax rises as much as you do now when Labour were in charge? Or were you like the rest of the left leaners that only discovered the utopian Scandavian world ( that is reducing its tax levels ) when the coalition was formed?
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Sept 19, 2014 13:36:42 GMT
Spot on. You do know the front bench is the cabinet? You think she was wrong on that? Always misquoting..... She didn't comment on the front bench. She commented on Blair particularly and that she could see socialism on the backbenches. She did this in 1994 before they even got in power. Yep, I think she was wrong. Wrong in so many ways hateful hag.
|
|
|
Post by slash on Sept 19, 2014 13:58:55 GMT
Now we can act like god damn Englishman and hammer the cunts for being a bunch of mutinous Celts a la the 'Hammer of the Scots' himself, Edward Longshanks:
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 14:12:30 GMT
Spot on. You do know the front bench is the cabinet? You think she was wrong on that? Always misquoting..... She didn't comment on the front bench. She commented on Blair particularly and that she could see socialism on the backbenches. She did this in 1994 before they even got in power. Yep, I think she was wrong. Did she not? Why does it say BEHIND THEIR FRONT BENCH in that quote you put up then? Or have you misquoted? And you think you know better than the sainted lady now? I'm impressed ???
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 14:14:53 GMT
By raising taxes. Like everything in life, you get what you pay for. Or, in the case of Scotland now, you get more than you pay for Pay peanuts, get shit services. Were you campaigning for these tax rises as much as you do now when Labour were in charge? Or were you like the rest of the left leaners that only discovered the utopian Scandavian world ( that is reducing its tax levels [to levels I would still shit myself at and do everything to avoid paying] ) when the coalition was formed? Yes, go back and check if you like
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 19, 2014 14:27:11 GMT
Always misquoting..... She didn't comment on the front bench. She commented on Blair particularly and that she could see socialism on the backbenches. She did this in 1994 before they even got in power. Yep, I think she was wrong. Did she not? Why does it say BEHIND THEIR FRONT BENCH in that quote you put up then? Or have you misquoted? And you think you know better than the sainted lady now? I'm impressed ??? It says she saw socialism on the backbenches because she thought there were socialists within those numbers. You are assuming that she didn't see any socialism on the front bench when in truth she did not mention the make up of front bench at all apart from 1 member on it that was Blair. No need to be impressed as I'm sure she would have taken a much different view had she commented in 2010 on what they actually did.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 19, 2014 14:30:10 GMT
Were you campaigning for these tax rises as much as you do now when Labour were in charge? Or were you like the rest of the left leaners that only discovered the utopian Scandavian world ( that is reducing its tax levels [to levels I would still shit myself at and do everything to avoid paying] ) when the coalition was formed? Yes, go back and check if you like I don't think this board goes that far back unfortunately or otherwise I definitely would
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 14:47:26 GMT
Yes, go back and check if you like I don't think this board goes that far back unfortunately or otherwise I definitely would Could you really be bothered ?
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Sept 19, 2014 15:04:30 GMT
I don't think this board goes that far back unfortunately or otherwise I definitely would Could you really be bothered ? Yep. If Lukey's telling me that he was saying he wanted higher taxes back in 2005 then I'm pretty sure I would find his posts telling us how they needed slashing.
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Sept 19, 2014 15:07:15 GMT
If you want conspiracy, you got it.
Ignore the nauseating tones and examine the footage.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 19, 2014 15:09:13 GMT
Alex salmond standing down as snp leader in November
this campaign has finished him
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 15:16:54 GMT
If you want conspiracy, you got it. Ignore the nauseating tones and examine the footage. a theory that even the YES campaign have debunked already mate /photo/1 it'd be one thing if it was Sky saying it but the YES campaign themselves have said it wasn't fixed.....unless they're in on the conspiracy to make themselves lose the referendum of course?
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Sept 19, 2014 15:24:42 GMT
If you want conspiracy, you got it. Ignore the nauseating tones and examine the footage. a theory that even the YES campaign have debunked already mate /photo/1 it'd be one thing if it was Sky saying it but the YES campaign themselves have said it wasn't fixed.....unless they're in on the conspiracy to make themselves lose the referendum of course? Not claiming anything, just for your consideration. The Sky claim is a response which they feel bound to give, but not sure it can be classed as "debunking" without proper investigation into these methods.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Sept 19, 2014 15:27:42 GMT
a theory that even the YES campaign have debunked already mate /photo/1 it'd be one thing if it was Sky saying it but the YES campaign themselves have said it wasn't fixed.....unless they're in on the conspiracy to make themselves lose the referendum of course? Not claiming anything, just for your consideration. The Sky claim is a response which they feel bound to give, but not sure it can be classed as "debunking" without proper investigation into these methods. It isn't a sky claim It is the response by the yes movement which sky broadcasted Totally different
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 15:28:24 GMT
a theory that even the YES campaign have debunked already mate /photo/1 it'd be one thing if it was Sky saying it but the YES campaign themselves have said it wasn't fixed.....unless they're in on the conspiracy to make themselves lose the referendum of course? Not claiming anything, just for your consideration. The Sky claim is a response which they feel bound to give, but not sure it can be classed as "debunking" without proper investigation into these methods. it's not a SKY claim though is it...it's a link to what YES Dundee put on the their twitter page...SKY are simply quoting what the YES campaign have said! EDIT: Al the bastard beat me to it
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 15:29:33 GMT
If you want conspiracy, you got it. Ignore the nauseating tones and examine the footage. scraping the barrel
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2014 15:32:13 GMT
Alex salmond standing down as snp leader in November this campaign has finished him No option really .....
|
|