CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Do we need a GE2015 thread?

(619 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. chdot
    Admin

    "we need a nuclear deterrent because the consequences of not having a nuclear deterrent are ... "

    There might be valid arguments for having the ND in a world where 'they' have them too. So perhaps 'reasonable' that NATO has some. May even be 'convenient'/strategic to have them in Scotland. But the 'need' for the UK to have nuclear weapons is to prop up the faded glory of 'world power status' - bonus being a Security Council seat. Is that a bonus?

    So does the UK need an independent ND? (Whether it can afford it or not.)

    It is independent isn't it??

    Posted 9 years ago #
  2. kaputnik
    Moderator

    I have to say, I'm feeling like the most popular potential Labour voter in Edinburgh East having received my personal* leaflet through the post from Sheila Gilmore today. That's now 5 from Labour and only 1 each from Greens and SNP.

    Until Sheila's leaflet arrived I was a bit dismissive of the "Printed in England by..." messages on the back of all the bumf. But things have changed - this one came all the way from Cardiff. Sadly the City of Print no longer seems to print things. For the Scottish Labour Party at least.

    * personalised in the sort of way that a machine printing my name on it makes it personal.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  3. Instography
    Member

    No, it's not independent. Nothing is.

    Membership of NATO is membership of a first-strike nuclear alliance. There's nothing much defensive about it. So that's the first question for all parties (although I suppose maybe more so for those that want membership of the club but for someone else to push the button and pay for the subs): why do you want to be members of NATO? Because if you want to be a member of NATO, quibbling about whether you pull the trigger or hold the gun just seems like posturing. They're not just posturing, are they?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  4. wee folding bike
    Member

    What makes you think that NATO is a first strike nuclear alliance?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  5. Instography
    Member

    "NATO members have also reaffirmed its nuclear declaratory policy of not ruling out the first use of nuclear weapons." Hoover Institution. Seems pretty first strike to me.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  6. chdot
    Admin

    "

    The outcome of this election is, on the whole, unpredictable. Who will form the next government is the question on everyone’s lips.

    But in hundreds of seats across the country, people already know the result. In Britain’s many ‘safe seats’, this election’s outcome is sadly a foregone conclusion.

    In fact, so safe are some of these seats that we’re confidently predicting the outcome in 364 constituencies. That’s over half (56%) of the seats in the UK, or 25.7 million voters. And we can be pretty confident. In 2010, we predicted the outcome in 382 seats, getting just two wrong; a 0.5% margin of error.

    "

    http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/blog/reading-tea-leaves

    Posted 9 years ago #
  7. chdot
    Admin

    Some predictions are more credible than others -

    "

    As it is, I also expect the Conservatives to win more seats than the bookies are pricing in at the moment – primarily due to the big shift in Scotland.

    "

    http://moneyweek.com/election-2015-why-david-cameron-will-remain-prime-minister

    7 Tory MPs in Scotland??

    Posted 9 years ago #
  8. wee folding bike
    Member

    Not ruling out is different from being it. Has NATO ever acted in a defensive capacity?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  9. chdot
    Admin

    I suppose it depends how "defensive" is defined -

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_peacekeeping

    Posted 9 years ago #
  10. The Boy
    Member

    No chance the Tories get 7 seats. I've been suggesting for a while that we might have more Tories than Lib Dems, but 7 is fantasy.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  11. The Boy
    Member

    imho, based on current evidence etc etc

    Posted 9 years ago #
  12. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    I find elections, particularly to the London parliament, grim because of the electoral system.

    It bears restating that if you don't vote for the winner in your constituency in May then your vote goes in the bin. We should be animated by righteous fury in this regard.

    Also, we don't elect the government. We elect an MP, and those MPs then arrange matters amongst themselves. I think this should also be a cause of ire.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  13. wee folding bike
    Member

    Airdrie was one of the safest UK seats so yes, it didn't matter too much what you voted. Ms Nash must be worried. She was chapping doors in our street last week and I'm on my second communication.

    I love how iDevices learn your words. It suggested Communards for communication. Rev Coles was hanging out with Mr Somerville yesterday.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  14. chdot
    Admin

    "Also, we don't elect the government. We elect an MP, and those MPs then arrange matters amongst themselves. I think this should also be a cause of ire."

    Several issues there!

    I think this is one election (particularly in Scotland) where many voters will actually take an interest in the actual candidates rather than 'simply' voting for a party - especially at a time when it looks like many people will be voting for candidates from parties they didn't vote for at the last Westminster election.

    "arrange matters amongst themselves" - that's always happened to the extent that the majority party chooses the PM and other ministers.

    Last time there had to be inter-party dealings while 'we' (the electorate) looked on. Looks like this time negotiations will be even more complex as they won't even be about producing an actual coalition.

    I suspect this time there will be more 'fuss' - not least if it gets portrayed in any way that Scotland will be ruling England... (Might involve some ire!)

    Part of the 'problem' is "Parties". The FPTP definitely encourages concentration of power/influence to just 2 or 3 - the current situation caused by the popularity of the SNP is something of an anomaly.

    It could be argued that there should be no Parties, but that is unlikely to make things 'better'.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  15. The Boy
    Member

    Also impossible to do (the last paragraph).

    After all when the Tories used to rely on Scotland returning a raft of Tory MPs to win elections they didn't even stand any candidates North of the Border. The Unionist Party were entirely distinct, but took the Tory whip when in Parliament.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  16. The Boy
    Member

    Incidentally, this is why I am a massive fan of the modified D'hondt method employed in Holyrood elections. Allows for votes to be cast for the candidate AND party. Also allows one to vote tactically without completely abandoning one's preferred position.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  17. gembo
    Member

    Observed young lad at Balerno farmers market today, shaved head big beard, tentatively approach the frozen looking and battered Labour Party table. Overheard him say I normally vote conservative (already started choking on my tattie scone crepe) but I am thinking about voting labour (nearly tripped over my virtually free coffee bean sack and free seed potatoes left over from tattie day) strange days are these.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  18. chdot
    Admin

    Just listened to the news.

    Politicians from all parties saying 'NHS needs more money'. Mr. F. saying 'because of open-door immigration'!

    I'm sure (almost) everyone on here agrees that 'the NHS is a good thing' and (broadly) 'it should get the money it needs'.

    But to some extent it seems that 'health' is like 'transport' - more roads/hospitals/bridges/drugs 'good'.

    Public Heath measures sidelined along with infrastructure to encourage walking and cycling?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  19. wee folding bike
    Member

    Is tattie scone crepe a left over from the auld alliance or a Morningside accent value judgement?

    So NATO doesn't appear to have done much. Perhaps it's one of those things where not using it means it has been a success.

    Local Labour candidate here wouldn't get my vote anyway as she is trying to claim credit for saving the A&E. In 2007 it was going to be closed. We even had a Save Monklands A&E candidate. She is also a bit hopeless and failed to turn up to a debate she actually called. She caused division in the local party when she was first selected and the agent, a guy I know and like, resigned as a result. That can't have been easy for him to do.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  20. The Boy
    Member

    Regarding majorities, I was only taking into account the Shinners not taking their seats earlier and forgetting about the speaker and deputy speakers.

    By my reckoning this makes the target for a working majority 321 seats.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  21. crowriver
    Member

    @kappers, Sheila Gilmore actually wrote to me on several occasions, on House of Commons paper, asking to come and visit me at home for a chat. I presume this is because I have written to her on a few occasions over the past decade on cycling related or other issues. So clearly her parliamentary researcher is good. I did not respond to her requests, incidentally. That may seem rude but I don't fancy hosting politicians in my home particularly.

    Alas her rather wish washy replies to the letters I wrote over the years did not go down well with me. So I won't be voting for her, despite her attentiveness. I shall be voting Green.

    If I lived in Edinburgh North & Leith constituency (actually I do, temporarily this summer due to ongoing flat renovations, but am not registered to vote here) then I would probably vote for Mark Lazarovitch as I think he is actually a good local MP, regardless of his party affiliation. He always turns up to local consultations, meetings, etc. in the Leith Walk area. I've studied his voting record on various issues, and he has been consistently in line with my own position on various issues I consider noteworthy, unlike Ms Gilmore.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  22. gembo
    Member

    @weefolding bike - you might like the tattie scone crepe. It is either a very big tattie scone or a very thick crepe made with potato flour. Depends on your definition of crepe or tattie scone. Liking your morningside accent.

    Agree with Crowriver that Mark Lazarowicz is a good MP, anti-trident, anti-austerity. Maybe the people of Leith will vote for the man, despite having fallen out of love with the party?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  23. bdellar
    Member

    I do love the whole "if you elect a non-Labour MP you'll help elect the Tories" nonsense. Utter, utter idiocy, but still, it seems to be Scottish Labours only attempt at defence against the SNP.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  24. bdellar
    Member

    In my constituency, Edinburgh East, the Greens are having a big push. I think they're extremely unlikely to win, but if they did, Peter McColl will certainly not be helping the Tories.

    More likely is that Tommy Sheppard wins for the SNP. And that won't help the Tories either.

    The third option is that Sheila Gilmore retains the seat for Labour. That also doesn't help the Tories.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  25. le_soigneur
    Member

    Yes, obviously James Murphy believes in the credo of telling a big enough lie loud enough, enough folk will believe it. No wonder he failed to graduate.
    The only parties other than the Tories that you can vote for and still get a Tory government are DUP or maybe UKIP/Lib Dems.
    If you don't want the Tories, you can vote Labour, Nats or Plaid. Possibly Greens in Brighton where Caroline Lucas is incumbent.
    If you want a protest vote, then vote for anyone who doesn't have a chance in your constituency, or mebbe for Sinn Fein in Norn Iron.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  26. Instography
    Member

    "Not ruling out is different from being it."

    "Being it" only really becomes "being it" when it's too late so not ruling it out will have to do for making the judgement on whether NATO is a first strike alliance. As I say, close enough for me.

    And you still have to wonder what it is that makes anyone ostensibly implacably opposed to trident want to remain in that club. At least NATO supporters in favour of trident can claim consistency.

    Not that I think that nuclear weapons are the most important issue in this election. Not in Scotland. In Scotland I would have thought the demand for full fiscal autonomy would be more of an election issue.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  27. chdot
    Admin

    "In Scotland I would have thought the demand for full fiscal autonomy would be more of an election issue."

    Really?

    *Most* people have never heard of FFA - they've at least heard of Trident. Whether they think there should be 4, 3, 2, 1 or 0 subs is a different question!

    Whether FFA means 'massive black hole' or 'prudent interim step towards Independence' or 'not gonna happen in the next 5 years' (or even if it's in the SNP manifesto), remains to be seen.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  28. gembo
    Member

    Clearly, there is not going to be agreement but I don't think the vote SNP get the Tories line is either a lie or utter, utter, idiocy, but then I am not voting SNP.

    To summarise, As has been discussed up thread, it is one possible scenario. Same as vote Lib Dem get the tories or Vote Green and get the Tories.

    Also, in the interest of balance many post war elections for westminster went with SCOTLAND voting labour and getting the Tories.

    Struck also by The Boy pointing out that the unionist party took the tory whip so the Tories need not venture North. However Winnie was the MP for Dundee back in the day.(1908-1922 as liberal)

    Must Google the Unionist Party - quite interesting from 1912 to 1965 with historical links to the Liberal Unionist Party who fell out with the liberals over Ireland, presumably at the turn of the nineteenth century. According to wiki in 1974 their voters went to labour and theSNP (maybe the forefathers and mothers of the low taxation advocates in the SNP, now defunct?). The same wiki pages have some interesting old maps with SCOTLAND all dark blue in one of them except what looks like a couple of south lanarkshire constituencies in red and a couple of yellow liberal seats way up north. Glasgow still blue at this time due to rangers, empire, etc. From this single wiki article it does seem there were other elections where the 70 or so scottish Seats ( there were more is seats in the past) were divided amongst several parties without one being totally dominant. But then these big surges occur and labour became the dominant party in the last big surge.

    And now in 2015 if polls right, the SNP are going to dominate. The other voices in the Yes campaign may benefit next year at Holyrood?

    Posted 9 years ago #
  29. Instography
    Member

    Yes, really.

    You think trident is a more pressing concern? At least FFA has immediate practical consequences for real people. Trident missiles can float around the seas being of no practical use or real consequence. FFA is more of a real threat.

    Mind, if FFA's not in the SNP manifesto that would be interesting in its own right.

    Posted 9 years ago #
  30. chdot
    Admin

    "Must Google the Unionist Party"

    Always a good idea before writing about something you're not sure about -

    Liberal Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dundee_by-election,_1908

    (My bold)

    Posted 9 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin