CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

And now? (Not the White Paper thread)

(693 posts)

No tags yet.


1…101112…24

  1. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @Roibeard, @stiltskin

    Indeed. One of the key ideas I was trying to sell this summer was that politicians are a necessary evil wherever they live. The response to this is to;

    * pick them from amongst us rather than from a political class
    * oblige them to operate in a framework of maximum transparency, and
    * keep them on a very short leash by having a highly democratic small state

    The Smith Commission, for good or ill, is the epitome of the diametrical opposite of these three principles. It will be amusing to see what they come up with, and how people respond to their proposals, assuming that any referendum voters are still alive if their final report's recommendations are ever implemented.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  2. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Interesting artice in the Grauniad;

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/05/catalonia-independence-more-than-nationalism

    though the author seems not to know that Scotland contributes a greater proportion of taxes to the UK than the proportion of public spending it receives, which is odd. He also seems to think Green MSPs are on the radical Left, which I would hardly think is an unarguable given.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  3. gembo
    Member

    STUC pow wow in Glasgow last Saturday seeking unity between left Yes and left No. Focus still on mud slung during campaign.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  4. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @gembo

    Might it be that the Yes/No divide has now become more important in Scotland than the Left/Right divide?

    You can be as left wing as you like, but the British state has rightist authoritarian characteristics (war, hierarchy, racism, inequality, deference to capital and authority and indifference to the environment) baked into it. I judge it to be beyond saving and I guess No voters are broadly either right wing authoritarians, have a low appetite for change or see a prospect of change in that state's nature. I suspect anyone in either of those three groups would be philosophically far from the average splittist.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  5. gembo
    Member

    @iwrats that would not be my analysis. You're description of the British state is the same as what I feel was on offer from the SNP. Remain in NATO, build more roads, depend to an extent on oil. Hierarchies abound and xenophobia is a scottish party trick (We hate Jimmy Hill... - xenophobia and homophobia in one chorus).

    I understand that many Yes voters were not voting for the SNP but in reality that was what was on offer. Apparently after 2016 it would all have been somehow different. I don't buy that.

    many yes people I spoke to had no plan B. There was a democratic vote. The margin was clear and still no willingness in some quarters to engage in dialogue. I worry about such insular, nationalist, separatist, parochial tendencies. I would like a common weal where left yes and left no can have constructive discourse. City of Edinburgh Council is an example of an SNP Labour coalition. Seems to work comme ci come ca?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  6. chdot
    Admin

    "

    The current system is indeed biased in favour of Labour, although most academics say this is the result of historical accident rather than deliberate “gerrymandering” by Labour.

    While the Conservatives appear to be seriously disadvantaged by current arrangements, most Tories remained firmly in favour of first-past-the-post and campaigned against the alternative vote system in the 2011 referendum.

    "

    http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-voting-system-rigged-favour-labour/19025

    Posted 9 years ago #

  7. LaidBack
    Member

    What 2011 referendum...?

    The word 'the' makes it sound important. (!)

    Internal vote?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  8. gembo
    Member

    I voted for a small party at Holyrood a while back using the PR/2 vote system. Turned out their leader went for extra sunbeds and allegedly attended swinging hot spot down in manchester

    Posted 9 years ago #

  9. Instography
    Member

    "I guess No voters are broadly either right wing authoritarians, have a low appetite for change or see a prospect of change in that state's nature."

    Or just weren't convinced by the half-baked proposals put forward by the SNP, maybe? Aside from the research I was paid to do (a lot of which involved spending evenings in hotel function rooms with limp sandwiches and bad coffee talking to voters) I had never been more popular at the school gates as people (middle class, mildly progressive) asked me what was going to happen and articulated their concerns about the SNP and their willingness to say anything to get what they wanted. Apart from the 30% or so who would vote of anything with independence written on it, they weren't trusted from any direction.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  10. gibbo
    Member

    @iwrats

    Paul Mason - Ch4 News' economics editor - is economically illiterate.

    During the campaign, he was interviewing some 16/17yo's about how they'll vote and he flat out told them that Scotland couldn't use the £.

    Not that there wouldn't be a currency union, but that we couldn't use the £.

    And, BTW, this was after the 2nd debate, where Darling had explicitly confirmed we could use the pound.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  11. bdellar
    Member

    Well, I've had to give up on some of the things I'd wanted from independence (a sensible electoral system, getting rid of nuclear weapons, reforming local democracy and getting rid of the obsession with the City of London), because I don't see any way of doing anything about them now.

    But, I can still campaign for smaller things (better bike infrastructure, better rail services).

    A lost opportunity, but that's politics for you.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  12. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @Instography

    The SNP's proposals were indeed half baked. You had to look beyond them, and most people did not. Westminster, though, hadn't baked its plans at all - it was still sneering at the flour, the yeast and the baker.

    The whole thing was a failure by the people, for the people and of the people.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  13. Ed1
    Member

    gibbo

    During the campaign, he was interviewing some 16/17yo's about how they'll vote and he flat out told them that Scotland couldn't use the £."

    There was a lot of dishonesty in the campaigns. Of course being internationally traded the pound could be used with out Westminster permission, however if there had been an independent vote would imagine west ministers would have issued a statement very quickly endorsing the use of the pound.

    The uncertainly could have caused instability in the markets there would have been immense pressure from the the city, the of likes of IMF , international investors and such would have meant an endorsement with in hours would guess . It would be impossible to unravel some things traded on the London exchange quickly enough would imagine, would have created immense uncertainty so would have been a quick agreement with in hours not because its good for Scotland, but because for the city and investors and internationally bodies would expect it.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  14. Instography
    Member

    @IWRATS
    As you've probably gathered, I've never understood why people should have looked beyond the SNP, where they should have looked or what they might have hoped to find. The post-independence electoral calculus would surely have been a Yes Alliance (as I think we call it these days) landslide with the SNP in the driving seat? And the White Paper would have been mandated by the sovereign will etc (how many times did Salmond say that, particularly in the days after his Canadian "pollsters" - I am laughing - told him it was in the bag?).

    That suggests that people who looked at the SNP plans and found them to be half-baked made a perfectly rational choice, without needing to be authoritarian, happy or optimistic. Sort of, should Scotland be an independent country? Aye, but that's nothing like independence.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  15. bdellar
    Member

    Well, it's too late now. As it is, we've voted for a UK with the Tories in charge. And no need to look beyond the Tories to see how else the UK might work.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  16. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    "how many times did Salmond say..."

    I paid as much heed to what he said as I did to 'the Vow'. Political forces were always going to come into play whatever the result, and pay no heed whatever to what had been said by anyone. No voters didn't, I suppose, foresee the prospect of EVEL, with the decreased liklihood of there being another Scots PM of the UK, but this was never made clear before the 18th. I don't suppose the poor Labour councillors running round my neighbourhood thought they were campaigning for that. There were many unspoken implications of both outcomes.

    The White Paper was such a mess it couldn't have been implemented even had there been a general will to do it. The outcome of a Yes vote was as unpredictable as the outcome of a No vote. Who knows even now what will happen to Scotland?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  17. gembo
    Member

    IWRATS did you not get the memo? We have to (I am singing now a tune form Les Miserables) - Let It Go

    Posted 9 years ago #

  18. chdot
    Admin

    Gembo did you not get the memo?

    No-one HAS to do anything.

    Apart from submit something to Smith (or not - personal choice) then wait to see what comes out the other end, The Vow, General Election etc.

    Oh and there are a couple of by-elections today so we'll see if England still wants to be in the UK, Europe etc.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  19. gembo
    Member

    I did get the memo, that was my attempt at humour. it was sent to me in another thread by IWRATS when I pointed out Denmark is not great.

    memo from Mr Gembo - Can we lighten up?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  20. Instography
    Member

    "The outcome of a Yes vote was as unpredictable as the outcome of a No vote."

    So what were you asking people to vote for? Or against, even?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  21. chdot
    Admin

    "

    Two months is too short a time to plan Scotland’s future, and Lord Smith should make this clear, says Joyce McMillan

    The Smith Commission, set up in the aftermath of the independence referendum to consider proposals for enhanced devolution to Scotland, is now seeking views from organisations, institutions and individuals across Scotland, about how it should proceed. Here is my submission to Lord Smith of Kelvin, the Chair of the Commission, in the form of a letter.

    "

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/joyce-mcmillan-reform-in-haste-repent-at-leisure-1-3568716

    Posted 9 years ago #

  22. Instography
    Member

    Indeed, the timetable is far too short and it would be nice if someone would say so. I suppose I particularly wish the SNP would do it because the other parties can't because it's a problem they created themselves.

    But I understand why the SNP won't and probably shouldn't. I get the politics of leaving the proponents of the vow and its timetable to dangle in the wind, rushing to bring forward something hasty and ill-considered and then criticise it.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  23. chdot
    Admin

    By-election turnouts - 51% and 36%.

    Voter apathy/continued disconnection/disaffection in England? (In spite of lots of publicity for UKIP as a 'proper party' and/or useful vehicle for a protest vote against two main parties.)

    Greens even beat LibDems in Clacton!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29549414

    Posted 9 years ago #

  24. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @Instography

    "So what were you asking people to vote for? Or against, even?"

    In the bluntest of terms I suggested that people should put their cross in the Yes box and then take their chances, as opposed to putting the cross in the No box and taking their chances. Those were the choices. I judged one of the darks into which we could have leapt to be less stygian than the other.

    I fully accept that a good light meter would have been useful and that we will never know if I was right.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  25. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29564608

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noh

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_standoff

    Posted 9 years ago #

  26. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Some peoples are making whoopee...

    Former Tory MP for Corby Louise Mensch, who now lives in New York, posits this intriguing scenario after next year’s general election. She writes on her Unfashionista blog:

    I am NOT suggesting that the SNP go into coalition with the Conservatives – it would be toxic for both parties north of the border. Ruth Davidson needs those Unionist votes to start rebuilding in SNP WM areas. And SNP are banned from propping up the Tories, their left-wing support wouldn’t like it.

    But I AM suggesting a scenario where Sturgeon can demand a DEAL with an rUK Conservative majority – after all the Referendum itself happened because Alec Salmond and David Cameron made a binding deal. A deal isn’t a coalition and the SNP wouldn’t need to prop up the Tories in this scenario – because devo-max and English votes for English laws would have meant that the SNP was “mainly governing” Scotland via Holyrood, and in rUK, the Tories would no longer need any Scottish votes (or even be able to use them) – on devolved matters for Eng Wales and NI. Cameron would still need other parties like the DUP and probably even the LibDems for comfort, but Sturgeon’s SNP would not be involved.

    Scenario goes like this - Tories largest party, no majority. SNP offer a deal whereby Nicola Sturgeon becomes Deputy PM as being able to command the second party of United Kingdom government, with or without a WM seat of her own. She need not have one, and she can always take a peerage if she likes, a nice Scottish peerage obviously. Sturgeon and Cameron horse-trade over devo-max and the financial settlement for Scotland in exchange for immediate, first-order-of-business “English votes for English laws” legislation. EVEL has been long planned by the Tories and has been in the last three Tory manifestos. This constitutional deal done, Sturgeon repairs to Scotland to govern.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  27. Morningsider
    Member

    Except, the SNP don't nominate members to the House of Lords. It's a very long standing SNP policy - they generally define the HoL as "an affront to democracy".

    I'm also fairly sure that its SNP party policy not to support a Tory Government - its splitting hairs to argue the difference between a "deal" and a "coalition". Why would the SNP chance losing all its new found support to secure a slightly better version of devo-max, when they have the political wind in their sails.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  28. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @Morningsider

    You are correct in all those assertions. Ms Mench is an amusing trouble-maker, gadfly and story teller. (She is also the author Louise Bagshawe.)

    I'm just enjoying the Tory fringes putting fireworks through the SNP's letterbox. Or possibly pulling the SNP's pigtails and running away.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  29. chdot
    Admin

    "pulling the SNP's pigtails and running away"

    Similar to 'having collar felt'?

    "

    It is understood the Tory leader was spoken to yesterday as a witness and party sources say there is no suggestion of any wrongdoing on her part, according to the Herald newspaper.

    "

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/police-speak-to-ruth-davidson-over-postal-votes-1-3569092

    Posted 9 years ago #

  30. chdot
    Admin

    Missed this one yesterday -

    "

    Former SNP MSP John Finnie defects to Greens

    "

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29582862

    Not that you can defect from being an independent!!

    Posted 9 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

1…101112…24

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin